ADVERTISEMENT

Third Quarter Economic Numbers….Uggg

lawpoke87

Serious Cat Circle of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 17, 2002
30,275
8,217
113
We’re in trouble. Of course most of us knew this and have been predicting the same since early spring. I’ve attached an article from Asiatimes out of deference to WATU. I haven’t seen any type of plan or even acknowledgment yet from the Biden Admin. Trillions of additional government spending will only place further pressure on prices.

 
We’re in trouble. Of course most of us knew this and have been predicting the same since early spring. I’ve attached an article from Asiatimes out of deference to WATU. I haven’t seen any type of plan or even acknowledgment yet from the Biden Admin. Trillions of additional government spending will only place further pressure on prices.

I see more value in the programs funded than the additional Wall Street money in the stock market. But that’s just me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: watu05
The programs aren’t near as much of an issue as the trillions in additional spending being proposed at a time of rapidly increasing inflation. I have yet to see a single plan regarding inflation other than “I hope it goes away”. Meanwhile, the poor and middle class are rapidly experiencing a reduction in income adjusted for inflation and an accompanying lower standard of living. The plan….inject more dollars into an economy under inflationary strain. Maybe wait on any significant additional spending until we get a handle on the price pressures we’re now seeing play out across the economic spectrum? Not to take such a path is beyond reckless and will greatly harm those who can least afford the rising prices we are now seeing. This isn’t going to end well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TU Pilot
I remember getting some Donnie Dollars and Biden Bucks and thinking "man this is going to screw us." I got a roughly 30% raise right after, but that raise is looking more like something I really had to have now that inflation is going crazy rather than something that's going to put my family ahead.
 
Congrats on the raise. Unfortunately, the wages of most Americans aren’t keeping pace with inflation. A common occurrence during times of rapidly rising inflation. I see no changes to this trend in the near future and indication the current Admin is willing to implement any policies to address the same. Maybe the midterm elections will be a wake up call.
 
The programs aren’t near as much of an issue as the trillions in additional spending being proposed at a time of rapidly increasing inflation. I have yet to see a single plan regarding inflation other than “I hope it goes away”. Meanwhile, the poor and middle class are rapidly experiencing a reduction in income adjusted for inflation and an accompanying lower standard of living. The plan….inject more dollars into an economy under inflationary strain. Maybe wait on any significant additional spending until we get a handle on the price pressures we’re now seeing play out across the economic spectrum? Not to take such a path is beyond reckless and will greatly harm those who can least afford the rising prices we are now seeing. This isn’t going to end well.
Spending isn't what has led to that inflation. It's been supply issues, it will continue to be supply issues. More or less spending won't solve or tremendously exacerbate that. But, allowing people to work instead of being at home taking care of preschool age kids because it's cheaper than preschool will slightly help lessen supply issues.
 
Spending isn't what has led to that inflation. It's been supply issues, it will continue to be supply issues. More or less spending won't solve or tremendously exacerbate that. But, allowing people to work instead of being at home taking care of preschool age kids because it's cheaper than preschool will slightly help lessen supply issues.
Europe has similar supply issues with half the inflation. The difference….no late spring trillion dollar spending spree. Basic economics tells us adding trillions of dollars into the economy over a short period of time results in upward price pressures. The statement more spending (trillions) won’t exacerbate inflation is blatantly wrong and goes against all monetary lessons . I warned of inflation months ago. Many dismissed my warning. I was correct then and correct now.

By going down this path the Dems are ensuring the poor and middle class will face hard times ahead providing food and shelter for their families. You don’t add trillions of dollars into an inflationary environment.

…and yes, supple shortages and trillions and trillions in spending have resulted in our current mess…and now we want to double down. Insanity
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TU Pilot
Europe has similar supply issues with half the inflation. The difference….no late spring trillion dollar spending spree. Basic economics tells us adding trillions of dollars into the economy over a short period of time results in upward price pressures. The statement more spending (trillions) won’t exacerbate inflation is blatantly wrong and goes against all monetary lessons . I warned of inflation months ago. Many dismissed my warning. I was correct then and correct now.

By going down this path the Dems are ensuring the poor and middle class will face hard times ahead providing food and shelter for their families. You don’t add trillions of dollars into an inflationary environment.

…and yes, supple shortages and trillions and trillions in spending have resulted in our current mess…and now we want to double down. Insanity
This might be a part of the problem… which if true, would have been a Trump era decision:


Labor Market Crisis​

The U.S. inflation situation appears to be unique and may be the result of the country’s way of handling the labor market crisis during the pandemic. Although European responses varied somewhat by country, governments generally mitigated lockdown-related unemployment by lending money to employers to keep workers on staff and making those loans forgivable so long as workers were not laid off. As such, when lockdowns ended and businesses reopened, workers simply returned to their previous jobs. The rise in U.K. and eurozone unemployment was fairly modest because even when they were not able to show up for work, most workers in these nations were still technically employed and on payroll.

By contrast, U.S. employers laid off workers in droves in March and April 2020, sending the unemployment rate soaring from 3.5% to 14.8%. These workers could then apply for enhanced unemployment benefits, which untethered them from their previous employers. Depending on the state, the enhanced benefits lasted for 15-18 months, and for many low-wage workers, the benefits paid about the same, and in some cases more, than their previous employment. Meanwhile, some workers relocated, moving in with friends or family members. Some left high-cost areas like New York and San Francisco to live in areas with lower costs of living.

As the U.S. economy began to reopen, this meant that workers were not necessarily able to return to their previous employers even if they wanted. This in turn sent employers scrambling for talent, in some cases offering signing bonuses or wage increases in order to entice workers back. Nothing comparable appears to be happening in Europe.

Moreover, the shortage of workers aggravated supply chain issues in the U.S. In the rest of the world, there have been supply-line problems pertaining to shipping containers and extremely strong demand for manufactured items, but these issues have not, by all appearances, generated the kind of inflationary pressures that so far seem to be peculiar to the U.S.
 
I think that’s fair to a point. The US unemployment rate during the first quarter of 2021 was approx 6% and falling. Yet, we extended cash payments to those not working as well as those currently working. Encouraging people not to return to work in a tightening labor market does what….yup, results in labor shortages and inflationary pressures. Europe didn’t pass the spring 2021 spending package thus didn’t experience these issues to the extent we saw in the US.

Fast forward to November 2021, we have a shortage of labor and goods. Yet we are attempting to throw trillions of additional dollars into the system to chase a limited amount of goods and services. My 7th grade economics class tells me this scenario results in inflationary pressure. Again….I (along with actual economist :) ) warned of what was to come in 2021 when we were flooding the system with trillions of dollars in stimulus given the growing shortages in goods and workers.

I’m not necessarily against limited government spending which is paid for. However, the attempt to inject trillions and trillions more into the system without first getting a handle on inflation seems reckless and short sighted. A path which will hurt those already struggling with higher costs for energy, housing, etc…. Get inflation under control then slowly implement these programs while watching the inflationary effects of the same
 
It wasn’t strictly the unemployment payments that caused people to stay away from their jobs… it was the fact that they got laid of en mass and the Europeans didn’t. In the US we relied on unemployment and in Europe they gave the businesses lobs which helped the businesses actually retain workers. Once the workers were severed from their occupations you had a problem. It didn’t really matter how much they were getting in government spending or for how long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: watu05
We paid billions to businesses to retain workers. However, when you force business to shut down payroll assistance often isn’t enough. When the businesses were allowed to open back up many of the workers simply chose not to come back. Which is why we have a labor shortage. Paying people not to work with a 6% unemployment rate is bad policy if your intent is to prevent shortages….as we’re now seeing.

The past is the past though. I’m more concerned about our economy going forward and the effects of pouring trillions more into a market suffering from a shortage of goods and services. It’s a set up for disaster. A cautious approach is needed. Unfortunately, caution is the last thing I expect to see.
 
We paid billions to businesses to retain workers. However, when you force business to shut down payroll assistance often isn’t enough. When the businesses were allowed to open back up many of the workers simply chose not to come back. Which is why we have a labor shortage. Paying people not to work with a 6% unemployment rate is bad policy if your intent is to prevent shortages….as we’re now seeing.

The past is the past though. I’m more concerned about our economy going forward and the effects of pouring trillions more into a market suffering from a shortage of goods and services. It’s a set up for disaster. A cautious approach is needed. Unfortunately, caution is the last thing I expect to see.
Did you even read the article? Europe shut down too. They just funded businesses to prevent layoffs instead of funding laid off workers. There has been little to no evidence that the unemployment benefits in terms of their duration or size are to blame for the current labor shortage (if that was the case they would be back in the labor force as benefits have ended, in many states quite a while ago). The problem was that people required unemployment at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: watu05
We funded businesses as well with forgivable “loans” to cover payroll. The jobs are here. The workers just haven’t gone back to work for various reasons. Here’s an article explaining our labor issues much better than I did. Most the blue collar business (construction) didn’t shut down as they were deemed essential btw

 
Last edited:
We funded businesses as well with forgivable “loans” to cover payroll. The jobs are here. The workers just haven’t gone back to work for various reasons. Here’s an article explaining our labor issues much better than I did. Most the blue collar business (construction) didn’t shut down as they were deemed essential btw

Coincidentally, construction (especially residential construction) hasn't inflated as fast as other industries, even given the rise in commodity prices. Which would lead to the supposition that, if you didn't have to shut down, you're less likely to have lost workers.

I'm not saying that we didn't fund payrolls at all... but we didn't fund them to a level necessary that most workers wouldn't be severed from their positions. I think that would have been a short coming of the commissions and decision makers responsible for helping people during shutdowns, and we're only now reaping what we sowed back then.

Also of coincidence is that wages are rising faster than they have in 20 years. Yes the inflationary pressure is eating much if not all of those gains.... but it makes me think that inflation isn't as much of a problem to the average consumer as you make it out to be because they're more likely now than ever to be able to find a good job with competitive pay to combat personal inflation stresses.


I would compare this economic cycle to the US coming out of WWII. Millions of job openings haven't yet matched with workers who were displaced from their previous positions and we've had to spend quite a bit to finance both the (Covid) war effort and the domestic effort as people get matched with jobs and have high demand for goods and services they missed during Covid. If we can come out of it as well as we did then though, it could be a pretty good long term prognosis for the next 10 or so years in spite of 5-6% inflation which is what they were suffering back then too. (Between 46 & 51 the inflation rate was somewhere in the realm of 8% annually)
 
Last edited:
The point was that we’re seeing shortages in the construction area as well which didn’t see the shutdowns other industries experienced. Thus there must be other factors precipitating these shortages other than simply not funding the businesses which were closed.

The average worker has seen a 2% reduction in wages after inflation year over year. The more we proceed with inflationary policies the greater these losses will become. As I’ve said many times, the people who are being hurt are the people who can least afford the same. We need a policy shift or this issue is only going to get worse.
 
The point was that we’re seeing shortages in the construction area as well which didn’t see the shutdowns other industries experienced. Thus there must be other factors precipitating these shortages other than simply not funding the businesses which were closed.

The average worker has seen a 2% reduction in wages after inflation year over year. The more we proceed with inflationary policies the greater these losses will become. As I’ve said many times, the people who are being hurt are the people who can least afford the same. We need a policy shift or this issue is only going to get worse.
In the third quarter, wages outpaced inflation by .3 percent. If you start removing things like energy costs which are absolutely transient and related to defined resource under exploration during the pandemic then the picture starts looking even rosier for the worker.
 
its not necessarily the money, its more about installing an agenda. free collage, paid time off, limiting job creation to only union jobs, penalizing success, minimum wage, ...

these thing are not functions of our gov as provided by the Constitution.
Having a standing army isn't within the scope of the Constitution either. Care to fully defund the organized branches of the military and go back to the Militia system as set out in the Constitution? We could certainly save quite a bit of money that way.
 
In the third quarter, wages outpaced inflation by .3 percent. If you start removing things like energy costs which are absolutely transient and related to defined resource under exploration during the pandemic then the picture starts looking even rosier for the worker.
Except for the fact energy costs directly and indirectly affect every person (workers included) and the current Admin’s policy will result in continued higher energy costs you’re correct. Nothing rosy about a 2% loss in real wages year over year.
 
Except for the fact energy costs directly and indirectly affect every person (workers included) and the current Admin’s policy will result in continued higher energy costs you’re correct. Nothing rosy about a 2% loss in real wages year over year.
The president doesn't directly control oil prices. Period. The energy costs you're speaking of are a result of market forces from not drilling / mining at all during Covid. Blaming that on the Biden administration is just being blind.
 
the constitution grants congress the authority to create armed forces.
It also says that Congress has the sole power to declare war.... didn't see you complaining about that abuse of power by multiple presidents over the last 70 or so years.
 
The president doesn't directly control oil prices. Period. The energy costs you're speaking of are a result of market forces from not drilling / mining at all during Covid. Blaming that on the Biden administration is just being blind.
The best analyst in the business disagrees with you (at least longer term) and the linked story was from January. This guy’s predictions were dead on btw. The obvious problem is inflation. Higher energy prices going forward. Labor shortages. Wage pressures. Housing. Commodities. Trillions and trillions of new spending.

 
Last edited:
The best analyst in the business disagrees with you (at least longer term) and the linked story was from January. This guy’s predictions were dead on btw. The obvious problem is inflation. Higher energy prices going forward. Labor shortages. Wage pressures. Housing. Commodities. Trillions and trillions of new spending.

As someone who actually knows about the volume of approved federal permits in existence that have yet to be drilled, I wholeheartedly disagree with that assessment. That’s before we get to the fact that the lease ban was thrown out in court anyway.

Moreover, it hasn’t been the lease ban that’s led to the current shortage. That was pretty clearly the fact that we had near zero rigs running for 6 months during Trump.
 
The president doesn't directly control oil prices. Period. The energy costs you're speaking of are a result of market forces from not drilling / mining at all during Covid. Blaming that on the Biden administration is just being blind.
gov regulations and mandates can.
 
As someone who actually knows about the volume of approved federal permits in existence that have yet to be drilled, I wholeheartedly disagree with that assessment. That’s before we get to the fact that the lease ban was thrown out in court anyway.

Moreover, it hasn’t been the lease ban that’s led to the current shortage. That was pretty clearly the fact that we had near zero rigs running for 6 months during Trump.
Why I said long term oil prices. We both know uncertainty in any industry will reduce investment and lending in the same. Both will result in less exploration and drilling. Which is why many are questioning whether high energy prices are temporary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TUMe
Why I said long term oil prices. We both know uncertainty in any industry will reduce investment and lending in the same. Both will result in less exploration and drilling. Which is why many are questioning whether high energy prices are temporary.
Investment will be there due to high commodity prices and record returns. Some smart investors will sit things out, but it won’t be due to Biden’s lease policies. It will be due to perceived long term demand shrinkage caused by things like EV’s. Oil might be end up being a high priced commodity over time, but it will eventually be in much less demand (at least in the states)
 
Investment will be there due to high commodity prices and record returns. Some smart investors will sit things out, but it won’t be due to Biden’s lease policies. It will be due to perceived long term demand shrinkage caused by things like EV’s. Oil might be end up being a high priced commodity over time, but it will eventually be in much less demand (at least in the states)
Disagree. Uncertainty results in caution and the tendency to sit on the sidelines. Much more to this than leases. Tax policy, regulations, etc.. Hard to run business models when you don’t know these things. Business 101.
 
Disagree. Uncertainty results in caution and the tendency to sit on the sidelines. Much more to this than leases. Tax policy, regulations, etc.. Hard to run business models when you don’t know these things. Business 101.
What tax policy or regulatory policy is currently up in the air in relation to Oil production / exploration? And, how will that make oil less valuable from an ROI standpoint (especially if it makes oil in shorter supply)

The investors of the world looking for quick gains will look to O&G in the near term. Nothing the Biden admin does will make oil less valuable unless it decides to withdraw the sanctions on Iran which it hasn’t moved to do.
 
Investment will be there due to high commodity prices and record returns. Some smart investors will sit things out, but it won’t be due to Biden’s lease policies. It will be due to perceived long term demand shrinkage caused by things like EV’s. Oil might be end up being a high priced commodity over time, but it will eventually be in much less demand (at least in the states)
before Jan 21, 2021, energy independent.
after Jan 21, 2021, not
 
The Fed dropped fed fund rates almost 10% from the beginning of 1981 to the end of 1982.
I should have put a slightly broader range. Between 80 and 82 they were increased from 5 to 20 then relaxed again as stagflation ended.
 
US Consumer sentiment drops to the lowest level in ten years. Lower than at any time during the pandemic.


 
Maybe if people initially took the pandemic more seriously we would be in less of this mess.
Considering the state with the country’s highest vaccination rate is experiencing it’s highest number of active Covid cases since the pandemic begin….doubtful.
 
There is no realistic scenario where we could have avoided serious economic pain through mitigation measures. In fact, the places that have experienced the least adverse economic consequences in the US are mostly the places that you would say took the pandemic the "least seriously." We are not a sparsely populated pacific island. Covid was going to get here and it was going to spread.

There are tradeoffs. Make the argument that we should have locked down harder and longer and accepted the harsher economic fallout, or make the argument that we should have been less restrictive and accepted whatever loss of life that entailed. But don't pretend there aren't tradeoffs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TUMU
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT