http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fiscal-cliff-already-hampering-us-economy-report-says/2012/10/25/45730250-1ecf-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_story.html?wpisrc=emailtoafriend
***************
"Yard by yard, life is hard; but inch by inch, it's a cinch." (Robert Schuller)
***************
Lori Montgomery reminds us in the Washington Post that, while the "Fiscal Cliff" is two months away, there is damage being caused now by it's prospect. She cites a new report out Friday from the National Association of Manufacturers that predicts that nearly 6 million jobs will be destroyed thru 2014 if Congress takes no action. Predicted unemployment rate: 12%.
But, right now, companies are bracing for the fallout by laying off workers, letting jobs go vacant, and postponing major purchases: "Commerce Department data released Thursday show business investment stalled in September, as orders for core capital goods such as machinery and equipment plateaued at $60.3 billion."
Mark Zandi, an economists whose testimony before both houses of Congress has been highly valued in the past, supports the double digit unemployment scenario if nothing is done to fix the situation.
My problem with all this is that "doing nothing" would appear to be something that "Congress" is very good at!
I hope for the best but I'm bracing for the worst!
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Friday, October 26, 2012
Pointing Toward Prosperity
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/opinion/krugman-pointing-toward-prosperity.html
***************
"One of the best ways to cultivate a possibility mind-set is to prompt yourself to dream one size bigger than you normally do." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
So Paul Krugman tells us in the Times today that Mitt Romney has been barnstorming the country, telling the voters that he has a five-point plan to restore prosperity: "And some voters, alas, seem to believe what he's saying. So, President Obama has now responded with his own plan, a little blue booklet containing 27 policy proposals."
How to these plans stack up? According to Krugman, Mr. Romney's plan is a "sham." It's just a list of what Romney says he'll do without any policies to back it up: "We will cut the deficit and put America back on track to a balanced budget" but, as Krugman points out, Romney refuses to specify which tax loopholes he will close to offset his $5 trillion in tax cuts.
Here's a quote: "So Mr. Romney is faking it. His real plan seems to be to foster economic recovery through magic, inspiring business confidence through his personal awesomeness."
So, what about President Obama? Krugman: "Where Mr. Romney says he'll achieve energy independence, never mind how, Mr. Obama calls for concrete steps like raising fuel efficiency standards."
I am not a Republican or a Democrat and I keep politics out of my classroom, but my final Krugman quote covers what concerns me: "And you should never forget the broader policy context. Mr. Obama may not have an exciting economic plan, but, if he is re-elected, he will get to implement a health reform that is the biggest improvement in America's safety net since Medicare. Mr. Romney doesn't have an economic plan at all, but he is determined not just to repeal Obamacare but to impose savage cuts in Medicaid. So, never mind all those bullet points. Think instead about the 45 million Americans who either will or won't receive essential health care, depending on who wins on Nov. 6."
I'm hoping we all win on Nov. 6.
***************
"One of the best ways to cultivate a possibility mind-set is to prompt yourself to dream one size bigger than you normally do." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
So Paul Krugman tells us in the Times today that Mitt Romney has been barnstorming the country, telling the voters that he has a five-point plan to restore prosperity: "And some voters, alas, seem to believe what he's saying. So, President Obama has now responded with his own plan, a little blue booklet containing 27 policy proposals."
How to these plans stack up? According to Krugman, Mr. Romney's plan is a "sham." It's just a list of what Romney says he'll do without any policies to back it up: "We will cut the deficit and put America back on track to a balanced budget" but, as Krugman points out, Romney refuses to specify which tax loopholes he will close to offset his $5 trillion in tax cuts.
Here's a quote: "So Mr. Romney is faking it. His real plan seems to be to foster economic recovery through magic, inspiring business confidence through his personal awesomeness."
So, what about President Obama? Krugman: "Where Mr. Romney says he'll achieve energy independence, never mind how, Mr. Obama calls for concrete steps like raising fuel efficiency standards."
I am not a Republican or a Democrat and I keep politics out of my classroom, but my final Krugman quote covers what concerns me: "And you should never forget the broader policy context. Mr. Obama may not have an exciting economic plan, but, if he is re-elected, he will get to implement a health reform that is the biggest improvement in America's safety net since Medicare. Mr. Romney doesn't have an economic plan at all, but he is determined not just to repeal Obamacare but to impose savage cuts in Medicaid. So, never mind all those bullet points. Think instead about the 45 million Americans who either will or won't receive essential health care, depending on who wins on Nov. 6."
I'm hoping we all win on Nov. 6.
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Good News For Residential Construction
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444868204578062310255566972.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_news
***************
"The will to win is worthless if you do not have the will to prepare." (Thane Yost)
***************
According to the "experts," yesterday's strong housing report helped push the stock market mostly higher while weak reports from IBM and Intel were subtractions against the Dow.
There are many who believe that housing is the last key indicator that needs to climb if the GDP growth rate in the U.S. is to be sustainable. Since U.S. builders started construction on homes in September at the fastest rate since July 2008, this looks like good news.
Builders started work in September on new houses and apartments at a seasonally adjusted annual rate that is up 15% from August and 34.8% from September a year ago. The National Association of Home Builders estimates that each home built generates three full-time jobs and $90,000 in new tax revenue.
According to Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan Chase, a sustainable pace of home building should add up to two percentage points to gross domestic product. Between 2007 and 2011, more than 2.1 million construction workers lost their jobs and, since then, only 273,000 have been hired back. So, from an employment point of view, that "sustainable pace" means a lot.
Some people think the pop in home building suggests a "divide" between consumers and industry in terms of how they look at a potential economic recovery. While businesses continue to hold back on big investments because of uncertainty surrounding the coming elections and changes in the tax code, consumers' attitudes are positive, pushing up spending on goods like new houses.
CoreLogic announced this month that the "shadow inventory" (the pending supply of homes that are delinquent or in foreclosure and could ultimately be listed for sale) fell to 2.3 million units in July, or a supply of 6.0 months, down 10.2% from a year earlier.
Let's hope the news continues to be good.
***************
"The will to win is worthless if you do not have the will to prepare." (Thane Yost)
***************
According to the "experts," yesterday's strong housing report helped push the stock market mostly higher while weak reports from IBM and Intel were subtractions against the Dow.
There are many who believe that housing is the last key indicator that needs to climb if the GDP growth rate in the U.S. is to be sustainable. Since U.S. builders started construction on homes in September at the fastest rate since July 2008, this looks like good news.
Builders started work in September on new houses and apartments at a seasonally adjusted annual rate that is up 15% from August and 34.8% from September a year ago. The National Association of Home Builders estimates that each home built generates three full-time jobs and $90,000 in new tax revenue.
According to Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan Chase, a sustainable pace of home building should add up to two percentage points to gross domestic product. Between 2007 and 2011, more than 2.1 million construction workers lost their jobs and, since then, only 273,000 have been hired back. So, from an employment point of view, that "sustainable pace" means a lot.
Some people think the pop in home building suggests a "divide" between consumers and industry in terms of how they look at a potential economic recovery. While businesses continue to hold back on big investments because of uncertainty surrounding the coming elections and changes in the tax code, consumers' attitudes are positive, pushing up spending on goods like new houses.
CoreLogic announced this month that the "shadow inventory" (the pending supply of homes that are delinquent or in foreclosure and could ultimately be listed for sale) fell to 2.3 million units in July, or a supply of 6.0 months, down 10.2% from a year earlier.
Let's hope the news continues to be good.
Saturday, October 6, 2012
The BLS & a Conspiracy Theory
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/from-jack-welch-a-conspiracy-theory/?emc=eta1
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/explaining-the-big-gain-in-job-getters/?emc=eta1
***************
"The wise man questions himself, the fool others." (Henri Arnold)
***************
So Jack Welch has once again shared his unlimited prowess in smelling out a political conspiracy that relates to unemployment. He probably feels he has some expertise in this area since he laid off 200,000 of the 400,000 people working at GE when he took over as CEO in the 80s. His nickname back then was "Neutron John." It's amazing what getting rid of people will do to your "profit-per-employee" ratios.
So, Welch shot out after the positive jobs news: "Unbelievable jobs numbers...these Chicago guys will do anything...can't debate so change numbers."
Fortunately, nobody who knows how those jobs numbers are put together, takes the Welch observation seriously. Frankly, I'm beginning to think that nobody takes most of Welch's observations seriously. It seems that he's part of a long line of retired CEOs who want to continue to be "heard."
Catherine Rampell does an excellent job in her post in "Economix" of both explaining how the "jobs" numbers work and giving us an overall perspective: "The numbers are tremendously volatile, but the reasons are "STATISTICAL" not "POLITICAL." And she goes on to prove it while emphasizing the plight of the 20 to 24 year old age group.
Rampell points out that there are no political appointees running the BLS and that their same systems they always use produced the current numbers/estimates.
Hopefully, the BLS numbers are another positive sign. I would prefer to look at it that way.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/explaining-the-big-gain-in-job-getters/?emc=eta1
***************
"The wise man questions himself, the fool others." (Henri Arnold)
***************
So Jack Welch has once again shared his unlimited prowess in smelling out a political conspiracy that relates to unemployment. He probably feels he has some expertise in this area since he laid off 200,000 of the 400,000 people working at GE when he took over as CEO in the 80s. His nickname back then was "Neutron John." It's amazing what getting rid of people will do to your "profit-per-employee" ratios.
So, Welch shot out after the positive jobs news: "Unbelievable jobs numbers...these Chicago guys will do anything...can't debate so change numbers."
Fortunately, nobody who knows how those jobs numbers are put together, takes the Welch observation seriously. Frankly, I'm beginning to think that nobody takes most of Welch's observations seriously. It seems that he's part of a long line of retired CEOs who want to continue to be "heard."
Catherine Rampell does an excellent job in her post in "Economix" of both explaining how the "jobs" numbers work and giving us an overall perspective: "The numbers are tremendously volatile, but the reasons are "STATISTICAL" not "POLITICAL." And she goes on to prove it while emphasizing the plight of the 20 to 24 year old age group.
Rampell points out that there are no political appointees running the BLS and that their same systems they always use produced the current numbers/estimates.
Hopefully, the BLS numbers are another positive sign. I would prefer to look at it that way.
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Former Students With Great Perspectives
http://behindcompanies.com/2012/10/how-to-find-a-job-after-college/
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/opinion/an-unhelpful-presidential-debate.html?emc=eta1
***************
"One's philosophy is NOT best expressed in words; it is expressed in the choices one makes. In the long run, we shape our lives and we shape ourselves." (Eleanor Roosevelt)
***************
The great gift that you get when you have the opportunity to share your thoughts with excellent students is that they "energize" you and continue to inspire you even after they've graduated from your class or your school.
Marcelo Somers comes back to talk to my classes and he posts on his blog and, all the while, he gives me energy transfusions! My students like him because he's close enough in age to have them "feel" he is still one of them. He's gone out in the big bad job market and done something creative and relevant with his bachelor's degree - that would be the degree that I think is now the equivalent of a high school diploma - and he takes the time to come back and talk to others about what they could do.
His blog posts talk to the issues that surround business competition and challenge all of us to think about them. His current post (attached) is a classic and a "must read."
*****
I try to stay away from politics in my classes (where I think I'm pretty successful at doing so) and in this blog but I have to comment on the NY Times take (attached) on last night's presidential debate.
First of all, I don't watch "presidential debates" because they'd cause me to fall asleep. But, I was interested this morning in the reaction of many supporters of President Obama that he was not really that good. I'm being kind here. When even your supporters don't think you did well, there's a problem. Chris Mathews (NBC), who admits to being and enthusiastic supporter of President Obama, was beside himself! I must admit that I was more concerned about the Yankees.
I have to say that I liked the NY Times characterization of "The Mitt Romney who appeared on the stage at the University of Denver seemed to be fleeing from the one who won the Republican nomination on a hard-right platform of tax cuts, budget slashing and indifference to those at the bottom of the economic ladder. And Mr. Obama's competitive edge from 2008 clearly dulled, as he missed repeated opportunities to challenge Mr. Romney on his falsehoods and turnabouts."
Evidently, the moderator, Jim Lehrer, didn't help much either. So, three people trying to look good on TV and no real facts exchanged. It would appear that President Obama could have done better but chose not to. Maybe he thinks he can win anyway. Somebody should tell him that no U.S. president has ever been re-elected with an unemployment rate above 6%.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/opinion/an-unhelpful-presidential-debate.html?emc=eta1
***************
"One's philosophy is NOT best expressed in words; it is expressed in the choices one makes. In the long run, we shape our lives and we shape ourselves." (Eleanor Roosevelt)
***************
The great gift that you get when you have the opportunity to share your thoughts with excellent students is that they "energize" you and continue to inspire you even after they've graduated from your class or your school.
Marcelo Somers comes back to talk to my classes and he posts on his blog and, all the while, he gives me energy transfusions! My students like him because he's close enough in age to have them "feel" he is still one of them. He's gone out in the big bad job market and done something creative and relevant with his bachelor's degree - that would be the degree that I think is now the equivalent of a high school diploma - and he takes the time to come back and talk to others about what they could do.
His blog posts talk to the issues that surround business competition and challenge all of us to think about them. His current post (attached) is a classic and a "must read."
*****
I try to stay away from politics in my classes (where I think I'm pretty successful at doing so) and in this blog but I have to comment on the NY Times take (attached) on last night's presidential debate.
First of all, I don't watch "presidential debates" because they'd cause me to fall asleep. But, I was interested this morning in the reaction of many supporters of President Obama that he was not really that good. I'm being kind here. When even your supporters don't think you did well, there's a problem. Chris Mathews (NBC), who admits to being and enthusiastic supporter of President Obama, was beside himself! I must admit that I was more concerned about the Yankees.
I have to say that I liked the NY Times characterization of "The Mitt Romney who appeared on the stage at the University of Denver seemed to be fleeing from the one who won the Republican nomination on a hard-right platform of tax cuts, budget slashing and indifference to those at the bottom of the economic ladder. And Mr. Obama's competitive edge from 2008 clearly dulled, as he missed repeated opportunities to challenge Mr. Romney on his falsehoods and turnabouts."
Evidently, the moderator, Jim Lehrer, didn't help much either. So, three people trying to look good on TV and no real facts exchanged. It would appear that President Obama could have done better but chose not to. Maybe he thinks he can win anyway. Somebody should tell him that no U.S. president has ever been re-elected with an unemployment rate above 6%.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)