More recessionary times ahead?
Are you preparing for the next bad economic wave?
You hear so-called reports of the “economy is on the road to recovery,” and how the stimulus packages and health care reform are necessary to kick-start the country.
Author James Srodes paints a bleak outlook for at least the next decade or more saying “This (next) recession is going to be a doozy. And the aftershocks will be felt long after President Hillary Clinton leaves the White House in 2024.”
You should have known it was coming
Srodes says what he’s sure is coming should be of no surprise to anyone, calling all the talking heads “chat-show economists” and “self-congratulatory” politicians. But adds that the upcoming downturn for the worse won’t necessarily be apocalyptic in nature, but rather a humbling reversal to the once-optimistic way it used to be for Americans. More belt-tightening and cautiousness than ever.
The article also tries to point out that these daily and weekly fluctuations in the stock market aren’t accurate indications of how our economy is doing, because it’s not the citizens who are trading commodities and stocks – but rather the bloated investment houses riding the waves of speculation.
He goes on to tell a sobering tale of Real Estate statistics, which are often under-reported – with “uncounted hundreds of thousands of vacant houses, condo and offices for which there is no rational prospect of a buyer during 2010 or perhaps ever.”
More is said about how unemployment numbers are also not telling the whole story, as the numbers don’t even count those who just threw in the towel. And those that are working (especially in retail), are getting hours cut, “which would be the envy of the Frenchman…” And points out that we shouldn’t ignore the many bubbles forming (and bursting) worldwide “New bubbles are forming all around us, in the commodity markets, in Hong Kong real estate, in the troubling data coming out of China and other Asian economies, all just waiting to buckle. Can you say Dubai? Greece?”
Ronald Reagan is quoted ““Nancy and I always believed that if you didn’t want the kids to overspend their allowances, you didn’t give them the money in the first place” and Srodes warns readers not to email him about “The myth of Bill Clinton’s surpluses; they didn’t happen. The last federal budget to have a genuine surplus of tax revenues over outlays was Lyndon Johnson’s $3 billion budget surplus for fiscal 1969.”
After talking about the misconceptions about energy sources, he points out that the days of estimating the true cost of human activities are over and – “Old solutions are increasingly disconnected from critical new challenges dressed in familiar terms—the need for new jobs, new products, market regulation, environmental responsibility, and truly global prosperity for all instead of competing regional advantages that disenfranchise entire races of people.”
He concludes: “Now ask yourself, how long will it take to reclaim the empty neighborhoods in Detroit, the empty condos in Las Vegas, or Phoenix, or, for that matter, in the McMansion-style suburbs that surround Washington, D.C.? What new jobs can be created to absorb the millions who have not only lost their jobs but who have stopped looking? What will those jobs make, and who will buy what is being offered?
Buddy, can you spare a dollar? Or maybe a Krugerrand?”
I found the article to be fantastic and truthful. Do you agree, or is it just hogwash?