Stocks Rise Sharply on Weak Jobs and Wages Numbers
Rising stock markets took some analysts by surprise, especially after the Thursday terrorist attacks in the capitol of Great Britain. By the afternoon on Thursday, stocks in the United States had shrugged off the troubles on the other side of the Atlantic, with the major stock indices closing up modestly. Friday's surge of 146 points in the Dow Jones Industrial Average reinforced the view among seasoned investors that, if anything, the terrorist attacks in London would be good for business. For defense and related industries, which will likely reap further government contracts as opposition to massive war and anti-terror spending becomes more muted and decidedly less effective, rising government expenditures by the Bush Administration and a Republican-controlled Congress should translate into better earnings performance.
The weak labor market was good news for investors who have been hoping that the Federal Reserve will soon end its string of rate hikes to ward off inflation. With the economy showing signs of slowing down as it moves into the third quarter, some on Wall Street believe that the Fed might want to give the economy a respite from the record string of rate hikes the U.S. central bank has imposed over the past year.
This hope was given a bit more life because the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Employment Report also showed that hourly wages rose a modest two-tenths of a percent last month, meaning that inflation is still running ahead of many households' gains in income, since the Report also indicated that the average workweek for an American laborer held constant from the month previous at 33.7 hours.Dark Wraith CyberGloss
Provided businesses can keep operating costs below the rate of inflation, but keep revenues rising at or closer to the inflation rate, company profits should increase.
With respect to interest rates, concern had been mounting in recent months about the way long-term interest rates have not risen as fast as short-term rates, a situation that could ultimately end up in an "inverted yield curve," where long-term yields on government bonds are actually lower than yields on short-term government debt instruments. In the past, inverted yield curves have been a very reliable leading indicator of looming recession or less severe, but still significant, economic slowdown.
Some analysts have been cheered by the how long-term yields have actually begun to rise modestly; but a closer look shows that they are not rising as fast as short-term yields, meaning that the entire yield curve has been slipping upward and continuing to flatten, possibly as the precursor to a full inversion later in the Summer or in the Autumn. Perhaps more important to average households is the fact that the recent rise in long-term yields on government debt have begun to show up in mortgage interest rates: mortgage reseller Freddie Mac reported on Thursday that the average rate on the benchmark 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage moved up to 5.62 percent this week, a rise of nine basis points from the week previous. This is the highest rate since the June 16 survey and slightly renews worries among some housing analysts that rates could be headed back above the six percent level that was seen only very briefly in the Spring of this year.Dark Wraith CyberGloss
One basis point is one one-hundredth of a percent; thus a rise of nine basis points on a mortgage rate of 5.53% would mean the rate had climbed to 5.62%.
In other news, after weeks of flirting with $60 per barrel, several times touching the mark in intra-day trading, U.S. crude on the New York Merc dispensed with all pretentions of courtship and penetrated deep into new territory, opening Friday at $61.30 per barrel before backing down by day's end to $59.63. The breakout through the sixty buck neckline sent prices at the gas pumps to record levels in some parts of the country just in time for the typical weekend uptick in demand. By Saturday afternoon, gasoline prices had slipped at many stations, but still remained in territory many American drivers have never seen. But as bad as the steep gasoline prices are, right now, analysts are perhaps just as concerned about the out-month futures contracts for petroleum distillates, which are currently priced at levels that indicate a very difficult Winter ahead for U.S. households that use home heating oil.
Unlike gasoline, for whichat least to some extent and over a period of monthsconsumers can reduce their amount demanded, usage rates of heating oil cannot be lowered much at all without significant hardship and discomfort. This means consumers of home heating oil will simply have to eat what could possibly be substantially higher heating costs this Winter, leaving less money for other necessities. Compounding the situation, moderately severe drought conditions in parts of the Midwest have already adversely affected expected supplies of certain grains, and this will, without question, result in higher food prices in the coming months. For many consumers whose hourly wages are already lagging inflation, the outlook through the remainder of 2005 and into next year is not full of cheer; and this might very well translate into serious difficulties for politicians in Washington who stand too close to the President and the party that could end up being blamed for the economic bad times that people will be experiencing.Dark Wraith CyberGloss
A futures contract for a given month is an agreement to deliver a specific amount of a commodity at a specific price on a specific date. A rising current price on a given futures contract indicates investors' expectations of a higher price of the commodity on the delivery date.
<< 16 Comments Total
Even though the outlook is not rosy, blame for the bad times being placed on the President, his cohorts, and his party, would cheer me considerably.
Good Morning
♠Dark Wraith♠,
...as opposition to massive war and anti-terror spending becomes more muted and decidedly less effective...
Do you really think that support for the anti-war movement is dwindling...?
I ask, because last week a sales rep for a headhunting company came around, looking for positions for their clients. When she got the business part over with, she asked me about how I saw the political climate.
Believe me, she got an earful from me! lol.. But then, she gave as good as she got.
She has been seeing small- and large- business managers, all with authority to initiate new hires. She said that most people she talked to were angry at the way that the government is acting, and are ready to do something about it.
OWL, I agree with you completely, I can only hope that this new building anger translates into a clean sweep of congress similar to the year of the Newt, this next election.
Good morning, SB Gyspsy.
There has obviously always been a disconnect between President Bush and those who oppose him. I honestly doubt that he even understands that there is a profound level of disdain for his ways. Unlike Clinton, who by his nature and the attacks that penetrated to his person, Mr. Bush just doesn't see what's happening.
The neo-conservatives I know in academia, the military, and politics also seem disconnected in a strange way: opposition to their policies and visions is to them minor, the product of people who are marginal and therefore largely ineffectual.
Terrorist attacks frighten Americans, and they do so in a way unlike how they affect Europeans. Our soil has been untouched by the ravages of war for more than a century and a half. Even the attacks on September 11, 2001, seem somehow entirely out of context for many people, like a horrible, once-in-a-lifetime "thing" that happened. We don't want to mess around with the possibility that those attacks could be the beginning of a future in which the United States is not off limits to war; and many people will sacrifice an awful fee in personal liberty and the blood of kids to any end that has any chance at all of keeping the American bubble from being burst again.
Another large-scale attack on continental targets would, in my judgment, have a disastrous effect on Americans' will to be a free people. I think the neo-conservative policy makers know this and will be more than willing to use the whispers of the possibility of another attack to advance their agenda, especially as it applies to wars and other aggressive acts against nations and individuals. Mr. Bush even went so far as to intimate that another attack on American soil is "inevitable." In so doing, he at once absolved himself of responsibility if it happens and gave people more reason to allow him all the latitude he wants to keep the "inevitable" at bay for a little while longer.
I trust that it is somewhat apparent in the language I used in the article above that I am trying to warn people of reason not to be intimidated into silence by terrorists: if Mr. Bush and his allies wish to silence us, we should not permit them to use tragedy as their weapon of effective choice in their war against our freedom.
If we are not to be taken to our collective grave by terrorists, then neither should we be brought to our knees by Mr. Bush.
The Dark Wraith has blustered.
Good morning, Old White Lady.
What I am seeing these days is less of the open, rah-rah type of support for Mr. Bush. Although there still seems to be considerable reticence in this part of the country to make a big thing of publicly criticizing him, at least I am being spared the worst of the drooling blather. It seems to me that quite a few people who were his supporters now don't know quite how to present their views: it's not easy (and perhaps not even particularly useful) to admit to having been wholly wrong about a President, and it still doesn't seem right to a lot of folks to criticize a President in a time of war. This all puts people in a difficult place.
I try to offer them the way out by explaining to them that I am an old-time conservative cut from a cloth different from these neo-conservatives like Bush and his people. Essentially, I can offer them a way to see that my own core values—at least the ones related to fiscal sanity and staying out of wars—are their core values, too, and it's the Republicans who have strayed into something bordering on wholesale lunacy.
It also helps to remind people that Bush is nothing but a Texas oilman, anyway. That usually seals the deal, and then folks are willing to jump ship and start talking quite reasonably about what needs to be done and why the Republicans aren't the ones to do it.
Unfortunately, the most obvious alternative is the Democrats.
The Dark Wraith should probably not even start political conversations if he doesn't have a clean end-point.
Good afternoon, ♠Dark Wraith♠.
What you say is true. Until we can get another party making waves in politics, it looks like Dems would be the choice. We have all these people who support their ONE party and will not realize that "party does not a candidate make". There are unfit choices in all groups. If the mass would look at each candidate, no matter what party, and choose the candidate with the best ideas, the best history of past examples of what they've done, (or if it is a newcomer) someone who has proven him/herself that they really support the ideas they sponsor, we could get better representation in our government.
Over in the city of Columbia, they have a mayor who's quite the greenie. He is actually a Dem and he supports the parks and bikeriding, etc. My jogging buddy and I had opportunity to walk the paths in the park that was owned by one of the colleges, but bought by the city a couple years ago. I thought it was crazy that the city would spend the amount, but after walking the park and realizing that there really isn't much open space/large amounts of trees left in that city so it was the right thing to do. I do, however, still think it should've been called "Taxpayer's Park", instead of what they insisted on naming it. Sorry, I guess you, now, why I have the email address I have...
Sort of on topic...How are we doing this year, as opposed to the same time last year, in labor market and economy? Do you know right off without having to research?
I guess you, now, why I have the email address I have...
KNOW!! now, why I have the email address I have... Damn typing skills.
"some on Wall Street believe that the Fed might want to give the economy a respite from the record string of rate hikes the U.S. central bank has imposed over the past year."
some on my street would point out that "the fed" kept interest rates absurdly low for far too long. some might even say that was a political decision and not an economic one. some might say that the correlation between rising unemployment and rising stock prices indicate the scorn and derision, the general attitude of exploitation,that the "investor class" displays toward the working class.
some.
Good evening, Dread Pirate Roberts.
Yes, some just might say those kinds of things... but not too loudly, I would caution: some might think people are reading articles and comments at The Dark Wraith Forums.
The Dark Wraith doesn't want the neo-cons to think people aren't happy with the New American Century.
[That would take all the surprise out of it for them when they're finally ridden out of town on a rail.]
Aren't they already using that technology for things like skin grafts?
I think it's probably a little early to think about meat being made in a test tube, but not at all too early to think about such tissues being made for medical purposes.
- oddjob
(OOPS! This was supposed to post on the next thread up! How did that happen??)
- oddjob
If Brit Hume is any indication, the London bombings should also make for a bull market.
Good Afternoon Dark Wraith,
Hi there OWL,
Until we can get another party making waves in politics, it looks like Dems would be the choice. We have all these people who support their ONE party...........
I would love to see a new party, without all the corruption- baggage, make some waves! The problem with this is that it is sooo darned difficult for a new party to break into politics in this country.
I remember in HS, this was touted as one of our 'merican strengths. The structure of the electoral system, and the structural changes that the present party has installed in congress make it nearly impossible for any democrats, never mind any third party, to accumulate power.
We cling to the democrats, because there is no viable alternative except a voter rebellion. I don't see a voter (taxpayer) rebellion happening until the ecomomy gets exponentially worse.
I've been reading Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared Diamond and in most cases, when it comes to that crisis stage, and the leadership only wants to pillage and use up(bushco), the populace ends up rioting and killing the rich first. This is what happened in Rwanda, and the French Revolution also comes to mind.
In the LA riots (I was still there, unfortunately, and slept with a gun - in front of my front door - for 4 nights) They first went after any light skinned person they could get ahold of, then they went into the neighborhoods adjacent to them that were prosperous- and I don't know if it was Koreans, or Chineese, or what, but I went to computer school there, and the signs on the shops were all in chineese-type writing - no english subtitles, either.
If the oriental shopowners had not fought back (thereby blocking them from access to the really rich areas) they could possibly have gotten as far as Beverly Hills.
I think that unless we learn, as a whole worldwide society, to conserve, and treat our planet in a more sustainable manner, we WILL end up having widespread riots, and a real breakdown of civilization - on a worldwide scale, because of globaliztion.
The question then becomes, after the wealthy are gone, will there be anyone left with the skills to put society back together??
Hello Gypsy,
The question then becomes, after the wealthy are gone, will there be anyone left with the skills to put society back together??
How many of us here posting at DWF are wealthy? Some of us are downright struggling, yet I think we'd be quite capable of putting back society. It would be quite changed, I think, from what we have now.
This assumes that the rebels who hit the wealthy first don't go after the intellectual elite (I love that designation) as their next victims.
Good morning, Dark Wraith.
Good morning S B Gypsy and Wild Clover.
SB Gypsy -
I keep remembering Ross Perot. He was so close! He ran a good campaign, but waffled there for a moment. He lost his advantage. I liked him! I worked on his campaign in my little town. It was an exciting time. He bussed the volunteers to St. Louis for a huge rally, sometime near the end of the campaign. His wife and children were all there, too. He gave a great "thank you" speech to us. It was amazing. I can understand why the W supporters hold on so closely to their love of W when they go to the rallies. That group feeling of being right can really be intoxicating. I wish they would open their eyes to the actions of their idol, though.
If we do end up having widespread riots, and the wealthy are removed (by any means) surely, there are enough intelligent people to put society back together. The big problem would be to get the mobs of angry people to stop the violence, make peace with each other, then come up with plans, together. If this couldn't be accomplished, Mother Earth would probably be happy if she was allowed to regrow in her natural state:) I'm sure she would see no loss - except for her creatures and flora, now extinct.
Good Afternoon, Dark Wraith,
Hi OWL!
I too wanted Ross Perot to win - until he decided to withdraw, and then decided at the last minute to get back in the race. Always made me suspicious - the Press were on his trail, and by withdrawing, he diverted them - what did he have to hide???
I also could not vote for someone who withdrew in the face of pressure. There's not a job on the face of the earth with the pressure that the US president has to put up with!
Now, when I think of what all of those free trade agreements have done to the world environmentally, and what they've done to our jobs (that great sucking noise was not hyperbole) I certainly wish he could have been elected.
Hi Wild Clover!
Putting it all back together is unfortunately not as easy as breaking it all up. I watched a show on TV that showed what was happening in the extreme south of Florida after Hurricane Andrew. There was not much actual damage, just downed power lines. In three days, with only a lack of electricity and water, civilization was at the brink of breakdown.
Communications were cut off, and the thugs came out of the woodwork ready to beat and kill and steal to live. Three days! Thank goodness they sent some nat. guard down there to see what was happening! Otherwise there would have been alot of killing. It was just starting, and the troops came in and arrested some people and nipped it in the bud.
I think at that point - in order to turn angry mobs into peaceful citizens again - it takes either the national guard if you get it early enough; or a very strong politico and the national guard.
But, if you get it early enough, that leaves us just where we are now - in an oligarchy, where those in power think that we all just don't matter, and they just need to say *whatever* in order to get us to pretend to vote for them.
The alternative: a strongman who can gather the strings of power into his(her) hands, and not only stop the violence, but organize the rebuilding, leaves us with a potential despot...
Please understand: I am not an advocate for anarchy - I've experienced it, and it sucks big time!
...Don't let the bastards grind you down! -U2