BUSINESS: America: #22; 49; 54 and Falling Fast

Originally posted by JoeDoaks

Originally posted by ServoHahn
Please excuse me if these issues have already been discussed in the thread (I joined late and currently do not have enough time to read it all, bad form, I know),
1. Don't let people on to the medical care problem, I was against it too until I became pre-med :-p and

I don't get it. What medical care problem?

Please say more ServoHahn!

P.S. Joe, you've stolen the heck out of this post. Bravo, you'll make a good president... or assassinated conspiracy theorist one day. I'll vote for you.

OBVIOUSLY you mean 'thread' (not post)

What can I say- sofi keeps pandering to me. I sometimes think she is baiting me

Am not baiting you!

...You seem to have a solid and deep understanding of things financial. I don't - and most people here probably don't either. IMO - I am just encouraging you to explain things more simply.

...My professional background is in advertising and marketing - have used demographics as a tool in that context, and in volunteer organizations.

Only recently took a look at the relationships between US demographics, economy and market - and the lights started flashing. But don't have the background for a full analysis and haven't connected all the dots yet. So went fishin. Wanted help. Glad to find it.


.

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by JoeDoaks
What can I say- sofi keeps pandering to me. I sometimes think she is baiting me

Am not baiting you!

. . . I am just encouraging you to explain things more simply.

The subtle difference are what make one bait the 'cast of the day' while another returns an empty hook.

As a marketer and advertiser, view these steps downward that you think America is taking. I'm listing a few 'thoughts I have on this, pick them to pieces for me as I'm kind of stuck with them.

Other than wealth, growth (real), military, science (broad based), influence, innovations, manufacturing ability- what is America laking?

Houghton Mifflin companion In 1901, under the leadership of J. Pierpont Morgan and Elbert H. Gary, the United States Steel Corporation, the largest industrial enterprise on earth, was established. Capitalized at $1.4 billion, it controlled more than 60 percent of the American market.

The steel industry continued to be the measure of the size and strength of national economies until well after World War II. American steel production peaked in 1969 when the country produced 141,262,000 tons. But new, more efficient steel plants with much lower labor costs were being built abroad, and these, helped by a sharp drop in transportation expenses, began to give American steel companies increasing competition.

A major shakeout of the industry ensued. By 1975 American steel production had plunged by 37 percent to only 89 million tons. The industry, however, still employed 457,000 workers at very high wages. By 1988 production had rebounded to 102,700,000 tons, but the number of steelworkers had declined to 169,000. Annual steel production per worker had more than tripled in thirteen years.

American steel was once again competitive on world markets. But steel would never again hold the central place in the economy it had held for a hundred years. The age of steel had ended; the age of the computer had begun.

Interesting. There is more, from 2001:

LCA letter
On a level playing field, cost is correctly the deciding factor, but we live in a world where subsidies are rampant. Foreign steelmakers have not sold nearly 120 million tons in the United States in the past three years because they are more efficient than their American counterparts, but because they receive massive subsidies, both direct and indirect, from their governments. The results are horrific: 16 American steel companies have filed for protection under the bankruptcy laws since 1998 and 15,000 steelworkers have lost their family-sustaining paychecks. Given that the potential for similar developments in our iron ore industry is very real, it is indeed appropriate that the Department of Commerce is conducting this investigation!

PDF file from an American iron/steel company, pg.4 in December 2003, the company partnered with Laiwu Steel of China to reopen a bankrupt and closed operation in Minnesota. Brinzo explains this was very significant to the company. "We were able to put 400 people back to work," he says. "It was great because we created jobs in North America to move product to Asia, instead of the other way around. We are very proud of this deal."
-and-
. . . in the industrial age, he says, the United States depleted its supply of high-grade ore, so it is left to mine the lower-grade ore. "We have to use technology to get it to the same high grade," he says. "We are the world leader in employing this processing technology that transforms low grade iron ore into high-quality iron ore pellets."

Ferrominera Orinoco owns a 3.3 million metric ton pellet plant located in Puerto Ordaz, Venezuela, where it processes high-grade ores that are produced from its main iron ore deposits in Ciudad Piar. Cliffs notes production from the mine and pellet plant is for both domestic consumption and sale in the international markets.

(Just a little slip to the side about Venezuela- remember the oil, remember China)

PPI data
Trade agreements that work receive little publicity -- but can get pretty remarkable results. The Clinton Administration's 1999 "Agreement on Agricultural Cooperation" with China, covering Chinese treatment of imported citrus, meat and western wheat, is an example. It ended a long-standing Chinese ban on imports of oranges and other citrus fruits, requiring science-based pest inspection standards and bringing Chinese Agriculture Ministry technical officials to the United States to inspect a series of American orange and lemon groves. As a result, by early 2000 American orange growers were free to export to a market almost totally closed for the past fifty years.

Since the agreement, U.S. exports of oranges to China have grown by approximately 7,500 percent, or well over 20 million kilos. The experience for other citrus fruits is similar: since 1999, exports of lemons to China have grown from 37,000 kilos to 646,000 kilos; exports of grapefruit from 21,000 kilos to 517,000 kilos; and exports of citrons from zero to 34,000 kilos. In total, this means about $15 million in additional export income a year for citrus growers in Florida, California and Arizona.

There is more, much much, more out there. The U.S. leads in capital goods- something that misses the heasdlines.

A couple years back (2002)

US Embassy
Washington - The U.S. trade deficit jumped 21.5 percent in 2002 to a record $435,200 million, reflecting continued weakness in the global economy and a strong U.S. dollar.

Throughout the year rising imports, particularly for such consumer goods as pharmaceuticals and video equipment, combined with slumping U.S. exports to set the stage for the widening gap, the Commerce Department reported February 20. Services exports, long a strong sector in the U.S. economy, rose just 4 percent during the year.

For those that bemoan a weak dollar- look to the other side. A weak dollar helps capital good exports.

Captial goods/trade deficit data for 2003. while this is a PDF file, it loads quick. The three graphs give an “ahh hah” view of the balance of trade.

. . . the depreciation of the dollar should help to stabilize and, ultimately, turn around the trade deficit. As shown in the bottom chart, the gap between growth rates of real exports and real imports has narrowed . . .

Like I said before, nothing is as it seems (appears).
.

.

Joe, you're right, I realized that I said "post" after I edited my reply to include my PS, and was/am too lazy to edit again. So I forever shall seem like a BBoard newbie so long as that post exists somewhere in the ethernet.
Sofi, as I understand it, our doctors and nurses make a lot more for doing a lot less compared to other developed countries, right? This always disturbed me and I think that health care should be more socialized. While socialized health care DOES SEEM like a good idea right now, you will still be paying for your health care through taxes or some kind of social security (and rumor around the trailer park is that SS isn't going to pay out for my retired generation due to... government dipping?). Could you imagine being taxed 50% of your wages or more? Sure, more people would live longer but do you think the upper class (the most powerful in our country) would support that? In may leftward leaning opinion, it won't be possible because our country has too much emphasis on capitalism (and I don't care what you say, capitalist societies look almost the same as aristocracies to me). Should the lower class take sticks and rocks and revolt in the streets of Beverly Hills?
Anyway, I've been working my butt off for the past two years to become a nurse (and other Californian nurses are bitter about new state policies regarding health care and the lack of the funding promised by Aaahhhnold). After I'm able to save enough money, I'm hoping to go to a medical school and be maybe... a nurse practitioner? A chiropractor? I dunno. Anyway, after having worked at the VA, I know that our nurses and (most) doctors work their butts off for 12 hours at a time! I don't think I could take a 7-7 shift. The problem is with the health care system, not with our nurses and doctors. I mean hospitals are run like a business... one which can't be outsourced. I'm concerned that if we socialize health care, our local citizens won't see the point in going to school for 7 or 8 years if they're not going to get paid as much as our doctors are getting paid today. Maybe medical school will lower the standards for their students and we'll get below par doctors, or maybe it's going to be a job that immigrants will vie for, leaving an employment gap.
Mostly, I just want to be able to provide for my future family and retire comfortably. It would be great if, instead of taking our SS to wage wars and so forth, they could just put it into Medicare, or just leave it alone! It is our SOCIAL security.. it's meant to be for all of us!
Anyway, I'm rambling. How much money is there in the world? I want to see how our national debt compares.
-S

quote]Originally posted by ServoHahn
Could you imagine being taxed 50% of your wages or more? Sure, more people would live longer but do you think the upper class (the most powerful in our country) would support that? In may leftward leaning opinion, it won't be possible because our country has too much emphasis on capitalism (and I don't care what you say, capitalist societies look almost the same as aristocracies to me). Should the lower class take sticks and rocks and revolt in the streets of Beverly Hills?

What is your address? I have an old used keyboard with a working 'enter key' that will assist in forming paragraphs.

Those long, one paragraph posts are really hard to read.

Back to the thread- don't know about 50%. While the 'upper class' may be the most powerful they also are in a precarious position and they know it. The French Revolution serves as a prime example of what happens when class warfare erupts. Watts, CA got close.

A chiropractor?

Good dough!

having worked at the VA, I know that our nurses and (most) doctors work their butts off for 12 hours at a time!

props

The problem is with the health care system, not with our nurses and doctors. I mean hospitals are run like a business... one which can't be outsourced. I'm concerned that if we socialize health care, our local citizens won't see the point in going to school for 7 or 8 years if they're not going to get paid as much as our doctors are getting paid today.

By taking the $$ out of much of health care and the malpractice insurance extortions perhaps Doctors and Nurses would be able to take home a bigger piece of the pie?

It is our SOCIAL security.. it's meant to be for all of us!

Anyway, I'm rambling. How much money is there in the world? I want to see how our national debt compares.

Here, drive yourself crazy

In the U.S. (1999) there was around 7 trillion dollars.

Fractional money
With only $27.93 of cash reserves for every $10,000 of assets (as of June 1999) the bank has just created the remaining $159,553 of that interest-earning money out of thin air. When, after 25 years of hard work, you pay off your mortgage, the $159,553 vanishes back into thin air. Not so the interest however. It vanishes into the banker's pocket. Chartered (i.e. privately owned) banks, such as The Bank of Montreal, The Royal Bank, The CIBC, etc. have created about 95 percent of our total money supply ($589.1 billion as of Sept 1999) in exactly this way. But the cash reserves in their vaults amount to only a paltry $3.893 billion. (About $32 billion of cash circulates in public hands.) This is called fractional reserve banking, and it's the greatest scam of all time because it creates debt for no reason other than to enrich the banking class. Its long term effect – as becomes clearer every day – is to steadily suck wealth out of the community and into the hands of a few people, a fact that bankers and most politicians stubbornly refuse to admit.

Servo how much money in the world?

I have no idea. I haven't found a site (spurious or otherwise) that attempts to answer this. I suspect 'cash' is not near what you might suspect. Maybe $5 trillion?

.

.

Originally posted by JoeDoaks

In the U.S. (1999) there was around 7 trillion dollars.

.

Joe - the US National debt is now $7.7 trillion dollars. If there is only about $7 trillion US cash - does it mean anything that the amount of debt and printed cash are the same? ...If so, what?


.

Well, off the top of my head-

America owes more money then it has

So what to do? BORROW

That's what T-bills/bonds and corporate bonds are. Loans.

Stock prices are subjective I.O.U.s

Then of course there is 'bank paper'

As a last resort - 'whirrrrr' the old printing press.
.

.

Yes, well "How much money is there in the world?" is a silly question, and I guess you'd have to take into account credit, money borrowed and maybe even assets. But to simplify the question, I would like to know how much actual money saved and invested... real money, not credit... because I've seen no evidence that the money that credit is given credit for actually exists (j/k).
Anyway, I think as it is, doctors and nurses get paid pretty well. Male nurses can make 60-80K a year right out of school (here in L.A... but we've got a pretty high cost of living and we're surrounded by greedy bastards at every turn). Joe, you're absolutely right, America is lawsuit CRAZY! As a result, most doctors take the easier (and less involved) path. For example, take a look at C-section ratios for the past 20 years. Notice a steady increase? Less is likely to go wrong, so doctors prefer it to natural birth. What I would like to see is people getting their medicare and social security benefits (I'm paying for it, dammit) paid in full. I suppose that because of the national debt, SOMEONE's been dipping into these "benefits"? I mean... that's not what it's there for. If Bush wanted to borrow some money from us to wage a 200+billion dollar war, he should have just asked! I mean, sure we have the best military in the world... because we spend a gajillion dollars a year to have it!
There are certain types of Americans who definately get paid too much... actors, producers, musicians (and if you're a "struggling musician or artist", then you're doing it right), record companies, Bill Gates. But I'm to blame for some of that... we all are. We're willing to pay 9.75 for a movie ticket, 20+ for a CD (and I pirate all mine... hypothetically), 25+ for a hardcover book, and hundreds for an operating system. My computer probably would've cost me 300 bucks if it didn't have Windows, or MacOS, or Linux (like there are any other viable options). The consumer is part to blame, but the middle man! Oh, God the middle man! The middle man or merchant was meant to be somewhere in the middle class, not random people who make money for no good reason! Who are they, really? Just someone who gets in between the makers and the buyers (go eBay!). The middle man is so involved with jacking up prices that there's actually a seperate market for wholesalers! Of course, I couldn't imagine a surgeon who'd like to make house calls... but a hospital shouldn't be run like a business anyway.
Should I blame the neo-cons, republicans, democrats, or ultra-liberals (and I think we're all to blame in some way)? If we would refuse to buy from big businesses, and pay so much at the pump (even though it's well below what the rest of the world pays), and pay so much for football, basketball, and baseball tickets, we'd have a bigger middle class from both ends without resorting to socialism. (BTW, we're paying an average of 2.40/gal here in LA and I heard on the news today that several Malibu gas stations went up past 3) Well, if people would stop hoarding all their friggin' money and buy the less-reliable American made products... or maybe we could impose heavier taxes and tariffs on imports... I mean... there's a way we can get the US dollar back on top of the euro, right?... right?

-S
P.S. Joe, my rants run into eachother. If you find me less excited, you'll find me more organized. My enter key works, screw you very much!
P.P.S. (I can never remember everything I want to say before I hit "submit") Know what's weird?
Take note of when the ammount started to rise the most rapidly since 1959
What year are the numbers about half of what they are currently?
Compare the info on that page to a population graph... note correlation (or lack thereof). Compare to rising cost of girls scout cookies... coinsidence? I think not.

[edit on 19-3-2005 by ServoHahn]

[edit on 19-3-2005 by ServoHahn]

[edit on 19-3-2005 by ServoHahn]

[edit on 19-3-2005 by ServoHahn]

Originally posted by ServoHahn
Take note of when the ammount started to rise the most rapidly since 1959
What year are the numbers about half of what they are currently?
Compare the info on that page to a population graph... note correlation (or lack thereof). Compare to rising cost of girls scout cookies... coinsidence? I think not.

That C-section statement worries me.
Exactly what are you pointing out 'since 1959?' I missed it.

I don't see any inflation or buying power adjustments. Did I nmiss them?

The M3's include Euro's, right? When did the euro dollar take hold?




(Is this earier to read?)




Can't

tell

if

you

were

being

serious, but...

the numbers should go up exponentially, like a population. However, compare population, inflation and the previous graphs and you'll see little correltation. Just look at the past ten years. Again, never took business math, but it still doesn't look right.

Anyway, my original point was, can you think of a viable solution to our medical insurance problem? You know, where rich people can get heart transplants whenever they want them, but poor fathers have to resort to suicide in order to get a heart for their sons. Maybe not so extreme, but even people with good coverage only get covered up to $50-100K. What's going to happen to my credit when I go into a 20 year coma?
-S

[edit on 21-3-2005 by ServoHahn]

Originally posted by ServoHahn
The M3's include Euro's, right? When did the euro dollar take hold?
the numbers should go up exponentially, like a population. However, compare population, inflation and the previous graphs and you'll see little correltation. Just look at the past ten years. Again, never took business math, but it still doesn't look right.

Anyway, my original point was, can you think of a viable solution to our medical insurance problem? You know, where rich people can get heart transplants whenever they want them, but poor fathers have to resort to suicide in order to get a heart for their sons. Maybe not so extreme, but even people with good coverage only get covered up to $50-100K. What's going to happen to my credit when I go into a 20 year coma?
-S

M3 is US value (in your example) not someone else's

Eurodollars- what they are
Euro- what it is

Not the same beast
(20 year coma- who cares? They'll probably use you as a harvest donor

Information on the U.S. Government Deficit and Deficit Forecast
Marketvector side trip Look at the number on the deficit- right after the U.S. election jump.
GDP 'thought' to be more meaningful than GNP. Up as well.
Unemployment- dramatic drop!

Money Supply:

Hummel pages



The narrowest definition, M1, includes only the transaction deposits of banks. A broader definition, M2, adds savings accounts and small term deposits at banks plus retail money market funds. The broadest definition, M3, adds large term deposits, institutional money market funds, repurchase agreements, and eurodollars. The concept behind these three categories is that they represent decreasing levels of activity, M1 being the most active.

Easy to follow definitions. Everyone interested in their own money should at least be acquainted with these terms. I am no banker and this guy clearly knows more than me. I do disagree with some of his statements but they aren't important to where we are at in this thread.

How banks/Fed control the economy

Discount Rate Policy Group
The Discount Rate Policy Group is composed of senior officers at the BOG in Washington. The purpose of this group is to review and assess the impact of current discount rate policy and policy alternatives on the financial markets and economic activity. The functions of this group are:

1. to oversee the operation of the discount function and uniform application by the district banks;
2. to assess the impact of discount policy on domestic and international economic activity and on the banking system;
3. to study operating and regulatory matters pertaining to the discount function;
4. to anticipate emergency situations that may call for more liberal credit at the discount window; and
5. to evaluate trends in types and volumes of discount window credit.

Other, easy to follow banking pages. The Board of Governors of the FED probably affects your take home pay, ability for new businesses to acquire loans and expansion of local economies more than 'the Fed (under Greenspan)' does. Interest rates are important, but lending policy are more important.

Example:
2001
Company A borrows $1million with accounts receivables as collateral at 7%
*change in policy (publicly boosts the markets and makes people feel better)
2002 Fed lowers interest rates
Company A borrows $600k with accounts receivable of $1million as collateral at 5%

Same collateral (assets) but less borrowing. While the interest rate is lower the amount of usable money is also lower. In theory the regional banks all act in unison, in reality I doubt it.

Why the economy is growing Ecomagi chart M3

M3 Money Supply: Support of a Different Kind
Gold-Eagle chart of M3

Maybe a better indication of where things really are:
M3 Money Supply: Support of a Different Kind
Gold-Eagle M3 chart adjusted
Shocking? You don't need to agree with the conclusions, just be aware of other forces at play in the economy.

.

.

quote]Originally posted by JoeDoaks

Information on the U.S. Government Deficit and Deficit Forecast
.
Yes, this is good news in other parts of the world as well. But you're probably one of those who thinks the USD will make a huge comeback, no? (over China's dead body)
Here's a more right wing source if you don't believe the King of the Britons.

^ "The US trade deficit - a key concern for President George W Bush's second term - exceeded $50bn for the fourth month in a row in September." I heard on KNX Money 101 today that it is a record high (and it always will be as long as we have a growing economy) but that a surplus left from Clinton (due to severely cut government spending) will be enough to "get us over the hump" as it were... even though I thought it was squandered.

And then unemployment did go down, but then... back up. 5.6% is where it Clinton picked it up on his second term... handed it over at 5.4 then down to 5.2... but then... well, it's on there. Overall in the past 12 years, UE's stayed about the same... it's not like the changes have been severe... 2 , million? Is that severe? I'm haveing a hard time putting it into context.

And how many of those jobs were volunteer jobs? Sure, the information is dated, but what about the jobs initially lost? What about those lost since then?

go crazy

"In the first two years of the Bush Administration, 2 million workers lost their jobs - the worst job loss record for an administration since World War II. And the President’s newly unveiled tax cut proposal would create fewer than 200,000 jobs, according to economists. In addition, the President failed to personally weigh in last year to force Congress to pass an extension of the unemployment insurance program before it expired for 800,000 unemployed workers this past December." Ew.

D'oh!

So, our money supply is going up. That means inflation is going up. It means stocks are going up. It means rich people and companies are getting richer. What I wanted to point out is that with a bigger money supply and stronger, sturdier companies, we get inflation (and a million friggin' bucks at the pump! I doubt drilling in Alaska is going to help us here), higher minimum wage and a larger gap between the upper and lower class (by all accounts the middle class should stay the same, maybe losing some on the upper and lower end).

"This isn't going to be a discussion about the in-appropriateness of the actions of the Federal Reserve or the future ramifications to our financial health of a hyper inflating broad money supply."

The federal reserve isn't supposed to manipulate the market? What are the future ramifications of this, and who are they going to hurt?

Ok, so Bush's administration can't be single-handedly responsible for the ENTIRE country's economy, but given the record of Bush and his administration's, into whose hands do you think this money will fall? At the cost of who?

Yes... all kinds of numbers went up for the Bush administration. Just remember, you can make the numbers go down too. Just reverse your graph. Unemployment isn't up, it's just that employment is down! I got a new job this year and it's not as a prison guard, government volunteer, or a computer technician!
-S
P.S. I can look up a lot of useless biased crap on the internet too.

Oh, yeah, I forgot. Ok, so we have a powerful new money supply, up to a trillion dollars, right? But then we've forgotten about our little friend The National Debt. Doesn't it mean something that we have a good new supply of cash, but that our new debt far outwieghs it? Is most of our "M3" on loan? I see where it comes from, but the debt owed is just as scattered.

[post never edited... ignore the following]



[edit on 21-3-2005 by ServoHahn]

Originally posted by ServoHahn
P.S. I can look up a lot of useless biased crap on the internet too.

Get outta here-

None of that stuff YOU posted was useless

That volunteer site is awesome! I'm sending copies to some folks

When all is said and done what 'number' the nation is in doesn't really matter. What matters is that we have enough time to enjoy life.

Even without the dough some of us think we 'deserve,' time is the only thing we can't get somewhere no matter how smart we are or how hard we try.

It is such a high sadness to me that many young adults will never see another sunrise.
.

.

LOL
You're so melodramatic.
-S

Originally posted by ServoHahn
LOL
You're so melodramatic.
-S

Yeah, I cought it AFTER reading your 'brief' shot

I was 'droll' when I posted, thinking of wars and young death, sorry *sniff*

Your retort cracked me up.

I need to get more sleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep

I was looking for an old link that compared nations' GDP with global corporations income - and found this old thread. Forgot about it. Interesting. ...and the global "Financial Crisis" came along 3 years later. Surprise, surprise.