The stock market is really booming as the author writes, and new surveys demonstrate that we are in the midst of an economic revival, the greatest in the past five years!
Housing prices have risen dramatically after a long decline, rising 10.2 percent in the first quarter of 2013, and the highest since 2007!
Consumer confidence in the future, an important psychological barrier, also reached a five year high, with growing confidence about an improved job market, something that has taken a long time, just as it did in the Great Depression of the 1930s!
Consumer spending is more than 10 percent above 2009, and unemployment compensation claims are down, other good signs of a rapidly improving economy!
All this is happening, despite Republican attempts to stall a recovery, in order to wage war on President Obama, as they have demonstrated no concern about the average middle class or poor American, and continue their image of being out there for the elite two percent and the corporations!
Hello Professor,
Yes despite the predictions of the Extreme Reactionary Conservatives / Teabaggers, we are now entering an economic revival. I have to ask how much sooner would it have come about if it were not for the Republican obstructionists “for simply the sake of obstruction†in Congress today?
With reference to your statement of the housing prices rising, I can confirm that in the Columbus, OH area; as soon as a house goes on the market there are at least three people bidding on the home and the starting bid is the full asking price and it goes up from there. There is more demand than supply of homes for sale. Construction is rappidly coming back.
The Honda plant in Ohio is designing from the bottom up a new car line. The design was done in the U.S., the manufacturing of all components will be done in the U.S., and they are doubling the size of the assembly facility in Ohio to produce this car solely in Ohio. This is the value added manufacturing that is the true wealth of a nation I have been speaking of.
Another company is moving into the Columbus area that is looking to employ over 3,000 people.
Ohio is expecting to add over 100,000 new jobs within this year alone.
After the President bailed out the auto industry in Ohio against the cries of Mitt Romney and the Teabaggers, this state has gone from a low of being the 48th worst economic condition to the 4th best economic state in the nation. Think where they would have been if the Republican Governor had embraced the light rail running from Columbus to Cleveland and all the business opportunities and jobs that would have created. Many business leaders are voicing their disappointment of the partisan politics that halted this opportunity….. (Can’t make the President look good you know.)
It is not a misstatement to say that this Ultra- Extreme Reactionary Conservatives are waging a war on the Working Middle Classes in this country to deescalate and depressing the wages, medical benefits, vacation time off, and retirement contributions, to the Working Middle Classes. When they are successful in these task, that is more wealth into their off shore bank accounts.
Wait till the govt can no longer print money and the dollar is no longer the world monitary standard as the debt continues to spiral out of control and the cult of Obama disintegrates as all leftest regimes do.
@ Dave – Lulz!
Engineer Of Knowledge, you have expressed brilliantly above the reality of economic revival and particularly, how it has affected Ohio, whose Governor, John Kasich, stood in the way of the rail project that would have also helped that state, much like Rick Scott stopped it in Florida, a massive mistake!
As the economic revival becomes evident, it is hoped that the right wing will suffer in the polls, as people realize that the Tea Party Movement that took over the governorships and the House of Representatives has been destructive in its desire to destroy Barack Obama, and in so doing, harming America!
Also @Dave – I am putting you on the same ignore list as Guano. Why? Because I’m fed up with your ridiculous fantasy world comments.
@Engineer, @Maggie – You can have at Dave too! He’s all yours! 🙂
Believer’s right up to the last drop of koolaid, I would expect no less.
Oh Princess Leia,
Never argue with a stupid person….they just constantly try to drag you down to their level then defeat you with their experience.
Because the Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned, and most of their directors are chosen by their stockholders, but it is common to hear assertions that control of the Fed is in the hands of the government. So when Dave makes silly statements such as, “Wait till the govt can no longer print money..†not even closely accurate and proves he truly knows nothing about what he has been posting about. As a matter of fact, it is even laughable if the ignorance was not so sad. Again Leia…not a factor with any validity.
I would venture a guess that Dave could not present HIS OWN economic evaluation of the economy to support. Bottom line, I’m sure he failed not just history, but economics as well. Oh he can cut and pass on nihilistic, misleading, information from some web site….but again with no validity. Dave is simply not a factor…..they will sell a computer to anyone. Doesn’t make what they post true or even worth considering.
And I love this last misstatement, “Believer’s right up to the last drop of Kool-Aid, I would expect no less.†This is really referring to the religious fanatic followers of Jimmy Jones in Jonestown who based on religious faith, drank the poison Kool-Aid and died. This statement is applied to those of Fanatical Religious viewpoints who never use critical thinking to any situations. Dave couldn’t even get this right.
So Dave, you please keep drinking the Kool-Aid that will eventually kill you, but don’t even try to apply this where it does not even refer to. You just show your lack of knowledge towards….well anything.
Engineer Of Knowledge, I thank you again for your statement, which I totally agree with, and I could not have said it better!
Engineer: Are you denying the fact the The Federal Reserve is having an expansive monetary policy?
Juan..is that what I said?…:-)
No, you said the government doesn’t print money because the Fed is privately own and it seemed you were dismissing the potential of an inflationary spiral. Now, technically the Treasury through The Mint prints paper money, but it is the Fed that established the monetary policy via low interest rates and other instruments by which the Fed expands liquidity when is it has an expansive monetary policy. Therefore, the fact remains that there is a danger of inflation or collapse of the bubble created by this expansion of liquidity in the current stock market, thanks to the expansive monetary policy of the Fed.
Also the Fed is monetizing the debt created by the Treasury, which in itself creates another future problem. In other words, there seems to be a couple of time bombs that have been created thanks to the policies of Geitner at Treasury and Bernanke at the Fed, don’t you think?
Had this been the case a year ago at this time, President Obama would have been re-elected along more traditional lines which involve, by comparison to first-election victory, increases in both the popular-vote margin and electoral-vote score. But he was re-elected anyway. I do wonder if this will translate to a third consecutive Democratic presidential victory in 2016. Or, perhaps, that outcome (if it’s a Democratic hold) will manifest with other determining dynamics.
Juan,
Sorry to be getting back to you so late. My sincere apologies. My youngest graduated last night so I was involved with that.
To answer your question, I will whole heartily agree that there in not only the “potential†of inflation, but it is going on right now as we speak. My son-in-law is a mortgage broker. (an Economist Degree from an Ivy League School with $600k plus salary per year).
Last Thursday, May 23, the interest rate jumped up a full 1/2% in just that one day. (A very big shock to the industry…3% to 3.5% in just one day without notice!) On Friday it was up to 3.625. When I spoke with him last night it was up to 4%.
This of course is a necessary aspect taken by the “privately owned†( 🙂 ) Federal Reserve to slow down the economy to keep it in check and monitored. (This is their job.)
I had enough foresite to see this coming and made an appointmen to visit to my Stock Broker Tuesday morning to make adjustments in my retirement fund to be proactive for this inevitable adjustment in the economy. As the Stock Market cools down and drops, so does the Bond Market drop.
With regards of the debt created by the Treasury, everything taken in a relative aspect, there was a much larger debt after WWII. Truman entered into the Korean War which added more debt; and President Eisenhower then followed up after that by investing in the highway infrastructure we now enjoy today as the economic stimulus. This worked very well to bring the country out of the recession they were in. It was Kennedy who started to reduce the national debt during his short tenure. (Side note: Even Clinton’s tenure had a surplus in operating budget capital and was even paying down the National Debt.)
So in summation, as the National Debt is higher than I would like it to be, but has been much higher; like I have said with everything being relative, in the past.
D, I agree that had the economy been seen as better a year ago, Obama would have won MORE electoral and popular votes, so the GOP did a good job of holding back economic growth, but not enough to put Mitt Romney in office, a total phony on just about every issue by the time of the election!
I believe that no matter who the Democrats were to run in 2016, the Electoral College dynamics favor a win for the White House, particularly if the nominee is Hillary Clinton!
Engineer: The Fed is slowing down the economy you say? Did I understand correctly? If so , slow down from what? There is practically no growth. The Stock Market you know is just another bubble created by the Fed. So??
Juan,
I don’t have time to give you an Economics Course lesson plus I am not sure you are more interested in being a wise ass instead of understanding what I can pass on. Now that being said I will continue in good faith in the aspect you may actually be interested.
Interest rates have been managed to historically low levels to aid in economic recovery, and it can be considered they will increase sometime in the future. No one can predict exactly when rates will rise, but it’s reasonable to expect the next significant move will be upwards.
The Federal Reserve has pledged to keep short-term interest rates low until unemployment improves, but that doesn’t mean longer term rates can’t rise in the meantime. Rising rates will create a future opportunity for investors who are seeking income and have money to invest. However, when longer term rates rise, the pries of existing bonds will fall, with longer term bonds falling more in price than shorter term bonds.
I hope you have understood what I have passed on.
Ronald writes, “I believe that no matter who the Democrats were to run in 2016, the Electoral College dynamics favor a win for the White House, particularly if the nominee is Hillary Clinton!”
True, for a number of reasons. For now, I’ll mention these three:
1. Since 1992, the year establishing “The Blue Firewall” (pointed out by “National Journal’s” Ron Brownstein), the Democrats have had a lock on 242 electoral votes between states which haven’t voted for a Republican since at latest 1988. This refers to California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Vermont. Add to it others, not having colored red since 1984, that are Hawaii, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin. Factor in Minnesota, which last colored red for Richard Nixon’s 49-state re-election in 1972. Add to it District of Columbia, which has had the vote since 1964 and is the bluest area in the U.S.
2. If you look at the states—many included above—with double-digit electoral votes, because they rank as Nos. 1 to 21 in population, you see how they add up rapidly: Calif. (55); N.Y. (29); Ill. (20); Pa. (20); Mich. (16); N.J. (14); Wash. (12); Mass. (11); Md. (10); Wis. (10); and Minn. (10). These add up to 207 electoral votes. That is already 76 percent of the required 270 for election. This is before those single-digit electoral-vote states strongly in the Democratic column. Since the 1990s, the only double-digit electoral-vote state carried every time for the Republicans has been the No. 2-ranked Texas (38). Factor in Ohio, perhaps the nation’s top bellwether state (with the longest unbroken streak which dates back to 1964!), and those 18 electoral votes brings it up to 225. You add Florida, which votes like Ohio and has backed the winner in 20 of the last 22 election cycles (and has been within a five-point spread of the national margin in every election since 1996; that is true in all since 1964 for the Buckeye State), and that adds another 29 for 254 electoral votes. This is before counting Iowa (6) and New Mexico (5), the only two states which backed the popular-vote winners of both 2000 (Al Gore) and 2004 (George W. Bush). This is before N.H. (in George W. Bush’s 2000 column but Democratic in all others). This is also before Nevada, which has voted the same as N.M. in all elections since the latter’s first presidential vote in 1912, minus the split outcome year in 2000, and has—like Ia.—become with Election 2008 a long-established bellwether state (all winners since 1912 minus backing Gerald Ford over Jimmy Carter in 1976) that has developed a blue tilt. (Meaning, Barack Obama, unlike Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton, carried Nev. in both his elections with margins exceeding his national numbers. Iowa, which voted for Michael Dukakis in 1988, has had a blue tilt since 1984. N.M., in both 2008 and 2012, produced statewide margins more than double Obama’s national numbers, making it even bluer than Pa., Minn. and Wis. in both cycles. This means, with such tilts, if a Democrat wins election/re-election to the presidency, these states will carry.)
3. Given plenty examples already mentioned, factor in the 1992 to 2012 electoral-vote scores vs. the amounts of states which were carried. Average them out. Since the 1990s, no presidential winner carried more than the 32 states (plus D.C.) in Bill Clinton’s 1992 column. So, it goes like this:
* 1992—Clinton won 370 electoral votes with 32 states + D.C.
* 1996—Clinton re-elected with 379 electoral votes with 31 states + D.C.
* 2000—George W. Bush won 271 electoral votes with 30 states.
* 2004—Bush re-elected with 286 electoral votes with 31 states.
* 2008—Barack Obama won 365 electoral votes with 28 states + Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District + D.C.
* 2012—Obama re-elected with 332 electoral votes with 26 states + D.C.
On average, and with no estimates from remainders, Clinton won an average of 11 (1992) and 12 (1996) electoral votes. Bush won an average of 9 (2000 and 2004) electoral votes. Obama won an average of 13 (2008) and 12 (2012) electoral votes. In the 1990s, the average [electoral-vote] states for Clinton were Al Gore’s home state Tennessee, [now fellow ex-bellwether] Missouri, and Wisconsin followed by, with re-election, Massachusetts and Indiana. In 2000, the average states for Bush were Alabama and Louisiana. In 2004, include those two states with the now-established bellwether Colorado, the 22nd-ranked state in population (after Minnesota), which moved up from 8 to 9 electoral votes during that decade. In 2008, the average state for Obama was now-established bellwether Virginia (which, in both the 44th president’s elections, led all other states with coming closest with its statewide margins in best reflecting the national outcome). In 2012, the average state for Obama was Washington.
The point of this is that the two parties became realigned and they switched brands and base states. (The South, which used to be Democratic, is now Republican. Dwight Eisenhower, the only Republican during the Democratic realigning period of 1932 to 1964, won the same states as Bill Clinton, the only two-term Democrat during the Republican realigning period of 1968 to 2004, with exceptions of Clinton’s home state Arkansas and Georgia.) The Democrats now have the numbers’ advantage in terms of populous states, indeed, and the Republicans are the ones who nowadays have to thread the needle (which was exactly the cases of 2000 and 2004 with George W. Bush).
“Add to it others, not having colored red since 1984, that are Hawaii, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin.”
Revise: Add to it others, not having colored red since 1984, that are Hawaii, [Massachusetts], New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin.
D, thanks again for your wonderful and insightful analysis of Presidential Election history and how much politics has changed since Gerald Ford’s defeat in 1976! The fact is that Ford looks better all of the time, when compared to his three GOP successors in the White House, as he was a decent, and moderate, mainstream Republican, who, if it had not been for the Nixon Pardon, would have defeated Jimmy Carter in 1976!