<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Third-quarter GDP shows growth -- is the recession over?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/third-quarter-gdp-shows-growth-is-the-recession-over/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/third-quarter-gdp-shows-growth-is-the-recession-over/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/third-quarter-gdp-shows-growth-is-the-recession-over/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/before-the-bell/" rel="tag">Before the Bell</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/good-news/" rel="tag">Good news</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/10/arrow_up_up_240.jpg" width="160" height="149" alt="" />It appears that the U.S. economy may finally be dragging itself out of the economic doldrums. At least, that is what the third-quarter Gross Domestic Product indicates. The GDP showed that the <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-3q-gdp-increases-35-most-in-two-years-2009-10-29">U.S. economy grew at a 3.5% annual pace</a> in the third quarter, snapping a four-quarter contraction streak. <br /><br />The growth is attributed to the massive government stimulus, which led to higher consumer spending. In addition, a reduction in inventories and robust government spending helped spur growth in the third quarter. But even excluding the influence of auto sales, production and inventories, the economy grew 1.9 percent last quarter.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/third-quarter-gdp-shows-growth-is-the-recession-over/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Third-quarter GDP shows growth -- is the recession over?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/third-quarter-gdp-shows-growth-is-the-recession-over/">Third-quarter GDP shows growth -- is the recession over?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:35:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/third-quarter-gdp-shows-growth-is-the-recession-over/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19214735/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/29/third-quarter-gdp-shows-growth-is-the-recession-over/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>economic growth</category><category>economic recovery</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>EconomicRecovery</category><category>economy</category><category>featured</category><category>GDP</category><category>gross domestic product</category><category>GrossDomesticProduct</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:35:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Four reasons we're stuck with high unemployment for a while]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/20/four-reasons-were-stuck-with-high-unemployment-for-a-while/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/20/four-reasons-were-stuck-with-high-unemployment-for-a-while/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/20/four-reasons-were-stuck-with-high-unemployment-for-a-while/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/employees/" rel="tag">Employees</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/personalfinance/" rel="tag">Personal Finance</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/05/unemploymentpicture.jpg" />Some of the jobs that have disappeared through this <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/recession/">recession</a> are gone forever, it seems. Even when the market turns, and even gains momentum,<a target="_blank" href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-10-19-high-unemployment-remains_N.htm"> we could be stuck with a fairly weak employment market for a while</a>. The recovery will take longer than we'd like, putting more distance between now and the top of the next market run. We've lost 7.2 million jobs since December 2007, and the predictions of some economists <a target="_blank" href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/05/job-market-expected-to-recover-in-2014/">that we'll get them back by 2014 may actually seem optimistic</a>. </p>
<span style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-top: 7px;"><script> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/business_finance/Four_Reasons_We_re_Stuck_with_High_Unemployment_For_a_While'; </script> <script src=" http://digg.com/api/diggthis.js"></script></span>    Unemployment is at 9.8%, and it's expected to clear 10% early next year. Then, we have the specter of a jobless recovery with which to contend. "Full employment" is often considered to be an <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/unemploymentrate/">unemployment rate</a> of 4% to 5%, but it could be a while before we get there. The last downturn, following the <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/dotcom/">dotcom</a> bust, resulted in a peak unemployment rate of 6.3% in 2003 ... and we're already well past that.
<p> </p>
<p>Why is the recovery going to be such a grind? Check out the four major reasons after the jump. </p>
<p> </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/20/four-reasons-were-stuck-with-high-unemployment-for-a-while/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Four reasons we're stuck with high unemployment for a while</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/20/four-reasons-were-stuck-with-high-unemployment-for-a-while/">Four reasons we're stuck with high unemployment for a while</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-10-19-high-unemployment-remains_N.htm>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/20/four-reasons-were-stuck-with-high-unemployment-for-a-while/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19201853/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/20/four-reasons-were-stuck-with-high-unemployment-for-a-while/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>bank loans</category><category>BankLoans</category><category>banks</category><category>consumer spending</category><category>ConsumerSpending</category><category>dotcom</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>featured</category><category>foreclosed</category><category>foreclosure</category><category>foreclosures</category><category>job</category><category>job cuts</category><category>JobCuts</category><category>jobless rate</category><category>jobless recovery</category><category>JoblessRate</category><category>JoblessRecovery</category><category>joblosses</category><category>jobs</category><category>mortgage</category><category>mortgage defaults</category><category>MortgageDefaults</category><category>mortgages</category><category>unemployment</category><category>unemployment rate</category><category>UnemploymentRate</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Leading index predicts record U.S. growth]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/09/leading-index-predicts-record-us-growth/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/09/leading-index-predicts-record-us-growth/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/09/leading-index-predicts-record-us-growth/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/good-news/" rel="tag">Good news</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/indices/" rel="tag">Indices</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/marketmatters/" rel="tag">Market Matters</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/09/upgreen.jpg" />There are two opposing schools of thought on the current economic condition. One the one side are those who for see a "double dip" recession with the downturn continuing into next year. On the other side we have another group who see economic growth picking up rather than slacking off next year.</p>
<p>The Economic Cycle Research Institute <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSNYS00549020091009">has developed an index</a> that "predicts" future growth (RPT-ECRI). The index is predicting record growth rate shooting to a hitting a record high. Its weekly leading index rose to 128.3 from 127.1 the prior week.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/09/leading-index-predicts-record-us-growth/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Leading index predicts record U.S. growth</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/09/leading-index-predicts-record-us-growth/">Leading index predicts record U.S. growth</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSNYS00549020091009>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/09/leading-index-predicts-record-us-growth/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19190613/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/09/leading-index-predicts-record-us-growth/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>double dip recession</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>RPT-ECRI index predicts record growth</category><category>Rpt-ecriIndexPredictsRecordGrowth</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Connie Madon]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 14:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Economy shrinks less than expected]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/30/economy-shrinks-less-than-expected/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/30/economy-shrinks-less-than-expected/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/30/economy-shrinks-less-than-expected/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/good-news/" rel="tag">Good news</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="0" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/09/benjamin-franklin.jpg" alt="GDP numbers" />The Commerce Department released GDP numbers today for the second quarter, and showed that the economy <a href="http://money.aol.com/article/economy-dips-at-07-percent-pace-in-2q/670400">shrank less than expected</a> for the April - June period.<br /><br />According to today's report, second quarter GDP figures dropped by 0.7%. Before the report, analysts had been expecting to see that GDP actually dropped by 1.1%, providing some fresh evidence that the economy will probably start growing again during the second half of the year.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/30/economy-shrinks-less-than-expected/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Economy shrinks less than expected</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/30/economy-shrinks-less-than-expected/">Economy shrinks less than expected</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/30/economy-shrinks-less-than-expected/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19179504/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/30/economy-shrinks-less-than-expected/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>ben bernanke</category><category>BenBernanke</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>economy</category><category>Federal Reserve</category><category>FederalReserve</category><category>GDP</category><category>inthenews</category><category>jobs</category><category>recession</category><category>unemployment</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Fowlkes]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Will the recession end in 2009?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/27/will-the-recession-end-in-2009/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/27/will-the-recession-end-in-2009/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/27/will-the-recession-end-in-2009/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/analyst-reports/" rel="tag">Analyst Reports</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p>It appears that a majority of economists believe that the current recession in the United States is <a href="http://money.aol.com/article/economists-see-recession-ending-in-09/499352">going to end this year</a>. The National Association for Business Economics (NABE) will release today a survey that reflects this belief and is in line with a forecast from Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and others. <br /><br />According to the survey, 74% of the forecasters believe the recession will end in the third quarter, with 19% pegging the fourth quarter as the final quarter for the recession. The remaining 7% believe the first quarter of 2010 will be the recession's swan song. <p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/27/will-the-recession-end-in-2009/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Will the recession end in 2009?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/27/will-the-recession-end-in-2009/">Will the recession end in 2009?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 27 May 2009 11:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/27/will-the-recession-end-in-2009/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19048942/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/27/will-the-recession-end-in-2009/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>economic growth</category><category>economic recovery</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>EconomicRecovery</category><category>inthenews</category><category>NABE</category><category>NABE forecast</category><category>NabeForecast</category><category>recession</category><category>unemployment</category><category>unemployment rate</category><category>UnemploymentRate</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 11:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Do we need a second economic stimulus bill?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/01/do-we-need-a-second-economic-stimulus-bill/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/01/do-we-need-a-second-economic-stimulus-bill/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/01/do-we-need-a-second-economic-stimulus-bill/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/other-issues/" rel="tag">Other Issues</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/conventions-and-conferences/" rel="tag">Conventions and Conferences</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/politics/" rel="tag">Politics</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p>Congressional Democrats, including Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va, are <a href="http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080731/BUSINESS01/807310368/1002/business">pushing for the enactment</a> of a second economic stimulus bill worth $24 billion, including a $6 billion lifeline for the beleaguered auto industry. Odds of it passing in a presidential election year are slim to none.<br /><br />Democrats, though, are giving the people what they want. Regardless of whether it's a good idea or not, it's fantastic politics. Democrats can prove to voters, who are fed up with the lousy economy, that they "feel their pain," leaving aside the debate of whether it's needed.<br /><br />That explains why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., says that the second stimulus bill will need to have bipartisan support -- as the first one got -- because it is vital for the economy. Like the first economic stimulus plan, Byrd's bill will be temporary, targeted and provide disaster relief, according to <a href="http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&amp;docID=cqmidday-000002931358">CQ Politics.com</a>.
<p>"The Speaker earlier had vowed to enact a second measure, totaling at least $50 billion, before Congress leaves this year," the website says. "But the president and congressional Republicans have been less enthusiastic about the idea, repeatedly arguing that lawmakers should wait to assess the impact of the tax rebates and other incentives enacted in February."</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/01/do-we-need-a-second-economic-stimulus-bill/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Do we need a second economic stimulus bill?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/01/do-we-need-a-second-economic-stimulus-bill/">Do we need a second economic stimulus bill?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 01 Aug 2008 12:10:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.cnbc.com/id/25949236>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/01/do-we-need-a-second-economic-stimulus-bill/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1272191/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/01/do-we-need-a-second-economic-stimulus-bill/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>barack obama</category><category>BarackObama</category><category>economic growth</category><category>economic stimulus</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>EconomicStimulus</category><category>economy</category><category>Ed LAZear</category><category>EdLazear</category><category>nancy pelosi</category><category>NancyPelosi</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan Berr]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 12:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Why the dollar will keep falling]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/03/why-the-dollar-will-keep-falling/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/03/why-the-dollar-will-keep-falling/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/03/why-the-dollar-will-keep-falling/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/international-markets/" rel="tag">International Markets</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a></p><p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/07/cash-wad.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" /><em><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/04/business/worldbusiness/04euro.html?_r=1&amp;hp=&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1215086808-oDn2CXzLhrmo6lVplJQbfw&amp;oref=slogin">The New York Times </a></em>reports that the European Central Bank raised its equivalent of the Fed Funds rate to 4.25%. Meanwhile, Bernanke's economic wrecking crew has kept the U.S. rate at 2%. Investors will sell dollars and buy Euros. That will cause the dollar to lose even more of the 72% it's lost since January 2001. But none of this is really happening because <em><a href="http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jmQRMDU6vPY5AkLrjukfcP6gEXWg">AFP</a></em> reports that President George Bush has declared that "we're strong dollar people." </p>
<p>The key to U.S. policy is repeated denials of the obvious -- which is that U.S. policy is consistently intended to weaken the dollar. The reason is that a weak dollar makes the goods of big U.S. corporate exporters relatively cheap when they sell overseas. And of course, since oil is traded in dollars, a weak one causes the price of oil to spike. It now resides at a comfortable <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i5TtajgUpSm7KY5jf-lCJGHBB-tAD91MAM3G1">$146</a> a barrel, up 508% since January 2001. </p>
<p>But <em><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSL0327283220080703?pageNumber=2&amp;virtualBrandChannel=0">Reuters</a></em> reports that Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson -- who last year brought us <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/marketsNewsUS/idUKWBT00686520070420">"subprime is contained"</a> -- now says that the weak dollar is not to blame for high oil prices. With apologies to the old <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.F._Hutton">E.F. Hutton advertisements</a> -- which said "When E.F. Hutton talks, people <em>listen</em>" -- when Hank Paulson talks, people <em>snicker</em>.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/03/why-the-dollar-will-keep-falling/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Why the dollar will keep falling</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/03/why-the-dollar-will-keep-falling/">Why the dollar will keep falling</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:10:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/04/business/worldbusiness/04euro.html?hp=&amp;adxnnl=1&amp;adxnnlx=1215086808-oDn2CXzLhrmo6lVplJQbfw>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/03/why-the-dollar-will-keep-falling/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1244652/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/03/why-the-dollar-will-keep-falling/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>dollar</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>economics</category><category>economy</category><category>featured</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Cohan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Economic forecasters give in to recession talk]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/21/economic-forecasters-give-in-to-recession-talk/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/21/economic-forecasters-give-in-to-recession-talk/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/21/economic-forecasters-give-in-to-recession-talk/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/products-and-services/" rel="tag">Products and Services</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/consumer-experience/" rel="tag">Consumer Experience</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><img width="160" vspace="4" hspace="4" height="NaN" border="0" align="right" alt="question mark" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/09/question-mark.jpg" />Economic forecasters and analysts are beginning to give in to recession language, with 51% of respondents to a poll conducted by the National Association for Business Economics (NABE) indicating they believe that a stalled economy is where we may be headed. An <a href="http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/survey-30-percent-believe-economy-will/n20080421085809990002">Associated Press report</a> indicates that 70% of all survey respondents feel the economy shall grow 3% or less in the first half of this year. A whopping 30% of respondents indicated they feel the economy shall actually contract.<br /><br />Associated Press stated, "The majority of forecasters polled -- 51 percent -- thought the economic growth during the first half of this year would clock in between zero and 1 percent, which would still mark a feeble showing. Sixteen percent pegged growth in the first half at between 1 and 2 percent, while only three percent put it at between 2 and 3 percent."<br /><br />The question is whether or not consumers and their discretionary incomes shall tip the economic balance into classically defined recession. While inflation has a greater portion of personal incomes being utilized for the necessities of life, these days it's generally the optional "extras" that stimulate economic growth numbers. Recreational electronics, home entertainment devices, and items of fad and fashion make up the bulk of growth industries today. To what extent will they bear up and in what measure will they support domestic economy?<br /><br />Your guess is as good as mine...<br /><br /><em>Gary Sattler is a freelance blogger and former sole proprietor of a thriving retail establishment.</em><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/21/economic-forecasters-give-in-to-recession-talk/">Economic forecasters give in to recession talk</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:46:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/survey-30-percent-believe-economy-will/n20080421085809990002>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/21/economic-forecasters-give-in-to-recession-talk/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1173330/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/21/economic-forecasters-give-in-to-recession-talk/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>consumer spending</category><category>ConsumerSpending</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>inthenews</category><category>National Association for Business Economics</category><category>NationalAssociationForBusinessEconomics</category><category>recession</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary Sattler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:46:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[What about global cooling?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/03/14/what-about-global-cooling/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/03/14/what-about-global-cooling/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/03/14/what-about-global-cooling/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nextbigthing/" rel="tag">Next Big Thing</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/politics/" rel="tag">Politics</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/commodities/" rel="tag">Commodities</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/oil/" rel="tag">Oil</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><p>With all the hysteria about global warming and the impact that it will have on the globe, I found it quite funny that the <a href="http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20080313_coolest.html">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported</a> yesterday that we just experienced the coldest winter since 2001. Hey Al Gore -- how can that be? I remember when I was growing up, in the mid- 1970's, <em>Newsweek</em> magazine had a cover story about the beginning of the ice age. Amazing what can happen in 25 years. We can go from an ice age, to global warming. Not bad. </p>
<p>According to the NOAA <a href="http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20080313_coolest.html">report</a>: </p>
<p>"In the contiguous United States, the average winter temperature was 33.2&deg;F (0.6&deg;C), which was 0.2&deg;F (0.1&deg;C) above the 20th century average - yet still ranks as the coolest since 2001. It was the 54th coolest winter since national records began in 1895. "</p>
<p>Why not ask the Chinese about global warming? They just experience a horribly snowy winter which has been a major cause of inflation. Extreme cold temperatures were the norm this winter. Over the last 150 years or so the global mean temperature has increased by 0.7 degrees Celsius. This small amount of warming is not unusual, and falls well within the range of variation for both warming a cooling. </p>
<p><span style="FONT-STYLE: italic"><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/03/14/what-about-global-cooling/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>What about global cooling?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/03/14/what-about-global-cooling/">What about global cooling?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 14 Mar 2008 20:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2008/20080313_coolest.html>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href=http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzA5YjM2MzY0ZGI1OWIyNGI4NTdmY2QxZGU3NzM5NjE=>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/03/14/what-about-global-cooling/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1140040/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/03/14/what-about-global-cooling/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Al gore</category><category>AlGore</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>Ethanol</category><category>global cooling</category><category>global warming</category><category>GlobalCooling</category><category>GlobalWarming</category><category>NOAA</category><category>Thomas Sowell</category><category>ThomasSowell</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Aaron Katsman]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 20:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[As credit card delinquencies rise, consumers rein-in spending]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/08/as-credit-card-delinquencies-rise-consumers-rein-in-spending/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/08/as-credit-card-delinquencies-rise-consumers-rein-in-spending/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/08/as-credit-card-delinquencies-rise-consumers-rein-in-spending/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/consumer-experience/" rel="tag">Consumer Experience</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a></p>In a stat that most likely will surprise few economists, credit card delinquencies are increasing in the U.S. -- a sign that the housing sector slump that has displaced thousands of employees is beginning to exact a toll on revolving credit accounts, <em>The Wall Street Journal </em> (<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120243324726552445.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">subscription required</a>) reported Friday.<br /><br />The number of credit card accounts at least 60 days delinquent or that had gone into default increased to 7.6% in December 2007, up from 6.4% in December 2006, according to research compiled by RiskMetrics Group, the <span style="font-style: italic;">Journal</span> reported.<span style="font-style: italic;"></span> Further, Americans had $944 billion in total revolving debt in December 2007, which amounts to a seasonally adjusted annual increase of 2.7%, well below the seasonally adjusted growth rates of 13.7% and 11.1% for November 2007 and October 2007, respectively.<br /><br /><strong>Another bubble: credit cards</strong><br /><br />Economist Glen Langan told BloggingStocks Friday the credit card sector, like the housing sector, is correcting from an unprecedented -- and unsustainable -- growth period.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/08/as-credit-card-delinquencies-rise-consumers-rein-in-spending/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>As credit card delinquencies rise, consumers rein-in spending</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/08/as-credit-card-delinquencies-rise-consumers-rein-in-spending/">As credit card delinquencies rise, consumers rein-in spending</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 08 Feb 2008 12:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/08/as-credit-card-delinquencies-rise-consumers-rein-in-spending/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1110129/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/08/as-credit-card-delinquencies-rise-consumers-rein-in-spending/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>banks</category><category>consumer spending</category><category>credit cards</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>GDP</category><category>inthenews</category><category>retail sales</category><category>revolving debt</category><category>U.S. economy</category><category>U.s.Economy</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Lazzaro]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 12:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Fed comments spark inflation concerns]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/06/fed-comments-spark-inflation-concerns/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/06/fed-comments-spark-inflation-concerns/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/06/fed-comments-spark-inflation-concerns/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/other-issues/" rel="tag">Other Issues</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/consumer-experience/" rel="tag">Consumer Experience</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/mandftoday/" rel="tag">Money and Finance Today</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/housing/" rel="tag">Housing</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/federal-reserve/" rel="tag">Federal Reserve</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><img vspace="5" hspace="5" border="0" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/12/dollar-bill.jpg" />After a positive morning for the market, comments from the <a href="http://money.aol.com/marketnews/article">Federal Reserve regarding inflation</a> have brought out the bears and pushed the indexes down into the red.<br /><br />When the Fed was busy cutting rates by a total of 1.25% last month, the message it was sending to the market was that inflation was under control, and the Fed was <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/01/23/economic-growth-not-inflation-is-now-fed-s-main-concern/">more concerned with growth</a> and less concerned with inflation. Stating that inflation concerns had eased enough to warrant steep rate cuts, the Fed acted twice during January. The first cut came in the form of an emergency 75 basis point cut, and then the following week the market was given an addition cut of 50 basis points.<br /><br />Today, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia President <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0626308920080206">Charles Plosser</a>, has stoked inflation fears once again by stating that inflation was still on the Fed's minds. Plosser, speaking to the Rotary Club of Birmingham, Alabama, stated that he believes core inflation will remain above 2% through the year, which could prevent further rate cuts in the future.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/06/fed-comments-spark-inflation-concerns/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Fed comments spark inflation concerns</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/06/fed-comments-spark-inflation-concerns/">Fed comments spark inflation concerns</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0626308920080206>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/06/fed-comments-spark-inflation-concerns/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1108471/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/02/06/fed-comments-spark-inflation-concerns/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Charles Plosser</category><category>CharlesPlosser</category><category>dollar</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>featured</category><category>Fed</category><category>Federal Reserve</category><category>FederalReserve</category><category>GDP</category><category>housing</category><category>inflation</category><category>recession</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Fowlkes]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[November CPI up 0.8%, above estimate, on rising energy prices]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/14/november-cpi-up-0-8-above-estimate-on-rising-energy-prices/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/14/november-cpi-up-0-8-above-estimate-on-rising-energy-prices/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/14/november-cpi-up-0-8-above-estimate-on-rising-energy-prices/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bad-news/" rel="tag">Bad News</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/consumer-experience/" rel="tag">Consumer Experience</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/oil/" rel="tag">Oil</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/federal-reserve/" rel="tag">Federal Reserve</a></p>Consumer prices rose 0.8% in November 2007, above the 0.6% consensus, led by higher gasoline prices, <a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm">the U.S. Labor Department announced Friday</a>.<br /><br />Core CPI inflation, which excludes food and energy, rose 0.3%, slightly above the 0.2% consensus estimate, the Labor Department said. <br /><br />The Consumer Price Index has now risen 4.3% in the past 12 months, a pace considerably above the U.S. Federal Reserve's tolerance zone or 'acceptable inflation rate.' The core CPI has risen 2.3% in the past 12 months.<br /><br />"Clearly, it's not a good number," economist Steve Affinito told BloggingStocks Friday. "Some were hoping that the energy rise would not hit the CPI as hard, but it did. It suggests that inflation is accelerating, driven mostly by energy costs. Look for stores and businesses to start defending their margins by upping their prices, and this will not make the Fed's job any easier."<br /><br />During November 2007 energy prices increased 5.7%. Gasoline prices surged 9.3%, and have increased more than 37% in 2007. Apparel prices rose 0.8% and medical care rose 0.4%.<br /><br /><strong>Economic Analysis:</strong> The report is more bad news for the consumers, the U.S. economy, and the U.S. Federal Reserve. It reveals a price list that's beginning to feel the sting of persistent, elevated energy prices, as they work their way through the economy. Inflationary pressures are increasing, which will make it harder for the Fed to lower interest rates further to stimulate the U.S. economy. On the one hand, additional monetary policy easing may be needed to stimulate growth. On the other hand, the Fed must be careful regarding the amount of additional stimulus it applies, as it could propel even larger price increases at the consumer level.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/14/november-cpi-up-0-8-above-estimate-on-rising-energy-prices/">November CPI up 0.8%, above estimate, on rising energy prices</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:50:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://ftp//ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/empsit.txt>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/14/november-cpi-up-0-8-above-estimate-on-rising-energy-prices/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1062872/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/14/november-cpi-up-0-8-above-estimate-on-rising-energy-prices/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>consumer price index</category><category>CPI</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>energy prices</category><category>gasoline prices</category><category>GDP</category><category>inflation</category><category>inthenews</category><category>monetary policy</category><category>oil prices</category><category>U.S. economy</category><category>U.S. Federal Reserve</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Lazzaro]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:50:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Fed, central banks team up to stem credit crunch]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/12/fed-central-banks-team-up-to-stem-credit-crunch/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/12/fed-central-banks-team-up-to-stem-credit-crunch/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/12/fed-central-banks-team-up-to-stem-credit-crunch/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/international-markets/" rel="tag">International Markets</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/other-issues/" rel="tag">Other Issues</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/housing/" rel="tag">Housing</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/federal-reserve/" rel="tag">Federal Reserve</a></p><div style="text-align: left;">The U.S. Federal Reserve's effort, in coordination with the European Central Bank and three other central banks, to add liquidity by special and traditional means represents a prudent step to maintain properly functioning credit markets, economists and analysts told BloggingStocks on Wednesday.<br /></div>
<br />Further, the move is the largest coordinated international monetary policy action taken since the world's major central banks provided liquidity to ensure proper market function following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the United States.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20071212a.htm">The Fed announced Wednesday</a> that it would inject up to $40 billion in reserves into money markets via a new, temporary program called a "term-auction facility." The emergency funds would be made available to banks next week via auction process -- $20 billion each -- on December 17 and December 20. The Fed also said it is setting up lines of credit with the European Central Bank and the Swiss Central Bank that could be used for additional resources.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/12/fed-central-banks-team-up-to-stem-credit-crunch/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Fed, central banks team up to stem credit crunch</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/12/fed-central-banks-team-up-to-stem-credit-crunch/">Fed, central banks team up to stem credit crunch</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:50:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20071212a.htm>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/12/fed-central-banks-team-up-to-stem-credit-crunch/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1061324/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/12/12/fed-central-banks-team-up-to-stem-credit-crunch/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Bank of England</category><category>Ben Bernanke</category><category>Bernanke</category><category>bond market</category><category>Bush Administration</category><category>credit crisis</category><category>credit crunch</category><category>credit markets</category><category>discount rate</category><category>ECB</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>European Central Bank</category><category>Fed</category><category>Fed funds rate</category><category>foreclosures</category><category>housing</category><category>inthenews</category><category>monetary policy</category><category>mortgage backed securities</category><category>mortgages</category><category>recession</category><category>suprime mortgages</category><category>Swiss Central Bank</category><category>U.S. economy</category><category>U.S. Federal Reserve</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Lazzaro]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:50:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[GE looks to China and India to balance US slowdown]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/29/ge-ge-looks-to-china-and-india-to-balance-us-slowdown/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/29/ge-ge-looks-to-china-and-india-to-balance-us-slowdown/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/29/ge-ge-looks-to-china-and-india-to-balance-us-slowdown/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/products-and-services/" rel="tag">Products and Services</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/competitive-strategy/" rel="tag">Competitive Strategy</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/ge/" rel="tag">General Electric (GE)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/india/" rel="tag">India</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/china/" rel="tag">China</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a></p><p>The plan makes sense, at least on paper. <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/general-electric-company/ge/nys">GE</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/general-electric-company/ge/nys">GE</a>) believes that it can offset any slowdown in its US business by the acceleration of revenue in China and India. It is, perhaps, one of the benefits of being a multinational. </p>
<p>The <em>FT</em> <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d280c692-8586-11dc-8170-0000779fd2ac.html">writes that</a>, "GE's chairman and chief executive (Jeffrey Immelt) said the company's sales in emerging markets such as China and India were expanding at 20 percent a year, and there were few signs of this growth slowing."</p>
<p>But, GE's view is based on two assumptions that may not be true. The first is that a slowdown in the US will not spread to Asia and the Indian subcontinent. Much of the export income from China and India depends on demand in the US and Europe. if that demand slackens, there is no guarantee that their own economies will be able to continue growing rapidly.</p>
<p>GE is also assuming that growth in these countries, particularly China, will not come without a cost. Trade tensions between the US and the world's most populous country still exist. The China toy debacle demonstrates that. It would not take so terribly much for China to shut its markets to certain US goods and services, if it feels that it has been provoked.</p>
<p>GE's plan to keep growing outside the US looks good, for now.</p>
<p><em>Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at </em><em>247wall st.com.</em></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/29/ge-ge-looks-to-china-and-india-to-balance-us-slowdown/">GE looks to China and India to balance US slowdown</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 29 Oct 2007 09:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d280c692-8586-11dc-8170-0000779fd2ac.html>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/29/ge-ge-looks-to-china-and-india-to-balance-us-slowdown/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1024161/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/29/ge-ge-looks-to-china-and-india-to-balance-us-slowdown/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>CHINA</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>emerging economies</category><category>emerging markets</category><category>EmergingEconomies</category><category>EmergingMarkets</category><category>GE</category><category>general electric</category><category>GeneralElectric</category><category>INDIA</category><category>inthenews</category><category>JEFFREY IMMELT</category><category>JeffreyImmelt</category><category>US Economy</category><category>UsEconomy</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Douglas McIntyre]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 09:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[GDP growth better than expected -- enough to boost stocks?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/27/gdp-growth-better-than-expected-enough-to-boost-stocks/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/27/gdp-growth-better-than-expected-enough-to-boost-stocks/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/27/gdp-growth-better-than-expected-enough-to-boost-stocks/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/marketmatters/" rel="tag">Market Matters</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/07/gdp1.gif" alt="" />It seems some people are breathing a sigh of relief this morning following the news that <a href="http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/economy-growth-is-best-in-a-year/n20070727084909990002">the U.S. economy grew 3.4% in the second-quarter</a>, more than the 3.2% forecast by economists polled by Briefing.com and <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&amp;sid=a7IF9ggSqKTA&amp;refer=home">Bloomberg</a>. This growth pace is the most the economy had experienced in more than a year, and it follows a weak 0.6% growth in the first quarter. This is the advanced GDP number for Q2 and will be revised later. Twice.<br /><br />The reason for this better-than-expected performance? Rising exports (which should surprise no one given the weak dollar), commercial construction (due to a strong manufacturing sector) and government spending. It was consumer spending, however, the sector which had kept the expansion going in previous quarters, that was weak in the last quarter.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/27/gdp-growth-better-than-expected-enough-to-boost-stocks/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>GDP growth better than expected -- enough to boost stocks?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/27/gdp-growth-better-than-expected-enough-to-boost-stocks/">GDP growth better than expected -- enough to boost stocks?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:05:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/economy-growth-is-best-in-a-year/n20070727084909990002>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/27/gdp-growth-better-than-expected-enough-to-boost-stocks/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/951615/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/27/gdp-growth-better-than-expected-enough-to-boost-stocks/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>economy</category><category>gdp</category><category>gdp growth</category><category>GdpGrowth</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Melly Alazraki]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:05:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Fed should like moderate Q4 GDP growth]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/03/29/fed-should-like-moderate-q4-gdp-growth-stat/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/03/29/fed-should-like-moderate-q4-gdp-growth-stat/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/03/29/fed-should-like-moderate-q4-gdp-growth-stat/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a></p><a href="http://www.theflyonthewall.com/splashPage.php?source=AOL"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/03/fly-logo-live.gif" /></a>The U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 2.5% in Q4, the U.S. Commerce Department announced Thursday, slightly above the 2.2% consensus estimate. <br /><br />The stat represents the U.S. government's final revision for Q4 GDP. The government's initial estimates had projected 3.5% growth for the last quarter of 2006. Hence, the 2.5% stat represents a substantial under-performance by the world's largest economy.<br /><br />Slowing corporate earnings growth and business investment, combined with initial signs of a pull-back in consumer spending, and sub-prime loan defaults have economists concerned that the U.S. economy may slow too much in the first half of 2007 -- perhaps flirting with a recession. In 2006, the <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/press/monetary/2007/">U.S. Federal Reserve increased short-term interest rates</a> to slow the U.S. economy and take pressure off commodity prices, which had helped feed inflation. <br /><br /><strong>Fly Analysis: </strong>The Q4 stat provides further evidence that the U.S. Federal Reserve has slowed the U.S. economy, as intended. The 2.5% stat represent moderate, sustainable growth -- one that in and of itself should not accelerate pressure on prices. It's an acceptable growth rate for the Fed -- not too fast and not too slow -- and one that further supports the Fed's neutral short-term interest rate policy stance to date in 2007. Along with upcoming inflation data, the Fed will now await further statistics for Q1 to determine if the economy is continuing to slow, of in growth has started to re-accelerate -- factors that will help determine monetary policy as 2007 progresses.  <br /><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/03/29/fed-should-like-moderate-q4-gdp-growth-stat/">Fed should like moderate Q4 GDP growth</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:32:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/03/29/fed-should-like-moderate-q4-gdp-growth-stat/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/862996/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/03/29/fed-should-like-moderate-q4-gdp-growth-stat/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Commerce Department</category><category>CommerceDepartment</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>Federal Reserve</category><category>FederalReserve</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Lazzaro]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:32:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Economists are more optimistic -- are consumers?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/02/09/economists-are-more-optimistic-are-consumers/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/02/09/economists-are-more-optimistic-are-consumers/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/02/09/economists-are-more-optimistic-are-consumers/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/before-the-bell/" rel="tag">Before the Bell</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a></p><p>Economists are more optimistic about the U.S. economy and about economic growth than they been in the past, according to a <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&amp;sid=a2At7TaFnNKA&amp;refer=news">Bloomberg survey</a>. Here are some of the highlights from the survey:</p>
<ul>
    <li>The economy will expand at a 2.5% annual pace this quarter and 2.6% in the second quarter, up from last month's forecasts of 2.3% and 2.5% respectively.</li>
    <li>Consumer spending will grow at an annual rate of 3% this quarter, and 2.5% in the second</li>
    <li>Economic growth this year will average 2.7%</li>
    <li>The Fed will hold its target rate at 5.25% percent through the third quarter, and may cut the rate to 5% percent in the fourth.</li>
    <li>Consumer prices are forecast to rise 2.1% this quarter -- unchanged from last month.</li>
    <li>unemployment rate will remain at the January rate of 4.6% for the rest of this quarter, lower than last month's forecast of 4.7%. But the jobless rate will edge higher later this year, averaging 4.8% in the last half. </li>
</ul>
Meanwhile, economists the strong January same-store sales of 3.7% as a positive, saying job and income growth is driving spending despite the slumping housing market that lowers values of Americans' homes. Even the last Fed's statement suggested the economy is firmer while inflationary pressures have improved.<br /><br />The question is whether Americans feel the same way as economists do. Well, today <a href="http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/consumer-confidence-hits-2-12-year-high/n20070209020809990003">consumer confidence</a> was reported to have climbed to a 2 1/2-year high in February just as the president's job-approval rating sank to 32%. Americans, it seems, despite lingering concerns about the housing and automotive markets, are feeling even better about job  prospects, the current economic climate and investment opportunities.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/02/09/economists-are-more-optimistic-are-consumers/">Economists are more optimistic -- are consumers?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 09 Feb 2007 09:39:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&amp;sid=a2At7TaFnNKA&amp;refer=news>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/02/09/economists-are-more-optimistic-are-consumers/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/751105/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/02/09/economists-are-more-optimistic-are-consumers/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>consumer confidence</category><category>ConsumerConfidence</category><category>economic growth</category><category>EconomicGrowth</category><category>economy</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Melly Alazraki]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2007 09:39:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
