Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Yield Curve Inverts

  • Thread starter Thread starter lowecur
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 17

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

lowecur

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Posts
2,317
It's coming. This is a precusor to most recessions in the past. This will drive oil prices lower (as I predicted) by summer, with a further weakening towards the end of the year.

Good for the airline business????......yes and no. The easing in oil prices will help, but recessions usually mean less travel. The strong will grow stronger, and the weak will continue to lose market share.

:pimp:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/nationworld/ats-ap_business10dec27,0,6526420.story?coll=sns-business-headlines
 
For once, Lowecur might be right. An inverted yield curve is a great indicator of impending recession. Let's hope this time it's off. The last thing we need in this industry is a major recession.

However, even if the recession doesn't hit, I still think oil prices will continue to drop. I would bet on less than $50/bbl by the end of next year and back down below $40/bbl sometime in '07 if not earlier. Prices have stayed too high for too long. They're going to take a huge fall when people realize how ridiculous it's become.
 
Low IQ...

lowecur said:
It's coming. This is a precusor to most recessions in the past. This will drive oil prices lower (as I predicted) by summer, with a further weakening towards the end of the year.

Good for the airline business????......yes and no. The easing in oil prices will help, but recessions usually mean less travel. The strong will grow stronger, and the weak will continue to lose market share.

:pimp:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/nationworld/ats-ap_business10dec27,0,6526420.story?coll=sns-business-headlines

Did your parents take you to see the movie "Chicken Little" over Christmas?:rolleyes:
 
You can also bet on at least one more tightening; right before Greenspan leaves office. He's got a MAJOR axe to grind with dubya.
dubya forked Greenspan way back after Greenspan backed dubya tax cut proposal in Congressional testimony. In return, dubya was supposed to not unleash a deficit.
This'll be payback in politics, with the US economy going into a recession. Even though Greenspan's a GOP, he's going to do everything he can to fork the GOP as payback for letting the deficit get out of control.

Isn't it funny how Clinton and the Dems ('tax and spenders') were able to run a surplus?
 
Isn't it Funny

Isn't it 'Funny' that Clownton didn't have to contend with the Terrorist attacks on 9/11 and the resulting recession, loss of tax revenue, cost of creating the homeland security system, and going to war??

If Clownton would have quit playing with damp cigars, watching football and done the job that he was elected to do [defend our country from Bin Ladin], then what would the last 5 years have been like??

You must be pretty amusing to watch balance your checkbook.
 
Andy, Another bump won't come a to poke Bush in the eye, but rather to give Bernanke some room...either not requiring another cut right away or giving him slack to lower should the economy's momentum falter.
 
B6Guy said:
Isn't it 'Funny' that Clownton didn't have to contend with the Terrorist attacks on 9/11 and the resulting recession, loss of tax revenue, cost of creating the homeland security system, and going to war??

If Clownton would have quit playing with damp cigars, watching football and done the job that he was elected to do [defend our country from Bin Ladin], then what would the last 5 years have been like??

You must be pretty amusing to watch balance your checkbook.


Another Bush supporter!! We are doomed!
 
B6Guy said:
Isn't it 'Funny' that Clownton didn't have to contend with the Terrorist attacks on 9/11 and the resulting recession, loss of tax revenue, cost of creating the homeland security system, and going to war??

If Clownton would have quit playing with damp cigars, watching football and done the job that he was elected to do [defend our country from Bin Ladin], then what would the last 5 years have been like??

You must be pretty amusing to watch balance your checkbook.

I don't know what ticked you off, but you may want to gain some knowledge on the subject prior to spouting off. Greenspan testified before Congress in Jan 2001 and dubya broke his under the table deal with Greenspan well before 9/11.
It may have been payback for Greenspan forking dubya's daddy and breaking a backroom deal that they had when the senior Bush was in office.
But you don't sound like you'd let facts get in the way of a good story.
 
What does

What does your above post about Greenspan and deals have to do with your previous comment:
"Isn't it funny how Clinton and the Dems ['tax and spenders'] were able to run a surplus"
????

I was pointing out that your comment does not reflect the realities of having a 'surplus' and having a 'deficit'. It's easy to run a surplus when you have large tax revenues and cut way back on defense. It's very difficult to not have a deficit when tax revenues drop because of recession and you have to fight a war and defend ourselves.

Your above quoted comment has nothing to do with Greenspan and the economics of interest rates or deals under the table.

You figure it out.

.
 
B6Guy said:
What does your above post about Greenspan and deals have to do with your previous comment:
"Isn't it funny how Clinton and the Dems ['tax and spenders'] were able to run a surplus"
????

I was pointing out that your comment does not reflect the realities of having a 'surplus' and having a 'deficit'. It's easy to run a surplus when you have large tax revenues and cut way back on defense. It's very difficult to not have a deficit when tax revenues drop because of recession and you have to fight a war and defend ourselves.

Your above quoted comment has nothing to do with Greenspan and the economics of interest rates or deals under the table.

You figure it out.



.

"have to fight a war"...................now that's funny!
 
I may have to "contend" with major hospital bills if I cross the street without looking. I might have to "contend" with a bill collector if I spend like a drunken sailor.
With the former president I "contended" with low fuel prices, a good economy and without a constant barrage of U.S. servicemen being killed in order to make a political point. Send the man a box of Cubans.
 
If Clownton would have quit playing with damp cigars, watching football and done the job that he was elected to do [defend our country from Bin Ladin], then what would the last 5 years have been like??

Oh, like Bush taking 2 month vacations in Crawford every year? Bush can't even defend us against hurricaine damage. What exactly did Bush do about Bin Laden during the first 9 months in his presidency...? Nothing, not a damn thing. Did he catch Bin Laden after 9/11? Nope, more time has lapsed as of today since 9/11 than the time of America's involvement in World War 2, and we still don't have the guy that caused 9/11 killed or captured..
 
It's amazing how poor the civics education curriculum is in schools these days.
 
73-Driver said:
It's amazing how many people consider FOX to be their only reliable news source!

If it was said by Shawn Hanitty it must be true! What a looser. I wish Bush would walk off a cliff so all these crazy people would follow him.
 
Wow. What a bunch of simpletons. Anyone who thinks the president has any real effect on the economy is a flaming idiot.

I do not credit Bush with any good news nor charge him with any bad news regarding the economy. The economy is what it is, and it is largely uncontrollable.

You people would try to Blame Bush (tm) for a cloudy day.

The president, whomever he may be, always serves as a convenient scapegoat for the complaint du jour. How many of you on the left blame Clinton for the dotcom bust that "OCURRED UNDER HIS WATCH" (a favorite melodromatic term from the left)?

Get a life and get an education, or you will continue to be manipulated by fallacious logic.

Idiots on both sides.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top