Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

I was wrong go figure
zander83 Posted: Wed Dec 17 11:56:52 2003 Post | Quote in Reply  
  So hif you'll be happy to know that i seem to have been wrong. Bush seems to have pulled off the impossible(as far as im concerned) and created an economic recovery. This economic recovery doesn't actually make sense(have you seen the current account deficit) and one imagines interest rates can't stay this low forever. Stock market seems to have picked up and corporate spending is up.

Retail figures for the month of november and things seem to be looking up. Sales at Neiman-Marcus, Saks Fifth avenue, and Tiffany's are up. If you're thinking about popping into Barneys for an $895 Marc Jacobs Venetia bag, forget about it. It's sold out. Stores that sell $9,000 plasma televisions, like Best Buy, or expensive tchotchkes, like the Sharper Image (electric shoe buffer, anyone?), are also doing well. Online shopping—typically the province of the connected, and hence the better-off—is rising.
However, sales at Wal-mart, JC Penny's and Target are down. Heres the funniest thing though. The states which feature more retail employee's or where the wal-mart economy(not insulting in my book) is more predominant (mid-west and south{you don't have to believe me but its true that}. The stocks at other discounters that cater to workers(i know, elitism, but i couldn't find another word for it)—like Dollar General and Kohl's—have slumped, too.
It's tempting to cast the struggles of discounters in a positive light. If you were flush with cash and wanted to buy clothes, maybe you'd shop at Target or J.C. Penney instead of Wal-Mart. Perhaps Wal-Mart's sales are disappointing because its core consumers are trading up this year. But anecdotal data suggests that's not happening. On Monday, Target said that sales at its stores for last week were running "below plan." And J.C. Penney's November same-store sales fell. On one side there's the Wal-Mart economy, serving (and affecting) the half of the American population that doesn't own stocks, that has been left out of the market revival and isn't benefiting from lower marginal tax rates. Leveraged to the hilt and pessimistic because of anemic job growth and the prospect of their own jobs being shipped offshore, the masses are buying what they need and not a whole lot more. And it's no small irony that Wal-Mart shoppers tend to reside disproportionately in the red states*—areas that supported President Bush in 2000 but have yet to reap significant gains from his policies.

Meanwhile, the holiday mood is very different among the other half—those who own assets and hence enjoy disproportionately the fruits of higher stock prices and lower dividends, those who work on Wall Street and shop at Tiffany's and for whom offshore is a destination for vacation, not their jobs. Those people are fat and happy and consuming and spending their way to further happiness. Again, it's no small irony that most Barneys and Saks shoppers tend to reside in the coastal red state terrain that Republicans now find hostile.





 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Dec 17 12:22:23 2003 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Predicting the economy is like predicting the weather. Actually the weather is more dependable anymore.
Economists are a dime a dozen, and they all have differing opinions. It is most definitely not an exact science.
Two important facts your essay did not take into account and they are both having a most profound effect on the holiday sales numbers.
Back to back storms bringing inclement weather to the northeast quarter of the country and internet shopping.


 
zander83 Posted: Wed Dec 17 13:19:05 2003 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I do mention online shopping...

Back-to-back storms were in the north-east the region that is spending more on expensive stuff...Weather usually has the opposite effect.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Dec 17 14:47:07 2003 Post | Quote in Reply  
  zander83 said:
>I do mention online shopping...
>
>Back-to-back storms were in the north-east the region that is spending more on expensive stuff...Weather usually has the opposite effect.


REALLY ?

Disappointing Results for Electronics Retailers

Wednesday, December 17, 2003

NEW YORK — Best Buy Co. (BBY), the top U.S. electronics retailer, on Wednesday said fourth-quarter profit would miss Wall Street estimates and rival Circuit City Stores Inc. (CC) reported a wider-than-expected quarterly loss, in the latest signs of a disappointing holiday shopping season.

Minneapolis-based Best Buy, whose shares rose 2 percent, reported a higher third-quarter profit, but said early winter storms in the Northeast cut into sales for the fourth quarter.

Shares of Circuit City, meanwhile, tumbled 6.14 percent on worries that it continued to lose market share even with aggressive price promotions and a costly push to revamp stores.

Best Buy Chief Financial Officer Darren Jackson said "primarily as a result of inclement weather in the Northeast, quarter-to-date revenue trends are modestly below our expectations."

Back-to-back snowstorms have plagued retailers over the last two weekends, dashing hopes for a pickup to the slow start of the all-important holiday selling season (search). Even discounter Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) on Monday said its December sales would reach only the lower end of its estimates.

Colin McGranahan, an analyst at Bernstein, said there was still "an upside possibility for an even stronger finish to the holiday season" as shoppers begin spending the highly popular gift cards through January and February. Such cards are not counted as revenue until they are redeemed for merchandise.

For the third-quarter ended Nov. 29, Best Buy said it earned $122 million, or 37 cents a share, up from $86 million, or 27 cents a share, a year ago. The analysts' average estimate was 37 cents, according to Reuters Research, a unit of Reuters Group Plc.




 
Malik Posted: Wed Dec 17 17:09:25 2003 Post | Quote in Reply  
  First of all, the economy is not up. Sure, the Dow hit 10k, but the stock market isn't a pure litmus test of the American economy. Just because the stock market goes up doesn't mean that the majority of America is doing swell and dandy. The only people who are going to benefit from this rise in the stock market (which, BTW, isn't holding) are the aggressive stocktraders who capatialize on every opportunity. Average Joe who has a mutual fund or stock options in his company isn't going to see a big turnout.


And, I hate to break it to ya, but Bush has about as much control over the world economy as I do over women. (And that's not very much, guys...) So, even if the economy was going up, it's not his praise.

Giving Bush credit for a good economy is like saying that he is good at battlefield tactics because Saddam was captured. Sure he has the power to encourage and suggest, but the balance of power exists in the government so that the president doesn't have the direct power to snap his fingers and enact a bill that will fix the economy in any way he sees fit.
However, it's not entirely his fault if the economy goes into a slump. Sure, he can help or hurt some, but give and take credit where credit is due: Greenspan. That man has more power over the economy than anyone else in the world. He can all but snap his fingers and raise the intrest rates, causing a slump in the economy, or lower them to give it a small boost.




 
addi Posted: Thu Dec 18 07:34:40 2003 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Malik said:

>And, I hate to break it to ya, but Bush has about as much control over the world economy as I do over women. (And that's not very much, guys...) So, even if the economy was going up, it's not his praise.
>
>Giving Bush credit for a good economy is like saying that he is good at battlefield tactics because Saddam was captured.


So wise!
As Sailovzi would say, "Word!"



 
Iamjustdancing. Posted: Fri Dec 19 11:55:21 2003 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Well, in the same thought... you can't blame Bush for a bad economy as much as you can't blame him for a good one. The 'downturn' in the economy started under slick willy. Bush has done all he can (granted it's not much...meddling with the economy as a government is stupid to say the least) to try to help spur the economy by puting all your hard earned cash back into YOUR pocket. Imho i think i can spend my money better than any government can.




 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]