US GDP shrinks 2.9% in first quarter

[Geaux4it]

Obamanamics taking hold

The US economy suffered its worst performance for five years in the first quarter of 2014, a third and final official estimate has shown.


The US Commerce Department said the economy shrank by an annualised rate of 2.9%

It was almost double economists' expectations for a fall of 1.7%,

A second estimate last month showed the economy shrank by 1%, blaming the unusually cold winter for the fall.

The gap between the second and third estimates is the largest on record.

Growth in the US economy has now been revised down by 3% since the first estimate.

BBC News - US GDP shrinks 2.9% in first quarter

Obamacare. Forcing people to give up thousands of their dollars to insurance companies is no different than a tax.

SCOTUS said its a tax.. Only way they could pass an unconstitutional law.

-Geaux

 

[Mac1958]

Inflation is a general rise in prices. Cheap money fuels it. We are seeing inflation, which was the Fed's intent all along. But they dont know how to shut it off before it gets out of control.

There definitely are some signs, and we don't have the growth yet to mitigate it.

The Fed can pull liquidity back out of the system easily enough, and one report says that could be as early as first quarter 2015.

Yikes, talk about threading a needle. I dunno.

.

I saw in the report that not only was GDP down but productivity is down as well. That is a terrible sign, declining productivity in the face of higher prices.
The Fed has an abominable track record on interest rates. The entire crisis of 2008 came about because the Fed misjudged the interest rate environment and lowered rates when they should have raised them.
I have zero confidence they will raise rates in time. They already have gone back on their promises to raise rates off zero when unemployment got to 6.7%.

I can't really disagree, as much as I'd like to. There's no way of knowing how Yellen will react.

This story I saw yesterday, about the Fed expecting to tighten in 1st quarter 2015, was troubling. You can't make predictions like that, this far out. The only thing I can think of is that they're trying to send a message to grease the wheels - but if it doesn't work, they're gonna look like schmucks.

The anti-business environment is what it is, and the Fed no longer has either the resources or the confidence of the market. Businesses aren't stupid. And investors are going to need real reasons to invest, at least at some point. So now it's a race between inflationary pressures and growth.

It could go in multiple ways: Growth, stagflation, Japan?

.

 

[Geaux4it]

 

[The Rabbi]

But that's not inflation. That is a direct result of Obama energy policy causing all overhead to increase due to everyone's energy costs rising. Obama is a creep and his supporters are mostly stupid. Some are just insulated.

Inflation is a general rise in prices. Cheap money fuels it. We are seeing inflation, which was the Fed's intent all along. But they dont know how to shut it off before it gets out of control.

Inflation is the superficial rise in prices due to the devaluing of the currency. Much of our cost increases are tangible and lay at the foot of the energy door. Obama' restrictions on oil and coal extraction are the culprit.

The inflation of the 1970s was blamed on the oil price shocks starting with the embargo in 1973. But Milton Friedman pointed out that was wrong. Germany experienced higher oil prices (all of their oil was imported) but didnt experience the same inflation. Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Fed will not slow the money pump because the velocity of money is still in a nose dive. It will not end for at least 4 years when the M2 velocity gets down to 1.3 or up to 11 years from now when all the Baby Boomers have retired.

Another wrong worthless statement.
The Fed will be forced to raise rates, probably after the election in November. But they wont do it enough or soon enough and we'll be back to the late 1970s again with stagflation.

Yes your statements are wrong worthless.

The falling velocity of money holds down interest rates & inflation. To burn off the bubble it will decline to 1.3 taking nearly 4 more years. Plus there are Boomers retiring, declining government spending & job market slack.

There is no Reagan/Bush runaway inflation, or interest rates to force the Fed to act. You idiots have been trying to project your inflation failures on Obama since he was elected & have been way wrong every time.

We went off the gold standard in 1971, had Arab Oil Embargo of 1973 & the 1979 interest rate spike was caused by the failure of congress to raise the debt ceiling in time screwing bondholders who had to sue the government to recoup their money. This caused rates to explode, stagflation & double dip recession. Republicans tried to not raise the debt ceiling to cause another one of these disasters on Obama to punish the country for electing him.

That's not even coherent,much less correct. Are you drinking?

 

[KissMy]

Why do you think corporate profit, CEO pay & dividends went through the roof?

Could it be they under pay, over charge, under taxed, over subsidized, bailed out & get cheap money from the Fed?

 

[TimeForChange]

Why do you think corporate profit, CEO pay & dividends went through the roof?

Could it be they under pay, over charge, under taxed, over subsidized, bailed out & get cheap money from the Fed?

funny how the richest made less money, less profits and poor people had it BETTER WHEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS

isnt it?

 

[KissMy]

Why do you think corporate profit, CEO pay & dividends went through the roof?

Could it be they under pay, over charge, under taxed, over subsidized, bailed out & get cheap money from the Fed?

funny how the richest made less money, less profits and poor people had it BETTER WHEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS

isnt it?

The workers had more jobs at better pay & disposable income under Clinton THEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS INTO THE GROUND, bailed out Big Crony Companies forcing most others out of business.

It's time for Obama to crack some skulls on Big Crony Monopolies. Obama has better employment & economy than Bush had when he left office. Bush turned Clinton's best economy in history into a smoking pile of ash. Obama has resurrected Phoenix from the ash & it is about to soar.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why do you think corporate profit, CEO pay & dividends went through the roof?

Could it be they under pay, over charge, under taxed, over subsidized, bailed out & get cheap money from the Fed?

funny how the richest made less money, less profits and poor people had it BETTER WHEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS

isnt it?

The workers had more jobs at better pay & disposable income under Clinton THEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS INTO THE GROUND, bailed out Big Crony Companies forcing most others out of business.

It's time for Obama to crack some skulls on Big Crony Monopolies. Obama has better employment & economy than Bush had when he left office. Bush turned Clinton's best economy in history into a smoking pile of ash. Obama has resurrected Phoenix from the ash & it is about to soar.

That's an interesting version of reality.
The truth is that UE was lower under Bush than under Clinton, with steadier economic growth. Then the Democrats took Congress in 2006 and it was bye bye. Since htat time we've suffered the worst economic recovery on record, and are even now heading into recession.

 

[BlindBoo]

Bush inherited the dot com bust. Bush inherited Clinton's failed policy on terrorism, leading to 9/11. Clinton inherited Reagan's successful defeat of the Soviets, allowing for the peace dividiend, which CLinton squandered.
Obama took a tough situation and made it worse.

Bush ignored Clinton's specific warning about al Qaeda. Clinton inherited the remnants of the Kuwait rescue. But he was a war hawk too. Clinton's biggest mistake was not implementing his plan against al Qaeda and the Taliban after Oct. 12 2000. We might not have had a Bush as President in 2001 had he kept his word.

Wow. Clinton's plan seemed to be to lob cruise missiles at the desert and declare those responsible would be brought to justice. His actions in Somalia directly led to 9/11 as they encouraged bin Laden. Clinton's entire law enforcement approach to terrorism, repeated by Obama, is simply wrong and a failure.

In every case Democrats are merely the victims. It is like they hold no power once they are in office.

Yeah sure fall back on the meme that they just haphazardly lobbed a few cruise missiles up some camels butt, perhaps only to distract the press from covering who was polishing his knob.

Clinton's warning and plan, outlined here: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/clarke memo.pdf

Somalia? Another clusterfuck resulting from years of our bipartisan policy of foreign interventionism.

 

[BlindBoo]

Wow. Clinton's plan seemed to be to lob cruise missiles at the desert and declare those responsible would be brought to justice. His actions in Somalia directly led to 9/11 as they encouraged bin Laden. Clinton's entire law enforcement approach to terrorism, repeated by Obama, is simply wrong and a failure.

In every case Democrats are merely the victims. It is like they hold no power once they are in office.

How many terrorist did Bush get before 9/11? Did Bush even try to stop terrorist before 9/11? How many terrorist were in Iraq before the Bush invasion? How many terrorits are in Iraq now? Obama killed 10 times more terrorist in his first term than Bush did in 2 terms. Obama has 5 times less collateral damage killed per terrorist. Bush got 5 times more US citizens killed on his watch than Obama.

How many terrorists did Clinton get? How many attacks did we have after the World Trade Center bombing? How many attacks did we have after Bush responded to 9/11?
See, an effective policy is what happens after you actually do something. In Bush's case he had a successful policy. In Obama's case he's had nothing but failure.
Bush-success
Obama-failure.

Bushes biggest success is that he was such a failure that either Hillary or Barack was going to win in 2008.

Predictions of Obama's failure started even before the election, in the echo chamber, when they realize McCain/Palin had no chance. It's to early to tell what kind of success/failure the Obama administration is going to be. Will he get the blame for the Do Nothing Congress? I'm sure the goose steppers in the GOP think so.

 

[The Rabbi]

Bush ignored Clinton's specific warning about al Qaeda. Clinton inherited the remnants of the Kuwait rescue. But he was a war hawk too. Clinton's biggest mistake was not implementing his plan against al Qaeda and the Taliban after Oct. 12 2000. We might not have had a Bush as President in 2001 had he kept his word.

Wow. Clinton's plan seemed to be to lob cruise missiles at the desert and declare those responsible would be brought to justice. His actions in Somalia directly led to 9/11 as they encouraged bin Laden. Clinton's entire law enforcement approach to terrorism, repeated by Obama, is simply wrong and a failure.

In every case Democrats are merely the victims. It is like they hold no power once they are in office.

Yeah sure fall back on the meme that they just haphazardly lobbed a few cruise missiles up some camels butt, perhaps only to distract the press from covering who was polishing his knob.

Clinton's warning and plan, outlined here: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/clarke memo.pdf

Somalia? Another clusterfuck resulting from years of our bipartisan policy of foreign interventionism.

That is exactly what happened. Remember Wag The Dog? Clinton had no plan for dealing with terrorism other than to treat it as a police matter. That's why 9/11 happened.
Yeah, it's convenient: every success was Clinton's. Every failure was bipartisan. That won't wash.

 

[BlindBoo]

Wow. Clinton's plan seemed to be to lob cruise missiles at the desert and declare those responsible would be brought to justice. His actions in Somalia directly led to 9/11 as they encouraged bin Laden. Clinton's entire law enforcement approach to terrorism, repeated by Obama, is simply wrong and a failure.

In every case Democrats are merely the victims. It is like they hold no power once they are in office.

Yeah sure fall back on the meme that they just haphazardly lobbed a few cruise missiles up some camels butt, perhaps only to distract the press from covering who was polishing his knob.

Clinton's warning and plan, outlined here: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/clarke memo.pdf

Somalia? Another clusterfuck resulting from years of our bipartisan policy of foreign interventionism.

That is exactly what happened. Remember Wag The Dog? Clinton had no plan for dealing with terrorism other than to treat it as a police matter. That's why 9/11 happened.
Yeah, it's convenient: every success was Clinton's. Every failure was bipartisan. That won't wash.

Of course it was...........

 

[KissMy]

funny how the richest made less money, less profits and poor people had it BETTER WHEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS

isnt it?

The workers had more jobs at better pay & disposable income under Clinton THEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS INTO THE GROUND, bailed out Big Crony Companies forcing most others out of business.

It's time for Obama to crack some skulls on Big Crony Monopolies. Obama has better employment & economy than Bush had when he left office. Bush turned Clinton's best economy in history into a smoking pile of ash. Obama has resurrected Phoenix from the ash & it is about to soar.

That's an interesting version of reality.
The truth is that UE was lower under Bush than under Clinton, with steadier economic growth. Then the Democrats took Congress in 2006 and it was bye bye. Since htat time we've suffered the worst economic recovery on record, and are even now heading into recession.

Bush had a yo-yo economic collapse. Clinton had a 74.1% employment rate of working age populatiion. Bush knocked it all the way down to 65% killing nearly 17 million jobs.

Here is what you clueless idiots who complain about Obama's recovery don't get.....




Wait for it........








Obama would not have to recover the economy if Republicans hadn't destroyed it in the first place!!!

 

[Dad2three]

funny how the richest made less money, less profits and poor people had it BETTER WHEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS

isnt it?

The workers had more jobs at better pay & disposable income under Clinton THEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS INTO THE GROUND, bailed out Big Crony Companies forcing most others out of business.

It's time for Obama to crack some skulls on Big Crony Monopolies. Obama has better employment & economy than Bush had when he left office. Bush turned Clinton's best economy in history into a smoking pile of ash. Obama has resurrected Phoenix from the ash & it is about to soar.

That's an interesting version of reality.
The truth is that UE was lower under Bush than under Clinton, with steadier economic growth. Then the Democrats took Congress in 2006 and it was bye bye. Since htat time we've suffered the worst economic recovery on record, and are even now heading into recession.

NOW if ONLY you could give ANY bills Dems passed that changed Bush policies once they took control of Congress Jan 2007 (not 2006)? lol

 

[PredFan]

Obama is an utter failure.

 

[KissMy]

Wow. Clinton's plan seemed to be to lob cruise missiles at the desert and declare those responsible would be brought to justice. His actions in Somalia directly led to 9/11 as they encouraged bin Laden. Clinton's entire law enforcement approach to terrorism, repeated by Obama, is simply wrong and a failure.

In every case Democrats are merely the victims. It is like they hold no power once they are in office.

How many terrorist did Bush get before 9/11? Did Bush even try to stop terrorist before 9/11? How many terrorist were in Iraq before the Bush invasion? How many terrorits are in Iraq now? Obama killed 10 times more terrorist in his first term than Bush did in 2 terms. Obama has 5 times less collateral damage killed per terrorist. Bush got 5 times more US citizens killed on his watch than Obama.

How many terrorists did Clinton get? How many attacks did we have after the World Trade Center bombing? How many attacks did we have after Bush responded to 9/11?
See, an effective policy is what happens after you actually do something. In Bush's case he had a successful policy. In Obama's case he's had nothing but failure.
Bush-success
Obama-failure.

Bush had no effective policy against terrorist. He went to Iraq & created more terrorist. Bush barely killed any terrorist & let Bin Laden go. Obama killed 10 times more terrorist than bush in half the time & he got Bin Laden.

 

[Dad2three]

Why do you think corporate profit, CEO pay & dividends went through the roof?

Could it be they under pay, over charge, under taxed, over subsidized, bailed out & get cheap money from the Fed?

funny how the richest made less money, less profits and poor people had it BETTER WHEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS

isnt it?

80% of the population owns 5% of the wealth.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

The middle class has been eviscerated.



Third World countries. One of the things they all had in common was a small, very rich elite, small middle class, and a large lower class. They also shared very low economic growth as a result. This has been known for at least 50 years. The US has been going in this direction for at least the last 30 years as we have gradually de-industrialized and government policies (such as trickle down economics) have promoted the shift of wealth from the lower and middle classes to the economic elite

 

[Dad2three]

Obama is an utter failure.

True, compared to Reagan tripling US debt and cutting and running from terrorists after he funded them

 

[ScienceRocks]

This has nothing to do with investing in our own country...Just the opposite, as most of the wealth is going to the top 1%. We need economic growth in the lower and middle 99%.

Reagan invested in America
Nixion invested in America
Ford invested in America
George HW Bush invested in America
George W Bush invested in America.

Libertriamism isn't the solution. Heck, you'd have 10% unemployment or more under it.