Odds of U.S. Recession Seen Rising by Academic Panel Majority

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 3:05 PM GMT
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-02/feldstein-recession-panel-members-see-rising-odds-of-a-renewed-u-s-slump.html

    The two-year-old U.S. recovery’s staying power may be diminishing as consumers and the government pare spending, say five of the nine economists on the academic panel that dates recessions.

    “This economy is really balanced on the edge,” Harvard University economics professor Martin Feldstein, a member of the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research, said yesterday in an interview on Bloomberg Television’s “Surveillance Midday” with Tom Keene. “There’s now a 50 percent chance that we could slide into a new recession. Nothing has given us much growth.”

    A greater-than-expected slowdown in the first half of 2011 poses risks for the world’s largest economy, said economist Robert Hall of Stanford University, the panel’s chairman. Gross domestic product climbed at a 1.3 percent annual rate from April through June after a 0.4 percent gain in the prior quarter that was less than earlier estimated, Commerce Department figures showed July 29.

    “The slower the growth rate, the more likely it is that an adverse shock would cause a recession,” Hall said in an interview.

    While the committee doesn’t forecast the odds of a recession, individual members can make their own predictions, Hall said. The panel took more than a year to determine that the deepest contraction since the 1930s ended in June 2009, a finding made in September 2010.

    Depth of Recession

    Gross domestic product shrank 5.1 percent from the fourth quarter of 2007 to the second quarter of 2009, compared with the previously reported 4.1 percent drop, the Commerce Department said last week. The second-worst contraction in the post-World War II era was a 3.7 percent decline in 1957-58.

    “The risks have gone up for another recession compared to where we were six months ago,” Christina Romer, a former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers and a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said in a Bloomberg Television interview Aug. 1 on “Street Smart” with Carol Massar and Matt Miller. She predicted “anemic, but positive, growth.”
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 3:19 PM GMT
    Apparently the stock market is already pricing in a double dip:

    Stocks pricing in a new recession:
    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/stocks-pricing-in-a-new-recession-2011-08-04?link=home_carousel

    The eight-day decline in the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA -2.07% — snapped Wednesday with a paltry almost 30-point gain — shows that investors are discounting a new recession next year.

    The latest batch of economic reports are almost too weak to digest, though that didn’t stop MarketWatch’s Washington bureau chief from compiling them into a terrifying summer reading assignment on Wednesday.

    If the payrolls and unemployment numbers on Friday are anywhere near as bad as they are expected to be, then stocks could get even worse next week. Economists predict July’s nonfarm payrolls grew by a meager 75,000, and that the unemployment rate stood pat at 9.2%.

    Anything weaker than 75,000, or a worst-case scenario of a negative number, could spur a stampede out of equities.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 3:29 PM GMT
    That's what happens when you cut and cut during an economic downturn. Apparently, the Tea Baggers didn't study the Depression.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 3:38 PM GMT
    Somebody please tell this academic panel that the US has already been in recession for four years.

    "Odds of Sky Being Blue Seen Rising by Useless Academic Panel"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 3:48 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidThat's what happens when you cut and cut during an economic downturn. Apparently, the Tea Baggers didn't study the Depression.


    Apparently you took all the wrong lessons from the depression - you might actually bother to read some of the academic research out there by those like Christine Romer. With spending still out of control (even with this debt deal, this adds 7 trillion dollars over the next several years to US debt levels), there is much work to be done post Obama. Frivolous spending on bureaucracies not only does not create value it might otherwise create but means Americans are paying for it well into the future.

    Money does not grow on trees Christian - and the rich certainly don't have an endless supply of it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 3:55 PM GMT
    More people are realizing this Administration's policies are strangling the economy and inhibiting job growth, e.g. EPA and NLRB, as well as health care cost uncertainties. Their policies and the ideology behind it have failed and they have nothing left in their quiver, save abandoning their policies, which they won't do. Their only other alternative left is to claim the recession was deeper to further blame Bush, but at the same time acknowledging their lack of understanding of the economy. They will also lavish idle empathy on the American people, while demonizing the opposition in ever more shrill and desperate ways, calling opponents terrorists, hostage-takers, and the like. People wanted results, not rhetoric, and the Administration will continue to receive dismal job performance poll results.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 4:15 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidMore people are realizing this Administration's policies are strangling the economy and inhibiting job growth, e.g. EPA and NLRB, as well as health care cost uncertainties. Their policies and the ideology behind it have failed and they have nothing left in their quiver, save abandoning their policies, which they won't do. Their only other alternative left is to claim the recession was deeper to further blame Bush, but at the same time acknowledging their lack of understanding of the economy. They will also lavish idle empathy on the American people, while demonizing the opposition in ever more shrill and desperate ways, calling opponents terrorists, hostage-takers, and the like. People wanted results, not rhetoric, and the Administration will continue to receive dismal job performance poll results.





    People do want results.

    Six months and counting and the Repubs haven't even proposed a jobs bill, let alone passed one.

    The Repubs promised to focus "like a laser beam" on "jobs jobs jobs" and they've broken their promise.
    Either that or they lied to the American people.

    That's a big part of why the approval ratings for the Repubs in Congress are in the toilet.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 4:20 PM GMT
    rickrick91 said
    socalfitness saidMore people are realizing this Administration's policies are strangling the economy and inhibiting job growth, e.g. EPA and NLRB, as well as health care cost uncertainties. Their policies and the ideology behind it have failed and they have nothing left in their quiver, save abandoning their policies, which they won't do. Their only other alternative left is to claim the recession was deeper to further blame Bush, but at the same time acknowledging their lack of understanding of the economy. They will also lavish idle empathy on the American people, while demonizing the opposition in ever more shrill and desperate ways, calling opponents terrorists, hostage-takers, and the like. People wanted results, not rhetoric, and the Administration will continue to receive dismal job performance poll results.

    People do want results.

    Six months and counting and the Repubs haven't even proposed a jobs bill, let alone passed one.

    The Repubs promised to focus "like a laser beam" on "jobs jobs jobs" and they've broken their promise.
    Either that or they lied to the American people.

    That's a big part of why the approval ratings for the Repubs in Congress are in the toilet.

    The thing you guys, including Pelosi from her talk yesterday, don't understand and I think will never understand, is that job growth to provide sustained economic growth must come from the private sector. The role of government is not jobs bills, but establishing policies to encourage hiring in the private sector.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 4:29 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    rickrick91 said
    socalfitness saidMore people are realizing this Administration's policies are strangling the economy and inhibiting job growth, e.g. EPA and NLRB, as well as health care cost uncertainties. Their policies and the ideology behind it have failed and they have nothing left in their quiver, save abandoning their policies, which they won't do. Their only other alternative left is to claim the recession was deeper to further blame Bush, but at the same time acknowledging their lack of understanding of the economy. They will also lavish idle empathy on the American people, while demonizing the opposition in ever more shrill and desperate ways, calling opponents terrorists, hostage-takers, and the like. People wanted results, not rhetoric, and the Administration will continue to receive dismal job performance poll results.

    People do want results.

    Six months and counting and the Repubs haven't even proposed a jobs bill, let alone passed one.

    The Repubs promised to focus "like a laser beam" on "jobs jobs jobs" and they've broken their promise.
    Either that or they lied to the American people.

    That's a big part of why the approval ratings for the Repubs in Congress are in the toilet.

    The thing you guys, including Pelosi from her talk yesterday, don't understand and I think will never understand, is that job growth to provide sustained economic growth must come from the private sector. The role of government is not jobs bills, but establishing policies to encourage hiring in the private sector.




    Thank you for admitting that the truth is that the Repubs LIED to the American people when they promised to focus "like a laser beam" on creating "jobs jobs jobs".

    The Repubs don't believe that the government CAN help to create jobs, so they never intended to do anything to try to help create jobs.
    They just lied to voters to try to win an election.

    That's why the Repubs haven't even proposed a jobs bill.
    They never intended to do anything to try to help create jobs.

    The Repubs just don't give a shit about the millions of people who are unemployed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 5:04 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    rickrick91 said
    The Repubs just don't give a shit about the millions of people who are unemployed.



    Hmmm... Just like Harry Reid and the Democrats don't care about the 75,000 FAA employees who just got a 5 week furlough because the Senate refused to pass the bill funding the FAA.


    They refused to supporting the union busting provision in said bill.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 5:06 PM GMT
    Well Damn !!! Lets get at the job of taking up collections for our corps and the rich, after all, they need more money to provide more jobs, to make more goods and provide more services, for the masses that have very little money now and soon will have even less to buy those goods and services. After all, give them poor jokers amongst the masses money and what do they do with it but spend it on stuff, Hell with that !! create policies and avenues to give more to the Corps and the Rich because they know how to handle money, they will create more jobs and hire more people.

    WE NEED THE RICH, SO LETS HELP THEM OUT !!! They wil buy all those goods and services after they hire the people to make and provide them, because they have the money the masses don't. What were we thinking ? All those years of prosperity and growth from the 60's through the 90's, we could have had more I tell you, we had it all wrong in those years by helping the masses instead of the RICH, and CORPS. We've had it all backwards, we could have had more, had we not taxed the Rich and the Corps so much.

    Can't you see that the 2000's could have been even better? That Bush tax cuts didn't go far enough, if only we had had the good judgement to have cut more taxes on the rich and take more taxes from the middle and Lower classes and end all those wasteful givaways to the poor and college grants, as well as mortgage deductions for the middle class. All that money should have gone to the Corps and Rich where it would have done more good at moving our economy, by taking more from the bottom end the rich and the corps. could have kept more, because everone knows they will buy more things they don't need, and hire more people to make more goods and provide more services that only the 2 % the rich represent can buy. YES-SIR-EEE !!! that's the answer !!! THAT WILL GET OUR ECONOMY MOVING !!!


    Lets get this economy moving by setting up donation centers for the Corps and the Rich THEY NEED FUNDS BECAUSE THEY ARE THE JOB CREATORS, The 2% holding the nations wealth need more so they'll spend and create demand, so they can hire more people and expand their businesses, then the money will recirculate amongst their 2% of population with even more money and get this stagnate economy moving, THAT'LL WORK !!!! Lets get this thing going !!! I'll donate $100, what will you donate to the JOB CREATORS ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 5:08 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidThat's what happens when you cut and cut during an economic downturn. Apparently, the Tea Baggers didn't study the Depression.


    Apparently you took all the wrong lessons from the depression - you might actually bother to read some of the academic research out there by those like Christine Romer. With spending still out of control (even with this debt deal, this adds 7 trillion dollars over the next several years to US debt levels), there is much work to be done post Obama. Frivolous spending on bureaucracies not only does not create value it might otherwise create but means Americans are paying for it well into the future.

    Money does not grow on trees Christian - and the rich certainly don't have an endless supply of it.


    Incorrect. Under FDR's policies the US went from Depression to 8-13% growth through 1937, when convinced by Republicans and nervous Dems, they suspended stimulus and focused on deficit reduction. So from 1937 - 1939 growth stopped, unemployment rose and it took WWII (basically a massive stimulus) to bring growth back.

    And your whole "create value" jargon is really tiring. It's a meaningless phrase like "free market" or "fiscally conservative Republican." icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 5:13 PM GMT
    realifedad said Well Damn !!! Lets get at the job of taking up collections for our corps and the rich, after all, they need more money to provide more jobs, to make more goods and provide more services, for the masses that have very little money now and soon will have even less to buy those goods and services. After all, give them poor jokers amongst the masses money and what do they do with it but spend it on stuff, Hell with that !! create policies and avenues to give more to the Corps and the Rich because they know how to handle money, they will create more jobs and hire more people.

    WE NEED THE RICH, SO LETS HELP THEM OUT !!! They wil buy all those goods and services after they hire the people to make and provide them, because they have the money the masses don't. What were we thinking ? All those years of prosperity and growth from the 60's through the 90's, we could have had more I tell you, we had it all wrong in those years by helping the masses instead of the RICH, and CORPS. We've had it all backwards, we could have had more, had we not taxed the Rich and the Corps so much.

    Can't you see that the 2000's could have been even better? That Bush tax cuts didn't go far enough, if only we had had the good judgement to have cut more taxes on the rich and take more taxes from the middle and Lower classes and end all those wasteful givaways to the poor and college grants, as well as mortgage deductions for the middle class. All that money should have gone to the Corps and Rich where it would have done more good at moving our economy, by taking more from the bottom end the rich and the corps. could have kept more, because everone knows they will buy more things they don't need, and hire more people to make more goods and provide more services that only the 2 % the rich represent can buy. YES-SIR-EEE !!! that's the answer !!! THAT WILL GET OUR ECONOMY MOVING !!!


    Lets get this economy moving by setting up donation centers for the Corps and the Rich THEY NEED FUNDS BECAUSE THEY ARE THE JOB CREATORS, The 2% holding the nations wealth need more so they'll spend and create demand, so they can hire more people and expand their businesses, then the money will recirculate amongst their 2% of population with even more money and get this stagnate economy moving, THAT'LL WORK !!!! Lets get this thing going !!! I'll donate $100, what will you donate to the JOB CREATORS ?






    SB, SoCal, Riddler !!! No donations ????
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 7:30 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidMore people are realizing this Administration's policies are strangling the economy and inhibiting job growth, e.g. EPA and NLRB, as well as health care cost uncertainties.


    And THIS administration's responsibility for Europe....and the debt crisis of Greece, Italy, etc? Or the Chinese Bubble? Or the sell-off in Brazil???

    Republicans are attributing great power to Obama now. Their magical thinking is quite impressive.

    So what is it that Republicans would have The Great and All-Powerful Obama do?

    Or better yet, in your perfect world, if Obama would step aside for The Republican Savior:

    WWRD: WHAT WOULD ROMNEY DO?

    What's the magical Republican approach to the worldwide recession?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 7:37 PM GMT
    PresentMind said
    And THIS administration's responsibility for Europe....and the debt crisis of Greece, Italy, etc? Or the Chinese Bubble? Or the sell-off in Brazil???

    Republicans are attributing great power to Obama now. Their magical thinking is quite impressive.

    So what is it that Republicans would have The Great and All-Powerful Obama do?


    With similar thinking, one would think that they should appreciate the current drop in oil prices, since it's all Obama's fault, right? icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 8:16 PM GMT
    PresentMind said
    socalfitness saidMore people are realizing this Administration's policies are strangling the economy and inhibiting job growth, e.g. EPA and NLRB, as well as health care cost uncertainties.


    And THIS administration's responsibility for Europe....and the debt crisis of Greece, Italy, etc? Or the Chinese Bubble? Or the sell-off in Brazil???

    Republicans are attributing great power to Obama now. Their magical thinking is quite impressive.

    So what is it that Republicans would have The Great and All-Powerful Obama do?

    Or better yet, in your perfect world, if Obama would step aside for The Republican Savior:

    WWRD: WHAT WOULD ROMNEY DO?

    What's the magical Republican approach to the worldwide recession?




    Romney would've vetoed the debt deal.

    The stock market is already sinking.
    If there had been no deal, we would've had a complete market crash.
    And a full blown recurrence of the Bush recession.

    The Tea Party extremists may have already driven us to that point, even with a debt deal.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 10:20 PM GMT
    Republicans? Republicans? Do you have no answers?

    WWRD: WHAT WOULD ROMNEY DO?

    I mean other than his signing the pledge to fight gay marriage----which he did today!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 11:10 PM GMT
    The first line says,

    "The two-year-old U.S. recovery’s staying power may be diminishing as consumers and the government pare spending, say five of the nine economists on the academic panel that dates recessions."

    Pare:

    Definition of PARE

    transitive verb
    1
    : to trim off an outside, excess, or irregular part of
    2
    : to diminish or reduce by or as if by paring

    I thought some of you wanted the gov't to cut spending....didn't you?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 04, 2011 11:46 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    PresentMind said
    So what is it that Republicans would have The Great and All-Powerful Obama do?


    Cut Federal spending across the board by 25% (except for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid). That would bring us to mid 2000s levels of government spending.

    After that, DO NOTHING ELSE (no more "stimulus" or "cash for clunkers" or QE3) and JUST SHUT UP (no more of those speeches demonizing "millionaires and billionaires" and "corporate jet owners.")

    Just those two things would do wonders for the economy.






    I can agree with you to a large degree, except that you need to add that we go back to the year 2000 on taxation of Corps and the rich. Keep the Wall street and Bank Regs prior to deregulation in the later 90's. The combination of thses is what kept us prosporous for decades with relatively minor bumps along the way compared to this current situation.

    Now where are we SB, SoCal, Riddler and likeminded ? You think the Corps and the Rich could stand to pay more taxes in order to return to more prosperous times. (those levels of taxation worked great for decades of properity) or should we start donating to the rich because they are the job creators and need more money to hire people to make 'stuff' that only they can afford but don't themselves need ? (that is the basics of what our TBagger/repubs are prescribing, cut cut cut the poor and give to the rich job creators)


    Prior to deregulation of the Banks and Wallstreet, Nafta and Bush tax cuts when the US was prospering. Shouldn't we return to those policies so the rich can make more money ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 05, 2011 12:23 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    realifedad saidYou think the Corps and the Rich could stand to pay more taxes in order to return to more prosperous times. (those levels of taxation worked great for decades of properity)


    Higher taxes were present in the 1990s during the dot com boom (and subsequent bust). Higher taxes were in no way responsible for the boom.





    The higher taxes on the rich that Clinton and the Dems passed in 1993 were responsible for the fact that the massive Reagan/Bush yearly budget deficits stopped - and President Clinton balanced the budget for the last four years of his presidency.

    Then Bush was elected.
    He passed the Bush tax cuts - and the very next year we reverted back to massive yearly budget deficits.
    Bush went on to double the National Debt by the time he left office.

    The Repub party's economic policies for the last 30 years have a proven track record of creating massive unsustainable deficits and an exploding National Debt.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 05, 2011 12:42 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    realifedad saidYou think the Corps and the Rich could stand to pay more taxes in order to return to more prosperous times. (those levels of taxation worked great for decades of properity)


    Higher taxes were present in the 1990s during the dot com boom (and subsequent bust). Higher taxes were in no way responsible for the boom.



    But they didn't do the boom harm did they ? Perhaps we could have investment in an infrastructure boom now, and investment in a green technology boom now, but no, the rich and the corps need to keep their money so they can hire to make more stuff that nobody can afford right !!! But in spite of very little demand for anything, surely if we give more money to the corps and the very rich they will hire anyway. That's the logic we hear from the TBagger Repubs. Lets help out those job creators !!!

    and since those higher taxes were lowered, things have really gone well haven't they ? WHERE ARE ALL THOSE JOBS ?

    Maybe we should start taking up collections for the Corps and the Rich now then ? Because they are the job creators, they need more money and the Bush tax cuts weren't enough because jobs did not appear on the horizon did they?

    Cut Cut Cut from the poor, because "if you take from the rich to give to the poor the rich will be no more" !!! (a favorite saying of my Rush Limbaugh fan brother)

    So lets reverse this shameful waste of money going to the poor, 'keep the war' and give to the rich so they can employ more of us for all that stuff the rich want to expand and make for no one to buy.

    THAT MAKES GOOD TBAGGER SENSE DOESN'T IT ?