Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
follow
1,000 Followers
follow
0 Followers
follow
People's Pundit Locals Community
Tuesday, March 4, 2025
SECTIONS
logo
mobile-logo
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 801)
Economy


producer-price-index-ppi

The Producer Price Index (PPI) reported by the Labor Department Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Labor Department said on Thursday its producer price index for final demand fell 0.4 percent last month, declining for the third time this year. The PPI increased 0.2 percent in March, but overall, U.S. producer prices continue to trend down in April as the cost of energy fell and a strong dollar have helped to keep inflation pressures low, at least according to Labor’s gauge.

Though the Federal Reserve relies upon their own index to calculate inflation, the PPD supports views that the FOMC will hold off on raising interest rates until later in the year. In the 12 months through April, producer prices fell 1.3 percent, which is the biggest year-over-year decline since 2010, after declining 0.8 percent in March.

Economists had forecast the PPI rising 0.2 percent last month and falling 0.8 percent from a year ago.

A drop of 0.7 percent in the index for final demand goods accounted for more than 70 percent of the decline in the PPI last month. Energy prices fell 2.9 percent after rising 1.5 percent in March, while food prices fell for a fifth straight month.

The dollar, which increased roughly 11 percent against the currencies of America’s main trading partners since June, coupled with lower energy prices have thus far kept inflation down.

The Fed has a 2 percent inflation target set as a guide decide the timing and trajectory of rate hikes, but considering the likely economic contraction in the 1Q, the Fed is just as likely to keep rates where they have had them since Dec. 2008 — near zero.

Last month, the volatile trade services component, which mostly reflects profit margins at retailers and wholesalers, fell 0.8 percent after slipping 0.2 percent in the prior month. A key measure of underlying producer price pressures that excludes food, energy and trade services barely increased 0.1 percent after rising by 0.2 percent in March.

The Labor Department said on Thursday its

Economy

Weekly-Jobless-Claims-Graphic

Weekly Jobless Claims Graphic. Number of Americans applying for first-time jobless benefits.

The Labor Department reported weekly jobless claims unexpectedly fell last week, despite the economy struggling to regain momentum after first quarter contraction.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits, or the number of Americans filing for first-time jobless benefits, fell modestly by 1,000 to a seasonally adjusted 264,000 for the week ended May 9. The number hovers right above the 15-year low hit two weeks ago after the Labor Department changed its methodology to calculate claims.

Meanwhile, claims for the prior week were unrevised, yet they have been below 300,000 for 10 straight weeks. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims rising to 275,000 last week.

A Labor Department analyst said there was nothing unusual in the state-level data and no states had been estimated.

The four-week moving average of claims — which is widely considered to be a better measure of labor market trends as it irons out week-to-week volatility — dropped 7,750 last week to 271,750. That was the lowest level since April 2000, but the number of ineligible Americans to collect and apply for those benefits is far lower than in either 2000 or even 2007.

The government initially estimated that the economy barely grew in the first quarter at a 0.2 percent rate, but the trade deficit wasn’t not estimated correctly. In truth, the revisions will show a contraction. Retail sales and manufacturing data suggest that while activity is picking up, the pace remains modest.

Thursday’s claims report showed the number of people still receiving benefits after an initial week of aid was unchanged at 2.23 million in the week ended May 2.

The Labor Department reported weekly jobless claims

Policy


dea

DEA agents took $16,000 from Joseph Rivers, a 22, as he was on his way from Michigan to Los Angeles, California to pursue a career in the music industry. (Photo: AP)

If I had to pick a government policy that would be most upsetting to our Founding Fathers, I’d be tempted to pick the income tax. Or maybe some useless agency, such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

After all, surely the Founders didn’t envision – or want – today’s Leviathan government in Washington. But I also know I’m biased since I work on fiscal policy issues.

So, upon further reflection, I think the policy that would be most horrifying to the Founding Fathers is so-called civil asset forfeiture, a.k.a., theft by government.

You may think I’m joking or exaggerating, but theft is the right word when you look at how citizens (such as the Dehko family and Lyndon McClellan) have had their bank accounts seized even though they were never even charged with a crime, much less ever committed a crime.

And now we have a new example that would have the Founders rolling in their graves, but also should get every decent person angry.

Reason has a report with the odious details.

…the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), is snatching the life savings of a young black male for the crime of being alone on a train. The man, Joseph Rivers, 22, was traveling from Michigan to Los Angeles by train with $18,000 in cash to pay for a music video. In Albuquerque, DEA agents boarded the train and started asking people questions. They got to Rivers, who told him he was going to shoot a music video and agreed to let them search his stuff.

Now, put yourself in the mind of Mr. Rivers. You’re not committing a crime. You’re not in possession of any drugs or other illicit substances.

Agents ask to search your stuff as part of their snooping on the train and you figure being cooperative is the best way of allaying suspicion (regardless of whether the DEA used profiling).

And what’s your reward for being cooperative?

The Reason report then shares some very ugly passages from a story in the Albuquerque Journal.

Rivers was the only passenger singled out for a search by DEA agents – and the only black person on his portion of the train… In one of the bags, the agent found the cash, still in the Michigan bank envelope.

Mr. Rivers explained why he had the money, but it didn’t do any good.

“I even allowed him to call my mother, a military veteran and (hospital) coordinator, to corroborate my story,” Rivers said. “Even with all of this, the officers decided to take my money because he stated that he believed that the money was involved in some type of narcotic activity.” Rivers was left penniless.

Here’s perhaps the most disturbing part of the story is the way government bureaucrats openly admit that they can take money without any criminal charges, much less a conviction for any crime.

“We don’t have to prove that the person is guilty,” Waite said. “It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty.”

Just imagine how the Founding Fathers, if they were still around, would react to the statements of this bureaucrat?

Imagine what they would think of a policy that gave bureaucrats arbitrary powers to take money from citizens?

By the way, I’m not asking these rhetorical questions because I have some inside knowledge that Mr. Rivers is a stand-up guy. Maybe his story was fake and he actually was going to buy illegal drugs.

So what?

I’m tempted to point out at this point the foolishness of the Drug War, but that’s the point I want to make today. Heck, we can assume he had $18,000 because he intended to commit a real crime. Perhaps he was going to pay a hit man to kill someone.

At the risk of being repetitive, so what?

Our Constitution was set up to constrain the powers of government and protect citizens from abuse by government. We have a 4th Amendment to protect us from unreasonable search and seizure and we have the presumption of innocence so that we can’t be punished unless that’s the outcome of a proper legal proceeding.

Needless to say, allowing agents to steal money from train passengers is not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

In a just society, there shouldn’t be shortcuts which trample people’s rights. Real police work should be used to amass evidence of real crimes, which then should be used in real courts where a jury can decide on guilt.

Let’s close with a few more passages from the Albuquerque story.

Rivers, 22, wasn’t detained and has not been charged with any crime since his money was taken last month. That doesn’t matter. Under a federal law enforcement tool called civil asset forfeiture, he need never be arrested or convicted of a crime for the government to take away his cash, cars or property – and keep it. Agencies like the DEA can confiscate money or property if they have a hunch, a suspicion, a notion that maybe, possibly, perhaps the items are connected with narcotics. Or something else illegal.Or maybe the fact that the person holding a bunch of cash is a young black man is good enough. …Meanwhile, Rivers is back in Michigan, dreaming, praying. “He’s handed this over to God,” his attorney said. Which seems infinitely safer than handing over anything further to government agents.

Amen.

I’ll make one final point.

In the absence of some evidence to the contrary, I’m not going to accuse the DEA agents of racial profiling. After all, government agents have stolen money from plenty of white people.

But I strongly suspect there was economic profiling. If Mr. Rivers was a 50-year old white guy in a business suit, the DEA probably wouldn’t have confiscated the money.

That doesn’t mean, by the way, that 50-year old white guys should rest easy. When government bureaucrats get away with stealing money from young people without power and connections, it’s probably just a matter of time before others get victimized as well.

Just keep in mind that slippery slopes are very slippery when government is involved.

P.S. Also keep in mind that asset forfeiture has become such an abusive nightmare that the first two heads of that division of the Justice Department now say the policy should be abolished.

P.P.S. I don’t know what’s riskier, riding trains while black or banking while Russian?

P.P.P.S. On a separate matter, the good people at the Competitive Enterprise Institute periodically measure the overall cost of regulation and red tape on the American economy. Their latest version of Ten Thousand Commandments was just released and it is very depressing reading.

Here are two charts (out of many) from the study. The first looks at the annual cost of federal rules.

The second chart looks at how the regulatory burden has grown over time.

As I said, very depressing. No wonder Santa Claus wasn’t happy with the end-of-year gifts he received last year from the Obama Administration.

[mybooktable book=”global-tax-revolution-the-rise-of-tax-competition-and-the-battle-to-defend-it” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

DEA agents took $16,000 from Joseph Rivers,

Opinion


Rand-Paul-Ted-Cruz

Ted Cruz (R-TX) (L) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) wait to speak at the ‘Exempt America from Obamacare’ rally, on Capitol Hill, September 10, 2013 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Getty Images)

A decision last week about NSA spying by a panel of judges on the United States Court of Appeals in New York City sent shock waves through the government. The court ruled that a section of the Patriot Act that is due to expire at the end of this month and on which the government has relied as a basis for its bulk acquisition of telephone data in the past 14 years does not authorize that acquisition.

This may sound like legal mumbo jumbo, but it goes to the heart of the relationship between the people and their government in a free society. Here is the backstory and the latest.

The Patriot Act is the centerpiece of the federal government’s false claims that by surrendering our personal liberties to it, it can somehow keep us safe. The liberty-for-safety offer has been around for millennia and was poignant at the time of the founding of the American republic.

The Framers addressed it in the Constitution itself, where they recognized the primacy of the right to privacy and insured against its violation by the government by intentionally forcing it to jump through some difficult hoops before it can capture our thoughts, words or private behavior.

Those hoops are the requirement of a search warrant issued by a judge and based on evidence — called probable cause — demonstrating that it is more likely than not that the government will find what it is looking for from the person or place it is targeting. Only then may a judge issue a warrant, which must specifically describe the place to be searched or specifically identify the person or thing to be seized.

None of this is new. It has been at the core of our system of government since the 1790s. It is embodied in the Fourth Amendment, which is at the heart of the Bill of Rights. It is quintessentially American.

The Patriot Act has purported to do away with the search warrant requirement by employing language so intentionally vague that the government can interpret it as it wishes. Add to this the secret venue for this interpretation — the FISA court to which the Patriot Act directs that NSA applications for authority to spy on Americans are to be made — and you have the totalitarian stew we have been force-fed since October 2001.

Because the FISA court meets in secret, Americans did not know that the feds were spying on all of us all the time and relying on their own unnatural reading of words in the Patriot Act to justify it until Edward Snowden spilled the beans on his former employer nearly two years ago.

The feds argued to the secret court that they were entitled to any phone call data they wanted — usually sought by area code or zip code or the customer base of telecom service providers — so long as they claimed to need it to search for communications about terror-related activities, and they claimed they needed EVERYONE’S records, and they claimed the Patriot Act authorized this.

The secret court bought those claims, and — fast-forward to today — the feds now have immediate access to our phone calls in real time. They can turn on our cellphones in our pockets and purses and use them as listening devices without us knowing it, and they have physical access to all telephone carriers’ equipment whenever they wish, which today is 24/7.

Some members of Congress reject this. Foremost among the outraged in the Senate is Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul. It is none of the government’s business, he argues, what we say on our phone calls. If the NSA wants to hear us, let them present probable cause to a judge identifying the person they want to hear and seek a search warrant. Paul’s is a genuine outrage from the only voice among those running for president who is faithful to the Constitution.

Other senators, foremost among them Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, also running for president, are pretending outrage by offering a Band-Aid to replace the Patriot Act called the Freedom Act. The Freedom Act gets the NSA physically out of the telecoms’ offices, but lets them come back in digitally whenever one of these secret FISA courts says so, and the standard for saying so is not probable cause as the Constitution requires. It is whatever the government wants and whenever it wants it.

The so-called Freedom Act would actually legitimize all spying all the time on all of us in ways that the Patriot Act fails to do. It is no protection of privacy; it is no protection of constitutional liberty. It unleashes American spies on innocent Americans in utter disregard of the Fourth Amendment.

Earlier this week, Paul announced that he feels so strongly about the right to be left alone, and takes so seriously his oath to uphold the Constitution, and believes so certainly that our phone calls are none of the government’s business that he plans to filibuster all attempts to permit this to continue. For that alone, he is a hero to the Constitution. Perhaps his friend Cruz will return to his constitutional roots and join him.

How do we know that the Freedom Act is a Band-Aid only? Because the NSA supports it.

Judge Andrew Napolitano argues that Sen. Rand

Opinion


William_Zinsser

William Zinsser, author of the book “On Writing Well,” died on May 12, 2015, at the age of 92.

If you’re one of the millions of readers who cherish William Zinsser’s book On Writing Well, then you may feel this week that you’ve lost a dear friend.

Zinsser died Tuesday, at 92. He wrote 19 books, the most famous of which is On Writing Well, which was first published in 1976. The small book, issued as a 30th-anniversary edition in 2006, is a firm but gentle tutorial on how to get out of your own way and say what’s on your mind with simplicity and clarity. And with brevity, please, always.

“Writing improves in direct ratio to the number of things we can keep out of it that shouldn’t be there,” he wrote. “Is every word doing new work?”

There’s not a writer working today who wouldn’t benefit from asking that question about everything he or she writes.

Zinsser, by the way, would be OK with my attempt just now at gender inclusion, as long as I don’t plan to make a habit of it. He long ago acknowledged how the male pronoun “rankles” us feminists.

But — a word he encouraged us to use at the beginning of sentences as an alert to a shift in thought — there are limits to a reader’s patience.

“To turn every ‘he’ into a ‘he or she,’ and every ‘his’ into a ‘his or her,’ would thicken the language and make it much harder to read.” And forget anything on the diagonal. “I reject ‘he/she’ altogether; the slant has no place in good English.”

Within hours of hearing the news of Zinsser’s death, I pulled out my own copy of On Writing Well, the second edition, which I have owned since its publication in 1980. It was a gift from my boyfriend at the time. Thirty-five years later, we are still friends, a rare status on my short list of former beaus. I’m not saying I always hug him hello because he gave me Zinsser’s book, but I can’t say it doesn’t make me just a little happier to see him.

Zinsser was a writer’s champion, and he never lost his affection for those who wanted to tell their stories. In his 80s, he started writing a blog for The American Scholar that won a National Magazine Award for digital commentary. One of my favorites: his essay titled “The Right to Write,” in which he took on a New York Times critic who bemoaned the abundance of memoirs by people who had failed to catch his prior attention.

“No one wants to relive your misery,” the critic wrote.

Zinsser declared him an intolerant bore. Nicely, of course.

“Sorry to be so harsh, but I don’t like people telling other people they shouldn’t write about their life,” Zinsser wrote. “All of us earn that right by being born; one of the deepest human impulses is to leave a record of what we did and what we thought and felt on our journey.”

Make haste, he urged. “There are many good reasons for writing your memoir that have nothing to do with being published. One is to leave your children and grandchildren a record of who you were and what heritage they were born into. Please get started on that; time tends to surprise us by running out. One of the saddest sentences I know is ‘I wish I had asked my mother about that.'”

I never met Zinsser, but he knew me well.

He knew that the act of writing, not publishing, would make me a writer.

He knew I was insecure and worried that I would never hold my own with writers I admired. “Don’t try to be a ‘writer,'” he wrote. “Be yourself and your readers will follow you anywhere. Try to commit an act of writing and your readers will jump overboard to get away.”

And he knew that as an essayist, I’d worry to this day about how much is too much.

“You’re not required to tell everybody’s story,” Zinsser wrote in his essay titled “Family Albums.” “You only need to tell your story. If you give an honest accounting of the important people and events in your life, as you best remember them, you will also tell the story of everybody who needs to be along on the ride. Throw everything else away. Don’t ask: ‘What will my sister think?’ If your sister has a problem with your memoir she can write her own memoir.”

He knew all these things about me because he always knew the heart of the writer, every last one of us.

Most importantly, he knew that you, too, have a story to tell.

Consider this a nudge, and make haste.

If you're one of the millions of

Politics, Video


ted-cruz-jeb-bush

Sen Ted Cruz, R-Texas, responded to an interview former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush did with Megyn Kelly. (Photo: FOX News)

Sen Ted Cruz, R-Texas, responded to an interview former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush did with Megyn Kelly, rebutting his positions on Common Core and immigration. Cruz, who was the first to announce he will seek the Republican nomination and run for president in 2016, credited Bush for his honesty but made clear there were stark differences between him and the 43rd president’s brother.

“You know, look, I’m a fan of Jeb Bush. I’ll give him credit for candor and consistency, he is running based on his views, his views are different from that of a lot of Republican primary voters,” Cruz said. “But he’s honest about it, and I think we’re going to have a clear straight-up debate about what’s the right direction for the Republican Party to go and what’s the right direction for the country to go.”

Those views would include Common Core, immigration and the Iraq War. On two of those issues, immigration and Common Core, Cruz defended his criticisms against both Jeb Bush and Megyn Kelly, who clearly sided or sympathized with the former Florida governor. Kelly challenged Cruz on immigration, stating that Bush’s position “isn’t an amnesty exactly,” though past events and recent developments more than suggest otherwise.

“Well, you know, there are an awful lot of candidates in the 2016 field who have supported amnesty or have gone back and forth on the issue. My position has been consistent and clear. I think amnesty is wrong. I think it is unfair.”

The Texas senator and tea party-backed conservative expanded on his position.

“Well, but if you grant in state tuition to students who are here illegally, that comes at the expense of American citizens or it comes at the expense of legal immigrants who follow the rules to come here, you know, there’s a finite number of slots, and a finite number of dollars,” Cruz said. “And often the people that get left behind in this immigration debate are legal immigrants, are people like my dad who in 1957 fled Cuba, he came on a student visa, came here legally, and I think most American people outside of Washington agree that we need to secure the borders, we need to stop illegal immigration. Amnesty is wrong.”

During the exchange on Common Core, which is growing increasingly unpopular among voters, parents and teachers who demonstrate a greater understand of the policy, Kelly again argued that the former governor was correct in his assertion that education would still be directed at the state and local level.

“But Megyn, that’s not how it works,” Cruz rebutted. “The Obama administration has used race to the top money, federal money to force states to adopt Common Core standards.”

Kelly simply redirected by declaring that “they (states) could bail out if they don’t want to be a part of it,” but didn’t challenge the premise of Cruz’s argument.

“Well, sure, they can, but there are a lot of dollars connected to it,” he pointed out. “And the federal government, you know, it’s sort of like the drug dealer that goes to the junior high and gets a kid hooked by saying, just try it once, the federal government does that to the states with dollars, and there are so many strings attached.”

Despite focusing on the substance of the in-depth policy discussions by both Cruz and Bush, the media has obsessed over one of Bush’s answers regarding the Iraq War. In the context of a hypothetical, Bush said he would have authorized the invasion of Iraq, as well, had he been president during his brother’s tenure.

“I would have. And you know who else would have? Hillary Clinton,” Bush said. However, the media pounced and took it as if he was speaking about the present, or given what we know today. That narrative clearly doesn’t sum up the governor’s position, particularly when considering his final answer.

“Nation building is a good sentiment. Exporting our values is a good sentiment,” Bush said. “But the core of my foreign policy will be peace and security.”

Again, Cruz offered a different point view, stating that “our military’s job isn’t to transform foreign nations into democratic utopias — it’s to hunt down & kill terrorists.”

READ ALSO — Meet Team Ted Cruz 2016: Players, Pollsters And Pockets Behind The Campaign

Sen Ted Cruz, R-Texas, responded to an

US


Amtrak-crash-site

As many as six more people remain critically injured, some were unaccounted for and more than 140 more riders were being evaluated and treated at local hospitals, as federal investigators were on scene to determine what caused the accident. (Photo: AP/ Joseph Kaczmarek)

The Amtrak crash near Philadelphia Tuesday night has claimed its 7th life Tuesday as two reports claim the train was traveling over 100 mph around a 50-mph turn. Authorities confirmed Wednesday that they have recovered the black box from the train and are currently inspecting video footage recorded from the front of the train just moments before it derailed.

Amtrak and city authorities estimate that 238 passengers and five Amtrak employees were on the Northeast Regional Train 188 that was traveling from Washington, D.C., to New York City, when it went off the rails at about 9:30 p.m. local time. In addition to killing seven thus far, the crash sent over 200 to area hospitals and as many as six more people remain critically injured, However, Dr. Herbert Cushing, the chief medical officer for Temple University Hospital, said at a press conference late Wednesday he expected their condition to improve.

U.S. Naval Academy Midshipman Justin Zemser, 20, of Rockaway Beach, New York, and Associated Press software architect Jim Gaines, 48, of Plainsboro, New Jersey, are among the dead, according to media reports.

Citing two people with knowledge of the investigation, a report from the The Wall Street Journal claimed the Amtrak train and its passengers were traveling at more than 100 miles an hour as it approached a sharp curve, a speed twice the limit in the section. Further, The Associated Press analyzed surveillance video from the train also taken just before the crash and estimated that the train was speeding along at 107 mph.

According to Dr. Cushing, the majority of the trauma suffered rib fractures, collapsed and punctured lungs, indicating to him that the passengers were flung violently around within the rail cars. Passengers traveling in the rear of the train were up and talking, according to the doctor, but those in the front were in far worse condition.

https://twitter.com/TempleUniv/status/598444368350044160

Robert Sumwalt, a board member at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), said a team at the scene is studying the track, train signals, operations of the train and the condition of the train, itself, to determine more of the facts in the accident. Mr. Sumwalt said the train’s recorders have been sent to Delaware for analysis and will provide investigators with views from a forward-facing camera, the speed of the train and information as to whether the brakes were ever engaged at any point.

https://twitter.com/NTSB/status/598544708101615616

The engineer, who received medical treatment, will make a statement to the Philadelphia Police Department, Mayor Michael Nutter said at the Wednesday morning press conference.

Meanwhile, former Congressman Patrick Murphy of Bucks County, was a passenger on the train during the crash. He said that his rail car flipped over, but he escaped with minor cuts and bruises. Mr. Murphy preceded to roll up his sleeves and help firefighters and other first responders at the scene.

https://twitter.com/PatrickMurphyPA/status/598327444723097600

Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., was also on the train but got off in Wilmington before the train derailed outside of Philadelphia.

https://twitter.com/SenatorCarper/status/598315603431170048

Another Amtrak train crashed on Sunday. That train, bound for New Orleans, struck a flatbed truck at a railway crossing in Amite, La., killing the truck’s driver and injuring two people on the train.

In March, at least 55 people were injured when an Amtrak train collided with a tractor-trailer that was stuck on the tracks in North Carolina.

In all, 67 accidents involving Amtrak trains were reported in 2014, up from 58 the year before but down from a high of 150 in 2001.

The Amtrak crash near Philadelphia Tuesday night

Economy

import-export-prices-cargo-ship

The latest import prices and export prices, including data and reports. (Photo: REUTERS)

The Labor Department reported Wednesday that U.S. import prices declined for the 10th straight month in April, with nonfuel prices in April more than offsetting higher fuel prices.

Economists say the latest gauge on import prices could be reflecting the impact of a relatively strong dollar, the latest sign pointing to inflation pressures that could sway the Federal Reserve to delay raising interest rates past mid-June.

The Labor Department said on Wednesday import prices fell 0.3 percent last month after falling by 0.2 percent in March and 0.4 percent in February.

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast import prices to gain 0.3 percent, but in the 12 months through April, import prices have tumbled 10.7 percent.

The dollar has seen a gain of about 11 percent against the currencies of America’s main trading partners since June, particularly Canada, Europe and China. That has left inflation running well below the Fed’s 2 percent target.

With alleged low inflation, the U.S. central bank will keep interest rates down, as they have since Dec. 2008, longer than previously anticipated. It was a general consensus that the Fed would raise rates in mid-2015, but U.S. economic growth fizzled in the first quarter. The government’s estimates on the trade deficit had pegged GDP at around 0.2 percent, but they were wrong. The U.S. trade deficit ballooned in March, indicating the economy contracted.

Meanwhile, the price index for import fuel gained 0.7 percent in April after rising 1.2 percent the previous month, which was the first monthly increase in fuel prices since the index rose 1.6 percent in June 2014. Imported petroleum prices, specifically, rose 1.0 percent after increasing 1.6 percent in March, while import prices excluding petroleum dropped 0.4 percent in April after a similar decline in March.

Imported food prices, including foods, feeds, and beverages fell 0.9 percent in April, after declining 0.7 percent in March.

The report also showed export prices declined 0.7 percent last month after gaining a paltry 0.1 percent in March. Export prices fell 6.3 percent in the 12 months through April.

The Labor Department reported that import prices

Economy


retail_sales_data

Consumer spending index and data on retail sales reporting. (Photo: Reuters)

The Commerce Department reported Wednesday that retail sales were flat in April, though the latest report ends three consecutive months of declining sales.

The reading missed economists’ expectations for a gain of 0.2 percent found in a Reuters poll. Excluding auto sales, retails sales rose by just 0.1 percent, which was still far below forecasts for a 0.5 percent gain.

U.S. households cut back on purchases of automobiles and other big-ticket items, further indicating the economy is struggling even after the first quarter. The government initially reported that the U.S. economy barely grew by 0.2 percent in the first quarter, but they were off on their trade deficit estimate. The U.S. trade deficit ballooned in March, suggesting downward revisions that will reflect the economy in contraction.

The government will release its GDP revision later this month.

However, the Commerce Department revised retail sales for the month of March up to show a 1.1 percent gain, rather than the previously reported decline year-over-year.

Retail sales excluding automobiles, gasoline, building materials and food services were all unchanged after an upwardly revised 0.5 percent tick up in March. The so-called core retail sales, which were expected to rise by 0.5 percent in April, correspond most closely with the consumer spending component of gross domestic product.

Weak retail sales have become a trend despite lower gasoline prices, as American consumers continue to either save much of the money from the cheaper gasoline or put it toward rising health care costs.

Retail sales last month were weighed down by a 0.4 percent decline at auto dealerships, while sales at service stations dropped off by 0.7 percent. Sales at electronic and appliance stores also fell by 0.4 percent, while receipts at furniture stores shed 0.9 percent.

On the other hand, receipts at clothing stores were up 0.2 percent, likely a result of Easter holiday discounts.

Receipts at online stores increased 0.8 percent, as did sales at sporting goods stores. Sales of building materials and garden equipment rose 0.3 percent. Sales at restaurants and bars increased 0.7 percent.

The Commerce Department reported Wednesday that retail

Polls


jade-helm-15-map

Operation Jade Helm 15 map of operations and military presence.

A new poll found 45 percent of likely voters are concerned Jade Helm 15, or U.S. military exercises taking place this summer in several southwestern states, is sinister in nature. Lasting for a duration of eight weeks, Jade Helm 15 is one of many operations that have taken place within the continental U.S., but a large number of Americans worry the government is preparing for martial law.

Even though most likely voters (65 percent) don’t oppose such exercises in their states, the 45 percent who are concerned include 19 who are “very concerned.” However, a 52-percent majority say they are not concerned, perhaps a reflection of the fact that Rasmussen finds they continue to hold the U.S. military in high esteem. Similarly, according to the annual Gallup Confidence in Institutions tracking survey, the military is consistently the most trusted institution in America.

Still, 62 percent of Americans believe there is too much government power and too little individual freedom in the U.S., and 82 percent of voters in the near-majority who say they are concerned about Jade Helm 15 say the federal government is trying to exert more control over the states and infringe on the rights of the citizens in those states. However, there is some overlap regarding concern for the government’s motives, as 34 percent of those who favor military exercises in their state share that concern.

On the overall question of whether the U.S. military should conduct training exercises in their state, a significant 19 percent said they were not sure.

Not surprisingly, ideology trumps even party on the issue. While 56 percent of conservatives are concerned that the training exercises will lead to greater federal control over some states, only 50 percent of Republicans overall agree. Fifty-eight percent (58 percent) of moderates and 67 percent of liberal voters are not concerned, compared to 38 percent of Democrats and 46 percent of unaffiliated voters who say they are.

With Jade Helm 15 attracting at least marginal media coverage, though it is far more prominent on the Internet, the results are not too surprising. Only 20 percent of voters now consider the federal government a protector of individual liberty, and 60 percent see the government as a threat to individual liberty.  Only 19 percent trust the federal government to do the right thing “all” or “most of the time.”

[brid video=”8398″ player=”1929″ title=”Alex Jones Says ABC Lying About NoShow ‘They’re Afraid I Run Over Them'”]

READ FULL ARTICLE: http://ppdnews.us/1HbCQvB

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on May 7 and 10, 2015 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

A new poll found 65 percent of

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial

Subscribe