The U.S. Economy: Stand by for more worse news

[joepistole]

US GDP is growing at an annualized 4.2%. The unemployment rate is now 5.9% down from 10% in 2009.

Funny thing, for 6 years now Republicans have consistently claimed Obama's fiscal policies would run the nation into the ground. Economic Armageddon was just around the corner. Is this what Republicans call economic Armageddon? Perhaps they like where we were back in 2009 when Bush Jr. Left office, when the economy was shrinking at a 10% rate and the nation was loosing nearly a million jobs a month.

 

[Billy T]

The nominal increase in median household income from 2012 to 2013, first of five graphs below, is slightly less than an 0.35% gain, but less than inflation by about a factor of 5. Actually that tiny nominal increase can, I think, be due entirely to house hold that can't cover their expenses with only current jobs, so they have taken on new part-time job, while holding on to the one they had as best as they can. Here are some other percentage drops, quoted from the article text at:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2553215-why-the-market-topped-out?ifp=0
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009. Wealth inequality, which has been increasing for more than three decades, has accelerated." Graphs below show an economy about to crash and resumption of Fed 24/7 money printing press at max speed can't save it - that will only collapse confidence in the dollar faster as the Petrodollar system ends.

"The correlation {seen below} between QE and the S&P 500 performance has been very strong since the financial crisis, a fact some ignore to their peril."

Come on Joe: Get your brush and bucket of white-wash to work and tell us the facts above plus dollar still being the least ugly whore in the fiat currency whore house indicates a bright future for US economy, not coming collapse and the rise of the petroyuan when China issues gold backed bonds.

 

[joepistole]

The nominal increase in median household income from 2012 to 2013, first of five graphs below, is slightly less than an 0.35% gain, but less than inflation by about a factor of 5. Actually that tiny nominal increase can, I think, be due entirely to house hold that can't cover their expenses with only current jobs, so they have taken on new part-time job, while holding on to the one they had as best as they can. Here are some other percentage drops, quoted from the article text at:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2553215-why-the-market-topped-out?ifp=0
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009. Wealth inequality, which has been increasing for more than three decades, has accelerated." Graphs below show an economy about to crash and resumption of Fed 24/7 money printing press at max speed can't save it - that will only collapse confidence in the dollar faster as the Petrodollar system ends.

Income inequality is certainly real, and it didn’t begin with the Obama administration. It has been a problem which has vexed the economy for decades. So I don’t know what your point is here. Absent a congress which can change the way the game is played, there will be no change. The rich will continue to get wealthier and the middle class will continue to get poorer. But none of that changes the fact that the economy is doing very well. Unemployment is down and near historical norms and the economy is growing and has been growing for some time and it is growing faster than it has in several years.

As for the rest of your complaints about people not paying their bills and taking on part time jobs, there is no evidence to support those claims. Bankruptcy filings are basically flat. So that suggests there has been no change in the ability of people to pay their bills.

"The correlation {seen below} between QE and the S&P 500 performance has been very strong since the financial crisis, a fact some ignore to their peril."

And why would that be a peril exactly? The reason the Federal Reserve is ending QE is because the economy is doing much better.

Come on Joe: Get your brush and bucket of white-wash to work and tell us the facts above plus dollar still being the least ugly whore in the fiat currency whore house indicates a bright future for US economy, not coming collapse and the rise of the petroyuan when China issues gold backed bonds.

What makes you think a brush and bucket are needed? Contrary to your much vaunted forecast for a run on the dollar in a few days, there no evidence to support your predictions. In fact, the US dollar index is up about 8% this year - so much for your “ugly whore” fiat currency predictions. Ironically, the rising value of the dollar presents a long term threat to the US economy. Because a strong dollar makes goods and services produced in the US more expensive and less competitive internationally, it is one reason the markets sold off last week.
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/dxy/charts

 

[Billy T]

Income inequality is certainly real, and it didn’t begin with the Obama administration.

Neither I nor my link suggested income inequality began with Obama. My link said (without the bold I added):
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009. Wealth inequality, which has been increasing for more than three decades, has accelerated."

As for the rest of your complaints about people not paying their bills and taking on part time jobs, there is no evidence to support those claims.

Nor did I say people were not paying their bills. I said that with buying power of salaries essentially stagnate and certainly not keeping up with the rapid increases in rents* and food prices, many Americans were forced to add a second part time job (and try not to be one of those being laid off from their regular job), so they could pay their bills.

And why would that be a peril exactly? The reason the Federal Reserve is ending QE is because the economy is doing much better.

Yes for the top 10% it is much better (assuming their stock market gains don't "evaporate") but thing are worse for more than half of the American who work, instead of invest for most of their income. To again quote from link of post with five graphs:
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009. Wealth inequality, which has been increasing for more than three decades, has accelerated." Also note that number of people needing food stamps to eat, continues to increase. Yes "much better" those at the top, much worse for the bottom 25% and about static, or slightly worse for the middle class - as reflected in the decade long decline in the median house hold incomes (inflation adjusted - i.e. their buying power).

* "Rental rates increased 1% during the third quarter to an average of $1,111 a month nationwide, according to Reis Inc., REIS -0.73% a real-estate research firm that collects data on 79 U.S. metropolitan areas. That was up 3.3% from the same quarter a year ago. Last quarter's 1% increase was faster than the second quarter's 0.9% rise. Apartment rents have risen nationally for 23 straight quarters and are 15.2% higher than they were at the end of the recession in 2009.** The figures suggest the five-year squeeze on renters shows little sign of easing." Quote from WJS 1 October 14 issue. Read more here: http://online.wsj.com/articles/apartment-rents-are-rising-steadily-and-quickly-141222060

Taking a second part-time job, even manning a grave-yard shift at hotel desk weekends, is better option than sleeping on the street (or in car if you have one).
** and recall median house hold income is DOWN 4% in purchasing power since 2009

You need to get busy with that bucket of white-wash Joe to tell us that this 15.2 + 4 = 19.2% hit the renters have taken is not real.
And, BTW, please stop shooting down things I never even suggested were true - work on this 19.2% hit fact instead.

By edit: I forgot to speak about what the "peril" in high correlation between Fed's printing press money and high stock prices was as it is sort of obvious - If the Fed's presses do stop - the stock bubble that 4 trillion rise in Feds assets blew up, that will trigger a great drop of the S&P 500 etc. (or the correlation must end) but here are the Fed current problems / risks:
"Fed officials now have two problems, and both are growing in urgency.

Events in global markets and economies exert further downward pressure on U.S. prices. West Texas Intermediate oil is down more than 20 percent from this year’s June peak; wages were flat in September, according to Labor Department figures, and the Fed’s trade-weighted dollar index is up 4.5 percent year-to-date.

A stronger dollar makes it cheaper for Americans to pay for imported goods. A 10 percent increase in the dollar versus currencies of major trading partners could trim inflation by a quarter percentage point, said Michael Hanson, U.S. senior economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch in New York."

Or if you want to actually hear it from the Fed's Fisher's mouth, watch his lecture here:
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/fed-...l-economic-growth-IbQ4YWkuSuaR1zG7h0IjyA.html

 

[joepistole]

Neither I nor my link suggested income inequality began with Obama. My link said (without the bold I added):
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009. Wealth inequality, which has been increasing for more than three decades, has accelerated." Nor did I say people were not paying their bills. I said that with buying power of salaries essentially stagnate and certainly not keeping up with the rapid increases in rents* and food prices, many Americans were forced to add a second part time job (and try not to be one of those being laid off from their regular job), so they could pay their bills.Yes for the top 10% it is much better (assuming their stock market gains don't "evaporate") but thing are worse for more than half of the American who work, instead of invest for most of their income. To again quote from link of post with five graphs:
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009. Wealth inequality, which has been increasing for more than three decades, has accelerated." Also note that number of people needing food stamps to eat, continues to increase. Yes "much better" those at the top, much worse for the bottom 25% and about static, or slightly worse for the middle class - as reflected in the decade long decline in the median house hold incomes (inflation adjusted - i.e. their buying power).

* "Rental rates increased 1% during the third quarter to an average of $1,111 a month nationwide, according to Reis Inc., REIS -0.73% a real-estate research firm that collects data on 79 U.S. metropolitan areas. That was up 3.3% from the same quarter a year ago. Last quarter's 1% increase was faster than the second quarter's 0.9% rise. Apartment rents have risen nationally for 23 straight quarters and are 15.2% higher than they were at the end of the recession in 2009.** The figures suggest the five-year squeeze on renters shows little sign of easing." Quote from WJS 1 October 14 issue. Read more here: http://online.wsj.com/articles/apartment-rents-are-rising-steadily-and-quickly-141222060

Taking a second part-time job, even manning a grave-yard shift at hotel desk weekends, is better option than sleeping on the street (or in car if you have one).
** and recall median house hold income is DOWN 4% in purchasing power since 2009
You need to get busy with that bucket of white-wash Joe to tell us that this 15.2 + 4 = 19.2% hit the renters have taken is not real.
And, BTW, please stop shooting down things I never even suggested were true - work on this 19.2% hit fact instead.

By edit: I forgot to speak about what the "peril" in high correlation between Fed's printing press money and high stock prices was as it is sort of obvious - If the Fed's presses do stop - the stock bubble that 4 trillion rise in Feds assets blew up, will trigger a great drop of the S&P 500 etc. (or the correlation must end) but here are the Fed current problems / riskS:
"Fed officials now have two problems, and both are growing in urgency.

Events in global markets and economies exert further downward pressure on U.S. prices. West Texas Intermediate oil is down more than 20 percent from this year’s June peak; wages were flat in September, according to Labor Department figures, and the Fed’s trade-weighted dollar index is up 4.5 percent year-to-date.

A stronger dollar makes it cheaper for Americans to pay for imported goods. A 10 percent increase in the dollar versus currencies of major trading partners could trim inflation by a quarter percentage point, said Michael Hanson, U.S. senior economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch in New York."

Or if you want to actually hear it from the Fed's Fisher's mouth, watch his lecture here:
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/fed-...l-economic-growth-IbQ4YWkuSuaR1zG7h0IjyA.html

Well actually as I said previously, the economy is better for virtually everyone. The economy isn't shrinking at a 10% annualized rate and more with each passing month as it was when Obama was sworn into office. We are and have consistently been adding 200k plus jobs every month for many years now rather than loosing 800k jobs and more with each passing month as we were when Obama assumed office.

It's difficult to make sense of your posts as you frequently throw a bunch of unrelated stuff together and come up with an unrelated assertion. In your last post you are comparing inflation adjusted to non inflation adjusted numbers.


Further, where did I say you said income inequality began with Obama? I didn't. You also said people couldn't pay there bills. If they cannot pay their bills as you claim, then logically they are not paying their bills. And you have no evidence to support your contention more people are being forced to take 2 jobs.

Yes a strong dollar makes foreign goods cheaper for American consumers. But as I said before, it also makes goods and services produced in the US MORE expensive and less competitive internationally. Further, it reduces the value of overseas earnings for companies doing business overseas like Ford and GE. That is one reason why markets are down.

Inflation, isn't a problem for the US. If you are fighting US inflation you are jousting with windmills.

 

[Billy T]

... You also said people couldn't pay there bills. If they cannot pay their bills as you claim, then logically they are not paying their bills....

That logic would be correct IF I had said simply "people couldn't pay their bills" as you FALSELY claim I did. Here the sentence in full (without your distorting cheery picking part only to quote:
"Actually that tiny nominal increase {in incomes} can, I think, be due entirely to house hold that can't cover their expenses with only current jobs, so they have taken on new part-time job, while holding on to the one they had as best as they can. " This quote is the second sentence of my post 862.

Again I ask you to, please stop shooting down things I never even suggested were true - work on the 19.2% increase in real rent cost since 2009 instead.

 

[joepistole]

That logic would be correct IF I had said simply "people couldn't pay their bills" as you FALSELY claim I did. Here the sentence in full (without your distorting cheery picking part only to quote:
"Actually that tiny nominal increase {in incomes} can, I think, be due entirely to house hold that can't cover their expenses with only current jobs, so they have taken on new part-time job, while holding on to the one they had as best as they can. " This quote is the second sentence of my post 862.

Again I ask you to, please stop shooting down things I never even suggested were true - work on the 19.2% increase in real rent cost since 2009 instead.

You are quibbling over nonsensical stuff. Clarification of something you brought up isn't wrong.

Where is your source for rental cost assertion?

 

[pjdude1219]

The nominal increase in median household income from 2012 to 2013, first of five graphs below, is slightly less than an 0.35% gain, but less than inflation by about a factor of 5. Actually that tiny nominal increase can, I think, be due entirely to house hold that can't cover their expenses with only current jobs, so they have taken on new part-time job, while holding on to the one they had as best as they can. Here are some other percentage drops, quoted from the article text at:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2553215-why-the-market-topped-out?ifp=0
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009. Wealth inequality, which has been increasing for more than three decades, has accelerated." Graphs below show an economy about to crash and resumption of Fed 24/7 money printing press at max speed can't save it - that will only collapse confidence in the dollar faster as the Petrodollar system ends.

"The correlation {seen below} between QE and the S&P 500 performance has been very strong since the financial crisis, a fact some ignore to their peril."

Come on Joe: Get your brush and bucket of white-wash to work and tell us the facts above plus dollar still being the least ugly whore in the fiat currency whore house indicates a bright future for US economy, not coming collapse and the rise of the petroyuan when China issues gold backed bonds.

no one is going to back anything with gold. that is a fantasy. quit being an apologist for autocrats. quit pretending that china's economic gains from industrilisation and modernization mean anything until they tapped out of those gains. I'm sorry its hard to take you seriously when your more interested in the bad things that happen to the US than anything postitive anyplace else.

 

[Billy T]

foot note of

... Where is your source for rental cost assertion?

Source was given in my post as I almost always do:

Quoting from the first foot note of post 864:
"Rental rates increased 1% during the third quarter to an average of $1,111 a month nationwide, according to Reis Inc., REIS -0.73% a real-estate research firm that collects data on 79 U.S. metropolitan areas. That was up 3.3% from the same quarter a year ago. Last quarter's 1% increase was faster than the second quarter's 0.9% rise. Apartment rents have risen nationally for 23 straight quarters and are 15.2% higher than they were at the end of the recession in 2009.** The figures suggest the five-year squeeze on renters shows little sign of easing." Quote from WJS 1 October 14 issue. Read more here: http://online.wsj.com/articles/apartment-rents-are-rising-steadily-and-quickly-141222060

and Quoting from start of post 862;
" ... from the article text at: http://seekingalpha.com/article/2553215-why-the-market-topped-out?ifp=0
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009."

I.e. 15.2 nominal + 4 of "inflation adjustment" = the 19.2% real rise in median rental rates since 2009 as I asserted.

You should try giving documentation for your assertions, at least half the time as a first step. That will not hurt you.

 

[Billy T]

You are quibbling over nonsensical stuff. Clarification of something you brought up isn't wrong.

Correcting your misquote of me is not "quibbling." You claimed: "You also said people couldn't pay there bills. If they cannot pay their bills as you claim, then logically they are not paying their bills...."

But of course as usual, you are just lying by "cheery-picking" part of my sentence, which, IN FULL, was:
"Actually that tiny nominal increase {in incomes} can, I think, be due entirely to house hold that can't cover their expenses with only current jobs, so they have taken on new part-time job, while holding on to the one they had as best as they can."

I.e. you lie. I did NOT say they can't pay their bills - I said they were taking second jobs so they could pay their bills. I suggested this additional income was why there was a tiny nominal increase {in incomes} between 2012 to 2013. The purchasing power of salaries has been static of declining, but if you take an second job, your total salary will increase.

 

[joepistole]

Correcting your misquote of me is not "quibbling." You claimed: "You also said people couldn't pay there bills. If they cannot pay their bills as you claim, then logically they are not paying their bills...."

But of course as usual, you are just lying by "cheery-picking" part of my sentence, which, IN FULL, was:
"Actually that tiny nominal increase {in incomes} can, I think, be due entirely to house hold that can't cover their expenses with only current jobs, so they have taken on new part-time job, while holding on to the one they had as best as they can."

I.e. you lie. I did NOT say they can't pay their bills - I said they were taking second jobs so they could pay their bills. I suggested this additional income was why there was a tiny nominal increase {in incomes} between 2012 to 2013. The purchasing power of salaries has been static of declining, but if you take an second job, your total salary will increase.

You are quibbling over nonsense. The record speaks for itself. Repetition ad nauseum doesn't change anything.

I quoted you verbatim as I always do.

 

[joepistole]

foot note of Source was given in my post as I almost always do:

Quoting from the first foot note of post 864:
"Rental rates increased 1% during the third quarter to an average of $1,111 a month nationwide, according to Reis Inc., REIS -0.73% a real-estate research firm that collects data on 79 U.S. metropolitan areas. That was up 3.3% from the same quarter a year ago. Last quarter's 1% increase was faster than the second quarter's 0.9% rise. Apartment rents have risen nationally for 23 straight quarters and are 15.2% higher than they were at the end of the recession in 2009.** The figures suggest the five-year squeeze on renters shows little sign of easing." Quote from WJS 1 October 14 issue. Read more here: http://online.wsj.com/articles/apartment-rents-are-rising-steadily-and-quickly-141222060

and Quoting from start of post 862;
" ... from the article text at: http://seekingalpha.com/article/2553215-why-the-market-topped-out?ifp=0
"Median inflation adjusted family income is down ~7% from its previous peak in 2007 and is down ~4% since the recession officially ended in June 2009."

I.e. 15.2 nominal + 4 of "inflation adjustment" = the 19.2% real rise in median rental rates since 2009 as I asserted.

You should try giving documentation for your assertions, at least half the time as a first step. That will not hurt you.

Here is one of your problems, the rental numbers you cited are not consistent with the US Census numbers.

The fact is inflation has been extraordinarily low. Citing opinion pieces is a step up from citing advertisement. You believe advertisements and undocumented opinion pieces at your own peril.

You can keep lying about me, calling me names, but it will not change the truth Billy T.

You want real numbers , go to the US Census web page and download the spreadsheet.

 

[Billy T]

Here is one of your problems, the rental numbers you cited are not consistent with the US Census numbers. ....

As usual, just your assertions. Quote (with reference link) as I do, where Census numbers refute my links, especially the Wall Street Journal one.

 

[joepistole]

As usual, just your assertions. Quote (with reference link) as I do, where Census numbers refute my links, especially the Wall Street Journal one.

What you do is cite undocumented opinion pieces and advertisements. Your numbers are not consistent with any credible source.

You cannot GOOGLE US Census Bureau? Download histtable11.xls for rental data. The BLS has the inflation data.

You are making all these grand predictions and you cannot access data sources?

 

[Billy T]

My WSJ ref was not good enough? Then
Here is some more "undocumented opinion pieces and advertisements" from Janet Yellen today, via Bloomberg:

Numeric form of "rich get richer/poor get poorer"

Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen said she’s “greatly” concerned by the most sustained rise in U.S. wealth and income inequality since the 19th century, while declining to offer any policy prescriptions.

The lower half of U.S. households by wealth held 1 percent of the total last year, according to 2013 data from the Fed Survey of Consumer Finances, while the wealthiest 5 percent held 63 percent, Yellen said today in the text of a speech prepared for delivery at a Boston Fed conference on economic inequality.

“The past few decades of widening inequality can be summed up as significant income and wealth gains for those at the very top and stagnant living standards for the majority,” Yellen said.

BTW: The burden of getting references is on the one making assertion, you, not your readers, must quote and give link that can be checked. As I do!

 

[river]

The BS continues

Carry on

 

[joepistole]

My WSJ ref was not good enough? Then
Here is some more "undocumented opinion pieces and advertisements" from Janet Yellen today, via Bloomberg:

Numeric form of "rich get richer/poor get poorer"


BTW: The burden of getting references is on the one making assertion, you, not your readers, must quote and give link that can be checked. As I do!

Well your "WSJ" article was an opinion piece whose numbers were not consistent with numbers from The census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics. But I also know you don't like "official" numbers. You have a preference for specious material.

In your Bloomberg/Yellin reference you are changing the subject matter. As has been repeatedly stated over the years, wealth inequality is a problem for the US. That isn't the same as inflation - your previous assertion.

Income inequality is a fiscal problem which will not be solved as long as Republicans control one or more houses of Congress or the presidency. Income inequality isn't a monetary issue and has nothing to do with the Federal Reserve.

 

[Billy T]

Well your "WSJ" article was an opinion piece whose numbers were not consistent with numbers from The census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics. ...

As usual, another undocumented or referenced claim / Joepistoe opinion.

 

[joepistole]

As usual, another undocumented or referenced claim / Joepistoe opinion.

Well only undocumented when you repeatedly ignore the documentation as you have repeatedly done.

Among the unfortunate facts for you Billy T is there is absolutely no sign of runaway inflation. And there is no Evidence to back up your much vaunted prediction of a run on the dollar - next week BillyT. The time draws near.

 

[Billy T]

My post 878 was: "As usual, another undocumented or referenced claim / Joepistoe opinion."

Well only undocumented when you repeatedly ignore the documents as you have repeatedly done.

Same complaint I made in this post 873:

As usual, just your assertions. Quote (with reference link) as I do, where Census numbers refute my links, especially the Wall Street Journal one.

andin my post 869:
"You should try giving documentation for your assertions, at least half the time as a first step. That will not hurt you. "

In fact I'm begin to think you don't know how to quote a reference source as you never do that despite this suggestion.

Yes Yellen did complain about the increasing wealth gap, but that is not all or the main reason I quoted her. She said and I quoted her data*:
"The lower half of U.S. households by wealth held 1 percent of the total last year, according to 2013 data from the Fed Survey of Consumer Finances, while the wealthiest 5 percent held 63 percent,

* Unlike you, I give referenced data, not my opinion.