That's funny. When it went up after announcing a 1.4% decline in GDP, you told me I was wrong for stating such a thing (just opposite, because the thought there is that a decline in GDP would lead to less rate hikes). Then it was blah blah blah, great report, Amazon Apple etc.
You are just a spin machine that bends everything to stupid narrative. Consistency is NOT one of your strong points.
Try getting out of your bubble and visiting the real world. You'll see a great example of those who want to work and enjoy it and those who have to work but hate it, along with everything in between.
The best example of those you leftist don't want to include in the numbers can be found in the grocery stores and restaurants where they get free food for not working.
Thinking is not one of your strong points.
The Fed has a dual mandate - price stability and maximize employment.
The stock market has been on an epic run because of loose monetary conditions - low interest rates and quantitative easing.
The signal in November of bad inflation numbers and the Fed pivot caused a peak in hyper growth stocks (speculative tech trading at high valuations). The market didn’t peak until a few months later as the money that came out of hyper growth went into more conservative growth-at-reasonable-price companies (like mega cap tech).
There has been a rolling correction going on in the market since November and the only thing holding the indexes up at -10% to -15%, while many things were down > -50% is the mega cap tech stocks that comprise a significant weighting in the index and represent strong, safer cash flows. They are generally considered safer and more defensive.
But that makes the whole market more vulnerable to single stock risks. Those trades are crowded and if they unwind it has big impact on the index and that has other follow on impacts.
This is not unique to this cycle. It almost works this way, as eventually even the safer investments get hit at the end before you get the capitulation required to lead to a new sustained rally.
IMO, the market is going to continue to go down until the market sniffs out a new Fed pivot or you get a really painful capitulation, and maybe both. Good macro economic news (employment or positive economic growth) suggests that the timing of a pivot is further away, thus we still have further down to go.
Of course really bad growth numbers (negative growth coinciding with consumer or business weakening) would also be bad if it coincides with still accelerating inflation. Hopefully we won’t see that, but could be possible if there are major setbacks in solving the chip shortage or the energy supply-demand imbalance gets much worse.
My best guess is that we hit the 40 month exponential moving average before we find a bottom. That is another 700 Nasdaq points or so from here. Apple is a strong general though with their 90 billion in stock buybacks that they can deploy to defend their stock price.
The particular GDP print that you are focused on (or at least the headline number that you are solely focused on for political, rather than investing reasons) wasn’t the type of bad number that would discourage the Fed. That number had significant noise from imports and base effects. In fact, some of that is actually good news because it goes to the narrative that supply chains are sorting themselves out (thus the big increase in imports relative to prior quarter), thus easing inflation pressures, which directionally suggested that inflation may have peaked and there would be a sooner Fed pivot.
Follow?
Follow you? Never. I like people with brains.
It was a bad number. You can spin -1.4% any way you want, but it's still a -1.4% (CONTRACTION) in domestic production. That was what fueled the market to rally when it was announced. Just like yesterday.
I remember you were the brilliant one that blamed Trump for a virus in the US. You have no credibility to lose.
It wasn’t a bad number. Base effects of imports that weren’t coming in the previous quarter that are now coming in, reduced government spending from a base effect of huge pandemic era spending, and draw down of inventories to meet consumer demand.
The components that we would look to for economic weakness - consumer spending and business investment were UP.
Doesn't change the fact that the number caused the market to go up, and that was because investors figured the fed would have less room to raise rates. Your viewpoint is entirely driven by politics, which isn't surprising because that's what you accused me of doing. And whether it's in the feds stated goals or not, they do try to protect the capital markets.
That's why we got an increase that was smaller than what it should have been.
Get ready for more supply chain disruptions with the shutdowns in China, BTW. It was stupid to ever shut down our economy, and in a global environment we will suffer much the same from the shutdown in any supplier's economy. Much like we are suffering from Biden's war on energy production coupled with Russia's aggression in Ukraine.
Best case is that we get some of the documents that were not destroyed in Ukraine to identify the "public servants" that were selling us out and fleecing the Ukrainian government for American taxpayer dollars.
Usually the Fed tries to protect the capital markets. But to control inflation, they have to hurt it. It is the only tool they have because they can’t address the supply chain issues.
You are the one that is mixing politics in this. Not me.
The Fed wasn’t going to respond to a negative GDP headline number. That is irrelevant. The components are what matter and what that says about job markets and inflation - their dual mandates. Their is evidence that inflation may have peaked and that is positive, but to get it back to target is going to require things outside the Fed’s control to go right or for them to drive the economy into recession by increasing the cost of capital and destroying the wealth effect that supports demand.
Gasp!
Anyone needing any more proof that mental health issues run rampant in Sleepy's family....
Joe Biden's Sister Backs Meghan Markle for White House Run (breitbart.com)