Showing posts with label spending. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spending. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 6, 2016

Economic Miseducation

I have taught basic principles of economics for thirty years to groups after groups of college students who were often cross-eyed, bored, running late, playing with their phones, angry that I gave them too many notes, “hard tests,” and too many assignments which interfered with their busy social lives.  

Many students were there just to get a grade and to complete their useless social studies degrees on the way to an advisor’s assurance of a six-figure salary job on day one, an offer that would never materialize on their limited horizons. They did not care that their parents went in debt to pay for this college miseducation they received or that hard-working taxpayers funded their federal grants for four years. Most of them had no clue how the economy ran nor did they care.

It is painfully obvious that today students and college graduates are just as woefully incompetent and uninformed. They are voting in droves for their Marxist/communist of their choice, falling for empty promises of free education in their communist utopia of free birth control pills and free legalized drugs.

None of them paid attention in Economics classes that in communism abortion is not a choice, birth control pills are not available or expensive, and drug use is punishable with hard time in jail.  Education is free technically but there is no room to educate everybody in the halls of higher learning, so only a select few are chosen, usually the elite’s children are picked first, regardless of grades. If there are places left, then those with the highest scores are admitted.

Someone who spends a lot of his time running computer models to predict economic downturns, upturns, bubbles, crashes, and collapse, attempted to educate the audience on Facebook. Most of his advice fell on deaf ears because people are tired of listening to anybody, they know it all already, and have already made up their minds to go full speed ahead off the cliff, they want to try things for themselves, why listen to reason and rational thought. Repeating failed history in hopes of a different result seems enticing to most people.

In his analysis, in an economic environment of “120 percent debt to GDP ratio, we have less than five years before economic implosion.” He defined “Point Zero” as the point where the national debt becomes 120 percent of GDP, an unsustainable scenario that would cause an unrecoverable spiraling downturn of the economy. A black swan event would make things much worse.

In order to make sure the economy becomes sustainable again in the face of a 19 trillion national debt, “entitlements” must be reformed, spending and waste must be cut, some regulatory burdens on corporations must be reduced or eliminated, and taxes must be raised.

And this does not even begin to address unfunded liabilities such as Social Security and Medicare. Entitlements comprise 70 percent of the budget and debt servicing is 10 percent. This leaves just 20 percent of the budget that can be cut. Is that sufficient to even begin reducing the huge national debt?

Cutting the corporate credit card will force Congress to balance the budget. They cannot spend more than they take in from Treasury auctions and taxpayers. How many Congressmen will risk their careers in order to do what is right? Congress does not seem willing to address any of the above because they do not want to compromise their political careers and thus destroy the power they yield in Washington.  

Even though both spending cuts and tax increases are necessary, Congressmen fight and politically posture on both sides of the isle while nobody’s pet project or state funding gets cut. Why are Congressmen unwilling to cut pet projects? When they do, they know their constituents will vote them out of office.

We keep giving money to the U.N., we fight unwinnable wars with strange rules of engagement, and we waste more money on our political friends and foes overseas at a time when we can ill-afford it.

To make matters worse, inflation is looming on the horizon because of the three quantitative easings (QEs), printing money without the backing of goods and services in order to purchase our own debt.

The corporate mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has not even taken full effect yet. We are not sure if Congress will repeal Obamacare without a replacement. The preexisting conditions’ feature of ACA is a good idea.  In spite of dishonest political rhetoric, nobody will die in the streets without medical care.

But there is rationing occurring already due to the burgeoning and very expensive bureaucracy. We cannot offer care to more people and illegal aliens without substantial costs to the nation which so far seem to be far greater than if we would have given free premiums to the millions of uninsured who, before ACA, could not secure nor afford medical insurance. Some of them were already recipients of Medicaid.

We are sitting on a social unrest powder keg as evidenced by Ferguson, Baltimore, the Black Lives Matter, the collegiate race-baiting violence, and ISIS coming to our shores via unprotected borders. The social cohesion is breaking down faster than you can say All Lives Matter.

Even though our national debt to GDP ratio is quite high (104.7%), our economic situation is slightly different than Greece’s because we can print our own dollars. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp

Our fiscal policy is in a mess. Taxation burdens the middle class and favors crony capitalism while spending is out of control.  Almost 50 percent of the country does not pay any taxes and crony corporations move their headquarters to other countries to avoid paying proper share of taxes. Because corporate tax in the U.S. is one of the highest in the world, Congress enabled corporations to move overseas via Congressional bills.

The burden of taxation falls on the middle class yet again. TPP is going to move most of the remaining manufacturing sector overseas, transforming U.S. into a service economy and destroying many blue collar and white collar jobs in the process.

Congress originates the spending bills and approves them. The President can express what he wants and signs or vetoes bills, but the ultimate spending power and control rests with Congress. Congressmen are few and far between who have strength of character or the will to do what is unpopular. Nobody wants to be perceived as hurting parents trying to feed their kids, put a roof over their heads, or as “throwing grandmas over a cliff.” So the out-of-control spending continues to balloon.

American citizens themselves do not want to give up their instant gratification and suffer without their Starbucks coffee and the pain or indignity of a less than 75-inch TV or other electronic gadgets that are creating the blue screen hunchback nation. Why bear responsibility for yourself when Uncle Sam can do it for you?

Presidential hopefuls make promises to the electorate that will not reduce debt substantially in the absence of a robust and sustained economic growth that would bring in additional revenues. Some talk about “entitlement” reform by increasing the retirement age. Proposals to create economic growth are not very encouraging. There is no magical pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, nor another bubble that would bring in enough revenue to offset the very large budget and reduce the unpayable national debt.




Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Spending and Demographics

House Speaker John Boehner criticized President Obama’s “failed policies and hostility toward job creators.” The current administration established a “new normal” for Americans: fewer jobs, higher unemployment, more spending, higher prices, and bigger deficits. The White House official blog calls this status quo the “Great Recession.”

To say that the economy is anemic is an understatement – GDP is 1.9 percent, only 69,000 jobs were “created” in the month of May and unemployment is at 8.2 percent. Unemployment figures are constantly revised, massaged, and misrepresented. No wonder, citizens no longer trust their government, they fear it.

Congress, who controls the purse strings, has done little to curtail the out of control government spending and waste on bankrupted “green energy” that electrifies nothing except campaign sound bites and the die-hard environmentalist left. 

Last week President Obama signed the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank, raising its lending authority by 40 percent to $140 billion. The Export-Import Bank guarantees loans from U.S. banks to foreign businesses that buy U.S. made products.  Conservatives in Congress criticized the move and “assailed it for meddling in the free market.”

Legislators did not raise the most obvious question before approving the $140 billion giveaway. Why do we give loans to foreign corporations to buy American products? Do we have money to subsidize corporations, foreign or domestic? Why has Obama the Senator called the Import-Export Bank “little more than a fund for corporate welfare” during the 2008 campaign and promised to eliminate it, yet has reauthorized 40 percent more taxpayer dollars?

For the past three and a half years, the manipulated and constantly revised (a week or month later) unemployment rate has been above 8 percent. The real number is far worse, in the 11-14 percent range. Although the left maligned President George Bush on a daily basis, under his presidency full employment was always in the 4.5-5 percent unemployment range.

A sustained doubling of the unemployment rate is devastating to those who have lost jobs and for our economy. However, if you ask Spain, Greece, Italy, France, or Portugal, they would gladly trade places with us. Their full employment is an unemployment rate of ten percent and higher. This happens because their national priorities are stacked in favor of outrageous social programs and unionized labor, while the population becomes more slothful and happy to live on government handouts.

United States spends 14.8 percent of GDP on welfare programs and has not reached the welfare expenditures level of European socialist countries. France spends 28.5 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on welfare, Spain 21 percent, Greece 24.3 percent, Italy 24.4 percent, and Portugal 21.1 percent. There are European nations that spend more on welfare, such as Denmark (29.2 percent), Sweden (28.9 percent), Germany (27.4), and Belgium (27.2) but the economic situation in these countries is substantially different. (Statistical data source: NationMaster.com as quoted in Forbes)

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is vilified for her efforts to impose austerity measures on countries whose economies necessitate bailouts from the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Greece rejected the idea through vigorous and violent demonstrations, while 47 Greek parliamentarians walked out of meetings upon hearing about the type of austerity measures they would have to approve. France rejected austerity by electing a socialist president who promised more socialism, more spending, and more bureaucratic job creation. President Francois Hollande reneged on the austerity agreements his predecessor, Sarkozy, had cobbled with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Critics point out that Germany’s five percent unemployment rate makes it unfair and socially unjust for Angela Merkel to impose drastic welfare and pension benefits cuts in Greece, Spain, Italy, France, and Portugal when their respective unemployment rates are so much higher. In Spain, the overall unemployment has reached 25 percent, while 50 percent of young people, including recent college graduates, cannot find jobs and must leave Spain to seek employment.

Joel Kotkin describes them most vividly. “In Madrid you see them on the streets, jobless, aimless, often bearing college degrees but working as cabbies, baristas, street performers, or – most often – not at all. Call them the screwed generation, the victims of expansive welfare states and the massive structural debt charged by their parents.” (The Daily Beast, June 4, 2012)

A young man with a psychology degree, who is working in the grocery store where I shop, was complaining one day that he could not find a job. A quintessential liberal with the agenda of environmental sustainability, social justice and equity, the mantra of the left, it has not occurred to him that the “hope and change” he voted for, his overt distaste for capitalism, love for communism and the murderous Che Guevara whose t-shirt he is wearing under his uniform, is what is dooming his prospects of finding a decent job. He bought his college advisor’s empty promise of a six-figure salary upon graduation, his professors’ socialist/Marxist indoctrination, and is now facing Realville.

European demonstrators argue vociferously and increasingly violent that austerity and budget cuts are the primary reasons for their national economic crises. They believe that the largesse of the government welfare system spending has nothing to do with the government running out of money. As former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had said, “the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

Taxing the rich in France at the proposed 75 percent rate will not solve their financial difficulties for long; it will simply prolong the inevitable. Even confiscating everyone’s wealth will only pay the debt and cover the deficit for a few months at best.

Lavish spending is unsustainable when the economy grows too slowly and the population is not having enough babies. There are insufficient wage earners who pay taxes to support retirees who derive benefits and pensions from those taxes.

Demographically speaking, the population replacement value in the U.S. is still within normal range of 2.1 newborns per woman if we count the illegal aliens’ newborns. Without illegal alien births, the U.S. population replacement value is 1.9. Many European Union nations have even lower population replacement values, below 1.4 newborns per female.

According to Joel Kotkin, wealthier countries in the north such as Germany, Denmark, and Sweden, “have offset very low fertility rates and domestic demand by attracting migrants from other countries, notably from eastern and southern Europe, and building highly productive export oriented economies.” (Forbes, May 31, 2012)

Unemployment among young people in Greece and Spain has reached the fifty percent mark. Many have left Spain for employment opportunities elsewhere. Young people have postponed having babies, preferring instead to buy homes, vacations, and luxury goods. The birth rate in Spain dropped to the lowest level of 1.4 from the previous four children per woman fifty years ago.


Joel Kotkin argues that a Nordic welfare state is sustainable because “companies and the labor force are productive and highly skilled,” while Spain, Greece, Italy, and Portugal derives most income and revenue from tourism. By 2021, every working person in Spain will support six students and retirees. (Source: National Institute for Statistics as quoted in Forbes)

Implementing national policies that promote affordable housing for families, reduced taxation for married couples, and higher birth rates instead of abortions, should be a priority for countries with a penchant for lavish spending.

Since Roe V. Wade, millions of babies in the U.S. have been aborted. It is a human tragedy with economic ramifications that will affect our labor force and the future of our country. We can afford right now to import cheap labor from Central America or outsource it to China. Would that be enough in the future to support the ever-burgeoning welfare class in this country? What will happen when we reach the tipping point of no return of the European style demographic decline?