Funny. The story helped me step back to take a broad view. AP can put a mark on the wall for investigative reporting, no?
From Roads to Nowhere to Mosquito Abatement Districts, we are encumbered, indebted and sloppy. There's thousands of untold glitches in our budgets. Only a few can be blamed on policies begun a few months ago.
Calmed by blogs such as EconomicPopulist, I wonder if I would have the fortitude to endure a just and robust media! But I wait, and look forward every day. :-)
"Chinese companies have already played a leading role in pushing down the price of solar panels by almost half over the last year. Shi Zhengrong, the chief executive and founder of China’s biggest solar panel manufacturer, Suntech Power Holdings, said in an interview here that Suntech, to build market share, is selling solar panels on the American market for less than the cost of the materials, assembly and shipping."
Rob,
Could this possibly explain why our government is so eager to grant amnesty to millions illegal immigrants here from Mexico and to essentially open up the borders to immigration from other third world countries? Are we really destined to be an extension of the third world?
Perhaps all those "green jobs" we were promised are on "back order" until these immigration barriers are struck down? If so, what will become of the educated middle class?
So, I think Bloomberg, who is cheerleading on LEIs and is railing at someone who simply isn't predicting the stock market.
It's not a fair comparison and on a macro economic view they are seeing some statistics, indicators that are really a problem down the road (debt/deficit).
I'm noticing a pattern here. You are writing up posts on topics, say the FDIC is broke. Two weeks later all of a sudden we see....FDIC is running out of funds from even other bloggers, and the MSM. I think the same is true on CRE and a few other topics...
in other words is looks like you're batting average on being way ahead of the curve here is looking good!
I don't have links but I recall when you wrote that piece of flurry of others same out and said the FDIC never runs out of money and so on....
yet here we are....of course Congress will assuredly fund them but seemingly we didn't see anybody talking at all about them running out of money except your piece!
I would have to say I believe Roubini has jumped on the EP bus and is demanding we return to a production economy immediately. ;)
He's talking about the face Q2 GDP would have been a cliff without government spending, which is true from the components plus if one stops deficit spending...
that also will cause a cliff.....which is true...
and asking about an exit strategy for all of this...
but buried beneath the Dr. Doom classic is almost a little hint of Populist from this globalist...
i.e. how is the U.S. gonna jump start the real economy in order to get out of this cycle?
Interesting...I wonder if he'll get off of his emerging economy addiction.
I wanted people to go to his/her site because it's an awesome site generally. I put them in the middle column so you can just click on the latest but (s)he is making original graphs, seemingly from excel and uploading them so we can see the details and is continually showing some very interesting trends, time lines.
I caught the investment numbers but then saw the actual graph and that made it more "whoa, that's bad" than just looking at the tables and comparing for 1 year out and Q1 (where I is a cliff!)
That's the problem somehow on sharing awesome posts on other sites...I'm trying to direct traffic to them as well and not "steal their juju" ....
Underscoring the challenges facing the two companies in the wake of their recent bankruptcy restructurings, the transportation department said that GM models made up 17.6 per cent of the 690,100 vehicles sold under the scheme, while Chrysler accounted for 6.6 per cent of sales.
By contrast, GM’s market share in the first seven months of 2009 was 19.6 per cent, and Chrysler’s 9.6 per cent, according to Autodata, a market-research company.
and even worse, there are projections now to have the lowest sales volume....9M in Sept....
like ...ever....like when there were way less people here....like the 1970's...
oh man, not looking good as a real stimulate effect (unlike the WH stats!)
It's easy to say cash for clunkers was a success when you only look at the number of new cars sold. It's a completely different story when you factor in how much business was lost by auto repair shops, auto parts stores, used car dealers and car donation charities. When you look at the big picture, all that happened was we robbed Peter to pay Paul.
That is a major problem w/accepting TBTF theory. It is obvious now - look at Goldman Sachs - with Lehman and Bear Stearns out of the way look what happens. It is happening w/credit cards - BofA and Chase are doing what they want and charging whatever they want.
It will be very hard for small businesses to obtain credit because the bigger institutions ignored small businesses.
Interestingly, Lord Turner (I don't know if that is his title or name), chairman the Financial Services Authority in UK said that Britain's "swollen" financial services sector has become too big for the economy and needs to be cut down to size. The same could be said about the U.S. but you won't hear that from any of our numerous regulators.
There is one thing I'd like to see is what if scenarios...what if Citigroup for example had been allowed to fail, what if....
because it seems to me while the Zombies are kept alive...they are just sending smaller banks to the dogs and none of these banks were into toxic assets, CDOs, CDSes and all of this stuff....people cannot pay their bills is the problem.
What happened to competition and leveling the playing field...
but I just have never bought in my head this was the doom so supposed and all things rested on these few Zombies. What really would have happened long term was just this huge Economic Armageddon, if some of the more egregious offenders, say Citigroup had simply been allowed to go under.
Now they are gobbling up all of these smaller banks....what does that mean longer term for regional economies, the consumer, small business?
So $3 billion leads to 42k jobs (or $70k a job) and .3-.4 of a percent GDP (which is about $36 billion).
Not a half-bad job of Keynesian stimulus; not perfect, but not bad.
It's a national economy. It doesn't matter how many people are in it when dealing with national deficits between nation states. I would think it would make it worse looking at it that way because that means China is just pouring in goods and their own domestic economy isn't soaking up and consuming as much production as they probably could.
Or look at it another way, that means it's worse for "per capita" they are 4.24 times the number of consumers we are.
But that's just not a valid metric for you're dealing with national GDPs and so on.
Besides China is clearly causing havoc with the U.S. production (domestic) economy.
Population is simply not a scale to a trade deficit, GDP, PPP sure.
It's wrong to focus on China in the search for the root cause of our trade deficit. Of course our deficit with China is huge; they represent on fifth of the world's population. But when expressed in per capita terms, our trade deficit in manufactured goods with China barely makes the top 20. The deficit with many other nations, most of them much more densely populated than the U.S. (as China is), is worse - some much worse, as in the case with Japan and Germany. By far, our worst trade deficit in manufactured goods, on a per capita basis, is with Ireland - 25 times worse than China.
The problem is not China. The problem is our own trade policy that fails to account for the role of population density in skewing trade results.
I can tell you what will happen. First that would be called "protectionist" and then there would be claims of "trade violations"....
This goes into the "Buy American" meager provisions in the government procurement laws but I think that's exactly what they should do or examine the issue and figure out someway to beat China at it's own game, by either challenging their government subsidies, but usually the WTO rules against the U.S. every time...but something.
This goes on continually, China subsidizes, uses various manipulations to capture a market and only after they have that entire particular item, or market sector then will claims "oops" so sorry and respond to the charges.
we mandated that all federal buildings use solar panels and that they be manufactured in the US? Our domestic solar industry would ramp up to speed pretty darned fast. Also, we would inject a shitload of money into the economy over the short term while severe recession and deflation are the problem, and then reduce the amount of government spending on energy going forward when deficit spending may need to be cut in order to deal with inflation.
Funny. The story helped me step back to take a broad view. AP can put a mark on the wall for investigative reporting, no?
From Roads to Nowhere to Mosquito Abatement Districts, we are encumbered, indebted and sloppy. There's thousands of untold glitches in our budgets. Only a few can be blamed on policies begun a few months ago.
Calmed by blogs such as EconomicPopulist, I wonder if I would have the fortitude to endure a just and robust media! But I wait, and look forward every day. :-)
"Chinese companies have already played a leading role in pushing down the price of solar panels by almost half over the last year. Shi Zhengrong, the chief executive and founder of China’s biggest solar panel manufacturer, Suntech Power Holdings, said in an interview here that Suntech, to build market share, is selling solar panels on the American market for less than the cost of the materials, assembly and shipping."
Rob,
Could this possibly explain why our government is so eager to grant amnesty to millions illegal immigrants here from Mexico and to essentially open up the borders to immigration from other third world countries? Are we really destined to be an extension of the third world?
Perhaps all those "green jobs" we were promised are on "back order" until these immigration barriers are struck down? If so, what will become of the educated middle class?
So, I think Bloomberg, who is cheerleading on LEIs and is railing at someone who simply isn't predicting the stock market.
It's not a fair comparison and on a macro economic view they are seeing some statistics, indicators that are really a problem down the road (debt/deficit).
Based on recent articles it would seem that Roubini has more than "jumped on the EP bus", it would seem he has "jumped the shark"
from Bloomberg
Applying Roubini Wisdom to Stocks Means Missing Out
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aFs0mX7rBp0M
longest since the Great Depression.
That's another technical definition to note...it is 3 years or more of negative GDP which defines a depression, or a sudden > 10% GDP drop.
So, this NBER recession call was December 2007. So, we're looking at officially 20 months to date.
I'm noticing a pattern here. You are writing up posts on topics, say the FDIC is broke. Two weeks later all of a sudden we see....FDIC is running out of funds from even other bloggers, and the MSM. I think the same is true on CRE and a few other topics...
in other words is looks like you're batting average on being way ahead of the curve here is looking good!
I don't have links but I recall when you wrote that piece of flurry of others same out and said the FDIC never runs out of money and so on....
yet here we are....of course Congress will assuredly fund them but seemingly we didn't see anybody talking at all about them running out of money except your piece!
opinion in Forbes.
I would have to say I believe Roubini has jumped on the EP bus and is demanding we return to a production economy immediately. ;)
He's talking about the face Q2 GDP would have been a cliff without government spending, which is true from the components plus if one stops deficit spending...
that also will cause a cliff.....which is true...
and asking about an exit strategy for all of this...
but buried beneath the Dr. Doom classic is almost a little hint of Populist from this globalist...
i.e. how is the U.S. gonna jump start the real economy in order to get out of this cycle?
Interesting...I wonder if he'll get off of his emerging economy addiction.
I wanted people to go to his/her site because it's an awesome site generally. I put them in the middle column so you can just click on the latest but (s)he is making original graphs, seemingly from excel and uploading them so we can see the details and is continually showing some very interesting trends, time lines.
I caught the investment numbers but then saw the actual graph and that made it more "whoa, that's bad" than just looking at the tables and comparing for 1 year out and Q1 (where I is a cliff!)
That's the problem somehow on sharing awesome posts on other sites...I'm trying to direct traffic to them as well and not "steal their juju" ....
and is from that EconomPicData you quoted above:
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
Financial Times (h/t Calculated Risk):
and even worse, there are projections now to have the lowest sales volume....9M in Sept....
like ...ever....like when there were way less people here....like the 1970's...
oh man, not looking good as a real stimulate effect (unlike the WH stats!)
It's easy to say cash for clunkers was a success when you only look at the number of new cars sold. It's a completely different story when you factor in how much business was lost by auto repair shops, auto parts stores, used car dealers and car donation charities. When you look at the big picture, all that happened was we robbed Peter to pay Paul.
...One World Corporation --- easily predictable since we have that one world government thing going on (WTO, anyone?).
(No longer attending those Tin Foil Hats Anonymous meetings.)
That is a major problem w/accepting TBTF theory. It is obvious now - look at Goldman Sachs - with Lehman and Bear Stearns out of the way look what happens. It is happening w/credit cards - BofA and Chase are doing what they want and charging whatever they want.
It will be very hard for small businesses to obtain credit because the bigger institutions ignored small businesses.
Interestingly, Lord Turner (I don't know if that is his title or name), chairman the Financial Services Authority in UK said that Britain's "swollen" financial services sector has become too big for the economy and needs to be cut down to size. The same could be said about the U.S. but you won't hear that from any of our numerous regulators.
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
There is one thing I'd like to see is what if scenarios...what if Citigroup for example had been allowed to fail, what if....
because it seems to me while the Zombies are kept alive...they are just sending smaller banks to the dogs and none of these banks were into toxic assets, CDOs, CDSes and all of this stuff....people cannot pay their bills is the problem.
What happened to competition and leveling the playing field...
but I just have never bought in my head this was the doom so supposed and all things rested on these few Zombies. What really would have happened long term was just this huge Economic Armageddon, if some of the more egregious offenders, say Citigroup had simply been allowed to go under.
Now they are gobbling up all of these smaller banks....what does that mean longer term for regional economies, the consumer, small business?
now those are White House statistics....
So $3 billion leads to 42k jobs (or $70k a job) and .3-.4 of a percent GDP (which is about $36 billion).
Not a half-bad job of Keynesian stimulus; not perfect, but not bad.
It's a national economy. It doesn't matter how many people are in it when dealing with national deficits between nation states. I would think it would make it worse looking at it that way because that means China is just pouring in goods and their own domestic economy isn't soaking up and consuming as much production as they probably could.
Or look at it another way, that means it's worse for "per capita" they are 4.24 times the number of consumers we are.
But that's just not a valid metric for you're dealing with national GDPs and so on.
Besides China is clearly causing havoc with the U.S. production (domestic) economy.
Population is simply not a scale to a trade deficit, GDP, PPP sure.
It's wrong to focus on China in the search for the root cause of our trade deficit. Of course our deficit with China is huge; they represent on fifth of the world's population. But when expressed in per capita terms, our trade deficit in manufactured goods with China barely makes the top 20. The deficit with many other nations, most of them much more densely populated than the U.S. (as China is), is worse - some much worse, as in the case with Japan and Germany. By far, our worst trade deficit in manufactured goods, on a per capita basis, is with Ireland - 25 times worse than China.
The problem is not China. The problem is our own trade policy that fails to account for the role of population density in skewing trade results.
Pete Murphy
Author, "Five Short Blasts"
I can tell you what will happen. First that would be called "protectionist" and then there would be claims of "trade violations"....
This goes into the "Buy American" meager provisions in the government procurement laws but I think that's exactly what they should do or examine the issue and figure out someway to beat China at it's own game, by either challenging their government subsidies, but usually the WTO rules against the U.S. every time...but something.
This goes on continually, China subsidizes, uses various manipulations to capture a market and only after they have that entire particular item, or market sector then will claims "oops" so sorry and respond to the charges.
we mandated that all federal buildings use solar panels and that they be manufactured in the US? Our domestic solar industry would ramp up to speed pretty darned fast. Also, we would inject a shitload of money into the economy over the short term while severe recession and deflation are the problem, and then reduce the amount of government spending on energy going forward when deficit spending may need to be cut in order to deal with inflation.
miasmo.com
Pages