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: jimmg who wrote (62313)	1/19/2007 12:47:15 PM
From: yard_man	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

these are funny ... >>4. Real wage gains are at cycle high. 5. Lower oil and gas freeing up discretionary spending dollars.<< what real wage gains??!!! if this is the cycle high for them, we are in deep doo-doo. here's a prediction for ya -- 5 isn't happening and won't -- energy prices will go lower, but be unmatched by new spending -- watch it this year, just watch. you should ask why energy prices trend lower for the next year -- it isn't jus because we've had a warm winter.

To: jimmg who wrote (62313)	1/19/2007 1:15:45 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

4. Real wage gains are at cycle high. 4a.Real wages gains are negative and exceptionally negative for the masses. Those gains are distorted by exceptional gains at the top end. The savings rate is negative for a record 18 straight months 5. Lower oil and gas freeing up discretionary spending dollars. 5a.Oil and gas prices are falling because the economy is weakening. You have this ass backwards. 6. All-time high corporate cash flows going into share repurchases and shrinking the overall equity base. 6a. That is a sign that corporations have no incentive to expand. They are burning up cash instead with buybacks. Your argument is ass backwards. I can go on for a long time. You get the picture. I have no problem accepting the argument that current strength in unsustainable but to argue that the economy isn't currently robust lacks credibility. It is your argument that lacks credibility. You overlook foreclosures, bankruptcies, and what is really happening with wages. You do not seem to understand that corporations buying back shares (while insiders are bailing like mad) means that corporations see no reason to expand their businesses. When it comes to jobs they are a lagging indicator and even there much of that job growth has been housing related or service sector retail & restaurant etc. The latter is not exactly high paying. You totally overlook a GDP that fell to 2%. That alone says you are wrong. Since when is 2% a "strong economy"? The stock market is soaring because average Americans are spending like there is no tomorrow. Most bears think it's all a conspiracy by Pig Man, Da Boyz, the Cabal, Goldman Sachs or whoever. It's not a conspiracy, but it probably is not what you suggest either. What it is is a sign of willingness to speculate. When that sentiment changes anyone knows but the stock market itself is NOT a sign of a strong economy. I might point out that an inverted yield curve and plunging housing permits is definitely a sign of weakness (impending recession). Did you see my post on leading indicators? globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Those indicators say you are wrong. I repeat there is no basis to say the economy is strong right now. There just isn't. Not in aggregate. If you want to say things are not as weak as bears think, perhaps you are right but to call things strong is cherry picking the best of the data while ingnoring everything on the other side including the GDP itself. All you have is a slight uptick in jobs and low unemployment (generally lagging indicators IMO). Mish

To: jimmg who wrote (62313)	1/19/2007 2:08:31 PM
From: regli	Respond to of 116555

"1. Weekly unemployment claims near all-time low." I think you may have been aware of the mild weather and its influence on seasonally adjusted figures in housing. Here is what happened "seasonally unadjusted" to your "near all-time low": dol.gov " UNADJUSTED DATA The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 511,643 in the week ending Jan. 13, an increase of 6,531 from the previous week. There were 439,873 initial claims in the comparable week in 2006. The advance unadjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.4 percent during the week ending Jan. 6, an increase of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week. The advance unadjusted number for persons claiming UI benefits in state programs totaled 3,178,053, an increase of 169,813 from the preceding week. A year earlier, the rate was 2.5 percent and the volume was 3,162,229. ..."