This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Steve Liesman: Round Two
Steve Liesman: second round (from Sunday, 11:19 am). Mr. Santelli - your turn.
With a charactersitic bout of nerve over wisdom, let me offer just one more reply:
What exactly are you arguing about here? Whether I'm a jerk or a tool? Is that even worthy of a single reply? Ok, don't answer that.
What would seem to be worth everyone's time is the focus on the issue raised by the essential disagrement between Rick and myself: are the jobs numbers improving or not and what is the right investment play relative to the direction of jobs and the economy?
The question is not are the jobs numbers bad, awful and otherwise horrible now. That is irrefutable. But the existence of 15 million unemployed Americans and millions more discouraged workers don't tell us anything about whether the numbers are worsening or improving. And it doesn't tell us whether we should buy bonds or stocks or gold or cans of tuna fish (is there an ETF for that yet?) to prepare for the end of the world as we know it.
I offer four piece of evidence that the jobs market is improving and believe it will continue to do so:
1. The 4-week avg. of jobless claims (NEW inputs into the system) have stepped down dramatically from 674k at its worst in March to 474k in the last week.
2. Payroll job losses have been reduced to a 3-month average loss of 87k from 691k in losses in the first quarter. Inside the November report we learned of strong upward revisions to Sept. and Oct., a long workweek and the strongest monthly gain in temp. employment in five years.
3. The employment gauge of the ism mfr. index has risen to a rate that suggests job and economic growth. (though it came down slightly in the last month, it remains above 50)
4. Ridiculously high productivity rates that must come down, meaning more jobs and/or longer hours.
I am aware of other indicators that point the other way. The NFIB survey (which I report every month), the ISM services indicator employment component and the stubbornly high duration of unemployment, along with the EUC gains. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate may not be done rising.
But why spend time on personal attacks when history is unfolding all around us, when there are monumental debates to be had about the economy, the right policy, the data and, most important, how to make a buck at all this?
I wish you all happy and prosperous holidays and make a request to keep your eye on the prize, which for me is an expansive bonefish flat, on a warm, windless day and lots of time to enjoy it.
----Steve Liesman
»
- 10752 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Desperate little troll. Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time.
At least Mr Liesman took the time to respond which more than some of his other CNBC colleges have managed.
That says something and should not be dished. People should not get confused with on air persona's.......
Who Knows what remits Steve has to work with in ?? Maybe Comcast might allow a different remit.
I remain highly skeptical that Comcast will be any different then GE vis a vie blowing the public.
One only had to watch Greenspan (MTP this morning) discuss the $5T of wealth created by the stock market over the last 9 months and how that is the real driver of economic improvement as evidenced by the retail sales number, to conclude that the collusion between wall street and government continues unabated.
One can only hope ... :-)
Its a shame that the US output can not follow the example set by CNBC Europe & CNBC Asia.
Agree. Are these stations really NBC property or some partnrrship with local stations?
@ lizzy Meet the Press was pure trash today. I don't know why I bothered to watch it. Anyway lizzy, or anyone, if you have a pic of Greenspan and Cramer sitting next to each other from MTP this morning could you post a link ??? Thanks. I'm thinking about making a few t shirts but haven't thought of a good headline. any suggestions?
Sorry to use you like this Careless, but when you see how important it is for people to read this, early in the thread, I hope you will forgive me. I have reposted this twice already.
-------------------------------------------------------
LIESMAN is really LAZYMAN
He gets to know just a few well placed people and then feeds the public what they tell him.
Bluesquid posted this link below. READ THE LINK.
Nine months after Liesman declared that Russia's debt market was due for a rebound, and just over seven months after proclaiming the end of the Russian recession, the Journal--like most US newspapers--found itself having to explain the near-total collapse of Russia's economy and capital markets.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/19991004/taibbli
Good catch there MsCreant, sounds like steve-o hasn't changed much since then.
Bluesquid gets credit for the find.
Not to argue that one should be an enabler, but the "psychology of confidence" only works if someone creates it and the sheeple fall for it.
This whole thing is nothing more than a "Big Push" theory on a monetary scale. The problem is, many of the sheep are not falling for it.
In other words, what the frak else are they supposed to say to the public?
ARGHHHH We're all Fucked!!!!Run for your lives!!
(Your fellow Sara Connor Syndrome sufferer, Cindy)
Anyway, I still say someone needs to start tje implosion dead pool here on ZH.
Sheesh isnt it time they put the little gnome in a nursing home, he went senile ages ago.
comcast won't be any different. it is just a big circle of the same people passsing these big media companies around to each other. until a independent thinking entity gets a hold of one, well, it will always be the same.
i mean look what they did to ted turner. turner danced to their tunes, and thought like they think but nevertheless they did not trust him. so they screwed him out of a bunch of money and got rid of his ass from the very company he built...CNN
because..
because even though he was similar to them in many respects, they felt that he could not be trusted and was a loose cannon on deck.
so they made their move and took over his very own company.
then CNN became the communist news network .......
and the rest is
hiss tow ree....
Dennis Kneale responded to some ZH stuff in a last ditch attempt to garner interest/audience. I can only hope that this is a last throes type of thing for Steve as well. He has done a tremendous disservice to this country and perpetuates all that is wrong with financial journalism. My best guess is that this some sort of pathetic attempt by some viral marketing types at CNBC to salvage any credibility/audience they may have left.
The game plan is to extend and pretend, fake it til you make it, perpetrate a confidence scheme on the investing public and run head-long into another bubble (Dear God, just one more bubble please!). If all goes well, the Wall Street psychopaths will be exonerated and free to do another melt down further decimating the fabric of our society. Steve is firmly entrenched in the game plan to destroy you. Wish him well at your own peril.
Exactly!! American's are tired of all the LIES day after day. Steve is free to make his own choices here--continue to work for the financial cabal that is destroying America, or get the balls to tell the truth. His choice to keep working at CNBC, says everything about his character.
+1000
Did Kneale ever put his name to a post on ZH ??
Things have come on since the Zero Intelligence quips..... :-)
MCC is due a post ;-)
Well put, JohnKing, well put!
And to Lies' reply I would say: if one observes a lizard on the ground, it is justifiable to point at the creature and say, "Look at that lizard."
Geez, sorry to be soooo profound.
Totally agree with etrader! Unfortunately, the quality of posts (and hence the whole site) is continually deteriorating.
If only people could concentrate on facts and stop personally attacking everyone with a different opinion.
--
How do you shoot the devil in the back? What if you miss?
Self-fulfilling prophecy?
The whole last name throws me which is why I never hire experts in my cases with last names such as this or "crooks" and so forth.
Liesman should be careful. Doesn't he know that (like Dennis Kneale) allowing yourself to be pilloried on ZH is like the career kiss of death?
Mr. Liesman, Dead man talking?
How about this Mr. Liesman:
Stand up straight and report the facts. No spin.
If there is a company policy to always report with a positive spin, then grow a spine and quit. You most likely have enough intelectual capacity to get your own show elsewhere.
Do some soul searching and go after the policy makers, don't try to screw the liitle guy who will eventually loose most of his money.
I sent Liesman a couple of pissed off emails at CNBC. He responded promptly, courteously, even had a sense of humor, and altho he didn't change my mind about what's going on with the economic reports or with CNBC, he was amicable and we had a decent dialogue. He replied at least, which most of them won't do (except Faber and Santelli). The rest are just stooges so who gives a shit what they say.
"I offer four piece of evidence that the jobs market is improving"
... but then his first two pieces of evidence only show that it's getting worse at a slower rate. Which obviously has to happen at some point and implies absolutely nothing about things improving.
Exactly right. It isn't surprising to see an apparent decline or deceleration in job losses. If you start with, say, 1 million jobs and lose 10% the first month, you've got 900,000 left. It only takes 90,000 the second month to accomplish the same thing, then 81,000, etc. These aren't hopeful signs. They're just signs that it takes a while to lay off everybody who's going to be laid off, but we're getting there.
said differently, you can only fire each person ONCE! i don't know why people are pleasantly surprised that job losses slow - they HAVE to slow!
Especially since most of this hiring has been temporary. When they are let go at the end of the holidays they will not show up in most new unemployment stats as they haven't qualified for new benifits.
Which I'm sure some govt Troll will try to spin as a green shoot!
Gentleman, and -ladies,
It just dawned on me.....we're living in a world of fractional-reserve employment...so it would take only 1 person to accomplish the production we're using 12-50 persons for now....
Logical conclusion is that the current unemployment vector is only the natural way to go.
Worth an article by the Austrians ?
Bas.
Add that x-mas sales, good or bad, many shops will close in the face of uncertain future thus creating yet higher unemployment.
I am in the housing industry. Its gone. This industry and the car industry have carried us until now.
The effect of one house being built is far reaching, from architect at the start, to the logger who cut the trees for the studs, the log trucks and those who maintain them and the diesel supplier.
Plumbers, pipes, carpet layers and carpets, door and window manufacturers,carpenters,sawblades etc.
Its an extremely far reaching industry. So as i see it we are plucked unless we get new industry (solar panel on each house?) and a new way of living with less chasing of desires while fulfilling fewer needs.
On utube my tag is 1mealperday. Having lived in penthouses in New york and under bridges across the country, having had much money and other times starved I know what is enuff!
Real wealth to me is the moment in which i live. NOW. Perhaps in a world of scarcity and insecurity we will learn to appreciate what we have instead of the constant MORE
A few months prior to butcher day, I feed a steer a fine diet of pure grass and grain to fatten him up. However, a few days before he meets his maker I stop all feed. You see he's grown tremendously fat, but a few starving days strips a lot of the excess off, and makes his skin loose and supple, easier to strip.
In the fulness of time, we will realize we were simply fattened for the slaughter.
We're being starved out for meat, hide, and rendering.
As a confirmed carnivore I've never felt any remorse and always smirk at the "I don't eat anything with a face" crowd. However walking down the shoot to get an airhammer to the skull certainly describes whats being done to us by our fearless leader and his cabal of neo-com's!
Message!
I think this says it all
Liesman holds a Masters of Science from Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and a B.A. in English from the State University of New York, Buffalo.
Bonefish for the bonehead
I think the problems Rick S and most others have boils down to this:
1)the 4 week 'average' loss of half a million jobs instead of a number closer to 3/4 of a million, is an "improvement" in name only.
2)those falling off extended benefits who are no longer being 'counted' are still unemployed none the less, no?
I've never thought Steve Liesman was particularly talented, but he's not evil, and he's not incorrect here. You can't argue that the rate of change in job losses hasn't declined dramatically since January. The only question really is whether or not the jobs picture will get worse going forward, ie. double-dip.
The problem he has is that trying to present the bright side of the picture in the face of all that we have in front of us makes him lose a lot of credibility. It's this loss in credibility that really hurts him. I know it's nicer to say good things and to try to be positive, but that won't help how people view your journalistic integrity.
Credibility. Exactly.
My biggest problem with SL and his reporting on ANY economic "data" is why does he feel obligated to defend each report as if it were his own.
Where is his critical insight on say......Fridays bullshit retail numbers and the new way of calulating them?
I believe Steve sees himself part of the "economists club". Thus he feels the need to defend the numbers regardless of the sensibility of doing so. And he feels he's on safe ground because many other "economists" in the "club" are also defending the numbers and talking happy talk.
Combine this with network pressure to be "positive" and you have his daily televised groveling and humiliation.
+1
Well said.
I would prefer to see investigative journalism rather than bobble-headed reporting from someone of Steve's pedigree and training. Mr. Carl Is-it-fun-being-a-billionaire Quintanilla has that arena already locked up.
I don't blame Steve, I blame CNBC. Steve is put on the spot to report on data without having an ability to review the actual numbers.
Anyone that supports the Federal Reserve as a legitimate institution is either:
Naive or Evil. Black or White. How is fractional reserve banking good, ever!
This guy is no journalist. And since when do we have respect for pied pipers?
+100
Yo Stevo!
'Jerk' & 'tool' are not mutually exclusive.....
Some breaking news on the Employment front:
"U.S. Workforce Disappearing At Alarming Rate"
http://outsidethe-cardboard-box.tumblr.com/post/281336116/u-s-workforce-disappearing-at-alarming-rate
Interesting link.....
I was also a little harsh on Steve. I suspect the original video was....
1. Staged by the producers to amuse us with the conflict between Steve and Rick S (go Rick).
2. Steve was being completely disingenuous and pimping a point of view. If Rick wasn't there reminding him of the Emerg. extended unemployment bennies, some people may have been fooled. LOL
PS. The previously high productivity numbers are very likely bogus as well
love the link, very witty, very funny....the Det police say they "know a crime has been comitted...", population increases, but employed people decreases...just as Daily Shows, exposing their logic often makes you laugh at the absurdity, if you step back from MSM bubble world.
I think most of these pundits don't get it because they hang out with non-regular people, live in a bubble.
...calling the kettle black.
Glad you like the link, money!
All of the posts on Outside The (Cardboard) Box are satire. If you'd like to check out another one, go to the 'home' page & scroll down.....
http://outsidethe-cardboard-box.tumblr.com
The one on 'Tax Fraud' is fun. The fact that post was lifted and distributed as Real News by prisonplanet.com and a bunch of other, um, fringey sites is an additional bonus!
The problem with you is that you don't "report" these other numbers on air as far I as can tell. Instead, you only present the "green shoots". Why not report all of the data as the economist you proport to be and let your few viewers decide these things for themselves? Who are you to decide the "right" policy? And when have you ever given advice on "how to make a buck at all this"? Lastly, you only give part of the data then dismiss any debate that points out the data you hide. And you come here and defend that? You are a tool.
less bad is still not better
Steve, I sent you a Hair Club for Men gift card c/o CNBC. May I send your friend Ben's gift card to your attention?
I don't understand why people believe this man to be an economist? He is a senior reporter. He is no more an economist as the paper boy is a contributing editor for throwing the paper against your door.
Speaking on job forecasts: did you see the eye movements and body language of Larry Summers today on ABC. He is clearly a bad actor and fibber.
LIES-man will say anything his corporate handlers want him to say. He's the PR arm for the Federal Reserve and the Dept. of Treasury.
LIES-man is Baghdad Bob. He and Bob (don't)Piss-on-me have the intellectual capacity of a toad.
What's truly remarkable is the fact that Liesman feels the need to come here and defend himself at all. If Zerohedge wasn't having any sort of impact on the broader community, he likely wouldn't even have bothered.
He ought to stop whining about the manner in which he's being criticized. He's a national pundit with an audience of millions, even with CNBC's declining ratings. If he hasn't figured out that he's going to be held to a higher standard as a result of this, a less high-profile line of work might suit him better.
You are right on target --- at ZH the Lies-dood gets far more public exposure than he would ever get on.....what was the name of his program and station????
I think it is awesome that ZH is influencing CNBC. Maybe ZH could aquire them or at least provide content review and outsourcing services to Comcast.
The real question is are we going to have a normal recovery like previous recessions. All the really smart people are saying no the recovery will be at best very slow. This means that even if we do stop losing jobs we are probably in for many months of plus or minus 10's of thousands were the net impact is zero change. This seems to be the best case scenerio.
So I'm not real sure where the good news is. The even greater question is does the trend have another trend down. The answer to that is yes there is a strong possibility. Every recession our recovery has been fuelled by major increases in household debt. Until recently we had never seen household debt decline. If household debt continues to at best flat line and potentially continue to decline then the world economy could very well retrace further down.
Job openings of around 2.5 million have not picked up. How does LIES-man think that hiring can pick up if job openings are crawling along at cycle lows? Tool and a Jerk? Yes but more of an IDIOT.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_num...
I vote for TOOL!
sink long enough, and sure enough, you'll hit the bottom of the sea & stabilize; i feel so much better now.
Steve Liesmann and Bob Pisani both on the Payroll...do not know how they sllep at night...."Stocks are higher ..while the dollar is at its highs for the day" Wow Bob..missed an actingclass or two?
Oy, vey! Don't get me started on Pisani, the original bobblehead--the Voice of Sauron...
Move along--these aren't the 'droids you're looking for...
sink long enough, and sure enough, you'll hit the bottom of the sea & stabilize; i feel so much better now.
As an engineer, I just love when "economists" and other pundits treat a discrete data set as if it was a continuous set and apply continuous functions, i.e. average, 2nd derivative etc. Twelve data points (monthly job numbers) do not even come close to a continuous data set and therefore seeing "trend" after 1 or 2 data points is laughable.
Wow, drbill, you explained that perfectly.
Or as the Jesuits used to teach us: "Post hoc ergo proctor hoc." That which comes after, doesn't necessarily follow" (i.e., there is no connection).
Nice point - let's switch to the weather channel and check the 10-day forecast. If Greenspan had studied meteorology we'd know if it was sunny on my birthday by now. The problem is all our smart people are economists and spooks.
I just flat out do not believe the number the government reports. So since I am in that camp, I can't really argue past that point since I believe that they are cooking the books for political reasons.
The big problem here is really one of definition:
Please define the words 'improvement' and 'improving' and place them in a proper context. Once you so this and do it on a regular basis, the quality of the disagreement may change, as opposed to the quantity.
In months past, the former 'green shooters' defined improvement as anything that would move the stock market, but used economic terms and observations as McGuffins. Fortunately for them and those who live by the wall street bonus and 2% account management fees, a lot of free money was causing the stock market to rise simply on the basis of excess liquidity. Green shoots abounded for them, but not so much for anyone else.
Now that QE has substantially ended, the green shooters have retired and the economy must rise or fall on its own merits, and not the pronouncements of shills who profit from distraction. The stock market is essentially dead until new money enters or old money leaves.
Unfortunately, Mr Lieseman, you have been lumped into the former group of 'shills who profit from distraction' at this time. Personally, I'm a fan. I always thought you would make the best Econ 101 teacher anyone ever had. At this time, you are not putting your remarks in a proper context. You conflate 'good' with 'less bad' frequently. It is very hard to tell if you are simply unclear or simply uninformed and just selling something.
Simply by adding context and documenting economic or statistical flows that clearly show where things were, are, and are possibly headed, you will improve your credibility greatly.
Dead Hobo
PS I don't watch much anymore, but really hate the MCC paired with Dumbass show. Or is it Kneal paired with Dumbass show? I forget. Kearnan is tolerable. Tell him DH says HI.
Steve,
the answer to your question "how to make a buck at all this?" is very simple. Let me lend at the Fed rate with 1:50 leverage and I buy 10 years Treasuries. As of today 12/11/09 it makes 3.30% from me , in real numbers 1.65M per year.
Steve .... at least we can agree that the job numbers are not good. Are they improving? Consider the following, relative to your points:
1. Assuming that the layoff process does not result in all workers being laid off, then the rate of descent naturally slows. It might even bump up a little bit here and there. There is nothing about the raw numbers of this process that would necessarily imply improving business conditions.
2. The increase in Temp hiring was completely predictable for two reasons. One, it is that time of year. Second, there were many more people willing to work as temps and employers needed more temps because they had cut below the point of being fully staffed for the holiday season. Again, there is nothing about this that would imply that business is improving.
3. High productivity rates, as you imply, are due to the fewer hours being worked. The rates will probably drop somewhat but, again, this would not imply major improvements in economic conditions.
The entire picture is still overlaid by huge amounts of debt, a weak banking system, weak real estate prices, and a "recovery" (if there is one) that is completely dependant on federal intervention and federally improvised low interest rates. Oh, and we also have many millions of people who no longer have much real money to spend.
When you think about it, high productivity numbers actually indicate an employment picture that is getting worse. CNBC always trumpets high productivity as a good thing, as a pro-America thing. If the same amount of work is getting done by fewer people, productivity goes up. A six-percent gain in productivity, for example, indicates that there are six fewer jobs in a company with 100 employees. Since capital spending is down or flat, the increase in productivity comes mostly from personnel cuts, or at least less hiring. Productivity gains can be seen as a forward indicator. Employers are not hiring the additional staff to take on increased workloads, they are flogging the existing staff to get more done. A few overtime hours, even at time-and-a-half, are still cheaper than hiring new employees.
This was a good post and I would like to follow up with more reasons why the data should be looked at sceptically:
1) Only 19% o of CEO's indicated last week that they thought their companies would be hiring in 2010
2) The sector which grew was business services...the last to usually grow and the hardest to survey (therefore it is a suspicious number). Manufacturing and IT (the sectors with the highest productivity gains you indicate presages employment when things get better) actually lost jobs again this month
3) Anyone who has ever worked in or owned companies in the temp services world knows that October and November is the best month for hiring during each and every year and has been for decades. All sorts of transport, warehouse, pick pack and ship and retail jobs increase this time of year....and so does hours worked for the same reason. All these jobs go away come January. And then even more go in March after all the returned merchandise is processed
4) The retail sales number for November was reported to go up 1.2%. (?). But as you can see from a chart on Jesse's Cafe Americain, ( http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2009/12/about-those-strong-november-us-retail.html ) outside of gasoline purchases, car parts, repairs and winterization instead of new cars and deeply discounted electronics the rest of the categories are in bad shape. In other words, consumers had to spend more on gasoline and their cars and stores got volume at lower margins. In sum, both consumers and retail supply chains will now have even less cash flow in the months ahead.
I do not discount that there is contradictory data...but I sure would not want to come to an optimistic conclusion based on that compliation of context, data and their implications
Perhaps CNBC should consider adding a daily 15 minute or so segment along the same lines as the 'Unknown Comic'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj3Q9l9Ivng
TD, Marla or any of the other contributors with their identities hidden would present a daily dose of market wisdom and economic reality in an effort (albeit probably totally futile) to enlighten all the now almost completely mindless and brainwashed viewers.
I have a question: How do we know this is really Steve Liesman?
If it is, how can ZH confidently and boldly state that it is without having some other inside knowledge that it is, in fact, SL?
ZH authors could be disgruntled CNBC insiders. After all, the pointed and very poignant analysis of viewership, ratings, Cabrerra boobs, etc... smack of someone on the inside.
The economy is far from fixed, but so is the ZH CNBC drama.
Is Zero Hedge is turning into CNBC's "Myspace" foe? That is just too funny. In all fairness to Liesman, if he did not do the job, some other tool would.
When things get tough, the tough go shopping. The CNBC staff would look extra cool in cursing fish logos http://www.cafepress.com/fishgonebad.238155220
ok, great, whatever. We're getting worse at a slower rate. Got it. And should I add: whoop dee do, Basil. Debt, debt, debt, debt, debt, debt, spend, spend, spend, spend. Steve, stop bein' a playa and step up to the plate. Rock the boat, you and your ilk, while you still can-there might still be a chance if we bite the bullet now. Otherwise, best be makin' exit plans for when the mobs start roaming the streets.
Have been critical of SL yet will agree with him when he says "Ridiculously high productivity rates that must come down, meaning more jobs and/or longer hours." The employed American people are so scared of losing their jobs, and as such are now working at a staggering rate to keep them since there are many longtime unemployed people just waiting to pounce on a newly open oppertunity. It is a downward spiral and those working extremely (overly) hard are probably not happy about this situation either. Then again employers can easily churn and burn through warm bodies.
Meanwhile the retail arms of the market manipulating Federal Reserve such as Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, etc have employees who allow their HFT computers do the work as their employees rake in record bonuses. Screw the hardworking person who is actually producing physical goods/products while the men in fancy Italian suits with connections to the US Central Bank rape the financial system and any investor stupid enough to play the Wall Street game.
Quite a few investors i know have pulled out of this market manipulation and are buying and taking delivery of physical gold as a play against such outrageous Federal Reserve activities plus removing funds from banks, which could of course be taken over by the FDIC as this pretend and extend game continues almost unabated... until KaBoom!
SL, am sure you are smart enough to realize the market is manipulated and as such perhaps you could do an honest investigative journalism piece on the massive corruption and bring to light various facts to the viewers on CNBC. If you do a great job perhaps Comcast would recognize your great efforts and promote you. Or you may choose to simply continue doing what you have always done, as you feeel there is no reason to evolve as a TV personality.
Uh, Steve, as to #4, productivity rates are complete bullshit. A car part made in China goes into a car made in the US and the entire thing counts as US GDP? Get real. This is a huge problem and throws off the entire concept of productivity. Econometric models always break down at real turning points in the economy. Witness the 'birth/death model'.
Why don't you read your own stupid employer's reporting:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33786428
Thanks for posting an intelligent response. Agree with other posters here that your credibility would improve dramatically (and CNBC may actually gain some viewers) if you had some adult debates and alternative opinions presented on-air.
Try some serious point - counter point stuff instead of the typical CNBC "who can talk over who the loudest" type segment.
people who make their livings with words ought to know better than to write ''tuna fish''.
Steve- No one wants to hear your bs anymore. We all know about the BLS crap. We all know it's in .gov's interest to pump things to get people spending. We all know your employer wants us to do the same.
But at the same time - we all know THE ENTIRE COUNTRY is in DEEP ^&$*#. Consequently - we're looking for solutions not a prolonging of the inevitable. The days of pumping, bs, plastic fences, huge SUVs, even 'huger' SIVs, firemen with $150K pensions and McMansions, credit for J6P instead of wages and negative savings rates is OVER. Get with the program.
-
Steve- No one wants to hear your bs anymore. We all know about the BLS crap. We all know it's in .gov's interest to pump things to get people spending. We all know your employer wants us to do the same.
But at the same time - we all know THE ENTIRE COUNTRY is in DEEP ^&$*#. Consequently - we're looking for solutions not a prolonging of the inevitable. The days of pumping, bs, plastic fences, huge SUVs, even 'huger' SIVs, firemen with $150K pensions and McMansions, credit for J6P instead of wages and negative savings rates is OVER. Get with the program.
why does not liesman report on the Bloated FHA and how it is being used as a piggy bank to rape the taxpayers and all the other govt ponzi schemes?
he calls this recovery when the govt intervention is distorting just about everything in the economy.
Maybe this assclown should focus on the exploding federal and state budget deficits.
I won't attack Steve but I will quote Paul Volcker verbatim:
We have not yet achieved self-reinforcing recovery.
Mr. Liesman:
Thank you for responding to Zero Hedge.
I have 2 thoughts on the subject matter to share with you.
1. My understanding is that you are billed as a "reporter" by CNBC; if this title is correct, versus being a pundit/commentator/opinion maker, then I am of the impression that you are not living up to the standards of objective journalism. I have found from watching you previously and currently (though I rarely do watch cnbc anymore since May 09) and reading you that your emphasis is clearly on the "bull" side of the economy (not the u.s. equity market, which cnbc seems to portray as the end all, be all vs. other markets) versus the "bear" side. In other words, when reporting on the news it seems I rarely here you inform viewers/readers of the contrasting opinion to your postulation of being a bull. As an example, the recent BLS NFP numbers were quite divergent from other continuing data points (adp, b'berg consensus, etc.) and there is certainly an enormous amount of chatter about the validity of government reported numbers. do you question that? have you? will you do so in the future? when reporting on the housing crisis, do you report on the shadow inventory? do you report on the bank's accounting practices in regards to valuation of assets? has anyone at cnbc reported on the implications of fasb 166/167? Another example is the current state of the US Dollar. My impression is that cnbc cheerleads the declining dollar (Kudlow is an exception from his blog that I read) in favor of a rising u.s. equity market. do you or others at cnbc report on the other ramifications of a dollar decline/debasement? there are numerous other examples discussed daily on the financial blogs that challenge the green shoot approach bias that you and cnbc have adopted. it's just that I don't see the other side reported frequently.
2. as to the personal attacks on you. I could not agree more with you on this matter. It sickens me when I see personal attacks on you or anybody else for that matter because it simply distracts from the matters at hand. You are correct indeed that we should strive for debate (but, let's put all sides of the equation on the table or, in your case, on the television) and put aside ad hominem attacks. Unfortunately, there will always be those that resort to attacking the messenger as opposed to debating the message.
as always:
"sometimes you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right."
Steve: If this Christmas YoY sales are up the 10.5% you said Fri on Nightly News. We will all apologize.
It's interesting how much cred the blogoshere is getting. These guys would never bother to respond to anything their masters did not deem worthy. Kneel got denninger on his show, even. This gives me hope, a little , for America.
With the limited exception, of getting S.L.'s attention so that he responds to the questions presented, personal attacks should be carefully considered.
It seems to me that Steve's argument on the job loss front is akin to a doctor saying, " look, look, you are bleeding a lot less." But the underlying question is "how much blood do you have left at any given bleed rate?"
The United States will not see any consistent, long term job growth until we INSOURCE our manufacturing jobs and OUTSOURCE the executives and banksters that have undermined this nations economy (and therefor, its security).
Even the growth jobs of the last decade- unloading and transporting containers from China, and stocking shelves at Walmart, are in decline.
Odd thing that- our politicians watched on the sidelines as our manufacturing jobs were uprooted to China, then they encouraged consumer borrowing (OPM-other people's money), rather than keeping the manufacturing jobs (and the income and tax base) that once made this country great. And a dirt poor Communist dictatorship became a banker to the United States. Strange politics indeed.
When the contemporary history of the United States is written, the turning point of the decline will include the rise of Walmart (made in China),the one-way trade relationship with China, the rise of the uberclass of New York banksters (the peasants are revolting, let them eat cake), and the decline of political morality (what's wrong with rob from the poor and give to the rich).
America's great presidents always put the country first. This president, like the last, sold out (along with our Congress) before he was elected. "hey Barry, Hank is on the line."
It seems to me that Steve's argument on the job loss front is akin to a doctor saying, " look, look, you are bleeding a lot less." But the underlying question is "how much blood do you have left at any given bleed rate?"
BINGO! We have a winner! In addition, it may seem as though the net amount of blood loss may be a lot less if, just prior to the most recent measurement, the amount of blood lost previously is no longer counted......
That's what these spinsters are good at: using a lot of fancy words when everyone already knows it ain't getting any better yet. The only way to maintain any credibility at this point is to just say it flat-out: it's not getting better. Stop being a Fed apologist or shrivel up, please.
this is fantastic that liesman is responding here on this site
some of the brightest minds on the web are here reading daily
Steve: If this years Christmas sales are up 10.5% YoY, as you said Friday on Nightly News, we will all apologize.
Steve is merely the messenger. He does what he is told. He has been in his own little personal bubble for so long it is hard for him to see that the average taxpayer is getting shafted while a select few are making millions and millions with no risk while indirectly and directly being billed to the taxpayer. Steve seems to have no clue how the average taxpayer views our current situation. We are tired of being pissed on and being told that its just an april shower. Do you want your weatherman to cheerlead the weather or to give you a detailed accurate report of current conditions so you can plan accordingly? Sorry Steve if you dont understand all the hostility. There are still a few business people left in this country that believe failure in the business world is a must for healthy free market capitalism. I dont know if I should envy you or feel sorry for you.
Goldman knew AIG could never pay out GSacs bets, GSacs knew they could not rely on AIG to pay out for what they were "insuring", and yet they staked the solvency of their company on getting AIG money...so they made the right bet, they knew govt would bail them out...a lot like people investing in GSEs that had no real govt control, but when they went bust, investors expected govt to pay.
GSacs uses their insider knowledge to rape markets and taxpayers, can we get a perp walk
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704201404574590453176996032.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection
A good journalist should investigate and report BUT NOT ADVOCATE. Advocating is a different business entirely.
We now live in an era where journalist's have by and large rejected the investigate and report model for advocating a point of view. Liesman is just one example in a very crowed field of journalist's.
Do you think he is looking for a job at the FED? Just wondering?
"when there are monumental debates to be had about the economy, the right policy, the data and, most important, how to make a buck at all this?"
We know your advice, Steve.
BUYBUYBUY!!!
And the cadre of infotainment, NFL pre-game show masqurading as a financial news programming is just the right marketing tool to SELLSELLSELL us stocks!!!
Here is the problem Steve, no matter how bad it gets, the media will still bang-out its "Sunny Jim" market-forcasts while reinerating every mangled phrase and muddled thought from our jacklegged government. The lines from the shelters, pawn shops and soup kitchens may stretch from the Golden Gate to the Statue of Liberty, but the perennially upbeat prediction of a "bottom in housing" or an "economic turnaround" will continue to blast from every media bullhorn in the nation. America's financial media is a never ending source of baseless optimisim and hogwash.
If a astoroid smashed into the planet and killed 2 billion people, Kudlow would tell you it is good for the economy. Cramer has never met a stock he didn't BUYBUYBUY!!! Christ, Mark Haines and some of your producers have openly stated they will not 'talk down the markets', regardless of reality.
Perhaps you are just a perpetual optimist, but don't expect this attitude to 'sell' in the years ahead like it used to.
Give Steve credit to respond to Zero, that is respectful and cool. The point I took away from the discussion between Steve and Rick--is that Steve did not seem to understand EUC and its purpose and significance in the numbers... So I am suspect on his overall take on the breakdown of the numbers.. And productivity numbers should continue to improve---I know that I am busting my ass to stay employed, who isn't!
well, hmm, aside from the fact that the errors in GDP like reporting carburettors as US GDP and not the importing countries GDP, cars are fuel injected and don't require carburettors. ANother sign that economist don't actually measure anything correctly. I think you guys should be ashamed of setting fire to tramps sleeping in fluoresecent lit subways like SL on CNBC. I don't want tramps in this house thank you very much. Arguments should remain focused on this slip into communism, which is the inevitable corrolary of the double standards applied to rock and roll america which can work in greater safety and (formaldehyde in the head at birth if its a girl) China. The correct employment numbers are available from the tax department, right now, in volume and value terms. GS can make as much money as it likes, provided its legal and we have laws which reflect ethics and morality and it pays taxes. Our choices remain whether to let financial institutions profit by "they win, we lose" or we graduate to a society of "they win, we win". I think I could write some laws that would claw back the $350 billion in bonuses paid to the housing industry professionals over the last 15 years which were nothing short of an old fashioned con trick, sponsored by the government, bought and paid for by the banks, realtors and valuers (abetted by Fraudy and Funny, as a second derivative of the same scam). So let sleeping hobos like SL and that other share market reporter and the commodity pit caller alone. If i want to watch down and outs its either CNBC or PBS.
like the claw back thing...they talk aobut clawing back money from innocent people who invested in Madoff and happened to get money out...but no one talks about clawing back money from GS people who knowingly decieved, defrauded.
BLS is to truth as CNBC is to economic forecasting.
Pure bullshit wrapped in shiny gold paper with a big red bow on top...but I'm kinda glad Pisssanti is there...when he starts giggling like a school girl it's ALWAYS time to leave...works every time.
I dub it Media Hedonics...LOL.
nmewn
Oh guys, give Steve a break. I mean, what do you want on CNBC, nothing but babes in skimpies?
If that is really an option, in a word: HELLYAH! If I'm going to get spun, I'd rather have it be by babes in skimpies. Spin me right round, baby, right round.
I propose to scrap those numbers. You can argue whether they are right or not, should bit be 10,50 or 100K more or less. It's irellevant.
Instead, we should concentrate on earning brackets, and how many people are in them and approximate total earned in that bracket. At the same time, we should have some index that tracks outsourcing and tax revenue. Combining these 3 things should give meaningful indicator of how well personal balance sheets will be doing.
If a person was employed full time at a higher wage, earning say 120K, then lost that job and immediately found a job that pays 60K. He's obviously not better off, but it wouldn't show up in a report that just counts employed/unemployed regardless of measurement technique.
good point. I have a friend that did exactly what you described, went from six figures to 60k job, only after living off 20k in unemployment insurance for a year. He is an engineer, smart, technically competent, professional, well-organized, personable, good work ethic, timely, dependable, good at networking, good at presenting himself, good at public speaking etc..but barely making more than what a starting engineer made a year or two ago. According to stats, he is no longer unemployed, but if this guy took that kind of hit, what is happening to others who have some disadvantages, no education, education in non-technical field, aren't perfect personalities, are just ordinary workers...
Also, I think unemployment numbers do not compare to similar stat to 30-40 years ago. Do freelance contractors told not to come in for work tomorrow count as unemployed? Are freelance workers that are working 20 hours a week rather than 50? There are some corporate campuses that have 30-50 percent of the full-time professionals that come to work from 8am-5pm, 52 weeks a year to their coporate buildings that are not "employees" but "contractors". This was way way more prevalent going into this recession than previous recessions. So 10 percent unemployment now, even if it was correct and consistently measured from previous recessions, still means much more real economic misery than similar level of unemployment meant in previous times
Stevie boy......
How about the weekly hours worked???? 33 hours????? WTF??? Even the people that are working......aren't working full time.
thank you, I'm employed, but I am making about 30 percent less dog treats than last year, 10 percent wage reduction and now 32 hours per week reducing salary another 20 percent.
'dog treats' says it all.
That one is up from 33 to 33.2, he will spin that as improvement.
II | III | Sept. | Oct. | Nov.33.1| 33.1| 33.1| p33.0| p33.2|
nor liesman nor anybody on cnbc ever questions the validitiy of all economic numbers.they still believe all numbers are real since they come mostly from government.but we all know that these numbers are manipulated (also thanks to the good research of zh). Therefore the statement of steve liesman is worthless in my eyes. after all lies in this year, we reached a point where you have to question the number first before commenting it. the usa is virtually bankrupt but the show must go on as nobody cares who will pay the bill.
Check Mish Shedlocks site for his employment projections, we are at the point where it almost mathematically impossible for unemployment to come down in any meaningful way over the next ten years.
This high unemployment/Afghanistan/bailouts/usual government mishegoss etc will drive even more deficit spending going forward.
Does it even matter if there are incremental gains in employment along the way?
In the words of Dr Marc Faber
DOOMED!
AndyC
quite right omi. if we have been exporting jobs and leaving a polarisation of jobs in either scammers of wall street inc and wally world or mickey d's then we have consigned ourselves to a pitiful future. do you remember the line that greenspan took that our intellectual capacity is a huge earner? i believe that is one of the (few) things I agreed with him on. If a political system sponsors win/lose as an ethos and the vast majority of people lose, then this system is broken. middle america is an area I read a lot about in the sense that it is being "hollowed out". Why should it be win/win for trade globalisation (even though working standards are hugely exploitative in countries that benefit, even now, compared to the worst employers/lowest rewarders like wally world) and win/lose in domestic policy. The great hope was that Obama would turn this around, but he hasn't got the ability with this flawed system and we will all watch as one of the greatest orators and debators of our time is shown for what he is..just a debator and orator. Business/ethics/morality leadership skills of any one of us, no better, no worse. We need a modern smart version of a Marshall plan with goals that will last another 100 years, not an election cycle or a bankers annual profit number. Anyway, well said. I maintain that we get the Government we deserve. I think we deserve better!
From my perspective, Steve Liesman engaging the ZH community is a good thing. Progress if you will. We must remember, Steve must live and survive (keeping his job), in the myopic world of CNBC’s relentless pump machine they choose to espouse. We can agree with his statements, or take the other side of the trade and dispute his claims. There is nothing wrong with that.
For those who expect him to be this beacon of credible journalism, on a mission to expose the scam for what it really is, you’re listening to the wrong channel – it ain’t gonna happen. That is not CNBC’s mission, and we all know it. I think Steve is genuine in his beliefs, seen in the criticism he receives from people on his own station. Still, he defends his position, wrong or not. Nothing wrong with that, opinions are like assholes and we all have one.
Since he reached out to the rumble tumble world of ZH, to defend and expand his thoughts, knowing he will be ripped apart once again, shows some courage in my opinion. The simple fact he is willing to engage us proves he, and probably many others on CNBC, do read this blog, therefore gleaning the thoughts and feel of common Americans. Our rebuttals should carry the same seriousness, and scope of the message, like Steve gave to us, or we will be once again labeled digital dickweeds. It should be about the message, not the messenger.
In times like this, we need as many on the same side of the trade as possible. We have proof Steve has listened, that’s a start. If enough voices are heard, and the message is disseminated in a professional manner, more of our message will be heard. As we witnessed from the town hall meetings, name calling, shout downs, and general chaos will not solve anything. Respectful discourse and intelligent conversation might go a long way in making our voices heard, and maybe, just maybe, someday the people in congress might listen as Steve did.
Steve, while I don’t always agree with you, and as some have pointed out, you at times go too far defending your position, I commend you for engaging the ZH community. Kudos’s to you Sir.
zh may be closer to regular folks opinion than CNBC, but most regular people just know they are broke and hurting, they often don't have the focus of their anger as ZHers do.
Steve Liesman engaing ZH is only as good as his commitment in continuing to do so-- or in another context, express/confirm there are alternative points of view on the economy that deserve thoughtul consideration. If he can do that on a media outlet like CNBC he has my respect.
As for the economic data points, I still think he misses the mark. The cumulative effect of unemployment is a very serious factor in this recession, primarily because many of us have debts that can only be paid off if we are working full time. So when the unemployment spigot fills and is overflowing, the incremental claims data may appear "better"-- but unfortunately, it's just piling on an already worse situation.
As for productivity, it's overblown as a statstic. While it's nice to see higher productivity, its more encouraging to see it based on higher payroll growth and higher hours worked. All that higher productivity shows me today is that companies will avoid hiring at almost all costs-- unless it is truly warranted.
If Liesman would actually talk about the imporantance of looking at ALL the data, and admit that there are flaws in what the government reports-- it would be a good start in building his credibility. But he does give the appearance of being a typical MSM shill, and for that, I think he's earned it.
So the economy is losing jobs at a slower rate, and that with massive unsustainable fiscal and monetary stimulus. We are two years into this now. Less bad is not good enough anymore. The economy is nowhere near being able to stand on it's own two feet and actually grow.
A give props to Liesman for responding. I disagree with him in that he seems to think this is some kind of an inventory recession. It is not. It is a credit collapse/debt deflation depression which is ongoing. Liesman has been overly optimistic since the beginning of the crisis. Do we really need to break out the Youtube videos?
Funny entertainment!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMZKNYaIdvs
Jesusss H, Liesman--You just don't get it do you??
It's a real basic question. Are any numbers delivered in government or Wall Street reports even close to REAL???
The answer: A resounding NO~~ The point is, NONE of your numbers address the fundamental realities on the ground. They are pulled out of your corporate master's A$$, and delivered by YOU with ZERO regard for what is real and true.
There is a REASON CNBC's ratings are through the floor. What is clear to anyone with half a brain is, that you and your network are bought and paid for, and simply a tool of the corrupt cabals that OWN YOU...
LIESman---your name tells us all we need to know!
Steve, dude, how much more do you want to be fooled, WATCH THIS EVERYBODY:
http://europac.net/video_cnbc_050425.asp
That's from 05, Peter Schiff gives it to Steve STRAIGHT, he still doesn't get it.
Birth/Death model creates those numbers you are referring to victoriously, WAKE UP buddy, that model is FARSE. GET IT NOW????
also look at the side, price of Gold 435, Dow 10210. Doesn't take a genious to find out which is a better investment does it Stevey boy?
SL... from the video above:
Dow = 10210
S&P = 1160
Gold = $434
Oil = $56
Euro = 1.30 to USD
5 year = 3.92%
10 year = 4.25%
So ask yourself which one performed the best? And why?
@10044 thanks for that link. interesting how things are unfolding. oh the DENIAL on that set! and yeah gold was $434 that day.
Mr. Liesman,
There are two main issues I have with your comments and CNBC in general:
a) The positive spin put on the current state of affairs. While most of us would agree that things are worsening at a slower rate, to use the word "improving" is a little much. If a gunshot victim loses blood at a slower rate, would a doctor say that his/her condition is "improving"? If a ship begins to sink at a slower rate, would the coast guard call that an "improvement"?
b) Not addressing the different data sets. As a viewer, I would expect that CNBC's economic expert to be aware of the EUC numbers. Regarding your disagreement with Mr. Santelli, your keyboard was directly under your fingertips.
Those things aside, I applaud your efforts to connect with readers on Zero Hedge and the blogosphere in general.
-V
MASSIVE MANIPULATION Steve. That's the force behind 90% of your Mary Sunshine numbers.
The masses are waking up and they know they can't trust you or CNBC to report what is really happening, because you don't have an objective bone in your body!
That's what's up. Hopefully, as you are casting for Bonefish and contemplating the meaning of life, you will realize, like Dylan Ratigan did, that it is too short to be lived as a LIE... In this season of HOPE, we can only pray for your awakening, but will choose to get our news elsewhere in the meantime.
Cheers!
drbill was succinct @10:39 in what most I would wager feel is the essential problem with your reporting. And that of most of the world for that matter. These are not stupid people and to be treated as such is really annoying. It just plain weirds me out to such a degree that you guys are trying to blow sunshine up our collective butts all the time when we and most anyone in the market are perfectly capable of translating said numbers ourselves.
So when the crap comming from sources like CNBC et al just keeps comming I simply turn the tube off and I been watching since it was FNN.
Santelli and Palin are becoming wildly popular because they offer something no else does. HONESTY. Simple useful information. Not some sales pitch boiler plate to push me in some direction or other. Leisman become useful and you will have a job as long as u want and be wildly popular. That is usefull to those that really pay the bills and not those slugs that simply confiscate it and in real terms create nothing.
Read more >> Options >>Steve--The Truth will set you free. Try it sometime! Employ some actual critical thinking skills from time to time, and stop allowing Wall Street to use you like that.
Honestly, there isnt much of a difference between folks like Ashlee Dupree and you. Get it? We do.
i have to admit i am still coming to terms with a "truth" that obama will halve the deficit to a mere 700 billion a year in five years..from the odd 1.4 trillion now. does a reduction in the deficit in standard economic parlance of GDP = C + G + I + (X-M) mean that the G is going to drain 1.4% per annum to get from 1.4 trillion to 700 billion in five years? or is this still a positive 1.4 trillion diminishing to 700 billion boost. and if we inject 12% into GDP from the government in one year and get just 3% growth (great "normal" number) does that mean that C + I + (X-M) was down the other 9%? I mean chit! 9% drop in GDP last year without Government intervention? help me out here! ;)
Easy to make promises 5 years out when your term is 4. Playing politics as usually, but what we really needed was massive government spending cuts in 2009. He decision has already been made, Military or Medicare. He choose war.
Mark Beck
I had written commending Diana Olick early this year after watching her remain calm while arguing with the CNBS pep rally squad. My comment to her was just report the facts and numbers.
Liesman, on the other hand gets a report and reaches into his lipstick toolbox to paint the pig. Spouting off his "less worse" nonsense, what kind of crap is that? It's clear Steve tows the CNBS dem loving party line. People get it, you're for free health care, stimulus, Tarp, bailouts, Cap & Tax and anything else coming out of the liberal left loons in Washington. A large number, I'd argue, don't buy it and feel the country has not been saved but merely bandaged up with money that we don't have.
Finally a question for CNBS.
What's the fastest way to lose viewers watching the days market?
A "breaking news" cut to another daily Obama campaign speech.
Diana Olick appears to be the only journalist on cnbc.
Agree, and she's kinda hot too, but I digress. Not long ago she was reporting on some housing data that wasn't very good. Kudlow argued and argued with her, stopping very close to calling her a liar. It was horrible, and you could tell they both were getting pissed. Diana for the way Kudlow spoke to her, and Kudlow because she wouldn't change her statements. That is the kind of shit that turns people away, and it should.
She has an Emmy for journalism and a diverse background in reporting versus punditry.
My advice to Steve is much like digalert recommends. If you want to talk about the jobs report, get the PDF and bring it up on the monitor, and show the report, live on TV. No need to draw conclusion, or speculate. Just show the facts. The most basic kind of journalism. Simple.
Once you get beyond journalism 101, then its on to 102. But, here you will have to do your own research and corroborate facts in postulation of a theory relevant to understanding or improving the lives and circumstances or your viewers. Unfortunately, the vast majority of in-depth economic topics will not be in line with your corporate handlers. But, at least you can still be good at 101 stuff.
But, just in case you get a green light for the 102 stuff, here is one to work on. Even if they do not, you might want to do it on the side anyway to in order to look out for your family and friends.
Summary:
The economic engine once known as the USA, is non-functioning at several levels. What is clear from Government subversion into free markets and the private sector, is that solutions put in place do not directly address the underlying structural economic problems. Mal-investment from the Gov and FED have squandered and squeezed out healthy capital investment. The end result of this new "non-economy" structure (deficits, de-leveraging debt, non-savings) and demographics (increasing numbers of people on SS and Medicare), are that the tax paying base will be unable to significantly increase tax revenues for 10 years and beyond.
All you really need to do is look at our national debt, deficit (presidents budget proposal up to 2018), yearly interest paid, obligations made on our behalf by the FED, and then consider we may take in $2T Net Revenue at best in 2010, 2011, and 2012, and you soon realize that without immediate action, we will never have a balanced budget, or produce any surplus to pay down the debt for over 10 years into the future. It's really simple math.
Our nation lives on the good graces of our creditors, and most recently the FED through QE. This is how the US finances the government. Through issuing debt. Let me say this again, because it means the the US is structurally weak, different than the USSR perhaps in its mechanisms, but just as precarious.
The US Treasury, without the FED further debasing the currency, must sell debt at a massive rate to sustain government spending in 2010, and well beyond 2018. Many do not believe that the world has the capacity or inclination to float this massive investment in US debt for one year, let alone 10 or more.
Well, thats it, you can work the problem in a simplified spreadsheet form, moving from a cash to accrual basis for the entitlements, or get sophisticated through using probably distributions in multidimensional flows.
You can do it Steve, a few weeks of research, put together charts using the governments own data, and the picture will become all too clear. Actually Congress and Obama the Administration has been informed many times about the problems facing the nation from the CRS and CBO.
This is the big one, if you don't want it, perhaps 60 minutes will take up the torch.
Mark Beck
hooter alert! oops slaps self for being well whatever is the arrestable offence!
I wonder if the ZH community can marshal enough resources to try to tip over some key Remocrat/Depublican senator(s) in the coming election.
The vast majority of voters are disgusted and enraged at the never-ending party in Washington and New York. The BIG LIE of, first we have to save the banking system (our friends at Goldman), is seen by everyone as the biggest con of this century.
It seems to me that we all see the big picture here.
To save this country, at the very least, it will take a modern day Marshall Plan.
Productivity is a joke and you know that Steve. Why don't you call out how that number is calculated? Whya re you not calling out how the BLS is taking people out of the workforce to bring down the unemployment number? Why are you not talking about how the BLS B/D model overestimated job creation and will have to add 800K to the unemployment rolls in, get this, Feb. of 2010? Why did you not question how the employment report suddenly got so good when the ISM data rolled over?
What I am saying is do your job as an economist and, yes, as a reporter now. You are not doing that and are simply a mouthpiece for the administration, the network or, worst yet, Wall St. The employment report last week was a joke at best, how many people "left" the workforce to come up with tht number?? No one says that the numbers are not getting better, hell companies cannot fire EVERYONE, but they are trying to get rid of as many people as possible. When JnJ is laying off 6-8% of their workforce you know there is a major problem, especially this far into the recovery or recession, take your pick. Am I an economist? Nope, but it seems I can do a better freaking job of reading and digging into the data than you can and that, my friend, is a problem for you, not me.
P.S. Steve - I had respect for you last year during the crisis when you seemed to report facts, but then something happened, what I don't know, but something happened. You turned and became a tool for the man or the system, the whole network did except for Rick which is why everyone likes him and why everyone has disdain for the rest of the anchors on the network.
Dennis Kneale is an idiot, Maria, Charlie is a sellout, Michelle and Kudlow prostitute themselves out to corporate America and Erin is an air head. Haines, he has his moments, but for the most part is just a cranky man. Here is hoping the new year brings pink slips to the staff at CNBC so you will become 'marginally attached' to the workforce to see just how bad things are out there. Maybe Cramer will hire you all at the Street.
Give it up Steve, your reply to ZH reads (predictably) just like one of your on air report that got you into the "debate" with Rick Santelli that started this mess. The jobs numbers are still bad, period. But I think the real worry here is not so much losing face against the "Rickster" as much as it is going through the torture such as Jim Cramer faced at the hands of Jon Stewart on the Daily Show when the bottom falls out again! Good luck with that gig!
Thanks ZH, now if you can get to the nightly networks (including PBS) it would be great. I hope CNBC will now report on the whole story. Unemployment is crushing us.
Steve--
It's about a total lack of journalistic credibility and independent, critical thinking at CNBC. You accept everything you are spoon-fed by your FED masters, and spin away to the public, hoping they won't see the glaring discrepancies. Well, we do, and it isnt even comical anymore, just downright annoying.
Just saying--
"The question is not are the jobs numbers bad, awful and otherwise horrible now. "
You state the above quote, then you go on to spout the propaganda of an improving jobs picture. Mr. Liesman, until we have sustained hiring, there is no improving jobs picture. Maybe you buy into that second derivative crap, but I don't. Do you think a pedestrian cares if a vehicle is decelerating but does not come to a completed stop before mowing through the pedestrian? What the anonymous poster said above is correct. You and the rest of your cohorts at CNBC have a credibility gap. It takes a long time to regain one's credibility and your most recent effort posted above is not a good start. I do have a tip for you, though. You could probably get a lot of viewers if you began to discuss John Williams' Shadow Stats. So, that's my challenge. Stop the cheerleading, be more objective and cover some of the dissenting voices out their like Mr. Williams. If you did that, I might start watching again.
I think Tyler opened the can of worms with this post, either that or none of us has anything else to do on this stupid wet Sunday afternoon!
keep'em coming, redicule CNBC to the BONE....
Mr. Liesman,
Just because a curve reaches a bottom does not mean that it's going to turn around and rise. Indeed, a curve leveling out might be a pretext to the curve headed down again.
You have offered zero data in support of improving job numbers and instead are relying on a slowdown in worsening job numbers as a somehow magical indicator that things must be about to improve.
I submit to you that your understanding of the situation is falsely colored by your current job situation, which depends upon you convincing investors that they need to BUY BUY BUY. This conclusion is based further upon examination of your prior buy-sell recommendations, most of which have managed to be horrible examples of buying at the top of the market and selling at the bottom of the market.
If CNBC wants to know why more and more viewers are turning away, they need only look directly at you, Mr. Liesman.
Liesman has a BA in English from a State college in Buffalo. He is not an economist nor is he a financial professional, Steve Liesman is a fisherman.
again, HuffPo, the home of the Obama worshippers, continues to skewer the President's economic team. Your current headline:
Arianna: 'Summers Is The Wrong Man To Be Heading The President's Economic Team'
When a car crashes into a wall, is it in better shape when it "stops"?
Lastly, if we started with 100 jobs, and lost 10 jobs for 9 consecutive weeks, would you say it's good news that we "only" lost 9 jobs in week 10? 99 people would be out of work, but I guess you could spin that someone still has a job............ until week 11.
Dennis Kneale Jr.
Davos, behave! That was exceedingly ugly, degrading, and uncalled for.
I would just add to the points anti-SL is that he never questions the core validity of the payroll numbers. First, the CES Birth/death model, which is an input into the unadjusted payroll figures, has become a scandal. The CES adamantly points out that the b/d adjustment is made to the unadjusted payroll figures, as if this makes the B/d model somehow 'okay', and implies that the 'adjusted' data would then not have the same bias as the 'unadjusted' data. The BLS did finally admit earlier this fall that its B/d model has become invalid, as it has been adding hundreds of thousands of phantom jobs to payroll numbers during the depression. Its initial estimate of its own error is an overstatement of 824,000, I believe. Income and payroll tax withholding, as numerous other blogs correctly point out, suggest a much deeper and continuing decline in payrolls, not an improvement or a 'getting worse slower' case. The household data are also so flawed as to be worthless. By comparison to the 30's depression and adjusting for alternative definitions of unemployment as well as gender differences, one can argue that ture unemployment is now as bad if not worse than during the height of the 30's depression. The gov't social safety net is still masking this, but the collapse of state budgets suggest an eventual withdrawl of much of said safety net in due time. Perhaps if SL presented all the data, rather than cherry picking according to the wants of his prior GE overlords (will Comcast do the same?), maybe he would regain a bit of credibility.