Showing posts with label Stock Market Crash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stock Market Crash. Show all posts

April 28, 2011

When It Finally Occurs, Today’s Depression Will Make the Great Depression Look Like a Sunday Picnic

A Tale of Two Depressions

By Reverse Engineer, The Burning Platform
January 6, 2011

JimQ and I have been having a wee bit of a dispute regarding just how much Real Estate values are going to fall as we progress forward with the economic collapse.

Like many Optimistic Pundits here on the net, he holds the belief that if Goobermint support was removed from the RE market and real Price Discovery was allowed, the market would experience perhaps another 20% drop before stabilizing, at which point prudent local savers and international investors would jump back in and buy up the properties in foreclosure.

In Counterpoint to this view, along with a few other Collapse observers like Nicole Foss and Charles Hugh Smith, I consider a much larger drop to be likely, on the order of 80% down from the Peak Mania period prior to the initial 2008 crash. The reason for this is the parallel we are following with the timeline of the Great Depression, beginning actually prior to that with the Mania period of the 1920s.

In this article, I will highlight some of the similarities and differences between your Grandfather’s Depression and this one, and why for the most part I expect it will be an order of magnitude worse in this go round, including the massive collapse of Real Estate values on the order of –80% or more.

Following at the end of this post is a Timeline of significant events and milestones from the period beginning in 1920 through to the 1940s. I will in the course of this article highlight a few of those numbers and events for comparative purposes and show why they are likely to be even worse this time around. Those numbers and events are presented here in [Brackets and Bolded.] For those of you unfamiliar with this Timeline, reviewing it (see the end of this article) prior to reading this post could be worthwhile.

Let’s begin with Real Estate prices which are the driving force in a deflationary depression, and provided the grist for the mill beginning this Point-Counterpoint Debate. The reason for this is that whether the economy is agrarian based or industrial based, during the mania period RE asset prices get inflated by the expanding credit based money in the economy.

In the mostly agrarian economy prior to the 1920s, farmland rose in speculative value as the FSofA provided food for Europe recovering from WWI. However, with Europe mostly recovered by the mid 1920s, the amount of export food dropped and increasing productivity due to mechanization meant less ag land was necessary for food production. As the 1920s progressed, Ag Land lost 30%-40% of its value.

[The value of farmland falls 30 to 40 percent between 1920 and 1929.]

Areas of our country which expanded rapidly with the McMansion Bubble here have experienced a similar decline already, in places like Las Vegas and Florida and California. Nationally, the average decline is less, but a massive inventory of homes are held in shadow inventory which will further depress the market as it becomes necessary to liquidate this inventory.

As the Great Depression progressed onward, the early collapse in RE prices made many Banks insolvent, which then precipitated the Stock Market Crash of 1929. This is an analogue of the sub-prime collapse precipitating the October 2008 collapse of the current market. This creates another feedback loop with RE and commodity prices, and so in Granddad’s Depression by 1932 Farm Prices take a further nosedive losing another 53% in value.

[Farm prices had fallen 53 percent since 1929.]

This reflects the period of the “Grapes of Wrath”, when for all intents and purposes, farmland was basically worthless and many J6P Family farmers lost their farms just for the Taxes owed on them.
We are not at this period yet in Today’s Depression. We are right now rhyming with around 1930, when Da Fed was artificially depressing interest rates and providing liquidity to the market.

[By February 1930, the Federal Reserve has cut the prime interest rate from 6 to 4 percent. Expands the money supply with a major purchase of U.S. securities.]

In the period directly following this (hasn’t happenned yet, but likely will for numerous reasons foreign and domestic), Da Fed finally does pull the liquidity from the market, as then Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon advocates for Debt Liquidation.

[Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon announces that the Fed will stand by as the market works itself out: “Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate real estate… values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wreck from less-competent people.]

As we know now, letting the system fail and liquidating all the malinvestment of that era did not usher in a new era of Prosperity; in fact, things got a whole lot worse after that, and remained so up until massive amounts of new Debt was issued leading into WWII.

We still haven’t even approached the real Crisis Year of 1933 when FDR started making some Socialist Reforms, and the Illuminati of the time attempted to stop the Wealth redistribution with a Military Coup d’Etat.

[Alarmed by Roosevelt’s plan to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor, a group of millionaire businessmen, led by the Du Pont and J.P. Morgan empires, plans to overthrow Roosevelt with a military coup and install a fascist government. The businessmen try to recruit General Smedley Butler, promising him an army of 500,000, unlimited financial backing and generous media spin control. The plot is foiled when Butler reports it to Congress.]

A good question for Today’s Depression is whether 2-3 years from now, if an attempt like FDRs is made to do a Socialist Wealth redistribution, whether today’s Illuminati will fail in the effort as DuPont and Morgan did, and whether there is somebody with the kind of Integrity General Smedley Butler had to report it, and whether the CONgress Critters would stop such a Coup d’Etat or passively go along with it. If they don’t, our Timeline will diverge at this point and we will pursue a further deepening Fascist paradigm.

Despite the fact we have what already amounts to Depressionary numbers when you look at statistics like the U-6 UE, the increasing number of people on Food Stamps and the massive number of Foreclosures, for the most part unless you are currently living the nightmare, today’s Depression just doesn’t seem quite as bad as Granddad’s Depression, at least not from how you remember it from the Newsreels and Photos of the era.

Even on the international level, the rioting in Greece and the Strikes in France don’t seem to live up to the expectation you have when you look at those old newreels of 1930s era Nazi Rallies. We don’t have the Japanese invading China, we don’t have huge Hoovervilles on the Potomac like the Bonus Army with Vietnam Vets demanding their Bennies.

So how come? Is this Depression just not as bad as the last one? Have we figured out the secret for keeping everything looking good on the surface level while the monetary system disintegrates? Or are we just experiencing the Calm Before the Storm? The answer is both.

First, the worst pictures in your mind of Granddad’s Depression are of gaunt Hobos with the “Brother, Can you Spare a Dime” look on their faces. There are quite a few Bums out there in the Big Shitties these days of course, but at least for the moment the Bum shelter system has been keeping up with the problem. They get swept off the streets on those really cold nights, and though the shelter may be out of beds, they get a place on the floor. During Granddad’s Depression, such a shelter system for those who were on Skid Row wasn’t nearly as developed as it is today.

Even more important is the Hunger problem. In your Granddad’s Depression, the distribution of food to the starving came through Soup Kitchens, so you have the Photos of the lines outside the Kitchen and the sad faces of families sitting around a cafeteria style table eating whatever it was they got served up. Today, we issue SNAP cards which function just like your ATM Card at the checkout, and with the money Da Goobermint drops on the card each month, you can pretty much buy whatever you would like in the grocery store. Exception being anything from the Hot Food counter. I only know this because recently in the checkout line a SNAP card user directly in front of me did not know this, and couldn’t buy the Chinese Buffet special of the day he had scooped up.

In your Granddad’s Depression, you have pictures of the Dustbowl in your head, and the Joad family heading for CA in their rusty old Jalopy on Route 66. Today’s almost nobody lives on Farms on a statistical basis anymore, and if they do they aren’t heading for California. The Jalopies they own are still pretty nice looking cars they bought on Credit, which the Bank isn’t bothering to Repo because then they would have to admit the GMAC Auto Loan had gone south.

Similarly, instead of foreclosing on everybody and pushing them all into Hoovervilles, the McMansions themselves are turning into Hoovervilles. Foreclosures are indefinitely delayed, the residents stop paying the mortgage and squat on the housing until the power and water get turned off, and sometimes even after that. About the only thing that will drive them out now is when they finally run out of money to buy Gas, and become unable to drive to the Walmart 10 miles down the road to buy food with the SNAP card.

That hasn’t happened yet for the most part because in Today’s Depression, UE Bennies have been extended for 2 years. So really at the moment only the very first folks to start taking the hit in 2008 are completely out of Bennies, which will make it interesting to see how it progresses from here with these people. In Europe though, you pretty much can never fall off the UE Dole; there are no expiration dates on the Dole there. In your Granddad’s Depression, though there was some Goobermint Dole, it was very limited.

The existence of most of the social safety nets that have evolved since your Granddad’s depression are the primary reason that so far this one doesn’t LOOK as bad as the old one did in the pictures and the newsreels. Over in Europe, though the population is mighty unhappy over the Austerity measures and gradual evisceration of their Pension system -- current pensioners are still getting their checks; and like here, across the Pond, as of yet, very few people are actually STARVING. That condition is reserved for the truly poor of the world who don’t live in ANY of these countries anymore. In the real 3rd World countries though as the price of a cup of rice or bag of flour goes up here, where there are no SNAP cards -- these folks are on the verge of starvation level conditions, if they are not already there.

In your Granddad’s Depression, as the Jobs disappeared, so also disappeared the Food off the shelves. Farmers couldn’t make a profit on their food as the ability of the people to buy it disappeared. In today’s depression, food keeps moving off the shelves via the SNAP cards, and most Food Production comes not from Family Farms, but from Agribiz, who if they are losing money due to Margin Compression as their Input Prices go up have access to the ZIRP money Helicopter Ben issues out to all TBTF companies. While wholesale prices on the COMEX have recently EXPLODED in upward Volatility, at least my Grocery bill hasn’t changed much. Canned Napa Chili con Carne is still 99 cents a can, even a Ribeye Steak is still coming in at around $7 a pound. That IS around 18% up from as cheap as I could buy it before COMEX prices went up so fast in this cycle, but since food for me only represents about at most 20% of my budget, an increase like this doesn’t affect me much. It can affect very poor people much more of course, but then only if they buy Rib Eye steaks. They can of course substitute cheaper cuts of meat for quite some time, and then start eating Chicken.

Here finally is why at least, to date in most of the 1st World countries, Today’s Depression hasn’t yet seen the kind of social dislocation of your Granddad’s Depression. By this stage of the game in the 1930s, Da Fed had quit on the idea of perpetually pushing new money into the system and Liquidation was Andrew Mellon’s Game. They couldn’t physically even GET money out to all the Failing Banks fast enough in those days to cover the Bank Runs.

Today, to keep enough money in your local Branch Office of your Bank, all Helicopter Ben has to do is click the Free Money function button on his Laptop and direct enough to your bank so when you slide your ATM card through the checkout register and type in your PIN, the Digimoney still appears to be there. A bunch of Regulators may show up on the weekend to “close” your Bank, but by Monday morning its “owned” by a bigger bank in the neighborhood, and Da Goobermint is backstopping all the bad assets on their books. Its still BAU on Monday morning, although a few Branch offices might have closed and a few Tellers are now on the UE line.



As much as you might know that the perpetual money printing game cannot continue in perpetuity, for the time being the additional grease being pushed through the engine has kept the wheels of commerce moving for the last couple of years. Without this Funny Money, Da Goobermint wouldn’t be able to keep the UE Bennies flowing, they wouldn’t be able to keep the money flowing to the Military paying all those soldiers, and keeping people employed in the biznesses that supply the military with all the stuff they need to run a good War. Without the Funny Money, the Social Security checks would stop or at least be seriously cut in size. Worst of all, without the Funny Money, the Bankster Pigmen would not be taking home those Big Bonuses and the parties in the Hamptons would come to a grinding halt.

For anyone who has at least a passing knowledge of history and basic math is concerned watching all this, you know in your Gut that it cannot last in perpetuity. You can’t make Something from Nothing, so you wait for some portion of this vast machine to seize up, and for the ever greater quantities of debt money being issued to simply stop working. For most of us observing this, it already has gone on far longer than I think anyone thought possible. How much longer CAN it go on? Will Jacking Up the Deficit Ceiling by another $2T in March allow the game to be continued onward for another full year? My guess right now is that Yes it Can. Of course, given my track record on short term predictions, this probably means the Sky Will Fall this year. If RE predicts the Sky Will NOT Fall this year, we could be in big trouble. LOL.

In any event, whatever the cause will be of this perpetual motion machine seizing up is, right now it doesn’t look like it will happen first here on these shores. There are many indicators now that the Chinese economy is moving toward a Hyperinflationary endgame, resulting from years of exporting Deflation to the First World countries in the form of depressed labor costs. The systemic problems of the structure of the Euro distributed among states with vastly different economies and political structures are making the instabilities there far greater than they are here, where for the most part our Political system is owned lock stock and barrel by the TBTF Banks.

So the Big Black Swan, when it does inevitably come in for a landing, looks more likely to touch down first in China or Euroland than it does in the FSofA. Not that we will be far behind of course, because then the cascade failure of the Shadow Banking system will begin in earnest.

When it finally does occur of course, then Today’s Depression will make your Granddad’s Depression look like a Sunday Picnic. The various systems developed to maintain order and continuity in the First World countries will seize up. Social Security, SNAP Cards and funding the vast Military will become impossible. Trade will come to a grinding halt, and the lifeblood of our industrial civilization will be unavailable to buy at any price, in any currency, including Gold.

The differences that exist now between your Granddad’s Depression and Today’s Depression are not that great really, and if you go down the list point by point some of the similarities are positively frightening of course. The most important thing to realize here is that in the current timeline, we are only at the very beginning stages, and as Debt Liquidation finally takes hold, all asset classes from Stocks, to Bonds to Real Estate are all destined for massive losses, likely exceeding the 80% loss in the value of Industrial Stocks by 1932.

[Industrial stocks have lost 80 percent of their value since 1930.]

Let me leave you with this final thought. In your Grandfather’s Depression, both Farmland and Industrial Stocks took a MASSIVE hit in asset value. However, in both those cases, they still held SOME intrinsic value. Industry was in its infancy really, and in the 1930s there was plenty of easily accessible Oil right here in the FSofA to grow industry with, once of course more debt was issued to fight WWII. As far as Farmland goes, it always has SOME intrinsic value, even just for Subsistence Farming purposes.

What Intrinsic Value do McMansions have? They are totally dependent on the presence of cheap Oil to run, and themselves are not productive as Farmland. They depend on the ability of the Owner to go out and make a living in some other facet of the economy, and to use his SUV to get there.

As the Jobs disappear and the Oil to run the Cars becomes more scarce and expensive, these White Elephants lose ALL the value they once held. Even if the price on one of them dropped down to 10% of its value, I would not buy one. The model is not sustainable.

Good Ag Land should hold some value here, but even there you have to weigh the Tax Liabilities you will incur with Ownership against what you might be able to sell produce for to an increasingly impoverished general population.

The collapse of Credit in a deflationary depression renders the monetary value of all assets questionable, and just Printing Money does not resolve that problem. It just drives a hyperinflationary spiral for a while before it collapses, but it collapses either way.

The underlying problem here is a collapse of Asset Value that depends on the availability of Cheap Oil. As that disappears, all those assets are rendered WORTHLESS. Not even 20 cents on the Dollar really, that is just an intermediary level here. The model no longer works, because Peak Oil is REAL, and its effects are beginning here. Just BEGINNING friends -- by no means are we yet into the real consequences. We will begin to see them though as the Real Estate market collapses entirely.



Will it happen this year? Probably not. Nevertheless, its Coming Soon to a Theatre Near You.

TIMELINE OF GENERAL EVENTS OF THE GREAT DEPRESSION

1920s (Decade)
* During World War I, federal spending grows three times larger than tax collections. When the government cuts back spending to balance the budget in 1920, a severe recession results. However, the war economy invested heavily in the manufacturing sector, and the next decade will see an explosion of productivity… although only for certain sectors of the economy.
* An average of 600 banks fail each year.
* Agricultural, energy and coal mining sectors are continually depressed. Textiles, shoes, shipbuilding and railroads continually decline.
* The value of farmland falls 30 to 40 percent between 1920 and 1929.
* Organized labor declines throughout the decade. The United Mine Workers Union will see its membership fall from 500,000 in 1920 to 75,000 in 1928. The American Federation of Labor would fall from 5.1 million in 1920 to 3.4 million in 1929.
* “Technological unemployment” enters the nation’s vocabulary; as many as 200,000 workers a year are replaced by automatic or semi-automatic machinery.
* Over the decade, about 1,200 mergers will swallow up more than 6,000 previously independent companies; by 1929, only 200 corporations will control over half of all American industry.
* By the end of the decade, the bottom 80 percent of all income-earners will be removed from the tax rolls completely. Taxes on the rich will fall throughout the decade.
* By 1929, the richest 1 percent will own 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. The bottom 93 percent will have experienced a 4 percent drop in real disposable per-capita income between 1923 and 1929.
* The middle class comprises only 15 to 20 percent of all Americans.
* Individual worker productivity rises an astonishing 43 percent from 1919 to 1929. But the rewards are being funneled to the top: the number of people reporting half-million dollar incomes grows from 156 to 1,489 between 1920 and 1929, a phenomenal rise compared to other decades. But that is still less than 1 percent of all income-earners.
1922
* The conservative Supreme Court strikes down federal child labor legislation.
1923
* President Warren Harding dies in office; his administration was easily one of the most corrupt in American history. Calvin Coolidge, who is squeaky clean by comparison, becomes president. Coolidge is no less committed to laissez-faire and a non-interventionist government. He announces to the American people: “The business of America is business.”
* Supreme Court nullifies minimum wage for women in District of Columbia.
1924
* The Ku Klux Klan reaches the height of its influence in America: by the end of the year it will claim 9 million members. It will decline drastically in 1925, however, after financial and moral scandals rock its leadership.
* The stock market begins its spectacular rise. Bears little relation to the rest of the economy.
1925
* The top tax rate is lowered to 25 percent – the lowest top rate in the eight decades since World War I.
* Supreme Court rules that trade organizations do not violate anti-trust laws as long as some competition survives.
1928
* The construction boom is over.
* Farmers’ share of the national income has dropped from 15 to 9 percent since 1920.
* Between May 1928 and September 1929, the average prices of stocks will rise 40 percent. Trading will mushroom from 2-3 million shares per day to over 5 million. The boom is largely artificial.
1929
* Herbert Hoover becomes President. Hoover is a staunch individualist but not as committed to laissez-faire ideology as Coolidge.
* More than half of all Americans are living below a minimum subsistence level.
* Annual per-capita income is $750; for farm people, it is only $273.
* Backlog of business inventories grows three times larger than the year before. Public consumption markedly down.
* Freight carloads and manufacturing fall.
* Automobile sales decline by a third in the nine months before the crash.
* Construction down $2 billion since 1926.
* Recession begins in August, two months before the stock market crash. During this two month period, production will decline at an annual rate of 20 percent, wholesale prices at 7.5 percent, and personal income at 5 percent.
* Stock market crash begins October 24. Investors call October 29 “Black Tuesday.” Losses for the month will total $16 billion, an astronomical sum in those days.
* Congress passes Agricultural Marketing Act to support farmers until they can get back on their feet.
1930
* By February, the Federal Reserve has cut the prime interest rate from 6 to 4 percent. Expands the money supply with a major purchase of U.S. securities. However, for the next year and a half, the Fed will add very little money to the shrinking economy. (At no time will it actually pull money out of the system.) Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon announces that the Fed will stand by as the market works itself out: “Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate real estate… values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up the wreck from less-competent people.” (More)
* The Smoot-Hawley Tariff passes on June 17. With imports forming only 6 percent of the GNP, the 40 percent tariffs work out to an effective tax of only 2.4 percent per citizen. Even this is compensated for by the fact that American businesses are no longer investing in Europe, but keeping their money stateside. The consensus of modern economists is that the tariff made only a minor contribution to the Great Depression in the U.S., but a major one in Europe. (More)
* The first bank panic occurs later this year; a public run on banks results in a wave of bankruptcies. Bank failures and deposit losses are responsible for the contracting money supply.
* Supreme Court rules that the monopoly U.S. Steel does not violate anti-trust laws as long as competition exists, no matter how negligible.
* Democrats gain in Congressional elections, but still do not have a majority.
* The GNP falls 9.4 percent from the year before. The unemployment rate climbs from 3.2 to 8.7 percent.
1931
* No major legislation is passed addressing the Depression.
* A second banking panic occurs in the spring.
* The GNP falls another 8.5 percent; unemployment rises to 15.9 percent.
1932
* This and the next year are the worst years of the Great Depression. For 1932, GNP falls a record 13.4 percent; unemployment rises to 23.6 percent.
* Industrial stocks have lost 80 percent of their value since 1930.
* 10,000 banks have failed since 1929, or 40 percent of the 1929 total.
* About $2 billion in deposits have been lost since 1929.
* Money supply has contracted 31 percent since 1929.
* GNP has also fallen 31 percent since 1929.
* Over 13 million Americans have lost their jobs since 1929.
* Capital growth investments have dropped from $16.2 billion to 1/3 of one billion since 1929.
* Farm prices have fallen 53 percent since 1929.
* International trade has fallen by two-thirds since 1929.
* The Fed makes its first major expansion of the money supply since February 1930.
* Congress creates the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. (More)
* Congress passes the Federal Home Loan Bank Act and the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932. (More)
* Top tax rate is raised from 25 to 63 percent.
* Popular opinion considers Hoover’s measures too little too late. Franklin Roosevelt easily defeats Hoover in the fall election. Democrats win control of Congress.
* At his Democratic presidential nomination, Roosevelt says: “I pledge you, I pledge myself, to a new deal for the American people.”
1933
* Roosevelt inaugurated; begins “First 100 Days” of intensive legislative activity. (More)
* A third banking panic occurs in March. Roosevelt declares a Bank Holiday; closes financial institutions to stop a run on banks.
* Alarmed by Roosevelt’s plan to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor, a group of millionaire businessmen, led by the Du Pont and J.P. Morgan empires, plans to overthrow Roosevelt with a military coup and install a fascist government. The businessmen try to recruit General Smedley Butler, promising him an army of 500,000, unlimited financial backing and generous media spin control. The plot is foiled when Butler reports it to Congress. (More)
* Congress authorizes creation of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Farm Credit Administration, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, the National Recovery Administration, the Public Works Administration and the Tennessee Valley Authority. (More)
* Congress passes the Emergency Banking Bill, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, the Farm Credit Act, the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Truth-in-Securities Act. (More)
* U.S. goes off the gold standard.
* Roosevelt does much to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor, but is obsessed with a balanced budget. He later rejects Keynes’ advice to begin heavy deficit spending.
* The free fall of the GNP is significantly slowed; it dips only 2.1 percent this year. Unemployment rises slightly, to 24.9 percent.
1934
* Congress authorizes creation of the Federal Communications Commission, the National Mediation Board and the Securities and Exchange Commission. (More)
* Congress passes the Securities and Exchange Act and the Trade Agreement Act. (More)
* The economy turns around: GNP rises 7.7 percent, and unemployment falls to 21.7 percent. A long road to recovery begins.
* Sweden becomes the first nation to recover fully from the Great Depression. It has followed a policy of Keynesian deficit spending. (More)
1935
* The Supreme Court declares the National Recovery Administration to be unconstitutional.
* Congress authorizes creation of the Works Progress Administration, the National Labor Relations Board and the Rural Electrification Administration. (More)
* Congress passes the Banking Act of 1935, the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act, the National Labor Relations Act, and the Social Security Act. (More)
* Economic recovery continues: the GNP grows another 8.1 percent, and unemployment falls to 20.1 percent.
1936
* The Supreme Court declares part of the Agricultural Adjustment Act to be unconstitutional.
* In response, Congress passes the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act. (More)
* Top tax rate raised to 79 percent.
* Economic recovery continues: GNP grows a record 14.1 percent; unemployment falls to 16.9 percent.
* Germany becomes the second nation to recover fully from the Great Depression, through heavy deficit spending in preparation for war.
1937
* The Supreme Court declares the National Labor Relations Board to be unconstitutional.
* Roosevelt seeks to enlarge and therefore liberalize the Supreme Court. This attempt not only fails, but outrages the public.
* Economists attribute economic growth so far to heavy government spending that is somewhat deficit. Roosevelt, however, fears an unbalanced budget and cuts spending for 1937. That summer, the nation plunges into another recession. Despite this, the yearly GNP rises 5.0 percent, and unemployment falls to 14.3 percent.
1938
* Congress passes the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 and the Fair Labor Standards Act. (More)
* No major New Deal legislation is passed after this date, due to Roosevelt’s weakened political power.
* The year-long recession makes itself felt: the GNP falls 4.5 percent, and unemployment rises to 19.0 percent.
* Britain becomes the third nation to recover as it begins deficit spending in preparation for war.
1939
* GNP rises 7.9 percent; unemployment falls to 17.2 percent.
* The United States will begin emerging from the Depression as it borrows and spends $1 billion to build its armed forces. From 1939 to 1941, when the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor, U.S. manufacturing will have shot up a phenomenal 50 percent!
* The Depression is ending worldwide as nations prepare for the coming hostilities.
* World War II starts with Hitler’s invasion of Poland.
 1945
 * Although the war is the largest tragedy in human history, the United States emerges as the world’s only economic superpower. Deficit spending has resulted in a national debt 123 percent the size of the GDP. By contrast, in 1994, the $4.7 trillion national debt will be only 70 percent of the GDP!
* The top tax rate is 91 percent. It will stay at least 88 percent until 1963, when it is lowered to 70 percent. During this time, America will experience the greatest economic boom it has ever known.

The Great Depression: The Business Plot to Overthrow Roosevelt

By Steve Kangas, The Great Depression: Its Causes and Cure
Copyright 1996

In the summer of 1933, shortly after Roosevelt's "First 100 Days," America's richest businessmen were in a panic. It was clear that Roosevelt intended to conduct a massive redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Roosevelt had to be stopped at all costs.

The answer was a military coup. It was to be secretly financed and organized by leading officers of the Morgan and Du Pont empires. This included some of America's richest and most famous names of the time:
  • Irenee Du Pont - Right-wing chemical industrialist and founder of the American Liberty League, the organization assigned to execute the plot.
  • Grayson Murphy - Director of Goodyear, Bethlehem Steel and a group of J.P. Morgan banks.
  • William Doyle - Former state commander of the American Legion and a central plotter of the coup.
  • John Davis - Former Democratic presidential candidate and a senior attorney for J.P. Morgan.
  • Al Smith - Roosevelt's bitter political foe from New York. Smith was a former governor of New York and a codirector of the American Liberty League.
  • John J. Raskob - A high-ranking Du Pont officer and a former chairman of the Democratic Party. In later decades, Raskob would become a "Knight of Malta," a Roman Catholic Religious Order with a high percentage of CIA spies, including CIA Directors William Casey, William Colby and John McCone.
  • Robert Clark - One of Wall Street's richest bankers and stockbrokers.
  • Gerald MacGuire - Bond salesman for Clark, and a former commander of the Connecticut American Legion. MacGuire was the key recruiter to General Butler.
The plotters attempted to recruit General Smedley Butler to lead the coup. They selected him because he was a war hero who was popular with the troops. The plotters felt his good reputation was important to make the troops feel confident that they were doing the right thing by overthrowing a democratically elected president. However, this was a mistake: Butler was popular with the troops because he identified with them. That is, he was a man of the people, not the elite. When the plotters approached General Butler with their proposal to lead the coup, he pretended to go along with the plan at first, secretly deciding to betray it to Congress at the right moment.

What the businessmen proposed was dramatic: they wanted General Butler to deliver an ultimatum to Roosevelt. Roosevelt would pretend to become sick and incapacitated from his polio, and allow a newly created cabinet officer, a "Secretary of General Affairs," to run things in his stead. The secretary, of course, would be carrying out the orders of Wall Street. If Roosevelt refused, then General Butler would force him out with an army of 500,000 war veterans from the American Legion. But MacGuire assured Butler the cover story would work:
    "You know the American people will swallow that. We have got the newspapers. We will start a campaign that the President's health is failing. Everyone can tell that by looking at him, and the dumb American people will fall for it in a second…"
The businessmen also promised that money was no object: Clark told Butler that he would spend half his $60 million fortune to save the other half.

And what type of government would replace Roosevelt's New Deal? MacGuire was perfectly candid to Paul French, a reporter friend of General Butler's:
    "We need a fascist government in this country… to save the nation from the communists who want to tear it down and wreck all that we have built in America. The only men who have the patriotism to do it are the soldiers, and Smedley Butler is the ideal leader. He could organize a million men overnight."
Indeed, it turns out that MacGuire travelled to Italy to study Mussolini's fascist state, and came away mightily impressed. He wrote glowing reports back to his boss, Robert Clark, suggesting that they implement the same thing.

If this sounds too fantastic to believe, we should remember that by 1933, the crimes of fascism were still mostly in the future, and its dangers were largely unknown, even to its supporters. But in the early days, many businessmen openly admired Mussolini because he had used a strong hand to deal with labor unions, put out social unrest, and get the economy working again, if only at the point of a gun. Americans today would be appalled to learn of the many famous millionaires back then who initially admired Hitler and Mussolini: Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, John and Allen Dulles (who, besides being millionaires, would later become Eisenhower's Secretary of State and CIA Director, respectively), and, of course, everyone on the above list. They disavowed Hitler and Mussolini only after their atrocities grew to indefensible levels.

The plot fell apart when Butler went public. The general revealed the details of the coup before the McCormack-Dickstein Committee, which would later become the notorious House Un-American Activities Committee. (In the 50s, this committee would destroy the lives of hundreds of innocent Americans with its communist witch hunts.)

The Committee heard the testimony of Butler and French, but failed to call in any of the coup plotters for questioning, other than MacGuire. In fact, the Committee whitewashed the public version of its final report, deleting the names of powerful businessmen whose reputations they sought to protect. The most likely reason for this response is that Wall Street had undue influence in Congress also. 
Even more alarming, the elite-controlled media failed to pick up on the story, and even today the incident remains little known. The elite managed to spin the story as nothing more than the rumors and hearsay of Butler and French, even though Butler was a Quaker of unimpeachable honesty and integrity. Butler, appalled by the cover-up, went on national radio to denounce it, but with little success.

Butler was not vindicated until 1967, when journalist John Spivak uncovered the Committee's internal, secret report. It clearly confirmed Butler's story:
    In the last few weeks of the committee's life it received evidence showing that certain persons had attempted to establish a fascist organization in this country…

    There is no question that these attempts were discussed, were planned and might have been placed in execution if the financial backers deemed it expedient…

    MacGuire denied [Butler's] allegations under oath, but your committee was able to verify all the pertinent statements made to General Butler, with the exception of the direct statement suggesting the creation of the organization. This, however, was corroborated in the correspondence of MacGuire with his principle, Robert Sterling Clark, of New York City, while MacGuire was abroad studying the various form of veterans' organizations of Fascist character.
Needless to say, the survival of America's democracy is not an automatic or sure thing. Americans need to remain vigilant against all enemies... both foreign and domestic.

Exposed: How the U.S. Government Is Hiding the Depression

Financial Sense
December 29, 2010

The real US unemployment rate is not 9.8% but between 25% and 30%. That is a depression level of job losses -- so why doesn't it look like a depression for many people? How can so large of a statistical discrepancy exist, and how is it that holiday shopping malls are so crowded in a depression?

The true devastation is hidden by essentially placing the job losses inside three different "boxes": the official unemployment box, the true full unemployment box, and most importantly, the staggering and persistent private sector job loss box that has been temporarily covered over by a fantastic level of governmental deficit spending. The "recovering and out of the recession" cover story is only plausible when nobody connects the dots and adds all the boxes together.

We will add together the three boxes herein -- using US government statistics for all three -- and convincingly show that the US economy is in far worse condition than what is presented by the government or by the mainstream media. No, we have not emerged from "recession" and there will be no "double dip" -- because the first "dip" was straight down to a depression-level economy in 2008/2009, and we haven't come back up.

Creating artificial "free money" on a massive scale that artificially boosts short-term employment is how you segment depression level unemployment into the separate boxes and hide what is really happening. It is this radical strategy that most distinguishes the current downturn from the 1970s and 1930s. The ultimate source of most of the current "free money" that hides the depression is the government risking the impoverishment of US savers and investors for potentially decades to come, with the worst of the damage concentrated on retirees and Boomers.

To have a chance of defending your hoped-for future lifestyle, there is simply no substitute for seeing the truth clearly. For it is only when we see through the lies with clarity that we can distinguish the false opportunity of manipulated markets from the real opportunities that can be found in unexpected places.

Headline Unemployment (Box 1)



The graph above is our starting point and first "box". It is the "headline" rate of unemployment in the US that is featured in newspaper articles and discussed on the cable business news. As of November 2010 the official US unemployment rate was 9.8%. While that's deeply painful, and unemployment rates since 2008 have been the highest seen since the end of the Great Depression (with the exception of the 10.8% peak in 1982), 9.8% is not a depression level unemployment rate.

Real Unemployment (Box 2)

As economists and political decision makers know quite well, the "official" unemployment rate is not the full rate of US unemployment. The "official" rate is technically known as the U3 rate of unemployment, and it is a politically advantageous partial accounting for the unemployed. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates unemployment 6 different ways, U1-U6, and it is only in the U6 statistic that all the categories of unemployment are added together.

The two biggest differences between the U3 official rate of unemployment and the U6 full rate of unemployment are in the treatment of the long-term unemployed and involuntary part-time workers. If you've been out of work for a long time, you badly want a job, but you know from your long search that nobody in your area is hiring; you already have applications on file at every reasonable prospect, and you haven't filled out a new application recently -- then from an official perspective (U3), you are not only no longer unemployed, you just became a non-person altogether. Alternatively, if you have a master's degree in engineering, lost your job, and are working 15 hours a week (the most you can get) in a convenience store at minimum wage to keep a little money coming in, then from an official (U3) perspective you would be fully employed. In contrast, U6 is the most inclusive measure of unemployment, as it includes both the long-term unemployed and the involuntary part-time categories. Thus, individuals in each of the situations described above would be included in the U6 measure.

Disappearing Employment U6

The green bar segment in the graph above illustrates what happens when we look at the full, U6 measure of unemployment as reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for November of 2010. Our unemployment rate almost doubles, as we go from 9.8% to 17% of the civilian work force being unemployed. The real unemployed go from one in ten workers, to one in six workers. The difference between a just-under-10% unemployment rate and a close to 20% rate of unemployment is the difference between recession and depression.

Unfortunately, there is more in the mix than simple unemployment statistics, and when we look inside the "third box" in the next section, we will see that the economic situation is not a mild depression, but rather a full blown major depression.
To try to prevent a flood of corrective e-mails from readers, let me state that the challenge I set for myself in writing this article was to illustrate what was happening using only official US government numbers. Meaning, in my opinion, using unreliable and deliberately misleading numbers that have been subjected to increasing degrees of political manipulation over the decades. I have been writing articles for years that have discussed increasing government manipulation of inflation statistics, and am well aware of the work of John Williams and others in trying to independently determine genuine inflation and unemployment rates. I personally believe that the real inflation and unemployment rates are substantively higher that what is being reported to us, and that the real U6 measure is likely 20% or above.
That said, I wanted to separate the concept of the three boxes from the concepts of statistical manipulation, so there were no distractions for a reader who was skeptical about manipulations, i.e. whether the US government would abuse the fine print of economic statistics to mislead its citizens for political purposes. If you have no trouble accepting that the government manipulates statistics for political advantage, then understand that the situation is significantly worse than what is illustrated herein.

The Gaping Hole In The Economy

To see what a real depression looks like, take a long look at the graph below, which shows what happened to the US economy between 2007 and 2009. As shown with the blue bars and the chart below the graph, the size of the US private sector economy plunged by $1.3 trillion -- and it hasn't come back.



Yet, we don't see the full extent of this plunge around us on the streets or in the headlines. Indeed, despite this ongoing, gaping hole in the US economy, the official story is that the US isn't even in a recession. What happened to all of the job losses from this rapid and persistent collapse of a large section of the US private economy?

The answers can be found in the red and yellow bars above, representing Federal government spending and state and local government spending. Federal spending rose by $700 billion, and state and local government spending rose by $300 billion. (With the state and local spending being funded by Federal government transfers that have been netted out, so it is really almost all growth in Federal spending.) The private economy plummeted by $1.3 trillion while the government economy soared by $1 trillion, and we were left with what looks like a much more manageable $300 billion shrinkage, the kind of economic change that might be associated with a 9.8% official unemployment rate. In other word, a little over 75% of the collapse in the private economy was (and is) being covered by increased government spending.

August 23, 2010

Get Ready for a Stock Market Crash Because the Feds Want Our Private Retirement Assets Converted into Government Annuities to Fund the National Debt

Wall Street will crash the stock market to destroy our private retirement assets so that we'll let the government confiscate them in exchange for a guaranteed lifetime annuity modeled on the Federal Employees Retirement System. But unlike federal employees, don't expect to be able to retire in your 50s with a generous pension. Once the feds get a hold of your individual private retirement assets they will be managed like Social Security and benefits will be paid out in the same way. In other words, you won't be able to retire until 67 or 70 (if they increase the retirement age as planned) and your annuity will be greatly reduced.

I believe Congress' next target for funding new spending is the trillions of dollars in private, individual retirement accounts. How would the U.S. government get away with this? It's diabolically simple. First, there will be some big unforeseen market event... another financial catastrophe similar to the market meltdown we saw in 2008 after Fannie and Freddie collapsed. This is when Congress will step in… citing its desire to “protect” the American people from future market shocks. Then politicians will mandate that a portion of all managed retirement funds be invested in the “safety and security” of U.S. Treasury bonds. - Urgent Warning -- How to protect yourself today from a desperate, bankrupt government, Sovereign Man, June 22, 2011

The Obama Administration is using the same tactics to pass a nationalized retirement plan as they did to pass the nationalized health care bill (connect the dots when you read the following articles). In other words, the federal government is going to takeover private retirements assets in the same way it is taking over private health care. These things were planned long ago, and now everything is accelerated under Obama. They have until until December 21, 2012 (if they're following the Mayan calender, as many believe) or January 20, 2013, when Obama's term ends (although he probably will be re-elected) to get the bills passed and signed into law.

Private sector defined benefit (DB) plans, private sector defined contribution (DC) plans, and state and local pension plans have all suffered declines of over 25 percent of their 2007 values, but that is simply another way of stating that the three types of plans (in aggregate) had basically the same portfolio composition at the end of 2007. The one exception is the federal government's civilian retirement plan, which (for the DB portion) is similar to Social Security insofar as the investments are completely in non-marketable government debt issues ... To date, the most immediate effects of the stock market crash have been on DC participants planning to retire in the next few years. However, all DC participants observe, when reading their quarterly statements or checking on-line balances, that they have incurred dramatic losses ... The extent to which the 2008 stock market crash affected pension participants obviously depends on the extent to which those participants were invested in the stock market before the crash. We use data from the Federal Reserve Board's Flow of Funds Accounts to measure the aggregate change in pension assets across the four broad categories of plans: private sector DB, private sector DC, state and local, and federal civilian. Of these, all but the federal civilian employee plan were greatly exposed to the drop in equity prices. This distinction is reflected in the approach to funding pensions before 2008; all but the federal civilian plan relied on equity exposure to achieve funding targets, which allowed lower contribution rates. - How will the stock market crash affect the choice of pension plans?, National Tax Journal, September 1, 2009

We suspect that when the Dow hits 4,000, the average pension fund will have assets to cover 30% to 40% of benefits. That said, they will probably cut payouts by some 50% or more. This should occur in a year or two. In two to three years, public pensions and Social Security will be cut an equal amount. As we have said previously, pull cash values out of life policies and terminate annuities. Many insurance companies will go under. We have listed several already near the edge. State insurance funds will be unable to cope with the losses as the financial edifice falls apart. - Bob Chapman, Crime, Corruption and Collapse on Wall Street, The International Forecaster, March 11, 2009

U.S. RETIREMENT ASSETS DECLINED IN 2008

Download an Excel file of this data.

The Government Wants Your 401(k) and Retirement Account

Compass Corporate Retirement Solutions
July 7, 2010

Hang onto your Individual Retirement Accounts and 401(k) plans because the Federal Government wants them. According to an article by Goldworth, Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, and Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis Borzi head an endeavor to have Americans convert their retirement accounts. The Government wants them converted into annuities and Treasury bills to fund the national debt. They need to sell $2 trillion dollars of bonds, and foreign countries aren’t buying like before. The world is concerned about the growing debt of the United States.

The powers pushing this idea are the White House, Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and Congressional activists. Theresa Ghijarducci, of the Swartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis, wants the Government to present the public a proposal of converting these accounts, as early as the middle of July. The announcement seeks to get America’s response to the idea.

The Goldworth article said the New York Times reported the United States would pay out more benefits this year than it takes in from payroll taxes. This deficit will grow, as over 78 million boomers retire and take money out of government coffers.

Last March, Business Week reported our Government wants the converted accounts placed in government-controlled institutions, such as AIG. What the Government seems to have in mind is another power grab, on the lines of the health care plan pushed down America’s collective throats. The national health care plan and the funding of the national debt through converted retirement accounts are brazen acts of Nationalization.

The route to Nationalization the United States is on is similar to the one Argentina took to their demise. In the 1990’s, Argentina had a vibrant economy but it eroded to the point it defaulted on $155 billion of public debt, in 2002. The erosion began when Argentina’s economy slowed, and they continued to spend and print money as a close-gap method to make ends meet. Their peso devalued until it was worthless, inflation set in and the languishing economy never picked up. Finally, with nothing to hold the economy up and their citizenry too broke to keep up with inflation, the economy collapsed. Since then Greece defaulted, for the same reasons, and Spain and others teeter.

Similarly, the United States has a large National Debt, $13 trillion, the interest on it $500 million per day, but the Government shows no sign of slowing entitlements. For example, the Congressional Budget Office predicts the recently passed health care will add $562 billion to the deficit over the next ten years. Our Government is printing money like it’s going out of style, tax rates are going up next year and inflation shows signs of beginning to rise. As a result, per-capita spending is slowing, which takes money out of the economy. The United States can only fund the present debt until 2020, then it engulfs our GNP. Washington DC must stop spending.

Goldworth: 401 (k)/ IRA Nationalization Quietly Moves Forward: goldworth.com

Could the Government Take Away Individual Control of 401(k) Savings?

NuWire Investor
January 13, 2010

A government proposal would take away some control of 401(k) by requiring retirees to convert some of their savings to annuities although 70% of US households oppose it. Whether this controversial plan would give retirees the hoped for security is however doubtful. See the following post from Expected Returns.

Our government is in the middle of a funding crisis that will be resolved as it always has: through the confiscation of citizens' hard-earned wealth. Judging by the way Americans are being conditioned to accept criminal behavior at the highest levels of government, this confiscation will probably be pretty explicit. I'm guessing we'll eventually see a FDR-style confiscation of gold and retirement accounts (401(k)'s).

From the following article in Businessweek, Americans Oppose Initiatives Limiting 401(k) Choices, ICI Says, it seems that day is quickly approaching.

U.S. investors oppose federal initiatives that would force them to give up control over their 401(k) accounts, the Investment Company Institute said.

Seven in 10 U.S. households object to the idea of the government requiring retirees to convert part of their savings into annuities guaranteeing a steady payment for life, according to an institute-funded report today.

7 out of 10 Americans against government control of 401(k)'s? This probably means legislation is going to be shoved down our throats anyway. I mean, isn't this the new trend in our new "government-knows-best" style of government?

Annuity Conversion, aka Theft

The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.
The coming theft of retirement accounts is one of the most obvious trends for the next 20 years. I mean seriously, the American public stood shell-shocked like 5-year olds while getting looted to the tune of trillions of dollars--what makes you think the government isn't going to steal your retirement accounts?

The government is going to try to sell the move into annuities as a "safe" way to protect the public from the vagaries of the stock market. The truth is, the government is damn broke, which means they will have their hand in every person's pocket. The confiscation will function like this: American citizens will be forced to buy a worthless asset (in this case U.S. Treasuries) and receive a paltry return on capital. Factoring in inflation, returns are likely to be negative.

That the government has to resort to such measures indicates the severity of the current funding crisis. First, the insane monetization of debt. Now, Americans will be compelled to prop up the Treasury market. Five years ago you couldn't make this stuff up; today, it is a reality.

Stock Market Collapse + Retirement Hopes Destroyed

Ok. So the government is basically telling us they are going to confiscate 401(k)'s. Now think for a second what happens when massive forced inflows of capital into stocks turn into massive forced outflows. It doesn't take a genius to figure out stocks are going to crater, and with it, the retirement hopes of millions of Americans.

When a critical mass of the population realizes this, then you will really know what a panic is.

401(k)’s were always structurally deficient products. The standard line is that with tax benefits and company matches, nothing can possibly go wrong! 401(k)'s are for the "wise" investor who is in it for the mythical "long-term". Whenever I hear this ridiculous line from someone, I know the person hasn't looked at a single "long-term" chart in his life. Sorry to ruin the party, but in the "long-term" (at least for Baby Boomers) stocks are going to go down in real terms and taxes are going to rise. And oh yea, you're getting taxed on earned income, which means if your 401(k) is actually worth something, the only person who will be celebrating is Uncle Sam. This is a disaster in the making for the disappearing middle class in America.

2010-2020: Major Paradigm Shifts Coming

These are interesting times. I can tell you this much: a lot of paradigms are about to change in the next 10 years. Most people are already skeptical of our government, which is clearly evidenced by the plunging approval ratings of both Congress and President Obama. However, most people are ignorant about the lengths governments always go to in order to prevent insolvency.

The current forced bond purchase scheme by our government reminds me a lot of what happened in France during the French Revolution, when church property was confiscated in return for assignats--which functioned as bonds. It didn't take long for those assignats to be worthless in value. I expect the same thing to happen eventually with U.S. Treasuries.

There will be a crisis of sorts in the near future. This is just one of the many reasons I am extremely bullish on gold.

This post was republished from Moses Kim's blog, Expected Returns.

Retirement Overhaul: 401(k)s May Not be the Answer Now

USA TODAY
Originally Published on October 23, 2009

When Vise-Grip closed its plant last year in DeWitt, Neb., and moved it to China, Anita Oltmans lost her job. With no job, federal law prevented her from continuing to contribute to her 401(k) plan. She watched her account spiral down as the stock market crashed.
"They closed the doors on Halloween of last year," says Oltmans, 40, who worked in assembly at the plant and is now in college. "Before that happened, I was happy with what I had saved for retirement. But now, it's very scary."
Congress created the 401(k) in 1980 to supplement company pension plans. But with pension plans no longer offered to all workers or frozen, millions of Americans, such as Oltmans, have been relying solely on 401(k) plans to fund retirement. Others — nearly one-third of American households — don't have any retirement savings, according to a McKinsey & Co. report. And only 4% of middle-income married couples who don't have a pension and are nearing retirement are likely to have enough money to last their lifetime, according to a new report by Ernst & Young.

America faces a retirement crisis, says an influential group of organizations that have started a new retirement initiative called Retirement USA. Wednesday, the group meets in Washington, D.C., to begin searching for solutions.

Retirement USA was launched last March by the Economic Policy Institute, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, the Service Employees International Union and the Pension Rights Center. The coalition has grown since, adding the AFL-CIO, the National Caucus and Center on Black Aged and the National Consumers League, among others. The group's goal is to create a new retirement system that works in conjunction with Social Security and existing plans.
"We're not under an illusion that this will happen overnight," says Karen Friedman, policy director of the Pension Rights Center. When the group comes up with a retirement proposal, it will need congressional support.
Members agree that the retirement system must be universal, secure and able to ensure that all will have a reasonable standard of living after they stop working. The current system does not meet those basic needs, they say.

Millions of retirees are barely surviving financially, says Retirement USA. Nearly 24% of Americans older than 65 have incomes below the poverty threshold, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. And the United States, Ireland, South Korea and Mexico have the highest old-age poverty rates among the 30 OECD countries.
"I feel we're watching a slow-motion train wreck," says Steve Bartlett, president of the Financial Services Roundtable, which represents large institutions, such as Citigroup, Allstate and Fidelity. "It's pretty clear that with the current trend, the country's Baby Boomers and the next generation will not have enough money to retire."
O(k), or not O(k)

The 401(k) is clearly the center of the retirement storm. Some consumer advocates say the 401(k) is a failure that should end. Others, especially financial industry representatives, think 401(k) plans are still the best retirement option and they simply need shoring up. Retirement USA wants to keep the best parts of the current system and add to it.

Bartlett says 401(k) plans are now the retirement reality and should be quickly strengthened. The Roundtable is not part of Retirement USA, but it has recommended a number of improvements, including increasing access to retirement savings plans for small-business employers.
"Every day that we delay makes it harder," he says.
Proponents say 401(k)s are good because they're easy to contribute to, they provide tax breaks, and they are portable from job to job. And if an employer offers a company match to an employee's contributions, even better, says Jane White, author of America, Welcome to the Poorhouse.

Many workers who have stayed at one job for years and consistently contributed to 401(k) plans have been able to build decent nest eggs. To urge more workers to start saving for retirement, about half of midsize-to-large employers provide automatic enrollment to 401(k) plans, up from 44% in 2008, according to a 2009 Hewitt Associates survey.

But companies have cut costs due to the recession and have not spared 401(k) plans, often slashing or eliminating contribution matches and not offering automatic enrollments.

Not a panacea

Statistics also show that 401(k) plans don't serve everyone well, and that those who use them often make big investing mistakes, including cashing them out early.

Many workers — especially women, Hispanics and African Americans — don't contribute to a 401(k) plan at all. Only 41% of Hispanic workers say they save money for retirement, and only 25.6% are covered by employer-sponsored retirement plans, according to a new study by the Hispanic Institute, a non-profit organization.
"It's a grim reality," says Dr. Yanira Cruz, president of the National Hispanic Council on Aging.
Women also face an obstacle men do not. They need to replace more of their final pay for retirement — 2% more than the average male — because they live longer, Hewitt says. Women, however, typically save less than men and invest less aggressively.

Not all 401(k) plans provide good options. Although they are voluntary savings plans, employers choose the menu of investment vehicles.

Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economics at the New School for Social Research in New York, says the Enron debacle, where workers had far too much of their retirement portfolios wrapped up in company stock that became worthless, is a perfect illustration of a broken system. Workers also pay high investment fees, and employers can shift administrative costs to workers without detection, she says.

Those who do contribute to such plans often get subpar investment returns and make bad decisions.

Marshall Goldsmith, 41, a customer care representative for American Hotel Register in Las Vegas, says he stopped contributing to his 401(k) plan and instead contributes to an IRA.
One reason: "Not one of the funds is in positive numbers, even since the market improved in the last couple of months," he says. His company also has dropped its matching contribution.
Many workers agree with Goldsmith: A recent AARP survey found that 29% of workers ages 45 to 64 had stopped making retirement contributions. About 18% of workers in the same age group have withdrawn funds from their 401(k) plans in the past year, either taking loans or cashing out.

Sandy Shore, senior credit counselor at Novadebt, in Freehold, N.J., says she understands the dilemma facing folks, but draining retirement funds to pay off credit card debt or medical bills is a losing proposition.
"They think it will solve their problem, but when the underlying problem doesn't go away they end up not paying back the 401(k) loan and taking the tax penalty," she says.
A change of perspective

For many people, trying to determine when they might be able to retire and how much they will need is simply a vexing question.

Throw in rising unemployment, the stock market meltdown and the drop in some company matches, and it becomes all the more confusing.

Mark Heup, a commodity manager in Baltimore, doesn't have an overall retirement strategy. He lost his job in February, and his wife, Julie, a structural engineer, lost her job last November. They are both 41 and have a son, Matthew, who is 4.

Although they started new jobs in June, albeit in different cities, they're worried about their retirement future. Before they lost their jobs, they had not been contributing the maximum amount to their 401(k) plans.
"We were just buying things or spending money on our house," says Heup, who now works for Black & Decker. "I guess that being out of a job" has made the couple focus on retirement saving, he says.
It's a rougher road because Heup's company has put a freeze on its company match. Some 26% of companies say they are reducting their 401(k) matching contributions, according to a new Grant Thornton survey. Still, Heup is making the maximum contribution.

People who have worked for 20 to 30 years will need to have 10 times their final pay banked to retire securely, says author Jane White. And not many people are that fortunate.

To come close to that, they need to start contributing at age 25 and keep contributing for 50 years, so they have the benefit of compound interest, she says. And they need to have a company match and avoid cashing out any of the savings until retirement, she says.

The Retirement USA members see the difficulties, confusion and current economic circumstances as catalysts for a new system. The group doesn't want to derail the current system so much as improve it and come up with a new plan that provides security for all Americans.

Some longtime supporters of 401(k) plans agree it may be time for a change.
"Now, we're in a different world," says Ted Benna, a retirement consultant who created the first 401(k) plan in 1980 and is semi-retired. "How are we going to move forward from here? It will be interesting to see. And I am not going to lose any sleep if 401(k) doesn't survive."

Retirement’s Future: Pension vs. 401(k)

CalPensions.com
Originally Published on June 15, 2009

About a dozen chief executive officers of public employee pension funds met in Chicago last month to get acquainted and discuss ways to defend the traditional pension model.

It was an unprecedented gathering called by the new CEO of CalPERS, Anne Stausboll, who in January became the first woman to hold the top job at the nation’s largest public pension fund.

After an historic market crash last fall erased a third of the value of many pension funds, the CEOs might have talked about adjusting investment portfolios or “smoothing” techniques that could avoid contribution rate shocks for state and local governments.

But professional staffs can present those options to decision makers on pension boards. What the CEOs did was compare notes on handling a public discussion about retirement security that may be pushed by the Obama administration and others.
“I’m anticipating that when that discussion heats up, they will be coming to the public pension funds to talk about the defined benefit model, how has it worked historically,” said Stausboll. “So it’s a good opportunity for us to be giving some messages about the relevance of the defined benefit design.”
A “defined benefit” is the monthly payment guaranteed for life in a traditional pension. It’s opposite is the “defined contribution,” a 401(k)-style plan that puts money into a tax-deferred individual investment plan that can rise and fall with the market.

The “defined benefit” is the standard retirement plan for government employees. Critics contend that powerful public employee unions have negotiated generous retirement plans that are straining government budgets and may be unsustainable.

Businesses that offer retirement plans (about half of U.S. workers only have Social Security) are moving toward 401(k)-style plans, avoiding the potential for a massive pension debt that has hurt the auto industry and other old-line corporations.

The 401(k)-style plan is portable, moving with workers as they go from job to job in the new economy, where career-long employment with one firm is said to be increasingly less likely.

But critics say the 401(k)-style plan was only intended to be a supplement, and the stock market crash dramatically revealed its shortcomings, devastating the holdings of older persons who cannot wait for investment earnings to rebuild their retirement funds.

So, if it’s “defined benefit” versus “defined contribution,” who’s winning? Both sides sound as if they are feeling a little besieged.
“In addition to talking about the national discussion, we did talk about the negative focus that we have seen in the media and various forums around defined benefit plans,” Stausboll said of the Chicago meeting.

“We talked about what we could do to balance those negative stories,” said the new CEO of the California Public Employees Retirement System. “But again, in an educating kind of way based on our experience.”
The Profit Sharing/401k Council of America shares Stausboll’s view about a coming national discussion of retirement, calling on its website for a stronger voice because “the future of the 401(k) system” may be determined by the current Congress.
“Not only have investment returns recently been poor, but the media has piled on with story after story about how 401(k) itself is the problem, David Wray, the council president wrote on his web log. “However, the real story is that 401(k) participants continue to save and invest in their plans even in what some term the worst of times.”
The debate over retirement models, with its subtext of government versus private-sector control, takes a number of forms.

A CEO who attended the one-day Chicago meeting on May 4 in an airport hotel, Chris DeRose of the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System, said in recent years he has discussed retirement issues with the Legislature, Congress and system members.
“We have reached out to all of our stakeholders in helping them to understand that there is this challenge and there are people who want to change our plan, whether they want to change how we invest our money or whether they think a mandatory defined contribution plan is the way to go,” DeRose said.
Comment on Calpensions posts from “Bull,” often denunciations of government pensions with words in all-cap letters, are e-mail that can be traced to a large financial firm in New York that sells retirement products.

A new group, Retirement USA, which includes the Service Employees International Union and several think tank-like organizations, launched a drive earlier this year for a new plan to supplement Social Security.

The new group, seeking ideas to be considered at a conference this fall, has proposed a framework that combines traditional pensions and 401(k) plans (with perhaps some new wrinkles) that would be supported by employers, workers and the government.

The California Assembly passed a bill this month authorizing CalPERS to handle the investments for a new savings retirement plan for workers who do not have an employer-sponsored plan.

AB 125 by Assemblyman Kevin De Leon, D-Los Angeles, would allow automatic deductions from paychecks, an option regarded as a key to getting people to save. A similar bill, also opposed by the financial industry, cleared the Assembly last year and died in the Senate.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said last month that his office wants to work with Congress “to flesh out the initiatives” in the president’s budget to help the half of working Americans who only have Social Security.
“These proposals would make it easier for people to save for their own retirement, either through their workplaces or on their own, and would move us toward universal retirement savings coverage,” he told the House appropriations committee on May 21.
A hybrid plan that would use an annuity to convert part of a 401(k) savings account into guaranteed monthly income is being discussed by a Geithner assistant, Mark Iwry, who formerly was with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s in the early stages, but there has been a fair amount of interest in our ideas and the core concepts so far,” Iwry told Investment News last month.
A legal affairs newsletter said the appointment of Iwry in late April signals that retirement has become a higher priority in the Obama administration’s Treasury department.
“Policy issues Iwry will be working on include a possible overhaul of rules for private defined contribution plans, funding relief for defined benefit plans, a direct-deposit IRA program for employers that don’t offer retirement plans, and expansion of the saver’s tax credit,” said the CCH Financial Crisis News Center newsletter.
That would be a sweeping agenda. And as with the current health care debate, there would be plenty of room for political conflict over whether retirement programs should be run mainly by the government or by the private sector.

The Treasury Is Soliciting Your Feedback Regarding the Proposed Annuitization of 401(k)

Zero Hedge
February 1, 2010

Yes, slowly but surely it is happening. In a federal notice filed earlier, the DOL and Treasury are soliciting a response on what has been on many investors' mind, namely the process of converting 401(k)s into annuity-like products. To wit:
The Department of Labor and the Department of the Treasury (the "Agencies") are currently reviewing the rules under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and the plan qualification rules under the Internal Revenue Code (Code) to determine whether, and, if so, how, the Agencies could or should enhance, by regulation or otherwise, the retirement security of participants in employer-sponsored retirement plans and in individual retirement arrangements (IRAs) by facilitating access to, and use of, lifetime income or other arrangements designed to provide a lifetime stream of income after retirement. The purpose of this request for information is to solicit views, suggestions and comments from plan participants, employers and other plan sponsors, plan service providers, and members of the financial community, as well as the general public, on this important issue.

Full Notice here.
A cursory read of the document does not seem to ask about a flat out regulatory requirement for annuitization. We point your attention to item 13:
13. Should some form of lifetime income distribution option be required for defined contribution plans (in addition to money purchase pension plans)? If so, should that option be the default distribution option, and should it apply to the entire account balance? To what extent would such a requirement encourage or discourage plan sponsorship?
For readers who feel compelled to respond to this increasignly socialistic and ludicrous development, we suggest you voice your anger at the following address:

* e-ORI@dol.gov. Include RIN 1210-AB33 in the subject line of the message

Pension Insurer Shifted to Stocks

Concern increases as losses mount; Failing plans could overwhelm agency

The Boston Globe
Originally Published on March 30, 2009

Just months before the start of last year's stock market collapse, the federal agency that insures the retirement funds of 44 million Americans departed from its conservative investment strategy and decided to put much of its $64 billion insurance fund into stocks.

Switching from a heavy reliance on bonds, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation decided to pour billions of dollars into speculative investments such as stocks in emerging foreign markets, real estate, and private equity funds.

The agency refused to say how much of the new investment strategy has been implemented or how the fund has fared during the downturn. The agency would only say that its fund was down 6.5 percent -- and all of its stock-related investments were down 23 percent -- as of last Sept. 30, the end of its fiscal year. But that was before most of the recent stock market decline and just before the investment switch was scheduled to begin in earnest.

No statistics on the fund's subsequent performance were released.

Nonetheless, analysts expressed concern that large portions of the trust fund might have been lost at a time when many private pension plans are suffering major losses. The guarantee fund would be the only way to cover the plans if their companies go into bankruptcy.
"The truth is, this could be huge," said Zvi Bodie, a Boston University finance professor who in 2002 advised the agency to rely almost entirely on bonds. "This has the potential to be another several hundred billion dollars. If the auto companies go under, they have huge unfunded liabilities" in pension plans that would be passed on to the agency ...
In addition, Peter Orszag, head of the White House Office of Management and Budget, has "serious concerns" about the agency, according to an Obama administration spokesman.

Last year, as director of the Congressional Budget Office, Orszag expressed alarm that the agency was "investing a greater share of its assets in risky securities," which he said would make it "more likely to experience a decline in the value of its portfolio during an economic downturn the point at which it is most likely to have to assume responsibility for a larger number of underfunded pension plans" ...

Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS)



According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis for 2008, the average federal employee made $79,197 [the average private sector employee made $49,935]. The pension for the average employee can be calculated as follows:

$79,197 x 30 Years x 1% = $23,759
$79,197 x 40 Years x 1% = $31,678

Understanding the FERS Retirement

When we talk about your FERS Retirement, we're really talking about several different benefits. FERS (Federal Employees Retirement System) has three main components: fers retirement

  1. Basic FERS Pension
  2. Social Security
  3. Thrift Savings Plan (TSP)

Your FERS pension and Social Security will be fixed dollar amounts. But the money you get from your TSP will depend on how much you contributed and how well you managed the money.

As a FERS, you have a chance to take a more active role in managing your own retirement than CSRS do. But, that means you need to stay up-to-date on your benefits.

Here are some important things you need to know about each part of your FERS retirement...

Reductions to Your FERS Pension

There are some choices you can make that will reduce the amount of your FERS pension: Thrift Savings Plan for FERS

The Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) is a special account for Federal Employees. The TSP was created as part of the Federal Employees Retirement System in 1986. Most government employees (FERS and CSRS) are eligible for the TSP even those hired before it was created.

The TSP allows you to save pre-tax dollars in a special personal account. You can choose how to invest those dollars although your choices are limited.

With your FERS retirement pension and Social Security, you will receive fixed amounts. But with your TSP, the amount you receive depends on how much you put in and how well you managed the money.

Your TSP contributions are optional and separate from your FERS pension.

You may also be able to get your Federal Agency [taxpayers] to contribute money to your TSP. Click here to learn more about the match the government gives FERS employees.

Social Security for FERS

Employees covered under the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) are typically eligible to receive Social Security benefits when they retire. Every pay period, the Federal Government takes out 6.2% of your basic pay to put towards Social Security. But just like your FERS pension, your Social Security benefit is not based on your contributions - it is based on other factors.

According to the U.S. Social Security Administration, the Social Security taxes you and other workers pay into the system are used to pay for Social Security benefits.

You pay Social Security taxes on your earnings up to a certain amount. That amount increases each year to keep pace with wages. In 2011, that amount is $106,800.

You pay Medicare taxes on all of your wages or net earnings from self-employment. These taxes are used for Medicare coverage.

You pay 4.2%* 1.45%
Your employer pays 6.2% 1.45%
You pay 10.4% 2.9%

Currently, U.S. citizens cannot collect Social Security benefits until age 62 (lawmakers are considering raising this age to 67 or 70). The maximum Social Security benefit at age 62 is $21,636 per individual.

* The employee contribution was temporary lowered from 6.2% to 4.2% on January 1, 2011.


Government-sponsored speculation and the housing market crash
The housing bubble and the financial crisis
States Budgets Blow as Housing and Credit Markets Crash
Household Wealth in Freefall
The Housing Crash and the Retirement Prospects of Late Baby Boomers
Housing crash will leave millions of homeowners dependent on Social Security in retirement
Boomers, Housing and Retirement: A Symbiotic Relationship Unravels
Defined Contribution Plans May Skip 2009 Minimum Required Distributions
Rollover Rip-off: How the Government Steals Millions from the Unemployed
2009 Global Pension Assets Study
Top 1,000 funds' asset decline slows
The Decline of Defined Benefit Retirement Plans and Asset Flows
Financial Crisis Pulls Billions From Pension Plans, Crimping Consumers' Dreams and Corporate Profits
Will the markets crash as baby boomers retire?
As Baby Boomers Spend Their Savings, Will the Stock Market Decline?
Retirement Assets Drop - How Will Baby Boomers Ever Retire?
Pension Plans Decline in June 2010, No Relief in Sight
Significant Market Volatility Prompts Decline in Global Pension
Five years of pension gains wiped out in 2008

Go to The Lamb Slain Home Page