It won't let me create a direct address yet for some reason, but once I can get one, I'll add a button with the RSS and the Twitter feeds.
For all of you facebook fans I hope you "like" or "fan" or whatever it is, The Economic Populist.
I can also use some help is setting it up right. I don't use Facebook, this site is what I work on, so making sure I've set up right for Facebook users or anything I should be setting up, please let me know. I seriously could use some help, it's like they have "rewritten the Internet" for me and so figuring out their procedures is a new world.
I didn't go through their math in this post, but I noticed they used theta to represent people and their income ratios. They reference a series of papers on this positional externality, i.e. social class, "herd" behavior to keep up with the Jones.
I was looking at it thinking interest rates. For a long time regular savings doesn't really pay because there is little interest, so why would people save?
Then, I'm seeing people are plain broke and having to use MC/Visa to eat, make rent, not exactly buying two boats.
The McMansion thing though we sure did see this in the last decade, millions signing up for homes they could not afford.
Anyway, I'm not that up on my "behavioral" and have a tendency to like very concrete numbers I'm assured are true cause/effect...
Regarding Tony's post. I don't understand why anyone in America right now would agree with tax breaks to ship jobs overseas, which leads to loss of jobs here and cheaper prices? I'm still waiting for my $2 shirt from China.
If labor costs are 10% of America, then why haven't prices plunged in correlation?
All Americans should walk away from Chinese goods and focus on buying products and services made in USA. Check out Americasgotproduct.com
"...social class pressures which cause people to spend, basically beyond their means ..."
I have often heard this "keeping up with the Joneses" explanation of people being drawn into excessive spending, but I don't think I have ever seen that clearly demonstrated. I would be interested to see research addressing this.
Surely, Mr. $48,000 probably tries to fit in with Mr. $72,000s lifestyle if they have contact with each other, and lately many have been willing to go into debt to get their kids through college and thus cope with a tighter job market. But I know this overreaching isn't a continuous distribution -- it has fairly sharply demarcated break points where some of these choices are not possible, by any degree of debt or scrambling.
At some of those break points, people don't even try to keep up with the Joneses, but instead they get down with the Snopeses.
A mild example of this "amble to the bottom" has been the boom in second-hand and thrift shops in the last 20 years. When I was in college in the 70s, pawn shops and charity stores were for poor people, and middle class folks stayed away. Now, they're only a step below Wal-Mart, and people of the lower 4 quintiles shop there as readily as anywhere else. (I was an early adopter in this regard.)
And then there are food banks. In the 70s there were no such things. Now they are everywhere, and a high percentage of their clients are working.
Not pride and pretense, but mostly rational coping strategies, have driven Americans into debt.
I don't use facebook but it's seemingly everywhere. Do you think it would be useful add those "like" and "recommend" facebook links and so on? I will if you're telling me there is a whole world on there concerned about real economy policy versus this "corporate directed diversion" battle going on this election and on TV.
Don't forget our "buttons", namely the arrows on the upper left corner to promote a post to the front page. ;)
...the idea that Congre$$ or our corporate tool of a President are going to do anything to rebalance the conditions of trade with China is laughable.
Our political system, including the executive, is a wholly owned subsidiary of The Corporate Slave State and until we are all living in refrigerator boxes in alleys outside abandoned suburbs the voters will continue to go along with the current stupidity.
If you're a data junkie, consider registering on the site. A host of new features are available for registered users.
Generally, graph origins are cited, although the data used in the graph is often indirected cited. Because the St. Louis Fed automatically generates a citation on their graphs themselves (or should I say your generated graph from their tools and databases), I don't include it, but I use multiple tools for original graphs on EP and all equations are created with mimeTex, which is a LaTeX port for the web.
I love eye candy, graphs because it gives such a better picture on what's going on and I'm a math head.
I sure hope folks reading this site are pickin' up on how to read, visualize, look at a graph. I try to put that kind of info into the text description.
That's a real communication problem generally. When I see a number, that number speaks to me and screams "Holy shit the economy is going down a rat hole" whereas I think to the general public, numbers are just weird little scribblings to be ignored....
They cannot fathom scale, that's one of the biggest problems I think. $221 looks the same to them as $221B.
So, one of the goals of the site is to bridge the gap so numbers scream to others what they scream to math heads all by themselves.
Anywho, sign up! We love eye candy, numbers, graphs and stats here!
Industrial production. Some of the original graphs on EP, I have had to collect raw data from press releases, plus go back and check for number revisions.
Basically create my own spreadsheet and then create graphs from there. In other words, there is no Federal Reserve graph like the above, that's original, like many other graphs on EP, created from the data and then posted.
The St. Louis Federal Reserve doesn't publish all data, esp. Census data (too massive probably), but they are by far the easiest, most awesome economics tool/website out there, but they do not graph or hold data for everything, not by a long shot.
So, what I do is use their database if available and if they are not covering a particular topic, I'm running my own spreadsheets and then generate summaries, graphs from that.
I always put the links to the "home base" of the government report in these economic report overview posts. The links always go to the current release at minimum but you need to go to the DDP program from the Fed, which is a scripted database, not a statistic URL, so follow the "home base" URL for the Fed on industrial production, linked above.
On this site at least, the links are loaded with references and almost a citation.
You also need to note the major revisions and the fact no matter what you try to do, they "normalize" these numbers, i.e. baseline division by some year, so in terms of really getting to the raw, unedited, metrics is very hard.
I have raw cap, but the problem is the Fed went back and "revised" all sorts of historical numbers, then turned around and used year 2007 as a baseline.
The reason I'm graphing out raw capacity is because it dropped this recession and that is a first! To me is shows the offshore outsourcing of our manufacturing base and I honestly feel the Fed fudges or at least hides this report.
I don't find it well explained, I find inconsistencies and it bugs me. I will assume "user error" first on any data, (although I believe I'm making a hell of a lot less errors than most of the financial press and even a lot of blogs). In other words, I will assume I have made a mistake or do not understand something before I accuse any governments statistician of playing data games to hide bad news. Aggregate data for an entire nation to me is a tough job, to adjust statistically plus be accurate.
So, I personally work on it and it's only when I can make numbers match, make sense, do I post a graph from a working spreadsheet, database.
Case in point is rectifying trade data with GDP. I have the price import/export multipliers and still cannot get those two to jive, so in that case, I keep working on it but don't put it on EP, for it would be "economic data fiction". ;)
I'm putting the site URL on original graphs, so feel free to use them but cite...the site. St. Louis Fed automatically does the same thing, puts their URL on graphs and Calculated Risk, I can tell you his graphs are almost always correct, also does.
Just cite the source or don't try to remove the source URL.
Hoping you could tell me where you pulled the raw Industrial Capacity figures. Was it from the St. Louis Fed like the rest of the data in this post? Would be grateful for any tips. Thank you.
I must say, where did you get that? Off of a cereal box? That's a GOP talking point, empty, meaningless without detail. While the health care legislation is loaded, obviously by the health insurance lobby and other for profit health care corporations, do you believe the GOP would give the U.S. socialized medicine, which is what is really needed to bring down costs?
I mean seriously, do you seriously believe the GOP would do anything but give even more power to insurance companies than they already have?
People are worried about the government takeover of health care, yet fail to notice we have already a corporate take over of health care.
Which would you prefer? A for profit corporation deciding whether you live or die based on your financial statements, or the government deciding that?
I get not trusting the government, but why do people trust corporations, for profit corporations with their lives?
That's what's wrong here. We get corporate lobbyist written bills and no one is happy, except the corporate lobbyists, but instead of getting a real system to lower costs, we get the GOP wanting to make the situation even worse....for oops, one lobbyist didn't like one little amendment in a bill.
All this hoopla is just a smoke screen, this administration is just sitting and waiting for the, China coat tails.
ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION IS THE PLAN, EVIDENT BY THIS ADMINISTRATIONS POLICY TO ALLOW FOREIGN SHIPS A FREE ECONOMIC PASS TO DESTROY OUR WATERS.
A December 2009 report for Congress describes import cost would rise with national ballast water legislation.
The House voted for regulations 395-7 in 2008, but the legislation was not taken up in the Senate during this administration.
The continued delay tactics of more comment, study, and only a proposal for a long time line to implement standards for ballast water and foreign ships dumping human pathogens and virus illustrates this administrations reason for delay is not to hinder economic globalization, even at the expense of our environment and manufacturing competitiveness.
The following report for Congress in DEC 2009 “Although estimates of the costs of ballast treatment may be imprecise and vary from vessel to
vessel, there is some general agreement on average costs.14 For example, it may cost an estimated $400,000 per vessel for modification of container/bulk vessels to use onshore ballast water treatment facilities at California ports. More generally, the cost of retrofitting vessels to treat
ballast water has been estimated at between $200,000 and $310,000 per vessel for mechanical
treatment and around $300,000 for chemical treatment.15 Most of this expense will be borne by
foreign shipping companies, as the U.S. flag fleet is a small percentage of the global fleet,16 and
likely passed along to consumers of products imported on these ships.”
In September 2000, a Republican Senate and Democratic president Bill Clinton passed a law granting China PNTR (Permanent Normal Trade Relations). President Clinton's Trade Representative had this to say at the time:
In a Reuters news story, U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky is quoted as stating, "Granting PNTR for China not only provides tremendous economic opportunities for U.S. workers, farmers and businesses, it is also the best way to promote reform in China and stability in the region."
Since then, our trade deficits, and job losses - especially in manufacturing - have been a disaster. Thanks Charlene Barshefsky, for those "tremendous economic opportunities" brought about by China PNTR ... and for destroying the jobs, pride, and families of so many working Americans.
Oh, and wasn't it our dear President Obama who said throughout his campaign that he would re-negotiate NAFTA? Were these lies President Obama and if not, can you add "re-negotiate China PNTR" to that list?
Haven't seen you for a long time and this is a great piece of information. People do not realize that the reasons for offshore outsourcing are not just cheaper labor but the above and can even go into "who you know" in D.C.. Case in point on that one is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce/NASSCOM (BPO) or Indian body shops, offshore outsourcing. Truly a lot of these contracts do not make financial sense.
I also quoted Hindrey in an earlier post, so he must be on a roll! I didn't know he was a campaign adviser and how interesting that campaign advisers would not automatically be the real ones.
Not a Honda/Toyota devotee here. I own a GMC and the S10 from before they offshore outsourced it to Mexico, the Vortex V6, LOVE that engine!
Bottom line I agree with you on the bail outs. It seems to me the GM bail out was by far the most successful and saved many a job, plus the U.S. auto industry.
That said, we're not too keen on GM offshore outsourcing jobs and stimulus money, or labor arbitraging U.S. workers....
They should be raising hell about China tariffs on trucks, not labor arbitraging U.S. workers. Raise hell on health insurance costs, don't squeeze workers. That's the "touchy feeling" of this post, offshore outsourcing of any Stimulus money, bail out funds....
we want it to be Buy American, Hire America and Made in America, and put pressure on China, where GM is doing very well, on their tariff schedule and demands U.S. manufacturers operate domestically to sell in China.
Always interesting reading misleading articles based on feelings and written by Toyota/Honda devotees. They're out to hang an "overpaid" Big Three worker - their "dad" since most of them are over 45 years old at this point. GMs loan amounted to less than 1% of "bailouts". General Electric was more than Chrysler and GM combined.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aZchK__XUF84
They have claimed Toyota and others would build new plants in the U.S., add jobs and make up for the Big Three production cuts. It's 2 years later and Toyota announces their new plant will be in Mexico. These same Toyota lovers explain that Toyota has actually provided U.S. jobs when the statistics say otherwise - statistics don't lie.
http://www.cargroup.org/documents/Apale_book8a_002.pdf
Angry Bear has up an analysis on the China interest rate hike and is also implying China is not re-evaluating their currency, instead devaluing it, in a subtle method by this rate hike.
That's the bottom line, China is not going to reduce their exports by re-evaluating their currency.
Gets better and for the life of me I cannot find the original post, but Zerohedge has a repost(?) of someone named Albert Edwards saying also that China will devalue, not increase, the yuan and so there is no choice but to enact wholesale tariffs against China.
I agree with that, playing China's game when the evidence is overwhelming their currency manipulation is giving them a huge unfair trade advantage, causing jobs to be offshore outsourced to China, hurting other economies, is a joke.
The Nash Equilibrium, is just referring to game theory, which says because China ain't playing by the rules, it's inevitable that the U.S. is going to enact wholesale tariffs...
although given our government and their refusal to act, get serious and play a no holes barred game of economic chicken and this time, actually win instead of lose...
we'll see. The U.S. has been playing to lose on trade, economics for a good 30 years now, long term.
Business Insider, tells us Albert Edwards is from Societe General.
Thanks for letting me know. These graphs are larger than normal, but the site is fluid, so if you expand the browser everything should scale, but I'll make a point to check out the ipad display dimensions or look to scaling the graphs for posts in future.
Hi everyone,
I'm working on adding The Economic Populist on Facebook.
Here is the URL:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Economic-Populist/164442030250560
It won't let me create a direct address yet for some reason, but once I can get one, I'll add a button with the RSS and the Twitter feeds.
For all of you facebook fans I hope you "like" or "fan" or whatever it is, The Economic Populist.
I can also use some help is setting it up right. I don't use Facebook, this site is what I work on, so making sure I've set up right for Facebook users or anything I should be setting up, please let me know. I seriously could use some help, it's like they have "rewritten the Internet" for me and so figuring out their procedures is a new world.
The thing already freaked me out on privacy.
I didn't go through their math in this post, but I noticed they used theta to represent people and their income ratios. They reference a series of papers on this positional externality, i.e. social class, "herd" behavior to keep up with the Jones.
I was looking at it thinking interest rates. For a long time regular savings doesn't really pay because there is little interest, so why would people save?
Then, I'm seeing people are plain broke and having to use MC/Visa to eat, make rent, not exactly buying two boats.
The McMansion thing though we sure did see this in the last decade, millions signing up for homes they could not afford.
Anyway, I'm not that up on my "behavioral" and have a tendency to like very concrete numbers I'm assured are true cause/effect...
but the stats they provided are real.
Regarding Tony's post. I don't understand why anyone in America right now would agree with tax breaks to ship jobs overseas, which leads to loss of jobs here and cheaper prices? I'm still waiting for my $2 shirt from China.
If labor costs are 10% of America, then why haven't prices plunged in correlation?
All Americans should walk away from Chinese goods and focus on buying products and services made in USA. Check out Americasgotproduct.com
"...social class pressures which cause people to spend, basically beyond their means ..."
I have often heard this "keeping up with the Joneses" explanation of people being drawn into excessive spending, but I don't think I have ever seen that clearly demonstrated. I would be interested to see research addressing this.
Surely, Mr. $48,000 probably tries to fit in with Mr. $72,000s lifestyle if they have contact with each other, and lately many have been willing to go into debt to get their kids through college and thus cope with a tighter job market. But I know this overreaching isn't a continuous distribution -- it has fairly sharply demarcated break points where some of these choices are not possible, by any degree of debt or scrambling.
At some of those break points, people don't even try to keep up with the Joneses, but instead they get down with the Snopeses.
A mild example of this "amble to the bottom" has been the boom in second-hand and thrift shops in the last 20 years. When I was in college in the 70s, pawn shops and charity stores were for poor people, and middle class folks stayed away. Now, they're only a step below Wal-Mart, and people of the lower 4 quintiles shop there as readily as anywhere else. (I was an early adopter in this regard.)
And then there are food banks. In the 70s there were no such things. Now they are everywhere, and a high percentage of their clients are working.
Not pride and pretense, but mostly rational coping strategies, have driven Americans into debt.
Noni
I don't use facebook but it's seemingly everywhere. Do you think it would be useful add those "like" and "recommend" facebook links and so on? I will if you're telling me there is a whole world on there concerned about real economy policy versus this "corporate directed diversion" battle going on this election and on TV.
Don't forget our "buttons", namely the arrows on the upper left corner to promote a post to the front page. ;)
...the idea that Congre$$ or our corporate tool of a President are going to do anything to rebalance the conditions of trade with China is laughable.
Our political system, including the executive, is a wholly owned subsidiary of The Corporate Slave State and until we are all living in refrigerator boxes in alleys outside abandoned suburbs the voters will continue to go along with the current stupidity.
...it's a hotbed of anti-Corporate Ca$h citizens.
If you're a data junkie, consider registering on the site. A host of new features are available for registered users.
Generally, graph origins are cited, although the data used in the graph is often indirected cited. Because the St. Louis Fed automatically generates a citation on their graphs themselves (or should I say your generated graph from their tools and databases), I don't include it, but I use multiple tools for original graphs on EP and all equations are created with mimeTex, which is a LaTeX port for the web.
I love eye candy, graphs because it gives such a better picture on what's going on and I'm a math head.
I sure hope folks reading this site are pickin' up on how to read, visualize, look at a graph. I try to put that kind of info into the text description.
That's a real communication problem generally. When I see a number, that number speaks to me and screams "Holy shit the economy is going down a rat hole" whereas I think to the general public, numbers are just weird little scribblings to be ignored....
They cannot fathom scale, that's one of the biggest problems I think. $221 looks the same to them as $221B.
So, one of the goals of the site is to bridge the gap so numbers scream to others what they scream to math heads all by themselves.
Anywho, sign up! We love eye candy, numbers, graphs and stats here!
Industrial production. Some of the original graphs on EP, I have had to collect raw data from press releases, plus go back and check for number revisions.
Basically create my own spreadsheet and then create graphs from there. In other words, there is no Federal Reserve graph like the above, that's original, like many other graphs on EP, created from the data and then posted.
The St. Louis Federal Reserve doesn't publish all data, esp. Census data (too massive probably), but they are by far the easiest, most awesome economics tool/website out there, but they do not graph or hold data for everything, not by a long shot.
So, what I do is use their database if available and if they are not covering a particular topic, I'm running my own spreadsheets and then generate summaries, graphs from that.
I always put the links to the "home base" of the government report in these economic report overview posts. The links always go to the current release at minimum but you need to go to the DDP program from the Fed, which is a scripted database, not a statistic URL, so follow the "home base" URL for the Fed on industrial production, linked above.
On this site at least, the links are loaded with references and almost a citation.
You also need to note the major revisions and the fact no matter what you try to do, they "normalize" these numbers, i.e. baseline division by some year, so in terms of really getting to the raw, unedited, metrics is very hard.
I have raw cap, but the problem is the Fed went back and "revised" all sorts of historical numbers, then turned around and used year 2007 as a baseline.
The reason I'm graphing out raw capacity is because it dropped this recession and that is a first! To me is shows the offshore outsourcing of our manufacturing base and I honestly feel the Fed fudges or at least hides this report.
I don't find it well explained, I find inconsistencies and it bugs me. I will assume "user error" first on any data, (although I believe I'm making a hell of a lot less errors than most of the financial press and even a lot of blogs). In other words, I will assume I have made a mistake or do not understand something before I accuse any governments statistician of playing data games to hide bad news. Aggregate data for an entire nation to me is a tough job, to adjust statistically plus be accurate.
So, I personally work on it and it's only when I can make numbers match, make sense, do I post a graph from a working spreadsheet, database.
Case in point is rectifying trade data with GDP. I have the price import/export multipliers and still cannot get those two to jive, so in that case, I keep working on it but don't put it on EP, for it would be "economic data fiction". ;)
I'm putting the site URL on original graphs, so feel free to use them but cite...the site. St. Louis Fed automatically does the same thing, puts their URL on graphs and Calculated Risk, I can tell you his graphs are almost always correct, also does.
Just cite the source or don't try to remove the source URL.
Hoping you could tell me where you pulled the raw Industrial Capacity figures. Was it from the St. Louis Fed like the rest of the data in this post? Would be grateful for any tips. Thank you.
I must say, where did you get that? Off of a cereal box? That's a GOP talking point, empty, meaningless without detail. While the health care legislation is loaded, obviously by the health insurance lobby and other for profit health care corporations, do you believe the GOP would give the U.S. socialized medicine, which is what is really needed to bring down costs?
I mean seriously, do you seriously believe the GOP would do anything but give even more power to insurance companies than they already have?
People are worried about the government takeover of health care, yet fail to notice we have already a corporate take over of health care.
Which would you prefer? A for profit corporation deciding whether you live or die based on your financial statements, or the government deciding that?
I get not trusting the government, but why do people trust corporations, for profit corporations with their lives?
That's what's wrong here. We get corporate lobbyist written bills and no one is happy, except the corporate lobbyists, but instead of getting a real system to lower costs, we get the GOP wanting to make the situation even worse....for oops, one lobbyist didn't like one little amendment in a bill.
I'd have to say :
Roll back of Health Care Reform = another Lehman Brothers of U.S. economy.
Middle class & housing market collapse & an irrevocable cash under the mattress.
I didn't know about this bill, but there are others the house passed, very good, which the Senate didn't bring to the floor.
Thanks for posting information on it.
I thin this is why Pelosi is so under attack and Harry Reid, not so much. It's the Senate where every piece of good legislation gets stopped.
Right, Obama so far hasn't done anything on trade, offshore outsourcing and he could through the executive branch.
All this hoopla is just a smoke screen, this administration is just sitting and waiting for the, China coat tails.
ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION IS THE PLAN, EVIDENT BY THIS ADMINISTRATIONS POLICY TO ALLOW FOREIGN SHIPS A FREE ECONOMIC PASS TO DESTROY OUR WATERS.
A December 2009 report for Congress describes import cost would rise with national ballast water legislation.
The House voted for regulations 395-7 in 2008, but the legislation was not taken up in the Senate during this administration.
The continued delay tactics of more comment, study, and only a proposal for a long time line to implement standards for ballast water and foreign ships dumping human pathogens and virus illustrates this administrations reason for delay is not to hinder economic globalization, even at the expense of our environment and manufacturing competitiveness.
The following report for Congress in DEC 2009 “Although estimates of the costs of ballast treatment may be imprecise and vary from vessel to
vessel, there is some general agreement on average costs.14 For example, it may cost an estimated $400,000 per vessel for modification of container/bulk vessels to use onshore ballast water treatment facilities at California ports. More generally, the cost of retrofitting vessels to treat
ballast water has been estimated at between $200,000 and $310,000 per vessel for mechanical
treatment and around $300,000 for chemical treatment.15 Most of this expense will be borne by
foreign shipping companies, as the U.S. flag fleet is a small percentage of the global fleet,16 and
likely passed along to consumers of products imported on these ships.”
In September 2000, a Republican Senate and Democratic president Bill Clinton passed a law granting China PNTR (Permanent Normal Trade Relations). President Clinton's Trade Representative had this to say at the time:
In a Reuters news story, U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky is quoted as stating, "Granting PNTR for China not only provides tremendous economic opportunities for U.S. workers, farmers and businesses, it is also the best way to promote reform in China and stability in the region."
Since then, our trade deficits, and job losses - especially in manufacturing - have been a disaster. Thanks Charlene Barshefsky, for those "tremendous economic opportunities" brought about by China PNTR ... and for destroying the jobs, pride, and families of so many working Americans.
Oh, and wasn't it our dear President Obama who said throughout his campaign that he would re-negotiate NAFTA? Were these lies President Obama and if not, can you add "re-negotiate China PNTR" to that list?
Haven't seen you for a long time and this is a great piece of information. People do not realize that the reasons for offshore outsourcing are not just cheaper labor but the above and can even go into "who you know" in D.C.. Case in point on that one is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce/NASSCOM (BPO) or Indian body shops, offshore outsourcing. Truly a lot of these contracts do not make financial sense.
I also quoted Hindrey in an earlier post, so he must be on a roll! I didn't know he was a campaign adviser and how interesting that campaign advisers would not automatically be the real ones.
Not a Honda/Toyota devotee here. I own a GMC and the S10 from before they offshore outsourced it to Mexico, the Vortex V6, LOVE that engine!
Bottom line I agree with you on the bail outs. It seems to me the GM bail out was by far the most successful and saved many a job, plus the U.S. auto industry.
That said, we're not too keen on GM offshore outsourcing jobs and stimulus money, or labor arbitraging U.S. workers....
They should be raising hell about China tariffs on trucks, not labor arbitraging U.S. workers. Raise hell on health insurance costs, don't squeeze workers. That's the "touchy feeling" of this post, offshore outsourcing of any Stimulus money, bail out funds....
we want it to be Buy American, Hire America and Made in America, and put pressure on China, where GM is doing very well, on their tariff schedule and demands U.S. manufacturers operate domestically to sell in China.
Always interesting reading misleading articles based on feelings and written by Toyota/Honda devotees. They're out to hang an "overpaid" Big Three worker - their "dad" since most of them are over 45 years old at this point. GMs loan amounted to less than 1% of "bailouts". General Electric was more than Chrysler and GM combined.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aZchK__XUF84
They have claimed Toyota and others would build new plants in the U.S., add jobs and make up for the Big Three production cuts. It's 2 years later and Toyota announces their new plant will be in Mexico. These same Toyota lovers explain that Toyota has actually provided U.S. jobs when the statistics say otherwise - statistics don't lie.
http://www.cargroup.org/documents/Apale_book8a_002.pdf
Angry Bear has up an analysis on the China interest rate hike and is also implying China is not re-evaluating their currency, instead devaluing it, in a subtle method by this rate hike.
That's the bottom line, China is not going to reduce their exports by re-evaluating their currency.
Gets better and for the life of me I cannot find the original post, but Zerohedge has a repost(?) of someone named Albert Edwards saying also that China will devalue, not increase, the yuan and so there is no choice but to enact wholesale tariffs against China.
I agree with that, playing China's game when the evidence is overwhelming their currency manipulation is giving them a huge unfair trade advantage, causing jobs to be offshore outsourced to China, hurting other economies, is a joke.
The Nash Equilibrium, is just referring to game theory, which says because China ain't playing by the rules, it's inevitable that the U.S. is going to enact wholesale tariffs...
although given our government and their refusal to act, get serious and play a no holes barred game of economic chicken and this time, actually win instead of lose...
we'll see. The U.S. has been playing to lose on trade, economics for a good 30 years now, long term.
Business Insider, tells us Albert Edwards is from Societe General.
Thanks for letting me know. These graphs are larger than normal, but the site is fluid, so if you expand the browser everything should scale, but I'll make a point to check out the ipad display dimensions or look to scaling the graphs for posts in future.
Pages