US: June industrial production roars ahead

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Click me!

Inflation seems to be very well in check helping to drive the industrial sector along with good reported consuer confidence. If oil prices will hold in check (or lower themselves), a nice long economic expansion might just take place. Also, it would be hopeful to increase manufacturing jobs as industrial activity picks up (at least one can dream).


By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer
37 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Industrial production roared ahead in June at the fastest pace in 16 months, with half of the gain attributed to a big increase in output at the nation's utilities, reflecting the onset of hot weather.

The Federal Reserve reported that industrial output increased 0.9 percent in June, three times faster than the 0.3 percent rise in May. The good performance provided further evidence that the nation's factories, mines and utilities have rebounded from a spring slowdown.

Meanwhile, the Labor Department provided a second dose of good news on inflation, reporting that prices at the wholesale level were unchanged in June even though gasoline prices shot up at the fastest pace in eight months. On Thursday, the government reported that consumer prices were also frozen in June.


Taken together, the two reports showed an economy that was expanding at a solid pace with inflation well contained.

The 0.9 percent rise in industrial production was the best showing since a 1.1 percent increase in February 2004. More than half of the gain came from a 5.3 percent surge in utility output, reflecting warmer-than-usual temperatures in June. Utility production had been down in both May and April as unseasonably cool weather in many parts of the country had depressed demand for electricity to power air conditioning.

Manufacturing output was up a solid 0.4 percent in June following an even stronger 0.5 percent rise in May. Both gains had followed two months of declines which had raised concerns that the manufacturing sector, the hardest hit in the 2001 recession, could be faltering again.

Output at mines, a category that includes oil production, rose by 0.4 percent in June following a 0.2 percent May increase.

The good news on wholesale prices reported in the Labor Department's Producer Price Index occurred because a steep decline in food prices last month offset a big jump in the cost of energy. Outside of food and energy, prices were well-behaved with so-called core inflation falling by 0.1 percent, the first decline since February.

In a third report, the Commerce Department said business inventories rose a slight 0.1 percent in May as stockpiles of unsold cars at auto dealerships fell sharply. The small May increase followed a revised 0.2 percent rise in April inventories held at all levels of business.

The good news on wholesale prices followed a report Thursday that prices at the retail level were also unchanged in June. However, the report on consumer prices showed energy prices falling for a second consecutive month while the report on wholesale prices showed an increase in energy costs.

Analysts explained the difference by noting that the wholesale price report measures price pressures at an earlier point in the delivery chain before they reach the consumer. Therefore the PPI picked up a jump in energy costs that had not yet hit gasoline pumps.

Energy price pressures have increased even more since both the wholesale and retail price surveys were taken for June. Crude oil costs hit a record high above $61 per barrel in early July and gasoline pump prices rose last week to a nationwide average of $2.33 per gallon, up 10 cents from the previous week.

Those increases are expected to push inflation at both the wholesale and retail levels up in July.

For June, the rise in wholesale energy costs reflected an 8.7 percent jump in gasoline prices, the biggest increase since a 12.8 percent increast last October.

Food costs at the wholesale level fell 1.1 percent in June, the biggest drop in 11 months. The decline was led by an 8 percent drop in beef prices and a 7.7 percent fall in pork prices, the biggest one month drop in nearly seven years.

Outside of food and energy, the 0.1 percent drop in core inflation at the wholesale level reflected a 1 percent drop in the cost of new passenger cars and a 1.7 percent decline in prices for light trucks. Both decreases were attributed to decisions by automakers to bring back attractive incentive deals.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Good news! Hopefully things can continue rising to the levels when Bush took office.
 

ntdz

Diamond Member
Aug 5, 2004
6,989
0
0
Conjur and the gang must be sh!tting their pants about now, there hasn't been a single bit of negative economic news this month.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: ntdz
Conjur and the gang must be sh!tting their pants about now, there hasn't been a single bit of negative economic news this month.

Try googling up some spin.
 

Train

Lifer
Jun 22, 2000
13,599
90
91
www.bing.com
Originally posted by: ntdz
Conjur and the gang must be sh!tting their pants about now, there hasn't been a single bit of negative economic news this month.
ooh your gonna get it now, here come 10 liberals with sob stories about how thier mothers uncles friend lost a job last week.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Bbbbubububububut if you discount that .9% of the economy, production hasn't risen at all!
 

irwincur

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2002
1,899
0
0
there hasn't been a single bit of negative economic news this month.

Actually, the past two years have been pretty much positive. At this point we are entering a fairly well sustained boom period.

 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
And you guys are any different? I see a good OP followed by nothing but liberal bashing for the sake of liberal bashing.

Now, as for the OP. That's great news. That's true that this month has had excellent economics news. (Which has been reflected nicely by my investments.) I'm also really impressed by how well the market has responded to the terrorists attack in London. A lot of economic indicators look very good right now. The only thing that has me worried is the possibility of an inverted yeild curve and the defecit. If we could just get spending under control, I'd feel that this country was in great shape. Unfortunately, neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
Aim low and anything is attainable.
In peak economic activity of a nation, one should not aim for halving record deficits, but eliminating them. The public sector (gov't jobs) is growing faster than any other sector, this is unacceptable for a "conservative" in power. The US needs aggressive spending cuts.

Good News recently, props to all americans :thumbsup:
 

Train

Lifer
Jun 22, 2000
13,599
90
91
www.bing.com
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
Aim low and anything is attainable.
In peak economic activity of a nation, one should not aim for halving record deficits, but eliminating them. The public sector (gov't jobs) is growing faster than any other sector, this is unacceptable for a "conservative" in power. The US needs aggressive spending cuts.

Good News recently, props to all americans :thumbsup:
Cutting 7 Trillion dollar deficit in half in 4 years is aiming low? pfft thats pretty incredible if you ask me, especially considering the fed has been in debt since 1951.
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?

The Dems made progress too, but it was based mostly on an improving economy that reduced the defecit. That's what you have now. the economy is improving, so its making up some of the defecit. Until one of the parties (and right now, it would have to be the republicans since they are in contol) is willing to actaully get spending under control, we will always run massive defecits. Only through real spending control will we be able to stop relying on defecit spending. I'm not saying that being ahead of schedule isn't good, but I find it unlikely they will be able to sustain the improvement over the long term (that is unless they show some real fiscal restraint). But we will see, only time will tell.
 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
Aim low and anything is attainable.
In peak economic activity of a nation, one should not aim for halving record deficits, but eliminating them. The public sector (gov't jobs) is growing faster than any other sector, this is unacceptable for a "conservative" in power. The US needs aggressive spending cuts.

Good News recently, props to all americans :thumbsup:
Cutting 7 Trillion dollar deficit in half in 4 years is aiming low? pfft thats pretty incredible if you ask me, especially considering the fed has been in debt since 1951.
Isn't the deficit at about $600billion?
In economic high times it is aiming low, spending has been increasing fast, that's no way to drive down the deficit. Bush is merely relying on economic performance (cycles occur every 7 years almost like clockwork)
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
That's cutting yearly deficits in half...not the national debt.
 

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
Aim low and anything is attainable.
In peak economic activity of a nation, one should not aim for halving record deficits, but eliminating them. The public sector (gov't jobs) is growing faster than any other sector, this is unacceptable for a "conservative" in power. The US needs aggressive spending cuts.

Good News recently, props to all americans :thumbsup:
Cutting 7 Trillion dollar deficit in half in 4 years is aiming low? pfft thats pretty incredible if you ask me, especially considering the fed has been in debt since 1951.

You're slightly confused. He's plannign to cut the national defecit in half (the amount we're going into the whole each year). Not the debt. So he isn;t going to cut the 7 trillion figure in half, he's going to cut the rate of increase in half. To cut the debt (7 trillion ) in half in a few years he'd have to pull a miracle.

 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
Train knows it's the deficit in half, I'm sure he just misread my post, he knows what he is talking about.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: ntdz
Conjur and the gang must be sh!tting their pants about now, there hasn't been a single bit of negative economic news this month.
ooh your gonna get it now, here come 10 liberals with sob stories about how thier mothers uncles friend lost a job last week.

That's all true Liberals and conservatives are losing jobs, losing good paying ones, losing high-tech ones. Glad I'm not your age..competing with third word gonna be rough on y'all.

You think liberals are bad check out Dr. Roberts...Reagans tres sec..WSJ and National Review editor (not exactly moveon.org material) has to say.

The No-Think Nation
By Paul Craig Roberts

Thought is not an American forte. Consider the speed with which our government got us trapped in two quagmires, Iraq and Afghanistan.

The CIA says that Bush?s invasion of Iraq has created ideal conditions for training insurgents and terrorists. The longer we are there, the worse it gets.

Our military is being worn down by a gratuitous war of no benefit to anyone except Osama bin Laden. Bush?s war has provided substance for bin Laden?s propaganda and radicalized the Middle East.

Bush?s war is being financed by debt, and the result is to give our foreign bankers more control over our interest rates and our currency?s value, should they choose to use the power we have placed in their hands.

Not only has our government demonstrated an inability to think before rushing to war, it cannot think about the economy either. Each month in the 21st century the government?s own statistics tell the tale of the US winding down as a superpower and devolving into a third world country. Not a single net new high tech or manufacturing job has been created for native-born Americans in the 21st century.

Month after month this devastating information is released and ignored.

Now comes a report from Richard Freeman, professor of economics at Harvard University and associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. Freeman?s conclusions suggest that the US is not only losing its lead in science and engineering but also might be losing the professions themselves.

A country that outsources its manufacturing and its R&D abroad doesn?t have jobs for its own engineers and scientists.

Corporations have moved many information technology, high-tech manufacturing, engineering, and research and development jobs away from America to lower cost countries principally in Asia. The result is declining opportunities and salaries for American graduates in science and engineering, which discourages students from these curriculums.

As my free market friends are fond of saying, "the market works." It certainly does. The market is working to close down the great American middle class and to dismantle the ladders of upward mobility. The US economy in the 21st century has been able to create new jobs only in nontradable domestic services. A labor market orientated toward domestic services is the hallmark of a third world economy.

The jobs problem is more serious than the war problem and receives even less attention. Economists misperceive the offshore outsourcing of jobs as the beneficial workings of free trade, a subject they have given scant thought for 200 years, being, as they are, content with Ricardo?s demonstration that comparative advantage ensures mutual gains from trade.

America?s no-think economists have yet to fathom that the offshore outsourcing of jobs reflects the workings of absolute advantage, not comparative advantage. When American capital, technology and business know-how employ foreigners in place of Americans, foreigners benefit and Americans lose.

In the short-run the corporations benefit. The lower labor costs raise profits and executive bonuses. But the long-run effect is to destroy the US consumer market for the goods and services that the corporations supply from abroad.

American profits and American employment no longer move in tandem. A recent report in the New York Times by John Markoff and Matt Richtel says profits have rebounded in Silicon Valley but not employment. They use the example of Wyse Technology, a maker of computer terminals.

At the beginning of this year, 90 percent of Wyse?s work force was in Silicon Valley. At the present time the figure is 48 percent, with only 15 percent of its engineers remaining in Silicon Valley. The reason?

Wyse has created technology development teams in India and China, adding 100 employees in India and 35 in China so far this year.

America has a new development model, one unprecedented in history. The growth and prosperity of American corporations is now keyed directly to the employment of foreign workers in place of Americans.

It is impossible for a country to prosper when its capital, technology, and business knowledge are used to enhance the productivity of foreign workers in place of its own. American incomes are stagnating and falling. By abandoning American employees, corporations are eroding the great American consumer market and America?s position in the first world.

Dr. Roberts, [email him] a former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal and a former Contributing Editor of National Review, was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during the Reagan administration. He is the author of The Supply-Side Revolution and, with Lawrence M. Stratton, of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow?s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
http://www.vdare.com/roberts/050712_no_think.htm


 

ntdz

Diamond Member
Aug 5, 2004
6,989
0
0
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
Aim low and anything is attainable.
In peak economic activity of a nation, one should not aim for halving record deficits, but eliminating them. The public sector (gov't jobs) is growing faster than any other sector, this is unacceptable for a "conservative" in power. The US needs aggressive spending cuts.

Good News recently, props to all americans :thumbsup:

Actually, last month 20,000 govt jobs were LOST.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
Aim low and anything is attainable.
In peak economic activity of a nation, one should not aim for halving record deficits, but eliminating them. The public sector (gov't jobs) is growing faster than any other sector, this is unacceptable for a "conservative" in power. The US needs aggressive spending cuts.

Good News recently, props to all americans :thumbsup:

Actually, last month 20,000 govt jobs were LOST.


Which is good. Now, just like trying to reduce the deficit, it's time to lose part of those over 1,000,000 government employees that have been hired in the last 4 years and turn them over to the rising economic situation of the private sector.
 

ntdz

Diamond Member
Aug 5, 2004
6,989
0
0
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
Aim low and anything is attainable.
In peak economic activity of a nation, one should not aim for halving record deficits, but eliminating them. The public sector (gov't jobs) is growing faster than any other sector, this is unacceptable for a "conservative" in power. The US needs aggressive spending cuts.

Good News recently, props to all americans :thumbsup:

Actually, last month 20,000 govt jobs were LOST.


Which is good. Now, just like trying to reduce the deficit, it's time to lose part of those over 1,000,000 government employees that have been hired in the last 4 years and turn them over to the rising economic situation of the private sector.

I couldn't agree more. I'm not sure it's 1,000,000, but less govt employees is always a good thing.
 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
A lot of job growth in Bush's terms were public sector.
I agree though, less gov't jobs the better, 20,000 drop is a good step, hopefully it is a trend like the hiring frenzy.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Stunt
A lot of job growth in Bush's terms were public sector.
I agree though, less gov't jobs the better, 20,000 drop is a good step, hopefully it is a trend like the hiring frenzy.

You're correct. Most of the .6% employment gain has been government since 2001. Private accounts for only .03% of the gains since 2001.


from Jobwatch.org.

Updated June 3, 2005

Private sector recoups jobs lost since the 2001 recession; industry picture mixed

Last month, jobs in the private sector finally reached the level of March 2001, when the last recession began. The 50 months that it took to regain peak-level employment in the private sector was the longest on record. Total employment (including government jobs as well as the private sector) also took a record 46 months to recover the level of March 2001. In contrast to the 50 months it has taken to regain the level of jobs since this recession began, it took an average of 23 months to return to the level of private employment at the onset of previous post-war recessions. The prior record, set during the "jobless recovery" following the 1990-91 recession, was 33 months. (For additional analysis of the May employment numbers, see EPI's Jobs Picture.)

Private-sector employment?total employment minus the government sector?is an important economic barometer. Employment in the government sector can be countercyclical (meaning that government employment may increase during economic downturns), and therefore not reflect underlying private-sector demand.

Since March 2001, total employment is up 0.6%, while private-sector employment is up 0.03%. The overall private service-producing sector is up 2.6%. Industries within that sector that have fared well are educational services (+14.3%), health care and social assistance (+11.3%), and leisure and hospitality (+6.0%). Although overall employment in the private sector has been recouped, that does not mean that employment in all industrial sectors has rebounded. One outstanding exception in the private service-providing sector is information, which continued to be down 15.5% from its peak employment level. The largest part of the information sector is telecommunications, but it also encompasses the publishing, motion picture, and broadcasting industries.

 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: tss4
And you guys are any different? I see a good OP followed by nothing but liberal bashing for the sake of liberal bashing.

Now, as for the OP. That's great news. That's true that this month has had excellent economics news. (Which has been reflected nicely by my investments.) I'm also really impressed by how well the market has responded to the terrorists attack in London. A lot of economic indicators look very good right now. The only thing that has me worried is the possibility of an inverted yeild curve and the defecit. If we could just get spending under control, I'd feel that this country was in great shape. Unfortunately, neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
:thumbsup:

I'm especially glad to see inflation abating a bit. Hopefully we can keep it in check.

(And :cookie:s to the usual BushCo trolls for their unprovoked attacks.)
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Train
Originally posted by: tss4
... neither party has shown themselves to be willing to do what it takes to get spending under control.
Like being ahead of schedule to halve the deficit by 2009?
That's a bit like setting one's house on fire, then bragging about how well you're fighting the blaze.