The Economy

44,085 Views | 892 Replies | Last: 5 hrs ago by DiabloWags
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

movielover said:

DiabloWags said:

movielovrr said:



Illegal immigrants took away jobs from African American women who worked as hotel maids. It allowed employers to drop wages and stop providing health care.Lose-lose-lose.


The ACA only mandates employers (who have 50 or more employees) to pay health care benefits if employees work over 30 hours per week.

It's highly unlikely that Hotel housekeepers are working full-time.

As a result, your claim is bogus.



I see here your ignorance and racism coming through. Black and White hotel maids worked full time and more, and lifting mattresses 8-10 hours a day considered back breaking for some.




Cool story.

Because with virtually an unlimited supply of housekeeping labor, a Hotel chain is going to employ workers that work over 30 hours per week so that they have to pay benefits.




Cool story only to be believed by the demented and uninformed. Most hotel workers in California big cities are unionized.

Did you really go to CAL?
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

sycasey said:

chazzed said:

This is classic. MAGA in a nutshell.



I thought the argument was that the illegals were TAKING all the jobs that real Americans could have had?

Yes, REAL AMERICANS want to work in the Hotel industry cleaning toilets, bathrooms, and making beds.

They want to work in a meatpacking plant, cutting up carcasses until they can no longer grip the knife.

They also want to work in the Central Valley picking crops in the heat while inhaling pesticide ridden dirt.

But the illegal immigrants TOOK THOSE JOBS AWAY.

The claim that illegals are only taking the jobs you listed is flat out wrong and disingenuous.

Your reading comprehension is terrible.
I never said that illegals are ONLY taking the jobs above.

Did you really go to CAL?

Have you ever mentioned another kind of job? Nope, just meat processors, produce pickers, landscapers and maids - the stereotypical ones that make it safe to argue no American would ever do the work.


A friend from Iowa, grew up on a farm, tells me companies used illegal immigrants to bust the unions and cut wages in HALF.
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
More nonsense from this administration regarding the economy,

DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

sycasey said:

chazzed said:

This is classic. MAGA in a nutshell.



I thought the argument was that the illegals were TAKING all the jobs that real Americans could have had?

Yes, REAL AMERICANS want to work in the Hotel industry cleaning toilets, bathrooms, and making beds.

They want to work in a meatpacking plant, cutting up carcasses until they can no longer grip the knife.

They also want to work in the Central Valley picking crops in the heat while inhaling pesticide ridden dirt.

But the illegal immigrants TOOK THOSE JOBS AWAY.

The claim that illegals are only taking the jobs you listed is flat out wrong and disingenuous.

Your reading comprehension is terrible.
I never said that illegals are ONLY taking the jobs above.

Did you really go to CAL?

Have you ever mentioned another kind of job? Nope, just meat processors, produce pickers, landscapers and maids - the stereotypical ones that make it safe to argue no American would ever do the work.


Feel free to point out a white male in his 20's picking strawberries in Salinas.
I'll wait.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

movielover said:

DiabloWags said:

movielovrr said:



Illegal immigrants took away jobs from African American women who worked as hotel maids. It allowed employers to drop wages and stop providing health care.Lose-lose-lose.


The ACA only mandates employers (who have 50 or more employees) to pay health care benefits if employees work over 30 hours per week.

It's highly unlikely that Hotel housekeepers are working full-time.

As a result, your claim is bogus.



I see here your ignorance and racism coming through. Black and White hotel maids worked full time and more, and lifting mattresses 8-10 hours a day considered back breaking for some.




Cool story.

Because with virtually an unlimited supply of housekeeping labor, a Hotel chain is going to employ workers that work over 30 hours per week so that they have to pay benefits.




Cool story only to be believed by the demented and uninformed. Most hotel workers in California big cities are unionized.

Did you really go to CAL?


Just because you are part of a Union doesn't mean that you are working FULL TIME and guaranteed benefits.
This should be obvious but you aren't the smartest tool in the shed.

You are the KING of CONFLATION.

Did you really go to CAL?

oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

movielover said:

DiabloWags said:

movielovrr said:



Illegal immigrants took away jobs from African American women who worked as hotel maids. It allowed employers to drop wages and stop providing health care.Lose-lose-lose.


The ACA only mandates employers (who have 50 or more employees) to pay health care benefits if employees work over 30 hours per week.

It's highly unlikely that Hotel housekeepers are working full-time.

As a result, your claim is bogus.



I see here your ignorance and racism coming through. Black and White hotel maids worked full time and more, and lifting mattresses 8-10 hours a day considered back breaking for some.




Cool story.

Because with virtually an unlimited supply of housekeeping labor, a Hotel chain is going to employ workers that work over 30 hours per week so that they have to pay benefits.




Cool story only to be believed by the demented and uninformed. Most hotel workers in California big cities are unionized.

Did you really go to CAL?


Just because you are part of a Union doesn't mean that you are working FULL TIME and guaranteed benefits.
This should be obvious but you aren't the smartest tool in the shed.

You are the KING of CONFLATION.

Did you really go to CAL?




Cool story bro. Unfortunately, that doesn't jive with reality where Los Angeles implemented the Los Angeles hotel housekeeper rules, established by the Hotel Worker Protection Ordinance (2022), which mandated daily room cleaning, require hotels with 45+ rooms to adhere to square footage workload limits (3,500-4,000 sq ft/8-hr day) or pay double-time. The ordinance also limits voluntary overtime to 10 hours per day.

The above wouldn't be necessary if housekeepers were primarily part-time, as you seem to think in your fantasy world.


Did you really go to CAL?
calpoly
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

sycasey said:

chazzed said:

This is classic. MAGA in a nutshell.



I thought the argument was that the illegals were TAKING all the jobs that real Americans could have had?

Yes, REAL AMERICANS want to work in the Hotel industry cleaning toilets, bathrooms, and making beds.

They want to work in a meatpacking plant, cutting up carcasses until they can no longer grip the knife.

They also want to work in the Central Valley picking crops in the heat while inhaling pesticide ridden dirt.

But the illegal immigrants TOOK THOSE JOBS AWAY.

The claim that illegals are only taking the jobs you listed is flat out wrong and disingenuous.

Your reading comprehension is terrible.
I never said that illegals are ONLY taking the jobs above.

Did you really go to CAL?

Have you ever mentioned another kind of job? Nope, just meat processors, produce pickers, landscapers and maids - the stereotypical ones that make it safe to argue no American would ever do the work.


Feel free to point out a white male in his 20's picking strawberries in Salinas.
I'll wait.


Don't hold your breath. We are still waiting to see the proof that he actually bought Tesla stock many years ago.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calpoly said:

DiabloWags said:

tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

tequila4kapp said:

DiabloWags said:

sycasey said:

chazzed said:

This is classic. MAGA in a nutshell.



I thought the argument was that the illegals were TAKING all the jobs that real Americans could have had?







Have you ever mentioned another kind of job? Nope, just meat processors, produce pickers, landscapers and maids - the stereotypical ones that make it safe to argue no American would ever do the work.


Feel free to point out a white male in his 20's picking strawberries in Salinas.
I'll wait.


Don't hold your breath. We are still waiting to see the proof that he actually bought Tesla stock many years ago.

As you well know, that would be Pure Fantasy.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CANT WAIT FOR THE TRUMPERS TO GO CRAZY LATER TODAY WITH 'TWEETS" FROM THEIR LEADERS ABOUT THE LATEST JOB REVISIONS FOR MARCH 2024 - MARCH 2025.

BEAR 1234 MADE A BIG DEAL ABOUT THIS LAST YEAR.
IT WAS PART OF HOW BIDEN "RIGGED" EVERYTHING.

LMFAO.


On Tuesday, the BLS will provide preliminary data for its annual effort of gaining a near-complete employment count by squaring past jobs data from business surveys (more timely but not as accurate) with comprehensive unemployment insurance quarterly tax filings (highly accurate but significantly lagged in timing).

Tuesday's release marks the first step in an annual review called benchmarking, a previously innocuous process that's been applied to BLS jobs data in some shape or form for 90 years.

"It is not a bug, it's a feature; it makes the [Current Employment Statistics] more accurate," said Erica Groshen, a former BLS commissioner who now serves as senior economics adviser at the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations. "And that happens every year."

2025 Preliminary Benchmark Revision to Establishment Survey Data to be Released on September 9, 2025 : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

7:00 AM Pacific Time

Current Employment Statistics Preliminary Benchmark (National) Summary - 2025 A01 Results

DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

movielover said:

DiabloWags said:

movielovrr said:



Illegal immigrants took away jobs from African American women who worked as hotel maids. It allowed employers to drop wages and stop providing health care.Lose-lose-lose.


The ACA only mandates employers (who have 50 or more employees) to pay health care benefits if employees work over 30 hours per week.

It's highly unlikely that Hotel housekeepers are working full-time.

As a result, your claim is bogus.



I see here your ignorance and racism coming through. Black and White hotel maids worked full time and more, and lifting mattresses 8-10 hours a day considered back breaking for some.




Cool story.

Because with virtually an unlimited supply of housekeeping labor, a Hotel chain is going to employ workers that work over 30 hours per week so that they have to pay benefits.




Cool story only to be believed by the demented and uninformed. Most hotel workers in California big cities are unionized.

Did you really go to CAL?


Just because you are part of a Union doesn't mean that you are working FULL TIME and guaranteed benefits.
This should be obvious but you aren't the smartest tool in the shed.

You are the KING of CONFLATION.

Did you really go to CAL?




Cool story bro. Unfortunately, that doesn't jive with reality where Los Angeles implemented the Los Angeles hotel housekeeper rules, established by the Hotel Worker Protection Ordinance (2022), which mandated daily room cleaning, require hotels with 45+ rooms to adhere to square footage workload limits (3,500-4,000 sq ft/8-hr day) or pay double-time. The ordinance also limits voluntary overtime to 10 hours per day.

The above wouldn't be necessary if housekeepers were primarily part-time, as you seem to think in your fantasy world.


Did you really go to CAL?


Once again, you demonstrate that you are the KING of CONFLATION.
The twisted mental gymnastics that you put yourself through are truly remarkable.

Just because there are laws that prevent excessive work hours doesn't mean that housekeepers don't work part-time.
There is nowhere in the law that you cite that requires hotels to employ housekeepers FULL TIME.

I don't think you went to CAL.




Hotel Worker Protection Ordinance Rules and Regulations_0.pdf


sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

oski003 said:

DiabloWags said:

movielover said:

DiabloWags said:

movielovrr said:



Illegal immigrants took away jobs from African American women who worked as hotel maids. It allowed employers to drop wages and stop providing health care.Lose-lose-lose.


The ACA only mandates employers (who have 50 or more employees) to pay health care benefits if employees work over 30 hours per week.

It's highly unlikely that Hotel housekeepers are working full-time.

As a result, your claim is bogus.



I see here your ignorance and racism coming through. Black and White hotel maids worked full time and more, and lifting mattresses 8-10 hours a day considered back breaking for some.




Cool story.

Because with virtually an unlimited supply of housekeeping labor, a Hotel chain is going to employ workers that work over 30 hours per week so that they have to pay benefits.




Cool story only to be believed by the demented and uninformed. Most hotel workers in California big cities are unionized.

Did you really go to CAL?


Just because you are part of a Union doesn't mean that you are working FULL TIME and guaranteed benefits.
This should be obvious but you aren't the smartest tool in the shed.

You are the KING of CONFLATION.

Did you really go to CAL?




Cool story bro. Unfortunately, that doesn't jive with reality where Los Angeles implemented the Los Angeles hotel housekeeper rules, established by the Hotel Worker Protection Ordinance (2022), which mandated daily room cleaning, require hotels with 45+ rooms to adhere to square footage workload limits (3,500-4,000 sq ft/8-hr day) or pay double-time. The ordinance also limits voluntary overtime to 10 hours per day.

The above wouldn't be necessary if housekeepers were primarily part-time, as you seem to think in your fantasy world.


Did you really go to CAL?


Once again, you demonstrate that you are the KING of CONFLATION.
The twisted mental gymnastics that you put yourself through are truly remarkable.

Just because there are laws that prevent excessive work hours doesn't mean that housekeepers don't work part-time.
There is nowhere in the law that you cite that requires hotels to employ housekeepers FULL TIME.

I don't think you went to CAL.




Hotel Worker Protection Ordinance Rules and Regulations_0.pdf





I can assure you that most housekeepers at California hotels are not part-time, especially in light of the fact that California hotel workers have a strong union. Of course you are welcome to continuously think you are right about everything, despite being proven wrong repeatedly.

... Edited to add

Although this was unnecessary, I just texted my friend who is currently a roving GM / consultant of distressed properties, after working as a general manager for several IHG and Marriott properties over the last 25 years, and here is his reply:

"Almost all housekeepers are full time, they are in hot demand"
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I've met a number of Brazilians who do housekeeping, they all work 40 hours plus. (One couple now run a Brazilian BBQ on weekends. He told me he recently became a citizen. Good man.)
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2025/09/09/bidens-final-flop-911000-fewer-jobs-than-reported-in-the-year-through-march/


The U.S. economy added nearly a million fewer jobs in the year through March 2025 than previously reported, according to preliminary figures released Tuesday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The revision, the largest on record, suggests job growth during that period was running at roughly half the pace initially believed.

The BLS said payrolls will likely be revised down by 911,000 jobs, or 0.6 percent. That reduces total employment gains for the 12 months ending in March to about 850,000, compared with the 1.8 million originally reported. On a seasonally adjusted basis, average monthly job growth drops from about 147,000 to just over 70,000.

The downward adjustment hits nearly every industry and most states. Wholesale and retail trade accounted for the largest share of the shortfall, followed by leisure and hospitality, professional and business services, and manufacturing. Information employment was revised down by more than 2 percent, the steepest cut in percentage terms.

A Weaker Inheritance
The revision recasts the economic backdrop at the start of President Donald Trump's second term. Far from inheriting a booming labor market, Trump stepped into office amid an economy that was already weaker than believed. What was described at the time as a historically strong job market now appears far less robust.

In June 2024, White House economic adviser Jared Bernstein told the New York Times that "it's beyond question that this is one of the strongest labor markets that we've ever seen." Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said in December that "the U.S. economy has just been remarkable… performing very, very well." Both statements rested on payroll data that has now been sharply revised down.

At the time, analysts argued that voters were discounting plentiful jobs in favor of focusing on inflation. The new data suggests voters weren't overlooking strength they were detecting weakness obscured by inflated statistics.

Pressure on the Fed
The revision also highlights the risk that the Federal Reserve miscalibrated policy in late 2024. The central bank lowered interest rates three times between September and December, but has left them in place since Donald Trump took office. In recent months, job growth has slowed to a crawl and the revisions show that it was weaker even before Trump took office, meaning the Fed was already behind the curve. With unemployment rising to 4.3 percent in August, the highest in nearly four years, the case for further cuts is now even stronger.

A Pattern of Large Revisions
Tuesday's announcement marks the second unusually large benchmark revision in a row. In February, the BLS lowered its estimate of job growth through March 2024 by nearly 600,000. The new revision, which will be finalized and incorporated into official statistics in February 2026, underscores that the earlier overstatement was not an anomaly but part of a pattern of inflated initial payroll figures. Some economists expect that final revisions will not be as large as the preliminary estimate, repeating the pattern from last year when the first estimate was for 818,000 fewer jobs.

The revisions have also intensified scrutiny of the Bureau of Labor Statistics itself. President Trump last month dismissed the agency's Senate-confirmed commissioner, Erika McEntarfer, citing the repeated large revisions. He has nominated economist E.J. Antoni, a longtime critic of the bureau's methods, to take her place.

The revision does not directly affect data after March 2025. But combined with recent weak monthly reports just 22,000 jobs added in August it paints a picture of a labor market that is faltering faster, and from a weaker starting point, than most forecasters assumed.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"CONtext"

The Democrat Autopen Administration overstated [lied] about jobs numbers at a historic level - 1.5 Million Fake jobs - prior to a Presidential Election. Sheds further light on why President Trump canned the BLS director, and boosts calls for the Fed to cut rates.


DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LUMBER PRICES COLLAPSING!

ONE OF THE MOST RELIABLE LEADING INDICATORS OF THE HOUSING MARKET AND MAIN STREET.

DOWN 24% SINCE HITTING A 3 YEAR HIGH IN AUGUST AND NOW AT $526.50 PER THOUSAND BOARD FEET.

THE ORANGE MAN IS SO ****ED.





Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That August high is mostly the effect of blocking cheaper Canadian lumber.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

That August high is mostly the effect of blocking cheaper Canadian lumber.


Ouch. "Context.

He seems to be cheering for America's demise.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If you'd take an Econ. 1 class you'd be more credible.
Get a clue.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

That August high is mostly the effect of blocking cheaper Canadian lumber.


Potential tariffs.
Buy the rumor. Sell the news.
PAC-10-BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PAC-10-BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Yes.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
But ... Trump Steaks failed!
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

But ... Trump Steaks failed!


And an average effective tariff rate of 17.4% is AWESOME!

$130 BILLION in new TAXES since April.

It's working wonders for the ECONOMY.

Job growth is surging!

Welcome to DUMBERICA.





movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, President Trump inherited a dumpster fire from the Autopen Administration, who lied about job numbers, crime, the border...

Prosecute her for the damage to our economy.

tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

movielover said:

But ... Trump Steaks failed!


And an average effective tariff rate of 17.4% is AWESOME!

$130 BILLION in new TAXES since April.

It's working wonders for the ECONOMY.

Job growth is surging!

Welcome to DUMBERICA.

This is your drum and you continue to beat it. But the revised job numbers yesterday also point to real questions about those incorrect numbers, the Fed relying on those numbers and monetary policy being suspect.

Back of the napkin math tells us Biden's 2024 averaged something in the range of 70K jobs a month, which is not good. Job numbers under Trump held steady-ish through spring and have now cratered this summer. The Fed's main mantra has been that jobs were great and gotta watch out for inflation, as if it was still 2022. Now we know jobs numbers were not great but unemployment has held steady (4.2% / Aug of 2024; 4.3% Aug of 2025 (source: AI summary of BLS numbers)...even with Trump eliminating a handful-hundred thousand federal employees have been terminated). And inflation has trended down since August 2023, not increased under Trump's tariffs (source: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/12/heres-the-inflation-breakdown-for-february-2025-in-one-chart.html). GDP has been trending down since Q2 '24 (source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/188185/percent-change-from-preceding-period-in-real-gdp-in-the-us/). Yet in light of this economic picture the fed has held firm, only lowering the prime rate .75 points since August 2023 (notably, from Oct 2024 - Jan 2025...just in time for the election...what a coincidence! source: https://www.fedprimerate.com/prime_rate_history-monthly.htm).

In normal circumstances if jobs and GDP are down but inflation and unemployment are steady and in a good zone what fed policy would we expect?

Of course an administration's economic policy matter but especially with the revised job numbers a bigger picture emerges to tell a fairly consistent story since 2024. It appears the Fed has misread that story.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Many of your claims are not backed by current data or are erroenous.

For example, GDP is not down as you claim.
You posted a chart that showed Q1 GDP as your last data-point.
The fact of the matter is that GDP in Q2 (second estimate) came in at 3.3%
And the lastest Atlanta FED GDPNow is at 3.1% as of today.

GDPNow - Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

You also claim that inflation has not increased under Trump's tariffs.
And yet the Fed's preferred inflation gauge, the PCE has gone from +2.2% in April to +2.6% in July.

The closely watched Core PCE has also ticked higher, now at 2.9% for July.
It's the third straight month that the core PCE has moved higher.

August PCE will be released this Friday.




Thus, your following claim is not accurate:

"In normal circumstances if jobs and GDP are down but inflation and unemployment are steady and in a good zone what fed policy would we expect?"

And your inference regarding The FED cutting rates before the Election (to help Biden) is not accurate either.

The Fed lowered rates 1/2 a point in mid-September of 2024 and two more times AFTER THE ELECTION.
(Nov. 7th and Dec. 18th)

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




[url=https://www.cfodive.com/news/consumer-confidence-dips-anxiety-jobs-income-conference-board/758678/][/url]




DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As for the Fed, they are clearly data dependent as they should be when it comes to achieving their dual-mandate of full employment and stable prices. The last thing they want to do is help facilitate increased inflationary expectations . . . because if they do at this point and time, they will have to come back and slam on the brakes even harder.

Clearly, they've been thrown a "curve-ball" given Trump's unprecedented Trade War and aggressive tariffs.
Their job is not as "easy" as you have implied in your post.

I'm not sure where you get your economic data from, but the Conference Board has repeatedly released inflation expectation data that has been surging higher. In fact, inflation expectations by the consumer have now increased to 6.2% for the next 12 months, up from 5.7% in July.

[url=https://www.cfodive.com/news/consumer-confidence-dips-anxiety-jobs-income-conference-board/758678/][/url] Consumer confidence dips on anxiety about jobs, income: Conference Board | CFO Dive

The Fed has been rightfully wary of these expectations.

While Fed Governor Waller (and candidate to become the next Fed Chairman) has argued that the higher prices from tariffs will merely be a "one-time" spike and he's been vocal about lowering rates as a result, it's not completely clear if consumers won't be embedding the prospect of higher prices in their consumption patterns.

Given the recent slowing in employment, the Fed will undoubtedly be cutting short-term rates next week.

And that is what the equity market has been rallying off of for the last couple of months.
Market expectations are for 3 rate cuts for a total of 3/4's of a point between now and year end.

In the last week, BofA just went from 2 rate cuts expected from none, given the recent data.
Again, this is reflective of just how difficult and complicated the Fed's job has been given the data.

On another note, this is a prime example of how the stock market is not the economy.
Many people get that confused.

The stock market is a "discounting" machine.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

As for the Fed, they are clearly data dependent as they should be when it comes to achieving their dual-mandate of full employment and stable prices. The last thing they want to do is help facilitate increased inflationary expectations . . . because if they do at this point and time, they will have to come back and slam on the brakes even harder.

Clearly, they've been thrown a "curve-ball" given Trump's unprecedented Trade War and aggressive tariffs.
Their job is not as "easy" as you have implied in your post.

I'm not sure where you get your economic data from, but the Conference Board has repeatedly released inflation expectation data that has been surging higher. In fact, inflation expectations by the consumer have now increased to 6.2% for the next 12 months, up from 5.7% in July.

[url=https://www.cfodive.com/news/consumer-confidence-dips-anxiety-jobs-income-conference-board/758678/][/url] Consumer confidence dips on anxiety about jobs, income: Conference Board | CFO Dive

The Fed has been rightfully wary of these expectations.

While Fed Governor Waller (and candidate to become the next Fed Chairman) has argued that the higher prices from tariffs will merely be a "one-time" spike and he's been vocal about lowering rates as a result, it's not completely clear if consumers won't be embedding the prospect of higher prices in their consumption patterns.

The stock market is a "discounting" machine.



August Wholesale Inflation Drops -0.1% as Manufacturers and Suppliers Absorb Tariff Costs

The manufacturers are absorbing the majority of the tariff costs, the importers are absorbing the remnants and the consumer prices are not reflecting the tariff.

This is exactly what happened with China in Trump term 1.0.

"The Producer Price Index, which measures final demand goods and services prices, declined 0.1% in August from the month before significantly below estimates of a 0.3% rise, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said Wednesday."

Boom! Time for a rate cut?

DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

DiabloWags said:

As for the Fed, they are clearly data dependent as they should be when it comes to achieving their dual-mandate of full employment and stable prices. The last thing they want to do is help facilitate increased inflationary expectations . . . because if they do at this point and time, they will have to come back and slam on the brakes even harder.

Clearly, they've been thrown a "curve-ball" given Trump's unprecedented Trade War and aggressive tariffs.
Their job is not as "easy" as you have implied in your post.

I'm not sure where you get your economic data from, but the Conference Board has repeatedly released inflation expectation data that has been surging higher. In fact, inflation expectations by the consumer have now increased to 6.2% for the next 12 months, up from 5.7% in July.

[url=https://www.cfodive.com/news/consumer-confidence-dips-anxiety-jobs-income-conference-board/758678/][/url] Consumer confidence dips on anxiety about jobs, income: Conference Board | CFO Dive

The Fed has been rightfully wary of these expectations.

While Fed Governor Waller (and candidate to become the next Fed Chairman) has argued that the higher prices from tariffs will merely be a "one-time" spike and he's been vocal about lowering rates as a result, it's not completely clear if consumers won't be embedding the prospect of higher prices in their consumption patterns.

The stock market is a "discounting" machine.



August Wholesale Inflation Drops -0.1% as Manufacturers and Suppliers Absorb Tariff Costs

The manufacturers are absorbing the majority of the tariff costs, the importers are absorbing the remnants and the consumer prices are not reflecting the tariff.

This is exactly what happened with China in Trump term 1.0.





Once again, you fail to provide context.

The tariffs with China during Trump's first term were only $34 Billion.
They were miniscule compared to now.
Peanuts.



tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
First let me say that I appreciate reasoned and non-combative discussion. That is the way it should be but often isn't.

Yes, I missed the fact that Statistica only went to Q1. My mistake. I saw and read GDPNow but didn't use it because it is a projection. Note that although its forecast is as you say, it also shows that the average of the top 10/bottom 10 forecasts range from @0 to 2.5%. Again, not relying on forecasts.


Do you agree that the Statistica numbers from 2024 into Q1 of 2025 are accurate? 3.0 > 2.8 > 2.4 > -.5 Four straight quarters is a trend, no?

IIRC you previously claimed that Q2 GDP results were anomalous, resulting from companies engaging in activity to avoid the impact of tariffs. Perhaps I am misremembering. But if not then you can't have it both ways - Q2 means nothing when we want to complain about tariffs but Q2 is valid when we want to defend the Fed.

I hope Q2 numbers are real and mean what they normally mean and I hope that GDPNow is correct about Q3.
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

You also claim that inflation has not increased under Trump's tariffs.
And yet the Fed's preferred inflation gauge, the PCE has gone from +2.2% in April to +2.6% in July.

The closely watched Core PCE has also ticked higher, now at 2.9% for July.
It's the third straight month that the core PCE has moved higher.

August PCE will be released this Friday.




Thus, your following claim is not accurate:

"In normal circumstances if jobs and GDP are down but inflation and unemployment are steady and in a good zone what fed policy would we expect?"

As you note, I said inflation was "steady." See the chart you included. Yes, there are monthly variations, but November '24 to the latest reporting is all within a range of approximately .5%. "Steady"
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CNN: "Wholesale inflation cooled in August as businesses absorb tariff costs - for now"
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

CNN: "Wholesale inflation cooled in August as businesses absorb tariff costs - for now"
The key words are "for now".
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.