"blounce"?

OT

Analysis: Voter ire evident in Mass. Senate race

"
Anti-incumbent, anti-establishment sentiment is rampant. Independents are leaving Obama. Republicans are energized. Democrats are subdued. None of it bodes well for the party in power.

"It's going to be a hard November for Democrats," Howard Dean, the Democratic Party chairman in the 2006 and 2008 elections when the party took control of the White House and Congress, told The Associated Press in an interview. "Our base is demoralized."

While he praised Obama as a good president, Dean said the Democrat hasn't turned out to be the "change agent" the party thought it elected, and voters who supported Democrats in back-to-back elections now are turned off. Said Dean: "They really thought the revolution was at hand but it wasn't, and now they're getting the back of the hand."

Just how much voters have soured since Obama took over a country in chaos is reflected in the president's late-game decision to rush to Massachusetts on Sunday to try to stave off an extraordinary Republican upset in the race for a Senate seat held by Democrats for more than half a century.
"

SNAFU wrote:

Anti-incumbent, anti-establishment sentiment is rampant.

All this over an open seat? Glod, people are so insistent on establishing memes in places where it isn't valid.

Added: For all of Dean's talk about building a 50 state party and just moan like this, it's about time you started to man up and do your frigging job. You knew the limitations of the office, you knew the makeup of your party in the senate, a electioneering plan of hopeing the teabaggers take over the GOP from the bottom up isn't much of a plan.

SNAFU wrote:

"Our base is demoralized."

Dean's agenda is pulling the Democratic party to the left. But the truth is that there are people who voted for both of the main parties who can now see, as plain as day, that there is a bipartisan elite, an American oligarchy, running our financial system for their own benefit. What we need is not a pull to the right or to the left, but a pull away from this oligarchy. That's what voters in Massachusetts are expressing, not so much a desire to go further left or right.

Going back to the last thread, the leverage per "squealer" has got to frighten TPTB. One pissed off, out of work underwriter could easily force tens or hundreds of millions in a single MBS back on a bank. No bank or government official wants to give those people an official forum to air their dirty laundry.

Regardless, one data point doesn't make a trend, be it GDP or elections.

Barley wrote:

Good luck w/ that. O has his prize so he will not rock the boat.

Oh, I know it will fail, Barley. Lloyd Blankfein, Jamie Dimon, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel, Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Barney Frank, Alan Greenspan, Chris Dodd, Hank Paulson, and the like are much too powerful to let one close call in the Senate derail their mutual nest-feathering.

As I pointed out in another thread, to these folks the rest of us are the unwashed masses to be fleeced and fed occasional cheap populist measures to keep us sedated.

badger wrote:

Regardless, one data point doesn't make a trend, be it GDP or elections.

Well, if opinion/comments on this blog is indication, in the last 12 months we certainly have a meme! And its not pro-O-admin!

voters who supported Democrats in back-to-back elections now are turned off

O needs to change his name to O-for. Currently O for three (about to got 0 for four) when campaigning.

Deeds in Va
Corzine in NJ
Olympics

Not disputing your data, CR, but in addition the Fed Funds rate rose from 8.68% in July, 1980 to 20.06% in January, 1981.

JMO, but such a stunning rise in interest rates alone would have been instrumental in quickly returning the economy to recession. I'm certain that the inventory build-up without an equal return in demand will result in a continuing sluggish recovery, as you say (or as I interpret you saying), but a return to recession doesn't seem likely.

Sebastian

i weep for eric's puts

Has Eric even mentioned them lately?

Also, belongs on last thread, but--

I know Nothinnnnng! -- Sgt Schultz.

As I pointed out in another thread, to these folks the rest of us are the unwashed masses to be fleeced and fed occasional cheap populist measures to keep us sedated.

You're forgetting a continuation of the years of propaganda that assure everyone that those rich/corporate types know what's best for them (the general public) & have their "best interests" at heart. What with their being proponents & transparent practitioners of free markets and all that kind of thing.

Sebastian wrote:

I'm certain that the inventory build-up without an equal return in demand will result in a continuing sluggish recovery, as you say (or as I interpret you saying), but a return to recession doesn't seem likely.

If you're building inventory at a pace outstripping final demand, eventually you'll have to reduce production until final demand improves. If enough companies have to ratchet back production a return to recession becomes probable.

I'm sure this has been covered, I'm just surprised it's only 25%.

Associated Press
WASHINGTON — About 25 percent of homeowners who received trial loan modifications through President Obama's main foreclosure prevention plan are failing to keep up with their new reduced payments, the Treasury Department said.

At least 196,000 borrowers have missed some or all of their required payments, according to comments Treasury officials made on a conference call yesterday and calculations from government data. An additional 115,000 homeowners who started trial repayment plans last year have either dropped out or been kicked out of Obama's Home Affordable Modification Program, the officials said.

"None of these programs have really been a success," said Vivek Sriram, a mortgage strategist for RBC Capital Markets in New York. "With the high unemployment rate, it's tough to solve the problem because these people will redefault even if their loan terms are fixed."

Loan program's failure rate at 25% | honoluluadvertiser.com | The Honolulu Advertiser

Before the Haiti earthquake pre-empted all other talk,
I was beginning to hear people in the ofc corridors, grumbling
more and more the way we do.

And more and more suspicion of tv cheeriness.

Conjure Bag contributes the following to this discussion:

Conjure Bag.pdf

The impact from the stimulus on GDP growth is already waning, and it will be a drag on growth (because of declining spending) by mid-year.

Middle/end of this year should be entertaining ... with interest rate creep after wind down of QE, stimpack fade, and employment fade of census workers.

And if the R's take massachusetts it could put a dagger in any major stimpack2 before the elections.

Liz, there's a bounce.

lawyerliz wrote:

Also, the trial mods are a delaying tactic too.

I think some of the services will say "Forget the government money; just do the mod in our program. We've already paid the cost of an appraisal and trying to verify income. Don't waste more money trying to meet the government rules."

If they were in danger of defaulting and they make five or six payments at the lower level; take the chance that the lower level will buy you another year of payments. Foreclosure isn't a very attractive option right now and maybe not for a couple of years.

patientrenter: I've come to the conclusion its not just USA elites. If one looks at the primary dealers of the fed.reserve, if one looks at who owns huge quantities sr. preferred shares in major banks/corporations, etc. it runs from the middle east to the UK and Europe. If there is perhaps an outsider, it would be China as their O is different from our O.

I'm think I'm seeing cracks in China's great wall too between capitalists and their draconian government. This isn't about google but about strengthening of the Yuan and some other actions. As usual China isn't revealing the truth about their economic condition which I suspect isn't as strong as they broadcast.

Yes, that's right. Conjure is now looking at more data and agrees with CR that there's going to be a bounce.

But, it's not going to last. This is a very temporary thing.

CR Sez...

When was the last time we saw 5%+ GDP growth, due mostly to inventory changes, and increasing unemployment? It was in Q1 1981.

It does have that eerie early 1980s feel to it.

More anecdotal - one of the customer's we supply parts to has been so hand-to-mouth due to [1] planned inventory cut backs due to bad business environment and [2] their existing supply chain failing & going BK that they are taking WAY more product from us now than was typical a few years ago...

So lets say they used to have 25 turns a year average [turn is a measure of inventory level and equals consumption or usage divided by inventory on hand... if you use 50,000 parts a year and typically hold 2000 parts in inventory then you would have 25 turns - also called 'turnover']... so if they had 25 turns per year typically... they are now currently taking way more than that so we'd guess turns have fallen off to 3-4 turns per year [WAG from seeing their MRP/ERP requirements & forecasts then looking at our orders]. They want stuff on shelf NOW Just in case another round of failures hits their supply chain [like say us].

Eventually they will get 'comfortable' again and take less and maybe even draw inventory back down again - but to a level they are comfortable with at that time. JIT [just in time] works great when things are stable and companies are healthy - it can become a disaster in turbulent times. For them it was last year.

So even without additional stress from the financial sector the inventory swings both up and down are likely to continue... and of course we aren't out of the woods yet on the financial stress thingy either.

So by March/April timeframe there will be a gigantic reality check, if I am reading you correctly?

thanks mp

yeah a bounce

i, like many others, fear that the booster rocket burns out

before the ship reaches orbital velocity

we are burning borrowed fuel and there aint enough

6%? Why not 10%? 10% is bigger and better than 6%.

I bid 11%!! Do I hear 12? 11, going once, going
twice. . . .

black dog wrote:

1981 did not have the jet pack of ARRA. Romer wrote on the white house blog a week or so ago that Q4 GDP got a 2.7% boost from the stimpack (versus 2.8% for Q3 so stimpack decline began in Q4).

Actually the biggest difference was Volcker. Carter admin was stomping on the gas pretty hard prior to 1980 election in the hope it would save them - but the harder the administration stomped on the gas Volcker was stomping on the brakes and did so well into the 1980s.

Don't see Ben doing that - he's pumping nitro while the admin stomps on the gas... and it still barely lurches ahead 4-6% [if the 's #s can be trusted].

Time to bring this puppy into the pits for an overhaul.

lawyerliz wrote:

The international elite thing is nothing new.

I may just be waking up to the behavior going on within the US, LL, but this seems more like a self-serving group helping itself than what happened in 1979-1983, for example, when last we had some really tough economic times. Something has got worse.

lawyerliz wrote:

Doesn't it also matter where exactly this inventory is made?

Yes, in December makes from Asia (Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, etc) had a larger market share than "US" makes (Ford, GM, Chrysler)

lawyerliz wrote:

This feels
different. It feels 'way worse.

It might be regional differences, LL. I didn't enjoy 1979-1983 very much, but in the last two years all I can see is barely dented prosperity. Even the people I know who lost jobs earned millions before the recession, and have homes and stocks worth many millions still. Hardly destitute.

That's what the hub sez. Have these jobless millionaires cut
personal spending?

lawyerliz wrote:

I was there doing the 17 1/2 loans in the 80s. This feels
different.

You weren't in rust belt - we shook states like Wisconsin & Iowa and sent them to Florida to find jobs so they could afford to pay 17% on a house. Up here it isn't even CLOSE to as bad as it was in the 80s except for Detroit - they got it then, they get it now - double lucky.

mp wrote:

In regards to Nanoo's comment, yes, there's going to be a big reality check for everyone--especially for Mr. Market--if final demand doesn't come through.

I've been telling everyone I know: "You need to push break even points lower - a lot lower - so you don't need a bounce to survive." Its starting to sink in with a few of them.

Bob Dobbs wrote:

You can talk about left or right, but people who talk about tearing down the institutions of the powerful are usually classed as leftists.

If your community is mostly on the political left, you see those of your own ilk as the true reformers. Everyone else is a no-good obstructionist. If your community is mostly on the political right, then you see those of your own ilk as the true reformers, and everyone else is a no-good obstructionist. It's the people in the middle who are usually the least enthusiastic about reform.

But all of that is just a distraction fed to us by people who are playing both sides, while always getting what they need. Bankers at Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan are just as likely to be Democrat as Republican. And some of the most important people in both parties are trusted allies of these bankers. Most of that vigorous left-right debating you see every night on TV is just like the gladiatorial contests of ancient Rome - spectacles to keep us entertained while the Emperor and his entourage lived in luxury regardless of which gladiator died.

Most of that vigorous left-right debating you see every night on TV is just like the gladiatorial contests of ancient Rome - spectacles to keep us entertained while the Emperor and his entourage lived in luxury regardless of which gladiator died.

Jas hit the nail on the head when he referred to them as rival gangs. They both loot the taxpayer to feed their favored interests.

The analysis of changes in private inventories was extracted from an internal ConjureCast.

I didn't intend to hijack the thread, but simply thought it would add to the discussion.

I found it helpful, thank you mp.

patientrenter

bob dobbs

from 133 above

yeah you are right

but to do it people on the left and right have to set aside their favorite issues

isssues which are real and do spell out a difference between dems and repubs

warming, health care, drill baby drill, gay marriage, abortion, etc

and agree to come together to institute basic reform

which means...given what the supreme court is doing about corporations right to 'free speech"

we will need to amend the cosntitution

a balanced budget constitutional amendment

limit all legislation to one subject

end corporate, union, organizational funding of campaigns

and especially limit house of rep campaign contributions to citizens who live in the congressional district

if we could do those kinds of basic procedural issues

a new party...the independants party or what ever could succeed

but as soon as the party starts to look partisan...left or right...its over

black dog wrote:

They both loot the taxpayer to feed their favored interests.

It's worse than that, black dog: 3/4 of their interests overlap. Do you think that Phil Gramm or Hank Paulson or Alan Greenspan are destitute now that they are out of power? Of course not. They are swimming in the same pool as before, just in the part labeled "private" instead of "public". And Rahm Emanuel and Ben Bernanke and Barney Frank and Tim Geithner are all swimming in the same pool too. And some day they will move (back) to the the "private" section of the pool. The people calling the shots are more accurately viewed as one self-serving elite community, separate and apart from the unwashed masses, and crossing lines between the public and private sectors and between Democrats and Republicans, than as champions of various sectors of those unwashed masses.

Here in California, it's bifurcated. Those who have a cushion have a big cushion, and are still living high. Those who had no cushion are dying...

Witness the growth of (at least for the short term) wildly successful epicurean restaurants in Oakland the last couple of years. Oakland; where at the low end homes are going at 15% OF previous selling price and high end homes at 15% OFF previous selling price.

volker the viking wrote:

it;s the anecdotal why I come here

Me too - I look for others 'on the ground' take too.

Roger that. Funny, I was just looking at that site after a 3 month hiatus.

josap wrote:

The plan had an end plan. This time I don't see a full plan, just panic and do whatever you think might work responce.

This is the part I don't understand. We are told over and over that we need not worry about the monetary easing causing inflation, yet there has been no path laid out by our economic leaders showing how they will resolve the conflict between still-excessive asset prices and an absence of future inflation. It's very unsettling, and makes me think they are lying through their teeth. Hardly confidence-inspiring. These are the best leaders we can get?

Didn't end June 09, just bottomed.

dryfly wrote:

Not saying it can't get there - just isn't there yet. Not even close.

The payment system wasn't completely digital then.

The payment system didn't come close to lock up, or Volker couldn't have done his gig.

We're a long way from the gold window now, Toto...

'But a return to recession doesn't seem likely...'
Totally agree...if steps aren't taken to curb govt. debt or use the bailout money to stimulate the real economy if that's even possible in this deflationary spiral...welll...might be a return to D.

Right now the recession is hitting the coasts but thanks to a weak dollar and high oil and food prices, the middle of the country isn't feeling that bad. But I think the next few months will be different. I think the dollar will be stronger and oil and other commodities will give back some of their gains. So some of the food, mining and manufacturing companies will see less strength; while service and retailing will benefit from the extra cash that consumers will find in their pockets due to lower gasoline prices.

I think it will be a very temporary, if welcome, respite.

Comrade Misean is Dope wrote:

We're a long way from the gold window now, Toto...

Gold window was dead in '65... actually was already terminal in '33... just waiting for the obits to be writen. We had been completely fiat since at least WWII. Nothing really different in that respect - digital doesn't matter.

What was different was a huge sector of the economy & its working public got turned upside down - that would be rust belt mfg - and it gashed a big hole though that whole segment of the economy - it never fully returned to its same hey day but did scab & scar over. That is where we are now.

What replaced it was FIRE in places like Florida, AZ & Cali - which was hardly scathed in stagflation & rust belt. Well THAT economic segment is feeling it now like rust belt did then. It is very much sector & regionally focused. Again not that my sleepy little Midwestern town isn't feeling it but NOTHING like what is happening in So Cal, AZ & Fla. Of course we didn't have the 'wealth' to 'lose' either - not this cycle anyway.

mp wrote:

which is all academic.

It most decidedly is. I think it will be sooner as there are other forces and risks overseas which could push it sooner. I also think that CRE, CMBS, small business distress will all pressure sooner rather than later. Small banks will be increasingly challenged as off balance sheet will begin to appear this year, recasting ARMs begin this year.

Germany's GDP took a tumble which surprised me as the headlines coming from Germany seemed to indicate they were doing better than the rest of the EU nations. This is a global economy with global credit, with global exposure here and we are exposed to losses overseas. These factors make it a more perilous situation. The 'black swan' has been overused in the lexicon but as economies weaken, lesser and lesser events become more and more significant. It doesn't have to be financial either, a large natural disaster we are now reminded could just as well be the catalyst.

Academics and Wall Street got away with ignoring Main Street and its relative health. They succeeded at it for too long, the primary reason I think is attaching income with investments so completely that savers were the ones ultimately punished. The very last remaining way for ordinary people to shelter themselves and maintain wealth overtime was their homes. It was/is a lynch-pin to a health economy, that and an enabled middle class (which now consists of professionals as well as non-professionals) with opportunities for stable work. Risk taking and speculation, misallocation of capital became more profound, this also includes the misuse of our resources of people, their skills and intellect. This happened profoundly here but also globally and perhaps even more profoundly in other nations.

Its gonna be an interesting year.

patientrenter wrote:

My friends in California are almost all doing well - still living off enormous gains on home prices and stocks over the last 10-25 years

There was some of that in rust belt too - especially in agriculture. They were a minority and many of them eventually got wrung out a few years later [farm crisis]. Trouble with living off assets is you need to eventually cash them out - somebody else has to have income to pay it off again.

Like I've said a million times here you can't eat the money [house, gold, etc] - somebody needs to produce the stuff.

SNAFU wrote:

Anti-incumbent, anti-establishment sentiment is rampant. Independents are leaving Obama. Republicans are energized. Democrats are subdued. None of it bodes well for the party in power.

If Obama was smart, he would stay away from Mass. By going there, he'll just damage the Democrat.

It's more about Obama and his image and healthcare fiasco than it's about Democrats, anyway.

If it was about supporting Democrats, Obama would have visited NYC just ONCE and his visit would have helped to defeat Bloomberg.

Before that happened, there were a lot of blacks and Hispanics in NYC who still believed in Obama and his spiels.

rich wrote:

It's more about Obama and his image and healthcare fiasco than it's about Democrats, anyway.

It's all about Obama.

there, IFIFY

That didn't take long for the Cards.

Well, mid-middle class.

rich wrote:

If Obama was smart, he would stay away from Mass. By going there, he'll just damage the Democrat.

Really? He can damage a candidate who's too effing lazy to campaign for herself?

Puh-leaze

Yeah...it seems the econ blog discussions are mostly about Main St., Wall St., and Wash. DC...so to try and figure out what's happening or going to happen with these three parts of the economic/financial system will leave you with a partial analysis limited in scope. Like the 'Crisis' Commission is limited in scope looking at the banks and regulators. It's like the system that drives the whole thing - the central banking process - is often underestimated, edited, deleted, or ignored in many interesting and energetic perspectives, debates, & opinions.

Comrade Alexei Mikhailovich wrote:

That didn't take long

never heard that with the lights out

whoever has the ball last wins this one

maybe Swami was right: 77 - 75 Saints

Yeah, I closed them. The difference was you knew what the payment
would be at all times. And buying down an interest rate, which developers
did then, didn't involve any neg am. Tho of course there was neg am too.

merchants of fear wrote:

Cards will win.

if they don't, will you buy a tile in my name?

Saints should be the favorite.

who dat!

Daily Kos: Obama says 4 million jobs in 2010...unlikely

My ad is of an incredible shrinking lady. But then she
blows up fat again.

and who dat!

Offer expired.

patient renter: the effect spread nationally to a proportional effect

God bless 'em

@gruntled (profile) wrote (in reply to...) on Sat, 1/16/2010 - 3:01 pm
km4 wrote: Daily Kos: Obama says 4 million jobs in 2010...unlikely

Obama has been in the White House only a year, but he's already become as disconnected from reality as GW ever was.
Shame! As someone said, he can keep the change. I just want my vote back!

Facts:
- In the 1990s the U.S. economy created a net 22 million jobs, or 2.2 million a year. (note: won't see again in USA with global competition today)

- From 2000 to the end of 2007, the rate plunged to 900,000 a year. (Note: we'll be fortunate to get back to this rate in next couple yrs. )

- From Dec 2007 we've lost 8.1 million jobs and need between 100,000 and 150,000 new jobs each month just to keep up. So we're actually down 10.5 million jobs.
- Pres. Obama recently said he's going to generate 4 million jobs in 2010 4 million jobs - Obama ups the ante - Mike Allen and Craig Gordon - POLITICO.com

disconnected from reality as GW ever was

Bingo !

The end of the office... and the future of work - The Boston Globe

The United States Government Accountability Office has estimated that so-called contingent workers - everything from temps to day laborers to the self-employed to independent contractors - make up nearly a third of the workforce. And forecasters believe that proportion will rise.

THE EMPLOYMENT RATE IS NOW AT 58.2% — THE LOWEST RATE SINCE AUGUST 1983

Yes indeed Obama is disconnected from reality as GW ever was

patientrenter wrote:

That $1 trillion from the Fed was directed at keeping house prices high. So now we know where it went - California homeowners.

No they were just the conduit funneling it all back to Wall Street via MBS. The benefit to them is they still get to remain in their conduit - they just can't easily cash out anymore so they HELOC out.

gruntled wrote:

he's already become as disconnected from reality as GW ever was.

far as I can tell he's no different now than then

gruntled wrote:

he's already become as disconnected from reality as GW ever was.

no differnt now v then

Review - 'Mania, Panics, and Crashes'
-'Often when the bubble bursts there is a contagion effect that is explored along with the discovery of frauds or swindles that become exposed in the downturns.'
-'...the rise in fiat currencies has also resulted in more frequent crises.'
Review -- Manias Panics and Crashes 5th Edition: History of Financial Crises by Charles Kindleberger & Robert Aliber

gruntled wrote:

he's already become as disconnected from reality as GW ever was.

really?

@ josap (profile) wrote (in reply to...) on Sat, 1/16/2010 - 3:15 pm
km4 wrote: temps to day laborers to the self-employed to independent contractors - make up nearly a third of the workforce
Yep, when the job market has no jobs people buy a job of their own (self employment) or open a small company or consult or whatever keeps the bills paid. I did that in the 90s and have never regretted that change.

Bingo and have been an independent consultant for 15 yrs

dryfly wrote:

No they were just the conduit funneling it all back to Wall Street via MBS.

Trust me, dryfly, I know lots of Californians and almost all of them have enormous gains on RRE, net of any loans. Not all Californians were borrowed to the max, especially not the middle-aged or older, middle class or better, folks.

Review - 'Mania, Panics, and Crashes'
-'Often when the bubble bursts there is a contagion effect that is explored along with the discovery of frauds or swindles that become exposed in the downturns.'
-'...the rise in fiat currencies has also resulted in more frequent crises.'
Review -- Manias Panics and Crashes 5th Edition: History of Financial Crises by Charles Kindleberger & Robert Aliber

Oh, I dunno. I think the rest of society are contingent on what
we independents do.

Kali-fornians are Still getting Helocs? Tell me
I misunderstood.

OT: Just spoke with my parents back in Southern California. They're expecting rain of biblical proportions over the next 7 days. I used to own a house in Arrowbear, outside of Running Springs - they expect 10 inches of rain with snow levels at 6000ft. I expect headlines of catastrophe in the next few days...

dryfly wrote:

illusion of stability.

Ben B's real job is to maintain the forcefield

Like the Hotel California, you can check out of CR, but you
can never leave.

tg wrote:

Ben B's real job is to maintain the forcefield

Yup. So far so good.

dryfly wrote:

The day of reckoning comes as more and more try to cash out and there isn't any 'new money' available to buy their piece out.

Just quoted for the sake of posterity. These people may be paper wealthy, but they won't be buying much with that wealth while it is locked up in those 4+ walls.

crazyv wrote:

for the 90% of the population who are employed they have seen increasing wages

Not only wrong but dangerously wrong - that is 90% of the labor force - which continues to drop at an alarming pace. The percentage of the employed population is EMRATIO, and that continues to decline in a historic fashion...
St. Louis Fed: Series: EMRATIO, Civilian Employment-Population Ratio

Private income less transfer payments is not increasing, look at the quarterly numbers from BEA (line 35), you'll notice the last column there is less than the previous column, which is less than the one before etc...
U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

I wonder how many of those people are working under the table?

Err, that is getting paid under the table.

"I wonder how many of those people are working under the table? "

zOMG! Jeeze ll, this is a family site!

I edited, I edited. I knew someone with a dirty mind
would read something into my innocent mistake.

For the unemployed, new job often means a pay cut - Yahoo! News 

Unemployed for nearly a year, David Becker was relieved to land a new job in information technology last summer. The offer carried a price, though: It was a lower-rung job than the one Becker had lost. He had to uproot his family from Wisconsin to Nevada. And, like many formerly jobless people who find work these days, Becker is now paid far less than before — $25,000 less.

Let's see U6 is around 20% so more of this.

The United States Government Accountability Office has estimated that so-called contingent workers - everything from temps to day laborers to the self-employed to independent contractors - make up nearly a third of the workforce.

Time for more with for extend and pretend baby

patientrenter wrote:

And the govt appears to be making every effort to help them hold onto it.

That is accurate - same situation along the NE corridor where similar situation holds true. It won't work UNLESS one of two things happen: [1] excess money creation to 'inflate' wages & asset valuations so as to allow them to still cash out [even though that cashout is worth less and less in real purchasing power]... or we actually produce stuff of value so as to really raise incomes so there is a 'next generation' of buyers able and willing [need both conditions] so as to allow for cash out.

Looks to me gov't is pretty heavily invested in door #1 [above]. Even that is no sure bet to happen given the size of the pyramid.

yagij wrote:

the money has to come from somewhere to pay for that 4+ USD/gal of gasoline and those rising CA taxes and "fees".

Retail Money Market funds are down 20% in the last year according to the Federal Reserve.

Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.6 - January 14, 2010

dryfly wrote:

median is prolly about right tho.

In 2004, median net worth of all US families was $93,100, mean was $448,200.

Wealth in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I would guess those numbers are down from 2004.

somebody's calling BS!

'Looking at the historical evidence, Kehoe and Prescott conclude that bad government policies are responsible for causing great depressions. In particular, they hypothesize that, while different sorts of shocks can lead to ordinary business downturns, overreaction by government can prolong and deepen the downturn, turning it into a depression.'
http://www.econ.umn.edu/~tkehoe/papers/FdCordobaKehoeCrisisEnglish.pdf

dryfly wrote:

I believe the average is higher due to Warren & Bill's contribution to the total... median is prolly about right tho.

Yea, if Bill walked into a bar on Skid Row, the average income would be in the billions, the mean 8 thousand.

km4 wrote:

get out there and work harder

The harder I work, the more they inflate the assets!!

yagij wrote:

The harder I work, the more they inflate

it's a racket

km4 wrote:

But it's called the American Dream, 'cause you have to be asleep to believe it . . .”
-George Carlin

"It's a club, and YOU'RE not in it!"!

I loved that guy..

dryfly wrote: "or we actually produce stuff of value so as to really raise incomes"

The evil genie is out of the bottle what with all the off-shoring in the last few decades. How do we bring back the jobs average people can do?

Anonymous Bosch wrote:

How do we bring back the jobs average people can do?

The forex knows how - of course that also means most of us won't be able to afford big screens or beemers either - not that we ever should have.

Bob Dobbs wrote:

it did exactly what it was supposed to do

Will it still do what it was supposed to do in 2030?

badger
yours had a remodell too. im waiting for the scooter riders to start drag racing.

When you're stockpiling your pepper and nutmeg for trade goods, don't forget the oldest commodity of all; salt. I'll bet most people don't have more than a pound in stock at home at any given time.

yagij wrote:

NWO... one way or another?

Ya sort of. It really depends on the kind of country we want to have - one where most everyone works but the incomes are modest for most all OR one where far fewer work - some of those that do are VERY wealthy & everyone else either poor or VERY poor.

km4 wrote:

Not sure I understand the question. Are you referring to U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time ?

Oh, that debt.
Yes, well, you see, we don't really count that, because we were planning on having someone else, maybe the kids, pay it. Erm, oh, and maybe the Chinese will pay it for us. That sounds like a plan!

Krugman: Curb your enthusiasm

sm_landlord wrote:

Yes, well, you see, we don't really count that, because we were planning on having someone else, maybe the kids, pay it. Erm, oh, and maybe the Chinese will pay it for us. That sounds like a plan!

It rolls over and over - what matters is the near term inescapable obligations & while they are nowhere near as severe as the 'future' headline number... they are getting bigger and bigger faster. A Net Present Value analysis would show that. The current population isn't going to skate free from this monster - the effects will be felt much sooner than many realize.

patientrenter wrote:

So maybe a newly unemployed middle-aged middle class Californian has $400,000 in stocks, including 401k

This appears to wildly overestimate the average savings via stocks/401k, by about 5x to 8x with a median that is smaller indicating a skewed distribution. If your definition of middle class is those with incomes in the top decile (top 10%), that may hold but others may have some issue with that definition of middle class...

Average 401(k) account balance slumped 27% last year | Money & Company | Los Angeles Times
http://bx.businessweek.com/retirement-strategies/view?url=http%3A%2F%2Fici.org%2Fpdf%2Fper15-02.pdf 
Fidelity: Average 401(k) Balance Rebounds - Planning to Retire (usnews.com)

rajesh
always it seems revised downward.

energyecon wrote:

This appears to wildly overestimate the average savings via stocks/401k, by about 5x to 8x with a median that is smaller indicating a skewed distribution. If your definition of middle class is those with incomes in the top decile (top 10%), that may hold but others may have some issue with that definition of middle class...

The neighborhood I am familiar with in So Cal is Newport Beach and environs, and the community are workers in FIRE. I thought I was reaching for the average Joe with my numbers, but obviously it's not close to the national average.