Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Economy Shrank 0.1% in the 4th Quarter


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • ALL-PRO
  • 17,231 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:19 AM

But as a whole the government spent $908 billion in Q4, compared to $877 billion in Q3.

http://www.fms.treas...mts/mts1212.pdf


Fair enough.

A true retraction/recession isn't going to happen until people stop spending money and companies start laying off people. And home prices drop etc... Consumer spending is just fine so we should not be worried.

The shrink in the economy last quarter is basically random noise in the process.

#17 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • ALL-PRO
  • 17,231 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:46 AM

But as a whole the government spent $908 billion in Q4, compared to $877 billion in Q3.

http://www.fms.treas...mts/mts1212.pdf


Strange. I keep reading articles that say government spending dropped.

Government spending tumbled at a 6.6 percent rate, as defense outlays plunged at a 22.2 percent pace, wiping out the previous quarter's gains.


http://www.chicagotr...0,2857095.story

#18 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,869 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:17 AM

I'm not sure what the discrepancy in reporting is.

For example I'm not getting those numbers for defense outlays at all.



Department of Defense outlays Q3 (FY2012Q4): http://www.fms.treas...mts/mts0912.pdf (page 32)

July2012 $49,282,000
August2012 $61,545,000
September2012 $49,694,000

Total: $160,521,000


Department of Defense outlays Q4 (FY2013Q1): http://www.fms.treas...mts/mts1212.pdf (page 32)

October2012 $62,549,000
November2012 $53,784,000
December2012 $50,140,000

Total $166,473,000 (+3.71%)




WTF?

#19 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,869 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:24 AM

The department of homeland security also enjoyed a 41% boost in outlays last quarter vs the previous quarter.

July-Sep $11,201,000
Oct-Dec $15,823,000

#20 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • ALL-PRO
  • 17,231 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 11:54 AM

Any of these numbers are going to be so caveated and adjusted that it will be impossible to audit them.

#21 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,869 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:17 PM

This is what I was thinking as well.

#22 mr beauxjangles

mr beauxjangles

    Large Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,397 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 12:54 PM

Outlays can rise while expenditures drop. It's just accounting. Massive capital costs will show up in full as outlays in one period but expenses will be broken out over time (over the life of the physical capital...building, machine, equipment, whatever).

#23 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,400 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 03:29 PM

Hilarious...I just mentioned the jobs council and bam...an article from Mother Jones appears.

http://www.motherjon...-jeffrey-immelt

President Barack Obama's jobs council, a panel formed in January 2011 to gather outside expertise on job creation, is set to expire Thursday. It appears unlikely that the president will renew it for another term, but experts say that the council has been such a loser that its death might actually be a good thing.
The jobs panel, officially called the President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, is made up of 26 important people from industry, labor, and academia, and was "created to provide non-partisan advice to the President…on ways to create jobs, opportunity, and prosperity for the American people," according to its website. But the panel failed to accomplish much over its two-year life span, and a lot of what it did turn out was more friendly to business than to regular people.




The council hasn't met in over a year (its last meeting was January 17, 2012) and has only met four times since it was created. Last summer, the White House said that the council had not convened in the past several months because the president had "a lot on his plate." The panel has put out a total of three policy recommendation reports, but that hasn't translated into much actual movement on jobs.


Much like Obama's real work...all talk. He's not going to step on the toes of his special interests and instill policies that would look too Romney-like.

#24 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,400 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 03:32 PM

And Obama blames the house...lol.

Anyone seen a serious Obama budget? What a freaking joke of a president we have.

http://thehill.com/h...-for-gdp-shrink

#25 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,097 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 06:03 PM

the best part of all this is that for 4 years, crazies like G5 have been telling us that we are still in a recession, but Obamas cooking the books or whatever; now, to complain about this, they have to acknowledge that it was over a long time ago to make any sense.

You know, like what they are doing with immigration in order to save their goofy party. McCain coming out and touting our great progress in stemming illegal immigration the past 8 years. As time goes on, everything liberals have known and understood for years finally drifts down to the cement blockheads.

#26 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,635 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:39 PM

I'm not sure what the discrepancy in reporting is.

For example I'm not getting those numbers for defense outlays at all.



Department of Defense outlays Q3 (FY2012Q4): http://www.fms.treas...mts/mts0912.pdf (page 32)

July2012 $49,282,000
August2012 $61,545,000
September2012 $49,694,000

Total: $160,521,000


Department of Defense outlays Q4 (FY2013Q1): http://www.fms.treas...mts/mts1212.pdf (page 32)

October2012 $62,549,000
November2012 $53,784,000
December2012 $50,140,000

Total $166,473,000 (+3.71%)




WTF?


A few ships going into the shipyards, along with a couple of armoured brigades and air wings going into maintence and upkeep could easily account for this difference. Not that I am saying that is the reason, but you have to dig into why.

For example, just to decommission the USS Enterprise is going to add a one time cost to the Navy's budger for 2013 of over 800 million dollars.

#27 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,075 posts

Posted 31 January 2013 - 03:40 PM

This entire government from the President to the most unknown Congressman is an absolute disgrace.

Lets worry more about healthcare reform and guns than the economy. Seems like a great plan.

What a fuging joke.

#28 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,110 posts

Posted 31 January 2013 - 08:49 PM

i don't have to worry about healthcare so why does the government worry about healthcare :( :( :(

such a disgrace :( :( :(


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com