Economists predict solid US economy under Bush or Kerry

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US economy will grow solidly in 2005 despite high oil prices, no matter whether President George W. Bush (news - web sites) or John Kerry (news - web sites) is in the White House, top business economists said.


Gross domestic product -- total economic output -- was expected to grow 3.7 percent in 2005 after a 4.3-percent expansion in 2004, said a National Association of Business Economists (NABE) panel.


"After a soft patch in the spring quarter the economy appeared to find firmer footing this summer," NABE president Duncan Meldrum said.


"Fortunately, our panel expects the expansion to gain additional traction over the second half of this year and advance at a solid pace in 2005," Meldrum said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1506&ncid=696&e=2&u=/afp/20041004/ts_alt_afp/us_economy_vote

[mhr]

1. Unemployed 52 Months - What Economy Are These Folks Talking About

These guys must be smoking the crack again.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

2. The economy has been EXPANDING(growing) since November 2001!

Three years out and we are still LAGING for job growth and wage growth. Wages are stagnant and Real Wages have fallen. With the continued out sourcing I don't see how we are going to see strong growth next year (2005). Didn't they say that 2004 would be a "good year" for the economy???

:eyes:

What about the double deficits (Budget and Trade)???

:eyes:

[mhr]

4. Wall Street Plans To Outsource 210 Billion Worth Of Jobs Next Year

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/holnus/002200410031288.htm

"$ 210 bn. jobs will be outsourced to India in 2005"

New Delhi, Oct 3 (UNI) Top 100 global financial companies will offshore jobs worth over 200 billion dollars to India and other countries in 2005, says a new research by Deloitte and Touche.

''Financial institutions are moving business functions to India because they are recognising compelling cost advantages and they are able to lock in savings and manage risks effectively,'' Mr Peter Lowes, the US leader of Deloitte's outsourcing practice, said.

In 2005, Deloitte expects the top 100 global financial companies to offshore a total of 210 billion dollars of their operating costs, saving on average, 700 million dollars.

The survey, covering 43 financial services companies around the world, suggests that the number of firms taking the offshore option increased by 38 per cent last year. Deloitte also estimated that by 2010, 20 per cent of the operating costs of global financial institutions would be centred abroad, reducing costs by about 37 per cent.

Snip ......

[BJ]

3. "...oil prices need not be a drag(?!) "

Said Federal Reserve governor Ben Bernanke?

"Terrorism risks had little impact on the NABE outlook(?!)"

Jeez, why don't these guys just strip down to their jockeys, build a bonfire out of stock-ticker tape and chant "boo-gah-boo-gah-boo-gah!"
Hell, that'd make as much sense.

[VegasWolf]

5. Just trying to comfort the bush rubes worried about the economy - hey

isn't the next debate about economics, just in time
to let the rubes know that bush has it figured out for them.

New Information Shows Bush Indecisive, Paranoid, Delusional

[The_Casual_Observer]

6. "After a soft patch in the spring quarter"

They never point to anything concrete for these good news assessments.
It is just happy talk. Meanwhile, the job market is stagnant, oil prices continue to climb, and the middle class continues to sink down into the working poor.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

7. Until Greenspan raises interest rates past a sustainable level and...

...the housing market collapses followed closely by a sharp increase in bankruptcies as well as foreclosures.

[GreenArrow]

8. why am I not heartened?

?

[leQ]

9. get ready for the 'well, it was expanding before kerry took office' excuse

n/t

[seasat]

10. Depends on what they mean by solid.

IMHO, the economy will continue to perform well for the top 20%..especially if Shrub's policies remain in place. It will continue to decline for the rest of us. We'll probably see increases in GDP while median wages and job growth will remain stagnant. It'll eventually catch up with the rest of the economy and send us into a recession. I know that we've cut back on spending in recent months and Christmas spending will not be what it was in previous years.

[saracat]

11. Yeah, then why are the Nobel winning economists

endorsing Kerry ? Surely they must have a reason? They are not just bored with nothing to do!

[Norquist Nemesis]

13. Exactly!

So let's say the econs in the op are correct. The questions then become: 1) who will best handle it? and 2) what are we (the American people) going to do to make sure that person is in the driver's seat?

I'm voting to take away Bush's driver's license and do as much as I can to get right of the congresscritters that have been giving him gas for the ride.

[wishlist]

12. Article does not address impact of huge deficit, rising healthcare costs

A lot of problematic factors that impact the average person are not even touched on in this article. A financial 'expert' on CNBC said recently that holiday retail sales would be up significantly this year. But when he was questioned skeptically about his claim, he admitted that the big increase was only expected in the upscale retail market, indicating that people with higher incomes would be doing all of the increased spending.

[Amigust]

14. Talking the market up for Bush

If the market is up before the election, it looks better for the incumbent. Historically, the fed manipulation factor runs high prior to presidential elections.

[sweetheart]

15. Funnily "the economist" is concerned about those things

and has cast a rather dim view of bush's inability to add up the
dangerous deficit, combined with an aging population and what it
describes as a cumulative 70 trillion dollar shortfall when all the
social security obligations come due.

The economist is otherwise cowardly and, like rupert murdoch,
kneejerks to the warmongering side, totally betraying the liberalism
that walks with "political economy".

The economist also, based on current fiscal irresponsibility,
forecasts a necessary 20% drop in the dollar... hmmm.

THat is not calling the game the same... kerry is a clearly more
responsible long term development candidate.

[w4rma]

16. I'm starting to think to be quoted as an "expert" the one qualification is

to be willing and able to repeat the Repug party line.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ReadTomPaine]

19. Opposed to what?

You're not making any sense.

In fact, your pretty close to spamming these threads with responses written so fast, there isn't enough time between your posts for you to actually read what you are referring to.

RTP.

[underpants]

21. YES! Exactly

Our new friend here has posted just that all over the place.

[mumon]

18. I don't believe that for one second...

Here's a scary article from Gwynne Dyer:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3594217&thesection=news&thesubsection=dialogue

(It's over a week old, though):

As the opinion polls move steadily in favour of President George W. Bush and the likelihood of a John Kerry presidency recedes, Democrats in the United States can take solace in two facts. If their man is not in the White House for the next four years, then they will not end up carrying the blame for the almost inevitable US defeat in Iraq - and they will not have to preside over the biggest financial crisis to hit the US since the Great Depression.

"The US dollar is going the way that went as it lost its place as the world's reserve currency," said Jim Rogers, the Wall St wizard who in 1973 co-founded the Quantum Fund, one of the first and most successful hedge funds, in a recent interview. "I suspect there will be exchange controls in the US in the foreseeable future ... Whoever is elected President is going to have serious problems in 2005-06. We Americans are going to suffer." Why?...


It's the combination of the two deficits that is potentially lethal. The US has got away with running a big trade deficit for most of the past 20 years because foreigners, mostly in Asia and Europe, kept on investing in the US, and that huge inflow of foreign capital largely covered the deficit. They invested in the US not because it was the world's fastest-growing economy (it wasn't), but mainly because the US dollar was seen as the safest currency, the world's "reserve currency" in which other countries settle their debts even with each other. ..

Foreign investors hold about US$8 trillion ($12 trillion) in US securities, and everybody realises that a concerted move to bail out of them would trigger a collapse of the dollar and the destruction of their investments. On the other hand, everybody also knows that the first investors to get out will save most of their money, and the laggards will lose most of theirs. It is a highly unstable situation.

My money's still going largely foreign, I think in the near future.

Especially if Putsch is not re-defeated.

[Steelangel]

20. Dear Economists

http://www.academycomputerservice.com/economics/charts.htm

Explain that!

Maybe they are talking about RICH people, not middle/low class citizens.

[newyawker99]

22. Hi Steelangel!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Ezlivin]

23. If we have a choice, I'd like a solid economy under Kerry, please

It won't benefit me to have a good economy under the martial law imposed by Bush.

And as a disabled veteran, I know that Bush is going to make it harder on me, not easier.

So if we have choice, could we please have Kerry lead us during the coming economic boom? It would be much more pleasant.