U.S. May Lose AAA Credit Rating

More bad news...

The U.S. and the U.K. have moved “substantially” closer to losing their AAA credit ratings as the cost of servicing their debt rose, according to Moody’s Investors Service. ...

...Under the ratings company’s so-called baseline scenario, the U.S. will spend more on debt service as a percentage of revenue this year than any other top-rated country except the U.K., and will be the biggest spender from 2011 to 2013, Moody’s said today in a report.

Government Workers Doing Well in the Recession

Not only is government expanding (and government jobs along with it) but government workers make more on average (in both salary and benefits) than comparable private sector workers.

Federal employees earn higher average salaries than private-sector workers in more than eight out of 10 occupations, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data finds.
Accountants, nurses, chemists, surveyors, cooks, clerks and janitors are among the wide range of jobs that get paid more on average in the federal government than in the private sector.

Overall, federal workers earned an average salary of $67,691 in 2008 for occupations that exist both in government and the private sector, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The average pay for the same mix of jobs in the private sector was $60,046 in 2008, the most recent data available.

Monthly Deficit Tops $220 BILLION in February

Unbelievable, when you consider that the pre-Obama record ANNUAL deficit was $455 billion in 2008.....This administration will blow past that in about 2 months!!

The government racked up a record-high monthly budget deficit of $220.9 billion in February, the Treasury Department announced today.

The latest flood of red ink brings the total deficit for the first five months of the current fiscal year to $651 billion, far exceeding the $589 billion shortfall for the same timeframe in the last fiscal year.

The government ended the 2009 fiscal year with a record $1.4 trillion shortfall. The Obama administration has forecast a $1.56 trillion deficit for this year.

Excellent Analysis of Democrat Health Care Reform

This is Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin explaining the cost problems with the Democrat's Health Care Reform - it's an excellent analysis showing that the bill will increase costs and increase deficits. Watch the whole thing (six minutes long)...

Or, if you prefer reading, here is a transcript (via PowerLine):

RYAN: Thank you. Look, we agree on the problem here. And the problem is health inflation is driving us off of a fiscal cliff.

Mr. President, you said health care reform is budget reform. You're right. We agree with that. Medicare, right now, has a $38 trillion unfunded liability. That's $38 trillion in empty promises to my parents' generation, our generation, our kids' generation. Medicaid's growing at 21 percent each year. It's suffocating states' budgets. It's adding trillions in obligations that we have no means to pay for it.

Now, you're right to frame the debate on cost and health inflation. And in September, when you spoke to us in the well of the House, you basically said -- and I totally agree with this -- I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future.

Since the Congressional Budget Office can't score your bill, because it doesn't have sufficient detail, but it tracks very similar to the Senate bill, I want to unpack the Senate score a little bit.

And if you take a look at the CBO analysis, analysis from your chief actuary, I think it's very revealing. This bill does not control costs. This bill does not reduce deficits. Instead, this bill adds a new health care entitlement at a time when we have no idea how to pay for the entitlements we already have.

Now, let me go through why I say that. The majority leader said the bill scores as reducing the deficit $131 billion over the next 10 years. First, a little bit about CBO. I work with them every single day -- very good people, great professionals. They do their jobs well. But their job is to score what is placed in front of them. And what has been placed in front of them is a bill that is full of gimmicks and smoke-and-mirrors. Now, what do I mean when I say that?

Well, first off, the bill has 10 years of tax increases, about half a trillion dollars, with 10 years of Medicare cuts, about half a trillion dollars, to pay for six years of spending.
Now, what's the true 10-year cost of this bill in 10 years? That's $2.3 trillion.

It does couple of other things. It takes $52 billion in higher Social Security tax revenues and counts them as offsets. But that's really reserved for Social Security. So either we're double-counting them or we don't intend on paying those Social Security benefits.

It takes $72 billion and claims money from the CLASS Act. That's the long-term care insurance program. It takes the money from premiums that are designed for that benefit and instead counts them as offsets.

The Senate Budget Committee chairman said that this is a Ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff proud.

Now, when you take a look at the Medicare cuts, what this bill essentially does -- it treats Medicare like a piggy bank. It raids a half a trillion dollars out of Medicare, not to shore up Medicare solvency, but to spend on this new government program.

Now, when you take a look at what this does, is, according to the chief actuary of Medicare, he's saying as much as 20 percent of Medicare's providers will either go out of business or will have to stop seeing Medicare beneficiaries. Millions of seniors who are on -- who have chosen Medicare Advantage will lose the coverage that they now enjoy.

You can't say that you're using this money to either extend Medicare solvency and also offset the cost of this new program. That's double counting.

And so when you take a look at all of this; when you strip out the double-counting and what I would call these gimmicks, the full 10- year cost of the bill has a $460 billion deficit. The second 10-year cost of this bill has a $1.4 trillion deficit.

And I think, probably, the most cynical gimmick in this bill is something that we all probably agree on. We don't think we should cut doctors 21 percent next year. We've stopped those cuts from occurring every year for the last seven years. We all call this, here in Washington, the doc fix. Well, the doc fix, according to your numbers, costs $371 billion. It was in the first iteration of all of these bills, but because it was a big price tag and it made the score look bad, made it look like a deficit, that bill was -- that provision was taken out, and it's been going on in stand-alone legislation. But ignoring these costs does not remove them from the backs of taxpayers. Hiding spending does not reduce spending. And so when you take a look at all of this, it just doesn't add up.

And so let's just -- I'll finish with the cost curve. Are we bending the cost curve down or are we bending the cost curve up?

Well, if you look at your own chief actuary at Medicare, we're bending it up. He's claiming that we're going up $222 billion, adding more to the unsustainable fiscal situation we have.

And so, when you take a look at this, it's really deeper than the deficits or the budget gimmicks or the actuarial analysis. There really is a difference between us.

And we've been talking about how much we agree on different issues, but there really is a difference between us. And it's basically this. We don't think the government should be in control of all of this. We want people to be in control. And that, at the end of the day, is the big difference.

Now, we've offered lots of ideas all last year, all this year. Because we agree the status quo is unsustainable. It's got to get fixed. It's bankrupting families. It's bankrupting our government. It's hurting families with pre-existing conditions. We all want to fix this.
But we don't think that this is the answer to the solution. And all of the analysis we get proves that point.

Now, I'll just simply say this. And I respectfully disagree with the vice president about what the American people are or are not saying or whether we're qualified to speak on their behalf. So...
(LAUGHTER)
... we are all representatives of the American people. We all do town hall meetings. We all talk to our constituents. And I've got to tell you, the American people are engaged. And if you think they want a government takeover of health care, I would respectfully submit you're not listening to them.

So what we simply want to do is start over, work on a clean-sheeted paper, move through these issues, step by step, and fix them, and bring down health care costs and not raise them. And that's basically the point.

Graph of Recent Federal Deficits

This is why I don't believe the White House when they claim they will fix the deficit "later."

Government Union Jobs Growing

While private industry continues to lose jobs, the number of government jobs continues to increase. This is a problem for several reasons:
1) you can't easily fire people from government jobs (even if they are incompetent or unnecessary),
2) government jobs are now paying more and giving more in benefits on average than the private sector (all of which are paid for by us), and
3) once you have a critical mass of people employed by the government, there is no incentive to reform or improve the efficiency of government.

While the private sector has lost 7 million jobs, the number of public-sector jobs has risen. The number of federal government jobs has been increasing by 10,000 a month, and the percentage of federal employees earning over $100,000 has jumped to 19 percent during the recession. (emphasis added)

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Public-sector-unions-bleed-taxpayers-to-help-Dems-83652517.html#ixzz0eyACifIL

Deficit Worse Than We Thought

A few days ago I posted on the record-breaking deficits for 2009 and 2010. Now the Obama Administration admits that the budget it is proposing will incur closer to a $1.6 Trillion deficit for 2010. This means that in two years of President Obama and Democrats in charge, our overall national debt will have gone up something like 30%. Here is some detail on action that Congress is likely to take this week.

The debt measure set for a House vote Thursday would raise the cap on federal borrowing to $14.3 trillion. That's enough to keep Congress from having to vote again before the November elections on an issue that is feeding a sense among voters that the government is spending too much and putting future generations under a mountain of debt to do it.

Already, the accumulated debt amounts to $40,000 per person. And the debt is increasingly held by foreign nations such as China.

Passage of the bill would send it to President Barack Obama, who will sign it to avoid a first-ever, market-rattling default on U.S. obligations. Democrats barely passed it through the Senate last week over a unanimous "no" vote from GOP members present.

To ease its passage, Democrats attached tougher budget rules designed to curb a spiraling upward annual deficit - projected by Obama to hit a record $1.56 trillion for the budget year ending Sept. 30. The new rules would require future spending increases or tax cuts to be paid for with either cuts to other programs or equivalent tax increases.

If the rules are broken, the White House budget office would force automatic cuts to programs like Medicare, farm subsidies and veterans' pensions. Current rules lack such teeth and have commonly been waived over the past few years at a cost of almost $1 trillion.

Skeptics say lawmakers also will find ways around the new rules fairly easily. Congress, for example, can declare some spending an "emergency" - a likely scenario for votes later this month to extend jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed.

Deficits and More Deficits

The Congressional Budget Office predicts the 2010 budget deficit will be $1.35 TRILLION, after a budget deficit in 2009 of $1.4 TRILLION. Yes, that is PER YEAR.

Compare that to the $455 Billion deficit the last year of the Bush Administration, which at that point was the largest deficit in history. That was a horrible deficit - it just looks tiny now in the face of annual deficits that are more than 3 Times the magnitude.

Since 2006, when Democrats took control of Congress (which is where money is spent), the deficit has increased 38%. It took us 60 years to get to a $10 Trillion deficit - we will be at $20 Trillion before you know it!!.

What is sad but funny about the new "spending freeze" proposed by President Obama is that the tiny part of the budget that it will affect (roughly 13%) will be "frozen" at the inflated spending levels of the last year!!

U.S. Dollar in Decline

As the world begins to to talk about pricing oil in a currency other than the dollar, the dollar has also lost its status as the reserve currency of the world.

Over the last three months, banks put 63 percent of their new cash into euros and yen -- not the greenbacks -- a nearly complete reversal of the dollar's onetime dominance for reserves, according to Barclays Capital. The dollar's share of new cash in the central banks was down to 37 percent -- compared with two-thirds a decade ago...

...Economists believe the market rebellion against the dollar will spread until Bernanke starts raising interest rates from around zero to the high single digits, and pulls back the flood of currency spewed from US printing presses.

"That's a cure, but it's also going to stifle any US economic growth," said Schiff. "The economy is addicted to the cheap interest and liquidity."

Economists warn that a jump in rates will clobber stocks and cripple the already stalled housing market.

"Bernanke's other choice is to keep rates at zero, print even more money and sell more debt, but we'll see triple-digit inflation that could collapse the economy as we know it.

"The stimulus is what's toxic -- we're poisoning ourselves and the global economy with it."

Our rapidly increasing national debt along with expansionary spending policies (causing the U.S. government to print more money while keeping interest rates near zero) is leading the world to believe that we are no longer a reliable source of investment.

U.S. Currency and Financial Stability

The World Economic Forum has come out with their rankings...the U.S. is now ranked 50th in currency stability and 38th in financial stability.

And our Congress continues to spend money that we don't have....don't look for these numbers to get any better any time soon.

Has the Stimulus Bill Helped the Economy?

Early in the year we were told that the massive, pork-laden stimulus bill had to be passed immediately so that our economy could rebound more quickly. The Obama Administration showed us graphs of what would happen with and without the stimulus package. They promised it would "create or save" millions of jobs (never mind that you can't measure "saved" jobs).

Well, if you go back and look at that graph, we WORSE OFF than we would have been WITHOUT that massive spending bill. Except, of course, that our government is further in debt...

click here for graph

US Debt Per Household Tops $546,668

The amount of federal U.S. debt per household is now $546,668.

Bottom line: The government took on $6.8 trillion in new obligations in 2008, pushing the total owed to a record $63.8 trillion.

And this is before General Motors and Chrysler, the 2009 Stimulus bill and the 2009 Omnibus bill. Also before any more government involvement in health care, which is coming up soon!!

And this is before additional federal deficits are piled on...remember this chart?

GM=Government Motors?

First we bailed GM out with $17.5 billion last December...then an additional $6 billion in March.

At that time President Obama said "We cannot make the survival of our auto industry dependent on an unending flow of taxpayer dollars. These companies -- and this industry -- must ultimately stand on their own, not as wards of the state."

After GM declares bankruptcy today, the U.S. Government will own 70% of the company, with upwards of $50 billion in federal money being infused into the new GM.

The United States will accept stock in lieu of the cash the company owes, and Washington -- that is, you, the taxpayer -- will become the owner of 70 percent of the new GM. When might the company stand on its own, to paraphrase Mr. Obama? When would the government exit the stage? The (Washington) Post reports today that administration officials hope to depart within five years, but the truth is that nobody knows when or whether taxpayers would recover their investment. (emphasis added)

Not only that, but the deal made goes against U.S. bankruptcy rules by giving other claimants more stock/money than secured bondholders (see earlier posts). And, the Treasury Department has given GM a list of which dealerships must be closed, without ever disclosing any kind of criteria for which should be closed and which should not (profitability is not the criteria, as the list shows).

Also amazing is that the Executive Branch has engineered this entire thing without Congress, even though something like this would traditionally be handled by Congress.

Government Workers are Sitting Pretty

Years ago, my Dad suggested I get a job in the government, because they have rich benefits, short hours, and you can't get fired!! I never took him up on this advice, but you can really see how right he was....

A study in 2005 by the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute estimated that the average public-sector worker earned 46% more in salary and benefits than comparable private-sector workers. The gap has only continued to grow. For example, state and local worker pay and benefits rose 3.1% in the last year, compared to 1.9% in the private sector, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

But the real power of the public sector is showing through in this economic crisis. Some five million private-sector workers have lost their jobs in the last year alone, and their unemployment rate is above 9% according to the BLS. By contrast, public-sector employment has grown in virtually every month of the recession, and the jobless rate for government workers is a mere 2.8%. For anyone who thinks such low unemployment numbers are good news, remember that the bulging public sector must be paid for with revenues that most governments don't currently have. (emphasis added)

Remember, we pay for those salaries and benefits.

In addition to having recession-proof jobs and rich benefit plans, the public sector unions yield great political power. For example:

The Obama administration is threatening to rescind billions of dollars in federal stimulus money if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state lawmakers do not restore wage cuts to unionized home healthcare workers approved in February as part of the budget.

California has a huge budget deficit, and unlike the federal government, cannot print money or issue debt to pay for their deficits. But it looks like they won't be allowed to cut public payrolls either, which will make it nearly impossible to get their deficits under control. Not to mention the philosophical issues with the federal government telling a state how to run their business...

$100 Million in Budget Cuts - Short Video to Provide Perspective

Only 100 seconds, and is a good visualization.... Video

TARP Funds Closer to $3 Trillion than the $700 Billion Passed Last Fall

More troubling news about the TARP bailout (in addition to the fraud investigations and the threats made by the government to banks):

On April 21, the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program Act of 2009--"SIGTARP"--submitted his quarterly report to Congress on his office's activities in relation to the TARP program. The report is a disquieting document that should be read by every American--certainly be every taxpayer.

The Inspector General's report documents the stunning and at least partly illegal expansion of TARP from the $700 billion originally allocated by Congress to what is now a $3 trillion complex of programs. This chart shows the various programs that are now included within SIGTARP's oversight, and how they have expanded from the initial $700 billion. Note that some of the programs are still incipient; $3 trillion is by no means a final number.

It is also distressing that the Treasury is refusing to tell taxpayers how this money is being spent (this is from the SIGTARP report):

In light of the fact that the American taxpayer has been asked to fund this extraordinary effort to stabilize the financial system, it is not unreasonable that the public be told how those funds have been used by TARP recipients. Treasury is now conducting regular surveys of the banks' lending activities; however, with the exception of Citigroup and Bank of America, Treasury has refused to seek further details on TARP recipients' use of funds.

The entire report is available here.

Saving Money?

Yesterday, President Obama asked his Cabinet to save $100 Million out of their budgets. While it's always good when the government cuts back expenditures, $100 Million is a tiny percentage of the $1 Trillion operating budget for the cabinets this year alone (it's about 1/10000 of a percent).

So let's not fool ourselves that government spending is being reined in. This year will be the biggest budget in our history, and this year's deficit will by over 4 times larger than last year's deficit.

Spending vs Spending Cuts - In Pictures

Granted, the Heritage Foundation is a conservative organization. However, they do a good job of reporting facts. The numbers are not made up. The picture and example in this post say it all. And just to reiterate. Any money that they do "cut" is not going back to the taxpayers. It is just "less overspending".

Stimulus Bill at Work?

We are now hearing that President Obama sees signs of optimism from the economy. Could it be a result of the actions of Congress and this Administration, in moving so quickly to pass a huge stimulus bill?

The answer is no....stimulus funds are just now starting to percolate down, with many not slated to be spent until 2010 (and 30% slated to be spent after 2010).

White House officials say the bulk of the money will start hitting the streets later this year and early next, with the goal of spending 70 percent of it by the summer of 2010.

Is it possible that we could be in relatively the same economic position without having spent 800 Billion dollars that we don't have? We will never know.

The good news: some of the delay in spending the funds is because state and local officials must show plans for how they will use the money before they can get it.

Bush Deficits vs. Projected Obama Deficits

This is why so many people are upset with what's happening in Washington. From the Washington Post:

U.S. Government Deficits

Data is from the Congressional Budget Office.