Alright. I’m one of them, then. The comment above says:
In other words, “strong employment growth” for American citizens, always was and remains a fabulation, and the only job growth in the US is for illegals, who will work for below minimum wage, which also explains why inflation hasn’t spiked in the past year as millions of illegals were hired.
Came here as a student, then H1B which was needed to get a job. However, to get the H1B my employer had to apply and inform the government of salary as it had to be at least the average going rate to be approved. That was to ensure H1B people didn’t get jobs because they were paid less.
That seems to be their starting point. Looking at some known job losses from some chains closing, and extrapolating these to the whole state. Like you said, probably some real job losses but the figure definitely looks more uncertain than they make it sound. Should be obvious pretty soon once these workers report to the CA unemployment agency.
Same exact path here. Foreign born, Ph.D student then H1B, then permanent resident, then naturalized American years ago. I was legally in the US the whole time but was foreign born the whole time as well.
IMO the chart is not saying what the authors think it does. It shows that we “import” foreign-born workers with the skill sets that local workers do not have. Like mentioned by harish, the H1B and permanent residency process is not simple or cheap. If employers could find the same American born workers for their job openings, they would. Attorney fees for my employment were over $15k total (which the company paid).
I do not know whether the end of the petrodollar agreement with Saudi Arabia is significant or not. This article goes to ridiculous lengths to downplay it.
Apparently many Economics Nobel prize winners believe that the Trump platform would increase inflation further if implemented: Actual letter easier to read than on Axios
Unsurprisingly, these economists were quickly labelled “worthless out-of-touch Nobel Prize winners” but I disagree and actually respect at least a few of these like Shiller, Sharpe, Sims, or Akerlof and Stiglitz.
So it’s a bit concerning to me that they forecast even higher inflation from a potential Trump second term. I wish they had expanded on what they see in the reports from Evercore, Allianz, Oxford Economics, and the Peterson Institute that justifies labeling Trump’s irresponsible budgets more dangerous than Biden’s current and forecast budget deficits. Seems to me that the current level of deficit spending is unsustainable as well - whether you call it investment or not - and likely to promote long-term inflation so I’d like to see more of the data and analysis behind the statement. Especially when the letter sounds a little too rozy towards the Bidenonomics platform we’ve seen in action for the last 4 years.
Vice versa, the Trump’s side argument " You don’t need to listen to respected economists, just listen to what we say" is pretty vacuous. And name calling of respected economists without any supporting evidence actually sounds like you have nothing data-driven to provide as counter point which effectively reinforces the point of these critics.
Haven’t there been data-driven reports from bipartisan sources that compare the two fiscal platforms other than those mentioned in the letter and which reports would be more favorable to Trump’s platform?
The world is sitting on a $91 trillion problem. ‘Hard choices’ are coming
owe an unprecedented $91 trillion, an amount almost equal to the size of the global economy and one that will ultimately exact a heavy toll on their populations.
Debt burdens have grown so large — in part because of the cost of the pandemic — that they now pose a growing threat to living standards even in rich economies, including the United States.
Yet, in a year of elections around the world, politicians are largely ignoring the problem, unwilling to level with voters about the tax increases and spending cuts needed to tackle the deluge of borrowing. In some cases, they’re even making profligate promises that could at the very least jack up inflation again and could even trigger a new financial crisis.
The International Monetary Fund last week reiterated its warning that “chronic fiscal deficits” in the US must be “urgently addressed.” Investors have long shared that disquiet about the long-term trajectory of the US government’s finances.
It appears that Biden’s apparatchiks refuse to give up on the myth of a “strong labor market” just yet even as they admit to anyone who reads between the lines just how ugly things are getting.
Moments ago the BLS reported that in June the US added 206K jobs, above the 190K expected.
Not bad, especially with Goldman expecting 140K. Of course, a quick glance reveals where the “beat” came from: both previous months were revised sharply lower:
last week’s news today, inflation recap for June - lower than expected with drop of about -2% in energy prices. Monthly for June was -0.1%, an actual decrease. Core CPI was still +0.1% however, as rent, food, and housing all rose somewhat.
U.S CPI (MOM) (JUN) ACTUAL: -0.1% VS 0.0% PREVIOUS; EST 0.1%
US CPI YOY ACTUAL 3.0% (FORECAST 3.1%, PREVIOUS 3.3%)
US CORE CPI MOM ACTUAL 0.1% (FORECAST 0.2%, PREVIOUS 0.2%)
market response was positive, expecting a higher chance of a Fed rate cut in Sept ahead of the election.
U.S. STOCK FUTURES TURN POSITIVE AFTER JUNE CPI DATA
U.S. SHORT-TERM INTEREST-RATE FUTURES RISE AFTER CPI DATA, AS TRADERS BOOST BETS ON FED RATE CUTS
SPOT GOLD EXTENDS GAINS AFTER U.S. CPI DATA, LAST UP 1%
RATE FUTURES PRICE IN 85% CHANCE OF A SEPT FED RATE CUT AFTER CPI DATA, UP FROM ABOUT 70% BEFORE
TRADERS SEE 25% CHANCE OF THIRD 25BP FED CUT IN 2024
Trillions in Hidden Debt Drove China’s Growth. Now It Threatens Its Future.
Local governments racked up as much as $11 trillion in off-the-books debt to build industrial districts, resorts, transit systems and housing projects, including many that failed
For years, Liuzhou and scores of other Chinese cities together amassed trillions of dollars in off-the-books debt for economic development projects. The opaque financing was the yeast that helped China rise to the envy of the world.
Today, overgrown construction sites, sparsely used highways and abandoned tourist attractions make much of that debt-fueled growth look illusory and suggests China’s future is far from assured.
Liuzhou, a city in the southern region of Guangxi, raised billions of dollars to build the infrastructure for a new industrial district, where a state-owned financing group acquired land and opened hotels and an amusement park. Other tracts of acquired land sit vacant, and many area streets look practically deserted. Birds flit through the rows of abandoned buildings at an unfinished apartment complex.
“The government is broke,” said one local resident who watched the project falter from her shop across the street.
The bond market is sure there will be a fed rate cut in September
European Central Bank holds interest rates, says domestic price pressures ‘still high’
The European Central Bank left interest rates unchanged on Thursday, after implementing a cut in June.
The decision — which keeps the key interest rate at 3.75% — was widely expected amid ongoing concern over inflationary pressures, particularly from the labor market.
Market pricing suggests firm expectations for two more 25 basis point cuts this year, in September and December, with a pause during the central bank’s October meeting.
Are those numbers legit or is that from The Bee? Asset prices went up significantly more after the pandemic. Inflation did also, briefly, so the graph on the right might correspond to the one on the left, I just don’t think the one on the left is correct. It also doesn’t correspond with my own numbers, which are +66% (red) and +77% (blue) nominal.
Stocks were strong under both and around a similar amount, slight edge to Trump with the pandemic Fed boost.
Stocks are only one part of household wealth, and their ownership is most concentrated among the wealthy. A better measure of financial health is net worth: all assets, including stocks, bonds, cash and property, minus debts. Total household net worth rose 19% through Biden’s first three years in office, according to Federal Reserve data—not much less than the 23% through Trump’s first three years.
Adjusted for inflation, net worth was up just 0.7% through Biden’s first three years, compared with 16% through Trump’s first three years.
