Showing posts with label economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economics. Show all posts

Monday, December 21, 2015

The economy is not a Zero Sum Game, part 2

This is what they teach our kids in school.
This is the stuff Common Core Teaches.
This is why parents must be in control
of what our kids learn.
We must explain to them that,
the economy is not a Zero Sum Game:
that they can get rich too. 
So, as I wrote last week, the economy is not a zero sum game.  Still, progressives believe that it is. They teach that if one one person makes a dollar another person loses a dollar.  This is why they believe in taking from the greedy rich, or the top 1%, and redistributing it. This is why progressive programs are set up to punish those who achieve, even turn them into villains.

Yet it's not just rich individuals they despise, but rich nations as well.  They hate the United States because it has become a rich and prosperous nation at the expense of every other nation of the world.  This is why they aim to punish the rich United States, to bring it down to size.

It goes beyond just money. They believe if the United States is using up all the oil, that there is none left for anyone else. They believe we are taking advantage of poor nations to get rich.

Yet they are mistaken. There is enough money to go around for everyone. Likewise, there is enough oil to go around for everyone. At least, it's available to anyone who has a desire to obtain it. It's there for anyone who knows how to get it.

Look, poor nations are poor not because the U.S. is rich: they are poor because of the government they created. If they want to become rich like the United States, then they need to create a democracy, or a republic.  They need to create a capitalistic society.  They need to create a system whereby people with an idea and the desire and are willing to take risks can go with it and prosper; move up the ladder, so to speak; to get rich.

The Bible teaches capitalism. Most poor nations are not God fearing. That's why Muslim nations tend to be totolitarian and not capitalistic. That's why Muslim nations are poor. They do not preach the Bible. They do not preach conservatism.  They do not preach capitalism.  They believe that rich people are evil and should be punished.  They, like liberals, want everyone to be equally poor.

That's not our fault. That's not the fault of the United States.

Progressives believe in a Zero Sum Game.  Obama believes in a Zero Sum Economy.  Obama thinks of everything in terms of Zero Sum.  He believes if the United States has nukes then everyone else should have them, because if we have them no one else can.  If we have them it's unfair to other nations.  That's why he made the deal with Iran allowing them to get nukes.  That's also why they want to take them away from Israel, because they give Israel an unfair advantage over Muslim nations that surround them.

This is why he wants to bring down our military, and the military of Israel, and destroy our nuclear weapons.  He wants to make us equal to nations like Iran; to equal the playing field because it's not fair if we have them and they don't.  This is

Obama is an anti colonialist. This is the same reason Iraq can have nukes and America can't. They think that if America has nuclear weapons, if Israel has nukes, and other nations don't, then America, and Israel, have an unfair advantage.  That's because of the Zero Sum Economy that they believe in. This is what they were taught.  This is what their schools teach our kids.

This is why it is so hard today to push forward with our conservative agenda. This is why the constant attacks on capitalism. This is why the constant attacks on the U.S. military. This is why he does not properly fund the military.  This is why Clinton closed military bases.  

This is why they complained when Reagan spent all that money to build up our military.  That's why they hate the idea of Trumps that he wants to likewise spend money on the military to "make America so powerful that no one will mess with us."  They believe if money is spend on the military that it will not be available for hard working Americans.  And they are wrong.

Look, the liberal solution is to come up with ways to take money from America. This is why they try to get us involved in agreements whereby we have to spend money to fight and prevent global warming.  They use this as an excuse to punish America; to get our money; to redistribute it to poor nations.  They want to take our nukes and our oil too. 

They attack individualism.  They believe it is your job as an individual to make sacrifices for the good of the state, or the collective.  They want to take any money that they decide you don't need and give it to others. They don't want you to invest money in things they decide you don't need.  They think if you are investing in this stuff, you are taking money from other people.  

What they don't see, however, is that you are spending money on that stuff, you are circulating it into the economy.  You are funding other people.  You are not just giving it to Walmart, you are giving it to the distributors, the manufacturers, and also all the people who work for those companies.  You are helping to fund their livelihood as well.

Bottom line, progressives believe in a Zero Sum Economy, and they are wrong.  They believe America is the cause of the worlds problems because of American Exceptionalism, Individualism, and Capitalism.  So they believe the solution to the worlds problems is to take away America's oil supply, take away America's nuclear supply, and and take away our money supply.  They do this by forcing us to agree to regulations that force us to make loans to foreign nations that we took advantage of.

This is the mentality of the people who are teaching our kids. This is the mentality of many members of the media.  This is why we must constantly remind our kids of the truth.  And in this case, the truth is that the economy is not a Zero Sum Game.  If you succeed, others can succeed too.  If America succeeds, other nations can succeed too. 

Monday, December 14, 2015

The economy is not a Zero Sum Game

A zero Sum Game is a situation where one person's gain is another person's loss.  Poker is a good example of this, considering the sum total of the winnings of one player equals the losses of all the other players.  It's any game, according to Dictionary.com, where the winnings minus the losses always equals zero.  Many people believe that the economy is a Zero Sum Game. This is a myth, and I would like to explain why.

Many people think the economy is a Zero Sum Game.  They believe if you have a rich person like Donald Trump, that every dollar he makes is a dollar taken away from someone else, or a dollar that is not available to someone else.  They believe that the rich do not need to spend their money, so it just sits in savings,and investments.  They have it invested in their million dollar houses and their boats.  It is not available for anyone else.

They believe if one person, or group of people (the rich, the 1%) has the money, if one person is hoarding it, that there's no money left for those who are looking for jobs; that there's no money to be distributed. They believe is the top 1% have 40% of all the wealth, that the rest of the population has to fight over the remaining 60%.

It is for this reason that progressives, liberals, socialists or fascists justify taking from the rich and giving to the poor, or redistributing wealth.  They do it to equal the playing field. They do it to give the poor an equal opportunity to have some of the money that the rich otherwise are hoarding.  This is why they constantly attack the rich as greedy and selfish.

The truth is, however, that the economy is not a zero sum game.  In order for the rich to enjoy their money, they have to constantly spend this money.  They have large houses, and so they must hire people, often at higher wages, to clean and maintain these houses.  They have airplanes, and they have to hire people to maintain them. So they are providing jobs for many people. They are creating work.

They are also constantly cycling money into the economy.  They are spending money on fuel to heat their homes, businesses, and planes.  They buy food.  They buy wedding rings.  They buy furniture.  They buy electronics, such as televisions and iphones.

Their money is not sitting in a lock box.  It is constantly being circulated in the economy.  This money is available to anyone who has a service, or a talent, that can be tapped into. This money is not distributed. If you want some of it, you have to earn it.  How much money you make is completely up to you.  If you work hard, if you are willing to relocate, if you have a talent, then you will make as much money as you want.

A good example here is the CEO of a hospital.  He makes triple digits.  I hear people complaining about this all the time.  They say things like, "It's not fair.  I make so little, and they make so much."  But it is fair, if you think about it.

One of my coworkers, I'll call him Dave, was a nurse.  While other nurses were content to just be nurses, and live on nurses wages, Dave was ambitious.  He went back to school.  He obtained a bachelor's degree in nursing.  Instead of stopping there, he went on to become a physician's assistant (PA). The next time I saw him he was a PA for a surgeon.

He didn't stop there.  He applied for and obtained a job as supervisor of surgery.  Then he applied for and obtained a job as vice president of the hospital.  He could have stopped there, but he didn't.  He applied for CEO of another hospital, and he got that job.  He was ambitious, he was willing to relocate.  Most people are not willing to do this. So it only makes sense that Dave should be rewarded.  He had a talent, mainly ambition, that should be rewarded.  He now makes triple digits.

You see, there is money available, and plenty of it.  If economics were a Zero Sum Game, people like Dave wouldn't be able to tap into the system.  They might as well just remain as nurses or respiratory therapists. But it is not a Zero Sum Game.  If you want to be like Dave, if you want to make more money, you have to have the talent, the desire, the ambition, of Dave.

You also have to be willing to take risks.  Dave took lots of risks.  He spend thousands of dollars to become educated, and the gamble was that this would pay off.  For Dave it did pay off.  Dave is now in the top 1%. Dave is now the envy of the poor.  Dave, and Donald Trump, and people like them, ought to be put up on a pedestal as examples of what can happen in America. They are examples of the American Dream.

This is what conservatives do.  This is what capitalism does.  Sure some people who take the risk, some with talent, will fall flat on their faces.  This is the risk. But many others will become the Donald Trumps and the Daves of the world.  The opportunity is there, you just have to tap into it.  The money is there, you just have to tap into it.

Liberals, however, and progressives, and socialists, and communists, and fascists believe, and falsely so, the economy is a zero sum game.  By teaching this, people develop an "it's not fair" attitude toward the rich, or toward those who achieve.  They think there is no money available, so they might as not even try to obtain it. So they become content to just be nurses and respiratory therapists. Some don't even try to get those jobs, and they sit around their homes waiting for a check to come from the government through government redistribution of wealth policies.

Look, I'm not mocking nurses and respiratory therapists or any other hard working American.  All those jobs are essential for the economic prosperity of the nation.  After all, I am a respiratory therapist.  I am not content with my job nor the money that I make, but I also don't have the ambition of Dave.  I also do not have the desire to sacrifice many years of schooling.  I am also not a risk taker. So it is my own fault that I am where I am in life.  And I am content with my lot in life.

Regardless, for those who want to tap into it, the money is available.  The economy is not a Zero Sum Game.

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Barack Obama: The dismal statistics

Some people claim Obama was the worst president in U.S. history.  Here is a collection of statistics (and related information) from various sources during the Obama administration to confirm this claim (along with links to their sources).
  1. Wages down 23% since 2008
  2. Obama on track to surpass Obama outings
  3. Record $2.6 trillion tax revenues
  4. Government runs 460 billion deficit that our children will have to pay for.
  5. Total debt rises to $18 trillion; up 70% under Obama. Our children will have to pay for this too.
  6. Feds take record $341,591,000,000 in tax revenue and spend most of it on entitlement programs for the me generation. We used to be concerned about us, and we are now concerned about me, me, me, me, me. "What will the government do for me? What free stuff will I get next? What bathroom should I get to use? 
  7. 51 million immigrants in 8 years; 82% of U.S. population growth. We don't know where most of them are, and when they are caught Obama's policy is to let them go. No background checks, means some of them may be criminals and terrorists. They do not make any pledge to assimilate, and this was why immigration was shut down from the Coolidge through the Johnson administration. If we don't do something we will lose our sovereignty like Europe has. 
  8. Record 20% of American Households on Food stamps in 2013. This might help explain how the 94 million working age Americans who are no longer looking for work are eating. 
  9. Loss of full time jobs in favor of part time jobs, and claiming net job gains. This is a direct result of Obamacare, which forces companies to pay a fine if they have more than 50 employers and don't offer them free health insurance. Part time work counts as full time work in Obama's economic numbers. For instance, Obama reported 160,000 jobs created in June of 2013. However, if you look closer at the numbers. 162,000 full time jobs were lost that month, and 322,000 part time jobs were created. You see, they give you the numbers, but don't tell you what they mean, so people just assume things are getting better when they are indeed not. 
  10. Median household income in 2013 was $51,900, according to recent reports from the US Census Bureau, 8% lower than before the recession began in 2007.  So, 2008, the last year of Bush and all of Obama's administration. Median household income has fallen about 8%.
  11. Economy slows to halt in first quarter of 2015: Grows at measly 0.2%
  12. 1 in 5 elderly dies broke
  13. 1 in 5 Americans on Welfare. Again, this is what the 94 million no longer in the workforce are using to support themselves and their family. They are sitting around watching game shows while the rest of us pay for it. This is another example of the me generation.
  14. Home ownership suffers 20 year low; blacks suffer most
  15. $2,446,920,000,000: Federal Taxes Set Record Through June... while only 50% pay taxes
  16. $16,451 in taxes per U.S. worker
  17. Under Obama, the U.S. has a post-Depression era record high number of citizens living at or beneath the federally-defined poverty line
  18. Under Obama, the U.S. has a record high number on the federal welfare foodstamps/SNAP program
  19. Under Obama, the U.S. has a record low workforce participation number. It has been around 94 million.
  20. Six-and–half years into the Obama presidency the economy has set yet another new statistical low.
  21. 46.7 million in poverty
  22. Immigration population hits 42.4 million -- record high; most are not immigrants, they are invaders (those who cross the border illegally are not immigrants, they are invaders). 
  23. Record 94,610,000 not in workforce; labor force participation rate lowest since 1977, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
  24. 56,646,000 women no longer in workforce
  25. 63.2 million non-English speaking residents, a record number. You see, they are not assimilating. They are not becoming Americans. We are losing our sovereignty. 
  26. We've run up close to eight trillion additional national debt dollars since 2008, since Obama was inaugurated, and there hasn't been any concern for it expressed in the Media. Actually, when Obama took office the debt was $10 trillion. It is now (as of June, 2016) up to $10 trillion. Despite this, he brags how he brought down the national debt and reduced spending. 
  27. 17% of jobs now held by immigrants. This causes a spike in the number of workers and drives down wages. Due to low wages Americans can't afford to take these jobs, even if they need work. 
  28. 94,103,000 not in labor force. That's 27% of Americans not working. That's a 27% unemployment rate. But it's reported as 5.5%. Go figure. That 27% doesn't even include the 5.5% who are not working and still looking. So, when you total the two, you get close to a 40% unemployment rate. That's pretty bad, considering 24% was considered bad in 1930. Since these folks are on food stamps, are on welfare, and living in comfortable homes, you don't see them in long food lines like you did in 1930. So, for this reason, we get no public outcry. Even with these poor economic statistics, Obama continues to claim the economy is improving. When you look at the actual numbers, we are in an economic depression worse than the Great Depression. We are in a Great Depression. 
  29. Over 43 million Americans living in poverty, which is up over 8 million since Obama became president, according to Census Bureau.
  30. 43 million Americans on food stamps, which is 12 million more since Obama took office, according to USDA. This is one explanation for not seeing soup lines.
  31. 1 in 5 families do not have a single person in the workforce, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics.
  32. 1 in 6 men between the ages 38-34, prime working years, are either incarcerated or out of the labor force. They are either in jail incarcerated or living with their parents. This is according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics
  33. The death rate from drug overdose more than doubled from 1999 to 2013. This is typical of a depression. When they don't work they lose their self-esteem and feeling of self-worth. Suicide rates are typically higher in a depression. Yet the White House continues to talk about the economy as though it's getting better.
  34. 58% of Americans feel like strangers in their own country. This isn't all Obama's doing, although he has made the problem worse by refusing to build the wall that was already approved by Congress under the Bush Administration. He has also made it easier to enter our country illegally. He also refused to enforce immigration laws on the books, which would easily solve this problem. Of course his amnesty program encourages more to come in too. 
  35. First president not to see a single year of 3% economic (GDP) growth. This makes Obama the forth worst on record. This is sad, because "The rate of real economic growth is the single greatest determinate of both America’s strength as a nation and the well-being of the American people."
  36. Home ownership falls to third lowest on record. It's amazing how the economy is doing so great yet people can't afford to buy homes. 
  37. By the end of his two terms, home ownership was the lowest it had been in the past 51 years, according to the Census Bureau
  38. Despite the Feds collecting a new record of $2,139,254,000,000 in taxes, deficit, the debt is $407,099,000,000
  39. The number of U.S. police officers shot deat increases 78% in first half of 2016 alone. 
  40. Second quarter of 2016: Economy grows at a measly 1.2%
  41. Recovery weakest in post WWII era, or weakest recovery since 1949. The real gross domestic product growth averaging 2.1%. At 7 1/2 years and counting, it is also among the longest on record. But it hasn’t packed much of a punch. Cumulative growth of 16.5% since the trough is well shy of the 38.4% increase during the 1982-1990 expansion and 42.6% from 1991-2001, according to the Wall Street Journal.
  42. U.S. Debt up 122% under Obama
  43. 700 inmates have been released from Gitmo -- more than 200 have returned to the fight
  44. Crime increased 10% in 2015, and violent crime increased almost 4%. It's true crime rates have been higher other years, yet this is spike was the result of beurocrats preventing police officers from doing their jobs. It's also the result of an economy that is not as good as Obama says it is. During recessions and depressions, crime rates tend to rise. 
  45. 66% of kids 15-29 living with parents. That's up 6% between 2007 and 2014. 
  46. By the time he leaves office, the United States will have acquired more debt than all 43 presidents before him combined
  47. His Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and he ignored 600 separate requests for added security at the embassy in Benghazi, and all of them were ignored. This resulted in four Americans being killed in an act of terror. 
  48. Not necessarily a stat, although he told Americans they would save $2,100 per year under Obamacare, but the complete opposite happened: millions of people lost their doctors, millions lost their healthcare plans, Obamacare premiums surged by double digits. On average, since Obamacare went into place, there has been a $4,100 increase per family. 
  49. He signed the Iranian Nuclear Deal. This gave the world's #1 state sponsor of terror $150 billion and the ability to spin their nuclear centrifuges. 
  50. He let people from countries who do not support our values, and who did not pledge to support our values, into our country. He let people from nations who do not support women's rights and gay rights. They also don't respect other Faiths, especially Jews and Christians. 
  51. African Americans under Obama saw 58% increase in food stamps, according to USDA.
  52. African Americans under Obama saw an 18% increase among those not in the workforce, according to Bureau of Labor and Statistics. 
  53. In 2016, from January to November, Chicago saw 3,817 African Americans have been shot, according to the Chicago Tribune
  54. Since 2009, since Obama has been President, 3,656 people have been murdered in Chicago, and 75% of those victims were African American, according to the Chicago Police Department.
  55. Our educational system is failing, especially in inner cities
  56. High school graduation rates are 9% lower than the national average, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.
  57. High school dropout rate for African Americans in 2014 was 7.4%, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. This is higher than the national average. 
  58. As of November, 2011, the U.S. is ranked 4th in the world among developed countries, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 
  59. The U.S. is ranked 4th in the world on per pupil spending, and that comes to $11,600 per student. Despite this, the U.S. is ranking among developed countries is 17th in reading, 19th in science, and 26th in math, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. 
  60. During the 8 year presidency of Obama, the democrats saw the number of democrat members of the U.S. Senate declined by 10.2%, democrat members of the U.S. House of Representative declined by 19.3%, democrat members of state legislatures declined by 20.3%, and democrat governorships declined by 35.7%. This shows a complete rejection of the democratic party agenda as a result of the Unconstitutional agenda of Barack Obama. This is according to the Washington Post
  61. In fact, after the election of 2016, democrats were only left with control of the Governorship and State House in only four states, or five states if you include Connecticut where there is a tie and the tiebreaker goes to democrats (compared to 25 for republicans). The four states are California, Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Oregon. In this way, democrats now hold the fewest number of state legislatures in history (republicans hold 4,170 seats and democrats hold 3,129). 
  62. Worded another way, since 2008, democrats have lost 11 seats in the Senate, 60 seats in the House of Representatives, 14 governorships (in only 5 of 50 states do democrats have control of the governorship and the state House). Democrats have lost 900 state legislative seats across the country. They have also lost mayor's offices and city councils.  Compare this with republicans, who have 33 state Governors and full control of the governorship and state legislature in 25 states.
  63. Or, worded yet another way, during Obama's tenure, and despite his popularity, democrats lost over 1,000 seats. This includes the presidency, including a loss in U.S. Senate seats from 55 to 46, a loss in the House of Representatives from 256 to 194, a loss of governorships from 28 to 16, and a loss of 958 state legislative seats. The net loss was a total of 1,042 state and federal democratic seats. 
  64. To add to this, Republicans today hold 31 out of 45 lieutenant governor offices, they hold 31 of 50 Secretary of State offices, and they currently remain at 69 of 99 legislative chamber majorities – an all time record for the party. GOP control of 69/99 of the state legislatures (Nebraska’s is unicameral) is an all-time high, Beginning in 2017, republicans will have thoe most state-elected lawmakers in office since 1920.
  65. In 2008, Rush Limbaugh said, "I hope he fails." He was referring to Obama's policies. Obama succeeded, and that's why he was completely repudiated in 2016. 
  66. Life expectancy drops for first time in a decade, particularly among citizens less than 65 years old. This is an indicator of the overall well-being of a nation, so this is not good. This could also be an indicator of the rise in suicides, which usually goes up during depressions. The death rate tends to rise when the people see that there is little hope that things will improve. So, this is yet another indicator of the failed policies of Barack Hussein Obama.
  67. According to The Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Federal Register now exceeds 75,000 pages with over 90,000 regulations and from 2016 alone. In fact, on one day in November 2016, Obama handed down a whopping 527 pages of regulations, which made his total number of regulations the most of any U.S. President. In 2010, he created 81,405 pages. This was the old record, which has now been exceeded by a whopping 235 pages.  They are made on the premise that they will make people safer, although the true purpose of most of them is to make a few lobbyists and corporate interests richer and the American people poorer. 
  68. Americans businesses have paid over $873.6 billion in regulations. This has paid a significant tole on the economy. When potential employers have to pay these regulations, they have to do so at the expense of creating jobs. Many do not even open their doors because of the high burden of regulations. There was also $344 billion in EPA regulations alone. In total, Obama has created over 2,988 new regulations. 
  69. He failed to gain control of wage stagnation. People like your author here went four of Obama's year's in office without getting a raise, and his pay is now $4 below the market average for a respiratory therapist. 
  70. Democratic voter turnout dropped in 2010, 2012 and significantly in 2014
  71. Despite unemployment being at 4.7%, the number of working age people who have given up for work and are no longer considered unemployed is a record 95,102,000. This is up 18% since Obama took office in 2009. This is your proof that his economy is failing people. To all those who are not working, it is called a depression.
  72. Obama may have broken racial barriers when he became the first African-American president of the U.S., but his election did nothing to improve race relations. In fact, a majority of Americans (54%) say that race relations deteriorated under Obama, according to a recent CNN/ORC poll.
  73. He has refused to use the term "Radical Islamic Terrorism." There have been many random acts of terror on U.S. since Obama took office in 2009, although he continues to say there have been none. He has been naïve to terrorism. If we don't call it what it is, the problem will never be resolved. He calls terrorism things like "workplace violence." And, rather than going after the organizations responsible for their radicalization (such as ISIS), he has chosen to champion for stricter gun laws for law abiding citizens. So, basically we get punished because of the actions of a few nut cases.
  74. Trade deficit climbs to 6.8% in November, 2016
  75. Obama gave his final speech on January 11, 2017. He claimed the economy is good, and that race relations have improved. However, according to a Washington Post poll, 65% of Americans believe race relations have gotten worse. That's up from 48% in the spring 2016
  76. So, Obama gave his final speech on January 11. He claimed the economy has improved. He did not mention any of the above dismal statistics. He did not mention that we are experiencing the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years, He did not mention over 11 million Americans are on foodstamps since he became President (which explains why the 94 million no longer in the workforce are making a living, and why they quit looking for work). 
  77. In his farewell speech, Obama did not mention that over 43 million Americans now live in poverty, nor that 1 in 5 American families do not have at least one person in the labor force. He did not mention that 1 in 6 men (18-34) are either incarcerated or out of the workforce. He did not mention that he accumulated more debt than all other presidents combined (over $20 trillion). He amassed $9.3 trillion in debt over 8 years. While Obama brags about how many jobs he has created, America has lost over 301,000 manufacturing jobs, In 2016, America had a global trade deficit of over $732 billion. 
  78. Obama said you can keep your doctor. He said if you like your insurance you can keep it. Obamacare did the exact opposite. Millions of people lost their doctors and lost their health insurance, and were forced to pay more for Obamacare. In 2017, Obamacare costs are increasing by 25% on average. 
  79. Obama said average American family would save $2,500 a year. The exact opposite happened. In 2008, the average healthcare cost for families was $12,680. In 2016 it was $18,142. This was an increase of 42%. Deductibles are so high for most families they can't even use their plans. 
  80. The number of healthcare providers are evaporating. Many people buying on the exchanges have just a single doctor to choose from. 
  81. Many insurers are pulling out of the Obamacare exchanges because they are losing money. So not only are there fewer doctors to choose from, there are fewer insurance agencies to choose from. This was actually the intent when Obamacare was created. Obama wanted this to happen so people would crawl to government asking for it to bail them out. If Hillary would have been elected, this would have been an ideal time to transfer Obamacare over to the universal healthcare system Obama has wanted all along. 
  82. He gave Iran, the world's #1 sponsor of terror $150 billion. Lord knows what they are going to do with this money. 
  83. The CDC reported that 33,091 deaths resulted from opioid overdoses in 2015
  84. The $9,334,590,089,609.44 that the debt increased under Obama as of the close of business on Wednesday (January 20, 2017) is more debt than was accumulated by any previous president. It equals nearly twice as much as the $4,889,1000,310609.44 in additional debt that piled during the eight years George W. Bush served as President. This equates to approximately $75, 129 for every person in the U.S. who had a full time job in December (of 2016).
  85. After Obamacare was passed in 2010 by a straight-line democratic vote, the 2012 mid-term election saw 23 of those legislators lose their seats. 

Thursday, October 15, 2015

Economy worse today than Great Depression

There is a neat article at Zero Hedge blog called "Why this feels like a depression for most people" by Jim Quinn from the Burning Platform Blog.  He said that even though there are no soup lines, the statistics confirm that we are presently living through economic hardships that are far worse than the Great Depression.

Surely we must consider there were fewer people in the U.S. during the great depression, but these statistics are overwhelming regardless.  Consider.
  • There were 12.8 million Americans unemployed during the Great Depression. These were the men pictured in those soup lines. This is estimated, because the Department of Labor did not keep official unemployment numbers until 1940. That comes to 24.9% of the Labor Force. 
  • Today, there are 46 million Americans unemployed. This is the U3 number that is reported, which comes to 5.1% of the Labor Force.  It does not include the people who have stopped looking for work, so it actually makes the economy look better than it really is.
  • Today, there are 94 million people not working or not participating in the Labor Force, this is the highest this number has been (or the lowest labor force participation rate) since 1977. This is the U6 unemployment number, which comes to about 14%. It includes all the working age people who are currently not working.  
  • Those 94 million not looking for work are not starving; they have become official dependents of the government
  • 94 million not looking for work, 8 million officially called unemployed, equals 40% of the population not working. 
  • Sixty-two percent of the labor force is working; 38% not working
  • Today, there are 123 million households in America and 23 million of them are on food stamps. Therefore 19% of all households in America require food stamp assistance to survive. So food stamps have replaced soup lines, so they are not seen.  We do not see hungry people in the U.S. today, so we do not know how bad the economy really is. 
  • In 1933, there were approximately 126 million Americans living in 30 million households.  
  • In 1933 there were no food stamps
  • In 1933 there was no welfare
  • In 1933 if you did not work you didn't eat
  • In 1933 there was no incentive to stay at home and collect welfare, because if you didn't work you didn't eat.  You see, people did not give up looking for work, because they needed to feed themselves and their families.  
  • In 1933 people didn't become dependents of the state
  • In 2015, greater than 109,631,000 live in households receiving federal welfare benefits, according to the Census Bureau. That equals 35.4 percent of all 309,467,000 people living in the U.S.
  • In 1933, you had to work, you had to walk to and stand in, soup lines to receive charity
  • In 2015, you can be among the 94 million not working and have a roof over your head, have a cell phone, a car, your home is probably air-conditioned, and you're eating as much as you want.
  • Daily Caller: "Fifty-one percent of working Americans make less than $30,000 a year." This data from the Social Security Administration. That's $2,500 a month before taxes. That is just above the federal poverty level for a family of five. "The new numbers come from the National Wage Index, which SSA updates each year based on reported wages subject to the federal income tax." So half the folks who are working don't have any disposable income, and therefore are unable to propel the economy.
Then you can add the following, and it gets even worse.
  • Open borders so anyone can get in, legal or not
  • Our borders are flooded with low skilled, low educated people who cannot command any kind of a decent wage because they're not qualified, and most qualify for entitlements that we pay for
  • People who work are paying for it, whether they want to or not.
  • Government controlling what kids learn, and not parents. It's called Common Core, although most schools won't call it that because 54% of Americans hate Common Core.  It's faceless bureaucrats in Washington deciding what kids should learn instead of parents. 
  • We are $18 trillion in debt
  • We are printing money left and right and dumping it into the stock market (called quantitative easing) to maintain the stock market bubble that is going to pop some day
  • We are paying people not to work
What these statistics show, other than that we are in a depression, is that liberals like Obama are buying votes. That's why we have 94 million people not working and they are all eating; they are all living comfortably off the government, and that's why these numbers keep getting worse; that's why so many people vote for liberal democrats, and why Bernie Sanders even has credibility in the democratic party despite publicly claiming to be a socialist who hates capitalism. That's why Obama got elected two times. He, in essence, bought votes with our money. That's what FDR did too.

And don't get me wrong, I do want to help the needy. I'm all for charity.  However, the best way to help the poor is not by giving them something for nothing.  The poor must work for what they receive. We need to put them to work if they receive assistance.  We need to make the poor uncomfortable so they have an incentive to keep looking for work.  

Look, these statistics show that, even adjusting for the population increase, current abysmal economic statistics are far worse than during the Great Depression.  We have more people not working, and more people not looking for work.  And it isn't getting better, won't get better, by creating more programs that take from those who work to create more government programs that give to people who quit looking for work; who have no incentive to look for work.  

Related Links.

Monday, September 28, 2015

Myth Buster: All rich people, corporations, nations are greedy

Quite often my liberal friends say things like, "Donald Trump is greedy," "It's a rich, greedy corporation." They refer to any rich person as greedy, not just Trump.  Any corporation that makes money is greedy, such as, "Greedy pharmaceuticals" set their prices too high. I think It's frustrating to me when they say stuff like this, but I think I understand why they do: it's based on a fallacy.

It almost seems as if liberals hate success, as they are often trying to punish people who succeed. They falsely believe, that left to their own devices, people will not give to charity; they will not help the poor. I attempted to allay this myth in my post, "Pope Francis Wrong About Capitalism."  Capitalism creates opportunities, and people under capitalistic societies donate more to charity than people under any other form of government.

I think the big misconception, the big fallacy of progressives, is that they believe there is only so much money in the world, and if one person, or one corporation, becomes wealthy, that this comes at the expense of everyone else, especially the poor.  In other words, if one person makes a million dollars, this is a million dollars that will not help the poor; in fact, it hurts the poor.  That's why they refer to rich people like Donald Trump as greedy and selfish.

The truth is that there is plenty of money to go around so that everyone can get rich.  This what Trump is saying when he says, "I'm rich, and I will make you rich too."  There is no shortage of money in the world. Rather than trashing people like Trump who succeed, we ought to put them up on a pedestal with an inscription under saying, "You can be like Trump: You can get rich too."

That's the whole point of American exceptionalism.  It's not that we are better than other nations, it's that, before American, 90% of people lived in poverty. America -- more specifically: American Exceptionalism -- has made it so that anyone can rise up to be as rich as kings or queens or totalitarian leaders. This was never possible before America.

People like Trump are a rare breed who sacrifice all to succeed.  Trump had to sacrifice years and money on educating himself, and he had to take great risks to succeed.  In fact, he was so focussed on succeeding that he risked his first marriage to Ivana. I don't mean to ramp up Trump here, I'm just trying to give an example of how getting rich is not bad.  Trump got rich by creating hundreds if not thousands of jobs. As Trump rose to the top he took many people with him.

That's the whole purpose of unfettered capitalism or capitalism.  Some call it supply side economics.  As Jack Kemp used to say, "A rising tide lifts all ships."  During the 1980s, when regulations and taxes were cut, people of every class rose to a higher class. In fact, when regulations, taxes, and government programs were cut in the 1920s, there was no unemployment (it was 2%, while most economists consider 4.5% no unemployment as there will always be people between jobs).

It's not only just individuals and corporations that are greedy, it's America. There are literally people, even within our own country, who think this is unfair; it's unfair that Americans are so rich, because they get rich at the expense of every other nation. They think we are the reason other nations are poor because we absorb all the money in the world.  They think it's not fair that we have all the wealth and no one else does.

What they fail to see is that 99.9% of the world was poor prior to America. Before America, there was no place in the world you could go to be free; there was no place in the world where you could worship what are religion you wanted; there was no place in the world you could go to take an idea you had and prosper.

Again, what they should do is put America on a pedestal and teach rulers of other nations how to accomplish what America has accomplished. Instead of saying Americans are greedy, they ought to ask: What made America so great? What made Americans so prosperous? Why does everyone want to go to America? How can I do that for my country?

Let me word this another way. People who really care for the poor, for the little guy, should want the little guy to have an improved life: more contentment, more happiness, more stuff.  If this is true, then they should want to emulate the United States. You certainly wouldn't want to tear it down.  If you truly cared about the poor, you would create a nation just like the United States.  You wouldn't teach them that America is selfish and greedy and rich at the expense of everyone else.

America is about freedom, liberty, and prosperity.  So if you want people to succeed, you should teach American principles, not deride them. Because before America there was no prosperity. The people who teach that America is rich and greedy try to make things fair by punishing and penalizing people at the top. Then when those people are gone, there are no jobs. This is substituted for government checks, which will disappear when the U.S. is gone. Then everyone will be equally poor. That is the utopia they seek -- fairness, equality of poverty.

It doesn't make sense. Why try to destroy the one beacon of hope, the one shining city on a hill, where every person has an equal opportunity to succeed.  Why destroy that by telling people that those people are greedy in their materialism? Why, if you truly love the poor and want to help them, wouldn't you teach them how to get it too? Why not teach your people how to prosper?

You have a special place, you want it to stay special, you better learn how it got special. Otherwise, you are going to have people want to destroy it, and you won't have a reason to stop them. Or, if someone were to come into our nation (as progressives have) and try to tear it down one piece at a time, and you didn't know why it was great in the first place, you might just stand by and let it happen.  In fact, you might even be willing to give up your liberties for the cause. You might be convinced to do just that.

And that's what's wrong with our country today, is our schools are not teaching the answers to these questions, so kids are growing up in the most prosperous nation in the history of the world, and yet they think it has always been this way. They think people were always free. They don't understand that 99.9% of people lived under totalitarian dictatorships or monarchies before the U.S. came about, and that freedom had to be fought for. They aren't taught this, so they don't feel the need to protect and defend it against the onslaught of liberalism.

That's why they can so easily be taught that anyone who succeeds in life is greedy and selfish; that anyone who gets rich does so at the expense of the poor; that capitalism breeds poverty. When the truth is that everyone was poor before the Unisted States, and capitalism creates prosperity not poverty.

Anyway, America is special, and to keep it special we must know how we got to where we are.  Once we know that, it will be easy to see how capitalism creates jobs; capitalism creates prosperity.  Capitalism makes life better for the poor, not worse.  If you really, truly love the poor, then you will tell them that they can have it too if they want.  And that's why Trump says, "I am rich, and I want to make you rich too."

Thursday, September 10, 2015

People who believe unemployment rate is 5.5% are fools

So, the White House is reporting a 5.5 unemployment number, the best it's been since 2008.  This sounds good, especially considering 4.6% is considered no unemployment. This is true because it's not possible for every person to have a job all the time, as people are shifting jobs all the time.  So the 5.5% unemployment number comes out and we are supposed to be all happy and think that the recession is over.

Yet this is not true once we investigate the numbers.  First of all, we must realize that the 5.5 number is the U3 unemployment number. It does not count the number of people who have given up trying to find a job after being out of work four years. If you're not actively seeking a job and you don't have one, you're not counted as unemployed. When you count those who are no longer looking, it's called the U6 number. The current U6 unemployment rate is 10.3%.

Right now there are a record 92.8 million working age people no longer in the workforce, and that is a 37 year low (and it's been a record low now for 11 consecutive months).  The total number of people 16 and over who are able bodied people who could be working is 243 million, so that means that almost half of the people who could be working are not.

Of course the actual percentage of working age people working is currently 62.8%, which is at a 37 year low.  That means that 37.2% of working age people are not working.

What we do know is that all of these people are eating. It used to not be that way.  It used to be that if you weren't working you weren't eating, and that was your incentive to get a job.  If you weren't eating when you weren't working, you bit your pride and got any old job. That might mean working at McDonalds.  That's not the case today as a record 50 million people are on food stamps.

No matter how you look at it, people who think the 5.5% unemployment is accurate, and that it's an indicator that the economy is getting better, are fools.

Further Reading:

Friday, July 3, 2015

The truth about Obama's economic numbers

So the AP comes out with this story today that the unemployment rate fell to a seven year low at 5.3%. They tell us that this is because 223, 000 jobs were gained during the last month. The White House is hailing this as good economic news, and the AP goes right along with it. Yet when we look at all the numbers we see a different picture.

First of all we must look at the rest of the data, for to get an accurate economic picture we must view it all. Right now, in the U.S. a record 93 million people are no longer in the workforce, and are not counted in the unemployment statistics that are reported by the White House. So, if you take out all these working age people, the unemployment rate is 5.3%.  This is called the U3 unemployment number, and by most accounts it is the least accurate, although best looking, unemployment number.  In essence, reporting this makes Obama look good.

Now, if you add the 93 million to the unemployment number you get the U6 unemployment number, and most economist get somewhere between 10 and 14 percent unemployment rate. However, economist David Stockman estimates that it would be upwards to a 42.9% unemployment rate. Now, could you imagine what would happen if Obama released that unemployment number? Obama's popularity would plummet. So it only makes sense that he release the smallest of the samples.

Investigating the numbers further, 432,000 people lost their jobs last month (I'm referring to June). Now, let's put this in Math 101 form: 223,000 jobs created minus 432,000 jobs lost equals negative 209,000 (-209,000). So now we see what the true damage of Obamanomics had on our nation during the month of June.

Now, here are the numbers as reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: 5.3 unemployment rate, 223,000 jobs created, and 432,000 work force decline. In May the statistics were similar. So if you do the math, the trend of economic collapse is obvious.

There are a lot of reasons why Americans can't find jobs. For one thing, Baby Boomers are not retiring, perhaps because they need healthcare. Baby Boomers cannot afford to retire. High School and College Students are not working because the low paying jobs they used to take either no longer exist or are taken up by low skilled, uneducated immigrants who do not speak English. Either that, or older people who have lost their jobs are taking these jobs, leaving younger Americans with no work.

Because of Obamacare the 40 hour work week is no longer defined as full time work; 30 hours is. This is because most companies limit hours so they don't have to pay for health insurance. So this has forced many Americans to take on two part time jobs, leaving no jobs open for new workers.

In many places minimum wages are so high that places like McDonald's have to hire fewer workers, and this eliminates jobs for high school and college age kids. So, there are a variety of reasons why so many people are not in the work force. This is not to mention the record number of people who live off the government and so they have no incentive to look for work.

So, anyway, the economic numbers do not look so good.  The White House is lying about the economy being good.  

Some, however, believe he has simply redefined the definition of a good economy.  For instance, the Gross Domestic Product is shrinking.  For most of history the GDP has been the number one indicator used by economists to measure how the economy is doing.  The White House no longer wants to use the GDP as an indicator, claiming "it just doesn't show the whole story."  

They don't want to show it because the GDP shows the economic failures of the Obama administration that they don't want you to know about.  You have 93 million no longer in the workforce, an actual unemployment number greater than 10 percent, college graduates with big college loan debts who can only find a job working 30 hours per week.  There is simply no room for the economy to grow, unless you count government jobs. 

Recession has been re-defined as well, because if you considered two consecutive quarters of a declining GDP as a recession, the entire Obama term would have to be considered a recession.  He doesn't want that, so he has re-defined recession by simply not reporting the GDP.  

The economy has been stagnating, sort of like it did during the Jimmy Carter administration.  Still, the Obama administration keeps reporting that we are in a recovery.  

More people are not working than ever before, immigrants are taking all the jobs that college and high school age kids once took, twice as many jobs are lost in a given month than jobs created, full time work is now considered 30 hours, wages have stagnated (are not going up), disposable income has stagnated, and the number of people who have no desire to work because they receive government checks is growing.  

So you have no markers of a growing economy, and yet the White House continues to say that we are in a state of recovery.  Then the Associated Press, instead of doing its own review of the data as I just did, just reports what the White House releases.  The same is true of most of the rest of the media, and so too many people are mislead into thinking the economy is in a state of recovery.  

What the White House wants you to think is that all this doesn't matter.  What matters is that Obama and the democrats are nice.  Democrats have made it so "everyone" can get healthcare.  Democrats have made it so that anyone can get food stamps and other forms of government assistance.  Democrats will give you free cell phones.  Democrats will protect your social security.  Democrats are nice. 

But all this niceness is actually making the country worse. 

Further reading:

Saturday, March 7, 2015

A closer look at economic numbers

The White House announced that the latest unemployment number is at 5.5 percent, which is the lowest it has been in seven years.  So does this mean that Obama's economic policies are finally working, and the economy has recovered?

If you listen to Christine Romans on CNN you would think so.  She said: "Sometimes a good headline is just a good headline, Carol, and that's what this report shows us. When you look within these pages and pages of tables, you see an American economy that is creating jobs again across the spectrum. The trend here has been good. Jobs added consistently month after month. The unemployment rate, really important milestone here for the unemployment rate, 5.5%. It's been trending down for a year. The lowest since May 2008."

However, when I attended journalism school at Ferris State University school back in 1988, we were told to look deep into statistics to make sure they were completely accurate. If you do otherwise, if you report only the numbers reported without analyzing them, you are letting other people direct the flow of news for you.  Or, in other words, you are just being a pawn, so to speak.

I will give you a quick example.  In 1988 Ferris State University released a statistic showing that 98 percent of their graduates were employed. On the surface this number brought joy to a lot of faces. However, after a deep look into this number, I learned that it included any job, including jobs at McDonalds.  In the end, we learned this number was misleading.  

So, that in mind, is an unemployment number of 5.5 percent really telling us that the economy is improving?   Let us look deeper into the number.  

Labor Force.  This includes all people over the age of 16 who are not in the military or an institution. This number is currently at 249,899,000.  

Labor Force Participation Rate.  This includes the percentage of of the Labor Force that is actively working or actively seeking work. This number currently stands at 62.8 percent, which is a 37 year low.  The last time this number was this low was in 1978, or when Jimmy Carter was president. What this means is that a total of 92,898,000 Americans have given up looking for work, and this number is at a record high. Since Obama was elected in 2008,12,369,000 Americans have left the workforce.  Right now, at the time of this writing, the rate is the lowest it's been in 37 years, as it stands at 62.8%. 

U3 Unemployment Number.  This is an unemployment number that does not include anyone who has looked for a job fore greater than four years and has stopped looking.  That 5.5 percent unemployment rate is the U3 number. Of the 157,002,000 who did participate in the labor force, 148,297,000 had a job, and 8,705,000 did not have a job but were actively seeking one -– making them the nation’s unemployed (5.5%). This is usually the number the White House reports because it is the one that usually makes it look the best.

U6 Unemployment Number.  This includes all working age adults who are capable of working who are not working.  This unemployment number currently resides around 11.5 percent.  This number is considered by economists to be more accurate than the U3 number.

Everybody Eats.  As a nation, we have set up a system where everybody eats, whether you have a job or not.  At present we have 50 million Americans on food stamps, and of course there are many other programs that make sure everyone eats.  As recently as 20 years ago, if you didn't have a job you did not eat.  This was a great incentive for people to search hard to find a job. 

Jobs numbers.  This number includes all the jobs lost over a month, and the number of jobs created. The jobs created also includes part time work.  For example, last July the Obama White House reported that 273,000 jobs were created in June, and this meant the economy was improving.  Of this, I wrote: First of all, the numbers he uses are misleading. While the Bureau of Labor Statistics report that 273,000 jobs were created last month, 800,000 people left the workforce. So while the unemployment rate presently sits at 6.3%, the U-6 unemployment rate sits at 13.6%. This is a more accurate depiction of the 963,630,000 people in America currently not working..
Further reading:

Bottom line.  A good journalist would dig deep into numbers and report the whole story, rather than just letting the White House tell the story with the numbers it releases.  

Friday, August 29, 2014

Austrian Economics creates prosperity

The names "austrian school," or "austrian economics," may not sound familiar to most Americans, yet if we call it by it's modern name, perhaps you'll recognize it. It's modern name is supply-side, or trickle down, economics. Perhaps a more fitting name for it is free market economics.

Ron Paul, in his book "Liberty Defined," describes the history of this economic philosophy:
The school of thought is named for the country of its modern founder, Carl Menger (1840-1921), an economist at the University of Vienna who made great contributions to the theory of value.  He wrote that economic value extends the human mind alone and is not something that exists as an inherent part of goods and services; valuation changes according to social needs and circumstances.  We need markets to reveal to us the valuations of consumers and producers in teh form of the price system that works within a market setting.  In saying these things, he was really recapturing lost wisdom that had earlier been understood by Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850), J.B. Say (1767-1832), A.R.J. Turgot (1727-1781), and many more throughout history.  But history needs people like Menger to rediscover forgotten wisdom.
Andrew Mellon and Jack Kemp were two economists who renewed interest in this philosophy, encouraging Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan respectively to adapt it.  Both Coolidge and Reagan reduced taxes and regulations, and with government out of the way, the American economies of the 1920s and the 1980s soared to its greatest heights in American history.

Paul continues:
The Austrian school champions private property, free markets, sound money, and the liberal society generally.  It provides a way of looking at economics that takes into account the unpredictability of human action (absolutely no one can quantitatively know the future) and the huge role of human choice in the way economies work (in markets, consumers drive decisions over production), and explains how it is that order can emerge out of the seeming chaos of individual action  In short, the ustrian School provies the most robust defense of the economic system of the free society that has ever been made.
The Austrian School "had achieved mainstream status before the so-called Keynesian Revolution of the 1930s swept away the older wisdom.

Monday, July 21, 2014

Obama's economic statements misleading

I used this quote on another post on this blog, although I find it so amazing that I must use it again to make another point.  Consider the following from a March, or April, joint press conference with Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
We've learned that our businesses created 273,000 new jobs last month. All told, our businesses have now created 9.2 million jobs new jobs over 50 consecutive months of job growth. The grit and determination of the American people are moving us forward. There's plenty more that Congress should be doing from raising the minimum wage to creating good construction jobs rebuilding America. And I want to work with them wherever I can, but I keep acting on my own wherever I must to make sure every American who works hard has the chance to get ahead.
First of all, the numbers he uses are misleading.  While the Bureau of Labor Statistics report that 273,000 jobs were created last month, 800,000 people left the workforce.  So while the unemployment rate presently sits at 6.3%, the U-6 unemployment rate sits at 13.6%.  This is a more accurate depiction of the 963,630,000 people in America currently not working.

Another thing to note here is that Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is influenced by three factors: consumer spending, business spending, and government spending.  If consumer spending is not rising, and business spending is not rising, then a rise in GDP can only be explained by government spending.  If government spending is needed to make the GDP rise, it reveals the market is not self sustaining.ector does.

Other than his statistics, the rest of Obama's comments are also misleading.   If "the grit and determination" were actually working to improve the economy, then the government would not need to take action in order to stimulate the GDP.

Besides, the government doesn't create good construction jobs anyway, the private sector does.  Yet, I suppose, if you don't have a good understanding of economics 101, which is no longer taught in public schools just for this reason, you'd have no clue you were having the wool pulled over your eyes.

In fact, if you read the entire quote, the 1st part suggests the economy is booming, and the second part says the government needs to create jobs and artificially raise wages.  The first part completely contradicts the second part.

I suppose if you were the leader of a nation and your policies are failing, you'd spin the statistics too.  I wouldn't.  I can honestly tell you that if what I did failed, I'd recognize it and try something different.  I would not lie to make my failures look like successes and continue trudging forward with what's not working.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

What is Gross Domestic Product (GDP)?

Spikes in GDP by government spending are only temporary.
Among the most common means of measuring economic status of a nation is the gross domestic product (GDP).

So what is GDP? I think we are safe to use wikepedia in this instance.
The basic measure of a country's economic performance and is the market value of all final goods and services made within the borders of a country in a year. It is a fundamental measurement of production and is very often positively correlated with the standard of living.
Basically GDP is the sum of three products:
  • Consumption by the people
  • Investment by businesses and people
  • Spending by government
The acronym for this is CIG: Consumption, Investment, Government spending. That should make this easy to remember.

However, this marker has come under scrutiny by some economists as it may be misleading. Take, consider, for example, the October, 2009, number, which showed an improvement in economic activity 3.5%. Many economists used this as a sign that the recession ended.

However, if you dissect the sum of the three above products, you will see that that 3.5% is misleading. According to statistics there was no new consumption by consumer;  they were not buying the goods and services produced by businesses; they were not buying houses; they are not buying vacations and TVs and electronics. In fact, according to statistics, consumer spending was down.

Likewise, according to statistics there was no increased investment in businesses or by businesses. They did not create new jobs, the did not spend on new equipment, the did not build new facilities.

So, if you consider consumption by the people and investment by business and people, you see no economic growth.  This is bad, because, in order for an economic recovery to be sustainable, it must come from the private sector

However, if you look at spending by the government, you do see economic growth. This is bad because it shows that the only economic growth was because the government was spending money it collected by taxes.  This, in essence, is artificial economic growth, and is unsustainable growth.

If you look back to this time in Obama's term, it was when he was handing out cash for people to buy cars.  In other words, you see growth because people bought cars because the government just paid $24,000 per car bought during the cash for clunkers program. It was also a time when the government was handing out cash to get people to buy houses, so this also helped spike the GDP.

So you can see, that if you analyze all the numbers, the private sector was not growing in October of 2009, and the government sector was.  Individual people and businesses were not investing money into the market, but the government was busy spending other people's money.

In fact, economic experts have said that half the 3.5% increase in GDP was the result of cars bought during the cash for clunkers program, which, by the way, had expired by October, 2009.  A large portion of the remainder was from houses bought under the house refund program, which was set to expire in November, 2009.

The Obama administration purposefully increased government spending because this is the crux of Keynesian economics.  So, to Obama and his progressive followers, the GDP of October 2009 of 3.5% was good. This was not by accident, it was because Obama is a follower of Keynesian economics.

Keynesian economists believe that that the economy will improve if the government stimulates it by artificially increasing demand. FDR used the same economic system.  Both Obama and FDR increased spending on goods and services in order to create government jobs and increase spending, and therefore GDP, in this way.

However, increasing economic activity through government spending has drawbacks.
  1. Most jobs are temporary.  Creating temporary government jobs by government programs to build bridges, repair roads, plant trees, etc. will create jobs that increase the GDP, but a few months later the GDP will shrink as these jobs are eliminated. 
  2. Money used to pay for government jobs is taken from people who work, meaning they will have less money to put into the market.  
  3. Obama's stimulus package increased the national debt by trillions of dollars that must be paid back at the expense of our economic future. 
  4. Like the cash for clunker program, all government created jobs are only temporary. While they are in effect the GDP may rise, but once they are expired the GDP will go back down again. Thus, a rise in GDP caused by increased government is NOT a sign of an improving economy.
  5. Government programs like cash for clunkers artificially inflates the sale of cars, making economists thin the economy is improving when it's not.  So car companies hire workers only to have to lay them off when the program ends, resulting in a shrinking of the GDP. 
  6. Government spending increases the national dept, forcing future generations to pay it off, and forcing the government to borrow money from other nations, such as China.  The ultimate risk here is that the entire system will collapse, and other nations will lose respect for America. It presently stands at $17,480,794,453,219.59
  7. Keynesian economists use dept to create economic growth.  This comes with severe consequences if that dept cannot be paid off.
  8. U.S. government debt to GDP failed to rise dramatically from 1960 to 2008, but it almost doubled from 2008 to date, just as households took on debt rapidly from 2001 to 2009 and companies quietly increased their leverage.
The only way to get real economic growth is to create incentives like cutting taxes on consumers so they have extra after tax revenue to purchase goods like computers, TVs, cars, houses, telephones, and MP3 players, and services like cable TV and the Internet.

The only way to get real economic growth is to cut taxes and regulations on businesses so they have an incentive to increase investments on things that will boost the economy like new machines, tools, buildings and workers.  This is the only time tested method of getting long-term increases in GDP, and real economic recovery. You have to have growth in the private sector.

So, during an economic recovery you will have an increase in consumer spending and investment by businesses, not the government. An improved GDP is good, but not so much when the reason for that increase is due to an increase in government spending which is funded by increased taxes, increased national debt and printing of more money -- things that decrease confidence in the economy and devalue the dollar.

The private sector is what holds the key to you and me making money. It's where all the good paying, long term, jobs are created. If the private sector does well then the economy is doing well.  If the private sector is doing well, both the unemployment and the U-6 unemployment rate will drop.

Falsely spiking the GDP by government spending is a Keynesian strategy to artificially make economic numbers look better. True economic growth would be indicated by a rise in GDP due to spending by consumers and businessmen.

References:

  1. Exploding Private-Plus-Government Debt To GDP: Davos (World Economic Forum) Conversation Starter
  2. U.S. National Dept Clock

Monday, July 14, 2014

What is the U-6 unemployment number

U6 Unemployment Rate from 2000-2014
According to the The Bureau of Labor Statistics the unemployment rate dropped from 6.7 to 6.3% in March of 2014.  While these numbers have some thinking the economy is improving, others suggest these numbers may be misleading.

This is especially true when matched up against other statistics provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which show that 800,000 fewer people were in the workforce in March, making the total of 92,594,000 . When you compare these statistics with the unemployment number, we can see that something doesn't add up.  

As a matter of fact, if news outlets report that the unemployment rate dropped in March, that looks good for Obama.  That is the intent of the methods of doing the unemployment number.  The reason they look so good is not because jobs were created, but because the unemployment rate does not include people who have given up looking for work.

A better number than the unemployment number is the U-6 unemployment rate. This number includes all people of working age who are not working.  So, while the reported unemployment rate for March was 6.3%, the U-6 unemployment rate was 12.6%.

The despite the misleading numbers, Obama uses them to his advantage.  Consider the following quote by Obama from a joint press conference with Obama and German Chancellor, Angela Merkel.
We've learned that our businesses created 273,000 new jobs last month. All told, our businesses have now created 9.2 million jobs new jobs over 50 consecutive months of job growth. The grit and determination of the American people are moving us forward. There's plenty more that Congress should be doing from raising the minimum wage to creating good construction jobs rebuilding America. And I want to work with them wherever I can, but I keep acting on my own wherever I must to make sure every American who works hard has the chance to get ahead.
While those numbers may be good public relations for people who don't understand economics, we understand that they are misleading, and not truly representative of true economic status.

Bottom line: the U-6 unemployment number is the number that should be used to measure economic status, and the U-6 number should be reported by the media -- no matter who the president is.

You can check out the history of the U-6 unemployment rate at portalseven.com.

Friday, July 11, 2014

Government spending 20% of GDP

If you want to improve your standard of living, you're not going to do it by receiving a check from the government.  The only way to improve your standard of living is by investing yourself in the marketplace.

Yet there are a lot of folks who think the government is needed to make life better for people.  They think that it's a good thing that 20% of the gross domestic product (GDP) is government.  In fact, the media is reporting this as a good thing.  They are reporting that if it weren't for Obamacare, that the economy would have had negative growth in the first quarter of 2014.

They say healthcare spending increased at its fastest pace in more than three decades because of Obamacare, according to Reuters.  They say it caused a floor that prevented a net loss in economic activity.  They say this is good.

Reuters notes:
Healthcare spending increased at a 9.9 percent annual rate, the quickest since the third quarter of 1980, and it contributed 1.1 percentage points to GDP growth.
But this is not good news.  In fact, it is bad news.  When the only reason the government grew at all (an abysmal 1% of 1% in the first quarter of 2014) is due to government spending, then you have a serious problem.  This is because, for there to be an economic recovery, it needs to come from the private sector.

It's the private sector where the good jobs come from.  It's the private sector that provides the best opportunities to get rich.  It's the private sector that provides the best opportunity to improve your lot in life, not the government.

Surely the government can create jobs.  But it does so at the expense of the private sector.  Surely the government can assure that everyone has healthcare.  Sure the government can assure everyone has a retirement.  But, it does so at the expense of the private sector.

Why? Because everything the government does is with money it took from people who work for a living.  When you take what people earn, that's money they won't be spending on goods and services; that's jobs that won't be created. All this growing government is spending money that is not yours.

But when 51 percent of people who vote don't pay taxes, they have no invested interest in this.  They don't care how much the people who work are taxed, because they're not affected by it.

It doesn't help when the media buys into the idea that more government is a good thing, and they put a positive spin on it.  They sell the idea that Obamacare prevented a negative GDP for the first quarter of 2014 and sell it as a net positive.

No wonder the youth in this nation, the millennials who have never seen a robust economy, have a pessimistic view of their country.