OR
I think it is going to take much longer to break and it will snap back relatively quickly only to have the inflation rate jump again...
Until the government stops spending money it doesnt have, inflation will always be lurking
OR
I think it is going to take much longer to break and it will snap back relatively quickly only to have the inflation rate jump again...
In 2008 the Prime rate was so low the introduction of Quantitative Easing occurred. So the precedent doesn’t go very far back. Just because it hasn’t happened doesn’t mean it won’t. I wouldn’t be surprised to see more QT in the future. I am amazed at how many people thought restoring the Prime rate back to historic norms could only end in disaster.When was the last time the FED landed softly?
No one on this board has ever, to my knowledge, called for an increase of tax revenue. Not even for companies and corporations that make millions and do not pay federal taxes. We cannot cut the debt with just cuts to discretionary spending and we never seem to cut the waste of mandatory spending.In 2008 the Prime rate was so low the introduction of Quantitative Easing occurred. So the precedent doesn’t go very far back. Just because it hasn’t happened doesn’t mean it won’t. I wouldn’t be surprised to see more QT in the future. I am amazed at how many people thought restoring the Prime rate back to historic norms could only end in disaster.
As bad as the US budget deficit is, we are doing quite well compared to the rest of the world. If the voter base wants to elect a fiscally responsible president, then we will see a change but I don’t foresee that happening until the problem hits people right in the wallet.
In 2008 the Prime rate was so low the introduction of Quantitative Easing occurred. So the precedent doesn’t go very far back. Just because it hasn’t happened doesn’t mean it won’t. I wouldn’t be surprised to see more QT in the future. I am amazed at how many people thought restoring the Prime rate back to historic norms could only end in disaster.
As bad as the US budget deficit is, we are doing quite well compared to the rest of the world. If the voter base wants to elect a fiscally responsible president, then we will see a change but I don’t foresee that happening until the problem hits people right in the wallet.
No. However, you have to ignore everything preceding QE.The FED has been around for 110 years. In those 110yrs, have they ever increased rates and had a soft landing?
USD | Average Hourly Earnings (MoM)(Jul) | 0.4% | 0.98 | 0.3% | 0.4% | |||||
08:30 | USD | Average Hourly Earnings (YoY)(Jul) | 4.4% | 1.36 | 4.2% | 4.4% | ||||
08:30 | USD | Average Weekly Hours(Jul) | 34.3 | -1.25 | 34.4 | 34.4 | ||||
08:30 | USD | Labor Force Participation Rate(Jul) | 62.6% | - | - | 62.6% | ||||
08:30 | USD | Nonfarm Payrolls(Jul) | 187K | -0.21 | 200K | 185K | ||||
08:30 | USD | U6 Underemployment Rate(Jul) | 6.7% | - | - | 6.9% | ||||
08:30 | USD | Unemployment Rate(Jul) | 3.5% | -0.74 | 3.6% | 3.6% |
No. However, you have to ignore everything preceding QE.
Post covid, everything changed..Do you think the FED just does QE vs rate cuts? They did QE in the spring during the peak of the banking failures. Balance sheet is down from 8.9T to 8.2T even with the 400B QE in the spring. I bet they would love to keep at this rate (8.7-8.2 since March) of around 1.5T per year. It would still mean 4 years of QT just to get to 0.
Post covid, everything changed..
To save banks from failing? Probably. But that’s if that even happens. Consider the fact that we are talking about occasional pauses and quarter point hikes vs. the huge hikes we saw a year ago today. I don’t think as many banks will be caught flat footed like we saw with Silicon Valley.Do you think the FED just does QE vs rate cuts? They did QE in the spring during the peak of the banking failures. Balance sheet is down from 8.9T to 8.2T even with the 400B QE in the spring. I bet they would love to keep at this rate (8.7-8.2 since March) of around 1.5T per year. It would still mean 4 years of QT just to get to 0.
No one on this board has ever, to my knowledge, called for an increase of tax revenue. Not even for companies and corporations that make millions and do not pay federal taxes. We cannot cut the debt with just cuts to discretionary spending and we never seem to cut the waste of mandatory spending.
We are definitely better off than the rest of the world, but we continue to decrease government revenue while increasing government spending. A fiscally responsible president can not control the whole of Congress, who owes their donors.
The only responsible answer is term-limits which will not happen anytime soon.
In the meantime, I remain an optimist in regards to the market. The economic numbers don’t lie.
Dana Carvey did an HW Bush cold open on SNL talking about having to “R- R- Raise taxes” and Clinton did another tax hike in his presidency. All this coupled with Newt and his hatchet to spending led to the end of the budget deficit.No one on this board has ever, to my knowledge, called for an increase of tax revenue. Not even for companies and corporations that make millions and do not pay federal taxes. We cannot cut the debt with just cuts to discretionary spending and we never seem to cut the waste of mandatory spending.
We are definitely better off than the rest of the world, but we continue to decrease government revenue while increasing government spending. A fiscally responsible president can not control the whole of Congress, who owes their donors.
The only responsible answer is term-limits which will not happen anytime soon.
In the meantime, I remain an optimist in regards to the market. The economic numbers don’t lie.
Not just billionaires. How about corporations that pay NO federal taxes?The core issue is too much spending. If you taxed billionaires 100% of their WEALTH, i.e. expropriated it, the debt would still be $25 Trillion. @UMFarArcher posted a summary of all of the taxes that already exist.
Not just billionaires. How about corporations that pay NO federal taxes?
Not one thing will be enough. We need revenue, cuts and downsizing, and it will take decades for such a staggering amount. But everything needs to be on the table and it must be bi-lateral with States and parties getting involved.It still wouldnt be enough. Raising taxes on the rich and corporations might be a good campaign slogan, but its not sound economic policy. When any business is doing poorly, the first thing you do is cut spending, not raise it.
Also, we live in a global economy. Many corporations have fled the US (especially under Obama) because of high US taxes. Its similar to taxpayers leaving the high tax states to move to the lower tax states.
In summary, look past the catchy campaign slogans and take into account economic reality.
Aapl being down is no biggie. They are commenting on weak iPhone and iPad sales last quarter, but no one knowingly tries buying models before the new one comes out. New model is next month. I expect a blowout quarter.Not one thing will be enough. We need revenue, cuts and downsizing, and it will take decades for such a staggering amount. But everything needs to be on the table and it must be bi-lateral with States and parties getting involved.
APPL took a beating, but will come back strong with AI…jmo