I've been waiting for the other shoe to drop in the form of the Pick-Up Truck Index. Well, I guess that's it then. Game over. This will all end in tears. Debate over.
This is a secondary effect from the housing bust; slower auto sales, especially slower truck sales as construction workers find less work.
I think it's a lot bigger than that - it's clearly more than just construction workers who buy trucks... heck I know a lot of guys who never carry anything heavier than golf clubs who have huge full size 4x4s... Why? Who knows but they do.
The fall off for big trucks & SUVs is multi-factor - fuel prices, flat incomes, construction declining, debt & interest rates, 'image' change - and none of them favor Detroit.
For US automakers this is really the perfect storm - a few years back they made a strategic decision to focus on large trucks and SUVs. It worked very well for a while. Now they're being pummeled by the combined effects of high gas prices, a downturn in construction, and the beginning of a broad-based economic decline. Add to that a lack of competitiveness with foreign manufacturers.
It looks bleak.
And I think we're just on the very leading edge of economic downturn being caused by the housing slump.
I try to keep my pessimisim in check because usually I'm quite bullish, and still am for the long term. But so far the pessimism has been justified... and I'm beginning to wonder if there's some merit to the predictions that a US housing collapse will propogate around the globe though the lending industry and commodity markets and result in a global economic bust.
There will be no recession. The FED has managed the business cycle into 10 year spans, we have not even reached the peek of this cycle yet.
So Housing slows, to many people tried to get rich of it, moving them into other areas of the economy which is running fine will be a smooth and orderly transition.
CR, either you hate Bush or something else is bothering you, but you continue this constant whining about Recession why un-educated individuals like Roubini continue to spout this doomsday propaganda. Please be more objective.
"So Housing slows, to many people tried to get rich of it, moving them into other areas of the economy which is running fine will be a smooth and orderly transition."
So the only thing that has kept the economy going for the last 4 years slows. So the only increase in "wealth" which consumers leveraged to keep the economy going is over. So homeowners, who haven't saved a dime in 4 years are cashed out.
How bad could it be.
...either you hate Bush or something else is bothering you...
Ah, now we get down to the nuts and bolts of things.
Perhaps your assessment of CR is right, but what about people like me -- I've long been a long been a conservative / republican sympathizer (especially when that meant being a fiscal conservative with a libertarian bent), and at one point supported GWB (though no longer).
I have not changed my idealogical disposition, but for the most part I find that I agree with CR. Why? My conclusions are a result of what I believe to be a sober and critical application of basic economic principals.
I believe the viewpoints on this website, for the most part, represent a similar way of thinking... otherwise I wouldn't bother checking in.
If you have an economically sound argument as to why we're not likely to see a housing driven recession, I'd certainly like to hear it so I could move on with life.
What I do despise more than anything, though, are specious economic or scientific arguments made for the purposes of some political agenda.
It's peak, not peek.
It's too, not to.
It's off, not of.
It's which are, not which is.
Educated people only capitalize "housing" and "recession" when those words begin sentences.
And un-educated is not a word.
Although I congratulate you on your perception that education is important.
Actually, Lenny sounds like a "talking head" that you hear on the financial channels in the morning. The economy is doing great, housing just got a little overheated and now will cool down "orderly" and "reasonably" ete ete ete but the rest will pick up slack mantra's.
For those of you who like numbers -- here is the NY Times article where the author claims to have found the perfect recession predictor (new car sales)
The problem with this article is that there is no way I know to replicate that darn smooth graph. I even contacted the census bureau and they had no idea which time series the dude was referring to.
If I'm not mistaken, the census bureau publishes the amount of money spent at car dealers. So the dude (author of the article) -- claims to have discounted that by the inflation rate. That should basically tell you how many new cars were sold. But if thats what you want to see you can just look at this time series:
as you see car/truck sales are 15% down from a year ago. However, this could be because one year ago we had this huge spike when GM and Ford started to sell cars at/below cost.
Take a look at this table. The first column is the date, second column is the number in mil, third column is the change in % from today to that date:
I cant make any conclusions from this at all. But i Must be dumm cause the times clearly sees somethin here.
Oops wait -- stupid me indeed -- I should look how much are car+truck sales down so far into the year -- well lets take a look then:
Between 2005-07-01 and 2005-01-01 inclusive we had 120.30 Mil units sold.
Between 2006-07-01 and 2006-01-01
inclusive we had 116.59 mil units sold. Thats down 3.7%. For a noisy time series such as this one this doesnt mean much.
I do agree that car/truck sales fall in recessions. But we haven't seen that so far. Wait till the recession gets going a bit.
Between 2005-07-01 and 2005-01-01 inclusive we had 120.30 Mil units sold.
Between 2006-07-01 and 2006-01-01
inclusive we had 116.59 mil units sold. Thats down 3.7%. For a noisy time series such as this one this doesn't mean much
That has to be new and used cars or a big mistake - somewhere.
Typically there is something like 16 million cars & small trucks BUILT in the US per year. There are way more used vehicles sold - not sure of that number.
The Times article specifies NEW only & that makes sense since there is a whole lot more economic activity involved in the build-sell of a new vehicle compared to a used resale.
There are two main drivers of auto sales forecasting:
(1) interest rates - better if low and or falling
(2) age of the existing stock on the road - better if old & worn out
We are clearly in a situation where both are working against auto sales. The cars are new enough so that they don't have to be replaces and more expensive if they do anyway.
On top of that many folks have cars that are upside down (owe more than worth) and can't even use them as a down payments.
And we aren't even discussing flat wages, the end of the housing ATM and high fuel costs dragging on demand.
According to THIS - See Page 2 for 2004, similar for 2005... US new light vehicle sales are about 16 million units per year with about 12 million per year produced in the US (I assume the rest are imports). Anyone have better info?
The point is the domestic build is declining and the ripples through the economy is likely to be painful.
The question keeps jumping one ahead of the popular perception. By the time the MSM and usual talking heads are talking about what kind of recession we are entering the real question becomes whether we can hold this to merely a severe recession. My guess, yes with the "victim" being the USD. Hey, not so bad, means we can export some of the pain to our debt holders and trade partners. Maybe oil goes dual currency EU/USD so what? The currencies were/are liquid vis a vis anyway. A good general recession can clear out a lot of accumulated excesses. Bring it on. OKAY, I'm kinda on a caffeine buzz with my coffee futures at 7 freakin' year highs so give me a little slack. My wheat futures are getting creamed so I am not bragging either just 'splainin the facts.
I propose that logic is retaught each year from K through 12. The material will be an hour each day. The entire hour will be spent repeating one single example of 'if p then q' DOES NOT imply 'if q then p'.
Another hour each day will be spent repeating one example to illustrate the difference between correlation and causation.
Maybe after 12 years of rote programming the general public will develop the ability to spot it.
We can swap them with uselessly overcooked material like history.
Those two tools are probably the most important weapons employed in mass control. They are definitely the pass and run in the playbook of manipulation.
If you don't like Bush, then you must be a terrorist!
Sorry to fart in the echo-chamber but poor ol' un-ed-u-kated Lenny is probably right, or more right than Roubini, who is consistently wrong. Perhaps he is operating on the stopped-clock-is-right-twice-a-day principle, and he'll get it right this time, but if he does it'll be a first.
Now I know, "past results do not guarantee future ..." etc etc but this guy is a joke with a flashy web site.
I apologize - let's get back to the regular broadcasting:
I thought the Japanese car manufacturers were doing great while the US ones were having many issues.
I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we're heading into a recession, but every day it seems like it's more and more likely. I don't see why everyone labels Roubini as being such a pessimist. He states that there's a 70% chance of recession. I would put the odds at closer to 50%, but I generally agree with him. He's nowhere near as pessimistic as those who think everyone should buy gold before the USD collapses.
Anon-
I take it you are a big fan of Alan Greenspans bubbles and GWB? Dr. Roubini may appear somewhat 'frothy' but Kudlow acted like he was back on Coke.
I love these Wall Street Wags and their so called 'consenus' opines. NO RECESSION- soft landing-everything will be fine etc etc etc
I suppose all the incredible excesses of this bubble will simply be a soft landing.
Roubini may be a 'wingnut' but more 'credible ' and honest economists like David Rosenberg of ML- and Ian Shepherdson of High Frequency Economics- and Joel Naroff of Naroff Economics agree with the 'wingnut'.
They have said a housing implosion would likely cause a recession- many however on the 'street of dreams' and those 'consenus guys and gals still believe it will happen. (recession)
In the case of Dr. Shepherdson (who is not a nutcase) He predicted in the Autumn of 2005 of a meltdown for housing begining in mid 2006, with a recession in 2007 - thus far he has been correct. As for Mr. Naroff, he has said the current housing situation is a 'rout'..... that will lead to 'at least a big slowdown'.
Dr. Roubini may act and look strange, and his predictions rather severe, but he is not the only economist making a doomsday scenario.
And thus far his predictions (Roubini) and the others mentioned above regarding housing and the economy hold more weight then the polyanna cheerleaders and denial dogs.
Right Peter, one would follow the other. If I'm skeptical of Roubini's track record, which is poor, I must be a FED/Kudlow/Republican lickspittle.
I never called Roubini a wingnut, so I'm not sure what the quotes are for. I called him a joke, which he is. I don't base this on acting or looking strange. Rather, I base this on the wide gap between his silly, bombastic rhetoric and Krugman-like self-regard on one hand, and his rather poor record on the other. Not that having a poor record is unusual for a voodoo priest, oops I mean "macroeconomist".
I also never said "NO RECESSION". I simply said that our pal Lenny (way above in the comments) is probably closer to the truth than Roubini, if only because betting against Roubini has paid off pretty well so far.
You need to calm down. A recession sometime in the future is a 100% probability. What isn't a 100% probabliliy is that a recession = doomsday.
I simply said that our pal Lenny (way above in the comments) is probably closer to the truth than Roubini, if only because betting against Roubini has paid off pretty well so far.
You need to calm down. A recession sometime in the future is a 100% probability. What isn't a 100% probably is that a recession = doomsday.
I agree with BOTH of those statements 100%.
(1) FWIW - This recovery has been truly extraordinary in its stubbornness to roll over to 'us' pessimists... no doubt about it. Betting against Roubini has so far been a take-it-to-the-bank franchise.
However it is possible he has been wrong for all the right reasons - this reminds me of the on going debate between technical market timers and fundamental analysts. In general they are both right in their own domain (tech's picking timing & fundies spotting rotten eggs that will eventually burst, eventually). But they suck at each other's game.
Just because something that can't go on forever won't, doesn't mean it will end NOW.
(2) Recessions can be very good things for some people. I've made by FAR most of my money in recessions.
The front ends are terrible but the back ends are wonderful (after all the carnage has passed and there is nothing but carrion left - yum).
Seriously. I am a bit of a scavenger or parasite on the manufacturing industry - providing services & products they won't or can't easily produce in-house.
In boom times they can do it all - they got money to burn and they burn it well. In the early part of a recession they are paying so much attention to damage control they ignore me and everyone else - just trying to put out the fires and make it through another day. But after the smoke clears... then it gets interesting. Sometimes VERY interesting.
My guess is EVERY industry or service sector has a similar 'sour spot' that benefits from a slowing economy. If you know where it is for your business, this 'recession' won't be doomsday, it will be payday. Do your homework now.
BTW - a very old sage I work with has a motto... "We'll end this recession an order at a time." I've heard that from him in the mid '80s, early '90s and just after 9/11... my guess is I'll be hearing it from him again sometime soon - when is a question of debate.
dryfly - I agree with your point about benefiting from a recession. Our mobile home parks are only 80% full; but waiting to be filled with ex-middle class!
Having read pre-fancy site Roubini, I find myself agreeing with most of his fundamentals. His call for the end of the global BW2 system, for example, may yet happen; it is just that he may be off a few decades on the timing.
Perhaps the case is that the folks that read Roubini do so for fun, having already distanced themselves from any forthcoming ill effects.
One thing is for sure - Nouriel has stuck his neck out. He'll either be star or a goat... with that strong of a call I doubt he'll remain ignored.
::::
Eric - don't laugh, I was 100% serious about the 'up side' of recessions. Unless you are on top of the heap, a shake up of the status quo presents the possibility you will either end up higher, lower or in the same spot than you were once the shaking & sifting stops.
But regardless of where we are when it settles you know the ride is going to be a little rough for a while - I been there - that part's for sure.
I've been waiting for the other shoe to drop in the form of the Pick-Up Truck Index. Well, I guess that's it then. Game over. This will all end in tears. Debate over.
This is a secondary effect from the housing bust; slower auto sales, especially slower truck sales as construction workers find less work.
I think it's a lot bigger than that - it's clearly more than just construction workers who buy trucks... heck I know a lot of guys who never carry anything heavier than golf clubs who have huge full size 4x4s... Why? Who knows but they do.
The fall off for big trucks & SUVs is multi-factor - fuel prices, flat incomes, construction declining, debt & interest rates, 'image' change - and none of them favor Detroit.
dryfly is right, just like is usually is.
Heck, here in SoCal I even see hot babes and Hollywood movie stars running around in F150's because its the "in thing" to drive.
I'd like to see a L-T chart that compares auto/truck sales to GDP growth. As I recall, car sales are reasonably good leading indicator, no?
For US automakers this is really the perfect storm - a few years back they made a strategic decision to focus on large trucks and SUVs. It worked very well for a while. Now they're being pummeled by the combined effects of high gas prices, a downturn in construction, and the beginning of a broad-based economic decline. Add to that a lack of competitiveness with foreign manufacturers.
It looks bleak.
And I think we're just on the very leading edge of economic downturn being caused by the housing slump.
I try to keep my pessimisim in check because usually I'm quite bullish, and still am for the long term. But so far the pessimism has been justified... and I'm beginning to wonder if there's some merit to the predictions that a US housing collapse will propogate around the globe though the lending industry and commodity markets and result in a global economic bust.
There will be no recession. The FED has managed the business cycle into 10 year spans, we have not even reached the peek of this cycle yet.
So Housing slows, to many people tried to get rich of it, moving them into other areas of the economy which is running fine will be a smooth and orderly transition.
CR, either you hate Bush or something else is bothering you, but you continue this constant whining about Recession why un-educated individuals like Roubini continue to spout this doomsday propaganda. Please be more objective.
"So Housing slows, to many people tried to get rich of it, moving them into other areas of the economy which is running fine will be a smooth and orderly transition."
So the only thing that has kept the economy going for the last 4 years slows. So the only increase in "wealth" which consumers leveraged to keep the economy going is over. So homeowners, who haven't saved a dime in 4 years are cashed out.
How bad could it be.
hehehehehehehehe
...either you hate Bush or something else is bothering you...
Ah, now we get down to the nuts and bolts of things.
Perhaps your assessment of CR is right, but what about people like me -- I've long been a long been a conservative / republican sympathizer (especially when that meant being a fiscal conservative with a libertarian bent), and at one point supported GWB (though no longer).
I have not changed my idealogical disposition, but for the most part I find that I agree with CR. Why? My conclusions are a result of what I believe to be a sober and critical application of basic economic principals.
I believe the viewpoints on this website, for the most part, represent a similar way of thinking... otherwise I wouldn't bother checking in.
If you have an economically sound argument as to why we're not likely to see a housing driven recession, I'd certainly like to hear it so I could move on with life.
What I do despise more than anything, though, are specious economic or scientific arguments made for the purposes of some political agenda.
Lenny:
It's peak, not peek.
It's too, not to.
It's off, not of.
It's which are, not which is.
Educated people only capitalize "housing" and "recession" when those words begin sentences.
And un-educated is not a word.
Although I congratulate you on your perception that education is important.
I agree.
Lenny here is probably SS, the troll on Barry's blog.
Geez, these trolls are morons...
Felix, you're a hard man.....you know diction and grammar haven't been taught for two decades....
Felix,
Well done.
Lenny,
Please stop, if only for your own sake.
Actually, Lenny sounds like a "talking head" that you hear on the financial channels in the morning. The economy is doing great, housing just got a little overheated and now will cool down "orderly" and "reasonably" ete ete ete but the rest will pick up slack mantra's.
For those of you who like numbers -- here is the NY Times article where the author claims to have found the perfect recession predictor (new car sales)
OFF THE CHARTS; A Car-Sales Indicator Suggests a Recession Is Near or Already Here - NY Times
The problem with this article is that there is no way I know to replicate that darn smooth graph. I even contacted the census bureau and they had no idea which time series the dude was referring to.
If I'm not mistaken, the census bureau publishes the amount of money spent at car dealers. So the dude (author of the article) -- claims to have discounted that by the inflation rate. That should basically tell you how many new cars were sold. But if thats what you want to see you can just look at this time series:
St. Louis Fed: Series: ALTSALES, Light Weight Vehicle Sales: Autos & Light Trucks
as you see car/truck sales are 15% down from a year ago. However, this could be because one year ago we had this huge spike when GM and Ford started to sell cars at/below cost.
Take a look at this table. The first column is the date, second column is the number in mil, third column is the change in % from today to that date:
2005-05-01\t16.78\t2%
2005-06-01\t17.78\t-4%
2005-07-01\t18.78\t-10%
2005-08-01\t19.78\t-15%
2005-09-01\t20.78\t-21%
2005-10-01\t14.79\t14%
2005-11-01\t16.01\t7%
2005-12-01\t17.08\t0%
I cant make any conclusions from this at all. But i Must be dumm cause the times clearly sees somethin here.
Oops wait -- stupid me indeed -- I should look how much are car+truck sales down so far into the year -- well lets take a look then:
Between 2005-07-01 and 2005-01-01 inclusive we had 120.30 Mil units sold.
Between 2006-07-01 and 2006-01-01
inclusive we had 116.59 mil units sold. Thats down 3.7%. For a noisy time series such as this one this doesnt mean much.
I do agree that car/truck sales fall in recessions. But we haven't seen that so far. Wait till the recession gets going a bit.
Between 2005-07-01 and 2005-01-01 inclusive we had 120.30 Mil units sold.
Between 2006-07-01 and 2006-01-01
inclusive we had 116.59 mil units sold. Thats down 3.7%. For a noisy time series such as this one this doesn't mean much
That has to be new and used cars or a big mistake - somewhere.
Typically there is something like 16 million cars & small trucks BUILT in the US per year. There are way more used vehicles sold - not sure of that number.
The Times article specifies NEW only & that makes sense since there is a whole lot more economic activity involved in the build-sell of a new vehicle compared to a used resale.
This is clearly a perfect storm scenario.
There are two main drivers of auto sales forecasting:
(1) interest rates - better if low and or falling
(2) age of the existing stock on the road - better if old & worn out
We are clearly in a situation where both are working against auto sales. The cars are new enough so that they don't have to be replaces and more expensive if they do anyway.
On top of that many folks have cars that are upside down (owe more than worth) and can't even use them as a down payments.
And we aren't even discussing flat wages, the end of the housing ATM and high fuel costs dragging on demand.
This will take a while to work through.
If you want to get the 'real numbers' this is where you go...
Wards Auto Premium
I don't have access... anyone?
More confusion...
According to THIS - See Page 2 for 2004, similar for 2005... US new light vehicle sales are about 16 million units per year with about 12 million per year produced in the US (I assume the rest are imports). Anyone have better info?
The point is the domestic build is declining and the ripples through the economy is likely to be painful.
The question keeps jumping one ahead of the popular perception. By the time the MSM and usual talking heads are talking about what kind of recession we are entering the real question becomes whether we can hold this to merely a severe recession. My guess, yes with the "victim" being the USD. Hey, not so bad, means we can export some of the pain to our debt holders and trade partners. Maybe oil goes dual currency EU/USD so what? The currencies were/are liquid vis a vis anyway. A good general recession can clear out a lot of accumulated excesses. Bring it on. OKAY, I'm kinda on a caffeine buzz with my coffee futures at 7 freakin' year highs so give me a little slack. My wheat futures are getting creamed so I am not bragging either just 'splainin the facts.
As for education...
I propose that logic is retaught each year from K through 12. The material will be an hour each day. The entire hour will be spent repeating one single example of 'if p then q' DOES NOT imply 'if q then p'.
Another hour each day will be spent repeating one example to illustrate the difference between correlation and causation.
Maybe after 12 years of rote programming the general public will develop the ability to spot it.
We can swap them with uselessly overcooked material like history.
Those two tools are probably the most important weapons employed in mass control. They are definitely the pass and run in the playbook of manipulation.
If you don't like Bush, then you must be a terrorist!
Sorry to fart in the echo-chamber but poor ol' un-ed-u-kated Lenny is probably right, or more right than Roubini, who is consistently wrong. Perhaps he is operating on the stopped-clock-is-right-twice-a-day principle, and he'll get it right this time, but if he does it'll be a first.
Now I know, "past results do not guarantee future ..." etc etc but this guy is a joke with a flashy web site.
I apologize - let's get back to the regular broadcasting:
bleak... perfect storm... re-setting ARMs... MEW...
I thought the Japanese car manufacturers were doing great while the US ones were having many issues.
I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we're heading into a recession, but every day it seems like it's more and more likely. I don't see why everyone labels Roubini as being such a pessimist. He states that there's a 70% chance of recession. I would put the odds at closer to 50%, but I generally agree with him. He's nowhere near as pessimistic as those who think everyone should buy gold before the USD collapses.
Anon-
I take it you are a big fan of Alan Greenspans bubbles and GWB? Dr. Roubini may appear somewhat 'frothy' but Kudlow acted like he was back on Coke.
I love these Wall Street Wags and their so called 'consenus' opines. NO RECESSION- soft landing-everything will be fine etc etc etc
I suppose all the incredible excesses of this bubble will simply be a soft landing.
Roubini may be a 'wingnut' but more 'credible ' and honest economists like David Rosenberg of ML- and Ian Shepherdson of High Frequency Economics- and Joel Naroff of Naroff Economics agree with the 'wingnut'.
They have said a housing implosion would likely cause a recession- many however on the 'street of dreams' and those 'consenus guys and gals still believe it will happen. (recession)
In the case of Dr. Shepherdson (who is not a nutcase) He predicted in the Autumn of 2005 of a meltdown for housing begining in mid 2006, with a recession in 2007 - thus far he has been correct. As for Mr. Naroff, he has said the current housing situation is a 'rout'..... that will lead to 'at least a big slowdown'.
Dr. Roubini may act and look strange, and his predictions rather severe, but he is not the only economist making a doomsday scenario.
And thus far his predictions (Roubini) and the others mentioned above regarding housing and the economy hold more weight then the polyanna cheerleaders and denial dogs.
Right Peter, one would follow the other. If I'm skeptical of Roubini's track record, which is poor, I must be a FED/Kudlow/Republican lickspittle.
I never called Roubini a wingnut, so I'm not sure what the quotes are for. I called him a joke, which he is. I don't base this on acting or looking strange. Rather, I base this on the wide gap between his silly, bombastic rhetoric and Krugman-like self-regard on one hand, and his rather poor record on the other. Not that having a poor record is unusual for a voodoo priest, oops I mean "macroeconomist".
I also never said "NO RECESSION". I simply said that our pal Lenny (way above in the comments) is probably closer to the truth than Roubini, if only because betting against Roubini has paid off pretty well so far.
You need to calm down. A recession sometime in the future is a 100% probability. What isn't a 100% probabliliy is that a recession = doomsday.
I simply said that our pal Lenny (way above in the comments) is probably closer to the truth than Roubini, if only because betting against Roubini has paid off pretty well so far.
You need to calm down. A recession sometime in the future is a 100% probability. What isn't a 100% probably is that a recession = doomsday.
I agree with BOTH of those statements 100%.
(1) FWIW - This recovery has been truly extraordinary in its stubbornness to roll over to 'us' pessimists... no doubt about it. Betting against Roubini has so far been a take-it-to-the-bank franchise.
However it is possible he has been wrong for all the right reasons - this reminds me of the on going debate between technical market timers and fundamental analysts. In general they are both right in their own domain (tech's picking timing & fundies spotting rotten eggs that will eventually burst, eventually). But they suck at each other's game.
Just because something that can't go on forever won't, doesn't mean it will end NOW.
(2) Recessions can be very good things for some people. I've made by FAR most of my money in recessions.
The front ends are terrible but the back ends are wonderful (after all the carnage has passed and there is nothing but carrion left - yum).
Seriously. I am a bit of a scavenger or parasite on the manufacturing industry - providing services & products they won't or can't easily produce in-house.
In boom times they can do it all - they got money to burn and they burn it well. In the early part of a recession they are paying so much attention to damage control they ignore me and everyone else - just trying to put out the fires and make it through another day. But after the smoke clears... then it gets interesting. Sometimes VERY interesting.
My guess is EVERY industry or service sector has a similar 'sour spot' that benefits from a slowing economy. If you know where it is for your business, this 'recession' won't be doomsday, it will be payday. Do your homework now.
BTW - a very old sage I work with has a motto... "We'll end this recession an order at a time." I've heard that from him in the mid '80s, early '90s and just after 9/11... my guess is I'll be hearing it from him again sometime soon - when is a question of debate.
dryfly - I agree with your point about benefiting from a recession. Our mobile home parks are only 80% full; but waiting to be filled with ex-middle class!
Having read pre-fancy site Roubini, I find myself agreeing with most of his fundamentals. His call for the end of the global BW2 system, for example, may yet happen; it is just that he may be off a few decades on the timing.
Perhaps the case is that the folks that read Roubini do so for fun, having already distanced themselves from any forthcoming ill effects.
CR, two words in thanks for your research.
One thing is for sure - Nouriel has stuck his neck out. He'll either be star or a goat... with that strong of a call I doubt he'll remain ignored.
::::
Eric - don't laugh, I was 100% serious about the 'up side' of recessions. Unless you are on top of the heap, a shake up of the status quo presents the possibility you will either end up higher, lower or in the same spot than you were once the shaking & sifting stops.
But regardless of where we are when it settles you know the ride is going to be a little rough for a while - I been there - that part's for sure.
Dryfly
no offense- but your inabilty to take a stand on just about any issue is boring and so typically republican.
Anal retentive nontheless- from what I see you are a dyed in the wool republican, trying to prop up an incredibly corrupt regime.
Dryfly? A Republican?
Dryman. The mistake I've made was that the number is annualized. It makes no difference as far as percentages y to y. Conclusions stand.
My guess, yes with the "victim" being the USD.
rc helicopter
Tactical Flashlights
video game