Net US Treasury withdrawals up 3.82%...
$SPX is reporting revenue growth of 10.1% in Q2 2018, which would be the highest revenue growth since Q3 2011. https://t.co/mywCwPAYAb pic.twitter.com/RST4OPqHm3
— FactSet (@FactSet) September 2, 2018
$SPX is reporting revenue growth of 10.1% in Q2 2018, which would be the highest revenue growth since Q3 2011. https://t.co/mywCwPAYAb pic.twitter.com/RST4OPqHm3
— FactSet (@FactSet) September 2, 2018
16 comments:
If the US grows at 5 or 6%, China won't ever over take the US. Then what, the whole narrative about multipolar world goes to shit.
I'm still hung up on the math problem of FAANGS and their exponential growth vs Gompertz growth and long term returns on the s&p.
The Gompertz growth curve would suggest that undeveloped countries grow very slowly, while emerging countries experience exponential growth, and developed countries continue to develop but slowly. 6% is slow growth for China now, while 5-6% has been out of reach for the developed countries. Does anyone think that 5-6% growth is sustainable for any significant length of time in the case of developed countries?
The emerging world is expanding quickly as demand is filled. In developed countries demand has to be manufactured through marketing and advertising and "growth" is mostly "fictitious" rather than in crease in actual actual assets. Numbers don't mean much unless they are deconstructed.
Much of the US "growth" is due to military and related spending, FIRE, and the tech sector rather than production.
Ryan, I’m biased pro-index ... don’t know if I could defend an alternative...
“Does anyone think that 5-6% growth is sustainable for any significant length of time in the case of developed countries?” ~ Tom Hickey
No. Growth for the UK and USA only exists in the financial economy (as opposed to the real economy). Plus, as Tom notes, there is growth in military and related spending.
Growth in the tech sector is debatable, whereas “growth” in the FIRE sector is extraction, not growth.
Regarding the overall combined economy, total growth figures are unknown, since growth figures are always falsified for propaganda purposes, just like unemployment figures.
The world's largest real economy is China, followed by the European Union.
The only way that the developed world can match the rate of development of the emerging world is to capture that development through neoliberal globalization, which is a euphemism for neo-imperialism and neocolonialism. The means to this end is conflating the spread of capitalism with the "spread of democracy and freedom." This is what the "trade war" with China is about — opening the Chinese economy to takeover by Western capital. This also underlies NATO solidarity based on cui bono.
Does anyone think that 5-6% growth is sustainable for any significant length of time in the case of developed countries?
Yes. The developed countries have been strangling their economies for so long that they are living way below their means, and with GDP increasingly a distorted picture. The US has been the least Austerian big developed country for decades, but it is still worse than the 1933-73 era. Cut military expenditure by 75%, socialize medicine etc and do other deflationary things, then there is even more room for enormous non-inflationary spending on science, technology, the arts and public welfare and a high wage Job Guarantee, increased to say $30/hour in a few years.
Neoliberal globalization, neo-imperialism & neocolonialism and the intentional rise in internal inequality have plainly suppressed developed world growth, not increased it.
Agree with Calgacus, my prior assumptions are
For the US
under current militaristic opening of markets and neoliberalism: Population growth 2% (mostly immigration from military/coup actions, suppressed birth rates from austerity/poverty) + Productivity Growth 2% (suppressed because most investment in military and technology)
Under Keynesian or MMT populism: Population growth 3% (higher domestic birth rate) + Productivity Growth 3% (industry and services like education and healthcare improve productivity)
“under current militaristic opening of markets and neoliberalism”
What’s wrong with 3.82% YoY growth in fiscal? Sounds pretty “Keynesian”...
The tax cuts are good.
The major increases in outlays are for interest (procyclical) and defense readiness and new weapon systems. Better than a war. Even though Trump isn't a war hawk, you can bet another DemoRepub will win another election and start bombing for peace and humanitarian market interventions in 4 or 8 years.
And don’t forget about monetary policy the QE is coming off and banks can finance more risk assets...
“The major increases in outlays are for defense readiness and new weapon systems.”
The major increases in outlays are for enriching the executives of military contractors, who maintain the federal gravy train via deliberate cost overruns and development delays that executives stretch out as for long as they can get away with it.
Every extra $billion given to military contractors is an extra $billion that goes into the executives’ pockets.
“deliberate cost overruns and development”
Should be “compensation for continued technical development”
There fixed it for you Art boy.....
Oxymoron phrase: "sustainable growth."
Even though Trump isn't a war hawk...
Donald Trump expanding use of drone strikes - Axios
https://www.axios.com/trump-drone-strikes-iraq-and-syria-8a242b2b-2387-4153-ad9d-68ecda71b344.html
Should be, “theft of federal dollars.”
There fixed it for you moron…
Go back to finger painting....
From Mikes latest:
“In the latest bank report from the Fed, bank credit was up a strong, $32 bln, with Loans and Leases up $12.3 bln. All loan segments advanced, even autos for the first time in a while.”
Reserve assets at Depositories is set to break below $2T for the first time in like 10 years any week now... previous high 100s of $B higher...
Post a Comment