Rolling US Economy Into The Shitbin Thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

personally I'm applying for a civil servant position ASAP

El Tomboto, Thursday, 18 October 2007 23:45 (ten years ago) Permalink

Just FYI, during the 1930s depression, many civil servants were paid with vouchers rather than cash, because local governments were unable to collect property taxes and their receipts fell into the shitbin.

Aimless, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:12 (ten years ago) Permalink

Economy's doing poorly enough as it stands, why do we deliberately want to roll it into the shitbin?

Abbott, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:14 (ten years ago) Permalink

Because that way Hillary can rescue us all.

Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:17 (ten years ago) Permalink

lol property taxes

El Tomboto, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:18 (ten years ago) Permalink

shitbin's a great word, BTW.

Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:20 (ten years ago) Permalink

you been loving my thread titles lately

El Tomboto, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:26 (ten years ago) Permalink

i came to this country some time ago with little more than a crippling debt burden in GB Pounds and the shirt on my back. i used to have to send back $1,200 each month to pay off my UK debt, and now I'm sending back over $1,400 to cover the same amount of debt repayment. that's two and a half thousand dollars disappearing from my tiny disposable income every year, for no explicable reason. i *heart* the decline of the US economy.

Roberto Spiralli, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:27 (ten years ago) Permalink

anyway why start this thread now because the bit where ritholtz points out that domino's pizza can't print new menus fast enough to keep up with inflation was pretty fucking amazing

I wish rasheed wallace was still around to show us the latest and greatest exploding bubble blogs

El Tomboto, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:28 (ten years ago) Permalink

wow Roberto that was some shitty timing, that sucks

El Tomboto, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:29 (ten years ago) Permalink

This was in the paper today:

Mortgage defaults

Hit an annual rate of 1.5 million in September. That compares with 900,000 last year from fewer than 800,000 in 2005. At the current rate, more than one million Americans will lose their homes to foreclosure, making this the worst housing recession since the Second World War.

Housing starts

Sank to a 14-year low of 1.19 million in September. Starts are a vital economic engine, creating jobs and growth as people stuff their homes with sofas and TVs. Starts peaked at 2.3 million in early 2006, and the decline will be a drag on the rest of the economy until the slide stops.

Mortgages

A quarter of the roughly 50 million U.S. home mortgages are subprime. That's seven times the number of high-risk mortgages there were in 2001. That means that many more marginal homeowners have mortgages, making it far more likely they'll wind up in default.

House prices

Fell 3.2 per cent in the second quarter. Prices are falling faster and more broadly than they have in decades, according to the closely watched Case-Shiller index.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071018.IBUSECONOMY18/TPStory/Business

everything, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:29 (ten years ago) Permalink

In regard to inflation, in the USA during the past three years inflation has been soaring - but almost entirely in the housing sector. The fact that people are encouraged to see their houses as investments rather than as expenses doesn't mean that skyrocketing housing costs weren't inflationary. They were.

As the bubble market bursts, I predict a recession with an extra added bonus of inflation running close to 10% - before the end of 2008. As it has for the past 30 years, the official CPI will understate the real inflation rate. It was rigged under Reagan so that government entitlement programs indexed to the CPI would not increase at the true pace of inflation.

If Bush continues to shovel shit on the dollar right up to the end of his term in January 2009, the inflation rate could hit 15%-20% by 2010.

Aimless, Friday, 19 October 2007 00:55 (ten years ago) Permalink

There are some good economics articles put up here as well:
http://www.VoxEU.org

stet, Friday, 19 October 2007 01:02 (ten years ago) Permalink

Which shit on the dollar are you referring to?

Dandy Don Weiner, Friday, 19 October 2007 01:02 (ten years ago) Permalink

As the bubble market bursts, I predict a recession with an extra added bonus of inflation running close to 10% - before the end of 2008.

lol

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Friday, 19 October 2007 06:11 (ten years ago) Permalink

this is why i live in canada!

J0rdan S., Friday, 19 October 2007 06:13 (ten years ago) Permalink

oh wait.

J0rdan S., Friday, 19 October 2007 06:13 (ten years ago) Permalink

Guys, this is a good time stay in academia right?

Catsupppppppppppppp dude 茄蕃, Friday, 19 October 2007 11:51 (ten years ago) Permalink

It's a good time to learn a European language.

Nubbelverbrennung, Friday, 19 October 2007 13:33 (ten years ago) Permalink

Prime shit examples:

When Bush was elected in 2000, the federal budget was in surplus and the national debt was being paid down. Had this state of affairs continued, as projected, it would have led both to lower interest rates and a strong dollar, together. Instead, Bush submitted a series of enormous tax cuts to the Republican-controlled Congress and lobbied them through. Immediately, the CBO's projected budget surpluses turned to projected deficits for the next decade.

Bush also initiated a war of choice, not necessity, in Iraq. This war has already cost well over $700 billion. Yet, Bush insisted on making his tax cuts permanent. Overall, the national debt has increased under Bush by about $2 trillion in seven years. This represents a difference of about $3 trillion of debt from what was projected at the start of his first term.

Because, due to Bush's tax cuts and other policies, the Federal government was in a far weaker position to stimulate the economy when the recession started after 9/11, almost the entire stimulus was delivered via lower interest rates. Because these rate cuts were artificial, and not based on a stronger dollar, this stimulus not only inflated the current housing bubble, but it also undercut the dollar even more than the ballooning national debt did.

Now the dollar is at an all-time low against the euro and the canadian dollar. However, the incomes of the top 10% of American households have increased at a good clip, while the lower 50% of households have seen a decrease in income after inflation. This is largely thanks to Bush's shitty policies. I expect more of the same mismanagement until he is gone.

Aimless, Saturday, 20 October 2007 18:36 (ten years ago) Permalink

I agree with everything you've just said. You're predictions still seem a tad extreme on the downside though, if I may so.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Saturday, 20 October 2007 18:50 (ten years ago) Permalink

i wonder if income inequality will ever arrive as a political issue in this country. americans tend to not begrudge the rich - so it'll have to be more of a "for everyone's good" type of angle. no?

jhøshea, Saturday, 20 October 2007 18:54 (ten years ago) Permalink

I remember the 1970s and early 80s quite well. Back then people couldn't belileve it, either. Bush has done a bangup job of recreating many of the same policy errors under Johnson and Nixon that led to raging stagflation back then, except the underlying economy is now weaker than it was in the 1970s and the oil shocks we are likely to get are not political, as when OPEC was formed, but structural.

Oil will exceed $100/barrel some time this winter. The ever-weakening dollar will lead to smaller profit margins and rising retail prices on all imported goods (which means almost everything we buy in the USA). Transport costs will rise with pil prices. Stock prices will erode along with profits. With so many savings tied up in stocks and home equity, consumer spending will be crunched, and personal debt and bancruptcies will rise like a tide. Businesses will retrench and unemployment will rise. No end in sight.

I hope I am wrong.

Aimless, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:07 (ten years ago) Permalink

Anyone want to join my modern-day James Gang? We shall ride across the lower Midwest, robbing and pillaging.

milo z, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:09 (ten years ago) Permalink

sounds fun

jhøshea, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:13 (ten years ago) Permalink

Sorry, I don't want to relocate. But this scheme sounds ripe for franchising.

Aimless, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:14 (ten years ago) Permalink

Oil will exceed $100/barrel some time this winter. The ever-weakening dollar will lead to smaller profit margins and rising retail prices on all imported goods (which means almost everything we buy in the USA). Transport costs will rise with pil prices. Stock prices will erode along with profits. With so many savings tied up in stocks and home equity, consumer spending will be crunched, and personal debt and bancruptcies will rise like a tide. Businesses will retrench and unemployment will rise. No end in sight.

I hope I am wrong.

-- Aimless, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:07 (14 minutes ago) Link

The coming of $100/barrel oil is not Bush's fault. It's yours and mine and everyone else's for using too damned much energy. I agree Bush could and should have done a lot more with policy to encourage energy efficiency, but there's little he could have done to stop oil's eventual rise to that price level.

Hurting 2, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:26 (ten years ago) Permalink

Part of the pricing of oil represents the weakness of the dollar. This hurts the USA more than it does other countries. US citizens are paid in dollars and the US government collects revenue in dollars, so they are stuck. EU countries can use euros to buy increasingly cheap dollars, so they don't see the same rise in prices as we do. The weakness of the dollar is mainly Bush's fault.

Aimless, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:31 (ten years ago) Permalink

The US also uses way more oil than other countries.

Hurting 2, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:33 (ten years ago) Permalink

he could have done to stop oil's eventual rise to that price level.
Not starting a war in Iraq would definitely have helped here.

stet, Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:57 (ten years ago) Permalink

arrgh, if that won't work then
http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/2007/10/imf-mortgage-reset-chart.html

El Tomboto, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:47 (ten years ago) Permalink

tombot u r freakin me out

gff, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:50 (ten years ago) Permalink

i hope my small apartment + modest savings plan + job in "information services" is enough to weather the shitstorm, if it comes. i got myself out of credit card debt a few months ago, at least

gff, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:53 (ten years ago) Permalink

well if you can hold down a job and don't have to worry about an ARM reset you should be okay, it's the homeowner with kids and a subprime loan and two cars who ought to be shitting themselves

El Tomboto, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:58 (ten years ago) Permalink

apart from some student loans and binging on credit cards over a few years, i'm kind of debt phobic.

which has actually made me lose out over the past several years, i realize, since i pay for EVERYTHING with a debit/check card... i could have just paid that balance on a credit card with some rewards scheme and has some air miles or something

gff, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:00 (ten years ago) Permalink

rolling gff personal finances into the shitbin thread, ha

gff, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:01 (ten years ago) Permalink

This will give you a boner Tombot

http://nymag.com/guides/money/2007/39952/

Dandy Don Weiner, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 11:30 (ten years ago) Permalink

the economy increased by 3.9% this quarter! bull market forever, baby. economy's better than ever. golden age.

yet me and so many people I know are getting laid off next month. granted we're all in the writing/design field, but urhhhhh. gggg.

burt_stanton, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 14:58 (ten years ago) Permalink

http://nymag.com/guides/money/2007/catastrophist071105_560.jpg
http://nymag.com/guides/money/2007/catastrophist071105_2_560.jpg

^^^ lol

most of that guy's scenario is not really news to regular bigpicture/CR readers I don't think. But #5, the "we don't pay attention" thing, yeah, well, evidently the awareness campaign is underway, but hell if the big players are paying attention.

He also leaves out the approaching demographic catastrophe as millions of inexperienced thirtysomethings and even some late-twenties kids are forced to move into arguably tougher jobs that the boomers have been holding for two decades. Beyond the social security and healthcare costs associated with mass retirement, I don't really know if this generation has the work ethic and definitely not the rolodex to just start filling in and not fuck up royally. too busy updating their linkedin pages.

El Tomboto, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 15:11 (ten years ago) Permalink

can someone explain what "being upside down on your mortgage" means, in plain English?

Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 16:14 (ten years ago) Permalink

essentially, owing more than your home is worth.

Dandy Don Weiner, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 17:10 (ten years ago) Permalink

also Tombot I'm not going to blame this generation as much as I blame their parents.

Dandy Don Weiner, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 17:11 (ten years ago) Permalink

isn't that the way people buy homes? by paying for the privilege of a loan?

Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 17:12 (ten years ago) Permalink

When you enter into a contract with a bank for a mortgage, both you and the bank assume that the property value will not plummet. The bank doesn't want you to default any more than you want to default. But if for whatever reason you need to sell your home, and you can't get what you owe on it, then you will owe the difference to the bank. And the bank knows that when that happens, you probably will not have enough assets to cover the difference.

Predatory-type loans (which seems like a nebulous description to me) typically compound the problem because they have higher transaction rates (points, etc.)

Dandy Don Weiner, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 17:17 (ten years ago) Permalink

oh certainly! well played baby boom letting healthcare slide for the 20 years you've owned the electorate

El Tomboto, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 17:18 (ten years ago) Permalink

yeah Tracer it's also called "negative equity"

El Tomboto, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 17:19 (ten years ago) Permalink

There might be some initial stimulus effect from his tax plan I guess, but isn't the agenda otherwise to slash government spending?

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 12 December 2016 21:52 (one year ago) Permalink

Nah they're gonna let him do a big deficit-spending infrastructure bonanza. everyone is keynesian when their party is in power

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-free-market-republicans-stimulus-232387

flopson, Monday, 12 December 2016 21:56 (one year ago) Permalink

That assumes the infrastructure spending doesn't get funneled directly to people who are going to stash it. Even more than under Reagan or Dubya, this round of trickle-down spending is going to go directly into the pockets of the billionaire class - Keynesianism only works if that money is actually being spent.

Kiarostami bag (milo z), Monday, 12 December 2016 22:06 (one year ago) Permalink

ya Trump stimulus is gonna suck as hard as possible ito regressivity and ineffiency, but still might work demand-wise at least short- to medium-term

flopson, Tuesday, 13 December 2016 03:47 (one year ago) Permalink

Yeah, I guess I need to read the details but it sounded to me like maybe it was just gonna be some tax credit giveaways to people who were already going to do the same shit anyway and aren't going to, like, go spend the extra money on new jeans and restaurant dinners.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Tuesday, 13 December 2016 03:59 (one year ago) Permalink

relevant: https://mainlymacro.blogspot.ca/2016/12/reactionary-keynesianism.html

flopson, Tuesday, 13 December 2016 17:13 (one year ago) Permalink

Well, when GDP hits 7-8% you'll all have egg on your faces.

Eallach mhór an duine leisg (dowd), Sunday, 18 December 2016 17:59 (one year ago) Permalink

lol that's usually a precursor to a huge debilitating crash, so not really

a Warren Beatty film about Earth (El Tomboto), Sunday, 18 December 2016 19:15 (one year ago) Permalink

one month passes...
two weeks pass...

Translation from econ people out there?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-12/america-s-biggest-creditors-dump-treasuries-in-warning-to-trump

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 13 February 2017 14:27 (eleven months ago) Permalink

The US Treasury holds auctions of new US debt obligations (T-Bills and bonds) on a regular basis to fund the US government, which runs chronic deficits and must borrow to cover current expenses. There is also a secondary market where people or institutions can buy and sell US T-bills and bonds, too.

The more US debt that is dumped into the secondary market, the more competition there is for the new debt we're trying to fob off on investors. If normally big buyers of new US debt stop buying and turn into sellers instead, then the government will have to pay higher interest rates to attract buyers for the new US debt.

There is one big loophole in this process that can be exploited, if the Federal Reserve can be persuaded to play along. The Fed can enter the auction of new US debt and buy as much as it wants to, whenever it wants to, with money that it has created for that purpose. This process is called "monetizing the debt" and it is the infamous "paying for government by printing up more money" that is so poorly understood by the masses.

The drawback to monetizing the debt is that, if it is done immoderately, it can flood the financial system with new money and cause inflation, devaluing the dollar and triggering even more dumping of US debt, even higher interest rates and necessitate budget cuts or a new round of monetization. Can you say "vicious circle"?

Of course, the Fed is usually loath to tread anywhere near such a remedy except in the face of a crash and a looming depression. So, the main upshot we're talking about is higher borrowing costs for the US government.

a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Monday, 13 February 2017 20:36 (eleven months ago) Permalink

The other side of the story is that (and I only speak anecdotally) bond yields in other countries are kinda shit right now (maybe even negative) and the US's are pretty attractive. In spite of this, people dont want to buy US bonds because Trump is insane and his policies will lead to lower yields/rates or something worse.

carthago delenda est (mayor jingleberries), Monday, 13 February 2017 20:42 (eleven months ago) Permalink

that's a great explanation, Aimless! :)

yah, breaking fed-treasury independence is how you get hyper-inflation

international sell-off mostly being countered by more domestic demand for t-bills: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-07/demand-for-treasuries-is-now-a-made-in-the-u-s-a-phenomenon

flopson, Monday, 13 February 2017 20:55 (eleven months ago) Permalink

Ha, asked on the wrong thread. What is stagflation?

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 13 February 2017 21:13 (eleven months ago) Permalink

Inflation + High Unemployment

flopson, Monday, 13 February 2017 21:21 (eleven months ago) Permalink

wasn't thought to be possible during Keynesian consensus (which maintained they would be negatively related) in the 50s and 60s, until it happened in the 70s. macroeconomics hasn't really recovered since

flopson, Monday, 13 February 2017 21:22 (eleven months ago) Permalink

high inflation also completely fucks over idiots like me who were too afraid of equities to invest and have just been sitting on an ever dwindling cash pile in a savings account. luckily I have a 401k from my old job where I was at for 12 years to make up for it.

carthago delenda est (mayor jingleberries), Monday, 13 February 2017 21:53 (eleven months ago) Permalink

three months pass...

FWIW, finance people I know hypothesized that the only thing keeping markets afloat had been the promise of massive tax cuts, which seemed at least plausible with a GOP White House and Congress. But seeing as that now seems unlikely to pass any time soon, that might partially explain today's big sell off. Let's see how things go tomorrow, but a market correction seems like it needed to happen, at least to better reflect the tenuous state of the economy but also to further put a check on the GOP's more draconian ideas.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 20:39 (eight months ago) Permalink

372 points off the DJIA is a pretty modest-sized sell off when it's above 20,000. Several more shoes would need to drop before it becomes a real market correction. Greed hasn't yet given way to fear, but it is pretty obvious that the big sugar daddies in DC aren't well positioned to deliver on Wall Street's dream legislation. They will be lucky to get Dodds-Frank repealed before Christmas.

A is for (Aimless), Wednesday, 17 May 2017 20:52 (eight months ago) Permalink

Yeah, let's see now things go tomorrow.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 20:53 (eight months ago) Permalink

stock market != economy. fundamentals are fine. finance ppl are deranged

flopson, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 20:55 (eight months ago) Permalink

one month passes...

“Who cares about fixed-income trading in the last two weeks of June? I mean, seriously,” Dimon said after a reporter asked about the health of the bonds markets.

“That is the weather,” he said of changes in the markets. “It goes up and down, this and that, and that’s 80% of what you guys focus on.”

Dimon said financial journalists would be better off concentrating on the “bad policies” that are hurting average Americans.

“It’s almost an embarrassment being an American traveling around the world and listening to the stupid shit Americans have to deal with,” he said.

- JP Morgan Chief Jamie Dimon
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jul/14/jp-morgan-chief-jamie-dimon-american?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

illegal economic migration (Tracer Hand), Saturday, 15 July 2017 08:26 (six months ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

Jesus was not a poor man. As the son of God, he had access to essentially limitless wealth -- consider, as just one example, the fact that since he (or one facet of him) created the Earth, he knew where all the gold deposits were -- and yet he deliberately chose to never claim this vast wealth. In essence, he elected to forgo his rightful fortune, which was absolutely his for the taking, in order to reach out to the poor and the sick, etc. This is what made the people's betrayal of him in the end so especially jarring -- not only were they turning their back on the Son of God, but they were turning their back on, potentially, the richest man on Earth. It was a double rejection of him, in other words, and it's why it's so especially galling that today we still have people committing the sin of scorning the wealthy -- denying them tax cuts; blaming them for every recession, depression, and economic collapse; accusing them of not giving away enough of their wealth. It hurts the Lord to see this sort of behavior, which is why He has given us, through his newest group of prophets, the wonders of the Prosperity Gospel to guide us. There is still hope in His plan.

reggie (qualmsley), Thursday, 3 August 2017 23:47 (five months ago) Permalink

Recognizing the satire, but IRL Mary Magdalene (probably a wealthy widow) financed Jesus, James, and the rest of his retinue.

#IMPOTUS (Sanpaku), Thursday, 3 August 2017 23:54 (five months ago) Permalink

the magdalenes curated a lucrative pre-MAGA pyramid scheme, distributing foot ointments and such as independent contractors; they believed in school vouchers and private mercenary armies iirc

reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 4 August 2017 00:36 (five months ago) Permalink

You realize, of course, that all that debt is carried on the books of the creditors as "assets".

A is for (Aimless), Wednesday, 9 August 2017 18:01 (five months ago) Permalink

Wish the moon wasn't the only thing casting a shadow across the country. We got through one, we'll get through the other. #SolarEclipse2017

— Lloyd Blankfein (@lloydblankfein) August 21, 2017

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Monday, 21 August 2017 20:25 (four months ago) Permalink

What's the gist of that FT paywalled article?

Gukbe, Wednesday, 23 August 2017 22:55 (four months ago) Permalink


Please use the sharing tools found via the email icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licens✧✧✧@f✧.c✧✧ to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/bbcde2fa-8688-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787?desktop=true&conceptId=67e7d2d7-ef1f-3a02-9e07-35726073e2c5&segmentId=d8d3e364-5197-20eb-17cf-2437841d178a#myft:notification:instant-email:content:headline:html

The world’s biggest hedge fund manager is turning more defensive on concerns the political drama in Washington will impair the US government’s ability to function and weigh on already wobbly financial markets.

The move by Ray Dalio, the founder of Bridgewater, which manages about $150bn, comes in a month that has seen the benchmark S&P 500 dipping 1.7 per cent amid Donald Trump’s nuclear brinkmanship with North Korea and White House infighting over the president’s response to neo-Nazi demonstrations in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Although the S&P 500 closed slightly higher in New York trading on Monday, the fall since the start of August puts it on track for the worst monthly performance in almost a year as a series of “Trump trades” have fizzled out over the summer.

Mr Dalio, who was initially optimistic about the economic impact of Mr Trump’s policy agenda, wrote on Monday that divisions in Washington meant “conflicts have now intensified to the point that fighting to the death is probably more likely than reconciliation”, pointing to the president’s sharply diverging approval ratings among Democrats and Republicans.

The hedge fund manager said Bridgewater was “reducing our risk” because of the likelihood the conflicts will not be “handled well”, arguing that their resolution “will have a greater effect on the economy, markets and our overall wellbeing than classic monetary and fiscal policies”.

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Thursday, 24 August 2017 00:18 (four months ago) Permalink

Thanks

Gukbe, Thursday, 24 August 2017 01:28 (four months ago) Permalink

The world’s biggest hedge fund manager

7'2" and 300lbs

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Thursday, 24 August 2017 04:34 (four months ago) Permalink

INNN THISSSS COR-NERRRR

j., Thursday, 24 August 2017 05:09 (four months ago) Permalink

one month passes...
two months pass...

How Dollar General Became Rural America's Store of Choice

Dollar General is expanding because rural America is struggling. With its convenient locations for frugal shoppers, it has become one of the most profitable retailers in the U.S. and a lifeline for lower-income customers bypassed by other major chains.

The more the rural U.S. struggles, company officials said, the more places Dollar General has found to prosper. “The economy is continuing to create more of our core customer,” Chief Executive Todd Vasos said in an interview at the company’s Goodlettsville, Tenn., headquarters.

“We are putting stores today [in areas] that perhaps five years ago were just on the cusp of probably not being our demographic,” he said, “and it has now turned to being our demographic.”

mookieproof, Monday, 4 December 2017 20:44 (one month ago) Permalink

Many popular brands are packaged in small quantities to keep prices under $10 -- generally yielding higher profits per item than bulk goods at such warehouse chains as Costco, which sells half-gallon bottles of cooking oil and 7-pound packages of fresh chicken.

mookieproof, Monday, 4 December 2017 20:48 (one month ago) Permalink

“We are putting stores today [in areas] that perhaps five years ago were just on the cusp of probably not being our demographic,” he said, “and it has now turned to being our demographic.”

too real :(

Roberto Spiralli, Monday, 4 December 2017 21:02 (one month ago) Permalink

Take your payday loan check on down to Dollar General!

IF (Terrorist) Yes, Explain (man alive), Monday, 4 December 2017 21:09 (one month ago) Permalink

/trench

IF (Terrorist) Yes, Explain (man alive), Monday, 4 December 2017 21:17 (one month ago) Permalink

Reality as a whole needs posting on the trenchant thread

But doctor, I am Camille Paglia (Bananaman Begins), Monday, 4 December 2017 21:28 (one month ago) Permalink

this is why i live in canada!

― J0rdan S., Friday, October 19, 2007 6:13 AM (ten years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lets revisit this

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Monday, 11 December 2017 22:37 (one month ago) Permalink

four weeks pass...

FUK

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 11 January 2018 01:52 (one week ago) Permalink

You know that $1.4 trillion in unfunded tax cuts the Congress just decided to borrow over the next 10 years in order to do nothing useful? Apparently China doesn't find that idea appealing from the lender's perspective. To paraphrase a famous American, that makes them smart!

A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 11 January 2018 01:57 (one week ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.