Retail Sales In US Climb the Most in Five Months as Recovery Takes Hold

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
I disagree that the article shows anything substantial on logical grounds, and that we should wait and see if the recovery lasts before making judgements.

But this simple logic has the potential to take Blackjack off his Obama-high, so:

Click!

4!

Feel better discounting logical opinions? A short-term recovery was basically guarranteed by the stimulus. Let's see how long it lasts.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
It was explained to you, but you don't seem to comprehend. The numbers are seasonally adjusted. That means that AFTER accounting for increased spending from tax returns, sales are up. Thus, your claim that sales are up as a result of tax returns is incorrect.

I understand that you take whatever is spoonfed to you as fact.

Why are sales up between February, March and April? During that time people should still be paying off credit card debt from christmas.

Those numbers that are "supposed" to be adjusted, how do the people doing the adjusting know how much to adjust for? How do we know how many tax returns were invested, and how many were spent?

Stop the spoon feeding and think for yourself.

We might as well look at black Friday as evidence that the economy is recovering, as then look at February.

~edit~

Before the celebrate that the economy is recovering, lets wait for June, July and August and see what things look like then. But even then, people are going to have to be spending on back to school supplies and clothes, so there might be a spike in the economy in August as well.
 
Last edited:

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,796
572
126
If you don't trust the people in government atm why not trust a company that does payroll services for many other companies.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...s-in-february-adp-employer-services-says.html

first few paragraphs


Companies in the U.S. added more workers in February than a month earlier, another sign of labor market strength, data from a private report based on payrolls showed today.
Employment increased by 216,000 for the month after a revised 173,000 gain in January, according to figures from ADP Employer Services. The median estimate in the Bloomberg News survey called for a 215,000 increase this month.

Further employment gains would help generate the wage gains necessary to sustain household spending, which accounts for about 70 percent of the economy. Businesses added 225,000 jobs in February, and the unemployment rate held at 8.3 percent, economists project a Labor Department report will show in two days.
“Everything is pointing to broader employment gains,” Troy Davig, a senior U.S. economist at Barclays Capital Inc. in New York, said before the report. “As people start experiencing a steadier stream of income, that will translate into consumption and that will start building a stronger foundation for growth.”
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
I saw an interesting statistic that 93% of the recovery has gone to the top 1%.

So this is a risk for Obama: better numbres, but people not 'feeling it's better'.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
I disagree that the article shows anything substantial on logical grounds, and that we should wait and see if the recovery lasts before making judgements.

But this simple logic has the potential to take Blackjack off his Obama-high, so:

Click!

4!

Feel better discounting logical opinions? A short-term recovery was basically guarranteed by the stimulus. Let's see how long it lasts.

click

5!

Wait your turn! :)
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
If you don't trust the people in government atm why not trust a company that does payroll services for many other companies.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...s-in-february-adp-employer-services-says.html

first few paragraphs


Companies in the U.S. added more workers in February than a month earlier, another sign of labor market strength, data from a private report based on payrolls showed today.
Employment increased by 216,000 for the month after a revised 173,000 gain in January, according to figures from ADP Employer Services. The median estimate in the Bloomberg News survey called for a 215,000 increase this month.

Further employment gains would help generate the wage gains necessary to sustain household spending, which accounts for about 70 percent of the economy. Businesses added 225,000 jobs in February, and the unemployment rate held at 8.3 percent, economists project a Labor Department report will show in two days.
“Everything is pointing to broader employment gains,” Troy Davig, a senior U.S. economist at Barclays Capital Inc. in New York, said before the report. “As people start experiencing a steadier stream of income, that will translate into consumption and that will start building a stronger foundation for growth.”

Too bad there were 360,000+ new unemployment claims to completely wipe out that 225,000 jobs number. Probably why the overall rate stayed the same.

http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm

Edit: click

6!
 
Last edited:

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Right.

Well, except that Europe also had a collapse at the same time we did, and after adopting austerity measureas (as many Republicans would be infavor of) as opposed to fiscal stimulus, they are stagnating or are in decline.

Can't wait to vote for Obama again to keep this growth going. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

Maybe I'll even vote twice! :awe:


Europe had been stagnated for years before the collapse. Anybody remember the threads in here circa 04-05 where Germany has an unemployment rate of nearly 12%? Anyways Europes issue right now is Greece and the potential for a wave that will hit Spain and Ireland. I really dont see how what happens there validates or invalidates what is happening here.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
Too bad there were 360,000+ new unemployment claims to completely wipe out that 225,000 jobs number. Probably why the overall rate stayed the same.

http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm

Edit: click

6!

You don't get counted until you spin the good news in the article as bad news.

And we know why the overall rate stayed the same - lots of people that had dropped out of the labor force altogether began looking for work again.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,796
572
126
Too bad there were 360,000+ new unemployment claims to completely wipe out that 225,000 jobs number. Probably why the overall rate stayed the same.

Yeah I've heard speculation that people who have given up on the finding a job are now coming out to look for them again... who knows?

Hopefully the added jobs trend keeps on going up.
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
You don't get counted until you spin the good news in the article as bad news.

And we know why the overall rate stayed the same - lots of people that had dropped out of the labor force altogether began looking for work again.

You stopped counting spin from what I can tell so.....

Um if lots of people began working again the rate would have dropped..since they are no longer counted in that rate after they stop working for a period of time. Excellent spin yourself!
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
I disagree that the article shows anything substantial on logical grounds, and that we should wait and see if the recovery lasts before making judgements.

But this simple logic has the potential to take Blackjack off his Obama-high, so:

Click!

4!

Feel better discounting logical opinions? A short-term recovery was basically guarranteed by the stimulus. Let's see how long it lasts.

Yep. We're still deficit spending to the tune of $1T/year. I would expect that summoning up that large a percentage of GDP out of thin air will improve the economy by roughly the same percentage. Now good luck weaning the country off of continued massive deficit spending to prop up this amazing recovery.

Also, there have been a lot of threads about how great the Obama economy is. It wasn't that long ago that the left was bemoaning the fact that it would take at least 4-8 years to fix the mess that Bush left. If it takes that long for the economy to react to presidential policy, is this actually Bush's recovery?
 

Munky

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2005
9,372
0
76
LMAO. So because bloomberg says so it must be true! But please ignore the high unemployment, the bankster fraud, the still-tanking housing market, and most importantly - ignore that the government is deficit spending like a drunk in a casino to present the illusion of recovery!
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
You stopped counting spin from what I can tell so.....

Um if lots of people began working again the rate would have dropped..since they are no longer counted in that rate after they stop working for a period of time. Excellent spin yourself!

U3 unemployment doesn't count "discouraged" workers. It does count those workers once they get back into the workforce, however. So if a person that has been out of the workforce for a long time gets a job, it won't bring down the U3 rate nearly as much as a short term unemployed person finding a job.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
Didn't Obama land on an aircraft carrier and announce The recovery is here! back in 2010? Now we find out it wasn't really a recovery and we're still recovering? Deja Vous Thoris all over again!

Yes, the economy experienced a signifcant contraction with big reductions in GDP, house prices, corporate spending, consumer spending, and practically every other metric of economic health. This is in addition to near collapse of the financial and automotive industries. The recovery will take many years.

That's exactly why it's so important to re-elect Obama and keeps his policies in place.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
if there's one thing I know, it's that Obama is wholly responsible for everything good that happens in the world between 2008-2012 and George Bush is wholly responsible for anything bad that happens in the world between 2000-2012.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Yes, the economy experienced a signifcant contraction with big reductions in GDP, house prices, corporate spending, consumer spending, and practically every other metric of economic health. This is in addition to near collapse of the financial and automotive industries. The recovery will take many years.

That's exactly why it's so important to re-elect Obama and keeps his policies in place.

So all we have to do is keep buying shit on the national credit card for many years and everything will be better? Wow, it's so simple!

Democrats are as big a joke as Republicans, they're just not as in your face crazy. They're actually scarier, because they're stupid enough to believe what they say.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
if there's one thing I know, it's that Obama is wholly responsible for everything good that happens in the world between 2008-2012 and George Bush is wholly responsible for anything bad that happens in the world between 2000-2012.

Thank you Neverending Jesus!
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
if there's one thing i know, it's that obama is wholly responsible for everything good that happens in the world between 2008-2012 and george bush is wholly responsible for anything bad that happens in the world between 2000-infinity and beyond.

fixed.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
Also, there have been a lot of threads about how great the Obama economy is. It wasn't that long ago that the left was bemoaning the fact that it would take at least 4-8 years to fix the mess that Bush left. If it takes that long for the economy to react to presidential policy, is this actually Bush's recovery?

In theory, it could be, yes. But Bush's only stimulus was a small tax refund that people received in 2008, when the recession was still shallow. He did, however, have a hand in TARP and the auto-bailout. That part of it is shared by both administrations. If this recession had occurred in say, 2006 and Bush had undertaken aggressive measures to boost the economy which hadn't come to fruition until now, then the point could have more validity.