Consumer Sentiment Lowest In Four Months

[Purveyor]

Source: MarketWatch

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — A gauge of consumer sentiment declined in March to the lowest level in four months, led by gloomier expectations, according to data released Friday morning.

The consumer-sentiment gauge reached a final March reading of 80 — the lowest level since November — from a final February level of 81.6, according to a report form the University of Michigan and Thomson Reuters. A preliminary March reading pegged the level at 79.9.

Economists polled by MarketWatch had expected a final March sentiment reading of 81. For context, the sentiment gauge averaged 86.9 over the 12 months leading up to the start of the recession.

Read more: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/consumer-sentiment-lowest-in-four-months-2014-03-28

[jwirr]

1. Are they measuring sentiment or lack of money due to all the cuts to food stamps and unemployment?

[dotymed]

2. Last week, "they" reported

that "consumer confidence: was at a many month "high."
It was posted here on D U....

IMO, more propaganda. Hell, we, the majority, are suffering at historic proportions.
The wealthy are doing great though.

[rtracey]

3. funny

Funny how the DU article just below this says " Consumer Spending in U.S. Increases by Most in Three Months", so tell me what is it... are consumers sentiment low, but spending more? Is this because prices are going up? or is one of these articles incorrect? thanks

[malthaussen]

5. They're spending more, but liking it less.

I thought that was amusing, too. The reports were released within minutes of each other, I wonder if they are both spin on the same data?

-- Mal

[Journeyman]

4. And yet, the article posted just 5 minutes before this on DU, says consumer spending increased. . .

Consumer Spending in U.S. Increases by Most in Three Months

Consumer spending climbed in February by the most in three months as a pickup in incomes (PITLCHNG) encouraged Americans to return to stores after a harsh winter held the economy back.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014767251

It all seems nothing but "foma" put out to confuse and distort.

[pffshht]

6. "But actually, he thought as he re-adjusted the Ministry of Plenty's figures,

it was not even forgery. It was merely the substitution of one piece of nonsense for another. Most of the material that you were dealing with had no connexion with anything in the real world, not even the kind of connexion that is contained in a direct lie. Statistics were just as much a fantasy in their original version as in their rectified version. A great deal of the time you were expected to make them up out of your head. For example, the Ministry of Plenty's forecast had estimated the output of boots for the quarter at 145 million pairs. The actual output was given as sixty-two millions. Winston, however, in rewriting the forecast, marked the figure down to fifty-seven millions, so as to allow for the usual claim that the quota had been overfulfilled. In any case, sixty-two millions was no nearer the truth than fifty-seven millions, or than 145 millions. Very likely no boots had been produced at all. Likelier still, nobody knew how many had been produced, much less cared. All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot."