Recession Watch: September (it goes on, and on, and on...)

Are we still in recession or are we in recovery?


  • Total voters
    49
I think the problem with all this is it may be a "statistical" recovery but won't feel like it in the real world.

Well it should be felt by many businesses and people who have jobs, but for the still unemployed it won't be.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fed-f...tml?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

Yeah, recession over...

This kind of reporting is more nauseating than the Pre Iraq War credulous hack coverage.

Its nauseating to report that most people think the economy is growing this quarter?

Because it conflicts with what you think is going to happen? Or possibly because it conflicts with what you want to happen, or think "should" happen.
 
I think the problem with all this is it may be a "statistical" recovery but won't feel like it in the real world.

It's not even statistical:

Code:
G.19                                                        CONSUMER CREDIT                        For release at 3 p.m. (Eastern Time)
1                                                              July 2009                                              September 8, 2009

Consumer credit decreased at an annual rate of 10-1/2 percent in July 2009.  Revolving credit decreased at an annual rate of 8 percent, and 
nonrevolving credit decreased at an annual rate of 11-3/4 percent.

CONSUMER CREDIT OUTSTANDING 1
Seasonally adjusted
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 2008                            2009
                                                                        _______________________ _______________________________________

                                2004 r  2005 r  2006 r  2007 r  2008 r   Q2 r    Q3 r    Q4 r    Q1 r    Q2 r    May r   Jun r   Jul p
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent change at annual rate 2
  Total                            5.6     4.5     4.1     5.6     1.6     4.1     0.6    -3.0    -3.7    -6.6    -4.2    -7.4   -10.4
   Revolving                       4.1     3.8     5.0     7.8     1.9     5.0     3.3    -7.3    -9.6    -9.7   -12.1    -6.4    -8.0
   Nonrevolving 3                  6.4     4.9     3.6     4.4     1.4     3.6    -1.0    -0.4    -0.2    -4.8     0.4    -8.0   -11.7

Amount: billions of dollars
  Total                         2191.5  2291.0  2384.8  2519.5  2559.1  2574.3  2578.3  2559.1  2535.3  2493.6  2509.2  2493.6  2472.1
   Revolving                     799.2   829.8   871.3   939.6   957.3   967.2   975.2   957.3   934.3   911.7   916.6   911.7   905.6
   Nonrevolving 3               1392.3  1461.2  1513.5  1579.9  1601.8  1607.1  1603.2  1601.8  1601.0  1581.9  1592.6  1581.9  1566.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[url]http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/Current/[/url]

Credit is still going southward.
 
Its nauseating to report that most people think the economy is growing this quarter?

Because it conflicts with what you think is going to happen? Or possibly because it conflicts with what you want to happen, or think "should" happen.

Again, it is not "most" people. It is the finance industry people, who are getting the bailout money.

It's a lie. Look at the numbers. 1 million more homes are going to go into foreclosure. The chances of any of them curing is below 10%. Do you honestly believe car sales are going to rebound at all, after 700,000 were bought in cash for clunkers? Who is going to buy a car now that cash for clunkers is over? Ford (we own 10%) and GM (we own 60%) are going to have some real, real, piss poor quarters coming up. What about the $8,000 FHA grants? Once those are gone, who is going to buy a house? Who is going to be like, "well, geeze, now that the government isn't handing out money, I suppose I should buy."

Pent up consumer demand? 40% of Californians of working age, are not working! They don't have any money. There are so many empty houses, that construction jobs are going the way of the dodo. Nothing has really started to rise, especially if you remove the cash for clunkers effect, everything , is slowing the rate of loss. People are asking, is this gonna be a v-shaped recovery, or W shaped recovery?

You know what it means when everyone is saying the market is going up?

I'm buying silver. I am going to continue to buy silver. Gold and silver continue to rise, even as the DOW rises. This is not particularly normal. It's a sign of inflation. The numbers are starting to look better, because there is more money making the numbers look better. That does not mean actual productivity is rising, and that certainly does not mean employment is rising.
 
Well it should be felt by many businesses and people who have jobs, but for the still unemployed it won't be.



Its nauseating to report that most people think the economy is growing this quarter?

Because it conflicts with what you think is going to happen? Or possibly because it conflicts with what you want to happen, or think "should" happen.

It's nauseating because the language of what a recession is has been changed so that anything that ISN'T cliff diving or TEOTWAWKI isn't recession any longer.

Stabilization isn't growth. Less loss is not growth. Less loss is not stabilizing if the loss surpasses precedent. Continued government backstops and cash injection is not a sign of stabilization in anything but aggregate numbers.

I can and have made money whether the market goes up or goes down. I don't want anything to happen except money in my pocket and I don't think anything should happen except money in my pocket. The thing I'm wary of and find unacceptable is a false sense of security that can exacerbate panic and people losing what little they have because they believed something that was portrayed in a false or deceiving way.
 
I'm buying silver. I am going to continue to buy silver. Gold and silver continue to rise, even as the DOW rises. This is not particularly normal. It's a sign of inflation. The numbers are starting to look better, because there is more money making the numbers look better. That does not mean actual productivity is rising, and that certainly does not mean employment is rising.

The goldnuts I can understand, so long as states still hold gold as a currency reserve it has some backing for use as money.
But silver? :confused:

And productivity may actually rise, just fire enough people: productivity is output per employee. Not that firing people is going to improve anything for an economy as a whole, unless those unemployed are provided with an alternative source of income...
 
The goldnuts I can understand, so long as states still hold gold as a currency reserve it has some backing for use as money.
But silver? :confused:

States don't use gold. I choose silver because 1. its more small denomination, and 2. It has industrial uses. 3. Those uses are in industries I expect America to remain competitive in.

And productivity may actually rise, just fire enough people: productivity is output per employee. Not that firing people is going to improve anything for an economy as a whole, unless those unemployed are provided with an alternative source of income...

lets not forget, that even if employment goes up, if it is in healthcare or government, it really does not help the value of the dollar, as those are both "products" no other citizens of the world want, except in rare cases.

Even worse, healthcare jobs will be a growing market as the baby boomers retire and get older, but healthcare costs tend to deplete savings, not grow them, as the problems come unexpectedly, and are usually not budgeted in a family budget. They are top priority, and a large share of them will be paid by medicare and medicaid. So yes, there may be more jobs, but they will not help the dollar be competitive with the rest of the world currencies.
 
Pent up consumer demand? 40% of Californians of working age, are not working! They don't have any money. There are so many empty houses, that construction jobs are going the way of the dodo. Nothing has really started to rise, especially if you remove the cash for clunkers effect, everything , is slowing the rate of loss. People are asking, is this gonna be a v-shaped recovery, or W shaped recovery?

You know what it means when everyone is saying the market is going up?

Single-family home starts are now up 37 percent compared with January, the month analysts now consider the bottom of the current cycle.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/18/AR2009081803329.html
 
Just an excerpt of an article this time:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/poll-backs-governments-stimulus-plan-20090913-fm73.html
Almost six in 10 felt the (Australian) Government's efforts to address the economic crisis were ''about right''; one in five thought its efforts were going too far, while 17 per cent thought they did not go far enough.

Although comparisons should be made with caution, when a similar question was asked in 19 countries between April and June, only in China did a higher proportion indicate their government's actions were about right.
 
Bloomberg

Sept. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize- winning economist, said the U.S. has failed to fix the underlying problems of its banking system after the credit crunch and the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

“In the U.S. and many other countries, the too-big-to-fail banks have become even bigger,” Stiglitz said in an interview today in Paris. “The problems are worse than they were in 2007 before the crisis.”

Stiglitz’s views echo those of former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who has advised President Barack Obama’s administration to curtail the size of banks, and Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer, who suggested last month that governments may want to discourage financial institutions from growing “excessively.”
 
PiMan said:
Just an excerpt of an article this time

By far the best part, the number of people who want to continue or expand the stimulus, politics at work.

the poll finds opinion divided but a majority supporting maintaining or boosting the measures: 46 per cent said the stimulus should continue as it is, 10 per cent want it increased, 20 per cent said it should be reduced and 21 per cent want it ended.
 
From guardian

Executives at Britain's top companies saw their basic salaries leap 10% last year, despite the onset of the worst global recession in decades, in which their companies lost almost a third of their value amid a record decline in the FTSE.

Bonus payouts were lower, but the basic salary hikes were more than three times the 3.1% average pay rise for ordinary workers in the private sector. The big rise in directors' basic pay – more than double the rate of inflation last year – came as many of their companies were imposing pay freezes on staff and starting huge redundancy programmes to slash costs.

The Guardian data also shows that a coterie of elite bosses at the helm of multinational corporations are seeing their overall pay packets soar ever higher. The 10 most highly paid executives earned a combined £170m last year – up from £140m in 2007. Five years ago, the top 10 banked some £70m.

The Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, Vince Cable, said: "The Guardian's analysis shows the breathtaking cynicism involved in a lot of executive pay deals, which are unrelated to either personal or corporate performance and involve people who are very well off helping themselves to larger salaries when private sector wages in many companies are being cut."

The stealth increases in basic pay took much of the sting out of falls in bonuses tied to the performances of their companies. Overall pay for directors of FTSE companies, including bonuses, fell by an average of 5%.

The average chief executive of a blue-chip company now earns a basic salary of £791,000. However, adding bonus payments, share awards and the value of perks ranging from cars and drivers to school fees and dental work, the average pay package rises dramatically. Nearly a quarter of FTSE chief executives received total 2008 pay packages in excess of £5m, and 22 directors now have basic salaries of more than £1m.

The survey is likely to spark renewed calls for shareholders to take a tougher line to control boardroom pay. Earlier this year, City minister Lord Myners accused shareholders of behaving like "absentee landlords".

In the wake of the banking crisis, there has been a wave of shareholder revolts over directors' remuneration. But even if investors vote against over-generous boardroom payouts, companies are not obliged to take their views into account.

Some of the City's biggest and most influential shareholders are also part of the problem – their bosses are among those raking in multimillion-pound salaries. Michael McLintock, a director of Prudential and the boss of its investment arm, which holds big stakes in thousands of companies, was last year paid £6.6m – putting him among the 25 best-paid bosses in the UK.

Brendan Barber, general secretary of the TUC, said: "The recession has done nothing to stop the gap between top directors and the rest of their staff getting wider every year.

"It is even more offensive when the Institute of Directors has called for spending cuts that would hit pensioners, the poor and low-paid public sector staff. We've already had the 1980s-style recession, it looks depressingly like we are going back to 1980s greed-is-good politics, too."

The highest paid boss last year was Bart Becht, the chief executive of Reckitt Benckiser, whose brands include Harpic, Veet and Strepsils. He was rewarded with £36.8m in pay, bonuses, perks and share incentive schemes. Becht, 53, has been a regular feature in the upper echelons of the annual survey for several years, earning more than £80m during the last three years.

The highest paid woman was Cynthia Carroll, the head of the mining giant Anglo American. The vast multinational also owns a big stake in the De Beers diamond business. Carroll, a 52-year-old American, earned a basic salary of more than £1m last year, but benefits, bonus payments and share awards took her total payout to nearly £4m. She was also paid another £93,000 sitting on the board of BP.

The glass ceiling, however, appears to be almost entirely intact. Just one in 15 boardroom seats are occupied by women – and most of those are non-executive, part-time directors. Only 22 women hold full-time executive director positions, involved in the day-to-day running of the business.

The best-paid boardroom last year was that of Tullow Oil, a London-based oil exploration business, where 11 directors picked up a total of £59m. Most of their gains came from share options, as they cashed in on a share price that had soared along with the oil price. The directors made much more from their cheap share handouts than the rest of the 470-strong workforce were paid in the year.

Despite the credit crunch, the best-paid employees are still those working for City-based firms. The average pay at money broker ICAP, which employs 4,330 staff, was more than £200,000. Hedge fund group Man had the second best-paid staff. Its 1,776 employees were paid a total of £353m in 2008 – an average £198,000 each. Five years ago the Guardian survey showed that the average salary at Man was £100,000. The chief executives of those two companies also feature among the highest-paid FTSE 100 chiefs. Man boss Stanley Fink, who has now stepped down, received £15m last year, while ICAP's Michael Spencer received nearly £7m.

At the other end of the spectrum, the worst-paid staff are those working in the retail and leisure sectors and for mining companies.
 
Back
Top Bottom