US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:59 am

Buc2 wrote:
Deuce wrote:
Then why reply to my comment?

Sorry. Fixed.


I chuckled
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Deuce » Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:05 am

Zarniwoop wrote:
Buc2 wrote:Sorry. Fixed.


I chuckled


Not trying to be a ****. But I honestly can't see how commenting "I'd need more information to form an opinion" is helpful. We could post that in any thread here. Who should start, Winston or Fitz? Hm...not gonna answer. I'd need more info.

We're just talking here. This isn't a job interview. Let the opinions fly!
User avatar
Deuce
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:23 pm
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby bucfanclw » Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:15 am

Deuce wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:
I chuckled


Not trying to be a ****. But I honestly can't see how commenting "I'd need more information to form an opinion" is helpful. We could post that in any thread here. Who should start, Winston or Fitz? Hm...not gonna answer. I'd need more info.

We're just talking here. This isn't a job interview. Let the opinions fly!

I'm sorry, but that's just not good enough. This is political discussion on a football message board. Do you not understand how important that is?
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 3855
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 162 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby RedLeader » Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:21 am

Fed raises rates by quarter point


The U.S. Federal Reserve lifted short-term interest rates by a quarter percentage point, a move pushing up rates on everything from credit cards to adjustable-rate mortgages. The increase sets the target for the benchmark federal-funds rate at 2% to 2.25%. It's also the eighth move higher since 2015, and the third this year, as economic growth and inflation pick up.

Central bank officials also indicated another increase would be forthcoming before year-end.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:25 am

RedLeader wrote:Fed raises rates by quarter point


The U.S. Federal Reserve lifted short-term interest rates by a quarter percentage point, a move pushing up rates on everything from credit cards to adjustable-rate mortgages. The increase sets the target for the benchmark federal-funds rate at 2% to 2.25%. It's also the eighth move higher since 2015, and the third this year, as economic growth and inflation pick up.

Central bank officials also indicated another increase would be forthcoming before year-end.



they will hit 3% by 2020. mark it down.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby RedLeader » Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:47 pm

Zarniwoop wrote:
RedLeader wrote:Fed raises rates by quarter point


The U.S. Federal Reserve lifted short-term interest rates by a quarter percentage point, a move pushing up rates on everything from credit cards to adjustable-rate mortgages. The increase sets the target for the benchmark federal-funds rate at 2% to 2.25%. It's also the eighth move higher since 2015, and the third this year, as economic growth and inflation pick up.

Central bank officials also indicated another increase would be forthcoming before year-end.



they will hit 3% by 2020. mark it down.


Indeed.. Although, still at historic lows, anyone in the market for a home purchase or refinance, now may be the time to do it.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby RedLeader » Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:50 pm

As Debt Rises, the Government Will Soon Spend More on Interest Than on the Military, Medicaid or children's programs.


:shock:


https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/as-debt ... r=sharebar
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby HamBone » Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:03 am

We’ll just write it off...problem solved.
User avatar
HamBone
 
Posts: 2309
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby mdb1958 » Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:29 am

HamBone wrote:We’ll just write it off...problem solved.
Your New York Aristocrats ain't gonna go for that
mdb1958
 
Posts: 9759
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 91 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:27 am

HamBone wrote:We’ll just write it off...problem solved.

More like issue a bond to pay interest on a bond.

The only way it would be "Written off" would be if the Fed Reserve itself purchased the bond since The Fed is required by law to remit its interest income back to the Treasury.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:50 am

Let’s not forget that little thing called principal. That has to be paid back too. I’d love to see the gov’t convince the Fed to write that off
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:59 am

Zarniwoop wrote:Let’s not forget that little thing called principal. That has to be paid back too. I’d love to see the gov’t convince the Fed to write that off

That happens all the time.

When a treasury note matures, the bond holder has two options. Cash out the bond, or swap the bond for a new one. If you're holding T-bills as a long term investment, you want a new bond issued for the money preferably at a higher interest rate. Regardless if you do that or cash it out, the transaction is part of the federal budget.

If the federal reserve is the bond holder of a treasury bond, and the Fed is required to remit its revenue to the treasury every year...poof.

That's what Japan is doing.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:08 am

Except that’s not how it happens

Do you not remember whose money it is in the Fed?


Can you tell me why they would have any incentive to continually reinvest in bonds and never get their original loan principal back
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:31 am

Zarniwoop wrote:Except that’s not how it happens

Do you not remember whose money it is in the Fed?


Can you tell me why they would have any incentive to continually reinvest in bonds and never get their original loan principal back

I'm not suggesting the fed swap mature bonds. Just the opposite.

And the only reason the government would have the Fed do that would be to reduce the amount of bonds on the market for the purpose of "destroying" that money. At this point we still have economic growth and relatively low inflation so there's no real reason to do it right now.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:33 am

All I'm saying is that it COULD be done.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:50 am

Mountaineer Buc wrote:All I'm saying is that it COULD be done.



The Federal Reserve already owns gov't bonds -- of every level (local, state, federal). They buy and sell those bonds when they want to influence the availability of liquid cash in the market, thus moving the interest rate. They do not do it to lose money or pay down the federal debt .... the FED has to cover its own expenses. It gets ZERO money from the federal gov't...as such it must make enough profit to finance itself...and yes the FED can make a profit (though the amount of profit is capped)

The money in the federal reserve is NOT the US gov'ts. Its private banks money. The gov't by LAW cannot tell the FED what to do with its money including what assets to buy.





Thank God our federal reservse system is nothing like the central bank of Japan or that of most European countries. Ours at least still has a modicum of independence.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:53 am

Zarniwoop wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:All I'm saying is that it COULD be done.



The Federal Reserve already owns gov't bonds -- of every level (local, state, federal). They buy and sell those bonds when they want to influence the availability of liquid cash in the market, thus moving the interest rate. They do not do it to lose money or pay down the federal debt .... the FED has to cover its own expenses. It gets ZERO money from the federal gov't...as such it must make enough profit to finance itself...and yes the FED can make a profit (though the amount of profit is capped)

The money in the federal reserve is NOT the US gov'ts. Its private banks money. The gov't by LAW cannot tell the FED what to do with its money including what assets to buy.





Thank God our federal reservse system is nothing like the central bank of Japan or that of most European countries. Ours at least still has a modicum of independence.

Uhh. I know that.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby RedLeader » Tue Oct 02, 2018 5:01 pm

Tax cuts aren't plumping payrolls

Workers shouldn’t expect a noticeable wage increase even though U.S. companies are saving money thanks to last year's tax overhaul, reports The Wall Street Journal. One recent survey of 152 companies found that only 14% were putting some of their savings toward base salaries. Another poll of 1,500 companies found that only 4% are using the savings to pad paychecks in the coming year. Companies are likely avoiding an increase to their permanent payroll, said one expert. Instead, they’re looking for long-term investments like staff training.

----


Apparently companies are opting for longer-term reinvestment strategies such as additional training and bigger contributions to retirement...



yay for us.
User avatar
RedLeader
 
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: G14 Classified
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby SDBucs » Tue Oct 02, 2018 5:33 pm

Labor Market sets the wages, companies just provide the jobs

You want higher wages:
You create a scarcity of available workers at that wage while making a higher wage something companies can afford to do.

Companies can then afford to pay a higher wage and the companies really can't afford not to or they lose the potential worker to competition = company forks up higher wage to stay competitive

This wage growth continues until either A. The companies can't afford to pay any higher of a wage B. There becomes a saturated enough pool of laborers at the current wage which allows companies to keep it there (We were here prior to Trump and going further and further in this direction for most everyone but massive corporations)

Under Trump we have helped companies with A. (lower taxes, costs, etc. I.E. they can afford to fork out wages) the next step is getting B. taken care of (The labor market supply needs to shrink enough that companies are forced to compete via wage increases)

Until there is a labor market supply change/new forms of legislation or a form of wage regulation, companies have no incentive to up wages. The former solves the problem on a deeper level, the later (raising minimum wage or whatever) is a bandaid solution that creates new problems down the road.
SDBucs
 
Posts: 1144
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:30 pm
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Oct 02, 2018 7:24 pm

SDBucs wrote:Labor Market sets the wages, companies just provide the jobs

You want higher wages:
You create a scarcity of available workers at that wage while making a higher wage something companies can afford to do.

Companies can then afford to pay a higher wage and the companies really can't afford not to or they lose the potential worker to competition = company forks up higher wage to stay competitive

This wage growth continues until either A. The companies can't afford to pay any higher of a wage B. There becomes a saturated enough pool of laborers at the current wage which allows companies to keep it there (We were here prior to Trump and going further and further in this direction for most everyone but massive corporations)

Under Trump we have helped companies with A. (lower taxes, costs, etc. I.E. they can afford to fork out wages) the next step is getting B. taken care of (The labor market supply needs to shrink enough that companies are forced to compete via wage increases)

Until there is a labor market supply change/new forms of legislation or a form of wage regulation, companies have no incentive to up wages. The former solves the problem on a deeper level, the later (raising minimum wage or whatever) is a bandaid solution that creates new problems down the road.

That's it?
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:20 am

Very good podcast on the highest ever (inflation adjusted) Median household income level, $61,372.

http://reason.com/blog/2018/10/03/mark- ... ian-income


touches on inflation, income equality, etc.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby beardmcdoug » Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:26 am

Zarniwoop wrote:Very good podcast on the highest ever (inflation adjusted) Median household income level, $61,372.

http://reason.com/blog/2018/10/03/mark- ... ian-income


Image

that's right goyim, you can double your household income if you both work! kids? kids are a pain in the ass!!! Who wants kids!?

"if we don't have kids, who's going to support the retirees", you ask?

well there's people knocking on the door to get into the country! open those borders up and problem solved! Don't be racist!
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 3147
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 382 times
Been thanked: 250 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:30 am

its actually amazing to see that as household income increases household size has actually went down....so when you control for household size, it's even more positive.





---------------------


one stat the really stuck out was that that around 55% of individuals will at some point be in the top 10% of earners at one point in their lives. talk about mobility
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:35 pm

Zarniwoop wrote:one stat the really stuck out was that that around 55% of individuals will at some point be in the top 10% of earners at one point in their lives. talk about mobility


I don't believe that for one second.

EDIT: My bad, if you sell your house when you retire, that counts. So for one fleeting moment in your life you get to call yourself a 10%er.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Ken Carson » Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:48 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:one stat the really stuck out was that that around 55% of individuals will at some point be in the top 10% of earners at one point in their lives. talk about mobility


I don't believe that for one second.


The top 5% of households earned $166K in 2005, 3/4s of which were dual income households. Top 10% of earners isn't some mythical lofty millionaire status. The top 0.12% is everyone who makes $1.6MM+.

So, you may not believe it, and you don't have to believe it. But being in the top 10% is something completely achievable by people who make good decisions. 4 years ago, I was making $39K a year and my wife was looking for a job. I took a lower paying job at a growing company, and she took a job she was overqualified for. She's been promoted twice, and is now and executive manager. I've been promoted 4 times, and am now a lead account manager for the company's flagship account. We're quite likely going to be top 10% earners this year, despite not being in the top 50% just four years ago.

Maybe your disbelief is a self-fulfilling prophecy?
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 184 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Zarniwoop » Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:54 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Zarniwoop wrote:one stat the really stuck out was that that around 55% of individuals will at some point be in the top 10% of earners at one point in their lives. talk about mobility


I don't believe that for one second.

EDIT: My bad, if you sell your house when you retire, that counts. So for one fleeting moment in your life you get to call yourself a 10%er.


Except of course the full selling price of your house isn’t counted as income on your 1040...in fact it’s rare that proceeds of home sales will be listed as income even when making a “profit” on your investment .... for the people that it will, it’s likely they are in the top 10% anyway
Last edited by Zarniwoop on Wed Oct 03, 2018 1:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6476
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 330 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:54 pm

Ken Carson wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:
I don't believe that for one second.


The top 5% of households earned $166K in 2005, 3/4s of which were dual income households. Top 10% of earners isn't some mythical lofty millionaire status. The top 0.12% is everyone who makes $1.6MM+.

So, you may not believe it, and you don't have to believe it. But being in the top 10% is something completely achievable by people who make good decisions. 4 years ago, I was making $39K a year and my wife was looking for a job. I took a lower paying job at a growing company, and she took a job she was overqualified for. She's been promoted twice, and is now and executive manager. I've been promoted 4 times, and am now a lead account manager for the company's flagship account. We're quite likely going to be top 10% earners this year, despite not being in the top 50% just four years ago.

Maybe your disbelief is a self-fulfilling prophecy?

My disbelief is an observable reality. I don't disparage anybody going out and earning a good living, and I know that you don't have to be a brajillionaire to crack the top 10%. But to suggest that just about everyone is going to get there at some point without cashing out 20 years of home equity is disingenuous.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Ken Carson » Wed Oct 03, 2018 1:13 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:
Ken Carson wrote:
The top 5% of households earned $166K in 2005, 3/4s of which were dual income households. Top 10% of earners isn't some mythical lofty millionaire status. The top 0.12% is everyone who makes $1.6MM+.

So, you may not believe it, and you don't have to believe it. But being in the top 10% is something completely achievable by people who make good decisions. 4 years ago, I was making $39K a year and my wife was looking for a job. I took a lower paying job at a growing company, and she took a job she was overqualified for. She's been promoted twice, and is now and executive manager. I've been promoted 4 times, and am now a lead account manager for the company's flagship account. We're quite likely going to be top 10% earners this year, despite not being in the top 50% just four years ago.

Maybe your disbelief is a self-fulfilling prophecy?

My disbelief is an observable reality. I don't disparage anybody going out and earning a good living, and I know that you don't have to be a brajillionaire to crack the top 10%. But to suggest that just about everyone is going to get there at some point without cashing out 20 years of home equity is disingenuous.


Saying they will get there once is not the same as get there and stay for life. And it's not some absurd standard. A GM at a McDonald's makes $55K/year. If that person gets promoted to a District manager, the average salary is $71.5K/year. A public school teacher in Philadelphia ($70K/year) who is married to a District Manager of a McDonald's AoR would earn more than enough to be a top 10% earner in a lot of years. Are you saying that the average household is incapable of getting to those numbers? Store managers at Publix make ~ $82K per year. I could go on and on. There are plenty of career paths to get to the top 10%.
Ken Carson
 
Posts: 3422
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 184 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Wed Oct 03, 2018 1:19 pm

Ken Carson wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:My disbelief is an observable reality. I don't disparage anybody going out and earning a good living, and I know that you don't have to be a brajillionaire to crack the top 10%. But to suggest that just about everyone is going to get there at some point without cashing out 20 years of home equity is disingenuous.


Saying they will get there once is not the same as get there and stay for life. And it's not some absurd standard. A GM at a McDonald's makes $55K/year. If that person gets promoted to a District manager, the average salary is $71.5K/year. A public school teacher in Philadelphia ($70K/year) who is married to a District Manager of a McDonald's AoR would earn more than enough to be a top 10% earner in a lot of years. Are you saying that the average household is incapable of getting to those numbers? Store managers at Publix make ~ $82K per year. I could go on and on. There are plenty of career paths to get to the top 10%.

How many positions like that are there, Ken? 100,000 nationwide?

That's less than 10% of the workforce.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 13817
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Re: US ECONOMY News and Discussion Thread

Postby Deuce » Wed Oct 03, 2018 1:29 pm

Ken Carson wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:My disbelief is an observable reality. I don't disparage anybody going out and earning a good living, and I know that you don't have to be a brajillionaire to crack the top 10%. But to suggest that just about everyone is going to get there at some point without cashing out 20 years of home equity is disingenuous.


Saying they will get there once is not the same as get there and stay for life. And it's not some absurd standard. A GM at a McDonald's makes $55K/year. If that person gets promoted to a District manager, the average salary is $71.5K/year. A public school teacher in Philadelphia ($70K/year) who is married to a District Manager of a McDonald's AoR would earn more than enough to be a top 10% earner in a lot of years. Are you saying that the average household is incapable of getting to those numbers? Store managers at Publix make ~ $82K per year. I could go on and on. There are plenty of career paths to get to the top 10%.


There's a big difference between "incapable of getting to those numbers" and 55% of people making it. For every Publix store manager, there are 99 people working under him, earning less (my store employed around 100 anyway). And according to your own numbers, two Publix store managers would have to be married to hit the 10%.

McDonald's district manager...now you're talking about (I'm guessing) hundreds of stores under that person. Each has a GM, assistant GM, shift supervisors, cooks, dishwashers, etc. So that's like 1 guy out of 2500 (say 100 stores x 25 employees each) that is not even halfway to $166k.

EDIT: I confused the top 5% number with top 10%, but my greater point still stands.
User avatar
Deuce
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:23 pm
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 47 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

cron