Economy in Recession? More Liberal Lies?

reply to post by CoffinFeeder


So aside from a big mouth, do you have any actual evidence or theories to back up your position? Or is talking down to an ATS member suffice for us all to take your word?

On Topic Please.

*** Reminder *** Attack the message, not the member.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Indeed, we are not in a recession by government standards.

However, I still await you detailing to me How the GOVERNMENT numbers are CORRECT?

Really not that hard mate, if you know what your talking about (which so far it's been copy and paste/regurgitation of Government sites.....)

Well, since neither of us has access to the raw economic data, I will prove I am correct through inference.

I personally know dozens of investment bankers on Wall St. making over $1 million a year, many of them making tens of millions a year, and every single one uses the Fed data as part of their business.

You on the other hand, with your ShadowStats.com website, apparently are not quite as successful.

In fact, I do not know anybody who has become even moderately successful basing their financial or investment decisions based on ShadowStats.com data.

Perhaps you can prove us all wrong and make millions by utilizing the proprietary information gleaned from ShadowStas. You know, put your money where your mouth is sort of thing.

Otherwise, comparing ShadowStats with the Fed data simply looks juvenile and foolish.

Thanks for trying though.

If you don't believe me, try calling Goldman Sachs and asking to speak to a sales rep. Tell them you are a multi-million dollar investor and want to place money with them. Then ask if they use the Fed data or ShadowStats. Then wait for their incredulous response, and politely hang up.

The economic data which is published is preliminary and will be later revised.

For example the last quarter GDP data was published at 1.9% and then later revised to .9%. So what you see is not necessarily what you get.

Additionally, in reference to your astute investment associates. Lets look at the stock markets which are a good honest indicator of the health of the economy.

The Dow is currently at 11,475.40 languishing in a sideways channel in the 11,000 range after steadily dropping from a high of 14,000 in October of last year.
Last week's GDP reports had minimal impact whatsoever on the markets they're still right around 11,500 which where they've been for the past month or so because everyone is aware that they're preliminary and will only be revised later.

But If the economic numbers were indeed that positive don't you think that the Stock Market Indices specifically the DOW, S&P 500 and the Nasdaq would reflect this ?


Here's an excerpt under GDP... from Shadow Government Statistics

A Tempting Target for Manipulation

In the introduction to this series on government reporting, I mentioned political manipulation of the GNP/GDP in the Johnson and first Bush administrations that went beyond overly positive methodological changes. In both instances, my sources were consulting clients who had been involved directly in the process. In the latter instance, an individual at the BEA also confirmed the situation.

Few people argue with the GNP/GDP reports, so when Lyndon Johnson kept sending the initial GNP estimates back to the Commerce Department for correction, he eventually got what he wanted, and the media dutifully reported stronger than actual economic growth.

www.shadowstats.com...

Gross Domestic Product
www.shadowstats.com...



[edit on 2-9-2008 by nh_ee]

reply to post by Elfworkz


As a mechanic he gets paid by the jobs that come in, not by the hour. In the past year the customers are trickling down. Everyone in his dealership is slow, as is the dealerships around him. If people don't absolutely have to get it taken care of, they don't. There are days where they are done by 10am. does that make sense?

Originally posted by jamie83

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Indeed, we are not in a recession by government standards.

However, I still await you detailing to me How the GOVERNMENT numbers are CORRECT?

Really not that hard mate, if you know what your talking about (which so far it's been copy and paste/regurgitation of Government sites.....)

Well, since neither of us has access to the raw economic data, I will prove I am correct through inference.

I personally know dozens of investment bankers on Wall St. making over $1 million a year, many of them making tens of millions a year, and every single one uses the Fed data as part of their business.

You on the other hand, with your ShadowStats.com website, apparently are not quite as successful.

In fact, I do not know anybody who has become even moderately successful basing their financial or investment decisions based on ShadowStats.com data.

Perhaps you can prove us all wrong and make millions by utilizing the proprietary information gleaned from ShadowStas. You know, put your money where your mouth is sort of thing.

Otherwise, comparing ShadowStats with the Fed data simply looks juvenile and foolish.

Thanks for trying though.

If you don't believe me, try calling Goldman Sachs and asking to speak to a sales rep. Tell them you are a multi-million dollar investor and want to place money with them. Then ask if they use the Fed data or ShadowStats. Then wait for their incredulous response, and politely hang up.

Look, just because you know people on Wall that are making over a million a year doesn't mean anything....The fact is Wall St. is largely rigged to hurt the investor.

Say your buying common stock in a company, your a shareholder assuming a large amount of risk. Not only are you assuming most of the risk, if the company goes south, your the last in line to receive any money. You want to find stocks are are paying a good dividend otherwise, your just playing a game on pure speculation, with a huge amount of asymmetry of information. These brokers have incentive to sell you certain stocks/mutual funds from their higher-ups.

It's the common stock holder that will take the fall on Wall St, not the million dollar brokers. Your the last to know of any trouble, it's a speculation game and should be treated as such.

This isn't about people who make a million dollars a year, it's about the middle class. I have family who have a significant amount of money tied up in stocks, and if things went south in a hurry, they'd be luck to get out with 10% of their investment. This would be true for many Americans who 'Invest' in the market with the assumption that stocks will ALWAYS GO UP. This is a wrong assumption propagated into the mind of the average American, it's simply a lie. Simply telling us that your know people that make millions as brokers doesn't mean anything!

Shadowstats.com is simply an independent economist/s, who feel that (rightly so) the new ways of calculating things like GDP/CPI are misleading. AND THEY ARE.

They want the number to look better than normal, because it's the only thing keeping the speculation game, which is the stock market afloat.

If the M3, or lack there of, data doesn't scare the # out of you, then I don't know what to say. We should be mad as hell that the Fed is with-holding vital data like the M3 from the public. Asymmetry or information is the name of the game, thank God for the internet.

I mean your ignoring 90% of the situation in favor of 10% that is manipulated 'good news'

What's that sound?!!
Oh, could of swore I heard someone starting up a Dodge.
:p

[edit on 2-9-2008 by Blacknapkins]

[edit on 2-9-2008 by Blacknapkins]

[edit on 2-9-2008 by Blacknapkins]

reply to post by marg6043


They are confusing you with me. My husband isn't jobless, but looking for a new job because of lack of business.

I think you need more evidence to back up your claims than one measly graph. The graph shows the overall wealth of the country from 1925 and hypothesizes it to 2015.
a) The chart mentions shaded regions that represent recession, which I see none of. Did you edit these out of the picture?
b) The chart doesn't zoom in enough on the time period in question, aka, past 10 years.
c, and most importantly) The chart doesn't show the depression of 1926 and residual effects. Oh, wait, or are you saying that didn't happen either?

And in addition, the majority of the gross national product is in the hands of fewer people than ever. So more people are homeless, jobless, starving, struggling, bankrupt, going through foreclosures, and the like. Just saying that the GNP is increasing doesn't mean anything, since it's not like it even matters for the well being of most of the country.

[edit on 9/2/2008 by ravenshadow13]

OMG you are either a disinfo agent or just don't see it the "right" way. Those are numbers, and I do not disagree with them at all. I can also see how the GDP has gone up.

BUT!!!

Look at the dollar, look at our incredible deficit and the astronomical cost of the war every day. That is the info they show to control the economy, and if your going to tell me its a lie...

Dont post here again, The motto is DENY IGNORANCE, and a btw, the American public believes whatever the hell you tell them.

Folks, few non-bias sources are now trying to dispel the fact that we are in a recession. Let me deal with a myth stated by jamie83.

We are not in a recession. The most recent data for the 2nd quarter show the U.S. economy on pace for a 3.3% growth rate. A recession is defined as TWO consecutive quarters of negative growth. We have not even had ONE quarter of negative growth.

This is from Nouriel Roubini on rgemonitor.com. The original quote was posted in early August, so keep in mind the numbers do not reflect current:

First, the NBER does not use the popular press definition of a recession as two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. Thus, the fact that Q1 GDP was positive does not prevent the NBER from eventually finding that a recession did start in Q1.

Further in his analysis he states:

Fourth, the NBER definition of a recession emphasizes a variety of variables in addition to GDP whose contraction is a signal of a recession. According to NBER you get a recession when you have a “significant” decrease in activity over a sustained period of time. The declines would be visible in GDP, payrolls, production, sales and incomes.

He ends this particular analysis with the following:

In summary, if it walks, quacks and ducks like a recession duck it is a recession duck. We are in a recession now! At this point it is fully clear that the economy entered a recession in Q1 of 2008 and that the Q2 growth recovery is totally artificial and totally driven by the massive tax rebates that artificially propped consumption –that was on a falling path – in Q2 (recent academic research confirmed the sharp boost in Q2 consumption as due to the tax rebates). But the headwinds hitting consumption are massive and stronger than the tax rebates whose temporary effect will fizzle out at the latest by August. Already in June retail sales were flat in nominal terms (+0.1%) and falling in real terms. So if desperate consumers have already stopped consuming at the peak of the tax rebate drug boost what will happen when this fix will fizzle out by August?

Nouriel's predictions have been correct for the past year or more. He foreshadowed the downturn of 2008, and many are crediting him with his impeccible analysis. Please see the rgemonitor for the full analysis. It is the most thorough and compelling argument to recession out there, without the partisan spin.

Originally posted by jetxnet

Here is the million dollar question Jaime, Mr. Economics here.

You can regurgitate Government numbers all day. I want to see you do this:

Prove to me that the Government Numbers are correct.

OMG - so now the government is messing with the economic growth index numbers - I'll tell you, that Bush sure has control over every Department in the government, both Democrat and Republican.

Look at the dip in 2001 and then the rebound - the numbers are correct.

Awesome analysis Jamie.

Jext what are you still doing on this thread hmm? You have already admitted that the middle class is going to hell in a handbasket in this thread shall I requote you? You know whats going on but for some reason have chosen to look beyond what you know to stick up and parrot what jamie is saying. So please turn from this thread and walk away until you can throw some honesty in here instead of regurgitating jamies rhetoric.

reply to post by tommy_boy


The problem is that the word recession in an election year is not to be use, is counterproductive to the political propaganda.

If this weren't an election year "recession" would have been by now in every news paper heading.

This show you the deceptions behind our own government systems, it doesn't give a crap about the one hurting the most, the common American hard working and tax payer.

This week two more banks go out of business one in my neck of the woods in GA.

Integrity Bank of Alpharetta, Georgia, was closed by U.S. regulators today, the 10th bank to collapse this year amid a surge in soured real-estate loans stemming from the worst housing slump since the Great Depression.

Integrity Bank, with $1.1 billion in assets and $974 million in deposits, was shuttered by the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Regions Financial Corp., Alabama's biggest bank, will assume all deposits from Integrity, which was run by Integrity Bancshares Inc. The failed bank's five offices will open on Sept. 2 as branches of Regions, the FDIC said.

www.bloomberg.com...





[edit on 2-9-2008 by marg6043]

Originally posted by jamie83


I have two engineering majors, a minor in economics, and I work in the private equity industry. Yes, I can read economic data, and yes, some things really are simple.

I thought u said earlier in the thread your major was in computer science or do u major in that also?

reply to post by mybigunit


Actually I lost count on how many majors he have.

Originally posted by jamie83

Please run the numbers for us and explain how the $95 billion impacts an economy that has over $12 trillion in disposable income.

Basically, your claim is that the government removed $95 billion (I think this was your figure from a previous post) of disposable income from the economy, and has now returned it.

So wouldn't the implication of that be that even if we were in a recession, it would be the government's fault for taking too much money in taxes?

12 trillion in disposable income are we living in the same country? Americas tax reciepts were 2 trillion last year. We have a 10 trillion dollar debt with 65 trillion in obligations. We have NO money to spend dude. We can print or borrow which is the republican way but we have no money. If this was a business it would of bankrupted long ago.

reply to post by jamie83


So according to what you are saying the power of our economy and growth is based on how much Wall Street is making? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Rockpuck


By God if we are not the fattest laziest self involved pos bunch of citizenry, had the backbone of our ancestors or possessed an ounce of dignity we would hang those bastards in the streets of DC.

When we declared our independence we where fed up and pissed off over little things like taxing paper and tea. Nowadays if it can't be taxed it's illegal. And when some major cartel rapes the American people's lively hood we raise taxes to bail them out. Not sure if I am the only one seeing the parallel, but where is the cry for change, change by any means necessary?

Brings a tear to my eyes. I couldnt of said it any better. Star for you sir.

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Indeed, we are not in a recession by government standards.

However, I still await you detailing to me How the GOVERNMENT numbers are CORRECT?

Really not that hard mate, if you know what your talking about (which so far it's been copy and paste/regurgitation of Government sites.....)

He cant do it. The numbers if not all of them most of them are a fraud. The include and exclude things to make the numbers look good to the public. Inflation for example. The make the inlfation numbers low by excluding food and energy. Its like we dont have to PAY for food and energy so it needs to be excluded. Regardless I could make a case that even excluding food and energy everything else has gone up at least 10% even though the inflation numbers are only showing around 5% from a year ago.

reply to post by mybigunit


That is why I posted the original GDP formula, but it seems that jamie has not clue what it means.

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) The formula to calculate GDP is this:

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) =

Consumption + investment + government expenditure + net exports (exports minus imports) =

Wages + rents + interest + profits + non-income charges + net foreign factor income earned

But the GDP figure is vulnerable to "creative accounting":

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by mybigunit

 

That is why I posted the original GDP formula, but it seems that jamie has not clue what it means.

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) The formula to calculate GDP is this:

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) =

Consumption + investment + government expenditure + net exports (exports minus imports) =

Wages + rents + interest + profits + non-income charges + net foreign factor income earned

But the GDP figure is vulnerable to "creative accounting":

Hehe yup. Very VERY creative accounting and pencil pushing. Good post for you