Showing posts with label national debt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label national debt. Show all posts

Friday, January 17, 2014

Obama’s Numbers (January 2014 Update - FactCheck.org)

Latest statistics show stagnant wages, persistent long-term joblessness, soaring profits and stock prices, and moderating health care spending.
January 15, 2014 / FACTCHECK.org

Summary

As we do every three months, we are updating our “Obama’s Numbers” report with fresh statistics reflecting what has happened since the president first took office.

Some highlights from this round:

The economy continues to gain jobs, but the number of long-term unemployed is nearly double what it was when Obama became president.

Wages remain stagnant,
increasing a scant 0.3 percent after inflation during Obama’s time. Meanwhile corporate profits are running 178 percent higher than just before he took office, and stock prices have doubled.

The number of low-income persons on food stamps remains just below the record level reached in 2012, with 15 percent of the population still getting benefits.

Health care spending has increased 15.8 percent under Obama, which is faster than inflation but modest by historical standards. But there’s scant evidence that the Affordable Care Act is causing the slowdown. The government economists and statisticians who track the spending said the law’s impact has been “minimal.”

U.S. exports have gone up just 34 percent — leaving the president far short of his announced goal of doubling them by the end of this year.

The number of suspected terrorists held prisoner at Guantanamo — which the president once ordered closed by January 2010 — is down only 36 percent.

The federal debt owed to the public has nearly doubled since Obama was sworn in, increasing by 95 percent.




Analysis

This report follows our October 2013 update and previous quarterly reports dating back to our first “Obama’s Numbers” article in October 2012. All figures here reflect the most recent available as of Jan. 14.


Jobs

As of December, the economy had gained a net total of 3,246,000 jobs since Obama first took office, and the unemployment rate had fallen to 6.7 percent, down from 7.8 percent. But that's a misleading stat.

Despite the gains, more than 10 million people remained unemployed, including 3.9 million who had been out of work for 27 weeks or longer. That’s an increase of nearly 1.2 million “long-term unemployed” since the start of the Obama presidency.

The average time that an unemployed person in December had been looking for work was 37 weeks, nearly double the average at the time Obama entered the White House.

Another troubling jobs statistic is the civilian labor force participation rate, which has now declined by 2.9 percentage points since Obama became president, to the lowest point since 1978. But that’s not entirely due to “discouraged workers” dropping out because they believe no jobs are available, as some Obama critics would have you believe.

Other labor-force dropouts include members of the baby-boom generation, who are retiring in droves. They also include disabled workers gaining Social Security disability benefits (a number that has doubled in the past 17 years, and is up 20 percent just since Obama took office).

There’s a lively debate among economists about the causes — and implications — of the shrinking participation rate, which started long before Obama took office. The rate actually peaked in early 2000 and declined 1.5 percent under Obama’s predecessor. A Labor Department economist, looking at current demographic trends, predicts further declines through at least 2022 — long after the end of Obama’s presidency.


Slowing Health Care Costs

Health care costs have risen only moderately since Obama took office, but not for the reason the White House wants you to think.

The most recent official figures were posted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, whose nonpartisan economists and statisticians have tracked health care spending since 1960. CMS officials also published their findings in a Jan. 6 article in the journal Health Affairs.

The figures show health care spending in the U.S. rose 3.7 percent in 2012, and stood 15.8 percent higher than it did in 2008, the year before Obama took office.

That’s moderate by historical standards. And the White House was quick to claim credit.

Jason Furman, chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, published an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal Jan. 6 under the headline, “ObamaCare Is Slowing Health Inflation.” In the body of the piece, he argued that the slowdown in health costs is due “in part” to the Affordable Care Act, which he said is making a “meaningful” contribution. He cited, for example, the law’s provision penalizing hospitals if too many patients need to be readmitted, which he said has helped reduce hospital readmission rates by more than 1 percentage point.

But the nonpartisan number-crunchers at CMS said in their Health Affairs article that the ACA had only a “minimal” impact on the slowdown in spending. The reasons they cited instead were:
The economic slowdown and subsequent sluggish recovery
Drops in some prescription drug costs brought about by the expiration of patents on several costly medications including Lipitor, Plavix and Singulair, which are now available in low-cost generic versions, and
A one-time reduction in Medicare payment levels to skilled nursing facilities.

The Health Affairs authors suggested the slowdown in health spending may only be temporary, as has been the case after past recessions.



Health care spending consumed a record 17.4 percent of the nation’s entire economic output in the recession-plagued year of 2009. That declined only slightly, to 17.2 percent, in 2012.

“[T]his pattern is consistent with historical experience when health spending as a share of GDP often stabilizes approximately two to three years after the end of a recession and then increases when the economy significantly improves,” the authors said.

To conclude that the slowdown is permanent, they said, would require “more historical evidence.”


Moderate Inflation

Other costs have risen even more slowly under Obama. As of November, the Consumer Price Index has risen 10.3 percent since he first took office. Some policymakers even worry the inflation rate might be too low — foreshadowing sluggish economic growth in the future.

The highly visible (and highly volatile and highly politicized) price of regular gasoline stood at a national average of $3.33 per gallon in the week ended Jan. 13. That’s more than half a buck cheaper than it was in September 2012, when Republicans were making it an election issue. The recent price is 80 percent higher than it was when Obama took office in the midst of a worldwide recession, which had dampened demand. But the price under Obama has never equaled the historic high of more than $4 per gallon that it reached in June and July 2008, before he took office.


Disappointing Exports

The president has a long way to go to meet his goal of doubling exports of U.S. goods and services, which he first made in his 2010 State of the Union address. So far, exports have increased only 33.6 percent since Obama took office, according to data from the U.S. Commerce Department. (We compared seasonally adjusted figures for the fourth quarter of 2008 with those for the July – September quarter of 2013, the most recent figures available.)

Obama is facing the same global economic headwinds that he did six months ago, when we last updated the export figure. Simply put, overseas customers are still struggling. European unemployment is stuck at 12 percent, for example. And China’s economic growth has slowed and remains problematic. The president mentions his 2010 National Export Initiative on occasion. But at the current rate he won’t come close to meeting his original goal of doubling exports by the end of 2014.


Rising Federal Debt

The president is fond of boasting that annual federal deficits are falling rapidly. But they remain large by historical standards. And the fact is, they are piling up.

Total federal debt now stands at nearly $17.3 trillion, which is 63 percent higher than when Obama took office. That figure includes money the government owes to itself, chiefly through the Social Security trust funds.

A figure that economists consider more important — the debt the government owes to the public — has risen even more dramatically. That figure now stands at $12.3 trillion, an increase of 95 percent under Obama. At the current rate it will surely rise to a doubling during Obama’s presidency — possibly by the time of our next update three months hence.

Net interest payments consumed 6.4 percent of all federal spending in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. And the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office officially projects that interest payments will gobble up an even bigger share of federal spending in the future. “CBO expects interest rates to rebound in coming years from their current unusually low levels, sharply raising the government’s cost of borrowing,” CBO said in its most recent long-term budget outlook document.


Government Workers

While cash-strapped state and local governments have been laying off teachers, firefighters, police and other workers, the federal government has increased the number of its employees under Obama.

The most recent figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that as of December, workers on the federal payroll (excluding postal workers) numbered more than 2.1 million, up 3.2 percent since January 2009.

During the same time, the number of workers on state payrolls went down 3 percent and those on local government payrolls declined by 3.5 percent. A big reason for the disparity is that state and local governments generally must balance their spending and income each year, while the federal government can keep up spending by borrowing.

The figures also show that in recent months state and federal governments have been able to hire back some of their laid-off workers. Obama’s hiring spree also peaked in 2011 (ignoring spikes in hiring of temporary Census workers in 2010), and the number of non-postal federal workers has gone down more or less steadily during the budget battles of the past two years. But the number is above where it was when he took office.


Stagnant Wages, Record Corporate Profits

The divide between the affluent and ordinary wage earners — which the president last month called the “defining challenge of our time” — has widened during his time in office.

Wages remain stagnant, barely keeping up with inflation. Average weekly earnings of workers on payrolls, measured in inflation-adjusted dollars, have edged up a scant 0.3 percent between Obama’s first month in office and November 2013, the most recent on record. And there’s no clear upward trend. We reported a 0.1 percent increase in the real earnings figure in our July update six months ago, but that had evaporated by the time of our October update three months later, when the figure was exactly zero.

Relatively fewer people now own their own homes. Under Obama, the home ownership rate has declined by 2.4 percentage points, to 65.1 percent in the July-September quarter, according to U.S. Census figures. (The decline actually began in 2004, when the rate peaked at 69.4 percent as the housing bubble was inflating.)

And the number of low-income persons on food stamps (now called Supplemental Nutrition Assistance, or SNAP) continues at near-record levels. The most recent figures from the Department of Agriculture put the number receiving benefits at just over 47.4 million as of October — or 15 percent of the entire U.S. population.

That’s down a bit from the nearly 47.8 million record set in December 2012. But it is still an increase of 48.3 percent during Obama’s presidency.

The increase in food stamp beneficiaries is due partly to economic pressures, but also to liberalizations in both benefits and eligibility under President Obama and also under his predecessor. We covered those in some detail back in 2012 when GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich accused Obama of being the “food stamp president.” The number of food stamp beneficiaries increased by 14.7 million during Bush’s two terms in office, and is up another 15.4 million under Obama.

One factor behind Obama’s increase is that benefit levels were raised in 2009 as part of his economic stimulus program. That “temporary” increase was extended several times, and didn’t lapse until Nov. 1 last year.

But while wage earners and low-income people struggle, corporate profits keep setting records. Even after taxes, corporate profits were running at an annual rate of nearly $1.9 trillion in the July-September quarter of last year, the most recent for which figures are available. That’s nearly triple the rate during the three months before Obama became president — an increase of 178 percent.

To be sure, that last quarter of 2008 was the worst since 2002, thanks to the worst business recession since the Great Depression. But profits rebounded to well above previous levels. Profits in the most recent quarter were running 33 percent higher than the highest level seen before 2009, which was the third quarter of 2006, when profits ran at a rate of $1.4 trillion.

Obama’s time in office also has been good for those who own corporate stocks — whose values have doubled and more under Obama. As of the close of the market on Jan. 14, the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index was 128 percent higher than it was when Obama first took office.

Other market indicators also have soared. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 106 percent, and the NASDAQ Composite index had nearly tripled, rising by 190 percent.



Booming Oil, Gas, Wind and Solar

The remarkable and historic boom in U.S. oil and gas production continues. Production of crude oil in the U.S. now has increased 60 percent since Obama took office, while imports of foreign oil and petroleum products have declined by 51 percent, as measured by the most recent Energy Information Administration figures, comparing the most recent three-month period with the last quarter of 2008.

As a consequence, U.S. dependency on imported oil has dropped sharply. The nation imported 34 percent of what it consumed in the first 11 months of 2011, according to the most recent EIA figures. (See Table 3.3a, “net imports” as a percent of “product supplied.”) That’s a drop of 23 percentage points from 2008, when the U.S. imported 57 percent. The decline actually began in George W. Bush’s second term, after U.S. dependency peaked at 60.3 percent in 2005. But the trend has gathered momentum under Obama.

As we’ve said before, the U.S. energy boom is a result primarily of the use of new drilling technology by the industry, not of any policy changes in Washington. But the president hasn’t been in any hurry to impose restrictions on the hydraulic fracturing method. The Environmental Protection Agency has been studying the impact of “fracking” on drinking water for years. It announced the study March 18, 2010, and issued a “progress report” Dec. 21, 2012. The EPA says it expects a draft report to be released for scientific peer review sometime this year.

Another factor behind reduced U.S. dependency on imported oil is more fuel-efficient automobiles. The latest figures from the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute show the average EPA city/highway “window sticker” mileage of cars and light trucks sold in December was 24.8 miles per gallon, an improvement of 18 percent over the average for vehicles sold in the month that Obama took office.

Washington is now calling for even greater efficiency in the future. The Obama administration has put in place requirements that cars and light trucks average 54.5 mpg by model year 2025. But it remains to be seen whether the industry can produce such vehicles and get Americans to buy them, and whether future presidents will stick to Obama’s ambitious goal.

Under Obama, wind and solar power has tripled. In the most recent 12 months on record (ending in October) electricity generated by wind and solar had increased by 206 percent over the total for 2008. That was spurred in part by large federal tax subsidies for wind and solar generation.

Despite the large percentage increase in wind and solar generation, such energy accounted for just under 3.2 percent of all electricity generated in the U.S. in the July-September quarter of 2013, the most recent on record. Coal still accounts for the biggest share, followed by natural gas and nuclear power.

War and Terrorism

The detention facility for suspected terrorists remains open at the Guantanamo Naval Base in Cuba, despite the order Obama signed two days after taking office, directing that it be closed within one year. On Dec. 31 the U.S. announced it was releasing three more prisoners — all ethnic Uighur Chinese nationals — and transferring them to Slovakia, which had agreed to resettle them. But that leaves 155 “detainees” in custody (the Pentagon prefers not to call them “prisoners”), a number just 36 percent below the 242 who were being held nearly five years ago when Obama became president.

And the war in Afghanistan grinds on. According to official Pentagon figures, the U.S. has suffered a total of 1,676 military fatalities since 2008 in Operation Enduring Freedom.

Since 2008, a total of 264 U.S. military fatalities were attributed to the two Iraq war operations, Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn, according to official Pentagon figures. Although the last U.S. troops left Iraq at the end of 2011, two deaths were attributed to the conflict in 2012: Marine Staff Sgt. Oscar Eduardo Canon, who died in February 2012 of wounds suffered earlier, and Army Staff Sgt. Ahmed Kousay al-Taie, who had been missing since 2006 and whose remains were identified in February 2012.

– by Brooks Jackson
Sources

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Total Nonfarm Employment, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; Unemployment Rate, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; Unemployment Level, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; Number Unemployed for 27 Weeks & Over, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; Labor Force Participation Rate, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey; Not in Labor Force, Searched For Work and Available, Discouraged Reasons For Not Currently Looking, Unadjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Social Security Administration. “Number of Social Security recipients—time series for selected benefit type: Disabled Workers.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Klein, Matthew C. “Is Jobless Rate Really Falling?” Bloomberg News. 9 Jan 2014.

Toossi, Mitra. “Labor force projections to 2022: the labor force participation rate continues to fall.” Monthly Labor Review. Dec 2013.

Martin, Anne B. and Micah Hartman, Lekha Whittle, Aaron Catlin and the National Health Expenditure Accounts Team. “National Health Spending In 2012: Rate Of Health Spending Growth Remained Low For The Fourth Consecutive Year.” Health Affairs. Jan 2014.

Furman, Jason. “ObamaCare Is Slowing Health Inflation.” Wall Street Journal. 6 Jan 2014.

Petrof, Alanna. “Euro zone unemployment at 12%, while U.S. improving.” CNN Money. 8 Jan 2014.

“China’s Stocks Fall to Five-Month Low on Economic Growth Concern.” Bloomberg News. 5 Jan 2014.

White House. “Remarks by the President in the State of the Union.” 27 Jan 2010.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Consumer Price Index – All Urban Consumers.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

“Inflation, Strangely Low, Holds Key to 2014 Fed Policy.” Thompson/Reuters. 12 Jan 2014.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Weekly U.S. Regular All Formulations Retail Gasoline Prices.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Obama, Barack “Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address.” White House Office of the Press Secretary. 27 Jan 2010.

Petroff, Alanna. “Euro zone unemployment at 12%, while U.S. improving.” CNN Money. 8 Jan 2014.

“China’s Stocks Fall to Five-Month Low on Economic Growth Concern.” Bloomberg News. 5 Jan 2014.

U.S. Treasury. “The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It.” 10 Jan 2014. Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Treasury. “Final Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the United States Government For Fiscal Year 2013 Through September 30, 2013, and Other Periods.” Undated. Accessed 14 Jan 2014.

Congressional Budget Office. “The 2013 Long Term Budget Outlook.” Sept 2013.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Government, Federal, except U.S. Postal Service, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Government, State Government, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Government, Local Government, Seasonally Adjusted.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Obama, Barack. “Remarks by the President on Economic Mobility.” White House Office of the Press Secretary. 4 Dec 2013.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National); Average Weekly Earnings of All Employees, 1982-1984 Dollars.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Census Bureau. “Time Series: Seasonally Adjusted Home Ownership Rate.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Data as of January 10, 2014).” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Plumber, Brad. “Food stamps will get cut by $5 billion this week — and more cuts could follow.” Washington Post Wonkblog. 28 Oct 2013.

Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis. “Corporate Profits After Tax (without IVA and CCAdj) (CP).” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Google Finance. “S&P 500.” Historical prices. Accessed 14 Jan 2014.

Google Finance. “Dow Jones Industrial Average.” Historical prices. Accessed 14 Jan 2014.

Google Finance. “NASDAQ Composite.” Historical prices. Accessed 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “U.S. Crude Oil Production.” Accessed 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Table 3.3a. Monthly Energy Review.” Dec 2013.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Table 1.1.A. Net Generation by Other Renewables: Total (All Sectors), 2003-April 2013.” Accessed 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “EPA Initiates Hydraulic Fracturing Study: Agency seeks input from Science Advisory Board.” News release. 18 Mar 2010.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “EPA Releases Update on Ongoing Hydraulic Fracturing Study.” News release. 21 Dec 2012.

University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. “Average sales-weighted fuel-economy rating (window sticker) of purchased new vehicles for October 2007 through December 2013.” 8 Jan 2014.

“Obama Administration Finalizes Historic 54.5 MPG Fuel Efficiency Standards.” News release, White House Office of the Press Secretary. 28 Aug 2012.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Electric Power Monthly: Table 1.1.A. Net Generation from Renewable Sources: Total (All Sectors), 2003-October 2013.” 20 Dec 2013.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Electricity Data Browser: Net Generation.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

“Closure Of Guantanamo Detention Facilities: Executive Order – Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention Facilities.” The White House. 22 Jan 2009.

U.S. Department of Defense. “Detainee Transfer Announced.” News release. 31 Dec 2013.

U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Casualty Analysis System. “U.S. Military Casualties – Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Casualty Summary by Month.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Casualty Analysis System. “U.S. Military Casualties – Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) Casualty Summary by Month.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Casualty Analysis System. “U.S. Military Casualties - Operation New Dawn (OND) Casualty Summary by Month.” Data extracted 14 Jan 2014.

Shapiro, Joseph. “Remembering Marine Sgt. Oscar Canon, A ‘Superstar.’ ” National Public Radio. 24 Feb 2012.

“Missing U.S. soldier killed by Shiite group.” The Associated Press. 27 Feb 2012.

Thursday, July 12, 2012

American Freefall

Misery Rising
by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Washington has been at war since October, 2001. This war took a back seat when Bush concocted another excuse to order the invasion of Iraq in 2003, a war that went on without significant success for 8 years and has left Iraq in chaos with dozens more killed and wounded every day, a new strong man in place of the illegally executed former strongman, and the likelihood of the ongoing violence becoming civil war.

Upon his election, President Obama foolishly sent more troops to Afghanistan and renewed the intensity of that war, now in its eleventh year, to no successful effect.

These two wars have been expensive. According to estimates by Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, when all costs are counted, the Iraq invasion cost US taxpayers $3 trillion dollars. Ditto for the Afghan war. In other words, the two gratuitous wars doubled the US public debt. This is the reason there is no money for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, the environment, and the social safety net.

Americans got nothing out of the wars, but as the war debt will never be paid off, US citizens and their descendants will have to pay interest on $6,000 billion of war debt in perpetuity.

Not content with these wars, the Bush/Obama regime is conducting military operations in violation of international law in Pakistan, Yemen, and Africa, organized the overthrow by armed conflict of the government in Libya, is currently working to overthrow the Syrian government, and continues to marshall military forces against Iran.

Finding the Muslim adversaries insufficient for its energies and budget, Washington has encircled Russia with military bases and has begun the encirclement of China. Washington has announced that the bulk of its naval forces will be shifted to the Pacific over the next few years, and Washington is working to reestablish its naval base in the Philippines, construct a new one on a South Korean island, acquire a naval base in Viet Nam, and air and troop bases elsewhere in Asia.

In Thailand Washington is attempting to purchase with the usual bribes an air base used in the Vietnam war. There is opposition as the country does not wish to be drawn into Washington’ s orchestrated conflict with China. Downplaying the real reason for the airbase, Washington, according to Thai newspapers, told the Thai government that the base was needed for “humanitarian missions.” This didn’t fly, so Washington had NASA ask for the air base in order to conduct “weather experiments.” Whether this ruse is sufficient cover remains to be seen.

US Marines have been sent to Australia and elsewhere in Asia. To corral China and Russia (and Iran) is a massive undertaking for a country that is financially busted. With wars and bankster bailouts, Bush and Obama have doubled the US national debt while failing to address the disintegration of the US economy and rising hardships of US citizens.

The annual US budget deficit is adding to the accumulated debt at about $1.5 trillion per year with no prospect of declining. The financial system is broken and requires ongoing bailouts. The economy is busted and has been unable to create high-paying jobs, indeed any jobs. Despite years of population growth, payroll employment as of mid-2012 is the same as in 2005 and substantially below 2008. Yet, the government and financial presstitute media tell us that we have a recovery.

According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment in 2011 was only 1 million more than in 2002. As it takes about 150,000 new jobs each month to stay even with population growth, that leaves a decade long job deficit of 15 million jobs.

The US unemployment and inflation rates are far higher than reported. In previous columns I have explained, based on statistician John Williams’ work (shadowstats.com), the reasons that the government’s headline numbers are serious understatements.
 The headline (U3) unemployment rate of 8.2% counts no discouraged workers who have given up on finding a job. The government has a second unemployment rate (U6), seldom reported, which includes short-term discouraged workers. That rate is 15%. When the long-term discouraged workers are added in, the current US unemployment rate is 22%, a number closer to the unemployment rate of the Great Depression than to the unemployment rates of postwar recessions. (in fact, it's higher than all but 2 or 3 years during the Great Depression...





Changes in the way inflation is measured have destroyed the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as a measure of the cost of living. The new methodology is substitution based. If the price of an item in the index rises, a lower priced alternative takes its place. In addition, some price rises are labeled quality improvements whether they are or not and thus do not show up in the CPI. People still have to pay the higher price, but it is not counted as inflation.

Currently, the substitution-based rate of inflation is about 2%. However, when inflation is measured as the actual cost of living, the rate of inflation is 5%.

The Misery Index is the sum of the inflation and unemployment rates. The level of the current Misery Index depends on whether the new rigged measures are used, which understate the misery, or the former methodology that accurately measures it. Prior to the November 1980 election, the Misery Index hit 22%, which was one reason for Reagan’s victory over President Carter. Today if we use previous methodology, the Misery Index stands at 27%. But if we use the new rigged methodology, the Misery Index is 10%.

The understatement of inflation serves to boost Gross Domestic Product (GDP). GDP is calculated in current dollars. To be able to determine whether GDP rose because of price rises or because of increases in real output, GDP is deflated by the CPI. The higher the inflation rate, the less the growth in real output and vice versa. When the substitution based methodology is used to measure inflation, the US economy experienced real growth in the 21st century except for the sharp dip during 2008-2010.

However, if the cost-of-living based methodology is used, except for a short period during 2004, the US economy has experienced no real growth since 2000. The lack of employment and real GDP growth go together with the decline in real household median income. The growth in consumer debt substituted for the lack of income growth and kept the economy going until consumers exhausted their ability to take on more debt. With the consumer dead in the water, the outlook for economic recovery is poor.

Politicians and the Federal Reserve are making the outlook even worse. At a time of high unemployment and debt-stressed households, politicians at local, state, and federal levels are cutting back on government provision of health care, pensions, food stamps, housing subsidies and every other element of the social safety net. These cutbacks, of course, further reduce aggregate demand and the ability of incomestressed Americans to survive.

The Federal Reserve has interest rates so low that retirees and others living on their savings can earn nothing on their money. The interest rates paid on bank CDs and government and corporate bonds are lower than the rate of inflation. To live on interest income, a person has to purchase Greek, Spanish, or Italian bonds and run the risk of capital loss. The Federal Reserve’s policy of negative interest rates forces retirees to spend down their capital in order to live. In other words, the Fed’s policy is destroying personal savings as people are forced to spend their capital in order to cover living expenses.

In June the Federal Reserve announced that it was going to continue its policy of driving nominal interest rates even lower, this time focusing on long-term Treasury bonds. The Fed said it would be purchasing $400 billion of the Treasury’s 30-year bonds. Driving interest rates down means driving bond prices up. With 5-year Treasury bonds paying only seven-tenths of one percent and 10-year Treasuries paying only 1.6%, below even the official rate of inflation, Americans desperate for yield move into 30-year bonds currently paying 2.7%. However, the the high bond prices mean that the risk of capital loss is very high.

The Fed’s debt monetization, or a drop in the exchange value of the dollar as other countries move away from its use to settle their balance of payments, could set off inflation that would take interest rates out of the Fed’s control. As interest rates rise, bond prices fall.

In other words, bonds are now the bubble that real estate, stocks, and derivatives were. When this bubble pops, Americans will take another big hit to their remaining wealth.

It makes no sense to invest in long-term bonds at negative interest rates when the federal government is piling up debt that the Federal Reserve is monetizing and when other countries are moving away from the flood of dollars. The potential for a rising rate of inflation is high from debt monetization and from a drop in the dollar’s exchange value. Yet, bond fund portfolio managers have to follow the herd into longer term maturities or see their performance relative to their peers drop to the bottom of the rankings.

Some individual investors and foreign central banks, anticipating the dollar’s loss of value, are accumulating gold and silver bullion. Realizing the danger to the dollar and its policy from the rapid rise in the price of bullion during 2011, the Federal Reserve has arranged offsetting action. When the demand for physical bullion drives up the price, short sales of bullion in the paper market are used to drive the price back down. Similarly, when investors begin to flee Treasuries, thus causing interest rates to rise, J.P. Morgan and other dependencies of the Federal Reserve sell interest-rate swaps, thus offsetting the effect on interest rates of the bond sales. (Keep in mind that interest rates rise when bond prices fall and vice versa.)

The point of all this information is to establish that except for the 1 percent, the incomes and wealth of Americans are being cut back across the board. From 2002 through 2011 the economy lost 3.5 million manufacturing jobs. These jobs were replaced with lowerpaying waitress and bartender jobs (1,189,000), ambulatory health care service jobs (1,512,000) and social assistance jobs (578,000).

These replacement jobs in domestic services mean that on a net basis US consumer income was moved out of the country. Potential aggregate demand in the US dropped by the differences in pay in the job categories. Clearly and unambiguously, jobs offshoring lowered US disposable income and US GDP and, thereby, employment.

Despite the lack of an economic base, Washington’s hegemonic aspirations continue unabated. Other countries are amused at Washington’s unawareness. Russia, China, India, Brazil, and South Africa are forming an agreement to abandon the US dollar as the currency for international settlement between themselves.

On July 4 the China Daily reported: “Japanese politicians and prominent academics from China and Japan urged Tokyo on Tuesday to abandon its outdated foreign policy of leaning on the West and accept China as a key partner as important as the United States. The Tokyo Consensus, a joint statement issued at the end of the Beijing-Tokyo Forum, also called on both countries to expand trade and promote a free-trade agreement for China, Japan and South Korea. “

This means that Japan is in play.

The Chinese government, more intelligent than Washington, is responding to Washington’s military threats by enticing away Washington’s two key Asian allies. As the Chinese economy is now as large as the US and on far firmer footing, and as Japan now has more trade with China than with the US, the enticement is appealing.

Moreover, China is next door, and Washington is distant and drowning in its hubris. Washington, which flicked its middle finger to international law and to its own law and Constitution with its arrogance and gratuitous and illegal wars and with its assertion of the right to murder its own citizens and those of its allies, such as Pakistan, has made the United States a pariah state.

Washington still controls its bought-and-paid-for NATO puppets, but these puppet states are overwhelmed with derivative debt problems brought to them by Wall Street and by sovereign debt problems, some of which were covered up by Wall Street’s Goldman Sachs.

Europe is on the ropes and has no money with which to subsidize Washington’s wars of hegemony.

Washington is becoming an isolated and despised element of the world community. Washington has purchased Europe, Canada, Australia, the former Soviet state of Georgia (and almost Ukraine), and Columbia, and continues its effort to purchase the entire world, but sentiment is turning against the rising Gestapo state that has shown itself to be lawless, ruthless, and indifferent, even hostile, to human life and human rights.

A government, whose military was unable with the help of the UK to occupy Iraq after eight years and was forced to end the conflict by putting the “insurgents” on the US military payroll and to pay them to stop killing American troops, and a government whose military has been unable to subdue a few thousand lightly armed Taliban after 11 years, is over the top when it organizes war against Iran, Russia, and China.

The only prospect Washington has of prevailing in such an undertaking is first use of nuclear weapons, of catching its demonized opponents off guard by nuking them out of the blue. In other words, by the elimination of life on earth.

Is this Washington’s program revealed by the neoconservative warmonger, Bill Kristol, who had no shame to ask publicly: “What’s the good of nuclear weapons if you can’t use them?

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

How the New American Empire Really Works

Why the Wars Will Not End
by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Great empires, such as the Roman and British, were extractive. The empires succeeded, because the value of the resources and wealth extracted from conquered lands exceeded the value of conquest and governance. The reason Rome did not extend its empire east into Germany was not the military prowess of Germanic tribes but Rome’s calculation that the cost of conquest exceeded the value of extractable resources.

The Roman empire failed, because Romans exhausted manpower and resources in civil wars fighting amongst themselves for power. The British empire failed, because the British exhausted themselves fighting Germany in two world wars.

In his book, The Rule of Empires (2010), Timothy H. Parsons replaces the myth of the civilizing empire with the truth of the extractive empire. He describes the successes of the Romans, the Umayyad Caliphate, the Spanish in Peru, Napoleon in Italy, and the British in India and Kenya in extracting resources.

Parsons does not examine the American empire, but in his introduction to the book he wonders whether America’s empire is really an empire as the Americans don’t seem to get any extractive benefits from it. After eight years of war and attempted occupation of Iraq, all Washington has for its efforts is several trillion dollars of additional debt and no Iraqi oil. After ten years of trillion dollar struggle against the Taliban in Afghanistan, Washington has nothing to show for it except possibly some part of the drug trade that can be used to fund covert CIA operations.
America’s wars are very expensive. Bush and Obama have doubled the national debt, and the American people have no benefits from it. No riches, no bread and circuses flow to Americans from Washington’s wars. So what is it all about?

The answer is that Washington’s empire extracts resources from the American people for the benefit of the few powerful interest groups that rule America. The corporate military-industrial-security complex, Wall Street, agri-business and the Israel Lobby use the government to extract resources from Americans to serve their profits and power. The US Constitution has been extracted in the interests of the Security State, and Americans’ incomes have been redirected to the pockets of the 1 percent. That is how the American Empire functions.

The New Empire is different. It happens without achieving conquest. The American military did not conquer Iraq and has been forced out politically by the government that Washington established. There is no victory in Afghanistan, and after a decade the American military does not control the country.

In the New Empire success at war no longer matters. The extraction takes place by being at war. Huge sums of American taxpayers’ money have flowed into the American armaments industries and huge amounts of power into Homeland Security. The American empire works by stripping Americans of wealth and liberty.

This is why the wars cannot end, or if one does end another starts. Remember when Obama came into office and was asked what the US mission was in Afghanistan? He replied that he did not know what the mission was and that the mission needed to be defined.

Obama never defined the mission. He renewed the Afghan war without telling us its purpose. Obama cannot tell Americans that the purpose of the war is to build the power and profit of the military/security complex at the expense of American citizens.

This truth doesn’t mean that the objects of American military aggression have escaped without cost. Large numbers of Muslims have been bombed and murdered and their economies and infrastructure ruined, but not in order to extract resources from them.

It is ironic that under the New Empire the citizens of the empire are extracted of their wealth and liberty in order to extract lives from the targeted foreign populations. Just like the bombed and murdered Muslims, the American people are victims of the American empire.

Monday, September 20, 2010

$200 Trillion: US Govt 'hiding true amount of debt'

By Gregory Bresiger From: NewsCore September 20, 2010

THE actual figure of the US' national debt is much higher than the official sum of $13.4 trillion given by the Congressional Budget Office, according to analysts cited on Sunday by the New York Post.

"The Government is lying about the amount of debt. It is engaging in Enron accounting," said Laurence Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University and co-author of The Coming Generational Storm: What You Need to Know about America's Economic Future.

"The problem is we're seeing an explosion in spending," added Andrew Moylan, director of government affairs for the National Taxpayers Union.

In 1980, the debt - the accumulated red ink incurred by the Federal Government - was $909 billion.

This represented some 33 per cent of gross domestic product, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Thirty years later, based on this year's second-quarter numbers, the CBO said the debt was $13.4 trillion, or 92 per cent of GDP.

The CBO estimates the debt will be at $16.5 trillion in two years, or 100.6 per cent of GDP.
But these numbers are incomplete.

They do not count off-budget obligations such as required spending for Social Security and Medicare, whose programs represent a balloon payment for the Government as more Americans retire and collect benefits.

In the case of Social Security, beginning in 2016, the US Government will be paying out more than it is collecting in taxes.

Without basic measures - such as payment cuts or higher payroll taxes - the system could be on the road to bankruptcy, according to officials.

"Without changes," wrote Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue, "by 2037 the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted. There will be enough money only to pay about $0.76 for each dollar of benefits."

Mr Kotlikoff and Mr Moylan agree US national debt is much more than the official $US13.4 trillion number, but they disagree over how to add up the exact number.

Mr Kotlikoff says the debt is actually $200 trillion.

Mr Moylan says the number is likely about $60 trillion.

That is close to the figure quoted by David Walker, the US Comptroller General from 1998 to 2008.

He launched a campaign to convince Americans that the federal spending and debt is a greater threat than terrorism.

But whichever figure is accurate, all three agree that the problem has worsened in the last few years.

They say it is because Congress and the Administration, whether Republican or Democrat, consistently overspend.

Sunday, August 22, 2010

Corporate CEOs Dance the Economic Catch-22 Boogie

By karoli Saturday Aug 21, 2010

Economics 101: Healthy economies include low unemployment rates. Low unemployment rates mean consumers are consuming/buying goods. Consumers buying goods stimulates the economy, creates growth.

Economics 101 corollary: Sluggish economies include high unemployment rates, tight credit. In sluggish economies, consumers buy less, pay down debt, and the economy remains sluggish.

Until the unemployment rates drop, at which time more consumers have more money with which to consume.

Makes sense, right? Well, yes, until you read this Washington Post article where they interview corporate CEOs about why it might be that they're sitting on piles of cash and not hiring. Then it just gets really, really weird.

According to these CEOs, it's not really the national debt, the deficit or a need for more stimulus that's keeping them from hiring and allowing them to hoard cash. No, it's the consumer, who sparks a big no-confidence vote in them.

They blame their profound caution on their view that U.S. consumers are destined to disappoint for many years. As a result, they say, the economy is unlikely to see the kind of almost unbroken prosperity of the quarter-century that preceded the financial crisis.

They really don't address the question of why they're hoarding trillions in cash instead of reinvesting in their business or {gasp} hiring again. They have some vague objections to legislation that's passed in this Congress, but nothing specific.

But when Speer and other executives were pressed on the role that tax and regulatory policies play in hiring, they drew only vague connections. Speer said his decision whether to hire is driven primarily by demand for his products. Orders are coming in strong enough that he is running about 20 hours a week of overtime. So he is weighing whether to hire two or three additional manufacturing workers.

None of the executives interviewed linked a specific new government initiative with a specific decision to refrain from hiring.

What we have here is the corporate Catch-22 boogie. We know it and they know it. We, the consumers, cannot and will not be spending anything until we're employed again. They the businesses, can, but will not, hire until we spend again. They would prefer to pay existing employees overtime than to hire new employees to fill the ranks of the employed.

I don't buy it. It sounds like the kind of political gobbledegook that gets spit out when the answer is right there in front of everyone like a pink elephant in a tutu. These guys are holding out for a Congress that they believe will give them the tax breaks and regulatory relief they expect and have been used to receiving in the past.

I called it a Catch-22, but really, it's a siege. They are mounting a siege against the middle class in this country -- their own customers, by the way -- in order to get leverage and the right to rewrite rules, including union contracts and pay rates that are below those of the past.

This is why small businesses really do need Congress' intervention. If they can get credit, they'll hire and we'll get some creative new industries going instead of just caving into the fat cats with trillions waiting to be sent off to Haley Barbour or some other teabag organization to defeat progress.