Jim,
The latest from USAWatchdog is called "How Much Should A Job Cost?" Wasteful spending is just another way to rob America.
Your friend,
Greg Hunter
How Much Should A Job Cost?
1 FEBRUARY 2010 3 COMMENTS
By Greg Hunter
Since the State of the Union Address, the White House has turned its attention to jobs. President Obama said last week, “…jobs must be our focus in 2010, and that is why I am calling for a new jobs bill.” A $100 billion jobs bill has already passed the House of Representatives. The Obama Administration is now pressing the Senate to get a bill on his desk in short order. It will likely end up being a combination of spending and some tax incentives.
After the $787 billion stimulus that was appropriated last year by Congress, $100 billion seems paltry. My question is how much will it cost to save or create jobs? In the State of the Union Address, the President said, “Because of the steps we took, there are about 2 million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed.” So, taxpayers spent $787 billion to create or save 2 million jobs; that works out to be to be about $393,000 per job so far.
Back in October, the Associated Press claimed, “The government has overstated by thousands the number of jobs it has created or saved with federal contracts under the president’s $787 billion recovery program…” The AP report also said, “The review found some counts were more than 10 times as high as the actual number of jobs…” (Click here for more on the AP report) But, let’s just take the President at his word and say 2 million jobs were saved or created.
The President also contends that, “We’re on track to add another million and a half jobs to this total by the end of the year.” That gives you a grand total of 3.5 million jobs saved or created by the $787 billion stimulus plan. That works out to be nearly $225,000 spent to create or save each and every job!
Notes From Underground: Russia is the bear in the China shop
Yra | January 31, 2010 at 7:52 pm
Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson’s book, "On the Brink: Inside the Race to Stop the Collapse of the Global Financial System", attempts to explain why he should be praised and not buried.The question is whether it his book should be classified as fact or fiction.
Jim,
Take a look at this…
It is downright morbid when you think about it. The sellers are betting that folks will die prematurely while buyers are concerned that we live too long. You can now bet on human death. That pretty much encapsulates this conscience-less generation.
I wonder how one goes about "rigging" this market if they are a short seller of this stuff. Spooky isn’t it?
Trader Dan
Dear Trader Dan,
It has been said that if enough people bet a horse will get shot before he passes the finish line, he will get shot.
Now they are developing what sounds like an over the counter human death derivatives market.
I wonder what "natural disaster" is being planned, and for whom.
Longevity Swap Issuers Aim to Trade Death Derivatives (Update1)
By Karen Eeuwens
Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) — Insurance companies are seeking to create a secondary market in so-called longevity swaps and other derivatives whose values are tied to life expectancy.
Axa SA, Deutsche Bank AG, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and five other firms are founding the Life & Longevity Markets Association today to develop standardized contracts, a trading index and a valuation model for mortality, they said in a statement.
The first tradable contracts are likely to be longevity swaps, according to John Fitzpatrick, director of Pension Corp. and a member of the LLMA’s board. Longevity swaps protect insurance companies from people living longer and pay out when life expectancy exceeds forecasts in certain indexes. The contracts are a kind of derivative, financial instruments linked to specific events like changes in interest rates and events such as natural disasters.
Jim Sinclair’s Commentary
Here is some necessary reading to understand the scope of the problems and the baseless nature of the daily dosing of MOPE.
My sincere thanks to CIGA Richard B for his continuing and first class rendition of the facts that matter, throwing real light onto what the public now takes so lightly – every Friday’s bank failures.
How dumbed down have the sheeple become? How many banks fail in Euroland every week?
Dear Jim,
The FDIC announced six more bank closings on Friday evening, bringing this year’s total to 15. The dollar values were quite large.
In total, the closings cost the FDIC an estimated $1.86 billion. In addition, the FDIC had to enter into loss-share agreements on more than $4 billion of the assets purchased, and had to take an additional $386 million of the failed banks’ assets onto its own balance sheet for disposition.
This week’s closings continued what has become a familiar pattern:
1. Even though the failed banks appeared well capitalized on paper, it cost the FDIC historically unprecedented sums to close them.
2. Where closing a bank might traditionally have involved the FDIC paying out less than 8% of the value of the failed bank’s deposits, most closings now involve payouts of at least 25% and as much as 50% of the value of deposits.
3. This escalation in FDIC costs reveals a huge disparity between the paper and market values of the banks’ assets. This disparity is the inevitable result of the Financial Accounting Standards Board having last year suspended mark to market valuation requirements after caving in to intense political pressure.
4. The FDIC’s estimated cost of closing each bank is almost certainly being understated because in each transaction, the FDIC is having to enter into loss-share agreements with respect to virtually all of the assets purchased.
First Regional Bank of Los Angeles, California involved some of the worst numbers seen so far in this crisis. It cost the FDIC $825.5 million, about 44% of the value of First Regional’s deposits, to close this bank even though on paper it had assets worth $300 million more than its deposits. First Regional’s assets were over-valued by 109%.
Florida Community Bank of Immokalee, Florida, came in a close second. The estimated cost of closing it — $353 million – was also about 44% of the value of its deposits. Its assets were over-valued by 98%.
First National Bank of Georgia, Carrollton, Georgia’s assets were over-valued by 67%, and its closing cost the FDIC 34% of deposits.
Community Bank and Trust, Cornelia, Georgia’s assets were over-valued by 60%, and its closing cost the FDIC 32% of deposits.
American Marine Bank, Bainbridge Island, Washington’s assets were over-valued by 50%, and its closing cost the FDIC 19% of deposits.
Finally, the last of the six banks closed, Marshall Bank, NA, of Hallock, Minnesota, actually provided a refreshing example of what a successful bank closing should look like. Its closing only cost the FDIC $4.1 million, about 7.5% of deposits, and its assets were over-valued by only about 18%. Unfortunately, it was by far the smallest of the six banks closed.
The likelihood is that cases like Marshall Bank will continue to be the exception, while cases like First Regional Bank and Florida Community Bank will continue to be the rule.
Respectfully yours,
CIGA Richard B.
Personal incomes, consumer spending up in December
CIGA Eric
Personal incomes rose more than expected in December and consumer spending increased for the third straight month, helping the economy slowly recover from the worst recession in decades.
Today’s personal income (PI) trend, in terms of both velocity and acceleration, look extremely tame in comparison to the 1930′s Great Depression.
Long Term Personal Income Trend: 
I warn you not be lulled into a state of apathy by illusion of statistics. Personal income, like most government statistics, has been altered many times. These alteration are called data revisions.
