Dallas Fed Respondent Sums It Up: “Anyone Saying We’re Not In Recession Is Peddling Fiction”

The Dallas Fed has some questions.

Looks like we keep hearing about being "out of the recession" and "the economy keeps improving".

But according to some data on a graph, all we've been doing is flip flopping in and out of mini recessions sine 2009.

Why do they keep lying?

Are the banks in big trouble and have they been somehow smoothing over the accounting ledgers?

I say probably.

It's all "give & take" style stagnation.


Dallas Fed Respondent Sums It Up: “Anyone Saying We’re Not In Recession Is Peddling Fiction”

Headlines will crow of the seasonally-adjusted ‘beat’ of expectations for the Dallas Fed survey (-13.6 vs -25.8 exp) but this is the 15th month in contraction (below 0) – something only seen in recession. Scratching below the surface we see employees, workweek, and capex all in contraction and forward expectations for new orders and employment tumbled.

Perhaps that reality is what drove one respondent to rage, ”anyone who says the economy is not in recession is peddling fiction.”

Tyler Durden? LOL Seems legit. What is a federal reserve "respondent"? Is that someone who responded in the comments of a federal reserve blog? Why is the source unnamed? Why is the entire article a two page quote with no additional commentary?

Garbage "journalism"; gotta love it. *rolls eyes*

a reply to: xuenchen

But according to some data on a graph, all we've been doing is flip flopping in and out of mini recessions sine 2009.

If the sine wave of flip flops becomes greater then it could lead to another glitch like in 2008. See in the chart how big the wave was prior to 2008? Big Positive followed by a big negative? See how the new negative is the largest yet?

Due to rising tides of inflation and quantitative easing (increasing the money supply), it has to eventually end badly.

And why not? The same schmucks that ran it into the ground in 2008 are still at the helm.

How about some more endless debt sauce to go with your cooked goose?

originally posted by: WeDemBoyz
Tyler Durden? LOL Seems legit. What is a federal reserve "respondent"? Is that someone who responded in the comments of a federal reserve blog? Why is the source unnamed? Why is the entire article a two page quote with no additional commentary?

Garbage "journalism"; gotta love it. *rolls eyes*

You do realize you are the first "member" here to cast aspersions at Zerohedge and Tyler Durgin?

You should give the owners all of your "evidence" and ask them to "BIN" it....good luck on that endeavor.

Incredible growth in Dallas. I've been viewing it and the recession didn't much change things. We've been expanding these last 15 months for sure.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
Incredible growth in Dallas. I've been viewing it and the recession didn't much change things. We've been expanding these last 15 months for sure.

That's Dallas.

Are you saying that Dallas is the rest of the country or that everyone should move to Dallas?

a reply to: onequestion

Neither, but you've been invited.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

I know and I'm down but I was waiting for a response.

a reply to: xuenchen

Mini-recessions? Seriously?? Good luck peddling that nonsense. A recession qualifies as 4 consecutive quarters or more of negative GDP growth. The US hasn't had one such quarter since 2011; moreover, it has averaged 2.4% annual GDP growth from 2011-2015. Don't believe me and instead some protester/respondent, take a read here: Annual US GDP Growth: 2011-2015

Education, and not partisanship helps. The US economy is still the biggest in the world and nowhere near a recession. Maybe a view/read of yesterday's panel discussion with Yellen, Bernacke, Greenspan and Volcker would be of interest to you?

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

Wait wait wait a minute here before I see anyone else trying to peddle this mindless drivel here on ATS.

I'm tired of it I swear to god people on this website used to know this.

BLS

The labor participation rate has steadily declined every single year since 2006 according to this graph while simultaneously we are experiencing record numbers of people on food stamps and welfare.

Nothing to see here folks move along.

a reply to: onequestion

Wait a minute, I swear to god people used read their own sources. You can continue your drivel, but the labor force participation rate has over the last few months INCREASED (a direct factual conradiction of your drivel). Read your damn sources. And so you don't have to rely on graphs solely, you can use some numbers and explanations reading this piece:

Why a Higher Unemployment Rate Is a Good Thing - Increasing Labor Participation Rate

Good luck walking back that mindless drivel.

It's increased by .4% in the first three months of 2016.

I'll be impressed A if that trend continues and B if it begins to reflect on wages.

WHICH IT ISNT.

You know how the economy is really doing not only by the participation rate but by wages and weather or not they stagnate decline or increase.

Three months is nothing look at the other years there are plenty of fluctuations.

a reply to: onequestion

You were still wrong. And, no in the years since the decline there hasn't been an increase (BTW the increase is from 62.4 to 63.0 from 09/2015 to 03/2016, which is longer than 3 months and more than 0.4% [but nice cherry-picking of data]) of this trend or magnitude.

I bring facts, not mindless drivel and assertions. Typing in all caps doesn't make it true. Wages haven't increased, but they have kept pace with inflation for the first time in quite some time, as well. I'll assume you understand that as long as wages (wage increases) aren't exceeded by inflation (inflationary increases) buying power is the same. But that's a stretch considering the way you cherry-pick data from your own sources.

Help me out here, you're making this way too easy and beginning to look like an ideologue and not someone interested in facts - let alone the ones you reference - so prove me wrong as I have done to you again.

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

The increase your talking about is relatively minor in comparison.

[/URL]

It's practically nothing and it means nothing until it holds steady enough to actually affect the amount of money the average American makes and not what rich people are making out of he market.

It still shows the true state of the labor market and the false paradigm create by the illusion of the unemployment rate when the numbers are skewed by how they are calculated.

This really is common knowledge and has been discussed extensively here for many years, nearly a decade in fact.

This works in the same way that they calculate your idea of what inflation really is and how it is calculated.

Another false paradigm create to keep the TV watchers in the dark to control the narrative.

Please do show me a wage increase to purchasing power ratio in real understandstandable terms or source material for me to read to support your position.

What I personally find acceptable is;

How many hours worked to buy a specific item

How many hours worked in order to pay rent or a mortgage.

Keep hurling the insults It's kinda funny.

a reply to: xuenchen
www.cnbc.com...

Some economists now see first-quarter growth as negligible, and it could easily turn out to be negative.

Economists shaved already weak growth forecasts by a few more tenths Friday, after wholesale inventories fell 0.5 percent month over month in February, much more than the anticipated 0.1 percent decline. January was also revised down by 0.4 percent.

The closely watched Atlanta Fed GDPNow model now shows first-quarter growth tracking at 0.1 percent, compared to a 0.4 percent estimate earlier in the week. JPMorgan economists now forecast the economy only expanded by 0.2 percent in the first quarter, from 0.7 percent.
Barclays economists shaved tracking GDP growth for the first quarter to 0.3 percent from 0.4 percent.

a reply to: onequestion

It's not my problem for you to understand. You were wrong and keep trying to qualify your incorrect stance with talking points. Look I was right, pointed out your were wrong, and your refusal to acknowledge any of it is for me to say, "me one, you zero". Go find someone else to talk false paradigms with. Throw in some baseless assertions while you're at.

I'm out.

United States Gross National Product



tradingeconomics.com

GPD at Market Prices (US $)

United States

2011: 15,517,926,000,000

2012: 16,163,158,000,000

2013: 16,768,053,000,000

2014: 17,419,000,000,000

World Bank

a reply to: [post=20584061]Gryphon66[/post

Capital gains or overall economic health?

Who's making the money?

With all the record shattering profits I'm thinking it's all investors and it's not reflective of the health of local economies.

originally posted by: BeefNoMeat
a reply to: onequestion

It's not my problem for you to understand. You were wrong and keep trying to qualify your incorrect stance with talking points. Look I was right, pointed out your were wrong, and your refusal to acknowledge any of it is for me to say, "me one, you zero". Go find someone else to talk false paradigms with. Throw in some baseless assertions while you're at.

I'm out.

That's all you got?

a reply to: onequestion

Do you understand the concept of Gross National Product?

Do you understand the concept of Gross Domestic Product?

If so, your questions are answered.

However, I note that you directed ZERO questions to the very sketchy OP, so perhaps you can explain (as you seem to concur):

What is the source of the "Tyler Durden" article this post pretends to cite? As there is no direct link to the "Zerohedge" blog where "Tyler Durden" spews his one-sided propagandized economic "theory" ...

What is the source of the "graph with numbers" that the OP article presents? It certainly is NOT the Dallas Federal Reserve?

Since you like to ask Questions, perhaps you can answer some as well.