Category: Economics

Spending Crisis – Part III

George Noga
Possible solutions: grow, cut, tax, inflate, repress, restructure, repudiate, seize, MMT
Spending Crisis – Part III
Possible Solutions to Spending Crisis
By: George Noga – May 12, 2019

           This is the third of four posts in our Spending Crisis series, which is available in its entirety at www.mllg.us. There are many theoretical ways a spending crisis could be averted; we could grow, cut, tax, inflate, repress, restructure, repudiate, seize, or MMT our way out. More likely, we will employ a combination of these measures.

          Grow: There once was a time, as recently as 5-10 years ago, where growth was a possibility: no longer. There is no way the economy can grow at a faster rate than the debt, which currently is growing by 5.25% and increasing to 8.00% by 2025.

         Cut (Spending): FY 2019-2020 spending will be about $4.7 trillion with a deficit of $1.1 trillion. To balance the budget requires spending cuts of 23.4% but, by the time an impending crisis gets Congress’s attention, cuts of 30% will be necessary. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions and defense would have to be savaged to such an extent as to sow the seeds of civil unrest. Moreover, the cuts would have to remain in effect for 15 straight years just to get back to today’s 78% debt ratio.

       Tax: Balancing the budget will require a 36% tax increase. Even if possible, it would be self defeating, as sky-high taxes would lead to economic stagnation. Note: tax hikes are a higher percentage than spending cuts due to starting from a lower base.

        Inflate: Inflation is the cruelest tax of all and devastates everyone’s plans, hopes and dreams. Just to cut the debt in half requires 10 years of 7.5% inflation provided the deficit is not increasing during that same time. Realistically, it would require 20%  inflation for ten or more consecutive years just to maintain the status quo.

       Repress: Repression is government action that insidiously transfers wealth from the private to the public sector to facilitate financing massive public debt. It includes: (1) low or negative interest rates; (2) war on cash; (3) currency/capital controls; and (4) bail-ins. We already have repression; it will get much worse as the crisis approaches.   See our post of November 11, 2018, devoted entirely to financial repression.

       Restructure: Debt restructure likely will be part of the government crisis response. It takes many forms including: (1) lengthening maturities; (2) requiring roll-over; (3) imposing haircuts; (4) lowering interest rates; and (5) conversion to other securities.

       Repudiate: Nations that have repudiated are unable to borrow again for decades. Any repudiation would be perpetually tied up in courts and would decimate the savings of ordinary Americans who own government debt, directly or indirectly, in money market accounts, pensions and annuities. A direct repudiation is unlikely.

       Seize: When crisis hits, there will be $25 trillion of IRA, 401(k) and pension assets; government could seize some or all such assets in exchange for government pensions. In recent years, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Ireland and France have, through one artifice or another, seized money from pension assets. Government, like Willie Sutton, will go where the money is and that place is pensions.

         Modern Monetary Theory: MMT has been around for a while but recently has been embraced by the democratic socialist crowd as a justification for unlimited spending. MMT asserts that a sovereign government that issues debt in its own currency, has flexible exchange rates and controls its central bank can spend without limit or constraint. With MMT, the state simply creates unlimited amounts of money.

Combination of Most of the Above

          Just to stabilize (not to fix) the ratio requires $1.25 to $1.50 trillion per year from the above sources for up to 15 years. In the early stages of the crisis, a panicky government will: (1) enact VAT and/or carbon taxes; (2) make modest spending cuts; (3) increase repression; and (4) tweak Social Security and entitlements. It will be too little, too late; at most, it could slow the progression of the crisis for a few years.

          In the advanced stages of the crisis anything is possible including: (1) massive tax increases; (2) hyperinflation; (3) severe financial repression including negative interest and currency/capital controls; (4) debt restructure; and (5) reliance on MMT to create unlimited amounts of money. When the crisis reaches the desperation stage, I would not rule out government seizure of most or all IRA, 401(k) and pension assets.

        Our final post in this series (next week) addresses the ultimate question of whether or not a spending crisis catastrophe can be averted. Don’t miss it.

Spending Crisis – Part II

George Noga
Official government data are frightening – despite being wildly optimistic.
Spending Crisis – Part II
Analyzing the Data
By: George Noga – May 5, 2019

       This is the second of four posts on the spending crisis. The entire series is available on our website: www.mllg.us. Parts III and IV will be distributed on May 12 and 19 respectively. We begin with some data. The current public debt to GDP ratio is 78% and is increasing rapidly. GDP has been growing at 2.5% (with no recessions); we assume it continues to grow at 2.5% in the future, but at a net rate of 2.0% after taking into account the inevitable periodic recessions. The debt is now growing at 5.25%; we assume it grows at 6% until 2025, 8% to 2028 and 10% thereafter – again net of recessions. This assumption is consistent with projected deficits and demographics. These are conservative assumptions and actual results are likely to be worse.

          Based on the assumptions supra, the US will exceed a 90% ratio in 2022 and a 100% ratio in 2025. After 2025 it gets really ugly, with the ratio approaching 150% by 2030. Social Security is now devouring its reserves, Medicare exceeds its funding in a few years and interest on the debt skyrockets. Deficits will average $1.5 trillion over the coming decade. The deficit easily will exceed $2 trillion during the next recession and it would not be shocking for it to be as high as $2.5 trillion, or even $3.0 trillion.

          The really bad news is that the above data (mostly from government sources) are wildly optimistic. For example, CBO projected in 2018 that the deficit would not go above $1 trillion until 2022, but now is expected to exceed that in FY 2019-2020. CBO is touted as being non-political, but it really isn’t; it is required to follow the rules established by Congress. Hence, CBO is severely constrained and its data are neither objective nor accurate. MLLG’s data have proven to be far more accurate.

Caution: Don’t get hung up on the source of the numbers or the specific timing. There is no significant difference whether you use CBO, MLLG or other data; they all lead to the same ultimate outcome, only the timing differs slightly. 

Significance of a 90% Public Debt to GDP Ratio

          The 90% ratio is not arbitrarily plucked from the ether. Governments have been borrowing money for 600 years and there is no example of recovery from a 90% ratio without social and economic upheaval, usually accompanied by a lost generation until excess debt is purged. The 90% ratio is valid because beyond 90% the mathematics of interest and compounding results in an economic death spiral. Note: The World Bank asserts the tipping point is reached at 77%, which the US already has exceeded.

          The crisis doesn’t begin on cue when the debt ratio hits 90%; that just represents the point-of-no-return. The crisis may not begin until years later when the ratio reaches 125%, or even higher. The 90% ratio is analogous to Titanic hitting the iceberg. The ship remained afloat for quite some time after the iceberg encounter and no crisis was immediately evident to passengers. Nonetheless, the moment Titanic hit the iceberg its fate was irreversible as is a nation’s fate once its debt exceeds 90% of its GDP.

The Mathematics of a 100% Public Debt to GDP Ratio

          When GDP and the debt are equal, i.e. the ratio is 100%, it is much easier to grasp the mathematics of the death spiral. At a 100% ratio, the economy (GDP) must grow as fast as the debt to prevent a meltdown. Herein we assume that GDP grows at a sustained 2% rate net of recessions and in 2025 debt grows at 8%. The differential between the growth of the economy and the debt is then 6% per year; debt grows $2.0 trillion while GDP grows $400 billion. The annual addition to the debt now is up to $2.0 trillion and increasing; soon thereafter, the debt reaches critical mass.

           Clearly, our debt is growing at a much faster rate than our means to discharge it. This is readily apparent to creditors who are likely to demand much higher interest rates. If interest on the debt simply reverted to its historic level of a composite 6%, it would amount to $1.5 trillion a year in 2025, equal to about 25% of the budget. Long before America reaches that point, the spending crisis will be in full bloom.

– – – – – – – – – – – –  – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Next on May 12th – Part III: Possible solutions to the spending crisis.

Spending Crisis – Part I

George Noga
At root, the spending crisis is moral rather than economic.
Spending Crisis – Part I
Introduction and Background

By: George Noga – April 28, 2019

           This is the first post in our series about the spending crisis. It is a spending crisis and not a debt or deficit crisis because it is the spending that drives both the debt and deficits. It is a moral rather than an economic crisis because preventing the crisis requires only summoning the national will to control spending. It is about who we are as a people, what kind of country we bequeath to our children and our national security and survival. I have marshalled all the facts, logic and wordsmithery I possess to explain this crisis in an objective and non-political manner.

Our series is in four parts. Part II, Analyzing the Data, will be distributed May 5, Part III, Possible Solutions, on May 12, and Part IV, Can Catastrophe Be Averted?, on May 19. The full series is now on our website www.mllg.us. The series was reviewed in advance by three experts with diverse viewpoints. I carefully considered all their feedback, incorporated much of it and offered to publish any dissenting opinions.

         In addition to my MBA, CPA background, I have studied economics for 50 years. I devoted much of one summer in Montana to constructing a quantitative model of the US economy, including the deficit, which has proven to be highly accurate. I have been writing about the crisis of spending, debt and deficits for over a decade.

Background Information

         US GDP now is $21.0 trillion; the public debt is $16.3 trillion, while the total debt is $22.2 trillion. This results in a public debt to GDP ratio of 77.6% and a total debt to GDP ratio of 105.7%. The $5.9 trillion difference between the total debt and the public debt consists of intragovernmental debt, which mostly is money owed to Social Security and, to a lesser extent, to FHA and other agencies. For example, when Treasury spent the Social Security surplus, it issued special non-negotiable bonds.

        Throughout this series we use the public debt ratio and not the total debt ratio because intragovernmental debt is notional, with interest accrued and not paid in cash. It is analogous to writing yourself an IOU. Most who cite the higher total debt ratio do so out of ignorance or as a scare tactic. However, there are some credible sources who believe total debt is more relevant than public debt. If they are right, our debt ratio is 105.7% and not 77.6% and America is much worse off than described in this series.

           There are some who minimize the seriousness of the current ratio because it was higher (115%) in the aftermath of WWII (the only time prior to 2009 it was above 50%) and America easily recovered. However, the WWII deficit saved America from totalitarianism and was transitory. Afterward, war expenses ceased, Social Security ran surpluses, Medicare didn’t exist and demographics were favorable. Now, the deficit is structural; Social Security, Medicare and pensions run huge deficits and demographics are bleak. We are in the tenth year of an economic expansion and growth is 3%; yet, the FY 2019-2020 deficit will be $1.1 trillion and increasing each year thereafter.

       It must be noted that many states, counties and cities also are in serious debt trouble and will, at some point, require federal government bailouts. Private debt is hovering at an all-time high. The world debt to GWP (Gross World Product) ratio currently is 84% and spiraling upward. Global debt (public and private) is $230 trillion and is over 300% of GWP. Although these issues are beyond the scope of this spending crisis series, they deserve at least some recognition.

          We close with some examples that seem to defy expectations. Japan’s debt ratio is 250%, but dedicated pension assets lower the effective ratio to 110%. The NIKKEI index is down 46% from 1989 and economic growth is 1% amidst chronic deflation. Greece’s ratio hit 180%; it avoided default due to its small size and bailout by the EU. It’s economy contracted, pensions were halved and there was social and political upheaval. Italy, with a 130% ratio, is following in Greece’s tracks. Even though they avoided default, Japan, Greece and Italy did not escape the consequences of massive debt; they all have suffered lost generations and their crises are far from resolved.

Next on May 5th is Part II of our series about the spending crisis.

Wanted: More Millionaires and Billionaires

George Noga
Newly minted millionaires and billionaires are essential for a thriving society.
Wanted: More Millionaires and Billionaires
By: George Noga – April 7, 2019

         Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez condemned “a system that allows billionaires to exist“. Her chief of staff tweeted “Every billionaire is a policy mistake.” Pocahontas called billionaires “freeloaders“. Bernie Sanders said “Billionaires’ insatiable greed is having an unbelievably negative impact on the fabric of our country“. The economic illiteracy of such people is staggering. Even the laughable commie economists (oxymoron) of the old USSR understood that new millionaires were vital to economic success.

      In a market economy, one becomes rich only by creating a product or service voluntarily purchased by sovereign consumers. The more people helped, the greater the wealth. Sam Walton, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos became billionaires by improving the lives of hundreds of millions, or even billions, of people. Newly created wealth is the best metric for gauging how well a society is innovating and serving the needs of its people. A society with no new wealth creation is stagnating.

        Many who well understand that wealth creators are vital to America’s prosperity, nonetheless believe inherited wealth is evil. They are wrong; however, we leave that issue for another day. We do note however that almost all great wealth is dissipated within three generations due to the ever-increasing number of heirs, estate taxes, charitable bequests and poor decision making. Also, much of the motivation of the original wealth creators was to provide financial security for future generations.

        Not only is the latte left dead wrong about wealth creation, its positions on many other economic issues – tax rates, minimum wage, free college, Medicare for all and rent control – are voodoo economics and nothing short of modern day witchcraft.

Income tax rates/minimum wage: These were subjects of full postings on March 3 and 10 respectively and are available on our website: www.mllg.us. In those posts, we showed that higher tax rates do not result in more tax revenue and that minimum wages are insidious and harmful, especially to the people they purport to help.

Free college: Social science degrees from overcrowded schools, with courses taught by graduate assistants, are cruel hoaxes. The inevitable result is a surfeit of psychology, sociology and hyphenated-studies majors driving for Uber. Free college devalues all college degrees and the added competition from more degrees suppresses wages. There will be more degreed people seeking the same number of jobs requiring degrees.

Rent Control: Government creates housing shortages by restricting development and then compounds it by enacting rent control. They blame landlords when the problem is due entirely to government failures. Ultimately, it leads to more homelessness.

Medicare for all: The bill Democrats introduced in Congress provides for rationing and reinstitutes the dreaded Obamacare death panels. Even the Canadian system, which is better than many, is a failure; see our July 22, 2018 post entitled “Canadians Flock to Whitefish“. In Canada, the median wait time between referral and treatment is 21 weeks and years in some provinces. Over one million Canadians (3%) are on wait lists when same day service is inexpensive and readily available in the USA.

        Progressives prefer to attack the wealthy rather than to improve the lot of the poor; they care more about appearances, class warfare and political talking points than about results; it is much easier to demagogue billionaires than it is to reduce poverty. Instead of billionaires being policy mistakes, good economic policy fosters creation of more billionaires. Most Americans don’t resent success, they want to achieve it!

Our next post challenges Hillary Clinton’s claim to winning the 2016 popular vote.

Hauser’s Law: Why You Can’t Soak the Rich

George Noga
Taxpayers are not sheep docilely waiting to be shorn.
Hauser’s Law: Why You Can’t Soak the Rich
By: George Noga – March 3, 2019

        There are 7 reasons it is impossible to soak the rich by raising income tax rates; there is only one way it can be done – revealed herein. Full disclosure: I have firsthand knowledge of this by virtue of being a CPA tax professional and, during the 1970s and 1980s, the founder and CEO of one of the largest tax shelter firms in America.

Why You Can’t Soak the Rich With Higher Tax Rates 

1.  Hauser’s Law: Tax revenue remains constant at 18% of GDP (20% in good times, 16% in bad times) regardless if the top rate is 28% or 92%. This has been true for the 75 years since WWII. Later in this post we explain why Hauser’s Law works.

2. Elasticity of Taxable Income: ETI is a variant of Hauser’s Law and is measured by comparing tax returns before and after tax increases. For incomes above $500,000 the ETI is -1.2, which means the higher rate collected less money than before. For capital gains and dividends, the ETI shows that virtually no added tax is collected.

3. The rich are not the same people: The highest bracket taxpayers are not the same people each year. Someone who runs a family business with modest income suddenly becomes rich for one year when the business is sold. It is precisely such ordinary people (rich for one year only) who get caught in the crosshairs of high tax rates.

4. There is no way to identify the rich: Government (thankfully) has no data on wealth, only on certain types of income – which is a poor surrogate for wealth. It is impossible to soak the rich if there is no way to know who they are. Also see #3 supra.

5. Corporate taxes are not paid by owners: Businesses and corporations collect taxes but the money they pass along to government is not their money. Nearly all business taxes are passed along to consumers as higher prices – extremely regressive.

6. There aren’t enough rich: Not only are they different people from year to year, there just are too few of them to make soaking them worthwhile. The only way to raise significantly more revenue within the current tax code is to tax the middle class.

7. The income of the truly rich is not taxed as ordinary income; it is capital gains.

Why Hauser’s Law Works and ETI is Negative

        Hauser’s Law appears counterintuitive; why would government collect the same percentage of taxes when the top rate is 92% as it collects when it is 28%? The answer lies in human behavior; people are not sheep docilely waiting to be shorn. Higher rates incentivize people to go to great lengths to reduce taxes. They will work, save and invest less; barter, retire earlier; hide, defer and underreport income, convert ordinary income to capital gains and not realize capital gains without offsetting losses.

        They employ tax shelters; shift income to lower bracket family members; seek out tax-free income; change the amount, location and composition of taxable income; exploit ambiguities and loopholes; shift income to corporations; lobby aggressively for tax breaks, move from one place to another – even outside the US; move into the occult economy; employ top tax lawyers and accountants and much more – mostly legal.

How to  Soak the Rich – Using the Tax Code

       There is only one way to soak the rich and that is with lower tax rates. It works for the same reasons that Hauser’s Law works; the rich become disincentivized to take measures to reduce their tax bill. Whenever rates drop, the rich pay a much higher share of taxes than before. The 2003 Bush tax cuts resulted in the largest tax increase on the rich in American history; they paid over double what they paid when Carter was president. It works every time, but you won’t hear it from AOC and her compadres.

Our next post debunks another liberal shibboleth, the $15 minimum wage.  

Debt Crisis Timetable Accelerating

George Noga
When Titanic struck the iceberg, it remained afloat and the disaster was not yet apparent. However, its fate was irreversible from that moment; so it is with a 90%  debt/GDP ratio.
Debt Crisis Timetable Accelerating
By: George Noga – August 1, 2018

       I have a recurrent nightmare about an endless train, brimming with passengers and priceless cargo, slowly but inexorably hurtling along its tracks toward a bottomless abyss. The engineers, conductors, passengers and observers all know the train is going over the cliff; however, instead of trying to stop the train they are opening the throttle to speed it up. When I awake, I realize it is no nightmare; it is happening right now to the United States of America. Following are data just released by CBO and SS.

  • Social Security begins devouring reserves this year, 4 years earlier than projected last year. Reserves will be depleted in 15 years and benefits would require a 25% cut.

 

  • Medicare will be unable to pay scheduled benefits in 8 years; just during the past year this shortened by 3 years. What does that say about the integrity of the data?

 

  • Deficits average $1.5 trillion (total $15 trillion) over the next 10 years (based on current policy), raising the public debt/GDP ratio to 105% per the latest CBO estimate.

 

  • Interest on the debt will triple to just under $1 trillion per year within 10 years per the June 2018 CBO report. Debt service will soon overtake defense spending.

 

  • The really bad news is that the projections cited above, by government agencies, are wildly optimistic. None assumes a recession during the coming decade, while it is nearly certain there will be one or possibly even two. Recent projections made by private sector economists (Fortune Magazine, Cato Institute) are much worse.

       No one cares! For most Americans the problem is too abstruse; they are tired of hearing pundits cry wolf; and there is no discernable impact on their daily lives. For politicians, tackling the issue has no upside; it is all downside, including possible electoral loss. No constituency exists for reining in benefits, cutting spending or raising taxes; the political apparat favors the opposite. Each year that we dithered, the problem became more intractable and costly; now, finding a solution is virtually hopeless.

        Economists believe the point-of-no-return is a public debt to GDP ratio >90%; the World Bank says 77%. The US already is at 77% and will reach 90% much earlier than believed only months ago. The crisis doesn’t begin when we exceed 90%; it just means there is no going back. The Titanic remained afloat a long while after it struck the iceberg and the crisis was not immediately evident to those aboard. Nonetheless, the moment Titanic hit the iceberg, its fate became irreversible; so it is with a 90% ratio.

       As my nightmare continues, nothing happens until after the train goes over the cliff and we are subsumed by crisis. Panicked politicians impose a VAT, modest at first, but rapidly ramped up to European levels of 20+%. Income taxes skyrocket. Only token changes are made to entitlements. Economic growth tanks. Defense is compromised. There is a 15-25 year lost generation as we morph into a European-style welfare state. People lead lives of quiet desperation and the USA, as we know it, ceases to exist.

      There are two certainties about the impending debt crisis: (1) if something cannot go on forever, it won’t; and (2) excess debt ultimately must be purged from the system. The debt can be purged only via higher taxes, less spending (especially entitlement spending), hyperinflation or repudiation; there are no other options.

      By the time the crisis hits, a combination of new and higher taxes and spending cuts totalling $1.25 trillion per year in today’s dollars (25% of the budget) for 15 straight years will be needed just to get back to today’s 77% debt/GDP ratio. That should give you some perspective about the devastation that purging the debt will wreak on America – as well as the reason for my recurrent nightmares.

Our next post on August 10th documents great causes turning into rackets.

American Birthright Accounts: Readers Respond

George Noga
This post compares American Birthright Accounts to Social Security and responds to readers’ questions about seeming too good to be true.
American Birthright Accounts: Readers Respond
By: George Noga – June 17, 2018

       Reaction to our May 20th post about American Birthright Accounts (“ABA”) was extensive and spirited. If you missed the original post or wish to reread it, you easily can access it on our website: www.mllg.us; however, we provide a summary in the next two paragraphs. Reader responses (addressed herein) centered on (1) comparisons with Social Security; and (2) questioning whether ABAs were too good to be true.

       American Birthright Accounts are an original MLLG idea, although the name is borrowed. ABAs are simple and affordable. Every child born in the USA receives a professionally managed, tax-free account funded by government for $5,000 at birth and $500 per year thereafter until age 65. If the account grows at 7% net of inflation, which mirrors the average annual performance of markets since 1930, the account will exceed $1 million at age 65 and generate $6,000 per month of retirement income.

         A retired couple, both with ABAs, receives $12,000 a month tax-free, equivalent to $200,000 per year taxable. They own their own accounts and have $2 million to bequeath to their heirs – all tax-free and in today’s dollars. The cost to the government is equal to one-half of one percent of the federal budget, or 25% of what we will spend this year just on food stamps. ABAs also would vastly reduce inequality in America!

How Do ABAs Compare with Social Security?

       An American working from age 20 to 67 earning the median income ($60,000) pays $430,000 into Social Security (“SS”) and receives a real (net of inflation) rate of return of 1.2% (per Heritage Foundation) resulting in a notional value of $738,000 at retirement. The average SS beneficiary receives $16,000 per year, or a rate of return of 2.2%. Because SS is 85% taxable, the benefit is equivalent to $13,000 after tax – equal to a real return of 1.8%. Finally, SS benefits are unsustainable at their present level and after circa 2030 beneficiaries can expect to receive only 75% of present benefits.

        Let’s put SS side by side with an ABA. The average cost of SS is $430,000, for an ABA it is only $37,500 ($5,000 at birth and $500 a year for 65 years). Average SS benefits are $13,000 per year after tax; for ABAs the comparable number is $72,000. At death, the value of your SS account is zero, zilch, nada; the value of your ABA is over $1 million. Everyone benefits equally from an ABA, whereas the benefits vary wildly for SS. I could go on ad infinitum in this vein, but I believe you get the drift.

Are ABAs Too Good to be True?

      Some readers had trouble with the mathematics of ABAs, wondering how it is possible for everyone to be a millionaire? The math is straightforward; the initial $5,000 increases to $435,000 and the $500 per year grows to $573,000 for a total of $1,008,000, all computed from standard compound interest formulas. ABAs compound from birth for 65 years, whereas SS doesn’t begin until 20 years later. ABAs grow at a market rate, while SS grows at the much lower short-term government bond rate.

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

      There is a much larger lesson here. ABAs succeed due to the power of markets, while SS fails because of the evils of government. Progressives oppose privatizing SS, fearing market success will turn workers into nascent capitalists by giving them a big stake in the free-market economy. Liberal poseurs oppose making everyone rich because it doesn’t fit their nihilist, tribalist, class warfare, identity group narrative.

Next up: The Supreme Court decision to permit sports betting. 

American Birthright Accounts

George Noga
American Birthright Accounts can make every child born in America a millionaire!
American Birthright Accounts
By: George Noga – May 20, 2018

         Browsing The Wall Street Journal one day, I saw a piece by David Smick about federal baby bonds. The article mentioned a decade-old piece of legislation that would have given every baby born in the USA a $500 bond. It failed to pass Congress despite bipartisan support. I couldn’t get baby bonds out of my mind. As a college math major and a CPA, I am good with numbers. This post presents my realistic and affordable plan to make every child born in the USA a millionaire and in today’s’ dollars.

        During my career in what now is called wealth management, I advised clients who owned businesses to set up Roth IRA accounts for their children as young as age 6. This is legal provided you pay them for actual work around the office. If my clients contributed the maximum amount each year until the children finished college and if the money continued to grow until their retirement, the sum could approach $1 million tax free – even if not another penny ever was contributed after the kids left college.

       Thus, I already was familiar with the power of money to grow over long time periods. People, like my business owning clients, could afford IRAs for their kids who likely would be well off no matter what. Those on the lower rungs of the economic ladder however are mostly wage earners who cannot legally make (nor afford) Roth contributions for kids and who never benefit from stock ownership over time. These folks need a user-friendly way to participate in future global wealth generation.

        My plan is simple. The federal government creates a tax-free American Birthright Account (“ABA”) for each child born in the USA and funds it for $5,000. Each year until the recipient retires, another $500 is added. The ABA is professionally invested in a diversified portfolio of global index funds. Since 1930, markets have increased 7% per year net of inflation despite depressions, bubbles and meltdowns. Since the 2009 market bottom, stocks quadrupled but working class families have not participated. When the ABA beneficiary is 65 years old, the account exceeds $1 million and generates over $6,000 per month of income – all tax free and in today’s dollars.

         My plan is affordable. There were 3,945,000 US live births in 2017. Taking into account infant mortality and premature deaths, there will be about 3.5 million new ABA beneficiaries every year. This equates to an annual cost of $17.5 billion for the initial $5,000 and $1.75 billion for the additional $500 per year. The average cost for the first 10 years is $25 billion. In year 11 the cost is $35 billion and increases $1.75 billion each year thereafter. This is only one-half of one percent of the federal budget.

          Every person born in America is a millionaire and receives tax-free over $6,000 per month in retirement income. A retired couple, both with ABAs, receives $150,000 per year tax free, equivalent to $200,000 taxable income in the 25% bracket. Unlike Social Security, ABA beneficiaries own their accounts and a couple would have $2 million to bequeath to heirs. ABAs would reduce inequality and give working class families the same advantages enjoyed by affluent Americans. Moreover, ABAs would give all Americans a stake in our economic system by making them stockholders.

        There are no tricks or legerdemain involved; American Birthright Accounts would transform America. It would be the most significant economic legislation ever enacted and would rival the Homestead Act of 1868 as the greatest legislation in American history. Just as the Homestead Act made landowners out of working class Americans, American Birthright Accounts would make them stakeholders in America and would affix an entirely new and profound meaning to “Born in the USA“!

Next up is our MLLG collection of blog-worthy but short topics.

The Politics of Harvey, Irma and Maria

George Noga
“Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks! Rage! blow! You cataracts and hurricanes, spout till you have drenched our steeples, drowned the cocks!”  (King Lear)
The Politics of Harvey, Irma and Maria
By: George Noga – November 26, 2017
      The lines above are from King Lear’s famous diatribe against the storm. The once mighty Lear, now powerless, urges nature to bring on another apocalypse. The storm symbolizes Lear’s state of mind. Shakespeare’s words could easily have been spoken by politicians following Harvey, Irma and Maria, ranting about climate change, price gouging and, in Puerto Rico, blaming others for their lack of preparedness.
     Harvey was the first major (cat 3) hurricane to make US landfall since Wilma in 2005, the longest hurricane-free period ever. Irma was the only major hurricane to hit Florida in 12 years, toppling a 165-year record. What happened next was as predictable as it was pathetic. There were climate change diatribes worthy of King Lear about how 12 hurricane-free years somehow proves hurricanes are more (not less) frequent.
       Meanwhile, a 2017 peer-reviewed study (D’Aleo, Wallace, Idso) found man-made adjustments to temperature readings account for all reported warming in the past 75 years. The study’s authors said when numerous adjustments are made, it is reasonable to expect some to have the effect of increasing warming and some of decreasing warming. Instead, nearly all adjustments increased warming; i.e. the data underpinning global warming are based entirely on human adjustments – not on actual data!
       EPA Administrator Pruitt and Energy Secretary Perry have suggested red-blue team exercises (used by military and intelligence services) to expose vulnerabilities in climate science. Climate alarmists went ballistic, arguing it would be a dangerous attempt to elevate minority opinions and to undercut the legitimacy, objectivity and transparency of existing climate science. Why would legitimate scientists be afraid to debate any issue? They should welcome debate. Newton is spinning in his grave.
       Politicians also mimicked King Lear in castigating price gouging. Florida Senator Nelson and AG Bondi were the best Lear impersonators. Bondi vowed to prosecute and to shame gougers and established a hotline for reporting violations. They are economically illiterate; economists universally agree price gouging is beneficial.
       Americans understand prices for the same product fluctuate in different conditions. Hotel rooms in a college town cost more during a big game. Americans openly flaunt anti-scalping laws. A poor ghetto kid risking scarce capital to broker tickets should be honored, not incarcerated. We readily accept Uber’s surge pricing and viscerally grasp it is beneficial. Government engages in price gouging at, inter alia, airports, toll roads, turnpike rest stops and sporting venues – Nelson and Bondi take note.
      Prices in free markets convey accurate, truthful and useful information about the value of a good or service; government prices are lies; consider the following:
  •    Market prices are determined by voluntary cooperation among people. Government prices are coercive and based on the naked police power of the state. Markets enforce themselves; government prices must be enforced by men with guns.
  •   Market prices alleviate shortages by directing resources to where they are most needed; government prices (rent control) lead to rationing and create shortages.
  •   Market prices are logical, non-political, foster civility and encourage honest behavior. Government prices are illogical, political and strain the social fabric by criminalizing laudable and honest behavior. Government prices create black markets, incentives for illegal behavior and breed disrespect for the law as in Venezuela.
  •   Market prices result in more supplies being available during a crisis, storing extra goods beforehand and conservation. Government prices create shortages, rationing and empty shelves. Market prices are better for victims of natural disasters.
       Why should a hurricane somehow be different than a football game when it comes to the price of a hotel room? Market prices are truthful; government prices are lies. In what kind of society would you prefer to live – one based on voluntary cooperation of people in markets or one based on government lies enforced by men with guns?
Our next post describes the four gifts of Christmas

Americans Vote With Their Feet

George Noga
People vote with their feet and 1,000 Americans each day are leaving blue state
progressive hellholes and moving to red states with greater economic freedom. 
Americans Vote With Their Feet
By: George Noga – February 19, 2017

     As far back as 260 years ago Americans voted with their feet; witness this excerpt from a 1775 letter in the Boston Gazette.

“Taxes continue very high. A great many of our industrious inhabitants are gone into the country; the burden now falls on a smaller number – and they less able to bear it.  Some have moved and others are about to move to country towns where their taxes are greatly eased. I love my native town but as my taxes are so large, I am resolved to move my family into the country.”
     Liberal politicians in California, New York, Illinois and other blue states have not learned the lesson from 1775. Nearly 1,000 people every day move from blue to red states. There are critical shortages of moving vans in California and New York and corresponding gluts in Texas and Florida. Illinois is hemorrhaging people. Folks fleeing blue states earn $20,000 more (per IRS) than those moving in and the gap is widening. The divide in education and social pathologies undoubtedly is just as great.
     Why is this so, given that blue states claim to be creating utopias for workers? The main reasons cited by those escaping are: (1) no right to work law; (2) high income tax rates; (3) high minimum wages; (4) pro-union work rules; (5) extravagant welfare benefits; (6) expansive regulations; and (7) green energy policies. Instead of workers’ paradises, progressive policies always result in impoverished snake pits.
     In a recent year, Florida gained nearly $10 billion in income from blue state defectors and Texas gained $6 billion. Five of the seven states with the biggest income gains have no income tax at all. New York was the biggest loser, shedding 115,000 people and $6 billion while Illinois lost over 110,000 people and $4 billion of income. In the past 10 years, a net of 1.5 million refugees abandoned California.
     Throughout human history, productive, hard-working people gravitate to where there is economic freedom. According to Gallup’s Index of Well Being, states with greater economic freedom also rank higher in happiness and well being. The five states ranking highest in economic freedom are SD, ND, TN, ID and OK (all red), while the five worst are NY, CA, NJ, HI and VT (all blue). The top 10 states in freedom enjoy median a household income $9,000 or 21% higher than the bottom 10. Moreover, all minority groups and immigrants in the freedom states also earn considerably more.
      States with more laissez-faire policies and greater economic freedom enjoy higher median incomes, more equitable income distribution, less poverty, greater success for immigrants and minorities and better overall well being. Despite hyperventilation by liberals, it is crystal clear in the real world which policies work and which fail. Smaller, less intrusive government always triumphs over big brother statism. America is voting with its feet resulting in a landslide for more liberty and less government!
      P.S. Will the last person leaving Illinois kindly turn off the lights?
Our next post February 26th takes on government regulation