Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (27306)	4/12/2005 2:45:06 AM
From: shades	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

I can't eat that stuff will work for something needed something body craves jimbeam.com

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (27306)	4/12/2005 10:08:04 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

U.S. Feb. trade gap widens to record $61 bln - Tuesday, April 12, 2005 1:15:51 PM afxpress.com WASHINGTON (AFX) - Continued U.S. consumer demand for imported goods and a further surge in textile imports from China boosted the trade deficit to $61.0 billion in February, a 4.3% jump from January and the largest deficit on record, the Commerce Department said The February trade gap was larger than economists had forecast. Economists expected the trade deficit to widen to $58.5 billion in February, according to a MarketWatch survey. The January trade deficit was also larger than initially estimated. The department revised the January trade deficit to $58.5 billion, compared with the previous estimate of $58.3 billion The widening trade deficit in February was fueled by a 1.6% rise in imports of goods and services, which totaled a record $161.5 billion in the second month of the year. Exports were essentially flat, rising 0.1% at a record $100.5 billion. Imports of goods alone rose 1.7% to $135.9 billion. Although imports of petroleum were the second largest on record, the rise in imports was not just oil. Imports of non-petroleum products were a record $117.4 billion in February The non-petroleum deficit widened 2.2% to $47.3 billion in February Imports of consumer goods rose 2.0% in February, led by drugs, clothing and toys Exports of goods alone rose 0.1% to $71.2 billion. Increased exports of industrial supplies and consumer goods were offset by declines in exports of capital goods and farm products Chinese textiles The U.S. trade deficit with China widened to $13.9 billion in February compared with $8.3 billion in the same month last year. The February deficit is lower than the $15.3 billion deficit in January In February, imports of textiles from China rose 9.8% to $2.08 billion from the previous month. In the first two months of the year, Chinese textile imports are up 62.4% from the same period in 2004 The increases followed a Jan.1 expiration of world-wide limits on trade in textile and apparel products. U.S. manufacturers have asked the Bush administration to put new import curbs on Chinese products Oil The U.S. petroleum deficit widened 8% to $16.4 billion The U.S. imported 296.9 million barrels of crude oil in February, or 10.6 million barrels per day, compared with 322.8 million or 10.4 million barrels in January The average price per barrel of oil rose to $36.85 in February from $35.35 in January

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (27306)	4/12/2005 10:09:45 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

Even though the economy added 2.2 million jobs in 2004 and produced strong growth in corporate profits, wages for the average worker fell for the year, after adjusting for inflation - the first such drop in nearly a decade. . . . Most economists dismiss as overblown the widespread fear that the number of jobs will shrink in the United States because of foreign competition from China, India and other developing nations. But at the same time many of these economists argue that the increasing exposure of the American economy to globalization, along with other forces - including soaring health insurance costs that leave less money for raises - is putting pressure on wages that could leave millions of workers worse off. the rest: nytimes.com