<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Forum  

They were wrong again.

August 13 2009 at 9:23 AM
No score for this post
  (Login Rob18D)
from IP address 205.188.116.198

Nearly every week I read stories about how "experts" were "surprised" about something to do with the economy. These people who forecast the numbers on economic reports are worse than weathermen/women because at least weathermen/women admit that they really don't know for sure what the weather will be at a particular time and place in their forecasts while most of these economists and other "experts" making their predictions or analyzing economic reports often portray their views as the gospel.

In the Army we had a term for knowingly and falsley presenting the facts to put the best face on them possible. It is called "Blowing smoke up ones ass."
And that is EXACTLY what this administration with it's willing accomplices in the media have been doing.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fed-says-economy-leveling-new-apf-1948834182.html?x=0&.v=7

Retail sales dip unexpectedly, jobless claims rise
Unexpected drop in July retail sales, rise in new US jobless claims point to strained recovery
By Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer
On Thursday August 13, 2009, 12:01 pm EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Retail sales disappointed in July and the number of newly laid-off Americans filing claims for unemployment benefits rose unexpectedly last week. The latest government reports reinforced concerns about how quickly consumers will be able to contribute to a broad economic recovery.

"There is really no positive spin to put on these numbers," Jennifer Lee, an economist with BMO Capital Markets, wrote in a research note. "The U.S. consumer remains very weak. The jobs situation, while slowly improving, is still dismal."

The Commerce Department said Thursday that retail sales fell 0.1 percent last month. Economists had expected a gain of 0.7 percent.

While autos, helped by the start of the Cash for Clunkers program, showed a 2.4 percent jump -- the biggest in six months -- there was widespread weakness elsewhere. Gasoline stations, department stores, electronics outlets and furniture stores all reported declines.

The July dip was the first setback following two months of modest sales gains. Excluding autos, sales fell 0.6 percent, worse than the 0.1 percent rise economists had forecast. And excluding both auto and gas purchases, retail sales fell 0.4 percent -- the fifth straight monthly decline.

Households are working to pay down debt and add to savings, longer-term trends along with little job growth making it "probable that the U.S. consumer will not be much of a help during the early stages of the economic recovery," Joshua Shapiro, chief U.S. economist at consulting firm MFR Inc., wrote in a note to clients.

The Labor Department said initial claims increased to a seasonally adjusted 558,000, from 554,000 the previous week. Analysts expected new claims to drop to 545,000, according to Thomson Reuters.

The number of people remaining on the benefit rolls, meanwhile, fell to 6.2 million from 6.34 million the previous week. Analysts had expected a smaller decline. The continuing claims data lags initial claims by one week.

The four-week average of initial claims, which smooths out fluctuations, rose by 8,500 to 565,000. That reverses six straight weeks of decline.

A weak job market hurt sales last month. Gas station sales plunged 2.1 percent in July, due more to falling pump prices than weak demand. Excluding that drop, retail sales would have posted a modest 0.1 percent increase.

Department store sales fell 1.6 percent and the broader category of general merchandise stores, which includes big chains such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Target Corp., posted a decline of 0.8 percent.

Wal-Mart on Thursday reported virtually flat second-quarter income compared with a year ago, but the results beat Wall Street expectations and the world's largest retailer raised the low end of its profit outlook as a series of cost-cutting moves draw frugal shoppers away from rivals.

Still, the July weakness in overall retail sales highlighted worries about the potential strength of the recovery from the recession. Consumer spending accounts for about 70 percent of total economic activity.

"Households are in no position to drive a decent economic recovery," Paul Dales, U.S. economist at Capital Economics, wrote in a note to clients.

Elsewhere, some of Europe's largest economies benefited from government programs to support the auto industry. Germany and France returned to economic growth in the second quarter, raising hopes the recession in the 16-country euro area may end sooner than thought. Europe's two biggest economies each grew 0.3 percent from the previous three-month period, surprising analysts and technically ending their worst recession in decades.

While there have been recent signs of stability in the U.S. housing market after three years of plunging prices, record foreclosures persist. The number of U.S. households on the verge of losing their homes rose 7 percent in July, as the foreclosure crisis continued to outpace government efforts to limit the damage.

Foreclosure filings rose 32 percent from the same month last year, RealtyTrac Inc. said Thursday. More than 360,000 households, or one in every 355 homes, received a foreclosure-related notice. That's the highest monthly level since the foreclosure-listing firm began publishing the data more than four years ago.

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday delivered a more upbeat assessment of the economy. The central bank held interest rates at record lows and said it would slow the pace of an emergency rescue program to buy $300 billion worth of Treasury securities, shutting it down at the end of October, a month later than previously scheduled.

The Fed again pledged to keep a key bank lending rate near zero for "an extended period" to nurture an anticipated recovery.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues said the economy appeared to be "leveling out" -- a considerable upgrade from their last meeting in June, when the Fed observed only that the economy's contraction was slowing.

On Wall Street, stocks edged up in midday trading Thursday. The Dow Jones industrial average gained about 20 points, while broader indices also rose.

Initial claims reflect the pace of layoffs by employers. The Labor Department last week said companies cut 247,000 jobs in July, a large amount but still the smallest number in almost a year.

The unemployment rate dipped to 9.4 percent in July from 9.5 percent, its first drop in 15 months.

There were 617,000 new jobless claims in late June, before the figures were distorted last month by a shift in the timing of temporary auto plant shutdowns. That shift caused claims to drop sharply and then jump up last month.

Claims fell steeply last week, however, when the data were no longer affected by the distortions.

Still, initial claims remain far above the roughly 325,000 that economists say is consistent with a healthy economy. New claims last fell below 300,000 in early 2007.

Including federal emergency benefit programs, 9.25 million people received unemployment compensation in the week ending July 25, the latest data available. That's down from a record of 9.35 million the previous week. Congress has added up to 53 extra weeks of benefits on top of the 26 typically provided by the states.


De Oppresso Liber

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

KeithDB
(Premier Login KeithDB)
Forum Owner
24.244.189.77

Re: They were wrong again.

No score for this post
August 14 2009, 5:04 AM 

There's the old joke that "if you laid all the economist of the world end to end, they still wouldn't reach an agreement."  A skeptic in one of my health economics courses once observed "Have you noticed that economists never put numbers on the side of those graphs."

In the first economics course I ever took the professor started bydefining economics as "the science that attempts to explain, predict and control the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services in society."  He acknowledged that many preferred it be referred to as a "social science" but he said that would reduce it to the level (add scorn to his voice) "of psychology and sociology."  He regarded economics as must more "scientific" than those "social sciences."

I argued that point with him.  I pointed out that conducting experiments in economics was so impractical that the field of "experimental economics" was practically non-existant.  Hypothesis testing, to the extent it occurs, generally only uses historical data.  That includes my own later effort at a scientific approach to health macro-economics summarized here:  http://www.network54.com/Forum/594658/thread/1220397701/America%27s+Healthcare+System

The fact of the matter is that the very lack of consensus about even fundamental economic princples precludes it from being a true science in my view.  Scientists looking at the same data should come to roughly the same conclusions.  Economists don't.



"A man never drinks anything that a plant lives in" --DBone (A Real Man).
http://vimeo.com/4938173

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login Rob18D)
205.188.116.198

Re: They were wrong again.

No score for this post
August 14 2009, 1:12 PM 

You do realize that what you have said about economics not being a real science can also be applied for the very same reason to climatology?

As with many sciences, the real hard core activities in Cimatology and Economics are in mathimatical modeling. This is because ultimatly, the holy grail of both of these sciences is to accuratly predict events in the future by mathimatically modeling the relationships of complex and greatly disparate data.

For a mathimatical model to be truley viable then it must be proven to accuratly predict future events repeatedly. Neither Economics nor Climatology have produced such a model.

De Oppresso Liber

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Current Topic - They were wrong again.
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Forum