Don't go screaming the sky is falling as of yet, there are many factors into the equation.
Economic recovery might not be as smooth as we think. Any economist will tell you that public spending doesn't solve economic crises, but is supposed to act as way to treat the symptoms of such, ultimately it boils down to the laws of supply and demand in the market, and buyer and seller trying to find a reasonable bargain.
So, last month data in consumer spending looked like one of worst since. Give time for things to adjust. For all we know because of this businesses are going to sell goods at lower prices now. Both article say that a double dip may
happen if such and such isn't put into account. It's all theoretical and based on happenings in the past, which have their similarities but of course are unique in their own ways.
My article made it sound the next possible crises isn't months away but maybe in a few years:
"The report recommended winding down stimulus packages, raising interest rates in the long term and forcing through reforms of the financial system to prevent sudden shocks from causing market-wide collapse as they did two years ago."
Winding down the stimulus packages -- Why not? Financial institutions are better off now than they were.
Raising interest rates in the long term -- Yeah that's the general idea: that's what actually happens as a result of interest rates being low, the supply of borrowable money shrinks, and to adjust money-supply interest rates are risen as money is more scarce, and therefore valuable (well theoretically, without external actors).
Forcing through reforms of the financial institutions -- Well you can't keep the same incentive around for financial institutions to make loans to people who are at risk of defaulting. It's harder to get loans these days anyways.
However in the yahoo report didn't say what Bank for International Settlements said in how stimulus should be cut and for who, how rates should be risen, and what kind of reforms are necessary.
Let's look at your article
"Monday's weak consumer spending data is the latest in a string of reports that has many Americans worried about a "double-dip" recession."
I read somewhere last week, that consumer spending has gone down as a result of the ending of the tax incentives for buying homes. I don't really know how that correlation was concluded. But:
"Housing Rolling Over: Last week's housing numbers were horrific, especially the steep drop in new home sales."
Tax incentives cut maybe?
"Jobs Still Hard to Come By: Despite signs of recent progress, "there's no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession,"'
I've read elsewhere that we're creating jobs at the same rate we are losing them at this point, but were still backed-up from the start of the great recession. When the dotcom bubble burst, and economic recovery came as a result of the Fed lowering interest rates it took two years for those left unemployed by the crisis to get employed. Unemployment nowadays is a lagging indicator in our post-industrial society. It isn't a reliable source to determine economic recovery. It used to be like before 1970, because most Americans were employed in factories, and so when consumer spending increased waves of workers kept of furlough would come pouring into their workplaces, and consumer spending would increase even more.
"Hair-Shirts' in Fashion, Worldwide: As discussed here, this weekend's G20 meeting shows that policymakers believe the time for fiscal austerity is at hand. From an economic point of view, the G20 confirms that the appeal of government spending (i.e. Keynesian economics) to combat the downturn is on the wane, replaced by a view that it's better to take the pain now and cut spending (i.e. Austrian economics)."
Mix-and-match maybe? Most policymakers don't really dogmatically hang onto just one set of theoretical guideline, unless of course they are extremists. Maybe Keynesian economics isn't relevant right now as the "too-big-to-fail" have all been bailed out? The article doesn't say why this shift in thinking has occurred and to what extent.
As for the bond market I don't really know much about it.
"Of course, it was unrealistic to expect the economy to indefinitely continue its V-shaped rise from the depths of last year. Most recoveries are uneven so it's premature to say what's happening lately is proof positive the economy is rolling over, as Henry and I discuss in the accompanying video."
Yup, economic growth is pretty uneven nowadays.