<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Global Economic Intersection</title>
	<atom:link href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress</link>
	<description>Global Economic News and Analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 22:03:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Economic Zeitgeist</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36506</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36506#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 21:21:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[macroeconomics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Austrian economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marginalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Naked Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neoclassical economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[objectivism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philip Pilkington]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subjectivism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[utility]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36506</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<h3><em>The Ideology to End Ideologies – A Response to Corey Robin on Nietzsche, Hayek, Mises, and Marginalism</em></h3>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Philip Pilkington</em></p>
<em>This article was first published by <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com" target="_blank">Naked Capitalism</a></em> (May 13, 2013)
<blockquote><strong>Editor's Note:</strong> <em>Econintersect</em> considers this a fundamentally important discussion of the philosophical underpinnings of 20th and 21st century economic thinking.  It is contentious, to the point of being "in your face", and is a far more complex subject than many would try to address in an essay of this length.  However, the author has succeeded illustriously in his effort.  The  reader is encouraged to take the time to read this carefully and critically.  We think it is well worth the effort.</blockquote>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" title="ar849d8" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar849d8.png" alt="" width="180" height="159" />The political philosopher Corey Robin recently published <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/174219/nietzsches-marginal-children-friedrich-hayek">an interesting essay</a> on what he thinks to be the connection between the late German  philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and the economic theory of marginalism  which Robin associates with the Austrian school (<em>but which, of course,  is also a mainstay of mainstream neoclassical economics</em>). I should start  by saying that I respect Robin’s work a great deal; I respect it to the  extent that <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/01/philip-pilkington-the-reactionary-mind-%E2%80%93-the-truth-about-conservatism-an-interview-with-corey-robin-part-i.html">I did an interview with him</a> for this very site when his last book appeared. However, his latest  piece is grossly misguided and reflective of the fact that, when it  comes to theoretical economics, academic critics on the left simply do  not know their enemy at all.<span id="more-36506"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36506">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h3><em>The Ideology to End Ideologies – A Response to Corey Robin on Nietzsche, Hayek, Mises, and Marginalism</em></h3>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Philip Pilkington</em></p>
<em>This article was first published by <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com" target="_blank">Naked Capitalism</a></em> (May 13, 2013)
<blockquote><strong>Editor's Note:</strong> <em>Econintersect</em> considers this a fundamentally important discussion of the philosophical underpinnings of 20th and 21st century economic thinking.  It is contentious, to the point of being "in your face", and is a far more complex subject than many would try to address in an essay of this length.  However, the author has succeeded illustriously in his effort.  The  reader is encouraged to take the time to read this carefully and critically.  We think it is well worth the effort.</blockquote>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" title="ar849d8" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar849d8.png" alt="" width="180" height="159" />The political philosopher Corey Robin recently published <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/174219/nietzsches-marginal-children-friedrich-hayek">an interesting essay</a> on what he thinks to be the connection between the late German  philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and the economic theory of marginalism  which Robin associates with the Austrian school (<em>but which, of course,  is also a mainstay of mainstream neoclassical economics</em>). I should start  by saying that I respect Robin’s work a great deal; I respect it to the  extent that <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/01/philip-pilkington-the-reactionary-mind-%E2%80%93-the-truth-about-conservatism-an-interview-with-corey-robin-part-i.html">I did an interview with him</a> for this very site when his last book appeared. However, his latest  piece is grossly misguided and reflective of the fact that, when it  comes to theoretical economics, academic critics on the left simply do  not know their enemy at all.<span id="more-36506"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36506">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36506</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should You Tell Your Kid to Drop Out of High School?</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36361</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36361#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 07:01:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weekly Economic Summary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[college]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dropout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high school]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[university]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weekly review]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36361</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
There have been several posts over the past few weeks discussing college / university education.  Goldman Sachs economist Jan Hatzius <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/hatzius-college-educated-unemployment-2013-5#ixzz2T3GgQsJ6">stated</a>:
<blockquote>[T]he faster job growth among college graduates is entirely due to  faster growth in the size of the college-educated population; the  employment/population ratio among college graduates has in fact fallen  sharply,</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/z-temp10.png"><img class="size-full wp-image-36363 aligncenter" title="z temp" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/z-temp10.png" alt="" width="380" height="142" /></a></p>
<span id="more-36361"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36361">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
There have been several posts over the past few weeks discussing college / university education.  Goldman Sachs economist Jan Hatzius <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/hatzius-college-educated-unemployment-2013-5#ixzz2T3GgQsJ6">stated</a>:
<blockquote>[T]he faster job growth among college graduates is entirely due to  faster growth in the size of the college-educated population; the  employment/population ratio among college graduates has in fact fallen  sharply,</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/z-temp10.png"><img class="size-full wp-image-36363 aligncenter" title="z temp" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/z-temp10.png" alt="" width="380" height="142" /></a></p>
<span id="more-36361"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36361">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36361</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Initial Claims Not Great but Not as Bad as Claimed</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36542</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36542#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 22:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lee Adler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36542</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Lee Adler, <a href="http://affiliate.plugnpay.com/affiliate.cgi?url=http://wallstreetexaminer.com&amp;ampaffiliate=haganes&amp;merchant=capitalsto" target="_blank">Wall Street Examiner</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 6px;" title="ar859d4" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar859d4.png" alt="" width="180" height="58" />The media exhibited much consternation today as economists’ consensus guess on first time unemployment claims turned out to be way too  optimistic this week. That raised two questions in my mind. Was the  number really that bad, and even if it was, does it matter?

The <a href="http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/eta20130939.htm">Labor Department reported</a> that the seasonally adjusted (SA) representation of first time claims for unemployment rose by 32,000 to 360,000 from a revised 328,000 (was 323,000) in the advance report for the week ended May 11, 2013. The  consensus estimate of economists of 330,000 for the SA headline number was too optimistic after 3 weeks of guesses that were too pessimistic. Call it “<em>evening things up.</em>” They were wrong one way 3 times in a row, so they overcompensated the other way this week. It’s a ridiculous game, but everybody plays anyway. Forecasters are virtually always wrong, not just because economic forecasting is quackery, but also because the seasonally adjusted number, being made-up, is impossible to consistently guess (<em>see endnote</em>).<span id="more-36542"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36542">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Lee Adler, <a href="http://affiliate.plugnpay.com/affiliate.cgi?url=http://wallstreetexaminer.com&amp;ampaffiliate=haganes&amp;merchant=capitalsto" target="_blank">Wall Street Examiner</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 6px;" title="ar859d4" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar859d4.png" alt="" width="180" height="58" />The media exhibited much consternation today as economists’ consensus guess on first time unemployment claims turned out to be way too  optimistic this week. That raised two questions in my mind. Was the  number really that bad, and even if it was, does it matter?

The <a href="http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/eta20130939.htm">Labor Department reported</a> that the seasonally adjusted (SA) representation of first time claims for unemployment rose by 32,000 to 360,000 from a revised 328,000 (was 323,000) in the advance report for the week ended May 11, 2013. The  consensus estimate of economists of 330,000 for the SA headline number was too optimistic after 3 weeks of guesses that were too pessimistic. Call it “<em>evening things up.</em>” They were wrong one way 3 times in a row, so they overcompensated the other way this week. It’s a ridiculous game, but everybody plays anyway. Forecasters are virtually always wrong, not just because economic forecasting is quackery, but also because the seasonally adjusted number, being made-up, is impossible to consistently guess (<em>see endnote</em>).<span id="more-36542"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36542">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36542</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Preliminary May 2013 Michigan Consumer Sentiment Highest Since July 2007</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36368</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36368#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 14:50:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Doug Short</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Consumer Sentiment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Advisor Perspectives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conference Board]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer confidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Doug Short]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dshort.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36368</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Doug Short, <a href="http://advisorperspectives.com/dshort/" target="_blank">Advisor Perspectives/dshort.com</a></em></p>
<img style="margin: 6px; float: left;" title="z consumer" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/z-consumer.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="128" />

The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment preliminary number for  May came in at 83.7, a major advance over the April final reading of  76.4. This is the highest level since July of 2007, prior to the Great  Recession. The Briefing.com consensus was for 78.5.

See the chart below for a long-term perspective on this widely  watched index. I've highlighted recessions and included real GDP to help  evaluate the correlation between the Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index  and the broader economy.

<span id="more-36368"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36368">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Doug Short, <a href="http://advisorperspectives.com/dshort/" target="_blank">Advisor Perspectives/dshort.com</a></em></p>
<img style="margin: 6px; float: left;" title="z consumer" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/z-consumer.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="128" />

The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment preliminary number for  May came in at 83.7, a major advance over the April final reading of  76.4. This is the highest level since July of 2007, prior to the Great  Recession. The Briefing.com consensus was for 78.5.

See the chart below for a long-term perspective on this widely  watched index. I've highlighted recessions and included real GDP to help  evaluate the correlation between the Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index  and the broader economy.

<span id="more-36368"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36368">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36368</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 2013 Leading Economic Index Forecasts Continuing Economic Expansion</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36366</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36366#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 14:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[LEI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CEI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conference Board]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic indicator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ECRI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[forecast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36366</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin-left: 4px; margin-right: 4px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-lei1.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="170" />

The Conference Board Leading Economic Index (LEI) for the U.S. improved 0.6% in April to 95.0 (2004 = 100).   Overall, the index value has been slowly trending up, and one month is not a trend.

This index is designed to forecast the economy six months in advance.    The market expected a 0.3% improvement in the LEI (versus the +0.6% reported).

Both the LEI and ECRI's WLI are forecasting improving growth for the next six months.

<span id="more-36366"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36366">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin-left: 4px; margin-right: 4px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-lei1.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="170" />

The Conference Board Leading Economic Index (LEI) for the U.S. improved 0.6% in April to 95.0 (2004 = 100).   Overall, the index value has been slowly trending up, and one month is not a trend.

This index is designed to forecast the economy six months in advance.    The market expected a 0.3% improvement in the LEI (versus the +0.6% reported).

Both the LEI and ECRI's WLI are forecasting improving growth for the next six months.

<span id="more-36366"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36366">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36366</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Uncertainty, Liquidity Hoarding, and Financial Crises</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36150</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36150#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 21:13:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money and banking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Central banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[haircuts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interbank market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberty Street Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liquidity hoarding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[repo runs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tanju Yorulmazer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36150</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p class="entry-header"><strong>Analysis from Liberty Street Economics</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Tanju Yorulmazer, </em><em> <a href="http://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/" target="_blank">Federal Reserve Bank of New York</a></em></p>
One of the most interesting phenomena marking the recent financial crisis was the disruptions in the interbank market, where banks borrow and lend reserves to each other. This post draws upon my paper with Douglas Gale, “<a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1794062" target="“_blank”">Liquidity Hoarding</a>,” to discuss this practice by banks during times of increased uncertainty about future liquidity needs and its consequences for the efficient transfer of liquidity in the interbank market.
<p style="text-align: left;"><img class="aligncenter" title="money-hoarding-under-matress" src="http://econintersect.com/images/2013/4/380_82111295money-hoarding-under-matress.JPG" alt="" width="380" height="209" /><span id="more-36150"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36150">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="entry-header"><strong>Analysis from Liberty Street Economics</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Tanju Yorulmazer, </em><em> <a href="http://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/" target="_blank">Federal Reserve Bank of New York</a></em></p>
One of the most interesting phenomena marking the recent financial crisis was the disruptions in the interbank market, where banks borrow and lend reserves to each other. This post draws upon my paper with Douglas Gale, “<a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1794062" target="“_blank”">Liquidity Hoarding</a>,” to discuss this practice by banks during times of increased uncertainty about future liquidity needs and its consequences for the efficient transfer of liquidity in the interbank market.
<p style="text-align: left;"><img class="aligncenter" title="money-hoarding-under-matress" src="http://econintersect.com/images/2013/4/380_82111295money-hoarding-under-matress.JPG" alt="" width="380" height="209" /><span id="more-36150"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36150">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36150</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>May 2013 Philly Fed Business Outlook Goes Negative</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36370</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36370#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 16:36:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail & Business Sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[backlog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conditions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philly Fed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philly_man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36370</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" title="philly fed headquarters" src="http://www.philadelphiafed.org/about-the-fed/_images/philadelphia-fed-exterior.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="117" />

The Philly Fed Business Outlook Survey fell into negative (contraction) - after two months in positive territory. This survey has been negative for 9 of the last 13 months. Key element new orders slipped further into contraction territory.

This is a very noisy index which readers should be reminded is sentiment based. The Philly Fed historically is one of the most negative of all the Fed manufacturing surveys.

The market was expecting the index value of 2.0 to 2.5 (actual was -5.2).  Positive numbers indicate market expansion, negative numbers indicate contraction.
<span id="more-36370"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36370">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" title="philly fed headquarters" src="http://www.philadelphiafed.org/about-the-fed/_images/philadelphia-fed-exterior.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="117" />

The Philly Fed Business Outlook Survey fell into negative (contraction) - after two months in positive territory. This survey has been negative for 9 of the last 13 months. Key element new orders slipped further into contraction territory.

This is a very noisy index which readers should be reminded is sentiment based. The Philly Fed historically is one of the most negative of all the Fed manufacturing surveys.

The market was expecting the index value of 2.0 to 2.5 (actual was -5.2).  Positive numbers indicate market expansion, negative numbers indicate contraction.
<span id="more-36370"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36370">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36370</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Residential Building Sector Growth Continues in April 2013</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36372</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36372#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 14:44:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Construction Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[housing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new home completions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new homes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new housing construction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[permits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36372</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 19px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-permits2.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="127" />Residential building permits and construction completions in April 2013 continues to show the industry growth.
<ul>
	<li>Our analysis paints a slightly different picture than the headline data.</li>
	<li>Apartment building permits comparing April 2012 to April 2013 are stronger this month.</li>
	<li>The rate of annual growth for building permits in the last 12 months for this sector has been mostly in a channel between  25% and 40%. This month is above this channel.</li>
	<li>Please note that the media concentrates on housing starts as a single metric for this data series - while <em>Econintersect</em> focuses on the general growth trends of the sector (permits versus completions) which are the best indicator of trends which show the health of this sector. Housing starts would give an indication of construction contribution to GDP.</li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36372"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36372">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 19px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-permits2.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="127" />Residential building permits and construction completions in April 2013 continues to show the industry growth.
<ul>
	<li>Our analysis paints a slightly different picture than the headline data.</li>
	<li>Apartment building permits comparing April 2012 to April 2013 are stronger this month.</li>
	<li>The rate of annual growth for building permits in the last 12 months for this sector has been mostly in a channel between  25% and 40%. This month is above this channel.</li>
	<li>Please note that the media concentrates on housing starts as a single metric for this data series - while <em>Econintersect</em> focuses on the general growth trends of the sector (permits versus completions) which are the best indicator of trends which show the health of this sector. Housing starts would give an indication of construction contribution to GDP.</li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36372"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36372">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36372</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 2013 CPI Moderates to 1.1% Year-over-Year Inflation</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36374</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36374#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 13:36:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Doug Short</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prices - PPI, CPI and More]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Advisor Perspectives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CPI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Doug Short]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dshort.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[export prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[finished goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gasoline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inflation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[producer prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36374</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Doug Short and <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin-left: 6px; margin-right: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-cpi.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="160" />The April 2013 Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) year-over-year inflation rate fell from 1.5% to 1.1% .    Core inflation (CPI less food and energy) fell slightly also from 1.9% to 1.7%.

The dynamics were large decreases from the gasoline index (which is not part of core inflation), and some inflationary pressures   from electricity and natural gas.

The Producer Price Index (<a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36380" target="_blank">released yesterday</a>) showed finished goods fell to a 0.6% year-over-year inflation rate.

<span id="more-36374"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36374">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Doug Short and <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin-left: 6px; margin-right: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-cpi.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="160" />The April 2013 Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) year-over-year inflation rate fell from 1.5% to 1.1% .    Core inflation (CPI less food and energy) fell slightly also from 1.9% to 1.7%.

The dynamics were large decreases from the gasoline index (which is not part of core inflation), and some inflationary pressures   from electricity and natural gas.

The Producer Price Index (<a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36380" target="_blank">released yesterday</a>) showed finished goods fell to a 0.6% year-over-year inflation rate.

<span id="more-36374"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36374">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36374</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 2013 Sea Container Counts Are Still Contracting</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36393</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36393#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 05:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[container]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shipping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[traffic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truck]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36393</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin-right: 6px; margin-top: 10px;" title="z container" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/z-container.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="121" />

For the second month in a row, both import and export container counts are contracting year-over-year - comparing same months in 2012 and 2013.
<ul>
	<li>Economically intuitive imports however are "less bad" (but are still growing year-to-date);</li>
	<li>exports are also "less bad" in April but continues to contract year-to-date.</li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36393"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36393">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin-right: 6px; margin-top: 10px;" title="z container" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/z-container.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="121" />

For the second month in a row, both import and export container counts are contracting year-over-year - comparing same months in 2012 and 2013.
<ul>
	<li>Economically intuitive imports however are "less bad" (but are still growing year-to-date);</li>
	<li>exports are also "less bad" in April but continues to contract year-to-date.</li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36393"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36393">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36393</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Schizophrenic U.S. Housing Market</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36469</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36469#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 04:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Home Sales and Home Prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adam Whitehead]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer confidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[existing home sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[home sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[housing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inventories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36469</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<h3><strong>Housing Smoke and Mirrors (Part 6)</strong></h3>
<h3 style="text-align: center;"><em> “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”</em></h3>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/whitehead_adam.htm">Adam Whitehead</a>, <a href="http://keysignals.wordpress.com/category/global-macro/" target="_blank">KeySignals.com</a></em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://econintersect.com/images/2013/4/74402747ar845d1big.png" target="_blank"><img style="float: center; margin: 6px;" title="ar845d1" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar845d1.png" alt="" width="380" height="276" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em>Click to enlarge</em></p>
We thought it would be amusing to start this discussion with the latest “Smoke and Mirrors” from <em>RealtyTrac</em>. They clearly have an interesting perspective and “scale” in relation to measuring the housing recovery. If a picture can be worth a thousand words, hyperbole has just reached a new level. No prizes for guessing what the consensus view on the housing market is.<span id="more-36469"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36469">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h3><strong>Housing Smoke and Mirrors (Part 6)</strong></h3>
<h3 style="text-align: center;"><em> “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”</em></h3>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/whitehead_adam.htm">Adam Whitehead</a>, <a href="http://keysignals.wordpress.com/category/global-macro/" target="_blank">KeySignals.com</a></em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://econintersect.com/images/2013/4/74402747ar845d1big.png" target="_blank"><img style="float: center; margin: 6px;" title="ar845d1" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar845d1.png" alt="" width="380" height="276" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em>Click to enlarge</em></p>
We thought it would be amusing to start this discussion with the latest “Smoke and Mirrors” from <em>RealtyTrac</em>. They clearly have an interesting perspective and “scale” in relation to measuring the housing recovery. If a picture can be worth a thousand words, hyperbole has just reached a new level. No prizes for guessing what the consensus view on the housing market is.<span id="more-36469"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36469">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36469</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Self-defeating Austerity Shocks</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36063</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36063#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 21:24:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Economic data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[macroeconomics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[austerity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer confidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fuad Hasanov]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inflation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reda Cherif]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36063</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<blockquote>by Reda Cherif and Fuad Hasanov, <a href="http://www.voxeu.org" target="_blank">Voxeu.org</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>This article was originally published by <a href="http://www.voxeu.org" target="_blank">Voxeu.org</a> <em>(May 3, 2013)</em></blockquote>
<blockquote>Europe’s austerity-first approach has triggered research-based efforts  to evaluate the effectiveness of debt-reduction strategies. This column,  based on a US empirical study, suggests that an ‘austerity shock’ in a  weak economy may be self-defeating. Public-debt reduction historically  occurs gradually amid improved growth. If policymakers, firms and  households respond as in the past, we should expect lower deficits amid  higher growth and, eventually, decreasing debt ratios.</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img style="float: center; margin: 6px;" title="ar802d5" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar802d5.png" alt="" width="280" height="223" /></p>
In many advanced countries, in the wake of the 2008 global financial  crisis, deficits skyrocketed and public debt ballooned (<em>see Figure</em> 1).  In fact, fiscal stimulus accounted for only a small fraction of the  increase in debt, whereas collapsing revenues and higher unemployment  and social benefits contributed the largest share (IMF 2011).<span id="more-36063"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36063">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote>by Reda Cherif and Fuad Hasanov, <a href="http://www.voxeu.org" target="_blank">Voxeu.org</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>This article was originally published by <a href="http://www.voxeu.org" target="_blank">Voxeu.org</a> <em>(May 3, 2013)</em></blockquote>
<blockquote>Europe’s austerity-first approach has triggered research-based efforts  to evaluate the effectiveness of debt-reduction strategies. This column,  based on a US empirical study, suggests that an ‘austerity shock’ in a  weak economy may be self-defeating. Public-debt reduction historically  occurs gradually amid improved growth. If policymakers, firms and  households respond as in the past, we should expect lower deficits amid  higher growth and, eventually, decreasing debt ratios.</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img style="float: center; margin: 6px;" title="ar802d5" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar802d5.png" alt="" width="280" height="223" /></p>
In many advanced countries, in the wake of the 2008 global financial  crisis, deficits skyrocketed and public debt ballooned (<em>see Figure</em> 1).  In fact, fiscal stimulus accounted for only a small fraction of the  increase in debt, whereas collapsing revenues and higher unemployment  and social benefits contributed the largest share (IMF 2011).<span id="more-36063"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36063">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36063</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 2013 Industrial Production Soft &#8211; But Still In a Growth Trend</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36376</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36376#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 13:57:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capacity utilization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[utilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36376</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin-top: 6px; margin-right: 10px; margin-left: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-ip.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="127" />The headlines say Industrial Production (IP) <strong>declined </strong>0.5% in April 2013 and <strong>up</strong> 1.9% year-over-year.   <em>Econintersect</em>'s analysis using the unadjusted data is that IP was <strong>also showed a decline </strong>of 0.5% month-over-month but the year-over-year was <strong>up</strong> 2.5% year-over-year.
<ul>
	<li>The year-over-year rate of growth is trending up using a three month rolling average, but is down using any rolling average between 6 to 12 months.</li>
	<li>Industrial production is being affected by large movements in utilities, but the data was soft in most categories.</li>
	<li>The market was expecting a month-over-month <strong>decrease</strong> of 0.2% to 0.5% (vs the headline growth decline of 0.5%).</li>
	<li><em>T</em>he manufacturing sub-index (which is more representative of economic activity) was <strong>down </strong>0.4% month-over-month - and <strong>up</strong> 1.3% year-over-year - seasonally adjusted.</li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36376"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36376">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin-top: 6px; margin-right: 10px; margin-left: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-ip.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="127" />The headlines say Industrial Production (IP) <strong>declined </strong>0.5% in April 2013 and <strong>up</strong> 1.9% year-over-year.   <em>Econintersect</em>'s analysis using the unadjusted data is that IP was <strong>also showed a decline </strong>of 0.5% month-over-month but the year-over-year was <strong>up</strong> 2.5% year-over-year.
<ul>
	<li>The year-over-year rate of growth is trending up using a three month rolling average, but is down using any rolling average between 6 to 12 months.</li>
	<li>Industrial production is being affected by large movements in utilities, but the data was soft in most categories.</li>
	<li>The market was expecting a month-over-month <strong>decrease</strong> of 0.2% to 0.5% (vs the headline growth decline of 0.5%).</li>
	<li><em>T</em>he manufacturing sub-index (which is more representative of economic activity) was <strong>down </strong>0.4% month-over-month - and <strong>up</strong> 1.3% year-over-year - seasonally adjusted.</li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36376"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36376">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36376</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>May 2013 Empire State Survey Goes Negative &#8211; Under Expectations</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36378</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36378#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 13:07:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail & Business Sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Empire State survey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Fed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[order backlog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36378</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin-left: 6px; margin-right: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-empire.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="112" />

The Empire State Manufacturing Survey (manufacturing in New York State) in May 2013 shows manufacturing is contracting after expanding for the previous three months in a row.
<ul>
	<li>This noisy index has moved from 17.1 (May), 2.3 (June), 7.4 (July), -5.9 (August), -10.4 (September), -6.2 (October), -5.2 (November), -8.1 (December),  -7.8  (January 2013). 10.0 (February) , 9.2 (March), 3.1 (April) - and now -1.4.</li>
	<li>Expectation was for a reading of 1.0 to 3.5 versus the -1.4 reported</li>
	<li>New orders sub-index also shows this sector is marginally contracting, while unfilled orders continues to say this sector is slightly contracting.</li>
</ul>
As this index is very noisy, it is hard to understand what these massive moves up or down mean - however this regional manufacturing survey is normally one of the most pessimistic.

<span id="more-36378"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36378">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin-left: 6px; margin-right: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-empire.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="112" />

The Empire State Manufacturing Survey (manufacturing in New York State) in May 2013 shows manufacturing is contracting after expanding for the previous three months in a row.
<ul>
	<li>This noisy index has moved from 17.1 (May), 2.3 (June), 7.4 (July), -5.9 (August), -10.4 (September), -6.2 (October), -5.2 (November), -8.1 (December),  -7.8  (January 2013). 10.0 (February) , 9.2 (March), 3.1 (April) - and now -1.4.</li>
	<li>Expectation was for a reading of 1.0 to 3.5 versus the -1.4 reported</li>
	<li>New orders sub-index also shows this sector is marginally contracting, while unfilled orders continues to say this sector is slightly contracting.</li>
</ul>
As this index is very noisy, it is hard to understand what these massive moves up or down mean - however this regional manufacturing survey is normally one of the most pessimistic.

<span id="more-36378"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36378">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36378</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 2013 Producer Price Index Shows Almost No Year-over-Year Growth</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36380</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36380#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 12:42:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prices - PPI, CPI and More]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crude goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[finished goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inflation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intermediate goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[producer prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36380</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-ppi.png" alt="" width="170" height="135" />The Producer Price Index year-over-year inflation is disappearing..

The <a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ppi.pdf">BLS reported</a> that the Producer Price Index (PPI) finished goods prices year-over-year inflation rate<strong> fell</strong> from 1.1% in March to 0.6% in April 2013 - with the month-over-month growth <strong>down</strong> 0.7%.   The PPI represents inflation pressure (or lack thereof) that migrates into consumer price.

The market had been expecting a contraction of 0.5% month-over-month in finished goods prices compared to the 0.7% <strong>contraction</strong>.

<span id="more-36380"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36380">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-ppi.png" alt="" width="170" height="135" />The Producer Price Index year-over-year inflation is disappearing..

The <a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ppi.pdf">BLS reported</a> that the Producer Price Index (PPI) finished goods prices year-over-year inflation rate<strong> fell</strong> from 1.1% in March to 0.6% in April 2013 - with the month-over-month growth <strong>down</strong> 0.7%.   The PPI represents inflation pressure (or lack thereof) that migrates into consumer price.

The market had been expecting a contraction of 0.5% month-over-month in finished goods prices compared to the 0.7% <strong>contraction</strong>.

<span id="more-36380"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36380">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36380</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What Do Weekly Unemployment Claims Tell us About Recession Risk?</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36101</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36101#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 06:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Doug Short]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36101</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Doug Short, <a href="http://advisorperspectives.com/dshort/" target="_blank">Advisor Perspectives/dshort.com</a></em></p>

<blockquote><strong>Note from dshort</strong>: I've updated this commentary to include the latest labor force data in May's release of the April employment report.</blockquote>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" title="ar809d6" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar809d6.png" alt="" width="140" height="186" />Every Thursday I post an <a href="http://advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Weekly-Unemployment-Claims.php" target="_blank">update on weekly unemployment claims</a> shortly after the BLS report is made available. My focus is the  four-week moving average of this rather volatile indicator. The  financial press takes a fairly simplistic view of the latest weekly  number, and the market often reacts, for a few minutes or a few hours,  to the initial estimate, which is always revised the following week.

One of my featured charts in the update shows the four-week moving average from the inception of this series in January 1967.<span id="more-36101"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36101">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Doug Short, <a href="http://advisorperspectives.com/dshort/" target="_blank">Advisor Perspectives/dshort.com</a></em></p>

<blockquote><strong>Note from dshort</strong>: I've updated this commentary to include the latest labor force data in May's release of the April employment report.</blockquote>
<img style="float: left; margin: 6px;" title="ar809d6" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar809d6.png" alt="" width="140" height="186" />Every Thursday I post an <a href="http://advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Weekly-Unemployment-Claims.php" target="_blank">update on weekly unemployment claims</a> shortly after the BLS report is made available. My focus is the  four-week moving average of this rather volatile indicator. The  financial press takes a fairly simplistic view of the latest weekly  number, and the market often reacts, for a few minutes or a few hours,  to the initial estimate, which is always revised the following week.

One of my featured charts in the update shows the four-week moving average from the inception of this series in January 1967.<span id="more-36101"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36101">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36101</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Export / Import Price Deflation in April 2013</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36384</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36384#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 12:48:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prices - PPI, CPI and More]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BLS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[commodities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[export]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[import]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OIL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36384</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 10px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-exim.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="130" />

In April 2013, year-over-year price deflation continues in import prices for 11 of the last 12 months .  Export price price are also deflating this month:
<ul>
	<li> with imports down 0.5% month-over-month, down 2.6% year-over-year</li>
	<li>and exports down 0.7% month-over-month, down 0.9% year-over-year.</li>
</ul>
The dominate factors in the month-over-month changes were falling oil import prices and falling food export prices - however export prices fall was broad based.

<span id="more-36384"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36384">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 10px;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/z-exim.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="130" />

In April 2013, year-over-year price deflation continues in import prices for 11 of the last 12 months .  Export price price are also deflating this month:
<ul>
	<li> with imports down 0.5% month-over-month, down 2.6% year-over-year</li>
	<li>and exports down 0.7% month-over-month, down 0.9% year-over-year.</li>
</ul>
The dominate factors in the month-over-month changes were falling oil import prices and falling food export prices - however export prices fall was broad based.

<span id="more-36384"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36384">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36384</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stratfor: The Decline of the Colorado River</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36386</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36386#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 12:24:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[colorado river]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stratfor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[usa]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36386</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<img style="margin: 6px; float: left;" title="z temp" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/z-temp68.png" alt="" width="170" height="87" />
<div>

An  amendment to a standing water treaty between the United States and  Mexico has received publicity over the past six months as an example of  progress in water sharing agreements. But the amendment, called Minute  319, is simply a glimpse into ongoing mismanagement of the Colorado  River on the U.S. side of the border. Over-allocation of the river's  waters 90 years ago combined with increasing populations and economic  growth in the river basin have created circumstances in which  conservation efforts -- no matter how organized -- could be too little  to overcome the projected water deficit that the Colorado River Basin  will face in the next 20 years.

<span id="more-36386"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36386">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<img style="margin: 6px; float: left;" title="z temp" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/z-temp68.png" alt="" width="170" height="87" />
<div>

An  amendment to a standing water treaty between the United States and  Mexico has received publicity over the past six months as an example of  progress in water sharing agreements. But the amendment, called Minute  319, is simply a glimpse into ongoing mismanagement of the Colorado  River on the U.S. side of the border. Over-allocation of the river's  waters 90 years ago combined with increasing populations and economic  growth in the river basin have created circumstances in which  conservation efforts -- no matter how organized -- could be too little  to overcome the projected water deficit that the Colorado River Basin  will face in the next 20 years.

<span id="more-36386"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36386">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36386</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Retail Sales Stay Right on Trend but Economists Get It Wrong Again</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36421</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36421#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 06:28:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail & Business Sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[macroeconomics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer confidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CPI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gasoline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lee Adler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retail sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade balance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36421</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Lee Adler, <a href="http://affiliate.plugnpay.com/affiliate.cgi?url=http://wallstreetexaminer.com&amp;ampaffiliate=haganes&amp;merchant=capitalsto" target="_blank">Wall Street Examiner</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 6px;" title="ar846d3" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar846d3.png" alt="" width="180" height="161" />Retail sales grew modestly and on trend in April. There was no evidence of either a slowing economy or one that is overheating and about to cause conventional inflation measures to move higher. At the  same time, as usual, economists got the outlook wrong, underestimating  the growth rate.

According to the Commerce Department’s Advance Retail Sales Report, retail sales rose by 0.1% in April (<em>month to month</em>) and were up 3.7% annually, which was an acceleration from the annual rate of +2.8% in  March. These are seasonally adjusted estimates which will be revised  several times before they are finalized. Neither figure is adjusted for  inflation. The median forecast of economists in mainstream media surveys  was for sales to be down -0.3% to -0.6% month to month. The  economists’ consensus was too low (<em>what else is new</em>?), with the problem  being partly with the seasonal adjustment, and partly just the fact that  economic forecasting is quackery. These big forecasting misses happen  almost every month lately.<span id="more-36421"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36421">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>by Lee Adler, <a href="http://affiliate.plugnpay.com/affiliate.cgi?url=http://wallstreetexaminer.com&amp;ampaffiliate=haganes&amp;merchant=capitalsto" target="_blank">Wall Street Examiner</a></em></p>
<img style="float: right; margin: 6px;" title="ar846d3" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ar846d3.png" alt="" width="180" height="161" />Retail sales grew modestly and on trend in April. There was no evidence of either a slowing economy or one that is overheating and about to cause conventional inflation measures to move higher. At the  same time, as usual, economists got the outlook wrong, underestimating  the growth rate.

According to the Commerce Department’s Advance Retail Sales Report, retail sales rose by 0.1% in April (<em>month to month</em>) and were up 3.7% annually, which was an acceleration from the annual rate of +2.8% in  March. These are seasonally adjusted estimates which will be revised  several times before they are finalized. Neither figure is adjusted for  inflation. The median forecast of economists in mainstream media surveys  was for sales to be down -0.3% to -0.6% month to month. The  economists’ consensus was too low (<em>what else is new</em>?), with the problem  being partly with the seasonal adjustment, and partly just the fact that  economic forecasting is quackery. These big forecasting misses happen  almost every month lately.<span id="more-36421"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36421">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36421</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>March 2013 Business Inventories and Sales Continues to Show Little Improvement</title>
		<link>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36389</link>
		<comments>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36389#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 15:04:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steven Hansen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail & Business Sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aa syndication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fuel costs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inventories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retail sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sales to inventory ratios]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Hansen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[u.s. census bureau]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wholesale sales]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36389</guid>

		<description><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="margin: 10px; float: left;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/z-business.gif" alt="" width="170" height="165" /><em>Econintersect</em>'s analysis of final business sales data (retail plus wholesale plus manufacturing) for March 2013 is closer to the headline data.
<ul>
	<li>business sales with this month's data is continuing to trend less good (positive growth, slower rate of improvement).</li>
	<li>The inventory levels are not sending any warning signals but are on the high side.</li>
	<li>This is a record current dollar month for sales - with a record sales in 19 of the last 20 months.  Note that real (inflation adjusted) dollars are used in GDP, and the headlines are not inflation adjusted.</li>
	<li><strong>This data shows business sales are contracting if you inflation adjust.</strong></li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36389"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36389">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Written by <a rel="author" href="http://econintersect.com/authors/author_rel.htm?author=/home/aleta/public_html/authors/s_hansen.htm">Steven Hansen</a></em></p>
<img style="margin: 10px; float: left;" src="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/z-business.gif" alt="" width="170" height="165" /><em>Econintersect</em>'s analysis of final business sales data (retail plus wholesale plus manufacturing) for March 2013 is closer to the headline data.
<ul>
	<li>business sales with this month's data is continuing to trend less good (positive growth, slower rate of improvement).</li>
	<li>The inventory levels are not sending any warning signals but are on the high side.</li>
	<li>This is a record current dollar month for sales - with a record sales in 19 of the last 20 months.  Note that real (inflation adjusted) dollars are used in GDP, and the headlines are not inflation adjusted.</li>
	<li><strong>This data shows business sales are contracting if you inflation adjust.</strong></li>
</ul>
<span id="more-36389"></span> &nbsp; <a href="http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?p=36389">Read more &raquo;</a> ]]></content:encoded>
	
		<wfw:commentRss>http://econintersect.com/wordpress/?feed=rss2&amp;p=36389</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: econintersect.com @ 2013-05-19 08:46:14 by W3 Total Cache -->