GDP Shows Surprise Drop for U.S. in Fourth Quarter

[spursncowboys]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100419252

Is this going to be a trend?

Is this the new norm?

[coyotes_geek]

Hopefully not.

[boutons_deux]

It was due to "runaway govt spending" :lol

“government spending cuts and slower inventory growth subtracted a total of 2.6 percentage points from growth.”

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/01/30/1513791/economy-shrinks-2009-gdp/

If Bishop Gekko were elected with Repug assholes controlling Senate and House, Rand-licker Ryan's severe austerity program would have pushed the US into recession. eg, UK is now looking at a triple-dip recession due to the Conservatives severely cutting govt spending. Europe the same. Cutting govt spending in a recession, pro-cyclical cuts, GUARANTEES a worsening recession, not the the govt-hating, austerity-pimping 1%ers GAF since they are totally insulated from the economic disaster.

[spursncowboys]

Hopefully not.
word

[Warlord23]

Meh ... private consumption went up 2.2%, and that's the #1 driver of GDP. Defense spending dropped 22% and that type of decrease is unlikely to happen next quarter. Red team should be happy that the government is cutting spending.

[TeyshaBlue]

Meh ... private consumption went up 2.2%, and that's the #1 driver of GDP. Defense spending dropped 22% and that type of decrease is unlikely to happen next quarter. Red team should be happy that the government is cutting spending.

Red team blue team didn't even enter the discussion until bouton's obligatory talking point rant. Odd you would latch on to that too.

[boutons_deux]

Red team blue team didn't even enter the discussion until bouton's obligatory talking point rant. Odd you would latch on to that too.

BIG LIES from Repugs/VRWC is that Barry is a profligate spender, govt has runaway spending problem, and Govt spending doesn't create jobs or wealth.

When in fact govt retraction in the Banksters Great Depression kills jobs and economic growth, and USA has a Repug/VRWC-caused revenue problem, not a spending problem.

TB :lol One can't honeslty separate economic management from politics, but DISHONESTY is what you right-wing mofos deliver non-stop.

[TeyshaBlue]

Dumbass...nobody but you is vomiting talking points. This is what you RSS bots deliver non-stop. No-content fwd:fwd:fwd: talking points.

[boutons_deux]

Dumbass...nobody but you is vomiting talking points. This is what you RSS bots deliver non-stop. No-content fwd:fwd:fwd: talking points.

TB :lol ANOTHER profound, loquacious addressing of the topic. Pushback sucks, don't it? :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

run away again, little bitch.

[TeyshaBlue]

Still waiting for you to address the Oil Boom thread.

[boutons_deux]

Why consumers are so glum

The Conference Board reported Tuesday that the preliminary January figure for consumer confidence in the United States fell to its lowest level in more than a year.

The last time consumers were this bummed out was October 2011, when there was widespread talk of a double-dip recession.

But this time business news is buoyant. The stock market is bullish. The housing market seems to have rebounded a bit.

So why are consumers so glum?

Because they’re deeply worried about their jobs and their incomes – as they have every right to be.

The job situation is still lousy. We’ll know more this coming Friday about what happened to jobs in January. But we know over 20 million people are still unemployed or underemployed.

Personal income is in terrible shape. The median wage continues to drop, adjusted for inflation.

Most people can’t get readily-available loans because banks are still cautious about lending to anyone without a sterling credit history. (Eliminate student loans and you find Americans aren’t borrowing any more than they were a year ago.)

And the payroll tax hike has reduced paychecks for the typical American by about $100 a month. That’s just about what the typical family spends to fill up their gas tanks per month. Or half what they spend for groceries each week.

Contrast the current pessimism with consumer sentiment last October. Then, a majority polled by the Conference Board expected their incomes to rise over the next six months.

Now just 14 percent expect their incomes to rise, and 23 percent expect them to fall.

That 9 percent gap of pessimists exceeding optimists is the largest since the spring of 2009 when the Great Recession was almost at its worst.

The stock market is bullish because corporate profits are up, costs are down, the “fiscal cliff” agreement has locked in low taxes for most of the upper-middle class and wealthy, and there’s no sign of inflation as far as the eye can see.

But corporate profits can’t stay high when American consumers – whose spending is 70 percent of the U.S. economy – are this pessimistic about the future. They’re just not going to spend.

American companies won’t be able to make up the difference in foreign markets. Europe is careening into a recession. Japan is still in deep trouble. China’s growth has slowed.

Profits are the highest share of the U.S. economy on record. Wages are the lowest. But this imbalance can’t and won’t last.

Investors: beware.

Politicians: Don’t do any more deficit reduction. When consumers are this glum, austerity economics is particularly dangerous.

If the next showdowns over the fiscal cliff, government appropriations, and debt ceiling result in more deficit cuts this year, we’re in a recession.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Robert-Reich/2013/0130/Why-consumers-are-so-glum?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feeds%2Fcsm+%28Christian+Scie nce+Monitor+|+All+Stories%29

[boutons_deux]

run away again, little bitch.

TB :lol trashing talking use of RSS protocol! :lol

Pushback sucks, huh?

[TeyshaBlue]

:cry

lol @ pushback.

[Warlord23]

Red team blue team didn't even enter the discussion until bouton's obligatory talking point rant. Odd you would latch on to that too.

Just preempting the blame game tbh. Even the CNBC article spent more time fretting about the overall decline than pointing out the underlying positives.

[TeyshaBlue]

Just preempting the blame game tbh. Even the CNBC article spent more time fretting about the overall decline than pointing out the underlying positives.

Ignoring the blame game would be refreshing. Not gonna happen here, I suppose.

[boutons_deux]

Just preempting the blame game tbh. Even the CNBC article spent more time fretting about the overall decline than pointing out the underlying positives.

CNBC! :lol

Now there's an apolitical organization! :lol

[spursncowboys]

Just preempting the blame game tbh. Even the CNBC article spent more time fretting about the overall decline than pointing out the underlying positives.
By playing the 'defense by any means' game?

[TeyshaBlue]

CNBC! :lol

Now there's an apolitical organization! :lol


It's an AP article. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/smilies/facepalm.gif

[spursncowboys]

Meh ... private consumption went up 2.2%, and that's the #1 driver of GDP. Defense spending dropped 22% and that type of decrease is unlikely to happen next quarter. Red team should be happy that the government is cutting spending.
I wouldn't put much into a quarter's results. Do you think that GDP will grow for next quarter, or more so than the same quarter the year prior? If its the Def spending, then that's only going to get worse-so then you think this is the new norm? Not trying to put things into your comment. I'm just trying to understand better.

[TeyshaBlue]

I wouldn't put much into a quarter's results. Do you think that GDP will grow for next quarter, or more so than the same quarter the year prior? If its the Def spending, then that's only going to get worse-so then you think this is the new norm? Not trying to put things into your comment. I'm just trying to understand better.

It's not so much the drop, it's the timing. 4th quarters are generally robust.

[Warlord23]

I wouldn't put much into a quarter's results. Do you think that GDP will grow for next quarter, or more so than the same quarter the year prior? If its the Def spending, then that's only going to get worse-so then you think this is the new norm? Not trying to put things into your comment. I'm just trying to understand better.

Consumer spending added 1.5 percentage points to GDP, and business investment added 1.1 points (source: Fox news (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/30/us-economy-shrinks-01-percent-1st-time-in-3-12-years/)). That's basically a 2.6% uptick from the private sector alone. It's the private sector that will need to pull the economy forward, so that's a positive outcome in my book.

I think most of us can agree that certain government spending needs to be cut, and defense is a fair place to start. Now cutting government spending will drag down the economy, so the net GDP growth going forward might well turn out to be lower than expected. But that's OK in my book as long as the private sector keeps growing. Over the next several months I'll be primarily following the private sector's contribution to GDP. Once a lower, more stable level of government spending is reached, then I'll be interested in the overall GDP number.

Also, another factor in this quarter's GDP drop was the fall in inventories. If consumer demand has grown, businesses will grow inventory, so this is unlikely to repeat. All in all, I think the next quarter will still show a modest overall GDP growth, mostly fueled by private sector consumption and investment.

[spursncowboys]

:toast

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Is this going to be a trend?

Is this the new norm?

With a shrinking population especially within the realm of 'haves' you can count on it.

[mavs>spurs]

It shrank because everyone was bracing for the tax hikes we all knew were coming. Obamanomics!

[boutons_deux]

one of the very best economic analysts going:

Economy Shrinks -- Here's Why It's Not Bad News ...

http://www.alternet.org/print/economy-shrinks-heres-why-its-not-bad-news



and btw :lol

Obama’s Job Approval Hits Three Year High

Fresh off of victory and his second inauguration President Obama has seen his job approval rating soar to the highest it has been since the beginning of his first term. According to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll 60 percent of Americans approve of the job Obama is doing and 37 percent disapprove. Obama’s approval rating had been struck around 50 percent for the last few years but has increased significantly in recent months.

Obama’s inauguration speech also received high markers. The poll found 51 percent approved of the speech and only 24 percent disapproved, with the rest having no opinion.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2013/01/30/obamas-job-approval-hits-three-year-high/

[spursncowboys]

With a shrinking population especially within the realm of 'haves' you can count on it.

What do you mean. There are going to be less people in the upper income? Less rich people?

[TeyshaBlue]

Consumer spending added 1.5 percentage points to GDP, and business investment added 1.1 points (source: Fox news (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/30/us-economy-shrinks-01-percent-1st-time-in-3-12-years/)). That's basically a 2.6% uptick from the private sector alone. It's the private sector that will need to pull the economy forward, so that's a positive outcome in my book.

I think most of us can agree that certain government spending needs to be cut, and defense is a fair place to start. Now cutting government spending will drag down the economy, so the net GDP growth going forward might well turn out to be lower than expected. But that's OK in my book as long as the private sector keeps growing. Over the next several months I'll be primarily following the private sector's contribution to GDP. Once a lower, more stable level of government spending is reached, then I'll be interested in the overall GDP number.

Also, another factor in this quarter's GDP drop was the fall in inventories. If consumer demand has grown, businesses will grow inventory, so this is unlikely to repeat. All in all, I think the next quarter will still show a modest overall GDP growth, mostly fueled by private sector consumption and investment.

Nice analysis. Thx!

[boutons_deux]

What do you mean. There are going to be less people in the upper income? Less rich people?

how many millionaires+ have enough kids equal or greater than replacement number?

Certainly most recent college grads with $25K average college debt, and many with much more, won't be buying houses, new cars, or are starting families for many years.

[boutons_deux]

How More Austerity Will Push The U.S. Further Away From Full Employment

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/outputgapchart.jpg

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/01/30/1515801/chart-austerity-full-employment/

The Banksters Great (Jobs) Depression continues to screw 10Ms of Americans (Banksters doing OK)

Has any Repug mentioned "23 million unemployed (Obama's fault)" since the Pres campaign was over?

[Wild Cobra]

Another great, laughable link, brought to you by ShazBot.

[boutons_deux]

"buy shazbot"? I'm way out of your price range

[Wild Cobra]

"buy shazbot"? I'm way out of your price range
No...

Shit is cheap, and I don't want any.

[boutons_deux]

No...

Shit is cheap, and I don't want any.

whoa! you're really at the top of your game.

And what makes you laugh at the GDP that is still-cratered by the Banskters?

[Wild Cobra]

whoa! you're really at the top of your game.

And what makes you laugh at the GDP that is still-cratered by the Banskters?
I'm not laughing at the GDP. It's no laughing matter. I'm laughing at your assessment.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What do you mean. There are going to be less people in the upper income? Less rich people?

A shrinking population in and of itself leads to less economic transactions but by wealth being concentrated into a smaller and ever smaller pool that tends to save their money as it is furthers the issue. Do you think one man with $5m spends more or less than the total of 5 people with $1m each?

[TeyshaBlue]

A shrinking population in and of itself leads to less economic transactions but by wealth being concentrated into a smaller and ever smaller pool that tends to save their money as it is furthers the issue. Do you think one man with $5m spends more or less than the total of 5 people with $1m each?

I've never approached this idea from that angle but I would guess the 5 w/1 million would outspend the single with 5 mill. Rather handily I suspect.:toast

[Capt Bringdown]

Why defense spending plunged 22% last quarter — and killed GDP (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/30/why-defense-spending-dropped-22-last-quarter-and-shrunk-gdp/)

Government defense expenditures plunged by a staggering 22.2 percent between October and December. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Pentagon spent significantly less on just about everything except military pay. Had the Pentagon not cut back on spending, the economy would have grown at a weak but positive 1.27 percent pace.

Was this big plunge in defense spending unusual? Yes and no. To a certain extent, it’s part of a pattern: Defense spending often rises in the third quarter of a year and drops in the fourth quarter.

There’s a reason for this. The fiscal year ends in September, and government agencies typically try to spend all the money Congress allotted them for that year by then — otherwise, they fear, they’ll get a smaller budget next time around.

“In the Pentagon, you have to use it or lose it by the end of the fiscal year in September,” said Lawrence Korb, a former assistant secretary of defense now at the Center for American Progress, in a recent interview. “You see this a lot. ‘We’ve got to fly a lot this month for training, otherwise Congress will take back the money they gave us.’”
- more - > (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/30/why-defense-spending-dropped-22-last-quarter-and-shrunk-gdp/)

[Wild Cobra]

Why defense spending plunged 22% last quarter — and killed GDP
Such decreases in my experience are normal... but at the end of the fiscal year, and not to that degree.

The fiscal year and calendar year are not the same Captain!

I suggest something else is likely the case.