Why Another Stock Market Collapse Could Be Imminent [View article]
And then there's mark-to-market - the FASB is going to act upon that soon. The banks "profits" have been a chimera, a charade. Once they have to report more truthfully the value of their toxic assets, their capital lending and their valuations and stock prices will both plummet - and drag the markets and the economy with them.
How Scared Are Americans of Job Losses? [View article]
I'm really surprised that no one has caught the logical fallicy inherent in Salmon's argument. 6 out of 10 families think they will be adversely affected by layoffs - but in his worst case scenario only 4 out of 105 million really are so the chances of any particular family being affected are "slim".
But the problem right now isn't the lack of demand caused by those who are unemployed - but the lack of demand caused by those who think they will be unemployed - because they don't know if they will be among those 4 million out of 105 million .
I am reasonable sure that my job is ok for the next 6 months maybe. I might be lucky enough to completely avoid being among those unlucky 4 million out of 105 million - but as long as that fear lasts, regardless of whether I actually do lose my job or not - I won't be buying that big screen TV that I've been wanting. Salmon tries to minimize the actual lack of demand cause by job loss to limiting the effect solely down to the numbers of those who actually lose their jobs - but the real metric is the much larger number - those who are in fear of losing their jobs - fully 60%+ of the 105 million families.
America: Is This the End of an Era? [View article]
"Let me be clear, we've gorged ourselves on a horn of plenty that was fueled by easy credit and massive financial leverage, and now we have to pay the price. That means 2009 will be a very tough year. Unemployment will rise, crime will increase and many more families will lose their homes"
What do you mean "we", kemo sabe? The middle class people that I know spent this decade worrying about holding onto their jobs, watching their wages stagnate while the costs of housing, energy, food, and education all rose dramtically. They watched all of the benefits flow to the multi-millionaire bond traders and hedge fund managers (yes, I'm looking at you), while these same multi-millionaires were able to get their obligations toward maintaining the the costs of the society that enabled them to reap their fortunes steadily reduced and pushed down the road to be paid for by the children and grandchildren of the middle class.
The middle class aren't the ones who "gorged ourselves on a horn of plenty that was fueled by easy credit and massive financial leverage" - yet they are they and the poor will end up being the ones who will get hurt the most now that it's time to pay the piper while the bond traders and hedge fund managers are laughing themselves all the way to the bank via government bailout million dollar bonuses.
When you speak of these problems caused by this "we" - look in the mirror at yourself and your wealthy Wall St buddies - but leave the middle class out of it - we're way too busy having to clean up after your mess.
The Perversion of American Capitalism [View article]
<i>Because of an extremely inaccurate new methodology of inflation calculation introduced by Bill Clinton</i>
Bald assertion indicating a political agenda always catches my eye. A very cursory Google easily uncovers that this change in methodology was specifically advocated by Greenspan and pushed by Speaker Newt Gingrich immediately upon assuming office after the Republican takeover of Congress after the 1994 elections. Said Gingrich, as quoted in The Washington Post (January 16, 1995), "We have a handful of bureaucrats who, all professional economists agree, have an error in their calculations. If they can't get it right in the next 30 days or so, we zero them out," transfer the job to the Federal Reserve or the Treasury, "and tell them to get it right." Several Democratic senators have taken issue with Gingrich, speaking out, as quoted by Associated Press (January 19, 1995), against "pressure exerted by politicians" and in favor of "careful study." (Quoted in The Consumer Price Index, the deficit, and politics. By Norwood, Janet L. (former head of the BLS during the Reagan and Bush 41 Administrations) Publication: Government Finance Review Date: Saturday, February 1 1997)
Just because something happened during the Clinton Administration, doesn't necessarily mean that it was "introduced by Bill Clinton". The fact is, the change in the methodology was specifically a Republican goal, and effected only after the Republicans flexed their political will. Baldly blaming it solely on Clinton only serves to hide the Republican culpability and calls into question the bias of the author as well as the validity of any conclusions as just another political hit piece.
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedWhy Another Stock Market Collapse Could Be Imminent [View article]
We haven't seen the worst of this yet, by far...
How Scared Are Americans of Job Losses? [View article]
But the problem right now isn't the lack of demand caused by those who are unemployed - but the lack of demand caused by those who think they will be unemployed - because they don't know if they will be among those 4 million out of 105 million .
I am reasonable sure that my job is ok for the next 6 months maybe. I might be lucky enough to completely avoid being among those unlucky 4 million out of 105 million - but as long as that fear lasts, regardless of whether I actually do lose my job or not - I won't be buying that big screen TV that I've been wanting. Salmon tries to minimize the actual lack of demand cause by job loss to limiting the effect solely down to the numbers of those who actually lose their jobs - but the real metric is the much larger number - those who are in fear of losing their jobs - fully 60%+ of the 105 million families.
America: Is This the End of an Era? [View article]
What do you mean "we", kemo sabe? The middle class people that I know spent this decade worrying about holding onto their jobs, watching their wages stagnate while the costs of housing, energy, food, and education all rose dramtically. They watched all of the benefits flow to the multi-millionaire bond traders and hedge fund managers (yes, I'm looking at you), while these same multi-millionaires were able to get their obligations toward maintaining the the costs of the society that enabled them to reap their fortunes steadily reduced and pushed down the road to be paid for by the children and grandchildren of the middle class.
The middle class aren't the ones who "gorged ourselves on a horn of plenty that was fueled by easy credit and massive financial leverage" - yet they are they and the poor will end up being the ones who will get hurt the most now that it's time to pay the piper while the bond traders and hedge fund managers are laughing themselves all the way to the bank via government bailout million dollar bonuses.
When you speak of these problems caused by this "we" - look in the mirror at yourself and your wealthy Wall St buddies - but leave the middle class out of it - we're way too busy having to clean up after your mess.
Markets Historically Overbought: Dangerous to Enter New Longs Right Now [View article]
The Perversion of American Capitalism [View article]
Bald assertion indicating a political agenda always catches my eye. A very cursory Google easily uncovers that this change in methodology was specifically advocated by Greenspan and pushed by Speaker Newt Gingrich immediately upon assuming office after the Republican takeover of Congress after the 1994 elections. Said Gingrich, as quoted in The Washington Post (January 16, 1995), "We have a handful of bureaucrats who, all professional economists agree, have an error in their calculations. If they can't get it right in the next 30 days or so, we zero them out," transfer the job to the Federal Reserve or the Treasury, "and tell them to get it right." Several Democratic senators have taken issue with Gingrich, speaking out, as quoted by Associated Press (January 19, 1995), against "pressure exerted by politicians" and in favor of "careful study." (Quoted in The Consumer Price Index, the deficit, and politics. By Norwood, Janet L. (former head of the BLS during the Reagan and Bush 41 Administrations) Publication: Government Finance Review Date: Saturday, February 1 1997)
Just because something happened during the Clinton Administration, doesn't necessarily mean that it was "introduced by Bill Clinton". The fact is, the change in the methodology was specifically a Republican goal, and effected only after the Republicans flexed their political will. Baldly blaming it solely on Clinton only serves to hide the Republican culpability and calls into question the bias of the author as well as the validity of any conclusions as just another political hit piece.