Why are Americans down on the economy?

[Jhhnn]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think a lot of opinions on the economy are based on the ?I?m doing fine, but I worry about my friend down the street.?

This effect even shows up in polls.
When asked how they feel the overall economy is doing you?ll end up with X saying it is good.
Then when you ask people how they are doing personally you end up with a much higher percentage saying that they are doing good.

I think it is all based on what they hear on the news. And for months if not years we have been hearing about the up coming slow down in the economy etc etc.
Hell? every time we post a thread about the continuing growth in tax revenue a dozen people chime in with the ?we can?t keep up this type of growth forever? type of comments.

Face it? the economy is doing quite well. We all thought the housing market crash would lead to a slow down or even recession but we are starting to see signs that we have gone past that crisis and are starting to re-emerge into growth again.

Heh. It's all about teh ebil libruhl meedyuh, right?

It's easy to look good on borrowed money, for a while, anyway. We haven't seen the end of housing issues, not by a longshot, only the beginning. Not to mention the deceptive consequences of ongoing $500B/yr deficits... or the effects of increasing concentration of wealth and income...

It's easy to paint the overall picture as rosy even as growth goes to the top and stays there, even as the buying power of the median wage declines.

Heck, they think they're doing great in Brazil, really enjoying their "growth", too-

http://www.falkland-malvinas.c...?id=10917&formato=HTML

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: piasabird
If you look at the stock market and that is making more money than ever that is a good indication that corporations are making lots of money, but there are other factors in the economy you need to look at.

1. Inflation in the Home owners market of the price of housing.
2. Foreclosures on Homes.
3. Inflation of the price of electricity.
4. Inflation of the price of automobiles.
5. Inflation of the price of Goceries.
6. Inflation of the price of Gasoline.

All of these effect the real cost of living. However, they may or may not effect the stock market.

I have one addittional take on this subject. If this personal income group goes up higher, then the businesses like Oil Companies, and Electric companies make more money for the same amount of customers. This causes them to make more money and causes more taxes to be collected if they are based on % of cost of an item. This will make it appear that the corporations that sell these products are doing well and making record profits. However, they are not a good indicator that the average joe's wallet has more money in it. If you want to give this index a name call it the Wallet Index!

If your savings are invested in the Stock Market this may be good news.

However, if you can barely make ends meet and can not save much money then this is bad news.

Well apparently according to the rich Republicans on here you don't need:

A house

Electricity

Car

Groceries

Internet

Phone

so there is no problem.

 

[heartsurgeon]

i'm gonna make a wild guess that all the folks that make statements like:

Anyone with an ounce of economic sense knows that Dow/Nasdaq/S&P500 setting all-time records doesnt automatically mean good economy

don't own any stocks, and for that matter probably don't have any investments.

You probably don't even know what a "bad economy" looks like!!

Inflation over 10%, unemployment over 10%, GDP growth under 1%, prime housing lending rates 21%!!, stock market tanking......

THAT'S a crummy economy....

gee, I wonder who was President then (hint: "peanuts")??

when you have no knowledge of history, and no perspective, how can you accurately judge the economy..

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
i'm gonna make a wild guess that all the folks that make statements like:

Anyone with an ounce of economic sense knows that Dow/Nasdaq/S&P500 setting all-time records doesnt automatically mean good economy

don't own any stocks, and for that matter probably don't have any investments.

You probably don't even know what a "bad economy" looks like!!

Inflation over 10%, unemployment over 10%, GDP growth under 1%, prime housing lending rates 21%!!, stock market tanking......

THAT'S a crummy economy....

gee, I wonder who was President then (hint: "peanuts")??

when you have no knowledge of history, and no perspective, how can you accurately judge the economy..

Sounds like Herbert Hoover. The ecnomony will right itself up. Do nothing, everything will be fine. Government can only make things worse.

 

[heartsurgeon]

Next guess??

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: "I'm leaving and I'm never coming back" heartsurgeon
Next guess??

Why it's good ole Jimmy Carter who inherited that mess from Nixon and Ford.

 

[heartsurgeon]

Jimmuh Carter!! Yes, the correct answer.

As far as inheriting a bad economy, I would agree with that assessment. However, if you look at the numbers (or if you lived tthrough that time, as I did, and perhaps you did), Pres. Carter actively made the economy much worse with his fiscal policies. That's a big reason that Carter lost to Reagan (who inherited Carter's even worse economy, and CUT TAXES!!! YAhOO!! marking the beginning of a prolonged rise in the DOW (still going on today) and growth of the economy, from "stagflation").

The kids on this forum have no idea what a bad economy is...

 

[heartsurgeon]

Just to clarify (for those of you who don't read much)

Carter was a Democrat.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Jimmuh Carter!! Yes, the correct answer.

As far as inheriting a bad economy, I would agree with that assessment. However, if you look at the numbers (or if you lived tthrough that time, as I did, and perhaps you did), Pres. Carter actively made the economy much worse with his fiscal policies. That's a big reason that Carter lost to Reagan (who inherited Carter's even worse economy, and CUT TAXES!!! YAhOO!! marking the beginning of a prolonged rise in the DOW (still going on today) and growth of the economy, from "stagflation").

The kids on this forum have no idea what a bad economy is...

I still remember the WIN (Whip Inflation Now) buttons from Ford's term. I also remember the Oil Embargo by Opec which had a lot to do with the economy really tanking during Carters term. It seemed to me it was more a situation of circumstances that doomed Carter than anything he did (or didn't do).

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

The kids on this forum have no idea what a bad economy is...

Do you?

National Debt Graph (2007 Budget data)

Or are you just another feel good, bleeding-heart neo-con?

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Jimmuh Carter!! Yes, the correct answer.

As far as inheriting a bad economy, I would agree with that assessment. However, if you look at the numbers (or if you lived tthrough that time, as I did, and perhaps you did), Pres. Carter actively made the economy much worse with his fiscal policies. That's a big reason that Carter lost to Reagan (who inherited Carter's even worse economy, and CUT TAXES!!! YAhOO!! marking the beginning of a prolonged rise in the DOW (still going on today) and growth of the economy, from "stagflation").

The kids on this forum have no idea what a bad economy is...

I still remember the WIN (Whip Inflation Now) buttons from Ford's term. I also remember the Oil Embargo by Opec which had a lot to do with the economy really tanking during Carters term. It seemed to me it was more a situation of circumstances that doomed Carter than anything he did (or didn't do).

Yep the US basically went bankrupt from the Vietnam war and had to make the dollar nearly worthless to pay off the war debts. On top of that the US hit it's own domestic Hubbert Peak Oil and had to start to import more oil from abroad. Of course this hit the consumers and lead to hyperinflation and Carter had to raise interest rates very high to stop it. Carter, in contrast to Reagan, was in fact adult and responsible in his economic management.

 

[heartsurgeon]

Dawn, i would agree that WIN was utterly moronic (but that was Gerry Ford...utterly moronic). Yes, Carter did inherit a bad situation. Yes, he also had to deal with pretty stark increases in oil prices, but he also messed up the money supply, the prime rate, and kept taxes high. He helped a bad economy get worse. I remember buying my first home when Carter was President....I got an assumable 13% mortage and I was so happy...I thought that was a good rate. When we sold the house about a year later, the assumable 13% mortgage was a MAJOR selling point, because interest rates had gone up to 16-18%!!

That was a sucky economy.....

NOTHING about the current economy even comes close to those days.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Dawn, i would agree that WIN was utterly moronic (but that was Gerry Ford...utterly moronic). Yes, Carter did inherit a bad situation. Yes, he also had to deal with pretty stark increases in oil prices, but he also messed up the money supply, the prime rate, and kept taxes high. He helped a bad economy get worse. I remember buying my first home when Carter was President....I got an assumable 13% mortage and I was so happy...I thought that was a good rate. When we sold the house about a year later, the assumable 13% mortgage was a MAJOR selling point, because interest rates had gone up to 16-18%!!

That was a sucky economy.....

NOTHING about the current economy even comes close to those days.

Oh come on.

While the rates are true you forgot one critical detail.

The actual price of the real estate.

Home prices were reasonable for the time.

Now they are just plain criminally out of sight.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Dawn, i would agree that WIN was utterly moronic (but that was Gerry Ford...utterly moronic). Yes, Carter did inherit a bad situation. Yes, he also had to deal with pretty stark increases in oil prices, but he also messed up the money supply, the prime rate, and kept taxes high. He helped a bad economy get worse. I remember buying my first home when Carter was President....I got an assumable 13% mortage and I was so happy...I thought that was a good rate. When we sold the house about a year later, the assumable 13% mortgage was a MAJOR selling point, because interest rates had gone up to 16-18%!!

That was a sucky economy.....

NOTHING about the current economy even comes close to those days.

Oh come on.

While the rates are true you forgot one critical detail.

The actual price of the real estate.

Home prices were reasonable for the time.

Now they are just plain criminally out of sight.

In certain areas, yes. House prices are beyond ridiculous. There are still tens of thousands of houses on the market in in very pleasant parts of the country with great school districts and low crime that are very affordable. Anything 2 hours south of Chicago in IL is pretty reasonable. A very large part of Iowa is reasonable. Nebraska is affordable. And the entire stretch going east from Indiana over to a lot of Pennsylvania is very affordable.

It's what happens when you don't pay a premium to live in a huge booming metropolis or in a place that has perfect weather 300+ days a year.

Drop the coasts off the equation and the medium home prices would be half what they are.

 

[Blain]

I love smoke & mirror statistics.
You can use the same numbers to arrive at two different conclusions.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Vic

You mean I don't respond your usual vitriol, personal attacks, and statistics twisting that you pretend are "proper debates?" God forbid!! :Q

Let me help you out: that the sun will rise tomorrow is a fact. Your interpretations of data and opinions are NOT.

Keep being a tool though, posting about me behind my back :roll:

So, essentially, you have no proof. Figures. Guess you can't refute the Fed eh?

That's ok.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: rchiu


Totally agree. Stock market is not a true indicator on how the economy is doing. The Wall St. is awashed in money because of all the M&A activities. All the investment bankers are getting like 100% bonus. All those activities are nothing but creating money out of thin air, well mostly, not to mention all the debt and leverage people use to fuel those activities that add to the profits of Wall St.. Lot of talks on synergies and value creations after M&A and LBO but you rarely see those things realized. With all the speculations on M&A and other activities, that's why the stock market is high right now.

What's happening is that people in certain sector are benefiting from those activities right now. But the rest of America have to deal with slowing house market and broken sub-prime leading system and the problems that comes with it.

Not saying the economy is really bad, but the stock market is definitely not an indicator of how the economy is doing.

Not all bankers are getting 100% bonuses and nobody is creating "money out of thin air". I cannot stand this saying. Nobody but the Fed can create money. Everything purchased has to be purchased with money, even LBO debt. That purchase is backed by the assets of the company and the future cashflows, which aren't "created".

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Next guess??

Are you going to refute my point or just ignore it like Vic and not post anything meaningful? Do you have any facts to refute mine?

 

[Jhhnn]

Gotta love HS's assertions about home prices- of course there are seemingly inexpensive areas- that's because there aren't any jobs in those areas, and wages are depressed as a result. Peachy if you're retired and don't have to work, otherwise a non sequiter.

One of my coworkers was raised on a farm in (very) rural N Dakota. He tells horror stories about how the neighboring farmhouses had to be torn down to keep out meth labs when the senior farmers passed on or needed to live in environments that provide care... Few people want to live there, because there aren't any jobs.. When the time comes, he'd probably pay somebody to live in his parents' place until it's time for him to retire... if he thought they were reliable... Increasing energy prices will make outlying homes even less desirable over time, too- no transit, high priced gasoline...

We've just begun to see the cracks in the edifice of sky-high real estate. Most people couldn't afford to buy the home they live in, today, if they had no equity to carry... Equity for today's buyers may be very elusive as prices decline and interest rates rise... The example of late 70's interest rates is a false analogy, as prices were rising, and those high rates were only temporary. As rates fell, refinancing was very attractive, available, and sensible, too, because they wouldn't loan you 125% of value on the basis of hype.... Lenders actually held mortgages, rather than acting as pass-thrus...

Approximately half of the US population owns no stocks, HS, and a large part of the rest don't enjoy direct ownership or control- only shares in mutual funds in their 401K's or a vestment in a traditional pension plan... I know people who had to come out of retirement when the value of their holdings crumpled in 2002... others whose hopes for that were dashed, and haven't yet recovered...

If nothing else, the rapid proliferation of payday loan outfits should indicate that things aren't quite so peachy for people at the lower end... they obviously fill a need in the market, otherwise they'd be gone...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Next guess??

Are you going to refute my point or just ignore it like Vic and not post anything meaningful? Do you have any facts to refute mine?

What's to refute when we don't actually disagree on the facts, and so all you do is fling personal attacks against me so that you can pretend that we do for the sake of your ego? I've noticed that as a consistent trend with you. Typical of an e-thug short pushing for a market dump for personal profit to insist that any interpretation of market facts other than their own of dire doom-and-gloom is a refutation of the facts themselves.
The best part about you, LK, is that you've become the McOwen of the housing market. You bitch that prices are too high, then chicken little that they're going down. Even after what a total jackass you've been, I couldn't have possibly imagined a worse punishment.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Gotta love HS's assertions about home prices- of course there are seemingly inexpensive areas- that's because there aren't any jobs in those areas, and wages are depressed as a result. Peachy if you're retired and don't have to work, otherwise a non sequiter.

One of my coworkers was raised on a farm in (very) rural N Dakota. He tells horror stories about how the neighboring farmhouses had to be torn down to keep out meth labs when the senior farmers passed on or needed to live in environments that provide care... Few people want to live there, because there aren't any jobs.. When the time comes, he'd probably pay somebody to live in his parents' place until it's time for him to retire... if he thought they were reliable... Increasing energy prices will make outlying homes even less desirable over time, too- no transit, high priced gasoline...

We've just begun to see the cracks in the edifice of sky-high real estate. Most people couldn't afford to buy the home they live in, today, if they had no equity to carry... Equity for today's buyers may be very elusive as prices decline and interest rates rise... The example of late 70's interest rates is a false analogy, as prices were rising, and those high rates were only temporary. As rates fell, refinancing was very attractive, available, and sensible, too, because they wouldn't loan you 125% of value on the basis of hype.... Lenders actually held mortgages, rather than acting as pass-thrus...

Approximately half of the US population owns no stocks, HS, and a large part of the rest don't enjoy direct ownership or control- only shares in mutual funds in their 401K's or a vestment in a traditional pension plan... I know people who had to come out of retirement when the value of their holdings crumpled in 2002... others whose hopes for that were dashed, and haven't yet recovered...

If nothing else, the rapid proliferation of payday loan outfits should indicate that things aren't quite so peachy for people at the lower end... they obviously fill a need in the market, otherwise they'd be gone...

I'm sorry... do you have a solution for all this negativity or are you just ranting? If the former, please tell us, if the latter, then you should know that it doesn't make you look smart. Any idiot can see all the bad in the world, as there's no shortage of it and never will be. It takes something a bit more to figure out how to make any good come of it. Ah... but then you wouldn't have anything to rant about, now would you?

 

[Jhhnn]

So, Vic, are you attempting to defend HS's fluffery and denial, or merely to engage in personal attack?

If it's not the former, why engage in the latter?

Solutions only come if there's recognition that a problem actually exists- And I suspect that the market will solve the current problem in ways unpleasant for recent and near future buyers, also those invested in REIT's. How far that will ripple thru the economy, dunno. And how that will effect long term opportunities for home ownership for our descendants remains unclear to me. Maybe the good part of it all is that housing prices may return to a level where the median family can buy a median home in most markets without needing massive equity to do so.

If you have an opinion to the contrary, have at it, express yourself. And, for sure, the sun will come up tomorrow, and life will go on within us and without us, but that's not really the point.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Next guess??

Are you going to refute my point or just ignore it like Vic and not post anything meaningful? Do you have any facts to refute mine?

What's to refute when we don't actually disagree on the facts, and so all you do is fling personal attacks against me so that you can pretend that we do for the sake of your ego? I've noticed that as a consistent trend with you. Typical of an e-thug short pushing for a market dump for personal profit to insist that any interpretation of market facts other than their own of dire doom-and-gloom is a refutation of the facts themselves.
The best part about you, LK, is that you've become the McOwen of the housing market. You bitch that prices are too high, then chicken little that they're going down. Even after what a total jackass you've been, I couldn't have possibly imagined a worse punishment.

Yeah, I am "shorting" the market. What's funny is that I am not shorting anything. I am long on certain classes of bonds right now, but I am not shorting anything. Nice assumption though.

I really don't get your last point, I am not facing any punishment. If anything my theories are being proven correct the whole time.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
So, Vic, are you attempting to defend HS's fluffery and denial, or merely to engage in personal attack?

If it's not the former, why engage in the latter?

Solutions only come if there's recognition that a problem actually exists- And I suspect that the market will solve the current problem in ways unpleasant for recent and near future buyers, also those invested in REIT's. How far that will ripple thru the economy, dunno. And how that will effect long term opportunities for home ownership for our descendants remains unclear to me. Maybe the good part of it all is that housing prices may return to a level where the median family can buy a median home in most markets without needing massive equity to do so.

If you have an opinion to the contrary, have at it, express yourself. And, for sure, the sun will come up tomorrow, and life will go on within us and without us, but that's not really the point.

Who knows what he is trying to do. Here's his typical post.

"You guys are shorting, you are robbing people of millions, they need to buy inflated houses! You're evil! Home ownership and equity are at all time highs (he provides no proof), things should keep going, we are in a great economy (he provides no proof)."

Then you counter with "Here is xx, xx, yy, zz, data, what do you think of that"?

"STOP THE PERSONAL ATTACKS, I DON'T NEED TO BACK UP ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU ATTACKED ME, SCUM!"

Don't expect anything but above.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
So, Vic, are you attempting to defend HS's fluffery and denial, or merely to engage in personal attack?

If it's not the former, why engage in the latter?

Solutions only come if there's recognition that a problem actually exists- And I suspect that the market will solve the current problem in ways unpleasant for recent and near future buyers, also those invested in REIT's. How far that will ripple thru the economy, dunno. And how that will effect long term opportunities for home ownership for our descendants remains unclear to me. Maybe the good part of it all is that housing prices may return to a level where the median family can buy a median home in most markets without needing massive equity to do so.

If you have an opinion to the contrary, have at it, express yourself. And, for sure, the sun will come up tomorrow, and life will go on within us and without us, but that's not really the point.

I'm not defending anyone. This isn't black and white, except to the usual partisan suspects, yourself included.. You don't make any arguments, you just whine and rail at all the negative things you see. OMG TEH HORRORZ!

"Awareness" is for people who don't want do anything to solve the problem, because then they wouldn't have anything to bitch about (or be "right" about on internet forums). As if it's so hard to find and point out the negative!