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 : The New Economy and its Winners -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (30770)	11/5/2006 2:28:42 AM
From: bob zagorin	Respond to of 57684

i've been buying lots of stock so i certainly am not expecting a crashing econmomy but i have to say the latest jobs nos. are very suspect. when they came out cnbc and all the analysts were "quote" laughing at them. the huge upward revisions in the past 2 mos were based on the admin sudden decision to rejigger the base to include household survey nos... i actually heard the bush commerce sec. say the headline number was more important than the accuracy because they can revise them later.... my 2c, the general economy is weak and the consumer will lag because of the downward trend of housing and home equity. but i think certain areas of cap spending (networking, broadband, security, maybe some supply chain), some health care areas will do well. big ticket consumer (except for big tvs) will struggle. jmho...

To: greenspirit who wrote (30770)	11/5/2006 9:07:36 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57684

Is there something missing in this data Yes. The budget deficit. We are using borrowed money to buy things and to give the very rich a tax break. If we are going to borrow money, we should spend it wisely. Instead of giving it away to Bill Gates, Donald Trump, and the other very rich people who don't need the money - they know how to make money. Leave them alone. They will do fine under any circumstance. We should give away more of this money to the middle class and the very poor. They need the money and they will spend it on the things they need. The money will quickly go back into the economy. We should also spend some of this money on helping workers dislocated by globalization. This dislocation is inevitable, but we need to help those effected to minimize the pain. If we are going to borrow money, we should spend it wisely and not just give it away to the very rich and wish for some voodoo economic notion to occur. It is just like Katrina and the War in Iraq. There is a role for government to manage things wisely. Leaving it to some higher authority will not cut it.

To: greenspirit who wrote (30770)	11/5/2006 11:05:43 AM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 57684

yeah whats missing is we are not talking about the 96-00 period Michael, that was still the "Clinton economy" when we were creating 350K jobs/month. WIth an economy of this size we need to generate 18K jobs per year just to break even. data.bls.gov Jan 2001: 132471 "the Bush economy" Oct 2006: 135844 See the problem here Michael? The Bush economy created 3.3 million jobs in 5 years, or 56K jobs per month, about ONE THIRD of what we need just to handle population growth. In Comparison look at the early non-bubble Clinton years: Jan 1992: 108313 Jan 1996: 118192 The Clinton economy created 10 million jobs in 4 years.