Tag: government

  • Buffett Expects Terrible Problem for Municipal Debt

    Buffett Expects “Terrible Problem” for Municipal Debt

    “There will be a terrible problem and then the question becomes will the federal government help,” Buffett, 79, said today at a hearing of the U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission in New York. “I don’t know how I would rate them myself. It’s a bet on how the federal government will act over time.”

    Berkshire’s investment portfolio included municipal bonds valued at less than $3.9 billion as of March 31, down from more than $4.7 billion at the end of 2008. The company had a maximum of $16 billion at risk in derivatives tied to such debt, according to the company’s annual report for 2009.

    Buffett said last month that the U.S. may feel compelled to rescue a state facing default after the government committed $700 billion to bail out financial firms and automakers. “It would be hard in the end for the federal government to turn away a state having extreme financial difficulty when they’ve gone to General Motors and other entities and saved them,”

    About $14.5 billion of municipal bonds defaulted in 2008 and 2009… Many those were securities backed by revenue from nursing homes, property developments and other projects without claim to government tax revenue.

    Defaults by local governments with the power to raise taxes are less common. Jefferson County, Alabama, defaulted on more than $3 billion of bonds backed by sewer fees after the deals grew more costly in the wake of the credit crisis in 2008. Vallejo, California, filed for bankruptcy in 2008 after its tax revenue tumbled.

    Related: USA State Governments Have $1,000,000,000,000 in Unfunded Retirement ObligationsBuffett on Need to Reduce Government DeficitsPoliticians Again Raising Taxes On Your Children

  • Fiscal Irresponsibility Results from Financial Illiteracy

    Failing to pay for the deferred costs of current expenditures gets all those practicing credit card budget thinking in trouble. That includes lots of individuals. But it also includes many governments. They pay huge rewards to special interests and act like they think the cost doesn’t exist. Only an extremely financially illiterate society could elect so many of these people. We have not learned that in the modern financial economies financial illiteracy is a huge societal problem (along with scientific illiteracy).

    Padded Pensions Add to New York Fiscal Woes

    In Yonkers, more than 100 retired police officers and firefighters are collecting pensions greater than their pay when they were working. One of the youngest, Hugo Tassone, retired at 44 with a base pay of about $74,000 a year. His pension is now $101,333 a year.

    Such poor financial management by public sector organization (California is horrible also) are causing huge damage to those living in such poorly managed states.

    the cost of public pensions has been systemically underestimated nationwide for more than two decades, say some analysts. By these estimates, state and local officials have promised $5 trillion worth of benefits while thinking they were committing taxpayers to roughly half that amount.

    The use of public money for outsize retirement pay really stings when budgets don’t balance, teachers are being laid off, furloughs are being planned

    Roughly one of every 250 retired public workers in New York is collecting a six-figure pension, and that group is expected to grow rapidly in coming years, based on the number of highly paid people in the pipeline.

    Thirteen New York City police officers recently retired at age 40 with pensions above $100,000 a year; nine did so in their 30s.

    Before Yonkers adopted a richer pension formula for police in 2000, for instance, it was told the maximum cost would be $1.3 million a year. But instead, the yearly cost is now $3.75 million and rising. David Simpson, a spokesman for the mayor of Yonkers, said pension cost projections were “often lowballs,” so the city could get stuck. “Once you give something, you can’t take it away,” he said.

    It isn’t complicated. So long as you elect people that are financial illiterate and only care about granting favors to special interests, not the consequences of doing so, you are setting yourself up for a great deal of pain once your credit card bill comes due.

    Related: NY State Raises Pension Age to Save $48 BillionCharge It to My KidsBogle on the Retirement CrisisPoliticians Again Raising Taxes On Your Children

  • Government Debt, Greece is a Very Small Part of the Problem

    Roubini Says Rising Sovereign Debt Leads to Inflation, Defaults

    Credit-rating cuts on Greece, Portugal and Spain this week are spurring investors’ concern that the European deficit crisis is spreading and intensifying pressure on policy makers to widen a bailout package. Roubini’s remarks underscore statements by officials such as Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the IMF, that the global economy still faces risks.

    “The thing I worry about is the buildup of sovereign debt,” said Roubini

    If the problem isn’t addressed, he said, nations will either fail to meet obligations or experience higher inflation as officials “monetize” their debts, or print money to tackle the shortfalls.

    “While today markets are worried about Greece, Greece is just the tip of the iceberg, or the canary in the coal mine for a much broader range of fiscal problems,”

    Greece “could eventually be forced to get out” of the 16- nation euro region, he said in a Bloomberg Television interview yesterday. That would lead to a decline in the euro and make it “less of a liquid currency,” he said. While a smaller euro zone “makes sense,” he said, “it could be very messy.”

    [Roubini supports] a carbon tax on gasoline, with Roubini saying it would reduce American dependence on oil from overseas, shrink the trade deficit and carbon emissions, and help pay down the U.S. budget deficit.

    I agree that the damage done by those (which is nearly all of them) countries living beyond their means is significant. The USA and many countries in Europe and Asia (South Korea and China are two exceptions) have raised taxes on the future (by default – spending more than you have necessarily increases taxes later) to consume today. The strong emerging markets are another exception, many having learned their lessons and stopped spending money they didn’t have in the 1990’s.

    However the richest countries have been spending money they don’t have for decades and the increase in government debt as a portion of GDP is an increasingly serious problem. It would be nice if the government of the rich countries could behave responsibly but it does not look like many of them have citizens who will elect honest and competent leaders. As long as they elect leaders that insist on raising taxes on the future (and lying to the populace by claiming they cut taxes – because they eliminate taxes today) those countries will pay severely for the irresponsible spending.

    Saying you cut taxes when you just delay them is equivalent to saying I paid off my credit card bill when all I did was get 2 new credit cards, borrow all the money I owed on my original card, pay that one off, and then borrow more to increase my debt even more. Yes it is true I did pay off my original credit card, but that is hardly the salient point. My credit card debt increase. All that has happened in the USA since the Clinton administration had a balanced budget is politicians used a credit card thinking to lower taxes while necessarily increasing them in the future. You don’t reduce debt by spending money you don’t have.
    (more…)

  • Private Foreign Banking Deposits by Country

    According to a new report on Privately Held, Non-Resident Deposits in Secrecy Jurisdictions the United States is the country with the largest amount of private, non-resident, deposits. Cayman Islands takes second, upholding its commonly held reputation as a tax haven often used to avoid paying taxes own by wealthy people. Switzerland comes in 9th.

    The countries with the most private, foreign deposits in billion of $US.

    Country June 2008 June 2009
    1 United States $2,899 $2,183
    2 Cayman Islands $1,515 $1,550
    3 United Kingdom $1,796 $1,534
    4 Luxembourg 588 435
    5 Germany 494 426
    6 Jersey 544 393
    7 Netherlands 413 316
    8 Ireland 273 276
    9 Switzerland 289 274
    10 Hong Kong 325 268

    Since 2001 deposits in the Cayman Islands have more than tripled, while those in the UK have close to tripled and in the USA they have a bit more than doubled.

    • Total Current total deposits by non-residents in offshore centers and secrecy jurisdictions are just under US$10 trillion;
    • The United States, the United Kingdom, and the Cayman Islands top the list of jurisdictions, with the United States out in front with more than US$2 trillion in non-resident, privately held deposits in the most recent quarter for which data are available (June 2009);
    • Contrary to expectations of perceived favorability for deposits, Asia accounts for only 6 percent of worldwide offshore deposits, although Hong Kong is the tenth most popular secrecy jurisdiction by deposits in this report;
    • The rate of growth of offshore deposits in secrecy jurisdictions has expanded at an average of 9 percent per annum since the early 1990s, significantly outpacing the rise of world wealth in the last decade. The gap between these two growth rates may be attributed to increases in illicit financial flows from developing countries and tax evasion by residents of developed countries.

    The report is an interesting read and provides some background on the banking practices often used in concert with wealthy people avoiding paying taxes. As you may we recall we noted that rich USA tax evaders tried to sue to hide their illegal activities from the Department of Justice. As far as I know those rich thieves have not been put in jail. I guess stealing tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars from the United States of America, by rich people, is not seen as important (either that or brides work to make sure the way rich people steal isn’t punished) say compared to some teenager stealing from a store.

    Related: Government Debt Globally as Percentage of GDP 1990-2008USA, China and Japan Lead Manufacturing Output in 2008Oil Consumption by Country in 2007

    (more…)

  • How the New Health Care Law May Affect You

    10 Ways the New Healthcare Bill May Affect You by Katie Adams

    Starting this year, if you have an adult child who cannot get health insurance from his or her employer and is to some degree dependent on you financially, your child can stay on your insurance policy until he or she is 26 years old.

    Starting this fall, your health insurance company will no longer be allowed to “drop” you (cancel your policy) if you get sick.

    Starting this year your child (or children) cannot be denied coverage simply because they have a pre-existing health condition. Health insurance companies will also be barred from denying adults applying for coverage if they have a pre-existing condition, but not until 2014.

    If you currently have pre-existing conditions that have prevented you from being able to qualify for health insurance for at least six months you will have coverage options before 2014. Starting this fall, you will be able to purchase insurance through a state-run “high-risk pool”, which will cap your personal out-of-pocket expenses for healthcare. You will not be required to pay more than $5,950 of your own money for medical expenses; families will not have to pay any more than $11,900.

    Under the new law starting in 2014, you will have to purchase health insurance or risk being fined.

    Starting in 2018, if your combined family income exceeds $250,000 you are going to be taking less money home each pay period. That’s because you will have more money deducted from your paycheck to go toward increased Medicare payroll taxes. In addition to higher payroll taxes you will also have to pay 3.8% tax on any unearned income, which is currently tax-exempt.

    Related: How the health care bill could affect youAnswers About Health Care BillWhy the Health Care Bill May Eventually Curb Medical Costspost on health careUSA Consumers Paying Down DebtPersonal Finance Basics: Long-term Care Insurance

  • USA State Governments Have $1,000,000,000,000 in Unfunded Retirement Obligations

    There was a $1 trillion gap at the end of fiscal year 2008 between the $2.35 trillion states had set aside to pay for employees’ retirement benefits and the $3.35 trillion price tag of those promises, according to a new report released by the Pew Center on the States. The shortfall, which will have to be paid over the next 30 years by state and local governments, amounts to more than $8,800 for every household in the United States.

    The figures detailed in Pew’s report, The Trillion Dollar Gap, include pension, health care and other non-pension benefits promised to both current and future retirees in states’ and participating localities’ public sector retirement systems.

    Pew’s numbers likely underestimate the bill coming due because the most recent available data do not account for the second half of 2008, when states’ pension fund investments were particularly affected by the financial crisis. Additionally, most states’ accounting methods spread the investment declines over a period of time–meaning states will be dealing with their losses for several years.

    “While the economic crisis and drop in investments helped create it, the trillion dollar gap is primarily the result of states’ inability to save for the future and manage the costs of their public sector retirement benefits,” said Susan Urahn, managing director, Pew Center on the States. “The growing bill coming due to states could have significant consequences for taxpayers—higher taxes, less money for public services and lower state bond ratings. States need to start exploring reforms.”

    In fiscal year 2008, states’ pension plans had $2.8 trillion in long-term liabilities, with more than $2.3 trillion reserved to cover those costs. Overall, states’ pension systems were 84 percent funded—above the 80 percent funding level recommended by experts. Still, the unfunded portion–$452 billion–is substantial, and states’ performance is down slightly from an 85 percent combined funding level in fiscal year 2006. Pension liabilities have grown by $323 billion since 2006, outpacing asset growth by almost $87 billion.

    Retiree health care and other non-pension benefits, such as life insurance, create another huge bill coming due: a $587 billion total liability to pay for current and future benefits, with only $32 billion–or just over 5 percent of the cost–funded as of fiscal year 2008. Half of the states account for 95 percent of the liability. Because of a 2004 Governmental Accounting Standards Board rule, the full range of non-pension liabilities was officially reported in fiscal year 2008 for the first time across all 50 states.

    Many state and local governments continue to provide very large pay to state and local government employees and often use very generous retirement packages as a way of disguising the true cost of the pay packages they provide.

    Related: NY State Raises Pension Age to Save $48 BillionTrue Level of USA Federal DeficitCharge It to My KidsUSA Federal Debt Now $516,348 Per HouseholdPoliticians Again Raising Taxes On Your ChildrenConsumer Debt Reduced below $2.5 Trillion
    (more…)

  • House Votes to Restore Partial Estate Tax Very Richest: Over $7 Million

    As I have said previously, capitalists support the estate and inheritance taxes. Not those that see themselves as nobility, and call wish to be called capitalists, that want to reward the children of the wealthy (because we all know they need more advantages than they already get). While the Democrats voted in favor of capitalism (letting those who earn wealth prosper) instead of supporting nobility, as has been the recent trend, they did so only for the richest few. So they decided Kings and Queens should not pass all their wealth to the kids (still they can pass more than 50% of it – oh don’t you feel sorry for those poor kids you might have to get just $3.85 million instead of the $7 million they “need”). So the Democrats decided all the children of Lords, Dukes, Earls… should not have to have their trust funds impinged in any way.

    The House voted 225-200 to indefinitely extend the current tax, which imposes a top rate of 45 percent.

    “We make the estate tax go away for 99.75 percent of the people in the country,” said North Dakota Democrat Earl Pomeroy, the main sponsor. Republicans who voted against the measure said they favored repealing the levy.

    Congress in 2001 decided to drop the estate tax in 2010 before reinstating it in 2011 at the previous higher top rate of 55 percent for estates valued at more than $1 million.

    Isn’t it amazing how little the children of wealthy are asked to share in the huge inheritances they get. But until the economic literacy of the country improves they are able to pretend noble blood lines passing down huge fortunes are not just those with the gold making the rules.

    You might notice the government is in pretty desperate need of money. But some still think asking the kids of the super rich to part with some of their inheritance is too much to ask. I wish they would learn about economics. It is not capitalist to reward being born in the right house with more cash than than many will every earn working 40 plus years (a 50% inheritance tax on the super rich is less than it should be – and it shouldn’t be just the super rich that pay inheritance tax). Maybe exempt $1-2 million and index that. The next million at 50%. Then increase the rate 5% every million. I don’t really see any need to give some kid $100 million because they happen to have been born to a rich parent. Capitalism is about rewarding economic productivity not the birth lottery.

    Related: Rich Americans Sue to Keep Evidence of Their Tax Evasion From the Justice DepartmentKilling Capitalism in Favor of Special InterestsIgnorance of CapitalismCharge It to My KidsBuffett on Taxes

  • Dollar Decline Due to Government Debt or Total Debt?

    With the dollar declining sharply, many are focused on the issue now. And the most common culprit for blame seems to be the federal debt. While I agree the dollar is likely to fall, the deficit doesn’t seem like the main reason, to me. The federal debt is large and growing quickly, which is a problem. But still the USA federal debt to GDP is lower than the OECD average. Even with a few more years of crazy federal debt growth the USA will still be below that average.

    Japan has by far the highest level of government debt in the OECD. The Yen is not collapsing. The debt is a factor but the lack of saving (USA consuming more than it produces) seems the biggest problem to me. China not only does not have large government debt it has large amounts of personal savings. People have been living far within their means in Japan and China (only by government intervention, due to desires to not have the currency appreciate has that appreciation been slowed).

    Thankfully we have been increasing savings a bit recently but it is a drop in the bucket so far (Consumer Debt Down Over $100 Billion So Far in 2009). It will have to increase in size and continue for years to begin to address the problems in a significant way.

    Related: The USA Economy Needs to Reduce Personal and Government Debt (March 2009)The Truth Behind China’s Currency PegWho Will Buy All the USA’s Debt?

  • Using Outcome Measures for Prison Management

    What is the aim of prison? To keep criminals locked up so they can’t commit crimes in society is another. Punishment, in order to deter people from committing crime is one reason they exist. And you would hope to mold prisoners so they do not commit crimes when they are freed. But the payment for services does not factor in the results of releasing productive members of society. It seems like doing so could result in improvements.

    Better Jails by Andrew Leigh, economics professor, Australian National University

    Prisons do reduce crime, but mainly because of what criminologists call ‘the incapacitation effect’ (when you’re doing time in Long Bay, it’s harder to hotwire a car). There may also be some deterrence effect, but this is small by comparison. And there is little evidence of a rehabilitation effect.

    To encourage innovation, we should start publicly reporting the outcomes that matter most. Rather than merely telling the public how many people are held in each jail, governments should publish prison-level data on recidivism rates and employment rates.

    As well as focusing on the important outcomes, Australian states should rethink the contracts they write with private providers. At present, about 16% of inmates are held in a private jail. Unfortunately, the contracts for private jails bear a remarkable similarity to sheep agistment contracts.

    Providers are penalised if inmates harm themselves or others, and rewarded if they do the paperwork correctly. Yet the contracts say nothing about life after release. A private prison operator receives the same remuneration regardless of whether released inmates lead healthy and productive lives, or become serial killers.

    A smarter way to run private jails would be to contract for the outcomes that matter most. For example, why not pay bonus payments for every prisoner who holds down a job after release, and does not reoffend? Given the right incentives, private prisons might be able to actually teach the public sector a few lessons on how to run a great rehabilitation program.

    The idea of paying for outcomes is great. It makes sense for some pay to be based on keeping prisoners housed during their terms. But providing incentives for achievement in returning productive people back to free society is something we should try.

    Related: Lean Management in PolicingUrban PlanningRich Americans Sue to Keep Evidence of Their Tax Evasion From the Justice DepartmentRandomization in SportsLA Jail Saves Time Processing CrimeMeasuring and Managing Performance in Organizations
    Quality Improvement and Government: Ten Hard Lessons From the Madison Experience by David C. Couper, Chief of Police, City of Madison, Wisconsin
    (more…)

  • If you Can’t Explain it, You Can’t Sell It

    Over the last few years Elizabeth Warren has become one of my favorite leaders. She is a leader in economic thought, ethical society and the law (she is a law professor at Harvard Law School). Far too many on Wall Street, Washington and in C-suites are leading us down a very bad path. She is a voice we need to heed.

    If you can’t explain it, you can’t sell it

    “We need a new model: If you can’t explain it, you can’t sell it,”

    The 1966 high school debate champion of Oklahoma may get what she wants. The House of Representatives will vote in December on her idea. She suggested a Financial Product Safety Commission in a 2007 article in the magazine Democracy [Unsafe at Any Rate]. President Barack Obama proposed it to Congress in June as the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

    Warren won’t discuss whether she may be a candidate to lead the authority, which would have the power to regulate $13.7 trillion of debt products. A Warren nomination would tell banks that Obama is determined to force reduced checking-account fees and limit lender claims in mortgage advertising, among other measures the industry opposes, said Thomas Cooley, dean of New York University’s Stern School of Business.

    In her role overseeing the TARP, Warren has been critical of the administration, accusing the Treasury Department of undervaluing the stock warrants that were supposed to compensate taxpayers when banks repay their bailouts. A lack of transparency about how TARP functions “erodes the very confidence” it was to restore, her committee said in a report.

    I hope she can take her attempts to reduce political favors being granted huge financial institutions and those institution be forced to follow sensible rules to protect individuals and our economy. With a few more people like there we will have a much better chance of a positive economic future.

    Related: Bogle on the Retirement CrisisBankruptcies Among Seniors SoaringDon’t Let the Credit Card Companies Play You for a Foolhttp://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2009/04/08/the-best-way-to-rob-a-bank-is-as-an-executive-at-one/