Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump's Economy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TopHatter
    replied
    Trump will probably have to deal with a 10%-plus unemployment rate come November's election

    The U.S. labor market will probably be in a more positive place come election season this fall than the one being battered by the COVID-19 pandemic this spring.

    But most Wall Street pros Yahoo Finance has spoken with think that even if the U.S. economy is back to creating jobs later this year as businesses reopen, the unemployment rate will remain above 10%.

    Legions of people will have to be retrained to support the jobs of today, which is one factor in the unemployment rate likely staying elevated. It will take time to make that happen, and experts believe the government may have to get involved with a major upskilling program.

    The other factor in play is that scores of U.S. businesses simply won’t survive the health crisis currently gripping the country. By extension, those are jobs that could completely go away. And another is that when businesses do reopen, they will be doing so with far less demand, lessening the need to bring back a large amount of their workforces.

    “We think the unemployment rate is going to decline relatively slow. By the end of the year, it will still be in the double-digits,” Deutsche Bank chief U.S. economist Matthew Luzzetti told Yahoo Finance’s “The First Trade.” “My concern is that reopening is not flipping a switch, and it’s not just going back to 100% for a lot of these businesses. It will be a much slower process. And it means businesses are operating at less than full capacity for a long period of time.”

    Indeed, these will be brutal macroeconomic headlines for president Trump to circumvent in the lead-up to the November election. Trump arguably hasn’t created the existing economic downturn, but by the fall people will be looking for clear plans to return back to work if they haven’t done so already. Frustrations tied to the lack of jobs and sub-par pay could easily be expressed at the polls.

    Deutsche Bank estimates the U.S. unemployment rate will fall to 7% by the end of 2021. That would still be light years away from the 50-year low unemployment rate of 3.5% hit at the end of 2019.

    To be sure, a 7% unemployment rate would be great compared to right now.

    ‘Lacking leadership at the federal level’

    The U.S. economy shed a record 20.5 million jobs in April and the unemployment rate spiked 14.7%, as the coronavirus pandemic forced businesses across the country to temporarily shut down and lay off or furlough workers. All sectors bled jobs in the month. Upward revisions took the total number of jobs lost in March to 870,000.

    In a new interview with Yahoo Finance, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation co-founder Melinda Gates blamed the federal government for the nation’s economic struggles.

    “We are lacking leadership at the federal level in the United States, and it’s highly distressing and disappointing to have 50 state grown solutions is insufficient. It makes no sense and it’s costing people their lives. It’s costing people their health,” Gates told Yahoo Finance’s editor-in-chief Andy Serwer.

    She added, “It it impacting families now because if we had good testing and tracing systems like Germany, we would have started to reopen slowly more places in the economy and people wouldn’t be struggling so much to put a meal on their table. The lack of action is really causing harm and hurt unnecessarily in this country. And I'm incredibly disappointed to see that.”

    Many unemployed people may also be disappointed, and they will have a chance to vote those feelings come November.
    _________________

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    Interesting bit of news concerning Trump's tweet today about an oil deal. From some parties involved it is "what deal."

    Trump doesn't know what he wants. Cheap oil means cheap gas which he likes. Yet cheap oil isn't good for a strong stock market which he also likes. A deal to cut production he likes. Yet, Saudi will only agree to cut production if ALL cut production including US shale oil. Trump likes US being #1 in oil as it represents MAGA but Saudi doesn't...

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...l?srnd=premium

    Leave a comment:


  • DOR
    replied
    Update

    Previous week was revised up by 24,000 (seems normal on this scale), but the continuing cases -- not initial -- were revised down by 19,000
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • astralis
    replied
    geezus, 6.6 million unemployment claims reported this week; combined with the 3.3 million from last week, 10 million jobs lost in 2 weeks.

    6.6 million was -again- 50% above the HIGH range of predictions. I have a feeling this is just the start, because the lockdowns are only gonna get worse in the upcoming 2 weeks.

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    Originally posted by DOR View Post
    The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office released its assessment of the President’s budget this week, and there are a few items that jump right off the spreadsheet.

    Overall, during 2021-30, the White House wants $936 billion more in revenue, and $3,006 billion more spending … as compared to just 12 months ago … for an increased deficit of $2,070 billion and an extra $10,573 billion in federal debt held by the public.

    As a bone to the miniscule portion of the GOP that still pays lip service to the notion of being fiscally responsible, for every dollar reduction in defense spending, four dollars will be cut from other discretionary spending.

    In the 2021-30 period, and in comparison to March 2019 …
    • $581 billion less for healthcare, $111 billion less for student loans, and $72 billion less for income security.
    • $14.62 billion less temporary assistance to needy families, probably because everyone’s doing so well.
    • $7.03 billion less money for low-income households heating bills.
    • $1,167 billion less revenue from individual and estate and gift taxes. That’s only paid by the upper, upper class.


    https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56278
    Definitely a market economy philosophy where those who can't contribute anything to the exchange of money uphill are not worth shi!.

    Leave a comment:


  • DOR
    replied
    The 2021-30 Budget

    The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office released its assessment of the President’s budget this week, and there are a few items that jump right off the spreadsheet.

    Overall, during 2021-30, the White House wants $936 billion more in revenue, and $3,006 billion more spending … as compared to just 12 months ago … for an increased deficit of $2,070 billion and an extra $10,573 billion in federal debt held by the public.

    As a bone to the miniscule portion of the GOP that still pays lip service to the notion of being fiscally responsible, for every dollar reduction in defense spending, four dollars will be cut from other discretionary spending.

    In the 2021-30 period, and in comparison to March 2019 …
    • $581 billion less for healthcare, $111 billion less for student loans, and $72 billion less for income security.
    • $14.62 billion less temporary assistance to needy families, probably because everyone’s doing so well.
    • $7.03 billion less money for low-income households heating bills.
    • $1,167 billion less revenue from individual and estate and gift taxes. That’s only paid by the upper, upper class.


    https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56278

    Leave a comment:


  • JRT
    replied
    Originally posted by astralis View Post
    I agree with the idea that if you're gonna be in Congress, you must divest of all individual stocks.
    Even if they invest in an S&P_500 index fund, 17.5% (as of Jan 2020) of that index is comprised of only 5 large tech stocks (Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Facebook). So government policy favoring for those five, for example some legislation increasing government spending on cloud computing, would favor that index, would favor investment in any mutual fund closely tracking that index.
    Last edited by JRT; 27 Mar 20,, 17:22.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Originally posted by astralis View Post
    I agree with the idea that if you're gonna be in Congress, you must divest of all individual stocks.

    I could live with all investments being placed in a blind trust while you serve.

    But your suggestion is the preferred method. When I joined civil service after years as a contractor I divested $17,000 of defense mutual funds since I was entering the Acquisition Corps and wanted to be Caesar's Wife.

    Leave a comment:


  • astralis
    replied
    unemployment insurance claims shot up to 3.3 million this week...and it's only been a week since a number of states started doing shelter-in-place, let alone full lockdown. as context, Goldman Sachs last week thought it was going to be 2 million; BOA was more accurate and predicted 3 million.

    so things are worse than even the worse projections. Fed Reserve Bank of St Louis Prez thinks unemployment will hit 30% in the second quarter, and that was -before- this data came out.

    here's where the statistic about 40% of Americans not having $400 for an emergency is about to rear its ugly head.

    Trump is being insanely...optimistic...if he thinks the US will be "open for business" by Easter, but even then...that's 17 days away.

    Mnuchin is saying that the stimulus should arrive in American checking accounts in three weeks. the $1200/American cavalry to the rescue will need to do a lot of rescuing.

    Leave a comment:


  • astralis
    replied
    yeah, it's not equivalent to what Burr and Loeffler did, at all.

    but that won't stop the false equivalence brigade.

    I agree with the idea that if you're gonna be in Congress, you must divest of all individual stocks.

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    Originally posted by astralis View Post
    and then there are the Senators whom took US intel reporting on the coronavirus, warned the rich donors, and cashed out on the stock market....
    I needed to check into Feinstein because I was getting so much grief about it on Mopar forum where many are Trump lovers and California haters. Feinstein's assets have been in a blind trust but her husband's are not since he is an investment banker. The stock he sold, $500,000 - 1,000,000, was a biotech start up making a new cancer drug for possible use. He bought it in 2018 at $18 a share and sold it at $21.38 a share or at it's lowest level in 2020 at the time. Feinstein wasn't present at the intel meeting.

    It has since gone up to $27 a share in mid-March right when everything else was tanking. I moved my 35 year old S&P 500 index fund over to a money market one week before the market tanked. So it sounds to me that Blum was re-arranging his portfolio (stock a small portion) more than anything else since that company would have no exposure to what happened in the market.
    Last edited by tbm3fan; 21 Mar 20,, 19:12.

    Leave a comment:


  • DOR
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    But if you have zero assets how can you with any prudence lend? One default of a loan and you are bankrupt.
    Who has zero assets?
    Even Lehman Bros had something, it just wasn't enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • snapper
    replied
    Originally posted by DOR View Post
    snapper,
    Have a look at this graph:
    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/EXCSRESNW

    See the flat line at the bottom? The one with all the years below it?
    That’s the minimum required level of reserves.
    Anything above that line is excessive.
    Now, note the scale of the left … those are millions, as in millions of millions = trillions.
    Get it?
    But if you have zero assets how can you with any prudence lend? One default of a loan and you are bankrupt.

    Leave a comment:


  • DOR
    replied
    Trump said on Friday that restrictions were not placed on companies at the time because "we thought they would have known better but they didn't know better."
    One more reason the man is unqualified for office, high or otherwise.

    Leave a comment:


  • DOR
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    This goes terribly wrong at some point. You cannot lend what you do not have.
    snapper,
    Have a look at this graph:
    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/EXCSRESNW

    See the flat line at the bottom? The one with all the years below it?
    That’s the minimum required level of reserves.
    Anything above that line is excessive.
    Now, note the scale of the left … those are millions, as in millions of millions = trillions.
    Get it?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X