An exchange showing one hand giving cash to the another for new house and keys, a vector illustration for new home sales. (Photo: AdobeStock)
New home sales came in at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 646,000 in June, a gain of 7.0% (±15.2%). The U.S. Census Bureau and Department of Housing and Urban Development report on new residential sales was more moderate the forecast, but 4.5% (±21.8%) above the June 2018 estimate of 618,000.
Prior
Revised
Consensus Forecast
Forecast Range
Result
New Home Sales (SA)
626 K
604 K
660 K
635 K to 676 K
646 K
“Today’s report on new home sales, where June sales increased to 646,000 from 604,000 in May, is really a ‘bounce-back report’ after the 7.8% decline from April,” Tim Anderson, analyst at TJM Investments, said.
The rate for May was revised downward to 604,000.
The median sales price of new houses sold in June 2019 was $310,400. The average sales price was $368,600. The seasonally‐adjusted estimate of new houses for sale at the end of June was 338,000.
That’s a supply of 6.3 months at the current sales rate.
Median Existing Home Sales Price Hit All-Time High
File photo: A sold sign on an existing home. (Photo: AdobeStock)
The National Association of Realtors (NAR) reported existing home sales declined in June amid a shortage in housing inventory. Two of the four major U.S. regions saw moderate gains, while the other two posted greater declines.
Prior
Revised
Consensus Forecast
Forecast Range
Result
Existing Home Sales
5.340 M
5.360 M
5.320 M
5.150 M to 5.450 M
5.270 M
“Home sales are running at a pace similar to 2015 levels – even with exceptionally low mortgage rates, a record number of jobs and a record high net worth in the country,” said Lawrence Yun, NAR’s chief economist. Yun. “Imbalance persists for mid-to-lower priced homes with solid demand and insufficient supply, which is consequently pushing up home prices.”
The median existing-home price for all housing types in June reached an all-time high of $285,700, up 4.3% from June 2018 ($273,800). The increase in the month of June marks the 88th straight month of year-over-year gains.
Total housing inventory at the end of June increased to 1.93 million, up from 1.91 million in May. However, that’s still unchanged from one year ago. Unsold inventory is at a 4.4-month supply at the current sales pace, up from the 4.3 month supply recorded in both May and in June 2018.
Existing home sale in the Northeast rose 1.5% to an annual rate of 680,000, still 4.2% lower than one year ago. The median price was $321,200, up 4.8% from June 2018.
In the Midwest, existing home sales rose 1.6% to an annual rate of 1.25 million, still 1.6% lower than one year ago. The median price was $230,400, a 6.7% increase up from a year ago.
Existing home sales in the South declined 3.4% to an annual rate of 2.25 million, a decline of 0.4% from a year ago. The median price was $248,600, an increase of 4.9% from one year ago.
In the West, existing home sales were down 3.5% to an annual rate of 1.09 million, which is 5.2% lower than a year ago. The median price was $410,400, up 2.3% from June 2018.
Real estate market with price tags above home properties to illustrate house prices in 3D abstract. (Photo: AdobeStock)
The FHFA House Price Index (HPI) finds house prices rose just 0.1% in May and 5.0% year-over-year from May 2018 to May 2019. The stronger-than-expected 0.4% increase for April 2019 was unchanged, while the year-over-year was revised slightly higher from 5.2% to 5.3%.
Prior
Revised
Consensus Forecast
Forecast Range
Result
M/M ∆
0.4%
0.3%
0.1% to 0.3%
0.1%
Y/Y ∆
5.2%
5.3%
—
—
5.0%
For the nine census divisions, seasonally adjusted monthly house price changes from April 2019 to May 2019 ranged from -1.0% in East South Central to +0.5% in the South Atlantic. The 12-month changes were all positive, ranging from +3.6% in West South Central to +6.7% in the Mountain.
The FHFA monthly HPI is derived from home sales price information from mortgages sold to, or guaranteed by, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
U.S. economy on an American flag background waving in the wind, in 3D rendering. (Photo: AdobeStock)
The Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) ticked up slightly to -0.02, near the average for June and ensuring a rate cut won’t lead to overheating. The three-month moving average (CFNAI-MA3) also ticked up to –0.26 from –0.27 in May.
Prior
Revised
Consensus Forecast
Forecast Range
Results
CFNAI
-0.05
-0.03
0.00
-0.30 to 0.10
-0.02
CFNAI-MA3
–0.17
–0.27
—
—
-0.26
Forty of the 85 indicators made positive contributions to the CFNAI, while 45 made negative contributions in June. Thirty-six indicators improved and 49 deteriorated. Of those that improved, 9 made negative contributions.
Production-related indicators were neutral contribution in June, down from +0.08 in May. Industrial production was flat, as utilities offset mining and manufacturing.
Employment-related indicators contributed +0.06 to the CFNAI in June, up from –0.08 in May. The Employment Situation (jobs report) for June reported the U.S. economy added a stronger than expected 224,000 jobs, bouncing back after a gain of 72,000 in the previous month.
Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel speaks at a December 2017 fundraiser in New York with President Donald Trump. (Photo: SS)
President Donald Trump and Republicans are posting significantly larger fundraising totals than 2020 Democratic opponents and the Democratic Party.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) raised a total $20.8 million in June, the most ever for that month outside of an election year. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) raised just $8.5 million.
It’s not clear how much the DNC raised in the second quarter (Q2) 2019. But the RNC took in $51 million, more than the $45.8 million Republicans raised in Q1 2019. Republican have far more cash-on-hand and no debt.
Since RNC Chairwoman McDaniel took the helm at the beginning of 2017, the party raised more than $400 million. By comparison, the DNC hauled in $212 million during that period. The RNC raised $97.1 million for the cycle and boasted a whopping $43.5 million cash-on-hand in June.
Meanwhile, 2020 Democratic hopefuls continue to lag behind President Trump in fundraising, with the president raising the vast majority from low-dollar contributions.
Candidate
Q2
Donald J. Trump
$54
Pete Buttigieg
$24.9M
Joe Biden
$22M
Elizabeth Warren
$19.2M
Bernie Sanders
$18M
Kamala Harris
$11.8M
Combined, the Trump Campaign and RNC joint fundraising efforts raised $105 million in Q2. A $54 million fundraising haul came from the campaign and committees, roughly $10 million more than the combined total of the five leading Democratic candidates.
President Trump raised a record $24.8 million for his re-election campaign in less than 24 hours of his announcement in June, more than four of those candidates’ totals for the entire quarter.
As People’s Pundit Daily (PPD) previously reported, roughly 98.5% of contributions to the Trump Campaign in Q4 2018 came from donations of $200 or less. In Q1 2019, that percentage ticked slightly higher to 98.79%.
The Q4 2019 total was nearly $10 million more than Q4 2018. The Trump Campaign had nearly 21 times more cash-on-hand than the Obama Campaign at that point in the re-election cycle.
The Trump Campaign and RNC’s joint fundraising committees have added 100,000 new small donors so far in 2019, and more than one million new small donors since Inauguration Day.
(File Photo, May 1969) — The prime crew of the Apollo 11 lunar landing mission. Left to right, are Neil A. Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin E. Aldrin Jr. (Photo: NASA)
On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy challenged the nation to perform a crewed lunar landing and return to Earth. On July 16, 1969, Apollo 11 launched from Cape Kennedy carrying Commander Neil Armstrong, Command Module Pilot Michael Collins and Lunar Module Pilot Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin into an initial Earth-orbit of 114 by 116 miles.
The backup crew consisted of Commander James A. Lovell, Lunar Module Pilot Fred W. Haise Jr., and Command Module Pilot William A. Anders.
Apollo 11 launched from Cape Kennedy at 9:32 a.m. EDT. Two hours, 44 minutes and one-and-a-half revolutions after the launch, the S-IVB stage reignited for a second burn lasting five minutes, 48 seconds.
That second burn put Apollo 11 into a translunar orbit.
Then, the command and service module (CSM) Columbia separated from the S-IVB stage, which included the spacecraft-lunar module adapter, or SLA, containing the lunar module, or LM, Eagle. A three-second burn of the SPS was conducted on July 17 to perform the second of four scheduled midcourse corrections.
But the launch had been so successful that the other three burns were not needed.
Following the burns and the jettisoning of the SLA panels on the S-IVB stage, the CSM docked with the LM, the S-IVB stage separated and injected into heliocentric orbit. It was four hours and 40 minutes into the flight.
Shortly after, Earth received the first color TV transmission from Apollo 11 during the translunar coast of the CSM/LM.
On July 20, 1969, an estimated 650 million people watched the lunar landing on television and heard Armstrong as he took “one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.”
On July 24, 1969, at 12:50 p.m. EDT Apollo 11 splashed down in the Pacific Ocean 13 degrees, 19 minutes north latitude and 169 degrees, nine minutes west longitude. The USS Hornet picked them up from the landing point, which was changed by about 250 miles due to bad weather.
The crew logged 195 hours, 18 minutes and 35 seconds of flight time, roughly 36 minutes longer than planned.
The 1-year estimate in the 2017 American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau counted 123,484 aerospace engineers and 11,183 atmospheric and space scientists. Gender details aren’t available for 2017, yet.
But in 2016, there were a total 111,435 aerospace engineers, including 99,810 males and 11,625 females. That gap may appear large, but it reflects a gap in interest and education, and represents a significant labor force change in the industry since the Apollo 11 mission.
In 1970, there were 51,868 male aeronautical and astronautical engineers, while only 848 female. There were 2,122 male atmospheric and space scientists. There were no female atmospheric and space scientists.
Key with business words and rig equipment graphic icons relative to the oil and gas industry. (Photo: PPD/AdobeStock/JEGAS RA)
The Baker Hughes (BHI) North America Rig Count was down by 3 for the week ending July 19. The U.S. rig count was down 4 from last week to 954 and down 92 from last year. Canada rose by 1 and remained down 93 from last year.
Rigs classified as drilling for oil and in operation fell by 5 in the U.S. to 779, which is 79 rigs less than the 858 one year ago. Rigs classified as drilling for gas declined by 2 to 174, and are still 13 fewer than the 187 one year ago.
Indicator
July 12
July 19
North America Rig Count
1075
1072
U.S.
958
954
Gulf of Mexico
26
25
Canada
117
118
Rigs in Canada classified as drilling for oil fell 2 to 83, which is 59 less than the 142 rigs in operation one year ago. Rigs classified as drilling for gas rose by 3 to 35, which is now 34 less than the 69 in operation one year ago.
The Gulf of Mexico, which is a subset of the U.S. total, fell by 1 to 25 rigs. That’s 8 more rigs than the 17 in operation one year ago.
The Baker Hughes North America Rig Count tracks changes in the number of active operating oil and gas rigs on a weekly basis. Active rigs are essential for exploration and development.
The United States and Canada are separate components, and a separate count for the Gulf of Mexico is given as a subset of the U.S. total. The count includes only rigs that are significant users of oilfield services and supplies.
Sale, consumerism and people concept – happy family with child and shopping cart buying food at grocery store or supermarket. (Photo: PPD/AdobeStock/Syda Productions)
The preliminary reading for consumer sentiment in July ticked slightly higher to 98.4, just below the 98.6 consensus forecast. Consumer Expectations increased and Current Conditions decreased 0.8, respectively.
Survey of Consumers (Prelim)
Prior
Consensus Forecast
Forecast Range
Result
Sentiment Index
98.2
98.6
96.9 to 99.5
98.4
Current Conditions
111.9
—
—
111.1
Consumer Expectations
89.3
—
—
90.1
“Consumer sentiment remained largely unchanged in early July from June, remaining at quite favorable levels since the start of 2017,” Surveys of Consumers chief economist Richard Curtin, said.
“Moreover, the variations in Sentiment Index have been remarkably small, ranging from 91.2 to 101.4 in the past 30 months.”
The next data release for the final reading is scheduled for Friday, August 02, 2019 at 10:00 am EST.
Senator Elizabeth Warren gives remarks on the Senate floor on June 22, 2017 after the release of the Senate Republicans’ health care bill.
I’m constantly surprised by what happens in the world of politics. I didn’t think Donald Trump had any chance of winning in 2016, yet I was obviously wrong.
I also thought Elizabeth Warren’s political career would be crippled after people found out she fraudulently claimed Indian ancestry to gain special preferences in hiring at law schools. Yet she’s now a serious candidate to be the Democratic nominee in 2020.
So, instead of political prognosticating, I’ll stick with policy analysis, which is what I do in this clip from an interview about Sen. Warren’s plan to give Washington more power over capital markets.
If you want specifics on her plan, this Politico story has lots of detail, and this CNN report also has plenty of information.
I’ve previously written about some of the provisions, such as Glass-Steagall and carried interest, so today I want to focus on the broader point from the interview.
Every single economic theory agrees that saving and investment play a key role in long-run growth and higher living standards. But who controls and directs how capital is allocated?
The socialists, by contrast, think government can directly control how capital is allocated. At the risk of understatement, that approach doesn’t have a good track record.
Elizabeth Warren prefers an indirect approach, which involves lots of regulation, taxation, red tape, and intervention. This cronyist approach also is misguided. Her corporatist agenda unavoidably will hinder the efficient (i.e., growth maximizing) allocation of capital and also reduce the overall level of saving and investment.
Are getting dumber, or are they just letting their emotions get carried away with their sensibilities? Tom discusses the issue on Liberty Never Sleeps.
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.
