Comments on: The “square root” Economy and Goldman Sachs “Surprises” http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/ Sun, 27 May 2012 07:03:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Ellen D http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265440 Ellen D Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:55:58 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265440 It's easy to babble on happily about numbers that no one can prove. But when your company has just laid off half its workers and when the friends you know haven't found jobs it is harder to BS that. It’s easy to babble on happily about numbers that no one can prove. But when your company has just laid off half its workers and when the friends you know haven’t found jobs it is harder to BS that.

]]> By: whoisjohngalt http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265230 whoisjohngalt Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:41:12 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265230 Yes, he will have ended the recession because the # will have improved from a dismal quarter the year before. This = Nobel Prize. However, a 0.1% improvement when you were in the crapper probably still means you are still in the crapper. Yes, he will have ended the recession because the # will have improved from a dismal quarter the year before. This = Nobel Prize. However, a 0.1% improvement when you were in the crapper probably still means you are still in the crapper.

]]> By: MrMike http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265227 MrMike Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:14:41 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265227 I might have missed it, but the one thing I hear about is the amount of losses in real estate value and retirement investments caused by the meltdown. The thing is what are the real losses? I mean if the price of a house was inflated by demand caused by easy credit, what was the actual loss incurred? Same for investments. I might have missed it, but the one thing I hear about is the amount of losses in real estate value and retirement investments caused by the meltdown.
The thing is what are the real losses?
I mean if the price of a house was inflated by demand caused by easy credit, what was the actual loss incurred? Same for investments.

]]> By: oowawa http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265223 oowawa Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:55:51 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265223 The shape of the "recovery": not V,U, or L. It'll be a W, and the next leg down will be a crusher. We've lived through various "bubbles" that have moved the economy up, the "internet-tech" bubble and the "housing" bubble being the most recent. Eventually, these bubbles burst, causing great pain. Now the government, with the cooperation of the media, is working hard to inflate what can only be called the BS bubble; blown up with absolute nonsense and rosy prognostications, the BS bubble is filled with "green shoots," fudged statistics, and "better than expected" pipe-dreams based on an imaginary "slowing" in the rate of decline. In order for the BS bubble to continue to grow, "lagging indicators," such as the unemployment rate, must be ignored. When the BS bubble bursts, and it will, look out below. The BS will soon hit the fan. The shape of the “recovery”: not V,U, or L. It’ll be a W, and the next leg down will be a crusher.

We’ve lived through various “bubbles” that have moved the economy up, the “internet-tech” bubble and the “housing” bubble being the most recent. Eventually, these bubbles burst, causing great pain. Now the government, with the cooperation of the media, is working hard to inflate what can only be called the BS bubble; blown up with absolute nonsense and rosy prognostications, the BS bubble is filled with “green shoots,” fudged statistics, and “better than expected” pipe-dreams based on an imaginary “slowing” in the rate of decline. In order for the BS bubble to continue to grow, “lagging indicators,” such as the unemployment rate, must be ignored.

When the BS bubble bursts, and it will, look out below. The BS will soon hit the fan.

]]> By: Tricia Spiegel http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265221 Tricia Spiegel Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:52:59 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265221 Thanks for this post, even though it is sobering to say the least. Linda, you are a great reporter. This kind of story actually helps us make real life decisions. (I think I will sell my few shares of stock today--they have zoomed upwards and I could not figure out why.) Thanks for this post, even though it is sobering to say the least.

Linda, you are a great reporter. This kind of story actually helps us make real life decisions. (I think I will sell my few shares of stock today–they have zoomed upwards and I could not figure out why.)

]]> By: donjo http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265203 donjo Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:03:37 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265203 Does this mean that Geithner will win the Nobel for Economics? Does this mean that Geithner will win the Nobel for Economics?

]]> By: Sassy http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265201 Sassy Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:51:07 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265201 The co-founder of Home Depot was on Cavuto yesterday afternoon, and his comments were very similar to those you quote, Linda. Unemployment is expected to be high at least into 2013, and more governors have acknowledged that their states have no alternative but to cut services, even in vital areas like law enforcement. Things may very well get far worse before they get better, and I think the days of easy money and plenty of jobs are gone! The co-founder of Home Depot was on Cavuto yesterday afternoon, and his comments were very similar to those you quote, Linda.
Unemployment is expected to be high at least into 2013, and more governors have acknowledged that their states have no alternative but to cut services, even in vital areas like law enforcement.
Things may very well get far worse before they get better, and I think the days of easy money and plenty of jobs are gone!

]]> By: whoisjohngalt http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265193 whoisjohngalt Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:38:48 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265193 By definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Recession is defined simply as a period when GDP falls (negative real economic growth) for at least two quarters. If one looks at this: Percent change at annual rate GDP: 4Q 2007 ….. +2.1% 1Q 2008 ….. –0.7% 2Q 2008 ….. +1.5% 3Q 2008 ….. –2.7% 4Q 2008 ….. –5.4% 1Q 2009 ….. –6.4% 2Q 2009 ….. –0.7% the recession did not really begin until the 3Q of 2008. I think the press likes to frame it back to jobs lost since December 2007 to make it look more like it was Bush's fault. True, we did have a negative 1Q in 2008, but 2Q 2008 was positive. So when is a recession over? Answer: when the GDP grows compared to the depressed quarter from the previous year. Thus, when the positive # comes out for 3Q 2009 when compared to a depressed 3Q 2008, then everything will be great--recession over, Obama is great! Not really with official unemployment near 10%, underemployment near 17%, delinquent mortgages above 13%, tax revenues down 18% and the yearly federal deficit at $1.8 trillion. I have learned a new word, you should too. Quadrillion which is a thousand trillion or 1,000,000,000,000,000. Again, by definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Timothy Geithner or anyone else can end a recession in one year because it is a rigged game by definition. By definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Recession is defined simply as a period when GDP falls (negative real economic growth) for at least two quarters. If one looks at this:

Percent change at annual rate GDP:

4Q 2007 ….. +2.1%
1Q 2008 ….. –0.7%
2Q 2008 ….. +1.5%
3Q 2008 ….. –2.7%
4Q 2008 ….. –5.4%
1Q 2009 ….. –6.4%
2Q 2009 ….. –0.7%

the recession did not really begin until the 3Q of 2008. I think the press likes to frame it back to jobs lost since December 2007 to make it look more like it was Bush’s fault. True, we did have a negative 1Q in 2008, but 2Q 2008 was positive.

So when is a recession over? Answer: when the GDP grows compared to the depressed quarter from the previous year. Thus, when the positive # comes out for 3Q 2009 when compared to a depressed 3Q 2008, then everything will be great–recession over, Obama is great! Not really with official unemployment near 10%, underemployment near 17%, delinquent mortgages above 13%, tax revenues down 18% and the yearly federal deficit at $1.8 trillion. I have learned a new word, you should too. Quadrillion which is a thousand trillion or 1,000,000,000,000,000.

Again, by definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Timothy Geithner or anyone else can end a recession in one year because it is a rigged game by definition.

]]> By: whoisjohngalt http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265190 whoisjohngalt Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:23:17 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265190 By definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Recession is defined simply as a period when GDP falls (negative real economic growth) for at least two quarters. If one looks at this: http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=2&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2006&LastYear=2009&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no the recession did not really begin until the 3Q of 2008. I think the press likes to frame it back to jobs lost since December 2007 to make it look more like it was Bush's fault. True, we did have a negative 1Q in 2008, but 2Q 2008 was positive. So when is a recession over? Answer: when the GDP grows compared to the depressed quarter from the previous year. Thus, when the positive # comes out for 3Q 2009 when compared to a depressed 3Q 2008, then everything will be great--recession over, Obama is great! Not really with official unemployment near 10%, underemployment near 17%, delinquent mortgages above 13%, tax revenues down 18% and the yearly federal deficit at $1.8 trillion. I have learned a new word, you should too. Quadrillion which is a thousand trillion or 1,000,000,000,000,000. Again, by definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Timothy Geithner or anyone else can end a recession in one year because it is a rigged game by definition. By definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Recession is defined simply as a period when GDP falls (negative real economic growth) for at least two quarters. If one looks at this:

http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=2&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2006&LastYear=2009&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no

the recession did not really begin until the 3Q of 2008. I think the press likes to frame it back to jobs lost since December 2007 to make it look more like it was Bush’s fault. True, we did have a negative 1Q in 2008, but 2Q 2008 was positive.

So when is a recession over? Answer: when the GDP grows compared to the depressed quarter from the previous year. Thus, when the positive # comes out for 3Q 2009 when compared to a depressed 3Q 2008, then everything will be great–recession over, Obama is great! Not really with official unemployment near 10%, underemployment near 17%, delinquent mortgages above 13%, tax revenues down 18% and the yearly federal deficit at $1.8 trillion. I have learned a new word, you should too. Quadrillion which is a thousand trillion or 1,000,000,000,000,000.

Again, by definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Timothy Geithner or anyone else can end a recession in one year because it is a rigged game by definition.

]]> By: whoisjohngalt http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265188 whoisjohngalt Sat, 10 Oct 2009 13:14:29 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265188 By definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Recession is defined simply as a period when GDP falls (negative real economic growth) for at least two quarters. If one looks at this: http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=2&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2006&LastYear=2009&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no the recession did not really begin until 3Q 2008. I think the press likes to frame it back to jobs lost since December 2007 to make it look more like it was Bush's fault. True, we did have a negative 1Q 2008, but 2Q 2008 was positive. So when is a recession over? Answer: when the GDP grows compared to the depressed quarter from the previous year. Thus, when the positive # comes out for 3Q 2009 when compared to a depressed 3Q 2008, then everything will be great--recession over, Obama is great! Not really with official unemployment near 10%, underemployment near 17%, delinquent mortgages above 13%, tax revenues down 18% and the yearly federal deficit at $1.8 trillion. I have learned a new word, you should too. Quadrillion which is a thousand trillion or 1,000,000,000,000,000. Again, by definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. The game is rigged so that Timothy Geithner or anybody else can get us out of a recession in a year. By definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. Recession is defined simply as a period when GDP falls (negative real economic growth) for at least two quarters. If one looks at this:

http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=2&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2006&LastYear=2009&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no

the recession did not really begin until 3Q 2008. I think the press likes to frame it back to jobs lost since December 2007 to make it look more like it was Bush’s fault. True, we did have a negative 1Q 2008, but 2Q 2008 was positive.

So when is a recession over? Answer: when the GDP grows compared to the depressed quarter from the previous year. Thus, when the positive # comes out for 3Q 2009 when compared to a depressed 3Q 2008, then everything will be great–recession over, Obama is great! Not really with official unemployment near 10%, underemployment near 17%, delinquent mortgages above 13%, tax revenues down 18% and the yearly federal deficit at $1.8 trillion. I have learned a new word, you should too. Quadrillion which is a thousand trillion or 1,000,000,000,000,000.

Again, by definition it is difficult to sustain a recession for more than a year. The game is rigged so that Timothy Geithner or anybody else can get us out of a recession in a year.

]]> By: The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER : PlanetTalk.net - Learn the truth , no more lies http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265168 The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER : PlanetTalk.net - Learn the truth , no more lies Sat, 10 Oct 2009 06:28:44 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265168 [...] Read the original here:  The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER [...] [...] Read the original here:  The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER [...]

]]> By: jwrjr http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265164 jwrjr Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:29:21 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265164 He says that conditions are "fragile". Geithner looks up a mountain, sees an avalanche, and says that it looks "fragile". How about if more people adopt <strong>his</strong> standards about paying taxes, huh? He says that conditions are “fragile”. Geithner looks up a mountain, sees an avalanche, and says that it looks “fragile”. How about if more people adopt his standards about paying taxes, huh?

]]> By: The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265163 The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:10:31 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265163 [...] Original post:  The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER [...] [...] Original post:  The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER [...]

]]> By: Ellen D http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265162 Ellen D Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:00:34 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265162 <blockquote>Many countries will be “surprising” in their economic growth in 2010, he said,</blockquote> This is the line that scares me. Sounds like money leaving the U.S. And why the heck not? Who gambles in a casino where there is virtually no chance of winning because the deck is so stacked against you? Other countries have regulations. Apparently we're not getting ours back. So who wants to invest in our corrupt third-world country where financial fraud is running rampant? Actions have consequences.

Many countries will be “surprising” in their economic growth in 2010, he said,

This is the line that scares me. Sounds like money leaving the U.S. And why the heck not? Who gambles in a casino where there is virtually no chance of winning because the deck is so stacked against you?

Other countries have regulations. Apparently we’re not getting ours back. So who wants to invest in our corrupt third-world country where financial fraud is running rampant?

Actions have consequences.

]]> By: The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER - Pasarici.NET Blog http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/34352/the-square-root-economy-and-goldman-surprises/#comment-1265157 The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER - Pasarici.NET Blog Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:28:30 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=34352#comment-1265157 [...] the original: The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER Share and [...] [...] the original: The “square root” Economy and Goldman “Surprises” : NO QUARTER Share and [...]

]]>