“The Great Depression of Debt” is a hardcover updated edition of “The Second Great Depression, Starting 2007, Ending 2020.” “The Great Depression of Debt” can be purchased at most bookstores or at Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/Great-Depression-Debt-Survival-Techniques/dp/0470423714
I trust everyone had good holidays! For the New Year, I have decided to try monthly blog updates. These will occur in the middle of each month.
THE RISING DEFICIT
If you recall, over the past year we established that the causes of the rising U.S. deficit were split pretty evenly between an increase in spending and a decrease in tax rates. We have also seen that neither of our political parties is willing to truly address both issues. So we are unlikely to see any meaningful solution, at least not until the elections.
GOOD NEWS on UNEMPLOYMENT?
The U-6 unemployment rate dropped 1.2% from September 2011 through December 2011. But there is another government number that does not support this improvement at all! The Bureau of Labor Statistics http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf shows September age-16-and-over employment/population as 58.4% versus December at 58.5% – virtually unchanged! Since the workforce is 64% of the population, you would expect the drop in unemployment would be matched by an employment/population gain of 0.8%. But the gain isn’t there! In fact, the employment/population rate has been very stable for over two years. And that has been during a period of high stimulus, including the extended unemployment benefits and the tax holiday regards social security withholding, which added an annual $350 billion into the economy last year.
A good part of the perceived improvement in the unemployment rate is due to the labor-force-size calculation, which can be affected by people coming in and out of the labor-force. Both the labor force size drop and the drop in employment rate can be seen very clearly in the chart labeled “Civilian Labor Force Ratios” on Page 28 of the graphs found in http://www.richmondfed.org/research/national_economy/national_economic_indicators/pdf/all_charts.pdf. The employment rate dropped dramatically in 2008 and 2009, and it hasn’t recovered one iota since!
Without the continuance of current stimuli, which is only approved until the end of February, the economy will likely slow and drive up unemployment. Republicans now have the spotlight on them. Do they approve what some call an added tax by reversing the tax holiday regards social security? And do they play the bad guys by ending the ever-continuing extensions of unemployment benefits? The current depression is not yet as visible as The Great Depression. One reason is that 99 weeks of unemployment checks are being sent to 10 million jobless Americans.
HOUSING
A recent WSJ article noted that some big investors have turned bullish on the housing market in the past quarter. These include the likes of hedge funds run by SAC Capital Advisors, Blackstone Group, and Goldman Sachs Group. These prestigious groups are out of their collective minds! Unless the time-tested concept of supply and demand has suddenly become invalid, there is no way this is going to happen. Perhaps the reason for their bullish view on housing comes from the fact that housing prices have pretty much dropped to their historic inflation-adjusted price levels. Or, maybe they believe that unemployment has turned the corner and everyone will be getting a job next year and immediately buying a house! NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!
Let’s first look at housing supply. Over 11% of U.S. homes are empty, and the U.S. real estate market is about to be hit by another surge of bank repossessions according to RealtyTrac. And new home sales are unlikely to take off with all the existing homes on the market, some at greatly reduced prices due to foreclosures.
Now let’s look at housing demand. Per Family Matters: Multigenerational Families in a Volatile Economy from Generations United, as of the end of 2009, the number of multigenerational households (three or more generations) in this country was nearly 5 million higher than in 2007. That likely means that demand for homes has gone down substantially in two years. Morgan Stanley projects some 7.5 million more foreclosures over the next five years. Some of these foreclosed people will rent homes; but many will go into apartments or move in with relatives, further lowering the demand for single family homes.
CONSUMER SPENDING and SAVINGS RATE
Consumers broke out their credit cards for the holidays and spent! Per Reuters, consumer credit surged 10 percent in November, its biggest jump in a decade. But increased holiday spending was not universal. As reported by Thomson Reuters, elite stores like Nordstrom and Macy’s had over 6 percent sales increases; Saks and Dillard’s had over 4 percent. On the other end of the spectrum, some stores like Fred’s and Kohl’s actually saw same-store sales decline in December. Increased sales were apparently led by the more affluent portions of our society, consistent with what we have seen with the growing wealth disparity.
Not only did consumers use credit cards to drive up spending, they have also reduced their saving rate in the recent few months. After dropping their savings rate to near zero before this downturn started, consumers then recovered the rate to 8%. But now, their savings rate is back down to 3.5%. They can’t go much lower, which means they can’t keep using this as a way to increase their spending! And if the tax holiday regards social security is not extended, the average consumer will no longer have the extra $1,000 per year to spend!
WEALTH GAP
This whole issue of wealth disparity isn’t going away. According to a recent poll published by the Pew Research Center, nearly two-thirds of Americans believe that the wealth gap is the greatest cause of tension in America. And that includes 55% of Republicans. This may become a major issue for Republican front runner Mitt Romney who is portraying this as just a President Obama ploy of encouraging envy and class warfare. Romney may be completely misreading the electorate.
THE EURO
I have yet to see any scenario, other than additional delaying tactics, that show how the Euro is going to survive without losing countries like Italy and Greece. And it isn’t just the excessive amount of debt of these countries. These countries are not willing or able to cut spending enough to make a difference. And, even if they do, austerity will just lead to slower economies with less tax income and higher debts. Many people in countries like Greece don’t even own up to their own responsibility for the problems. They blame it on banks, on Germany, on the wealthy, etc. And Germany doesn’t want to eat Greece’s debt because they think that the Greeks are lazy and just living too luxuriously. Sort of like listening to Democrats and Republicans argue about the U.S. economy!
IRAN
It seems like we are heading to some sort of major event with Iran this year, with perhaps Iran blocking oil shipments or Israel/U.S. bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities. Either one will hurt all nations’ economies and will perhaps bring the world closer to war.
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Germany is leading the way! Per the Associated Press, “Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government passed legislation in June setting the country on course to generate a third of its power through renewable sources — such as wind, solar, geothermal and bioenergy — within a decade, reaching 80 percent by 2050, while creating jobs, increasing energy security and reducing harmful emissions.”
Apparently the U.S. has no need for “creating jobs, increasing energy security and reducing harmful emissions.”
PRESIDENT OBAMA
Although it seems a little late, President Obama is finally making some small steps in addressing both costs and jobs. He is suggesting merging some governmental agencies to reduce redundancy, with a resultant reduction of people. The people reductions will come through attrition, not layoffs. On the job front, the President is talking to companies who have brought back jobs to the U.S. President Obama is proposing tax breaks for such companies while removing tax breaks for those that outsource jobs to other countries. Why wasn’t he talking to such in-sourcing companies a year ago rather than dealing with the likes of Jeff Immelt, the CEO of GE, who could be the poster child of outsourcing?
These small steps by our President may help get him reelected. But his steps are baby steps compared to the huge strides this country needs to keep us out of a depression.
SUMMARY
Real unemployment has not gotten better and is likely to worsen as the U.S. moves away from stimulus. Housing prices will continue to drop because of all the homes already on the market and those coming on the market with continuing foreclosures. Current increased spending by consumers is temporary, enabled by increased debt and decreased savings, both of which are near their limits. If the tax holiday regards social security and unemployment benefits are not extended, spending and the economy will slow. And the breakup of the Euro or some major actions related to Iran are likely to be the triggers that finally cause this whole house of cards built on a foundation of debt to crumble. And it will likely be this year; or next year at the latest.
THE STOCK MARKET NUMBERS
The Price/Dividend (P/D) ratio for the S&P 500 is now 50. The current P/D of 50 can be compared to the historical median P/D of 26 and the 17.2 target I use to get back into the market. At current dividends, the market will have to drop 48% to get down to its median P/D and drop 66% to get to my own entry target P/D.
Do not interpret the P/D ratio as a predictor of the direction of the economy. It is a historical unemotional measure that I believe reflects whether the market is overpriced. The P/D ratio can stay very high for many years with little rationale, as it did in the nineties.
Here is where I get my P/D ratios. http://www.indexarb.com/dividendYieldSortedsp.html. Go to the bottom of the table and read the value opposite “Average Dividend Yield (%) of All S&P 500 Stocks.” Take the inverse of this number X 100 to get the price/dividend.
As always, people should use their own judgment/data to affect their own investment strategies; and they should not blindly use the above information. Intelligent people can, and do, disagree.
January 15, 2012 at 6:15 pm |
WELCOME BACK !!!
with all due respect..you remind me of a War horse who, when taken out of the fray pines to
Return no matter the risk.
So it is with me and many others who felt a comparable
Void in our Internet ramblings…
January 15, 2012 at 7:08 pm |
What a welcome surprise!
January 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm |
The US is a debt driven macroeconomy.
As the US goes, so goes the global macroeconmy.
The great attraction for the Brussee hypothesis is that this gentleman appears to understand debt as the causative underlying impetus of the US economy.
Total private, business, governmental debt has doubled about every 9 years. 1980 4T(trillion); 1989 8T; 1997 16T; and 2007 32T. In 2012 the expected progression of debt creation would be about 48T and by 2016 64T.
Debt creation has reached a US macroeconomic saturation asymptote. The asymptote is defined by the elements that Mr. Brussee elegantly discusses in his updates.
Indeed, if the US historical progression of debt creation was perpetuated, total US debt in 2052 would be 1014 trillion – more than enough to handle inflation adjusted and politically gamed entitlement payments.
Total debt in 2012 is about 38 trillion, 10 trillion less than the needed 48 trillion in 2012 for continuation of the dependent debt – asset inflation – wage inflation system that has heretofore represented the growing stable system.
And the federal government contributed nearly all of the 5.5T in the last 4.5 years of extremely sub par debt creation. Without it, ten million unemployed would be on the streets and the US defense system which is not arguably but in fact the backing for the US dollar would be at a BB- rating.
Congress is completely polarized; there are no moderates; there are only bond owner representatives verses citizen representatives :: misguided tea partiers and republicans verses democrats.
These are the qualitative reasons that a nonlinear asset deflation will occur.
For Lammert fractals a nodal valuation low 5/13/10/7 month :: x/2.5x/2x/1.5x SPX fractal can be observed starting in March 2009 with QE1 followed by QE2. This is not… not … the primary fractal sequence. Expect nonlinear devaluation of non US long term debt assets……
Expect the unexpected…….
February 2, 2012 at 8:30 am |
Dear Sir (theeconomicfractalist),
My name is Peter and I would like to establish a private communication with you. Can you please e-mail me at: maxpetar@yahoo.com
Thank you in advance.
January 15, 2012 at 10:03 pm |
Welcome back Warren!
Thank you for keeping this blog alive.
I wish you a very happy New Year!!!!
January 16, 2012 at 2:07 am |
Thank you for taking the time to continue this blog. I’m a regular lurker here and look forward to your updates. Unlike the mainstream media and the used car salesman that call themselves realtors, It’s refreshing that someone like yourself is out there calling it like it is. I see much of what you talk about happening right outside my window here in the Bay Area. Go Niners!!
January 16, 2012 at 2:52 am |
I have gone away for some time and now back, I am glad to see you are back as well. I didn’t know you were gone because I was gone….but I missed your knowledge and insight….Please keep writing…I appreciate your ideas and writings.
-Quentin Lewis
January 16, 2012 at 3:26 am |
Thank you for hanging on !…did very well with TIPS this year,Thanks again !
January 17, 2012 at 12:06 am |
Warren, Do you still believe that the US can inflate out of this thing?
I am agnostic on this myself but I do not see how we can inflate out of it if government cannot or will not flatten spending. Can they ever stop government spending enough?
Unlike in past history today all major currencies are fiat and there is no currency large to replace the euro or Greenback. It seems to me that you need have a substantive currency to move into if you are going to move out of one. I no longer see US investors moving their money to the euro. As there is no other life boat / currency large enough in print to handle the masses. even Gold / silver, though they will likely go up in value, they are a long ways off in supply as well as processing infrastructure capabilities to be used as a day to day retail currency.
How can the dollar plummet like Zimbabwe if there is no currency alternative? Argentina, Germany in the 20′s, zimbabwe etc. Had panic at the currency window because they had alternative currencies like sterling or the dollar (asset backed currencies in many cases).
It seems that the same panic would be quelled as there is no standard currency to outlet too.
As to Gold / Silver being a pure alternative (i state this all as someone who has bought plenty of gold coins and Bullion)……
Even if ma and pa kettle moved their money to gold they would have to pull it out of the bank, contact a metals broker, discuss the varying options of silver vs. gold, coins vs bullion then place the order have a wire transfer from bank acct (oh thats right they just pulled their money out of the bank) correction…. secure the purchase with a CC … oh thats right they either don’t accept a cc or Ma and Pa do not have enough room on the cc for a 10′s of thousands of dollar purchase.
Ma and Pa jump in the model T (or camry as it were) and head back down to the bank to redeposit their money to then begin the process all over again.
Once they place the order for the metal they will wait 30 -90 days depending on what they ordered. They will also lose 5 -10% of their savings in paying commissions to the brokers.
Meanwhile they will have to pay the bills for the farm, feed, mortgage, cable, cheese of the month club etc. so they will have to leave most of the money they originally took out of the bank, back in the bank.
Does that sound like a currency crashing or a bank run to you so far??
Oh, when they get their gold and silver they hide it in 100 different places (in case one gets discovered by an itinerate seasonal farm hand). They will for get about 10% of the places they hid it thus losing another 10% on top the additional 5% they will lose when they turn it back to the metals broker to buy seeds from Monsanto.
Rinse and repeat. Does this sound like it will work?
January 17, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
Thank you for continuing your insightful blog. I read it monthly.
January 17, 2012 at 10:09 pm |
mark joseph asks, “Do you still believe that the US can inflate out of this thing? …I do not see how we can inflate out of it if government cannot or will not flatten spending.”
Inflation is only part of the solution. And, the problem is not just spending; it is also that taxes are much lower than historical and we need to grow jobs. As I have said many times before, the solutions just aren’t that hard. That doesn’t mean that the government will do what is required; but the solutions are doable if anyone in government had the leadership skills to do them. 1) Put taxes back to historical levels. 2) Cut expenses in areas that don’t hurt unemployment, like bringing our troops home (Ron Paul agrees with me on this). 3) Support renewable energy projects by putting a temporary tax on excessive assets gained over the last 10 years. 4) Give tax relief to companies that bring jobs back; take away the tax breaks to companies that outsource jobs to other countries.
Then, let inflation rise to 8%. In 6 years or so you have cut our real prior debt by a third. We don’t need any of the drama you described in your comment.
January 18, 2012 at 4:54 am |
dear warren: a great compromise solution. i think your voice is a great record of the truth about our times. i am glad you are willing to continue. dennis black
January 20, 2012 at 2:39 am |
Hello Warren:
I am glad you decided to continue posting.
Have you read any information from John Mauldin? He sends out newsletters about the world economy. It seems interesting to me. The information can be accessed at http://www.johnmauldin.com. Can you view the web site and post an opinion? On the right (under most popular articles) are the compelling ones.
Thanks,
Curtis
January 20, 2012 at 7:08 pm |
Curtis asks: “Have you read any information from John Mauldin?”
I read his material regularly and I also find it interesting. His writing style is at times a little too verbose and folksy for my taste. But I try to look beyond that to the substance, which is generally quite good in my opinion.
January 21, 2012 at 5:06 am |
Thank You Warren!
January 22, 2012 at 3:08 am |
Welcome Back & Thank you for your post
Wishing you a Happy, Healthy & Proseperous 2012!
January 23, 2012 at 1:45 pm |
Glad to see this blog is back!!! Monthly is more than acceptable.
In case anybody is interested, I also follow Paul Krugman’s blog titled “The Conscience of a Liberal by The New York Times Co.” He blogs a few times each day, and I take it on my Kindle (It is better to read it on the Internet because the graphs do NOT show up on the Kindle) at the huge expense of $0.99/month. Again, he is data driven, and usually tells you where he is getting his sources (with links).
Paul’s blog often involves scanning what others are saying on the economy without the reader having to find those sources (again, he usually includes the links).
About the only real difference between Warren and Paul is that Paul talks in economic lingo. He puts in the title of his blogs whether a particular blog is “wonkish,” and how wonkish. Both see the state of the economy in much the same terms. Hope this blog is helpful to some of the readers here.
January 23, 2012 at 6:31 pm |
Dr. Brussee, I’d like to ask a question that which may be derived by whomever, however your criticism would be appreciated. It’s this: At such point that our domestic fiat currency becomes so debased that hardly twenty dollars would suffice for a loaf of good baked bread…you see, well at that point to which we are nearing would purchasing real assets such as real property at such dollar related values be one of the better markets to venture?
January 23, 2012 at 6:47 pm |
Dear Dr. Brussee,
After my salutation of the earlier post I meant to say “a question to which an answer is sought…”
Thank you again,
Walker Richardson
January 23, 2012 at 7:59 pm |
Walker Richardson asks: “At such point that our domestic fiat currency becomes so debased that hardly twenty dollars would suffice for a loaf of good baked bread…you see, well at that point to which we are nearing would purchasing real assets such as real property at such dollar related values be one of the better markets to venture?”
The rate of assumed debasement is important to answer your question. For example, what a dollar bought in 1913 now costs over $22.00. If the debasement of the dollar continues at the historical rate, then indeed by the year 2110 a loaf of bread will cost over $22.00. Is that the rate of debasement you want to assume?
Not only is the assumed rate of debasement important, but also what “real property” are you going to buy that is assured to do well in the future? Those who bought a home three years ago certainly did worse (on the average, investment-wise) than someone just holding on to U.S. dollars. And I would bet that this will hold true for at least another several years.
February 1, 2012 at 12:01 am |
I am glad that you are back big fan of your book and the blog
February 1, 2012 at 4:00 am |
I want to go back to an idea I put forward fo wihich Warren thought poorly. The idea of capitalizing that portion of the federal budget that was being spent on infrastructure projects which had a payback over many years and then depreciating them over those years.
Warren, related this idea to the CEO of GE using capitalization as a way of reducing expenses in the current years and, thereby increasing the profits of GE during the current year. This pushed up the price of GE stock and probably increased Jack Welch’s compensation. I am sure that what Warren stated about GE is correct but I wonder if it is if it is relevant to what I am trying to accomplish.
I want a way for the federal government to get money to spend on infrastructure projects without increasing the deficit. We really need trillions to jump start the economy and give working people the capacity to consume and still pay down their own debts. It could create jobs, rebuild and modernize a decaying infrastructure and make the US competitive in the 21st century. IN addition, if the projects are well selected and managed the holders of our debt should not only give us the money at good rates but be glad that we are rebuilding.
Please give it a second thought. What do others think.
February 1, 2012 at 11:51 pm |
Way Up North Says: “I want to go back to an idea I put forward for which Warren thought poorly. The idea of capitalizing that portion of the federal budget that was being spent on infrastructure projects which had a payback over many years and then depreciating them over those years… I want a way for the federal government to get money to spend on infrastructure projects without increasing the deficit…It could create jobs, rebuild and modernize a decaying infrastructure and make the US competitive in the 21st century.”
Okay, accounting-wise, you may be able to justify capitalizing some infrastructure projects in that you are extending the useful life of an asset, like the interstate highway system as an example. Per the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, “The Interstate System currently has approximately 210,000 lane-miles of pavement. As these pavement structures reach 40 to 50 years of life, the traditional approach of rehabilitation and resurfacing will no longer be sufficient and major portions of the Interstate System will need to have their pavements and foundations completely reconstructed. The Interstate System also has more than 55,000 bridges and tens of thousands of other significant structural elements, many of which are reaching 40 to 50 years of age. Bridges and other structures of this age usually require substantial rehabilitation, and, as we look out another 20 to 30 years, they will require complete replacement.”
So, rather than waiting for things to actually fail, we borrow the money to do these projects now but don’t include the delayed capitalized portion of the costs in the current deficit. However, in manufacturing when you capitalize a machine, you are doing it on the assumption that future profits or savings will then cover the future recognized capitalized costs. What profits or savings are going to result from these improvements to our interstate highway system? As far as I can see, we would be just setting ourselves up for future costs and increased deficits as we recognize the capitalized costs in future years. Those increased costs may have come anyway, but you are not precluding those costs by doing the projects now. Perhaps if we look at our power system infrastructure, some real savings may indeed be able to be realized, making capitalization more realistic.
I guess that a case could be made that by putting people to work now and getting our economy going now, we will stimulate our GDP and therefore be able to afford the future capitalized costs. But that assumption requires a healthy dose of optimism, especially given all the other delayed costs that are on the horizon, especially related to health care costs for the elderly and social security retirement costs.
It seems to me that we are trying awfully hard to ignore the obvious: this country has enough money to do what it must to stimulate the economy by going back to previous tax levels, quit being policeman to the world, and put some import controls on Chinese goods being made in slave labor conditions. Note that this still enables the extremely wealthy to be very wealthy (so it can’t be called socialism, communism, or any other “ism”- I just want taxes back the way they were 25 years ago), this still enables us to protect our country by putting troops on our borders rather than overseas, and it still enables trade with China (just somewhat reduced).
Now, my idea has no chance of being implemented. So, if Way Up North’s idea can be implemented, I certainly like it better than doing nothing at all, which is what is going on now. The “capitalizing” approach at least has a chance of success. Doing nothing has no chance of success!
As Way Up North requested, let’s get some other readers’ inputs!
February 2, 2012 at 6:48 am |
Hi Warren!
Thanks for coming back on-line.
You have been greatly missed.
Please keep this blog alive.
Peter.
February 3, 2012 at 1:59 pm |
I see the unemployment rate dropped to 8.3% but it seems like not too many are hiring still. Is this more fudging by the Gov to make Obama look good for re-election??
February 3, 2012 at 2:02 pm |
This is this morning’s jobs report. I have to admit I am a little bit shocked at the strength. I think we need to ask the question – Are we missing the start of a new recovery in the U.S. economy?
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 243,000 in January, and the unemployment rate decreased to 8.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job growth was widespread in the private
sector, with large employment gains in professional and business services, leisure and hospitality, and manufacturing. Government employment changed little over the month.
MY NOTE: Employment for the last few months was revised upward.
February 3, 2012 at 9:15 pm |
Way Up North Says: “This is this morning’s jobs report. I have to admit I am a little bit shocked at the strength. I think we need to ask the question – Are we missing the start of a new recovery in the U.S. economy?…Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 243,000 in January, and the unemployment rate decreased to 8.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.”
The headline should have read “People Continue to Take Themselves Out of the Workforce” rather than “Unemployment drops to 8.3%”
Look at the following data from The Bureau of Labor Statistics, Page 8, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate
Nov 2011 64.0%, Dec 2011 64.0%, Jan 2012 63.7%
Employment to Population Ratio
Nov 2011 58.5%, Dec 2011 58.5%, Jan 2012 58.5%
This shows that the rate of employment in the population has not changed at all in the last three months through January, 2012. Instead, a continuing reduced percentage of people consider themselves part of the workforce. Why is this? I don’t know, but I suspect that many people have given up on the idea that they can get a job that meets their qualifications or demands. Or maybe families have discovered that they can live on one income if they reduce spending, or jobs are so demanding that people no longer think they are worth the hassle.
So, we have to decide which BLS number is the one with most value. People taking themselves out of the workforce is NOT a positive for GDP growth. And the unemployment calculation is based on that changing workforce number. So, it seems to me that the employment to population ratio is the more valuable number when trying to ascertain if “we missing the start of a new recovery in the U.S. economy.” We aren’t! The best we can say is that the employment rate is just holding its own with the help of all the debt-driven stimulus.
February 3, 2012 at 10:10 pm |
Did we or did we not create 243,000 new jobs. If we created 243,000 new jobs in January and 200,000 jobs in December, how come the ratio of employment to population stayed the same. I find that confusing. As Ricky Ricardo would say “Somebody’s gots a lot of splaining to do”.
February 3, 2012 at 10:20 pm |
Here is a link to an article that tries to explain the jobs number and put it in perspective.
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/deconstructing-massive-beat-employment-data
February 3, 2012 at 11:43 pm |
Way Up North Says: “Here is a link to an article that tries to explain the jobs number and put it in perspective.”
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/deconstructing-massive-beat-employment-data
Good link!
February 4, 2012 at 3:18 pm |
Way Up North Says: “Did we or did we not create 243,000 new jobs. If we created 243,000 new jobs in January and 200,000 jobs in December, how come the ratio of employment to population stayed the same? I find that confusing.”
Between November 2011 and January 2012, using the same BLS table I referenced earlier, the population rose 1,828,000. To keep the same 58.5% employment to population ratio, we would have had to create 1,069,000 new jobs. The data you quote shows only 443,000 new jobs, so the question should be is why did the employment to population ratio not drop? Well, the BLS table to which I refer actually shows 1 million more people working, which almost keeps up to the population growth needs.
So, we peel the onion down another layer. Why does this BLS show 1 million more jobs and your data shows only 443,000 jobs created? First, the recent BLS numbers reflect a lot of changes/updates. Per The Economic Populist, “The BLS not only incorporated the 2010 Census data but also revised their payroll statistics all the way back to 2007. Part of this is their annual payroll benchmarks, calculated from March 2011 tax receipts, which modified their monthly change statistical model, adjustments to the businesses started and ended and finally the seasonal adjustment algorithm was modified.” This makes comparing January specific data with earlier specific data problematic, at least in looking for small changes. However, ratios should not be quite as big of a problem.
The job creation numbers to which you referred are derived using a completely different methodology than the payroll benchmarks – the job creation numbers are based on business survey results, but also statistically extrapolated from those survey results. In general, these job creation data are considered less reliable than those based on the payroll benchmarks.
Based on all the conflicting numbers, we can’t be totally sure of what is happening to our economy. But, when I include all observations on the economy in general (the slow growth of GDP, the continuing wealth disparity, the growing number of people on welfare/food stamps, etc.); it is difficult for me to believe that real unemployment is dropping so dramatically!
February 5, 2012 at 10:00 pm |
Economic slow growth and system debt saturation…
The value of a system’s money ideally should be based on service, labor, innovation, and societally useful job creation. If a house in 1912 with ‘x’ interest rate cost 2.5-4 times the worker’s annual salary and 100 years later the cost was 2.5-4 times the worker’s annual salary, the currency system in a debt dependent forward based macroeconomy works … in spite of the home being being worth 100 more of the relatively floating currency units.
However, if the house costs 50 or 100 times the annual work salary because inflation is occurring at 10 percent a week or month, the monetary system and economic system doesn’t work.
Periodically forward based credit systems get ahead of themselves. Good regulatory rules resulting from and after the valuation crashes during the preceding credit over expansion cycle are dismantled by the greedy and politically connected.
The politically advantaged create tax advantaged rules to favor gains from speculation and interest on accumulated wealth. The money system ideally based on general socetal beneficience has been corrupted. With tax advantaged rules wealth disparity becomes greater and greater and creates political system instability….
Here we are February 2012. Good news on the job front. But as Mr. (Dr) . Brussee ( PhD engineer?, wouldn’t doubt it; your thoughtful considered writings speak for themselves in regards to intellect – an intended decided compliment) points out, as compared to past 50 years of US job creation, the 5 year averaged gains represent a declining asymptote ratio relative to the US growing population. as a denimnator.
And if the age for medicare retirement is raised to 70 or 80 which would solve the absolute (sans eexpected debt doubling)actuary problem, the denominator grows more….
The 11 October 2007 was predicted by the pattern science of saturation macroeconomics as the Generational Saturation Day for the Wilshire on 10 October 2007 on the Huffington Post.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/09/australian-dollar-hits-23_n_67659.html
US equity euphoria was ubiquitous …. As it is oddly now … in spite of the imminent cascading Euro based and derivative dollar linked European debt default.
Now the Wilshire’s 11 October 2007 shadow falls on 6 February 2012 – a similar lower peak valuation area for both the Wilshire and for the Nikkei’s relatively long peak 1989 saturation valuation area: 5/12/10 of 12 -17 year 40000 to 3000, an absolute 93 percent and inflation adjusted 99 percent valuation collapse.
Looking at the Nikkei’s long term pattern can any reasonably pattern observer fail see that the asset valuations in the money-asset-debt system follow inexorable recurrent – growth, peak valuation saturation, decay, and nadir valuation saturation – patterns?
http://www.economicfractalist.com/
For 6 February 2012…
expect a Wilshire minutely valuation gap to a new (lower) monthly high at the beginning of the trading day and ending on or near the low. This will likely near or the final major lower high of the Wilshire’s 1982 9/23 year fractal series.
QE 3, 4, 5, et. al. will be needed to protect (the 0.3 percent super rich elite) US bond holder’s wealth denominated in US dollars. Ultimately that wealth is citizen tax-backed and citizen labor and services backed. Without QE programs US citizens could default on their IOU. A grass root US citizen based third political party could be the rapid means to achieve US bond debt repudiation.
February 6, 2012 at 4:21 am |
Hi Warren & Mr. Fractalist,
:):):):).
Both of your comments and posts are appriciated.
Keep them coming.
February 12, 2012 at 1:31 pm |
Hi Warren,
Very happy to see that you are back, thank you.