January Income Drop Not A Worry (CBS - bush* economy is GREAT!!)

[diamond14]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/28/ap/business/main676918.shtml


January Income Drop Not A Worry

WASHINGTON, Feb. 28, 2005


(CBS/AP) Personal incomes which had been bolstered by a large stock dividend payment in December plunged 2.3 percent in January, the sharpest decline in more than a decade. Consumer spending was flat, the government reported Monday.


"It's nothing to worry about," Mark Zandi, chief economist of Economy.com, told CBS Radio News. "I think underlying income growth is solid, primarily because the job market is improving, we're creating lots of jobs, wage growth looks to at least have stabilized and the combination of both those things means more income for all of us."

Meanwhile, the number of new single-family homes sold in January fell 9.2 percent, the agency said in a second report.

The drop in new home sales was accompanied by a fall in prices. The median new home price — the point where half the homes sold for more and half for less — was $199,400 in January, down 13.2 percent from a median sales price of $229,700 in December. It was the lowest new home price since a median of $196,000 in December 2003.

For January, consumer spending was held back by a big drop in demand for durable goods such as cars. It was the weakest showing since a 0.3 percent decline in June of last year.

[Jack Rabbit]

1. And if you state the obvious, you're a terrorist sympathizer

. . . and Ann Coulter will say you're an old Arab.

[lastknowngood]

2. Not one good number in there look for them to pump the numbers

next week to try to keeep the sheeple in the market.

[Crankie Avalon]

3. "Oh, would you stop worrying...

...about all those Indians you think are around every corner!"--George Armstrong Custer (1839-1876)

[Beetwasher]

4. New Jobs Are Being Created? Really? Where?

Oh, that's right, in India and China...Nothing to worry about! Said hey Captain on the Titanic!

[HockeyMom]

8. PART TIME

$5/hour MCJOBS aren't even FULL TIME anymore. Oh, can't image WHY? NO BENEFITS. So, Bush laughed at the single Mom with THREE part time jobs? Hey, no spin? Just look at all the jobs being created!!! This woman has THREE JOBS.

[ender]

5. deflation... wheeeee!

deflation is fun kiddees! see what obscene downward pressure on wages and taxes do? see?

[Chef]

9. Screwed

Screwed, I tell ya. I started to reply to the previous post on Wal-Mart but this news is the most appropriate reply. The bottom is about to come out of the basket. Hang on. We are in for a bumpy ride.

[ozone_man]

21. That would be my take.

The beginning of a deflationary depression. I think we are close to the point where our national and consumer debt accumulation is catching up with us. The debt bubble. Payback will be a b@itch.

[daleo]

6. Actually, this sounds kind of like a recession coming.

I don't know, just a hunch, but these two items together strike me as having "leading indicator" potential.

[htuttle]

7. "The Ministry of Plenty reports a record wheat crop for this season..."

"...allowing an increase in the chocolate ration from 35g to 25g per week."

Crack open a bottle of Victory Gin and celebrate, citizens!

[plasticsundance]

10. Here's a graph of the great job recovery

http://www.jobwatch.org/

Here's another one:



http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_snapshots_11102004

Where's my shade's?
:eyes:

[Nordmadr]

22. What happens to the people that are unemployed

are unable to find jobs and run out of unemployment? Are they still counted in these unemployment figures? Something tells me not.

Olaf

[plasticsundance]

24. Exactly ...

olafvikingr,

The second graph is from my second link. The tile of that link is, Unemployment rate masks high share of long-term unemployed.

This how the article stated it:

As the figure shows, the unemployment rate for the third quarter of 2004 was 5.5%—not much lower than when TEUC was enacted. However, the share of the unemployed who had been unemployed for more than 39 weeks in the third quarter of 2004 was 14.5%, or 1.2 million of the unemployed—much higher than when TEUC was enacted. Historically, a share this high has been associated with much higher unemployment rates. For example, the share of very long-term unemployed was 16.4% in the fourth quarter of 1992 when the unemployment rate was 7.4%—at which time extended federal unemployment benefits were available.

Despite the elevated percentage of very long-term unemployment, today's unemployed workers are not able to receive any extension of their regular state UI benefits. Neither of the two options for extending the duration of UI benefits—another round of federally funded TEUC and the federal/state Extended Benefit program—are currently available to assist the very long-term unemployed. (Eligibility for TEUC expired in December 2003, and workers received their final benefits under the program in March 2004.)

While some may question the necessity of extending benefits given today's 5.5% unemployment rate, this rate hides very long spells of unemployment for many workers who have no extended UI benefits to tide them over.

[Warpy]

11. The rich aren't paying taxes

the managerial class is getting fatter, all's right with the world!

Funny money continues to pour into the stock market so the rubes will think it's a safe place for their FICA premiums, so the economy's just ducky!

This scam is simply unsustainable. The destruction of social security and the attempt to rob 100% of the FICA premiums (instead of the current 40%) is their best hope to keep their scam afloat for the next few years, or until Bush is gone and they get a Democrat to blame for the collapse.

Don't let them. Please.

[reprobate]

12. Is this the sound of the real estate bubble bursting?

The drop in new home sales was accompanied by a fall in prices. The median new home price — the point where half the homes sold for more and half for less — was $199,400 in January, down 13.2 percent from a median sales price of $229,700 in December. It was the lowest new home price since a median of $196,000 in December 2003.

[chelsea0011]

13. These talking heads make $$$$$$$$$$$. Of course it's "no problem"

[high density]

14. Income growth is solid??

Yeah, in India!

[onehandle]

15. My income has dropped 23%+ since Bush came into office.

I've had the same job in the corporate world for nine years.

No bonuses, no raises company wide in 2002 and 2003.
(Except for Bush lovin' executive management)

They just announced a wage freeze starting immediately...again.

[Rose Siding]

16. Guess I'll just have to make all my December stock dividends last

:eyes:

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Hmmm personal reserarch to be done

on the Great Depresion of 1929

Neo Hooverism is leading straight to that.

[oldtime dfl_er]

18. no worries!

I haven't had a raise in five years -- coincidence? I think not.
Folks, they can't keep the economy propped up artificially any longer.

www.cafepress.com/showtheworld

[TexasLawyer]

19. more RNC-directed smoke and mirrors

From Slate, last month

Odd Jobs
Why the unemployment rate is really higher than it looks.
By Daniel Gross
Posted Friday, Jan. 30, 2004, at 1:57 PM PT


"People are finding work," President Bush proclaimed yesterday in New Hampshire. "There's an excitement in our economy." Evidently, President Bush failed to read the first paragraph of the most recent Employment Situation Summary, which showed that the mammoth U.S. economy added a paltry 1,000 payroll jobs in December. He probably skipped right to the second paragraph, which showed that the unemployment rate fell in December to 5.7 percent from 5.9 percent in November.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment in two ways. The Establishment Survey gathers data directly from 400,000 companies and then estimates how many Americans have payroll jobs. The Household Survey, based on surveys of 60,000 households, determines how many people are working and produces the unemployment rate. Occasionally, the two surveys show divergent trends in job growth—especially when an economy is coming out of recession. According to the payroll survey, the number of jobs fell 232,000 over the course of 2003 on a seasonally adjusted basis. But according to the Household Survey, which includes farm workers, the self-employed, and people who may work off the books, the number of Americans working rose by 1.03 million in 2003 on a seasonally adjusted basis.

Last October, I dubbed the debate over the two surveys, and the emerging campaign to ignore the payroll numbers and focus on the household numbers, "antidisestablishmentarianism." Last week I described how it has become central to the Republican defense of President Bush's economic stewardship. The comparatively strong Household Survey figures also bolster the Republican case for refusing to extend the federal Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation program. (Yesterday, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities charged that about 375,000 people will see their benefits expire in January amid a lame labor market.)

<snip>

http://slate.msn.com/id/2094690/

[Massachusetts]

20. Don't worry...be happy!

[jswordy]

23. Match those numbers with a lower revised 4th Q assessment...

...and there's plenty to worry about!

Has the real estate bubble burst? Looks like it is leaking, but we must wait til spring to see for sure.