"The US Is Bankrupt," Blasts Biderman, "We Now Await The Cramdown" Submitted by Tyler Durden on 08/04/2014 21:32 -0400 B+ Bond Budget Deficit Charles Biderman Cramdown ETC Federal Reserve Federal Tax Gross Domestic Product Medicare Moral Hazard Precious Metals Purchasing Power Real estate Reality Tax Revenue TrimTabs White House Z.1 in Share 8 Submitted by Chris Hamilton via Charles Biderman TrimTabs' blog , US is Bankrupt: $89.5 Trillion in US Liabilities vs. $82 Trillion in Household Net Worth The Gap is Growing. We Now Await the Nature of the Cramdown. There are many ways to look at the United States government debt, obligations, and assets. Liabilities include Treasury debt held by the public or more broadly total Treasury debt outstanding. There’s unfunded liabilities like Medicare and Social Security. And then the assets of all the real estate, all the equities, all the bonds, all the deposits…all at today’s valuations. But let’s cut straight to the bottom line and add it all up… $89.5 trillion in liabilities and $82 trillion in assets . There. It’s not a secret anymore…and although these are all government numbers, for some strange reason the government never adds them all together or explains them…but we will. The $89.5 trillion in liabilities include: $20.69 trillion $12.65 trillion public Treasury debt (interest rate sensitive bonds sold to finance government spending) Fyi – $5.35 trillion of “intra-governmental” Treasury debt are not included as they are considered an asset of the particular programs (SS, etc.) and simultaneously a liability of the Treasury $6.54 trillion civilian and Military Pensions and Benefits payable $1.5 trillion in “other” liabilities http://www.fms.treas.gov/finrep13/note_finstmts/fr_notes_fin_stmts_note13.html . $69 trillion (present value terms what should be saved now to make up the present and future anticipated tax shortfalls vs. present and future payouts). $3.7 trillion SMI (Supplemental Medical Insurance) $39.5 trillion Medicare or HI (Hospital Insurance) Part B / D $25.8 trillion Social Security or OASDI (Old Age Survivors Disability Insurance) Fyi – $5+ trillion of additional unfunded state liabilities not included. Source: 2013 OASDI and Medicare Trustees’ Reports. (pg. 183), http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/661234.p These needs can be satisfied only through increased borrowing, higher taxes, reduced program spending, or some combination. But since 1969 Treasury debt has been sold with the intention of paying only the interest (but never repaying the principal) and also in ’69 LBJ instituted the “Unified Budget” putting all social spending into the general budget reaping the gains in the present year absent calculating for the future liabilities. If you don’t know the story of how unfunded liabilities came to be and want to understand how this took place, please stop and read as USA Ponzi explains nicely… http://usaponzi.com/cooking-the-books.html $81.8 trillion in US Household “net worth” According to the Federal’s Z.1 balance sheet http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/z1r-5.pdf , the US has a net worth of $81.8 trillion – significantly up from the ’09 low of $55.5 trillion…a $23 trillion increase in five years. Fascinatingly, “household” liabilities are still $500 billion lower now than the peak in ’08 but asset “valuations” are up $22.5 trillion. All while wages have been declining. A cursory glance at the Federal Reserve’s $4 trillion in balance sheet growth in the same time period shows how the lack of growth in “household” liabilities (currently @ $13.7 trillion) has been co-opted by the Fed. I believe it’s clear when incomes no longer supported credit and debt growth in ’08, consumers tapped out and in stepped the Federal Reserve to bridge the slowdown. But what the Fed may or may not have realized is once they stepped in, there was no stepping out. (Charles, would be great if you could export this chart from FRED to be included…or if you have a better idea to show this relationship, would be great???) http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=GVF How We Got Here – Growth of Debt vs. GDP 45 years of ever increasing debt loads, social safety net growth, corporate welfare. 45 years of Rep’s and Dem’s in the White House and Congress bought by special interests and politicians buying citizens votes with laws enacted absent the revenue to pay for them. We have a Treasury and Federal Reserve willing to “innovate” and wordsmith to avoid the national recognition of the true difficulties and implications of our present situation. 45 years of intentionally avoiding an honest accounting of our national obligations, mislabeling, and misdirecting to pretend these obligations can and will be honored. 45 years of cornice like debt and promise accumulation simply awaiting the avalanche of claimant redemptions and debt repayments. First, an historical snapshot for perspective of the last time US Treasury debt was larger than our economy (debt/GDP in excess of 100% in 1946) and subsequent progress of debt vs. GDP…and why anyone suggesting there is a parallel from post WWII to now is simply ill informed. Post-WWII: ’46-’59 (13yrs) Debt grew 1.06x’s ($269 B to $285 B) GDP grew 2.2x’s ($228 B to $525 B) ’60-’75 (15yrs) Debt grew 2x’s ($285 B to $533 B) GDP grew 3.3x’s ($525 to $1.7 T) Income grew 3.3x’s ($403 B to $1.37 T) ’65 Great Society initiated, ’69 unfunded liabilities begin under a “Unified Budget” Post-Vietnam War: ’76 -’04 (28yrs) Debt grew 15x’s ($533 B à $7.4 T) Unfunded liability 15x’s ($3 T to $45 T) GDP grew 7.3x’s ($1.7 T à $12.4 T) Income grew 7.4x’s ($1.37 T to $10.1 T) ’05 -’14 (9yrs) Debt grew 2.4x’s or 240% ($7.4 T à $17.5 T) Unfunded liability 1.5x’s ($45 T to $69 T) GDP grew 1.4x’s or 140% ($12.4 T à $17 T) Income grew 1.4x’s ($10.1 T to $14.2 T) Z1 Household net worth grew 1.25x’s from $65 T to $82 T… http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/2014/pdf/pi0614_hist.pdf If the trends continue as they have since ’75, Treasury debt will grow 2x’s to 3x’s faster than GDP and income to service it…and the results would look as follows in 10 years: ’15 – ‘24 Treasury debt will grow est. ($17.5 T à $34 T to $44 T) GDP* will grow est. ($17 T à $22 T to $24 T)…income growth likely similar to GDP. * = I won’t even get into the overstatement of economic activity within the GDP #’s…just noting there is an overstatement of activity. So, while the Treasury debt growth rate skyrocketed from ’05 onward and the GDP growth slumped to its lowest since WWII, the unfunded liabilities grew even faster. Drumroll Please – Total Debt/Obligation growth vs. Debt Let’s go back to our ’75-’14 numbers and recalculate based on total Federal Government debt and liabilities: ’75-’14 debt (total government obligations) grew 33x’s 168x’s ($533 B à $17.5 T $89.5 T*) GDP grew 10x’s ($1.7 T to 17 T) Household net worth grew 15x’s ($5.4 to $82 T) while median household income grew 3x’s (est. $17k to $51k) while Real median household income grew 1.13x’s ($45k to $51k) *$89.5 T is the 2012 fiscal year end budget number, the 2013 fiscal year end # is likely to be approx. $5+ T higher, or debt grew 180x’s in 40 years vs. 10x’s for GDP / income….but seriously, does it really matter if debt grew at 10x’s, 16x’s, or 18x’s the pace of the underlying economy…all are uncollectable in taxes and unpayable except for QE or like programs. Why Can’t We Pay Off the Debt or Even Pay it Down? Take 2013 Federal Government tax revenue and spending as an illustration: $16.8 Trillion US economy (gross domestic product) $2.8 Trillion Federal tax revenue (taxes in) $3.5 Trillion Federal budget (spending out) -$680 Billion budget deficit (bridged by sale of Treasury debt spent now and counted as a portion of GDP) = $550 Billion economic growth?!? PLEASE NOTE – The ’13 GDP “growth” is less than the new debt (although the new debt spent is counted as new GDP) and the interest on the debt will need be serviced indefinitely. Why Cutting Benefits or Raising Taxes Lead to the Same Outcome While many try to dismiss these liabilities assuming we will continue to only service the debt rather than repay principal and interest; assuming we turn down the SS benefits via means testing, delaying benefits, reducing benefits; assuming we will bend the curve regarding Medicaid, Medicare, and Welfare benefits; assuming we will avoid further far flung wars and military obligations and stop feeding the military industrial complex; assuming no future economic slowdowns or recessions or worse; assuming a cheap and plentiful energy source is found to transition away from oil. But all these debts and liabilities are someone else’s future income they are now reliant upon; someone’s future addition to GDP. If these debts or obligations are curtailed or cancelled to reduce the debt or future liability, the future GDP slows in kind and tax revenues lag and budget deficits grow. Of course I do advocate these debts and liabilities cannot be maintained, but austerity (real austerity) is painful and would set the stage for a likely depression where the nation (world) proceeds with a bankruptcy determining what and how much of the promises made can be honored until wants, needs, and means are all brought back in alignment. So What’s it All Mean? Let’s get real, austerity is not going to happen and we aren’t going to balance the budget. We’re never going to pay off our debt or even pay it down. We’re rapidly moving from 4 taxpayers for every social program recipient to 2 per recipient. And ultimately, now we aren’t even really paying the interest on the debt…the Federal Reserve is just printing money (QE1, 2, 3) to buy the bonds and push the interest payments ever lower masking the true cost of these programs. Of course, interest rates (Federal Funds Rates) have edged lower since 1980’s 20% to todays 0% to make the massive increases in debt serviceable. Politicians and central bankers have shown they are going to print money to fulfill the obligations despite the declining purchasing power of the money. It’s not so much science as religion. A belief that infinite growth will be reality through unknown technologies, innovations, and solutions that in four decades have gone unsolved but somehow in the next decade will not only be solved but implemented. Because it is credit that is undertaken with a belief that the obligation will ultimately allow for future repayment of principal, interest, and a profit. But without the growth, the debt cannot be repaid nor liabilities honored. Without the ability to repay the principal, the debts just grow and must have ever lower rates to avoid interest Armageddon. This knowledge creates moral hazard that ever more debt will be rewarded with ever lower rates and thus ever greater system leverage. The politicians and central bankers will continue stepping in to avoid over indebted individuals, corporations, crony capitalists, cities, states, federal government from failing. It is a fait accompli that a hyper-monetization has/is/will take place…and now it is simply a matter of time until the globe either becomes saturated with dollars and/or reject the currency (so much to discuss here on likely demotion or replacement of the Petro-dollar and more…) . Because the earthquake (unpayable debt and obligations) has already taken place, now we are simply waiting for the tsunami. Forget debt repayment or debt reduction…forget means testing or “bending cost curves”…we’re approaching the moment where even at historically low rates we will not be able to pay the interest and maintain government spending…without printing currency as this generation of American’s have never seen. Bad governance and bad policy coupled with disinterested citizens will demand it. Epilogue – So Where Do you put your Money? No one can really know what will have value in this politicized crony capitalistic system as the hyper-monetization ramps up…all I can suggest is to hedge your bets with some physical precious metals, some minimal leveraged real estate, but also stocks and bonds and even some cash…because although there are natural forces in favor of the tangible, finite goods…there are also equally determined forces bound to push bond yields down, real estate and particularly stock prices up. Unfortunately, the more you know, the more you know you don’t know…invest and live accordingly. Average: 4.73913 Your rating:None Average:4.7 (23votes)
The Financial System Doesn't Just Enable Theft, It Is Theft Submitted by Tyler Durden on 07/31/2013 16:49 -0400 CPI fixed Gross Domestic Product Purchasing Power Quantitative Easing Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog , It's not just inflation that is theft. It is painfully self-evident that our financial system doesn't just enable theft, it is theft by nature and design. If you doubt this, please follow along. Inflation is theft, but we accept inflation because we've been persuaded it benefits us. Here's the basic story: our financial system creates new credit money (i.e. debt) in quantities that are only limited by the appetites of borrowers and the value of assets they buy with freshly borrowed money. If this expansion of credit money exceeds the actual growth rate of the real economy, inflation results. Since our economy is ultimately based on expanding debt in every sector (government, corporations, households), inflation is a good thing because it enables borrowers to pay back old debt with cheaper money. For example, if J.Q. Citizen makes $50,000 a year and owes $50,000 on his fixed-rate mortgage, what happens if inflation jumps 100%? Assuming J.Q.'s wages rise along with prices, his earnings jump to $100,000 while mortgage remains at $50,000. Though prices of everything else have also doubled, the debt remains fixed, making it much easier for J.Q. to service the mortgage. Before inflation, it might have taken ten days of earnings to make enough money to pay the mortgage payment; after inflation, it only takes five days' wages to make the payment. This apparent benefit evaporates if wages do not rise along with the price of goods and services. If earned income stagnates during inflation, the purchasing power of wages declines. If it took two days' earning to pay for groceries and gasoline before inflation, now it takes three days' wages. The wage earner is measurably poorer thanks to inflation. How much poorer? Take a look: (chart by Doug Short ) Using the governments' flawed consumer price index (CPI), household income has declined over 7%. But this understates inflation in a number of ways; as several readers pointed out after reading What's Up with Inflation? (July 25, 2013), such calculations of inflation do not track the reduction in package contents that mask the fact that our dollars are purchasing less goods even though the package remains unchanged: the cereal box is the same size as last year but the quantity of corn flakes has declined. There are other reasons to be skeptical of official measures of inflation. As I note in the above link, how can healthcare be 18% of the GDP but only 7% in the CPI's weighting scheme? The obvious fact is that inflation is stealing purchasing power from every household with earned income, for the simple reason that wages are not rising in tandem with prices. In 19th century Britain, the price of bread remained stable for most of the century: the price of a loaf of bread in 1890 was the same as it was in 1850. Any increase in wages in a no-inflation environment means the wage earner's purchasing power has increased. In an inflationary financial system, as earned income stagnates, everyone without access to credit and leverage loses purchasing power, i.e. becomes poorer. The advent of unlimited credit and leverage enabled new and less overt forms of expropriation, otherwise known as theft. Let's say that two traders enter a great trading fair seeking to buy goods to sell elsewhere for a fat profit. That is, after all, the purpose of the capitalist fair: to enable buyers and sellers to mutually profit. One trader uses the time-honored method of letters of credit: he buys and sells during the fair by exchanging letters of credit which are settled at the end of the fair via payment of balances due with gold or silver. Ultimately, the trader's purchases are limited by the amount of silver/gold (i.e. real money) he possesses. Trader #2 has access to leveraged credit, meaning that he has borrowed 100 units of gold with a mere 10 units of gold and the promise of paying interest on the borrowed 90 units. This trader can buy 10 times more goods than Trader #1, and thus reap 10 times more profit. After paying 10% in interest, Trader #2 reaps 9 times more profit based on the credit-funded expansion of his claim on resources. The issuance of paper money is an even more astonishing shortcut claim on real-world resources. Trader #3 brings a printing press to the fair and prints off "money" which is a claim on resources. The paper is intrinsically worthless, but if sellers at the fair accept its claimed value, then they exchange real resources for this claim of value. Needless to say, those with access to leveraged credit and the issuance of fiat money have the power to make claims on resources without actually having produced anything of value or earned tangible forms of wealth. Those with political power and wealth naturally have monopolies on the issuance of credit and paper money, as these enable the acquisition of real wealth without actually having to produce or earn the wealth. This system is intrinsically unstable, as the financial claims of credit and fiat money on limited real-world resources and wealth eventually exceed real-world resources, and the system of claims collapses in a heap. Though this end-state can easily be predicted, the actual moment of collapse is not predictable, as those holding power have a vast menu of ways to mask their expropriation and keep the game going. For example, quantitative easing (QE), which is ultimately the issuance of unlimited credit and leverage to the chosen few at the top of the heap of financial thievery: Are We Investing or Are We Just Dodging Thieves? (July 29, 2013). "The first panacea for a mismanaged nation is inflation of the currency; the second is war. Both bring a temporary prosperity; both bring a permanent ruin. But both are the refuge of political and economic opportunists." Ernest Hemingway, The Next War Average: 4.863635 Your rating: None Average: 4.9 ( 22 votes) !-- -- !-- - advertisements - .AR_2 .ob_empty {display: none;} .AR_2 .rec-link {color: #565656;text-decoration: none;font-size: 12px;} .AR_2 .rec-link:hover {color: #565656;text-decoration: underline;font-size: 12px;} .AR_2 {float: left;width:50%} .AR_2 li {list-style: none outside none !important;font-size: 10px;padding-bottom: 10px;line-height: 13px;margin:0;} .AR_2 .ob_org_header {color: #000000;text-decoration:bold; margin-left: 0px; font-size:14px;line-height:35px;} .AR_3 .rec-link {color: #565656;text-decoration: none;font-size: 12px;} .AR_3 .rec-link:hover {color: #565656;text-decoration: underline;font-size: 12px;} .AR_3 .rec-src-link {font-size: 12px;} .AR_3 li {padding-bottom: 10px;list-style: none outside none !important;font-size: 10px;line-height: 13px;margin:0;} .AR_3 .ob_dual_left, .AR_3 .ob_dual_right {float: left;padding-bottom: 0;padding-left: 2%;padding-top: 0;} .AR_3 .ob_org_header {color: #000000; text-decoration:bold; margin-left: 0px; font-size:14px;line-height:35px;} .AR_3 .ob_ads_header {color: #000000; text-decoration:bold; margin-left: 0px; font-size:14px;line-height:35px;} -- Login or register to post comments 12323 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: "Off With Our Heads!": Bil Gross On How "Future Generations Pay The Price For Their Parents’ Mindless Thrusting" Guest Post: Wealth Inequality – Spitznagel Gets It, Krugman Doesn’t Bill Gross Asks The $64,000 Question: "Who Will Buy Treasuries When The Fed Doesn’t?" His Answer: "I Don't Know"; Gross Is Getting Out Of Risk A Greek Default Doesn't Need To Be Chaotic For Greece This Cloud (Computing) Doesn't Have A Silver GDP Lining
What Gold Nationalization Really Means Submitted by Tyler Durden on 07/25/2013 19:40 -0400 Federal Reserve Nationalization New York Times Submitted by Simon Black via Sovereign Man blog , Gold owners are almost universally familiar with the story of Franklin Roosevelt criminalizing the ownership of gold back in 1933. Executive Order 6102 was signed on April 5, 1933, and it forbade the “Hoarding of Gold Coin, Gold Bullion, and Gold Certificates within the continental United States.” Roosevelt further ordered that citizens in the Land of the Free surrender their gold to the Federal Reserve in exchange for $20.67 per troy ounce in Federal Reserve notes. The term gold ‘nationalization’ is often thrown around. But remember, with nationalization, it’s the state that takes control of an asset. Executive Order 6012 took assets from private individuals, and then gave those assets to a private company – the Federal Reserve. This isn’t nationalization. It’s just theft. You’d think that the entire nation would have been in an uproar. But surprisingly, this wasn’t the case. In fact, the Executive Order didn’t even make the front page of the New York Times, whose main headline the day after was “BEER LEGAL AT MIDNIGHT”. It just so happened that prohibition was starting to be repealed right when Roosevelt’s order was going into effect. So people were too distracted with their pent-up, alcohol-induced euphoria to really notice. Very clever timing. Of course, Roosevelt was not the first, nor the last, to confiscate citizens’ gold. One of my favorite stories involves Charles I of England, who commandeered 200,000 pounds of gold in 1638 as the English Civil War was approaching. This gold belonged to private citizens, not to Charles. The rightful owners trusted their king and were storing their gold at the national mint for safe keeping. This trust proved to be misplaced. And Charles seized the gold, calling it a ‘loan’ (upon which the English government subsequently defaulted). This theme is consistent across history– governments have a notorious, unblemished track record of fleecing their citizens, particularly in times of desperation. History shows that the likelihood of a government pillaging its citizens’ wealth is directly proportional to that government’s fiscal health. Looking back, it seems so obvious. I’m sure the day after the bank account freeze in Cyprus earlier this year, people were probably thinking, “Wow, I can’t believe I didn’t see that coming…” Nearly the rest of the West is in the same position, or worse off, than Cyprus– overextended banking systems, interminable deficits, unsustainable debts, and strong precedents of setting the law aside to violate people’s freedom. All the warning signs are there. And just as in Cyprus, or in 17th century England, it’s going to be so obvious looking back. This is one of the reasons why it’s so important to be proactive now and move a portion of your assets abroad where they can’t grab it. As an example, there’s a fantastic private, secure storage facility here in Vienna called Das Safe that I’ve been writing about for a long time. Das Safe has been around for three decades. And because they’re not connected to any bank or government, it’s possible to anonymously rent a safety deposit box where you can store gold. Under current US law, this is not reportable… so you can truly hold your savings privately, outside the banking system. Of course, gold is just one asset to think about. There’s another asset that I’m even more concerned about governments stealing: retirement accounts. More on that another time. Average: 3.789475 Your rating: None Average: 3.8 ( 19 votes) !-- -- Tweet !-- - advertisements - .AR_2 .ob_empty {display: none;} .AR_2 .rec-link {color: #565656;text-decoration: none;font-size: 12px;} .AR_2 .rec-link:hover {color: #565656;text-decoration: underline;font-size: 12px;} .AR_2 {float: left;width:50%} .AR_2 li {list-style: none outside none !important;font-size: 10px;padding-bottom: 10px;line-height: 13px;margin:0;} .AR_2 .ob_org_header {color: #000000;text-decoration:bold; margin-left: 0px; font-size:14px;line-height:35px;} .AR_3 .rec-link {color: #565656;text-decoration: none;font-size: 12px;} .AR_3 .rec-link:hover {color: #565656;text-decoration: underline;font-size: 12px;} .AR_3 .rec-src-link {font-size: 12px;} .AR_3 li {padding-bottom: 10px;list-style: none outside none !important;font-size: 10px;line-height: 13px;margin:0;} .AR_3 .ob_dual_left, .AR_3 .ob_dual_right {float: left;padding-bottom: 0;padding-left: 2%;padding-top: 0;} .AR_3 .ob_org_header {color: #000000; text-decoration:bold; margin-left: 0px; font-size:14px;line-height:35px;} .AR_3 .ob_ads_header {color: #000000; text-decoration:bold; margin-left: 0px; font-size:14px;line-height:35px;} -- - advertisements - Login or register to post comments 14222 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: NY Fed Finds No Wide-Ranging Risk To Financial System From BP Exposure, Which Likely Means It Is Panic Time What Came First: The Federal Reserve Or Economic Bubbles? A Brief History Of The Federal Reserve's Creation Does A Surging Gold Price Mean The Fed Will Be Forced To Sell Treasurys? What Is The Actual Book Value Of Germany’s Gold Reserves Capital Markets ber Alles: What Mitt Romney's Economic Advisor, Goldman Sachs (And The NY Fed) Really Think
Will It Be Inflation Or Deflation? The Answer May Surprise You Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/23/2013 22:33 -0400 Consumer Prices Federal Reserve Great Depression Gross Domestic Product Hyperinflation Recession Trade Deficit Warren Buffett Submitted by Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse blog , Is the coming financial collapse going to be inflationary or deflationary? Are we headed for rampant inflation or crippling deflation? This is a subject that is hotly debated by economists all over the country. Some insist that the wild money printing that the Federal Reserve is doing combined with out of control government spending will eventually result in hyperinflation. Others point to all of the deflationary factors in our economy and argue that we will experience tremendous deflation when the bubble economy that we are currently living in bursts. So what is the truth? Well, for the reasons listed below, we believe that we will see both. The next major financial panic will cause a substantial deflationary wave first, and after that we will see unprecedented inflation as the central bankers and our politicians respond to the financial crisis. This will happen so quickly that many will get "financial whiplash" as they try to figure out what to do with their money. We are moving toward a time of extreme financial instability, and different strategies will be called for at different times. So why will we see deflation first? The following are some of the major deflationary forces that are affecting our economy right now... The Velocity Of Money Is At A 50 Year Low The rate at which money circulates in our economy is the lowest that it has been in more than 50 years. It has been steadily falling since the late 1990s, and this is a clear sign that economic activity is slowing down. The shaded areas in the chart represent recessions, and as you can see, the velocity of money always slows down during a recession. But even though the government is telling us that we are not in a recession right now, the velocity of money continues to drop like a rock. This is one of the factors that is putting a tremendous amount of deflationary pressure on our economy... The Trade Deficit Even single month, far more money leaves this country than comes into it. In fact, the amount going out exceeds the amount coming in by about half a trillion dollars each year. This is extremely deflationary. Our system is constantly bleeding cash, and this is one of the reasons why the federal government has felt a need to run such huge budget deficits and why the Federal Reserve has felt a need to print so much money. They are trying to pump money back into a system that is constantly bleeding massive amounts of cash. Since 1975, the amount of money leaving the United States has exceeded the amount of money coming into the country by more than 8 trillion dollars . The trade deficit is one of our biggest economic problems, and yet most Americans do not even understand what it is. As you can see below, our trade deficit really started getting bad in the late 1990s... Wages And Salaries As A Percentage Of GDP One of the primary drivers of inflation is consumer spending. But consumers cannot spend money if they do not have it. And right now, wages and salaries as a percentage of GDP are near a record low. This is a very deflationary state of affairs. The percentage of low paying jobs in the U.S. economy continues to increase, and we have witnessed an explosion in the ranks of the " working poor " in recent years. For consumer prices to rise significantly, more money is going to have to get into the hands of average American consumers first... When The Debt Bubble Bursts Right now, we are living in the greatest debt bubble in the history of the world. When a debt bubble bursts, fear and panic typically cause the flow of money and the flow of credit to really tighten up. We saw that happen at the beginning of the Great Depression of the 1930s, we saw that happen back in 2008, and we will see it happen again. Deleveraging is deflationary by nature, and it can cause economic activity to grind to a standstill very rapidly. During the next major wave of the economic collapse, there will be times when it will seem like hardly anyone has any money. The "easy credit" of the past will be long gone, and large numbers of individuals and small businesses will find it very difficult to get loans. When the debt bubble bursts, cash will be king - at least for a short period of time. Those that do not have any savings at all will really be hurting. And some of the financial elite seem to be positioning themselves for what is coming. For example, even though he has been making public statements about how great stocks are right now, the truth is that Warren Buffett is currently sitting on $49 billion in cash. That is the most that he has ever had sitting in cash. Does he know something? Of course there will be a tremendous amount of pressure on the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve to do something once a financial crash happens. The response by the federal government and the Federal Reserve will likely be extremely inflationary as they try to resuscitate the system. It will probably be far more dramatic than anything we have seen so far. So cash will not be king for long. In fact, eventually cash will be trash. The actions of the U.S. government and the Federal Reserve in response to the coming financial crisis will greatly upset much of the rest of the world and cause the death of the U.S. dollar. That is why gold, silver and other hard assets are going to be so good to have in the long-term. In the short-term they will experience wild swings in price, but if you can handle the ride you will be smiling in the end. In the coming years, we are going to experience both inflation and deflation, and neither one will be pleasant at all. Average: 0 Your rating: None Tweet - advertisements - VectorVest Stock Analysis. Find out Whether a Stock is a Buy, Sell or Hold. Get your Free Stock Analysis simply by clicking here! Login or register to post comments 1064 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: How The U.S. Will Become a 3rd World Country (Part 2) Mike “Mish” Shedlock Answers: Is Global Trade About To Collapse; And Where Are Oil Prices Headed? Bernanke Speech And Word Cloud 2012 Year In Review - Free Markets, Rule of Law, And Other Urban Legends Silver Surges Over $46.25/oz As Rumours Of A Short Squeeze And Cornering Market Gain Credence
Guest Post: Why The Government Is Desperately Trying To Inflate A New Housing Bubble Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/25/2013 14:30 -0400 Bond Case-Shiller ETC Fail Fannie Mae Federal Reserve Freddie Mac Germany Gross Domestic Product Guest Post Home Equity Housing Bubble Housing Prices Insurance Companies Reality Sovereign Debt Student Loans Subprime Mortgages Too Big To Fail Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog , The Federal government and Federal Reserve are trying to inflate another housing bubble to save the "too big to fail" banks from a richly deserved day of reckoning. If we want to understand why the U.S. government is doing its best to inflate another housing bubble, we must start with the Devil's Pact partnership of the government and the "too big to fail" banks. Simply put, the TBTF banks would not exist without the Federal Reserve and Federal government bailouts, subsidies and protection from transparent marked-to-market pricing of the banks' collateral and risk. The basis if this partnership is simple: the banks' enormous profits and financial power have enabled them to capture the regulatory machinery of the government (the Central State) and the political machinery controlled by its elected officials. To understand the true meaning of the housing bubble, we need to understand how banks reap outsized profits. In classic capitalism, banks earn profits by maximizing the allocation of capital. In practical terms, this means lending money to low-risk, high-growth, high profit-margin enterprises, and avoiding lending to high-risk, low-margin enterprises. In the industrial era, banks reaped profits by funding large, centralized industrial corporations. In the post-industrial economy, banks began skimming huge profits from credit cards and other consumer loans. Mortgages remained a low-risk, low-yield business that operated more like a utility than an investment bank. When domestic opportunities for profit shriveled in the stagflationary 1970s, U.S. banks went international , loaning billions of dollars to South American nations at high rates of interest. The money-center banks assumed that sovereign debt (i.e. loans to governments) were low-risk. These loans generated enormous profits for the banks, until the unthinkable happened: the debtor-nations defaulted on their sovereign debt. The Federal government and the Federal Reserve had to step in and save the banks from the consequences of their faulty risk assessment and rapacious pursuit of high-risk, high-yield profits. By the 1990s, the new knowledge economy corporations had little need for bank credit. Technology companies generated so much cash, they either didn't need bank loans or if they chose to borrow money, they did so via the corporate bond market. Having already tapped almost every qualified borrower with a mortgage, auto loan or credit card, the big U.S. banks had once again run out of highly profitable markets to exploit. The government and Fed-created housing bubble handed the big banks a new market to exploit: high-yield mortgages to marginally qualified buyers guaranteed by Federal agencies (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FHA, VA, etc.), i.e. subprime mortgages. Federal agencies loosened lending standards so those who by prudent risk-management would not qualify for mortgages were now able to borrow vast sums with little or no money down, and the Fed pushed interest and mortgage rates down to lows not seen in generations in the wake of the dot-com bust of 2000. For PR purposes, this vast expansion of bank lending was sold as a high-minded extension of the "ownership society" (i.e. homeownership) to those households who had previously been denied the opportunity to become debt-serfs due to unfairly tight lending standards. In reality, the entire "ownership society" campaign masked the true intent, which was to open new and unexploited territory for the big U.S. banks to plunder. Even better (from the bankers' point of view), loosened regulations and oversight enabled banks to carve up mortgages into tranches that were then bundled into mortgage-backed securities (MBS) that could be peddled worldwide as "safe" investments for pension funds, townships, insurance companies, etc. The housing bubble enabled big banks to skim tens of billions of dollars in profits from originating mortgages to marginal buyers and securitizing mortgages into MBS. This is the heart of what I call the Neocolonial Model of Financialization : rather than make risky sovereign-debt loans to international borrowers, the big U.S. banks came home and exploited the low-risk domestic housing/mortgage market. When the bubble burst, as all speculative bubbles eventually do, the banks were rendered insolvent: their collateral (the mortgaged housing) had lost much of its value, and mortgages that had been sold as essentially risk-free were revealed as defaults waiting to happen. The Fed and Federal government immediately stepped in to save their treasured partner, the parasitic banking sector, from righteously earned destruction. The bailouts, guarantees and backstops totaled about $23 trillion, roughly 150% of the entire American Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and roughly twice the 2008 value of all U.S. residential mortgages (almost $12 trillion). The housing index has yet to decline to an inflation-adjusted pre-bubble level: valuations are still higher than they were before the bubble. To enable the TBTF banks to once again skim billions in profits, the Federal government and Federal Reserve immediately began trying to reflate the housing bubble. Tax credits were lavished to new home buyers, mortgaged rates were driven even lower, and the Fed began buying $1+ trillion of private mortgages. The first tax-credit frenzy faded once the credits expired, but the Fed's zero-interest-rate policy (ZIRP) gave investors no choice but to put their money in risky assets: stocks, high-risk corporate bonds or residential housing. As we can see in this year-over-year percentage chart of the Case-Shiller Index, these policies have sparked another spike up in housing prices (restricting inventory played a key role in this, of course). As a result, the housing bubble is alive and well in markets such as Los Angeles: If you have any doubts that the banking sector dearly loved the housing bubble, take a look at this chart and note that mortgage debt more than tripled during the bubble . For context on the enormity of that $8.2 trillion expansion of mortgage debt: that $8.2 trillion is three times the 2005 GDP of Europe's largest economy, Germany. (The GDP of Germany in 2005 was $2.7 trillion.) Thanks to writeoffs and writedowns, mortgage debt has declined in recent years, but we need to remember that if pre-bubble growth trends in population and housing valuations had remained in place, total mortgage debt in the U.S. would be around $5 trillion, not $10 trillion. The $1 trillion writedown in mortgage debt is just the start; we only need to write down another $5 trillion to get back to a non-bubble level of debt. Meanwhile, total consumer debt has barely budged. In other words, that $1 trillion reduction in mortgage debt has been offset with rising student loans, auto loans and other consumer debt. The total debt load on U.S. households remains at bubble levels, more than twice the debt owed in 2000. Population growth since 2000 accounts for 9.7% of this additional debt, meaning that if debt had risen at pre-bubble rates, total debt would be around $6.5 trillion rather than $13 trillion. Recall that adjusted income for most households has declined sharply since 2000. So the Fed's zero-interest rate policy is simply a holding action that enables over-indebted households to keep making their debt payments to the banks. Many people claim the Federal government and Federal Reserve are trying to inflate a new housing bubble to trigger a new "wealth effect," i.e. people seeing their home equity rising once again will feel encouraged to borrow and blow money like they did in 2001-2008. But if we look at current income (down) and debt levels (still high), there is little hope for a renewed wealth effect from housing. That leaves us with this conclusion: The Federal government and Federal Reserve are trying to inflate another housing bubble to save the "too big to fail" banks from a richly deserved day of reckoning. To read more on this subject: The E.U., Neofeudalism and the Neocolonial-Financialization Model (May 24, 2012) Average: 4.694445 Your rating: None Average: 4.7 ( 36 votes) Tweet Login or register to post comments 16514 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Guest Post: It's Always The Best Time To Buy Guest Post: All Is Well Guest Post: Apparitions In The Fog Guest Post: Extend And Pretend Is Wall Street's Friend Excelsia's Cliff Draughn Goes In Search Of Your Sleeping Point
What If Corporate Earnings Have Topped Out? Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/08/2013 10:13 -0500 Bear Market CPI ETC Gross Domestic Product Guest Post Medicare Unemployment Via Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog , The market may have reached cyclical highs in corporate earnings. That does not bode well for additional stock market advances. If corporate earnings have topped out, what will push the stock market higher? The usual answer is "central bank intervention," but history suggests that in the long run, the market eventually correlates to corporate earnings. Earnings up, market up; earnings down, market down. Frequent contributor B.C. recently shared some insightful charts of SP 500 (SPX) earnings. Here are B.C.'s comments on the first chart: Note that real earnings (CPI adjusted) in '09 fell to the levels of the 1920s-30s, 1890s, and 1870s, and to the levels of the 1970s in nominal terms. A "typical" cyclical decline would take earnings back to the long-term trend from 1932 and the log trend line at $40s-$50s from $87 today. Also, recall that the Fortune 300 firms have revenues equivalent to 50% to 100% of private GDP at $425,000/employee, so they are the economy. A decline of 50% for profits would be the equivalent of 10% of private GDP, which would match or exceed the decline in '08-'09, risking an increase in the Unemployment rate of 50-100% and a fiscal deficit exceeding 100% of tax receipts after Social Security and Medicare receipts. The next two charts track long-term historic trends: here is B.C.'s commentary: Reported earnings of the SP 500 (SPX) are highly cyclical with a periodicity of ~51 months. Earnings are contracting year-over-year (yoy) as occurred in late '07 and early '08, early '01, etc. Profits as a percentage of GDP at 10-11% are 65-70% above the historical average and 130% above the historical average during recessions and bear market troughs, implying the risk of up to a 55-60% decline in profits and profits as a percentage of GDP, i.e., a roughly $1 trillion decline or an equivalent of 10% of private GDP. The 10-yr. average P/E and 16- and 20-year real changes and real total returns to date for the secular bear market imply the risk of a crash at some point in the next 1/2 to 4 years and no real change to the SP 500 for 20 years, indicating just how grossly overvalued stock prices are historically. Thank you, B.C. for the charts and incisive commentary. Is it mere coincidence that the SPX has doubled over the past four years as corporate profits soared? If we haven't yet reached the 51-month cycle peak, we are certainly close. What happens to the post-QE market if earnings decline? 4th Quarter Earnings Will be an Unmitigated Disaster (EconMatters) Average: 4.5 Your rating: None Average: 4.5 ( 4 votes)
Spoiled Teenager Syndrome Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/03/2013 11:49 -0500 Federal Reserve Guest Post Reality Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog , Is masking risk, cost and consequence a strategy that leads to success? No; it is a pathway to catastrophic failure. What are the core characteristics of the spoiled teenager? The conventional view is that the spoiled teen "gets everything they want." In my view, the key characteristic of Spoiled Teenager Syndrome is that risk, cost and consequence have been masked. This is a systemic point of view, meaning that the masking of risk, cost and consequence help us understand not just the eventual failure of spoiled teenagers but the eventual failure of every group or enterprise that masks risk, cost and consequence as a strategy to paper over an unsustainable Status Quo. This includes families, companies, states and nations. The spoiled teen is spoiled precisely because the risk, cost and consequence of their choices and actions are suppressed by Mommy and/or Daddy. Since Mommy and/or Daddy diligently cover the cost and mask the eventual consequence of Junior's unrealistic expectations and poor choices, the risks created by Junior's choices and lifestyle are also masked. Junior naturally assumes Mommy and/or Daddy will bail him out of every scrape and "make it right" at no cost to Junior. Masking risk, cost and consequence creates an illusory world that eventually crashes on the unforgiving rocks of reality. Anyone who knows parents who have spoiled their kids has stories that beggar the imagination of those who have no choice but to live in the real world. In one such instance within our circle of friends, the daughter who was caught shoplifting told her Mom that she did not want to go to court, and Mom had to do something so she wouldn't have to face any consequence from her actions. This 16-year old apparently believed that Mommy could push risk, cost and consequence aside in all cases; even the law should give way if it proved inconvenient or painful. Are the values, experiences and skills spoiled teens receive going to help them navigate adulthood, or will they encourage a state of permanent adolescence? When will Mommy and Daddy stop hovering, warding off risk, cost and consequence? We know the answer: when they are finally unable to do so. Did all their "help" masking risk, cost and consequence actually aid their child in the long-term? Or did it cripple the child by leading him into a false sense of security, an illusory state where someone will always save you from consequence? What sort of skills to assess and manage risk does the spoiled teen have in hand when risk has been cloaked? How can the teen understand cost and trade-offs when the true costs of their lifestyle have been hidden? How can the teen navigate adult life, which is characterized by taking responsibility for one's actions and being accountable to others, when the consequences of his choices have been smoothed away by Mommy and Daddy? One intrinsic characteristic of parents who have masked risk, cost and consequence is that they do not perceive themselves as having spoiled their children. Instead, they see themselves as "good parents" who are protecting their children from the unpleasant rough edges of life. In their view, there is plenty of time later in life to learn about risk assessment, short-term and long-term trade-offs, costs (both financial and emotional), accountability, realistic appraisals and consequence. These parents seem blind to the reality that their coddling and hovering have left their children disastrously ill-prepared for adulthood. If there is any recipe for guaranteed unhappiness, it is nurturing expectations that are wildly at odds with what real life offers. Risk and return are indeed causally linked. I have watched in amazement as coddled 19-year olds taking a few classes at community college and dreaming of rock stardom confidently declare that they would be OK with being a firefighter in a wealthy city because the starting pay was $80,000. That there are 1,000 applicants for every opening did not seem to register in this young man's assessment, nor did his inability to clean up a weedy backyard; he stopped after an hour or so because there was no consequence to a sorrowfully half-baked effort. I grieve for young people so ill-prepared for a recessionary economy, not to mention marriage, managing scarce income and capital and a hundred other aspects of unsubsidized adulthood. Their parents have essentially robbed them of the slow and relatively safe part of the learning curve, where you get fired for being late at 16 years of age rather than at 26. Is it any wonder that many young people are boiling with frustration when they exit college and the protected enclave of their parents' home to find a world that doesn't respond to their desires for creative expression and their long list of likes and dislikes, i.e. demands? On the other side of the ledger, I have seen quiet young men and women, residents in youth homeless shelters, who received no buffering at all between the teen years and unforgiving adulthood. Abused at home or simply abandoned, they hit the road as the only alternative open to them. Penniless and without family support, they often face bleak choices. Their appraisals (in my limited experience) are by necessity realistic. Of course they are hurting; but ironically, perhaps, they are in some ways better prepared to navigate adulthood than teens who have yet to be exposed to risk, cost and consequence. Is masking risk, cost and consequence a strategy that leads to success? No; it is a pathway to repeated catastrophic failure. What is the Central Planning strategy being pursued by our Central State and the Federal Reserve? Masking risk, cost and consequence. Masking risk, cost and consequence is disastrous not just for teens, but for entire nations.
The Two Charts You Should See Before Risking A Dime In The Market In 2013 Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/16/2012 17:29 -0500 Ben Bernanke Ben Bernanke EuroDollar Gross Domestic Product Guest Post Via Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog , Two charts suggest a major decline is ahead in 2013. "Don't fight the Fed," blah blah blah. Really? What did the market do after QE3 and QE4 were duly announced? It tanked. What if the Fed is out of tricks? It's not really a question; Fed chairman Ben Bernanke said as much in his press conference. It's not clear if the Ibogaine was wearing off or just kicking in, but the Chairman had an apologetic deer-in-the-headlights look of, "Gee, we're out of tricks and I'm sorry to have to tell you what is painfully obvious to everyone who isn't stoned silly on Delusionol (tm)." Now that the Fed's magic hat is visibly out of rabbits, there are all sorts of complexities we could hash over such as the effects of bank charge-off rates on GDP or the Theater of the Absurd "fiscal cliff" play-acting, but why waste all that time and energy when a number of charts forecast trouble for the stock market in 2013? The first overlays bank derivatives with positive fair value against the SP 500 (SPX), lagged 28 months. Is it cricket to lag or advance indicators? Technician Tom McClellan thinks so, as his forward-12-months eurodollar COT/SPX chart has been eerily prescient in forecasting major market moves in 2012. Here is an article on the chart: Stocks And Euro-Dollar Futures Positioning (11/7/12) Keeping in mind that there is no one indicator or chart that accurately forecasts market moves consistently over time, consider this overlay of bank derivatives and the SPX: Charts courtesy of longtime correspondent B.C. Hmm. If there is a correlation here, it doesn't look positive for equities in 2013. Those familiar with McClellan's chart know that it forecasts a serious decline in the SPX in early 2013, followed by a countertrend rally that tops in May. The decline after May is the Big One that punishes everyone who stayed long the SPX. Next up, a long-term chart (from 1973 to the present) of the SPX, adjusted to the trade-weighted U.S. dollar. Were this basic A-B-C pattern to hold, the SPX will reverse sharply in 2013 and fall to the nearest trendline around 600, with a drop into the 300s possible. Yes, yes, I know it's "impossible" since the "Fed has the market's back," but the Fed may have to buy most of the market if it wants to keep it elevated at current levels. As a lagniappe, there is a third pattern suggesting a major decline just ahead: Three Peaks and A Domed House Pattern Signals An End To The Bull Market . Anyone who has studied a few charts knows that it is usually possible to torture a chart to fit the pattern one has already selected as the "likely outcome" (i.e. confirmation bias). But even with this caveat firmly in mind, 2012's SPX bears an uncanny resemblance to the classic Three Peaks and A Domed House Pattern. Here is another analysis of three peaks and a domed house . Could these charts be way off in their forecast? Of course. Nobody knows what the market will do tomorrow, much less next month or next year. Maybe the bulls predicting a new high in early 2013 will be proven correct. We will just have to see what happens. But as the saying has it, "Forewarned is forearmed." Thank you, B.C., for sharing your charts with us. Average: 4.533335 Your rating: None Average: 4.5 ( 15 votes) Tweet Login or register to post comments 15597 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Bernanke's Libor Alternatives EURUSD Surges To 3-Week High; Risk-Assets Mixed Pump, Dump, And Pump; Black Gold Red, Stocks Green, Bonds Blue NYSE Volume: Is This Some Joke...? Yen Set To Regain Funding Crown Soon?
Texas Schools Teaching Boston Tea Party As "Terrorist Act" Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/26/2012 12:56 -0500 Federal Reserve Guest Post Via Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog , Absolutely remarkable... and in Texas to boot! As I have said for years, pretty soon anyone that disagrees with Washington D.C., Federal Reserve policies and rule by TBTF Wall Street criminal banks will be labeled a “terrorist.” That is where all this is headed. From CBS Houston: HOUSTON (CBS Houston) – The most historical instance of protesting against taxation without representation is now being taught in Texas schools as a terrorist act. As recently as January of this year, the Texas Education Service Center Curriculum Collaborative included a lesson plan that depicted the Boston Tea Party, an event that helped ignite the American Revolution, as an act of terrorism. “A local militia, believed to be a terrorist organization, attacked theproperty of private citizens today at our nation’s busiest port, ” wrote the teachers in charge of organizing the curriculum about the Boston Tea Party. “Althoughno one was injured in the attack, a large quantity of merchandise,considered to be valuable to its owners and loathsome to theperpetrators, was destroyed. The terrorists, dressed in disguise andapparently intoxicated, were able to escape into the night with the helpof local citizens who harbor these fugitives and conceal their identitiesfrom the authorities. 1984 has arrived folks. Full article here . Average: 4.25 Your rating: None Average: 4.3 ( 24 votes) Tweet Login or register to post comments 18842 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: A Majority of Americans (Including Both OWS and the Tea Party) AGREE on the Most Important Issues … We Just Don’t Realize It The Real Meaning of the 1-Year Anniversary of Occupy Wall Street Senate Passes Bill Allowing Indefinite Detention of Americans ... Considers Bill Authorizing More Torture Guest Post: Drone Club You're a Potential Terrorist If You Are Young, Use Social Media, Or Question "Mainstream Ideologies"
About Raising Taxes As The "Solution" To The Fiscal Cliff... Submitted by Tyler Durden on 10/26/2012 10:45 -0400 Deficit Spending Guest Post Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog , Raising taxes is the "solution." Too bad incomes are declining. What will raising taxes do to household savings, spending and the economy? We all know cutting Federal spending is politically impossible, so that leaves raising taxes as the only "solution" to the "fiscal cliff." Since most income tax revenues flow from household income, let's look at some charts of the workforce and household income: As a percentage of the population, the workforce has contracted to levels of the late 1970s. As a percentage of national income, labor's share is in a free-fall: Hourly earnings have been trending down for years: Income for every age group other than 65+ seniors has declined sharply: The income of those in their peak earning years 45-54 have been slammed: Household debt loads have soared far above wages: Meanwhile, government expenditures are up, up and away: Yes, I know: the solution is to "tax the rich." The Problem with "Tax The Rich": It Won't Work (May 28, 2010) Will "Tax the Rich" Solve Our Deficit/Spending Crisis? (December 28, 2011) Do the Parasitic Elite Pay Any Taxes? (June 13, 2012) The parasitic Elites should certainly pay as much as the heavily taxed middle class ( The Real-World Middle Class Tax Rate: 75% (July 5, 2012), but since the parasitic Elites have captured the machinery of governance, the chances of Congress actually raising taxes on the top 1/10th of 1% are nil. There will be noises made, of course, for perception management and public relations, but when April 15th rolls around we will find tax revenues are stagnant: loopholes and tax breaks will have blossomed like mushrooms, magically enabling the parasitic Elites to escape any serious reduction in their income. Even if we were able to squeeze some additional taxes out of the parasitic Elites, their income stream is dwarfed by the Federal spending that looms ahead: The Fiscal Cliff and Demographic Drag . The top 1/10th of 1% cannot pay the rapidly expanding Federal benefits of the 99.9%, even if we confiscated every dollar of their incomes. How can tax revenues increase when household incomes are declining? Transfer more of the national income to taxes and that leaves less for savings, investment and consumption. The economy contracts, reducing the workforce and wages further. If that isn't a death spiral, it is a close approximation of one. Average: 3.75 Your rating: None Average: 3.8 ( 12 votes) Tweet Login or register to post comments 4586 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Guest Post: Now That The Easy Stuff Has Failed, All That's Left Is The Hard Stuff Guest Post: The Fiscal Cliff and Demographic Drag Guest Post: The Future of America Is Japan: Runaway Deficits, Runaway Debts Guest Post: The Future of America Is Japan: Stagnation Guest Post: The Real Reverse Robin Hood: Ben Bernanke And His Merry Band Of Thieves
标签: Blog经管大学堂：名校名师名课
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
