Which is your favorite paranoid fantasy?
I have a fondness for the growing police state. The others I don't buy.
While I was watching the X-Files somebody put a chip in my neck and now they know everything my neck does.
I'd have voted for global warming, but its not a paranoid fantasy -its REAL! Good luck all you folks under thirty!
I hope a police state is a paranoid fantasy. One wonders sometimes.
I'll accept that global warming is occuring on some sort of scale, although I'm still doubtful that it's effects are as harmfull as have been advertised
They're worse than advertized by some, and not as bad as advertized by others. But they're bad enough.
Which is your favorite paranoid fantasy?
The first three, Global Warming, Peak Oil, and Police State will only get as bad as necessary before we decided to address them. Terrorism is mostly hype. Traditional Values Collapse is a complete and utter myth - made obvious once numbers are provided.
Previous threats such as ozone layer destruction and acid rain were eventually made redundant once we addressed them. The hard part was acknowledging a problem. Once those problems were acknowledged, then a solution was (and is still ongoing) easy.
Well, its nice to hear that you think God is in his universe and all's right with the world on the ozone layer, tw. Here's the latest data from
NOAA
It shows that ozone depletion is indeed down from last year but still well above the average from previous years. One year does not a trend make, especially in the area of climatic change.
The other problem is that global warming is causing by CO2 emissions as much as anything and those are STILL on the increase.
While I was watching the X-Files somebody put a chip in my neck and now they know everything my neck does.
Hahahaha.......v.funny Bri:)
Actually? I had a dream where gas was 5.76/gallon. In my dream I was in NOLA and people were subletting their apts to pay for gas..but, also in this dream people were splitting their tongues in forks like a devil or snake just for fun, so, whattya gonna do?
Brianna, getting tongue splits was fashionable a year or two ago for about six months.
Griff, I'm not sure I could pick between my top two: terrorism originates from police states, or in trying to attain them.
And anybody who wants a greenhouse gas, try water vapor. Abundant atmospheric water vapor is by itself the reason our Earth isn't an iceball.
Abundant atmospheric water vapor is by itself the reason our Earth isn't an iceball.
HEHEHEH!
You ever see what happens when water molecules undego a phase change from gas to solid? It ain't pretty, I'm telling you, now. Don't ever visit Pluto in January, Big Guy.
Water vapor isn't gonna save us. The liquid phase might drown us, though.:p
While I was watching the X-Files somebody put a chip in my neck and now they know everything my neck does.
Oh shit. :lol2:
Well, its nice to hear that you think God is in his universe and all's right with the world on the ozone layer, tw. Here's the latest data from NOAA
It shows that ozone depletion is indeed down from last year but still well above the average from previous years.
Ozone depletion will exist for many decades or longer. Therefore the problem is solved - because we also consider other facts. Symptoms of that problem will probably take decades to be reversed. But the problem itself has been solved. The world's greatest people - the little people - have been empowered to eliminate reasons for ozone depletion. Ozone layer itself - a symptom - will probably take many decades - maybe many generations - to recover.
But the problem has finally been addressed because political types who were lying - perverting science - were finally silenced. Reasons for ozone depletion and acid rain have been solved or minimized. Symptoms remain. Further actions may be required in the future. Reasons for those symptoms have been addressed (even though George Jr tried to eliminate solutions to acid rain about three years ago).
Meanwhile, lawyers are rewriting science to proclaim global warming does not exist. Demonstrates why problems that can be solved by logic and science are not. Lawyers and MBAs were silenced on acid rain and ozone depletion. The symptoms still remain. But the problem is solved - at least for now.
While I was watching the X-Files somebody put a chip in my neck and now they know everything my neck does.
Are you now a neckrophiliac (you feel something in your neck)?
I'll take traditional values collapse for 100, Alex ...
By the process of elimination, I had to vote for 'traditional values collapse'. Paranoid implies that there is no reason for concern.
Actually paranoia is defined as 'delusions of persecution', so technically only the police state and terrorism options are paranoid, assuming they aren't real.
I was trying to get folks to acknowlege that much of what we fear is a function of our own thought processes being nudged one way or another by the media we choose to subject ourselves to, rather than a rational assessment of the threat.
Global Warming- We have not seen any new data to indicate that it is a threat but fatigue has set in, people are tired of pointing out the flaws in the arguments again and again especially when its just possible the global warming crowd may be right. (heh.. the Janus article called Katrina a climate event) Gore is releasing a new film to feed the paranoia, just in time for the Dems to make hay.
Peak Oil- We should eventually use up our oil reserves, unless the geologic processes for petroleum development are different than we assume. Is it a threat? No, it is an opportunity to move to fuels that are cleaner and don't involve releasing carbon that was stored (back to global warming). News magazines love to pimp this one, if we assume no one is working on the problem (opportunity), all kinds of magazine selling scenarios are possible. We should expect to see more government subsidies (ex: dead Marines) to protect oil companies who failed to become energy companies.
Police State- I am susceptable to this one because of my thought processes and what I read. We have two parties dedicated to the idea that individuals shouldn't make their own decisions and are incapable of protecting themselves. Will this nonsense ever really effect me? Probably not significantly, but this up-coming election cycle expect the Democrats to sell themselves as the antidote, if our system is self-correcting they will be successful. If our system really results in a ratchet effect we'll have to have a serious blow-out later.
Terrorism- Being all about fear, is the perfect tool for paranoia development. If we have a terrorist attack we need someone to save us. If we don't have an attack, we've been saved. The Republicans really need an attack right now because the "we've been saved" argument wears out faster.
Traditional Values Collapse- Who's values? Everyone has their own vision of this and is more or less suceptable to manipulation. Republicans find this one easier to manipulate but the Dems do a fair job themselves.
Who will win the next election? The outfit which exploits paranoia most effectively.
maggie has some sort of disorder. She will not-nay, cannot-allow a mispelling or grammatic error stand. She is actually your sixth grade English teacher come back from hell. And she's pissed!
That's really funny considering the mistakes she makes.:D
maggie has some sort of disorder. She will not-nay, cannot-allow a mispelling or grammatic error stand. She is actually your sixth grade English teacher come back from hell. And she's pissed!
Whom that be at?
And anybody who wants a greenhouse gas, try water vapor. Abundant atmospheric water vapor is by itself the reason our Earth isn't an iceball.
Water vapor is self regulating - at a certain temperature, the air can only hold so much before it precipitates. The automatic regulation of CO2 is done by plant life, and we're knocking out the rainforests like gangbusters.
Has the news grown quiet on this, already? Where is "bird flu/H5N1" on that list?
Dagnabit! I knew I was missing a big one, but then again it has shrunk from the headlines.
You ever see what happens when water molecules unde[r]go a phase change from gas to solid? It ain't pretty, I'm telling you, now. Don't ever visit Pluto in January, Big Guy.
Hmm. Which January? With an orbital period of 248.54 Earth years, each with its January, "embarrassment of riches" hardly scratches the surface.
Such phase change would evolve quite a bit of heat.
I love to hate the Traditional Values Collapse hugh and cry, but I'd like to do a write-in - the old hit "Freemasons rule the world", or, in earlier times, "the Freemasons are poisoning the wells." I know, I know, those paranoid fantasies are old and done. BUT... My grandfather just happens to be of freemason bent, while my grandmother is a jack-boot Mormon. Which makes me, by heritage... a Freemormon :eek: . I could start my own religion, ala Mr. Smith... but secretly... "Stealth Mormons: We're coming for you." (Wait, no. We're already here, and we have been for years. That's the ticket).
Nevermind. Got "paranoid fantasy" and "conspiracy theory" mixed up. We're still coming for you, though.
And conversion is no longer voluntary.
We Freemasons are not poisoning the wells.
We have to drink out of them too.
As per this "ruling the world"...
I've seen some of the ones running the brotherhood.
Don't worry about it.
Some of these guys couldn't find their ass with both hands and a GPS.
BTW: Fasinating fact -
Joseph Smith was a Freemason when he started the Mormon religion.
As was Charles Taze when he started the Jehovah's Witnesses.
My old man is a JW, and "HATES" when I bring up that little tidbit.
Sucks to be him.
Who controls the British Crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do, we do.
Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do, we do.
Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do, we do.
Who robs cave fish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do, we do
We claim no responsibility for Guttenberg.
That's the Knights of Columbus.
Blame them.
Has the news grown quiet on this, already? Where is "bird flu/H5N1" on that list?
I would have voted for Bird Flu too, but I agree the lazy media have finally got bored with this one.
I voted for Traditional Values Collapse partly as a reaction to the old couple I had the misfortune to sit behind on the bus today.
Of their MANY and varied whinges (15 minute journey, every sentence a complaint) was the following:
M - It's like the clock. They spent all that money cleaning the clock on the railway station, and I bet it still don't work.
F - No, they haven't put the hands back on yet.
M - Humpf, probably won't bother. Kids these days can't even tell the time, all got digital watches.
F - Arrrrrrrh!
Er, hello Grandad? I think you'll find the huge surge in digital watches was about 20 years ago. My Dad and some of my friends have them, but every child I know under 15 has a watch with hands...
They're all the same.
The Freemasons want to dominate the world. They erode traditional values so that we'll travel in fossil fueled vehicles, rather than stay at home with our families. This leads to global warming, peak oil prices, and urban sprawl, which brings people in closer contact to birds, which have the flu. The threat of terrorism causes us to accept a police state, which will keep us in line when fuel prices increase astronomically or suppy runs out.
IT'S ALL THE SAME THING! A GIANT INTERLOCKING PLAN!
Think about this:
W hasn't found Osama Bin Laden.
Why? Because W is not looking for him.
Why? Because OSB was working for W.
Why? Because W needed a terrorist attck on US soil.
Why? Because W needed a flashpoint to start a war on terror.
Why? Because the Neocons wanted to implement "The Project For The New American Century"
Why? Because neocons are freemasons, or their unwitting pawns, and the freemasons want to control the world!
True, 911 was Dubya & Co.'s Reichstag fire.
Plus, he can't kill the brother of his best buddy... that would be just wrong!
IT'S ALL THE SAME THING! A GIANT INTERLOCKING PLAN!
The Mormons have to fit in there somewhere. They'll replace Islam with Mormonism in the middle east as part of the new american century plan... it's almost too perfect...
Bin Laden is a polygamist?
Bin Laden is a polygamist?
Coincidence? I think not.
So his justification for why the deficit is lower is that... he's taking less?
What?
Maybe not? :(
"The 2006 deficit may be a bit lower, but it represents a $600 billion swing from the surplus projected in 2001. And a deficit of $296 billion is still a large deficit. In nominal terms, its one of the four largest in history,"
Considering the beating the Bush Administration has taken for the past few months, being able to say, "Hey! We suck less than we did last quarter!" is a pretty big deal...
The economy has been very seriously booming for the last year and a half. Growth is up, unemployment is low, profits are way up and in this most recent report wages are increasing. By every measure, things are awesome.
Of course the economy goes through ups and downs all the time, inevitably, and whoever is in charge when it booms gets credit, and whoever is in charge when it busts gets blame.
However there should be consequences to economists who
predict doom just before the boom.
Maybe he used the same calculatir that he used for his Medicare drug estimate.
As recently as September, Medicare chief Mark B. McClellan said the new drug package would cost $534 billion over 10 years. Last night, he acknowledged that the cumulative cost of the program between 2006 and 2015 will reach $1.2 trillion,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9328-2005Feb8.html
There's been rumor than everything is going great, but I don't see it. Maybe it's the higher energy prices (gasoline and PECO), or maybe it's that all those big profits haven't trickled down to me yet - if they ever will.
However there should be consequences to economists who predict doom just before the boom.
Well, if they work for the administration, they get hearty slaps on the back for making the actual numbers sound great!
Right. When you climb out of the truth hole you will notice that the actual numbers don't just "sound" great, they are objectively great.
It's remarkable to see the spin. CNN and the Times eked a negative out of them too. What hard work that must be. In 2004 the total emphasis was on job creation figures because that was the worst figure available. They mentioned it every day in 2004. They don't mention that number AT ALL any more.
The spin is always that things are secretly bad, or secretly good, according to incomprehensible matters just around the corner, or by certain numbers being emphasized differently. The numbers that are important are all good today. So it's harder to spin.
The administration got the last three projections wrong. The projections are based on past receipts. The receipts went up. So? Zat BAD?
The stupid thing is they can still easily criticize the administration (and I do) because if it weren't for all the stupid spending, the budget would be balanced today and the resulting boom would be really amazing. But fie on criticizing spending.
As recently as September, Medicare chief Mark B. McClellan said the new drug package would cost $534 billion over 10 years. Last night, he acknowledged that the cumulative cost of the program between 2006 and 2015 will reach $1.2 trillion,
Hmmm...If when Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt, he started spending a million dollars a day.....
....he'd still be trying to spend $1.2 trillion. :rolleyes:
The economy has been very seriously booming for the last year and a half. Growth is up, unemployment is low, profits are way up and in this most recent report wages are increasing. By every measure, things are awesome.
We were arguing here in the Cellar back in early 1990s that the economy sucked. Meantime Greenspan was saying growth and productivity increases were everywhere - except on those spread sheets. Later those spread sheets finally found growth.
You may remember back in the early 90s when I posted "This is the best it gets". Years later, the spread sheets finally reported same. The growth that Greenspan insisted existed finally appeared even in spread sheets.
Shop in any grocery store to see inflation. Government reports kept claiming there was no significant inflation. Right. The Fed has long worried about inflation that somehow does not appear in those spread sheets. Even the stock market sees no booming economy. Just like those spread sheets in 1990 - today’s spread sheets only report things that occurred 4 and 10 years previously. The economy has not been booming. And now the spread sheets are finally reporting a downturn.
Major storm clouds are everywhere. Inflation is galloping as indicated by the massive numbers of dollars floating overseas - in numbers so large as to even contribute to inflation in some other nations. Yes, anyone can keep printing money - using many financial instruments - and the resulting downturn does not occur for many years later (ie Vietnam late 60s then created mid 70s downturns).
Where is all this growth? A myth created by wild government spending. Pay everyone to rip up their lawn and replant it - and those same economic numbers would claim a booming economy. Eventually economics takes punishment for such wild spending. But it takes four and more years for spread sheets to actually measure reality. We are now just seeing the punishment for Bush tax cuts - as we saw after the Kennedy tax cuts - recession.
How deep is the denial? Oil has gone from $20 per barrel to $75 per barrel - and finance fiction writers still claim this has not harmed the economy. They even hype a myth that the economy is no longer so dependent on oil. Only a fool would believe stock brokers who have little grasp of what makes the economy tick. No wonder stock brokers claim there is almost no inflation and the Fed is completely wrong. Welcome right back to 1970s Deja Vue. Major storm clouds are brewing. The PBGC fiasco just one example of wild and unjustified spending.
If the economy is booming, then why has rosy stock broker hype resulted in near zero stock growth during George Jr rein. Just like in the 1990s, it took years for those no growth spread sheets to finally discover massive productivity increases. Today it will take years for those same spread sheets to report a downturn. And yet those who are not fooled by stock broker hype are saying the downturn is already here - in the stock market. We must now pay for George Jr massive 'spend spend and enrich the rich' economics.
If things are so awesome, then why does the stock market not reflect same? On 1 Jan 2000, the Dow was at 11,500. Six point five years later and it is only at 11,200. Add in maybe a few points of inflation every year and the stock market is even worse. Where is this growth? Where is this 8% annual increase that still is not sufficient to protect those pension funds (that assumed 9% growth annully)? The only awesome in the economy is how the richest have become so much richer. With inflation, the average Joe has been losing wealth for many years now. Amazing how mental midget economics is hyped when those who best know the economy - stock markets - instead show a 6 year recession. The rich - the upper most less than 5% - are getting wealthier.
With the highest forclosure rate in who knows how long, even before the shoe drops on the massive numbers of interest-only and adjustible rate mortgages, we are in for some rough times.
The spin is always that things are secretly bad, or secretly good, according to incomprehensible matters just around the corner.
I suppose that people finding interest-only and adjustible rate mortgages incomprehensible is part of the problem. But interest rates will go up at some point, and salaries aren't going up for most of the population. It's completely out in the open and comprehensible.
Living within one's means and not completely overextending yourself is the best way to not be affected by these up's and down's. That would mean not taking a mortgage that will take you 25 years to pay off IF you don't lose your job, IF you don't get injured, and IF the fantastic intrest rate you took your loan at doesn't change. Am I supposed to feel sorry for people who lose houses that they could never afford in the first place?
The spin is always that things are secretly bad, or secretly good, according to incomprehensible matters just around the corner.
I think a lot of the "secretly bad" aspect comes from the underlined importance of consumer confidence and purchase of luxury items. If those are up, everything is happy. While those indicators have been up and people are spending, what seems to be overlooked is that
wages haven't kept up with the rising cost of living. How can wages remain flat over five years or effectively go down and people still spend the same amounts of money? People are racking up huge amounts of debt and
the consumer savings rate is negative. Consumers can spend money on big purchases, buy houses on easy loans, and continuing living at the current rate and keep the numbers happy. Everything is dandy.
And, honestly, I see everything doing wonderful right now in the economy in the short term, and I can understand why there are a lot of good reasons to be pleased about the tracked economic indicators. I just fear that if people don't start making good decisions in their finances, we could see everything come to a head very quickly and the majority of people won't be prepared to shoulder the burden of debt or pull through on loans. We haven't seen a negative rate of savings in a long time and I'm not certain it will be handled well.
But, hey, what do I know?
You can spin this anyway you like, really, and
maybe people are keeping their heads?
Am I supposed to feel sorry for people who lose houses that they could never afford in the first place?
Feeling sorry for them is irrelevant. One of the strongest pillars of the economy in recent years has been the housing and home construction market, and that pillar has been made of pasteboard.
While we wait for the housing bust, predicted for the last three-four years now, and the interest rate bust, predicted for the last five-six years now, wages are now increasing (a lagging number in boom times!) and the economy has so far totally shrugged off the problem of higher fuel prices (which nobody predicted).
The economic futurism is a fun game, but having watched it for a while now, it's just a game. Economists themselves are mixed about the value of predicting the future - because they so often get it completely wrong. They wonder whether it devalues the entire profession.
Because the economy is actually so complex that nobody can model the whole thing. Because nobody can accurately predict human and societal behavior.
While we wait for the housing bust, predicted for the last three-four years now, and the interest rate bust, predicted for the last five-six years now, wages are now increasing (a lagging number in boom times!) and the economy has so far totally shrugged off the problem of higher fuel prices (which nobody predicted). ...
Because the economy is actually so complex that nobody can model the whole thing. Because nobody can accurately predict human and societal behavior.
The housing bust was predicted only in the past year. Did it or will it happen? Ten years are not yet up? It takes four to ten years just to design anything. That means money spent today does not create economic benefit or resulting recession for at least four to ten years. Nixon spent wildly on Vietnam with money we did not have. Therefore we had a very active economy in the early 1970s with no growth. So when did a resulting recession start? Mid 1970s. Made worse because the Fed dithered - did not raise interests rates well above 10%.
We are again in that same Vietnam era economy. We spend wildly making short term thinkers hype a mythical growing economy even though no such grow appears in the stock market. IOW we are all just tearing up and replanting lawns - or fighting a war based on lies in Iraq - same thing. It makes the economy look strong to a neo-classical economist who only plays ‘money game’ economics. But when those investments should have resulted in profits four and more years later, that is when an existing recession finally causes job losses.
Meanwhile the economy is quite complex. Just like in the 1970s, the stock market predicted a resulting recession oscillating in between 700 and 1000 for the entire decade. No growth. All this while, Nixon proclaimed the economy as healthy citing the same numbers that UT cites as proof of growth.
For the past few years, eliminating a top 5% incoming numbers, and adjusting for inflation; the American income has decreased every year. This is a booming economy? These were also symptoms of a recession - deja vue post 1970. The American wage has been decreasing for the past few years. Inflation is above 2% - and increasing. Wage increases are less.
Am I supposed to feel sorry for people who lose houses that they could never afford in the first place?
No. You are suppose to say that a so called 'booming' economy was partially due to people taking houses they could not afford. A later resulting recession created by an economy today inflated by wild and irresponsible government spending and other financial instruments that create only paper wealth. Just another reason why Fed rate increases are so necessary to soften a resulting recession.
Where are the next product innovations that will pay for those houses? Instead we spend money in Iraq on a war that was only supposed to cost $2billion and be paid for by oil revenues. "Mission Accomplished" creates innovative products? Yes, according to MBA (George Jr) reasoning. This 'flush with money' economy also makes those houses affordable today. Then when those now $450 billion bills (a number that increases about $100 billion annually) come due, who can no longer afford the house?
You don't care about anyone who loses his house. You care about everyone in an economy that is booming only because Cheney says, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter". Eventually those bills come due. Much of them bills will be paid to China who is currently financing the "Mission Accomplished" war.
Yes, deficits don't matter when your heart will not last long enough to have to pay those bills. Another example of the heartless. And yet he and I both agree - you don't give a damn about any one homeowner. Where we disagree is what happens when the debts come due and no innovation occurred to pay for those debts.
the economy has so far totally shrugged off the problem of higher fuel prices
so far it's been a little more of the discretionary income at the pump, the trash man tacked on $5 fuel surcharge, donuts went up a quarter, really not earthshaking unless your living an income that is marginal to begin with.
But the chance of oil, or any energy product, going down is somewhere between slim and none. How can this possibly not drive the cost of everything, the cost of living, up pretty rapidly.
Even if everything is made in China, they are paying more for energy too. Then the cost of shipping has to go up, so how can the cost of living not go up substantially? :confused:
I don't know -- but the price has been up for a year now and the economy really is shrugging it off. This isn't future prediction, it's what's been happening.
Two guesses: one, the price is actually still average in historical, inflation-adjusted terms. Two, improvements in shipping and logistics mean that shipping is less of the cost per item, overall.
On other items,
One strange thing to remember about the housing situation is that each individual who makes a deal on a house is bullish about his or her own situation. People make deals like that, which affect their entire financial situation, only if they are optimistic about their own future. Nobody *expects* to be foreclosed on. Mortgage companies are similarly motivated.
The stock market is not the economy. The numbers that are important are GDP, inflation, money supply, unemployment. The stock market is ownership in US blue chip companies, and it sits next to the economy so it is usually affected by it, but it is not a measure of anything IN the economy. Perhaps people are investing more overseas. People are investing more in NASDAQ, which didn't even exist until 1971.
The stock market is not the economy. The numbers that are important are GDP, inflation, money supply, unemployment.
Those same numbers (GDP, unemployment, etc) in early 1990s said the economy was seriously recessionary and had no productivity increases. Greenspan was saying the economy was otherwise. But again, those ‘lagging indicators’ did not report reality for many years. During those years, the stock market increased constantly from 2800 in 1990 to 4000 in 1994. Why? UT tells us the stock market does not measure an economy? GDP and unemployment were reporting a recession when the economy was actually growing and when the stock market was reporting same. GDP and unemployment numbers did not report massive productivity and economic growth until mid 1990s just as today they would not yet report a recession.
If we have moved into a recession, then GDP and unemployment will report that economic downturn many years later. Meanwhile the stock market is reporting, at best, a stagnant economy. An economy that has negative growth when inflation is included in to those numbers.
Oil price increases last year did not affect the economy? Again, this is how short term, foolish, MBA types think. They actually believe the spread sheets report what happened this year. Back in the early 1970s, a severe impact from gasoline that eventually rose to $7 per gallon (2006 dollars) did not appear for many years later – mid to late 1970s.
Years ago, the wholesale price of electricity was in the $10 to 40 per MW hour. Today, those same prices vary between $50 and $220. Even today (Saturday night) when most industries are not operating ing, the price is about $75. So you tell me where your electric bill has doubled? Why have electric rates increased seven and five times - but your electric bill has virtually no increases? Price increases take a long time – multiple years - to trickle through an economy and to appear in GDP and unemployment numbers. Those massive energy cost increases have yet to be seen by consumers. Historically, price of gasoline is only slightly above normal. Why have such massive energy price increases been 'shrugged off'? Because price increases due to energy have not yet fully arrived. But again, UT forgets how 'lagging' those economic numbers are. UT forgets why neo-classical economics fails to measure and predict what makes or breaks an economy.
Massive energy price increases will arrive and will seriously impact those economies that most guzzle wastefully. It has only been a year? Therefore no economic data (ie GDP or unemployment) has yet to measure those consequences.
We have yet to see the downturn that is coming due to George Jr ‘spend wildly tax cuts’. But again, recessions created by “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter” rationalizations take years to develop. It too will be coming. When it does, GDP and unemployment will be some of the last data to report it.
People are investing more in NASDAQ, which didn't even exist until 1971.
As a kid in the early 1960s, I would read the three stock exchanges - NYSE, American, and 'Over the Counter'. The last two are now called NASDAQ.
No, two consecutive quarters of negative GDP are the
dictionary definition of recession.
Here is the Wikipedia entry on "recession". The first sentence explains,
A recession is usually defined in macroeconomics as a fall of a country's real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in two or more successive quarters of a year.
The
American Stock Exchange did not become NASDAQ - it never went away. OTC didn't have blue-chippers like Microsoft until NASDAQ boomed, tracking the tech bubble in the 90s.
Isn't buying houses or stocks betting that if your personal finances go to hell you can always sell either and at least break even? Confidence, even irrational exuberance, in the housing or stock market. :confused:
No, two consecutive quarters of negative GDP are the dictionary definition of recession.
When that dictionary definition is met, then we were already entering recession years ago; when neo-classical economic numbers insisted the economy was booming.
We will not know if the recession is happening today (according to that definition) for many years. Years later, the GDP and unemployment numbers finally discover recession. Meanwhile, as that GDP number declares a recession, we may actually be back in a growing economy - as was the case in the early 1990s. They are lagging indicators because they measure things that occurred four and ten years previously.
Meanwhile, stock market currently says growth does not exist AND that numbers that define recession will say so years later. Common man's incoming has been falling for some years now. Using 'lagging indictors' only measure and report a recession years after the fact; years after the recession was created by a shortage of new and innovative products and created by 'money games'.
The American Stock Exchange did not become NASDAQ - it never went away. OTC didn't have blue-chippers like Microsoft until NASDAQ boomed, tracking the tech bubble in the 90s.
Irrelevant whether MSFT or INTC existed in NASDAQ or in a same stock exchange called 'Over the Counter'. NASDAQ pioneered trading by computers - not on a trading floor - even back in the 1960. That would be long before 1971.
The American Exchange is now part of NASDAQ when NASDAQ bought it. Back in the 60s, the OTC was the third exchange doing something radical - trading by computer. American Exchange that was #2 is now part of NASDAQ. But again, above provided as background information to demonstrate that "NASDAQ, which didn't even exist until 1971" is incorrect.
BTW, you can still buy products from RCA. And yet RCA has not existed for something like 20 years. AMEX is now part of NASDAQ that also existed long before 1971 - when AMEX was a larger and more respected exchange alongside NYSE.
Good points on all sides, honestly, and a reminder that any economic prediction is about as reliable as a weather forecast.
...actually, I trust the weather forecast a lot more, these days.
When that dictionary definition is met, then we were already entering recession years ago; when neo-classical economic numbers insisted the economy was booming.
And in the same sense, when the economic numbers are booming, we were entering that boom when the economic numbers showed bust.
Since the boom - bust cycle appears to be inevitable, this is not a very useful observation.
Since the boom - bust cycle appears to be inevitable, this is not a very useful observation.
A rather curious phenomena. Economics tends to have a cycle of about 10 years and another bigger cycle of about 30 years. Those thirty year cycles tend to be major changes. Take the 1970s. Add thirty years. A whole new breed of 'economic thinkers' trained in theory and little grasp of 1970s experience would only make same mistakes again. And so again, we are lying to the public how much we are spending in an illicit war, massive trade imbalances, interest rates climbing, commodity prices skyrocketing, inflation looming, rich getting richer while a middle class stagnates, government playing money games with spending and debts including emergency spending bills so that the actual fiscal mismanagement is not obvious, massive spending bills on coporate welfare such as the perscription drug plan to keep drug prices up and $8 billion to airlines with no stings attached, personal savings at an all time low, major institutions dealing with potential bankruptcy (ie GM, PBGC), and a population that does not have a positive economic attitude when economic statistics say otherwise. Welcome to the 1970s and to a event that traditionally occurs 30 years later - when economic leaders did not have personal experience from that history but plenty of training based in 'money game' theories (without grasp of the importance and nature of innovation).
Well, if you care to make a prediction, we can place it on the Cellar calendar and see whether it comes true. Give us a date for that downturn, it will be interesting in the future.
Well, if you care to make a prediction, we can place it on the Cellar calendar and see whether it comes true. Give us a date for that downturn, it will be interesting in the future.
Because innovation takes four to ten years to occur, and since shortage of innovation is a primary source of recessions, then four years is a minimal number for economic data to measure what was actually happening within an economy. Within four years, we should know.
Well, if you care to make a prediction, we can place it on the Cellar calendar and see whether it comes true. Give us a date for that downturn, it will be interesting in the future.
For the first time in 10 years, housing prices dropped this month. What makes it more interesting, those prices dropped by 2% in an economy that is now suffering a 2.8% inflation rate.
For the first time in 10 years, housing prices dropped this month. What makes it more interesting, those prices dropped by 2% in an economy that is now suffering a 2.8% inflation rate.
I'm a fiscal retard, can you give me the Cliff's notes interpretation of the implications of that fact?
Interpretation isn't the word I'm looking for, but there is an inchling who is distracting me.
I'm also economically challanged, but I'll take a stab at some of it.
If housing prices go down 2%, then the assesed value of my house should go down 2%, and my local government's real estate taxes should go down (HAH!) by 2%. So it's not such a bad thing, in my eyes.
Also, with housing prices going down, you will see fewer new housing starts. So the demand for building supplies should go down, and prices should go down a little too. You might be able to get a sheet of plywood for a reasonable price again. Good news if you are fixing up your own house.
Hmm. Our local assessment just went up nearly 50%. I think.
If it was 74,000 and is now 106,000 that is almost a 50% increase is it not?
Plywood is still pretty expensive but a bargain compared to copper or steel.
I'm a fiscal retard, can you give me the Cliff's notes interpretation of the implications of that fact?
Has good news in this economy been based in productive activities? Well, incomes have been dropping for the past five years. So why the strong housing market? Was that housing market due to productive and necessary products - or just wild speculation?
With ridiculously low interest rates, then people were either buying houses they needed, or speculating. Unfortunately, this - the major driving force in the American economy - is traceable to Americans who could not otherwise buy homes, Americans who have combined low interest rates with dangerous balloon and variable rate mortgages, and the rich buying vacation homes. IOW the economic boom will not result in increased wealth four and more years later.
Well maybe homes would be a good investment. But housing prices are now starting to do what was long predicted. People will do anything to not let their house price fall - even delay a sale. But eventually the dam will break. And so this 2% drop is feared to be a dam breaking.
Those who otherwise could not afford the home and those who were only buying on speculation will suffer. Big part of the American economy that has been its 'engine' may collapse. That is the economic fear to a flurry of bankruptcies, a collapse of industries that kept the American economy looking good, and maybe a major recession.
Is your house assessment performed annually? Of course not. An assessment increases 50% because prices have inflated into a bubble. Housing prices have become that much excessive - and people just kept buying. Even worse are the many who took out equity loans on their house. A housing bubble that economic analysts fear because economics tends to take back easy money - vindictively.
Any one of three things may happen. Housing prices drop leaving massive debts for homeowners - maybe a house worth less than its mortgage. Rents skyrocket. Third is inflation resulting in much higher interest rates. We already see inflation jolting upward AND massive American dollars overseas waiting for what?
This economy has not been about America producing things. America's manufacturing economy is about 15% below what it once was - proportionally. Americans are becoming less technically able as indicated by college degrees (and skyrocketing numbers of student no longer finishing college), exportable products, and the number of immigrants who are now required for the more productive jobs. All this time, those problems are vague and looming because problems do not yet appear on spread sheets.
One need only look at how Home Depot and Lowes are changing their business models to appreciate what is expected. This 2% downturn is expected to increase in next 5+ years. People with houses worth less than they paid for or less than its mortgage.
Economic diseases are cured by recessions. Are you financially secure to weather a recession, loss of housing values, or massive rent increases? This is the question that a 2% drop in housing prices asks of you. After all, what other industry is ready to employ Americans when the housing industry drops by 50%. Toll Brothers has already seen a 50% drop in sales – therefore even resulting in a drop in house prices. What's in your wallet - or savings account? Were you foolish enough to take out a balloon mortgage or interest variable rate? Are your credit cards at $0 balance? That 2% drop in housing prices may be your last few warnings. Speculation and easy money is over. Satan demands his due.
That 2% drop in housing prices is considered a leading indicator of economics taking revenge on easy money. A problem only made worse by an $800billion trade deficient and a $100billion war that is being lost. Of massive dollars sitting overseas and not yet appearing on spread sheets either as the selling of America, devaluation of the dollar, or inflation. The American economy was so stable and reponsible in the 1990s. Major problems are looming. Maybe this time, we will not make mistakes - and instead increase interests significantly before damage occurs; avoid the 'guns and butter' mistakes by Nixon in late 1960s. We have major outstanding debts and we have an economy that looked good only as long as housing prices kept increasing.
Any one of three things may happen. Housing prices drop leaving massive debts for homeowners - maybe a house worth less than its mortgage.
The loss of good "auto-jobs" in the last few years in the Detroit area has a high number of people upside down on their homes.
Overall I see this as amusing but only because most of these people believed that they were smarter than God by buying more house than they could afford. Why put money down on a house? Mortgage it to the max. It'll only increase in value, right?
Now, someone with a relatively small chunk of CASH could roll into those areas and own what was recently a very nice home.
Oh yeah...all of this bad news is Bush's fault. We all know that.
Oh yeah...all of this bad news is Bush's fault. We all know that.
George Jr's part in all this is massive spending because "Reagan proved that deficiets don't matter". That massive lump of American dollars overseas, a military now short of resources, a universally low American approval rating, quagmires in two wars that we cannot win, and the massive debt those wars are creating ... all are directly traceable to a president who then so fears Americans as to wiretap them - without judicial review.
We have yet to see how much George Jr will cost us. $100 million given away to build a hybrid. When that GM product did not appear 10 years later - GM still does not have a hybrid - then what does George Jr do? Nothing. Eventually more Detroit jobs lost as partioitic Americans buy the best - principles of a free market economy. The bastard even gave the airlines $8billion with no strings attached. Massive tariffs to protect an anti-American steel manufacturers industry.
Do you think corporate welfare is free? Do you really think economic forces do not come back four and ten years later to take revenge? That is the legacy of a president when god (rather than reality) talks to him. George Jr has successfully engineered an economy that is now growing less than the inflation rate. It is no accident that American wages have dropped during George Jr's tenure. Fiscal responsibility? He was a drunk and drug addict. He is an MBA. Where does that say anything about responsibility? Has he really changed - or just imposed his bad habits on us? We know he is a liar - no way around that reality.
George Jr's part in all this is massive spending because "Reagan proved that deficiets don't matter"...
That's right... because eventually a Democrat will get voted in and fix it for them. Until the next one comes along.
![NOAA]("http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/sbuv2to/gif_files/ozone_hole_plot.png"){kind=link}