Another week and another report. Here goes...
Inventories edged up for crude and distillate fuel. However, gasoline dropped, as the total of all products decreased nearly 8.7M barrels. The SPR showed a 300K barrel withdrawal.
Another week and another report. Here goes...
Inventories edged up for crude and distillate fuel. However, gasoline dropped, as the total of all products decreased nearly 8.7M barrels. The SPR showed a 300K barrel withdrawal.
Current national debt...
A brief history (simplified)...
We went off the so called gold standard in the 60s and early 70s. We began trading in dollar assets. We imported a bit more than we exported in the 70s, largely due to oil imports. The dollar fell in value, which prompted the circulation of more dollars and thereby inflation.
That led to the so called eurobonds (not to be confused with Euro Bonds). In this case the eurobonds were principally in deutschmarks, meaning the debt was to be repaid in deutschmarks, regardless of the trading value with the dollar... which was weakening against these eurobonds.
Famously, Paul Volcker dramatically raised interest rates, which propelled bond yields upward, with the resultant demand in dollar based debt instruments.
The era of the strong dollar, increased purchasing power for imported goods, which escalated. Normally, the profits from these imported goods, would have been repatriated to the exporting country currency, keeping the dollar vs foreign currency rather stable.
However creative ways and methods, including opening up U.S. companies, property, etc. to foreign entities. Of course, the early and easiest route was strong demand for U.S. debt. This continued until the early 2000s, when more and more U.S. property became the target and the attraction to Treasury debt became relatively stable. The dollar remained strong, as competing countries currencies weakened.
It became a necessity for everyone, to keep the dollar strong, as any weakening threatened the value of dollarized assets.
The graph above, indicates the timing of the various "QE" programs. The FED was basically absorbing the debt at the primary dealer market to keep interest rates low and inflation at bay.
When the "trust" hits zero, a hole of $300B~$400B will need to be somehow covered. Congress would need to authorize that additional expenditure.
Where will it come from?
As for #2: The FED in theory could enact a massive QE program, but it would require fiscal restraint by Congress. Remember that an unrestrained fiscal spending outlook, couple with a massive QE would eventually lead to undermining the entire financial system, which leads to same result as outlined in #1.
As for #3: Probably, once it is too late and public is clamoring for massive change.
All of that is extreme, but the "Trust" will be bust in 4th quarter of 2032, per the latest estimate. There is also a national election during that 4th quarter, as well.
If it goes bust, which I have spent most of this article predicting... an immediate and huge impact will hit the economy. Seniors that rely soley on S.S. trust fund income, will be in need of many of the other government programs, which will simply move the debt into those areas. Those that do not soley rely on the trust fund, will likely cut back on spending.
In the interim, goods and services will take a hit and industries will need to reduce spending (manpower) to bridge gap. Additionally, they may require loans to cover expenses, while the various product pipelines reduce inventories to a new reality. Just as the government is driving up interest rates on their bonds, notes, bills, etc. This is not just a U.S. debt problem, as the sum total of debt worldwide is increasing at a rapid rate.
If you think none of this can happen, just remember... we were here before, when everything was tiny, compared to today, and when there was a willingness to address the problems.
I would suspect that 2033 will be the year of reckoning, although significant cracks will be observed in the runup to that period.
Quite often we hear of some group wanting to eliminate waste in social security, make adjustments to save social security, etc.
Generally speaking, most of us think of social security as that pension for old folks, with the trust funds etc. That is just part of social security.
Social Security can be found in Title 42, Chapter 7 of the U.S. Code. There are currently, 21 sub chapters, with subchapter 2 being something called "Federal Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance. OASDI. That is the part we frequently refer to as social security, with trust funds. Medicare is subchapter 18, with associated trust funds. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is within subchapter 16.
Of course, the term social security was not used in the media, as it would have caused a kerfuffle if the media used the term "amend social security".
I doubt things will change, as our masters fully understand our ignorance on the matter of "social security", and thus use it... for political purposes.
![]() |
| Click to Enlarge |
Back in August I stated... somewhere between 8.6% ~ 9.0%. Clearly, a revision has taken place. Largely due to the continued drop in gasoline.
If you remember the July CPI report, it stated the -7.7% gasoline number held off all the price increases in everything else. August is over and I am betting the August CPI will be -10% for gasoline.
Of course, the C.O.L.A. is based on CPI-W, which slipped -0.1% in July and was 9.1% over the year. -10% in gasoline would in theory... create an even lower number than -0.1%. Granted, the other stuff may be accelerating inflation wise, but I am not so sure about that.
In any case, I suspect the CPI-W will be in the range as noted and the monthly change will be -0.3%~0.5%.
That would be stellar, except it is only gasoline and many other things like food, electricity, and heating bills are rising... going into that time of year. A lump of coal might be a welcome gift, come Christmas. (Hey, everything else has gone topsy turvy... why not?)
For the record, the C.O.L.A. announced in fall 1981 for 1982 year was 11.4%. The fall of 1982 announcement for year 1983 was 7.4%. This year's announcement should be between those two numbers.
And for the first time in a long while, there should not be much of an increase in Medicare B premiums. Mostly because we were over charged last year, but still, taking them at their word of that drug being half of last year's rise, and then they found out that drug was half the original price... we end up back to where we currently are for next year. That $60 we got over charged this year will be metered back to us this coming year.
I've had to revise downward, my previous forecast... by quite a bit. I am okay with that, as longing for inflation to continue upward, with the hopes of a higher check in the future... seems rather silly, imo.
While headline CPI was 0% for the month to month, the CPI-W declined -0.1%. Both were largely a product of the decline in energy, specifically gasoline. Gasoline has already fallen on this date, by similar numbers as July. Which will be more than enough to offset the rise in groceries (more later on groceries). Gasoline should fall a bit further over the next week, but seems to be set to stabilize.
It might even offset any expected increases in "core" inflation. My August projection in the chart is for a range of -0.2% ~ +.01% month to month for CPI-W. September CPI-W ranges from -0.3% ~ 0.0%. So while the chart plots the C.O.L.A. increase range as 8.6%~9.0%, the lower number is much more likely, imo.
Yes, it is too early, but I cannot help myself. After perusing all the forecasts of inflation, here goes. Of course an explanation is needed as to the rules regarding determining C.O.L.A.
CPI-W (Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers) is the gauge used, not the headline CPI, as in CPI-U (Consumer Price index for ALL Urban Consumers). The difference being the salaried and technical folks are in the latter.
Typically the CPI-W has lagged behind the CPI-U, (hereafter referred to simply CPI). This can be seen in the CPI reading of 292.296 (May-2022), compared to 288.022 for the CPI-W. Both started their indexes at the same time... back in the early 80s.
However, after lagging all that time, the CPI-W is catching up with a vengeance. Why? I don't know, maybe something to do with Covid. (That's intended to be humorous).
I recently read an article on a widely read news website that stated a 8.5%+ increase in Social Security was in the offing for 2023. It cited a certain "non-partisan" research firm.
Whoa...
"non-partisan" is quite a tube of lipstick. Overlooking the shady
history of this organization, it was clearly a political hit piece, intended to
plant an idea in the public's thought process in an election year.
While
it might be possible, there is nothing in the tea leaves to suggest such an
increase. The current suggestions indicate a range of 5.9%~6.2%. No doubt the
beneficiaries of this increase will harken back to the 8.5%+ number and claim
they have been cheated by the politicians in power.
For
that 8.5%+ to continue until the July ~ September time frame, would require
something above 0.7% monthly increases through September. Supply v Demand is
already indicating a drop off in demand for Gasoline, although Crude supplies
are short. Food demand will not drop off, with supplies tightening. Almost all
other items are beginning to stabilize.
Let's
face it... such an inflation rate necessary to hit the 8.5%+ YOY increase for
3rd Qtr. would likely send us into some type of recession.
I,
also, have been reading about how NATO is so much stronger now, with the
Russian invasion of Ukraine. If anything, the weaknesses are more visible. If someone
were to attack a NATO country, the NATO council would require “consensus”
for official involvement. Not likely and would end up with something akin to a “coalition
of the willing.”
Such an action would likely result in the halting
of energy supplies to Europe, which would result in widespread economic consequences.
THAT would be blamed on the good old USA… not Putin.
Of course, it would be a false
premise, but the USA should be used to being blamed for everything wrong in the
world. Of course, the USA has made more than a few mistakes, but not 100% of
everything. But being the leader of anything comes with intense scrutiny and
blame… every time something goes wrong. Which overshadows any accomplishments.
Which brings me to the
subject of Germany, the leader of the EU. A seismic shift has taken place
inside the country’s political objectives regarding Russia. Early on the
dialogue was about his 180° turn and the self-reflection of previous policies.
Now it seems the criticism
of Germany is causing the politicos to sound alarms about the “unfairness” of
such criticisms. Some is deserved and some… maybe not. When times get tough, it
is not uncommon to blame the leaders and Germany is a leader. It comes with the
territory.
German policies have
created the potential for a huge mess, but most of the EU followed along and
reaped the benefits. Faced with adversity… a scapegoat is needed. But they
shouldn’t worry too much, as eventually this will all be blamed on U.S. policies,
whether due to inaction, over-reaction, meddling, etc. After all, most of the
world blames the U.S. for Russia being forced to invade Ukraine.
| Courtesy of Freepik.com |
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Basically it says that taxing the general public for benefit of one group is not constitutional. Hence the bookkeeping around the whole matter. It was a workaround to avoid constitutional challenges of the act. And constitutional challenges in the 1930s was a fixture during FDR's early years... which led to an attempt to pack the court.
An act to provide for the general welfare by establishing a system of Federal old-age benefits
Here is the original Social Security Act. The above is the preamble. Note the number of "titles" in the act (11). The trust fund we are familiar with and the program most people think of in terms of Social Security is but one title. That would be Title II.
There is hereby created an account in the Treasury of the United States to be known as the Old-Age Reserve Account hereinafter in this title called the Account.
It details how it would be collected, spent, interest paid etc. The only change is how the accounting of the trust funds, relative to the overall budge. For awhile, it was treated separately, but currently is counted together, as far as national debt. Note: intragovernmental holdings would include all trust funds, which are many, and would include OAS, DI, and Medicare A.
Actually, the fractional reserve monetary system is the monetary system used by banks, the fed, etc. There is a school of thought that this should considered theft. However, can we really call something theft if we agree to collect interest and have the federal government guaranteeing our deposits?
I have been reading about attempts to save Social Security of which I partake. Does Social Security need saving?
The short answer is no, as social security will not come to an end in 2033/34. Think of the S.S. trust as a bank account. You put money into the bank and the bank uses it to make loans, which is how the bank can afford to pay interest into your account. That is the basic foundation of S.S. from the beginning in 1935.
The issue is... your expenses are now exceeding the amount you are putting into that bank account as well as the interest being paid to that account by the bank.
At some point in 2033/34, the amount being withdrawn cannot exceed the deposits, which results in something like 80% of withdrawals compared to previous.
The ideas being put forth, while ignoring the likelihood of congress doing anything...
A. Raise the eligibility ages. Considering the longevity of the average American is now older... probably an good idea, but not a complete resolution.
B. Remove the cap on taxable earnings or raise it substantially. Probably the best solution across the board and can take various forms to alleviate the issue going forward. Whether deducting only from the worker and continuing cap on employers, etc.
C. Change the method for calculating increases. This runs into changing from current Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) to either Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U, which is current headline used) or Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U) or Research CPI Experimental for Americans age 62 years of age and older (R-CPI-E).
As an elder, I can narrow down the choice fairly quickly, based on which would have benefited me. The current method of CPI-W had fairly consistently moved with CPI-U and outpaced C-CPI-U on a historical basis. It does strike me as odd that the current CPI-W year over year is outpacing those two by a large margin.
Historically, the following is based on typical rank of inflation (from highest inflation to lowest, based on August BLS release)...
Based on data from August BLS release...
Another week and another report. Here goes... Inventories edged up for crude and distillate fuel. However, gasoline dropped, as the total of...