Any Economic Indicator That Would Show owebuma In A...

[obumazombie]

Negative light will be spiked.
The same news with a GOP administration would be black and white and read all over as nadin might say...

Two wire service dispatches covering the government's June Wholesale Sales and Inventories release either glossed over or completely ignored what others are saying about the report's impact on near-term economic growth.

The final sentence of an unbylined Reuters report vaguely referred to future impact by indicating that current inventory balances, which are bloated by historical standards, "would weigh on manufacturing and economic growth" (i.e., have a negative impact).
Both Reuters and the AP's Josh Boak completely ignored a leading GDP forecaster's estimate that inventory buildups seen during the second quarter will cause a significant third-quarter pullback which will also knock down third-quarter economic growth considerably — and that was before today's news that the June buildup was even greater than expected.

Boak's report also contained an utterly unsupportable "things are getting better" statement.

To be clear, today's news would indicate that second-quarter growth, originally reported to be an annualized 2.3 percent, is in line to get revised upward.

That's fine, but the GDP Now analysis prepared by the Atlanta Branch of the Federal Reserve on August 6 had the following to say about the third quarter:

The first GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the third quarter of 2015 was 1.0 percent on August 6. The model projects that lower inventory investment will subtract 1.7 percentage points from third quarter real GDP growth.
Today's reported June inventory buildup was a seasonally adjusted 0.9 percent, which beat expectations ranging from 0.3 percent to 0.7 percent. May's downwardly revised increase — from 0.8 percent to 0.6 percent, partially but nowhere near fully offset June's news.

What the Altanta Fed said on Thursday, combined with today's news, indicates that the economy appears to be on track to turn in a result below 1.0 percent for third-quarter gross domestic product growth — a stark contrast to the breezy assumptions of 3.0 percent or so for this year's second half we've been seeing ad nauseam for several months.
You would think, after six-plus painful years of underachievement, that the prognosticators who insist that solid growth is just around the corner would exercise at least a little caution.

Nope.




Additionally, though it's highly hedged, the latest writeup at the High Frequency GDP Model managed by Moody's, home of the incurably optimistic Keynesian economist Mark Zandi, is also carrying a pretty dour third-quarter prediction:

... our high-frequency GDP model estimates third quarter GDP growth of 1.4% at an annual rate, down from 1.9% ...

... It's early and assuming the economy unfolds as we expect, third quarter GDP tracking shouldn’t remain below 2% for long.
The big wild card is inventories, which have the potential to be a significant drag.

Today's news may indicate that it might stay below 2 percent — and come in far lower if the Atlanta Fed, which has been spot-on in its predictions of first-release GDP during the past two quarters, is right.

Despite all of this, the AP's Boak reassured readers that "Economists say that growth should accelerate through the end of the year."
After making sure readers understand that second-quarter GDP is on track for an upward revision, Reuters only indicated, as noted earlier, that a situation like what we're seeing "would weigh on manufacturing and economic growth."

No, folks, if the situation as the government described today remains as reported and continues, it will weigh on growth.

Specifically, the current inventory-to-sales ratio remains at a level which contrarian blog Zero Hedge claims "screams recession."
That may be hyperbole (I hope it is), but no one should be taking comfort in the circumstances seen below:






The wild card is sales.
Though the raw (i.e., not seasonally adjusted) results don't look as bad as the seasonally adjusted data this time around (a relatively unusual occurrence), what the AP's Boak somewhat incoherently wrote is not cause for much confidence:

Sales increased 0.1 percent in June yet have dropped 3.8 percent over the past year largely because of cheaper oil prices.
What Boak intended to communicate — not particularly successfully, in my view — is that June 2015 sales came in 3.8 percent below June 2014. Neither wire service noted that sales this year, both raw and seasonally adjusted, have trailed the same month in 2014 for six straight months.,

Unless monthly sales jump considerably, inventories will need to come down for firms to maintain positive or sufficiently positive cash flow.
That's what the Atlanta Fed believes is already happening during this quarter.

Despite all of this, neither the AP or Reuters communicated any meaningful sense of foreboding in their writeups. In a Republican or conservative administration, they'd be all over it.

full article...

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tom-blumer/2015/08/11/ap-and-reuters-ignore-impact-bloated-inventories-future-growth#sthash.5F5f3GgT.dpuf

[JohnnyReb]

Despite all of this, neither the AP or Reuters communicated any meaningful sense of foreboding in their writeups. In a Republican or conservative administration, they'd be all over it......NO, they would be behind it and trying to drive it down still farther.

[obumazombie]

One economic indicator that has gotten worse under owebuma, and is more of a national disgrace than he is...is Social Security...

Carrying water for the left as their pet programs implode while pretending to be an objective reporter is a daunting task.
The Associated Press's Stephen Ohlemacher was not up to that task Thursday afternoon.

Twice, in relatively early paragraphs of his 31-paragraph writeup, the AP reporter claimed that the Social Security system has "money."
He then separately quoted a Democratic congressperson who insisted that it has money, and that the mere act of correctly asserting that it doesn't "manufactures a crisis."

But in a discussion of how big Social Security's problems really are, Ohlemacher acknowledged that Congress has already spent the balances in the so-called Social Security "Trust Funds."
The dictionary definition of money does not include promises to repay money borrowed, Stephen — and that's what the Social Security "Trust Funds" contain.

Here are excerpts from Ohlemacher's report — including, so to speak, the three "money" paragraphs (bolds are mine):

THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY AT 80: OVERHAUL TIME?



Social Security turns 80 on Friday, and the massive retirement and disability program is showing its age.

Social Security's disability fund is projected to run dry next year.
The retirement fund has enough money to pay full benefits until 2035.

But once the fund is depleted, the shortfalls projected to be enormous.

(Paragraph 13)

If the tax revenue were redirected (to the Disability Fund, which is set to go officially broke in 2016 — Ed.), the retirement fund would lose one year of solvency, so both the retirement program and the disability program would have enough money to pay full benefits until 2034.
At that point, Social Security would collect enough in taxes to pay 79 percent of benefits.

... Democrats are much more eager to defend the disability program, noting that its modest benefits keep millions of disabled workers and their families out of poverty.

"The issue is whether you're going to cut services and benefits to Americans who paid for them by saying that the Social Security program doesn't have the money, when in fact it has nearly $3 trillion," said Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif. "It manufactures a crisis."




... DID CONGRESS ALREADY SPEND THE TRUST FUNDS?

Yes.
For much of the past three decades, Social Security produced big surpluses, collecting more in taxes than it paid in benefits.

Social Security invested those surpluses in special U.S. Treasury bonds, which are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

They are now valued at $2.8 trillion.

But as Social Security was generating surpluses, the rest of the federal government was running deficits, for all but a few years around the turn of the century.

To finance deficit spending, the Treasury borrowed from the public and from other federal programs, including Social Security.

So there is no "money" after all.
Congress has spent it.

The bonds the system holds aren't "money."
A "bond" is "a promise to repay the principal along with interest."

The much longer full definition found at InvestorWords.com does not contain the word "money."
That's because bonds are not a form of money.

The AP's Ohlemacher knows that most users of this AP content will only worry about what is contained in the first few paragraphs, and will dutifully tell readers, listeners and viewers that the retirement "Trust Fund" has "money" to pay benefits for 19-20 years.
It doesn't.

It has $2.8 trillion in IOUs from the rest of the government, which is itself over $18 trillion in debt, i.e., it has no money to speak of.
Additionally, the government is projected to run annual deficits which, with rare exceptions, will be $500 billion or more a year as far as the eye can see — and that's if there's no serious economic downturn in the next 20 years, and if the unrealistic economic growth assumptions used by the Social Security administration (unrealistic as long as Keynesians control the government) pan out.

With his later Q&A treatment, Ohlemacher can claim he eventually got around to telling the truth, secure in the knowledge that almost no one will see or read it.

Such are the ways of the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press.

But, since it's an economic indicator that will show owebuma in a incompetent light, it will be spiked or otherwise sterilized.

full article...


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tom-blumer/2015/08/13/aps-ohlemacher-claims-social-security-system-has-money-then#sthash.o8iDJJXo.dpuf

[Lacarnut]

Billions have been pulled out of the stock market lately. Something is going on and it is not good. Also, a new phase of Obamy-mamy care will kick in Jan. 1, 2016. Prem. and drugs are going up. 

[libertybele]

Billions have been pulled out of the stock market lately. Something is going on and it is not good. Also, a new phase of Obamy-mamy care will kick in Jan. 1, 2016. Prem. and drugs are going up.

China.

[Lacarnut]

China.

From what I have read, billionaires like the Oracle man have withdrawn huge sums from the market. I have a feeling that gold and silver prices will start to rise.

[libertybele]

From what I have read, billionaires like the Oracle man have withdrawn huge sums from the market. I have a feeling that gold and silver prices will start to rise.

From what I've been reading and my understanding is that China's market is tanking and those invested in China have been pulling money out; as China's economy destabilizes gold is rising (slightly).  If China's market stabilizes gold will fall again.  China's recent economic boom in part was because China was pumping money by building real estate that weren't actually needed and are still sitting vacant.  That only worked for so long.

http://www.kitco.com/news/2015-08-14/Federal-Reserve-Minutes-China-To-Be-Keys-For-Gold-Traders-Next-Week.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-ghost-cities-in-2014-2014-6

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/business/dealbook/in-china-a-building-frenzys-fault-lines.html?_r=0

There are all kinds of warnings out there about the market crashing, the dollar being devalued, and all kinds of economic indicators showing global financial disaster.  Some "researchers" are giving advice and warning how to prepare ... but only if you buy their book for a ridiculous price.  Once such entity is Stansberry Research in conjunction with Ron Paul. I used to be a huge Ron Paul fan and he's been very accurate in economic predictions -- but he is now selling his advice for a hefty price.  I find this disheartening and I am now skeptical as this information is being disseminated for a price at the same time his son desperately needs money for his presidential campaign.