Pat Buchanan Is An Economic Dullard

[DemocratSinceBirth]

He's rattling on about the 7.2% quarterly GDP growth....

Fine enough....

Then he's touting the fact that durable goods are a major part of the increase and that bodes well for future economic growth...

If that is the case this robust growth will be short lived....


Durable goods are called durable because they last a long time... If consumers blow their wad on washing machines, big screen televisions, and cars they won't be buying anymore of these items anytime soon...

[HFishbine]

1. Flip Side

What I heard though is that inventories were drawn down substantially. That would indicate the need for greater production even if demand does not continue at the same pace as last quarter.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. If inventories Are Being Dramatically Drawn Down

Companies will have to hire more people to replace the inventory with new inventory or get their current workers to be more productive....

But that's not what Pat Buchanan said....

[camero]

2. They must be whipping thier credit cards out

Which is just what the economy needs. More consumer debt (I'm being sarcastic). I really don"t see alot of money being handed out when there are no jobs.

[Clete]

3. Who was the idiot who said people were leaving California

because of the liberals?

[MrJones]

5. Isabel?

I'm wondering how much of this is a one-time spike because of damage from hurricane Isabel.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. One Quarter Of 7.2% GDP Growth Is Not A Trend....

the future will tell if this recovery sticks....

[Kahuna]

7. I'm guilty. I spent like a drunken sailor during Q3....

Now I'm broke. Q4 won't get any help from me. :eyes:

[LeahMira]

8. I'm surprised...

... that you put "economic" in your subject line. You didn't need to! ;-)

[mlawson]

9. Consumer confidence is the key.

IF consumers now feel confident to spend on large ticket items, then it *could* indicate higher spending levels on many other products. IF inventories are thus drawn down, AND if producers expect the spending increase to continue for a significant period, THEN production would increase, and after current workers have been put to longer work weeks, earnring overtime, etc. Finally, if producers think that they need NEW employees, they might hire more people.

But hiring new employees is far more costly than increasing the hours or existing workers, because the cost of benefits packages comes into play. I doubt the economy is to that point, yet. Employment is what we call a 'lag variable'.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Right

Hiring part timers is less costly....


You don't have to pay benefits....