US Economy thread

[TSmith34, Inc.]

The little guy doesn't feel the benefit because his salary hasn't kept pace -- and won't for a few years -- and his cost of borrowing is sky high.

Actually, consumer confidence just hit a two-year high and real wages grew in 2023 (see chart in post #9). It's true there is typically a lag between better a better economy and when people perceive it, but it appears we are at that point now.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Yahoo Finance is producing these quarterly

Yahoo Finance Chartbook: 33 charts tell the story of markets and the economy to start 2024
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/yahoo-finance-chartbook-january-2024-110149183.html?.tsrc=372

[dgies9156]

Actually, consumer confidence just hit a two-year high and real wages grew in 2023 (see chart in post #9). It's true there is typically a lag between better a better economy and when people perceive it, but it appears we are at that point now.

Possibly, but until interest rates decrease substantially, there will be continued consumer angst.

Brother MUFan, I'm surprised there's any nuclear plants even close to under construction. But your point is exactly my concern -- late and way over budget. I'm not sure who or what is backing either the Georgia or Connecticut projects, but would you invest either in a nuclear power plant or a company that wants to construct a nuclear power plant.

Oh, and after 65 years of nuclear power plants, we still haven't figured out an agreed-on, safe way to dispose of radioactive waste. Over the years, our country has spoken of a waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, but nothing has been finalized. That's the challenge with nuclear, and any waste leakage is far more damaging than anything a hydrocarbon fueled plant could ever do! Just ask the folks in Northern Ukraine or Southeast Belarus. Or around Fukashima!

[MU82]

From Yahoo Finance:

Investors looking for earnings this week to wave a magic, clarifying wand over the economic and markets picture may end up being disappointed.

‌Take UPS (UPS) and General Motors (GM) as two examples of earnings that muddy the economic portrait.

UPS CEO Carol Tomé characterized 2023 as a “difficult and disappointing year” as the package delivery giant forecast sales for 2024 that fell short of estimates. UPS also announced it’s cutting 12,000 workers this year.

‌‌On the flip side, consider GM.

“Consensus is growing that the US economy, the job market, and auto sales will continue to be resilient.” That’s how CEO Mary Barra kicked off the earnings call. It accompanies the automaker’s forecast for earnings per share this year of $8.50 to $9.50, compared with the $7.70 predicted by analysts.

Whirlpool shares tumbled after the appliance maker warned consumer spending was softening.

Visa shares traded at a record intraday high after the stock shook off concerns over January weather and investors heeded the commentary from CEO Ryan McInerney: “Consumer spending remained resilient.”

[ATL MU Warrior]

Possibly, but until interest rates decrease substantially, there will be continued consumer angst.

Brother MUFan, I'm surprised there's any nuclear plants even close to under construction. But your point is exactly my concern -- late and way over budget. I'm not sure who or what is backing either the Georgia or Connecticut projects, but would you invest either in a nuclear power plant or a company that wants to construct a nuclear power plant.

Oh, and after 65 years of nuclear power plants, we still haven't figured out an agreed-on, safe way to dispose of radioactive waste. Over the years, our country has spoken of a waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, but nothing has been finalized. That's the challenge with nuclear, and any waste leakage is far more damaging than anything a hydrocarbon fueled plant could ever do! Just ask the folks in Northern Ukraine or Southeast Belarus. Or around Fukashima!

The Southern Company (SO) owns Georgia Power, thus the largest share of the nuclear plants in Georgia.  Their stock is doing just fine, about 12% off of all time high which was hit about 1.5 years ago.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

The Southern Company (SO) owns Georgia Power, thus the largest share of the nuclear plants in Georgia.  Their stock is doing just fine, about 12% off of all time high which was hit about 1.5 years ago.

The first US nuclear reactor built from scratch in decades enters commercial operation in Georgia
https://apnews.com/article/georgia-power-nuclear-reactor-vogtle-9555e3f9169f2d58161056feaa81a425

[Dr. Blackheart]

Fusion is the future, why are these dopes investing in fission?

[tower912]

Fusion is always the future.

[Pakuni]

Fusion is the future, why are these dopes investing in fission?

Something's got to keep the lights on for the next 40-50 years.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Fusion is always the future.

Except for the ignition breakthrough a year ago, which makes its future more immediate and where all the VC money is going. Why would government invest in a 20 year window on out of date and environmentally problematic fission technology?

[Dr. Blackheart]

Something's got to keep the lights on for the next 40-50 years.

Not according to the Biden administration
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a45324693/us-wants-working-fusion-reactor-by-2035/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=arb_ga_pop_md_dsa_prog_org_us_a45324693&gbraid=0AAAAADCyiSl1N0jD626BcO2-_E_dX2TwI&gclid=CjwKCAiA_OetBhAtEiwAPTeQZ63ys8N3OSITHbs31E3k6mkyZZk_dzmPgdmvxb5bWUKx3F1OkVt7EhoCmc8QAvD_BwE

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Fusion is always the future.

Plastics, young man.

[Pakuni]

Not according to the Biden administration
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a45324693/us-wants-working-fusion-reactor-by-2035/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=arb_ga_pop_md_dsa_prog_org_us_a45324693&gbraid=0AAAAADCyiSl1N0jD626BcO2-_E_dX2TwI&gclid=CjwKCAiA_OetBhAtEiwAPTeQZ63ys8N3OSITHbs31E3k6mkyZZk_dzmPgdmvxb5bWUKx3F1OkVt7EhoCmc8QAvD_BwE

Scientific American says 2050s at the earliest, 2060s more realistic.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-the-future-of-fusion-energy/

[Dr. Blackheart]

Scientific American says 2050s at the earliest, 2060s more realistic.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-the-future-of-fusion-energy/

Well if the topic is the economy, and the Secretary of Energy is doling out incentives with a goal to be commercial in ten years, why on god's green earth would for or non for profit entities be investing in old/soon to be obsolete, thin margin (that requires a 50 year payback), on top of 20 year capital intensive projects (to even get to startup) and have proven gigantic environmental liabilities? Did you invest in abacuses in the 1970s too?

[JWags85]

Not to be a tinfoil hat aficionado, but how many external factors do we think are truly at play preventing fusion?  Assuming that the vast majority of funding/incentives would be from the public sector, I can see opposition from both the fossil fuel cabal, as mentioned above, and the green/renewable energy sector who would get railroaded if fusion ever became a thing?  I'm far from a cynic, but I'm always wary when magic bullet technologies that could change the game get held up, even if there is a non-minor component that is actually technology/scientific delay related.

[Pakuni]

Well if the topic is the economy, and the Secretary of Energy is doling out incentives with a goal to be commercial in ten years, why on god's green earth would for or non for profit entities be investing in old/soon to be obsolete, thin margin (that requires a 50 year payback), on top of 20 year capital intensive projects (to even get to startup) and have proven gigantic environmental liabilities? Did you invest in abacuses in the 1970s too?

You'd have to ask someone who's investing in those projects. Or just assume they're not as clever as you.

[Dr. Blackheart]

You'd have to ask someone who's investing in those projects. Or just assume they're not as clever as you.

Are you from the Mike Madigan School of Business?  Of course you know who pays the bill.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/02/17/the-us-is-spending-billions-to-keep-money-losing-nuclear-plants-open.html

[dgies9156]

Are you from the Mike Madigan School of Business?  Of course you know who pays the bill.

Thanks Brother Doc and Right On!

The basic question is, notwithstanding the Georgia experience, what's going to happen when Consolidated Edison proposes a large-scale fission or fusion reactor on the Hudson River north of New York City. It will take about 10 minutes for enough lawsuits to come out of the woodwork to require a need for a million more lawyers a year from law schools to handle the litigation. Same for Com-Ed on the Illinois or Rock Rivers outside Chicago.

Gosh, I should have gone to law school!

And then there's the regulatory oversight process. To give an idea of how that works, look at the 737 Max oversight. The delays in the 737-8 Max and the 737-10 Max are about to bankrupt Boeing as regulators get cold feet about approving anything. Multiply that by a factor of one million and you begin to see how a regulator is likely to react to a new nuclear power plant.

The point of this discussion is to say there's no quick fixes to bolstering domestic electricity production. Yet, we are going down a path that by 2040, there will be more demand than supply for electricity. If California and Northeast states are paving the way, we'll have 150 million or so more electric vehicles on the road than we have today.

Where's the power coming from?

If we're really going to do this, then we need to begin adjusting our capital allocation, economic growth and related assumptions to accommodate an exponential increase in electrical generating capacity. The terawatts we're going to need are off the charts!

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Not to be a tinfoil hat aficionado, but how many external factors do we think are truly at play preventing fusion?  Assuming that the vast majority of funding/incentives would be from the public sector, I can see opposition from both the fossil fuel cabal, as mentioned above, and the green/renewable energy sector who would get railroaded if fusion ever became a thing?  I'm far from a cynic, but I'm always wary when magic bullet technologies that could change the game get held up, even if there is a non-minor component that is actually technology/scientific delay related.

It's the manufacturing of the unit itself.  My company provides superconducting wire to some of these international research projects.  Superconductors are needed to cool and control the fusion reaction.  MRI machines manufacturers are our largest customers.  They are trying to make an MRI machine the size of a football stadium and also keep control of an explosion inside. 

[Pakuni]

Are you from the Mike Madigan School of Business?  Of course you know who pays the bill.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/02/17/the-us-is-spending-billions-to-keep-money-losing-nuclear-plants-open.html

No idea what you're trying to get at here. That nuclear is a bad investment? Maybe! You'll have to bring that up with the dum-dums investing in nuclear, I guess.
Here's a partial list:
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/plans-for-new-reactors-worldwide.aspx

Doesn't change the fact that fusion - at least to the degree that it makes a dent in the country's energy needs - is several decades away. It'll do wonders for the lighting in your assisted-living facility.

[Dr. Blackheart]

No idea what you're trying to get at here. That nuclear is a bad investment? Maybe! You'll have to bring that up with the dum-dums investing in nuclear, I guess.
Here's a partial list:
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/plans-for-new-reactors-worldwide.aspx

Doesn't change the fact that fusion - at least to the degree that it makes a dent in the country's energy needs - is several decades away. It'll do wonders for the lighting in your assisted-living facility.

Good ageism comeback.

It's pretty simple, why publicly (or privately) invest in an obsolete technology that will be operational at the same as the new transformational one for the economy? I won't touch the politics of it and I respect you for staying out of that here.

As to the countries who are investing in fission, it's because they don't want to be dependent on the Cleptocracies. They are also investing in fusion big time. The US doesn't need to do that and in fact, it detracts from the potential of fusion.

As to the barriers, it's now all engineering. The science has been solved. That screams USA.

[Hards Alumni]

I dont disagree about the future of AI at all.  I was more speaking to the similarity between the 2 in how they are used as buzzwords.  The vast majority of transformative AI right now is not in "sexy" functions.  Its taking care of the brutal slog work and other stuff behind the scenes.  The stuff I'm talking about is people acting like they have some futuristic robot mind powering crazy app functions or other stuff.

For example, I know of a company that created app to combat fraud in the jewelry industry.  Lots of talk in their marketing materials and social media about "AI powered" and "using artificial intelligence" to do XY and Z.  In reality, its simple (and rather buggy) image matching done only if the fonts are exactly the same.  And further, most matches actually have a manual human review as well.  The only true "AI" is a chatbot the interfaces in the app.   Ive seen plenty of other situations similar to this.   Which is a far cry from where AI is gonna save tons of time, money, and human capital and create a ton of value in the near term.

Which is funny because blockchain should be a great thing for the jewelry industry.  It is excellent at combating fraud.

[Hards Alumni]

While I agree with most of your long post, there are a couple areas that I disagree with.

1. Who is advocating for taking away air conditioning in Florida?

2. Biden is old and moves like it - but you're nuts if you think he is senile - or just maybe watched too much Fox. He has passed numerous important bills despite constant opposition. The economy is humming. +He is dealing with an entire party that has gone insane (i.e. Rs saying no money for Israel or Ukraine without money for the border. Biden and Ds say yes to money for the border and Rs say we won't pass ANY border legislation). These are not sane people.

2. uhhhh he's clearly lost a step. 

[Hards Alumni]

Possibly, but until interest rates decrease substantially, there will be continued consumer angst.

Brother MUFan, I'm surprised there's any nuclear plants even close to under construction. But your point is exactly my concern -- late and way over budget. I'm not sure who or what is backing either the Georgia or Connecticut projects, but would you invest either in a nuclear power plant or a company that wants to construct a nuclear power plant.

Oh, and after 65 years of nuclear power plants, we still haven't figured out an agreed-on, safe way to dispose of radioactive waste. Over the years, our country has spoken of a waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, but nothing has been finalized. That's the challenge with nuclear, and any waste leakage is far more damaging than anything a hydrocarbon fueled plant could ever do! Just ask the folks in Northern Ukraine or Southeast Belarus. Or around Fukashima!

These problems have been solved for decades, but as you've mentioned, we haven't built a new plant in the US since the 70s.  The newer designs use the nuclear energy more completely and for longer.

Also, the amount of nuclear waste that has EVER been created can fit inside of a football field stacked 10 yards high.

[Pakuni]

Good ageism comeback.

Huh. And here I was thinking it was a compliment to suggest you'd still be around in 2065.