Balmer Report on Government 2014 nonpartisan
Your own words here.
Your own words here.
Steve Balmer, CEO, Microsoft, spent about $10 million (presumably his own money) gathering data with the help of Stanford U, The Wharton School, and Lynchburg College, to make sense out of the measurements and analyses of government performance data.
The link to the Balmer’s report is: https://www.usafacts.org/ . The report only contains facts from official government sources and does not attempt to draw conclusions. Conclusions are left to the reader.
It is a fabulous 57-page report with hundreds of source references. It should be read by all.
It covers the total expenditures (2014) of $5,217,217,757,000 from 90,106 jurisdictions that employ 23,269,407 people [7% of entire population].
My goal is the read the entire report line by line to draw some conclusions as an actuary might. Keep in mind that I have been a card carrying, dues paying Democrat all my life. I do test as a libertarian. I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative. I do believe, as the heads of most households do, that we should be generous to our family but we should balance the budget.
It will take be a year to complete this analysis. Here are my beginning notes on stuff I have just read. JTB: Joseph Thomas Brophy. I will need help so send me your cogent thoughts to josephbrophy@brophy.net
KEY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MISSIONS: as stated by Balmer:
- 1. Establish Justice and Maintain Domestic Tranquility
- 2. Provide Common Defense
- 3. Promote General Welfare
- 4. Secure the Blessings of Liberty for ourselves and posterity.
KEY POPULATIONS: total population; working 16-64; child <18; elderly 65+; poor (OPM)
Since 1980, the USA population has grown from 227m to 321m (41.4%) and the % working has remained at about 64.5%. Since 1980 the population has aged 7.7 years, from median age 30 to median age 37.7.
Children <18 have decreased from 28% to 23% while elderly have increased from 11% to 15%.
People in poverty (OPM=office of poverty management) has increased from 13% to 13.4% which means that 13.5 million have been added to the poverty roles.
To be updated by JTB
JTB CONCLUSION: NEITHER POLITICAL PARTY HAS BEEN EFFECTIVE IN REDUCING POVERTY NOTHWITHING THE $TRILLION$ SPENT IN WELFARE PROGRAMS SINCE LBJ’S GREATSOCIETY. [JTB estimates the cost of “aid to the disadvantaged” since 1980 to 2015 at $13.860 trillion; see https://www.google.com/search?q=how+much+%22aid+to+the+disadvantage%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=how+much+%22aid+to+the+disadvantaged%22].
IN 1980 THE OFFICIAL POVERTY LEVEL-OPM WAS set at $7450 (to include 13% of population) COMPARED TO $24,300 (13.4% of population) IN 2015. The poverty population has increased from 29.5m (1980) to 43m (2015), which means that 13.5 million have been added to the poverty roles. A major factor is the failure of the Obama Administration to create jobs fast enough following the GWBush /Pelosi recession. A major factor, in my judgment as an actuary, is simply the labor participation rate.
In 2012, CNSNews.com reported: “A record 94,708,000 Americans were not in the labor force in May 2012 -- 664,000 more than in April -- and the labor force participation rate dropped two-tenths of a point to 62.6 percent, near its 38-year low, the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday. When President Obama took office in January 2009, 80,529,000 Americans were not participating in the labor force; since then, 14,179,000 Americans have left the workforce -- some of them retiring and some just quitting because they can't find work.” See http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/record-94708000-americans-not-labor-force-participation-rate-drops
Another measure is the unemployment rate published by the BLS-Bureau of Labor Statistics. Unfortunately, there are several published rates: U3, U4, U5, and U6. And the politicians have a field day trying to prove their points of view. The current U3 rate is under 5%, but the real unemployment rate is probably = 9.7% http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/real-unemployment-rate-95
U-3 — This is what BLS calls the “official unemployment rate.” It represents unemployed workers who are actively searching for a new job. That’s the 8.3 percent rate that made headlines last week. (i.e. 2012).
U-6 — This is the catch-all of the lot. It includes all of the above groups — total unemployed, discouraged workers and the marginally attached — plus part-time workers who say they would like to be working more, but for economic reasons could only find part-time work. It was 15.1 percent in January 2012. http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/whats-the-real-jobless-rate/
In any event, putting politics aside, it seems that business and government must find a way to employ another 15 million people to move people off the poverty roles.
To be updated by JTB
JTB CONCLUSION: Children <18 have decreased from 28% to 23% because the USA FERTILITY RATE has decreased from 3.7 in 1960 to 1.8 in 2018. It is necessary for a society to maintain a fertility rate above 2.1 to maintain its culture. Abortions also drive down the fertility rate. Another negative effect of lower fertility rates – it makes it more financially difficult for working Americans to support its entitlement culture. Japan, Germany and Spain have very low fertility rates (1.5, 1.5 and 1.3 respectively) – which seriously threatens their ability to main their cultures. German leaders have already admitted that it will become a Muslim dominated nation by 2035. See opinions at https://www.quora.com/Will-Germany-become-a-Muslim-country . In general, Muslims have a significantly higher fertility rate than Catholics; 3.7% vs 1.8%. See http://graphics.wsj.com/catholics-world/ See also world bank fertility estimates http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN. See also fertility rates https://www.google.com/search?q=fertility+rates+us. See also Muslim vs non-muslimhttp://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/why-muslims-are-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religious-group/
**The U.S. Census Bureau determines poverty status by comparing pre-tax cash income against a threshold that is set at three times the cost of a minimum food diet in 1963, updated annually for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and adjusted for family size, composition, and age, but no adjustments for geographical region. http://www.irp.wisc.edu/faqs/faq2.htm
OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS
SINCE 1980, fed revenue has increased from $381B to $2.271T
Defense has increased from $155b to $747b.
Aid to Disadvantaged has increased from $66b to $785b (x%).
The deficit has increased from $6b to $19b (x%).
To be updated by JTB
JTB CONCLUSION: WE SIMPLY OVERSPEND AND STILL HAVE THE POOR WITH US; JESUS SAID: THE POOR YOU WILL ALWAYS HAVE WITH YOU, or words to that effect. [Mark 14:7; John 12:8; Matt 26:11.] Some scholars state that it is not what Jesus meant, but there is little doubt that Jesus made the statement.
DEFENSE SPENDING HAS NOT KEPT PACE NOTWITHSTANDING THE INCREASED THREAT OF TERRORISM (SEE the QUADRENIAL REPORTS PRODUCED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE POTUS BY NIC-National Intelligence Council: “GLOBAL TRENDS” 2030 AND 2035) See https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2017/01/paradox-progress-national-intelligence-council-releases-latest-global-trends-report/
PREDISENT CLINTON could DRIVE DEFICIT SPENDING TO NEARLY $0 PROVING THAT IT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED. CLINTON WAS A MODERATE DEMOCRAT AND PRO-BUSINESS. [ I will not dwell on his zipper problem since it doesn’t seem to have his affected his leadership.]
COMMENT FROM KEN CRAWFORD, AZ: “I enjoyed that. One comment however. RE “PREDISENT CLINTON WAS ABLE TO DRIVE DEFICIT SPENDING TO NEARLY $0 PROVING THAT IT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED. CLINTON WAS A MODERATE DEMOCRAT AND PRO-BUSINESS. [ I will not dwell on his zipper problem since it doesn’t seem to have his affected his leadership.]" Pretty much reveals the "non-partisan" aspect to that I suspect...but also fails to acknowledge it was during a Republican dominated Congress that controlled spending and deficits that this was accomplished. Yes, Clinton happened to be President at the time, and I would give him some credit for not vetoing everything the Republicans managed to accomplish while he was there. But frankly it wasn't his efforts that balanced the budget, it was Republicans. “ Submitted by KEN CRAWFORD, on Facebook.
FACTS: AS STATED IN THE BALLMER REPORT; [RED: data added by JTB]
$12,536 paid in taxes by average single parent in 2015
37.8 = median age in 2015; [1980 30; 1990 32.9; 2000 35.3 2010 37.2]
3,977,745 births in 2015. [PER CDC-CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL, THERE WERE 664,435 LEGALLY INDUCED ABORTIONS IN 2013. Other sources, including illegal abortions, cite a total of 926,190 abortions in 2015. The rate of abortions has been decreasing, probably because of better more effective contraceptive devices. The CDC reports a total of 51,888,303 abortions have been reported to them. By extension this would suggest a total of about 75m abortions, including illegal abortions.] [JTB CONCLUSION: Without engaging in the math of life contingencies; let me state the obvious: if these 75m abortions were brought to full term, then the median age of the USA would be decreasing, and the fertility rate would be significantly above 2.1%, and our society would be well equipped to maintain a viable Medicare and social security program. PLEASE NOTE: I am not an apologist for PRO-LIFE. In fact, I am PRO-CHOICE. For several reasons, the decision to birth or not must always be made by the pregnant mother. I generally believe that abortion is not a good idea, and I firmly believe that partial birth abortion is evil and murder. However, I am a consummate student of Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica, one of the greatest theologians, who wrote that life does not begin until the second trimester. The issue is complex because of rape, incest, dementia, depression, etc. I recall sitting in front of the pulpit in St Patrick’s Cathedral many years ago looking up and listening to a sermon by Cardinal Francis O’Connor on a controversial case reported in the NY Times of a mother and her abortion. Cardinal O’Connor said: “How can I possibly judge the state of mind of this woman. “
SOCIAL SECURITY & MEDICARE:
EXPENDITURES (net of premiums): 1980= $150B 2015= $1,431T 953.0%
TAX REVENUE: 1980= $138B 2015= $1,037T 968.8%
DEFICIT 1980= -$12B 2015= -$405B 3,375.0%
Using data from the report above: Since 1980, the USA population has grown from 227m to 321m (41.4%) and the % working has remained at about 64.5%. Since 1980 the population has aged 7.7 years, from median age 30 to median age 37.7. [JTB conclusion: let us put the data on a per capita basis]
EXPENDITURES (net of premiums): 1980= $661 2015= $4,4579 6,644%
TAX REVENUE: 1980= $171 2015= $3,231 1,889%
DEFICIT 1980= -$53 2015= -$1262 2,381%
JTB conclusion: if we analyzed this data on an age adjusted basis we would get different answers. If we analyzed this on a benefit adjusted bases, we would get an entirely different set of answers. This simplistic approach using population data suggests that the government is out of control and lacks fiscal discipline. If we were to project forward another 35 years to 2050; my educated guess is the system would have long since gone bankrupt. So, along the way, revenues should be increased and benefits reduced. NOTE: it is worth noting that this dismal outlook is exacerbated by the aging of the population, which place greater burden on the young workforce.
two comments