This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The WSJ’s Pathetic Sunnyside Journalism - Retracts Its Own GDP Narrative
Submitted by Alhambra Partners' Jeffrey Snider via Contra Corner blog,
Last week my good friend Fred Everett emailed me the Wall Street Journal’s take on GDP. They were, as you might expect, quite optimistic about what 3.5% implied toward future acceleration finally out of this seven-year depression:
The U.S. economy expanded steadily again during the third quarter, a sign of sustained growth fueled by American consumers and businesses despite mounting concerns about the health of overseas economies.
The problem with that assessment is that it is simply untrue. GDP expanded with very little aid from American consumers and businesses, especially since PCE contribution to GDP was among the lowest since 2009 (and true capex wasn’t any better). As my recent analysis of GDP history shows, that is a reason to be very pessimistic about trends due to the simple fact that over time GDP converges with American consumers and businesses, who continue to be quite and “unexpectedly” dour despite all these hugely positive narratives.
As it turns out, a few hours later, the Wall Street Journal seems to have become aware of all of this. The opening paragraph in the same article now reads:
The U.S. economy expanded at a healthy pace during the third quarter, a sign of sustained growth fueled by government spending and a narrower trade deficit despite mounting concerns about the health of overseas economies.
While the last clause in that sentence maintains the sunshine optimism, it is hardly the same interpretation, is it? “Sustained growth” has never been “fueled” by government spending and there is nothing to indicate, short of a total collapse in demand domestically, that the trade balance will remain “narrower.” Actual and significant improvement in American consumers and businesses would indeed “fuel” sustained growth, but it has been a decade since anything like that has been experienced (and even then it was largely insufficient and artificial). Despite the headline number for GDP, that doesn’t erase this deficiency.
Did they simply just run that paragraph assuming that 3.5% would necessarily mean what they said? Was it all just hope that no one would notice?
This is, to me, beyond simply bias toward whatever orthodox narrative is convention – which right now means the FOMC’s idea of recovery. Content and pesky facts should matter more than the narrative, which becomes all-too-clear in the retraction; it completely changes the context, and thus meaning, but yet the dominant sentiment remains unaltered despite the illogic of the correction. In this case, as with so much commentary, the data can change but that does nothing to modify the narrative as it is “too important” to simply let go.
»
- 5679 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
F! the WSJ!...As useless as CNBS and Bloomturd.
dropping a punch bowl on a terd
And with the "Strong" Dollar, exports are also likely to start suffering from 4Q14.
Yeah because using your own money to buy things makes you richer?
The U.S. economy expanded at a healthy pace during the third quarter, a sign of sustained growth fueled by government spending and a narrower trade deficit despite mounting concerns about the health
If you find truth in a Rupert Murdoch newspaper, it is only by mistake.
Rupet Murdoch? The WSJ, NYT and Washington Post are the biggest pieces of trash. Murdoch own them too?
They are all the same thing. They just pander to different cultural groups. The key thing is that none of them gets supreme power for an extended period of time.
It's kind of like a few guys (news agencies) sharing the same hooker (US public). Sometimes it shifts left, sometimes right, but bottom line is the hooker is getting fucked by the agencies who are in control.
When one side is slightly out of favor the other is in a refractory period, having a beer until they can fuck the hooker again.
Researchers working through Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth are planning a lawsuit that will target the release all of the records gathered during the investigation of the September 11th attacks. David Cole, one of the leading researchers, was told by the agencies that the number of documents, images and other items totals nearly 500,000 records that would provide critical new insight into discrepancies with the official report. The records include most of the evidence collected by NIST, FEMA and various contractors, as some is unavailable for various reasons. Cole has suspicions the real total may be far higher than half a million.
Read more
http://wtfrly.com/2014/11/01/ae-911-truth-researchers-plan-lawsuit-seek-...
Q: What is found at the front door lying?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A: It's the newspaper.
The good side to all of this is that TPTB have been exposed to all who care to see. Hopefully, come the financial apocalypse we will see a wider dissemination of deserved punishment than in the 1930's - to those who truly should be the targets.
It has become clear and patently obvious that we are being constantly manipulated to think a certain way. Perhaps the internet will become more than a source of pet cat videos and enlightenment will spread. If not, maybe Ebola will take care of the idiocracy fodder. If neither, I weep for the future of our civilization.
All Lies. All the time.
ZH, you could've left the headline: "WSJ's Pathetic." And so they are.
There is no such thing as a 'trade deficit'. They send the the results of their raw materials, labor and manufacturing capacity and we send them paper. Trade is balanced.
US shale oil will produce less GDP, while more oil will be imported. The media gilds the rotten future.
At least the WSJ covered itself (somewhat). In Barron's magazine, one of the featured writers was lauding the 3.50% GDP print with ***NO*** comment as to how government spending boosted the report.
"Personally, I thought both versions were incredibly negative", said every talking head shill reporter at CNBC.
Funny, this piece - in a piercing way. Look at the header above - to the far right of the screen. Marc Chandler's (Marc to Market) usual weekly blather about the all-dominant 'King $Dollar'. He states the importance of 'analysis', while blithering on about the 3.5% GDP print as 'proof' yet again, of solid economic footing, 'sustained recovery' and 'strength'. Yet, he provides 0 analysis of the story behind the 3.5% print, other than the obvious trouble in Japan & Europe. For a reality check, we rely on Gentlemen like Jeffrey Snider and David Stockman. How is it, professor Chandler, that these two blokes can easily provide the Accurate backdrop for the recent 3.5% GDP print, but all YOU can do is prattle on about how supreme the $DX is and how anyone who suggests otherwise is a tin-foil-hatter...?
GDP Math - In 2011 gov spent over $61,000 in welfare benefits per American household. It has increased since 2011.
They will get their 3.5% by understating the GDP deflator by saying there is no inflation.
Fuck it. Set the deflator to zero and have Real GDP = nominal GDP.
If America public can be sold the low inflations numbers and the U-3 rate instead of the u-6 rate of unemployment. They can be sold anything.
Screw the WSJ-read Investors Business Daily (and ZH, of course!)
So the writer for the WSJ is a Prozac junkie.
What's the beef?
Good work, Winston, you've earned an extra ration of gin.