Purpose:
To give America's future
a better chance to succeed
than our forefathers
gave our parents
and our parents gave us.
Greensboro CPA CPE "What Could Happen
After What May Happen Next"
September 21, 2010
8:30am to 4:15pm
Drury Inn & Suites,
Greensboro, NC

$100, 8 Hour CPA CPE "What Could Happen
After What May Happen Next"
September 9, 2010
8:15am to 4:30pm
Days Inn, Raleigh-Airport Research Triangle Park
1000 Airport Drive
Morrisville, NC
$100, 8 Hour CPA CPE "What Could Happen
After What May Happen Next"
September 2, 2010
8:15am to 4:30pm
Drury Inn & Suites,
415 W. T Harris Boulevard
Charlotte, NC

|
After receiving the same information,
what are the chances of 100 people thinking relatively the same thing
or acting in a similar way?
34% of Americans said the First Amendment goes too far.
46% believed the press was too free.
28% felt newspapers shouldn’t publish articles
without government approval.
31% wanted war protest outlawed during war.
State of the First Amendment Survey
University of Connecticut, 2003
Are you in grave danger of being slaughtered by terrorists?
…the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,
and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism,
and exposing the country to danger.
It works the same in any country.
Hermann Goering
Have your neighbors been conditioned to think
what they otherwise wouldn’t?
You cannot make a man
by standing a sheep on its hind legs.
But by standing a flock of sheep in that position,
you can make a crowd of men.
Max Beerbohm
Can corporate representatives politicians and media personalities
present information inconsistent with constituent need?
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Lenin
Print This Post
There’s been some suggestions that the payrolls report
had been distorted by the way the Bureau of Labor Statistics
accounts for business births and deaths
There’s been talk that the birth/death model
a little-noted detail in the monthly report
came in with a huge statistical discrepancy for this month
effectively adding as many as 220,000 jobs to the reading
In a conference call with reporters, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis
…insisted the BLS number was correct
and that no changes would be needed
Market Reaction Hints At False Note In Jobs Report
Bob O’Brien
Barrons, June 5, 2009


What is the likelihood
that the Bureau of Labor Statistics Birth/Death adjustment
which guesstimates employment at new businesses
added 220,000 hypothetical jobs in May 2009
including 43,000 new construction positions
as new small business loan availability cratered
77,000 in Leisure and Hospitality jobs
as hotel occupancy hit new lows
and 7,000 Financial Services positions
if 174,000 jobs were estimated in May 2008?
Is it conceivable
that the US created more construction and leisure/hospitality jobs
in April and May of 2009
than in April & May of 2002, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 2008
considering current economic circumstances?

Print This Post
August 18th, 2010 | Tags: Regulatory Ethics
Fed Unveils Slew of Mortgage Rules
The Federal Reserve unveiled…rules…aimed at protecting consumers from abusive lending practices blamed for luring millions into unaffordable home loans.
The rules include a ban on yield-spread premiums, controversial payments that mortgage brokers have historically received in exchange for guiding consumers toward higher-interest rate mortgages.
…The ban, set to take effect April 1, would apply to both mortgage brokers and the companies employing them. It also would prohibit loan originators from steering consumers toward loans that aren’t in their best interest but would generate stronger returns for brokers or loan officers.
…Since the financial crisis started, the Fed has been criticized for failing to enact sufficiently stringent mortgage lending standards and for moving too slowly in curbing the practice of paying yield spread premiums.
The Fed…proposed that lenders clearly tell borrowers what their mortgage could cost them in a “worst-case” interest rate scenario.
In addition, the Fed rules would require lenders to tell borrowers when balloon payments or minimum payment options could hike loan amounts, and disclose how payments could fluctuate for borrowers who have adjustable- or step-rate loans.
Meena Thiruvengadam
Wall Street Journal
Print This Post
If…the Ministry of Plenty forecast a surplus
and in reality the result was grossly less,
Winston’s job was to change previous versions,
so the old version would agree with the new one.
George Orwell
Print This Post
August 12th, 2010 | Tags: Accounting Ethics, CPA Continuing Education, Debt, Generational Ethics, Great Depression, Journalism Ethics, Political Ethics, Social Security, Statistics, Unemployment
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it,
people will eventually come to believe it.
The lie can be maintained only for such time
as the State can shield the people
from the political, economic and/or military consequences.
Joseph Goebbels
Statistics mask real economic pain
The jobless rate improved this week. It’s now 9.7 percent.
So it sounds as if Henry Paulson…can join Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers in self-congratulation over their roles in preventing a second Great Depression.
They can all cite today’s jobless rate and contrast it favorably to 1933, when it was about 25 percent.
…But the fact is that private-sector employment actually looks worse than during the Great Depression. If you compare the numbers with 1933, more than a third of U.S. workers are jobless today.
…In 1933, 25% of the working population meant 12.8 million people were out of work in a workforce of about 51 million. That included senior citizens, because only about 10% of older people had pensions in those years before Social Security.
Now, the federal government says we have an estimated 14.8 million unemployed, out of a work force of about 154 million. But that number is artificially lower than in the Great Depression because 33 million senior citizens are on Social Security — and not seeking jobs as they were then. An additional 7.4 million adults receive disability payments under Social Security, and some would also have been seeking work in 1933.
But that’s not all. We have a far larger standing military than in 1933 — about 1 percent of the work force, or 1.4 million men and women.
Another 1.6 million people are in jails and prisons, a near-record amount, and again a larger percentage of able-bodied U.S. residents than in 1933. They are excluded from the statistics today.
In other words, 43.4 million people are paid for government employment in the military, or supported through government programs. If added to the jobless numbers, it equals about 58 million people.
…The big difference now is that despair is masked. Social Security and the expansions of unemployment insurance mean that people are able to keep the wolf from the door. The bread lines of the 1930s are food banks.
…Maybe that’s one reason why the American people are so angry at their leaders. They know that many of the government statistics are often just statistical sleight-of-hand.
Kirstin Downey
Politico.com
Print This Post
U.S. Is Bankrupt and We Don’t Even Know: Laurence Kotlikoff
Let’s get real. The U.S. is bankrupt.
Neither spending more nor taxing less will help the country pay its bills.
…Last month, the International Monetary Fund released its annual review of U.S. economic policy.
…the IMF has effectively pronounced the U.S. bankrupt. Section 6 of the July 2010 Selected Issues Paper says: “The U.S. fiscal gap associated with today’s federal fiscal policy is huge for plausible discount rates.” It adds that “closing the fiscal gap requires a permanent annual fiscal adjustment equal to about 14 percent of U.S. GDP.”
The fiscal gap is the value today (the present value) of the difference between projected spending (including servicing official debt) and projected revenue in all future years.
Double Our Taxes
To put 14 percent of gross domestic product in perspective, current federal revenue totals 14.9 percent of GDP. So the IMF is saying that closing the U.S. fiscal gap, from the revenue side, requires, roughly speaking, an immediate and permanent doubling of our personal-income, corporate and federal taxes as well as the payroll levy set down in the Federal Insurance Contribution Act.
Such a tax hike would leave the U.S. running a surplus equal to 5 percent of GDP this year, rather than a 9 percent deficit. So the IMF is really saying the U.S. needs to run a huge surplus now and for many years to come to pay for the spending that is scheduled. It’s also saying the longer the country waits to make tough fiscal adjustments, the more painful they will be.
Is the IMF bonkers?
No. It has done its homework. So has the Congressional Budget Office whose Long-Term Budget Outlook, released in June, shows an even larger problem.
‘Unofficial’ Liabilities
Based on the CBO’s data, I calculate a fiscal gap of $202 trillion, which is more than 15 times the official debt.
…It reflects what economists call the labeling problem. Congress has been very careful over the years to label most of its liabilities “unofficial” to keep them off the books and far in the future.
For example, our Social Security FICA contributions are called taxes and our future Social Security benefits are called transfer payments. The government could equally well have labeled our contributions “loans” and called our future benefits “repayment of these loans less an old age tax”…
The fiscal gap isn’t affected by fiscal labeling. It’s the only theoretically correct measure of our long-run fiscal condition because it considers all spending, no matter how labeled, and incorporates long-term and short-term policy.
…How can the fiscal gap be so enormous?
Simple. We have 78 million baby boomers who, when fully retired, will collect benefits from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that, on average, exceed per-capita GDP. The annual costs of these entitlements will total about $4 trillion in today’s dollars…
…This is what happens when you run a massive Ponzi scheme for six decades straight, taking ever larger resources from the young and giving them to the old while promising the young their eventual turn at passing the generational buck.
…Uncle Sam’s Ponzi scheme will stop. But it will stop too late.
And it will stop in a very nasty manner. The first possibility is massive benefit cuts visited on the baby boomers in retirement. The second is astronomical tax increases that leave the young with little incentive to work and save. And the third is the government simply printing vast quantities of money to cover its bills.
…Most likely we will see a combination of all three responses with dramatic increases in poverty, tax, interest rates and consumer prices. This is an awful, downhill road to follow, but it’s the one we are on.
…Our country is broke and can no longer afford no- pain, all-gain “solutions.”
Laurence J. Kotlikoff
Professor of economics at Boston University
Bloomberg Opinion
Print This Post
August 11th, 2010 | Tags: Consumerism
Should consumers breathe in the air when opening a bag of potato chips,
considering the money paid for it?
Is it better to go to a grocery store with a list,
when you’re not hungry?
Could some do what they don’t want
to get what they think they need?
Print This Post
The economics profession appears to have been unaware of the long build-up to the current worldwide financial crisis and to have significantly underestimated its dimensions once it started to unfold.
…We trace the deeper roots of this failure to the profession’s insistence on constructing models, that…disregard the key elements driving outcomes in real-world markets.
The economics profession has failed in communicating the limitations, weaknesses and even dangers of its preferred models to the public.
This state of affairs makes clear the need for a major reorientation of focus in the research economists undertake as well as for the establishment of an ethical code that would ask economists to understand and communicate the limitations and potential misuses of their models.
The Financial Crisis and the Systemic Failure of Academic Economics
Print This Post
…The Diminishing Productivity of Debt Chart
comes from the U.S. Treasury’s latest Z1 data…
…the most important chart of your lifetime.
It relegates almost all modern economists and economic theory
to the dustbin of history.
Any economic theory, formula, or relationship
that does not consider this non-linear relationship of DEBT and phase transition
is destined to fail.
It explains the “jobless” recoveries of the past
and how each recent economic cycle produces higher money figures,
yet lower employment.
It explains why we are seeing debt driven events that circle the globe.
It explains the psychological uneasiness that underpins this point in history,
the elephant in the room that nobody sees or can describe.
This is a very simple chart.
It takes the change in GDP and divides it by the change in Debt.
What it shows is how much productivity is gained by infusing $1 of debt
into our debt backed money system.
Back in the early 1960s, a dollar of new debt
added almost a dollar to the nation’s output of goods and services.
As more debt enters the system the productivity gained by new debt diminishes.
This produced a path that was following a diminishing line targeting ZERO in the year 2015.
This meant that we could expect that each new dollar of debt added in the year 2015
would add NOTHING to our productivity.
Then a funny thing happened along the way.
Macroeconomic DEBT SATURATION occurred
causing a phase transition with our debt relationship.
This is because total income can no longer support total debt.
In the third quarter of 2009 each dollar of debt added
produced NEGATIVE 15 cents of productivity,
and at the end of 2009, each dollar of new debt now SUBTRACTS 45 cents from GDP!
This is mathematical PROOF that debt saturation has occurred.
Continuing to add debt into a saturated system, where all money is debt,
leads only to future defaults and to higher unemployment.
This is the dilemma created by our top down debt backed money structure.
Because all money is backed by a liability, and carries interest,
it guarantees mathematically that there will be losers
and that the system will eventually reach the natural limits,
the ability of incomes to service debt.
Nathan’s Economic Edge
Via Nathan’s Economic Edge

Print This Post
|
Disclaimers
What you may think I'm thinking
isn't necessarily what I'm thinking.
Format originally conceived
to conform
to compliance guidelines
for strategic, economic planning
and financial ethics courses,
for CPAs, attorneys and investors.
If anything can be refined,
don't be surprized
if some posts read differently
later.
Efficacy
through understanding
could be exponential,
as long as most don't know
what they could.
Writing style
is kind of like poetry
only different,
with as little punctuation
possible.
It's not supposed to be easy.
Many opinions expressed
are those of the author
as of the date of the post
and are subject to change
without notice.
Some views
do not necessarily represent
author opinions
or anyone elses.
Information
has been obtained from sources
believed to be reliable,
but accuracy is not guaranteed.
The material has been prepared
solely for information purposes.
The site’s content is provided
as general information only
and should not be taken
as investment or tax advice.
Fine print can take
what big print gives.
All site content
including advertisements
shall not be construed
as a recommendation
to buy or sell any security
or financial instrument,
or to participate in any trading
or investment strategy.
Any action taken
as a result of information, analysis
or advertisement on this site,
is ultimately reader responsibility.
Consult
investment or tax advisers
before investment decisions.
Past perfromance
is no guarantee of future results.
If you were
who you think you were,
and you are
what you think you are,
and some of what will
can, can’t or won’t change,
you may not be
who you think you’ll be.
Some of what was
may not have happened
the way you think.
The only two certainties,
are that you
and everything that’s not you
exists.
Without written exemptions,
sometimes multiple restrictions
may not apply,
unless they do.
Most information
is hypothetical.
What you don’t know
you don’t know
is more than you think.
If what others
think was, is and may
might not be what you do,
weigh author and self bias.
Author is not liable
if observation
alters the observed.
Think for yourself
and act accordingly.
The actual existence
of some information
can neither be confirmed
nor denied.
Author is not responsible
if some hypothetical questions
may not be,
under alternative interpretations.
Charles Darwin
may have been adopted.
Reality may or may not be
more than you think.
Time may exist independently
of human consciousness.
You may be a robot
and not know.
Nothing doesn’t change.
You can’t start over.
|