Investor Owned, Empty And In Need Of Work
A report from Reuters. “Janet Yellen used her last press conference as Fed Chair to muse that a flat yield curve should not be interpreted as a sign that the economy is heading for a slowdown. In other words, ‘This time it’s different.’ Seasoned Fed-watchers will be forgiven for feeling a sense of deja vu: Her predecessors Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke spun exactly the same line before the last U.S. recession began. In July 2005, then Fed chairman Alan Greenspan told the Senate Banking Committee there was a ‘misconception’ of the importance of the yield curve. The supposedly unusual behaviour of long-term yields, where they fell even though interest rates were rising - a phenomenon Greenspan dubbed a ‘conundrum’ - first became apparent in 2004.”
“The Fed started a tightening cycle in May that year with the fed funds rate at a half-century low of 1 percent which would end two years later with borrowing costs at 5.25 percent. In March 2006, barely a month after succeeding ‘the Maestro’ as Fed chair, Ben Bernanke echoed Greenspan’s skepticism that the yield curve was a harbinger of darker economic times ahead. ‘I would not interpret the currently very flat yield curve as indicating a significant economic slowdown to come, for several reasons,’ he told the Economic Club of New York on March 20.”
From the Preston Citizen in Idaho. “The Daytona Dairy in Dayton has passed into the history books as load after load of semi-haulers moved 2,900 cows to their new homes last week. The decision to sell was a difficult one for owner John Gomez, said his manager, Miguel Serna. But a lack of demand for the milk and falling milk prices is behind the move he said. ‘There are 20,000 too many cows in Idaho, Mexico has increased its dairies by 120 percent, and Canada is no longer taking our milk,’ he said.”
“The number of cows in the state have increased annually by about 20,000 animals to it current level of 600,000, said Idaho extension agent Ben Eborn. ‘That’s unreal,’ he said. Idaho is currently the fourth highest dairy producing state in the nation. Locally, before the sale of Daytona’s dairy cattle, Franklin County dairy cattle numbered 14,500. Ten years ago, it was 11,500, according to the USDA.”
“But at the same time, Canada raised is own quota and Europe has lifted its quotas, making it possible for their own dairymen to produce more of their own needs, and lessening their need for U.S. dairy products, said Serna. ‘It’s true, there is a glut of dairy products around the world,’ said Eborn.”
From Quartz Media. “The stress had been building on American retailers for some time, but in 2017, it simply became too much to bear. Before the year was half finished, it was on track for more store closures in the US than the great recession in 2008. Richard Hayne, CEO of Urban Outfitters, went so far as to liken the situation to the pop of the housing bubble that started the recession. The research firm Fung Global Retail & Technology predicts there will be more than 9,400 stores shuttered by the time this year is done.”
“Main streets and all but the high-end malls are looking dismal in what many have dubbed the ‘retail apocalypse.’ Undeniably there was a culling among long-withering department stores, and any number of struggling brands with bloated store spaces and store counts across the country.”
The Grand Forks Herald in North Dakota. “Some say Grand Forks has a healthy vacancy rate for rental units. But others believe the city may have too many apartments. ‘We’re overbuilt, absolutely overbuilt,’ said Kevin Ritterman, owner of real estate developer Dakota Commercial. ‘North Dakota as a whole is overbuilt.’”
“Demand and easier access to capital may have caused overbuilding, Ritterman said.”
The Orlando Sentinel in Florida. “Economists predicted slower price growth in Orlando, about 3 percent — down from double-digit increases in recent years. Getting back to 2006 price levels is key for homeowners who purchased at that time and also for those trying to gain a bigger ownership stake in their homes. One concern: Price increases could stall if investors dump the distress sales they purchased and transformed into rentals. Orlando is seeing near-record levels of single-family homes used as rentals, according to Zillow.”
“Seminole County schoolteacher Catherine Jollie, 26, said she looked at more than 20 houses when she was shopping earlier this year. Most of the houses were investor owned, empty and in need of work. Even though prices seemed high for the fixer uppers, they sold fast. Houses went under contract so quickly that her uncle, Winter Park real estate agent David Welch, quickly crossed them off the list because they were snapped up. ‘It was so frustrating to go in and know I couldn’t beat the offers from other investors,’ she said.”
“Welch said a wave of investment groups selling off properties could swell supply and depress listings. ‘I have definitely run into investors starting to divest themselves and I’m wondering what impact that will have,’ he said, adding that investor sales of starter homes fail to deliver the move-up buyers that benefit a market. ‘The investors are starting to say: ‘This may have played itself out.’”
The Philadelphia Inquirer in Pennsylvania. “If you’re tired of paying increasing rents, the good news is that it’s a buyer’s market in Philadelphia. The bad news, of course, is that if you’re trying to sell a home, it might take awhile. A new report by brokerage firm Owners.com lists Philadelphia as the third-best buyers’ market in the nation. The buyer’s markets in the top 10 — New York, Chicago and Boston among them — had an average listing price of $297,794. The report says that is $35,330 below the national average. In the end, homes in those markets sold for an average of $16,375 less than their listing prices, researchers found. The homes tended to be active for two weeks longer than properties elsewhere.”
“Number-crunchers also identified markets they called ‘overheated.’ They include locations where residents are spending more than 33 percent of their household income toward their mortgages. Almost all of them are in California, but Oregon and Hawaii squeak in there, too.”
“Janet Yellen used her last press conference as Fed Chair to muse that a flat yield curve should not be interpreted as a sign that the economy is heading for a slowdown.”
Yeah? Well she’s the head of the Fed so what should you expect her to say?
We don’t even expect honestly from these people anymore.
We couldn’t handle honesty even if we did get it.
Honesty resembles reality, something else that we can’t handle.
Have you got a mouse in your pocket?
You really have to step back to see how far we’ve gotten into bizarro world. I’ve mentioned that in the 80’s I watched some guys on TV discussing economics and the central bank. The topic of monetizing the debt came up. “It could never happen, for one it’s illegal, second the bond market would never stand for it,” one said.
Remember when the “plunge protection team” was a conspiracy theory most here laughed at? Now it’s an open, multi-trillion peso, standard global central banking policy.
‘ECB Governing Council member Vitas Vasiliauskas…singled out a second round of targeted long-term loans to banks as the most powerful addition to the ECB’s palette. The so-called TLTRO-II potentially offers to pay lenders to take central bank cash, the idea being that they pass it on to companies and households as loans. The first operation is scheduled for June 24.’
“This measure, personally for me, is very sexy,” Vasiliauskas said. “It can make direct impact on the real economy.”
“Markets say the ECB is done, their box is empty,” Vasiliauskas, who heads Lithuania’s central bank. “But we are magic people. Each time we take something and give to the markets — a rabbit out of the hat.”
“Sexy Rabbit, trick are for kids”.
“It could never happen, for one it’s illegal, second the bond market would never stand for it,”
Both reasons turned out to be irrelevant and the main point, incorrect.
“The truth will set you free. But first it will piss you off.” — various
That darned Trump with his pro-American, pro-business policies, look what he’s done. He is LITERALLy worse than Hitler.
—
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. home sales increased more than expected in November, hitting their highest level in nearly 11 years, the latest indication that housing was regaining momentum after almost stalling this year.
“The National Association of Realtors said”
That’s the problem with these kind of headlines…..
Mauna Loa, Hawaii Housing Prices Crater 12% YOY As Housing Demand Plummets To 20 Year Low
https://www.movoto.com/maunaloa-hi/market-trends/
I know you troll with these things daily. But here’s a tip: Don’t troll with a location that has 27 home for sale, to make a point about a market that has millions of homes bought and sold every year.
Remember my good friend….. Nothing accelerates the economy, creates jobs and raises the standard of living like falling prices to dramatically lower and more affordable levels. Nothing.
San Francisco, CA 91409 Housing Prices Crater 7% YOY
https://www.zillow.com/san-francisco-ca-94109/home-values/
Don’t forget to select price from dropdown box on first chart.
I was talking to my neighbor, a big MAGA guy, yesterday. He was talking about this great economy and how he was thinking about “Helocing some of his home equity” for improvements and a new car. I told him that he better hurry up since his Guy’s tax bill is going to kill his ability to write off any of the interest on that Heloc.
“That darned Trump with his pro-American, pro-business policies”.
The tax cuts to corporations will go straight into stock buybacks and dividends so that the CEO’s and their Boards can keep those yearly bonuses coming in. Just like they have been doing for the last 7-8 years.
Doubling the child tax credits will mean more FREE money for those of the illegal persuasion with children and many our own home-grown parasites that don’t pay any taxes but have plenty of kids (hat-tip to Rubio).
And the Obamacare “tax” penalty doesn’t disappear until 2019. My guess is that our leaders will take advantage of that deadline and make sure that it never happens.
“He is LITERALLy worse than Hitler.”
I understand the sarcasm. However, at least Hitler, unlike Trump, knew how to deal with Central Banks.
Didn’t Trump say something about building a big, beautiful wall and getting rid of the sceamers, I mean “dreamers” on his first day at work?
I’d love a pro-American President. I wonder if I will live long enough to ever see one?
Not being able to write off Heloc interest is a big deal, and is definitely MAGA.
I think - hope - Trump is getting the economy going for the little guy first, then when more of the middle class is employed and doing better he will turn his attention to reining in the nonsense like stock buybacks and predatory health care pricing. He plays public sentiment well - this tax bill coming at Christmas time is an example - no one in congress (save for braindead libs) wants to be the grinch.
I heard a clip of Fauxcahontas whining (she has no other mode, please please please run in 2020) about how this tax cut will destroy the middle class. Most people I know will get to keep a few grand more of THEIR money with this bill. I think when you’ve lied as much as Lieawatha has it is no longer possible to make a distinction between truth and lies, you just say anything to maintain your tenuous grip on power. Its why libtards can say a few years ago that doubling the debt is no big deal but now warn giving a tax cut will cause the debt to rise which is oh so dangerous.
How do you know a Dem is lying?
His (her) lips are moving.
I tried to look up how the bill would affect the EICB for illegal immigrants but only found one article which was unclear. Something about parents supplying SS numbers… I’m not sure it’s for the kids or the parents.
I also read that the Rubio tax refund maxes out at $1400. So if you pay 0 taxes and have a lot of kids, you only get max $1400 back. That’s not even 1 kid worth. I can live with that.
And you have to have paid payroll taxes to get it back, even if you don’t owe income tax.
None of us here - myself included - has done a very good job detailing the tax bill.
“The tax cuts to corporations will go straight into stock buybacks and dividends so that the CEO’s and their Boards can keep those yearly bonuses coming in. Just like they have been doing for the last 7-8 years.”
U-huh…tell me more.
“AT&T is giving $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 employees after tax bill”
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/tax-reform-reaction-att-is-giving-bonuses-to-200000-employees.html
‘ the Obamacare “tax” penalty doesn’t disappear until 2019′
That’d be the shared responsibility payment for not having insurance.
I have looked but not found whether the new tax bill addresses the net investment income tax, or the additional medicare tax on high wage earners. It doesn’t appear to.
All the OCare taxes stay other than the mandate tax. And yes it is a tax. Remember, that was the way SCOTUS allowed the entire abomination to survive, by calling it a tax.
I don’t think so. SCOTUS was fine with the rest of Obamacare (I don’t even think the rest of Obamacare was part of the case).
The ONLY part that was controversial was the mandate, so that’s all that the SCOTUS looked at. The mandate was deemed Constitutional because it was seen as an emergency room tax.
The Media and Congress said that the mandate was the lynchpin, and that without the mandate Obamacare would “fall apart.” So I guess now Obamacare will fall apart.
It’s been falling apart since the start
Well, steadykat, I have responses for you.
1. “He was talking about this great economy and how he was thinking about “Helocing some of his home equity” for improvements and a new car. I told him that he better hurry up since his Guy’s tax bill is going to kill his ability to write off any of the interest on that Heloc.”
I think this is a good thing, if you are correct. I am not in favor of people taking out second mortgages, especially to buy junk like cars and gadgetry. It’s socially and fiscally irresponsible. If the tax bill curbs idiotic consumption, I am all for it.
2. “The tax cuts to corporations will go straight into stock buybacks and dividends so that the CEO’s and their Boards can keep those yearly bonuses coming in. Just like they have been doing for the last 7-8 years.”
I don’t like this either. One would hope that the tax cuts will go into R&D and pay raises, but I am not naïve enough to believe this. Some of it will. (I also think that the tax cuts may go straight into lobbyist pockets). I AM more hopeful that the tax cuts will help small businesses. We need more small businesses, more mom and pops. I very much admire many mom & pop operations, and frequent them when I can.
3. “Doubling the child tax credits will mean more FREE money for those of the illegal persuasion with children and many our own home-grown parasites that don’t pay any taxes but have plenty of kids (hat-tip to Rubio).”
Don’t get me started on this; I unloaded my irritation here the other day. Rubio brought this up during the debates; right then and there I decided I would never vote for him. (Yes, on this issue alone.)
This is so unethical in so many different ways. I am very much against this. We need RESPONSIBLE parents, not freeloaders who, in effect, are models of parasitic behavior.
Having kids is not virtuous. It does NOT give you carte blanche to steal from others.
4. “And the Obamacare “tax” penalty doesn’t disappear until 2019. My guess is that our leaders will take advantage of that deadline and make sure that it never happens.”
I can wait until 2019. I think you’re wrong here, steadykat, I think they will make it stick.
If they do not make it stick, then the “Drain The Swamp” manifesto (for lack of better word), will be weakened considerable.
I think Trump is very serious about Draining The Swamp. He has experienced The Swamp firsthand since announcing he was running.
“I AM more hopeful that the tax cuts will help small businesses. We need more small businesses, more mom and pops.”
That’s exactly what this tax reform does.
My brother owns a small restaurant with a partner…he busts his *ss every day. This tax bill will help him, and that’s good.
As long as it remained in the final version, the bill also limited the deduction for interest for large businesses…reducing the incentive to borrow. And that’s good.
It limited the MID (first time in a LONG time that legislation went against the REIC)…and that’s good.
Personally, I would have liked it to go farther, but in amongst all the hand wringing and rhetoric slinging, this legislation could make a pretty big difference…corporate tax going to 21% could be a biggie when it comes to future investment in the US.
Keller, TX Housing Prices Crater 11%YOY
https://www.movoto.com/keller-tx/market-trends/
Only 113 home inventory there…SFMF wants to see a local market with zillions of homes bought and sold
DebtDonkey
Kensington, MD Housing Prices Crater 16% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/kensington-md/market-trends/
The left’s newest hotness in solving gloBULL warning is getting rid of cows. So they are in a war against meat and milk. The story in Idaho is the end result.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/04/11/301794415/gassy-cows-are-warming-the-planet-and-theyre-here-to-stay
Not really:
‘The number of cows in the state have increased annually by about 20,000 animals to it current level of 600,000, said Idaho extension agent Ben Eborn. ‘That’s unreal,’ he said.’
‘‘North Dakota as a whole is overbuilt.’ Demand and easier access to capital may have caused overbuilding, Ritterman said.’
‘easier access to capital’
I’ve posted many reports on the commodity boom and bust. It was global QE that caused it.
It’s kind of funny to talk about overbuilding cows.
You leave out a basic piece of the puzzle. The “overbuilding” was based on increased projected demand. The left then came in and has been doing all it can to destroy that demand through its war on cows.
My local school district now has no-meant-Mondays. And the reason is explicitly to fight gloBULL warming.
‘war on cows.’ They just can’t catch a break can they?
I read something about adding a small amount of something like algae or some other innocuous item, to cattle feed greatly reduces the amount of methane cows emit.
Regardless of global warming, reducing dairy and meat consumption is generally regarded as providing health benefits. A friend who has gout eliminated dairy from their diet and now no longer has to take the gout medicine.
We go vegan ~2 days a week simply for the health benefits. I haven’t drank cow’s milk in decades.
https://i.pinimg.com/564x/96/7d/96/967d9655fc49387e9722feaa62aacc79.jpg
We don’t eat a lot of meat anymore at our house. We do eat some fish now and again, but it’s rare that we eat red meat. We are not vegan as we consume eggs, yogurt, cheese, and milk. But we don’t eat much meat. Usually if we have meat it’s chicken. I was born in Idaho. Sorry, I guess I’m an (old) millennial that killed the cow industry. And football.
Processed meats have been deemed cancer-causing and red meat is “probably” cancer causing:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28450127
The paleo theory says that the meat itself isn’t the problem. It’s the hormones, the corn, the antibiotics, and the awful conditions in mass-produced cows which make meat bad. Especially when you add a bunch of carbs and margerine. Grass-fed cows are much better. Not sure about processed meats.
Jury is still out on dairy.
The paleo theory says that the meat itself isn’t the problem.
Life is the problem. Death is no problem.
“We don’t eat a lot of meat anymore at our house.”
Had some nice New York strips on the Weber Sunday, just finished off a full rack of St Louis ribs with fries and slaw from Park Avenue BBQ & Grille.
Left a pile of bones in my wake that would make Fred Flintstone jealous.
Take out of course because if you really want to enjoy ribs you will need some time for your face not to be looked at by others and to have some kind of basin near by after you’re done.
https://www.pabbqgrille.com/menu.asp
“Processed meats have been deemed cancer-causing and red meat is “probably” cancer causing:”
I know a doctor who is a cancer specialist who says your family history is the most accurate predictor of how you will get cancer and when you could die from it.
He says some people start smoking at 18 and are dead from lung cancer at 20.
Some people start smoking at 13 and live to be 105.
If you smoke cigarettes you are probably somewhere in the middle, what is your families history?
There was a smoker in my family who died at 65, a heavy drinker died from cirrhosis of the liver, the rest of us meat eaters lived into their 80s and 90s.
Enjoy your chicken and fish.
….. or Crow and CraterTaters in Donks case.
know a doctor who is a cancer specialist who says your family history is the most accurate predictor of how you will get cancer and when you could die from it.
I work with cardiologists and oncologists regularly (med-surg RN). If you are predisposed to developing cancer due to family history, then that is an even greater reason to watch your intake of red meat, but especially processed meats. The WHO information is based on extensive meta-analyses of epidemiological studies. It’s the best evidence that we have right now:
13. Could you quantify the risk of eating red meat and processed meat?
The consumption of processed meat was associated with small increases in the risk of cancer in the studies reviewed. In those studies, the risk generally increased with the amount of meat consumed. An analysis of data from 10 studies estimated that every 50 gram portion of processed meat eaten daily increases the risk of colorectal cancer by about 18%.
The cancer risk related to the consumption of red meat is more difficult to estimate because the evidence that red meat causes cancer is not as strong. However, if the association of red meat and colorectal cancer were proven to be causal, data from the same studies suggest that the risk of colorectal cancer could increase by 17% for every 100 gram portion of red meat eaten daily.
http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/
Incidentally, I do eat red meat on occasion. I’m a distance runner prone to anemia, so the occasional red meat (braised beef) helps keep iron. As with many things, moderation is key I think. Many of the peds that I see at the low-income clinic are anemic (mostly because they are milk babies and the milk inhibits iron uptake in the GI tract). I believe reasonable about of meat can be a very important in getting sufficient iron if a kid’s diet is lacking in eggs, dried fruit, or legumes. But vegetarian diets seem to be overwhelmingly superior from a health standpoint. But it’s difficult in some places to get to this point in the US culturally.
Anyway, I really don’t care what anyone else chooses to eat, just as long as they are well informed. But as for thinking smoking is benign, quitting smoking is probably the single greatest thing one can do to increase the odds of longevity.
My mother smoked like a hay stack and never got lung cancer. But she sure did have emphysema and died much younger than her non smoking relatives and siblings
My uncle who smoked for 45 years died 22 years earlier than my father (his brother) who didn’t.
That was the dudes point, he didn’t say smoking was good he said some people smoke 3 years and die, some 45 years and some 85. Family history is the best predictor in his mind.
It’s overcapacity. Note the retail article mentions oversupply. We’ve been way oversupplied in malls for years but the media wants to say it’s amazon. We have many multiples of the retail space per capita of Europe.
It’s the same with grains, fuels, metals, fish, nuts, you name it. Remember when the Chinese went crazy buying New Zealand dairy farms?
We have more retail than Europe because we are richer than Europe and buy more stuff. I always shake my head when people say stuff like this. Also we use 25% of the world’s energy but only 5% of the world’s population. Yes and that is again a good thing. Rich countries use a lot of energy. Would you rather be a 3rd World country that uses no energy and has no retail?
Amazon has redefined retail. People don’t go to the mall anymore, they shop online. Technology has created a fundamental shift in how people shop. And that means malls and other brick and mortal retail is going away. Or if not fully going away, greatly reduced. You might as well lament the loss of bank teller jobs or the loss of elevator operators or travel agents or horseshoe manufacturers.
Here’s a fun exercise. Calculate the amount of wealth lost by mall operators and calculate the amount of wealth created by Amazon. Guess which one is bigger? And it’s not even close.
Then how come amazon can’t make money? If you look just at their retail it’s a joke. And if we use so much energy, why can’t they breath in China? Everybody has to eat, go to work, stay warm. So a billion people use less energy than the US?
I’m not buying anything online this Christmas. I like to look at the thing or try it on. I also don’t see the point of generating 2 pounds of cardboard boxes for some do-dads or shirts.
I’m not lamenting anything. For one I don’t “consume” very much. Does everyone really need a new phone every year? When I was doing trash-outs several times a week, it was unbelievable how much crap people left behind. Even today when I drive around Arizona the garages are packed full of junk. IMO, that’s why they don’t make most garages big enough for cars. They park in the driveway or on the street and fill up the garage with stuff they really don’t need.
I don’t shop online.
Amazon has redefined slave labor and many people don’t go to malls anymore because of this.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mall+fight
The curse of not having a basement
It was the same in California. People had their garages stuffed with junk while their pricey cars sat outside in the elements.
Amazon can’t make money? I beg to differ.
October 26, 2017
“Amazon blew past Wall Street expectations for its third quarter earnings as the company’s stock spiked more than 7 percent in after-hours trading Thursday. The Seattle tech giant posted a 34 percent increase in net sales for the third quarter, to $43.7 billion, and reported ***profits*** of $256 million ($0.52 per share), in line with the year-ago quarter.”
And that’s terrific that you don’t consume and you don’t shop online. There will still be niche retail options for people like yourself. For the vast majority of people however, the future is online. Which is why Amazon’s stock is $1200 and Sears stock is $3.
Ditto with Amazon’s AWS. They in theory own the IT world now with their cloud, but their profit margins are rather thin. At least Apple can get suckers to overpay for their iPhones and Macs. I know from experience that Mac owners really believe their Mac laptops are really worth 2-3x more than a comparable Windows laptop.
Most of my former (laid off) coworkers refused to use the PC laptops my employer provided and would buy Mac a using their own money to work on. What made that especially funny was that our IT department would not support the Macs, so if you had a problem, you had to fix it yourself. And we mostly just used the laptops to SSH into UNIX boxes anyway. So in the end they were using vi to edit files anyway.
27 July 2017
“Amazon on Thursday reported its Amazon Web Services public cloud generated $916 million in operating income on $4.10 billion in revenue in the second quarter of this year. Revenue for the AWS business increased by 42 percent year over year, higher than analysts’ expectations according to FactSet”.
Oh dear, only 42%. And that’s what people actually said, because 5 quarters ago it was 80% growth. This is the second Amazon effect in the marketplace. Growing at 40% is now considered weak growth, LOL.
I’m old enough to remember, like 3 years ago, when growing at 40% a year was considered, you know, good and stuff.
“Then how come amazon can’t make money?”
Neither can crApple, Freakbook and the rest of these dying companies.
When your PE is well over 100, 40% IS weak growth.
It’s not well over 100, it’s around 80 and forecast in the 70s for 2019.
I take that back it is over 100 for 2018.
I get it, you all want AMZN to fail, because if it doesn’t the entire premise of the pending global crash goes away.
We shall see what happens. But for the time being AMZN is showing no signs of imploding.
Oct. 31, 2017
Amazon’s cloud business has become the company’s gold-egg-laying goose.
For much of the last two years, Amazon Web Services — the company’s cloud computing unit — has accounted for a sizeable chunk of Amazon’s overall profits. But, as we can see in this chart from Statista, in three of Amazon’s last five quarters it’s done even more — it’s covered over the red ink posted by Amazon’s other segments and helped it turn a likely loss into a profit.
The company’s most recent quarter is a case in point. The $1.2 billion operating profit posted by AWS wiped out the $936 million operating loss recorded by Amazon’s international e-commerce business…………..
http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-web-services-turns-a-loss-into-a-profit-in-q3-charts-2017-10
Lets repeat that…AWS wiped out the $936 million operating LOSS recorded by Amazon’s international e-commerce business.
Using AWS to erase the losses that Amazon’s E-retail business incurs on pretty much every online retail sale isn’t very impressive. Mom and Pop have to make their margins to cover payroll, rent and taxes to keep their business alive. There are no AWS coverups for their failures.
Bezos only has to use paper profits from his non-retail AWS entity to cover his losses so what does he care about margins or even profits for that matter?
It would appear that BezostheParasite is looking at the long play. Run all your retail competitors out of business, take the whole market share and then raise the prices on all your goods until you do make a profit.
He reminds me of these guys:
http://www.linfo.org/standardoil.html
For one I don’t “consume” very much. Does everyone really need a new phone every year? When I was doing trash-outs several times a week, it was unbelievable how much crap people left behind. Even today when I drive around Arizona the garages are packed full of junk. IMO, that’s why they don’t make most garages big enough for cars. They park in the driveway or on the street and fill up the garage with stuff they really don’t need.
+1000
Amazon can’t make money? I beg to differ.
Let’s see here…
43.7 billion sales, 256 million net
A whopping 0.6% profit. WOWEE!
I’ve seen a lot of storage unit places cropping up — the type that look a fenced-in line lines a garages, on the cheap land out in the country. Are people really paying $50(?)/month just to drive 15+ miles to visit their stuff?
Someone should start a business to charge $15/hour to sit with old ladies and help with the “death cleaning.”
‘you all want AMZN to fail’
I don’t think about them much. I am an accountant and spent a day going through their financials last summer. It’s another twitter. I’d say short them but the board approved billions to buy stock which they haven’t spent. It’s that same silicon valley snake-oil that you don’t need a profit. I saw that when I worked for a dotcom in the late 90’s.
If I had a little money, I could go into any business and sell at a loss and gain customers. I don’t know what’s going to happen, but that stock price is ridiculous.
IN COLORADO:
You wrote the following:
“Ditto with Amazon’s AWS. They in theory own the IT world now with their cloud, but their profit margins are rather thin. At least Apple can get suckers to overpay for their iPhones and Macs. I know from experience that Mac owners really believe their Mac laptops are really worth 2-3x more than a comparable Windows laptop.
Most of my former (laid off) coworkers refused to use the PC laptops my employer provided and would buy Mac a using their own money to work on. What made that especially funny….”
I find this entire post hilarious! There are so many prissy bitches in the IT world….egad. You just reminded me of them.
These same bitches likely spend hours defended the latest sh*tty Star Wars movie.
Oxide
Superstorm Sandy blew the lid off hoarding trend Homeowners who secretly stashed were exposed when workers needed access after the storm.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/08/superstorm-sandy-exposed-hoarding/2063679/
Amazon’s cloud business has become the company’s gold-egg-laying goose. ”
And that’s why Google, Microsoft etc are piling into the cloud business.
Lol macbeth.
‘piling into the cloud business’
And Shaw.
http://business.shaw.ca/cloud/cloud-services
Ben, since you wrote
If I had a little money, I could go into any business and sell at a loss and gain customers.
I wonder if you’ve ever read Beatrix Potter’s little picture book Ginger and Pickles? It has a lot of business wisdom…
No, I haven’t:
‘The Tale of Ginger and Pickles (originally, Ginger and Pickles) is a children’s book written and illustrated by Beatrix Potter, and first published by Frederick Warne & Co. in 1909. The book tells of two shopkeepers who extend unlimited credit to their customers and, as a result, are forced to go out of business.’
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_Ginger_and_Pickles
We have about 12 tiny Beatrix Potter books sitting by the side of our son’s bed, but this one somehow isn’t included in the set. I’ll have to run out and buy it now. I suppose I’m probably going to buy it on Amazon though.
I don’t know what’s going to happen, but that stock price is ridiculous.
+1,177
Another nice touch from Ginger & Pickles: when they close their shop, Tabitha Twitchit (owner of the only other shop) immediately raises her prices.
My favorite Beatrix Potter books are Ginger and Pickles, The Tailor of Gloucester, Peter Rabbit, Tom Kitten, Benjamin Bunny, and Jemima Puddleduck.
Massive agricultural subsidies dumped on the dairy industry probably don’t help with the problem of overinvestment in cows at the face of a milk glut.
Time for Uncle Sam to step up the cheese purchases?
Speaking of methane, a little earlier on Bloomberg Radio, they were talking about natural gas. And how there is a certain amount of leakage during the production process. This occurs starting from when it’s drilled, and at various stages on down the line. In fact, depending on the exact amount of leakage, it’s entirely possible NG is putting more of the dreaded greenhouse gas into the atmosphere than coal.
Hope the fires don’t get down to Porter Ranch in CA. I think you’d see some explosions from all that leaking gas.
Exactly. That’s the dirty climate-change-gassing little secret about “clean” natural gas.
Nobody has a fracking idea how much methane is leaking into the atmosphere at tens of thousands of wells all over our country.
Funny how environmentalists never talk about this.
Maybe humans need to lay off the bean burritos.
Charlton, MA Housing Prices Crater 12% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/charlton-ma/market-trends/
and 6% of the homes listed are “distressed”…Yikes!
One cannot go against the will of GOD ( hedge funds etc, )
“White House chief economic advisor Gary Cohn said the administration failed in its attempt to cut a hedge fund tax loophole even though it was a key campaign promise.
Axios co-founder Mike Allen asked Cohn what was the one change he would make to the tax reform bill.
“We would have cut carried interest,” Cohn said Wednesday. “We probably tried 25 times.”
He blamed resistance on Capitol Hill. “We hit opposition in that big white building with the dome at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue every time we tried,” he said in the interview. “It is just the reality of the political system.”
The Republican tax plan keeps the so-called carried-interest loophole that benefits managers of hedge funds and private equity funds. Carried interest is the money manager’s cut of the fund’s profit. It is taxed at the lower capital gains tax rate, while profit in other professions is taxed at the higher ordinary income rate.
President Donald Trump promised during his campaign that he would eliminate this loophole, saying hedge fund managers were “getting away with murder.”
But Cohn told Axios that the hedge fund and private equity lobby was too strong to overcome. “The reality of this town is that constituency [hedge funds and private equity] has a very large presence in the House and the Senate. They have really strong relationships on both sides of the aisle,” he said. “We just didn’t have the support on carried interest.”
Anyone heard any screeching from Schumer, Pelosi, Feinstein, etc. about carried interest leading up to the vote?
I didn’t…Feinstein did whine about the cut to the MID limit. And their was plenty of moaning about SALT deduction, etc.
Plenty of PE in CA/NY…no surprise that these politicians were pretty silent.
NOW, after the bill has passed, we’ll probably see plenty of grandstanding about the carried interest (now that it’s a done deal).
The swamp likes the carried interest.
“He blamed resistance on Capitol Hill. “We hit opposition in that big white building with the dome at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue every time we tried,” he said in the interview. “It is just the reality of the political system.”
Funny how they haul out the tired old Us vs Them Washington D.C. axiom as an excuse for giving Wall Street pretty much anything that they desire.
“We tried but the other side was just too strong to overcome”.
Heh, at least they tried 25 times.
Perhaps the time has come to stop asking:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy3MtznDeqg
I do appreciate how tough you can be, steadykat.
You need to post here more often - have you the time?
‘…hedge fund managers were “getting away with murder.”
But Cohn told Axios that the hedge fund and private equity lobby was too strong to overcome. ‘
Sounds as bad as the real estate lobby.
The bottom line is that the FIRE sector has the rest of America on its knees.
More evidence Democrats are lying (which will all knew) about the tax bill. They claim only evil rich CEOs will benefit from the tax cuts.
Reality:
Boeing also says that it will earmark $300 million for “employee-related and charitable investment” as a result of the tax cuts to “support our heroes, our homes, and our future”—though the company did not provide any further details.
According to CNBC, Fifth Third Bancorp plans to “raise its minimum hourly wage for all employees to $15, and distribute a one-time bonus of $1,000 for more than 13,500 employees” following passage of the bill.
But you know….NARRATIVE!!
Personally, I find this to be a very poorly written bill. I wouldn’t be surprised if it ended up triggering a mild recession. This is a philosophical belief. But I guess the interesting thing is that we get to see what happens in the next year or two. I am open to changing my mind and I certainly hope I am proved wrong. Maybe this time trickle down will work.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it ended up triggering a mild recession.
i’d be very surprised if it triggered a mild recession.
this isn’t a zero-sum game. the economy will grow with anything short of wwIII or a huge plague or comet strike.
Asteroids have been getting frequently closer. Who knows what the black swan could be.
Asteroids have been getting frequently closer. Who knows what the black swan could be.
There is just better observation and reporting. Asteroids been flying by for millenia. Chances are probably same as always for a hit.
You’re a Millennial. You said so yourself.
You weren’t alive for the first Trickle Down.
I was.
Trickle down was fairly successful for massive swaths of the population back in the 1980s and 1990s. The 1980s were a very optimistic decade (especially from 1983 onward). The 1990s were a decade of decent wages.
Maybe we’ll get some good music being made again! I know, I know - theres good music being made now, but not on scale of the 80s-mid 90s. And maybe, just maybe they’ll ditch the videos that look and feel like commercials for horror movies where they profess their allegiance to the illuminati and go back to making weird+funny+quirky videos.
I saw this for the first time last night and was blown away. Not even in tune but Frusciante kills it anyway - dude was channeling some serious mojo back then
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Dv75ZEggQg
I’m an old millennial, so I was around for the first trickle down. I don’t think it was very beneficial. More like debt fueled spending masquerading as growth. It probably spurred some growth, but at the cost of running up deficits. Looks like we’re going to be doing more of that.
This is the best description of trickle-down that I’ve read yet: “The poor do not work because they have too much income; the rich do not work because they do not have enough income. You expand and revitalize the economy by giving the poor less, the rich more.” I don’t believe it works for the economy as a whole, though it might help the very wealthy.
John Kenneth Galbraith, the Harvard economist who served Democratic presidents from Roosevelt to Johnson, wrote in the New York Review of Books in 1982 that trickle-down is “what an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.”
As far as wages have been concerned, trickle down has not been great for a long time:
In 1972, so-called production and nonsupervisory workers — some 80 percent of the American work force — brought home average wages equivalent to $738.86 a week in today’s dollars, after adjusting for inflation, according to an Economic Policy Institute analysis of federal data. Last year, the average worker brought home $723.67 a week.
In short, 44 years had passed with the typical American worker absorbing a roughly 2 percent pay cut.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/07/business/unemployment-wages-economy.html
I think the politicians have misdiagnosed the problem. It’s not that the wealthy and corporations need more money, it’s that the poor and middle class are drowning. They need a raise and/or to see the cost of living/survival to go down. I think we’ll get about $1k tax cut next year, but I’m sure my neighbor will probably owe about that much more. There will be some winners and losers in the middle class, but mostly winners for the top 1%, and especially the top 0.1%.
Get on the TrumpTrain my good friend….. Get on the TrumpTrain.
Neptune Beach, FL Housing Prices Crater 5% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/neptune-beach-fl/market-trends/
John Kenneth Galbraith, the Harvard economist
notice they always say “harvard economist”, like ‘harvard’ means anything these days. what they don’t ever say is “keynesian economist”. harvard sold out to the liberals many years ago.
keynesian economics is the tool of socialism. they’d have a much harder time passing their socialist agenda if they couldn’t persuade people to believe in keynesian garbage.
what would you expect galbraith to say? he has to pump the keynesian myth like some dancing minstrel. his bottom line depends on it.
tj, you seem to think everything is a Keynesian socialist plot. Rather than launching an ad hominem attack on Harvard and an economist that you probably know very little about, what would you say to the basic point of wage stagnation over the past 40 years? Would you dispute the point that wages have been largely flat or stagnating? If the point is to have economic growth and this growth is supposed to trickle down, it ought to follow that we’d have broad-based wage growth to. The facts don’t support that this has happened and yet we continue to try trickle down. The uber wealthy have benefited though, so the donor class is getting fed.
tj, you seem to think everything is a Keynesian socialist plot.
90% of universities teach it now. are you trying to say gal-breath isn’t a keynesian?
Rather than launching an ad hominem attack on Harvard
oh, poor haavaad. your brave liberal bastion.
what would you say to the basic point of wage stagnation over the past 40 years?
i’d say it’s due to constant tax creep and regulation suffocation that has weakened the economy.
Would you dispute the point that wages have been largely flat or stagnating?
i’d say they could have been and should have been higher. do you think that socialism is in any way economic?
If the point is to have economic growth and this growth is supposed to trickle down, it ought to follow that we’d have broad-based wage growth to.
how are we supposed to get wage growth in a weakening economy?
and economic growth doesn’t ‘trickle down’. you already know my position on this because i’ve told you directly before. economic growth happens through increasing efficiency of labor. higher taxation and regulation and government spending erode that efficiency.
The facts don’t support that this has happened and yet we continue to try trickle down.
‘trickle down’ isn’t only about reducing taxes.
you can reduce taxes and eat up all the gains with more regulation. or visa versa. you need both reduced, as well as reduced spending to realize maximum growth.
The uber wealthy have benefited though, so the donor class is getting fed.
yes, i already know how much you hate the rich even though you try to deny it.
all you’ve got is stupid zero-sum arguments. really.. you always argue from a zero-sum perspective. you never seem to realize that growth will always happen if the government doesn’t hamstring the economy. the pie grows in a free market.
TJ, love your lucid Austrian arguments. Zero sum games are an illusion. There’s always enough.
“what would you expect galbraith to say?”
Very little. Dead men tell no tales.
John Kenneth “Ken” Galbraith, OC was a Canadian-born economist, public official, and diplomat, and a leading proponent of 20th-century American liberalism. Wikipedia
Died: April 29, 2006, Cambridge, MA
Paul Krugman the NYT econ writer and nobel prize winner predicted a stock market crash on election night.
But you know….he is an expert and stuff.
Ans he went to Princeton too. How could he be wrong?
They laughed at trump when he said we wouls get 4% growth. They were right. It will be more like 5% next year.
There’s always enough.
thanks SW.
yes there will always be enough as long as we don’t let the socialists turn us into another venezuela.
Paul Krugman the NYT econ writer and nobel prize winner
what a sham, right? if mr. space aliens can win a nobel prize there’s hope for anyone.
he had to close the comments section on his website because his ideas were being ripped to shreds and he had no answers that couldn’t also be soundly refuted.
i’d say it’s due to constant tax creep and regulation suffocation that has weakened the economy.
So you accept that wages have stagnated for the last 40 years. Good, we’ve found some common ground. You stated that this as the reason for wage stagnation:
i’d say it’s due to constant tax creep and regulation suffocation that has weakened the economy.
The effective corporate tax rate has been trending down for about the past 40 years. Same with the individual income tax rate. In other words, taxes have been going down, not up. What has been going up is deficit spending.
Sustainable economic growth is the kind you advocate. I would in large part agree with this. We’ve played deficit-induced economic growth where the large part of the deficit fueled boom is going to the very wealthy and those most connected to the state (e.g. crony capitalism). I fail to see how this latest round of tax cuts does anything different than what we’ve already tried.
yes, i already know how much you hate the rich even though you try to deny it.
I’m not one for self-loathing. By most objective measurements, I belong to the top 5%. So no, I do not hate the rich. But I think there are structural problems with inequality. We are not even close to a meritocracy, and those who think we are are delusional.
So you accept that wages have stagnated for the last 40 years.
no, i’m just trying to avoid a dueling articles debate. i disagree with the quack’s numbers, but what i said is true in any case. a weakening economy causes a weakening dollar.
i explained to you at length before that in 2013 with gold near 1,100 per ounce, one had to work less than half as long to buy it as you would have had to work in 1913.
why do we always have to cover ground we’ve covered before? is it because you won’t accept what i’ve said, but you stop responding when i refute what you say? do you think i forget when you quit answering?
The effective corporate tax rate has been trending down for about the past 40 years.
that isn’t true, but even if it were, tax rates aren’t the whole story. as i’ve said above, you have to include regulations. you’re trying to say corps have been paying less and that’s hogwash.
I’m not one for self-loathing. By most objective measurements, I belong to the top 5%.
i wouldn’t say you’re self-loathing, i’d say you’re virtue signaling.
We are not even close to a meritocracy, and those who think we are are delusional.
agreed. how could we be close to a meritocracy with so much corruption and with liberals running things for so long?
why do we always have to cover ground we’ve covered before? is it because you won’t accept what i’ve said, but you stop responding when i refute what you say? do you think i forget when you quit answering?
tj, as much as I’d love to continue discussing, I am honestly lost by your argumentation. I can’t follow what you stand for and I’m not sure what metrics, facts, or sources you consider valid. All I seem to glean from the above is that you think our country’s problems are socialism, liberalism, high taxes, and regulation.
When I probed you about wage stagnation, you asked me what I thought about socialism, something completely unrelated. Unless you are trying to say that the reason we’ve had wage stagnation is because we’re a socialist country now. Either way, I don’t get it. My point was that, aside from being patently unfair, we’ve tried this, it hasn’t worked, and we shouldn’t do it again. It sounds like you think the opposite: trickle down has worked, tax breaks for the wealthy are good because they the the ones who actually contribute and will “grow the pie,” and therefore this strategy will work again.
The administration has claimed that lowering the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% will benefit workers because they will eventually see an addition $4k-$9k per the white house. We’ll see. I’m not holding my breath.
All I seem to glean from the above is that you think our country’s problems are socialism, liberalism, high taxes, and regulation.
then you seem to understand me pretty well. and you seemed to also understand me pretty well when we had a long exchange a while ago that ended when i started to show you that numbers of people had nothing to do with the efficiency of labor. i think it ended because you started to see that i might be right and you wanted to avoid the embarrassment of having to admit it.
there are a couple other examples of you suddenly ending the conversation too. and i don’t really care that you do that, except that you come back days or weeks later and start arguing something that has the same fundamental problem as before.
a big problem that i tried to bring up lately was your zero-sum thinking. you wouldn’t touch it. you didn’t deny it, you didn’t accept it, you didn’t try to prove it one way or another. it was like i never brought it up. one might suspect that you already know you’re a zero-sum thinker.
and in your immediate post above you mention my ‘growing the pie’ theme. growing the pie is the opposite of zero-sum thinking. so sooner or later we’ll have to cover the issue if you want to have a discussion with me.
Unless you are trying to say that the reason we’ve had wage stagnation is because we’re a socialist country now.
close, however i’m not saying we’re a socialist/communist country yet. but we are/were becoming one. trump may be turning the clock back on that, if he can be successful with his agenda. and even trump had a few socialist tendencies. but he may be learning on the job. he’s doing a better job than i expected. so yes, socialism is a big problem. after all, marx said communism is the goal.. socialism is the path.
My point was that, aside from being patently unfair, we’ve tried this, it hasn’t worked, and we shouldn’t do it again.
to the extent that free markets have been implemented, they’ve worked. to the extent socialism has been implemented, it hasn’t worked.
It sounds like you think the opposite: trickle down has worked, tax breaks for the wealthy are good because they the the ones who actually contribute and will “grow the pie,” and therefore this strategy will work again.
it WILL work again. but the socialists need wealth to plunder since they can’t create any. so as soon as they see a place that’s prospering they try to implement their own agenda. socialism is tyranny that tries to hide itself as goodness and kindness. by the time most people have learned the truth it’s nearly impossible for them to escape. just ask the immigrants from russia what it was like there.
I’m not holding my breath.
of course not. you don’t trust or believe in capitalism.
pretty well when we had a long exchange a while ago that ended when i started to show you that numbers of people had nothing to do with the efficiency of labor.
The reason I ended the conversation a few weeks ago was not because I was embarrassed or felt you were right. I have no hesitation to admit I am wrong. As Keynes said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?” Rather, it was becoming obvious to me that you were convinced of the “rightness” of your position and that you didn’t understand some basic economic concepts. I don’t have the time to litigate what constitutes economic growth and get in the weeds. The problem with our discussions is there is no yardstick of frame of reference.
For instance, all you give is platitudes (e.g. “To the extent that free markets have been implemented, they’ve worked. to the extent socialism has been implemented, it hasn’t worked.”). This type of black-white thinking is non-critical. You might have beef with the previous administration, but do you think the economy grew from 2008 to 2016?
Here is a chart:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDP
My advice to you is to pick a specific policy or action that you think is detrimental and focus on that. Conversely, you could laud or praise something that is working well.
Going back to our previous discussion, suffice it to say, there are many aspects of “capital.” There is human capital, which would comprise specialized knowledge, education, training, and know-how. Human capital would also comprise the good health, mental and physical, necessary for production. This is why the opioid scourge threatens America’s long-term economic prosperity, even though in the short-run drug makers, EMS, and morticians might have good business.
There is social capital, which is being able to be connected to other people that one can leverage to produce greater output (incidentally, this is one of the very important contributions that Krugman has posited about why clusters of urban centers tend to outperform rural areas in terms of recent economic growth). There is also productive capital, also known as machinery or technology. If you simply add more workers to an economy, you have the potential to increase GDP (e.g. If 10 workers can create 100 widgets in a day, 20 workers can create 200 widgets. Voila, a 100% increase in GDP!). So yes, simply adding people can boost GDP, but it doesn’t increase GDP per capita. You can also develop training techniques or sophisticated machinery to increase productivity. Maybe you create AI that can create widgets 24/7 without a human at all!
Anyway, you’re an interesting person to discuss with and you have some strongly held beliefs. I think you are overly dogmatic and zealous and I think this allows you to dismiss things out of hand that don’t fit your narrative.
a big problem that i tried to bring up lately was your zero-sum thinking. you wouldn’t touch it. you didn’t deny it, you didn’t accept it, you didn’t try to prove it one way or another. it was like i never brought it up. one might suspect that you already know you’re a zero-sum thinker.
Of course the pie can grow. This should be obvious; I’m not sure why I would need to prove that the economic pie can grow. The more relevant question is what is the best way to grow the pie and is it working for all quintiles of the population?
In the last 40 years, the answer is no:
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/09/19/u-s-household-incomes-a-50-year-perspective
However, the income gains from 2015-2016 were broad and across all income groups. Notably, the biggest increases were among the poor and the middle class, and there were smaller gains on a percentage basis among the upper middle and upper class. This is the type of growth that is broad-based and where the rising tide lifts all boats. If the current administration can keep this broad based growth going then we’ll be in much better shape in 4 years.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/15/upshot/picturing-a-big-year-for-the-poor-and-middle-class.html?_r=0&mtrref=www.google.com
you didn’t understand some basic economic concepts.
do tell, what basic economic concepts do i not understand? as soon as you fess up we’ll find out just who doesn’t understand what.
As Keynes said, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?”
yes, you quote your hero keynes again. keynesianism is an invented myth, invented by one man. austrian economics has had hundreds of contributions by many men for around a hundred years. it is time tested and proven. further, keynesianism i believe, has caused more suffering than wwII. the people that were taught it, should sue the universities for teaching them worthless crap.
but do you think the economy grew from 2008 to 2016?
do you measure the economy by gdp? because if you do, should know it isn’t an accurate measure of growth. for instance, it showed the economy grew after katrina. do you really think the economy grew from katrina? don’t tell me… you believe in the broken window fallacy, right?
My advice to you is to pick a specific policy or action that you think is detrimental and focus on that.
ok, but there are so many. let’s start with affirmative action. are you fer it or again’ it?
if yer fer it, tell me why.
I think you are overly dogmatic and zealous and I think this allows you to dismiss things out of hand that don’t fit your narrative.
when you know something is false, how do you compromise?
I’m not sure why I would need to prove that the economic pie can grow.
because so often you show you don’t believe it does.
In the last 40 years, the answer is no:
i don’t give a rat’s butt about ‘household’ incomes. i only care about individual incomes. are you going to try to say that individual incomes haven’t grown for 40 years?
and on top of that you’re cherry picking a relatively short timeline. why not talk about incomes with a longer timeline, like since the fed in 1913?
do tell, what basic economic concepts do i not understand? as soon as you fess up we’ll find out just who doesn’t understand what.
I can’t find the original thread, but I seem to recall we were going in circles about the importance of capital to economic growth. You were insisting that it was “efficiency of labor” was all that matters and I was insisting that capital, in its most broadest usage (human, social, productive), is paramount to growth. This might just be semantics since you seem to use the word “capitalism” often, but not ascribe much importance to capital.
This is of course ironic because the essence of capitalism is capital, and that means understanding what it is, who owns it, who benefits from it, and how it is put to use for individual and societal benefit, etc.
I make a very big deal about inequality because if capital is concentrated in very few hands, then we really have no capitalism at all but rather feudalism or oligarchy. A lot of my points revolve around how we can facilitate capital accumulation at all levels of the population (not just the top 0.1%, 1%, or 5%). If 95% of the US population can only rent out their labor, then we are really falling short of capitalism that works broadly.
do you measure the economy by gdp?
GDP is far from perfect when it comes to measuring economic growth. It’s flaws are numerous and you rightly point out that natural disasters–and I would add war–increase the GDP, but those can hardly be considered economically beneficial.
The Economist ran an excellent piece (The Trouble With GDP) last year that highlights the myriad problems with using GDP as a proxy for economic prosperity:
https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21697845-gross-domestic-product-gdp-increasingly-poor-measure-prosperity-it-not-even
Having said that, I do believe that when you net out these negative GDP events that the economy did grow. However, one stat you could look at is that we had 154 million people employed in 2017 and only 146 million people employed in 2007. So we rebounded from the Great Recession and continued to add.
My personal preference would be to look at the bottom 20% of the population and their median wage, their savings, their debt, their household ownership rate, etc. How well the bottom 20% is faring and how quickly their lot is improving says a lot about how robust economic growth is and if it is really growing the pie or rather just enriching a certain segment.
let’s start with affirmative action. are you fer it or again’ it?
I am against affirmative action in the sense of boosting an admission profile based on a superficial characteristic such as race, ethnicity, origin, etc. I am also against point based systems where applicants get extra points if their parents attended a specific school or were donors.
are you going to try to say that individual incomes haven’t grown for 40 years?
Since the 1970s, real hourly wages have grown a measly 8.9% whereas productivity has grown by 143%? Care to guess where the extra productivity is going? Not to wage earners, but to the capitalists (e.g. the owner class, the uber wealthy, etc.)
and on top of that you’re cherry picking a relatively short timeline. why not talk about incomes with a longer timeline, like since the fed in 1913?
I’ll quote Piketty here:
“When growth statistics are compiled over very long time horizons, the meaningfulness of comparisons between time periods breaks down such that they become relatively abstract and arbitrary. It is very difficult to accurately quantify purchasing power in one discrete number and make comparisons between groups and time periods because the nature and quality of what each group chooses to purchase invariably changes and is not homogeneous.”
Think about it: the nature of what was purchased in 1913 is fundamentally different than what is being purchased in 2017. This was before cars, TV, commercial airplanes, computers, household appliances, the internet, etc.
I can’t find the original thread, but I seem to recall we were going in circles about the importance of capital to economic growth.
you’ve already accused me of saying things i didn’t say and i had to go back and find the posts to prove i didn’t say them. now you’re hemming and hawing in vagueness. kindly just tell me what basic economic concept(s) i misunderstand. when you accused me of misunderstanding basic economic concepts, you sounded pretty sure you knew what they were.
The Economist ran an excellent piece (The Trouble With GDP) last year that highlights the myriad problems with using GDP as a proxy for economic prosperity:
why are you pointing me to an article about the problems with gdp when i was the one pointing them out originally?
I am against affirmative action in the sense
are you for it in any sense? if so, in what sense are you for it?
Since the 1970s, real hourly wages have grown a measly 8.9%
good. so you admit wages haven’t gone down or ’stagnated’ for 40 years. no doubt they haven’t gone up as much as you’d like and that goes for me too. further, i’ll say that if we keep going down the socialist road, wages will eventually fall. but the tax and reg cuts just passed will reverse that road and we should start to see wages gaining at a faster pace soon.
Care to guess where the extra productivity is going? Not to wage earners, but to the capitalists (e.g. the owner class, the uber wealthy, etc.)
ah yes, those evil capitalists don’t deserve to keep the money they’ve earned through the risk they took with their money, and hard work they’ve done to start a business and employ people. no, no. they should be taxed more, right?
I’ll quote Piketty here:
“When growth statistics are compiled over very long time horizons, the meaningfulness of comparisons between time periods breaks down such that they become relatively abstract and arbitrary.
if piketty jumped off a bridge, would you follow him? he just doesn’t like what the longer timelines are telling him. he a keynesian and i give him zero credibility.
i meant to add this..
you said: Think about it: the nature of what was purchased in 1913 is fundamentally different than what is being purchased in 2017.
it’s not ‘fundamentally different’ it’s just more diverse. we have many additional products now. but we still buy food, shelter, clothing and transportation (before the car we had buggies).
Gee, what a coincidence; ATT today announced that they, too, are going to give to each of its employees a thousand bucks.
Hmmmmmm …
Hey Mr. Banker, now’s the time to capture that cash and offer those $100 bonuses for opening a new account!
Naw, they will get a toaster and they will like it.
AT&T giving $1,000 bonus to each of their 200,000 employees, and announce more investment in the US, and Schumer finds a way to criticize them.
Comcast giving $1,000 bonuses to 100,000 non-executive employees.
Wells Fargo raising minimum wage for their employees.
GI Joe’s with the kung-fu grip in lots of stockings this year.
Record low demand won’t pick up until these record high prices falling to dramatically lower and more affordable levels. Until that happens this disastrous economy will continue to lie on the floor like a rotting corpse.
Monterey, CA Housing Prices Crater 8% YOY As Housing Correction Expands
https://www.movoto.com/monterey-ca/market-trends/
It’s a bad bill just for the fact that it’s impossible to write a good bill in that scale. One thing though, what Trump and McConnell promised to win the votes of McCain, Flake, Rubio, etc.?
Trump just got re elected today. The next 3 years will be Reaganesque.
Deficit-funded economic sugar high dead ahead…
Obama added more to the debt than all his predecessors combined. But all of a sudden liberals like you are concerned about debt? How cute.
I am not a liberal, nor a two-party lackey like you.
This is a misleading stat and it’s partisan, non-critical thought. It’s true that Obama administration did add to the debt significantly, but one needs to look at percentage increase increase in the debt, not merely nominal increase. Also, the increase in debt is was largely driven by the Great Recession which caused tax receipts to dip dramatically. 1/3 of government is entitlements, 1/3 is discretionary spending, and the other third is military. I didn’t vote for Obama, but these types of misleading statements is why we can’t have honest dialogue.
When viewed on percentage terms, Obama doesn’t even come close to some other administrations.
Trump got re elected today. The economy will be looking like the mid 80s for the next 3 years.
Thank you Mr. President Trump for discarding legalized crime aka Obamacare and chipping away at mortgage subisidies.
God Bless Mr. President Trump. God Bless America.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are war criminals. And economic terrorists. I want to be self-employed. The economic structure they created (and wanted to create) creates so much uncertainty.
John Oliver said “Drumpfh” on TeeVee and alot of millennials laughed.
You’re done laughing now.
And yeah, thank you Santa Trump for a tax cut.
“A tax credit that is not limited by the amount of an individual’s tax liability. Typically a tax credit only reduces an individual’s tax liability to zero. Refundable credits go beyond this and so really can be considered the same as a payment.
In other words, you’ll still get the credit even if you don’t owe any tax. The earned income credit is a good example of a refundable credit in the United States.”
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/refundablecredit.asp
Look! Over There! Look at the tax cut!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/20/trump-commutes-kosher-meatpacking-executives-money-laundering-sentence.html
“His prosecution came after federal authorities raided the plant and arrested 389 illegal immigrants in 2008.”
At least the guy’s meat is kosher!
Lexington, MA Housing Prices Plunge 20% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/lexington-ma/market-trends/
The new tax law is sure crippling home sales…NOT.
#Business News
December 20, 2017 / 7:38 AM / Updated 5 hours ago
U.S. home sales hit 11-year high, supply still tight
Lucia Mutikani
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. home sales increased more than expected in November, hitting their highest level in nearly 11 years, the latest indication that housing was regaining momentum after almost stalling this year.
…
I am grateful that the new tax law eliminates some of the tax advantages of owning a home. Now if we can shut down Frauddie and Phony, and get Uncle Sam out of the mortgage securities and insurance businesses, we can make America’s housing market great (and affordable) again.
Oxide ,Evan DC AREA
boots!
Virginia picks up about 8 billion or 1.5% gdp (12%of 70 billion)
Fxco gets about half that
MD gets boned
The 1% liberals who anchor the Morning shows sure seem awfully concerned about their tax bills going up while trying to explain why the new bill is bad for the middle class.
It’s like watching someone who is about to have their pinky sawed off explain why the middle class will still have 5 fingers and more money in their pocket this bill is bad for their pinky.
Plano, TX Housing Prices Crater 6% YOY
https://www.movoto.com/plano-tx/market-trends/
from 6:05 ‘trump, trump, trump’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1UToTsDClY