<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Business Press Spinsanity Over March&#8217;s ISM Manufacturing Index</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/04/01/business-press-spinsanity-over-marchs-ism-manufacturing-index/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/04/01/business-press-spinsanity-over-marchs-ism-manufacturing-index/</link>
	<description>The Business End of the Blogosphere</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:08:54 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: TBlumer</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/04/01/business-press-spinsanity-over-marchs-ism-manufacturing-index/comment-page-1/#comment-121561</link>
		<dc:creator>TBlumer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:47:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/04/01/business-press-spinsanity-over-marchs-ism-manufacturing-index/#comment-121561</guid>
		<description>Actually, the imports thing is not that counterintuitive, because it is a red flag that consumer spending has slowed. The only way it wouldn&#039;t be is if consumers all of a sudden decided to spend the same $, but domestically -- not likely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, the imports thing is not that counterintuitive, because it is a red flag that consumer spending has slowed. The only way it wouldn&#8217;t be is if consumers all of a sudden decided to spend the same $, but domestically &#8212; not likely.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dscott</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/04/01/business-press-spinsanity-over-marchs-ism-manufacturing-index/comment-page-1/#comment-121560</link>
		<dc:creator>dscott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 20:23:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/04/01/business-press-spinsanity-over-marchs-ism-manufacturing-index/#comment-121560</guid>
		<description>Sometimes looking at too much data can be misleading information overload.  When I checked the GDP figures since 1990, the leading indicator of a slow down was not exports or manufacturing but counter-intuitively - Imports!  
http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=1&amp;FirstYear=2006&amp;LastYear=2007&amp;Freq=Qtr  

 Let&#039;s say you click the appropriate boxes to choose 1990, quarterly to current.  Look at Durable and Non-durable goods as a change from the previous period.  You will note there are occasionally negative quarterly numbers before &amp; during Clinton&#039;s time.  Run the series again for the same time period but click annual instead of quarterly, you will notice two consecutive negative years in either Durable goods for 1990 &amp; 91, but nothing after that to present.  

Also notice the last true recession was in 1990 (IV) &amp; 1991 (I) consecutive quarters.  The idea that two negative consecutive quarters can&#039;t happen anymore is a flagrant lie to misrepresent either one negative or small growth quarter as the new standard, it can occur if there is a true slow down of the economy.   What&#039;s really interesting is the negative numbers simultaneously occured in housing &amp; imports of goods and services for both quarters.  Something we should be concerned about is that the precursor to that recession was 1990 (III) quarter was the negative residential housing number in conjunction with a negative imported goods number as we had in 2000/01 (dotcom bust leading up to 911) and have now for the 2007 (IV) quarter.   According to economic history imports are the real indicator of economic health.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes looking at too much data can be misleading information overload.  When I checked the GDP figures since 1990, the leading indicator of a slow down was not exports or manufacturing but counter-intuitively &#8211; Imports!<br />
<a href="http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=1&amp;FirstYear=2006&amp;LastYear=2007&amp;Freq=Qtr" rel="nofollow">http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=1&amp;FirstYear=2006&amp;LastYear=2007&amp;Freq=Qtr</a>  </p>
<p> Let&#8217;s say you click the appropriate boxes to choose 1990, quarterly to current.  Look at Durable and Non-durable goods as a change from the previous period.  You will note there are occasionally negative quarterly numbers before &amp; during Clinton&#8217;s time.  Run the series again for the same time period but click annual instead of quarterly, you will notice two consecutive negative years in either Durable goods for 1990 &amp; 91, but nothing after that to present.  </p>
<p>Also notice the last true recession was in 1990 (IV) &amp; 1991 (I) consecutive quarters.  The idea that two negative consecutive quarters can&#8217;t happen anymore is a flagrant lie to misrepresent either one negative or small growth quarter as the new standard, it can occur if there is a true slow down of the economy.   What&#8217;s really interesting is the negative numbers simultaneously occured in housing &amp; imports of goods and services for both quarters.  Something we should be concerned about is that the precursor to that recession was 1990 (III) quarter was the negative residential housing number in conjunction with a negative imported goods number as we had in 2000/01 (dotcom bust leading up to 911) and have now for the 2007 (IV) quarter.   According to economic history imports are the real indicator of economic health.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
