{"id":868,"date":"2012-06-05T05:47:17","date_gmt":"2012-06-05T11:47:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/?p=868"},"modified":"2012-06-05T07:52:23","modified_gmt":"2012-06-05T13:52:23","slug":"economic-notes-for-the-week-of-june-4th","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/2012\/06\/economic-notes-for-the-week-of-june-4th\/","title":{"rendered":"Economic Notes for the Week of June 4th"},"content":{"rendered":"

As you might have expected, there is a lot to talk about this week.\u00a0 So much so, that we turned this Weekly Review into a \u2018Special Edition\u2019 variety.<\/p>\n

In the revised estimate, first quarter GDP growth<\/strong> was adjusted from 2.2% down to 1.9%.\u00a0 This would probably not be as surprising or impactful in its own right, but coupled with more immediate May data, it made a negative dent on investor sentiment.\u00a0 The details of the report included higher final sales, while consumer spending was revised down, as was government spending (a big part of this).\u00a0 While disappointing, this data is now old news.\u00a0 Second quarter growth is expected to be a bit better, but maybe not dramatically so.\u00a0 Estimates have remained in the 2.0-3.0% range, although we very well could stay in the lower end of that for the time being.<\/p>\n

The Conference Board Consumer Confidence index<\/strong> fell from 68.7 to 64.9 for May, which was below expectations and in stark contrast to the positive Univ. of Michigan survey the previous week.\u00a0 Current conditions dropped the most, but expectations also fell a bit, as did the employment portion.<\/p>\n

The Chicago PMI<\/strong> also declined somewhat unexpectedly from 56.2 in April to 52.7 in May, while forecasters expected a small increase.\u00a0 Since the Chicago numbers had been a bit higher than the rest of the nation for several months, this could be a seen as a somewhat normal adjustment, but, regardless, this provides additional evidence that manufacturing activity has weakened during the past month or two.\u00a0 While the new orders, production and employment components fell, the prices paid piece was lower, so inflation was less of a concern.<\/p>\n

The ISM Manufacturing Index<\/strong> declined from 54.8 down to 53.5, which was roughly in line with expectations.\u00a0 The underlying parts were mixed, though, as new orders gained, inventories declined and prices paid were down, while, on the more negative side, production and employment declined significantly.\u00a0 On a separate note, construction spending<\/strong> increased +0.3%, which was in line with forecast, led by an increase in private residential building.<\/p>\n

Contrary to the other numbers, auto unit sales<\/strong> were very strong, as several carmakers reported sharp increases.\u00a0 Sales for Toyota were up 87% from a year ago, and several domestic carmakers were up at least in the double-digits.\u00a0 Why is this?\u00a0 For one, pent-up demand is helping, as the average car on the road is now a record 10.4 years old, and financing costs are very low\u2014the type of credit boost the Fed has been looking for by keeping rates low for so long.<\/p>\n

The Case-Shiller<\/strong> measure of home prices rose +0.1% for March, which was a few basis points lower than anticipated.\u00a0 At the same time, however, growth in earlier months was revised up a bit, which tended to counter this effect somewhat.\u00a0 Three-quarters of the surveyed cities showed price increases, the highest of which were in Phoenix, Seattle and Miami, while Detroit, Chicago and Atlanta continued to lose ground from a home price standpoint.\u00a0 It is interesting to note that the Case-Shiller series utilizes a three-month moving average, so offers more tempered results compared to competing measures like CoreLogic and FHFA.\u00a0 Statistics can conceal as much as they can reveal.\u00a0 U.S. pending home sales<\/strong> fell in April by -5.5% month-over-month, which was below expectations for a flat result and counter to the last six months of recovering sales numbers.<\/p>\n

The report on the nation\u2019s employment situation on Friday was far weaker than expected, which had a dramatic effect on markets and sentiment.\u00a0 Non-farm payrolls<\/strong> for May were only up by +69k versus an expected +150k.\u00a0 Now, the question is where this is coming from:\u00a0 either negative \u2018payback\u2019 from gains earlier this year due to some weather factors, or deeper structural issues.\u00a0 Construction jobs were down -28k and leisure\/hospitality positions fell by -9k, which point to the weather factors to some extent.\u00a0 The household survey<\/strong> component wasn\u2019t as bad, showing a gain of +422k jobs versus a loss of -169k in April.\u00a0 The unemployment rate<\/strong> rose from 8.1% to 8.2%\u2014again, negative on the surface, but labor force participation also increased (the denominator of that equation).\u00a0 This tends to occur over time in recovery, typically when the labor market is improving, but time will tell whether that is the underlying case now or there is a reversal downward in employment prospects.\u00a0 Consumer spending<\/strong> was up +0.3% and personal income<\/strong> also rose by +0.2% for April.<\/p>\n

There continues to be a lot of uncertainty in the air, and we wanted to put some of these data points into better perspective in the form of a mid-year economic update.\u00a0 Below are a series of questions that either we\u2019ve been asked or have come across in our interactions with various professionals and readings.<\/p>\n

What about Europe?\u00a0 Will it matter if Greece defaults?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

From a size standpoint itself, Greece is not critically important to the world economy (it is roughly equivalent to a mid-sized U.S. state\u2014to put this into perspective).\u00a0 The problem is about confidence and solidarity (or lack thereof) by the Eurozone as a whole.\u00a0 This is why we see the back-and-forth risk-on\/risk-off trading week-to-week based on political sentiment and commentary.\u00a0 Political decisions don\u2019t lend themselves to be modeled easily, as they\u2019re based on the whims of the electorate of various countries and constituencies, whose moods change frequently along with conditions.<\/p>\n

Europe is left with two primary options, essentially.\u00a0 The ECB (led by Germany) needs to either scoop up and\/or backstop all peripheral assets, which includes Greek government debt, Spanish bank debt and any other problematic liabilities and solidify the European nations under a single unified effort.\u00a0 Or, the peripheral nations can be let go, essentially, which would result in a smaller, but stronger core Europe.\u00a0 Both outcomes have pros and cons.\u00a0 While one might think German voters would prefer to \u2018dump\u2019 the problematic periphery, a smaller and even more German-dominated Europe could lead to a much stronger Euro, which could actually hurt the competitiveness of the core nations (due to more expensive exports, for one reason).\u00a0 At the same time, while most think leaving the Euro would be disastrous for nations like Greece, nations in the past that have dramatically restructured, with immediate pain of currency devaluation and social strife have eventually bounced back to become stronger and more competitive a just a few years later (one example is Argentina a decade ago).\u00a0 Again, the point is not to make guesses about possible outcomes but realize each choice has side effects\u2014knowable and unknowable.\u00a0 Based on poll results, the vast majority of Greeks (as well as Spaniards and Italians) prefer to remain in<\/span><\/em> the Eurozone\u2014a reflection on the economic benefits of membership.\u00a0 This should be kept in mind as we progress through the political posturing.<\/p>\n

What about our own economy?\u00a0 Are we headed back into recession?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

It doesn\u2019t appear so.\u00a0 The data has softened a bit during the last month or two, as manufacturing surveys and employment data aren\u2019t moving at the faster pace we saw sporadically in the first quarter.\u00a0 A few economists have surmised that some of this effect is \u2018payback\u2019 from strong gains made earlier in the year that should have been more evenly disbursed through the late spring and early summer\u2014due to weather effects, etc.<\/p>\n

The two charts below we put together internally and put a different spin on the same data.
\n\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Source:\u00a0 U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis<\/p>\n

Both use the same government data.\u00a0 The first chart is choppier and data-focused (much like the news media), whereas the second chart links levels of Real GDP growth into an \u2018indexed\u2019 time series.\u00a0 Much less scary of a story?\u00a0 Yes, but not as dramatic or newsworthy perhaps.\u00a0 Graphics for employment and retail sales are similar.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s entirely possible this year could be another of \u2018muddle-through\u2019 slow growth.\u00a0 Recession is possible, as it always is, but recessions are usually brought on by policy mistakes, engineered through higher interest rates, geopolitical events (war, energy price spikes, etc.) or just a normal progression of the business cycle.\u00a0 This does not appear to be anyone\u2019s base case currently.\u00a0 What is difficult about \u2018slowdown\u2019 phases (if this even is one) is that conditions are almost equally as likely to re-accelerate and continue to expand as they are to turn negative and contract from that point.<\/p>\n

What about commodity prices?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Commodities are sensitive to a few main issues:\u00a0 global growth, world concerns and other idiosyncratic supply\/demand situations.\u00a0 Over time, commodities are not generally correlated to equities or other asset classes, but, in recent years, we have seen stronger correlation as both \u2018risk-on\u2019 futures speculation and \u2018risk-off\u2019 reversals by investors have added to volatility.\u00a0\u00a0 But the relationship of commodity prices to an economy is complex.<\/p>\n

Oil prices have come back to earth in recent weeks.\u00a0 While notoriously volatile and sensitive to both economic growth itself as well as geopolitical shocks, higher oil prices are a strain on consumer and business budgets as well as raise the likelihood of recession (assuming the economy is tilted in that direction anyway).\u00a0 Lower prices result in lower input costs and can prove to help with consumer sentiment.\u00a0 If that sounds convoluted, it is, but lower prices are generally preferable to higher.\u00a0 In a portfolio sense, commodities as an asset class is meant to provide \u2018insurance\u2019 of sorts against inflationary and other geopolitical strife-related events that may hurt other asset classes.<\/p>\n

What should the Fed Funds rate be?\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Some economists have argued that a near-zero rate for an \u2018extended period\u2019 is excessive, considering the improvement in economic growth we\u2019ve seen during the past two years and potential for future inflation based on this form of monetary stimulus.\u00a0 Based on their positioning and rhetoric, the Federal Reserve disagrees, feeling the downside risks and slow growth continue to warrant low and stimulative rates.<\/p>\n

If we were to look at this quantitatively, through mathematical \u2018rules\u2019 intended to find an ideal rate with inputs such as unemployment, GDP, inflation, etc. (based on work from economists like John Taylor at Stanford and Greg Mankiw at Harvard, among others), ideal rates continue to point to zero (or even negative with some inputs, although it\u2019s functionally impossible to engineer a negative interest rate\u2014this would imply paying a bank to accept your deposit, checking and other fees notwithstanding).\u00a0 So, \u2018quantitative easing\u2019 was intended to create this additional stimulus not possible by further rate cuts, and continues to look appropriate to policymakers using tools like these.\u00a0 Will they provide more QE?\u00a0 They\u2019ve been hesitant, but the weaker the data looks, the more likely officials are to consider it.\u00a0 Will it continue to look rational in an environment of higher inflation and improved economic conditions?\u00a0 Not as much.<\/p>\n

Are interest rates ever going up?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Rising interest rates are a sign of several conditions, but generally result from either strong economic growth or inflation (the two tend to go hand-in-hand as economic growth that is \u2018too\u2019 fast can eventually result in inflation…so rising rates act as a \u2018brake\u2019 to keep this from happening).\u00a0 Interest rates are notoriously among the most difficult items to predict, as they are directly related to what investors are willing to pay for safety at any given time.\u00a0 However, we do feel that, from a probability standpoint, higher rates seem more of a threat than do lower rates.\u00a0 And higher rates tend to be bad news for most conventional bond investors, as is inflation\u2014making vehicles like shorter-duration and floating rate important portfolio components in these types of environments.<\/p>\n

Has increased \u2018regulation\u2019 hurt business?\u00a0 Has this hurt the economy?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

This is something difficult to measure directly, and some studies argue that we are not any more \u2018regulated\u2019 than we have been in the past.\u00a0 However, perceptions of the regulatory environment and fear of the unknown future certainly appear to play a role in corporate decision-making.\u00a0 This especially affects smaller businesses who are generally less informed and feel less empowered to circumvent regulations\u2014while such changes may or may not come to pass, a small company may postpone activities like capital purchases and\/or hiring.<\/p>\n

What about China and the emerging markets?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

This has been a secondary concern as of late, and has taken a back seat to European issues, but a concern nonetheless.\u00a0 China does appear to be tempering, which is not unexpected considering their fast pace of growth over the recent two decades.\u00a0 In fact, the Chinese government is allegedly working to provide additional stimulus in the amount of $300 billion to prop up growth and keep things on a \u2018soft landing\u2019 level.\u00a0 Despite the reputation for being solely producers and not consumers, China, as have many emerging economies, has been experiencing increased domestic consumption steadily over the years as the economy has matured and entered into a second stage of (lower) growth.\u00a0 Is this a bad thing?\u00a0 No, but growth expectations around the world need to be adjusted to account for this…10+% growth is not a \u2018forever\u2019 condition in any nation.<\/p>\n

At the same time, the vast majority of expected global growth in coming years is centered on the emerging markets, which are becoming larger from a market capitalization standpoint and ever-more-important players on the world stage.\u00a0 Despite shorter-term volatility, making a multi-year (or multi-decade, really) commitment to emerging market investments appears not only attractive but necessary to achieve the investment growth needed to meet client goals.<\/p>\n

How about the upcoming \u2018fiscal cliff?\u2019<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The \u2018fiscal cliff\u2019 is the year-end 2012 line in the sand that specifies by default, absent other actions by politicians before that time, a reversion to higher taxes (via the expiration of the Bush era and payroll tax cuts, along with a healthcare surcharge for higher-income households) and cuts in government spending as part of last year\u2019s compromise to raise the debt ceiling.<\/p>\n

Such a drop-dead date in the future and degree of political contentiousness looks scary, especially after the August 2011 shenanigans that led to the Standard and Poor\u2019s decision to cut the U.S. sovereign debt rating.\u00a0 That said, there is a risk here, but a political one (on both sides).\u00a0 Extreme spending cuts for the sake of deficit reduction and tax hikes are a surefire way to shear off economic growth and potentially lead us into a (politically unpopular) recession.\u00a0 It wouldn\u2019t be surprising to see political compromise and action delayed until the very last minute (again), but the stakes are especially high (again).<\/p>\n

But my clients all say the environment is terrible?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

It certainly seems that way from watching financial news.\u00a0\u00a0 Those headlines sell more advertising than do the \u2018economy is slowly improving and growing\u2019 types of stories.\u00a0 Investor sentiment in general is terrible (a \u2018Fear & Greed Index\u2019 published by CNN, that an advisor recently shared with us, reads \u2018fear\u2019 to \u2018extreme fear\u2019 in almost all categories\u2014near 2008 levels).\u00a0 While such measures alarm the public, what these really say is that risk assets are not popular and are heavily avoided (which is why they\u2019re discounted).\u00a0 When looking beyond the immediate, this is the time to purchase them, not sell them (rationale being:\u00a0 if everyone is panicking, who is left to sell?).\u00a0 Sure, this lengthens timeframes, but timeframes should be appropriately long anyway\u2014meaning years, as opposed to weeks and months.<\/p>\n

That the \u2018markets climb a wall of worry\u2019 is quoted often, but it is accurate.\u00a0 These current issues will abate, to be replaced by new issues yet to be determined.\u00a0 What may be especially discouraging for clients looking to stay informed is that several academic studies, after reviewing popular financial magazine covers for many years, found a powerful reversal\/contrarian effect following the publication date, so taking the opposite action of what is in the popular media has been more effective in many cases.<\/p>\n

Is this a repeat of 2008?\u00a0 Have things really gotten better?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

When looking at the two, there is no comparison in our minds.\u00a0 Nearly four years ago, we found ourselves in a truly dire financial crisis\u2014where banks and markets faced real liquidity problems that threatened to freeze the entire system.\u00a0 We are far from that situation today.\u00a0 Corporations are in great shape\u2014with the lowest levels of debt and the most cash on their balance sheets in generations.\u00a0 At the same time, earnings are strong, in no small part to emerging market growth contributions.\u00a0 The deleveraging process continues, and may for a few years (based on academic evidence of prior crises) but we appear to be in much better shape than we were a few years ago\u2014even if some problems continue to persist, like unemployment, and despite how it might \u2018feel\u2019 to many Americans.\u00a0 However, investment asset prices continue to reflect the same type of fear present in 2008.\u00a0 Right now, the S&P 500 is trading at 12x, which is quite low compared to historicals and, especially considering the accommodative interest rate environment we see today.\u00a0 The market rallies over time have dwarfed the downturns.<\/p>\n

So what do we do now?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

As many of you know through experience, left to their own devices, some clients are extremely reactive to current events.\u00a0 This can lead to terrible investment decisions.\u00a0 We also know that \u2018buy-and-hold\u2019 or \u2018stay the course\u2019 are often not especially reassuring to hear over and over in volatile markets (although we\u2019re not saying either is necessarily incorrect).\u00a0 Market timing or \u2018gut feeling\u2019 moves are quite often problematic because they\u2019re done after the fact, after the \u2018smart money\u2019 has already been involved.<\/p>\n

There are several ways to achieve investment results, whether the approach is based on \u2018top-down\u2019 or \u2018bottom-up\u2019 or \u2018value\u2019 or \u2018growth\u2019 or \u2018momentum\u2019 (just to name a few), but the key factor seems to be consistency\u2014and not deviating from a systematic approach because conditions have temporarily changed.\u00a0 That is where behavioral errors like extreme fear\/greed can erase years of discipline.<\/p>\n

Market Notes <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Period ending 6\/1\/2012<\/strong><\/td>\n\n

1 Week (%)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

YTD (%)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

DJIA<\/td>\n\n

-2.64<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.39<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

S&P 500<\/td>\n\n

-2.96<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.57<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Russell 2000<\/td>\n\n

-3.75<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.07<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

MSCI-EAFE<\/td>\n\n

-1.48<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

-3.79<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

MSCI-EM<\/td>\n\n

-0.92<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

-2.46<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

BarCap U.S. Aggregate<\/td>\n\n

0.33<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.20<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
U.S. Treasury Yields<\/strong><\/td>\n\n

3 Mo.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2 Yr.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

5 Yr.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

10 Yr.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

30 Yr.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

12\/31\/2011<\/td>\n\n

0.02<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.25<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.83<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

1.89<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.89<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

5\/25\/2012<\/td>\n\n

0.09<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.30<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.76<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

1.75<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.85<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

6\/1\/2012<\/td>\n\n

0.07<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.25<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.62<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

1.47<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.53<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Stocks were the big losers on the week, with disappointing economic data and general poor sentiment.\u00a0 In contrast with a few previous weeks, emerging markets actually outperformed developed, which in turn outperformed U.S. stocks.\u00a0 In the domestic world, defensive utilities, telecom and staples held their ground a bit better, while energy, financials and consumer stocks suffered the most.<\/p>\n

Unsurprisingly, bonds served as the main recipients of investor money last week.\u00a0 Despite negative real interest rates, investor money has continued to flood into fixed income\u2014especially U.S. government debt\u2014which has been referred to by many (including PIMCO\u2019s Bill Gross) as one of the \u2018cleanest dirty shirts\u2019 in the laundry.<\/p>\n

In the commodities world, economically sensitive products like oil and natural gas have continued to decline dramatically (which has also affected equities in the energy sector), as have industrial metals.\u00a0 Contrary to some unusual behavior exhibited during a pare back in pricing in recent months, precious metals were quite strong last week, presumably benefitting from the \u2018fear\u2019 trade.<\/p>\n

Have a good week.<\/p>\n

Karl Schroeder, RFC, CSA, AACEP
\nInvestment Advisor Representative<\/p>\n

Schroeder Financial Services, Inc.
\n480-895-0611<\/p>\n

Sources:\u00a0 FocusPoint Solutions, Associated Press, Barclays Capital, Bloomberg, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Asset Management, Morgan Stanley, MSCI, Morningstar, Northern Trust, Oppenheimer Funds, Payden & Rygel, PIMCO, Thomson Reuters, Schroder\u2019s, Standard & Poor\u2019s, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Federal Reserve, Wells Capital Management, Yahoo!, Zacks Investment Research.\u00a0 Index performance is shown as total return, which includes dividends, with the exception of MSCI-EM, which is quoted as price return\/excluding dividends.\u00a0 Performance for the MSCI-EAFE and MSCI-EM indexes is quoted in U.S. Dollar investor terms.<\/p>\n

The information above has been obtained from sources considered reliable, but no representation is made as to its completeness, accuracy or timeliness.\u00a0 All information and opinions expressed are subject to change without notice.\u00a0 Information provided in this report is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, investment, legal or tax advice; and does not constitute an offer, or a solicitation of any offer, to buy or sell any security, investment or other product.\u00a0 Schroeder Financial Services, Inc. is a registered investment advisor.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As you might have expected, there is a lot to talk about this week.\u00a0 So much so, that we turned this Weekly Review into a \u2018Special Edition\u2019 variety. In the revised estimate, first quarter GDP growth was adjusted from 2.2% down to 1.9%.\u00a0 This would probably not be as surprising or impactful in its ownRead more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-868","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-finance"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/868","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=868"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/868\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":874,"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/868\/revisions\/874"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=868"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=868"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dev.sunlakesofarizona.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=868"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}