• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

US Economy . . . .

CaptnKirk

CaptnKirk

Lifer
and Curls Up and Dies . . .

Well, actually not - but what the hell . . . anything for sensationalizing the news.

We're in a soft spot that the Bush Policies aren't making any better . . .
reguardless of whatever optomism dmcowen 674 has left.

<CLIP>

The economy grew at its softest pace in two years during the first quarter this year, slowing to a 3.1% annual rate of growth, the Commerce Department said on Thursday.
The latest reading on gross domestic product shows that consumers and businesses turned cautious in their spending in the January-to-March quarter, a key factor in the slower economic growth. High energy prices and rising borrowing costs caused Americans to tighten their belts a bit.

The expansion in gross domestic product, which measures total output within U.S. borders, was the weakest since a 1.9% pace during the first quarter of 2003 and was a surprisingly sharp deceleration from the 3.8% rate in the fourth quarter.

Wall Street economists had forecast first-quarter GDP would grow at a relatively more robust 3.6% rate.

For now, economists believe any soft patch will be temporary and don't believe that it would be a harbinger of recession. Although a 3.1% growth rate may disappoint, it is a decent pace of expansion.

Since the first-quarter GDP data was compiled, oil prices have continued to rise and fears have grown they will feed into the broader economy, with many analysts expecting growth in the second quarter to be affected further.

The softer-than-expected start to 2005 likely will boost expectations that Federal Reserve policymakers, who meet again next Tuesday to consider interest-rate strategy, will stick to a policy of smaller, gradual rate rises.

To combat inflation, Federal Reserve policy-makers have boosted interest rates seven times since last June. An additional increase is expected at the Fed's next meeting on Tuesday.

</ and more . . . .>
 
NONSENSE!

Even more leftist propoganda put out by the liburul media to destroy the greatest president this country has EVER seen.

😉
 
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
and Curls Up and Dies . . .

Well, actually not - but what the hell . . . anything for sensationalizing the news.

We're in a soft spot that the Bush Policies aren't making any better . . .
reguardless of whatever optomism dmcowen 674 has left.

<CLIP>

The economy grew at its softest pace in two years during the first quarter this year, slowing to a 3.1% annual rate of growth, the Commerce Department said on Thursday.
Click to expand...

It's still by far the best economy in the world, and it's hardly hurting if its growth is still 3.1%.

-------------------------
dmcowen674 Of course those that don't believe in Science would say such a thing
...two weeks later...
dmcowen674 water which contains a Hdrogen atom for every two Oxygen atoms

==============================================

Must be all the "Science".
 
Originally posted by: impeachbush
Originally posted by: Skoorb
It's still by far the best economy in the world, and it's hardly hurting if its growth is still 3.1%.
Click to expand...

Worst rationalization, ever.
Click to expand...
I'll grant you that it being the best economy in the world is irrelevant, but at 3.1% it is still a strong economy, so I stand on that one 🙂

 
Just wait a month or two and they'll revise those numbers downward. 😉

Anything to get the spin going their way in the face of the worst numbers in two years.

And right in the middle of Bush's big economic recovery. :roll:

I'm going right out and buying a Happy Meal. 🙂

 
DOOM! GLOOM!! DOOM!! GLOOM!

Yawn.. same line from the libbies.. economy is fine.. Gee, they aren't paying people $25/hr to screw in a bolt anymore.. no KIDDING.. Get some new training and move on to something new.. the days of the factories are gone. This isn't 1945 anymore.
 
We didn't publish the numbers.

And these effects aren't due to our economic policies.

Would you like happy news only? I fully understand why you would. 😉
 
3% growth is moderately high. Definately not somthing to look down on.
I draw more focus to inflation, budget deficit, debt accumulation more than other economic indicators.
 
Originally posted by: Skoorb
dmcowen674 Of course those that don't believe in Science would say such a thing
...two weeks later...
dmcowen674 water which contains a Hdrogen atom for every two Oxygen atoms
Click to expand...

LOL 😀
 
Please give definition of "best economy in the world". What aspect are you considering?

The stock markets have underperformed by quite a sensible amount both the european and the far-eastern ones.
The growth is not the most impressive.
The currency has plunged steeply against both euro and yen.
The so called "twin-deficits" are higher than ever.

I DO think the US have the most active, diverse and complex economy among the developed countries, and the its financial markets still provide plenty of interesting opportunities, even if they are not among the safests.

"Best economy in the world" appears to me a void statement.
 
Originally posted by: Tango
Please give definition of "best economy in the world". What aspect are you considering?

The stock markets have underperformed by quite a sensible amount both the european and the far-eastern ones.
The growth is not the most impressive.
The currency has plunged steeply against both euro and yen.
The so called "twin-deficits" are higher than ever.

I DO think the US have the most active, diverse and complex economy among the developed countries, and the its financial markets still provide plenty of interesting opportunities, even if they are not among the safests.

"Best economy in the world" appears to me a void statement.
Click to expand...
Growth is the most impressive for the western world. Developing nations are always going to have the ability to grow faster as there is literally nothing there yet.
US has the largest GDP, is the largest consumer in the world, has the leading experts and brightest people, most wealthy in almost every respect.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: Tango
Please give definition of "best economy in the world". What aspect are you considering?

The stock markets have underperformed by quite a sensible amount both the european and the far-eastern ones.
The growth is not the most impressive.
The currency has plunged steeply against both euro and yen.
The so called "twin-deficits" are higher than ever.

I DO think the US have the most active, diverse and complex economy among the developed countries, and the its financial markets still provide plenty of interesting opportunities, even if they are not among the safests.

"Best economy in the world" appears to me a void statement.
Click to expand...
Growth is the most impressive for the western world. Developing nations are always going to have the ability to grow faster as there is literally nothing there yet.
US has the largest GDP, is the largest consumer in the world, has the leading experts and brightest people, most wealthy in almost every respect.
Click to expand...


US have the largest GDP, but not the largest GDP pro capita. In fact they have a very badly distributed GDP, resulting in a not-so-rich middle class, and an impressive amount of poor people considering the impressive GPD. The fact is that the US are home to the biggest industrial conglomerates, wich are responsable for the high GDP, but a quite scaring amount of that GDP is kept in very few hands. This can be considered a good thing or a bad thing, mainly depending on if you are a part of that richest 1%. The US are definitely the largest consumer in the world, this is a fact. Consuming over saving is a distinctive part of the US culture and lifestyle.

The brightest people... hum... I guess this is a very american biased point of view. The top cultural production in almost every field has better exponents from other countries, but I agree that the economical power makes of the US a very interesting cultural HUB.
 
The largest GDP per capita is Luxembourg, the US is second. Absolutely stellar for a country of it's size, There is no country with a comparable population size and a GDP to match, even considering the EU.
Note that i am not american, and not biased in any form to any US view.
You are pulling stuff out of your a$$, please show an economy that is better than the US.
Then we'll talk.
If there is no country, then it is indeed "the best"
 
US have the largest GDP, but not the largest GDP pro capita. In fact they have a very badly distributed GDP, resulting in a not-so-rich middle class, and an impressive amount of poor people considering the impressive GPD.
Click to expand...

This is just plain stupid - and nothing more than liberal socialist propaganda. The US is horrible, free markets mean that those that work have more money - what a shame. The fact is the US still has one of the most well distibuted GDPs per capita in the world, and it does not rely on tax and regulation to accomplish its goal. Pretty damn good if you ask me.

Plus, 3.1% growth is typically considered to be very good.

Furthermore, if the economy is so soft, why are new home sales and starts at all time record highs? People usually do not buy or build new homes during soft economic times.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
The largest GDP per capita is Luxembourg, the US is second. Absolutely stellar for a country of it's size, There is no country with a comparable population size and a GDP to match, even considering the EU.
Note that i am not american, and not biased in any form to any US view.
You are pulling stuff out of your a$$, please show an economy that is better than the US.
Then we'll talk.
If there is no country, then it is indeed "the best"
Click to expand...


I am not american but living half of the year in NY. So I DO like this economy and have myself invested quite a percentage of my assets in this country. I am not bashing the US economy by any mean. Just saying that the "best economy of the world" simply doesn't exist. Otherwise you would see 95% of the investment funds from the market, because each and every investment institute would know for sure where to throw its money.
The GDP per capita is a very poor instrument. As I wrote before the total GDP of the US is so high and the population so small that of course the per capita GDP is still pretty high. There are more advanced instruments to describe the distribuition of richness among the people of a country. The US present a ver un-belanced curve... in a few words the richest 5% gets a HUGE part of the cake. In my opinion a better economy is the one that has the richest middle 50%, the richest middle class, and possibly no poors. The 18% of people living in poverty in the US is one of the highest percentages for the developed world. You won't find this in Germany, Swiss, Austria,Sweden, Finland, Italy, France, the Uk, Japan etc etc.. Swiss has a better economy than the US in my opinion, however I agree that the swiss economy is made possible by quite a number of historical, social and political exceptionalities. Nonetheless is the financial market considered by most people in the business as beeing the safest and consistent in its performances.
Also the GDP takes in account the wealth produced, not the wealth accumulated. Again, if you consider the middle 50% of the population you will find people in the US gaining a probably bigger salary than their european counterpart, but most of the americans are in debt, while most of the europeans have considerable assets, due to an higher propension to save.

I would say the the US present the biggest and more lucrative economic landscape for its corporations, not at all for the 95% of its citizens.

By the way: I am enjoying the debating... please keep it polite 🙂
Regards
 
The best economy in the world does exist, and it's the US. Economics is very much quantitative and understanding which is the best is not a hard concept to comprehend.
I do agree that GDP can be a a poor instument. In this case it is very much relevant. This may sound cynical, but an economy is not humanistic in any respect. The number of poor or how wealth is distributed is a trivial concept.
Care to address the wealth accumulated concept a little more? It is my belief that the US has the highest accumulated wealth, feel free to prove this wrong.
I disagree that the US has more debt...If they have a higher salary, they most likely live far better than the european counterpart.
Saving isn't always better, the american could have money in a house accumulating money, investments growing, etc. All increasing debt but making him/her far better off.

I'd say every american benifits from the US in its current form, I would like to discuss this futher.
Cheers.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
The best economy in the world does exist, and it's the US. Economics is very much quantitative and understanding which is the best is not a hard concept to comprehend.
I do agree that GDP can be a a poor instument. In this case it is very much relevant. This may sound cynical, but an economy is not humanistic in any respect. The number of poor or how wealth is distributed is a trivial concept.
Care to address the wealth accumulated concept a little more? It is my belief that the US has the highest accumulated wealth, feel free to prove this wrong.
I disagree that the US has more debt...If they have a higher salary, they most likely live far better than the european counterpart.
Saving isn't always better, the american could have money in a house accumulating money, investments growing, etc. All increasing debt but making him/her far better off.

I'd say every american benifits from the US in its current form, I would like to discuss this futher.
Cheers.
Click to expand...


The total GDP of the US tells us that this is a country capable of producing an huge amaount of goods and services each year. This is for sure, and nobody is discussing this.
But I think you are wrong about the distribuition of wealth beeing a trivial concept. In every financial group where I have worked it was considered a LOT. People living in state of poverty are not good consumers. They do not invest. They have hard time starting a business. They don't have access to top education. They are more incline to crime. Each of these things have both a humanistic value and an economic value. A country with a too big void between the richests and the middle class will be losing competitivity in the long term.
The US are a country blessed by a very rich soil, self sufficient in many compartments, and due to historical and political reasons it is one of the markets of choice of many capital movements. A big, big share of the world has been (and still is) taking money to wall street. This has generated a virtuous circle, providing the US economy plenty of capitals to invest in new ventures. Moreover the US economic policy has always been very friendly to corporations, wich enjoy a low taxation made possible by the lack of free services offered to the citizens. The US economy has blossomed.
But the very uneven distribuition of richness of the country means (aside from what you call humanistic worries) a very nervous economy. This is why the stock markets have done poorly compared to europe in the past months. Wall Street will do better than the European markets when things are globally good, and worse when things are globally bad. Again you may like this or not. Many american traders love it. Many european investment bankers don't.

One day (quite soon) China will have a bigger GDP than the US. Will this make of China the "best economy out there"? I don't think so. I work for a (mainly) financial news agency, and probably because of this I fail to understand how one can avoid connection between the social, political and humanistic aspects of an economy and the raw numbers. The raw numbers are all you need if your timeframe is 1 week. Traders do fine with just the daily figures. Those guys at the world bank look very closely to data like crime rate, education, health, immigration and wealth distribution. In the long term the will make the difference. I am from an "economics point of view" worried about the incredible inmate population in the US, or about the drops in the american school tests results.
And from a personal point of view (but here I agree, I am not a cynic) cannot consider the best economy in the world one having such a big amount of people living in poverty, or (probably more interesting) a middle class so far from the few richests.

The accumulated wealth of the american middle-class is by far smallest than its european counterpart. The acumulated wealth of the american richest 1% is by far bigger than its european counterpart. Same story. If you are the richest in the US you are richest on earth. Here real estate values might play quite a big role. In europe (small continent, lots of people, ancient crowded cities) the real estate values are just insane, even in small towns, while in the US (as usual) you find the extreems: iper-high prices in for exaple NYC or San Francisco, and very cheap prices in smaller cities. Real estate represent a considerable part of the middle class assets, and americans love to play the refinancing-game that doesn't even exist in other countries.

Debts are a very complicated issue. High debts are used by the people in america to support high consumes. They DO allow people to consume more, so we could say they permit them to make life better. Very, very risky game. I am confident that the US will eventually fix the allarming debt levels... but you, loving hard numbers, should be scared by the average per capita debt in the US.

In the end.. the fact is I live part of my life in the United States, so I am affected by the social and political problems of the economical structure of this country. It would be better for my life if the wealth were more equally distributed, because this would fix some of the most nasty social problems we experience here. In my opinion in the long term it would benefit also the "raw numbers" economy.

In no way I am saying the european or japanese economic models are better than the american one. Different. That's why I say I don't think a "better economy of the world" exist as a concept.
Regards
 
Originally posted by: irwincur
Plus, 3.1% growth is typically considered to be very good.

Furthermore, if the economy is so soft, why are new home sales and starts at all time record highs? People usually do not buy or build new homes during soft economic times.
Click to expand...
3.1% GDP growth is good for right now. What about the future though? The GDP growth has had 5 or 6 straight quarterly drops. A good GDP growth number that is consistantly dropping won't stay good for long.

Contrast that with inflation. Inflation (4.3% for the quarter ending March 2005) is getting to the high end (anything above 4% is bad in my opinion). It isn't bad right now. But what about the future? Inflation has picked up in each of the last few readings. What if that trend continues? A good inflation number that is consistantly increasing won't stay good for long.

Home sales are also quite good at the moment. That is due to interest rates which are still near multiple decade lows. However, the fed keeps inching up the interest rates. If inflation keeps growing, so with the interest rates. Eventually this will have a severe impact on housing. Housing starts take largest tumble in 14 years. Housing will be good for at least another year in my opinion, but it is showing signs of weakening.

Conclusion: economy is good now, but all signs for the future are for a bad economy if the recent trends continue.


 
Originally posted by: Crimson
DOOM! GLOOM!! DOOM!! GLOOM!

Yawn.. same line from the libbies.. economy is fine.. Gee, they aren't paying people $25/hr to screw in a bolt anymore.. no KIDDING.. Get some new training and move on to something new.. the days of the factories are gone. This isn't 1945 anymore.
Click to expand...

ROTFL!! It sounds to me like you need to have a few screws tightened up.

I guess you don't need a car or a bus or a train to get to work. I could go on, but I think I've made my point. I'll grant you that many things are being automated, but they still need people around that know how to do things well enough that a robot can do it.

Not everything can be automated either. I know people who make good money shoeing horses.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
The largest GDP per capita is Luxembourg, the US is second. Absolutely stellar for a country of it's size, There is no country with a comparable population size and a GDP to match, even considering the EU.
Note that i am not american, and not biased in any form to any US view.
You are pulling stuff out of your a$$, please show an economy that is better than the US.
Then we'll talk.
If there is no country, then it is indeed "the best"
Click to expand...


Ireland.

5.7% GDP growth
3% job growth
5.2% wage growth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top