Connect with us

International

Rising National Debt, Fewer Workers And Slower Growth Since 2001 – Why?

For weekend reading, Gary Alexander, senior writer at Navellier & Associates, offers the following commentary: Something more dramatic than the ……

Published

on

For weekend reading, Gary Alexander, senior writer at Navellier & Associates, offers the following commentary:

Something more dramatic than the loss of 3,000 American lives happened on September 11, 2001. We seem to have lost our nerve and taken leave of our financial senses. We launched a series of costly wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (with incursions elsewhere) and passed freedom restrictions disguised as Patriot Acts, and added costly laws and safety cushions that swelled our national debt 10-fold in just 22 years.

Bin Laden is dead, but did he win after all by killing our spirit of enterprise, risk-taking and freedom?

We took a four-year balanced-budget winning streak (1998 to 2001) and turned it into a 22-year losing streak, including trillion-dollar deficits in each of President Obama’s first four years, and now all four of the COVID and post-COVID 2020s fiscal years. Next week, we mark a sad first – the first rising deficit in a time of rising GDP with no American overseas wars – assuming you don’t count Ukraine as a U.S. war. (President Biden famously yanked American troops out of our 20-year Afghanistan engagement in 2021).

The Rising U.S. National Debt

From 1998 to 2021, Presidents Clinton, Bush, and the Republican Congress paid down the national debt by $560 billion with four consecutive surpluses: $69.3 billion (1998), $126.6 billion (1999), $236.2 billion (2000) and $128.4 billion (2001), but the first post-9/11 budget (2002) delivered a $157.4 billion deficit with barrels of red ink to follow. The total national debt on September 30, 2001, was $3.3 trillion. Today, it is $33 trillion, 10-fold higher. Measured by debt-to-GDP it was 35% in 2007 but 100%+ now.

At the end of next week, September 30, the 2023 federal fiscal year wraps up, and the Biden team and Congress have driven the deficit over $2 trillion from last year’s $1.38 trillion. We’ll soon know the end result, but the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) projected $2 trillion.

What caused the increase? Let’s ask White House Press Secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre. On Tuesday, September 5, a Time reporter asked her, “Why is the deficit increasing?” She responded, “It can be year to year—it can be very volatile.” He followed up; she repeated: “I just laid it out, it can be very volatile. … That’s the way it is, from year to year, it can be variable.” Then, a reporter from The NY Post interjected, “Why?” She shot back, “Talk to an economist, and they’ll tell you specifically.” (NY Post, Sept. 5)

I guess it’s hard to find good help these days, but it’s pretty easy to explain a rising deficit. It doesn’t take an economist. Ask any corporate officer or a savvy shopper – it’s lower receipts, higher expenditures, or some of both. You can’t explain it in 2023 by wars or recessions (none this year). You can’t explain it by emergency COVID benefits (no longer applicable). It’s big new spending programs, funding for Ukraine (billions disappearing into corrupt hands), lots of folks retiring early, plus rising Social Security benefits.

As a result, the 12-month (year-over-year) deficit has more than doubled from a low of $1.0 trillion as of July 2022 to a current $2.3 trillion through July 2023 (see chart, below), according to U.S. Treasury data.

Rising Debt

If the President’s press secretary called the boss’s Treasury Department, she would know that there was a half-trillion decrease in income tax receipts, from a record high $2.7 trillion, over the 12 months through last April, to $2.2 trillion over the 12 months through this July, due mostly to last year’s surge in capital gains revenues, as many cashed in for retirement in 2021 or early 2022, vs. staying invested since 2022.

Rising Debt

Next, we must address rising interest rates, engineered by the rapid 5% ratcheting up of the Fed Funds rate since April 2022. Servicing the $33 trillion national debt will now be much more expensive. Long-term rates are also up, as investors have not been so enthusiastic about bidding up 5-to-30-year Treasury bonds, sending yields over 4.3%, near multi-year high (4% is not historically high, since the “old normal” is around 4%, but the “new normal” has been near zero, since shortly after the Financial Crisis of 2008.)

Fitch Ratings downgraded U.S. government debt from AAA to AA+ on August 1, and there was no immediate reaction of consequence, but the long-term consequence will be a return to the “old normal,” pushing annual interest rate service costs above $1 trillion on our rising federal debt.

Due to the huge spending appetite of the current President and Congress, the Treasury will be selling or auctioning off lots of new notes and bonds throughout the fourth quarter and next election year, all while the Fed's new quantitative tightening (QT) program continues to shrink the Fed’s holdings of Treasuries by about $60 billion per month. Additionally, the recent banking crisis is causing many commercial banks to let their portfolios of Treasury securities mature, to divest themselves of long-bond maturity risks.

This means the U.S. must rely on the kindness of strangers (overseas investors, for the most part) to keep Treasury yields “low” (at 5% or less), or else rates and the deficit will balloon even higher, faster. Such a faith in China or Europe is a weak reed to lean on, considering the weakness of those economies now.

Whatever Happened In Y2K, Something Changed In 2001

We can’t lay everything at the feet of Obama bin Laen and his terrorist ilk, but something turned America around in 2001: We turned from surpluses to debt, high growth to slow growth, and we went on strike:

Rising Debt

OK, we didn’t exactly go on strike, but the percentage of healthy adults of working age participating in the labor force peaked in 2000 and has been going down ever since, particularly since COVID struck.

GDP growth has also been cut in half, on a per-capita basis. After half a century of 3.6% average annual growth, and 2.4% real annual per capita growth, 1950 to 1999, per capita growth was then cut in half:
 

Years

GDP per Year

Per Capita

1950-1999

+3.6%

+2.4%

2000-2022

+2.0%

+1.2%

Crestmont Research (Economy-GDP-R-By-Decade.pdf (crestmontresearch.com)

(Also see: 5-2-23: A Tale of Two Centuries: Growth (1950-99) vs. Debt (2000-23) - Navellier)

We also seem to care less about debts. So far in the 2020s, deficits exceed $9 trillion: $3.132 trillion in fiscal year 2020, $2.776 trillion in 2021, $1.375 trillion in 2022, and approximately $2 trillion in 2023.

This 21st Century experiment in Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) has backfired, as it always does, but big-time, since we are so big. Maybe we could learn some old-time economic religion if somebody could send a copy of Henry Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson” (1946) to the Biden White House, with a second copy to his Press Secretary….and heck, why not 535 more copies to each member of Congress?!

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Fighting the Surveillance State Begins with the Individual

It’s a well-known fact at this point that in the United States and most of the so-called free countries that there is a robust surveillance state in…

Published

on

It’s a well-known fact at this point that in the United States and most of the so-called free countries that there is a robust surveillance state in place, collecting data on the entire populace. This has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by people like Edward Snowden, a National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower who exposed that the NSA was conducting mass surveillance on US citizens and the world as a whole. The NSA used applications like those from Prism Systems to piggyback on corporations and the data collection their users had agreed to in the terms of service. Google would scan all emails sent to a Gmail address to use for personalized advertising. The government then went to these companies and demanded the data, and this is what makes the surveillance state so interesting. Neo-Marxists like Shoshana Zuboff have dubbed this “surveillance capitalism.” In China, the mass surveillance is conducted at a loss. Setting up closed-circuit television cameras and hiring government workers to be a mandatory editorial staff for blogs and social media can get quite expensive. But if you parasitically leech off a profitable business practice it means that the surveillance state will turn a profit, which is a great asset and an even greater weakness for the system. You see, when that is what your surveillance state is predicated on you’ve effectively given your subjects an opt-out button. They stop using services that spy on them. There is software and online services that are called “open source,” which refers to software whose code is publicly available and can be viewed by anyone so that you can see exactly what that software does. The opposite of this, and what you’re likely already familiar with, is proprietary software. Open-source software generally markets itself as privacy respecting and doesn’t participate in data collection. Services like that can really undo the tricky situation we’ve found ourselves in. It’s a simple fact of life that when the government is given a power—whether that be to regulate, surveil, tax, or plunder—it is nigh impossible to wrestle it away from the state outside somehow disposing of the state entirely. This is why the issue of undoing mass surveillance is of the utmost importance. If the government has the power to spy on its populace, it will. There are people, like the creators of The Social Dilemma, who think that the solution to these privacy invasions isn’t less government but more government, arguing that data collection should be taxed to dissuade the practice or that regulation needs to be put into place to actively prevent abuses. This is silly to anyone who understands the effect regulations have and how the internet really works. You see, data collection is necessary. You can’t have email without some elements of data collection because it’s simply how the protocol functions. The issue is how that data is stored and used. A tax on data collection itself will simply become another cost of doing business. A large company like Google can afford to pay a tax. But a company like Proton Mail, a smaller, more privacy-respecting business, likely couldn’t. Proton Mail’s business model is based on paid subscriptions. If there were additional taxes imposed on them, it’s possible that they would not be able to afford the cost and would be forced out of the market. To reiterate, if one really cares about the destruction of the surveillance state, the first step is to personally make changes to how you interact with online services and to whom you choose to give your data.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Stock Market Today: Stocks turn higher as Treasury yields retreat; big tech earnings up next

A pullback in Treasury yields has stocks moving higher Monday heading into a busy earnings week and a key 2-year bond auction later on Tuesday.

Published

on

Updated at 11:52 am EDT U.S. stocks turned higher Monday, heading into the busiest earnings week of the year on Wall Street, amid a pullback in Treasury bond yields that followed the first breach of 5% for 10-year notes since 2007. Investors, however, continue to track developments in Israel's war with Hamas, which launched its deadly attack from Gaza three weeks ago, as leaders around the region, and the wider world, work to contain the fighting and broker at least a form of cease-fire. Humanitarian aid is also making its way into Gaza, through the territory's border with Egypt, as officials continue to work for the release of more than 200 Israelis taken hostage by Hamas during the October 7 attack. Those diplomatic efforts eased some of the market's concern in overnight trading, but the lingering risk that regional adversaries such as Iran, or even Saudi Arabia, could be drawn into the conflict continues to blunt risk appetite. Still, the U.S. dollar index, which tracks the greenback against a basket of six global currencies and acts as the safe-haven benchmark in times of market turmoil, fell 0.37% in early New York trading 105.773, suggesting some modest moves into riskier assets. The Japanese yen, however, eased past the 150 mark in overnight dealing, a level that has some traders awaiting intervention from the Bank of Japan and which may have triggered small amounts of dollar sales and yen purchases. In the bond market, benchmark 10-year note yields breached the 5% mark in overnight trading, after briefly surpassing that level late last week for the first time since 2007, but were last seen trading at 4.867% ahead of $141 billion in 2-year, 5-year and 7-year note auctions later this week. Global oil prices were also lower, following two consecutive weekly gains that has take Brent crude, the global pricing benchmark, firmly past $90 a barrel amid supply disruption concerns tied to the middle east conflict. Brent contracts for December delivery were last seen $1.06 lower on the session at $91.07 per barrel while WTI futures contract for the same month fell $1.36 to $86.72 per barrel. Market volatility gauges were also active, with the CBOE Group's VIX index hitting a fresh seven-month high of $23.08 before easing to $20.18 later in the session. That level suggests traders are expecting ranges on the S&P 500 of around 1.26%, or 53 points, over the next month. A busy earnings week also indicates the likelihood of elevated trading volatility, with 158 S&P 500 companies reporting third quarter earnings over the next five days, including mega cap tech names such as Google parent Alphabet  (GOOGL) - Get Free Report, Microsoft  (MSFT) - Get Free Report, retail and cloud computing giant Amazon  (AMZN) - Get Free Report and Facebook owner Meta Platforms  (META) - Get Free Report. "It’s shaping up to be a big week for the market and it comes as the S&P 500 is testing a key level—the four-month low it set earlier this month," said Chris Larkin, managing director for trading and investing at E*TRADE from Morgan Stanley. "How the market responds to that test may hinge on sentiment, which often plays a larger-than-average role around this time of year," he added. "And right now, concerns about rising interest rates and geopolitical turmoil have the potential to exacerbate the market’s swings." Heading into the middle of the trading day on Wall Street, the S&P 500, which is down 8% from its early July peak, the highest of the year, was up 10 points, or 0.25%. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, which slumped into negative territory for the year last week, was marked 10 points lower while the Nasdaq, which fell 4.31% last week, was up 66 points, or 0.51%. In overseas markets, Europe's Stoxx 600 was marked 0.11% lower by the close of Frankfurt trading, with markets largely tracking U.S. stocks as well as the broader conflict in Israel. In Asia, a  slump in China stocks took the benchmark CSI 300 to a fresh 2019 low and pulled the region-wide MSCI ex-Japan 0.72% lower into the close of trading.
  • Get investment guidance from trusted portfolio managers without the management fees. Sign up for Action Alerts PLUS now.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

iPhone Maker Foxconn Investigated By Chinese Authorities

Foxconn, the Taiwanese company that manufactures iPhones on behalf of Apple (AAPL), is being investigated by Chinese authorities, according to multiple…

Published

on

Foxconn, the Taiwanese company that manufactures iPhones on behalf of Apple (AAPL), is being investigated by Chinese authorities, according to multiple media reports. Foxconn’s business has been searched by Chinese authorities and China’s main tax authority has conducted inspections of Foxconn’s manufacturing operations in the Chinese provinces of Guangdong and Jiangsu. At the same time, China’s natural-resources department has begun onsite investigations into Foxconn’s land use in Henan and Hubei provinces within China. Foxconn has manufacturing facilities focused on Apple products in three of the Chinese provinces where authorities are carrying out searches. While headquartered in Taiwan, Foxconn has a huge manufacturing presence in China and is a large employer in the nation of 1.4 billion people. The investigations suggest that China is ramping up pressure on the company as Foxconn considers major investments in India, and as presidential elections approach in Taiwan. Foxconn founder Terry Gou said in August of this year that he intends to run for the Taiwanese presidency. He has resigned from the company’s board of directors but continues to hold a 12.5% stake in the company. Gou is currently in fourth place in the polls ahead of the election that is scheduled to be held in January 2024. The potential impact on Apple and its iPhone manufacturing comes amid rising political tensions between politicians in Washington, D.C. and Beijing. Apple’s stock has risen 16% over the last 12 months and currently trades at $172.88 U.S. per share.  

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending