The ECONOMY Part Deux

15,309 Views | 237 Replies | Last: 45 min ago by DiabloWags
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
New warehouses, manufacturing plants going up right now as the BBB kicked in January 1st.

Our so-called leaders were so myopic, paid off crooks, dimwitted. Allowing or even incentivising the offshoring of key manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, etc was and is absurd.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?

You should ask yourself how much of our current 2.1% GDP is coming from the Ai surge which will eventually peak.

I repeat again . . . Trump's Trade Policy & Tariffs have failed to decrease the Trade Deficit
That's a fact.

DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?




Economists had expected 115,000 jobs created.
Came in at 57,000

dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wow. Big drop in prime age labor participation. From 83.9 to 83.3 in 1 month.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

Wow. Big drop in prime age labor participation. From 83.9 to 83.3 in 1 month.


The Labor Participation Rate dropped to the lowest level in 5 years at 61.5% last month
720,000 people left the labor force.

And May was revised downward from 172,000 to 129,000.
April revised downward by 31,000 to 148,000.

Leisure and hospitality employment dropped by 61,000
So much for the World Cup effect.

US job growth slows in June; unemployment rate falls to 4.2% amid decline in labor force
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Looks like my purchase of the 2-year Treasury Notes at 4.19% at the recent auction is working out so far.
Got down to 4.09 the other day.

Am surprised the Notes haven't rallied all that much today after the much weaker jobs report.

DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
These 4 charts sum up the latest jobs report.
But I will anxiously await commentary from Amuse before I come to any conclusions.

PAC-10-BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?

If we have the chips, we no longer have strategic need for Taiwan, which leads into the thesis that the US are removing their influence on China and Russia's borders (Ukraine and Taiwan), and in exchange they are removing their influence from our hemisphere in places like Panama, Venezuela, Cuba, etc.

Trump, Putin, and Xi, may already have a deal in place.
smh
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bs-ers gonna bs
not dead yet # funk trunk and i.c.e. too (allergic to AI)
PAC-10-BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
smh said:

bs-ers gonna bs

the robots are going to need a lot of chips.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I believe the Biden Administration continued Trump 1.0 policies, and Trump 2.0 put it into hyperdrive w tariffs, investments, BBB, etc.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?




PAC-10-BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PAC-10-BEAR said:


of course it didn't. You don't invest in RE do you?
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PAC-10-BEAR said:




That only would make sense to the extent real estate inflation was higher than general inflation
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PAC-10-BEAR said:




This is one of those things they will say didn't happen until they are forced to say yeah it happened but not that much.
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:




This is one of those things they will say didn't happen until they are forced to say yeah it happened but not that much.
read the article carefully. The click bait missed an important word, "of". So you can adjust your outrage downward a notch or two or Pac 10 can clarify the click bait link.

"The economists estimate unauthorized immigrant worker flows accounted for about 30% of employment growth, roughly 30% of home-price growth, and about 20% of rent growth in the average metropolitan area between March 2021 and March 2024.

They stress these estimates apply to the average metro area studied and do not suggest immigration was the sole driver of rising housing costs."


Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:




This is one of those things they will say didn't happen until they are forced to say yeah it happened but not that much.
read the article carefully. The click bait missed an important word, "of". So you can adjust your outrage downward a notch or two or Pac 10 can clarify the click bait link.

"The economists estimate unauthorized immigrant worker flows accounted for about 30% of employment growth, roughly 30% of home-price growth, and about 20% of rent growth in the average metropolitan area between March 2021 and March 2024.

They stress these estimates apply to the average metro area studied and do not suggest immigration was the sole driver of rising housing costs."





I don't think anyone has argued that it's the sole driver, just a significant driver as pointed out by the stats you chose to quote.

You're telling me 30% cheaper homes and 20% cheaper rent wouldn't be a huge relief for Americans?
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The NY Post based their claims from a working paper written by the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank.

Rather than fall prey to the "click-bait" from the notorious tabloid known as the NY Post, I suggest that people read the actual research paper

The Impacts of Unauthorized Immigration on U.S. Labor and Housing Markets: New Evidence from Administrative Microdata - Research Dept. Working Paper No. 2607 - Dallas Fed

Interestingly enough, the Dallas Federal Reserve did not find that a massive wave of 7 million unauthorized immigrants during the 2021 - 2024 period caused lower wages for Americans, as many Trumpers have claimed in this forum.

From Page #7:







BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What's your take on the housing part?
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Q2 GDP estimate has fallen off of a cliff.
Perhaps an Amusing twitter post can tell us why.





Current and Past GDPNow Commentaries - Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88 said:

cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:




This is one of those things they will say didn't happen until they are forced to say yeah it happened but not that much.
read the article carefully. The click bait missed an important word, "of". So you can adjust your outrage downward a notch or two or Pac 10 can clarify the click bait link.

"The economists estimate unauthorized immigrant worker flows accounted for about 30% of employment growth, roughly 30% of home-price growth, and about 20% of rent growth in the average metropolitan area between March 2021 and March 2024.

They stress these estimates apply to the average metro area studied and do not suggest immigration was the sole driver of rising housing costs."





I don't think anyone has argued that it's the sole driver, just a significant driver as pointed out by the stats you chose to quote.

You're telling me 30% cheaper homes and 20% cheaper rent wouldn't be a huge relief for Americans?
who said that? You did. I'm saying 20 percent X "the Growth" <<<<<< 20pct. But go on with your analysis please.
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:


I don't think anyone has argued that it's the sole driver, just a significant driver as pointed out by the stats you chose to quote.

You're telling me 30% cheaper homes and 20% cheaper rent wouldn't be a huge relief for Americans?

who said that? You did. I'm saying 20 percent X "the Growth" <<<<<< 20pct. But go on with your analysis please.


Correct.

Never mind that the growth data is terribly skewed due to unauthorized immigrants RENTING at a far higher rate than actually qualifying for a mortgage and owning a home. The Dallas Fed research paper takes this into consideration with further quant analysis that the tabloid NY Post didnt bother to explore.


SBGold
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:



of course it didn't. You don't invest in RE do you?

It's 100% fake. Disinformation should not be tolerated
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SBGold said:

cal83dls79 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:



of course it didn't. You don't invest in RE do you?

It's 100% fake. Disinformation should not be tolerated
it happened again, simple math blew up the lead, bummer
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:




This is one of those things they will say didn't happen until they are forced to say yeah it happened but not that much.
read the article carefully. The click bait missed an important word, "of". So you can adjust your outrage downward a notch or two or Pac 10 can clarify the click bait link.

"The economists estimate unauthorized immigrant worker flows accounted for about 30% of employment growth, roughly 30% of home-price growth, and about 20% of rent growth in the average metropolitan area between March 2021 and March 2024.

They stress these estimates apply to the average metro area studied and do not suggest immigration was the sole driver of rising housing costs."





I don't think anyone has argued that it's the sole driver, just a significant driver as pointed out by the stats you chose to quote.

You're telling me 30% cheaper homes and 20% cheaper rent wouldn't be a huge relief for Americans?
who said that? You did. I'm saying 20 percent X "the Growth" <<<<<< 20pct. But go on with your analysis please.


They had to backtrack off the dishonest headline. So they fall back on a dishonest interpretation of the stats. They are now looking to move on to the next topic ripe for misleading low information voters.
SBGold
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:




This is one of those things they will say didn't happen until they are forced to say yeah it happened but not that much.

read the article carefully. The click bait missed an important word, "of". So you can adjust your outrage downward a notch or two or Pac 10 can clarify the click bait link.

"The economists estimate unauthorized immigrant worker flows accounted for about 30% of employment growth, roughly 30% of home-price growth, and about 20% of rent growth in the average metropolitan area between March 2021 and March 2024.

They stress these estimates apply to the average metro area studied and do not suggest immigration was the sole driver of rising housing costs."





I don't think anyone has argued that it's the sole driver, just a significant driver as pointed out by the stats you chose to quote.

You're telling me 30% cheaper homes and 20% cheaper rent wouldn't be a huge relief for Americans?

who said that? You did. I'm saying 20 percent X "the Growth" <<<<<< 20pct. But go on with your analysis please.


They had to backtrack off the dishonest headline. So they fall back on a dishonest interpretation of the stats. They are now looking to move on to the next topic ripe for misleading low information voters.

The numbers were incoherent and should be treated like weekly garbage pickups (disposed of).

VOTE BLUE

NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK ON ANYONE ON THIS BOARD
BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SBGold said:

dajo9 said:

cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:

PAC-10-BEAR said:




This is one of those things they will say didn't happen until they are forced to say yeah it happened but not that much.

read the article carefully. The click bait missed an important word, "of". So you can adjust your outrage downward a notch or two or Pac 10 can clarify the click bait link.

"The economists estimate unauthorized immigrant worker flows accounted for about 30% of employment growth, roughly 30% of home-price growth, and about 20% of rent growth in the average metropolitan area between March 2021 and March 2024.

They stress these estimates apply to the average metro area studied and do not suggest immigration was the sole driver of rising housing costs."





I don't think anyone has argued that it's the sole driver, just a significant driver as pointed out by the stats you chose to quote.

You're telling me 30% cheaper homes and 20% cheaper rent wouldn't be a huge relief for Americans?

who said that? You did. I'm saying 20 percent X "the Growth" <<<<<< 20pct. But go on with your analysis please.


They had to backtrack off the dishonest headline. So they fall back on a dishonest interpretation of the stats. They are now looking to move on to the next topic ripe for misleading low information voters.

The numbers were incoherent and should be treated like weekly garbage pickups (disposed of).

VOTE BLUE

NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK ON ANYONE ON THIS BOARD


Please explain how so?
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SBGold said:

dajo9 said:

cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:


You're telling me 30% cheaper homes and 20% cheaper rent wouldn't be a huge relief for Americans?

who said that? You did. I'm saying 20 percent X "the Growth" <<<<<< 20pct. But go on with your analysis please.


They had to backtrack off the dishonest headline. So they fall back on a dishonest interpretation of the stats. They are now looking to move on to the next topic ripe for misleading low information voters.

The numbers were incoherent and should be treated like weekly garbage pickups (disposed of).

VOTE BLUE

NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK ON ANYONE ON THIS BOARD


The NY Post is nothing more than click-bait garbage.
The headline had no basis in reality.

I wish that Cal alums wouldn't be so gullible.
It clogs up the forum with misinformation and fake news.

BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88 said:


reposting misleading stuff again. So if housing affordability is so important why kill the housing affordability bill that both houses support? Oh I know why. Because trump is a baby.

Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
cal83dls79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here comes the flood of crap that 09 predicted would follow once they realized the dumb mistake and they all fell for it. 6 stars for bad math in the Econ discussion is not good.
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
More often than not, the ignore feature works fairly well.
But every now and then I get exposed to posts like the one you have copied and replied to.

A "6-star" post of pure basic math failure.
Hard to believe these are Cal alums.



BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cal83dls79 said:

BearlySane88 said:


reposting misleading stuff again. So if housing affordability is so important why kill the housing affordability bill that both houses support? Oh I know why. Because trump is a baby.




He didn't kill it. Please keep the discussions truthful.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.