NBC's Erin(?) Burnett had to resort to Craig's List tonight in order for NBC to declare us in a 'recession'.
Seems the number of CL users posting "Lost Job...need to sell" is now a prominent indicator.
Not that i totally agree with this new indicator... but anything to get Erin Burnett more air time is cool by me.
Is Erin the red head? Let her say what she wants, fine by me.
And as far as the "r" word, I guess you prefer the "D" word that our uniter/nay/divider uses? Something about a downturn...hard times... hard work....and oh yeah, and of course, Congress' fault. Yeah, that's the ticket! Congress just won't pass a bill that I don't feel obligated to veto. They MADE him veto stuff. Sounds suspiciously like the logic wife beaters use.
1.20.09.
Yeah, I started to give her a pass, but the length she went to show that no matter what the real definition of 'recession' is, her research on Craig's List confirms.
I don't care what anyone says, we are NOT in a recession yet. According to NBER (nat'l bureau of econ. research), a recession is two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. The last quarter with negative GDP was in 2001. However, the current state of consumer confidence will possibly put us into a recession in upcoming quarters. Recessions are self-fulfilling prophecies.
P-85, I'd say Pygmalian effect applies to the economy. [;)]
In spite of rumors, which can set off recession-like behaviors (hiring freezes, putting off capital expansion projects) the economy is fighting to keep from falling into the recession. Political candidates and the media seem to want in this election year.
My theory is high oil/gas/NG prices and election years coincide. Recall the last NG spike was during Clinton's last campaign, and there's been more than a little evidence they were directly related.
Beside, winner gets to make world better by falling prices.
I had suspected Dems would do whatever they could to create economic chaos as a prelude to voting. And, Repubs don't mind getting rich, so was an effective plan. Too bad it's us who suffer.
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle
My theory is high oil/gas/NG prices and election years coincide. Recall the last NG spike was during Clinton's last campaign, and there's been more than a little evidence they were directly related.
Beside, winner gets to make world better by falling prices.
I had suspected Dems would do whatever they could to create economic chaos as a prelude to voting. And, Repubs don't mind getting rich, so was an effective plan. Too bad it's us who suffer.
You give far too much credit for any politician having control of the economy. The economy is far too big and too complex for any one set of politicians to control with our system of government.
The most powerful man in Washington is the Federal Reserve chairman. But even his role is mainly reactive to the conditions around him.
If you want to know who controls the economy, check out the bankers, Wall Street, corporations, etc.
I didn't mean to imply polititians were in control of the economy, just those who wish to see them elected.
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle
I didn't mean to imply polititians were in control of the economy, just those who wish to see them elected.
OK, then, start naming names. Who would benefit from Obama? Who would benefit from Clinton? Who would benefit from McCain?
Corporations from all across the country are giving or will give money to all three candidates to hedge their bets in case they need a particular favor later. They're using a scattershot approach because they're having a hard time figuring out who's going to win.
Even so, what corporation that might (or might not) get a political favor is powerful enough to hold sway over the entire U.S. economy?
If corporations truly held that much power over a nation, they would never have money-losing quarters. Even a behemoth like Wal-Mart has bad quarters once in a while.
Sorry to hold your feet to the fire, but your semi-conspiracy theories aren't credible when examined next to the evidence.
We're not talking corporations or individuals today so much as industries. Though George Soros is a special case.
Similar to the way state's governors, mayors, et al, get together and 'share' new government tactics, like the mythical 'regional average'.
In Clinton's prior campaign, the linkage was primarily to one Oklahoma natural gas company.
You shouldn't have any trouble Googling it if you're that interested.
Tulsa's not in recession. Other parts of the country may be in mild depressions.
Why do we need declarations that we are in a recession? The real issue is, and will be, what is going on in the middle class of America? What is going on with Social Security? What about the despair in neighborhoods through out America?
Here's my straw test: My family in Iowa (mostly, some in KC, Minnesota, TX, OR, NM, Penn, Virginia, California, NY, Colorado, Phoenix, and Budapest... off the top of my head) , my wife's family in Illinois and Wisconsin, or my friends in Washington, Arkansas, or around the country are mostly this middle class (from Mechanics or concrete layers to accountants and parole officers) you speak of. We're all doing fine. That's a random sample of about 100 families around the country...
Stats say unemployment is around 5% for the nation, which is where we want it to be.
Things are settled at the status quo. We are no longer living on literally borrowed money, well, not to the same extent anyway. We probably need another QT like this to adjust to the energy prices and let the housing market slump to a reasonable level. Better it happen now than we continue to live the inflated lifestyle for another 10 years - god I hope we learned a lesson.
Also, American's think the end is coming if they don't get a raise and can't afford to get a new car every 3 years. Or they have to shut off their cable for a month. Save a few bucks, consume a little less, and plan ahead... LEARN a lesson here people.
Tulsa is doing better than fine, we're rockin' at the moment. Hopefully nationally we turn it around soon and Tulsa emerges well ahead of the pack as well as riding the national momentum for a change. Clearly a zero growth economy is not going to cut it nationally, but I think we delayed the inevitable for too long - so come what may. Let get it over with.
" Also, American's think the end is coming if they don't get a raise and can't afford to get a new car every 3 years. Or they have to shut off their cable for a month. Save a few bucks, consume a little less, and plan ahead... LEARN a lesson here people."
Unfortunately Cannon, the people that need to learn a lesson here are probably not able nor interested in this forum.
The recession -- if it is one -- seems highly localized, just like the real estate markets that are causing it. The areas I've read about that have been hardest hit have been Cleveland, Phoenix, Sacramento, Miami, etc. Then there's Tulsa, which doesn't have a scratch yet.
The other factor I've been reading about -- and which seems to have yet to trickle down completely to individual spenders -- is the lack of credit in the capital markets, and hence the slowdown in growth at the corporate level. So corporate earnings are down, but not down enough yet for layoffs and firings to happen. May never get that far, but lots of people seem to think it will.
The commodity price crunch -- the food and gas problem -- is mostly coincidental.
All of that means that there seem to be conflicting waves in the economy right now, which sometime cancel each other out or mask negative outcomes. Just like oil producers are going great guns while food producers aren't. Exports benefit from a weak dollar, but companies have a difficult time expanding because of nonexistent credit. That kind of thing.
I think that's why there's a lot of confusion out there, because the indicators aren't very clear.