Recession

United States Chamber of Commerce logo.
Image via Wikipedia

Disclaimer – This post is not intended to attack or accuse the USCC in any wrong doing. Rather it is just to understand why Republicans act as they do.

My take in all of this is that it goes like this…

The Republican Party, spearheaded by Tea Party elected House members, refuses to reverse the Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans, and refuses to consider legislation that would change (fix?) tax policy for large corporations.

Now why is that?

I would contend that the reason would be that they get most of their campaign finance from member companies of the US Chamber of Commerce either directly or through campaigning against (Dem) challengers. No Republican can afford NOT to listen to the special interest groups that put them in office. Of course this is all speculative but you may want to read the following article in the NY Times last year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/us/politics/22chamber.html

In all due fairness to the Chamber (not that they care an iota about what I am saying here, you can see their policies on taxes at the following link. The Republicans, I contend that were elected with big business moneys, tote this message verbatim. (OK, maybe not verbatim but it sounds the same.)

http://www.uschamber.com/taxes

Every time I hear this pitch I ask the same questions (that never get answered)

1. Can anyone prove that small business owners that make this money WILL hire if they dont get taxed more? Are they willing to make a commitment in exchange for keeping it the way it is? No more than the recipients of TARP moneys did/will.

2. Are these small businesses hiring now? Doesnt seem like they are!

Just a final note to really confuse you as to where I sit in this debate.

The founding fathers of the United States were the richest men in America. The President of the United States and most members of our Congress are the richest men (and women) in America. They are the richest men and women in America because their families own the largest businesses in America. So, why does the Middle Class of America expect them to give up anything? Be real! 

According to the report by Fox News I calculate 540,000 foreclosed homes were sold in March. From a human side of this story I wonder where these 540,000 families are living now? How many trailer homes have been sold in the same time period? How much Federal moneys were used to subsidize any of the resale of the Foreclosed properties. How many foreclosed homes were purchased by families who cant afford them and will end up with the others later?

*******************************

The National Association of Realtors reports sales of previously-occupied homes rose to an annualized rate of 5.1 million in March, with distressed sales comprising 40% of all sales.

More headlines from FoxBusiness.com:

http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=E0FE:B62430D1A5C996DDA07AB537361BF9C7&

I really had hoped for a Government Shutdown. Not because I want services lost for those of us that have been effected by the Recession but so government employees who have so far been spared the effects could TASTE a bit of what the REST OF US have felt.

Some things I think are worth considering.

  • The likelihood that the Fed would shut down the Fed is a bit ludicrous. Why in the world would they stop their own paychecks? Shutting down the Fed was not about the “REST OF US” potentially losing services, it was about the Fed losing a paycheck. Heaven forbid them finding out what is has been like for the REST OF US.
  • When you hear about Budget Cuts and Deficit Spending you need to think about things the Fed will not discuss…

1. Are the cuts about reducing or getting rid of services for John Q Public or do we continue to get services and the cuts effect Federal workers jobs or salaries? I assure you they will NEVER reduce their own paychecks or number of jobs. They will just reduce or kill the services the REST OF US get.

2. Who gained from the over spending? Two groups – The Fed and the Super Rich. Middle Class and Lower Class America, also referred to as the REST OF US, did not benefit from these increases in the deficit so we should not be the ones asked to pay it back.

  • Early on in the President’s term I blogged a post commending him as one of the best CEO’s of USA Inc in a long time. The President of the USA is first and foremost the CEO of the largest Corporation in the USA, USA Inc. He cannot represent the interests of the REST OF US, because Congress does not represent us so they are not designing legislation for the REST OF US. You may not realize it but the President does not have to go through Congress for many of the things he does as the CEO of the Federal Workforce. The Federal Worker is far better off today than they were when he came to office. If you love politics, research what he has done for them while the rest of us wait for Congress to come up with things that help the REST OF US. This is one of those times I can say “dont hold your breath.”
  • Several news agencies are touting articles asking us to check the labels on products we buy to see where they are made. I might recommend that the next time a politician trys to sell you their ideology you ask them how this ideology will effect the REST OF US and how it will effect the Federal Worker, aka USA Inc. If you care, WHICH YOU SHOULD, I think you will find a lot of back pedaling. Reason of course is that you are supposed to accept your elected officials comments because John Q Public cant possibly understand what happens in DC but they do. This is called ramming it down your throats.

“Wake up America!” at least Wake Up the REST OF US!

Defense Agencies of the United States Departme...

Image via Wikipedia

I recently did some searching to find out which US Army contracting officers in Europe were procuring the products my American employer sells to the Army in the USA. I also researched who they were currently buying from so I could understand what kind of competition we would run up against and what pricing we would be competing with. Once you know your competition finding out their official pricing is rather easy since all US vendors have contracts that are viewable if you know where to find them.

When I looked up procurement history from US Army Europe I found something that was very discouraging. Of the approximately $2,453,677,924 worth of procurements in the report, almost 25% of these moneys were paid to vendors listed only as MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN CONTRACT or MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN CONTRACTORS. No where in the record does it identify the name of the contractor OR what country they are from. The overall source list does make note of many foreign vendors on the list and a few fortunate American contractors who have opened up shop in Europe.

$579,395,496 paid out to who? Does not say.

Is this a problem? I think so.

Is it legal? Yes

When American media speaks about Americans who are angry at jobs being shipped overseas most do not really know what this means other than the fact that jobs once available in their Communities are no longer in their Communities.

When we hear about our budget deficits and the necessity to give Billions of Dollars to the US Department of Defense and US Department of State, it is NOT possible to determine how much of these moneys actually get used to procure services and products from US companies.

More to come…

Below are a series of news announcements that further infuriate me about the Federal Government‘s insistence that the Recession is over…

*************************

Subject: BREAKING NEWS: Consumer Confidence Slides in March

The Conference Board reports consumer confidence fell in March after hitting a three-year high in February.

http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=D020:B62430D1A5C996DD97EB5D3AC5355F5C&

**********************

Subject: BREAKING NEWS: U.S. Home Prices Fall for 7 Straight Months

The Case-Shiller home-price index of 20 metropolitan areas fell by a seasonally adjusted 0.2% in January from December.

http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=D01E:B62430D1A5C996DD2FEC67CDFB2DAE56&

*******************

Sales of new single-family homes during the month of February fell 16.9% to a record-low seasonally adjusted annual rate of 250,000.

http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=CC06:B62430D1A5C996DD1FA87C725DB7B5AF&

**************************

The Commerce Department reports orders for big-ticket items fell 0.9% in February, missing Wall Street’s expectation of a gain of 1.1%.

http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=CCD3:B62430D1A5C996DD67AA77D26EC4C0E0&

World Economic Outlook Update

Global Recovery Advances but Remains Uneven

 

January 25, 2011

The two-speed recovery continues. In advanced economies, activity has moderated less than expected, but growth remains subdued, unemployment is still high, and renewed stresses in the euro area periphery are contributing to downside risks. In many emerging economies, activity remains buoyant, inflation pressures are emerging, and there are now some signs of overheating, driven in part by strong capital inflows. Most developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, are also growing strongly. Global output is projected to expand by 4½ percent in 2011 (Table 1 and Figure 1: CSV|PDF), an upward revision of about ¼ percentage point relative to the October 2010 World Economic Outlook (WEO). This reflects stronger-than-expected activity in the second half of 2010 as well as new policy initiatives in the United States that will boost activity this year. But downside risks to the recovery remain elevated. The most urgent requirements for robust recovery are comprehensive and rapid actions to overcome sovereign and financial troubles in the euro area and policies to redress fiscal imbalances and to repair and reform financial systems in advanced economies more generally. These need to be complemented with policies that keep overheating pressures in check and facilitate external rebalancing in key emerging economies.

The global recovery is proceeding

Global activity expanded at an annualized rate of just over 3½ percent in the third quarter of 2010. A slowdown from the 5 percent growth rate of the second quarter of 2010 was expected, but the third-quarter rate was better than forecast in the October 2010 WEO, owing to stronger-than-expected consumption in the United States and Japan. Stimulus measures were partly responsible for the strengthened outturn, especially in Japan. More generally, signs are increasing that private consumption—which fell sharply during the crisis—is starting to gain a foothold in major advanced economies (Figure 2: CSV|PDF). Growth in emerging and developing economies remained robust in the third quarter, buoyed by well-entrenched private demand, still-accommodative policy stances, and resurgent capital inflows.

Figure 1. Global GDP Growth
Figure 2. Recent Economic Indicators

During the second half of 2010, global financial conditions broadly improved, amid lingering vulnerabilities. Equity markets rose, risk spreads continued to tighten, and bank lending conditions in major advanced economies became less tight, even for small and medium-sized firms. Nonetheless, pockets of vulnerability persisted; real estate markets and household income were still weak in some major advanced economies (for example, United States), and securitization remained subdued. And, in an echo of last May’s events, financial turbulence reemerged in the periphery of the euro area in the last quarter of 2010. Concerns about banking sector losses and fiscal sustainability—triggered this time by the situation in Ireland—led to widening spreads in these countries, in some cases reaching highs not seen since the launch of the European Economic and Monetary Union. Funding pressures also reappeared, although to a lesser extent than during the summer. One key difference was more limited financial market spillovers to other countries. The turmoil in mid-2010 led to a spike in global risk aversion and a scaling back of exposures in other regions, including emerging markets. During the recent bout of turbulence, markets have been more discriminating: measures of risk aversion have not risen, equity markets in most regions have posted significant gains, and financial stresses have been limited mostly to the periphery of the euro area (Figure 3: CSV|PDF).

Figure 3. Recent Financial Market Developments


Table 1. Overview of the World Economic Outlook Projections
(Percent change, unless otherwise noted)

                       
 
  Year over Year        
            Difference from October 2010 WEO Projections   Q4 over Q4
      Projections     Estimates Projections
  2009 2010 2011 2012   2011 2012   2010 2011 2012
 
World Output 1 –0.6 5.0 4.4 4.5   0.2 0.0   4.7 4.5 4.4
Advanced Economies –3.4 3.0 2.5 2.5   0.3 –0.1   2.9 2.6 2.5
  United States –2.6 2.8 3.0 2.7   0.7 –0.3   2.7 3.2 2.7
  Euro Area –4.1 1.8 1.5 1.7   0.0 –0.1   2.1 1.2 2.0
    Germany –4.7 3.6 2.2 2.0   0.2 0.0   4.3 1.2 2.7
    France –2.5 1.6 1.6 1.8   0.0 0.0   1.7 1.5 1.9
    Italy –5.0 1.0 1.0 1.3   0.0 –0.1   1.3 1.2 1.4
    Spain –3.7 –0.2 0.6 1.5   –0.1 –0.3   0.4 0.8 1.9
  Japan –6.3 4.3 1.6 1.8   0.1 –0.2   3.3 1.4 2.4
  United Kingdom –4.9 1.7 2.0 2.3   0.0 0.0   2.9 1.5 2.6
  Canada –2.5 2.9 2.3 2.7   –0.4 0.0   2.7 2.7 2.6
  Other Advanced Economies –1.2 5.6 3.8 3.7   0.1 0.0   4.5 4.7 2.9
    Newly Industrialized Asian Economies –0.9 8.2 4.7 4.3   0.2 –0.1   5.9 6.2 3.1
Emerging and Developing Economies 2 2.6 7.1 6.5 6.5   0.1 0.0   7.2 7.0 6.8
  Central and Eastern Europe –3.6 4.2 3.6 4.0   0.5 0.2   4.3 3.5 3.9
  Commonwealth of Independent States –6.5 4.2 4.7 4.6   0.1 –0.1   3.5 4.8 4.3
    Russia –7.9 3.7 4.5 4.4   0.2 0.0   3.4 4.6 4.3
    Excluding Russia –3.2 5.4 5.1 5.2   –0.1 –0.1   . . . . . . . . .
  Developing Asia 7.0 9.3 8.4 8.4   0.0 0.0   9.1 8.6 8.4
    China 9.2 10.3 9.6 9.5   0.0 0.0   9.7 9.5 9.5
    India 5.7 9.7 8.4 8.0   0.0 0.0   10.3 7.9 8.0
    ASEAN-5 3 1.7 6.7 5.5 5.7   0.1 0.1   5.1 6.4 5.2
  Latin America and the Caribbean –1.8 5.9 4.3 4.1   0.3 –0.1   4.8 5.0 4.3
    Brazil –0.6 7.5 4.5 4.1   0.4 0.0   5.2 5.1 4.0
    Mexico –6.1 5.2 4.2 4.8   0.3 –0.2   3.2 5.0 4.5
  Middle East and North Africa 1.8 3.9 4.6 4.7   –0.5 –0.1   . . . . . . . . .
  Sub-Saharan Africa 2.8 5.0 5.5 5.8   0.0 0.1   . . . . . . . . .
    South Africa –1.7 2.8 3.4 3.8   –0.1 –0.1   3.6 3.4 4.1
Memorandum                      
European Union –4.1 1.8 1.7 2.0   0.0 –0.1   2.5 1.4 2.2
World Growth Based on Market Exchange Rates –2.1 3.9 3.5 3.6   0.2 –0.1   . . . . . . . . .
                       
World Trade Volume (goods and services) –10.7 12.0 7.1 6.8   0.1 0.2   . . . . . . . . .
Imports                      
  Advanced Economies –12.4 11.1 5.5 5.2   0.3 0.1   . . . . . . . . .
  Emerging and Developing Economies –8.0 13.8 9.3 9.2   –0.6 –0.1   . . . . . . . . .
Exports                      
  Advanced Economies –11.9 11.4 6.2 5.8   0.2 0.3   . . . . . . . . .
  Emerging and Developing Economies –7.5 12.8 9.2 8.8   0.1 0.2   . . . . . . . . .
Commodity Prices (U.S. dollars)                      
Oil 4 –36.3 27.8 13.4 0.3   10.1 –4.1   . . . . . . . . .
Nonfuel (average based on world commodity export weights) –18.7 23.0 11.0 –5.6   13.0 –2.4   . . . . . . . . .
                       
Consumer Prices                      
Advanced Economies 0.1 1.5 1.6 1.6   0.3 0.1   1.5 1.6 1.6
Emerging and Developing Economies 2 5.2 6.3 6.0 4.8   0.8 0.3   6.5 4.7 4.4
London Interbank Offered Rate (percent) 5                      
On U.S. Dollar Deposits 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.9   –0.1 –0.5   . . . . . . . . .
On Euro Deposits 1.2 0.8 1.2 1.7   0.2 0.4   . . . . . . . . .
On Japanese Yen Deposits 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.2   0.2 –0.2   . . . . . . . . .
 
Note: Real effective exchange rates are assumed to remain constant at the levels prevailing during November 18–December 16, 2010. Country weights used to construct aggregate growth rates for groups of economies were revised. When economies are not listed alphabetically, they are ordered on the basis of economic size. The aggregated quarterly data are seasonally adjusted.
1 The quarterly estimates and projections account for 90 percent of the world purchasing-power-parity weights.
2 The quarterly estimates and projections account for approximately 78 percent of the emerging and developing economies.
3 Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam.
4 Simple average of prices of U.K. Brent, Dubai, and West Texas Intermediate crude oil. The average price of oil in U.S. dollars a barrel was $78.93 in 2010; the assumed price based on futures markets is $89.50 in 2011 and $89.75 in 2012.
5 Six-month rate for the United States and Japan. Three-month rate for the Euro Area.

The recovery is set to continue…

The baseline projections below assume that current policy actions manage to keep the financial turmoil and its real effects contained in the periphery of the euro area, resulting in only a modest drag on the global recovery. This view reflects the limited financial spillovers observed so far across financial markets and regions, as well as the fact that policy responses following the Greek crisis helped limit its impact on the global recovery in the second half of 2010. The baseline also assumes that policymakers in emerging markets respond in a timely manner to keep overheating pressures in check.

Activity in the advanced economies is projected to expand by 2½ percent during 2011–12, which is still sluggish considering the depth of the 2009 recession and insufficient to make a significant dent in high unemployment rates. Nevertheless, the 2011 growth projection is an upward revision of ¼ percentage point relative to the October 2010 WEO, mostly due to a new fiscal package passed in late 2010 in the United States that is expected to boost economic growth this year by ½ percent. A package with a similar growth impact passed in Japan is expected to sustain a moderate recovery in 2011. And although growth in the periphery of the euro area is marked down for this year, this is offset by an upward revision to growth in Germany, due to stronger domestic demand.

In both 2011 and 2012, growth in emerging and developing economies is expected to remain buoyant at 6½ percent, a modest slowdown from the 7 percent growth registered last year and broadly unchanged from the October 2010 WEO. Developing Asia continues to grow most rapidly, but other emerging regions are also expected to continue their strong rebound. Notably, growth in sub-Saharan Africa—projected at 5½ percent in 2011 and 5¾ percent in 2012—is expected to exceed growth in all other regions except developing Asia. This reflects sustained strength in domestic demand in many of the region’s economies as well as rising global demand for commodities (Box 1).

…and financial conditions in most regions are expected to remain stable

Financial conditions are expected generally to remain stable or improve this year. Bank lending conditions in the major advanced economies are expected to ease further, and bond issuance by nonfinancial firms is also expected to strengthen. Amid generally sluggish recovery and continued high saving in key emerging Asian economies, real yields are likely to remain low through 2011. In the United States, the outlook for Treasury yields is uncertain: a gradually strengthening recovery and fiscal concerns may push up yields, while quantitative easing may hold them back.

Financial stresses, however, are expected to remain elevated in the periphery of the euro area, where market participants are still concerned about sovereign and banking risk, the political feasibility of current and envisioned austerity measures, and the lack of a comprehensive solution. European sovereign peripheral spreads and bank funding costs are thus likely to remain elevated during the first half of this year, and financial turbulence could re-intensify.

Under a baseline scenario in which contagion from turmoil in the euro area periphery is contained, emerging market capital inflows are expected to remain strong and financial conditions robust. Bond issuance by emerging market sovereigns and firms is expected to remain robust in 2011. Low interest rates in mature markets and fairly strong investor appetite will continue to pose upside risks to emerging market flows and asset prices, despite some recent slowdown of inflows.

Box 1. Economic Outlook for Sub-Saharan Africa

Most countries in sub-Saharan Africa have recovered quickly from the global financial crisis, with the region projected to grow 5½ percent in 2011. But the pace of the recovery has varied within the region. Output growth in most oil exporters and low-income countries (LICs) is now close to precrisis highs. The recovery in South Africa and its neighbors, however, has been more subdued, reflecting the more severe impact of the collapse in world trade and elevated unemployment levels that are proving difficult to reduce.

Prior to the recent global crisis, sub-Saharan Africa enjoyed a period of strong growth. Growth in the region’s 29 LICs was particularly impressive at more than 6 percent during 2004–08, second only to developing Asia. This reflected the improved political environment, favorable external conditions, and sound macroeconomic management. These strong initial conditions helped most countries in the region weather the worst effects of the food and fuel price hikes of 2007–08 and the subsequent global financial crisis. Many countries supported output by injecting fiscal stimulus and lowering interest rates. As a result, LICs in the region continued to grow at nearly 5 percent in 2009, although output fell in the region’s middle-income countries—a grouping dominated by South Africa. In most of the oil-exporting countries growth slowed, with the notable exception of Nigeria.

Most countries in the region have now returned to precrisis growth rates. In 2011, LICs are projected to grow by 6½ percent. Domestic demand is being supported by automatic stabilizers, expansion in public investment and social support programs, and continued monetary accommodation. Growing trade ties with Asia are also playing a role in the region’s recovery, primarily through commodity markets. Output growth has rebounded in South Africa, but high unemployment and subdued confidence are expected to continue to dampen the pace of recovery, restricting growth to about 3½ percent in 2011.

Risks remain weighted to the downside, however. The pace of recovery in Europe, the dominant trade partner for most non-oil-exporting countries in sub-Saharan Africa, is modest and uncertain. More immediately, the sharp pickup in fuel and food prices stands to make a significant impact on many non-oil-exporting countries. Rising food prices are likely to affect the urban poor in particular, given the high share of food in their consumption baskets. In response, governments will need to consider targeted social safety nets, with attendant fiscal costs. Managing these pressures, particularly against the backdrop of elevated fiscal deficits and narrowing output gaps, will be an important challenge for the region in 2011—a year with a busy political calendar, including perhaps 17 national elections.

With recovery at hand in most countries in the region, the emphasis of macroeconomic policies needs to shift:

  • Countercyclical fiscal policy helped support output growth during the crisis, but has resulted in wider fiscal deficits across the board. With growth in most countries now approaching potential, the consistency of these wider deficits with financing and medium-term debt sustainability considerations should be reviewed. To promote growth and poverty reduction, attention also needs to be given to the appropriateness of the composition of government spending and revenue sources.
  • Inflation remains in check in most countries, and the monetary stance seems appropriate. But policymakers should remain alert to potential pressure from rising commodity prices—particularly with growth approaching potential levels.
  • Other policy areas requiring sustained attention include more intensive monitoring and sounder regulation of the financial sector, continuing policy improvements targeted at the business environment, and robust public financing mechanisms to plan and control government spending, including infrastructure investment.

SSAGDP

Commodity prices will remain high, and inflation is rising in some emerging economies

Prices for both oil and non-oil commodities rose considerably in 2010, in response to strong global demand but also to supply shocks for selected commodities. Upward pressure on prices is expected to persist in 2011, due to continued robust demand and a sluggish supply response to tightening market conditions. As a result, the IMF’s baseline petroleum price projection for 2011 is now $90 per barrel, up from $79 per barrel in the October 2010 WEO. As for non-oil commodities, weather-related crop damage was greater than expected in late 2010, and price effects are expected to unwind only after the 2011 crop season. As a result, non-oil commodity prices are expected to increase by 11 percent in 2011. Near-term risks are now to the upside for most commodity classes.

The uptick in consumer price inflation in emerging economies in 2010 was attributable partly to rising food prices. But the recent bout of high food price inflation has been quite persistent, straining the budgets of low-income households and beginning to feed into overall price inflation in a number of economies. More important, rapid growth in emerging and developing economies has narrowed or in some cases closed output gaps in these economies. Accordingly, overheating pressures are starting to materialize in some cases. Consumer prices in these economies are projected to rise 6 percent this year, an upward revision of ¾ percentage point relative to the October 2010 WEO. Signs of overheating are also becoming apparent in some countries via rapid credit growth or rising asset prices.

The picture is quite different in advanced economies, where still-ample economic slack and well-anchored inflation expectations will generally keep inflation pressures subdued. Inflation is expected to remain at 1½ percent this year, unchanged from 2010 and a slight upward revision from the October 2010 WEO.

Downside risks remain elevated

Downside risks arise from the possibility of tensions in the euro area periphery spreading to the core of Europe; the lack of progress in formulating medium-term fiscal consolidation plans in major advanced economies; the continued weakness of the U.S. real estate market; high commodity prices; and overheating and the potential for boom-bust cycles in emerging markets. On the upside, there are risks from stronger-than-expected business investment rebounds in major advanced economies.

The risk of financial turmoil spreading from the periphery to the core of Europe is a by-product of continuing weakness among financial institutions in many of the region’s advanced economies, and a lack of transparency about their exposures. As a result, financial institutions and sovereigns are closely linked, with spillovers between the two sectors occurring in both directions. Although the periphery accounts for only a small portion of the euro area’s overall output and trade, substantial financial linkages with countries in the core, as well as financial spillovers through higher risk aversion and lower equity prices, could generate a slowdown in growth and demand that would hinder the global recovery. In particular, continued market pressures could result in serious funding pressures for major banks and sovereigns, increasing the likelihood that problems spill over to core countries. Figure 4 (CSV|PDF) presents an alternative scenario that illustrates how larger spillovers can subtract from growth. The scenario—which is broadly similar to the one presented in the July 2010 WEO Update—assumes that a large shock followed by insufficiently rapid and strong policy action results in significant losses on securities and credit in the euro area periphery. This causes capital ratios to fall substantially in several countries, both in the periphery and the core. Under such a scenario, European banks tighten lending conditions by a similar magnitude as during the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. As a result, euro area growth is reduced by about 2½ percentage points relative to the baseline. Assuming that financial spillovers to the rest of the world are limited—with the increase in bank-lending tightness in the United States about half that in Europe—global growth in 2011 is lower by about 1 percentage point than in the baseline. But if financial contagion to the rest of the world is more severe—resulting in a spike in generalized risk aversion, a drying up of liquidity, and sharp falls in equity markets—the impact on global growth would be substantially larger, amplified by balance sheet weaknesses in other major advanced economies.

Figure 4. An Alternative Scenario of Intensified Financial Stress in the Euro AreaAnother downside risk stems from insufficient progress in developing medium-term fiscal consolidation plans in large advanced economies. The recently implemented stimulus measures in the United States and Japan make it more challenging to ensure medium-term fiscal sustainability. Therefore, it has become even more important to formulate more credible plans to bring debt down over the medium term.

On the upside, business investment could rebound faster than currently expected in key advanced economies, underpinned by strong corporate sector profitability.

In emerging economies, key risks relate to overheating, a rapid rise of inflation pressures, and the possibility of a hard landing. In the near term, upside risks to growth have risen, driven by accommodative policies, strong terms-of-trade gains for commodity exporters, and resurgent capital inflows. If, however, policymakers fall behind the curve in responding to nascent overheating pressures and asset price bubbles, macroeconomic policies in key emerging economies could be setting the stage for boom-bust dynamics in real estate and credit markets and, eventually, a hard landing in these economies. With emerging markets now accounting for almost 40 percent of global consumption and more than two-thirds of global growth, a slowdown in these economies would deal a serious blow to the global recovery—and to the rebalancing that needs to take place.

Decisive policy actions are needed to lessen risks and sustain growth

Despite the signs of near-term decoupling—between the periphery and core of Europe, between financial stresses and the real economy, and between advanced and emerging economies—the global economy remains tightly interconnected. A host of measures are needed in different countries to reduce vulnerabilities and rebalance growth in order to strengthen and sustain global growth in the years to come. In the advanced economies, the most pressing needs are to alleviate financial stress in the euro area and to push forward with needed repairs and reforms of the financial system as well as with medium-term fiscal consolidation. Such growth-enhancing policies would help address persistently high unemployment, a key challenge for these economies. They would also produce beneficial spillovers to emerging economies, where the main policy challenge is to respond appropriately to capital inflows, keep overheating pressures in check, and facilitate external rebalancing.

In the euro area, comprehensive, rapid, and decisive policy actions are required to address downside risks. Important steps at both the national and the euro-area-wide level have been taken since May, including measures to strengthen fiscal balances and introduce structural reforms, the stepping up of extraordinary liquidity support and the introduction of the Securities Markets Program by the European Central Bank (ECB), and the establishment of the temporary European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), to be succeeded by the permanent European Stability Mechanism (ESM) after 2013. But additional strengthening of national policy actions to further secure fiscal sustainability and rekindle growth continues to be key in many countries. Markets remain skittish about potential losses in the region’s banks and have not been assuaged by stress tests conducted to date. New stress tests that are more realistic, thorough, and stringent will increase clarity. They will need to be followed quickly by recapitalization. Markets also need to be reassured that sufficient resources are available from the center to deal with downside risks and that the overall policy approach is consistent. Hence the EFSF as well as the envisioned permanent ESM must have the ability to raise sufficient resources and deploy them in a flexible manner, as needed. In the meantime, the ECB will need to continue to provide liquidity and remain active in securities purchases to help preserve financial stability.

More generally in the advanced economies, there is a need for continued progress to repair and reform financial systems. This is a critical element of the normalization of credit conditions and would help reduce the burden on monetary and fiscal policy to support the recovery. The specific financial sector policies needed are discussed in more detail in the January 2011 Global Financial Stability Report Update.

The vulnerability of sovereigns emphasizes the urgency of moving toward more sustainable fiscal paths—not just by countries in the euro area periphery, but also by major advanced economies. In the near term, emerging signs of a handoff from public to private demand in many large advanced economies suggests that countries can push forward in formulating and implementing credible medium-term consolidation plans. Although some targeted measures in the United States are justifiable at this juncture given the still weak labor and housing markets, the recently implemented stimulus is expected to deliver only a relatively small growth dividend (given its size) at a considerable fiscal cost. The U.S. fiscal deficit is now projected at 10¾ percent in 2011 (more than double that in the euro area), and gross government debt is projected to exceed 110 percent of GDP in 2016. The absence of a credible, medium-term fiscal strategy would eventually drive up U.S. interest rates, which could prove disruptive for global financial markets and for the world economy. It is thus even more critical that policies be put in place to bring debt down over the medium term. Such measures could include entitlement reforms, caps on discretionary spending, reforms of the tax system to boost fiscal revenue, and the establishment or strengthening of fiscal institutions. Fiscal issues are discussed in more detail in the January 2011 Fiscal Monitor Update.

At the same time, monetary accommodation needs to continue in the advanced economies. As long as inflation expectations remain anchored and unemployment stays high, this is the right policy from a domestic perspective. Furthermore, it seems to have had an effect: following the news in August that a second round of quantitative easing was imminent, long-term rates fell to new lows in the United States. Although U.S. Treasury yields have since increased, particularly in the last quarter of 2010, this seems primarily attributable to the improving outlook for the U.S. economy, a fact corroborated by the strong performance of equity markets. From an external perspective, however, there is concern that quantitative easing in the United States could result in a flood of capital outflows toward emerging markets. The recent slowdown in capital inflows to emerging markets suggests that such effects may be limited so far (Figure 5: CSV|PDF).

Figure 5. Net Fund Flows to Emerging MarketsIn contrast, monetary tightening should begin or continue in emerging economies where overheating pressures are starting to emerge. Recent policy rate hikes by various countries are welcome in this regard, although in some of them more nominal exchange rate appreciation would have been preferable. Such tightening can, however, exacerbate the strong capital inflows that many of these economies are now experiencing. Therefore, prudential measures to keep increases in credit or asset markets from becoming excessive should also be considered.

The renewed surge in capital inflows to some emerging markets, whether driven by stronger fundamentals in the emerging economies themselves or by looser monetary policy in advanced economies, requires an appropriate policy response. A number of these economies quickly overcame the crisis and have continued to run current account surpluses (Figure 6: CSV|PDF), yet their real effective exchange rates remain close to precrisis levels—that is, the response to renewed capital inflows has been to accumulate even more foreign exchange reserves. For these countries, allowing the currency to appreciate would help combat overheating pressures and facilitate a healthy rebalancing from external to domestic demand. In other countries where the currency is above levels consistent with medium-term fundamentals, fiscal adjustment can help lower interest rates and restrain domestic demand. Macroeconomic policy responses may, however, need to be complemented by strengthened macro-prudential measures (for example, stricter loan-to-value ratios, funding composition restrictions) and, in some cases, capital controls.

Figure 6. Global Imbalances

Logo of the Economics and Statistics Administr...

Image via Wikipedia

I could not help but notice the upfront and brazen opposite reporting between both of these media giants. Which do you beleive?

From Fox this morning (Pessimists)

Gross Domestic Product up 3.2 percent in the fourth quarter, falling below expectations

More headlines from FoxNews.com:

http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=AE3F:B62430D1A5C996DD0DEFDA98013F31E1&

From the Post this morning (Optimists)

—————————————-
Breaking News Alert: Economic growth strengthened to 3.2 percent in fourth quarter
January 28, 2011 8:42:08 AM
—————————————-

The economy gained strength at the end of last year as Americans spent at the fastest pace in four years and U.S. companies sold more overseas. The growth is boosting hopes for a stronger 2011.

The Commerce Department reports Friday that growth rose to an annual rate of 3.2 percent in the October-December quarter. That’s an improvement from the 2.6 percent growth in the previous quarter. And it was the best quarterly showing since the start of last year.

http://link.email.washingtonpost.com/r/MEPMRJ/0G0DXO/QNKTX8/HGQ1EK/M0NQ3/B7/h

The Federal Reserve said Wednesday it is leaving its target on short-term interest rates unchanged, in a range of 0-0.25%. The central bank also said the economy continues to recover, but too slowly to significantly help the labor market

More headlines from FoxBusiness.com:

http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=AD13:B62430D1A5C996DD2ABD9349B7797F70&

The emblem of Recovery.gov, the official site ...

Image via Wikipedia

Implementing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

larry_summers_cnn2.top.jpgSee the full interview with Larry Summers on CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS, airing Sunday, January 16 at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET. By Annalyn Censky, staff reporter

 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — While the economy is still reeling from 8.5 million jobs lost in the recession, the outlook for job growth in America is looking up, former White House economic advisor Larry Summers said in an exclusive interview airing on CNN Sunday.

“I think the prospects for starting to see significant employment growth and reductions in unemployment right now are better than they’ve been in the United States in a number of years,” he told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria.


Until two weeks ago, Summers was President Obama’s chief economic advisor. A high-profile figure in business circles, he also served stints as the president of Harvard University and the Secretary of the Treasury under President Bill Clinton.

In the interview with Zakaria, he discusses the job market, friction between President Obama and big business, and his outlook for the recovery.

Summers is somewhat optimistic about the economy, expecting it to grow at a rate of 3% to 4% over the next few years.

But most economists say that’s still not enough to make for significant job gains.

Summers pointed to the construction industry specifically, to highlight how the housing crash will continue to reverberate through the job market for years to come.

“Now, because we have an overhang of houses that are vacant, malls that are vacant, of office buildings that are vacant, we have this tremendous drop in the demand for construction workers,” he said. “…For a certain class of men who haven’t gone to college, that’s a substantial part of employment.”

Health care and the IT industry, however, are likely to see job growth ahead, he said.

“Some of the jobs that were lost aren’t going to come back, but some of the jobs are going to come in new places,” he said.

Summers hailed the tax compromise signed by Obama last month as a key step toward raising domestic demand. The $800 billion deal includes a payroll tax holiday that will help many Americans, and hopefully spur employment, he said.

At the same time, Summers also pushed Obama’s goal of doubling exports over the next five years, and argued for cutting the national deficit. He also suggested infrastructure projects as a way to boost construction jobs.

As for corporate America’s friction with Obama — Summers pointed to corporate profits rising 60% over the last two years as a sign of progress in the private sector.

Obama’s economic team has seen a wave of departures in recent months, with Summers leaving to return to Harvard. Gene Sperling, formerly a counselor to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, was named Summers’ successor.

See the full interview with Larry Summers on CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS, airing Sunday, January 16 at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET. To top of page

A photo of Ray Mabus, Navy Secretary (2009-)

Image via Wikipedia

Statement by the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations on Efficiencies
Thu, 06 Jan 2011 14:17:00 -0600

 
IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 013-11
January 06, 2011
 

 


 Secretary Ray Mabus

            “Secretary Gates charged the Navy and Marine Corps to scrub everything, eliminate the unnecessary or underperforming, find savings, and apply those savings to warfighting.  We have done that.  Hard choices were made, but they were necessary to make certain we are the most efficient and effective fighting force we can be.  Secretary Gates’ leadership has resulted in reasonable and responsible reforms that will ensure the Navy and Marine Corps remain the most formidable expeditionary fighting force the world has ever known.”

Adm. Gary Roughead

            “The Navy enthusiastically participated in Department of Defense efficiency efforts.  I am pleased with the rigor undertaken throughout this process, the results of which will contribute to the Navy’s warfighting capabilities.  The initiatives we have undertaken will allow the Navy to address readiness and warfighting capabilities, optimize organizations and operations and ensure that resources are optimized in operations and maintenance initiatives.  These savings and changes will enable us to be the Navy the nation needs today and into the future.”

U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)On the Web: http://www.defense.gov/releases/
Media Contact: +1 (703) 697-5131/697-5132
Public Contact: http://www.defense.gov/landing/questions.aspx or +1 (703) 428-0711 +1

Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your User Profile Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please e-mail support@govdelivery.com.

GovDelivery, Inc. sending on behalf of the U.S. Department of Defense · 408 St. Peter Street Suite 600 · St. Paul, MN 55102 · 1-800-439-1420

John McHugh as United States Secretary of the Army

Image via Wikipedia

Statement by the Secretary of the Army John McHugh on Efficiencies
Thu, 06 Jan 2011 14:33:00 -0600

IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 012-10
January 06, 2011
 

 


 

            “As part of the Department of Defense (DoD) effort to achieve savings of $100 billion over the next five years, the Army has been a full partner in identifying cost savings of approximately $29 billion.  The Army proposes reinvesting these cost savings to accelerate fielding of capabilities needed by Army forces in the fight, preserving force structure as we reconstitute the force, building full-spectrum readiness and strategic flexibility, increasing soldier and family resiliency and modernizing the force for future conflicts.

            “Through comprehensive capability portfolio reviews the Army proposed savings by terminating or reducing weapons systems with declining relevance or unnecessary redundancy.  The Army also proposed additional savings by restructuring headquarters activities, leveraging investments in existing infrastructure and consolidating information technology.  These savings will help DoD achieve its goal over the next five years, but more importantly, it will enable the Army to reprioritize resources to fulfill urgent needs. 

            “In partnership with DoD, the Army will continue to ensure the taxpayer’s resources are put to the most efficient use in this time of fiscal constraint.”

U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

On the Web: http://www.defense.gov/releases/
Media Contact: +1 (703) 697-5131/697-5132
Public Contact: http://www.defense.gov/landing/questions.aspx or +1 (703) 428-0711 +1

Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your User Profile Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please e-mail support@govdelivery.com.

GovDelivery, Inc. sending on behalf of the U.S. Department of Defense · 408 St. Peter Street Suite 600 · St. Paul, MN 55102 · 1-800-439-1420

General James F. Amos, USMC 31st Assistant Com...

Image via Wikipedia

Statement by the Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. James Amos on Efficiencies
Thu, 06 Jan 2011 14:40:00 -0600

IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 014-11
January 06, 2011
 

 


 

                 “Today the Secretary of Defense announced the termination of the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) program.  I support his decision.  After a thorough review of the program within the context of a broader Marine Corps force structure review, I personally recommended to both the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Navy that the EFV be cancelled and that the Marine Corps pursue a more affordable amphibious tracked fighting vehicle. 

                “Despite the critical amphibious and warfighting capability the EFV represents, the program is simply not affordable given likely Marine Corps procurement budgets.  The procurement and operations/maintenance costs of this vehicle are onerous.  After examining multiple options to preserve the EFV, I concluded that none of the options meets what we consider reasonable affordability criteria.  As a result, I decided to pursue a more affordable vehicle. 

                “Our nation’s amphibious capability remains the Corps’ priority.  In the complex security environment we face, the execution of amphibious operations requires the use of the sea as maneuver space.  A modern amphibious tracked vehicleis the means towards this end.  It enables the seamless projection of ready-to-fight Marine rifle squads from sea to land.  It is thus the key to allowing ship-to-shore operations in permissive, uncertain, and hostile environments; assuring access where infrastructure is destroyed or nonexistent; and creating joint access in defended areas.  It is also central to the entire Marine tactical vehicle strategy for operations ashore.  Once on land, an amphibious armored fighting vehicle provides the Marine rifle squad with the protected mobility and firepowerto maneuver to a position of advantage to rapidly close with, engage, and defeat the enemy.  

                “The Marine Corps remains committed to develop and field an effective, survivable and affordable amphibious tracked vehicle.  To bring this capability to the force sooner rather than later, we intend to capitalize on the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s recent efforts to streamline procurement and to rapidly accelerate the acquisition and contracting processes in developing our new amphibious tracked vehicle requirement.  

                “Shortly, we will issue a special notice to industry requesting information relative to supporting our required amphibious capabilities.  We look forward to working with industry in meeting this challenge to field a modern and affordable amphibious tracked vehicle that will support our nation’s needs.”

U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

On the Web: http://www.defense.gov/releases/
Media Contact: +1 (703) 697-5131/697-5132
Public Contact: http://www.defense.gov/landing/questions.aspx or +1 (703) 428-0711 +1

Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your User Profile Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please e-mail support@govdelivery.com.

GovDelivery, Inc. sending on behalf of the U.S. Department of Defense · 408 St. Peter Street Suite 600 · St. Paul, MN 55102 · 1-800-439-1420

Official portrait of United States Secretary o...

Image via Wikipedia

DOD Announces $150 Billion Reinvestment from Efficiencies Savings
Thu, 06 Jan 2011 14:14:00 -0600

IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 010-11
January 06, 2011
 

 


 

                 Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announced today a series of efficiencies decisions designed to save the Department of Defense more than $150 billion over the next five years primarily by reducing overhead costs, improving business practices and culling excess or troubled programs.  Most of the resulting savings will be used by the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force to invest in high priority programs that strengthen warfighting capabilities.

                 In anticipation of an era of modest defense budget growth, Gates launched a comprehensive effort last May to reduce the Department’s overhead expenditures.  The goal was to sustain the military’s size and strength over the long term by reinvesting those efficiency savings in force structure and other key combat capabilities.  Specifically, the military services were directed to find at least $100 billion in savings that they could keep and shift to higher priority programs.  To achieve the savings targets, service leadership conducted a thorough and vigorous scrub of bureaucratic structures, facilities, programs, business practices, civilian and military personnel levels, and associated overhead costs.

                 The measures announced today are the latest in a series of DoD reform initiatives, to include the President’s last two annual defense budgets, which have rebalanced the Department’s spending habits while increasing investments in proven capabilities most relevant both to current wars and to the most likely future threats.

                 “Meeting real-world requirements.  Doing right by our people.  Reducing excess.  Being more efficient.  Squeezing costs.  Setting priorities and sticking to them.  Making tough choices.  These are all things that we should do as a Department and as a military regardless of the time and circumstance.  But they are more important than ever at a time of extreme fiscal duress, when budget pressures and scrutiny fall on all areas of government, including defense,” said Gates.

                 “While America is at war and confronts a range of future security threats, it is important to not repeat the mistakes of the past by making drastic and ill-conceived cuts to the overall defense budget.  At the same time, it is imperative for this Department to eliminate wasteful, excessive, and unneeded spending.  Indeed, to do everything we can to make every defense dollar count.”

                 The service departments achieved savings in several areas, including the number and size of headquarters staffs, base operations, energy consumption, and facilities sustainment.  At the same time, the service leaders undertook the normal process of setting priorities and assessing risks in preparing the fiscal 2012 budget request - a process that led to the recommended termination or restructuring of a number of troubled or unneeded weapons programs.

                 The services will keep the savings they were motivated to find and reinvest in the needed capabilities each service needs to support the warfighter.  The bulk of the savings will be used by the service departments to make key investments in areas such as ship building, long-range strike, missile defense, intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance (ISR), wounded warrior care and facilities, and much more.

                 Specifically, the Department of the Navy is proposing to use efficiencies savings to:

  • Accelerate development of a new generation of electronic jammers to improve the Navy’s ability to fight and survive in an anti-access environment;
  • Increase the repair and refurbishment of Marine equipment used in Iraq and Afghanistan;
  • Develop a new generation of sea-borne unmanned strike and surveillance aircraft;
  • Buy more of the latest model F-18s and extend the service life of 150 of these aircraft as a hedge against more delays in the deployment of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF); and
  • Purchase additional ships - including a destroyer, a littoral combat ship, an ocean surveillance vessel and fleet oilers. 

                 The Department of the Navy proposed efficiencies savings of more than $35 billion over five years to include:

  • Reducing manpower ashore and reassigning 6,000 personnel to operational missions at sea;
  • Using multi-year procurement to save more than $1.3 billion on the purchase of new airborne surveillance, jamming, and fighter aircraft;
  • Disestablishing several staffs (but not the associated platforms) to include submarine-, patrol aircraft-, and destroyer-squadrons plus one carrier strike group staff; and
  • Disestablishing the headquarters of Second Fleet at Norfolk, Va., and transferring responsibility for its mission to the Navy’s Fleet Forces Command.

                 For the Department of the Air Force, this efficiencies process made it possible to:

  • Buy more of the most advanced Reaper UAVs and move essential ISR programs from the temporary war budget to the permanent base budget.  Going forward, advanced unmanned strike and reconnaissance capabilities must become an integrated part of the service’s regular institutional force structure;
  • Increase procurement of the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle to assure access to space for both military and other government agencies while sustaining our industrial base;
  • Modernize the radars of F-15s to keep this key fighter viable well into the future;
  • Buy more simulators for JSF air crew training; and
  • Develop a new long range, nuclear-capable penetrating bomber, which will be designed using proven technologies, an approach that should make it possible to deliver this capability on schedule and in quantity.

              The Air Force proposed efficiencies measures that will total some $34 billion over five years and include:

  • Consolidating two air operations centers in the United States and two in Europe;
  • Consolidating three numbered Air Force staffs;
  • Saving $500 million by reducing fuel and energy consumption within the Air Mobility Command;
  • Improving depot and supply chain business processes to sustain weapons systems, thus improving readiness at lower cost; and
  • Reducing the cost of communications infrastructure by 25 percent.

              The Department of the Army would use its savings to:

  • Provide improved suicide prevention and substance abuse counseling for soldiers;
  • Modernize its battle fleet of Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, and Stryker wheeled vehicles;
  • Accelerate fielding to the soldier level of the Army’s new tactical communications network.
  • Accelerate procurement of the service’s most advanced Grey Eagle UAVs; and
  • Buy more MC-12 reconnaissance aircraft to support ground forces, and begin development of a new vertical unmanned air system to support the Army in the future.

              The Army proposed $29 billion in savings over five years to include:

  • Terminating the SLAMRAAM surface to air missile, and the Non-Line of Sight Launch System, the next-generation missile launcher originally conceived as part of the Future Combat System;
  • Reducing manning by more than 1,000 positions by eliminating unneeded task forces and consolidating six installation management commands into four;
  • Saving $1.4 billion in military construction costs by sustaining existing facilities; and
  • Consolidating the service’s email infrastructure and data centers, which should save $500 million over five years.

               Of the $100 billion identified by the service departments, approximately $28 billion will also be used over the next five years by the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps to deal with higher than expected operating expenses such as fuel, maintenance, health care and training costs. 

              In addition to directing the four services to find savings, Gates announced last August a set of initiatives aimed at reducing overhead costs and improving efficiency across the DoD as a whole - with special attention to the headquarters and support bureaucracies in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the combatant commands, and other defense agencies and field activities.

              Gates announced today that this effort - combined with a government-wide freeze on civilian salaries - has yielded approximately $54 billion in savings over the next five years.  These savings include further reducing the contractor staff cadre, consolidating IT support, culling redundant intelligence organizations, eliminating unnecessary reports and studies, freezing civilian staff levels and pay, downgrading overseas commands, decreasing the number of generals, admirals and civilian executives, and modest increases in TRICARE premiums on military retirees.

              In addition to terminating the Marine Corps’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, Gates also stated that he is placing the Marine Corps’ short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the JSF on the equivalent of a two-year probation because of significant testing problems.  As a result, the development of the Marine variant will be moved to the back of the overall JSF production sequence.  To fill the gap created from the slip in the JSF production schedule, the Department of the Navy will buy more Navy F/A-18s.

              The formal announcement of the President’s fiscal 2012 budget submission next month is also expected to call for a $78 billion reduction to the FYDP, to include no real growth in defense spending in fiscal 2015 and fiscal 2016.  But because of the rigorous reform efforts undertaken over the past year, it is possible for the DoD to absorb this reduction in the projected top-line without significant impact to warfighting capability, although it will necessitate a reduction in the size of the Army and Marine Corps starting in fiscal 2015.  The total savings generated by DoD-wide overhead efficiencies, the civilian staffing and pay freeze, and the future decrease in ground forces, when added together, are roughly equivalent to the sum of the top-line reductions projected in the FYDP. 

              With the efficiencies savings, Gates said he is confident the Department can effectively meet the threats it is likely to face over the next few years.  But he also stressed the FYDP represents the minimum level of defense spending necessary given the complex and unpredictable array of security challenges the United States faces around the globe.  Beyond this five year time frame, the savings from overhead efficiencies and force reductions will have mostly run their course.

             Gates concluded by talking about the importance of following through on all DoD reform measures while maintaining adequate levels of funding.

             “This Department simply cannot risk continuing down the same path – where our investment priorities, bureaucratic habits, and lax attitudes towards costs are increasingly divorced from the real threats of today, the growing perils of tomorrow, and the nation’s grim financial outlook,” Gates declared at the conclusion of today’s announcement.  “These times demand that all of our nation’s leaders rise above the politics and parochialism that have too often plagued considerations of our nation’s defense - whether from inside the Pentagon, from industry and interest groups, and from one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other.   I look forward to working through the next phase of the President’s defense reform effort with the Congress in the weeks and months ahead - to do what’s right for our Armed Forces and what’s right for our country.”

U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

On the Web: http://www.defense.gov/releases/
Media Contact: +1 (703) 697-5131/697-5132
Public Contact: http://www.defense.gov/landing/questions.aspx or +1 (703) 428-0711 +1

Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your User Profile Page. You will need to use your e-mail address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please e-mail support@govdelivery.com.

GovDelivery, Inc. sending on behalf of the U.S. Department of Defense · 408 St. Peter Street Suite 600 · St. Paul, MN 55102 · 1-800-439-1420

The emblem of Recovery.gov, the official site ...

Image via Wikipedia

I am including govt websites to help guide you through my argument. http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/arra.aspx

At this site you will see quotes by President Obama as to what the Recovery Act Billions would be spent on.

Barack Obama signs American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 on February 17

“For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act — not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together… All this we can do. All this we will do.”

President Barack Obama, Inaugural Address – Jan. 20, 2009

Notice his phrase “that feed our commerce and bind us together”. So, what does this mean. To me it meant highways and bridges that connect our homes to our employment. As you follow along you will see my confusion. It apparently is not what he meant…

On the same page is the following:

Overview of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) was signed into law by President Obama on February 17th, 2009. It is an unprecedented effort to jumpstart our economy, create or save millions of jobs, and put a down payment on addressing long-neglected challenges so our country can thrive in the 21st century. The Act is an extraordinary response to a crisis unlike any since the Great Depression, and includes measures to modernize our nation’s infrastructure, enhance energy independence, expand educational opportunities, preserve and improve affordable health care, provide tax relief, and protect those in greatest need.

What do they mean by “addressing long neglected challenges”. Considering that I learned from the retiring Superintendent of the Antietam Battlefield Park that the roads in the Park had not been repaired since 1951, and this was a Recovery Act project, perhaps this is an example of what they meant by “long neglected”. I find it strange that when our economy was at a high that the Clinton Congress saw no reason to address long neglected challenges when we HAD the money available without contributing to a deficit. When I posted this on a LinkedIn Group for the DNC a response said that this would have happened but the Republican Congress stopped it. Regardless of what happened then, I am speaking about NOW, and NOW is not the time for these types of expenditures.

So, lets take this a step further… Where did the money go and did it “modernize our nation’s infrastructure” and as the paragraph ends with “protect those in greatest need.”

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/economicrecovery/arardistribution.htm

Distribution of Highway Funds under
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

Let’s try to understand the 3rd segment of this official graph. Are park roads, roads in indian reservations, forest highways and refuge roads infrastructure? I guess they are but where are the bridges and federal highways that connect our homes with our employment. How does this $550M allocation help protect those in greatest need? I suppose if those in greatest needs lose their homes they will need somewhere to live. Perhaps it is an unwritten plan by the White House that they will create tent cities in our National Parks? Ludicrous thought but how else can they justify spending this much “DEFICIT” money on these projects?

Not done yet. Let’s dig a little deeper…

http://www.efl.fhwa.dot.gov/projects/list.aspx

Once you open the file, go to Column H and restrict the list to Recovery Act only.

I trust you have the intelligence to read what the projects are for.

I dont mean to say these projects should not be done. I am just saying that Clinton should have done these things when we had the money. As noted on the website above it states in bold clear terms…

The Act is an extraordinary response

to a crisis unlike any since the Great Depression

It seems to me, Mr. Taxpayer and future Deficit payer that someone up top took advantage of this dim situation and threw lots of PORK into the ACT.

Personally, I believe that one of the first things the new Congress should do is put an immediate halt to all Recovery ACT projects that are not being done to connect us from our homes to our places of employment.

You be the judge. Thanks for reading.

 

10 things to watch across government in 2011

By Ed O’Keefe

Eye Opener

Happy New Year! Want to know what The Federal Eye will be watching for in 2011? Here are 10 issues across the government worth tracking as the new year — and the new Congress — begins:

1.) Will President Obama order 5 percent spending cuts?

The president ordered agencies and departments to develop plans to make cuts, but hasn’t made them official. Such cuts could severely impact non-defense agencies and programs. Also important: Will Obama propose allowing agencies to keep some of the savings for other priorities?

2.) Do Republicans propose even deeper spending cuts?

In the new Congress, Republicans promise to fight for spending cuts, a repeal of the new health care law and job creation. How much priority will they give to cutting and will they want to go further than Obama? Will they seriously push for the elimination of certain agencies and departments? (The Education or Commerce departments, are perennial favorite targets.) Also: Will Congress actually pass a budget this year?

3.) What, if anything, do Republican oversight efforts unearth?

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) appeared on three Sunday talk shows and called Obama’s administration “one of the most corrupt.” GOP investigations in the next two years could save taxpayers about $200 billion, he predicted. Several economic stimulus projects and senior administration could face serious Congressional investigations. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. is “a particularly juicy target,” The New York Times recently suggested, because of his involvement with terrorism cases, civil rights enforcement and immigration reform.

4.) Will Congress order changes at the U.S. Postal Service?

Postal reform could be the sleeper issue of the year — and a politically tricky one. (Which lawmaker wants to become the champion of closing post offices?) But make no mistake: This is the year the Postal Service will really run out of money — unless Congress seriously addresses postal reform. Pensions are ballooning, mail volume and revenues are plummeting and — most perilous of all — a $15 billion line of credit with the U.S. Treasury dries up this year. Two substantive legislative proposals are on the table and after years of avoiding the issue, it appears Congress will have to deliver a serious solution in 2011.

5.) How long will it take to officially end “don’t ask, don’t tell”?

Ask anyone at the Pentagon and they really, truly don’t know. It took about eight years to fully integrate African Americans into the armed forces, but Obama, gay rights activists and lawmakers would not tolerate a similar timetable to officially permit gays and lesbians in uniform. Military leaders are expected to draft a training and implementation program, and then introduce it to the rank and file. Best guess: More than two months, less than a year.

6.) Will teleworking work?

Federal agencies and departments must expand the use of teleworking this year in an effort to cut operational costs, worker commutes and the government’s environmental footprint. Though many are eligible, many federal managers are resistant to the work-from-home option. So will workers actually telework? And will their bosses let them?

7.) How does the federal worker pay freeze impact the rank and file?

Will a two-year freeze on federal pay lead to mass retirements or low morale? And how will the pay freeze impact Obama’s campaign pledge to make the government “cool again“?

8.) What happens to federal hiring reform?

Will the pay freeze (see above) make moot the administration’s efforts to reform how the government recruit and retains workers? And if older federal employees start to retire en masse, will the government be ready to replace them? (Lawmakers have warned that many agencies aren’t ready for the impending brain drain.)

9.) Which government official, agency or department will cause embarrassment this year?

Last year Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack nearly derailed his tenure by quickly firing Shirley Sherrod and then having her rebuff repeated requests to rejoin USDA. The Securities and Exchange Commission faced days of negative headlines about porn-surfing employees and the Transportation Security Administration poorly countered the concerns of passengers upset by enhanced pat-downs while enduring several embarrassing incidents involving airport security officers. So who will screw up this year? Time will tell, but wasteful stimulus spending could yield some embarrassments. (See #3.)

10.) How fast will Washington’s revolving door swing?

Several top White House aides soon will decamp to Chicago to begin Obama’s reelection campaign and David Plouffe is moving into the West Wing. Tim Kaine appears to be staying put at the DNC and not moving to the Cabinet. Former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) is looking for a job, as are several former Democratic lawmakers — will any of them get hired by Obama? And when will Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates retire? Bottom line: There’s plenty to keep the Washington parlor games going.

Agree or disagree? What will you be watching for in 2011? your thoughts in the comments section below

Cabinet and Staff News: Obama’s news-free vacation yielded recess appointments for six picks. Details of his politically touchy search for a new top economic adviser. Is Amb. Jon Huntsman (former Republican governor of Utah) thinking of running against Obama? Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano visits Afghanistan. Hillary Clinton chats amicably with Hugo Chavez in Brazil. Vice President Biden is a linchpin for Obama’s presidency. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts decries brawling over judicial nominees. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke is tackling an ambitious export goal. In a Washington Post op-ed, Education Secretary Arne Duncan outlines a bipartisan blueprint for school reform.

DEFENSE DEPARTMENT:
With Air Force’s new drone, ‘we can see everything’: This winter, the Air Force is set to deploy to Afghanistan what it says is a revolutionary airborne surveillance system called Gorgon Stare.

Several warnings, then a soldier’s lonely death: Too many unanswered questions remain about Sergeant David Senft‘s lonely death in a parked sport utility vehicle on an American air base in Afghanistan, and about whether the Army could have done more to prevent it.

Navy to probe lewd videos shown to carrier crew: A top officer aboard an aircraft carrier broadcast to his crew a series of profanity-laced comedy sketches in which he uses gay slurs and opens the shower curtain on women pretending to bathe together.

EPA:
Coal’s burnout: Have investors moved on to cleaner energy sources?: The battle over coal plants could sharpen in 2011, as the agency deploys regulations to improve the efficiency of big power plants.

Texas launches another legal challenge to greenhouse-gas rules: The state filed its lawsuit just one day after a federal appeals court in New Orleans denied its request to suspend the administration’s efforts to issue greenhouse-gas permits on the state’s behalf.

GOVERNMENT WORK/LIFE/OPERATIONS:
As control of the House turns over, young aides perform a familiar shuffle: Job insecurity is a fact of life for the 10,000 or so at-will Hill workers who form the backbone of Congress.

Public workers facing outrage as budget crises grow: Across the nation, a rising irritation with public employee unions is palpable.

For Capitol’s nursing mothers, an escape from politics: Some of the most inconspicuous rooms on Capitol Hill have the most colorful nicknames — Lactation Lobby, Lactation Station, Milk Factory and Boob Cube.

NTSB:
NTSB bars airline from accident probe: The agency says American Airlines improperly downloaded information for its own use from the flight-data recorder of a Boeing 757 that rolled off the end of a runway at Jackson Hole on Dec. 29.

STATE DEPARTMENT:
Diplomats help push jet sales on global market: United States diplomats, acting like marketing agents, offered deals to heads of state and airline executives whose decisions could be influenced by price, performance and perks.

TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT:
An unlikely duo’s auto safety quest: A college professor and a former federal transportation official team up to seek standard installation of black boxes in cars.