Investing

[Deleterious]

 

[chasfh]

I don't know what you think, but even though I believe every administration fudges numbers here and there to make themselves look a little better, I can't help but wonder whether the Trump BLS is completely cooking these numbers.

[gehringer_2]

That's actually a better sign when looked at with the retail sales figures. Retails sales are up  - the theory is that people are trying to beat tariff price increases, but that should have given retailers some pricing leverage -  but if it did they didn't use it.

[Deleterious]

I imagine CPI numbers are fairly legit.  The formula to calculate it is public so a journalist with some hustle could get the data and plug it in to check.  Plus, the Federal Reserve does its own inflation report and it usually tracks with the BLS numbers.  It would be pretty hard to stack the Fed with yes men like a president could with the Labor Department.

Unemployment numbers on the other hand, oh boy.  I would trust the used car salesman at one of those finance anyone lots before I would trust unemployment numbers. 

[Hongbit]

4 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

I imagine CPI numbers are fairly legit.  The formula to calculate it is public so a journalist with some hustle could get the data and plug it in to check.  Plus, the Federal Reserve does its own inflation report and it usually tracks with the BLS numbers.  It would be pretty hard to stack the Fed with yes men like a president could with the Labor Department.

Unemployment numbers on the other hand, oh boy.  I would trust the used car salesman at one of those finance anyone lots before I would trust unemployment numbers. 

You have stumbled upon one of the very big issues with CPI.  The BLS use a very antiquated survey system and non-transparent model of how they compline and they later revise that data. 

[gehringer_2]

33 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

You have stumbled upon one of the very big issues with CPI.  The BLS use a very antiquated survey system and non-transparent model of how they compline and they later revise that data. 

True, the counterpoint would be that for April, the number the FED appears to watch - the PCEI was up 2.8 core 2.7 overall

Edited Tuesday at 04:42 PM by gehringer_2

[Hongbit]

21 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

True, the counterpoint would be that for April, the number the FED appears to watch - the PCEI was up 2.8 core 2.7 overall

Part of the issue is there is a 100% chance that these numbers reported today will be revised twice.   Next month and again at the end of the year.  

Every month I scratch my head at why these reports still move markets.  Any real accuracy on a month by month number can only get done at the end of the year after the true numbers are finally put out.   

 

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, Deleterious said:

I imagine CPI numbers are fairly legit.  The formula to calculate it is public so a journalist with some hustle could get the data and plug it in to check.

Then it’s the journalist’s word against the administration’s, with division along the usual lines and nothing being conclusively resolved. 

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Hongbit said:

Part of the issue is there is a 100% chance that these numbers reported today will be revised twice.   Next month and again at the end of the year.  

Every month I scratch my head at why these reports still move markets.  Any real accuracy on a month by month number can only get done at the end of the year after the true numbers are finally put out.   

 

It's the old line about managing the US economy is like steering an oil tanker while only looking in the rear view mirror.

One thing for sure though, if an administration actually gets a hold on an ability to manipulate the numbers, I can't think of a clearer signal we are done as a functioning democracy.

[Tiger337]

How will this work?  Is there going to be a wide selection of choices or is it going to be a high cost "preferred stock" fund?  

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/1-000-maga-accounts-wont-actually-make-most-american-kids-richer-experts-say-9fd6b9a2?mod=home_ln

 

Quote

the bill proposes a pilot program to create a so-called “Money Account for Growth and Advancement,” or “MAGA” account, for every child who is a U.S. citizen born after Dec. 31, 2024 and before Jan. 1, 2029. The accounts would be funded with $1,000 of taxpayer money that a family would invest in stocks. The money would be withdrawable from the account only after the child reaches the age of 18. 

 

[1776]

8 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

How will this work?  Is there going to be a wide selection of choices or is it going to be a high cost "preferred stock" fund?  

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/1-000-maga-accounts-wont-actually-make-most-american-kids-richer-experts-say-9fd6b9a2?mod=home_ln

 

 

A little bit more information here on the maga fund. 
 

https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/20250513438/1000-maga-accounts-wont-actually-make-most-american-kids-richer-experts-say

[1776]

After reading the Morningstar piece, I’m not at all impressed with this idea. The money is taxed upon withdrawal. That’s a huge penalty on the idea as a whole. 
 
 

[Deleterious]

Never understood why they went away from one of the most iconic names in TV.

 

[gehringer_2]

31 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

Never understood why they went away from one of the most iconic names in TV.

 

LOL - American Management: I worked for a fortune 100 that was horizontal integration of a bunch of very successful subsids. The divisions all had tons of long standing market cred and goodwill tied up in their names. The mothership in Houston couldn't wait to homogenize it all under their own logo -  to prove how smart they were I guess. Company ended being partially dismembered and sold at least twice after that brilliance.

[oblong]

Jac Nasser tried to demote Ford, and the Blue Oval, into just a brand like all the others in the portfolio to disastrous results.

I still called it HBO Max

Max to me meant Skinemax and those shows and movies I heard were on that network back in the 80s and 90s and 00s. 

 

 

[Tiger337]

3 hours ago, 1776 said:

A little bit more information here on the maga fund. 
 

https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/20250513438/1000-maga-accounts-wont-actually-make-most-american-kids-richer-experts-say

I'd like to know which companies are included in this private fund.  

[CMRivdogs]

1 hour ago, Deleterious said:

Never understood why they went away from one of the most iconic names in TV.

 

Much like 25 plus years ago when CBS radio bought Westinghouse Broadcasting (radio) then managed somehow to merge with Mel Karmazin to form Infinity Broadcasting. (Now Audacy)

[CMRivdogs]

 

[1776]

57 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I'd like to know which companies are included in this private fund.  

Even though the alleged Pelosi quote was likely taken out of context, my first thought after reading your comment was, ‘We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.’ I mean, that is how the federal government operates. 
 

I have searched for what funds/companies/stocks would be in this investment. I’m not finding anything on this. 
The Joint Committee on Taxation pegs the cost of these new accounts to the Treasury at $17.3 billion over 10 years. Of course, the taxes on the realized gains would recoup some this money. 
I don’t know why the morons in Washington don’t just work to improve the existing Roth IRA options that currently exist now. The Roth IRA is one of the most under appreciated investment vehicles out there for the average investor. This would be a much better approach than what I’m seeing in this bill. 

 

[gehringer_2]

24 minutes ago, 1776 said:

Even though the alleged Pelosi quote was likely taken out of context, my first thought after reading your comment was, ‘We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.’ I mean, that is how the federal government operates. 
 

I have searched for what funds/companies/stocks would be in this investment. I’m not finding anything on this. 
The Joint Committee on Taxation pegs the cost of these new accounts to the Treasury at $17.3 billion over 10 years. Of course, the taxes on the realized gains would recoup some this money. 
I don’t know why the morons in Washington don’t just work to improve the existing Roth IRA options that currently exist now. The Roth IRA is one of the most under appreciated investment vehicles out there for the average investor. This would be a much better approach than what I’m seeing in this bill. 

 

and if the gov is going to be responsible for picking private sector managers, the grift potential is off the charts. That's why the Dems have been shooting down repeated GOP proposals for privately managed gov investment vehicles since Reagan.

Edited 7 hours ago by gehringer_2

[oblong]

now they are poking fun at themselves, which is good.  Taking a meme based on a rival's IP and making it your own.  HBO Go was pretty awesome at the time, even if it had issues at first.

[chasfh]

4 hours ago, Deleterious said:

Never understood why they went away from one of the most iconic names in TV.

 

That's good, because I hadn't stopped calling it HBO Max.