Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over - Eric Janszen

[Chris Coles]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

Maybe wrong here, I haven't read his work but perhaps he meant this one?

http://www.lrsp.com/b2c.html

Spot on Sidewinder. Thanks for getting up early and setting the record straight before I got up myself.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

And then I noticed this at the bottom of your post

"If necessity is the mother of invention, desperation is the father..."


and I have to say I completely disagree. The only way forward towards successful exploitation of invention is to invest in the person that created the thoughts in the first place. But I am sure that anyone doing comprehensive research of the record will confirm that by far the majority of inventions are never properly capitalised and remain to this day as an idea on a piece of paper filed in the patent office.


Those that are invested in are usually taken from the originator and exploited and the originator marginalised. A VERY good example were the founders of CISCO who were shown the door by the VC that stepped in to fund their start up. How many new ideas did they have locked up in them? Instead, they simply walked away from invention.

[DSpencer]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

Wow, that was an unexpected response. Thanks for the background. I guess this idea is very personal to you given your situation. Hope your luck changes.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

Thanks for that; even the best of us have a "Bad" day when it is better to have a good moan and spend the day outside in the sun. So today was mine. Feel much better now.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

I think the growth of government employment is, in part, a response to this problem.

Flintlock, this is a popular myth, but I think it can be proven to be just that, a myth.

According to the census:

1) Total US population from 1997 to 2007 increased 11.2%
2) State employment (in FTEs) over this time increased 7.5%
3) Federal employment (full time employees) over this time decreased by 1.3%

In other words, neither Federal nor state employment increased at the same rate as the population, and Federal employment actually decreased over this time.

Technology can make government workers obsolete nearly as fast as those in the private sector, or so it may seem. With state and local governments in dire fiscal straits, I'd venture to bet you will see these numbers decrease drastically by the time the 2012 census of government occurs.

I do truly believe that it is important to dispel this myth that government employment is growing. I don't know where it stems from, but it is not the case.

Otherwise I agree with your earlier post

[bart]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

The facts, direct from the BLS, on government employment:

[metalman]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

Flintlock, this is a popular myth, but I think it can be proven to be just that, a myth.

According to the census:

1) Total US population from 1997 to 2007 increased 11.2%
2) State employment (in FTEs) over this time increased 7.5%
3) Federal employment (full time employees) over this time decreased by 1.3%

In other words, neither Federal nor state employment increased at the same rate as the population, and Federal employment actually decreased over this time.

Technology can make government workers obsolete nearly as fast as those in the private sector, or so it may seem. With state and local governments in dire fiscal straits, I'd venture to bet you will see these numbers decrease drastically by the time the 2012 census of government occurs.

I do truly believe that it is important to dispel this myth that government employment is growing. I don't know where it stems from, but it is not the case.

Otherwise I agree with your earlier post

charts i found googling itulip don't agree with your story...





The largest percentage increase in unemployment occurred in construction, agriculture, and professional services, the least in government.



Only in government did unemployment decline during the recession

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...y-Eric-Janszen

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

Federal employment actually decreased over this time.

If some Federal jobs were "privatized" or contracted out during that time, how would this show in your numbers? I presume this happened some, at least in the defense and intelligence areas.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

this myth that government employment is growing

Perhaps, even if government full-time employment is decreasing, the portion of the population depending on the government for money is increasing. Some collect social benefits (Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment, Food Stamps, ...) Some work for contractors or other companies heavily dependent on Federal or State government policies, regulations or expenses.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

If some Federal jobs were "privatized" or contracted out during that time, how would this show in your numbers? I presume this happened some, at least in the defense and intelligence areas.

You make a good point there - this is only counting full time employment - the numbers for part-timers and temps stay about even over the timeframe, but the numbers going out in private contracts are not readily available.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

charts i found googling itulip don't agree with your story...

Metalman,

The first chart you present from ITulip is not in agreement with the one that Bart just posted either - I will look into that later tonight.

The second and third charts are from a later time period. I was looking at the latest decade of census data available (1997 to 2007). You are looking at the effects of the recent recession.

I'm assuming that the second and third charts refer to unemployment claims (otherwise it's % of government unemployment compared to what?) - most state and local governments have tried rather to push workers into retirement by changing benefits unless they leave rather than fight a battle with public sector unions. This means that there may be less employees and less employment at the same time (whilst still draining government coffers).

Secondly, we have seen California public employees paid with IOUs, payments to employees to voluntarily leave, payroll reductions, furloughs, etc. This is again a factor of the unionized nature of public employees.

Thirdly, all employees hired by stimulus money are limited in their jobs until 2012, when they are unemployed, so a bullet was dodged for a couple of years there.

Fourth, if public sector employment did not rise as fast as population while times were good, then what is the big deal if there are less unemployment claims from it when times are tough?

I think that the total sum of these issues paints a differing picture than what is typically assumed.

[bart]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

The first chart you present from ITulip is not in agreement with the one that Bart just posted either - I will look into that later tonight.

The data is identical to what I have, its just looking at gov't employment numbers directly instead of as a percentage of NFP.

There is no conflict, and your original points have been shown to only be looking at a partial or incomplete picture.

[DSpencer]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

It is confusing to compare multiple graphs and numbers that use different time frames, measure slightly different things and use a different method (% vs number).

Fourth, if public sector employment did not rise as fast as population while times were good, then what is the big deal if there are less unemployment claims from it when times are tough?

I'm not sure where the idea that public sector employment should rise at the same rate as the population increases has originated, but I don't agree with it.

"the big deal", at least for people with my perspective, is that these public sector employees are non-productive members of society. Who cares if they go on unemployment when their original checks came from taxpayers anyway? In fact, I would prefer they be unemployed because they can't do as much harm as when they are "working" for the government.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

The data is identical to what I have, its just looking at gov't employment numbers directly instead of as a percentage of NFP.

There is no conflict, and your original points have been shown to only be looking at a partial or incomplete picture.

That is indeed the case - I was looking at state and federal employment - not local employment including teachers, local police &ct. Even with them included, there was a broad downward trend as a percentage of employment until the recession hit, and it still has not recovered to previous levels.

[bart]

Re: Debt-deflation Bear Market Update - Part I: First Bounce officially over (really)

If one looks at the raw data, it shows that the uptrend in gov't employees started before the recession.