Results 1 to 10 of 19

Hybrid View

  1. #1 50 Economic Numbers Too Crazy To Believe 
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809


    50 Economic Numbers From 2011 That Are Almost Too Crazy To Believe

    Even though most Americans have become very frustrated with this economy, the reality is that the vast majority of them still have no idea just how bad our economic decline has been or how much trouble we are going to be in if we don't make dramatic changes immediately. If we do not educate the American people about how deathly ill the U.S. economy has become, then they will just keep falling for the same old lies that our politicians keep telling them. Just "tweaking" things here and there is not going to fix this economy. We truly do need a fundamental change in direction. America is consuming far more wealth than it is producing and our debt is absolutely exploding. If we stay on this current path, an economic collapse is inevitable. Hopefully the crazy economic numbers from 2011 that I have included in this article will be shocking enough to wake some people up. >>>

    The following are 50 economic numbers from 2011 that are almost too crazy to believe....

    #1 A staggering 48 percent of all Americans are either considered to be "low income" or are living in poverty.

    #2 Approximately 57 percent of all children in the United States are living in homes that are either considered to be "low income" or impoverished.

    #3 If the number of Americans that "wanted jobs" was the same today as it was back in 2007, the "official" unemployment rate put out by the U.S. government would be up to 11 percent.

    #4 The average amount of time that a worker stays unemployed in the United States is now over 40 weeks.

    #5 One recent survey found that 77 percent of all U.S. small businesses do not plan to hire any more workers.

    #6 There are fewer payroll jobs in the United States today than there were back in 2000 even though we have added 30 million extra people to the population since then. >>>

    #10 According to author Paul Osterman, about 20 percent of all U.S. adults are currently working jobs that pay poverty-level wages. >>>

    #17 The U.S. Postal Service has lost more than 5 billion dollars over the past year. >>>

    #36 If you can believe it, 37 percent of all U.S. households that are led by someone under the age of 35 have a net worth of zero or less than zero.

    #37 A higher percentage of Americans is living in extreme poverty (6.7%) than has ever been measured before.

    #38 Child homelessness in the United States is now 33 percent higher than it was back in 2007. >>>

    #41 Today, one out of every seven Americans is on food stamps and one out of every four American children is on food stamps. >>>

    #45 For fiscal year 2011, the U.S. federal government had a budget deficit of nearly 1.3 trillion dollars. That was the third year in a row that our budget deficit has topped one trillion dollars. >>>

    #48 If the federal government began right at this moment to repay the U.S. national debt at a rate of one dollar per second, it would take over 440,000 years to pay off the national debt.

    #49 The U.S. national debt has been increasing by an average of more than 4 billion dollars per day since the beginning of the Obama administration.

    #50 During the Obama administration, the U.S. government has accumulated more debt than it did from the time that George Washington took office to the time that Bill Clinton took office.

    During 2011 we made a lot of progress in educating the American people about our economic problems, but we still have a long way to go.

    Hopefully next year more Americans than ever will wake up, because 2012 is going to represent a huge turning point for this country.

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

    The country can "survive" an 0bamination. But how does it survive a populace that voted for him?
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    718
    The problem is that they continually change the measurement stick.

    Unemployment - In the 70's, they used the U12 number -
    U12 = people that are unemployed for up to 12 months and want to work.
    This got reduced until today when they use the U3 number -

    U3 = people that are unemployed for up to 3 months and still want to work.
    If the U12 number was still being used today, unemployment would be over 20%
    Inflation used to be calculated by the increased cost of the same product over a period of time. To help Social Security to remain solvent, the rate of inflation needed to be "leveled" out. As inflation rises, so do Cost Of Living Adjustments.

    To resolve COLA increases, they introduced the concept of "substitute" items. This means that inflation is measured over a period of time with a basket of related products.

    For example, if you measured inflation, using the same product method, over the past 5 years by the price of a pound of filet mignon, there would be a substantial increase in price, therefore inflation.

    Substitute measurement allows you to compare the price of a pound of filet mignon 5 years ago to the price today of a pound of ground chuck. They reason that both products are beef and therefore suitable substitutions. This is how we can go for the last 2 years without any COLA adjustment on SS. Can anyone with a straight face say there has been no measurable inflation over the past 2 years??

    If we measured by same product method today, inflation would be over 10%. Therefor SS payments would be increasing by 10% and depleting the Federal Ponzi Scheme all the quicker.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    15,912
    #6 There are fewer payroll jobs in the United States today than there were back in 2000 even though we have added 30 million extra people to the population since then.
    So 30 million newborns to 11 year olds should be working by now?
    The Obama Administration: Deny. Deflect. Blame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    So 30 million newborns to 11 year olds should be working by now?
    Not quite. The thirty million kids born in the last 11 years will begin entering the workforce in another 5-7 years, a few million per year, but that's an ongoing process. Every year, the workforce expands as the population expands, generally to the tune of about 2 million new workers per year. It takes job growth of roughly 125,000 jobs per month to simply keep the unemployment rate static for that reason. If you fall below that level of growth, then the number of unemployed persons rises.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Compare these numbers to the statistics on the wealthy. Their income growth, their net worth, percentages of wealth held by them, percentages of stock, changes in political contributions, etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Compare these numbers to the statistics on the wealthy. Their income growth, their net worth, percentages of wealth held by them, percentages of stock, changes in political contributions, etc.
    Not this idiocy again.

    You want the wealthy to stop contributing to politicians? That's easy: Just eliminate the power that politicians have given themselves to regulate the markets and decide who gets rich(er) and who gets poor(er). As long as government can dictate winners and losers in the marketplace, people will seek to use that power on their own behalf.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Compare these numbers to the statistics on the wealthy. Their income growth, their net worth, percentages of wealth held by them, percentages of stock, changes in political contributions, etc.
    Not according to the actual figures:
    "The number of U.S. households with a net worth of $1 million or more, not including first homes, fell by 2.5 million to 6.7 million in 2008, according to the Spectrum Group report, as reported by Reuters.

    After the 27 percent drop, the number of millionaires is at the lowest level since 2003, when the millionaire population stood at 6.2 million..........The number of U.S. households with a net worth over $5 million, again not including first homes, fell by 28 percent to 840,000."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire

    Just because you want to believe that the rich are getting richer...etc....doesn't make it so. Clearly, there are fewer rich people (with a net worth of 1 mil not counting primary residence) than there were before the recession.

    Some of the measurements you propose above are just plain nutty. Percentages of stock? Really? Look up "changes in political contributions"; I won't even do that for you, and you'll find that the wealthy people these days are giving less, not more.

    You can't just make crap up and dish it out, Wei.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    16,441
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Compare these numbers to the statistics on the wealthy. Their income growth, their net worth, percentages of wealth held by them, percentages of stock, changes in political contributions, etc.

    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    So 30 million newborns to 11 year olds should be working by now?
    70% of all increase in population since 1970 has been due to immigration.

    I wonder if unemployed illegal aliens count as unemployed Americans.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •