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 Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (82966)	8/3/2007 2:33:49 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 306849

put you back on ignore. Your normal response when you can't hold up your end in a debate. You did the same to OMD when he made cream pie of you in the pre-recall debates about the CA state budget. Is he still on ignore even though he has disappeared? Here is a brief synopsis of the issue. In the 90s we had 4% GDP and ... - job creation 350K/MONTH research.stlouisfed.org research.stlouisfed.org The Fed begs to differ with you. I assume you mean the Clinton years- -1993 to 2001. Nonfarm employment was 109,962,000 in Jan 1993. It was 132,471,000 in Jan 2001. That's an increase of 22,509,000 over 96 months or 234,460/month. If it were 350K/month, it should have been 143,562,000. - Surpluses up the ying yang at federal state and local level Easy with no war expenditure, printing presses out of control, and high taxes. - stock market and asset boom Stock market boom? You mean the dot-bomb bubble? The biggest stock market swindle since 1929? I'm afraid you won't get away with claiming this as an accomplishment when the history books are written. Asset boom? You mean the one that picked up the hot money looking for a home after the bubble burst? The one that's coming apart around our ears right now? If if weren't for this fiasco, aided by Reagan's deregulation of the financial environment, the title of this thread would be right. Because the real question is: What now? If we can't find another Ponzi scheme, Hillary could inherit depression. This decade we have 3.8% GDP according to the fed and.... - job creation lower than the 80s, based on new jobs created, lower than population growth for an entire decade research.stlouisfed.org 72.3K jobs created per month since Jan 1, 2001. 152K/month from 1980 to 1990. You get this one. Population has grown by 1861800 people since Jan 2001. research.stlouisfed.org 24K a month. That makes a mockery of your claim. - largest deficits EVER for a long period There's a war on. Didn't you get the word? In 1943, FDR's admin spent 243% of the revenue it collected. When has this admin gotten even close to THAT? Do you condemn FDR? - stock market flat for a decade (unheard of since the 70s) Are you asleep or purposely lying? The market just hit new highs. You didn't get the word? finance.yahoo.com^dji;range=my;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;logscale=off;source=undefined You can hardly call THAT "flat for a decade". Since GDP is the main indicator of activity in the US economy either it was wrong in the 90s or it is wrong now. I don't care which it is. the fact that there are agreed upon measurements for GDP has nothing to do with this. The agreed upon measurements are WRONG. There needs to be some economic indicator that explains this discrepancy. You seem not to care about anythgig that upsets your pre-judged opinions. Facts don't matter. Fine. The agreed upon measure is wrong. Find a better one and get it adopted. That last will be the hard part. This is one of those political numbers I spoke of. But you can hardly use a biased, incorrect calculation to condemn one man and exonerate another when the both used the same measure. I posted a link to businessweek stating clearly that GDP today is overstated due to offshoring which is being counted as if it is production occuring here when it is only managed here. That is my view of the discrepancy but if thats not it, who cares. Just find accurate economic figures is all I am asking for. And this didn't occur in the 1990's? Who do you think shoved NAFTA down Congress's throat? If BW is right, we have stagflation and not a boom. research.stlouisfed.org Inflation since Jan 2001 has been 5.2% annualized. I say before ypu can have stagflation, you higher inflation than that. Ask Jimmy Carter. When the Bush admin whines that they are "not getting credit" for this booming economy theres a hint. The secret sauce is that we don't have a booming economy. We have stagflation masquerading as a booming economy. Nuts. We've seen the inflation numbers.the employment numbers and the GDP numbers. If we get lucky, we won't see a wild ride like you overstayed again in our lifetimes.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (82966)	8/3/2007 10:59:06 AM
From: John Vosilla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

'Since GDP is the main indicator of activity in the US economy either it was wrong in the 90s or it is wrong now.' The collapse of the dollar and the president's approval rating tell a lot more.. Remember GDP had been driven in recent years by the credit bubble, housing bubble and now the global economic boom. J6P not winning these days as the first two pillars of the house of cards collapse sending him into debt slavery and the remaining pillar only squeezes him even more..