Friday, July 9, 2010

A History of the American Economy - Part 4

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." P. J. O'Rourke (the funny thing about this quote is that it is a favorite on "Right Wing" web sites... sounds awfully Libertarian to me.)

Continued from Part 3

During the last 25 years of the 19th Century the U.S. bumped in and out of Recession - despite seemingly endless bounties of Oil, timber, coal, fisheries... and population growth. The 8 years following the civil war so overinflated capital investment that over-capacity existed until nearly WWI - 35 years later!

(If there was ever a sillier reason for the outbreak of War than WWI I simply cannot determine it. I think one could very effectively argue that the War was fought because it could be fought, and the financial system desperately needed an inflationary event. It is often said that WWII was a "Just" War, and taken on its own that might be so... I would argue that there was only ONE World War with a 20 year armistice. Without WWI, the Nazi's likely do not exist, or at least do not come to power, and without conflict in Europe Japan likely does not risk attacking the U.S.)

The Federal Government's budget in 2010 is slightly more than 26% of GDP, and that means nothing to people voting today... but when you consider that up until WWII the Federal budget had averaged something like 3% of what was then called GNP you get an idea of just how much Government intrudes into our lives. (Did the U.S. have nearly 2% of the adult male population in prison in 1900? NAFC.) Was the U.S. out and about as the "World's Cop"? NAFC. Were you responsible for your own problems? You bet. Was beer, surfing, sex, camping, eating, etc... still fun? You bet. I would argue that what little benefit came to American's lifestyle as a result of this massive increase in Government spending came at a horrific price.

(I read in detached awe the writings of Heinberg and Kuntsler. For the most part these are some exceedingly bright fellows, but their noodle must get overcooked when they try to express rational thought about economics. Most of the American lifestyle that these guys rail against, and I am with them, was created by the politicians and regulators on THEIR SIDE OF THE FREAKING ISLE!!!! These guys HATE the auto, but it was the democratization of transport that destroyed the environment and created suburbia! They HATE corporations (BTW, so do I... but for an entirely DIFFERENT reason... the way I see it, the onset of the shareholder Corporation gave the Left the perfect tax collection point to go forth and increase the size of the Government relative to GDP (and increase Government's ability to f**k with us) nearly 10X in less than 75 years) but it was the UAW and Steel Workers Unions that were the template (AND the funding source for the Left during much of the 20th Century, without which there would BE NO Left) for the Public Employee Unions that are destroying the fiscal stability of the state, city, county and local governments. The same guys that can grasp ERoEI with NO technical background suddenly go deaf, dumb, and blind when somebody points out that since there is a FINITE amount of fossil fuels then there is a FINITE amount of carbon that can make its way into the atmosphere... Guys... Guys... you can't get a little bit pregnant... and I realize that you guys make a living at this and must continue to appeal to your goof ball fan base (of which I count myself as one)... but your economic arguments are just silly even if they have appeal to economically illiterate populating the protest-just-about-anything set.)

I want to skip around for a moment and pass through the 00's, teens, and roaring twenties (though I will be back), and point out that Samual Clemmons (Mark Twain" really knew what he was talking about when he said:

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know... it's what we know for sure that just ain't so".
The media reconstructs history for reasons that should appear obvious, yet many in the electorate believe them! Read this excellent argument as to why the argument that the U.S. Government's policies during the 1930's are NOT what made the Great Depression what it was.

and we will talk more...

---------------------------------------------


Price does NOT matter as much as VOLUME.

--------------------------------------------

There are NO COINCIDENCES. I have NO IDEA what U.S. intelligence agencies picked up from China, but this is serious stuff and bears watching. I have maintained many times on this Blog that you will know when China has come to the conclusion that their U.S. Bond paper will never be paid back: They will take Taiwan by force. Just because I am an anti-War/anti-Empire Libertarian DOES NOT mean I reject the idea that the U.S. must maintain a strong National Defense. Fighting really dumb wars for an extra decade of Oil imports that puts us in extreme danger because we are stretched so thin is an outrage. OUTRAGE. The world is still a ugly, mean spirited place.








16 comments:

bureaucrat said...

Now you know WW2 was fought over oil :). Germany has lots of coal, but very few oil reserves. Why did Hitler invade Russia after he said he wouldn't, and where did he head straight for once he got into Russia? His Wehrmacht headed straight for the Caucasus oil fields (The loss at Stalingrad nearby, and the loss of those oil fields, was the WW2 turning point). Without oil, Germany's army was dead in the water.

Same thing for Japan. No oil. They had to guarantee a continuing supply from Indonesia, and the Dutch, British and the south Pacific were in the way.

All about oil. That's why we're here.

I won't mention again where 80% of U.S. government spending goes these days (hint: goes to the old and the wealthy)

And if you throw out the natural gas liquids and other minor products, EIA charts show we have been IMPORTING more oil in the last 6 months than the months before.

China bought and paid for the American military. We're not gonna be attacking them any time soon for any reason.

A Quaker in a Strange Land said...

You are erroneously reading whatever charts you are seeing. I gave you the link to the final number

----------------

Neve said we were going to attack China... hopefully, we ARE bluffing. Sooner or later, China WILL attack Taiwan - and we aren't going to do a thing about it. Hopefully, that is. The point was that THAT will be THE signal of the end of US deficit financings....

PioneerPreppy said...

I won't mention again where 80% of U.S. government spending goes these days (hint: goes to the old and the wealthy)

Not sure what you mean by that statement.

16% of spending went to education. That hardly fits the old and wealthy crowd.

14% for defense (I think this covers everybody whether you like it or not).

Just those 2 alone leaves only 70% and I doubt all of that 70% is going to old folks.

The others: pensions at 15% welfare at 11% health at 17% may be majority older Americans but do include a number who are not yet counted as Senior citizens. The largest segment is just called Remainder at 27%.

That from the simple pie chart at usgovernmentspending.com

Interesting that welfare is 11% hmmmm so even if as you claim most welfare goes to rural areas we spend more on education.

I will agree most everything since about 1942 has been about oil. I don't think WWII started over oil but it did become a main factor quickly once it began.

bureaucrat said...

Educate yourself, Preppy. :) You seem to be the type who likes to accumulate good information.

Take a look at my chart ...

federalbudget.com

Look at the five biggest programs at the bottom. 80% goes to SS & Medicare (the old), Medicaid (old and poor), Interest on Debt (who owns the Treasuries? The rich, directly and indirectly), and Defense (who owns the defense company stock? Not the poor).

The U.S. govt. spends almost nothing on Education (Education is a state and propery tax expense), and what the Feds do spend is on special needs education and defaulted college loans.

I think you need better charts. :)

Jeffers, the chart I'm seeing on U.S. oil imports is very easy to read ...

http://tonto.eia.
doe.gov/dnav/pet/
hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=WTTIMUS2&f=W

It rises then drops then rises.

bureaucrat said...

Prep, the 16% education and 14% defense you quote from usgovernmentspending.com is a COMBINED number for all government (federal, state AND local) spending. I am only concerned about Federal spending. I mean, spending is spending, but I think the Fed spending is where I have concentrated my thoughts. State govts. are small potatoes. :)

But you have to specify what "government" spending you are talking about.

Nice, colorful website, though.

bureaucrat said...

Prep, your website sucks. :) 21% of Federal dollars spent on pensions???? That's crap. The entire Federal civil service costs $120 billion for retirement, out of a $3,720 billion total budget (3% of it).

http://sagedrive.com/
fedbudget/fy2011/
fedbudget.htm

Lies! Lies! :)

Anonymous said...

Hey can someone kindly explain the significance of Taiwan for China? I'm looking at it on Google Earth and it looks to be a small island. Is it resource related or political? Thanks!

~College Student

Dan said...

After the civil war there were over 600K missing working age males; however the survivors initiated a baby boom so the population grew but was distorted and had a big hole in it. Malthus goes into the mechanics of it in his Essay on the principal of Population, but basically after a calamity reduces the population it springs back rapidly. Then because of simple demand and supply labor is much more valuable due to the missing laborers in the trades. However, those in the professions find that there are fewer people needing their services yet their numbers haven’t been reduced to as an extreme degree because they were much less likely to have been on the front lines. Ergo, the carpenter and farmer boom while the banker and physician go bust.

Dan said...

The 21 % on pensions is SS. See page 101 here where it’s 37%

PioneerPreppy said...

I am more interested in overall spending since such a large part of the States budgets are from Federal money.

Now where that counts in the chart (whether state or fed) is a good question.

Like you mentioned fed spends zip on education but yet the states get fed dollars they spend on education. Get the picture?

The site I linked has seemed pretty correct so far and up to date.

Dextred1 said...

The only two numbers that matter.

1. 2.381 trillion
2. 3.55 trillion

2+2=5

Estimated receipts for fiscal year 2010 are $2.381 trillion, an estimated decrease of 11% from 2009


The President's budget for 2010 totals $3.55 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2009.

In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable – what then?
- Winston Smith in George Orwell’s 1984

Dextred1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dextred1 said...

2010 totals with percent increase from last yr

$695 billion (+4.9%) – Social Security
$453 billion (+6.6%) – Medicare
$290 billion (+12.0%) – Medicaid

1.438 trillion.
2.101trillion with defense budget

Bur you are right that a lot of money goes into these programs, but not as much as you say, unless you are talking just about revenue?. Even with this rate that would leave about 300 billion for other things on the revenue side. The problem is all the other garbage programs thrown together by some group of ripoff artists. I think the defense budget does not include special appropriations so maybe 800? I doubt it will stay this high for long probably go back to 400-500 billion when/if war’s end.
This points to the fact that we don't have any true discretionary spending, just discretionary borrowing. The budget needs to be hacked and slashed. I think a nice 30 cut to start out with will get the ball rolling.

bureaucrat said...

When you figure out what Tibet means to China, then maybe you can explain to us what Taiwan means to China. :) My only guess is Taiwan represents everything China wants to be, but China isn't quite ready for prime time.

bureaucrat said...

There are big "little" programs in the Federal budget, and federalbudget.com has a nice layout: food stamps, agriculture supports, education loan defaults, veterans affairs, civil service retirement.

But the biggest part of the non-80% is "income security" at $686 billion, and that includes unemployment comp, housing and Federal employee retire. The big five still dominate Federal spending.

Admin said...

www.readaebook.blogspot.com