Existing users please login

 

Home / Markets / Economy

Higher Gas Prices Increase Consumer Spending in March

 
Associated Press
     

    WASHINGTON--

    Soaring prices for food, gas and other everyday needs pushed consumer spending to a faster pace than expected in March.

    The Commerce Department reported Thursday that consumer spending was up 0.4%, double the increase that economists had forecast.

    However, once inflation was removed, spending edged up a much slower 0.1%. The March figures represent the fourth straight lackluster performance as consumers have been battered by record gasoline prices, a deep slump in housing and rising job layoffs.

    In other economic news, the Labor Department reported that claims for unemployment benefits rose by 35,000 to 380,000 last week. That was a much bigger increase than the 18,000 that private economists had expected, and it highlights the strains that the weak economy is putting on the labor market.

    The report on jobless claims came a day ahead of a report on unemployment for April. Economists expect that report will show that the unemployment rate edged up to 5.2%, from 5.1% in March. The economy is expected to lose 70,000 jobs, for the fourth straight month of job losses.

    The White House said the weekly jobless claims are a volatile marker of the economy's health.

    "The bottom line is that they're higher than we'd like to see them," White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said. He added that a slight rise in the Gross Domestic Product for the first quarter was modestly encouraging news, and was in the range of what the administration had expected.

    Consumer spending is being carefully watched out of concerns that too big of a slowdown will push the country into a recession, since two-thirds of economic activity comes from consumers.

    The government reported Wednesday that the overall economy, as measured by the gross domestic product, eked out a tiny 0.6% growth rate in the first three months of this year as consumer spending slowed to the weakest pace since the second quarter of 2001, when the country was slogging through the last recession.

    Despite the slightly positive GDP performance, many economists believe that the economy has fallen into a recession and it will be reflected by a negative GDP figure in the current April-June quarter.

    The Federal Reserve on Wednesday cut a key interest rate for the seventh time in the past eight months, although it signaled the quarter-point move may be the last for awhile.

    The Fed, worried about rising inflation pressures, is hoping that its previous moves, combined with 130 million rebate payments that started going out this week, will be enough to keep the country from tumbling into a deep recession.

    On the inflation front, a price gauge tied to consumer spending rose by 0.3% in March, triple the 0.1% rise in February. Much of that jump reflected higher food and energy costs. Core inflation, which excludes those categories, rose by 0.2 % in March and is up 2.1% over the past 12 months, higher than the Fed's 1% to 2% comfort zone.

    Personal incomes rose by 0.3% in March, slightly slower than the 0.5% rise in February.

    The personal savings rate, savings as a percent of after-tax income, slipped to 0.2% in March from 0.4% in February.

     

    Fox Business Video


     

    FOX Translator

    Detach

    No data currently available.

    No data currently available.

    No-Load Funds

    Some mutual funds want you to pay for the privilege of them (or your investment adviser) taking your money to invest. It's called a load, and it works like a cover charge to get into a nightclub. Luckily, there are such things as no-load funds. As the name implies, shares of these funds are sold without a fee paid to a broker or investment advisor.

    The entire amount you invest in no-load funds goes to work for your returns. On the other hand, with load funds, right off the bat you're charged commission (not to mention other fees incurred over the life of the investment). Let's say, for example, you invest $25,000 into a load fund that charges a 5% commission. This costs you $1,250 off the top, bringing your actual investment down to only $23,750.

    The often-cited horse race analogy argues against investing in load funds. Here's the logic behind it: Would you place a bet on a horse that had to start a race 200 yards behind the others? Well, maybe you would if you got a tip from a sketchy, trench coat-clad man in a dark alley. However, under most circumstances, it's not smart to put your money on that handicapped horse.

    But some argue that at times that man in the trench coat (aka your broker) knows more about the horses than you do, and has a better shot at picking a winner. Also, sometimes these fees are unavoidable because some funds are available only through investment advisers.

    Cost-benefit analysis can help determine when a load fund is worth it (in other words, when it will score you a load) and when it is better to "do it yourself" and avoid the fees. Load-fund fees range depending on share class and can cover a variety of costs, such as paper work and fund management.