The Biden Boom: Biden's Economy Has the Best Growth Record Since 1969

[JDHillFan]

Go Brandon go!

 

away

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[BillStime]

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillStime]

LOL

 

[Tiberius]

 

[Tommy Callahan]

fed talking of lowering rates in the face of inflation is well reviewed in the markets.

 

If inflation continues, or grows due to the increased liquidity, good luck in the streets.

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[The Frankish Reich]

33 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

And right on cue: mortgage rates dip back under 7%

 

All this election talk (impeachment inquiry! 91 indictments! abortion back on the stage! Ukraine! Israel!), and yet I have a strong feeling that it will come down to what the economy does. I was with the analysts saying a recession is a near certainty. Now the "soft landing" seems to be solidly back in play. If inflation remains in check going forward, growth stays steady, and everyone's 401k keeps on an upward trend, well, that will create a very different political picture come October when ballots start getting returned.

 

EDIT: 10-year Treasury back under 4 percent too. The bond rally is on!

Edited December 14, 2023 by The Frankish Reich

[Kemp]

https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/

On 12/11/2023 at 10:04 AM, JDHillFan said:

Go Brandon go!

 

away

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogervaldez/2023/08/02/counterpoint-wall-street-ownership-is-why-housing-is-out-of-reach/

 

A little dose of realty for pinhead Trumpers.

[Tommy Callahan]

Hmm.  Hopefully all this liquidity in the market coupled with talks of reduced rates helps the people of this country as much as it does the investor class.  cause it won't slow inflation.  

 

 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[Tommy Callahan]

https://twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1735281231594676463?t=8ruX87YeXEFDFoI5dcNt7A&s=19

[BillStime]

All about messaging.

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

 

19 minutes ago, BillStime said:

All about messaging.

 

 

Like a lady falling for the charms of a guy claiming to have a huge member, nobody is feeling this imaginary prosperity.  

[The Frankish Reich]

2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

 

Like a lady falling for the charms of a guy claiming to have a huge member, nobody is feeling this imaginary prosperity.  

Good one.

But ... there's a lag time between an improving economy and the perception that the economy is, in fact, improving. Worrying for Biden supporters that we're now 11 months from the election and public opinion isn't showing any signs of shifting yet. But if we avoid recession (an the "soft landing" scenario is now the majority opinion of economists) there's a good chance that opinion does shift by summer. As with everything, we shall see.

[BillStime]

24 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

 

Like a lady falling for the charms of a guy claiming to have a huge member, nobody is feeling this imaginary prosperity.  

 

It's too bad Trump handed off a complete MESS at the end of his tenure.

 

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillStime]

🎯

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillStime]

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[aristocrat]

 

[Tommy Callahan]

Uh oh

.

 

[BillStime]

JFC - you can’t make this up.

 

Trump is so fortunate that his followers are dumber than a box of rocks. 

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[Capco]

11 hours ago, aristocrat said:

 

With unemployment so low and real wages for the average earners finally starting to increase (albeit still nowhere near where they should be), there's only so many places left to point to in order to explain the homelessness issue.

From 1979 to 2020, productivity of the typical worker increased 61.8%, but wages for the typical worker only increased by 17.5% adjusted for inflation.  If compensation had risen at the same level as productivity, the median hourly worker would be earning $9 more per hour today, or an additional $18,000 per year.  But the monetary value of those productivity gains didn't just disappear; it went up the ladder.

Since 2001, 83% of the subsequent federal tax relief went to the top 1% of earners.  The remaining 99% only received 17% of the tax relief.  

This combination has put enormous amounts of cash into the hands of a very small group of investors, and a large portion of this has been invested in residential real estate.  Over the last two decades, this has artificially lowered the proportion of the supply of houses for sale on the market, but demand for home ownership by individual families doesn't decrease every time an investor buys a new rental property.  Naturally, less supply without a change in demand drives up the price of houses.

The situation is further compounded by the sheer amount of capital that these investors have at their disposal.  This means these investors can actually buy houses at a lower cost than the average worker would have to pay, because the investors can either pay in cash or use the property they already own for collateral to negotiate lower interest rates.  

The end result is that fewer and fewer families can afford mortgages and are forced to rent.  The fundamental problem of this whole paradigm we are currently in is that if the renters were given the same mortgages and rates that the investors get, they'd be able to afford the mortgage payments lol.

That's literally how my family became millionaires.  Their renters paid for their mortgages and then some.  Landlords are certainly nothing new and I'm not saying we need the proletariat to revolt against the kulaks.  But the current situation in the housing market is greatly out of balance because of the concentration of wealth and the subsequent speculation.  

[aristocrat]

38 minutes ago, Capco said:

With unemployment so low and real wages for the average earners finally starting to increase (albeit still nowhere near where they should be), there's only so many places left to point to in order to explain the homelessness issue.

From 1979 to 2020, productivity of the typical worker increased 61.8%, but wages for the typical worker only increased by 17.5% adjusted for inflation.  If compensation had risen at the same level as productivity, the median hourly worker would be earning $9 more per hour today, or an additional $18,000 per year.  But the monetary value of those productivity gains didn't just disappear; it went up the ladder.

Since 2001, 83% of the subsequent federal tax relief went to the top 1% of earners.  The remaining 99% only received 17% of the tax relief.  

This combination has put enormous amounts of cash into the hands of a very small group of investors, and a large portion of this has been invested in residential real estate.  Over the last two decades, this has artificially lowered the proportion of the supply of houses for sale on the market, but demand for home ownership by individual families doesn't decrease every time an investor buys a new rental property.  Naturally, less supply without a change in demand drives up the price of houses.

The situation is further compounded by the sheer amount of capital that these investors have at their disposal.  This means these investors can actually buy houses at a lower cost than the average worker would have to pay, because the investors can either pay in cash or use the property they already own for collateral to negotiate lower interest rates.  

The end result is that fewer and fewer families can afford mortgages and are forced to rent.  The fundamental problem of this whole paradigm we are currently in is that if the renters were given the same mortgages and rates that the investors get, they'd be able to afford the mortgage payments lol.

That's literally how my family became millionaires.  Their renters paid for their mortgages and then some.  Landlords are certainly nothing new and I'm not saying we need the proletariat to revolt against the kulaks.  But the current situation in the housing market is greatly out of balance because of the concentration of wealth and the subsequent speculation.  

I’ve long said the large funds should be out of the single family home business. I thought I read that congress was trying to get them to unload their portfolios. Hell, I own 35 single family homes I rent out. 10 more I hold notes on to long term tenants I had that I actually offered to them. I get offers here and there from funds and just tell them to ***** off

[Capco]

20 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

I’ve long said the large funds should be out of the single family home business. I thought I read that congress was trying to get them to unload their portfolios. Hell, I own 35 single family homes I rent out. 10 more I hold notes on to long term tenants I had that I actually offered to them. I get offers here and there from funds and just tell them to ***** off

Amen buddy.

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[Tiberius]

Remember that recession that was suppose to come? 

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[Tommy Callahan]

I guess it depends on if we have three or six rate cuts in 2024.  Smh

 

[BillStime]

 

2 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:

I guess it depends on if we have three or six rate cuts in 2024.  Smh

 

 

What state do you live in?

[Tommy Callahan]

That was cool when the computers glitched out 30 minutes before the closing bell and Nasdaq dropped 1.3% in 30 mins.

 

But then again, when everything is an artificial bubble. doesn't take much.

 

 

 

 

 

3 cuts

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/economy/articles/2023-12-13/fed-signals-three-rate-cuts-in-2024-end-of-higher-interest-rate-cycle

 

https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/mortgages/interest-rate-cuts-2024-mortgages-76172791

 

6 cuts (that would mean it's a hell of a recession)

https://www.morningstar.com/economy/we-predict-6-interest-rate-cuts-2024

 

Caldwell: In addition to the first cut in March 2024, we’re expecting a total of six cuts for the whole year. That will bring the federal-funds rate down from currently at a 5.25% to 5.50% range. It will take that down to a 3.75%-4.00% target range. So, that’s a 150-basis-point reduction from current levels by the end of 2024. And then, we’re expecting further cuts, another 150 basis points of cuts in 2025, taking the federal-funds rate down to 2.25% by the end of that year. And then, even in 2026, we expect it to get down as low as 1.75%. So that’s taking the federal-funds rate really all the way back down to about prepandemic levels

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[Tiberius]

https://www.wsj.com/economy/what-to-watch-in-fridays-spending-report-inflation-closing-in-on-feds-target-0778037d

 

Inflation retreated further in November, and consumer spending rose, another indication the U.S. economy can avoid a recession while bringing prices under control.

The personal consumption expenditures price index fell 0.1% in November from the previous month, the first decline since April 2020. It was up 2.6% on the year.

Excluding food and energy prices, the index was up 0.1% on the month, same as in October. On the year, core inflation was up 3.2% in November, down from 3.4%. The Federal Reserve targets 2% annual inflation using the PCE price index.

On a six-month annualized basis, core inflation eased to 1.9%, suggesting the Fed is well on its way to reaching the target.

Consumer spending, meanwhile, was up 0.2% on the month in November, down from 0.1% in October. Overall personal income was up 0.4%, down from 0.3% in October, a sign of confidence in the economy on the part of American households.

[Tommy Callahan]

Funny how the good news is always revised down a few months later.

 

Now do credit card spending and 401K withdraws.