3.9% GDP growth!

They did it with the juice

The fudge juice...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-26/answer-why-us-gdp-surged-q3-because-americans-are-suddenly-80-billion-poorer

You know the economy is string because the Repooplicans are used lies and emotion to take the House and Senate.

Good Gawd, what if they actually admitted that, once again America< the economy grew under a Democratic President?

Obama deserves a lot of credit. If we'd had McCain/Palin, which hurts even to write, we'd have had austerity and the U.S. would be like Europe right now, suffering through years of double or triple dip recessions and double-digit unemployment. Private-sector industrial spending on major equipment grew over 10% last quarter. But it has helped that gov't stopped cutting spending, which was a drag on the economy for years after the stimulus ended. And don't forget in the appreciation of Obama that the deficit has also plummeted more than 50% since Bush.

Flagpole wrote:

Obama DOES get some major credit here that Bush does not. Bush said bin Laden was no longer important. Obama refocused the sights on him on day 1. The seals carried out the plan, but Obama made it a priority and he absolutely gets credit for doing so.

ISIS (the JV team) is grateful.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

-Joseph Goebels

In other news:

This, today…

UMich Confidence Misses By Most In 13 Months

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/26/2014 – 10:04

Chicago PMI Suffers 4th Biggest Drop Since Lehman

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/26/2014 – 09:54

Core Durable Orders Drop Most Since Polar Vortex, Core CapEx Lowest Since May

Initial Jobless Claims Spikes Above 300k To 3-Month Highs, Biggest Miss In 11 Months

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/26/2014 – 08:36

What the hey?! wrote:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

-Joseph Goebels

In other news:

This, today…

UMich Confidence Misses By Most In 13 Months

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/26/2014 – 10:04

yep - you do lie a lot. You cite a 'miss' when it hit a 7 year high? Are you f'in kidding me?

Consumer confidence climbed to a more than seven-year high in November as Americans’ views of their financial well-being improved heading into the holiday shopping season.

The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan final index of sentiment increased to 88.8, the highest since July 2007, from 86.9 in October. The median projection in a Bloomberg survey of 60 economists called for the index to rise to 90.

Being permanently bearish on equities definitely pays.

Just ask Zero-Hedge. Unfortunately, for wool-dyed pessimists and the other overly-skeptical black sheep of the thundering herd, it pays apocalyptic newsletter writers' paychecks, and Zero-Hedge/Tyler Durden's Manhattan bar tabs rather than those who permanently position against market priapism. And it's worse than zero-sum because those who are optimistically-challenged often pay for the bad advice - whether directly in subscriptions, inflated margins on retail bullion products, or indirectly via page-views and click-throughs AND then they get hosed by the market.

The first step to improving behaviour toxic to one's own self interest is admit one has a problem. As an aid to help those who have difficulty in distinguishing "a bearish trade" from "the lead boots of anger and pessimism", I've devised a little something I call the Zero-Hedge Test to determine more precisely whether readers objective realities are sufficiently paranoid, pessimistic, anti-social and rantingly angry to warrant more serious help.

I am savoring these, gente.

one at a time.

"financial redneck" is exactly right

Amen brother. Or sister. Cassandra? Are you a woman? That would be a doubly amazing thing - a woman on lrc and in the hedgy world.

I used to be at a hedge fund - I know exactly where you are coming from.

___

In turning over a new leaf, and recognizing that I have a perpetual bearishness problem, I have terminated my newsletter subscriptions and vowed never again to watch or read Marc Faber, David Tice, Dr. Hussman and Fred Hickey. I will not read ZeroHedge, Peter Schiff, Max Keiser, anyone named "Rickards" and especially anyone like Mike Shedlock who wraps their politics so deeply into their strategy vision, they cannot possibly provide objective counsel. And I will make Investors Business Daily my read of choice in the financial markets. I will personally go and apologize to Abby Cohen, Vic Niederhoffer and Charles Gave for all those less-than-nice things I said about them. Further, I have vowed to place 50% of my money into a Vanguard global equity Index Fund, and also have vowed not to look at its asset value more than once a quarter. I have taken 25% of my funds and placed in them in a global balanced fund, and earmarked the balance for disciplined allocation on any subsequent drops, to momentum strategies.

You can put "miss" in quotes all you like, but there is no lie. F you for a false accusation.

I'm sure you're right agip (/sarc)

Those lousy, overly-negative, always pessimistic doomsayers at CNBC!! Curse them!!!

What the hey?! wrote:

agip wrote:

yep - you do lie a lot. You cite a 'miss' when it hit a 7 year high? Are you f'in kidding me?

Consumer confidence climbed to a more than seven-year high in November as Americans’ views of their financial well-being improved heading into the holiday shopping season.

The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan final index of sentiment increased to 88.8, the highest since July 2007, from 86.9 in October. The median projection in a Bloomberg survey of 60 economists called for the index to rise to 90.

You can put "miss" in quotes all you like, but there is no lie. F you for a false accusation.

I'm sure you're right agip (/sarc)

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102214309

Those lousy, overly-negative, always pessimistic doomsayers at CNBC!! Curse them!!!

oh brother.

In your first post, you cited the U Mich survey as a 'miss' despite it hitting a 7 year high.

so you were stuck with a problem. You chose a creative solution and, without telling your readers, you clumsily skipped to the Conference Board survey, which does follow your first narrative.

What am I supposed to think about you after that?

3.9%, wow that's a lot of new fast food joints.

Think what you like. The beautiful thing is your opinion doesn't really matter. You aren't a person whose opinion I value.

The original headline was not mine. Here is the article from the headline you took issue with.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-26/umich-confidence-misses-most-13-months

Take care. Be careful who you call a liar.

If you care about his opinion, why do you feel the necessity to continually respond?

...DON'T care ...

Sorry.

Just asking. wrote:

If you (don't) care about his opinion, why do you feel the necessity to continually respond?

"Continually respond"? Interesting choice of words.

Are you asking why because you actually want to know, or because you doubt that I don't care about his opinion? Your question sounds like the latter.

If it doesn't take much time, I suppose I prefer to set the record straight. When publicly accused of something, I suppose I chose to defend myself. Not for the opinion of the accuser, but more for anyone else that might mosey along and be worth caring about.

for the record, here's what I meant by 'lie'

you cited Goebells' quote, which basically said that if you lie a lot and often and consistently, people will come to believe it.

So my understanding is that you were criticizing the government for lying again and again with stats that you and zero hedge don't believe are factual. (your irrationality is not the argument here, but I'd love to have that argument another time)

So by extension, you are saying that anyone that believes the lies you claim the gov't puts out...is a sheeple.

so I took offense.

Because I don't think the gov't lies about these stats.

So I confronted you by saying, in effect, you were lying by interpreting the best consumer confidence # in 7 years was a 'miss'. Because basically it is a lie - not a black/white lie but a shading of the truth to benefit your viewpoint,

And then you tried to show you weren't crafting the data by citing a completely DIFFERENT data series. Which wasn't quite as positive, but still pretty positive.

So who is tellign somethign more true here?

You, who with absolutely no evidence, claims that the gov't manufactures stats to cow the citizens? Who cites the wingnuts at Zerohedge? Who believes the more important fact was a 'miss' ...when the real story was that the # was the highest in 7 years?

Or me, who (shock!) believes the government and doesn't wiggle the facts around?

Fact is, you are a polemicist, trying to use data to prove your point. I am an empiracist, trying to find the truth rather than prove my thesis.