How about that economy???

[Rage Against the McKee]

S&P downgrades US credit rating from AAA



In its statement, S&P said that it had changed its view "of the difficulties of bridging the gulf between the political parties" over a credible deficit reduction plan.

S&P said it was now "pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics anytime soon."

I wonder what could have brought this about. . .

[Panjandrum]

Globalization of the economy occurred overnight?  Everyone is against Obama and his brilliant ideas, right?  If they'd just get out of his way. . .

No one ever said globalization happened overnight or that Obama has a plan to counter it.

You like to surround yourself with strawmen, don't you?

Oh, so you're just now realizing the economy is global???  C'mon...

How is globalizatoin an excuse for how terrible the US economy is? There's no straw man, I just read what you assholes posted and responded.  Excuse me for reading between the lines.  So Obama is allowed to rail on GWB and the GOP for "driving the car into a ditch" and then go on to talk about "piling dirt on top of it", then when his crap doesn't work and he's out of "GWB did it" goodwill, all of the sudden "we can't really control what's going on".  You people are incredible.

I'll rap economy, but I haven't read one single thing posted on here that even resembles economic discourse.  It's just politics under some thinly veiled economics guise.  I think ne'er-do-well is a bullseye.  

Seeya at the Bourgeoisie Pig, respect

One administration didn't get us into this mess.  Two administrations didn't get us into this mess.  This goes beyond party politics.  We now have over 9% unemployment, and I haven't seen or read anything before today regarding the fact that said unemployment rate is about 5-6% higher than usual, but corporate profits are soaring at record highs.  Could it be that we learned to get a lot leaner and meaner during the recession?  Could it be that we simply just don't need more workers?  Why would companies want to hire more people when they're already killing it on the bottom line?

I find it interesting that this article was just posted today by the AP that pretty much says exactly what I just did.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/A-boom-in-corporate-profits-a-apf-3135711604.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=2&asset&ccode&cmtnav=/mwphucmtgetnojspage/headcontent/main/3135711604/date/desc/11/s7752678

What's behind the disconnect between strong corporate profits and a weak labor market? Several factors:

-- U.S. corporations are expanding overseas, not so much at home. McDonalds and Caterpillar said overseas sales growth outperformed the U.S. in the April-June quarter. U.S.-based multinational companies have been focused overseas for years: In the 2000s, they added 2.4 million jobs in foreign countries and cut 2.9 million jobs in the United States, according to the Commerce Department.

-- Back in the U.S., companies are squeezing more productivity out of staffs thinned by layoffs during the Great Recession. They don't need to hire. And they don't need to be generous with pay raises; they know their employees have nowhere else to go.

-- Companies remain reluctant to spend the $1.9 trillion in cash they've accumulated, especially in the United States, which would create jobs. They're unconvinced that consumers are ready to spend again with the vigor they showed before the recession, and they are worried about uncertainty in U.S. government policies.

"Lack of clarity on a U.S. deficit-reduction plan, trade policy, regulation, much needed tax reform and the absence of a long-term plan to improve the country's deteriorating infrastructure do not create an environment that provides our customers with the confidence to invest," Caterpillar CEO Doug Oberhelman said.

Caterpillar said second-quarter earnings shot up 44 percent to $1 billion-- though that still disappointed Wall Street. General Electric's second-quarter earnings were up 21 percent to $3.8 billion. And McDonald's quarterly earnings increased 15 percent to $1.4 billion.

Still, the U.S. economy is missing the engines that usually drive it out of a recession.

Carl Van Horn, director of the Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University, says the housing market would normally revive in the early stages of an economic recovery, driving demand for building materials, furnishings and appliances -- creating jobs. But that isn't happening this time.

And policymakers in Washington have chosen to focus on cutting federal spending to reduce huge federal deficits instead of spending money on programs to create jobs: "If we want the recovery to strengthen, we can't be doing that," says Chad Stone, chief economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a research group that focuses on how government programs affect the poor and middle class.

Neither party has any idea how to tackle this mess because they can't agree on anything.  They are sitting there, jerking themselves off on cable news, while corporate America is finding ways to displace workers to increase the bottom line.  And believe me...companies are making investments, and part of the ROI discussed is a reduction in FTE's.  That's a big, big, big selling point for a lot of companies right now when they invest in corporate initiatives.  If you ever sit in on sales discussions or have conversations with CFO's, you'd know that large companies and corporations WANT to downsize.  The recession taught them how to do it, and now they're wanting to do it, recession or no.

If you want to put people back to work, you better find a way to increase the number of businesses that want to do business in America because the ones that are already here aren't looking for more people unless they really, really, really have desperate need for it.

And the clown show last week doesn't really inspire confidence.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

I think Pan got some stuff right.  Particularly the part about needing to incentivize investment in the U.S.  While Corp tax rates may be at an "all time low" based on some unknown metric, the fact of the matter is that in this GLOBAL economy, the current rates are beyond uncompetitive.  Like I've said, if you want american companies to invest in the US stop treating them like crap.  Demonizing anyone who's profitable (other than Apple) would be a nice start.  Slashing regulation, government oversight, regulation, reporting, and burdensome tax laws would incentive people to start new businesses (right now the cost of entry is extremely oppressive).

I'm also not sure what metric is being used to support the claim that Corporate Earnings are at an all time high.  Maybe Bookcat just said it enough on here so people think it's true.  I googled "S&P earnings per share", a fairly common sense way of evaluating broad based corporate earnings, and found that under no circumstance is that statement true

http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/spearn.htm


It certainly is true that corporations trimmed a lot of fat in this recession and became leaner and more productive.  What needs to be understood is that corporations don't owe a duty to the US Govt or the people (clearly two separate and distinct entities at this point) to create jobs.  Their duty is to their shareholders, and that duty is to be as profitable as possible.  The idea that they're creating more jobs overseas than at home has more to do with the growth prospects overseas than it does to some guy over there will do it cheaper.  In case you haven't noticed, there's already a McD's on every major intersection in the U.S.  Caterpillar is going gangbusters in SE Asia, because that's where they're selling construction equipment.  They have to have employees there, because that's where they're new, and rapidly growing, customer base is.  GE makes tons of money because Obama funnelled about $300B into their coffers under the guise of green energy infrastructure (cheap shot).

Instead of dealing with a shitty economy and making the US a great place to run a business (particularly those small ones), the Federal Govt has slammed business with Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and the constant threat of changes to the tax code (i.e., FIFO/LIFO, CapGains, depreciation schedules) and backdoor cap & trade through the EPA.  How does any of this crap help grow business in the US?  The outsource of jobs is largely manf and low-skill service jobs (i.e. call center).  How the above changes is going to help bring those crappy jobs back brings a pretty obvious answer, it won't.

While the deficit certainly is a problem that grew over decades, a bipartisan effort, a large portion of the blame for the current state of the economy has to be placed on this administration.  Just because you like the guy in office doesn't mean we should throw our hands up in the air and say we can't do anything about it.  This if the United States, we run the global economy.  It's time to cart off the community organizer, he doesn't understand what he's doing. 

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think Pan got some stuff right.  Particularly the part about needing to incentivize investment in the U.S.  While Corp tax rates may be at an "all time low" based on some unknown metric, the fact of the matter is that in this GLOBAL economy, the current rates are beyond uncompetitive.  Like I've said, if you want american companies to invest in the US stop treating them like crap.  Demonizing anyone who's profitable (other than Apple) would be a nice start.  Slashing regulation, government oversight, regulation, reporting, and burdensome tax laws would incentive people to start new businesses (right now the cost of entry is extremely oppressive).

I'm also not sure what metric is being used to support the claim that Corporate Earnings are at an all time high.  Maybe Bookcat just said it enough on here so people think it's true.  I googled "S&P earnings per share", a fairly common sense way of evaluating broad based corporate earnings, and found that under no circumstance is that statement true

http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/spearn.htm


It certainly is true that corporations trimmed a lot of fat in this recession and became leaner and more productive.  What needs to be understood is that corporations don't owe a duty to the US Govt or the people (clearly two separate and distinct entities at this point) to create jobs.  Their duty is to their shareholders, and that duty is to be as profitable as possible.  The idea that they're creating more jobs overseas than at home has more to do with the growth prospects overseas than it does to some guy over there will do it cheaper.  In case you haven't noticed, there's already a McD's on every major intersection in the U.S.  Caterpillar is going gangbusters in SE Asia, because that's where they're selling construction equipment.  They have to have employees there, because that's where they're new, and rapidly growing, customer base is.  GE makes tons of money because Obama funnelled about $300B into their coffers under the guise of green energy infrastructure (cheap shot).

Instead of dealing with a shitty economy and making the US a great place to run a business (particularly those small ones), the Federal Govt has slammed business with Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and the constant threat of changes to the tax code (i.e., FIFO/LIFO, CapGains, depreciation schedules) and backdoor cap & trade through the EPA.  How does any of this crap help grow business in the US?  The outsource of jobs is largely manf and low-skill service jobs (i.e. call center).  How the above changes is going to help bring those crappy jobs back brings a pretty obvious answer, it won't.

While the deficit certainly is a problem that grew over decades, a bipartisan effort, a large portion of the blame for the current state of the economy has to be placed on this administration.  Just because you like the guy in office doesn't mean we should throw our hands up in the air and say we can't do anything about it.  This if the United States, we run the global economy.  It's time to cart off the community organizer, he doesn't understand what he's doing. 

Good post.

[Panjandrum]

I think Pan got some stuff right.  Particularly the part about needing to incentivize investment in the U.S.  While Corp tax rates may be at an "all time low" based on some unknown metric, the fact of the matter is that in this GLOBAL economy, the current rates are beyond uncompetitive.  Like I've said, if you want american companies to invest in the US stop treating them like crap.  Demonizing anyone who's profitable (other than Apple) would be a nice start.  Slashing regulation, government oversight, regulation, reporting, and burdensome tax laws would incentive people to start new businesses (right now the cost of entry is extremely oppressive).

I'm also not sure what metric is being used to support the claim that Corporate Earnings are at an all time high.  Maybe Bookcat just said it enough on here so people think it's true.  I googled "S&P earnings per share", a fairly common sense way of evaluating broad based corporate earnings, and found that under no circumstance is that statement true

I don't disagree with much of what you said, however, I said profits and not earnings on your second paragraph.  Profits are at an all-time high.  Subtle distinction, but I want to make that clear.

I'm all for tax reform on the personal and corporate levels.  You'll get no argument from me there.  We may differ on the rates and brackets, but on this we agree.

As far as regulation goes, you're going to have to be more specific on what kinds of regulations you're interested in reducing.  There is a fine line that you have to walk when dealing with corporations because they WILL eff you over if you give them too much control.  I'm not necessarily for choking them to death, but there are certain environmental and safety regulations that businesses need to follow for the health of the population and their workers.  These may not be what you're referring to, but just saying 'regulations' is vague.

It's not that hard to do business in America.  Corporate tax reform would most likely go a long way, and it's going to be a bitch to do, but it's not that hard to do business in America outside of the tax rates.


http://doingbusiness.org/rankings

Personally, I don't like thinking of corporate income tax as a real revenue generator, so you'll get no argument from me if you think we should be lowering rates.  However, I am for killing a lot of the loopholes because a lot of companies put out bullshit investments to get some bullshit credit that benefits no one and is a big fat waste.  If the numbers I've seen are correct, corporate income taxes only made up 9% of total revenue in the US in FY 2010.  Personally, I think we get MORE income if restructuring the tax code and lowering rates increases employment and decreases our need to spend several hundred billion in social programs designed to support the unemployed. So I have a very conservative viewpoint in that regard.

So, basically, I agree with most of what you said, and I'm all for simplifying corporate taxes and lowering rates.  I may differ in regards to regulation depending on what specific regulations you are talking about. 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Personally, I don't like thinking of corporate income tax as a real revenue generator, so you'll get no argument from me if you think we should be lowering rates.  However, I am for killing a lot of the loopholes because a lot of companies put out bullshit investments to get some bullshit credit that benefits no one and is a big fat waste.  If the numbers I've seen are correct, corporate income taxes only made up 9% of total revenue in the US in FY 2010.  Personally, I think we get MORE income if restructuring the tax code and lowering rates increases employment and decreases our need to spend several hundred billion in social programs designed to support the unemployed. So I have a very conservative viewpoint in that regard.

Bingo.  The way to increase revenues is to increase the number of people working.

I'm not for alleviating all regulations, just those that are duplicative, arcane, or archaic.  The most regulated industry in the US is arguably the banking industry and that industry caused the 2008 collapse that this country is still reeling from.  Regulation may be a good way to keep things safe, but if the people in charge of enforcing them are slob bureaucrats they don't help anyone.


FYI, EPS is a net income (i.e. profits) number.  So we are talking about the same thing.

[06wildcat]

Personally, I don't like thinking of corporate income tax as a real revenue generator, so you'll get no argument from me if you think we should be lowering rates.  However, I am for killing a lot of the loopholes because a lot of companies put out bullshit investments to get some bullshit credit that benefits no one and is a big fat waste.  If the numbers I've seen are correct, corporate income taxes only made up 9% of total revenue in the US in FY 2010.  Personally, I think we get MORE income if restructuring the tax code and lowering rates increases employment and decreases our need to spend several hundred billion in social programs designed to support the unemployed. So I have a very conservative viewpoint in that regard.

Bingo.  The way to increase revenues is to increase the number of people working.

I'm not for alleviating all regulations, just those that are duplicative, arcane, or archaic.  The most regulated industry in the US is arguably the banking industry and that industry caused the 2008 collapse that this country is still reeling from.  Regulation may be a good way to keep things safe, but if the people in charge of enforcing them are slob bureaucrats they don't help anyone.


FYI, EPS is a net income (i.e. profits) number.  So we are talking about the same thing.

Which for most of the last decade was largely unregulated or regulations were simply ignored. The government didn't create or mandate interest only, no doc, or 125 percent to value loans. Banks did out of simple greed on the notion that housing prices were only going to go up forever.

Virtually everything that happened in the banking industry could have been avoided by requiring 20 percent down on any property purchase.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Personally, I don't like thinking of corporate income tax as a real revenue generator, so you'll get no argument from me if you think we should be lowering rates.  However, I am for killing a lot of the loopholes because a lot of companies put out bullshit investments to get some bullshit credit that benefits no one and is a big fat waste.  If the numbers I've seen are correct, corporate income taxes only made up 9% of total revenue in the US in FY 2010.  Personally, I think we get MORE income if restructuring the tax code and lowering rates increases employment and decreases our need to spend several hundred billion in social programs designed to support the unemployed. So I have a very conservative viewpoint in that regard.

Bingo.  The way to increase revenues is to increase the number of people working.

I'm not for alleviating all regulations, just those that are duplicative, arcane, or archaic.  The most regulated industry in the US is arguably the banking industry and that industry caused the 2008 collapse that this country is still reeling from.  Regulation may be a good way to keep things safe, but if the people in charge of enforcing them are slob bureaucrats they don't help anyone.


FYI, EPS is a net income (i.e. profits) number.  So we are talking about the same thing.

Which for most of the last decade was largely unregulated or regulations were simply ignored. The government didn't create or mandate interest only, no doc, or 125 percent to value loans. Banks did out of simple greed on the notion that housing prices were only going to go up forever.

Virtually everything that happened in the banking industry could have been avoided by requiring 20 percent down on any property purchase.

You're an idiot.  You have no rough ridin' idea what you are talking about.  Leave this thread now.
 
Do not make me make a rough ridin' fool out of you.  Consider yourself warned.  I will not put up with the above nonsense one more time.  If this wasn't the internet, I would grab you buy the neck, bend you over my knee, and spank your ass red like the child you are.

 

[06wildcat]

Personally, I don't like thinking of corporate income tax as a real revenue generator, so you'll get no argument from me if you think we should be lowering rates.  However, I am for killing a lot of the loopholes because a lot of companies put out bullshit investments to get some bullshit credit that benefits no one and is a big fat waste.  If the numbers I've seen are correct, corporate income taxes only made up 9% of total revenue in the US in FY 2010.  Personally, I think we get MORE income if restructuring the tax code and lowering rates increases employment and decreases our need to spend several hundred billion in social programs designed to support the unemployed. So I have a very conservative viewpoint in that regard.

Bingo.  The way to increase revenues is to increase the number of people working.

I'm not for alleviating all regulations, just those that are duplicative, arcane, or archaic.  The most regulated industry in the US is arguably the banking industry and that industry caused the 2008 collapse that this country is still reeling from.  Regulation may be a good way to keep things safe, but if the people in charge of enforcing them are slob bureaucrats they don't help anyone.


FYI, EPS is a net income (i.e. profits) number.  So we are talking about the same thing.

Which for most of the last decade was largely unregulated or regulations were simply ignored. The government didn't create or mandate interest only, no doc, or 125 percent to value loans. Banks did out of simple greed on the notion that housing prices were only going to go up forever.

Virtually everything that happened in the banking industry could have been avoided by requiring 20 percent down on any property purchase.

You're an idiot.  You have no rough ridin' idea what you are talking about.  Leave this thread now.
 
Do not make me make a rough ridin' fool out of you.  Consider yourself warned.  I will not put up with the above nonsense one more time.  If this wasn't the internet, I would grab you buy the neck, bend you over my knee, and spank your ass red like the child you are.

 

Tough talk from an internet pussy

[Kat Kid]

So repealing glass-steagal was somehow a net increase in red tape for the banking industry?

[06wildcat]

So repealing glass-steagal was somehow a net increase in red tape for the banking industry?

Apparently you're next for FSD's creepy clownsuit spanking fantasy.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Personally, I don't like thinking of corporate income tax as a real revenue generator, so you'll get no argument from me if you think we should be lowering rates.  However, I am for killing a lot of the loopholes because a lot of companies put out bullshit investments to get some bullshit credit that benefits no one and is a big fat waste.  If the numbers I've seen are correct, corporate income taxes only made up 9% of total revenue in the US in FY 2010.  Personally, I think we get MORE income if restructuring the tax code and lowering rates increases employment and decreases our need to spend several hundred billion in social programs designed to support the unemployed. So I have a very conservative viewpoint in that regard.

Bingo.  The way to increase revenues is to increase the number of people working.

I'm not for alleviating all regulations, just those that are duplicative, arcane, or archaic.  The most regulated industry in the US is arguably the banking industry and that industry caused the 2008 collapse that this country is still reeling from.  Regulation may be a good way to keep things safe, but if the people in charge of enforcing them are slob bureaucrats they don't help anyone.


FYI, EPS is a net income (i.e. profits) number.  So we are talking about the same thing.

Which for most of the last decade was largely unregulated or regulations were simply ignored. The government didn't create or mandate interest only, no doc, or 125 percent to value loans. Banks did out of simple greed on the notion that housing prices were only going to go up forever.

Virtually everything that happened in the banking industry could have been avoided by requiring 20 percent down on any property purchase.

You're an idiot.  You have no rough ridin' idea what you are talking about.  Leave this thread now.
 
Do not make me make a rough ridin' fool out of you.  Consider yourself warned.  I will not put up with the above nonsense one more time.  If this wasn't the internet, I would grab you buy the neck, bend you over my knee, and spank your ass red like the child you are.

 

Horrible post.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

So repealing glass-steagal was somehow a net increase in red tape for the banking industry?

Why don't you explain what G-S did that made the banking industry NOT the most regulated industry.  FHC's?  Floating savings account interest rates?

As I suspect, another unverified, unsubstantiated liberal talking point from a mindless idiot parrot.  Don't make me take off my belt.   

[0.42]

Personally, I don't like thinking of corporate income tax as a real revenue generator, so you'll get no argument from me if you think we should be lowering rates.  However, I am for killing a lot of the loopholes because a lot of companies put out bullshit investments to get some bullshit credit that benefits no one and is a big fat waste.  If the numbers I've seen are correct, corporate income taxes only made up 9% of total revenue in the US in FY 2010.  Personally, I think we get MORE income if restructuring the tax code and lowering rates increases employment and decreases our need to spend several hundred billion in social programs designed to support the unemployed. So I have a very conservative viewpoint in that regard.

Bingo.  The way to increase revenues is to increase the number of people working.

I'm not for alleviating all regulations, just those that are duplicative, arcane, or archaic.  The most regulated industry in the US is arguably the banking industry and that industry caused the 2008 collapse that this country is still reeling from.  Regulation may be a good way to keep things safe, but if the people in charge of enforcing them are slob bureaucrats they don't help anyone.


FYI, EPS is a net income (i.e. profits) number.  So we are talking about the same thing.

Which for most of the last decade was largely unregulated or regulations were simply ignored. The government didn't create or mandate interest only, no doc, or 125 percent to value loans. Banks did out of simple greed on the notion that housing prices were only going to go up forever.

Virtually everything that happened in the banking industry could have been avoided by requiring 20 percent down on any property purchase.

You're an idiot.  You have no rough ridin' idea what you are talking about.  Leave this thread now.
 
Do not make me make a rough ridin' fool out of you.  Consider yourself warned.  I will not put up with the above nonsense one more time.  If this wasn't the internet, I would grab you buy the neck, bend you over my knee, and spank your ass red like the child you are.

 

Horrible post.

 

[Bookcat]

up over 400 points today....

 

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

up over 400 points today....

 

lol   

[Panjandrum]

up over 400 points today....

 

lol   

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- U.S. stocks came off session lows Wednesday afternoon after encouraging comments by Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan, but remained sharply lower as fears about Europe's ongoing debt crisis resurfaced.

So does anyone other than China and the Isle of Man actually have money, or do we all owe it to some Bond villain somewhere?

[wiley]

up over 400 points today....

 

lol    

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- U.S. stocks came off session lows Wednesday afternoon after encouraging comments by Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan, but remained sharply lower as fears about Europe's ongoing debt crisis resurfaced.

So does anyone other than China and the Isle of Man actually have money, or do we all owe it to some Bond villain somewhere?

Invade Isle of Man and use their balance sheet instead of ours? 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

up over 400 points today....

 

lol   

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- U.S. stocks came off session lows Wednesday afternoon after encouraging comments by Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan, but remained sharply lower as fears about Europe's ongoing debt crisis resurfaced.

So does anyone other than China and the Isle of Man actually have money, or do we all owe it to some Bond villain somewhere?

I believe the Fed and the SS Admin are 1 and 2 (not sure of the order) in federal bond ownership.   

Isle of Man sounds like a gay bar.  Gay dudes (as portrayed on tv) always have tons of money.  It makes sense.

[Bookcat]

up over 400 points today....

 

lol   

ya...lol

U.S. stocks moved solidly higher Monday, with major indexes rising about 2%, as merger activity set a positive tone on Wall Street.

when it takes a dive you can bump this

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Even the sheeple can't be fooled for too long.   


Obama, remains clueless, blames 1/2 of congress for not passing plan he hasn't revealed and likely doesn't exist 

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-unveil-measures-boost-rural-jobs-051307612.html

 


Is there any doubt Obama = Ron Prince

[wiley]

Something i didn't realize.  Unemployment rate for college graduates (over 25) 4.5%  Not that this improves any kind of outlook, but was surprised to hear that with all the doom and gloom going on.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Something i didn't realize.  Unemployment rate for college graduates (over 25) 4.5%  Not that this improves any kind of outlook, but was surprised to hear that with all the doom and gloom going on.

UE rate doesn't include those who quit looking for a job.  Also doesn't include those who "went back to school".

might be a factor   

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

Something i didn't realize.  Unemployment rate for college graduates (over 25) 4.5%  Not that this improves any kind of outlook, but was surprised to hear that with all the doom and gloom going on.

I was at my neighborhood  In-N-Out the other night and there were a lot of thirty-somethings working there. Used to be mostly high school students. Service was definitely better, so that's a plus.