tuscl

Bloomberg: Economy Grows by Most in a Decade on U.S. Consumer-Spending Gain

Tuesday, December 23, 2014 5:49 AM
"The world’s largest economy surged in the third quarter, expanding at the fastest pace in more than a decade, as U.S. consumers and businesses spent more than previously estimated." Q3 annualized GDP revised up to 5%. This is on track with my estimate that we will see 5.5-6.5% GDP growth next year: [view link] Ok, now go onto to ZeroHedge or see what your Libertarian or Republican or favorite conspiracy theorists have to say to explain it all away and how there is actual doom and gloom ahead. Because Stevie-girl said so after all. I'll offer a more simple explanation for anyone who has a mind of their own, though I'm losing hope there are any in this board: We saw 5% GDP growth because we are in the fairly early early stages of a global economic boom. Now go summon Stevie-girl back from vacation so she can spend a minute or two googling and cherry picking headlines to feed your confirmation biases that despite the hard numbers we are actually fucked. LOL!

20 comments

  • Holdem2
    •
    10 years ago
    The solution could be very simple. The US has spent like a drunken sailor and accumulated record debt. If we elect fiscally responsible people to office the party will be over sooner rather than later. If we keep spending we will be fine a while longer but be worse off later. Simple concept really....debt with no repayment plan is bad.
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    Most of our debt is held by the Federal Reserve which just keeps rolling it out as it matures. There is also no shortage of those willing to loan to us at 2% for 30y. The interest the Fed doesn't roll out gets returned to the treasury and general revenue. It's becoming a nice chunk of change now too - $10s of billions a year. Holding it in the balance sheet is no problem because of all those dying to buy US. We should be dealing with surpluses soon and then the happy questions of how to spend the windfall. Aren't economic booms great? Who could have saw it coming, though? :-)
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    Lol! Who could have saw it coming? The Economist? Stevie-girl?
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    Consumer sentiment also near an 8y high. Absolutely DOOMED! Because Stevie-girl and The Economist said so.
  • mikeya02
    •
    10 years ago
    Doug, have you seen Zeitgeist the movie? The part about the Federal Reserve creating debt on purpose and banks cooking the books based on some formula that cannot be sustained forever was interesting.
  • JamesSD
    •
    10 years ago
    They're predicting this quarter will be more like 3% growth. Still a solid number, but more typical.
  • JamesSD
    •
    10 years ago
    I'm sticking to my call that we are in the late stages of this recovery. 2015 should be a great year with slowing into recession sometime in 2016.
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    Start of a boom, baby! I made alot of sacrifices this year to position myself for it. Sure hope I got my timing right but everything I'm seeing tells me I did. (Even the opinions of those like Stevie-girl who are so inaccurate you can take them as contrarian are lining up.)
  • farmerart
    •
    10 years ago
    @JamesSD, Ignore the talking heads on CNBC or Fox. They mostly tout the Republican party line. And as the history of the 20th century and the first years of the 21st century has shown Republican presidents are total incompetents when it comes to managing the US economy. Some of those dolts were incapable of even simple arithmetic......think Reagan, Bush I (The Dumb), and Bush II (The Dumber). Other Republican presidents were smart enough but they truly believed in economic policies more suitable to the 1800s USA economy........think Hoover, Nixon. Eisenhauer during the 1950s was the only Republican president who managed the USA national economy in a sane, coherent manner. Ike had social and demographic trends on his side and he had the great good sense not to mess around too much. His logistical genius demonstrated during his military career convinced him that the federal government should finance the build out of great infrastructure projects for the greater good of the nation. Can you imagine any Republican president who might be elected in this current era that would spent the trillions of dollars necessary for some national project comparable to what Eisenhauer did for the interstate highway system in USA? Republican presidents are good for something for crafty investors. They can provide glorious opportunities to invest in great companies whose shares get ravaged by stock markets cratering as a result of Republican economic folly. In my investing career of almost 45 years the two best buying opportunities were compliments of idiot Republican presidents......1974, Nixon and 2008/early 2009, Bush II (The Dumber). Other good buying opportunities, again compliments of idiot Republican presidents, were 1987, Reagan (the moron); and 1991, Bush I (The Dumb). 1987 and 1991 were just not as juicy as 1974 and 2008. Is there any chance that Bush III will win the presidency in 2016 elections?
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    If the democrats put up Liz Warren then Bush III should take it easily. If they put up Hilary Clinton it will be close, but I think she would take take despite the not inconsiderable number of die-hard haters she has. Will she be too old to run though?
  • sharkhunter
    •
    10 years ago
    We just need to keep congress and the President from doing anything to screw things up more and maybe we can get to 7% GDP growth. Then we can have a sustainable level of debt without having to cut spending. Anything less than 7% growth rate and I read our government will need to cut spending to have a sustainable debt level. If we could go higher than 7%, than we might compete with China on becoming the biggest economy again.
  • Club_Goer_Seattle
    •
    10 years ago
    @ Farmerart: Re: your second paragraph -- Now it's time to spend mega-bucks rehabilitating and maintaining the infrastructure that was built in the Eisenhower era. The problem is that "maintenance" isn't glitzy, like new construction projects are and were, back then. What is your suggestion for coaxing our elected officials to devote major resources to rebuilding our streets, highways, bridges, transportation terminals, energy system conveyances, and other infrastructure?
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    Huh? By what metric is China's economy larger than ours?
  • nemesisk7
    •
    10 years ago
    USA is last on everything from women to money
  • GACA
    •
    10 years ago
    Wow actual smart talk. @Dougster you as smart as a fox. here I thought this thread was going to be more asinine slaux.pas/crazyjoe crap.
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    Lol!
  • Dougster
    •
    10 years ago
    Don't worry, GAC. I'm sure when the New Year arrives Stevie-girl will return. Google and cherry pick a headline or two each day to deny the obvious. Then TUSCL can get back to circle-jerking each other about just how fucked we are. Maybe she'll even be able to quote a song lyric to such an affect that will clinch it in the TUSCL groupmind.
  • crazyjoe
    •
    10 years ago
    Real smart talk
  • Holdem2
    •
    10 years ago
    Not many people will argue that the Bush's weren't dumb asses. Why is it that people don't realize Obama is an idiot too? Is it the favorable treatment from the media? Obama talks a good game but it stops there. He is stimulating this economy short term through massive debt. He is an idiot just like the others but he doesn't scare me as much as his supporters do. He is a decisive career politician who never worked for an honest day's pay in his life.
  • Holdem2
    •
    10 years ago
    I got autocorrected there. Obama is divisive not decisive. Look at his poor treatment of race relations....
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion