Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 108 posts

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#31

Post by adventured »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #5
leereeves wrote: post #2

Bloomberg sure is working hard to talk down the economy. Throughout 2019 they were talking about recession. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bloomberg+recession+2019&t=ffab&at...

> Bloomberg sure is working hard to talk down the economy It’s a finance publication. Its bread is buttered by people paranoid about missing the next big thing, whether that be an unexpected winner or unexpected pullback.

CNBC - which is not even a great financial & business news media outlet - does a dramatically better job of balancing their bullish versus bearish articles. Bloomberg, the media platform, went noticeably bearish after Michael Bloomberg publicly came out against Trump a few years ago. I've been reading Bloomberg daily for a very long time, it wasn't a subtle turn, it was dramatic and immediate - which perfectly fits with what we've seen since then from Michael Bloomberg's direction to his firm re what they're allowed to do and say. They're following his marching orders.

The only positive thing I can say about that sort of bias and propaganda, is at least it's formally out in the open.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#32

Post by troydavis »

wozniacki wrote: post #10
leereeves wrote: post #2

Bloomberg sure is working hard to talk down the economy. Throughout 2019 they were talking about recession. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bloomberg+recession+2019&t=ffab&at...

He's been doing this since atleast 2016. I wouldn't rule out he having sights on a presidential run since atleast then. He did form an exploratory committee once before and abandoned the run when it showed he didnt have enough support.[1] [2] Stocks keep climbing and climbing, but Michael Bloomberg isn't sure why. "I cannot for the life of me understand why the market keeps going up," the former New York City mayor s…

Edit: As far as I can tell, my comment below was totally incorrect. Parent comment may well be unchanged. I dug up the web archive to confirm because there was uncertainty, and as far as I can tell, it's unchanged. I have a version on my phone that renders a different comment, but since, I can't repro it or verify it now, I need to retract what I wrote below.

My original comment: OP has edited the comment above without mentioning it, rendering this entire reply thread useless.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#33

Post by troydavis »

leereeves wrote: post #28
troydavis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in my case, I downvoted it because it cited Daily Mail as a reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail and https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ have more, but basically, it’s a tabloid. Their assessment of the decision is incomplete, probably because reporting is not how they differentiate. Here’s a few other entities' explanations of Bloomberg’s decision: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/…

Did you downvote the wrong comment? It was a different comment by the same author, with the same unique format, that cited the Daily Mail.

(Update: I'm no longer sure whether this is correct. More on this, for the three other people who care: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21969051)

No, OP subsequently edited the comment without saying so. This whole reply thread is now useless.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#34

Post by turk73 »

barrygwn wrote: post #6

Now that Michael Bloomberg is running for president, I can't help but question if there is an ulterior motive behind each article at Bloomberg.com

Chomsky eloquently demonstrated that there is always an agenda and always has been.

I do find it interesting that the more conservative states are the ones listed. It reads like propaganda. "See? All the blue states are doing great!" Yeah, right. One is robbing Peter to pay Paul and the more honest ones are letting market forces work which requires the occasional downturn. Everybody is going to take their medicine, the economy can't simply expand forever. The whole "tax and spend" approach that the more liberal states operate on is pushing people into poverty. The strain on the Middle Class is enormous and they are doubling down again! Worse, due to all the money printing, we are seeing a bout of price inflation for food and other necessities. Meanwhile, 44% of Americans work for about $12/hr.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ceos-of-sp-500-companies-e...

Love how Tasers are being used so heavily by government that Axon's CEO made $246M. Something is very, very wrong in this country!

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#35

Post by Dirlewanger »

rjtavares wrote: post #7
barrygwn wrote: post #6

Now that Michael Bloomberg is running for president, I can't help but question if there is an ulterior motive behind each article at Bloomberg.com

Honestly, I assume all media outlets have ulterior motives behind each article (ranging from the simple "catering to their specific audience with facts supporting their view" to more nefarious "willfully manipulating the people with falsehoods").

A good start would be to ban wholesale both Bloomberg and Washington Post articles from HN. Nothing from those publications should be trusted.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#36

Post by turk73 »

ianai wrote: post #18
alamaslah wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this being downvoted? It is a interesting contribution and gives valuable insight into the article that has been posted.

HN tends to take a dim view of political discussions in my experience. There have been a number of indicators of a slowing economy for quite some time now. There was at least one run towards bonds in recent months. The Fed has been famously weighing its rate decisions sighting troubling economic outlooks. The yield curve inverted. GDP figures are trending downward. This is all just off the top of my head.

The yield curve inverted but then the Fed cut rates and it sprung back. I don't think these low rates are a good idea, mind you, but I'm just saying that the yield curve is no longer inverted.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#37

Post by troydavis »

russler23 wrote: post #30
troydavis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in my case, I downvoted it because it cited Daily Mail as a reliable source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail and https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-mail/ have more, but basically, it’s a tabloid. Their assessment of the decision is incomplete, probably because reporting is not how they differentiate. Here’s a few other entities' explanations of Bloomberg’s decision: https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/…

Of the four sources posted, only the Mail did the work of getting quotes from Bloomberg reporters. That alone gives it more credibility on this story. The other sources have to editorialize, because they don’t contain original reporting. (NPR features some hot takes from uninvolved parties, which is what reporters do when they can’t get a direct quote.) The Daily Mail has the best reporting on this story.

> The Daily Mail has the best reporting on this story.

I respectfully disagree, but I think anyone who reads the stories can decide for themselves.

I agree that it's interesting that Daily Mail texted reporters (or as they wrote, "DailyMail.com's anecdotal sampling of Bloomberg reporters' opinions shows scattershot unease but no willingness to contest the company policy"). I think the 2 opinions I linked to are far more thorough, though. Daily Mail's piece is what they could put out in an hour or two, and the novelty of texting a few reporters doesn't replace thinking about the underlying problems.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#38

Post by rjtavares »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #35
rjtavares wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I assume all media outlets have ulterior motives behind each article (ranging from the simple "catering to their specific audience with facts supporting their view" to more nefarious "willfully manipulating the people with falsehoods").

A good start would be to ban wholesale both Bloomberg and Washington Post articles from HN. Nothing from those publications should be trusted.

I can think of better places to start, but that's not the point, is it?

The point is that you should be aware of individual biases, and should diversify your media consumption.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#39

Post by wozniacki »

troydavis wrote: post #33
leereeves wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you downvote the wrong comment? It was a different comment by the same author, with the same unique format, that cited the Daily Mail.

(Update: I'm no longer sure whether this is correct. More on this, for the three other people who care: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21969051 ) No, OP subsequently edited the comment without saying so. This whole reply thread is now useless.

I'm sorry to say but you seem to be a petulant person or someone with an axe to grind, here. I haven't seen anyone try to vociferously beat down a fully citation-ed comment with legitimate sources as if it were salvaged from some hearsay somewhere.

Some would mistake you for someone who works for the aforementioned billionaire's campaign, the way you seem to want to launder his image, here.

Re: Nine States Face Economic Contraction, Most Since 2009 Crisis

#40

Post by rjsw »

alamaslah wrote: post #27
troydavis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I didn't offer a biased position, or any position. I linked to 3 other sources with summaries of where they fall between purely factual reporting and opinion. The 2 opinions - which don't agree with one another - are from experts on journalism and have been widely cited by other sources. Since you're new here, https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html may be worth skimming, particularly "Please respond to…

And yet you have not linked to the mediabiasfact site's profile of the sources you provided...That is an example of bias. Are you going to answer my question? Ps. This is a new account. I've been here 11 years and I have noticed those that cite the guidelines are often trying to hide behind them. Also, your own positions are depending upon assuming bad faith.

The Daily Mail is not a newspaper of record.
Post reply on HN