Wrong again. Corporate America continues to generate profits . . . just not at the same pace and growth levels of last year. Intel is making money, IBM is making money, Lockheed Martin is making money - - - even economically sensitive Caterpillar is still making money . . . just not as much as in previous years.
It hasn't. You are wrong again. The GDP has fallen now for the last 3 quarters, which is the first time that that has happened in nearly forty years. Even so, the economy is still pumping out over $14.3 trillion dollars worth of GDP.
a country has to have 2 or more quarters of negative growth to be in recession the government admitted that they have been in recession since half way through 2007 thus 8 or 9 quarters of a reduction in gdp. when you counter an argument you do not provide any economic theory or concept, any statistics other than the government bill sales (which backed me up) you just keep saying your wrong with out any justification. you are not arguing your point you are just throwing your toys out the pram.
this is from an unbiased think tank. http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/01/news/economy/recession/?postversion=2008120115 i think the exact sound you are looking for is wah waah.
I have provided various statistics ( see the above post ) to prove my point. In fact, if anyone has been simply "tossing" out vague, unsubstantiated "generalizations" . . . it is you. Everyone knows that the U.S. GDP turned negative in the July-September quarter of 2008. It is also widely known that the National Bureau of Economic Research said that the U.S. Recession started in December of 2007. http://wjz.com/national/recession.National.Bureau.2.877158.html But that doesn't mean that Corporate America is no longer making any money. It simply means that the growth of GDP has declined from previous levels. Again, the USA is still generating upwards of nearly $14 trillion dollars of GDP. Your knowledge and understanding of economics and how the capital markets work is not very good.
It hasn't. US GDP has declined over 4 quarters. You are wrong again. See Page #6, Table 1: http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2009/pdf/gdp408f.pdf GDP was +0.9% in Q1-2008. GDP was +2.8% in Q2-2008. It was negative in Q3 and Q4 of 2008. Also negative for Q1 and Q2 of 2009. That makes 4 quarters of negative GDP. Not 8 - 9 as you have claimed.
1. you just omitted that i was right with my statistics that the recession started in 2007. 2. there is no way on earth there will be a recovery with no investment and that is not possible without foreign investment. you proved that with your own post on treasury sales. 3. i admit you did at the end provide a chart, with a biased poise unlike my post. 4. my posts were based on common economic schools of thought and the way they believe the labour market reacts to a reduction in the level of aggregate demand namely the rational expectations school and the adaptive expectations school, which i briefly explained. if you did not already know that then it means you did not study economics. 5. your understanding of credit and how it works with aggregate demand through a central bank controlling mechanisms is none existent. if you knew anything about credit and how it is used to control the level of aggregate demand you would understand that it is impossible to increase the interest rate without economic collapse and that if there is no incentive for saving there is no investment. 6. in your final post you don't provide proper analysis or arguments to back up your points you simply tried to claim ignorance on my part. if you read my points again you will understand that they are valid and that each time rather than countering the main argument you would try to pick up on another argument to start because my position was more valid than yours. if you read through the posts you will see that. finally if it is of any consolation. some of your points were ok but you seem to like the argument side of the forum rather than economic side. i make this comment because when i countered your arguments rather than countering the same point again you would start an argument on something else as if to say i was wrong about that but not about this. if you read through you will see you are the one changing the argument from one starting with economic recovery to corporate funding, it was not me. it is one am in england so i will go to bed now otherwise i would continue to post.
I deal in FACTS. You posted that our Treasury Auctions were not being met with solid foreign demand ( which I proved otherwise ) and you also claimed that our GDP has fallen "8-9 quarters"... which is NOT TRUE either. You also implied that Corporate America was not making any money . . . when in fact the US GDP is still humming along close to nearly $14 TRILLION dollars worth of output. Those are FACTS. I'm sorry that they don't agree with your extremely narrow and biased view of the greatest country on the planet Earth!