7 ms·

I haven't seen US economy this versatile and powerful in a long time, maybe since the 80s. This economy is diversified - manufacturing jobs used to be 32% in t

I haven't seen US economy this versatile and powerful in a long time, maybe since the 80s. This economy is diversified - manufacturing jobs used to be 32% in the 60s, now it is around 9% currently, but it is growing fast this year. We now have new jobs in every sectors growing, from finance (NY), college (Boston), healthcare (east coast), government (Washington DC), entertainment (Los Angeles), oil and gas (Texas), import/export (Cali/Florida), tourism (Florida), agriculture (flyover), and of course, tech (Silicon Valley, Seattle). And each industry is evenly distributed and growing. Thus the low unemployment rate and wage increases (higher in industries with higher demands) US has gone through lots of challenges (globalization, gas/oil crisis, 9/11, cold war) in the last 50 years, and has come out on top every time. 4% growth is huge for the largest economy in the world, and the economy is nearly double the size of the closest competitor country. Bay Area alone is nearly a trillion dollar economy, and has double the growth rate of any other county in US. Coupled with the flooding of capital back to US via the reduced expatriation tax rate, US is firing on all cylinders.

liftbigweights 8y ago
There is a lot you can criticize Trump about but what he has done with the economy deserves a lot of credit. Just 3 or 4 years ago, economists were saying that we would never see 4% growth ever again and that 1 to 2% growth was the new normal.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > Just 3 or 4 years ago, economists were saying that we would never see 4% growth ever again and that 1 to 2% growth was the new normal. No, they generally weren't, and any who were saying that we'd never see a quarter of 4% annualized growth rate four years ago (i.e., between the Q2 and Q3 releases of 2014) was especially silly. US GDP growth by quarter for 2014: Q1: -1% Q2: +5.1% Q3: +4.9% Q4: +1.9%
lovich 8y ago
The economy is growing but it doesn't appear to actually be flowing back into most citizens pockets. The unemployment rate is very low but wages aren't rising. Anecdotally, I am seeing more help wanted signs on retail and restaurants near me, but my friends who work those jobs are moving _farther_ away from work due to increasing rent without increasing pay. That doesn't seem sustainable
- compcoffee 8y ago
  >The unemployment rate is very low but wages aren't rising. ...yet. Wages are a driver of inflation, which will rear its head as we reach late cycle. Then we blow up and start over. This is the way of the world.
- joefranklinsrs 8y ago
  Could you link something that supports your opinion? As for me: US consumer confidence surges in August to 18 year high. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/29/us-economy-second-quarter-revised-report-figures https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/29/us-economy-.... Consumers wouldn't be spending if they didn't have extra cash in their pocket, and they expect the economy to stagnate/decline
  - simplemts 8y ago
    "Consumers wouldn't be spending if they didn't have extra cash in their pocket, and they expect the economy to stagnate/decline" Debt, leverage, credit cards, loans, home equity lines, etc. Perhaps 2007 is a great teacher about overleveraged consumers "spending money in their pockets". It wasn't real, sustainable, and ended terribly.
  - craftyguy 8y ago
    > Consumers wouldn't be spending if they didn't have extra cash in their pocket The entire credit industry would beg to differ.
  - tootie 8y ago
    Wage data is well-tracked and is shown to be growing more slowly than inflation. It's possible the high growth in nominal wages are engendering some good feelings, but actual purchasing power is dropping. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/2018/07/12/inflation-hits-year-high-wiping-out-wage-gains-average-american/?noredirect=on https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/2018/07/12/i...
    - joefranklinsrs 8y ago
melling 8y ago
I’ve been trying to learn a little about economics. Do you have any favorite economists, etc that you follow? I’m trying to learn more about the interaction of QE, rising fed rates, growing deficits, etc. Basically, I’d like to move beyond the headlines and the spin. [Update] Here are some people I try to follow: Jan Hatzius - Goldman Economist Robert Schiller Stephen Roach - Yale Economist https://www.project-syndicate.org/columnist/stephen-s--roach https://www.project-syndicate.org/columnist/stephen-s--roach Jeremy Grantham - GMO Ray Dalio - Bridgewater Larry Summers
- compcoffee 8y ago
  >Basically, I’d like to move beyond the headlines and the spin. Create a Twitter account and get on FinTwit (finance Twitter). Find the people doing real research (you have a couple in your list, Dalio, Grantham, I follow some of the guys from Ritholtz Wealth Management who are active on the platform) and follow their retweets or follows. More information than you can handle.
- mistermann 8y ago
  One I just found recently (via it being by far the leader in a recent "other blog" survey on slatestarcodex) is: https://marginalrevolution.com/about https://marginalrevolution.com/about "Marginal Revolution is the blog of Tyler Cowen and Alex Tabarrok, both of whom teach at George Mason University. MR began in August of 2003 and there have been new posts daily since that time. In numerous reviews and ratings over the years Marginal Revolution has consistently been ranked as the best or one of the best economic blogs on the web, but it is more (and less) than that, also representing the quirks of its authors." As far as I can tell so far, it seems to be a relatively unbiased, non-ideological commentary on economic news. One interesting article (not from the site itself, but from an "assorted links" post) is this one on NAFTA negotiations: https://moneymaven.io/baldingsworld/china/chinese-economics-of-the-nafta-deal-AsvcNPS2m0eapx-r0N9NeQ/ https://moneymaven.io/baldingsworld/china/chinese-economics-... Maybe I'm wrong, but as far as I can tell, that sort of perspective is highly unusual in mainstream public economic news. I've certainly never seen many articles on trade policy that go much beyond discussing aggregate GDP. The SSC survey: https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9aak39/favorite_blog_other_than_ssc_survey_2018_results/ https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9aak39/favo...
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I haven't seen US economy this versatile and powerful in a long time, maybe since the 80s. The big 90s expansion was much better than now. > 4% growth is huge for the largest economy in the world Not really; one quarter at a 4.2% annualized rate is nothing to write home about; there was a better single quarter in 2011 and two consecutively in 2014, and neither were particularly gangbusters aside from those blips. > Bay Area alone is nearly a trillion dollar economy, and has double the growth rate of any other county in US. “Bay Area” isn't a county, and the Bay Area growth rate over the last year is about double the overall national growth rate, not double the best non-Bay county (it's about the same growth rate as Washington State—not the top county in the state, but the state overall.)
jorblumesea 8y ago
While the US economy is doing great, it feels like the US workers are doing worse than ever. Spiraling healthcare costs, unaffordable housing, student debt and a lack of real wage growth are all pinching the middle class out of existence. Unemployment is low, but many of the job gains are in low skill temp positions and the gig economy. As is usual for the past 20 years, capital is doing great while labor suffers.
NTDF9 8y ago
> Coupled with the flooding of capital back to US via the reduced expatriation tax rate, US is firing on all cylinders. What happens when all the money is repatriated and no more dollars left for other countries to import from US?
- MR4D 8y ago
  We win. Seriously though, you’re asking a fantastic question. And, surprisingly, my tongue in cheek response above is sort of correct. The world was actually in a similar position to the one you ask about right after WWII ended. The world was still on fire and most countries had no real currency to spend. So, we loaned them the money to buy our goods (not much of a services economy back then). Of course, that’s what we know today as the Marshall plan. In it, we gave billions of dollars of aid to other countries to help them rebuild their infrastructure and economies. But if that ever happened in peacetime (I.e. not right after a war), then that would be very unusual. Maybe after a worldwide depression, but that is usually followed by war anyway. Great question, and hopefully we never really find out. It probably would be a very rough ride for lots of people on this planet. [0] - http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/marshall-plan http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/marshall-plan
  - nopinsight 8y ago
    > my tongue in cheek response above is sort of correct. The world is in a very different state now. Most of the manufacturing bases are outside the US. If the US somehow withheld the dollar, most of the world would just switch to alternative currencies and continue to trade with one another. That of course would most likely never happen in our lifetimes, since the dollar is a key pillar in the American economy and global power projection.
    - h4b4n3r0 8y ago
      Most of the world (and especially China and Mexico) cannot withdraw from the largest market for their goods without their economies totally collapsing. That’s why Trump is going to win his trade wars. Money talks, bullshit walks.

liftbigweights 8y ago

There is a lot you can criticize Trump about but what he has done with the economy deserves a lot of credit. Just 3 or 4 years ago, economists were saying that we would never see 4% growth ever again and that 1 to 2% growth was the new normal.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> Just 3 or 4 years ago, economists were saying that we would never see 4% growth ever again and that 1 to 2% growth was the new normal. No, they generally weren't, and any who were saying that we'd never see a quarter of 4% annualized growth rate four years ago (i.e., between the Q2 and Q3 releases of 2014) was especially silly. US GDP growth by quarter for 2014: Q1: -1% Q2: +5.1% Q3: +4.9% Q4: +1.9%

lovich 8y ago

The economy is growing but it doesn't appear to actually be flowing back into most citizens pockets. The unemployment rate is very low but wages aren't rising. Anecdotally, I am seeing more help wanted signs on retail and restaurants near me, but my friends who work those jobs are moving _farther_ away from work due to increasing rent without increasing pay. That doesn't seem sustainable

compcoffee 8y ago
>The unemployment rate is very low but wages aren't rising. ...yet. Wages are a driver of inflation, which will rear its head as we reach late cycle. Then we blow up and start over. This is the way of the world.
joefranklinsrs 8y ago
Could you link something that supports your opinion? As for me: US consumer confidence surges in August to 18 year high. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/29/us-economy-second-quarter-revised-report-figures https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/29/us-economy-.... Consumers wouldn't be spending if they didn't have extra cash in their pocket, and they expect the economy to stagnate/decline
- simplemts 8y ago
  "Consumers wouldn't be spending if they didn't have extra cash in their pocket, and they expect the economy to stagnate/decline" Debt, leverage, credit cards, loans, home equity lines, etc. Perhaps 2007 is a great teacher about overleveraged consumers "spending money in their pockets". It wasn't real, sustainable, and ended terribly.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  > Consumers wouldn't be spending if they didn't have extra cash in their pocket The entire credit industry would beg to differ.
- tootie 8y ago
  Wage data is well-tracked and is shown to be growing more slowly than inflation. It's possible the high growth in nominal wages are engendering some good feelings, but actual purchasing power is dropping. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/2018/07/12/inflation-hits-year-high-wiping-out-wage-gains-average-american/?noredirect=on https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/2018/07/12/i...
  - joefranklinsrs 8y ago

melling 8y ago

I’ve been trying to learn a little about economics. Do you have any favorite economists, etc that you follow? I’m trying to learn more about the interaction of QE, rising fed rates, growing deficits, etc. Basically, I’d like to move beyond the headlines and the spin. [Update] Here are some people I try to follow: Jan Hatzius - Goldman Economist Robert Schiller Stephen Roach - Yale Economist https://www.project-syndicate.org/columnist/stephen-s--roach https://www.project-syndicate.org/columnist/stephen-s--roach Jeremy Grantham - GMO Ray Dalio - Bridgewater Larry Summers

compcoffee 8y ago
>Basically, I’d like to move beyond the headlines and the spin. Create a Twitter account and get on FinTwit (finance Twitter). Find the people doing real research (you have a couple in your list, Dalio, Grantham, I follow some of the guys from Ritholtz Wealth Management who are active on the platform) and follow their retweets or follows. More information than you can handle.
mistermann 8y ago
One I just found recently (via it being by far the leader in a recent "other blog" survey on slatestarcodex) is: https://marginalrevolution.com/about https://marginalrevolution.com/about "Marginal Revolution is the blog of Tyler Cowen and Alex Tabarrok, both of whom teach at George Mason University. MR began in August of 2003 and there have been new posts daily since that time. In numerous reviews and ratings over the years Marginal Revolution has consistently been ranked as the best or one of the best economic blogs on the web, but it is more (and less) than that, also representing the quirks of its authors." As far as I can tell so far, it seems to be a relatively unbiased, non-ideological commentary on economic news. One interesting article (not from the site itself, but from an "assorted links" post) is this one on NAFTA negotiations: https://moneymaven.io/baldingsworld/china/chinese-economics-of-the-nafta-deal-AsvcNPS2m0eapx-r0N9NeQ/ https://moneymaven.io/baldingsworld/china/chinese-economics-... Maybe I'm wrong, but as far as I can tell, that sort of perspective is highly unusual in mainstream public economic news. I've certainly never seen many articles on trade policy that go much beyond discussing aggregate GDP. The SSC survey: https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9aak39/favorite_blog_other_than_ssc_survey_2018_results/ https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9aak39/favo...

dragonwriter 8y ago

> I haven't seen US economy this versatile and powerful in a long time, maybe since the 80s. The big 90s expansion was much better than now. > 4% growth is huge for the largest economy in the world Not really; one quarter at a 4.2% annualized rate is nothing to write home about; there was a better single quarter in 2011 and two consecutively in 2014, and neither were particularly gangbusters aside from those blips. > Bay Area alone is nearly a trillion dollar economy, and has double the growth rate of any other county in US. “Bay Area” isn't a county, and the Bay Area growth rate over the last year is about double the overall national growth rate, not double the best non-Bay county (it's about the same growth rate as Washington State—not the top county in the state, but the state overall.)

jorblumesea 8y ago

While the US economy is doing great, it feels like the US workers are doing worse than ever. Spiraling healthcare costs, unaffordable housing, student debt and a lack of real wage growth are all pinching the middle class out of existence. Unemployment is low, but many of the job gains are in low skill temp positions and the gig economy. As is usual for the past 20 years, capital is doing great while labor suffers.

NTDF9 8y ago

> Coupled with the flooding of capital back to US via the reduced expatriation tax rate, US is firing on all cylinders. What happens when all the money is repatriated and no more dollars left for other countries to import from US?

MR4D 8y ago
We win. Seriously though, you’re asking a fantastic question. And, surprisingly, my tongue in cheek response above is sort of correct. The world was actually in a similar position to the one you ask about right after WWII ended. The world was still on fire and most countries had no real currency to spend. So, we loaned them the money to buy our goods (not much of a services economy back then). Of course, that’s what we know today as the Marshall plan. In it, we gave billions of dollars of aid to other countries to help them rebuild their infrastructure and economies. But if that ever happened in peacetime (I.e. not right after a war), then that would be very unusual. Maybe after a worldwide depression, but that is usually followed by war anyway. Great question, and hopefully we never really find out. It probably would be a very rough ride for lots of people on this planet. [0] - http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/marshall-plan http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/marshall-plan
- nopinsight 8y ago
  > my tongue in cheek response above is sort of correct. The world is in a very different state now. Most of the manufacturing bases are outside the US. If the US somehow withheld the dollar, most of the world would just switch to alternative currencies and continue to trade with one another. That of course would most likely never happen in our lifetimes, since the dollar is a key pillar in the American economy and global power projection.
  - h4b4n3r0 8y ago
    Most of the world (and especially China and Mexico) cannot withdraw from the largest market for their goods without their economies totally collapsing. That’s why Trump is going to win his trade wars. Money talks, bullshit walks.