Holiday Sales Up 22% from Last Year
Which is it? Both can't be true at the same time. Either sales are up or sales are down. Looking at the articles and all the associated articles, it appears that sales are up (20 percent or more) across the entire market. The negative numbers are specific sectors or sub-sections (enclosed malls). It appears that the negative articles are written that way to indicate that the market and economy are doing much worse than they really are. This isn't the first time.
There is a significant amount of "talking down" of the economy. You can see this in the housing bubble theories, companies not doing enough, and the dire predictions of a weak holiday season (since proven untrue).
Unemployment is at 5.0 percent, despite two hurricanes. This is roughly half the rate of unemployment throughout most of Europe. Current income is up, GDP is growing (3.8 percent), and the stock market is up. Despite this, pundits insist that doom and gloom is coming even though economic indicators will continue to show increases.
Let's be honest a moment, it isn't the Republicans campaigning on a bad economy, it's the Democrats. Liberals' campaigns say that the economy is in the tank and that everyone is suffering despite the complete lack of any evidence to support those claims. Income is up. Home ownership is up. Unemployment is down. Home values are up. Almost every traditional indicator shows that the economy is growing, yet the perception is fostered that we are heading toward a Great Depression.
This trend in reporting shows two things. Democrats are beyond using facts to scare voters about the economy. Instead of coming up with a platform to better America, they spend their time telling America how bad things are. Facts be damned. Second, it shows that the press, once again, is in the tank with the Democrats' agenda and is carrying the water for them. The story is a roaring economy, but they search and scour for some shred of evidence to talk it down. Objective reporting or campaigning? I think the answer is clear.
Article comments
1 - Alethinos
Bombastic... The "it's all a liberal conspiracy" thing is growing very thin... We all know - we LIVE the economy. We can see what happens. The rich DO get richer - just QUICKER under Republicans is all...
Alethinos
2 - Dave Nalle
Nice start here, Bambi. But you could go into so much more detail. There are other even stronger economic indicators - like the stock market and saving and investment levels which are even more positive.
As Alethinos points out the rich are getting richer, but so are the middle class, and the truth is that both of those groups are GROWING. The poor are only getting poorer because those who can earn a decent living are leaving the ranks of the poor and those who are left behind are the most earnings-challenged in that group.
Dave
3 - Scott
Bambi, you do realize that the first two articles you link to do not contradict each other, right?
4 - Natalie Davis
That's true. In fact, the article's title is "Holiday Sales Get Off to Modest Start."
From that first article:
The 22 percent figure from the second article is in line with what is reported in the first -- the difference is that the first piece notes that different merchants had different experiences and that at some stores, the number of shoppers dropped after time-restricted sales came to an end. And expectations differed too: Some retailers may consider 22 percent to be a "modest" increase, given their dependence on the holiday-shopping season as the big moneymaker of the year.
In other words, any numbers are mere speculation at this point.
Whatever. When I look at the economy, watching how people live tells me more than any statistics. And from what I see, things are for shit right now.
5 - Natalie Davis
Oh, the second article's title is "Holiday sales dip, then they dazzle; Season-opening weekend rises 22%"
6 - Bliffle
When GWB came into office we had 140 million people employed in this economy, now we have 139 million. And those survivors are making lower wages and rates, too.
The fact is, the classes are diverging. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
7 - RJ
The Dems and their MSM allies are just waiting for an economic downturn. They've been waiting since about 2003, when "double-dip recession" was the phrase of the day.
At some point, the economy will head south. That's just what free markets do. And if this downturn occurs while Bush is still in office, they will blame it all on him, and say: SEE! I TOLD YOU SO!
And if it occurs a year or two after he leaves office? they will blame it all on him, and say: SEE! I TOLD YOU SO!
So, whenever the economy hits a rough patch, as it inevitably will, they will blame Bush for it, and claim they were predicting it all along.
That's the game.
8 - Alethinos
Natalie, you ought to know by now Bombastic can't READ what he's responding and linking to, he can only WRITE, and that's up for debate among various anthropologists. Come on! It's what we all know and have come to love about the guy...
Alethinos
9 - RJ
From the BLS:
Civilian labor force when Bush took office - 143.8 million
Civilian labor force now - 150.1 million
(An addition of 6.3 million)
Employment level when Bush took office - 137.8 million
Employment level now - 142.6 million
(An addition of 4.8 million)
Unemployment rate when Bush took office - 4.2%
Unemployment rate now - 5.0%
(An increase of 0.8%)
- - -
It should be noted that the economy began heading downward in late 2000, while Clinton was still President. Negative growth started in March 2001, when Bush had been in office less than 2 months. Positive growth began again in November of 2001, ironically less than 2 months after the worst terrorist attack in the history of the world. And the economy has been growing ever since.
10 - Alethinos
RJ, let's not forget that ever so SLIGHT deficit of 8 TRILLION...
Let's also not forget that there wasn't one when Bush took office.
Let's not forget that Bush plans to "handle" the deficit not by raising taxes, even SLIGHTLY on the rich and corporate America... No, he's going to take it from my mother and grandmother in medicare assistance... He's going to take it from my neighbor's foodstamps, the one's he's just received and embarassed to use, but will need to since his job has moved overseas...
And let's not forget that the economy hasn't come "roaring" back... it has crept back, inch by inch of the past five years. And now it will have to contend with a gargantuan debt - which leaves us very vulnerable to the whims of our foreign owners...
BUT OTHER THAN THAT... Yah, things are peachy right now..
Alethinos
Oh yah, then there's Iraq.
11 - MCH
Re comment #9;
A few more stats for your list:
Cost of the iraq invasion and occupation - $222,820,000,000 (about 223 billion dollars)**
American soldiers killed in Iraq - 2,108**
Female American soldiers killed in Iraq - 42**
American soldiers killed in Iraq since GW
Bush's "Mission Accomplished" speech May 1, 2003 - 1,971**
American soldiers wounded in combat in Iraq - 15,704**
**and counting....
12 - Dave Nalle
RJ, let's not forget that ever so SLIGHT deficit of 8 TRILLION...
That's the debt, not the deficit. The deficit is around $335 billion for 2004.
Let's also not forget that there wasn't one when Bush took office.
The debt increased at a higher rate during all but the last year of Clinton's administration than at any time during the Bush administration.
Dave
13 - Alethinos
Dave... You're right of course. Sorry for mis-typing that...
But, no, the economy was far healthier under Clinton. I didn't like the man but the course he took was considerably better than Bush's. The man is so clueless he feels we can actually escape this without raising taxes... At least on his friends.
Alethinos
14 - Dave Nalle
Since his 'friends' include me and everyone I know who has a job, I find his tax policy pretty appealing.
As for the economy being healthier under Clinton, that may have been true up until the very end of his administration when the price for his policies had to be paid. But it really wasn't Clinton's doing. Despite his supposed surpluses, the national debt still grew substantially during his 8 years.
Dave
15 - Alethinos
Oh come on now Dave! Oh wait! WAIT! I get it! You've enrolled in the DICK CHENEY SCHOOL OF REVISIONIST HISTORY WRITING haven't you! Of course! How's that going? Are these your first writing assingments? Excellent job... You NEARLY had me old stick...
Alethinos
16 - troll
where is the absolute good in reducing one's tax burden - why is this a political 'holy grail' - ?
perhaps the US could improve its bureaucracy without starving it...
just a question and a suggestion from one who prefers the plunder - tribute - tithe approach to public finance
---
business = war
war = hell
=> business = hell
role of government = promote business
=> role of government = promote hell
Bush runs the government
=> Bush promotes hell
Satan promotes hell
=> Bush = Satan
I hope that clears it all up
troll
17 - Alethinos
Yes Troll... What no one ever seems to point out is that the FEDERAL tax is amazingly low. It is virtually non-existent for both the very rich and the extremely poor. It bulges there in the middle but it has been hacked away at during both the Clinton and Bush administration. It isn't and HASN'T been federal taxes that have been a drain, if there is one, on people's pocket book - it is the SHIFT IN TAXING BURDEN from the Fed to the STATES...
Because of this constant hue and cry to CUT federal taxes a lot of the costs of programs, CRITICAL, physical, social, financial, educational INFRASTRUCTURE MUST be paid for by the much, much smaller population of the State. Consequently state governments reel under the massive weight of these needs with A TAX BASE that can't possibly SUPPORT them.
Yes, and yet, despite Dave's revisionism, the rich are getting terribly richer while our highways fall apart, the sewers clog, the schools are a joke... But HEY my federal taxes are low!
Alethinos
18 - Nancy
Thanks, Troll; I KNEW there had to be a logical reason why I consider Bush & Cheney to be evil.
19 - JR
RJ: At some point, the economy will head south. That's just what free markets do. And if this downturn occurs while Bush is still in office, they will blame it all on him, and say: SEE! I TOLD YOU SO!
Well, since the pro-Bush crowd is so eager to credit Bush with any upturn in the economy, it seems only fair.
20 - RJ
"RJ, let's not forget that ever so SLIGHT deficit of 8 TRILLION..."
Actually, you mean "debt" instead of "deficit"...
"Let's also not forget that there wasn't one when Bush took office."
There wasn't a national debt in the trillions when Bush took office? Cite?
21 - RJ
"What no one ever seems to point out is that the FEDERAL tax is amazingly low. It is virtually non-existent for [...] the very rich"
The top 1% of wage-earners supply roughly 33% of ALL federal income tax revenue...