Wrong. Do you buffoons have any concept of what an asset a house can be? Do you even realize what home ownership means to so many, especially low-income Americans?

I guess Habitat for Humanity and their ilk can just fuck off, right?

http://www.habitat.org/intl/na/218.aspx

Bush is an asshole for wanting Americans to own their own homes?! Is that all you've got?

1/23/2008 12:36:10 AM

Obviously in his zeal to get as many people owning homes as possible, he forgot the part of the plan where 6 years later the economy doesn't come crashing down.

1/23/2008 12:39:53 AM

^ Yeah, with all Bush's power--I mean, he's certainly rendered the Democrats in Congress impotent--he also controls the minds of individuals. Apparently, Bush has the ability to cloud their understanding of. . .ADJUSTABLE RATE MORTGAGEs!!!1

[Edited on January 23, 2008 at 1:01 AM. Reason : .]

1/23/2008 1:01:05 AM

ok how did they not know that the interest rates were lowered to get the poor people loans
but would eventually get increased beyond what they could pay

dont tell me they didnt see that comming.

i think it is a planned destruction of the US economy because they realize we must dramatically rearrange our economy inorder to keep up with china

the only way to do that is if the # of poor people increase

they tried to do it by sneaking illegal mexian in, but that gig is up

now they have to turn a huge % of american into lower class citizens

its real simple we are in direct competition with china now, and we are quickly going banckrupt, we have to make a quick change and natural change will take too long

1/23/2008 1:03:38 AM

Damn, that's a whole lot of stupid in one post.

I distinctly remember liberals complaining about unfair loan practices and qualification requirements that locked minorities out of homeownership. Now liberals are claiming that those same companies preyed on minorities with teaser interest rates and excessive subprime loans, qualifying minorities and others who had no business buying a house.

Make up your mind, you hypocritical bastards.

[Edited on January 23, 2008 at 1:16 AM. Reason : 2]

1/23/2008 1:15:29 AM

That was minorities claiming that. I honestly don't recall any politicians that said that.

1/23/2008 1:19:08 AM

Enabling subprime loans helped poor people, therefore it was good economic policy.
Providing welfare helped poor people, therefore it was good economic policy.
Protectionism helped poor people, therefore it was good economic policy.
Giving away free malt liquor helped poor people, therefore it was good economic policy.


[Edited on January 23, 2008 at 1:31 AM. Reason : .]

1/23/2008 1:29:39 AM

^^ That's because you don't know what you're talking about--you never have.

Hillary Clinton on affordable housing:

Quote :

"In addition to preserving the existing affordable housing stock, I have supported efforts to increase the supply of affordable housing. I co-sponsored the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act, which establishes a dedicated funding stream to produce 1.5 million new units of housing for low-income families."

http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/issues/housing/

John Edwards on affordable housing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0zcw2pmRqM

Barack Obama on affordable housing:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ku-zyChNixw

1/23/2008 1:31:28 AM

Well apparently these are policies that Bush and other Republicans supported as well so placing blame with just 1 party would be unfair.

1/23/2008 1:33:01 AM

Quote :

"That was minorities claiming that. I honestly don't recall any politicians that said that."

IMStoned420

^ Tap dancing V

http://youtube.com/watch?v=78JiAV4xvHo&feature=related

1/23/2008 1:41:07 AM

Fed's Action Stems Sell-Off in World Markets

Quote :

"By the close of trading Tuesday, stock prices, after gyrating wildly, had clawed much of their way back. Shares of banks and insurers of mortgage-backed securities, which had been battered in recent days, were among the day's biggest gainers. Asian markets seemed to calm Wednesday morning with most exchanges opening higher."

Quote :

"Ultimately, it is the Federal Reserve that has the most power to avert or soften a recession. But its power is finite, and its primary tool — lower interest rates — takes time to work. 'Monetary policy works with a lag,' said Mr. Reinhart, the former top Fed official."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/business/23fed.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&th&emc=th

Hmm. An interest rate cut--large though it is--caused market gains here, and most exchanges opened higher around the world. Impressive, I'd say.

BTW, whenever there's a "sell-off," there's also a corresponding buyup; The New York Times doesn't tell you that, though. And the Monopoly Man doesn't buy the stocks--he's not real (FYI).

1/23/2008 6:24:03 AM

If by "gains" you mean still losing over 100 points at close then yes. They gained. Good to know those rose-tinted glasses are a nice fit.

1/23/2008 6:40:52 AM

^^

This is like popping a vicodin when you're in pain because of metastatic cancer.

1/23/2008 8:36:01 AM

Recession FAQ form WSJ
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120078173684203245.html?mod=hps_us_inside_today

Quote :

"What a Recession Could Mean to You By GREG IP January 20, 2008 A recession in 2008 isn't official yet. But with unemployment rising and stocks falling -- including a 4% drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average last week -- many economists, including former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, say the U.S. is probably in a recession. What does that mean exactly? And what does it mean for investors? Here are answers to some key questions. Q: What is a recession? A: Business cycles are made up of periods of economic expansion and recessions, when the economy is contracting. The generally accepted arbiter of when U.S. recessions begin and end is the "business cycle dating committee" of the 87-year old National Bureau of Economic Research, a non-profit group based in Cambridge, Mass., that is made up of 600 academic economists. The NBER defines a recession as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months," and usually visible in measures such as gross domestic product, employment, incomes and industrial production. A popular rule of thumb says a recession is two consecutive quarters of shrinking GDP, although that doesn't fit some NBER-designated recessions. Q: Are we in a recession or about to enter one? A: We won't know for sure unless the NBER announces it, and that would likely be long after the fact. (It did not decide the last recession began in March of 2001 until November of that year.) So far, GDP has yet to shrink. But there are some things that are common to most recessions that are present now: a drop in the stock market, long-term interest rates falling below the level of short-term rates, and a decline in housing activity. Goldman Sachs says the unemployment rate, averaged over three months, has always risen at least 0.3 percentage points before or during a recession, a threshold that was crossed last month. REAL TIME ECONOMICS • Read the latest news and analysis on the economy at WSJ.com's Real Time Economics blog. But there are some indicators that are not flashing recession. Employers have not trimmed employee work weeks, as they commonly do if demand for their products has tailed off. Initial claims for unemployment insurance have actually dropped so far in January. Perhaps most important, inventories are not unusually high, which makes it less urgent for manufacturers to scale back production. Q: If it's a recession, how long and deep will it be? A: According to the NBER, there have been 32 recessions since 1854, lasting an average of 17 months. Recessions have gotten shorter and less frequent since 1945, averaging just 10 months. And the two last recessions were among the shortest and mildest on record; both the 1990-1991 downturn and the 2001 recession lasted just eight months. One reason recessions are less severe now is that traditionally a major cause of declines in GDP and employment has been manufacturers' need to reduce excess inventories. Over time, manufacturing has shrunk as a share of GDP and manufacturers and retailers now have better control over their inventories thanks to just-in-time supply-chain management. Recessions from 1945 to 1981 were principally caused by the Federal Reserve raising interest rates to suppress inflation, which then undermined demand for houses and cars. This time around, the Fed did not raise rates very high, and home construction has already fallen by half since the housing bubble burst in 2006. That suggests a lot of the potential damage to the economy has already been done. Even some of the economists who do expect a recession think it will be mild. Goldman Sachs argues, for example, that employers trim their payrolls nowadays mostly through attrition rather than layoffs, which will soften the blow to incomes. One area of concern, though, is that housing prices are declining nationwide, which hasn't happened on a sustained basis since the 1930s. As home values decline, households may cut back on spending, and the most overstretched borrowers will likely default. Loan defaults in turn weaken the health of banks and other lenders and may lead to further restrictions in credit. This could make the recession severe. Moreover, the fallout of the tech bust in 2001 was cushioned by the boom in housing that followed. No sector is an obvious candidate to provide the same degree of relief now. Q: If it's a recession, how will stocks perform? A: Stocks usually start to fall before a recession begins, as investors sense that economic activity and thus corporate profits are about to turn down. Prices often bottom out before a recession ends, as investors sense that the excess inventories or the glut of unsold homes that led to the recession have been resolved. The turnaround usually occurs once the Federal Reserve shifts its priority from battling inflation to supporting growth, and cuts interest rates. Charles Reinhard, director of portfolio strategy at fund manager Neuberger Berman, compared how stocks performed in previous periods when the Fed began cutting rates. In all but one of the past 11 rate-cutting cycles (including several when a recession didn't materialize), the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index has risen -- advancing an average 17% in the 12 months after the Fed starts to cut rates. The exception was 2001: the S&P 500 was still down 12% 12 months after the first Fed rate reduction. Mr. Reinhard says that's because the market started out so overvalued relative to earnings then. Since Sept. 18, when the Fed started cutting rates, the S&P 500 is down 13%. It's down 15% from its October peak. If pre-2001 patterns hold, that suggests the next eight months could end up being good for stocks."

1/23/2008 9:24:54 AM

so if between 45 and 81, the recessions came from raising interest rates to fight inflation, wouldnt lowering the interest rates make inflation go higher?

1/23/2008 9:28:40 AM

^ Bingo. So when things get back to "normal" we actually end up paying higher prices. Welcome to stagflation. But Bush's Fed wants to make sure the fat cats are taken care of now as well as then.

1/23/2008 9:39:28 AM

inflation has been pretty mild thus far.

That said, it could jump with these new rate cuts.

1/23/2008 12:06:54 PM

Quote :

"BTW, whenever there's a "sell-off," there's also a corresponding buyup; The New York Times doesn't tell you that, though. And the Monopoly Man doesn't buy the stocks--he's not real (FYI)."

Ok, so sell-off is a term we use to describe a decrease in stock price typically caused by a large jump is sell orders. The corresponding increase in price from a lot of buy orders is called a rally.

Now to be technical there is a sort of Monopoly Man, called a specialist or a market maker, who buys from anyone who wants to sell and sells to anyone who wants to buy during market hours. The drop in price during a sell-off occurs because the specialist is trying to stem the tide of sell orders by dropping his price, or likewise encourage an increase in buying.

Quote :

"o if between 45 and 81, the recessions came from raising interest rates to fight inflation, wouldnt lowering the interest rates make inflation go higher?"

All else being equal yes. However, there are strong deflationary forces at work now, declining global demand, declining asset prices, and shrinking credit.

[Edited on January 23, 2008 at 2:43 PM. Reason : .]

1/23/2008 2:41:18 PM

Haha. Go take a look at today's stock chart. It yells PPT.

1/23/2008 3:28:59 PM

^^ I borrowed the sell-off and buyup thing from billionaire Warren Buffett. Sorry, professor, but I'll take his wisdom over yours any day.

And the Monoploy Man you referred to is nothing like what I was referring to--and you know it. Obviously, I was referring to the stereotypical image that many hold of a white man in a suit and vest lighting his cigar with hundred dollar bills while he watches the ticker tape machine. Please try not to be purposely obtuse.

BTW:

Major Averages Close Higher After Substantial Turnaround

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Market%20Analysis/1019301/

1/23/2008 4:53:37 PM

CBO sees U.S. economy avoiding recession
Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:21pm EST

Quote :

"WASHINGTON, Jan 23 (Reuters) - The slowing U.S. economy is unlikely to sink into an election-year recession and an economic rebound could begin as early as next year as housing and financial market turmoil fades, the Congressional Budget Office forecast on Wednesday."

Quote :

"But he added, 'Although recent data suggest that the probability of a recession in 2008 has increased, CBO does not expect the slowdown in economic growth to be large enough to register as a recession.' The CBO's semi-annual budget and economic report also anticipated that the economy could 'rebound after 2008, as the negative effects of the turmoil in the housing and financial markets fade.'"

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN23615899

Neid zu fühlen ist menschlich, Schadenfreude zu genießen teuflisch

1/23/2008 11:37:49 PM

This is pretty interesting. From the Philadelphia Fed, it talks about the economy and if it is increasing or decreasing on a state-by-state level.

Blue is good, red is bad. The darker color means more good or more bad.

http://bp0.blogger.com/_pMscxxELHEg/R5e7jGQ3PxI/AAAAAAAABg0/g13emuhncTg/s1600-h/PhillyFed3month.jpg

[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 10:17 AM. Reason : /]

1/24/2008 10:17:09 AM

1/24/2008 12:20:51 PM

Quote :

"Neid zu fühlen ist menschlich, Schadenfreude zu genießen teuflisch"

only the Germans and Klingons would have a word such as "Schadenfreude"


other commentary on the beginning of the end of the era of extreme leverage:

http://tinyurl.com/2lzjsr



[Edited on January 24, 2008 at 1:42 PM. Reason : ffsfssfsdfsfsf]

1/24/2008 1:34:30 PM

Quote :

"I borrowed the sell-off and buyup thing from billionaire Warren Buffett."

I think Buffet was probably trying to be cute, then. He is a value investor so sell-offs are a good thing for him.

And you're right, the other one was a cheap shot. My apologies.

1/25/2008 12:49:23 PM

Yeah, the sky is falling, Chicken Littles.

NC state revenues remain $125M ahead at fiscal year's midpoint

Quote :

"Legislative economists said Thursday that state government revenue exceeded projections during the first half of the fiscal year, bringing in about $125 million more than expected. That's about 1.5 percent above the expectations used last year when creating the $20 billion state budget. The numbers cover revenue from July 1 through December 31. After the first quarter, the surplus was $75 million."

Quote :

"The economists said it's a sign the North Carolina economy remains resistant compared to other states that are reporting shortfalls. David Crotts, the General Assembly's chief economist, said revenues generated from state taxes withheld from worker paychecks remain higher than projected. Crotts said that's a sign of continued job growth, but he cautioned that the state won't have a firm picture of its fiscal position until April 15 tax returns arrive."

http://www.charlotte.com/204/story/461087.html

1/25/2008 12:53:56 PM

^

To be sure North Carolina's economy has been doing well and I am still unsure about whether the state will suffer a recession. Though our fundamentals are strong, we are so hooked up to the banking industry and tech. Obviosuly, banking is suffering and my guess is that tech can't withstand a full blown recession.

However, on our side is that Bank of America and Wachovia are not guilty of the same kind of bad behvavior as Citi. BofA in particular I think is strong and could emerge from all of this as an even larger player.

IBM is also one of the strongest tech type companies out there, though I am not sure if you can still call IBM solidly tech these days.

So, North Carolina has a firmer foundation. On the other hand a recession likely started in California back in Oct and is begining in Florida and Nevada now and will come on in New York shortly. Depending on how this whole things works out the economy on average could experience a hard recession but NC is hit only mildly.

1/25/2008 1:21:37 PM

^ Keep accentuating the negative, professor.

CBO sees U.S. economy avoiding recession
Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:21pm EST

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN23615899

1/25/2008 1:25:06 PM

Well, if the Republicans and Democrats put the guns away and came to a bipartisan agreement for the first time in maybe three years in just a couple days on giving me $600, the economy must be in fantastic shape.

(The CBO has often skewed results since Clinton politicized its reporting of numbers in the mid-1990s, fyi. Asking the CBO if the economy is good is like asking a Republican or Democrat if the other party are good or bad for America. You should expect a biased answer.)

[Edited on January 25, 2008 at 1:36 PM. Reason : .]

1/25/2008 1:27:36 PM

^ Do you actually think I don't know that? I used the CBO because it is supposedly nonpartisan.

Some of you will bitch about anything.

1/25/2008 1:37:29 PM

Quote :

" Keep accentuating the negative, professor. "

I am not saying that you're doing this, because we didn't communicate until recently but I amazed at the number of supporters I lost when turned bearish last summer. Until then I was a big proponent of the global growth story and I thought that expansion in China and India would make up for any slowdown here. At the time there were lots of people who were happy to hear what I was saying.

Then the evidence changes and I turn bearish. Now all of a sudden people want to say that I am a Negative Nelly or Debbie Downer. I actually had people shy away at Christmas parties when I suggested that we were headed for more losses in financials and tech and that we would probably be in recession by summer 08.

Well, the market did sell off going into 2008. We did have an uptick in unemployment. It appears that jobs are softening and that bank writedowns are accelerating. Sometimes the data tells a positive story, sometimes a negative story.

1/26/2008 4:34:32 PM

^^ Let me state for the record that absolutely none of kwsmith2's posts strike me as overwhelmingly positive or negative. Rather, they are in my view thoughtful, rational, and realistic assessments of the state of the economy. Not surprising of course considering he teaches this particular subject. Good for me too since I know next to nothing about this particular issue.


In short, stop being a prick b/c he's not agreeing with you. It is possible for you to be wrong, and it is possible that people say a recession is coming because a fucking recession is in fact coming.

1/29/2008 12:20:50 PM

^ This is not about me--or him.

Quote :

"As Yoram K. Bauman, an economist who teaches at the University of Washington and performs stand-up comedy, summed up an often-used line: 'Macroeconomists have successfully predicted nine of the last five recessions.'"

http://w4.stern.nyu.edu/news/news.cfm?doc_id=7059

Why Economists Are Betting A Recession Won't Happen

Quote :

"With the financial markets in turmoil and house prices sagging, there is a lot of talk that a recession is all but inevitable. Yet there's a case that the economy might avoid a painful downturn. In the latest WSJ.com survey of economists, forecasters on average put the chance of a recession -- often defined as two straight quarterly declines in gross domestic product -- at 38%. That's the highest in more than three years, but the forecasters' best bet right now is that the U.S. will skirt a recession. 'A lot of the underlying resilience of the U.S. economy seems a bit unappreciated,' says Citigroup economist Steven Wieting. 'It's not clear that this is so large a burden that we can't muddle through this' [emphasis added]. The Fed is on the case. The Fed, which has cut its main target for short-term interest rates by a full percentage point since August, is expected to ease rates through the middle of next year to cushion the economy from housing and credit woes, and officials are experimenting with new tools in an effort to ease the credit crunch and encourage banks to keep lending to worthy borrowers. The Fed's actions may have already helped. Recessions typically don't begin when rates are this low, says Joseph LaVorgna, chief U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank. The federal-funds rate, charged on overnight loans between banks, peaked at an inflation-adjusted 3% in the current cycle, far lower than the 4% peak before the 2001 recession and the 5.3% high before the 1990-91 downturn. 'We're putting a lot of faith in the Fed,' Mr. LaVorgna says. 'A proactive Fed and low rates to begin with are very powerful factors behind keeping us out of recession.' Strong global growth is propping up the U.S. economy. Global economic growth is raising demand for U.S. goods, offsetting softer domestic consumption. Emerging markets, which buy more than half of U.S. exports, continue to grow, some at an accelerating pace, even as industrialized economies cool. A weakening dollar -- in part due to the Fed's easing of interest rates -- will help carry the economy through its rough patch. It will help make U.S. exports more attractive to foreign consumers, and help U.S. producers that compete with foreign producers. Moreover, foreign companies may capitalize further on the falling dollar by investing more in the U.S. -- for example, by buying stock in American companies or setting up their own factories in the U.S. The economy is still creating jobs, supporting incomes. The job market is signaling a modest slowdown in hiring but not a sharp increase in layoffs. While jobs continue to bleed from the housing and finance sectors, growth in service jobs remains robust and most other sectors remain afloat. Economists in the WSJ.com survey predict an average monthly gain of about 84,000 nonfarm jobs over the next year, which would keep incomes growing and keep consumers spending. Shoppers defied many forecasts in November, opening their wallets despite concerns about the economy. That suggests the credit crunch and housing declines haven't hit consumers as hard as some analysts expected. Outside of housing, consumers and businesses can borrow at low rates. Moreover, people with the worst credit problems -- the ones least likely to get additional credit -- aren't the biggest spenders. The housing downturn's pain will continue, but has already done much of its damage to growth. For much of this decade, residential construction has been a significant driver of economic growth. But since last year, when home building began to tumble, housing's contribution has dropped substantially. Now, the share of economic growth due to residential-sector investment is so low that it has little room to shave GDP further. One of the biggest questions hanging over the economy remains: How far is the housing market from its bottom? Though many major markets are experiencing steep price declines, much of the country is OK. The S&P/Case-Shiller index, a popular measure of home prices that has shown steep price declines, has limited geographic coverage -- perhaps overstating the extent to which the housing sector's declines will weigh on consumers. 'The states that are having a hard time are where there's been a lot of speculation,' says Mark Nielson, chief economist at MacroEcon Global Advisors, which sees economic growth at more than 3% through next year. 'Their economies probably will not do as well as the rest of the country.' Government spending remains strong. And then there is the government -- not just Washington but state and local governments. Spending by state and local governments is contributing 25% of GDP growth this year -- and that is before an election year when officials will resist making cutbacks. 'State and local spending is kind of an unsung hero here,' Mr. LaVorgna says. It tends to lag federal spending and should continue to perform well next year even if it slows in 2009, he says. The odds of recession have risen, and the economy's skies are cloudy. But there is a chance the skies will be sunnier by the middle of next year."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119784514764832443.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

CBO sees U.S. economy avoiding recession

Quote :

"WASHINGTON, Jan 23 (Reuters) - The slowing U.S. economy is unlikely to sink into an election-year recession and an economic rebound could begin as early as next year as housing and financial market turmoil fades, the Congressional Budget Office forecast on Wednesday."

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN23615899

Top economists + CBO >> A novice econ professor + Some econ neophyte on the Internet

1/29/2008 1:00:10 PM

This is one of those cases hooksaw where I get the sense you've already decided to take a position and are simply posting any and all evidence that even modestly supports it. Anyone that diagrees with you either is a "debbie-downer," is playing partisan politics, or is out to get you.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest a recession is coming. Just fucking admit it.

1/30/2008 6:58:34 AM

haha, that'll happen when salisburyboy marries a jewess

1/30/2008 8:11:03 AM

^^ and ^ Ignoring facts does not mean that those facts cease to exist. The fact is that many top economists are predicting the U.S. economy will NOT go into recession--deal with it.

You can't harangue "evil Bush" on Iraq anymore, so now it's the economy. Whatever.

^ That's a cheap and stupid fucking shot and you know it. Is that the best you could come up with, boy? If you've got nothing, go with the old salisburyboy comparison, right? GG.

1/30/2008 11:15:32 AM

I think I'll move to Australia.

1/30/2008 12:47:55 PM

Quote :

"Ignoring facts does not mean that those facts cease to exist. The fact is that many top economists are predicting the U.S. economy will NOT go into recession--deal with it. -hooksaw"

Ah you really can be infuriating. Guess I'll have to do some old-fashioned pwn-age...

Let's refer back to kwsmith2. You know... the guys who actually has some idea of what he's talking about:

Quote :

" Some latest forecasts of recession here is Kasriel at Northern Trust. His index has never crossed 60% without an insuing recession. You can also see how the probabilities rise as we get closer to the recession, so as a human being you can see something the computer cannot which is the "forecast" of the the forecast."

Unfortunately his chart was no longer available. Instead, I went to Northern Trust's website directly:

http://www.northerntrust.com/pws/jsp/display2.jsp?XML=pages/nt/0601/1138283684288_6.xml&TYPE=interior

... and went to the December 2007 outlook:

Quote :

"What is the probability that the U.S. economy will fall into a recession in 2008? We would answer, 65.5%."

Really now? Recall that this index "has never crossed 60% without an insuing recession." Now look at the graph on page two:




...


Hooksaw... this where you pucker up and kiss my ass

1/30/2008 1:57:49 PM

Quote :

"In the latest WSJ.com survey of economists, forecasters on average put the chance of a recession -- often defined as two straight quarterly declines in gross domestic product -- at 38%. That's the highest in more than three years, but the forecasters' best bet right now is that the U.S. will skirt a recession."

Quote :

"As Yoram K. Bauman, an economist who teaches at the University of Washington and performs stand-up comedy, summed up an often-used line: 'Macroeconomists have successfully predicted nine of the last five recessions.'"

1/30/2008 4:19:47 PM

Hooksaw is a member of the Titanic's band.

1/30/2008 5:03:50 PM

1/30/2008 5:12:45 PM

Jan job report doesn't t look good

http://www.cnbc.com/id/22948805

Quote :

"U.S. employers unexpectedly cut 17,000 non-farm jobs in January, the first time in nearly 4-1/2 years that U.S. payrolls shrank as fading construction and manufacturing sectors reflected the economy's waning momentum. AP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Labor Department report on Friday came in much weaker than anticipated by analysts surveyed by Reuters, who had forecast 80,000 jobs would be added last month. The department revised December's new-job total up to 82,000 from 18,000 but the hiring trend clearly was fading as 2007 ended. The last time that jobs were cut was in August 2003 when 42,000 were lost."

Slight ease in the unemployment rate but it comes on the back of a shrinking labor force.

2/1/2008 9:12:17 AM

Quote :

"Now to be technical there is a sort of Monopoly Man, called a specialist or a market maker, who buys from anyone who wants to sell and sells to anyone who wants to buy during market hours. The drop in price during a sell-off occurs because the specialist is trying to stem the tide of sell orders by dropping his price, or likewise encourage an increase in buying."

Not always. 1987 was awesome because for like half a day not a single share traded (might be an exageration). Everybody kept yelling sell orders and no one was accepting them; everyone was waiting to see what price everyone else would accept because there was nothing else to base the price on. The DJIA fell 22% in a matter of hours.

2/1/2008 10:11:11 AM

If you are referring to Black Monday, we had record volume on that day. Now, it is true that a lot of sell orders could not be processed because of the huge backlog thats true. But trading didn't freeze on the NYSE.

Now I think there were some issue on the NASDAQ because back then I don't think the NASDAQ had specialists. I think it was just peer-to-peer trading.

2/1/2008 12:44:22 PM

Fears of U.S. recession exaggerated even with 17,000 job losses: CIBC

Quote :

"OTTAWA - The U.S. economy lost 17,000 jobs last month, but fears that the U.S. is slipping into recession and could derail the world and Canadian economies are overblown, says the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. That's because all signs are pointing to at most a mild recession or technical recession in the U.S. in the first half of this year - similar to the one the country underwent in 2001 - not a 1980s slump that could disrupt the global economy. 'What we're really quibbling about is a few decimal places,' said Meny Grauman, a senior economist with the CIBC. 'Everyone can tell the U.S. is definitely slowing down, but right now the data doesn't show that we're really in any danger of entering a deep recession.'"

Quote :

"Economists have been at odds for weeks whether the U.S. has already fallen in recession, is merely teetering on the edge, or will even approach a recession. University of Maryland economist Peter Morici, who is critical of the Federal Reserve's tardiness in intervening to halt the slide, says Friday's disappointing unemployment numbers for January shows the 'economy is in recession mode.' But others, like Brian Wesbury, chief economist with First Trust Portfolios in Illinois, completely discounts recession talk, noting that last quarter's gloomy 0.6 per cent growth was identical to first quarter growth in 2007, which was followed by two strong growth quarters."

Quote :

"And the new ISM [Institute for Supply Management] measure showed manufacturing activity in the U.S. actually expanded in January to move above 50 to 50.7 from 48.4 in December. All of the components except for employment increased. Production moved above 50 to 55.2 while new orders hovered around 50 at 49.5. Meanwhile, new export orders pushed back up to 58.5, indicating that international trade continues to support the U.S. economy. Grauman says the arguments about whether the U.S. will experience a sharp slowdown or a recession are semantics. Either way, the recession will be so shallow it will be a minuscule difference from slow growth [emphasis added]."

http://www.news1130.com/news/business/article.jsp?content=b0201140A

2/2/2008 4:05:35 PM

Will you guys stop arguing month to month with regards to economic trends.

The US economy isn't impressive because we're maintaining unsustainable trade deficits and printing vasts amount of money- the outcome of which you nor anyone else on the planet can predict properly right now but never in the history of global trade has led to anything 'positive.'

All you're doing is copying news organizations in analyzing essentially nothing.

Economic trends are measured in year-to-year analysis, not monthly quotes.

2/2/2008 4:15:05 PM

Predictions =/= Analyses of actual numbers

Weather predictions =/= Actual weather

And so on.

2/2/2008 5:05:23 PM

I was just about to toss in a global warming daily temp watch comparison.

2/2/2008 7:38:33 PM

I have seen a number of economists back off of recession calls in recent weeks but I remain concerned. There are still significant downside risks to US growth.

I think not enough people are acknowleding the effect of credit and solvency problems in the US financial system. Credit is blood for the economy and we still have serious credit problems. Not least of which is that the value of the most important source of collateral in the economy, housing, is declining.

Moreover, structured finance has not lived up to what we had hoped. I believe that structured finance was a big part of the global growth story of the last five years. I am not sure how we keep things going without it.

Hopefully, I am wrong but I see the makings of a large recession. My hope is that swift action by the Fed has averted the worst. However, the risks as I see them are significantly to the downside for growth.

2/3/2008 6:10:38 PM

^ Hey, if you want to talk economic slowdown in the United States, we can. Obviously, such has happened, and I think we'll see a continuation of the slowing down in various indices from Q1 '08 through possibly Q2 or Q3 '08.

My short list of problems with some of the naysayers here and elsewhere is as follows:

1. Some organizations and individuals are trying to change the generally accepted definition of "recession," which is two quarters or more of flat or negative growth in the GDP. It is neither helpful nor accurate to start screaming the R-word like a flap-jawed idiot every time U.S. markets correct or the economy slows a bit.

2. If the GDP continues to grow--even if it grows just a little--the U.S. economy is not in a recession. Deal with it.

3. Much of the howling about the current state of the U.S. economy--particularly by some here--is simply schadenfreude. Some want to blame Bush for it all--even though presidents do not control the economy. I understand that presidents get the credit and the blame (though Bush hasn't received much credit for things that have gone well), but the finger-pointing in question has little to do with reality and more to do with the pleasure derived from pinning the blame on Bush.

2/4/2008 12:40:27 AM