China sells almost all of its U.S. T Bills -
By that I mean, raising the debt ceiling becomes a lot less important when no one will loan you money. And China ditching our debt simply means that fewer and fewer investors are willing to front the spending-addicted Obama administration any dough.
China has dropped 97 percent of its holdings in U.S. Treasury bills, decreasing its ownership of the short-term U.S. government securities from a peak of $210.4 billion in May 2009 to $5.69 billion in March 2011, the most recent month reported by the U.S. Treasury.
Treasury bills are securities that mature in one year or less that are sold by the U.S. Treasury Department to fund the nation’s debt... Until October, the Chinese were generally making up for their decreasing holdings in Treasury bills by increasing their holdings of longer-term U.S. Treasury securities. Thus, until October, China’s overall holdings of U.S. debt continued to increase.
Since October, however, China has also started to divest from longer-term U.S. Treasury securities. Thus, as reported by the Treasury Department, China’s ownership of the U.S. national debt has decreased in each of the last five months on record, including November, December, January, February and March.
The hysteria generated by TurboTax Tim Geithner and the Democrats in Congress -- translating roughly to 'if you don't raise the debt ceiling, the four horsemen of the apocalypse will take a collective dump on the world economy' -- is utter bunk.
While it is true Congress has never before refused to raise the debt ceiling, it has frequently taken its sweet time to do so. In 1985, Congress waited nearly three months after the debt limit was reached before authorizing a permanent increase. In 1995, 4 1/2 months passed between hitting the ceiling and congressional action. And in 2002, Congress delayed raising the debt ceiling for three months. In each case, the U.S. and the economy survived.
... The people running this government are never going to deal with this untenable situation unless and until it becomes untenable for them. The only way that will happen is if Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling and forces the administration to prioritize payment of those obligations that must be paid to maintain our full faith and credit — for as Kevin and Veronique point out, this already perilous situation could be blown sky high if the interest rate we must pay to borrow spikes. Only when there is no way around it will we get serious consideration of what government should and should not do, and what kind of welfare state the public is willing to pay for.
If we put it off, if we expand the credit card of a bankrupt Washington whose credit card needs to be cut to pieces right now, not only will our dire straits get worse. We won’t get to deal with them — we will be at the mercy of how they deal with us when the music finally stops.
It turns out that 150 prominent economists back the GOP on the debt ceiling fight.
More than 150 economists back U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner's call to match any increase in the debt limit with spending cuts of equal size, according to a letter released by the Republican leader's office Wednesday... Signatories include Nobel laureate Robert Mundell of Columbia University and economists from schools like New York University and Georgetown University, as well as conservative think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute... Republicans say they will not back any increase that does not include steep spending cuts and other limits to ensure that debt stays at a manageable level.
Hey, Speaker Boehner: it's a real simple message. Try writing it on your palm, if you need to, for the Sunday talk shows.
President Obama better start slashing the federal government right this instant if he wants to avoid a downgrade or a default. He's grown the federal government by a phenomenal percentage in only two-and-a-half-years. And now it's time to balance the books.
Don't you dare raise the debt ceiling, Mr. Speaker. Period. Let Obama figure out where to start slashing this immense, unconstitutional federal leviathan. A default or a downgrade will be on Obama's head alone.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Do Federal Employees Realize Obama Just Began Raiding their Pensions This Week?
Do Federal Employees Realize Obama Just Began Raiding their Pensions This Week?
Do federal employees realize that Barack Obama and Turbo-Tax Timothy Geithner have begun pillaging their pension funds to pay the government’s bills? It’s not pension REFORM, if they’re spending it!
That must really BITE to spend all your union dues money and all that time campaigning for him only to have Barack pick your pocket? Take a number and get in line behind that Tea Party guy.
Zero Hedge:
[Yesterday] very quietly, the Treasury released its latest refunding announcement, in which it disclosed it would issue another $66 billion in 3, 10 and 30 Year notes next week. The irony of course is that the US is and continues to be at its debt ceiling limit (or just $25 million short of it), at a total of $14,293,975 million. Furthermore, as was also disclosed by the Treasury, this gross issuance will also be the net amount added in marketable debt, as upon settlement on June 15, there will be no redemptions of maturing bonds.
Which simply means that the continued “disinvesting” (which is merely a polite word for plundering) from intragovernmental debt, also known as retirement accounts, is about to kick into high gear. As a reminder, the only solution that Geithner currently has to run the government, at least until August 2 when even this runs out, is to slowly drain the debt in non-marketable accounts, in the form of Suspension of G-Fund and ESF reinvestments, as well as the Redemption and suspension of of CSRDF Investments, measure which when combined will provide a short-term buffer of $232 billion.
Yet for all practical purposes, what is happening is that retirement accounts are now being seriously plundered, and if the unthinkable were to happen, and the debt ceiling would not rise, not only would the US be in technical default, but various retirement funds, which already are underfunded, would find themselves even more severely in the Red. As the chart below shows, the total amount of intragovernmental debt currently outstanding, has dropped to levels last seen in early April, even as total debt has continued its steadfast move higher. The scary thing is that by the time August 2 rolls around, the current total of $4.608 trillion in various Trust Funds, will drop to well about $4.4 trillion, or an implicit 6% underfunding in 2 months merely to keep the bloated government operating for a few more months.
Read more here at ZeroHedge.
Nagging question: After the federal pension funds go to the same place that Medicare and Social Security funds went, then what?
How soon till there’s more talk of making the grab for private retirement accounts? Count on it sooner or later. Hearings have been held.
Think it can’t happen? Ask Argentina.
Do federal employees realize that Barack Obama and Turbo-Tax Timothy Geithner have begun pillaging their pension funds to pay the government’s bills? It’s not pension REFORM, if they’re spending it!
That must really BITE to spend all your union dues money and all that time campaigning for him only to have Barack pick your pocket? Take a number and get in line behind that Tea Party guy.
Zero Hedge:
[Yesterday] very quietly, the Treasury released its latest refunding announcement, in which it disclosed it would issue another $66 billion in 3, 10 and 30 Year notes next week. The irony of course is that the US is and continues to be at its debt ceiling limit (or just $25 million short of it), at a total of $14,293,975 million. Furthermore, as was also disclosed by the Treasury, this gross issuance will also be the net amount added in marketable debt, as upon settlement on June 15, there will be no redemptions of maturing bonds.
Which simply means that the continued “disinvesting” (which is merely a polite word for plundering) from intragovernmental debt, also known as retirement accounts, is about to kick into high gear. As a reminder, the only solution that Geithner currently has to run the government, at least until August 2 when even this runs out, is to slowly drain the debt in non-marketable accounts, in the form of Suspension of G-Fund and ESF reinvestments, as well as the Redemption and suspension of of CSRDF Investments, measure which when combined will provide a short-term buffer of $232 billion.
Yet for all practical purposes, what is happening is that retirement accounts are now being seriously plundered, and if the unthinkable were to happen, and the debt ceiling would not rise, not only would the US be in technical default, but various retirement funds, which already are underfunded, would find themselves even more severely in the Red. As the chart below shows, the total amount of intragovernmental debt currently outstanding, has dropped to levels last seen in early April, even as total debt has continued its steadfast move higher. The scary thing is that by the time August 2 rolls around, the current total of $4.608 trillion in various Trust Funds, will drop to well about $4.4 trillion, or an implicit 6% underfunding in 2 months merely to keep the bloated government operating for a few more months.
Read more here at ZeroHedge.
Nagging question: After the federal pension funds go to the same place that Medicare and Social Security funds went, then what?
How soon till there’s more talk of making the grab for private retirement accounts? Count on it sooner or later. Hearings have been held.
Think it can’t happen? Ask Argentina.
Obama-Inspired Ship “Audacity Of Hope” Set To Join Leftist-Islamist Gaza Flotilla II
(INN) — A ship flying US colors and carrying 34 passengers is set to joint this year’s Gaza-bound, IHH-sponsored “Freedom Flotilla 2” in June, the New York Times reported.
So-called “peace activists” on the first IHH flotilla in May 2010 ambushed Israeli naval commandos who boarded the ship in accordance with international law, attempted to take them captive, and seriously injuring several. The commandos were forced to kill nine aggressors in order to rescue their imperiled comrades.
This year’s American vessel, named The Audacity of Hope after US President Barack Obama’s best-selling book, is being organized by an American group called “US Boat to Gaza.”
Obama links to the Audacity do not end there, however. Prof. Rashid Khalidi, director of the Middle East Institute at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, and a friend from Obama’s time in Chicago, is among the supporters of an appeal launched by the group last week.
“We must raise at least $370,000 in the next month,” a statement on US Boat to Gaza’s Web site read indicating it doesn’t have the money needed to sail yet.
“These funds will be used to purchase a boat large enough for 40-60 people, secure a crew, and cover the licensing and registering of the boat. Together we will contribute to the great effort to end the blockade of Gaza and the illegal occupation of Palestine.”
Khalidi, an outspoken critic of Israel, garnered attention in 2008 when his friendship with Obama became a point of controversy during the US presidential campaign.
HT: GWP
Howard Dean Warns Fellow Dems That Palin Can Beat Obama
Former Democrat Party Chief Howard Dean Warns Fellow Dems That Palin Can Beat Obama
The Hill:
Howard Dean, the former Democratic National Committee chairman who helped Democrats capture the White House in 2008, warns that Sarah Palin could defeat President Obama in 2012.
Dean says his fellow Democrats should beware of inside-the-Beltway conventional wisdom that Obama would crush Palin in a general-election contest next year.
“I think she could win,” Dean told The Hill in an interview Friday. “She wouldn’t be my first choice if I were a Republican but I think she could win.”
Dean warns the sluggish economy could have more of a political impact than many Washington strategists and pundits assume.
“Any time you have a contest — particularly when unemployment is as high as it is — nobody gets a walkover,” Dean said. “Whoever the Republicans nominate, including people like Sarah Palin, whom the inside-the-Beltway crowd dismisses — my view is if you get the nomination of a major party, you can win the presidency, I don’t care what people write about you inside the Beltway,” Dean said.
Dean spoke to The Hill the same day the Labor Department revealed the national economy added only 54,000 jobs in May and the national unemployment rate had risen to 9.1 percent.
Last month the private sector created 83,000 jobs, about a third the average for the previous three months.
Dean said he doesn’t think Palin will win the GOP nomination or would have the advantage over Obama in 2012. But he warned it is dangerous for Democrats to dismiss her.
Palin said Friday that she was “still weeks away” from making a decision about a presidential campaign.
“Anybody who gets the nomination could win the presidency,” he said. “Do I think she’s going to get the nomination? No. But that process is so difficult and really tests candidates in ways that no other process can.”
Dean knows the rigors of presidential primaries first hand. In 2004, his unconventional campaign briefly put him in contention for the Democratic nod before the eventual winner, Sen. John Kerry (Mass.), pulled away.
“Anybody who survives the process can win the presidency,” he added.
Dean said Republicans made the mistake of underestimating Bill Clinton in the rest of the Democratic field in 1991 when former President George H.W. Bush seemed to have a strong advantage but the economy was still mired in recession.
“I can remember Bill Clinton, I think, was one of the seven dwarfs,” Cain said. “This goes on every four years and I think it’s best not to pay attention to that kind of talk.”
Bruce Cain, a political science and public policy professor and director of the University of California Washington Center, subscribes to the prevailing view that Palin would be a weak opponent against Obama.
“I stand with conventional wisdom that she’s way too flawed,” Cain. “Polls show that many women and independent voters aren’t happy with her.”
Cain believes the national economy must sink back into recession and unemployment swell to double digits before Palin becomes dangerous to Obama.
“If unemployment soars back up to double digits, voters will tune out any personal differences and be desperate for an alternative,” Cain said.
Dean thinks former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Jr. (R), who recently finished serving as the Obama administration’s ambassador to China, would be the president’s most dangerous general-election opponent in 2012, a view shared by many Democrats.
“He is an independent. He is a moderate on some social issues and has a strong record as a governor and also has international experience that I think is lacking in every other candidate,” Dean said, comparing Huntsman to the rest of the GOP field.
Dean, however, doubts Huntsman, who has little national name recognition, could win the GOP primary.
Cain, of the University of California, said Dean’s view of Huntsman matches up with the conventional wisdom of many Democrats.
He says Huntsman would be especially strong in the general election if unemployment and growth numbers fail to improve.
“With Huntsman or a more credible candidate, Obama could be in trouble with unemployment in the 9 percent range and [economic] growth at one percent,” he said.
The Hill:
Howard Dean, the former Democratic National Committee chairman who helped Democrats capture the White House in 2008, warns that Sarah Palin could defeat President Obama in 2012.
Dean says his fellow Democrats should beware of inside-the-Beltway conventional wisdom that Obama would crush Palin in a general-election contest next year.
“I think she could win,” Dean told The Hill in an interview Friday. “She wouldn’t be my first choice if I were a Republican but I think she could win.”
Dean warns the sluggish economy could have more of a political impact than many Washington strategists and pundits assume.
“Any time you have a contest — particularly when unemployment is as high as it is — nobody gets a walkover,” Dean said. “Whoever the Republicans nominate, including people like Sarah Palin, whom the inside-the-Beltway crowd dismisses — my view is if you get the nomination of a major party, you can win the presidency, I don’t care what people write about you inside the Beltway,” Dean said.
Dean spoke to The Hill the same day the Labor Department revealed the national economy added only 54,000 jobs in May and the national unemployment rate had risen to 9.1 percent.
Last month the private sector created 83,000 jobs, about a third the average for the previous three months.
Dean said he doesn’t think Palin will win the GOP nomination or would have the advantage over Obama in 2012. But he warned it is dangerous for Democrats to dismiss her.
Palin said Friday that she was “still weeks away” from making a decision about a presidential campaign.
“Anybody who gets the nomination could win the presidency,” he said. “Do I think she’s going to get the nomination? No. But that process is so difficult and really tests candidates in ways that no other process can.”
Dean knows the rigors of presidential primaries first hand. In 2004, his unconventional campaign briefly put him in contention for the Democratic nod before the eventual winner, Sen. John Kerry (Mass.), pulled away.
“Anybody who survives the process can win the presidency,” he added.
Dean said Republicans made the mistake of underestimating Bill Clinton in the rest of the Democratic field in 1991 when former President George H.W. Bush seemed to have a strong advantage but the economy was still mired in recession.
“I can remember Bill Clinton, I think, was one of the seven dwarfs,” Cain said. “This goes on every four years and I think it’s best not to pay attention to that kind of talk.”
Bruce Cain, a political science and public policy professor and director of the University of California Washington Center, subscribes to the prevailing view that Palin would be a weak opponent against Obama.
“I stand with conventional wisdom that she’s way too flawed,” Cain. “Polls show that many women and independent voters aren’t happy with her.”
Cain believes the national economy must sink back into recession and unemployment swell to double digits before Palin becomes dangerous to Obama.
“If unemployment soars back up to double digits, voters will tune out any personal differences and be desperate for an alternative,” Cain said.
Dean thinks former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Jr. (R), who recently finished serving as the Obama administration’s ambassador to China, would be the president’s most dangerous general-election opponent in 2012, a view shared by many Democrats.
“He is an independent. He is a moderate on some social issues and has a strong record as a governor and also has international experience that I think is lacking in every other candidate,” Dean said, comparing Huntsman to the rest of the GOP field.
Dean, however, doubts Huntsman, who has little national name recognition, could win the GOP primary.
Cain, of the University of California, said Dean’s view of Huntsman matches up with the conventional wisdom of many Democrats.
He says Huntsman would be especially strong in the general election if unemployment and growth numbers fail to improve.
“With Huntsman or a more credible candidate, Obama could be in trouble with unemployment in the 9 percent range and [economic] growth at one percent,” he said.
Obama monetary policy fueling pain at the pump
Obama monetary policy fueling pain at the pump, report says
By John Rossomando
Published: 12:23 PM 06/04/2011 | Updated: 4:37 PM 06/04/2011
MANHEIM, PA - MARCH 31: Democratic U.S. presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) looks at a gas pump prior to a news conference on biofuel at Molly's Gas Station March 31, 2008 in Manheim, Pennsylvania. Obama is on his six-day 'Road to Change' bus tour through Pennsylvania to campaign for the upcoming state's primary. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
The Obama administration’s monetary policies have added approximately 56.5 cents to the price of every gallon of gas you pump, according to a new congressional Joint Economic Committee report.
Estimates suggest that had the dollar maintained the value it had when Obama came into office, gasoline would cost approximately $3.40 per gallon instead of around $4 per gallon in many parts of the country.
“Analysts and pundits often cite, correctly or incorrectly, the turmoil in the Middle East, a strengthening global economy, or speculation as the causes for the run up in crude oil prices,” the report said. “What is rarely discussed as an important factor in the rise of the dollar price of oil is the role played by the dollar itself.”
The report attributes this increase to the Federal Reserve’s policy of increasing the money supply through the purchasing trillions worth of bank notes, treasury notes and mortgage-backed securities, known as quantitative easing, which it says has fueled inflation.
President Obama publicly defended the Fed’s decision to engage in quantitative easing last fall during the G20 Summit in India in the wake of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s decision to print money to buy back $600 billion worth of government bonds in August 2010.
“It was designed to grow the economy,” the president told Bloomberg.
But former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, a former top Obama economic adviser, warned last fall in an interview with Bloomberg that these policies could end up fueling inflation.
Longtime Fed Chief Alan Greenspan had a similar analysis, calling the Obama administration’s strategy that of “pursuing a policy of currency weakening”.
By John Rossomando
Published: 12:23 PM 06/04/2011 | Updated: 4:37 PM 06/04/2011
The Obama administration’s monetary policies have added approximately 56.5 cents to the price of every gallon of gas you pump, according to a new congressional Joint Economic Committee report.
Estimates suggest that had the dollar maintained the value it had when Obama came into office, gasoline would cost approximately $3.40 per gallon instead of around $4 per gallon in many parts of the country.
“Analysts and pundits often cite, correctly or incorrectly, the turmoil in the Middle East, a strengthening global economy, or speculation as the causes for the run up in crude oil prices,” the report said. “What is rarely discussed as an important factor in the rise of the dollar price of oil is the role played by the dollar itself.”
The report attributes this increase to the Federal Reserve’s policy of increasing the money supply through the purchasing trillions worth of bank notes, treasury notes and mortgage-backed securities, known as quantitative easing, which it says has fueled inflation.
President Obama publicly defended the Fed’s decision to engage in quantitative easing last fall during the G20 Summit in India in the wake of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s decision to print money to buy back $600 billion worth of government bonds in August 2010.
“It was designed to grow the economy,” the president told Bloomberg.
But former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, a former top Obama economic adviser, warned last fall in an interview with Bloomberg that these policies could end up fueling inflation.
Longtime Fed Chief Alan Greenspan had a similar analysis, calling the Obama administration’s strategy that of “pursuing a policy of currency weakening”.
Israeli Forces Fire on Protesters
TEL AVIV—Israel's army opened fire on dozens of Arab demonstrators who marched from Syrian border toward Israeli-controlled Golan Heights to mark the anniversary of the outbreak of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.
Syria's state-run news agency reported that four demonstrators were killed and over 30 were injured.
Inspired by popular domestic demonstrations around the Arab world, pro-Palestinian protestors in Syria and Lebanon are now challenging Israeli forces posted on the border. The violence marks the second flare-up in 15 days on a frontier that has remained relatively quiet for more than three decades despite frequent political tension.
According to the Israel army, protesters gathered in the morning at a hilltop on the Syrian side of the border within walking distance of the Golan Heights village of Majdal Shams. When the demonstrators began to march toward the border, soldiers tried to ward them off with verbal warnings and by firing into the air, said the spokesperson. Ignoring the calls, dozens of demonstrators then crossed the Syrian border and continued toward the Israeli line through the United Nations-monitored demilitarized zone.
"IDF forces were left with no choice but to open fire," said an army spokeswoman, who accused the Syrian government of permitting a border "provocation" in order to distract attention from the weeks-long revolt against the regime of President Bashar Assad.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday called the border demonstrations a threat to Israeli towns and cities, and said that soldiers had orders to act with "resolve" to prevent a repeat of two weeks ago, when dozens of protesters defied Israeli soldiers and reached the Golan Heights for several hours before returning to Syria.
Sunday's demonstrations were inspired by the anniversary of the Six-Day War, when Israeli forces opened a preemptive assault on Egypt, Jordan and Syria, capturing the Golan Heights, the Sinai Peninsula and the West Bank. Two weeks ago, the demonstrators marked the anniversary of the creation of the state of Israel.
Pro-Palestinian demonstrations were also planned at the Lebanese border Sunday, but organizers decided to postpone the protests after the Lebanese army declared the border a closed military zone. Two weeks ago several Palestinian demonstrators were killed on the Israel-Lebanon border.
In the West Bank, soldiers fired tear gas to subdue demonstrators who threw stones at the Qalandiya military checkpoint at the northern tip of Jerusalem.
—A reporter in Damascus, Syria contributed to this article.
Syria's state-run news agency reported that four demonstrators were killed and over 30 were injured.
Inspired by popular domestic demonstrations around the Arab world, pro-Palestinian protestors in Syria and Lebanon are now challenging Israeli forces posted on the border. The violence marks the second flare-up in 15 days on a frontier that has remained relatively quiet for more than three decades despite frequent political tension.
According to the Israel army, protesters gathered in the morning at a hilltop on the Syrian side of the border within walking distance of the Golan Heights village of Majdal Shams. When the demonstrators began to march toward the border, soldiers tried to ward them off with verbal warnings and by firing into the air, said the spokesperson. Ignoring the calls, dozens of demonstrators then crossed the Syrian border and continued toward the Israeli line through the United Nations-monitored demilitarized zone.
"IDF forces were left with no choice but to open fire," said an army spokeswoman, who accused the Syrian government of permitting a border "provocation" in order to distract attention from the weeks-long revolt against the regime of President Bashar Assad.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday called the border demonstrations a threat to Israeli towns and cities, and said that soldiers had orders to act with "resolve" to prevent a repeat of two weeks ago, when dozens of protesters defied Israeli soldiers and reached the Golan Heights for several hours before returning to Syria.
Sunday's demonstrations were inspired by the anniversary of the Six-Day War, when Israeli forces opened a preemptive assault on Egypt, Jordan and Syria, capturing the Golan Heights, the Sinai Peninsula and the West Bank. Two weeks ago, the demonstrators marked the anniversary of the creation of the state of Israel.
Pro-Palestinian demonstrations were also planned at the Lebanese border Sunday, but organizers decided to postpone the protests after the Lebanese army declared the border a closed military zone. Two weeks ago several Palestinian demonstrators were killed on the Israel-Lebanon border.
In the West Bank, soldiers fired tear gas to subdue demonstrators who threw stones at the Qalandiya military checkpoint at the northern tip of Jerusalem.
—A reporter in Damascus, Syria contributed to this article.
Stunner: Democrats Latest Plan Is to Spend More of Your Money
They never change.
Because tripling the US deficit in one year just wasn't good enough.
The Obama deficit will reach $1.65 trillion this year. (The Captain's Comments)
They wouldn't be democrats if they didn't want to spend more of your money.
The Hill reported:
House Democrats this week have amplified their calls for new spending on infrastructure and other federal projects in the face of May's discouraging job-creation figures.
Even as Republicans are insisting on "trillions" of dollars in spending cuts, Democrats maintain that a targeted injection of additional federal dollars in the near-term would go a long way toward reversing the hiring slump. Friday's disappointing job report, they say, only bolsters their case.
"The American people, while concerned about the deficit, place much more emphasis on job creation, and they see a role for the government," Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told The Hill. "A fast injection of job stimulus on the public side would help tremendously. … It [the job report] helps our argument about investment."
Other Democrats delivered a similar message on Friday. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said "the answer" to the lingering jobs crisis is "investment" in the "communities and businesses who need confidence and resources to hire [people]." Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) said "investing in our communities goes hand in hand with full economic recovery."
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) said that only in Washington is targeted new spending being demonized. "Once you get outside the Beltway, almost everyone agrees that we should be rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and investing in clean American energy that reduces our dependence on oil," Blumenauer said.
Because tripling the US deficit in one year just wasn't good enough.
They wouldn't be democrats if they didn't want to spend more of your money.
The Hill reported:
House Democrats this week have amplified their calls for new spending on infrastructure and other federal projects in the face of May's discouraging job-creation figures.
Even as Republicans are insisting on "trillions" of dollars in spending cuts, Democrats maintain that a targeted injection of additional federal dollars in the near-term would go a long way toward reversing the hiring slump. Friday's disappointing job report, they say, only bolsters their case.
"The American people, while concerned about the deficit, place much more emphasis on job creation, and they see a role for the government," Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told The Hill. "A fast injection of job stimulus on the public side would help tremendously. … It [the job report] helps our argument about investment."
Other Democrats delivered a similar message on Friday. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said "the answer" to the lingering jobs crisis is "investment" in the "communities and businesses who need confidence and resources to hire [people]." Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) said "investing in our communities goes hand in hand with full economic recovery."
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) said that only in Washington is targeted new spending being demonized. "Once you get outside the Beltway, almost everyone agrees that we should be rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure and investing in clean American energy that reduces our dependence on oil," Blumenauer said.
Sarah Palin: The Truth Is That Obama Is Not Misreporting Data, He's Lying (Video)
AGREED!!!
by Jim Hoft
Sarah Palin confronted our dishonest far left president on his constant lies about Medicare last night on Hannity.
"The truth is that President Obama is lying. He's not just misstating. He's not just misconstruing some facts or some data. No, he's lying when he says that those with Down Syndrome, that those with autism, those that need that safety net will be left on their own if the Republicans have their way. That is not true."
Agreed.
by Jim Hoft
Sarah Palin confronted our dishonest far left president on his constant lies about Medicare last night on Hannity.
"The truth is that President Obama is lying. He's not just misstating. He's not just misconstruing some facts or some data. No, he's lying when he says that those with Down Syndrome, that those with autism, those that need that safety net will be left on their own if the Republicans have their way. That is not true."
Agreed.
Revere Did Warn the British; Palin FTW!
Remember when Sarah Palin said that the Tea Party was going to party like it was 1773 and the left came out in droves to mock her , only to make fools of themselves when they realized she was referencing the year the Tea Party occured and she had schooled them in a little bit of history?
It seems the left will never learn. Learn history, at least.
The new “scandal” is that Sarah Palin doesn’t know her history enough to know that Paul Revere didn’t warn the British, he warned the colonists that the British were coming.
This video is evidence of Palin’s idiocy:
Here comes the history :
Those quibbling with Governor Palin’s statements have their history incomplete. During Paul Revere’s ride he was stopped by British soldiers, which Revere recounts in a 1789 letter maintained by the Massachusetts Historical Society ,in his original language (emphasis mine):
I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back,and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms
Upon being stopped, did Revere, in essence, warn the British soldiers of the colonists’ plans? Yes.
Maybe next time they can actually catch her up on something, but for now, Palin is once again taking the left to school.
It seems the left will never learn. Learn history, at least.
The new “scandal” is that Sarah Palin doesn’t know her history enough to know that Paul Revere didn’t warn the British, he warned the colonists that the British were coming.
This video is evidence of Palin’s idiocy:
Here comes the history :
Those quibbling with Governor Palin’s statements have their history incomplete. During Paul Revere’s ride he was stopped by British soldiers, which Revere recounts in a 1789 letter maintained by the Massachusetts Historical Society ,in his original language (emphasis mine):
I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back,and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms
Upon being stopped, did Revere, in essence, warn the British soldiers of the colonists’ plans? Yes.
Maybe next time they can actually catch her up on something, but for now, Palin is once again taking the left to school.
So Now All These People Will Apologize to Sarah Palin About Paul Revere, Right?
So Now All These People Will Apologize to Sarah Palin About Paul Revere, Right?
As with most people, I simply took at face value the popular version that Paul Revere warned that the British were coming, the British were coming.
Not having any real reason to look into it any deeper, Sarah Palin's statement that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting seemed odd.
But it appears that the popular version is not complete.
In fact, as pointed out at Conservatives4Palin, Revere did in fact tell the British that the colonial militias, who had been alerted, were waiting for them. Here is the original historical text written by Revere (spelling in original, bold added):
I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back,and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms
Palin's short statement on the video was less than clear; that sometimes happens but the part of the statement which has people screaming -- that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting -- appears to be true.
I've learned something new today, about Paul Revere.
The leading lights of the left-blogosphere have made fools of themselves, as have people who are not of the left-blogosphere. I presume they all will be apologizing.
Update: Aaron Worthing at Patterico has a round-up of all the hyperventilated left-blogospheric reaction, including by Think Progress, which writes:
It’s hard to imagine why Revere would warn the British of anything, or why he’d do it with bells and gun shots.
This account in "Paul Revere's Ride" by David Hackett Fischer (Oxford University Press 1994), may be of interest to Think Progress and all the others laughing because they purport to be so much better informed than Palin:
"A townsman remembered that 'repeated gunshots, the beating of drums and the ringing of bells filled the air.'.... Along the North Shore of Massachusetts, church bells began to toll and the heavy beat of drums could be heard for many miles in the night air."
It's available on Google Books.
As with most people, I simply took at face value the popular version that Paul Revere warned that the British were coming, the British were coming.
Not having any real reason to look into it any deeper, Sarah Palin's statement that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting seemed odd.
But it appears that the popular version is not complete.
In fact, as pointed out at Conservatives4Palin, Revere did in fact tell the British that the colonial militias, who had been alerted, were waiting for them. Here is the original historical text written by Revere (spelling in original, bold added):
I observed a Wood at a Small distance, & made for that. When I got there, out Started Six officers, on Horse back,and orderd me to dismount;-one of them, who appeared to have the command, examined me, where I came from,& what my Name Was? I told him. it was Revere, he asked if it was Paul? I told him yes He asked me if I was an express? I answered in the afirmative. He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up. He imediately rode towards those who stoppd us, when all five of them came down upon a full gallop; one of them, whom I afterwards found to be Major Mitchel, of the 5th Regiment, Clapped his pistol to my head, called me by name, & told me he was going to ask me some questions, & if I did not give him true answers, he would blow my brains out. He then asked me similar questions to those above. He then orderd me to mount my Horse, after searching me for arms
Palin's short statement on the video was less than clear; that sometimes happens but the part of the statement which has people screaming -- that Revere warned the British that the colonial militias were waiting -- appears to be true.
I've learned something new today, about Paul Revere.
The leading lights of the left-blogosphere have made fools of themselves, as have people who are not of the left-blogosphere. I presume they all will be apologizing.
Update: Aaron Worthing at Patterico has a round-up of all the hyperventilated left-blogospheric reaction, including by Think Progress, which writes:
It’s hard to imagine why Revere would warn the British of anything, or why he’d do it with bells and gun shots.
This account in "Paul Revere's Ride" by David Hackett Fischer (Oxford University Press 1994), may be of interest to Think Progress and all the others laughing because they purport to be so much better informed than Palin:
"A townsman remembered that 'repeated gunshots, the beating of drums and the ringing of bells filled the air.'.... Along the North Shore of Massachusetts, church bells began to toll and the heavy beat of drums could be heard for many miles in the night air."
It's available on Google Books.
20 Facts About US Inequality That Everyone Should Know (With An Update On The Uber-Wealthy And Global Wealth Inequality)
20 Facts About US Inequality That Everyone Should Know (With An Update On The Uber-Wealthy And Global Wealth Inequality)
Submitted by Tyler Durden
Courtesy of the Stanford Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality, we bring you the "20 facts about US Inequality that Everyone Should Know". For everything one has always wanted to know about wage inequality, CEO pay, homelessness, education wage premium, gender pay gaps, occupational sex segregation, racial gaps in education, racial discrimination, child poverty, residential segregation, health insurance, inter and intragenerational income mobility, bad jobs, discouraged workers, wealth inequality, labor market deregulation, job losses, immigrants and inequality and productivity and real income, this is the definitive resource.
1. Wage Inequality
Over the last 30 years, wage inequality in the United States has increased substantially, with the overall level of inequality now approaching the extreme level that prevailed prior to the Great Depression. This general characterization of the inequality trend oversimplifies, though, the actual pattern of change: The chart below shows that the trend at the top of the income distribution (the “upper tail”) is not exactly the same as the trend at the bottom of the distribution (the “lower tail”). “Lower-tail” inequality is measured here by taking the ratio of wages at the middle of the income distribution (i.e., the 50th percentile) to those near the bottom of the distribution (i.e., the 10th percentile); “upper-tail” inequality is measured by taking the ratio of wages near the top of the distribution (i.e., the 90th percentile) to those at the middle of the distribution (i.e., the 50th percentile of workers). We find that lower-tail inequality rose sharply in the 1980s and contracted somewhat thereafter, while upper-tail inequality has increased steadily since 1980.
Men's wage inequality
Source: Economic Policy Institute. 2011. “Upper Tail” inequality growing steadily: Men's wage inequality, 1973-2009. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. May 11, 2011. .
2. CEO pay
Recent decades have seen a clear increase in the difference between CEO compensation and that of the average worker in manufacturing or “production.” CEOs in 1965 made 24 times more than the average production worker, whereas in 2009 they made 185 times more. This chart shows how this ratio between the compensation of CEOs and production workers took off in the 1980s.
U.S. CEO pay in relation to the average production worker's compensation
Source: Source: Economic Policy Institute. 2011. More compensation heading to the very top: Ratio of average CEO total direct compensation to average production worker compensation, 1965-2009. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. May 16, 2011. .
3. Homelessness
There are 750,000 Americans who are homeless on any given night, with one in five of them considered chronically homeless. The ranks of the sheltered homeless include disproportionate numbers of males, blacks, middle-aged people (i.e., ages 31-50), veterans, and disabled.
Who is Homeless?
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2007. The Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress. See http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/ahar.pdf.
4. Education Wage Premium
Only college graduates have experienced growth in median weekly earnings since 1979 (in real terms). High school dropouts have, by contrast, seen their real median weekly earnings decline by about 22 percent.
Median weekly earnings of full-time workers (workers 25 years old & older, 2006 dollars)
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Charting the U.S. Labor Market in 2006; see http://www.bls.gov/cps/labor2006/home.htm. Updated to 2009 by Steve Hipple of the Bureau of Labor Statistics; see http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/17/the-value-of-college-2/
5. Gender Pay Gaps
Throughout much of the 20th century, the average woman earned about 60% of what the average man earned. Starting in the late 1970s, there was a substantial increase in women’s relative earnings, with women coming to earn about 80% of what men earned. This historic rise plateaued in 2005 and, since then, the pay gap has remained roughly unchanged.
Women's earnings as a percent of men's (full-time wage and salary workers, annual averages)
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2010. Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2009. Report 1017. See http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2009.pdf.
6. Occupational Sex Segregation
Women and men tend to work in very different occupations. And overall “men’s jobs” are better paid than “women’s jobs.”
Gendered occupations and unequal rewards
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2009. Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2008. Report 1017. See http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2008.pdf.
7. Racial Gaps in Education
High-school dropout rates are least among whites and highest among Hispanics, while college enrollment rates are least among blacks and highest among whites. The high-school dropout rate has grown more similar among these three groups, while the college enrollment rate has grown more sharply different.
High school dropout percentage (among persons 16-24 years old) and college enrollment percentage (among high school graduates)
Source: The Digest of Education Statistics 2008, National Center for Education Statistics.
8. Racial Discrimination
Racial discrimination continues to be in the labor market. An experiment carried out in Chicago and Boston during 2001 and 2002 shows that resumes with “white-sounding” names, whether male or female, were much more likely to result in call backs for interviews than were those with “black-sounding” names (even though the resumes were otherwise identical).
Interview call-back rate for women with “white” names and “black” names
Source: Bertrand, Marianne and Sendhil Mullainathan. 2004. “Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal?” American Economic Review 94(4): 991-1013.
9. Child Poverty
In the United States, 21.9 percent of all children are in poverty, a poverty rate second only to that of Mexico’s (among rich nations).
Relative Poverty Rates in Twenty-One Rich Nations at the Turn of the Century for Children
Source: Timothy M. Smeeding, 2008. “Poorer by Comparison.” Pathways 3-5.
10. Residential Segregation
We all know that the rich in the United States tend not to live in the same neighborhoods as the poor. But did you know that such residential segregation is on the rise? The graph below reveals that, between 1970 and 2000, there has been a sizable increase in segregation. We show this result by measuring (a) how likely it is for households in the top fifth of the income distribution to live with households not in the top fifth (in 1970 and 2000), and (b) how likely it is for households in the bottom fifth of the income distribution to live with households not in the bottom fifth (again in 1970 and 2000).
Class-based segregation
Source: Claude S. Fischer, Gretchen Stockmayer, Jon Stiles, Michael Hout. 2004. “Distinguishing the Geographic Levels and Social Dimensions of U.S. Metropolitan Segregation, 1960-2000.” Demography 41(1): 37-59.
11. Health Insurance
In 2007, 8.1 million children under 18 years old were without health insurance. Children in poverty and Hispanic children were more likely to be uninsured.
Uninsured Children by Poverty Status, Age, and Race and Hispanic Origin (percent)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports. 2008. Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007. See http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf.
12. Intragenerational Income Mobility
Intragenerational income mobility refers to the rate at which a person moves to a higher or lower income level during her or his work career. More than half of those individuals in the bottom income quintile in 1994 remained there 10 years later, and less than 4 percent reached the top quintile.
Relative Mobility Out of the Bottom Income Quintile (individuals age 25 to 44)
Source: Gregory Acs and Seth Zimmerman. 2008. U.S. Intragenerational Economic Mobility From 1984 to 2004. The Urban Institute. See http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/1001226_intragenerational_economic_mobility.pdf.
13. Bad Jobs
“Bad jobs” are typically considered those that pay low wages and do not include access to health insurance and pension benefits. As shown here, about 10% of full-time workers are in low-wage jobs, about 30% don't have health insurance, and about 40% don't have pensions. The graph also shows that the likelihood of being in a bad job is much worse for part-time workers, for on-call and day laborers, and for those working for temporary help agencies.
Employment relations and job characteristics
Source: Arne L. Kalleberg, Barbara F. Reskin, Ken Hudson. 2000. “Bad Jobs in America: Standard and Nonstandard Employment Relations and Job Quality in the United States.” American Sociological Review 65(2): 256-278.
14. Discouraged Workers
Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe that there are no jobs available for them. The number of discouraged workers in the U.S. increased sharply during the current recession, rising to 717,000 in the first quarter of 2009, a 70-percent increase from the first quarter of 2008. Relative to their share of the labor force, young people, blacks, and, to a lesser extent, Hispanics and men were over-represented among discouraged workers.
Unemployed and marginally attached workers in first quarter of 2009 (as share of the civilian population)
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2009. Ranks of Discouraged Workers and Others Marginally Attached to the Labor Force Rise During Recession. See http://www.bls.gov/opub/ils/pdf/opbils74.pdf.
15. Wealth Inequality
The ownership of wealth among households in the U.S. became somewhat more concentrated since the 1980s. The top 10% of households controlled 68.2 percent of the total wealth in 1983 and 73.1% of the total wealth in 2007.
Concentration of wealth in the U.S. between 1983 and 2007
Source: Source: Edward N. Wolff, 2010. “Recent Trends in Household Wealth in the United States: Rising Debt and the Middle-Class Squeeze – An Update to 2007.” Levy Economics Institute Working Paper No. 589. Annandale-on-Hudson, NY: Levy Economics Institute.
16. Intergenerational Income Mobility
Intergenerational income mobility can be measured by calculating the rate at which individuals move to income quintiles that are different that that of their families of origin. The proportion of sons who remained in the bottom quartile declined between 1961 and 1972 and stayed the same afterward.
Family Background and Income in Adulthood (individuals age 30 to 59)
Source: Harding, David, Christopher Jencks, Leonard M. Lopoo, and Susan E. Mayer. 2008. “Family Background and Incomes in Adulthood.” Pp. 505-515 in Social Stratification: Class, Race and Gender in Sociological Perspective, edited by David B. Grusky. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
17. Deregulation of the Labor Market
The percentage of all wage and salary workers who are union members has declined from 24% in 1973 to 12.4% in 2008. The decline in the private sector was steeper than the decline in the public sector. At the same time as union membership declined, the real value of the minimum wage also fell by 25% in the 1980s, leading to a weakening influence of the minimum wage on the low-wage labor market. These two developments in combination may be understood as the foundation of the newly “deregulated” U.S. labor market.
Private-sector union membership and real minimum wage, 1973-2008
Source: Barry T. Hirsch and David A. Macpherson. Union Membership and Coverage Database from the CPS. See http://www.unionstats.com; http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/labor_force_employment_earnings/compensation_wages_and_earnings.html
18. Job Losses
Employment fell by 3.1 million jobs during 2008. The job losses were more widespread and severe than during the previous two recessions in 1990-1991 and 2001 and in fact the fall in employment is comparable to that in the deeper recession of 1981-1982.
Job losses in four recessions, percent decline in employment from peak month
Source: Laura A. Kelter. 2009. Substantial Job Losses in 2008. Monthly Labor Review. See: http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2009/03/art2full.pdf18
19. Immigrants and Inequality
Does immigration to the U.S. bring highly-skilled workers into the labor force or unskilled workers? The answer is both! The education distribution below indicates that immigrants are concentrated in both tails of the skill distribution.
Characteristics of immigrant education enrollment in 2000
Source: David Card. 2009. Immigration and Inequality. Center for research and analysis of immigration. See http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/14325/1/14325.pdf
20. Productivity and Real Income
We are a richer country overall because of a spectacular rise in labor productivity. But who has profited from this rise? Although the growth of labor productivity has expanded total national income, the real income and wages of the median worker have at the same time stagnated.
Labor productivity and income of the median worker
Source: Bureau if Economic Analysis and U.S. Census Bureau
A slightly more updated and nuanced analysis, looking at the top of America's wealth pyramid was penned byZero Hedge back in May 2010, titled: "Visualizing America's Tax Inequality, The Wealthiest 11,000 People, And Why Obama's Campaign Promises Mean 77%-91% Taxes For The Richest" - for those curious about the non-linear scaling affecting those for whom money does not matter...
A summary of the details:
40% of US households make below $36,000
60% make below $57,000
80% make below $91,750
95% making below $165k
98% making less than $250,000
99.99% make less than $5 million and 0.01% make more than $5 million (with a very special category for those making over $1.5 billion: "Hedge Fund Managers")
1% of society makes 17.3% of the income,
The average income in the top 0.01%, or 11,000 households, is $35,473,200, and a minimum of $8,579,000
The average income in the the next 99,000 households, or 99.9%-99.99% of the population makes an average $4,699,500, and a minimum of $1,532,400
The average income in the next 451,000 households, or 99.5%-99.9% of the population makes and average $1,206,200, and a minimum of $482,400
The average income in the next 564,000 households, or 99$-99.5% of the population makes and average $269,800, and a minimum of $126,300
...and so forth.
Here are the charts that capture the stratification of America, and its new "nobility" class, courtesy of Visualizing Economics:
First - the peasants, and the clergy:
Next, the nobility:
And, a little bit more, on those who, unless they manage to stop Obama from following through on his plans, are about to be taxed between 77% and 91%.
And after looking at the US, here is the same data in a global perspective from a post we wrote back in 2010 titled: "A Detailed Look At Global Wealth Distribution"
By now it should be common knowledge to everyone that in American society, the top wealthiest 1 percentile controls all the political power, holds half the wealth, and pays what is claimed to be the bulk of the taxes (despite mile wide tax loopholes and Swiss bank accounts). The rest of the population is merely filler, programmed to buy every latest self-cannibalizing iteration of the iPad/Pod while never again paying their mortgage and brainwashed to watch 2 hours of prime time TV commercials to keep it distracted from the fact that the last time America was a democracy was around the time the Wright brothers were arguing the pros and cons of frequent flier programs. So far so good. But what about the rest of the world? How is wealth stratified in a global perspective? Where do the "rich" live? What kind of wealth is controlled by various countries? Where are the Ultra High Net Worth people? For answers to all these questions, and much more, confirming that just like in America, the wealthiest 0.5% control over 35% of world wealth, Credit Suisse has compiled and released its latest "Global Wealth Report." The findings are summarized here.
The first figure shows world wealth by region. The US, with its wealth of about $50 trillion, accounts for 25% of total world wealth, which at last check was about $200 trillion. And yes, Europe as a region has a slightly greater wealth portion (32%) than does America (31%).
When it comes to geographic distribution, it is to be expected that North America will have the greatest proportion of people in the ultra wealthy category. Indeed, the chart below confirms this.
Drilling down into asset composition in various countries, it becomes obvious why the Fed is so focused on keeping the stock market high. With America being the wealthiest country in the world, and the bulk of US wealth held in financial assets, offset by a material amount of debt, which confirms that a deflationary spiral would be the end for the "wealth effect" so desired by Ben Bernanke. More from CS: "Consider first the relative importance of financial versus non-financial assets, and the size of debt. Expressed as a percentage of gross household assets, the pattern clearly differs markedly between poorer and richer countries and regions. In developing countries (see Figure 1), for example India and Indonesia, it is common for 80% or more of total assets to be held in the form of non-financial assets, largely housing and farms. A high proportion of real property is also evident in transition countries in Europe, reflecting in part the wholesale privatization of housing in the 1990s. As countries develop and grow, the importance of non-financial assets tends to decline, so that the share in China, for instance, is now close to half. In the richest countries, financial assets typically account for more than half of household wealth. There are interesting exceptions to this general pattern. Recent robust house price rises have propelled the share of non-financial assets above 60% in France and some other major European countries. South Africa, on the other hand, is an outlier in the developing world, with exceptionally high holdings of financial assets: the figure of 80% exceeds the share found in both the United States and Japan." In other words, the more "developed" the world becomes, the greater the amount of wealth tied into the perpetuation of the Ponzi lies. Small wonder why so few in charge are willing to actually do anything that changes the status quo.
Next, it is time to drill down in the specific composition of the financial assets.
Figure 2 provides more detail, showing the breakdown of financial assets into three categories: currency and deposits, equities (all shares and other equities held directly by households), and other financial assets for selected countries. To add further detail, in most countries the reserves of life insurance companies and pension funds form the largest component of “other financial assets.” The composition of financial assets differs considerably across countries, especially with regard to the importance of shares and other equities. One interesting trend we note is that equities are not always a large component of household financial wealth, even in countries with very active financial markets. In the United Kingdom and Japan, for example, equities account for just 13% and 9% of total financial assets respectively. In contrast, they make up 37% and 43% of financial assets in Sweden and the USA, respectively. Broadly speaking, the relative importance of currency and deposits falls as that of bonds and equities increases. On the other hand, the portfolio share of “other financial assets” does not vary a lot, staying in the range of about 40%–45%. However, when we come to the UK, Japan and Colombia, which have the lowest portfolio share of equities, the pattern breaks down. The UK has a moderate currency and deposits share, but the largest “other financial assets” share, reflecting large life insurance and pension reserves. Colombia also has more in the form of “other financial assets” than is typical. Japan, on the other hand, which has a strong tradition of saving in deposit form, has a very large currency and deposits share and only a 35% share of “other financial assets.”
An interesting detour looks at gender distribution for asset holders in the US and the UK. As the chart below shows, in the UK women appear to hold more risky assets than men.
Looking at the history of global wealth per adult, net worth peaked just before the first ponzi/credit/housing bubble popped, confirming that a major portion of the then-record $50K/adult net wealth was imaginary. Yet it may have far more to drop: as CS says, "despite the financial crisis, the past decade has in fact been a relatively benign period for household wealth accumulation. Global net worth per adult rose 43% from USD 30,700 in the year 2000 to USD 43,800 by mid-2010. Since the number of adults increased from 3.6 billion to 4.4 billion over this period, aggregate household wealth rose by 72%. One important factor here was the depreciation of the dollar against most major currencies, which accounts for part of the rise in dollar-denominated values, but average net worth still increased by 24% when exchange rates are held constant." The next question is how much latent dollar devaluation has been accrued to this point and how much more is due to only gradually emerge.
The next chart is rather self-explanatory. The richest nations, with wealth in 2010 above USD 100,000 per adult, are found in North America, Western Europe, and among the rich Asian-Pacific and Middle East countries. They are topped by Switzerland, Norway, Australia, Singapore and France, each of which records wealth per adult above USD 250,000. Average wealth in other major economies such as the USA, Japan, the United Kingdom and Canada also exceeds USD 200,000.
And some more detail on the various wealth regions:
Emerging wealth: The band of wealth from USD 25,000 to USD 100,000 covers many recent EU entrants (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Cyprus) and important Latin American countries (Mexico, Brazil, Chile), along with a number of Middle Eastern nations (Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain).
Frontier wealth: The main transition nations outside the EU, including China, Russia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Mongolia, fall in the USD 5,000 to USD 25,000 range, together with some of their Far East neighbors (Indonesia, Thailand) and most of Latin America (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, El Salvador). The group also contains a number of African nations at the southernmost tip (South Africa, Botswana, Namibia) and on the Mediterranean coast (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt).
Finally, the category below USD 5,000 comprises almost all of South Asia, including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal, and almost all of Central and West Africa.
Next is a pie chart of with a detailed break down of wealth distribution by region.
Credit Suisse provides a look at geographic wealth distribution by decile:
To be among the wealthiest half of the world, an adult needs only USD 4,000 in assets, once debts have been subtracted. However, each adult requires more than USD 72,000 to belong to the top 10% of global wealth holders and more than USD 588,000 to be a member of the top 1%. The bottom half of the global population together possess less than 2% of global wealth, although wealth is growing fast for some members of this segment. In sharp contrast, the richest 10% own 83% of the world’s wealth, with the top 1% alone accounting for 43% of global assets. Figure 4 shows how the regions of the world are represented amongst the wealth deciles. Unsurprisingly for example, North America and Europe together make up the lion’s share of the top wealth decile (10%). China has relatively few representatives at the very top and bottom of the global wealth distribution, but dominates the middle section, supplying more than a third of those in deciles 4–8. The sizeable presence of China in the middle section reflects not only its population size and moderate average wealth level, but also relatively low wealth inequality. China’s position in the global picture has shifted upwards in the past decade as a consequence of a strong record of growth, rising asset values and the appreciation of the renminbi relative to the US dollar. China already has more people in the top 10% of global wealth holders than any country except for the USA, Japan and Germany, and is poised to overtake both Germany and Japan in the near future.
Next is the chart that everyone has seen as it pertains to America, but few have seen in terms of the entire world. Per CS, Figure 1 shows “The global wealth pyramid” in striking detail. It is made up of a solid base of low wealth holders with upper tiers occupied by fewer and fewer people. We estimate that 3 billion individuals – more than two thirds of the global adult population – have wealth below USD 10,000. A further billion adults (24% of the world population) are placed in the USD 10,000–100,000 range, leaving 358 million adults (8% of the world population) with assets above USD 100,000. Figures for mid-2010 indicate that 24.2 million adults are above the threshold for dollar millionaires. While they make up less than 1% of the global adult population, they own more than a third of global household wealth. More specifically, individuals with wealth above USD 50 million are estimated to number 81,000 worldwide.
Some more details on the various tiers of the pyramid:
Bottom of the pyramid
The various tiers of the wealth pyramid have distinctive characteristics. The base level is spread broadly across countries. It has significant membership in all regions of the world, and spans a wide variety of family circumstances. The upper wealth limit of USD 10,000 is a modest sum in developed countries, excluding almost all adults who own houses, with or without a mortgage. Nevertheless, a surprisingly large number of individuals in advanced countries have limited savings or other assets.
A high proportion are young people with little opportunity or interest in accumulating wealth. In fact, limited amounts of tangible assets combined with credit card debts and student loans lead many young people to record negative net worth. In Denmark and Sweden, for example, 30% of the population report negative wealth. This is an important and often overlooked segment, not least in the context of the credit crisis.
Low wealth is also a common feature of older age groups, particularly for those individuals suffering ill health and exposed to high medical bills. In fact, the means testing applied to many state benefits, especially contributions to the cost of residential homes, provides an incentive to shed wealth. Nevertheless, relatively few people in rich countries have net worth below USD 10,000 throughout their adult life. In essence, membership of the base section of the global wealth pyramid is a transient, lifecycle phenomenon for most citizens in the developed world.
The situation in low-income countries is different. More than 90% of the adult population in India and Africa fall in this band; in many low-income African countries, the fraction of the population is close to 100%. However, the cost of living is usually much lower. For a resident of India, for instance, assets of USD 10,000 would be equivalent to about USD 30,000 to a resident of the United States. In much of the developing world, this is enough to own a house or land – albeit possibly with uncertain property rights – and to have a comfortable lifestyle by local standards.
Middle of the pyramid
The billion adults in the USD 10,000–100,000 range form the middle class from the perspective of global wealth. With USD 32 trillion in total wealth, it certainly carries economic weight. This tier has the most regionally balanced membership, although China now contributes almost a third of the total. The wealth range would cover the median person over most of his adult life in high income countries. In middle income countries it would apply to a middle class person in middle age. However, in low-income countries only those in the top decile qualify, restricting membership to significant landowners, successful businessmen, professionals and the like.
High segment of the pyramid
When we consider the “high” segment of the wealth pyramid – the group of adults whose net worth exceeds USD 100,000 – the regional composition begins to change. With almost 358 million adults worldwide, this group is far from exclusive. But the typical member of the group is very different in different parts of the world. In high income countries, the threshold of USD 100,000 is well within the reach of middle-class adults once careers have been established. In contrast, residents from low-income countries would need to belong to the top percentile of wealth holders, so only the exceptionally successful, well endowed or well connected qualify.
The regional contrast shows up in the fact that North America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific regions account for 92% of the global membership of the USD 100,000+ group, with Europe alone home to 39% of the total. As far as individual countries are concerned, the membership ranking depends on three factors: the population size, the average wealth level, and wealth inequality within the country. Only 15 countries host more than 1% of the global membership. The USA comes top with 23% of the total. All three factors reinforce each other in this instance: a large population combining with high mean wealth and an unequal wealth distribution. Japan is a strong runner-up, the only country at present to seriously challenge the hegemony of the USA in the global wealth ranking. Although its relative position has declined since the year 2000 due to lackluster stock market and housing market performance, Japan is still home to 15% of individuals with wealth above USD 100,000.
Top of the pyramid
At the top of the pyramid, we find the world’s millionaires, where we again witness a slightly different pattern of membership. The proportion of members from the United States rises sharply to 41%, and the share of members from outside of the North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific regions falls to just 6%. The relative positions of most countries move downwards, but there are exceptions. The French share is estimated to double to 9%, while Sweden and Switzerland are each now credited with more than 1% of the global membership.
And next, is a detailed look at the very top of the pyramid: those individuals which have over 1 million in net worth.
To assemble details of the pattern of wealth holdings above USD 1 million requires a high degree of ingenuity. The usual sources of data – official statistics and sample surveys – become increasingly incomplete and unreliable at high wealth levels. A growing number of publications have followed the example of Forbes magazine by constructing “rich lists,” which attempt to value the assets of particular named individuals at the apex of the wealth pyramid. But very little is known about the global pattern of asset holdings in the high net worth (HNW – greater than USD 1 million) and ultra high net worth (UHNW – from USD 50 million upwards) range.
We bridge this gap by exploiting well-known statistical regularities in the top wealth tail. Using only data from traditional sources in the public domain yields a pattern of global wealth holdings in the USD 250,000 to USD 5 million range, which, when projected onward, predicts about 1000 dollar billionaires for mid-2010. Although not exactly comparable, this number is very close to the figure of 1,011 billionaire holdings reported by Forbes magazine for February 2010. Making use of the regional affiliation recorded in rich lists allows us to merge the top tail details with data on the level and distribution of wealth derived from traditional sources in order to generate a regional breakdown of HNW and UHNW individuals. At this time, we do not attempt to estimate the pattern of holdings across particular countries, except China and India which are treated as separate regions. However, as a rule of thumb, residents of the USA account for about 90% of the figure for North America.
The base of the wealth pyramid is occupied by people from all countries of the world at various stages of their lifecycle. In contrast, HNW and UHNW individuals are heavily concentrated in particular regions and countries, but the members tend to share a much more similar lifestyle, often participating in the same global markets for high coupon consumption items. The wealth portfolios of individuals are also likely to be similar, dominated by financial assets and, in particular, equity holdings in public companies traded in international markets. For these reasons, using official exchange rates to value assets is more appropriate, rather than using local price levels to compare wealth holdings.
Our figures for mid-2010 indicate that there were 24.5 million HNW individuals with wealth from USD 1 million to USD 50 million, of whom the vast majority (22 million) fall in the USD 1–5 million range. North America dominates the residence ranking, accounting for 11.1 million HNW individuals (45% of the total). Europe accounts for 7.8 million (31.7%) and 4.1 million reside in Asia-Pacific countries other than China and India. We estimate that there are now more than 800,000 HNW individuals in China, each worth between USD 1 million and USD 50 million (3.3% of the global total). India, Africa and Latin America together host the remaining 740,000 HNW individuals (3.0% of the total).
The take home message is that the wealthiest people in the world have the bulk of their wealth entrenched in the current system and any dramatic overhaul or reset of the status quo will be met by the stiff resistance of those who can summon fleet of jets, private armies, and even Fed chairmen on a whim. Whether anyone will have the wherewithal to confront the broken system under such conditions remains to be seen.
Submitted by Tyler Durden
Courtesy of the Stanford Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality, we bring you the "20 facts about US Inequality that Everyone Should Know". For everything one has always wanted to know about wage inequality, CEO pay, homelessness, education wage premium, gender pay gaps, occupational sex segregation, racial gaps in education, racial discrimination, child poverty, residential segregation, health insurance, inter and intragenerational income mobility, bad jobs, discouraged workers, wealth inequality, labor market deregulation, job losses, immigrants and inequality and productivity and real income, this is the definitive resource.
1. Wage Inequality
Over the last 30 years, wage inequality in the United States has increased substantially, with the overall level of inequality now approaching the extreme level that prevailed prior to the Great Depression. This general characterization of the inequality trend oversimplifies, though, the actual pattern of change: The chart below shows that the trend at the top of the income distribution (the “upper tail”) is not exactly the same as the trend at the bottom of the distribution (the “lower tail”). “Lower-tail” inequality is measured here by taking the ratio of wages at the middle of the income distribution (i.e., the 50th percentile) to those near the bottom of the distribution (i.e., the 10th percentile); “upper-tail” inequality is measured by taking the ratio of wages near the top of the distribution (i.e., the 90th percentile) to those at the middle of the distribution (i.e., the 50th percentile of workers). We find that lower-tail inequality rose sharply in the 1980s and contracted somewhat thereafter, while upper-tail inequality has increased steadily since 1980.
Men's wage inequality
2. CEO pay
Recent decades have seen a clear increase in the difference between CEO compensation and that of the average worker in manufacturing or “production.” CEOs in 1965 made 24 times more than the average production worker, whereas in 2009 they made 185 times more. This chart shows how this ratio between the compensation of CEOs and production workers took off in the 1980s.
U.S. CEO pay in relation to the average production worker's compensation
3. Homelessness
There are 750,000 Americans who are homeless on any given night, with one in five of them considered chronically homeless. The ranks of the sheltered homeless include disproportionate numbers of males, blacks, middle-aged people (i.e., ages 31-50), veterans, and disabled.
Who is Homeless?
4. Education Wage Premium
Only college graduates have experienced growth in median weekly earnings since 1979 (in real terms). High school dropouts have, by contrast, seen their real median weekly earnings decline by about 22 percent.
Median weekly earnings of full-time workers (workers 25 years old & older, 2006 dollars)
5. Gender Pay Gaps
Throughout much of the 20th century, the average woman earned about 60% of what the average man earned. Starting in the late 1970s, there was a substantial increase in women’s relative earnings, with women coming to earn about 80% of what men earned. This historic rise plateaued in 2005 and, since then, the pay gap has remained roughly unchanged.
Women's earnings as a percent of men's (full-time wage and salary workers, annual averages)
6. Occupational Sex Segregation
Women and men tend to work in very different occupations. And overall “men’s jobs” are better paid than “women’s jobs.”
Gendered occupations and unequal rewards
7. Racial Gaps in Education
High-school dropout rates are least among whites and highest among Hispanics, while college enrollment rates are least among blacks and highest among whites. The high-school dropout rate has grown more similar among these three groups, while the college enrollment rate has grown more sharply different.
High school dropout percentage (among persons 16-24 years old) and college enrollment percentage (among high school graduates)
8. Racial Discrimination
Racial discrimination continues to be in the labor market. An experiment carried out in Chicago and Boston during 2001 and 2002 shows that resumes with “white-sounding” names, whether male or female, were much more likely to result in call backs for interviews than were those with “black-sounding” names (even though the resumes were otherwise identical).
Interview call-back rate for women with “white” names and “black” names
9. Child Poverty
In the United States, 21.9 percent of all children are in poverty, a poverty rate second only to that of Mexico’s (among rich nations).
Relative Poverty Rates in Twenty-One Rich Nations at the Turn of the Century for Children
10. Residential Segregation
We all know that the rich in the United States tend not to live in the same neighborhoods as the poor. But did you know that such residential segregation is on the rise? The graph below reveals that, between 1970 and 2000, there has been a sizable increase in segregation. We show this result by measuring (a) how likely it is for households in the top fifth of the income distribution to live with households not in the top fifth (in 1970 and 2000), and (b) how likely it is for households in the bottom fifth of the income distribution to live with households not in the bottom fifth (again in 1970 and 2000).
Class-based segregation
11. Health Insurance
In 2007, 8.1 million children under 18 years old were without health insurance. Children in poverty and Hispanic children were more likely to be uninsured.
Uninsured Children by Poverty Status, Age, and Race and Hispanic Origin (percent)
12. Intragenerational Income Mobility
Intragenerational income mobility refers to the rate at which a person moves to a higher or lower income level during her or his work career. More than half of those individuals in the bottom income quintile in 1994 remained there 10 years later, and less than 4 percent reached the top quintile.
Relative Mobility Out of the Bottom Income Quintile (individuals age 25 to 44)
13. Bad Jobs
“Bad jobs” are typically considered those that pay low wages and do not include access to health insurance and pension benefits. As shown here, about 10% of full-time workers are in low-wage jobs, about 30% don't have health insurance, and about 40% don't have pensions. The graph also shows that the likelihood of being in a bad job is much worse for part-time workers, for on-call and day laborers, and for those working for temporary help agencies.
Employment relations and job characteristics
14. Discouraged Workers
Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe that there are no jobs available for them. The number of discouraged workers in the U.S. increased sharply during the current recession, rising to 717,000 in the first quarter of 2009, a 70-percent increase from the first quarter of 2008. Relative to their share of the labor force, young people, blacks, and, to a lesser extent, Hispanics and men were over-represented among discouraged workers.
Unemployed and marginally attached workers in first quarter of 2009 (as share of the civilian population)
15. Wealth Inequality
The ownership of wealth among households in the U.S. became somewhat more concentrated since the 1980s. The top 10% of households controlled 68.2 percent of the total wealth in 1983 and 73.1% of the total wealth in 2007.
Concentration of wealth in the U.S. between 1983 and 2007
16. Intergenerational Income Mobility
Intergenerational income mobility can be measured by calculating the rate at which individuals move to income quintiles that are different that that of their families of origin. The proportion of sons who remained in the bottom quartile declined between 1961 and 1972 and stayed the same afterward.
Family Background and Income in Adulthood (individuals age 30 to 59)
17. Deregulation of the Labor Market
The percentage of all wage and salary workers who are union members has declined from 24% in 1973 to 12.4% in 2008. The decline in the private sector was steeper than the decline in the public sector. At the same time as union membership declined, the real value of the minimum wage also fell by 25% in the 1980s, leading to a weakening influence of the minimum wage on the low-wage labor market. These two developments in combination may be understood as the foundation of the newly “deregulated” U.S. labor market.
Private-sector union membership and real minimum wage, 1973-2008
18. Job Losses
Employment fell by 3.1 million jobs during 2008. The job losses were more widespread and severe than during the previous two recessions in 1990-1991 and 2001 and in fact the fall in employment is comparable to that in the deeper recession of 1981-1982.
Job losses in four recessions, percent decline in employment from peak month
19. Immigrants and Inequality
Does immigration to the U.S. bring highly-skilled workers into the labor force or unskilled workers? The answer is both! The education distribution below indicates that immigrants are concentrated in both tails of the skill distribution.
Characteristics of immigrant education enrollment in 2000
20. Productivity and Real Income
We are a richer country overall because of a spectacular rise in labor productivity. But who has profited from this rise? Although the growth of labor productivity has expanded total national income, the real income and wages of the median worker have at the same time stagnated.
Labor productivity and income of the median worker
A slightly more updated and nuanced analysis, looking at the top of America's wealth pyramid was penned byZero Hedge back in May 2010, titled: "Visualizing America's Tax Inequality, The Wealthiest 11,000 People, And Why Obama's Campaign Promises Mean 77%-91% Taxes For The Richest" - for those curious about the non-linear scaling affecting those for whom money does not matter...
A summary of the details:
40% of US households make below $36,000
60% make below $57,000
80% make below $91,750
95% making below $165k
98% making less than $250,000
99.99% make less than $5 million and 0.01% make more than $5 million (with a very special category for those making over $1.5 billion: "Hedge Fund Managers")
1% of society makes 17.3% of the income,
The average income in the top 0.01%, or 11,000 households, is $35,473,200, and a minimum of $8,579,000
The average income in the the next 99,000 households, or 99.9%-99.99% of the population makes an average $4,699,500, and a minimum of $1,532,400
The average income in the next 451,000 households, or 99.5%-99.9% of the population makes and average $1,206,200, and a minimum of $482,400
The average income in the next 564,000 households, or 99$-99.5% of the population makes and average $269,800, and a minimum of $126,300
...and so forth.
Here are the charts that capture the stratification of America, and its new "nobility" class, courtesy of Visualizing Economics:
First - the peasants, and the clergy:
And after looking at the US, here is the same data in a global perspective from a post we wrote back in 2010 titled: "A Detailed Look At Global Wealth Distribution"
By now it should be common knowledge to everyone that in American society, the top wealthiest 1 percentile controls all the political power, holds half the wealth, and pays what is claimed to be the bulk of the taxes (despite mile wide tax loopholes and Swiss bank accounts). The rest of the population is merely filler, programmed to buy every latest self-cannibalizing iteration of the iPad/Pod while never again paying their mortgage and brainwashed to watch 2 hours of prime time TV commercials to keep it distracted from the fact that the last time America was a democracy was around the time the Wright brothers were arguing the pros and cons of frequent flier programs. So far so good. But what about the rest of the world? How is wealth stratified in a global perspective? Where do the "rich" live? What kind of wealth is controlled by various countries? Where are the Ultra High Net Worth people? For answers to all these questions, and much more, confirming that just like in America, the wealthiest 0.5% control over 35% of world wealth, Credit Suisse has compiled and released its latest "Global Wealth Report." The findings are summarized here.
The first figure shows world wealth by region. The US, with its wealth of about $50 trillion, accounts for 25% of total world wealth, which at last check was about $200 trillion. And yes, Europe as a region has a slightly greater wealth portion (32%) than does America (31%).
Figure 2 provides more detail, showing the breakdown of financial assets into three categories: currency and deposits, equities (all shares and other equities held directly by households), and other financial assets for selected countries. To add further detail, in most countries the reserves of life insurance companies and pension funds form the largest component of “other financial assets.” The composition of financial assets differs considerably across countries, especially with regard to the importance of shares and other equities. One interesting trend we note is that equities are not always a large component of household financial wealth, even in countries with very active financial markets. In the United Kingdom and Japan, for example, equities account for just 13% and 9% of total financial assets respectively. In contrast, they make up 37% and 43% of financial assets in Sweden and the USA, respectively. Broadly speaking, the relative importance of currency and deposits falls as that of bonds and equities increases. On the other hand, the portfolio share of “other financial assets” does not vary a lot, staying in the range of about 40%–45%. However, when we come to the UK, Japan and Colombia, which have the lowest portfolio share of equities, the pattern breaks down. The UK has a moderate currency and deposits share, but the largest “other financial assets” share, reflecting large life insurance and pension reserves. Colombia also has more in the form of “other financial assets” than is typical. Japan, on the other hand, which has a strong tradition of saving in deposit form, has a very large currency and deposits share and only a 35% share of “other financial assets.”
Emerging wealth: The band of wealth from USD 25,000 to USD 100,000 covers many recent EU entrants (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Cyprus) and important Latin American countries (Mexico, Brazil, Chile), along with a number of Middle Eastern nations (Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain).
Frontier wealth: The main transition nations outside the EU, including China, Russia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Mongolia, fall in the USD 5,000 to USD 25,000 range, together with some of their Far East neighbors (Indonesia, Thailand) and most of Latin America (Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, El Salvador). The group also contains a number of African nations at the southernmost tip (South Africa, Botswana, Namibia) and on the Mediterranean coast (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt).
Finally, the category below USD 5,000 comprises almost all of South Asia, including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal, and almost all of Central and West Africa.
Next is a pie chart of with a detailed break down of wealth distribution by region.
To be among the wealthiest half of the world, an adult needs only USD 4,000 in assets, once debts have been subtracted. However, each adult requires more than USD 72,000 to belong to the top 10% of global wealth holders and more than USD 588,000 to be a member of the top 1%. The bottom half of the global population together possess less than 2% of global wealth, although wealth is growing fast for some members of this segment. In sharp contrast, the richest 10% own 83% of the world’s wealth, with the top 1% alone accounting for 43% of global assets. Figure 4 shows how the regions of the world are represented amongst the wealth deciles. Unsurprisingly for example, North America and Europe together make up the lion’s share of the top wealth decile (10%). China has relatively few representatives at the very top and bottom of the global wealth distribution, but dominates the middle section, supplying more than a third of those in deciles 4–8. The sizeable presence of China in the middle section reflects not only its population size and moderate average wealth level, but also relatively low wealth inequality. China’s position in the global picture has shifted upwards in the past decade as a consequence of a strong record of growth, rising asset values and the appreciation of the renminbi relative to the US dollar. China already has more people in the top 10% of global wealth holders than any country except for the USA, Japan and Germany, and is poised to overtake both Germany and Japan in the near future.
Bottom of the pyramid
The various tiers of the wealth pyramid have distinctive characteristics. The base level is spread broadly across countries. It has significant membership in all regions of the world, and spans a wide variety of family circumstances. The upper wealth limit of USD 10,000 is a modest sum in developed countries, excluding almost all adults who own houses, with or without a mortgage. Nevertheless, a surprisingly large number of individuals in advanced countries have limited savings or other assets.
A high proportion are young people with little opportunity or interest in accumulating wealth. In fact, limited amounts of tangible assets combined with credit card debts and student loans lead many young people to record negative net worth. In Denmark and Sweden, for example, 30% of the population report negative wealth. This is an important and often overlooked segment, not least in the context of the credit crisis.
Low wealth is also a common feature of older age groups, particularly for those individuals suffering ill health and exposed to high medical bills. In fact, the means testing applied to many state benefits, especially contributions to the cost of residential homes, provides an incentive to shed wealth. Nevertheless, relatively few people in rich countries have net worth below USD 10,000 throughout their adult life. In essence, membership of the base section of the global wealth pyramid is a transient, lifecycle phenomenon for most citizens in the developed world.
The situation in low-income countries is different. More than 90% of the adult population in India and Africa fall in this band; in many low-income African countries, the fraction of the population is close to 100%. However, the cost of living is usually much lower. For a resident of India, for instance, assets of USD 10,000 would be equivalent to about USD 30,000 to a resident of the United States. In much of the developing world, this is enough to own a house or land – albeit possibly with uncertain property rights – and to have a comfortable lifestyle by local standards.
Middle of the pyramid
The billion adults in the USD 10,000–100,000 range form the middle class from the perspective of global wealth. With USD 32 trillion in total wealth, it certainly carries economic weight. This tier has the most regionally balanced membership, although China now contributes almost a third of the total. The wealth range would cover the median person over most of his adult life in high income countries. In middle income countries it would apply to a middle class person in middle age. However, in low-income countries only those in the top decile qualify, restricting membership to significant landowners, successful businessmen, professionals and the like.
High segment of the pyramid
When we consider the “high” segment of the wealth pyramid – the group of adults whose net worth exceeds USD 100,000 – the regional composition begins to change. With almost 358 million adults worldwide, this group is far from exclusive. But the typical member of the group is very different in different parts of the world. In high income countries, the threshold of USD 100,000 is well within the reach of middle-class adults once careers have been established. In contrast, residents from low-income countries would need to belong to the top percentile of wealth holders, so only the exceptionally successful, well endowed or well connected qualify.
The regional contrast shows up in the fact that North America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific regions account for 92% of the global membership of the USD 100,000+ group, with Europe alone home to 39% of the total. As far as individual countries are concerned, the membership ranking depends on three factors: the population size, the average wealth level, and wealth inequality within the country. Only 15 countries host more than 1% of the global membership. The USA comes top with 23% of the total. All three factors reinforce each other in this instance: a large population combining with high mean wealth and an unequal wealth distribution. Japan is a strong runner-up, the only country at present to seriously challenge the hegemony of the USA in the global wealth ranking. Although its relative position has declined since the year 2000 due to lackluster stock market and housing market performance, Japan is still home to 15% of individuals with wealth above USD 100,000.
Top of the pyramid
At the top of the pyramid, we find the world’s millionaires, where we again witness a slightly different pattern of membership. The proportion of members from the United States rises sharply to 41%, and the share of members from outside of the North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific regions falls to just 6%. The relative positions of most countries move downwards, but there are exceptions. The French share is estimated to double to 9%, while Sweden and Switzerland are each now credited with more than 1% of the global membership.
And next, is a detailed look at the very top of the pyramid: those individuals which have over 1 million in net worth.
To assemble details of the pattern of wealth holdings above USD 1 million requires a high degree of ingenuity. The usual sources of data – official statistics and sample surveys – become increasingly incomplete and unreliable at high wealth levels. A growing number of publications have followed the example of Forbes magazine by constructing “rich lists,” which attempt to value the assets of particular named individuals at the apex of the wealth pyramid. But very little is known about the global pattern of asset holdings in the high net worth (HNW – greater than USD 1 million) and ultra high net worth (UHNW – from USD 50 million upwards) range.
We bridge this gap by exploiting well-known statistical regularities in the top wealth tail. Using only data from traditional sources in the public domain yields a pattern of global wealth holdings in the USD 250,000 to USD 5 million range, which, when projected onward, predicts about 1000 dollar billionaires for mid-2010. Although not exactly comparable, this number is very close to the figure of 1,011 billionaire holdings reported by Forbes magazine for February 2010. Making use of the regional affiliation recorded in rich lists allows us to merge the top tail details with data on the level and distribution of wealth derived from traditional sources in order to generate a regional breakdown of HNW and UHNW individuals. At this time, we do not attempt to estimate the pattern of holdings across particular countries, except China and India which are treated as separate regions. However, as a rule of thumb, residents of the USA account for about 90% of the figure for North America.
The base of the wealth pyramid is occupied by people from all countries of the world at various stages of their lifecycle. In contrast, HNW and UHNW individuals are heavily concentrated in particular regions and countries, but the members tend to share a much more similar lifestyle, often participating in the same global markets for high coupon consumption items. The wealth portfolios of individuals are also likely to be similar, dominated by financial assets and, in particular, equity holdings in public companies traded in international markets. For these reasons, using official exchange rates to value assets is more appropriate, rather than using local price levels to compare wealth holdings.
Our figures for mid-2010 indicate that there were 24.5 million HNW individuals with wealth from USD 1 million to USD 50 million, of whom the vast majority (22 million) fall in the USD 1–5 million range. North America dominates the residence ranking, accounting for 11.1 million HNW individuals (45% of the total). Europe accounts for 7.8 million (31.7%) and 4.1 million reside in Asia-Pacific countries other than China and India. We estimate that there are now more than 800,000 HNW individuals in China, each worth between USD 1 million and USD 50 million (3.3% of the global total). India, Africa and Latin America together host the remaining 740,000 HNW individuals (3.0% of the total).
The take home message is that the wealthiest people in the world have the bulk of their wealth entrenched in the current system and any dramatic overhaul or reset of the status quo will be met by the stiff resistance of those who can summon fleet of jets, private armies, and even Fed chairmen on a whim. Whether anyone will have the wherewithal to confront the broken system under such conditions remains to be seen.
Why Is a California Teachers Union So Anti-Israel?
Teachers unions have historically been formed to protect the rights of faculty members through collective bargaining. So, why would the California Faculty Association, a union from the largest state university system in the country go out of its way to issue an resolution that is decidedly anti-Israel? Additionally, why is a teachers union even spending time discussing, debating and passing a resolution about Israel and the Palestinians? Let’s drill down into the union for more information.
The CFA (the California Faculty Association) claims to be a union which exists to support the teachers California’s colleges and universities. From their own website;
CFA stands for:
Quality education for our students
Fairness for those of us who earn our living as teachers
Policies that ensure access to higher education
That all sounds fairly typical of a teachers union; deliver quality education, get paid a decent salary and push so more people can gain access to the schools (guaranteeing continued employment). No big deal, right?
The union also states;
We are a union of 23,000 professors, lecturers, librarians, counselors and coaches who teach in the California State University system. In classrooms on the 23 CSU campuses, CFA members work hard to teach our students the critical-thinking skills, the technical know-how and the cultural insights they need to be thoughtful, productive and artistic participants in our society.
Great! All of that sounds swell. Digging a little deeper into the CFA’s history reveals some surprising ideas.
In 2009 the union adopted a resolution in 2009 titled, “CFA Call for a Halt to Violence Against All Civilians in Palestine and Israel.” The resolution is so patently Anti-Israel, that Leila Beckwith, a former UCLA professor, wrote the following in early 2010 for the American Thinker;
The resolution states seven propositions that form the basis for the actions recommended. The propositions include affirming a moral equivalence between Israel defending its citizens from missile attacks and Hamas firing missiles against Israeli civilians, a misstatement of the conditions in Gaza, an omission of the U.N. Security Council’s condemnation of acts of terrorism, and a false charge against the U.S. of not seeking a just peace agreement.
The suspect resolution was spearheaded by CFA board member Manzar Foroohar, a history professor with an obvious anti-Israel bias. Who is Manzar Foroohar? Lee Kaplan reports for FrontPageMag.com;
Manzar Foroohar, an Iranian immigrant and history professor specializing in the modern Middle East and Latin America at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo—came to the fore. However, the extent of her involvement was never publicly acknowledged. In fact, Foroohar authored and championed the resolution, which was presented by the CFA Peace & Justice Committee (Committee), unanimously adopted by the CFA Board of Directors on February 7, 2009, and passed by the CFA General Assembly in Sacramento on April 4-5 that same year.
Kaplan continues;
A cursory review of Foroohar’s academic work at Cal Poly reveals that she donates a good deal of her time both inside and outside the classroom to demonizing Israel, particularly by promoting boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS). Indeed, Foroohar, along with a number of Middle East studies academics teaching in California, is on the organizing committee for the U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel, a group that works internationally to promote BDS.
BDS – Boycott, Divestment, & Sanctions. Does that sound like the basic planks of education you might expect a student to be learning in college?
Mr. Kaplan’s research discovered that Ms. Foroohar’s personal bias against Israel has been public for almost a decade, but recently have become more pronounced;
Foroohar gave lectures at California State University, Sacramento, in February 2009 titled, “Occupation of Palestine: The Obstacle to Peace“ and ”Zionism and Peace: Compatible or Contradictory Ideas?” In March 2009, she took part in a panel discussion at the University of Southern California titled, “From la Frontera to Gaza: Chicano-Palestinian Connections.” She presented a slide show and discussion at California State University, Fresno, in October 2002, on “Occupation and Resistance.” In May 2005, Foroohar moderated a discussion session at Cal Poly following a Muslim Student Association co-sponsored screening of several anti-Israel “documentaries,” including Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land.
Based on her continued actions, and the resolution she is alleged to have written and pushed through the CFA, Ms. Foroohar’s personal beliefs on Israel appear to be creeping into the CFA. Again the question should be raised, ‘Why is a teachers union so involved in Middle East politics?’
We looked to the union for answers. Their web page has the following ‘Mission Statement’ from the CFA;
Our Principles
To protect our members and the lives and livelihoods of working people everywhere, we will advocate, educate and mobilize in the US labor movement for:
• A Just Foreign Policy that will bring genuine security and prosperity to working people. A policy that strengthens international treaties, supports human rights institutions, respects national sovereignty and upholds the right of self-determination for all peoples. $ A foreign policy that solves disputes by diplomacy rather than war. $ A policy that promotes global economic and social justice rather than the race-to-the-bottom, job-destroying, discriminatory practices favored by multinational corporations.
The opening paragraph of the CALIFORNIA Faculty Association says almost nothing about education, instead it focuses on ‘GLOBAL ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL JUSTICE.’ But wait, there’s more. The very next item in the Mission Statement says the following;
• An end to U.S. Occupation of Foreign Countries, replaced by the reconstruction of war-devastated nations with the full support of the international community and the full participation and decision-making power of affected peoples.
Again, nothing about educating students or providing a better working environment for teachers. There must be something about teachers pay and benefits in the next paragraph. Right?
• Redirecting the Nation’s Resources from inflated military spending to meeting the needs of working families for health care, education, a clean environment, housing and a decent standard of living based on principles of equality and democracy.
This one at least mentions the word ‘education’ – even if it is buried among what sounds like the basic promises of most Socialist organizations.
The CFA mission statement wraps up with three final goals;
• Supporting Our Troops and their Families by bringing the troops home now, by not recklessly putting them in harm’s way and by providing decent compensation, veterans’ benefits and domestic policies administered without discrimination that prioritize the needs of working people who make up the bulk of the military.
• Protecting Workers’ Rights, Civil Rights, Civil Liberties and the Rights of Immigrants by promoting democracy, not subverting it. Ethnic, racial and religious profiling and stereotyping must be replaced by policies that promote dignity, economic justice and respect for all working people.
• Solidarity With Workers and their Organizations Around the World who are struggling for their own labor and human rights, and with those in the U.S. who want US foreign and domestic policies to reflect our nation’s highest ideals.
It might be of interest to know that the CFA is also connected to SEIU, the large and powerful union that President Obama told, ‘SEIU’s agenda is MY agenda.‘ Let’s not forget that SEIU reportedly spent $60 million dollars to get Barack Obama elected in 2008.
The CFA is SEIU Local 1983.
Any questions?
H/T to the tireless members of the 9-12Project for bringing this to our attention.
The CFA (the California Faculty Association) claims to be a union which exists to support the teachers California’s colleges and universities. From their own website;
CFA stands for:
Quality education for our students
Fairness for those of us who earn our living as teachers
Policies that ensure access to higher education
That all sounds fairly typical of a teachers union; deliver quality education, get paid a decent salary and push so more people can gain access to the schools (guaranteeing continued employment). No big deal, right?
The union also states;
We are a union of 23,000 professors, lecturers, librarians, counselors and coaches who teach in the California State University system. In classrooms on the 23 CSU campuses, CFA members work hard to teach our students the critical-thinking skills, the technical know-how and the cultural insights they need to be thoughtful, productive and artistic participants in our society.
Great! All of that sounds swell. Digging a little deeper into the CFA’s history reveals some surprising ideas.
In 2009 the union adopted a resolution in 2009 titled, “CFA Call for a Halt to Violence Against All Civilians in Palestine and Israel.” The resolution is so patently Anti-Israel, that Leila Beckwith, a former UCLA professor, wrote the following in early 2010 for the American Thinker;
The resolution states seven propositions that form the basis for the actions recommended. The propositions include affirming a moral equivalence between Israel defending its citizens from missile attacks and Hamas firing missiles against Israeli civilians, a misstatement of the conditions in Gaza, an omission of the U.N. Security Council’s condemnation of acts of terrorism, and a false charge against the U.S. of not seeking a just peace agreement.
The suspect resolution was spearheaded by CFA board member Manzar Foroohar, a history professor with an obvious anti-Israel bias. Who is Manzar Foroohar? Lee Kaplan reports for FrontPageMag.com;
Manzar Foroohar, an Iranian immigrant and history professor specializing in the modern Middle East and Latin America at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo—came to the fore. However, the extent of her involvement was never publicly acknowledged. In fact, Foroohar authored and championed the resolution, which was presented by the CFA Peace & Justice Committee (Committee), unanimously adopted by the CFA Board of Directors on February 7, 2009, and passed by the CFA General Assembly in Sacramento on April 4-5 that same year.
Kaplan continues;
A cursory review of Foroohar’s academic work at Cal Poly reveals that she donates a good deal of her time both inside and outside the classroom to demonizing Israel, particularly by promoting boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS). Indeed, Foroohar, along with a number of Middle East studies academics teaching in California, is on the organizing committee for the U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel, a group that works internationally to promote BDS.
BDS – Boycott, Divestment, & Sanctions. Does that sound like the basic planks of education you might expect a student to be learning in college?
Mr. Kaplan’s research discovered that Ms. Foroohar’s personal bias against Israel has been public for almost a decade, but recently have become more pronounced;
Foroohar gave lectures at California State University, Sacramento, in February 2009 titled, “Occupation of Palestine: The Obstacle to Peace“ and ”Zionism and Peace: Compatible or Contradictory Ideas?” In March 2009, she took part in a panel discussion at the University of Southern California titled, “From la Frontera to Gaza: Chicano-Palestinian Connections.” She presented a slide show and discussion at California State University, Fresno, in October 2002, on “Occupation and Resistance.” In May 2005, Foroohar moderated a discussion session at Cal Poly following a Muslim Student Association co-sponsored screening of several anti-Israel “documentaries,” including Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land.
Based on her continued actions, and the resolution she is alleged to have written and pushed through the CFA, Ms. Foroohar’s personal beliefs on Israel appear to be creeping into the CFA. Again the question should be raised, ‘Why is a teachers union so involved in Middle East politics?’
We looked to the union for answers. Their web page has the following ‘Mission Statement’ from the CFA;
Our Principles
To protect our members and the lives and livelihoods of working people everywhere, we will advocate, educate and mobilize in the US labor movement for:
• A Just Foreign Policy that will bring genuine security and prosperity to working people. A policy that strengthens international treaties, supports human rights institutions, respects national sovereignty and upholds the right of self-determination for all peoples. $ A foreign policy that solves disputes by diplomacy rather than war. $ A policy that promotes global economic and social justice rather than the race-to-the-bottom, job-destroying, discriminatory practices favored by multinational corporations.
The opening paragraph of the CALIFORNIA Faculty Association says almost nothing about education, instead it focuses on ‘GLOBAL ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL JUSTICE.’ But wait, there’s more. The very next item in the Mission Statement says the following;
• An end to U.S. Occupation of Foreign Countries, replaced by the reconstruction of war-devastated nations with the full support of the international community and the full participation and decision-making power of affected peoples.
Again, nothing about educating students or providing a better working environment for teachers. There must be something about teachers pay and benefits in the next paragraph. Right?
• Redirecting the Nation’s Resources from inflated military spending to meeting the needs of working families for health care, education, a clean environment, housing and a decent standard of living based on principles of equality and democracy.
This one at least mentions the word ‘education’ – even if it is buried among what sounds like the basic promises of most Socialist organizations.
The CFA mission statement wraps up with three final goals;
• Supporting Our Troops and their Families by bringing the troops home now, by not recklessly putting them in harm’s way and by providing decent compensation, veterans’ benefits and domestic policies administered without discrimination that prioritize the needs of working people who make up the bulk of the military.
• Protecting Workers’ Rights, Civil Rights, Civil Liberties and the Rights of Immigrants by promoting democracy, not subverting it. Ethnic, racial and religious profiling and stereotyping must be replaced by policies that promote dignity, economic justice and respect for all working people.
• Solidarity With Workers and their Organizations Around the World who are struggling for their own labor and human rights, and with those in the U.S. who want US foreign and domestic policies to reflect our nation’s highest ideals.
It might be of interest to know that the CFA is also connected to SEIU, the large and powerful union that President Obama told, ‘SEIU’s agenda is MY agenda.‘ Let’s not forget that SEIU reportedly spent $60 million dollars to get Barack Obama elected in 2008.
The CFA is SEIU Local 1983.
Any questions?
H/T to the tireless members of the 9-12Project for bringing this to our attention.
The Gasland movie: a fracking shame – director pulls video to hide inconvenient truths
From “Not Evil, Just Wrong”: Gasland director hides full facts
Written by Phelim McAleer
Josh Fox has made a documentary that makes some pretty alarming claims about gas drilling across the US. But as is often the case when these claims are examined they do not stand up to scrutiny.
Fox’ documentary Gasland, claims that fracking, a way of drilling for natural gas, has polluted water and endangered lives. One of the most alarming scenes is when he lights water that residents claim has been polluted by fracking. It is dramatic and at first glance seems like a slam dunk. I mean they can light their water – it is polluted and there is gas drilling nearby. It must be responsible.
But then a little digging reveals a few inconvenient facts. A 1976 study by the Colorado Division of Water found that this area was plagued with gas in the water problems back then. And it was naturally occurring.
As the report stated there was “troublesome amounts of methane” in the water decades before fracking began. It seems that in geographical areas gas has always been in the water.
But Josh Fox knew this and chose not to put it in Gasland.
I asked him about this omission at a recent screening at Northwestern University in Chicago.
He said he had not included these facts that questioned his alarmism because “they were not relevant.” He also dropped the bombshell that I had not been aware of that there were media reports of people lighting their water as far back as 1936. Again this was not included in Gasland because it was not relevant.
Perhaps Josh you should include all the evidence and let people figure out what is relevant and what is not.
==================================================================
Note from Anthony: The Gasland director apparently didn’t like this video being used to criticize him (which falls under fair use) and he has pulled it from YouTube claiming a copyright violation. Fortunately, there are other options besides YouTube to show Phelim McAleer’s video:
And as way of verification of the Gasland’s claim of fracking causing methane in groundwater was based on a fabricated claim or not, I went looking for the 1976 report that McAleer cited. I didn’t find it, but I did find another report from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) which was equally damning:
Additionally, on May 13th, the New York Times reported:
Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” got a clean bill of health this week in the first scientific look at the safety of the oil and production practice.
So in light of all this, perhaps this description of Gasland’s director Josh Fox’ situation would be apt:
Liar, liar, tap water on fire!
Lest anyone think that natural gas right at the surface is a problem unique to the United States, I offer this video of the “Door to Hell” in Turkmenistan.
Also, back in 2009, before the green movement went fracking crazy, Treehugger reported this story about methane in a lake that could be ignited in a matter of fact sort of way.
Why Yes, Methane Bubbling Up From a Frozen Lake Can Be Lit on Fire
Here’s the video:
No mention of fracking or drilling nearby.
Even research scientists get a kick out of naturally occurring biogenic methane:
Written by Phelim McAleer
Josh Fox has made a documentary that makes some pretty alarming claims about gas drilling across the US. But as is often the case when these claims are examined they do not stand up to scrutiny.
Fox’ documentary Gasland, claims that fracking, a way of drilling for natural gas, has polluted water and endangered lives. One of the most alarming scenes is when he lights water that residents claim has been polluted by fracking. It is dramatic and at first glance seems like a slam dunk. I mean they can light their water – it is polluted and there is gas drilling nearby. It must be responsible.
But then a little digging reveals a few inconvenient facts. A 1976 study by the Colorado Division of Water found that this area was plagued with gas in the water problems back then. And it was naturally occurring.
As the report stated there was “troublesome amounts of methane” in the water decades before fracking began. It seems that in geographical areas gas has always been in the water.
But Josh Fox knew this and chose not to put it in Gasland.
I asked him about this omission at a recent screening at Northwestern University in Chicago.
He said he had not included these facts that questioned his alarmism because “they were not relevant.” He also dropped the bombshell that I had not been aware of that there were media reports of people lighting their water as far back as 1936. Again this was not included in Gasland because it was not relevant.
Perhaps Josh you should include all the evidence and let people figure out what is relevant and what is not.
==================================================================
Note from Anthony: The Gasland director apparently didn’t like this video being used to criticize him (which falls under fair use) and he has pulled it from YouTube claiming a copyright violation. Fortunately, there are other options besides YouTube to show Phelim McAleer’s video:
Gasland director hides full facts from Not Evil Just Wrong on Vimeo.
">And as way of verification of the Gasland’s claim of fracking causing methane in groundwater was based on a fabricated claim or not, I went looking for the 1976 report that McAleer cited. I didn’t find it, but I did find another report from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) which was equally damning:
Additionally, on May 13th, the New York Times reported:
Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” got a clean bill of health this week in the first scientific look at the safety of the oil and production practice.
So in light of all this, perhaps this description of Gasland’s director Josh Fox’ situation would be apt:
Liar, liar, tap water on fire!
Lest anyone think that natural gas right at the surface is a problem unique to the United States, I offer this video of the “Door to Hell” in Turkmenistan.
Also, back in 2009, before the green movement went fracking crazy, Treehugger reported this story about methane in a lake that could be ignited in a matter of fact sort of way.
Why Yes, Methane Bubbling Up From a Frozen Lake Can Be Lit on Fire
Here’s the video:
No mention of fracking or drilling nearby.
Even research scientists get a kick out of naturally occurring biogenic methane:
U.S. Hispanics by Country of Origin
Counts for Nation, Top 30 Metropolitan Areas
Mark Hugo Lopez, Associate Director, and Daniel Dockterman, Research Assistant
May 26, 2011
Hispanics of Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban origin or descent remain the nation's three largest Hispanic country-of-origin groups, according to the 2010 U.S. Census. However, while the relative position of these three groups has remained unchanged since 2000, the next four Hispanic sub-groups grew faster during the decade.
Hispanics of Salvadoran origin, the fourth largest Hispanic country-of-origin group, grew by 152% since 2000. The Dominican population grew by 85%, the Guatemalan population by 180% and the Colombian population by 93%. Meanwhile, the Cuban and Puerto Rican populations grow more slowly -- 44% and 36% respectively.
Despite their No. 1 status, Mexicans are not the dominant Hispanic origin group in many of the nation's metropolitan areas. Among the Miami metropolitan area's 1.5 million Hispanics, half are Cuban. In the New York-Northeastern New Jersey metropolitan area, 29.4% of Hispanics are of Puerto Rican origin and 19.7% are of Dominican origin. In the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, Salvadorans are the largest group, comprising one-third of the area's Hispanics.
However, in many metropolitan areas, Mexican-origin Hispanics are by far the dominant group among Hispanics. In Chicago, nearly eight-in-ten (79.2%) of the area's Hispanics are of Mexican origin. In the San Antonio, TX metropolitan area, Mexicans make up 91.3% of all Hispanics. And in Atlanta, GA, nearly six-in-ten (58.1%) Hispanics are of Mexican origin.
Read the full report here.
Find both the statistical profiles of the 10 largest Hispanic country-of-origin sub-groups and an interactive graphic analyzing the Latino population in selected metropolitan areas at pewhispanic.org.
Mark Hugo Lopez, Associate Director, and Daniel Dockterman, Research Assistant
May 26, 2011
Hispanics of Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban origin or descent remain the nation's three largest Hispanic country-of-origin groups, according to the 2010 U.S. Census. However, while the relative position of these three groups has remained unchanged since 2000, the next four Hispanic sub-groups grew faster during the decade.
Despite their No. 1 status, Mexicans are not the dominant Hispanic origin group in many of the nation's metropolitan areas. Among the Miami metropolitan area's 1.5 million Hispanics, half are Cuban. In the New York-Northeastern New Jersey metropolitan area, 29.4% of Hispanics are of Puerto Rican origin and 19.7% are of Dominican origin. In the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, Salvadorans are the largest group, comprising one-third of the area's Hispanics.
However, in many metropolitan areas, Mexican-origin Hispanics are by far the dominant group among Hispanics. In Chicago, nearly eight-in-ten (79.2%) of the area's Hispanics are of Mexican origin. In the San Antonio, TX metropolitan area, Mexicans make up 91.3% of all Hispanics. And in Atlanta, GA, nearly six-in-ten (58.1%) Hispanics are of Mexican origin.
Read the full report here.
Find both the statistical profiles of the 10 largest Hispanic country-of-origin sub-groups and an interactive graphic analyzing the Latino population in selected metropolitan areas at pewhispanic.org.
Pew Research News IQ Quiz
What's Your Political News IQ?
Take the Quiz
To test your knowledge of prominent people and major events in the news, we invite you to take our short 11-question quiz. Then see how you did in comparison with 1,004 randomly sampled adults asked the same questions in a national survey conducted Mar. 17-20, 2011 by the Pew Research Center.
The Pew Research Center updates the News IQ quiz every few months by conducting a nationwide survey of Americans reached by both landline and cell phones. Each version of the quiz asks a wide range of questions about current events and issues as well as background facts and concepts that are relevant to the news. For an analysis of the findings from the most recent national News IQ survey, read the full summary of findings. (No peeking! If you are going to take the quiz, do it first before reading the analysis.)
The exact same quiz administered on the telephone survey is replicated here on the website. When you finish, you will be able to compare your News IQ with: the average American, as well as with the scores of men and women; with college graduates as well as those who didn't attend college; with people who are your age as well as with younger and older Americans. Are you more news-savvy than the average American? Here's your chance to find out.
The full reports from earlier versions of the quiz are also available (See November 2010, July 2010, January 2010, October 2009, April 2009, December 2008, February 2008, September 2007 and April 2007). The April 2007 report also includes an analysis of how knowledge levels vary according to people's news sources.
Take the Quiz
The Pew Research Center updates the News IQ quiz every few months by conducting a nationwide survey of Americans reached by both landline and cell phones. Each version of the quiz asks a wide range of questions about current events and issues as well as background facts and concepts that are relevant to the news. For an analysis of the findings from the most recent national News IQ survey, read the full summary of findings. (No peeking! If you are going to take the quiz, do it first before reading the analysis.)
The exact same quiz administered on the telephone survey is replicated here on the website. When you finish, you will be able to compare your News IQ with: the average American, as well as with the scores of men and women; with college graduates as well as those who didn't attend college; with people who are your age as well as with younger and older Americans. Are you more news-savvy than the average American? Here's your chance to find out.
The full reports from earlier versions of the quiz are also available (See November 2010, July 2010, January 2010, October 2009, April 2009, December 2008, February 2008, September 2007 and April 2007). The April 2007 report also includes an analysis of how knowledge levels vary according to people's news sources.
Speed 3: Chasing Palin
Speed 3: Chasing Palin
**Written by Doug Powers
To read the Politico article, which is entitled “Sarah Palin’s tour a rolling menace,” you’d think the tour is being directed by Jerry Bruckheimer.
This could even be the script for the preview of “Speed 3: Chasing Palin” — provided Sandra Bullock has one more sequel in her. Here are just a few highlights from the action-packed article:
They speed. They run red lights and stop signs. They make last-second lane changes to get off the highway, sometimes without signaling.
So do the reporters following them.
Journalists in the caravan trailing her “One Nation” tour bus describe the experience as harrowing, a rolling menace careening up the East Coast in hot pursuit of the former Alaska governor who declined to provide any advance itinerary of her tour over six days on the road.
Palin’s two-SUV caravan traveled at 52 miles per hour in a 35 mph zone as it peeled away from the hosts’ neighborhood. Both cars blew through a stop sign about a mile later. They did 70 mph in a 55 mph zone on I-95 — and then, after they got off, without signaling, flew right past a flashing sign informing them they were going 45 mph in a 35 mph zone.
It takes someone like Sarah Palin to get the media to make following a bus sound like Rollerball.
Who knows how melodramatic these stories will sound a few weeks more into Sarah’s lawless rampage across the countryside.
**Written by Doug Powers
**Written by Doug Powers
To read the Politico article, which is entitled “Sarah Palin’s tour a rolling menace,” you’d think the tour is being directed by Jerry Bruckheimer.
This could even be the script for the preview of “Speed 3: Chasing Palin” — provided Sandra Bullock has one more sequel in her. Here are just a few highlights from the action-packed article:
They speed. They run red lights and stop signs. They make last-second lane changes to get off the highway, sometimes without signaling.
So do the reporters following them.
Journalists in the caravan trailing her “One Nation” tour bus describe the experience as harrowing, a rolling menace careening up the East Coast in hot pursuit of the former Alaska governor who declined to provide any advance itinerary of her tour over six days on the road.
Palin’s two-SUV caravan traveled at 52 miles per hour in a 35 mph zone as it peeled away from the hosts’ neighborhood. Both cars blew through a stop sign about a mile later. They did 70 mph in a 55 mph zone on I-95 — and then, after they got off, without signaling, flew right past a flashing sign informing them they were going 45 mph in a 35 mph zone.
It takes someone like Sarah Palin to get the media to make following a bus sound like Rollerball.
Who knows how melodramatic these stories will sound a few weeks more into Sarah’s lawless rampage across the countryside.
**Written by Doug Powers
Palin gives MSM a history lesson,
Palin Gives Media A History Lesson, Revere Warned British And They Retreated
The media and the Left are celebrating as they believe they'e shown-up Sarah Palin. Oops! Turns out she's correct. They appear to be taking their history from Longfellow's "Paul Revere's Ride", which wasn't written until 1860, almost 100 years after the event.
PALIN: (Revere) warned, uh, the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms uh by ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free and we were going to be armed.
The video of Palin is below. William Jacobson calls them out for their gaffe with this short bit from Paul Revere himself:
I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.
Here's a more elaborate telling by a historian, which spells it out rather clearly.
Revere and Dawes then headed for Concord and came across Doctor Prescott who then joined them. They decided to alarm every house along the way.
Just outside of the town of Lincoln, they were confronted by 4 Regulars at another road block. They tried unsuccessfully to run their horses through them. Prescott, who was familiar with the terrain, jumped a stone wall and escaped. Revere and Dawes tried to escape and shortly into the chase they were confronted by 6 more regulars on horseback. Revere was surrounded and taken prisoner. Dawes got away as they were taking Revere into custody.
The British officers began to interrogate Revere, whereupon Revere astonished his captors by telling them more than they even knew about their own mission. (HA!) He also told them that he had been warning the countryside of the British plan and that their lives were at risk if they remained in the vicinity of Lexington because there would soon be 500 men there ready to fight. Revere, of course, was bluffing.
The Regulars had Revere remount his horse and they headed toward Lexington Green, when suddenly, they heard a gunshot! Revere told the British officer that the shot was a signal "to alarm the country!". Now the British troops were getting very nervous ....
A few minutes later, they were all startled to hear the heavy crash of an entire volley of musketry from the direction of Lexington's meeting house and then the Lexington town bell began clanging rapidly! Jonathan Loring, a Lexington resident captured earlier, turned to his captors and shouted "The bell's a' ringing! The town's alarmed, and you're all dead men!"
The British officers then talked urgently among themselves and decided to release their captives so as they would not slow their retreat.
The media and the Left are celebrating as they believe they'e shown-up Sarah Palin. Oops! Turns out she's correct. They appear to be taking their history from Longfellow's "Paul Revere's Ride", which wasn't written until 1860, almost 100 years after the event.
PALIN: (Revere) warned, uh, the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms uh by ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free and we were going to be armed.
The video of Palin is below. William Jacobson calls them out for their gaffe with this short bit from Paul Revere himself:
I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.
Here's a more elaborate telling by a historian, which spells it out rather clearly.
Revere and Dawes then headed for Concord and came across Doctor Prescott who then joined them. They decided to alarm every house along the way.
Just outside of the town of Lincoln, they were confronted by 4 Regulars at another road block. They tried unsuccessfully to run their horses through them. Prescott, who was familiar with the terrain, jumped a stone wall and escaped. Revere and Dawes tried to escape and shortly into the chase they were confronted by 6 more regulars on horseback. Revere was surrounded and taken prisoner. Dawes got away as they were taking Revere into custody.
The British officers began to interrogate Revere, whereupon Revere astonished his captors by telling them more than they even knew about their own mission. (HA!) He also told them that he had been warning the countryside of the British plan and that their lives were at risk if they remained in the vicinity of Lexington because there would soon be 500 men there ready to fight. Revere, of course, was bluffing.
The Regulars had Revere remount his horse and they headed toward Lexington Green, when suddenly, they heard a gunshot! Revere told the British officer that the shot was a signal "to alarm the country!". Now the British troops were getting very nervous ....
A few minutes later, they were all startled to hear the heavy crash of an entire volley of musketry from the direction of Lexington's meeting house and then the Lexington town bell began clanging rapidly! Jonathan Loring, a Lexington resident captured earlier, turned to his captors and shouted "The bell's a' ringing! The town's alarmed, and you're all dead men!"
The British officers then talked urgently among themselves and decided to release their captives so as they would not slow their retreat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)