Jobs Report

[Delete This Account]

I've seen signs of a possible slow down over the past few months, and it seems as if it is pretty much confirmed, the question is how long will it last?

 

From my estimations, the slow down here domestically speaking began almost two to three months ago. ISM, Factory orders, Chicago PMI, consumer confidence, weekly jobless claims, the unemployment report and a whole host of other reports suggest that we will continue to cool down. What was especially bad about those jobs numbers wasn't even so much the lousy numbers for May, but the dramatic revisions for the month prior.

 

JA brought up a point the other day that he believed the lowering of Oil prices would be a good thing for the president, and it is to a degree, but I argued that if the price of oil went down to $85 a barrel that it would indicate possible fractures in the economy, and that if oil came down, then so would stocks, and that is precisely what happened.

 

With China continuing to slow down and utter chaos and uncertainty in Europe, the external forces that were helping grow our exporting manufacturing base (primarily coming from China,India) now seems that it won't be an engine of growth for our exporters. Again, how long will China, India and Brazil continue to cool down? To be honest, I really don't know, but I would guess at least for a few more months, until China's stimulus kicks in, which they have shown that they are quite efficient when implementing these measures.

 

Europe is a disaster, there is no good outcome over there. The only outcomes are either really bad or catastrophic and anything in between. So the uncertainty and depressed growth rates over there will serve as a negative for what happens over here.

 

Then there is the "fiscal cliff", since it appears that neither the president or the house republicans have any desire in compromising on this serious issue, it looks like the best possible scenario we could possibly see is that at some point, months from now, we get an extension of current policies until a president is decided after the elections. In the meantime, this will be yet another layer of uncertainty that will cloud over US corporations and small businesses which of course will create another obstacle for Job hiring.

 

So what are the possible implications for the presidency? I would of said going into the May Jobs report, that Romney stood a 50/50 chance, I would say that his odds of winning have gone up. I may be wrong, but I believe we are going to have really weak economic numbers for at least the next three months. Now of course, these ultra low interest rates could spur more lending (doubtful but possible), these low oil prices could help consumers who don't have 401ks and stocks have more disposable income, which in turn creates more demand for certain goods and services and then of course the Federal Reserve could come in with another round of QE (Which I believe is highly likely) and that could jump start the stock market again, helping create another manufactured wealth effect, that could in turn increase consumer confidence.

 

Of course another round of QE would most likely increase oil and gasoline prices, so that is a double edged sword.

 

If what I believe will happen, which is stagnant growth, and subpar employment numbers, then that will increase Romney's chances of winning this fall. He has already dramatically made headway over the past two months, my guess is that the polling numbers will continue to go his way.

yes romney!

 

jw

 

I've seen signs of a possible slow down over the past few months, and it seems as if it is pretty much confirmed, the question is how long will it last?

 

From my estimations, the slow down here domestically speaking began almost two to three months ago. ISM, Factory orders, Chicago PMI, consumer confidence, weekly jobless claims, the unemployment report and a whole host of other reports suggest that we will continue to cool down. What was especially bad about those jobs numbers wasn't even so much the lousy numbers for May, but the dramatic revisions for the month prior.

 

JA brought up a point the other day that he believed the lowering of Oil prices would be a good thing for the president, and it is to a degree, but I argued that if the price of oil went down to $85 a barrel that it would indicate possible fractures in the economy, and that if oil came down, then so would stocks, and that is precisely what happened.

 

With China continuing to slow down and utter chaos and uncertainty in Europe, the external forces that were helping grow our exporting manufacturing base (primarily coming from China,India) now seems that it won't be an engine of growth for our exporters. Again, how long will China, India and Brazil continue to cool down? To be honest, I really don't know, but I would guess at least for a few more months, until China's stimulus kicks in, which they have shown that they are quite efficient when implementing these measures.

 

Europe is a disaster, there is no good outcome over there. The only outcomes are either really bad or catastrophic and anything in between. So the uncertainty and depressed growth rates over there will serve as a negative for what happens over here.

 

Then there is the "fiscal cliff", since it appears that neither the president or the house republicans have any desire in compromising on this serious issue, it looks like the best possible scenario we could possibly see is that at some point, months from now, we get an extension of current policies until a president is decided after the elections. In the meantime, this will be yet another layer of uncertainty that will cloud over US corporations and small businesses which of course will create another obstacle for Job hiring.

 

So what are the possible implications for the presidency? I would of said going into the May Jobs report, that Romney stood a 50/50 chance, I would say that his odds of winning have gone up. I may be wrong, but I believe we are going to have really weak economic numbers for at least the next three months. Now of course, these ultra low interest rates could spur more lending (doubtful but possible), these low oil prices could help consumers who don't have 401ks and stocks have more disposable income, which in turn creates more demand for certain goods and services and then of course the Federal Reserve could come in with another round of QE (Which I believe is highly likely) and that could jump start the stock market again, helping create another manufactured wealth effect, that could in turn increase consumer confidence.

 

Of course another round of QE would most likely increase oil and gasoline prices, so that is a double edged sword.

 

If what I believe will happen, which is stagnant growth, and subpar employment numbers, then that will increase Romney's chances of winning this fall. He has already dramatically made headway over the past two months, my guess is that the polling numbers will continue to go his way.

yes obama!

 

jw

 

yes, Ron Paul.

 

jw

 

YAH! newt gingrinch. ... is he still in this thing? not sure, but why question. stalin!!!!!!

 

jw

 

i'm a goddam reactionary who likes to cover all bets,.

so two bits on hannity.

 

jw

 

wait, three bits on dc tom.

 

jw

 

and a parlay on magox

why nox.

 

jw

[Jim in Anchorage]

Right on time,3AM. Your cab is here.

[/dev/null]

Economy looks like its getting weaker

And Leon is getting laaarger!

[Doc]

And tons of people lose their coverage and dropped and people start to rethink the whole Obamacare thing.

 

That being overturned isn't as big as a political win as you think it is.

Forget political win; being overturned is a win for the country as a whole.

[IDBillzFan]

That being overturned isn't as big as a political win as you think it is.

It wouldn't be a political win to me, but a win for common sense and the rule of law. Beyond the disgusting fact that you would be forced to purchase something simply because you are alive, it's a health care reform bill that doesn't even make an effort to reform health care. It's a law that is supposed to reduce health care costs, and in its first two years has already increased them by about 25%.

 

It was forced down our throats, and to this day it STILL has over53% of Americans who not only hate it, but want it fully repealed. If this piece of crap gets schittcanned by SCOTUS, it WILL in fact be a great day for common sense and the rule of law. Alternately, it would be very, very bad day for progressives, who have no use for either.

Edited June 22, 2012 by LABillzFan

[fjl2nd]

It wouldn't be a political win to me, but a win for common sense and the rule of law. Beyond the disgusting fact that you would be forced to purchase something simply because you are alive, it's a health care reform bill that doesn't even make an effort to reform health care. It's a law that is supposed to reduce health care costs, and in its first two years has already increased them by about 25%.

 

It was forced down our throats, and to this day it STILL has over53% of Americans who not only hate it, but want it fully repealed. If this piece of crap gets schittcanned by SCOTUS, it WILL in fact be a great day for common sense and the rule of law. Alternately, it would be very, very bad day for progressives, who have no use for either.

 

I don't think actual progressives wanted anything like the bill we got. Just my opinion.

 

For me, it was public option or bust. Maybe someday, we'll get that single payer...

Edited June 23, 2012 by fjl2nd

[Nanker]

I don't actual progressives wanted anything like the bill we got. Just my opinion.

 

For me, it was public option or bust. Maybe someday, we'll get that single payer...

 

Have some more Chablis.

 

Maybe someday you'll pull your own weight.

[fjl2nd]

Have some more Chablis.

 

Maybe someday you'll pull your own weight.

 

Lame response IMO.

[WorldTraveller]

I don't think actual progressives wanted anything like the bill we got. Just my opinion.

 

For me, it was public option or bust. Maybe someday, we'll get that single payer...

The bill the far left wanted was even more unpopular than the final bill, which is why Obama went with what we have today. Most Americans don't share most progressives core values.

[fjl2nd]

The bill the far left wanted was even more unpopular than the final bill, which is why Obama went with what we have today. Most Americans don't share most progressives core values.

 

And what core values are those?

 

I don't label myself as a progressive really. But, I am a huge backer of a single payer health care system. Polling actually showed people liked the idea of the government competing with the private sector on health care.

[GG]

And what core values are those?

 

We like a free lunch.

[fjl2nd]

We like a free lunch.

 

Standard.

[GG]

Standard.

Basic truths are usually the simplest ones.

[fjl2nd]

Basic truths are usually the simplest ones.

 

But, when you views opposing views like that it gets us nowhere. I'm not going to keep going into it, but it's just stupid to pretend like you know what other people believe.

[GG]

But, when you views opposing views like that it gets us nowhere. I'm not going to keep going into it, but it's just stupid to pretend like you know what other people believe.

 

You poked your nose into a beehive by asking what progressive values are.

 

Unless you're a member of the neoprogressive wing of subwestern branch of the Peoria chapter, most garden variety progressives are a re-badged version of the liberal takeover of the Democratic party, which first and foremost believes in wealth distribution - aka, a free lunch for the recipients.

[3rdnlng]

And what core values are those?

 

I don't label myself as a progressive really. But, I am a huge backer of a single payer health care system. Polling actually showed people liked the idea of the government competing with the private sector on health care.

 

 

So, what is it, do you like single payer or the government competing with the private sector? The bill, as written now, will eventually eliminate private sector health insurance. How do you think the government will do without any competition?

[Joe Miner]

And what core values are those?

 

I don't label myself as a progressive really. But, I am a huge backer of a single payer health care system. Polling actually showed people liked the idea of the government competing with the private sector on health care.

 

The fact that you actually think gov't and the private sector can compete shows how unable you are to talk about this subject.

[Nanker]

I don't actual progressives wanted anything like the bill we got. Just my opinion.

 

For me, it was public option or bust. Maybe someday, we'll get that single payer...

 

 

Have some more Chablis.

 

Maybe someday you'll pull your own weight.

 

 

Lame response IMO.

Sure. Go back and edit your original lame slovenly crafted original post and then call my response to that slice of shite - lame.

Typical revisionist historian.

Edited June 23, 2012 by Nanker

[WorldTraveller]

And what core values are those?

 

I don't label myself as a progressive really. But, I am a huge backer of a single payer health care system. Polling actually showed people liked the idea of the government competing with the private sector on health care.

No, it depended on the wording, if the word "government" was used , the polling went way down. There were many variations of the same question worded differently that got various results, most of them tested unpopular. Let's just apply some logic, if it had been popular, ( which it wasn't) then wouldn't of the president pushed for it harder?

 

And let's be real, we know that the private sector can't compete with the government. Government can subsidizes losses at the expense of the tax payers ( for progressives this works just fine, because that means wealthier folks) running endless deficits, whereas the private sector doesn't have that luxury, in the real world that is called a "loss" and in the real world losses means companies closing down.

 

So in effect the public option would of eventually had a crowding out effect of the private sector health insurance companies which in turn would of dramatically expanded the size of government, which of course would of led to two things, higher deficits and higher taxes ( which for progressives would of been just dandy because wealthier folks would have been on the hook)

[John Adams]

And what core values are those?

 

I don't label myself as a progressive really. But, I am a huge backer of a single payer health care system. Polling actually showed people liked the idea of the government competing with the private sector on health care.

 

He said competing, Beavis.

 

Like they compete in the area of education.