You can read about it here. The next report is due out in another 3 months, and we will have a better gauge on things then.
NOTE: Maybe Obama DOES have the power to wreck our economy by changing the weather, so maybe it is still all his fault. LOL.
The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016
One of you will end up here next!
The market isn't going through the roof because of Fed policies. It's because corporate profits are through the roof, mostly as a result of squeezing employees as hard as they can during bad economic times.Never mind that any "growth" in the economy is fueled entirely by various Fed and government injections that are unsustainable and distort the market.
Companies are also holding record amounts of cash. Is that also a "negative indicator?" U.S. Firms Hold Record $1.64 Trillion in Cash With Apple in Lead - Bloomberg
"Rigged" by whom? Did the Fed make a big loan this morning, so that someone could single-handedly invest enough to boost the market?Stocks jumping higher on such horrible news is a pretty good indicator of how rigged the market has become.....
Or, perhaps the market shrugged off the news, because in their view it wasn't a big deal.
Which "meaningful indicators" are you talking about? The Conference Board's LEI has been rising for 3 months in a row. Pretty much everyone understands that Q1 got hammered by an awful winter, and it is likely to have produced some pent-up demand.All meaningful indicators point to a recession starting this year....
What fantasy is this? Or perhaps you are referring to George Bush 41, who threw immense sums at the S&L Crisis, which left Clinton with a nice chunk of fancy new debt? Heck, the S&L Crisis cost the taxpayers far more than anything Bush 43 or Obama did to get over the financial crisis.unlike Clinton, Obama will not be able to bail out the system and paper over the losses so that it gets pushed into the next guy's term.
Yes and no.The U.S. is still in bailout economy conditions and it would take the kind of money injection that usually precedes hyperinflationary sovereign default crises to prevent another serious downturn.
"Yes" in that we are still in a bit of a liquidity trap, which means the Fed can continue actions like QE without causing inflation any time soon -- in the same way that they have done so for many years now, without producing the "hyperinflation" expected by people who don't understand economics well.
"No" in that the Fed can't really do much more at this point if the economy takes a serious downturn. Inducing "hyperinflation" is obviously something no US central bank will do, at least not during our lifetimes. We are also a long, long way from any sort of default because of anything other than legislative dysfunction.
People like you supported this guy and his progressive policies. Voted for him and gave him the power to sign destructive legislation.
So why are the Conns the bad guys ?