Detroit News - All three Detroit automakers — including Chrysler Group LLC and General Motors Co. — reported Tuesday that vehicle inventories are now above 90 days’ supply. A normal level is considered 60 days, but can change depending on season.
-----
Slowing demand, growing inventory. That usually means something. Add the recent death of lending standards in the auto sales sector and I suspect my next car may have been sold in November.
21 comments:
I'd rather have an inventory based recession that a balance sheet recession...
:snark:
I have almost convinced myself that I need a pickup or a van. So the news of excess inventory sounds good. Of course, it's probably excess inventory of Hyundai motorized roller skates or something...
http://nypost.com/2013/12/05/global-warming-proof-is-evaporating/
Just rolled over 200K on my MDX and see no compelling replacements.
Blogger TJandTheBear said...
Global-warming ‘proof’ is evaporating
They not only conceded that average global surface temperatures stopped warming a full 15 years ago, but that this “pause” could extend into the 2030s.
Mind you, the term “pause” is misleading in the extreme: Unless and until it resumes again, it’s just a “stop.” You don’t say a bullet-ridden body “paused” breathing.
Remarkably, that stoppage has practically been a state secret.
There's more grant money in warming that in cooling or nothing...
Why Obama Can't Rescue the Middle Class
It would take a herculean breakthrough in Washington’s prolonged partisan gridlock to reverse that trend – a highly improbable new consensus over the need to revamp the nation’s tax code, the minimum wage law, employment and educational policies, welfare rules, investment and infrastructure programs and much more.
His observation on the tax code being a problem is correct, but based on his other observations, I'd suspect that whatever "solution" he'd propose would be wrong.
Keynesians Revive a Depression Idea
The diagnosis? Too much saving and a lack of investment opportunities, according to Harvard University’s Summers. And with the funds rate close to zero, the Federal Reserve can’t deliver the negative real interest rates he says the economy needs unless it creates higher inflation.
So what do Summers and Krugman advocate for the secular malaise? Why, a cyclical solution: government spending on infrastructure. They want the kinds of things Keynesians typically promote to stabilize the economy during a recession to become a permanent part of the fiscal architecture.
Sadly, there aren't many infrastructure programs out there that are shovel ready AND have the sort of "bang for the buck" of, for instance, the rural electrification program. About the only think I can think of is a smart grid which Rob has previously advocated...but that's not shovel ready, and captured interest would most likely bleed the return for that too...
Don't get me wrong. November sales were great. That it is a little bit on the balance sheet from extending subprime credit is an issue for next year.
The '99 Exedition has a dozen miles since September when we bought the '06 V70 2.5T. Good news on that front. Fooling with the radio now not only NPR and college stations but classical reception comes in. Progress. ;)
Anyway. The Expedition. Because Mrs Dawg has a company car with everything paid it is cheaper to park the behemoth than to get rid of it. Perverse incentives.
Are we headed to a Cuban transportation system?
And a side note. Thanks for your kind support. Visiting, posting and all that.
> Cinco-X said...
I'd rather have an inventory based recession that a balance sheet recession...:snark:
Why the snark? Best of the four kinds of recessions. Being prepared for an inventory recession makes for some awesome bargins.
Now someone is going to ask... Four?
Obama Devotes His Presidency To Inequality from the NYT
On Wednesday, in one of his strongest economic speeches, President Obama pushed past all the distractions of his opponents and addressed the core of those fears. He will spend the rest of his presidency, he said, on “the defining challenge of our time:” reducing economic inequality and improving upward mobility.
As you might expect, the conclusion is basically that it's Bush's fault...
Rob Dawg said...Why the snark?
Because I'd really rather not have a recession at all. OTOH, we probably need one to clear out the malinvestment. Unfortunately, there may have been so much that an inventory recession could quickly turn into another balance sheet recession.
Okay...I'll bite...four?
There are many shovel ready programs. Rural solar. Electric, natgas and H2 refueling transportation infrastructure.
A special one for Cinco, de-oil New England heating.
Port direct to electric rail. Midwest hydro and/or groundwater.
So many so little vision.
> TJandTheBear said...
Just rolled over 200K on my MDX and see no compelling replacements.
Wait for the next gen Lexus RH.
Debunking Presidential Economics
Yes, the distribution of earnings and wealth is less equal than it was in 1979 or 1980. But what’s the cause of it? Lots of things, but few that are mentioned by the President. Increasing the power of unions and the minimum wage are the wrong ways to make things better. How about improving our lousy school system in America’s inner cities?
All in all a nice take down...
Okay, okay. I'll put up another CAGW post. Just one thing, the NYT is being extremely dishonest. There never was any proof and damn little evidence. They are just CYA.
We need recessions. Recessions are good. Ever see what appens to a kid in a bubble when the seal breaks?
Credit recession. Aka depression.
Inventory recession.
Demand recession.
Come on, admit it. You need to pick. Is number four a currency, taxation or conflict recession? I might surprise you.
> Cinco-X said...
Obama Devotes His Presidency To Inequality from the NYT
Well yes. Obama has ideed dedicated his presidency to inequality. I doubt however he is queuing off the NYTimes for his instructions.
Rob Dawg said...
There are many shovel ready programs. Rural solar. Electric, natgas and H2 refueling transportation infrastructure.
A special one for Cinco, de-oil New England heating.
Port direct to electric rail. Midwest hydro and/or groundwater.
So many so little vision.
de-oiling NE heating would be the only one I'd consider "shovel ready".
Rural solar can be done now, but it's not cost effective without a smart grid and or government subsidies.
Piping electricity isn't a panacea without cost effective super conductors.
Alternative fuel refilling isn't cost effective/practical without a fleet of vehicles out there already (a chicken and egg thing).
And with the exception of the de-oiling proposal, there needs to be huge plans drawn up for all of them. If the plans AND studies were already done, THEN they would be shovel ready. As it is, we'd be looking at years of planing committees, environmental impact studies, etc.
We could "de-oil" NE, but running pipe for natural gas to homes is likely not planned for at teh moment, and hence should not be considered shovel ready. Sure, you can put a propane tank in everyone's backyard, but people could do that now without government intervention. They won't because it's not economical. A subsidy would help that, but this wouldn't require infrastructure...
Off topic.
"I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination," he said. "I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."
~ Mandela, 1964. RIP.
Less ice in Greenland 3,000 years ago than today
A new method for dating ancient sea shells reveals that the Greenland Ice Sheet was smaller between 3,000 and 5,000 years ago than it is today. The new study also indicates that the inland ice is more robust than previously thought.
Dates to the time of the Pyramids...
Policy: Twenty tips for interpreting scientific claims
Differences and chance cause variation.
No measurement is exact
Bias is rife
Bigger is usually better for sample size
Correlation does not imply causation
Regression to the mean can mislead
Extrapolating beyond the data is risky
Beware the base-rate fallacy
Controls are important
Randomization avoids bias
Seek replication, not pseudoreplication
Scientists are human
Significance is significant
Separate no effect from non-significance
Effect size matters
Study relevance limits generalizations
Feelings influence risk perception
Dependencies change the risks
Data can be dredged or cherry picked
Extreme measurements may mislead
Post a Comment