[NYCFarmboy]

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...d=aXuXEm5y10Uo

U.S. 3rd-Qtr GDP Grew at 8.2% Rate, Fastest Since '84 (Update2)

Nov. 25 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. economy grew at an 8.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter, faster than the government initially estimated as companies boosted inventories in September to meet the surge in demand.

The nation's gross domestic product, the value of all goods and services produced, grew from July through September at the fastest pace since the first three months of 1984, when Ronald Reagan was president. The Commerce Department previously reported a 7.2 percent third-quarter growth rate, following a 3.3 percent pace in the second quarter.

``Growth is now super-super strong compared to super strong,'' said Joseph LaVorgna, senior U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank Securities, whose forecast of 8.3 percent was the highest in a Bloomberg News survey.

Consumer spending increased at a 6.4 percent annual rate last quarter, the fastest pace in six years, and retailers such as Williams-Sonoma Inc. restocked shelves to help satisfy anticipated sales. A measure of profit widened to a record $739.7 billion, giving companies confidence to increase spending.

``Inventories declined less than people thought, and there was more production,'' said Kevin Logan, senior economist at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, who forecast 8.1 percent. ``The rebound in corporate profits will impress people with the idea that business spending will continue to support the economy for the next quarter or two.''

[typoon]

Originally posted by NYCFarmboy:
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...d=aXuXEm5y10Uo

U.S. 3rd-Qtr GDP Grew at 8.2% Rate, Fastest Since '84 (Update2)

Nov. 25 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. economy grew at an 8.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter, faster than the government initially estimated as companies boosted inventories in September to meet the surge in demand.

The nation's gross domestic product, the value of all goods and services produced, grew from July through September at the fastest pace since the first three months of 1984, when Ronald Reagan was president. The Commerce Department previously reported a 7.2 percent third-quarter growth rate, following a 3.3 percent pace in the second quarter.

``Growth is now super-super strong compared to super strong,'' said Joseph LaVorgna, senior U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank Securities, whose forecast of 8.3 percent was the highest in a Bloomberg News survey.

Consumer spending increased at a 6.4 percent annual rate last quarter, the fastest pace in six years, and retailers such as Williams-Sonoma Inc. restocked shelves to help satisfy anticipated sales. A measure of profit widened to a record $739.7 billion, giving companies confidence to increase spending.

``Inventories declined less than people thought, and there was more production,'' said Kevin Logan, senior economist at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, who forecast 8.1 percent. ``The rebound in corporate profits will impress people with the idea that business spending will continue to support the economy for the next quarter or two.''

Waaa Waaaa This isn't true we have the worst economy in the past 50 years. The economy is still bad because there are no jobs being created...<sarcasm>

AS the economy and the recovery happens the Democrats lose one more thing to try and bamboozel the American public about how bad it is. It's funny how they say that the Bush Tax Cuts still won't work or are not going to help.

[Spliffdaddy]

Well, you hafta figure that maybe 75% of Americans that are able to work - want to work. Yet 94% of the folks are employed. I think it's astounding that so damned many folks are employed.

A good way to lose an election is to appeal to voters who are unemployed. You'll get 6% of the vote, at best.

How can you be unemployed in America? Unless you choose to only work for other people, you can't.

[BRussell]

It's great. Of course, it's not sustainable, and politically speaking, if I were Bush I'd prefer more modest numbers that could be sustained to these very high but unsustainable numbers. Because you can be sure that Democrats will (unfairly) blame the slower growth numbers in subsequent quarters on Bush.

I believe the tax cuts probably played a role in this growth, above and beyond the regular economic cycle. If people have more money, they'll spend it, which helps the economy.

I'd like to ask some questions though.

Does it bother anyone that in order to accelerate this growth, we've cut taxes without cutting spending commensurately - indeed, while increase spending dramatically - and therefore we're living on borrowed money?

Does it bother anyone that Bush is a much, much bigger spender than Clinton ever was?

Does it bother anyone that when you increase deficits, you increase government spending even further, because tax money has to go to servicing the debt?

Does it bother anyone that, according to most economists, long-term interest rates rise when the debt increases, which depresses economic growth in the future?

I mean, I could go take out a few more credit cards, and tell my wife "look how much our financial situation has improved!" But in the end, I've deceived my family and hurt us in the long run.

Does any of that bother anyone? Or is it all about Bush '04, and screw everything after that?

[thunderous_funker]

How much of that 8.2% is government spending? How much is private debt?

GDP is the very broadest of broad economic indicators. It is value neutral--growth in GDP can reflect very negative social factors.

If the Fed spent $1 Trillion dollars combating an outbreak of bubonic plague that killed 100 million Americans, GDP would go through the roof.

Pollution, crime, terrorism and natural disasters all increase GDP because money is spent in dealing with them.

There is some good news in this, but let's not get carried away. Politically, the labor market is the key with consumer confidence a distant second.

[Spliffdaddy]

Yeah, BRussel, most of those things bother me, too.

You hafta keep in mind that the federal government has, historically, grown along with population increases. The size, the budget, the scope of government continues to grow. It would be expected that the federal budget would grow from one president to the next. Not excusing it, I'm simply noting that it's almost expected.

The economy, in general, is in the hands of the consumer. Their fears, feelings, and optimism are the basis for 'the economy'. It's all about faith, ya know. That twenty dollar bill ain't even worth a nickel, really...but as long as folks have faith, it's worth twenty bucks.

[Lerkfish]

you need to pay attention to WHY the figures are what they are...as I've warned previously, government figures can be easily manipulated...

the CNN story on the same rise includes:

One key reason for the large upward revision in third-quarter GDP was a re-evaluation of the rate of change in business inventories in the quarter. Originally, the government said businesses cut inventories by $35.8 billion in the quarter, but that figure was trimmed to $14.1 billion in the latest report.

Why the change, and what was it based on?
this cnn story
is a little more balanced in terms of what this figure actually represents. pay attention especially to how they project a much more dismal following quarter.

[moki]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
There is some good news in this, but let's not get carried away. Politically, the labor market is the key with consumer confidence a distant second.

It's actually quite a bit more good news than just the GDP -- check out the full report, consumer confidence is going great, as are many business factors.

[Zimphire]

moki that is the problem we have with some here.

They see good numbers, and don't think "Wow the country is doing better, yay!.

They see "Ugh, the country is doing better, this means Bush will look good."

They'd rather see the country in a mess and in shambles than see it doing good under Bush.

Now, most will deny this, but it's true. You can see it in their denial and pessimism.

It's pretty darn sad too. That they are such political party zealots that they would rather see the fall of their country, than to see the guy they don't like do good.

Sickening actually. They all need to move to France.

[petehammer]

moki that is the problem we have with some here.

They see good numbers, and blindly assume "Wow the country is doing better, yay!.

They don't bother to do any analysis and fact-checking. They don't want to find out why. They just want to be Bush sheep, following along the party line, thinking its all tax cuts instead of huge spending that will cripple the country in the long run.

They would rather Bush win in 2004 than accept that there are very real problems in this country.

Most will deny this, but it's true. You can see it in their blind willingness to follow Bush.

It's pretty darn sad too. That they are such political party zealots that they would rather crush dissention and civil liberties and not do any analysis of the current situation, than to see people criticize Bush.

Sickening actually. They all need to get over they envy of France.

[NYCFarmboy]

Sickening actually. They all need to get over they envy of France.

Who on earth would envy France? I mean... France is a nice enough country and all...a very nice tourist destination..... but it has definately slipped from first world status to second world socially and economically. (remember everyone dying there this past summer?)

[petehammer]

Originally posted by NYCFarmboy:
[France] has definately slipped from first world status to second world socially and economically. (remember everyone dying there this past summer?)

Damn, and here I thought Chicago was part of a 1st world country:
Heat wave deaths in Chicago
So, first world country is defined as "being able to control the weather"?

[NYCFarmboy]

15,000 people died in France due to lack of A.C. and of the non-existant health care "system" being out on summer vacation.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by petehammer:
Damn, and here I thought Chicago was part of a 1st world country:
Heat wave deaths in Chicago
So, first world country is defined as "being able to control the weather"?

500 deaths in Chicago, 15000 deaths in Paris... big difference.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
500 deaths in Chicago, 15000 deaths in Paris... big difference.

30 times more deaths in Paris. How many more elderly or disabled were there in Paris compared to Chicago? How does this compare per capita.

[NYCFarmboy]

The Chicago heatwave had a high temperature of at least 106 d. F. ...the highest temperature in Paris was 104 d. F

The real difference though was the humidity...the Chicago heat index was over 120 d. F when you factor in the humidity.

Had the Chicago heatwave hit Paris, the number of deaths would have been even higher in Paris.

[petehammer]

Originally posted by NYCFarmboy:
The Chicago heatwave had a high temperature of at least 106 d. F. ...the highest temperature in Paris was 104 d. F

The real difference though was the humidity...the Chicago heat index was over 120 d. F when you factor in the humidity.

Had the Chicago heatwave hit Paris, the number of deaths would have been even higher in Paris.

You don't provide links you also don't answer voodoo's questions. I believe your assertions but it is never answered:

How many elderly in Chicago compared to Paris? How many A/Cs? What was the duration of the heatwave? What was a the magnitude of the heatwave (how many affected, over what size area)? When was the heatwave? What aged people were dying?

Here's a good page to read if people really think that France's healthcare system is to blame:
The U.S. has the greatest healthcare system?

But this is far beyond the intention of this thread.

[NYCFarmboy]

all the information I got for my posts on the Paris heatwave was just from googling Paris Heat Wave.

The origin of this post is of course totally different, but someone chimed in that Americans should envy France which is just well....hmmm..they do produce nice wines & cheeses.

Without France's help during the American Revolution our country would be radically different from what it is today.

Of course had it not been for America, French would be a forgotten language by now supplanted by German.

One of my dearest friends on earth is Parisean (spelling?)... I love the French, but am dumbfounded by French foreign policy.

The two countries are eternal brothers in freedom. Its just that France has been so squirely lately! This will squabble will pass someday though. France needs to embrace Liberty again.

[Lerkfish]

BOT; I see no one has addressed my pointing out that these figures where intentionally manipulated to appear more positive....did anyone read the more balanced CNN story? or are we just going to talk air conditioners?

[daimoni]

.

[NYCFarmboy]

Originally posted by daimoni:

Happy Thanksgiving you ****ing Nazis.

wow..share the love!

[theolein]

How does a post on the US economy improving become a France bash-a-thon???

Mad props to the US on an improving economy. I'm not going to get into the paranoia about whether it's really improving or whether it's the evil Bushites manipulating the books. That's a bit over the top. An improving US economy is good for everyone, since most economies are interlinked these days. Perhaps bush will even drop his import tariffs on Steel and Chinese TV's and everyone'll be friends again.

Apart from this, it'll also be good for me personally in the long run, so I can finally get a job again.

[OldManMac]

Yes, let's talk about Bush's economic "recovery".

Long-term interest rates are going to creep up, as the economy heats up. This is going to put a damper on consumer spending, as people become more vigilant as to where their money's going. The housing refinance market is already showing signs of slowing down. Car sales are not particularly great, and are slowing down. Everyone seems to conveniently forget that the states are having fiscal crises, and they're responding by laying off your neighbors and friends, so the few bucks extra some of us saw through the "tax cuts" are just being spent elsewhere. I live in Michigan, which is one of the hardest hit states. My "tax cuts" are going to be spent on putting new shocks on my car, because our roads are in horrible shape. Americans are great at building huge projects and then conveniently forgetting that they need maintenance, until they're in such poor shape that they wind up rebuilding them all over again, at exorbitant costs!

The biggest issue for Duya is still going to be jobs. The reported increases of 125,000 in September, and 126,000 in October don't begin to make a dent in the issue! These numbers don't even keep up with the growth in the work force of 150,000 people per month. Of course, you're not told about that. According to the Economic Policy Institute, Bush needs to clear that number, plus create 300,000 more jobs per month to lower the unemployment rate 1 point, over the course of a year. Smoke and mirrors, and convenient ommissions, my friends!

The economy has been in "recovery" for more than two years, yet only one state has a lower unemployment rate than when the recession started, according to the EPI. "This is the largest sustained loss of jobs since the Great Depression." It's the very definition of a jobless "recovery"!

Job Watch states that real wages have declined 1.2% in the last 30 months; employers are making their employees work more hours instead of hiring new workers, and, now that Dubya has won the overtime battle, fewer workers will get paid overtime. They will have the option of extra time off, which of course they won't get, because they have to work more hours!

Rising interest rates are also going to slow down the housing market.

We are living in a war driven economy. Dubya better hope that he can keep spending money on the military, so that the few who have investments in that sector continue to make out like the fat cats they are.

If Greenspan continues to resist raising interest rates, if oil prices stay low, if Congress continues to write blank war checks, if the housing bubble doesn't burst, if consumers pick up their spending, and if more employers hire new workers, Dubya is all set. Then all he has to answer is why are we spending everything we have to make war, when our schools are crumbling, our infrastructure is crumbling, we have 43 million people without health insurance, we have thirty five million people in poverty, and why we have millions who go hungry, in the richest nation on earth!

Other than that, everything is just hunky dory!

[tie]

Originally posted by KarlG:
Long-term interest rates are going to creep up, as the economy heats up. This is going to put a damper on consumer spending, as people become more vigilant as to where their money's going.

This is normal. Of course 8% growth isn't sustainable, but so what?

so the few bucks extra some of us saw through the "tax cuts" are just being spent elsewhere.

One of three tax cut dollars is spent, two out of three saved or used to pay off debt. This is only wasteful by a factor of three (other economic stimulus packages, for example aid to states, could easily have every dollar spent) -- which is pretty good for Bush, at least from what we read about the Halliburton contracts in Iraq.

The biggest issue for Duya is still going to be jobs. The reported increases of 125,000 in September, and 126,000 in October don't begin to make a dent in the issue!
...
The economy has been in "recovery" for more than two years, yet only one state has a lower unemployment rate than when the recession started, according to the EPI. "This is the largest sustained loss of jobs since the Great Depression." It's the very definition of a jobless "recovery"!

Well, I would disagree that the economy has been in a recovery. Perhaps the recession technically ended, but the economy hardly recovered. This may be the start of a true recovery, and jobs are likely to lag still a bit further.

We are living in a war driven economy. Dubya better hope that he can keep spending money on the military, so that the few who have investments in that sector continue to make out like the fat cats they are.

Possibly, tax cuts for 2003 were $200 billion, and the Iraq war is going to cost maybe $150 billion over the first year. They could certainly have comparable short-term stimulus effects.

Then all he has to answer is why are we spending everything we have to make war, when our schools are crumbling, our infrastructure is crumbling, we have 43 million people without health insurance, we have thirty five million people in poverty, and why we have millions who go hungry, in the richest nation on earth!

Bush aims to help the Kenneth Lays of the world, not the rest of Americans. "Dubya is all set" as long as his rich, corrupt friends get richer.