The S&P Global US Services PMI rose from 53.7 in May from 50.8 in April showing significant strengthening in services. So the ISM and the PMI are now showing completely different things - basically, one is trying to be political and talk down the economy as the Democrats have done for the last 3 months. But, by the real data, it is not working.

"#10 | Posted by REDIAL"

I copied and pasted but edited out the 'flash reading' and did not update the "from" to "to" (good catch and a great value add to the conversation), which was 53.2 for the month. So, it improved greatly month over month and even surprised to the upside from the flash reading. All signs of expansion.

"More like signs of stocking up before the schittt hits the fan.
#12 | Posted by Danforth"

Stocked up on services? Take your pretend financial analyst skills along with your debunked cosplaying 'tax preparer' skills somewhere they have not already been repeatedly exposed and debunked.

"#13 | Posted by REDIAL"

Thank you again for your great value add for the conversation. I know what I, and I think everyone else on this website really wanted, was a grammar Karen. Thank you for providing this valuable service. It is way, way more important than debating the actual data.

"#17 | Posted by jpw"

Yes - I don't understand the subject as demonstrated by my comment directly related to the post and showing why it is not a reliable reading by quoting the other statistic globally quoted on the US service sector - not to mention the one that is more closely aligned with the official government statistics on economic activity.

Just because you have a cush job washing beakers for $15/hour - does not mean you are informed to even talk on this subject.

"Trump's ruining the America, stupid.
#22 | Posted by ClownShack"

We will have to wait and see if the grammar Karen Redial will come to comment on this.

"#30 | Posted by Danforth"

So you stocked up on your cheap Chinese made crap - gotcha. Let me guess, you intend to use these in your 'tax preparer' cosplay. First of all, I doubt you even have a net worth of $10K to spend so your 20% APR on the credit card you used to buy that crap will end up being more expensive than any tariff impact would have been. Great financial work their Buffett.

"#33 | Posted by Danforth"

So you bought $10K in Apple products - like, you purchased 10 Macbook Airs...sure you did? And yes, the iPhone is a utter garbage.

As for my shoes - I buy US made bespoke shoes -------. That is why I don't go to your deep blue -------- cities - I don't want to step on your feces or drug needles and dirty my shoes. Same goes for my clothing.

McDonald's is the top grossing hamburger seller in the US - must mean their product is not garbage compared to In-N-Out or ShakeShack by the logic of some -------- on this website.

"Is what generated September 29th 2008 the result of policy excellence?
#44 | Posted by redlightrobot"

No - it was the fault of the government forcing banks to give loans to people that would not otherwise qualify - mainly non-white poor people. Because of this, demand was artificially high - which pushed up housing prices for everyone. Predictably, they failed to make their repayments resulting in mass foreclosures and a major drop in house prices for everyone.

If you want an actual parallel, you are better served by comparing this to the student loan crisis. Again, government gave loans to people that are unlikely to pay it back resulting in mass defaults.

Trump and his tariff policies have literally nothing in common with what you are implying. Further, with the cratering energy prices due to Trump policies and the Saudis running huge deficits, it is likely that we could actually see a bit of deflation in things like food prices or other energy intensive activities.

Things that are already generally accepted as facts should not be questioned. It just makes the person asking look dumb and wastes the time of the person responding.

"" loans to people that would not otherwise qualify - mainly non-white poor people."
Nonsense. It was McMansions that broke the system. Not the folks defaulting on the cheapest homes around.
#53 | Posted by Danforth"

It was called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and specifically forbid lenders from using all the traditional underwriting criteria because it was 'racist' - 'racist' things like income level, income verification, credit history and savings history.

The default rate was not among 'McMansions' - it was among the urban poor using sub-prime loans that they could not afford and the banks were not allowed to reject. Sub-prime delinquency rates were nearly 30%. Those were not buying McMansions in the suburbs - that was the urban poor buying their ---------.

"#59 | Posted by Danforth"

Wrong again ------- - but at least you are trying to have actual facts this time rather than just lying like you normally do.