Looking at the 3-5 largest words I think it adequately fits what I am most passionate about when I do decide to say something of my own.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
My Wordle
Well being that I have been quite lazy as of late and have been mostly copying other blogs I have found interesting. My friend over at The Crimson Cavalier posted his 100th post (kudos) and did this neat word cloud. I thought to go back and look over only the posts that I actually put keyboard to (so to speak) and this is what i ended up wtih:
Looking at the 3-5 largest words I think it adequately fits what I am most passionate about when I do decide to say something of my own.
Looking at the 3-5 largest words I think it adequately fits what I am most passionate about when I do decide to say something of my own.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Creativity Abound!
For as much as I despise Apple products for their blatant attempt to become the mode of consumption for people rather than vehicles for productivity, I am admittedly wrong about Apple when it comes to creative types (artists, musicians, films). This performance was done solely on 4 Iphones plugged into a speaker. I'm speechless...
(UPDATE)
(UPDATE)
Friday, October 8, 2010
Much ado about nothing
Thank you Mr. President for making things clear
Presidential Memorandum--H.R. 3808
It is necessary to have further deliberations about the possible unintended impact of H.R. 3808, the "Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010," on consumer protections, including those for mortgages, before the bill can be finalized. Accordingly, I am withholding my approval of this bill. (The Pocket Veto Case, 279 U.S. 655 (1929)).
The authors of this bill no doubt had the best intentions in mind when trying to remove impediments to interstate commerce. My Administration will work with them and other leaders in Congress to explore the best ways to achieve this goal going forward.
To leave no doubt that the bill is being vetoed, in addition to withholding my signature, I am returning H.R. 3808 to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, along with this Memorandum of Disapproval.
BARACK OBAMATHE WHITE HOUSE,
October 8, 2010.
So Furious!
Obama's back room politics strike again. Pandering to the big banks at the expense of the people.
INFURIATING LINK HERE
The author goes on to say that the law will actually become valid 10 days after it was put to Obama's desk for a signature.
Basically what this Law says is that Banks are allowed to notarize a document not in the presence of the signer. Which is complete and UTTER CRAP.
I AM FURIOUS!
INFURIATING LINK HERE
The word is out that Pres. Obama’s pocket veto of the Digital Robo-Signing Act was actually a trick. Sen. Harry Reid didn’t actually adjourn the U.S. Senate. The Senate has been kept in session by a little understood ruse and the bill will become law tonight at midnight without the President’s signature.The big banks will file suit after the election to have this bill declared to be law.Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution seems to support this view.Some drunken bankers were already bragging about this an some major news outlets, including Fox News have reported on this.
The author goes on to say that the law will actually become valid 10 days after it was put to Obama's desk for a signature.
Basically what this Law says is that Banks are allowed to notarize a document not in the presence of the signer. Which is complete and UTTER CRAP.
I AM FURIOUS!
Monday, October 4, 2010
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Quote of the Day
"Do this. Don't do that. Stay back in line. Where's tax receipt? Fill out form. Let's see license. Submit six copies. Exit only. No left turn. No right turn. Queue up and pay fine. Take back and get stamped. Drop dead— but first get permit. "
-Robert Heinlein, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
-Robert Heinlein, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress
Monday, September 27, 2010
Great Post From the Inner Workings Blog
Dave’s Top 10 Reasons the World Isn’t Coming to an End
Japanese-style stagnation, not economic collapse, is the most likely scenario for the US. Harrisburg, PA and Greece may go down the drain (and maybe even California and New York City and Illinois), but that’s not the end of the world. It’s just the end of them.
10) China’s controlled growth deceleration is doing reasonably well, according to Cantor Fitzgerald’s Asia strategist Uwe Parpart, my old Bank of America colleague.
9) China’s banks may be choking on bad loans, but China’s massive foreign exchange reserves can cover the problem out of petty cash and rounding error.
8) Southeast Asia continues to grow, with local stock exchanges up about 20% year to date.
7) India is doing well. Add up these first four items and half the world’s population is doing just fine.
6) Europe’s economic problem is less important than it seems because “Europe” is no longer the relevant entity. Germany is decoupling from France and the Club Med countries and shifting its focus to China and Russia.
5) Russia isn’t doing badly, thanks to 12 million foreign workers from Turkey and the Turkic former republics of the Soviet Union which have solved its labor shortage, while
4) Turkey is doing well exporting labor, construction services, and manufactures to Russia and the Arab world while acting as a hub for Russian oil.
3) Retirees around the world are hard pressed to find investments that yield enough to pay for their retirements, but it’s an ill wind that blows nobody good: the extremely low yields on long-term debt that generate a $3 trillion deficit for US state and local governments also benefit capital-intensive industries. It’s not a wash, but it’s not a washout, either.
2) Irresponsible as US monetary policy may be, there’s no alternative to the dollar, and there will not be for some time (I own a decent amount of gold in various forms in case I’m wrong about that) — so the US can get away with huge deficits for quite some time.
But the number one reason that the world isn’t coming to an end is –
1)Barack Obama! He’s cooked politically. He’s practically a lame duck. Gridlock in Washington will prevent this dreadful administration from doing any more damage. And that’s good news.
That said, it’s not the end of the world — it’s just the end of you, if you’re one of the 6 percent of the US population reaching retirement age during the next ten years, or if you’re a public employee counting on a pension, or run a small business. Life will go on in these United States, drearily. But don’t expect a great cataclysm to put you out of your misery.
The equity risk premium will remain stupidly high for reasons detailed in the link. But there’s no reason for stocks to crash, that is, for the equity risk premium to get even higher than it is now.
10) China’s controlled growth deceleration is doing reasonably well, according to Cantor Fitzgerald’s Asia strategist Uwe Parpart, my old Bank of America colleague.
9) China’s banks may be choking on bad loans, but China’s massive foreign exchange reserves can cover the problem out of petty cash and rounding error.
8) Southeast Asia continues to grow, with local stock exchanges up about 20% year to date.
7) India is doing well. Add up these first four items and half the world’s population is doing just fine.
6) Europe’s economic problem is less important than it seems because “Europe” is no longer the relevant entity. Germany is decoupling from France and the Club Med countries and shifting its focus to China and Russia.
5) Russia isn’t doing badly, thanks to 12 million foreign workers from Turkey and the Turkic former republics of the Soviet Union which have solved its labor shortage, while
4) Turkey is doing well exporting labor, construction services, and manufactures to Russia and the Arab world while acting as a hub for Russian oil.
3) Retirees around the world are hard pressed to find investments that yield enough to pay for their retirements, but it’s an ill wind that blows nobody good: the extremely low yields on long-term debt that generate a $3 trillion deficit for US state and local governments also benefit capital-intensive industries. It’s not a wash, but it’s not a washout, either.
2) Irresponsible as US monetary policy may be, there’s no alternative to the dollar, and there will not be for some time (I own a decent amount of gold in various forms in case I’m wrong about that) — so the US can get away with huge deficits for quite some time.
But the number one reason that the world isn’t coming to an end is –
1)Barack Obama! He’s cooked politically. He’s practically a lame duck. Gridlock in Washington will prevent this dreadful administration from doing any more damage. And that’s good news.
That said, it’s not the end of the world — it’s just the end of you, if you’re one of the 6 percent of the US population reaching retirement age during the next ten years, or if you’re a public employee counting on a pension, or run a small business. Life will go on in these United States, drearily. But don’t expect a great cataclysm to put you out of your misery.
The equity risk premium will remain stupidly high for reasons detailed in the link. But there’s no reason for stocks to crash, that is, for the equity risk premium to get even higher than it is now.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Housing Has a Long way to go
From Zero Hedge:
On one end, you have the destruction left over from the extinction of US auto manufacturing. On the other end, you have PIMCO. And inbetween the two, there are 294 home markets, which make up the exponential curve of US real estate prices. It is not surprising that the non-normal distribution in home prices follows quite closely the Talebian extremistan distributions expected (even though the last word is an oxymoron in this context) out of modern day markets. We wonder which end of the curve the President has got his eyes focused most on these days for "excess efficiency" retention purposes.
According to the latest Coldwell Banker home listing report (link), the richest people in America reside in the following cities, which boast the following average home prices:
1.Newport Beach - $1,826,348
2.Palo Alto - $1,479,227
3.Rye - $1,325,500
4.San Francisco - $1,325,103
5.La Jolla - $1,210,300
6.Greenwich - $1,195,614
7.Wellesley - $1,080,458
8.Pasadena - $1,043,683
9.Honolulu - $1,026,821
10. Santa Barbara - $1,024,661
Alas for every market boasting an average home price over $1MM (ten of them), there are citis on the other end of the spectrum. And using the completely arbitrary cut off metric of $250,000, there are 145 markets whose homes cost less than that particular magic number, lef by the following:
1.Detroit - $68,007
2.Grayling - $84,625
3.Sioux City - $85,967
4.Cleveland - $87,240
5.Muncie - $100,314
6.Norfolk - $107,814
7.Kansas City - $112,449
8.Canton - $114,325
9.Port Huron - $116,267
10. Topeka - $116,343
At least Detroit is at the top of something. As is the broke state of California - with 6 of the 10 most expensive markets residing in the Golden State. We dread to think what will happen once the state's broke administrators realize how much wealth could be extracted from local housing if only they could collect a liiiittle bit of the net worth of each home (assuming said home is not already underwater on the debt it is pledged to).
On one end, you have the destruction left over from the extinction of US auto manufacturing. On the other end, you have PIMCO. And inbetween the two, there are 294 home markets, which make up the exponential curve of US real estate prices. It is not surprising that the non-normal distribution in home prices follows quite closely the Talebian extremistan distributions expected (even though the last word is an oxymoron in this context) out of modern day markets. We wonder which end of the curve the President has got his eyes focused most on these days for "excess efficiency" retention purposes.
According to the latest Coldwell Banker home listing report (link), the richest people in America reside in the following cities, which boast the following average home prices:
1.Newport Beach - $1,826,348
2.Palo Alto - $1,479,227
3.Rye - $1,325,500
4.San Francisco - $1,325,103
5.La Jolla - $1,210,300
6.Greenwich - $1,195,614
7.Wellesley - $1,080,458
8.Pasadena - $1,043,683
9.Honolulu - $1,026,821
10. Santa Barbara - $1,024,661
Alas for every market boasting an average home price over $1MM (ten of them), there are citis on the other end of the spectrum. And using the completely arbitrary cut off metric of $250,000, there are 145 markets whose homes cost less than that particular magic number, lef by the following:
1.Detroit - $68,007
2.Grayling - $84,625
3.Sioux City - $85,967
4.Cleveland - $87,240
5.Muncie - $100,314
6.Norfolk - $107,814
7.Kansas City - $112,449
8.Canton - $114,325
9.Port Huron - $116,267
10. Topeka - $116,343
At least Detroit is at the top of something. As is the broke state of California - with 6 of the 10 most expensive markets residing in the Golden State. We dread to think what will happen once the state's broke administrators realize how much wealth could be extracted from local housing if only they could collect a liiiittle bit of the net worth of each home (assuming said home is not already underwater on the debt it is pledged to).
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Another Epically Good Post By Karl Denninger
From Market Ticker (The Folly Of Investing Today):
Investing is all about trying to determine a longer-term direction for the market such that risk and reward align in some meaningful way.
Yesterday, on Blogtalk, I stated that I was pulling all of my long-term investments that were market-related, and for an indeterminate time forward I would be only short-term trading this market.
That deserves an explanation, and toward this end, I would like to present the following 10 year weekly chart.
The regular "trace" is the S&P 500 price. The white trace is the 10 year Treasury yield as a comparative.
You need to pay attention to this.
"This time it's different" is often said.
It is almost always wrong, and believing in it will almost always make you broke.
Here's reality folks. Over the previous 10 years the TNX has never declined meaningfully without the S&P 500 following it, and declining to near or below it on a comparative basis.
The TNX almost always leads on declines too, sometimes by as much as six months.
Well, it's been six months.
In 2007, the TNX peaked in late June, after which it began a dive. The market peaked in the middle of October of that year at 1576. The decline essentially reached the comparative bottom.
Now the TNX has peaked the first week of April of this year, and is quite close to the March 2009 lows. Yet the S&P, after it took a swoon, has recovered.
Exactly as it did in 2007.
We all know what came next.
The same thing happened in 2000, when the market peaked and fell apart. Again, the TNX led. It in fact peaked almost exactly at the end of the year in 1999. Three months later "it" began.
The TNX move today, as I outlined in Ticks in real-time, broke a triangle formation that should have moved higher. That was a continuation pattern. Instead, it broke the wrong way - hard - even before The Fed announcement. After The Fed announcement the move was accentuated dramatically.
This is not a sign of "improvement" nor is it a sign to "buy stocks", as Cramer claimed today after the FOMC announcement. To the contrary. It is a strong signal to sell everything and get the hell away from the stock market. It is an indication that the market should, if it follows past precedent, decline by as much as 30%, and perhaps more.
The market usually leads the TNX when it bottoms and the market heads higher.
The TNX always leads the market when it declines.
The 2yr is at all time record low yields.
Lower than during the decline in 2008 and 2009.
This strongly implies that the March 2009 "666" low in the S&P 500 is NOT a "generational low", AND IT WILL IN FACT BE BREACHED.
The bond market is very, very rarely wrong folks. When it disagrees with equities you're a fool to believe the equities, unless of course you hate money.
This has always been true, and it will always be true.
The market is "betting" that Bernanke will come in with more "Quantitative Easing", or even better, that it can force Bernanke to implement more "Quantitative Easing." Japan in fact did this, and has continued to do so.
Where was the all-time high in the Nikkei 225, and where does it trade now? Did it ever get back to those highs?
No.
Does Japan have a massive foreign account deficit? No - they have a foreign account surplus. Their debt is owed to Japanese - not to foreigners, as ours is.
"Quantitative Easing" is a scam. It's yet another sop and fraud to allow the government to deficit spend "allegedly" without consequence. It covered $1 trillion of deficit spending the last time. If they do come in again all they will do is cover another $1 trillion in deficit spending by the government, while your actual disposable income in terms of goods and services will see yet more declines, just as occurred from 2000-2010.
That's all folks.
The "scam" part of it is that there is no way The Fed can ever reduce it's balance sheet once it does
this, because to do so the government will have to decrease spending by an equivalent amount to that "eased." It will never do so. Not voluntarily, anyway. Gold is moving higher on the bet that the attempt to "allow" continued government spending will fail and ultimately the government will be forced to default (either literally or through massive unsterilized money printing that destroys the currency.) I don't think that will prove correct - I think our foreign creditors will pull our credit card first. But that's what Gold is saying, and if Gold is right, then America as a nation is finished, and our government will eventually dissolve either into outright tyranny or civil war and you will be THROWING your gold at people to defend yourself.
The only way The Fed can "fix" the market and economy in the intermediate term is to raise rates. That is, remove liquidity and force rates higher. Doing so will cause the TNX to rise along with the rest of the yield curve.
It will also shut down the Federal Government's deficit spending binge immediately as they will not be able to fund both that binge and the (higher) interest payments on the debt.
Bernanke is not going to do it.
Not now, not ever, unless he is forced by external events, and I believe eventually he WILL be.
Unlike Japan we cannot play this game as they did, simply because of our foreign account deficits. Japan got away with it for as long as they did for that reason, but even their capacity to do so is becoming strained.
The simple truth is that Bernanke can't pull liquidity at the present time because the government is spending all of its tax receipts paying for entitlements.
Even if the economy "recovers" he still can't do it because doing so means that interest expense would more than double, and the government doesn't have the money now and won't even under a rosy economic recovery scenario.
This is an environment in which it makes sense to own stocks as investments?
The hell it does.
This is a classic "death spiral" situation and equity valuations are in a severe bubble as a consequence of all the government "cheese", despite "appearing" to be "cheap."
Bernanke has bricked himself into the outhouse and he knows it. Thus, all the "soft threats" to "quantitative ease" and all the screaming from both the left and right for yet more of it - both sides know exactly what sort of box they're trapped in, and it's a box of their own design.
Oh sure, there can be short-term pops in the market. They might even last months. There could even be parabolic moves upward. The Nikkei has had several of them.
But you cannot invest in them.
You can trade them, and if you have the time and patience to do so in a dispassionate fashion then have at it, but you cannot invest in equities, nor can you buy any coupon (bonds) with any sort of meaningful duration.
If you do, you will ultimately be destroyed.
Those pension funds and other investors who are "reaching for yield" and "reaching for risk" at the present time are making the biggest mistake of their lives. It is inevitable that this strategy will fail and when it does what you formerly thought was "safe" - whether it be your pension, your Social Security, your Medicare, your kid's prepaid college education - all of it will be gone.
This preoccupation with Bernanke's folly is not only unhealthy, it is certifiably insane.
The TNX does not lie folks.
It has not in the past - not even when "Easy Al" was running the joint and handing out money like candy. Nor has it this time, with Bernanke doing the exact same thing Easy Al was doing.
Policies haven't changed and until they do neither will market relationships.
Act as you deem best, but ignore the bond market at your considerable peril.
It is rarely wrong.
Investing is all about trying to determine a longer-term direction for the market such that risk and reward align in some meaningful way.
Yesterday, on Blogtalk, I stated that I was pulling all of my long-term investments that were market-related, and for an indeterminate time forward I would be only short-term trading this market.
That deserves an explanation, and toward this end, I would like to present the following 10 year weekly chart.
The regular "trace" is the S&P 500 price. The white trace is the 10 year Treasury yield as a comparative.
You need to pay attention to this.
"This time it's different" is often said.
It is almost always wrong, and believing in it will almost always make you broke.
Here's reality folks. Over the previous 10 years the TNX has never declined meaningfully without the S&P 500 following it, and declining to near or below it on a comparative basis.
The TNX almost always leads on declines too, sometimes by as much as six months.
Well, it's been six months.
In 2007, the TNX peaked in late June, after which it began a dive. The market peaked in the middle of October of that year at 1576. The decline essentially reached the comparative bottom.
Now the TNX has peaked the first week of April of this year, and is quite close to the March 2009 lows. Yet the S&P, after it took a swoon, has recovered.
Exactly as it did in 2007.
We all know what came next.
The same thing happened in 2000, when the market peaked and fell apart. Again, the TNX led. It in fact peaked almost exactly at the end of the year in 1999. Three months later "it" began.
The TNX move today, as I outlined in Ticks in real-time, broke a triangle formation that should have moved higher. That was a continuation pattern. Instead, it broke the wrong way - hard - even before The Fed announcement. After The Fed announcement the move was accentuated dramatically.
This is not a sign of "improvement" nor is it a sign to "buy stocks", as Cramer claimed today after the FOMC announcement. To the contrary. It is a strong signal to sell everything and get the hell away from the stock market. It is an indication that the market should, if it follows past precedent, decline by as much as 30%, and perhaps more.
The market usually leads the TNX when it bottoms and the market heads higher.
The TNX always leads the market when it declines.
The 2yr is at all time record low yields.
Lower than during the decline in 2008 and 2009.
This strongly implies that the March 2009 "666" low in the S&P 500 is NOT a "generational low", AND IT WILL IN FACT BE BREACHED.
The bond market is very, very rarely wrong folks. When it disagrees with equities you're a fool to believe the equities, unless of course you hate money.
This has always been true, and it will always be true.
The market is "betting" that Bernanke will come in with more "Quantitative Easing", or even better, that it can force Bernanke to implement more "Quantitative Easing." Japan in fact did this, and has continued to do so.
Where was the all-time high in the Nikkei 225, and where does it trade now? Did it ever get back to those highs?
No.
Does Japan have a massive foreign account deficit? No - they have a foreign account surplus. Their debt is owed to Japanese - not to foreigners, as ours is.
"Quantitative Easing" is a scam. It's yet another sop and fraud to allow the government to deficit spend "allegedly" without consequence. It covered $1 trillion of deficit spending the last time. If they do come in again all they will do is cover another $1 trillion in deficit spending by the government, while your actual disposable income in terms of goods and services will see yet more declines, just as occurred from 2000-2010.
That's all folks.
The "scam" part of it is that there is no way The Fed can ever reduce it's balance sheet once it does
this, because to do so the government will have to decrease spending by an equivalent amount to that "eased." It will never do so. Not voluntarily, anyway. Gold is moving higher on the bet that the attempt to "allow" continued government spending will fail and ultimately the government will be forced to default (either literally or through massive unsterilized money printing that destroys the currency.) I don't think that will prove correct - I think our foreign creditors will pull our credit card first. But that's what Gold is saying, and if Gold is right, then America as a nation is finished, and our government will eventually dissolve either into outright tyranny or civil war and you will be THROWING your gold at people to defend yourself.
The only way The Fed can "fix" the market and economy in the intermediate term is to raise rates. That is, remove liquidity and force rates higher. Doing so will cause the TNX to rise along with the rest of the yield curve.
It will also shut down the Federal Government's deficit spending binge immediately as they will not be able to fund both that binge and the (higher) interest payments on the debt.
Bernanke is not going to do it.
Not now, not ever, unless he is forced by external events, and I believe eventually he WILL be.
Unlike Japan we cannot play this game as they did, simply because of our foreign account deficits. Japan got away with it for as long as they did for that reason, but even their capacity to do so is becoming strained.
The simple truth is that Bernanke can't pull liquidity at the present time because the government is spending all of its tax receipts paying for entitlements.
Even if the economy "recovers" he still can't do it because doing so means that interest expense would more than double, and the government doesn't have the money now and won't even under a rosy economic recovery scenario.
This is an environment in which it makes sense to own stocks as investments?
The hell it does.
This is a classic "death spiral" situation and equity valuations are in a severe bubble as a consequence of all the government "cheese", despite "appearing" to be "cheap."
Bernanke has bricked himself into the outhouse and he knows it. Thus, all the "soft threats" to "quantitative ease" and all the screaming from both the left and right for yet more of it - both sides know exactly what sort of box they're trapped in, and it's a box of their own design.
Oh sure, there can be short-term pops in the market. They might even last months. There could even be parabolic moves upward. The Nikkei has had several of them.
But you cannot invest in them.
You can trade them, and if you have the time and patience to do so in a dispassionate fashion then have at it, but you cannot invest in equities, nor can you buy any coupon (bonds) with any sort of meaningful duration.
If you do, you will ultimately be destroyed.
Those pension funds and other investors who are "reaching for yield" and "reaching for risk" at the present time are making the biggest mistake of their lives. It is inevitable that this strategy will fail and when it does what you formerly thought was "safe" - whether it be your pension, your Social Security, your Medicare, your kid's prepaid college education - all of it will be gone.
This preoccupation with Bernanke's folly is not only unhealthy, it is certifiably insane.
The TNX does not lie folks.
It has not in the past - not even when "Easy Al" was running the joint and handing out money like candy. Nor has it this time, with Bernanke doing the exact same thing Easy Al was doing.
Policies haven't changed and until they do neither will market relationships.
Act as you deem best, but ignore the bond market at your considerable peril.
It is rarely wrong.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
The Biggest Issue of 2010, In One Chart
If you were asked to produce a single chart illustrating the biggest single political issue in America today, what would it look like?
We're taking on that challenge today. Here's what we came up with:
In this chart, where we've graphed the trajectory of the total spending of the federal government with respect to the median household income in the U.S. for the years from 1967 through 2009, we see that the U.S. federal government's spending today has decoupled from the primary source of income that is required to sustain it.
Worse, it has literally "gone vertical" during the last two years.
In mathematical terms, that's the sort of thing you see when you divide any number by zero. Applied to the chart above, that means that the relationship between the change in total government spending and the typical income earned by an American household from year-to-year is now "undefined."
In practical terms, that means government spending has become completely disconnected from the ability of the typical American household to support it. And until this skyrocketing spending growth is arrested and reversed, we suspect that government spending has become disconnected from the ability of any American household to support it.
U.S. Census. Table H-5. Race and Hispanic Origin of Householder -- Households by Median and Mean Income (1967-2009).
We're taking on that challenge today. Here's what we came up with:
In this chart, where we've graphed the trajectory of the total spending of the federal government with respect to the median household income in the U.S. for the years from 1967 through 2009, we see that the U.S. federal government's spending today has decoupled from the primary source of income that is required to sustain it. Worse, it has literally "gone vertical" during the last two years.
In mathematical terms, that's the sort of thing you see when you divide any number by zero. Applied to the chart above, that means that the relationship between the change in total government spending and the typical income earned by an American household from year-to-year is now "undefined."
In practical terms, that means government spending has become completely disconnected from the ability of the typical American household to support it. And until this skyrocketing spending growth is arrested and reversed, we suspect that government spending has become disconnected from the ability of any American household to support it.
Data Sources
White House, Office of Management and Budget. Historical Tables, Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2011. Table 3.1 - Outlays by Superfunction and Function: 1940-2015.U.S. Census. Table H-5. Race and Hispanic Origin of Householder -- Households by Median and Mean Income (1967-2009).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)