Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Forget PIIGS, US Debt Is Out of Control (depreciation of the dollar looms)
MinyanVille ^ | 06/05/2010 | Robert Barone

Posted on 06/06/2010 8:59:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

The markets are in turmoil because of worry about the so-called PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, and Spain) debts. In Fiscal Crises: The Next Shoe, I opined that Greece is just the canary in the coal mine and that when we look homeward, we have our own huge debt issues, which aren't significantly different from those of the PIIGS countries. I believe that the only reason the European contagion hasn't yet spread to America is because of the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. That era is coming to an end, and it would behoove America to get its house in order.

A May 14, 2010 Barron’s piece entitled We’re Not Greece -- Yet (D. Henniger) referred to a Royal Bank of Canada (RY) study that concluded that “Although the states of California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Illinois are comparable in terms of economic output and population to Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, and Spain, RBC finds that states’ debt burden are nowhere near that of the PIIGS.” This, “even after including unfunded liabilities for states’ employees’ pension and other benefits.” As you'll see below, I take issue with the above conclusion, and the first half of this piece will deal with why. Basically, citizens of each US state are responsible not only for the debt burdens of their states and localities, but they're also responsible for their proportionate share of the federal debt. As you'll see, the combination of the two produces debt ratios far in excess of those of the PIIGS.

Table 1 shows the PIIGS data that the markets are concerned with.

Table 2 shows estimates (for fiscal year 2010) of the Population (1), State GDP (2), State Debt/State GDP (3), Local Debt/State GDP (4), Unfunded Pension/State GDP (5), Other Unfunded Benefits/State GDP (6), Total Debt/State GDP (7), and Per Capita Debt (8) for the states mentioned in the Barron’s piece plus Michigan.

Using California as an example, the population is rapidly approaching 40 million, the state’s GDP is estimated at $1.87 trillion, the State Government Debt/State GDP is 7.4%, Local Government Debt/State GDP is 17.2%, Unfunded State Worker Pension Liability/State GDP is 27.8%, Unfunded Other Health and Benefit Liabilities/State GDP is 3.3% for a Total Debt/State GDP of 55.7%. Translating this into Debt Per Capita reveals that every California citizen owes $26,000 for debt or liabilities contracted by their elected officials. Looking back at Table 1, this isn’t too different than the Debt/GDP ratio of Spain. And looking down the Total Debt/State GDP column of Table 2, it becomes apparent that both New Jersey and Illinois have Debt/GDP ratios equivalent to that of Spain.

But wait! Citizens of the states in the US are also responsible for the debt piled up in Washington, DC. So, to the debt of the states and localities, one must add the national debt. The first three rows of Table 3 show an average of all State (row 1), Local (row 2), and Federal (row 3) Debt/GDP and the Per Capita dollars owed by each US citizen.

Using the table, look at the intersection of the "Cumulative (%)" column and "+Agency" row, which represents the recognized public debt of the federal government and its agencies and an average state and local burden. One can see that at 134.6% of GDP, debt burdens are higher than those of all of the PIIGS countries that have given the markets so much heartburn. Table 4 substitutes the debts of the states shown in Table 2 for the "Average State" and "Average Local" and shows the indebtedness of the citizens of these states per capita and as percentages of both State and US GDPs. All of the states shown have Debt/GDP ratios significantly higher than that of Greece.

Now, I'm not an expert on debt levels in European countries. And, it could well be that citizens of those countries have taken on public debt that would be similar to US State and Local debt that isn't in the figures shown in Table 1. But, because the absolute levels of the Debt/GDP shown for the PIIGS have been a cause for concern, then the debts of the citizens of the US, and, specifically those states shown in Table 4, should also be cause for grave concern. For the most part, the European states are at least considering austerity measures. And while some US states are being forced into austerity because of their inability to print money, the major contributor to the indebtedness, the US Congress, doesn't seem all that concerned. This is a major difference from what's occurring in Europe.

So far in this piece I've only talked about public debt. Usdebtclock.org estimates total personal debt at $16.6 trillion, mortgage debt at $14.1 trillion, consumer debt at $2.5 trillion, and credit card debt at $848 billion. (Amazingly, of the four types of private debt, only consumer debt is shown at usdebtclock.org as expanding; the other three categories of consumer debt are contracting. I wish I could say the same about public debt!) So, on top of all of the public debt, each US citizen, on average, owes privately $53,525. Adding the public and private debt together totals $117,181 per capita, or a total Debt/GDP ratio of 248% (see Table 3). Wow! Now that's a lot of debt!

Finally, the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare are nearly $109 trillion, or about $352,000 per US citizen (see usdebtclock.org). That number alone is a Debt/GDP ratio of 745% and is so outside the realm of rationality that I didn't bother to put it in the table. Clearly, the recipients of these promises can't possibly hope to receive such benefits in current dollars. Depreciation of the currency or significant cutbacks in the promises (or both) is inevitable. The recognition of the real magnitude of these irresponsible promises should be enough to cause a loss of confidence in the dollar. In my view, unless the US moves to at least begin to address these issues, that day is closer than anyone might think.

All of the public debt was originated by governments and most of the private debt by banks or other financial institutions. In feudal times, serfs owed a significant portion of their toil to their lords. Have times really changed? The lords are now the politicians and "Too Big to Fail" bankers. Many ordinary people are serfs, highly indebted either voluntarily (private debt) or involuntarily (public debt). Looking at debt in this way helps to explain the unholy alliance between Washington and Wall Street (see The Unholy Washington-Wall Street Alliance) and why the "Too Big to Fail" and Washington politicians get richer and richer at the public's expense.

While US citizens are drowning in debt, the political system appears incapable of reducing it. In fact, the politicians continue to expand it in the erroneous belief that more debt will help. There are only two ways out: years of austerity or currency devaluation/inflation. The political system won't allow the former. Buy Gold!

-- This article was written by Robert Barone, head of Ancora West. Barone currently serves on AAA’s Finance and Investment Committee, which oversees $5 billion of investable assets. This column was originally posted on AncoraWest's Market Insights.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: debt; depreciation; piigs; usdebt
TABLE 1


TABLE 2


TABLE 3


TABLE 4


1 posted on 06/06/2010 8:59:15 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Depreciation of the dollar wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.

If we want to try and bring back manufacturing to this country we’re going to need some dollar depreciation.


2 posted on 06/06/2010 9:02:26 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

a 2 minute round-up on the global sovereign debt crisis - very funny and accurate.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/05/20/2905304.htm


3 posted on 06/06/2010 9:10:00 AM PDT by Ev Reeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
Depreciation of the dollar wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.

If the USD depreciates to an unacceptable level, expect our debtors (e.g. China ) to either dump the dollar or demand higher interest for lending us money.

The main thing saving us from the dumping of dollars is there are no alternative stable currencies anywhere in the world that people can look to. So, we're bad, but not as bad as Europe or Japan in terms of debt.

Higher interest rates will probably be the future if we don't get our debt under control.
4 posted on 06/06/2010 9:12:11 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

Indeed: devaluing the dollar would make our exports more competitive, imports less competitive (spurring U.S. activity to compete with foreign companies), and make the part of my pension fund invested overseas more valuable in dollar terms (^_^).


5 posted on 06/06/2010 9:12:18 AM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Higher interest rates will probably be the future if we don’t get our debt under control.”

...I wouldn’t mind a little bit higher interest rates...the interest I’m getting on my savings at the bank is miserable.


6 posted on 06/06/2010 9:18:39 AM PDT by STONEWALLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
"dollar depreciation"

Look at the experience of every country that has devalued its currency. First, you get a trade advantage and sell a little more to other countries. Then you realize you are paying more for imports. (China/Walmart anyone?) Then you have inflation. Bad inflation. Then your standard of living goes down. And your standard of living stays down.

How do you like your dollar devaluation now folks?

The trouble is, because everyone and every thing (the Feds and the states, counties and cities - and probably you) in this country is living on borrowed money, when the borrowing stops, the standard of living must go down and stay down. Now show me the politician who is willing to take the responsibility for that.

7 posted on 06/06/2010 9:20:36 AM PDT by I am Richard Brandon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ev Reeman

Funny because its soo true. Thanks for posting.


8 posted on 06/06/2010 9:22:32 AM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: STONEWALLS
.I wouldn’t mind a little bit higher interest rates...the interest I’m getting on my savings at the bank is miserable.

It will be good for savers, but think of how it will affect small businesses and home buyers and a whole heap of other institutions that need to borrow money...

This will of course continue to affect jobs as companies that need to pay more for interest will have to find ways to cut cost.

This will also affect the government's ability to operate, pay pensions, social security etc as most of these are dependent on issuing debt.

Just look at the example of Greece and other Latin American countries that have had to depreciate their currency and you begin to see the future of this once great country unless we control our debt.
9 posted on 06/06/2010 9:23:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

There are two ways out...
Default on debt
or
Inflate our way out.

It appears that the inflation method is becoming more difficult than thought.

Is this evidence of the battle between the ‘deflation’ and ‘hyperinflation’ camps?


10 posted on 06/06/2010 9:27:45 AM PDT by griswold3 (Barack Obama’s First Law of Leadership: “I just work here.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: griswold3
There are two ways out... Default on debt or Inflate our way out.

How about CUTTING SPENDING AND ENTITLEMENTS and GROWING THE ECONOMY?

I guess this isn't politically viable.
11 posted on 06/06/2010 9:30:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“How about CUTTING SPENDING AND ENTITLEMENTS and GROWING THE ECONOMY? I guess this isn’t politically viable.”

We can’t do anything that’s inconsistent with big government now, can we? /sarc


12 posted on 06/06/2010 9:35:05 AM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

CUTTING SPENDING AND ENTITLEMENTS and GROWING THE ECONOMY

Only if you believe in individual liberty and economic freedom. There are few of us out here. Those of us who know how to create value and who believe that is the correct path to prosperity are out numbered by those that capture value instead. This means a shift has occured. The ‘progressives’ just don’t see it yet. After the election of the leftist, producers have taken defensive action. We’re the ones ‘in the bleachers’ that Obama talks about. We refuse to participate in the destruction of our economy though the left is doing a pretty good job by themselves.


13 posted on 06/06/2010 9:41:03 AM PDT by griswold3 (Barack Obama’s First Law of Leadership: “I just work here.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

The far left and their agenda has been exposed by Obama for all Americans to see.

Americans are witnesses to it just as Jews were the witnesses (and victims) of the Holocaust.


14 posted on 06/06/2010 9:53:04 AM PDT by Ev Reeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Very useful compilation of data. It confirms that the U.S. is a far bigger PIG than any of the PIIGS. And unfortunately, the nation is now being led by the biggest porker ever.


15 posted on 06/06/2010 10:02:56 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I am Richard Brandon

I’m not living on borrowed money. I worked 80 hrs a week and had to be away from all all the time and missed much of my kids growing up so that I managed to retire before I was 47.

This oil spill may end up driving me back into some kind of career activity, if just because it will take away my ability to go fishing all day it looks like.

Having said that, the price of imports going up to the point where they can’t compete with domestic products is probably a good thing. I used to be a huge free trader as most MBAs are but for our country, we can’t have both free trade status and maintain a strong currency vis-a-vis the rest of the world with the costs of livings and US dollar living standards we have in America.

That’s what spurs outsourcing.

I think dollar depreciation represents one way to at least bring down unemployment and therefore ensure stability. Would I stand to lose money? Absolutely. It’s why I’ve begun reducing my liquidity and putting it into what I hope are fiat proof assets. It doesn’t mean I can’t see that from the macroprospective the US is facing a lot of unattractive choices and devaluation of the dollar is among the least unattractive of them.


16 posted on 06/06/2010 10:09:57 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

One important difference. We can do something that Greece and Latin America can’t. We can basically go into de jure empire mode and actually begin conquering our friends and neighbors and taking their resources back to the United States.

When do you think the Romans became true expansionists? It was in the first century BC when the Roman state was undergoing so much upheaval that they needed the money from vast colonial possessions just to sustain the social system in Italy.


17 posted on 06/06/2010 10:12:42 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

I think we must start adopting FAIR TRADE POLICIES to go along with our FREE TRADE POLICIES even if it means getting into tariff wars with our trading partners. Most of our big trading partners such as China take advantage of us trading wise. It’s about time we fought back and use the same tools these guys use against them.


18 posted on 06/06/2010 10:13:27 AM PDT by Ev Reeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In a time of high unemployment and massive private job losses the answer is no.

Federal government becomes the last refuge of those who can’t find work in the private sector, either through federal work or federal assistance.

Think of the census workers. These people are encountering a very hostile public. Why then do it? They do it because its the only thing they can get and when it ends these people are back to square 1.

There are firms advertising jobs in the country who now openly advertise that they’ll only consider those already employed and informally that is practiced among many other companies. In an economic climate like this that is catastrophic.

I believe in small government and I’m anti-taxes. However, the time to cut the federal payroll and begin seriously taking on entitlements and the deficit was in the 1980s and 1990s because the only time an economy can absorb a cut in the public expenditures and not see it be a net negative and not a positive is when the economy is in boom because then the private economy easily absorbs those coming out of the public sector.

If you ended unemployment and laid off 15% of federal workers today all you would do is further harm consumer demand and make an already bad situation 5 times worse.

There is no magic panacea. There is no magic bullet. All the choices we’re faced with are bad. The easiest and most effective could very well end up being WWIII.


19 posted on 06/06/2010 10:19:21 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
it would behoove America to get its house in order

That's not going to happen. We have a major s*** storm headed our way and the only question now is when

20 posted on 06/06/2010 10:20:10 AM PDT by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
If you ended unemployment and laid off 15% of federal workers today all you would do is further harm consumer demand and make an already bad situation 5 times worse.

This is a perfect illustration of the dilemma concerning all economic and financial decisions that must be made. We have successfully been maneuvered into a damned if you do and damned if you don't position mainly by incompetence and inaction over the last 30 years.

21 posted on 06/06/2010 10:24:21 AM PDT by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Table 2 shows estimates (for fiscal year 2010) of the Population (1), State GDP (2), State Debt/State GDP (3), Local Debt/State GDP (4), Unfunded Pension/State GDP (5), Other Unfunded Benefits/State GDP (6), Total Debt/State GDP (7), and Per Capita Debt (8) for the states mentioned in the Barron’s piece plus Michigan.

He's doing okay until he adds #5 and #6. Why would you compare a liability that's payable over decades to a GDP number that's one year? And if he does that, to show how bad off we are, he needs to add the same liability number to the debt numbers of the PIIGs.

Try again.

22 posted on 06/06/2010 10:28:02 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

“If we want to try and bring back manufacturing to this country we’re going to need some dollar depreciation.”

It will take more than the collapse of the dollar to bring back manufacturing in this country. A factory is a high capital cost investment that requires a long term view to justify the expense. A century ago, JP Morgan (the person) and other Wall Street investors funded factories, ships, railroads and other high cost, long term capital investments that allowed this country to become the strongest industrial nation on the planet. It was that industrial might that saved western civilization in WWII. Had the US industrial base not existed, it is likely the Third Reich and Japan would be ruling the world today.

Unfortunately, the Wall Street banks and investment houses today are populated by speculators with investment time horizons of nanoseconds. Today’s bankers will lend hundreds of thousands of dollars to high credit risk low income people to buy a house with an inflated price but will not consider a loan to a small business for a $50,000 machine tool with the potential to create products of value for several decades. The mortgage loan to the low credit score individual without the income to make the payments is considered less risky than the loan to the small businessman who always pays his/her bills on time. This distortion is due to government policy. Until we change government tax and trade policies to favor long term investment in productive manufacturing assets, we will continue to fritter our national savings away and fail to create the infrastructure required for a strong middle class.


23 posted on 06/06/2010 10:30:36 AM PDT by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
If you ended unemployment and laid off 15% of federal workers today all you would do is further harm consumer demand and make an already bad situation 5 times worse.

Well, this simply means that you are in effect, in agreement with what Obama and the Pelosi congress are doing. To generalize, everytime we have a recession, it would be good reason to expand the Federal payroll further... I can't help but feel that there's something wrong with this "solution".

What did Reagan do in the huge recession (stagflation) he inherited from Carter ? Did he EXPAND Federal payroll ?
24 posted on 06/06/2010 10:31:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

I respectfully disagree.

Government workers make twice what private sectoir workers make.

And the benefits and pensions are astronomical.

By cutting entitlements, the federal budget and eliminating whole departments and programs altogether and reducing the size and scope of the federal bureaucracy and channeling the savings into more productive areas would boost the economy, not threaten it.


25 posted on 06/06/2010 10:33:41 AM PDT by Ev Reeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ev Reeman

Not really. It’s easy for someone who hasn’t studied to ratchet off that talking point but it isn’t true.

Most government offices are filled with clerical staff that make in the 30k-40k range. I’m not saying that there aren’t those who advance far beyond that but most of your office employees in a federal office will be in that range.

Plus, federal workers essentially make a lifetime commitment to the government and forgo higher private sector wages in exchange for the better benefits, insurance and pension. If you try and take that away from them the streets of every city with a federal courthouse will look like Athens because there are more families then you realize now depending on the stable income of the family member who has the federal job.


26 posted on 06/06/2010 10:38:56 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I don’t recall Reagan laying that many people off in 1981. What he did was cut the top tax rates that began to start spurring economic investment.

But, I also don’t need to remind you that the recession continued through 1981 and 1982 and by early 1983 unemployment was worse then it ever was under Carter and Reagan looked like a dead duck.

Reagan got a second term because when it started picking up in late 83 it picked up fast and furious and he had the distinct advantage of getting Fritz Mondale as his opponent in ‘84.


27 posted on 06/06/2010 10:41:14 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

I’m not saying CUT ALL FEDERAL WORKERS.

I AM SAYING CUT OUT THE ONES THAT ARE NOT PRODUCTIVE. CLEAN HOUSE. I USED TO WORK FOR THE FEDS. I KNOW WHAT GOES ON. ONE THIRD OF ALL FEDERAL WORKERS DO ALL THE WORK AND THE OTHER TWO THIRDS SKATE BY BY DOING THE BARE MINIMUM AND NO MORE. THEY KNOW WHO THEY ARE AND THEIR CO WORKERS KNOW TOO. IT IS RATHER THE UNIONS AND THEIR BOSSES THAT PROTECT THEM FROM BEING FIRED OR LAID OFF. THAT IS WHAT THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY IS ALL ABOUT. THERE IS A LOT OF WASTE FRAUD AND ABUSE IN THE FEDERAL BUDGET THAT COULD BE CUT WITHOUT BATTING AN EYELASH.


28 posted on 06/06/2010 10:43:40 AM PDT by Ev Reeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
Informal depreciation of the dollar is already occurring. I was saving for a Canon 300 mm 2.8L lens. In January of 2008, it cost around 3K. Now, it's 4500, and is up $500 since January. The high end camera lenses are good meters for actual monetary depreciation because of the precision grinding of the lenses and mechanical complexity of the device. There is a floor for manufacturing cost which won't be overcome by technological advances.

Similarly, the Canon 1D MK IV camera is $1000 more than it's predecessor, the Mark III. Canon strives to make the new version of a camera match the old version in price. Canon and Nikon are in a blood war for the high end professional camera market, and keep each other honest on price.

The clowns in Washington are printing money as fast as they can (or adding numbers to the database) and the Arabs and N. Koreans are counterfeiting money.

They can control the rate of exchange, but foreign manufacturers will raise the price of products, regardless of what the governments dictate.

29 posted on 06/06/2010 10:46:08 AM PDT by Richard Kimball (We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
Most government offices are filled with clerical staff that make in the 30k-40k range.

Not any more. The average federal worker's salary is now $71,000, compared with $40,000 in the private sector. And that's before benefits.

In the last 18 months the number of federal workers making more than $100,000 went from 14% to 19%.

Source

Federal pay is completely out of control.

30 posted on 06/06/2010 10:46:54 AM PDT by Gideon7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
Yeah, devaluation's worked wonders for the inhabitants of the countries that have tried it - just go ask the Venezuelans and the Argentines (they've got plenty of spare time to talk to you, after all, considering how moribund their economies are).


31 posted on 06/06/2010 10:50:35 AM PDT by Oceander (The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance -- Thos. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gideon7

Is that mean or is that average?

I’ll give you an example. Here is firm A

300 workers make $35,000 a year. They are overseen by $100,000 making managers and there’s 100 of them (I know that ratio is less than realistic but I’m making a point here)

Now, the 100 managers make $10,000,000 combined and the workers they oversee make $10,500,000 combined and you get a total payroll of $20,500,000. Now, take that and divide it by 400 and you come up with $51,520.

Now, no one in that firm is making $51,520 but thats the average salary because that’s how you calculate a salary.

A far better guide of what salaries really are would be to find the mean but to compute the mean would require every salary stub in America and would be far more difficult to accomplish. No one wants to do that work. It’s easier to get the broad based average.

There are many overpaid federal workers but most of them are those who have some kind of advanced degree and who’s degree was the main qualifier for their job. I have had neighbors who were federal workers and I’ve had some business associates with federal worker wives.

For every 1 federal worker making $150,000 a year you have 5 office ladies at GS-5 making around $40,000. And an interest note, if you run up those numbers you come up with an average of $70,000.

Averages are a great statistic to use in many areas, but incomes for sector workers has always been known to be a bad one. Like with attorneys. Yes, the average salary for attorneys is around $100,000 but that’s only because you have a lot of 2 mil + attorneys canceling out all the shingle guys who struggle to bring in 60k in a year and apply that same rubric to any profession including medicine.

A far better determinant is mean salary but somehow I doubt any of us will do the work to determine the mean.


32 posted on 06/06/2010 11:09:04 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball

Eventually the idea would be that this would make foreign products untenable in the American market driving foreign producers to either produce in America to continue accessing our market or it would drive domestic interests to start bringing back manufacturing.

Most people seem to think we don’t have manufacturing capacity. We have a lot of equipment in old manufacturing plants just dying to be used if their was demand. Our manufacturing sector is dead because we simply can’t be profitable doing it.

A depreciated dollar could reverse that trend.


33 posted on 06/06/2010 11:11:43 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
The typical federal worker is paid 20% more than a private-sector worker in the same occupation.

Median annual salary: Federal: $66,591, Private: $55,000, Difference: $11,091.

From BLS statistics. Federal Pay Ahead of Private Industry (USA Today)

34 posted on 06/06/2010 11:18:36 AM PDT by Gideon7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson