MSNBC: Consumer spending rises as incomes grow, economy doing well

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

Consumer spending rises as incomes grow
Data indicate U.S. economy is doing well

Updated: 9:15 a.m. ET May 1, 2006

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12576252/

WASHINGTON - Consumers spent more freely in March as their incomes grew at the fastest pace in six months, another sign the economy has snapped out of its end-of-year funk.

The Commerce Department reported Monday that consumer spending rose 0.6 percent, an improvement from the 0.2 percent increase registered in February. Consumer spending plays a key role in shaping overall economic activity.

Incomes, the fuel for future spending, advanced by 0.8 percent in March. That was up from a 0.3 percent increase in February and marked the largest gain since September.

Income includes government payments as well as wages. Payments from the new Medicare prescription drug plan had the effect of helping to boost overall income in March. Wages, meanwhile, grew by a moderate 0.4 percent for the second month in a row.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spanone]

6. ...but propaganda is still propaganda.

[converted_democrat]

17. Are you serious? You've got to be joking.. n/t

[AllieB]

22. It's pure propaganda

More people have fallen below the poverty line since any time since the Great Depression. Foreclosures are up. Fuel and food prices have skyrocketed. The purchasing power of the average American has decreased. Where's the good news in those realities?

[begley]

26. OMIT. Dupe.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AllieB]

29. The real unemployment numbers are closer to 12%

unemployment only counts those that are still receiving unemployment insurance-not those who can no longer collect. Also, there is a vast number of 'underemployed' in this country, including white-collar 'consultants' who can't find a middle-class job.

A good stock market only benefits those that invest-around 15% of Americans. There is a larger number often cited-40%-but those folks are the ones who invest via a 401K or other retirement plan, and don't see the kind of dividends that the rich do.

I think you need to do some research. :-)

[Nederland]

34. I think you need to do some research

The unemployment number DOES NOT only count those that are still receiving unemployment insurance. It is calculated by a survey done by the Department of Labor. Take your own advice and research it.

[AllieB]

40. I have, and you're wrong

However, I'm not surprised to see you arguing that the economy is doing great.

[Nederland]

44. Educate yourself

Here is a link to the US Department of Labor, the organization that actually calculates the unemployment rate:

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_faq.htm

<snip>

Where do the statistics come from?

Because unemployment insurance records, which many people think are the source of total unemployment data, relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940 when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then. As explained later, the CPS estimates, beginning in 1994, reflect the results of a major redesign of the survey.

<snip>

I guess you can take comfort in the fact that you are not the only one confused on the issue.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nederland]

50. I'll tell you what

You seem to accept the word of the Professor. Let's ask him. Hey Professor, can you please explain to AllieB that she is wrong about how unemployment rates are calculated? Thanks.

[ProfessorGAC]

55. There Are Several Measures of Unemployment

The most commonly used term is, indeed, the number of people who are applying for, or are receiving UEI benefits. That's commonly called the U2 or the U3, depending upon whether the data is accumulated values from each state, or the direct values of people getting tax forms from the federal gov't declaring their income.

The U6 is a cumulative total of those for which UEI is extant, has run out, adjusted by the number of new hires provided by companies who answer surveys for the Commerce Dept.

So, it's always important to know which number is being touted by the news article or broadcast. They don't however, always tell us which is which. So, that's tricky sometimes. You have to actually go to either DoL or DoC websites to get the most current values, and those sites explain how the number is calculated.

The problem with any of these numbers of course, is that their lagging indicators. So, the number we get today is really more indicative of what happened a month or two ago. One thing i do is run an exponentially weighted moving average, add in a constant for truly new job creation (using an average proportion of the population over the last 25 years), deduct retirements (also based upon a historical average of 25 years, and then plot the masks of the moving average line, which should give a plus/minus value with 99% certainty, of the true number of people out of work, that are willing to work. My most current numbers (done in February), are 8.6 to 11.1%, or an average of 9.85% +/- 1.25%.

Hope that helps.
The Professor

[Nederland]

57. To be clear

Are you actually claiming that the U3 number is calculated from unemployment benefit numbers and not the CPS?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.tn.htm

[ProfessorGAC]

61. It's Weighted That Way, Yes

Those values are more immediate. The survey is still used, but more as a crosscheck to the cumulative values of the UEI submissions. Both values are used, with added weight given to the applications for, and receipt of UEI benefits. The surveys are too expensive to do over a broad enough sample to get the degree of precision desired for those numbers.
The Professor

[Nederland]

65. Thanks (nt)

[butterfly77]

77. Here's something someone else posted...

The reason that Bush Jr. is trying to tout about the labor employment figures by saying that overall over 2 million jobs have been created is because they have excluded nearly 1.5 million people from being counted in their latest employment figures. So by not counting nearly 1.5 million people (who were counted in the previous 4 weeks) the unemployment rate decreases i.e., from 5% to 4%, and the number of employed goes from i.e., 4.5 to 3.0 million. So essentially every 4 weeks they are discarding several million people from their unemployment data which has the net affect of reducing the actual number of reported unemployed and the unemployment rate.

I have also found it rather curious that there was no mention of the actual number of "outsourced jobs." If employers were eliminating those jobs then there would be an overall negative net affect on the jobs markets, but by classifying them as being "outsourced" as opposed to being "transferred" out or "eliminated" then the employers can still get all of the tax advantages of the "outsourced" jobs on their payroll. At the same time it has the net affect of canceling out large numbers of US people becoming unemployed. That means i.e., that if corporations "outsource" 2 million jobs to India, they will layoff and remove 2 million US workers from their payrolls, while at the same time adding 2 million Indians to their payroll, so the net affect is a wash and the unemployment data still reflects that the corporations have the same number of employees this month, quarter, or year as it had the last month, quarter, or year.

-- Industry Payroll Employment (Establishment Survey Data) - Over the year, payroll employment has grown by 2.1 million.

-- Persons Not in the Labor Force (Household Survey Data) - Nearly 1.5 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force in March .... They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.

* Source URL: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProfessorGAC]

30. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong, and Wrong

The economy is not more good than bad. First of all, a 5% annualized growth rate is mediocre, not good. Secondly, the DOW is near a 6 year high, which is still LOWER than it was a full 6 years ago. Third, we have NOT had real growth in the last 16 quarters. I have no idea where you got that nonsense. That's not even in the numbers provided by Commerce or Treasury! In fact, when the huge increase in the price of fuel and fuel oils and the nominal growth figures for the increase in population are redacted, we have been in a period of stagnation for nearly 4 years.

And, you're wrong. Presidents yield a significant impact, based upon fiscal policy and their management of monetary policy as set by the fed, of economic growth, consumer confidence, and savings rate. To say otherwise is at odds with the facts.

You may own your own business, and i wish you well. But you must be in a business that only requires the rudiments of microeconomic theory, because your statement reveals a profound ignorance of macroeconomics.
The Professor

[AllieB]

32. Thank you

for that cogent explanation of the facts.

I have an idea that he's picked up his economic nonsense from the mainstream media, or worse places.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[butterfly77]

66. Thats where you live go to los angeles to skid row..

where they are dumping senior citizens and women and children.Go to Detroit and ask the vets and others who are sleeping in their cars. I depends on what area of the city or town you live in and what states. I bet its good in wyoming, utah , idaho to name a few

[raccoon]

70. What planet are you living on?

"But overall the economy is more good than bad"

"The DOW is near a six year high,"

The Dow has NOTHING to do with the average American's standard of living.

" unemployment is low,"

If you believe the official unemployment figures, I have a bridge to sell you.

"My business is booming."

Well, good for you.

One thing I agree on: often (not always) what's going on in the economy can't be blamed on, or credited to, the POTUS.

[Nederland]

33. Response

A couple corrections:

More people have fallen below the poverty line since any time since the Great Depression.

Yes, because there are more people now than then. Duh.

Foreclosures are up.

Not as a percentage of homeowners, see above.

Fuel and food prices have skyrocketed.

Fuel yes, food no (however I guess it depends how you define "skyrocketed").

The purchasing power of the average American has decreased.

Yes, but the quality of the goods they purchase has improved so its a wash.

[ProfessorGAC]

35. How Would You Validate That Last Point?

What quantitative measure would you use to establish that it's a "wash"? Seems a pretty bold statement meant to intimidate the other poster, especially since it would strongly seem to suggest a conclusion with an irrefutable basis in fact.

Also, the number of people living in poverty as a proportion of the whole population has, indeed, gone up. So, that is NOT a function of sheer population growth.

And, food prices are rising in every section of the country, if only to recoup the cost of shipping and keeping the stores heated or cooled. Geez, the WSJ had a front page story on this just last week. (Wednesday, i think.) So, it's not like this is some hidden information.

And, finally, the delinquency rate on home loans is absolutely, irrefutably, on the rise. Traditional rates of delinquency for real estate loans is down around 0.09%. The last two quarters it was 0.12 and 0.15%. It has been above the mean for 6 of the last 7 quarters. That's statistically relevant. And, this information is obtainable from any publicly owned bank, and can also be acquired by writing a letter to FDIC, FSLIC, and CUNA.
The Professor

[Nederland]

37. Response

I was referring to many of the items in the basket of goods used to calculate the inflation rate, and therefore, by inference, determine whether or not people's purchasing power is increasing or decreasing. When you look many of the items in the basket--TVs, appliances, automobiles, housing, etc.--you see an enormous increase in quality over the last 30 years. Cars last longer. Houses are better insulated and take less energy to heat. Applicances are more efficient. TV's have better pictures and last longer. None of these facts get captured if you simply crunch the numbers to determine whether or not people are "better off" today than they were 30 years ago.

Yes, the percentage of people living in poverty has gone up recently, but it is no where near Great Depression levels.

Yes, food prices are up slightly, but as I said, it depends on what the OP meant by "skyrocketing".

As for foreclosure rates, they are up as a percentage of mortgages. I got that one wrong. :)


I guess overall I'd say may main point was that the economic news is neither all good nor all bad. Yes, there are things to be concerned about (rising energy costs for one), but I fail to see why anyone should be predicting total economic collapse at this point. I predict that the next 20 years will probably look like the last 20 years: the rich will get richer and the living standard of the poor and middle class will stay flat--at least until the rest of the world catches up.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

54. I'm sorry, that's bull

Cars last longer?? I drove a 67 ford until just 5 years ago, when the rust finally started getting to the frame, I had to get another car, 3 years old and already falling apart. (handles coming off, seats splitting, etc.)

TV's last longer?? I've bought 2 tv in the past 15 years that have both crapped out. Yet the old RCA from the very early 80's is still working great.

Just a few years ago, I used to be able to buy a loaf of bread for 59cents, and at least once a month they would put it on sale 3 for $1. When's the last time you found a loaf of bread for under $1? Even the store brands are running close to $1.50.

[Nederland]

56. Response

Perhaps you got lucky with your Ford, but one average, cars are lasting longer:

http://truckandbarter.com/mt/archives/000218.html

[Viva_La_Revolution]

67. check the comments under that chart, they don't believe those #'s

either.

[Nederland]

80. Believe what you want

...but until you realize that your own personal experience is useless in determining what is actually typical for hundreds of millions of other people you'll be forever ignorant.

[ProfessorGAC]

58. Fair Enough

Even in the Great Depression, some people with jobs critical to maintaining a society still got paid well, and some folks got rich on speculating when things would pick back up. So, no situation is 100% bad or 100% good. We completely agree on that.

The last 20 years, however, don't include quite the bad situation for the middle class that you suggest. In 1983-84 and the years 1994 to 1998, the middle class did see a real increase in wages that was far better than the years immediately before or immediately after those periods. That's why the economy, which is 70% consumption anyway, boomed. Middle class people actually can spend the lion's share of what they earn. The rich can't. The uber rich will still only buy one Ferrari or one yacht at a time. That consumption is a small percentage of their total income, while middle class folks spend 70, or 80, or 90% of their post tax income. (Maybe higher!) This stimulates demand, which in turn stimulates industrial expansion which keeps costs under control, because supply has accelerated to meet demand.

The vibrancy of the middle class is, imo, the key to macroeconomic health. That's why modest manipluation of tax rates for the highest wage earners accomplishes nothing in terms of growth. And, if it goes on long enough, bond rates rise, money flows from the equity markets as risk premiums shrink, and gov't has to borrow beyond their means. If you want the best example of this, ask Silverspoon's dad, who got saddled with a recession due to Reagan's supply-side cuts, and deficit spending that ultimately squeezed the life out of the economy.

The Professor

[spinbaby]

2. I'm missing the boat somewhere

My income hasn't gone up in six years. Whose incomes are going up?

[MADem]

11. That Fat Bastard guy with the platinum parachute from Exxon!

He's probably singlehandedly accounting for the gain!!!

And then, there's the people who are selling their estate jewelry and beloved knick-knacks in order to fill the tanks of the pigmobiles they were conned into buying...that'd dump some dough into the economy!

[Norquist Nemesis]

16. Oligarchy is on the march! n/t

[Nederland]

46. The top 30% of wage earners

...everyone else is flat or going down.

[leesa]

3. A little Monday morning trip to Fantasyland...

[mrcheerful]

4. Yeah right and santa is bringing me a little red wagon. When are people

get the real truth, spending went up because everything they buy has gone up. As far as the wages go, another statistic that can be manipulated to show whatever they want it to show.

[MADem]

12. Geez, I hope he brings enough wagons for EVERYONE!!!

Hell, we'll be riding them to work and shopping if this shit keeps up!!!

[harlinchi]

5. Does the consumer spending number include fuel while core inflation...

...ignores it? That would be one manner of explaining the discordant feel of the consumer spending report.

[enlightenment]

15. I don't know if core numbers ignore fuel costs,

but the CPI does include them. I managed to get sucked into participating in the survey this year (they call every three months, so it's not as bad as the 'diary' survey).
They do ask about fuel costs and other maintenance costs for vehicles.

Here's a link to the survey:
http://www.bls.gov/cex/capi/2004/cecapihome.htm

[flordehinojos]

7. was that statistics based on people paying more for gasoline, food,

property taxes and all the other hike-upwards and dollars away from our pockets our economy has taken due to bush's war, his zero taxes, etc?

i mean, income grows? where, for whom? when? for the oil magnates?

someone is pulling the wool over our eyes, i think.

[ComerPerro]

8. Hasn't gas gone up at least 10 or 20 precent since February?

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

9. I'd like to know if median wages went up.

The average wage can go up due to the president of Exxon getting a 200 million dollar per year raise and nobody else getting anything.

[Dr. Jones]

One word: BULLSHIT BUSH PROPAGANDA. Okay, three words...

This is pure bullshit. It's propaganda. Theyr're trying to bump up the economy again!

High gas prices going higher and higher. Rising interest rates. Higher mortgage rates. Record personal debt. Record governmental debt. Record foreclosures. Healthcare costs skyrocketing. Jobs hard to come by with insourcing/outsourcing/illegal immigration. The cost of every damn thing is sky high!!

Melody Hobson this morning on Good Morning America actually told the truth - she sees the stock market about to tumble! She was ALARMED. I've never seen her like that before.

But these guys are telling me it's all roses? Bullshit!

[Jackpine Radical]

10. I presume income includes some of those $400 mil bonuses...

[EVDebs]

13. I guess it's safe now to raise the Minimum Wage ?

Remembering economics class regarding 'marginal propensity to consume' and all that now vindicated Keynesian stuff. Nixon is supposed to have said "We're all Keynsians now" back in the '70s; looks an awful lot like the same situation for * as Tricky Dick's was back then, wouldn't you say ?

A guaranteed post-war inflation combined with a guaranteed oil-price shock.

[Booster]

14. Did they hire Anderson Accounting to do their books? If what

they say is true, how come we are about to have the largest labor protest in the history of our country? I don't believe a word of it.

[Roland99]

18. Payments from the Medicare drug program are the bulk of income increase

And here we thought the right was against social programs?

[earthside]

19. INFLATION Coming

Well, first, of course, "averages" can mean very high highs and very low lows -- and not necessarily much in the middle.

But, what this really means is that inflation is coming -- big time.

The Bushites have pumped so much money into the economy, at the same time resources, especially energy/petroleum supplies already cannot meet demand.

The federal government and consumers are open to inflation, too. It is a sneaky way to mitigate excessive debt.

The beginnings of runaway inflation ususally make everything look good, like real growth -- but it is an illusion.

Inflation will probably eventually mean higher unemployment along with a decline in living standards ... so all this big controversy about illegal immigration will soon be moot. Yes, even bleeding-heart DUers will be chasing illegals back across the border once their job is gone and they can barely afford to feed their own families.

So, better buy some gold/silver stocks now ...

[area51]

20. MSRNC: "economy doing well"

Riiiiight. So that's why so many Americans can't find jobs. :eyes:

[leftyladyfrommo]

21. I sepnt more but it was on gas.

I am really cutting back on everything else.

I figured that if I just got two tanks of gas a week I would be spending more than my car payment, my insurance payment, my house payment. It has become my #1 most expensive thing.

[originalpckelly]

23. Is that a rocket in your pocket or a nice wad of 159 $1 bills...

from that pay increase you had last month?

The answer may lie (both in the sense of truth and location) in the numbers posted by Department of Commerce here:
http://www.bea.gov/bea/newsrelarchive/2006/pi0306.pdf

From here we can find the latest number of people working:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm

When we take 22.2 billion (the amount wages increased in March) and divide it by 139,759,000 (the current number of people actually working in the USA, we find that each and every one of the 139,759,000 would have to receive $158.84 to produce a 22.2 billion wage increase.

Most people didn't receive $159 (I rounded up) bucks more last month did they?

It is complete and total bullshit. I doubt if the majority of working Americans had any raise last month.

[MadHound]

24. More Enron accounting,

Of course consumer spending went up, and most of it was spent on fuel. And while they managed to jury rig a rise in the rise in income by throwing in the Medicare drug payments:eyes:, they fail to mention that while wages went up by 0.4%, inflation was at 3.3%, thus in real world terms, we're talking a net 2.9% loss of income and purchasing power.

This is simply more propaganda accounting by this administration. If the real numbers aren't good, manipulate them so that they look good. If you can't convincingly manipulate the numbers, then start outright lying and pulling figures out of your ass.

I have a feeling that once Bushco is out of power, some enterprising young economist is going to go back and run the real numbers for the past few years, and find out that we really were in a recession all along.

[Acebass]

25. we've been discussing it here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1070593&mesg_id=1070593

[BiggJawn]

28. WTF are they smokin' in the Newsroom?

"income grew at the fastest pace in six months"???

Consumer spending rose a WHOLE 6/10%!

Well, DUH, Sparky! My FUEL COSTS rose 11% in that time frame...

Oh, I forgot, the Gubbmint doesn't include shit like fuel, heat, or food in that calculation, do they?

[Joe Fields]

31. No good news for the middle class. No good news for the poor.

OOps, I'm sorry, there is no middle class. Economic boom? Increased spending? Yeah, for the wealthy. Don't forget that they are not left out of the equation.

As the gulf widens between the wealthy and the struggling, any increases in consumer spending simply must be from the upper class sector. More yactchs and hummers being sold, more fur coats being purchased, etc...

[natrat]

36. my cut/paste skills from urbansurvival.com

Wage Rate Up 10% - But look, Ma - NO SAVINGS!

Wow - a blockbuster report this morning on the Personal Consumption and Expenditure rates from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Their report puts wage increases at 8-10ths of one percent for the month of March - a whopping 10% annual rate.



While the markets will no doubt call this "good news" on initial spin, the reality shows up on page 4 of the report - people can't save a dime!

"Personal saving -- DPI less personal outlays -- was a negative $32.5 billion in March, compared with a negative $58.3 billion in February. Personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income was a negative 0.3 percent in March, compared with a negative 0.6 percent in February. Negative personal saving reflects personal outlays that exceed disposable personal income. Saving from current income may be near zero or negative when outlays are financed by borrowing (including borrowing financed through credit cards or home equity loans), by selling investments or other assets, or by using savings from previous periods."

Now, carefully think back a couple of weeks ago, when I told you inflation was running at an 8.7% (using the "old weights" system at the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. I told you then, and I will tell you now - with these latest numbers supporting the case - that inflation in America is now running at 10% - and will no doubt go up as gasoline price impacts propagate.



The People's Economist will make it very simple for you, in the event that your coffee hasn't kicked in yet: "When wages going up 10% still results in a negative savings rate, then inflation is going up at something approaching 10%, too!" Damn, that's simple.



Welcome to the Argentina North. Watch metals continue their romp.

[0007]

38. Argh!!

[leftofthedial]

39. then why can't I get a frigging job?

[Yupster]

74. Come to West Texas

we're crying for workers - any workers.

Every business in town has a help wanted sign up.

The oilpatch is paying well and has sucked workers out of every other business in town so there are shortages everywhere.

[OhioChick]

41. Incomes are growing? Why isn't mine?? n/t

[Ksec]

43. Number magic

See any poll to understand how great this economy is. I tend to trust numbers when the people are involved, not a bunch of political eggheads with a reason to make things look better than they really are.
I dont believe these numbers anymore than I believed Cheney was sober.

[Beacho]

45. Man, they sure are out today

If you know what I mean, and I think you do

[AllieB]

48. Yes, it sure does smell like Sean Hannity's gym locker around here

:puke:

[Beacho]

49. You said it

not me!


:evilgrin:

[Nederland]

51. Yup

Those of us that don't conform to DU group think are expressing ourselves.

Horrible isn't it?

[Ksec]

52. So you think the economy is doing well?

If so then all those polls and the thousands of people who replied are all lying and relying on DU group think.

Riiiiight.

[Nederland]

53. It depends

I think the economy is doing well for the top 30% and flat for everyone else. The net result of this is that the bottom 70% feel like they are doing worse because, by comparision, even if not in absolute terms, they are.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

59. You keep saying it's 'flat' when it's declining...

My income stayed exactly the same, and since I'm pinching pennies anyway, I spent the same amount (everything) and came away with less. You know what I've had to cut most from the grocery budget? Meat, fruit and veggies. We've been eating more beans and cheap filler crap, yet I'm spending the same amount of money. If that's not a decline in standard of living, what the hell is?

[Nederland]

63. So for you it's declining

I never said anything about YOU as an individual. All I am making is broad claims about what is happening in the economy. Obviously at any given point in history you will find a certain set of people who are worse off than they were ten years ago and pissed off about it. I'm sorry for that, but I see no evidence that it ever was any different nor ever will be. Most importantly, I don't see what any US President could do to eliminate the business cycle.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

69. So I'm the only one buying groceries?

We're trying to get it through your skull that most of us are seeing a decline in our everyday standard of living, and you're telling us we aren't.

I made less money 10 years ago than I do now, yet back then I had disposible income. I had a minimum wage job and could actually pay all my bills, including daycare. Now the boys are teens and at $10 per hour I can't even afford the healthy food they need and keep a roof over their head. It's not all B*sh's fault, NAFTA, outsourcing etc. have had a lot to do with it, but it sure seems to be going downhill a lot faster in the last few years.

[Nederland]

71. Questions

When you say "most of us" what percentage do you mean?

When you say "everday standard of living", what are you referring to?

I think perhaps we just have a confusion over terminology.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

76. answers...

most of us - I mean most of the people I talk to in everyday real life and online. 90% seems about right, only 10% claim they don't see any change, or even claim that things are better.

everyday standard of living - comparing my $1 buying power today as opposed to what I was able to buy one year ago, or even one month ago (in the case of utilities and food)

[Nederland]

78. Fair enough

As to your claim that only 10% would say they don't see any chage or claim things are better, I think it's more like 30%. This matches what I said above.

I would agree that if you compare purchasing power over the last year things are worse, primarily due to increased energy costs. In the longer term I guess I would disagree though. I think things are closer to flat than getting worse if you take a five or ten year view.

[Yollam]

85. I will guarantee you that there are R-wingers at a certain site RIGHT NOW

sitting there sneering at you for making $10 an hour, and that you used to make minimum wage. To them, you are a "loser" for not making a ton of money, and making up tales about how only idiots can't make more money than that. No matter that the number of people making $10 or less is growing by leaps and bounds, no matter that that money buys less than ever, no matter that our benefits have been gradually taken away over the years.

What nerve we have, wanting to be PAID for working.

As long as they are getting theirs (or at least pretend they are, while really living in mom's basement), they couldn't give a crap about people who have to feed a family on shitty wages.


So a big F-U to the punks who have nothing to to but monitor DU and deride people for not being gorgeous millionaires in peak health.

Ever hear of karma? It's a bitch, baby.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

86. that's what I'm making on unemployment since I got laid off

okay, it's actually $329 a week, which is basically $10hr/40 hrs a week less taxes.

For their information, I was making $2500 a month. So they can stick it. :P

[Yollam]

87. Even more reason they will snicker.

See, they think unemployment is "welfare". Never mind that it's insurance that everybody pays into.

They are sick people.

[Beacho]

64. Horrible? No

Laughable, yes

BTW, How is the chocolate ration doing today?

[AllieB]

68. I don't believe that it's groupthink

I believe that established patterns of behavior indicate where one's sympathies lie.

[Nederland]

73. Absolutely

I think that anyone who held a manufacturing job and got laid off in the last 10 years is probably very angry about what is happening to the economy and probably believe that their situation is held by a higher percentage of the population than it actually is.

Likewise, my bias comes from the fact that I work as a software engineer and the last 15 years has been very good to me.

So yes, we all have biases. The only way to cut through those biases is to ignore personal anecdotes and look at statistical surveys like the CPS (which you believe is a Bush lie).

[linazelle]

60. Who? The Backwash?

:rofl:

[butterfly77]

62. Notice how the media is reporting this bull ....

lately every since those poll numbers of bushit have gone down. The guy little guy with the glasses and white hair( I don't know his name) on cnn was acting like he was reporting someones death the other week when he reported the numbers were at32% , anytime the numbers are up he acts like he wants to go up on the roof of cnn and start tap dancing. These are lies damn lies!

[Initech]

72. What are these "consumers" spending all that money on? Gas?

:shrug:

[Tactical Progressive]

75. Yes, Americans are going to be spending $100 billion more on gas

heating oil, energy and everything else that derives from them this year.

That's a real boon to the statistics of this economy. But as far as the economics itself, what it means is that the middle classes and the poor are going to be forking over tons more to the investor class, on a regressive basis, for even less of a living standard.

I'm sure that if we were forced to start paying nine dollars a gallon, and more for everything else because of it, there would be an even bigger rise in consumer spending. I can't see characterizing that as an 'improvement' in economic health as making much sense. It's not new stuff making the economy more efficient; it's the rich charging more for the staples in everyone's life.

[TexasLawyer]

79. yay! Drinks for the house!

I don't know why you guys were all doom and gloom! These are the good times! It says so right there in the article!
:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm:

[bleedingheart]

83. whose income is growing????

my husband just took a pay cut for a new experimental bonus program...that just got foisted upon the workers at his company...
they work 60+ hours a week and this new program is to give them an incentive to work even harder...

:eyes:

[Yollam]

84. Does gasoline count as "consumer spending"?

If so, why is it always exclude from inflation stats along with soaring food prices? Hmm?

And when they report rising incomes, I would like it if they were required to report incomes on a quintile basis rather than the average, since only incomes at the top 2 quintiles have consistently grown in recent years...

[Lindacooks]

88. 'Fastest pace in SIX MONTHS???'

That's all the further back they went? That's the stupidest reference I've ever heard. I want to see it compared to the 1990s.