Factory orders down
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 13, 2024, 10:24:41 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  Factory orders down
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Factory orders down  (Read 911 times)
CARLHAYDEN
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,638


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -0.51

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 02, 2009, 11:34:54 AM »

I personally believe that the factory orders component of the Leading Economic Indicators is far to heavily weighted.

However, here is the most recent numbers:

http://www.reuters.com/article/gc04/idUSTRE5913AS20091002
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,009


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2009, 02:52:19 PM »

Factory orders?  How does this affect the USA?  I thought all those left for China years ago.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,960


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2009, 03:36:20 PM »

This widespread myth is the result of confusion between jobs and production:

Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,009


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 03, 2009, 06:07:57 AM »

Well, I was making a joke, but even regarding 'production' as depicted in your chart, we're producing about 1/4 less than we should be with good economic policy.
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,167
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2009, 06:10:54 AM »

a service economy is unsustainable
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,906


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2009, 12:46:52 PM »
« Edited: October 03, 2009, 05:55:46 PM by phknrocket1k »


Why?

It's simply the LR trend to become a service-oriented economy (at least theoretically).

As productivity in agriculture increases it frees up labor for manufacturing industries and once productivity increases in manufacturing industries, labor is again freed  up to work in service industries. This can be seen also to correlate to the rural => urban => suburban transformation throughout our economic history (and other countries as well).

In terms of rate of productivity growth as defined by a production fn in the form of f(K,L) that would imply Q/L=A, we see that in terms of the rate of growth (conceptually think like a second derivative, x''). Agriculture > Manufacturing > Service.

This is pretty much confirmed by the graph that Beet posted, showing the overall value of manufacturing output to increase  (which is due to two things 1) productivity increases and 2)"moving-up-the-value-added-ladder").
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,009


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2009, 02:42:59 PM »


Why?

It's simply the LR trend to become a service-oriented economy. As productivity in agriculture increases it frees up labor for manufacturing industries and once productivity increases in manufacturing industries, labor is again freed up to work in service industries. In terms of rate of productivity growth (i.e. the second derivative x''). Agriculture > Manufacturing > Service.

The problem is concentration, not specific type of work.  As productivity increases we need greater and greater amounts of redistribution to correct concentration, and the resultant lack of demand which makes the system unstable.   Essentially public policy should ensure that nearly all of the increase in productivity goes to worker incomes/benefits/holidays/services/etc., instead of the small fraction currently so allocated.
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,906


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2009, 02:46:20 PM »
« Edited: October 03, 2009, 05:24:34 PM by phknrocket1k »


Why?

It's simply the LR trend to become a service-oriented economy. As productivity in agriculture increases it frees up labor for manufacturing industries and once productivity increases in manufacturing industries, labor is again freed up to work in service industries. In terms of rate of productivity growth (i.e. the second derivative x''). Agriculture > Manufacturing > Service.

The problem is concentration, not specific type of work.  As productivity increases we need greater and greater amounts of redistribution to correct concentration, and the resultant lack of demand which makes the system unstable.   Essentially public policy should ensure that nearly all of the increase in productivity goes to worker incomes/benefits/holidays/services/etc., instead of the small fraction currently so allocated.

Well opebo, it depends.

Productivity-boosting technology changes demand for labor through two mechanisms:
A. Substituting for some human tasks
B. Complementing other human tasks

Or perhaps a hitherto combination of the above.

Workers will initially benefit from A.
They will be initially hurt from B.

But I think over the long run, productivity increases should lead to benefits for all, assuming we have enough combinatorial innovation (a term that Hal Varian came up with) left in the system to generate new industries and sectors.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 11 queries.