U.S. Economy Shrinks by 0.1%

Posted 540 day(s) ago 797 Views 43 Replies
Results 1 to 44 of 44
  1. #1
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,157
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    U.S. Economy Shrinks by 0.1%

    Not good...and now we have lost over 2% of discretionary income due to the payroll tax going back to normal levels (probably closer to 4% of discretionary) and the income tax increase on the higher income folks....thanks, dems...

    Then we have the possible spending cuts the pubs want coming up for discussion and it looks like our DC leadership is going to lead us right to a recession...

    TWO BIG THUMBS UP!

    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/01/...s-contraction/

    WASHINGTON -- The U.S. economy shrank from October through December for the first time since the recession ended, hurt by the biggest cut in defense spending in 40 years, fewer exports and sluggish growth in company stockpiles.

    The Commerce Department said Wednesday that the economy contracted at an annual rate of 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter. That's a sharp slowdown from the 3.1 percent growth rate in the July-September quarter.

    The surprise contraction could raise fears about the economy's ability to handle tax increases that took effect in January and looming spending cuts.

    Still, the weakness may be because of one-time factors. Government spending cuts and slower inventory growth subtracted a total of 2.6 percentage points from growth.

    And those volatile categories offset faster growth in consumer spending, business investment and housing - the economy's core drivers of growth.

    Another positive aspect of the report: For all of 2012, the economy expanded 2.2 percent, better than 2011's growth of 1.8 percent.

    The economy may stay weak at the start of the year because Americans are coming to grips with an increase in Social Security taxes that has left them with less take-home pay.

    Subpar growth has held back hiring. The economy has created about 150,000 jobs a month, on average, for the past two years. That's barely enough to reduce the unemployment rate, which has been 7.8 percent for the past two months.

    Economists forecast that unemployment stayed at the still-high rate again this month. The government releases the January jobs report Friday.


    The slower growth in stockpiles comes after a big jump in the third quarter. Companies frequently cut back on inventories if they anticipate a slowdown in sales. Slower inventory growth means factories likely produced less.

    Heavy equipment maker Caterpillar, Inc. said this week that it reduced its inventories by $2 billion in the fourth quarter as global sales declined from a year earlier.

    The biggest question going forward is how consumers react to the expiration of a Social Security tax cut. Congress and the White House allowed the temporary tax cut to expire in January, but reached a deal to keep income taxes from rising on most Americans.

    The tax increase will lower take home pay this year by about 2 percent. That means a household earning $50,000 a year will have about $1,000 less to spend. A household with two high-paid workers will have up to $4,500 less.

    Already, a key measure of consumer confidence plummeted this month after Americans noticed the reduction in their paychecks, the Conference Board reported Tuesday.

  2. #2
    Yuck Fu's Avatar
    Posts
    4,264
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Ah so, mutha fucka.

    Maybe we could encourage the 47%ers to spend more of our hard earned money.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by Yuck Fu View Post
    Maybe we could encourage the 47%ers to spend more of our hard earned money.
    They already spend it like its not theirs. Thankfully.

  4. #4
    KCRuf/Nek's Avatar
    Posts
    39,111
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    0
    Location
    Prairie Village, Ks.

    Time to bring back birth control and actual ****. Need more shiny objects.

    Originally Posted by Yuck Fu View Post
    Maybe we could encourage the 47%ers to spend more of our hard earned money.
    San Fran Nan said that more people on the dole made for a better economy. What happened?

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by pphilfran View Post
    Not good...and now we have lost over 2% of discretionary income due to the payroll tax going back to normal levels (probably closer to 4% of discretionary) and the income tax increase on the higher income folks....thanks, dems...

    Then we have the possible spending cuts the pubs want coming up for discussion and it looks like our DC leadership is going to lead us right to a recession...

    TWO BIG THUMBS UP!
    You seem to feel that cutting spending will cause or at least encourage another recession. I think we disagree here--it is more dependent on what spending is cut.

  6. #6
    OU48A's Avatar
    Posts
    12,668
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Norman

    This is some more of that hope and change that we can all believe in.
    Yes we can make’s it all ok.

  7. #7
    OU48A's Avatar
    Posts
    12,668
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Norman

    The current spending levels send a message of an undisciplined and out of control government to business leaders and also to their investors. Add that to many GOV policies are not business friendly and it’s no wonder why business won’t take on even many new low risk ventures.
    Almost all business leaders and most investors also know that Keynesian economics are a failure.



    http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterfer...nesian-coffin/

    Keynesian economics is the false vision of human action which says the way to promote economic recovery and renewed growth is through increased government spending, deficits and debt. If that sounds nuts, that’s because it is.

    The idea is that the increased government spending and deficits will increase demand in the economy for more production, and that producers will increase supply to meet that demand, hiring more workers and reducing unemployment in the process. Keynesian economics arose in the 1930s in response to the Depression. It never worked then, as the recession of 1929 extended into the decade long Great Depression. And it never worked anywhere it’s been tried since then, in the U.S. or abroad.


    By the 1970s, Keynesian policies had produced double digit unemployment, double digit inflation, and double digit interest rates, all at the same time, along with four successive worsening recessions from 1969 to 1982. Keynesian monetary policy involves running up the money supply to increase demand, with artificially lowered interest rates promoting more spending. That is where the inflation came from.

    Ronald Reagan explicitly scrapped Keynesian economics for the more modern supply side economics, which holds that economic growth results from incentives meant to boost production. That results from reduced tax rates, which enable producers to keep a higher proportion of what they produce. It results from reduced regulatory costs, which also increases the net reward for increased production. And it results from monetary policies maintaining a strong, stable dollar, without inflation, which assures investors that the value of their investments will not be depreciated by inflation or a falling dollar, or threatened by repeated recessions resulting from policy induced boom/bust cycles, as in the 1970s.

    The results of these Reagan supply side policies have been recounted in several prior columns, and in thorough detail in my 2011 book America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb. Inflation was quickly whipped, cut in half by 1982, and in half again by 1983, never to be heard from again until recently. At the same time (which the Washington establishment said was impossible simultaneously), the economy took off on a 25-year economic boom from 1982 to 2007, interrupted by just two, short, shallow recessions, widely recognized in the economic literature, and by the National Bureau of Economic Research, as one long boom. During the first 7 years of that boom alone, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy.

    Supply side godfather Art Laffer and Wall Street Journal Chief Financial Writer Steve Moore summarize in their 2008 book, The End of Prosperity,


    “We call this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom – the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth – assets minus liabilities – of all U.S.households and business…was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007, …net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years.”

    Economist Henry Nau added in the Wall Street Journal on January 26, “the U.S. grew by more than 3% per year [in real terms] from 1980 to 2007, and created more than 50 million new jobs, massively expanding a middle class of working women, African-Americans and legal as well as illegal immigrants. Per capita income increased by 65%, and household income went up substantially in all income categories.”

    Similarly, Steve Forbes wrote in Forbes magazine in 2008,
    “Between the early 1980s and 2007 we lived in an economic Golden Age. Never before have so many people advanced so far economically in so short a period of time as they have during the last 25 years. Until the credit crisis, 70 million people a year [worldwide] were joining the middle class. The U.S. kicked off this long boom with the economic reforms of Ronald Reagan, particularly his enormous income tax cuts. We burst from the economic stagnation of the 1970s into a dynamic, innovative, high tech-oriented economy. Even in recent years the much maligned U.S. did well. Between year-end 2002 and year-end 2007 U.S. growth exceeded the entire size of China’s economy.”

    In other words, the growth in the U.S. economy from 2002 to 2007 was the equivalent of adding the entire economy of China to the U.S. economy.

    But Obama, who playacts like he was asleep during this whole time, like Rip Van Winkle, tells us it didn’t work. While many voters in 2008 thought they were electing a progressive, forward-looking President, Obama has turned out to be the most regressive, backward looking President in American history, taking us back to the failed, discredited Keynesianism of the 1930s to 1970s, as if nothing at all interesting happened from 1980 to 2007.

    Apparently determined to prove once more that Keynesian economics doesn’t work, Obama’s first major act in office was to pursue the unreconstructed Keynesianism of the nearly $1 trillion so-called “stimulus,” which we now know didn’t stimulate anything except government spending, deficits and debt. Obama promised us at the time that if his “stimulus” bill passed, the unemployment rate would never exceed 8%, and would decline to 5.8% by May of this year. But in reality it was 8.2% and rising in May.

    Last Friday’s jobs report for June indicated that the most commonly cited U3 unemployment rate remains stuck at 8.2%. That makes 41 straight months of unemployment over 8%, which the Joint Economic Committee of Congress confirms is the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression almost 75 years ago. Indeed, the last time before Obama that unemployment was even over 8% was December, 1983, when Reaganomics was bringing it down from the Keynesian fiasco of the 1970s. It didn’t climb back above that level for 25 years, a generation, which is another measure of the spectacular success of Reaganomics.
    2 users like OU48A's post: OU Sam, soonercoop1

    Last edited by OU48A; January 30th, 2013 at 04:12 PM.

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    You seem to feel that cutting spending will cause or at least encourage another recession. I think we disagree here--it is more dependent on what spending is cut.
    Currently any governmental spending cut, by definition, reduces GDP.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Teo9969 View Post
    Currently any governmental spending cut, by definition, reduces GDP.
    Yes, but cutting it in the right places could spur economic growth. As an extreme example, imagine if the IRS was abolished--spending would be cut drastically, but the economic growth would be tremendous.
    2 users like oucub23's post: nolesooner, pphilfran


  10. #10
    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    Yes, but cutting it in the right places could spur economic growth. As an extreme example, imagine if the IRS was abolished--spending would be cut drastically, but the economic growth would be tremendous.
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Thanks Cub....I needed that laugh

  11. #11
    tcrb's Avatar
    Posts
    4,444
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Behind enemy lines

    Just raise the debt ceiling, borrow more money from the Chinee, and pass it out in the form of more entitlements to the vulnerables. We could do another round of cash for clunckers and cash for appliances, and even do a cash for Obamaphones, cash for playstation/xbox, and a cash for that undersized 46" flat screen.

    And once the 10-20M illegal Mexicans are granted citizenship, we can start to collect taxes from them to give the Chinee back their money.

    Problem solved.

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Teo9969 View Post
    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Thanks Cub....I needed that laugh
    The growth would be impressive.

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    The growth would be impressive.
    I'm not disagreeing with you...but I'll be damned if that wasn't a funny little proposal.

  14. #14
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,157
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    You seem to feel that cutting spending will cause or at least encourage another recession. I think we disagree here--it is more dependent on what spending is cut.
    That is true...I will withhold judgement until I see the items cut...

    Whatever the case, we didn't grow any last quarter and now we head into a new quarter with less discretionary spending available...doesn't bode well...
    2 users like pphilfran's post: nolesooner, oucub23


  15. #15
    http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...for-gdp-shrink

    White House press secretary Jay Carney laid the blame for a surprise economic contraction squarely at the feet of congressional Republicans Wednesday, saying economic threats during the "fiscal cliff" negotiations had prevented important defense spending.
    "Our economy is facing a major headwinds, and that's Republicans in Congress," Carney said.

    More headwinds. Though now it's not tsunamis and ATMs, it's republicans.
    The following users like this post: nolesooner


  16. #16
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,157
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...for-gdp-shrink

    White House press secretary Jay Carney laid the blame for a surprise economic contraction squarely at the feet of congressional Republicans Wednesday, saying economic threats during the "fiscal cliff" negotiations had prevented important defense spending.
    "Our economy is facing a major headwinds, and that's Republicans in Congress," Carney said.

    More headwinds. Though now it's not tsunamis and ATMs, it's republicans.
    Congress sat on their hands for months and did nothing...then, thinking insanely, they thought they could get the deal done in a week...everyone that has a seat in Congress is to blame....

  17. #17
    Originally Posted by pphilfran View Post
    Congress sat on their hands for months and did nothing...then, thinking insanely, they thought they could get the deal done in a week...everyone that has a seat in Congress is to blame....
    I don't think it's sitting on hands. I think it's utter gridlock. It's not that they're not trying to get anything done--it's that they simply can't.

  18. #18
    pphilfran's Avatar
    Posts
    11,157
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    I don't think it's sitting on hands. I think it's utter gridlock. It's not that they're not trying to get anything done--it's that they simply can't.
    That may be true for yesterday, today, and tomorrow...

    They have know this was coming up, no surprise, and did nothing and waited until the last second to try to get a deal done...as a group they are incompetent...

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...for-gdp-shrink

    White House press secretary Jay Carney laid the blame for a surprise economic contraction squarely at the feet of congressional Republicans Wednesday, saying economic threats during the "fiscal cliff" negotiations had prevented important defense spending.
    "Our economy is facing a major headwinds, and that's Republicans in Congress," Carney said.

    More headwinds. Though now it's not tsunamis and ATMs, it's republicans.
    Obama and his storm troopers are masters at shifting the blame. The media keeps slurping it up and sucking on their ****
    2 users like OU Sam's post: Gonzo, nolesooner


  20. #20
    Originally Posted by pphilfran View Post
    That may be true for yesterday, today, and tomorrow...

    They have know this was coming up, no surprise, and did nothing and waited until the last second to try to get a deal done...as a group they are incompetent...
    When you have one group saying we need to reign in the deficit spending, and the other group saying we need to permanently remove the debt ceiling, I don't know if they can get anything done. It's now to the voters to get rid of one group or the other--2014 is just around the corner.
    The following users like this post: nolesooner


  21. #21
    brokebacksooner's Avatar
    Posts
    1,915
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    2500
    Location
    Miami, FL

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    Yes, but cutting it in the right places could spur economic growth. As an extreme example, imagine if the IRS was abolished--spending would be cut drastically, but the economic growth would be tremendous.
    Except you're adding another 100k + to the unemployment line just from the IRS; who knows how many others who rely on our stupid, complicated tax system to make their living. In the short term I'd assume it would cause shrinkage....

  22. #22

    U.S. Economy Shrinks by 0.1%

    Originally Posted by brokebacksooner View Post
    Except you're adding another 100k + to the unemployment line just from the IRS; who knows how many others who rely on our stupid, complicated tax system to make their living. In the short term I'd assume it would cause shrinkage....
    It would. Business would expand rapidly enough to cover the short contraction in 6 mos tops though. That's a pipe dream anyway--was more an example of how cuts won't necessarily trigger a deeper recession.

  23. #23
    Originally Posted by pphilfran View Post
    Not good...and now we have lost over 2% of discretionary income due to the payroll tax going back to normal levels (probably closer to 4% of discretionary) and the income tax increase on the higher income folks....thanks, dems...
    Many Ds and Rs thought that extending the payroll tax holiday was a bad idea. Don't turn that issue into a partisan hackfest.

  24. #24
    zevogolf's Avatar
    Posts
    5,117
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Florida

    Originally Posted by brokebacksooner View Post
    Except you're adding another 100k + to the unemployment line just from the IRS; who knows how many others who rely on our stupid, complicated tax system to make their living. In the short term I'd assume it would cause shrinkage....
    What would the ****ing lawyers do??

  25. #25
    KCRuf/Nek's Avatar
    Posts
    39,111
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    0
    Location
    Prairie Village, Ks.

    The following users like this post: OU48A


  26. #26
    lokifz1's Avatar
    Posts
    1,737
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Deep end of the gene pool.

    We need to get more people on unemployment pelosi said that stimulates the ecnomy.
    The following users like this post: KCRuf/Nek


  27. #27
    The following users like this post: OU48A


  28. #28
    OUMallen's Avatar
    Posts
    7,290
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    1500
    Location
    City of Nompton

    Originally Posted by oucub23 View Post
    You seem to feel that cutting spending will cause or at least encourage another recession. I think we disagree here--it is more dependent on what spending is cut.
    Well, the cutting of federal government spending took us from a modest gain to a modest loss, so I'd say it's not only possibly, but it has markedly occurred.

    Cutting federal spending is a great thing. It will cause or promote recession in some ways.

  29. #29
    OU48A's Avatar
    Posts
    12,668
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Norman

    Originally Posted by KCRuf/Nek View Post
    Santelli is always good and informative TV

  30. #30
    OU48A's Avatar
    Posts
    12,668
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Norman

    Originally Posted by SoonerLibertarian View Post

    This^ is basically true.

    The federal stimulus has become like a drug addiction that cannot end well!

  31. #31
    okie52's Avatar
    Posts
    7,297
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Edmond, OK

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    Well, the cutting of federal government spending took us from a modest gain to a modest loss, so I'd say it's not only possibly, but it has markedly occurred.

    Cutting federal spending is a great thing. It will cause or promote recession in some ways.
    You were for cuts in defense spending...weren't you?

  32. #32
    OUMallen's Avatar
    Posts
    7,290
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    1500
    Location
    City of Nompton

    Originally Posted by okie52 View Post
    You were for cuts in defense spending...weren't you?
    I'm for across the board cuts with minimal cuts in defense. Defense is not a sacred cow to me that can't be cut a little.

    But the point is: we have some cuts in federal spending, which literally made the difference whether we grew or shrank on the last report. So you know some of the GOP peeps that constantly cry CUT SPENDING!!!!! are now crying "OBAMA SUCKS, LOOK, THE ECONOMY SHRANK!" when the economy technically shrank due to the cuts.

    You can't have it both ways. Sometimes, some of our spending cuts will have a negative impact on our economic growth.

  33. #33
    okie52's Avatar
    Posts
    7,297
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Edmond, OK

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    I'm for across the board cuts with minimal cuts in defense. Defense is not a sacred cow to me that can't be cut a little.

    But the point is: we have some cuts in federal spending, which literally made the difference whether we grew or shrank on the last report. So you know some of the GOP peeps that constantly cry CUT SPENDING!!!!! are now crying "OBAMA SUCKS, LOOK, THE ECONOMY SHRANK!" when the economy technically shrank due to the cuts.

    You can't have it both ways. Sometimes, some of our spending cuts will have a negative impact on our economic growth.
    I stole this from another board but federal spending was actually UP when compared to the 2011 4th quarter.

    An interesting theory. Except that while the BEA says defense spending declined in Q4, overall federal spending was up $31 billion compared with Q4 2011 and up $98 billion compared with Q3 2012, according to monthly spending reports out of the Treasury Department.
    I'm not an economist but I find it difficult to blame spending cuts when overall spending actually increased.

  34. #34
    OUMallen's Avatar
    Posts
    7,290
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    1500
    Location
    City of Nompton

    Originally Posted by okie52 View Post
    I stole this from another board but federal spending was actually UP when compared to the 2011 4th quarter.



    I'm not an economist but I find it difficult to blame spending cuts when overall spending actually increased.
    I'm not economist either, but NPR said this morning that federal spending cuts resulted in the shrinkage.

    It's not 1 dollar per 1 dollar. Federal spending on defense has a great than $1 impact on the economy, I believe. The math gets difficult and is beyond me, but I do know it's not a linear relationship.

    Overall spending could go up, but if the *wrong* spending goes down, it can cause an overall net negative effect.

  35. #35
    The problems is that spending isn't being cut. Projected spending is being cut but that doesn't mean anything.
    The following users like this post: soonercoop1


  36. #36
    okie52's Avatar
    Posts
    7,297
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Edmond, OK

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    I'm not economist either, but NPR said this morning that federal spending cuts resulted in the shrinkage.

    It's not 1 dollar per 1 dollar. Federal spending on defense has a great than $1 impact on the economy, I believe. The math gets difficult and is beyond me, but I do know it's not a linear relationship.

    Overall spending could go up, but if the *wrong* spending goes down, it can cause an overall net negative effect.
    The fact that the NPR or the Obama administration says it doesn't hold much water with me. Oil and gas production also rose under Obama which he is quick to take credit for but we know he had nothing to do with that.

    I would also think we should be seeing the "end of Iraq war" dividend kicking in as most of our troops have been moved stateside...that could even be part of the cuts (I don't know).

  37. #37

    U.S. Economy Shrinks by 0.1%

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    Well, the cutting of federal government spending took us from a modest gain to a modest loss, so I'd say it's not only possibly, but it has markedly occurred.

    Cutting federal spending is a great thing. It will cause or promote recession in some ways.
    As I clearly stated, it's dependent on what spending is cut.

  38. #38
    Originally Posted by OU48A View Post
    This^ is basically true.

    The federal stimulus has become like a drug addiction that cannot end well!
    Peter Schiff has been calling this type of stuff for a long time.


  39. #39
    OUMallen's Avatar
    Posts
    7,290
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    vCash
    1500
    Location
    City of Nompton

    Originally Posted by okie52 View Post
    The fact that the NPR or the Obama administration says it doesn't hold much water with me. Oil and gas production also rose under Obama which he is quick to take credit for but we know he had nothing to do with that.

    I would also think we should be seeing the "end of Iraq war" dividend kicking in as most of our troops have been moved stateside...that could even be part of the cuts (I don't know).

    I can't speak to your distrust of NPR. But I'm pretty sure the rest of my post is correct...?

  40. #40
    okie52's Avatar
    Posts
    7,297
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Edmond, OK

    Originally Posted by OUMallen View Post
    I can't speak to your distrust of NPR. But I'm pretty sure the rest of my post is correct...?
    It's not particularly a distrust of NPR or any other news organization...they could accurately report the news that production increased under Obama without telling the "rest of the story".

    Your post may be accurate but I'll be cynical about spending cuts causing the contraction when spending actually went up. But, again, I'm no economist.

  41. #41
    nolesooner's Avatar
    Posts
    6,653
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Panama City, Fl

    I'm in the Civil Service and there are talks of cutting out 1 work day a week for 22 weeks starting in April. That is $400 a paycheck our $800 a month for me! That's ridiculous! Yes, that is taking my discretionary spending WAAAAY down. That is not good.

  42. #42
    zevogolf's Avatar
    Posts
    5,117
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Florida

    Originally Posted by SoonerLibertarian View Post
    The problems is that spending isn't being cut. Projected spending is being cut but that doesn't mean anything.
    The PERCENTAGE of spending INCREASES may have been cut. This is government economics!

  43. #43
    OU48A's Avatar
    Posts
    12,668
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Norman


    The impact of Obama’s monetary expansion on crude oil prices

    http://soberlook.com/2013/01/whats-d...crude-oil.html

  44. #44
    nlight1's Avatar
    Posts
    2,681
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    vCash
    1000
    Location
    Oklahoma & nowhere else

    U.S. Economy Shrinks by 0.1%

    The following users like this post: OU48A


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 48
    Last Post: October 17th, 2012, 04:41 PM
  2. Economy slows further
    By pphilfran in forum ThunderDome
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: July 27th, 2012, 07:49 PM