A coming recession?

[Gerald McGrew]

False analogy. Forbes is not to news as Answers in Genesis is to science.

"Obama is harboring an anti-colonial resentment that drives his anti-capitalist policies" is perfectly analogous to "evolutionists just don't want to answer to God".

Your view of it, then, is that if it's not spoken or written by a liberal democrat, it's like Answers in Genesis.

It is what it is...a conservative magazine owned, run, and edited by a conservative Republican who allows laughable hackery to grace its cover.

You'll need to connect this up -- you think that the economies of tiny blips like Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy, etc. control the US economy so much that the Presidential Administration has nothing to do with the economic indicators pointing to a possible recession? NOTHING - to do with it?

You're not making any sense, and once again you don't bother to read what people write. I'll say it again (with a bit more emphasis on the key points that seem to be beyond your abilities)...Nine economies in Europe are contracting and their debt crisis may pull others along with them.
China's growth continues to slow as well.

If the EU goes into another recession (or worse) and China's growth continues to shrink (or worse), that would have negative effects on the US economy, including increasing the possibility of our going into another recession. Duh. Does the POTUS have very much control over the EU and China?

You're really trying to suggest that there ARE economic indicators that the Obama Administration does have something to do with, but these aren't any of the economic indicators that point to a recession in 203? Obama only has something to do with those economic indicators that don't point to a recession?

Oh FFS. You need to stop being so desperate to try and score debate points that it makes you erect such stupid straw men.

[Coito ergo sum]

If the EU goes into another recession (or worse) and China's growth continues to shrink (or worse), that would have negative effects on the US economy, including increasing the possibility of our going into another recession. Duh. Does the POTUS have very much control over the EU and China?

He doesn't have control over the EU or China, but he does have influence on the US economy, and the economic indicators. It is not "so goes 9 Euro economies and a slowing China, and so goes the US."

You're really trying to suggest that there ARE economic indicators that the Obama Administration does have something to do with, but these aren't any of the economic indicators that point to a recession in 203? Obama only has something to do with those economic indicators that don't point to a recession?

Oh FFS. You need to stop being so desperate to try and score debate points that it makes you erect such stupid straw men.

It's not a straw man -- it's what you wrote. You're just trying to wiggle out.

[Gerald McGrew]

The article in the OP was written in September and as such relies on August economic numbers. Funny how it wasn't updated to include the subsequent September and October numbers that showed the recovery continuing rather than slowing. It also relies on the conservative myth that taxing billionaires 3% more will cause an economic collapse.

At least they make it clear whose interests they're looking out for.

[Gerald McGrew]

Jeebus Kryst CES. Somehow in whatever world you live in, "increasing the possibility of our going into another recession" is the same as "so goes 9 Euro economies and a slowing China, and so goes the US"?

Get yourself checked.

[pErvinalia]

Yeah, because discussing whether or not the economy is teetering on another recession, in light of a serious article in the mainstream media, is the same as "asking questions as to whether someone is a creationist or a hide bound reactionary."

Once again, you expect everyone here to swallow your bullshit. On the heels of a resounding defeat at the ballot box, you post an article from a conservative source that asserts, "The economy is staggering under the load of Obama’s policies, making it increasingly likely we will soon slip into a double-dip recession", and now you're trying to pass that off as an attempt at a serious discussion, rather than sour-grapes and partisan hackery? Un-fucking-believable.

It was actually, the fifth closest election in well over a century or thereabouts. The only ones closer were Bush/Gore 2000, Kennedy/Nixon 1960, Ford/Carter 1976 and Nixon/Humphry in 1968. Only an idiot would call it a "resounding defeat at the ballot box."

It's Forbes - it's a mainstream financial newspaper. And, so what if it is a "conservative source?" That doesn't mean it doesn't have a reasonable position. Why don't you read the fucking thing instead of spouting off your usual ignorant bullshit? If you care to respond to the article or the points made, then feel free. But, if all you want to do is come here and whine and cry like a little girl that the topic has been raised at all, then why don't you just fuck off to another thread that you do find interesting?

Something is seriously fucking wrong with you. If you don't feel like discussing the issue raised, then go somewhere else. Instead, you come here like a fucking fool and try to drown out the conversation altogether. This is a topic that, in your immature view ought not be discussed at all. To you, this is just a smear against Obama akin to calling him a creationist or something, because in your fawning, sycophant-like, fandom mind you have already categorized Obama as "can do no wrong." Therefore, even the mildest suggestion that that there could be a recession and that Obama's presidency might have something to do with it is too much for you to bear.

Grow up, you little baby.

The butt-hurt is strong in this one....

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The butt-hurt is strong in this one....

You didn't see this coming? He whinges about any and everything anyways, so when he gets it broken off in him he's in little piggy heaven.

[Coito ergo sum]

Don't worry about scanning headlines every day to determine the U.S. economy's chances of entering a recession in 2013.

We already know the answer.

Such indicators as gross domestic product (GDP), consumer spending, durable goods and exports all point to an economy not in a slow recovery, but on the verge of a 2013 recession.

That's because the trend lines, rather than showing gradual improvement, are moving in the opposite direction. The economy, after spending months with its head just barely above water, is about to go under.

The U.S. Commerce Department last week revised second quarter GDP sharply downward from 1.7% to 1.25%. The GDP was 1.9% in the first quarter of 2012. While we do not yet have any official data for the current quarter, a Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia survey of forecasters in August put the number at 1.6%.

That's an ominous pattern.

James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute explains: "Research from the Fed … finds that since 1947, when two-quarter annualized real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 48% of the time. And when year-over-year real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 70% of the time."

http://moneymorning.com/2012/10/02/this ... sion-2013/

[Coito ergo sum]

Wealthy dumping assets to avoid capital gains tax increase -- http://www.cnbc.com/id/49802535

Mark Faber on the stock market --

“I don’t think markets are going down because of Greece, I don’t think markets are going down because of the ‘fiscal cliff’ — because there won’t be a ‘fiscal cliff,’ ” Faber told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “The market is going down because corporate profits will begin to disappoint, the global economy will hardly grow next year or even contract, and that is the reason why stocks, from the highs of September of 1,470 on the S&P, will drop at least 20 percent, in my view.”

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49802535

[Jason]

If the 'wealthy' are going all Aesop's fable on the U.S., I say load em down.

[Tyrannical]

Man, somehow my time traveling took me to 2008.

Well let me warn you, in mid-2008 a huge world wide recession will hit and many people will blame GW who does share some responsibility. But don't be fooled by Hope and Change that will only extend the problem. The Democratic candidate will lavish even more money on the rich, kick an additional pittance to the poor and leave the country into worse shape. Time traveling rules prevent me from sharing his name, but it is close to an already very evil enemy of the US.

[Coito ergo sum]

If the 'wealthy' are going all Aesop's fable on the U.S., I say load em down.

I don't much mind the wealthy selling to avoid capital gains. That makes sense. To every seller there is a buyer who thinks there is money to be made. They have nothing to lose, really, by cashing out and taking their profits now, and it insulates them from a recession which could act to reduce the value of those assets -- so they're hedging against smaller profits being taxed at a higher rate.

[Coito ergo sum]

Man, somehow my time traveling took me to 2008.

Well let me warn you, in mid-2008 a huge world wide recession will hit and many people will blame GW who does share some responsibility. But don't be fooled by Hope and Change that will only extend the problem. The Democratic candidate will lavish even more money on the rich, kick an additional pittance to the poor and leave the country into worse shape. Time traveling rules prevent me from sharing his name, but it is close to an already very evil enemy of the US.

There will be many parallels between a 2008 recession and a 2013 recession. The parallel most trumpeted in the news media will be that both recessions share the commonality of being George Bush's fault.

[Gerald McGrew]

Don't worry about scanning headlines every day to determine the U.S. economy's chances of entering a recession in 2013.

We already know the answer.

Such indicators as gross domestic product (GDP), consumer spending, durable goods and exports all point to an economy not in a slow recovery, but on the verge of a 2013 recession.

That's because the trend lines, rather than showing gradual improvement, are moving in the opposite direction. The economy, after spending months with its head just barely above water, is about to go under.

The U.S. Commerce Department last week revised second quarter GDP sharply downward from 1.7% to 1.25%. The GDP was 1.9% in the first quarter of 2012. While we do not yet have any official data for the current quarter, a Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia survey of forecasters in August put the number at 1.6%.

That's an ominous pattern.

James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute explains: "Research from the Fed … finds that since 1947, when two-quarter annualized real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 48% of the time. And when year-over-year real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 70% of the time."

http://moneymorning.com/2012/10/02/this ... sion-2013/

Well, if you ever wanted proof positive that CES is scrambling about, hoping to score political points, this is it. The article above is over a month old, and pre-dates the release of US 3rd quarter GDP, which rose to 2.0%, better than expected and definitely not part of a trend towards a recession.

Gee...I wonder why CES didn't post the current data and instead cherry-picked a dire prediction that turned out to not be accurate? Hmmm....

"Nothing in modern conservatism makes sense except in the light of creationism"

[Coito ergo sum]

Don't worry about scanning headlines every day to determine the U.S. economy's chances of entering a recession in 2013.

We already know the answer.

Such indicators as gross domestic product (GDP), consumer spending, durable goods and exports all point to an economy not in a slow recovery, but on the verge of a 2013 recession.

That's because the trend lines, rather than showing gradual improvement, are moving in the opposite direction. The economy, after spending months with its head just barely above water, is about to go under.

The U.S. Commerce Department last week revised second quarter GDP sharply downward from 1.7% to 1.25%. The GDP was 1.9% in the first quarter of 2012. While we do not yet have any official data for the current quarter, a Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia survey of forecasters in August put the number at 1.6%.

That's an ominous pattern.

James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute explains: "Research from the Fed … finds that since 1947, when two-quarter annualized real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 48% of the time. And when year-over-year real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 70% of the time."

http://moneymorning.com/2012/10/02/this ... sion-2013/

Well, if you ever wanted proof positive that CES is scrambling about, hoping to score political points, this is it. The article above is over a month old, and pre-dates the release of US 3rd quarter GDP, which rose to 2.0%, better than expected and definitely not part of a trend towards a recession.

Gee...I wonder why CES didn't post the current data and instead cherry-picked a dire prediction that turned out to not be accurate? Hmmm....

"Nothing in modern conservatism makes sense except in the light of creationism"

Score political points? What are you on about?

What does it matter that the article is a month old? It's just another article that speculates about a possible recession. The gist of the article I posted was that (a) when two quarter GDP growth is below 2%, then the chance of a recession is 40%, and (b) when year over year GDP falls below 2%, chance of recession is 70%. GDP so far this year is 1.9%, 1.3% and now 2%. That doesn't bode well to get us up over 2% for this year.

What also happened in the third quarter is a 1.6% decline in exports and a drop in business investment. Investment in business equipment and software fell 1.3%, after a disappointing 0.4% gain in the second quarter. So, if you think the 3rd quarter data is looking good, then you're just trying to sell Shinola, as usual.

As you should know, the third quarter estimate was the "advance estimate" and is not the final number. The next third quarter GDP number comes out on November 29, 2012. Note, the first quarter 2012 advance estimate was 2.2% and then the revised estimate was 1.9% thereafter. Second quarter GDP was initially estimated at 1.5% but was revised down to 1.3%. We'll see if the 2% third quarter GDP is revised down, too.

[Gerald McGrew]

Gosh CES, I have no idea why you would post an article that relies on outdated data. Just like I have no idea why creationists post analyses of fossils from the 1950's.