The factual statistics of the economy is universal among truthful and trusting economist, who report the sad numbers which is serious enough to call it a depression. This economy is consumer driven in every aspect...the scam is to repeat over and over that happy days are here again when no such thing exist. Just to make it back to zero from minus 20 million, we need to create 20 million jobs...we have nothing that will create 20 million jobs nor will we ever have anything that can create 20 million jobs except 1...bring all the jobs back and that simply will never happen. It is not that the happy days economist are stupid, it is simply all that is left, is to constantly BS the consumer into spending because we are a consumer driven economy....and if we spend...the economist get to keep their job.
Consumers are spending more because they have too, as prices begin to rise with uncontrollable market speculation mostly to blame over record low interest rates and Ben Bernakes practice of QE resulting in out of control inflation starting at the pump and eventually leading to the shelf, unless change is made SOON to control that by increasing rates to at least 5.5% another recession is unavoidable within the next 18 months.
don't believe everything uou read.
Especially when you write it and misspell your words.
Couldn't they have just continued to demand more productivity from the employees they have, while at the same time reaping historic after tax profits as they reward the top executives like they have been every single quarter since Oct.. 2009 ? http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CP Before I retired in 2007 my employer had been demanding more from fewer workers for about 5 years. This seems to have become the norm for the last decade or so.And I'm kind of surprised they are changing course now.
As usual, full disclosure is not on the menu of the business and financial sector; or the people that report it.The truth behind the numbers is this:The writer states, "Rising labor costs could force businesses to raise prices. Still, some economists say higher prices wouldn't likely be sustained as long as nearly 13 million Americans remain unemployed and others aren't being paid enough to keep up with inflation."I say, EXCUSE ME!! Businesses are over-contributing to the jobless situation, then taking advantage of it to increase profits. Follow me closely here because I am watching this happen at my workplace: Through massive layoffs due to slowing sales, they pared down the labor force to LESS than a bare minimum. Then the company plays the shell game; shifting around worker positions and titles to reduce their wages; therefore increasing profits for the stockholders (How else could stockholders continue to make even larger returns and executives make larger bonuses during a recession?). Workers put up with the cuts in pay just to keep their jobs. Next the companies demand higher productivity from those same reduced wage workers (now one worker is doing the work of two or three); and again, the workers put up with it just to keep a job. Through all this, the price of most all goods went up, while low level workers' wages went down. The continuing "inflation" is totally stockholder driven. Their demand for that double-digit return on their investments (translation: greed) has put a stranglehold on the low to middle wage earner while they make more than ever before. So there's your 'DUH-HUH' to the statement from the economists in the second sentence.Then the article goes on to say:"Companies are likely to cover the higher labor costs by trimming their profits rather than raising the prices of their products," said Richard DeKaser, a senior economist at the Parthenon Group.I say: You know what? I REALLY feel sorry for them (NOT!). If they would have not been so greedy in the first place, we would not have had as deep a recession because less people would have been laid off, wages would not have gone down as far, therefore people could have better afforded to continue to purchase products and services, and the stockholders would have made more returns in the long run.