Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Factory activity in New York state contracted for a second month in a row in September, falling to its lowest level in nearly 3-1/2 years as new orders shrank further, a report from the New York Federal Reserve showed on Monday.
The New York Fed’s “Empire State” general business conditions index dropped to minus 10.41, from minus 5.85 in August, frustrating economists’ forecasts for an improvement to minus 2, according to a Reuters poll. It was the lowest level since April 2009.
The survey of manufacturing plants in the state is one of the earliest monthly guideposts to U.S. factory conditions. The sector contracted in August for the first time in 10 months.
Obama can't blame Bush for any of that!!
With orders plummeting, the impact on the labor force is predictable:
Employment gauges deteriorated. The index for the number of employees fell to 4.26 from 16.47 and the average employee workweek index slipped to minus 1.06 from 3.53.
The New York Times reports that corporate earnings are expected to falter in this quarter as well:
Giants like FedEx and Intel, two bellwethers of the global economy, are warning of lower quarterly profits because of weakness in worldwide demand. Overseas companies are feeling the pinch, too. Burberry, the British luxury retailer which had seemed immune to a slowdown, is offering a similar warning.
Even smaller, family-owned companies like Eastman Machine in Buffalo, which makes cutting equipment for the textile industry, are wary. “We feel like we are walking on a tightrope,” said Robert Stevenson, Eastman Machine’s chief executive.
In all, Wall Street expects quarterly profits at the typical large American company to decline for the first time since 2009.
Supporters of Obamanomics have long griped that corporate profits have skyrocketed under Barack Obama, but that’s at least partly due to their inability to price risk and put capital into play in any kind of rational manner. The Cash for Clunkers nature of Obamanomics, with its short-term gimmickry and long-term regulatory opacity, makes that impossible.
These two indicators point to very bleak third and fourth quarters in the US. We’re heading back into recessionary numbers, and we still have Taxmageddon ahead of us.
Manufacturing nationwide contracted in August according to the ISM data and manufacturing jobs were actually lost in August according to the jobs report. Based on the first regional survey to come out for September, it doesn't look like September will be much better.
I do think it's amusing that the Democrats talked about manufacturing jobs at their convention (but of course Obama didn't mention it in his speech, I don't think, because he had likely seen the jobs data that came out the next morning).
QE3 isn't a bailout for the economy, it's a bailout for OBAMA.
Except it's really too late to be a bailout for Obama. If it was going to help the economy (and I don't think it really will), then it needed to be done at least 3-6 months ago or so to help him.
At this point, it might actually be more likely to hurt him because it will cause oil prices and consequently fuel prices and food prices to rise without there being enough time for it to help the economy if it's going to.
It went up last Thursday/Friday because of a QE-induced sugar high. And up a lot before that in anticipation of QE.
One day means nothing. But all the same, you address the point. The markets are up only because of government welfare programs directed to the markets.
Despite the fact that it actually isn't, this story was released this morning, how do you think this new information will affect the Stock Market?
Do you think this will be greeted as good or bad news?
It doesn't matter in the big picture. The government is going to flood the markets with money which means they are going to go up despite the damage to the economy.
Quote:
PS: You skirted the question asked: Does this look like an economy that's moving forward?
Except it's really too late to be a bailout for Obama. If it was going to help the economy (and I don't think it really will), then it needed to be done at least 3-6 months ago or so to help him.
At this point, it might actually be more likely to hurt him because it will cause oil prices and consequently fuel prices and food prices to rise without there being enough time for it to help the economy if it's going to.
Probably so.
However, I truly believe that was the motivation behind it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
