Recession? We don' need no steenkeen recession!

jimpeel said:
We have some of the finest microbrews in the nation here in CO.
Click to expand...

new belgium brewery (ft. collins) is fantastic. and they're nice people, too.

and you do promise you won't try to plook me if i meet you for a beer, right? :laugh4:
 
jimpeel said:
He has a standing invite to go out for a beer the next time he comes to CO. You too if you ever make it here.

We have some of the finest microbrews in the nation here in CO.
Click to expand...
Never been to Colorado...but ya never know. I may take you up on it one day. I gotta go to Wichita first (standing invite), and visit SnP's southern fortress as well.

As for microbreweries... we have some serious competition up here in Canuckistan, especially in Montreal. Just finished the Beer Festival last weekend.... dayum!

This weekend..Grand Prix :D
 
jimpeel said:
I posted the original post at 8:49A and it took until 8:56 to repost it in its edited form because I added the reference link. You posted your ripost at 8:55 and I have not yet seen it as I was busy trying to make the correction and add the reference.

If you had used the quote button to respond, the post would have been there in its original form. There was no effort to edit after you posted to make your ripost invalid. It just happened that way; unless you believe that I could have done all of tyhat in one minute flat just to try to make you look bad.

BTW. The edit function is also available to you and you could have modified your ripost to reflect what I edited.
Click to expand...
:shrug: No harm, no foul.
 
MrBishop said:
Never been to Colorado...but ya never know. I may take you up on it one day. I gotta go to Wichita first (standing invite), and visit SnP's southern fortress as well.

As for microbreweries... we have some serious competition up here in Canuckistan, especially in Montreal. Just finished the Beer Festival last weekend.... dayum!

This weekend..Grand Prix :D
Click to expand...

:cool:
 
Once again, better than expected. What's with that? Are the economists hoping the economy will tank?

My favorite part:

... the unemployment rate jumped to 5.5% in May, up from 5% in April
Click to expand...

How many countries on this Earth would be absolutely ecstatic to have a 5.5% unemployment rate?

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/economy/stimulus-checks-bolster-retail-sales/

Thursday, June 12, 2008
Stimulus Checks Bolster May Retail Sales

WASHINGTON--

Retail sales jumped by the largest amount in six months in May as 57 million economic stimulus payments helped offset the headwinds buffeting consumers.

The Commerce Department reported Thursday that retail sales soared 1% last month, the biggest increase since November. A wide variety of retailers enjoyed a good month, including the biggest increase at department stores and other general merchandise stores in a year.

The May increase was double what economists had been expecting and indicated that the economy is getting a major boost from the $50 million in economic stimulus payments the government sent out in May, just under half of the total stimulus aimed at consumers.

...

It was a much bigger increase than analysts had been expecting. Last week, the government reported that the unemployment rate jumped to 5.5% in May, up from 5% in April. That was the biggest one-month rise in 22 years.

Analysts were surprised by the soild increase in retail sales and noted that sales in April were also revised to show a respectable gain of 0.4%, instead of the original estimate that sales had fallen by 0.2%.

[more]
Click to expand...
 
Make up what? Damn near every time there's a move in the market or a new scientific discovery, there's a tag line that the experts were surprised.

The state of the economy is growth. Slow growth but it's not been negative yet.
 
Gonz said:
Make up what? Damn near every time there's a move in the market or a new scientific discovery, there's a tag line that the experts were surprised.
Click to expand...

See, you just made that up. That's what I'm talking about. You probably only pay attention when something surprising happens.

The state of the economy is growth. Slow growth but it's not been negative yet.
Click to expand...

The economy is going into the crapper.
 
Gonz said:
Make up what? Damn near every time there's a move in the market or a new scientific discovery, there's a tag line that the experts were surprised.

The state of the economy is growth. Slow growth but it's not been negative yet.
Click to expand...

When the growth of the economy is actually negative, that's not a recession.
 
Having a fiancee that works the returns desk at Wal-Mart helps give me a little insight on what these stimulus checks are going for. Not HDTVs pr PS3s or things like that, but new underwear, name-brand shampoo instead of the dollar store stuff, etc. In other words, stuff that people used to be able to routinely afford but now need help from the government to buy because it cost $55 to fill up the Kia to drive to Wal-Mart. Lori spent a big chunk of her stimulus check on an eye exam and contact lenses for the new prescription

Hey, Jim... what have you seen more of lately coming through your line?

As for a few other things...

Once again, better than expected. What's with that? Are the economists hoping the economy will tank?
Click to expand...
"Better than expected" is different than "better than hoped." Unless you think economists masturbate while thinking about higher unemployment claims or something.

How many countries on this Earth would be absolutely ecstatic to have a 5.5% unemployment rate?
Click to expand...
I'm sure there are many... Kenya and Somalia come to mind. Really, though, you make it sound like the economy is fantastic in other nations with higher unemployment rates. News flash: individual nations' economies are not separate. If things suck here, they're going to suck in Great Britain, Japan, Germany, etc. as well. Further, unemployment is not the sole factor in whether the economy has gone to shit or not.

I also love how you didn't pay attention to the point about unemployment rising the fastest in a month it has in the last 22 years. That would be 1986, well before the stock market crash of 1988 and well before the recession in the early 1990s that led to the election of Bill Clinton because he promised change.

Also, what you cut out included this: Highlighting the pressures on the job market, the Labor Department reported Thursday that new applications for jobless benefits rose by 25,000 last week to 384,000, the highest level since late March. The sentence immediately following that, in which it was said that it was a bigger increase than analysts were expecting, you left in. That would seem to undermine your point, which was, I think, that analysts/economists masturbate thinking about the economy getting worse. Those two paragraphs are actually saying that unemployment was worse than the analysts thought it would be, instead of the analysts blowing it out of proportion. The only question is whether your reading comprehension needs help or whether you're trying to selectively read your own sources to make a point while discounting the possibility that the rest of us might click your links and read for ourselves.

I should also point out that the article used "jumped" (which you bolded) to describe a half-percent increase in unemployment, but used "soared" (which you ignored) to describe a one-percent increase in sales.

My next question is what you will say when August rolls around, the last of the stimulus checks have already been mailed and spent and all the major retailers st5art suffering sales drops instead of sales increases.
 
Inkara1 said:
what these stimulus checks are going for.

My next question is what you will say when August rolls around, the last of the stimulus checks have already been mailed and spent and all the major retailers st5art suffering sales drops instead of sales increases.
Click to expand...

Ours went to medical bills and stuff that was getting behind because of medical bills. The only economic stimulus we provided was for other people's benefit. I'm betting we weren't alone.
 
i'd return the check if i could be assured it would go to (and only go to) deficit reduction. but i'm not sure i'm eligible, anyway.
 
i thought a recession, by definition, was two successive quarters of negative growth. meaning contraction, not just a slower rate of positive growth.

it's been a while since my macroecon class. and the professor used to play in his beard with his pointer while lecturing. it was very odd. and distracting.
 
You're right, that is the common definition. I think I got mine from the eighties recession (when in fact the US had an increase in GDP as well, I believe). The S&L problem contributed a lot to that but by this definition that wasn't a recession either. Note that I don't think we're in a recession now, but I do think that we're in danger of falling into one given the global economic climate and the current condition of the banking industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top