The Economy, In Charts

[jyl]

Is this seasonally adjusted? Not surprising to see many spending categories rise seasonally in December. "Gifts", for instance. Christmas and all that.

Originally Posted by cl8ton

According to mint.com, some surprising numbers on spending trends!

[Jim Richards]

agreed. it made sense to me.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by nostatic

Bank market capitalization:

I am holding a boat-load of Deutsche Bank shares. This chart makes me want to weep!

[tc-sacto]

Quote from Dr. Doom to go along with the Bank Capitalization charts:

Professor Nouriel Roubini and his team have been noting in speeches in various venues around the world that they estimate that losses from the financial world could be as high as $3.6 trillion. That is composed of $1.6 trillion in loan losses and another $2 trillion in mark-to-market losses of securitized assets.

"U.S. banks and broker dealers are estimated to incur about half of these losses, or $1.8 trillion ($1-1.1 trillion loan losses and $600-700bn in securities writedowns) as 40% of securitizations are assumed to be held abroad. The $1.8 trillion figure compares to banks and broker dealers capital of $1.4 trillion as of Q3 of 2008, leaving the banking system borderline insolvent even if writedowns on securitizations are excluded."

[tc-sacto]

From Joseph H.Ellis...Former Goldman Sachs Analyst

The downtrend in year-over-year real hourly earnings (individuals’ purchasing power) in 2007–2008 once again provided some warning of the downtrend in consumer spending and a bear maket, although the magnitude of the recent market decline was far greater than normal due to the financial crisis. However, the recent upturn in growth of real wages (purchasing power) resulting from lower energy costs could be an early signal that real (unit) consumer spending will recover late in 2009. This would help begin a recovery in the economy in general and, of course, the stock market.

[cl8ton]

Originally Posted by jyl

Is this seasonally adjusted? Not surprising to see many spending categories rise seasonally in December. "Gifts", for instance. Christmas and all that.

No, these were raw, as they happened, real time numbers for 2008.

[jyl]

How do you get that info? I looked on the mint.com site but it wasn't obvious.

[Chuck Moreland]

Originally Posted by nostatic

Bank market capitalization:

This chart is intentionally misleading.

The reader naturally compares the area of the circles. But the data numbers correspond to the diameter of the circles.

If it had been presented in the typical candle chart format, the declines would have appeared far less severe, and would have been accurately portrayed.

Intentionally misleading.

[jyl]

From shadowstats.com. Note the estimated M3 curve.



From Census Bureau.



For everyone wondering why there's no inflation currently.

[cl8ton]

Originally Posted by jyl

How do you get that info? I looked on the mint.com site but it wasn't obvious.

From my fav blog, I read and comment daily on it, great info if your in the biz!
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/30/the-economy-according-to-mint/

[the]

The Granddaddy of PPOT charts, the one that most people (including most here) somehow didn't think would ever go down, the one I was called "Chicken Little" more than once when posting it over the past few years and giving warnings about where it was going . . .



I STILL can't believe how many people, in 2006, when this chart was cresting and starting to turn down, said "It won't go significantly down" and "maybe there will be a 5% correction, but that's it." "This time is different" "Real estate never goes down" "California real estate is special because everyone wants to live there" "Dumb rich asians will always overpay and keep the values up" etc. etc. etc.

Anyone who bought a house in Cal in 2005, 2006, 2007 was a fool, period.

[TheMentat]

Originally Posted by Chuck Moreland

This chart is intentionally misleading.

The reader naturally compares the area of the circles. But the data numbers correspond to the diameter of the circles.

If it had been presented in the typical candle chart format, the declines would have appeared far less severe, and would have been accurately portrayed.

Intentionally misleading.

Good catch!

[Jim Sims]

"Anyone who bought a house in Cal in 2005, 2006, 2007 was a fool, period."

Also a fool's buy in 2000-2004, 2008 and probably also 2009. I hope they have long snorkels for they're going to be underwater for a while.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by Jim Sims

"Anyone who bought a house in Cal in 2005, 2006, 2007 was a fool, period."

Not true if you flipped it for a profit.

[Jim Sims]

"Not true if you flipped it for a profit." - and then stayed out of the real estate market instead of rolling it back in for their next "big score".

If they were that clairvoyant then they also probably made a bundle timing the stock market perfectly.

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by Jim Sims

"Not true if you flipped it for a profit." - and then stayed out of the real estate market instead of rolling it back in for their next "big score".

If they were that clairvoyant then they also probably made a bundle timing the stock market perfectly.

Well let's face it, there are a lot of people who made a lot of money on the bubble.

So not everyone was a fool.

Simple point.

[oilonly]

Originally Posted by jyl

From shadowstats.com. Note the estimated M3 curve.



From Census Bureau.



For everyone wondering why there's no inflation currently.

Excellent charts. That m1 spike is going to stop the present deflation fast once inventories drop again.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by Chuck Moreland

This chart is intentionally misleading.

The reader naturally compares the area of the circles. But the data numbers correspond to the diameter of the circles.

If it had been presented in the typical candle chart format, the declines would have appeared far less severe, and would have been accurately portrayed.

Intentionally misleading.

How misleading is it really though? I think that while your point about area vs diameter is true along with assumptions that people make, I also think that people don't realize how fubar the whole thing is. If anything the graph isn't hyperbolic enough to relate the gravity of the situation.

I don't know what a candle chart is though. You mean bar graph?

[Jim Sims]

"Well let's face it, there are a lot of people who made a lot of money on the bubble.

So not everyone was a fool.

Simple point."

Its the money that one leaves "Vegas with" that counts.

However if they did make a bunch of money in the end, while essentially adding nothing of value to the system, then I would propose a significant retroactive "excess profits like tax" be applied to their gains (any yearly gain over say 4%) so they can assist the rest of us who will be paying for the bubble they profited from.

[Chuck Moreland]

Originally Posted by nostatic

How misleading is it really though? I think that while your point about area vs diameter is true along with assumptions that people make, I also think that people don't realize how fubar the whole thing is. If anything the graph isn't hyperbolic enough to relate the gravity of the situation.

I don't know what a candle chart is though. You mean bar graph?

Yes, a bar chart. Candle chart specifically means vertical bars.

If the intent was to relate the gravity of the situation, then the data would have been portrayed accurately. Instead the intent was to exaggerate the situation.

It is technically correct but highly misleading, and obviously intentionally so.

This is similar to the common trick of exaggerating differences by using a candle chart that doesn't start at zero. Technically correct, but misleading.