Positive Signs In The U.S. Economy

Tying a four-year low, fewer people sought unemployment benefits this past week of March. This has added confidence the job-market is showing signs of growth and strengthening. Applications for unemployment aid were down 14,000 to a seasonally-adjusted 351,000 according to a report released by the Labor Department. This has been a positive trend over the past six months as the average has declined 14% since October 2011.

Following this steady decline in unemployment benefits, employers have added an average 245,000 jobs a month between December and February. This amounts to the best three months of hiring in the past two years. The unemployment rate has also declined to 8.3%, the lowest in the past three years. This trend is expected to follow for March, with an additional 200,000+ jobs being added. This indicates the labor market is steadily growing, slowly indeed, but improving none the less.

February's rise in gas prices did drive U.S. wholesale prices up last month, but excluding this, inflation did not change significantly. The producer price index rose 0.4% and the core index (which excludes food and gas prices) increased 0.2%. In the past year, wholesale prices have increased 3.3%, and this represents the smallest year-over-year gain since August 2010.

All things considered, the job growth is driven by a stronger economy, which grew at an annual rate of 3% in the last three months of 2011. Consumers show more confidence and have added additional spending to the market. Auto sales and the stock market have both shown positive growth over this same period.

Manufacturing has also expanded in February. Manufacturing conditions rose in March to 12.5 on the index of manufacturing conditions, a measure used by the Federal Reserve Bank to measure the strength of the manufacturing sector. The Labor Dept. reports that in the last week of February, manufacturing jobs have grew by 31,000, and over the past year, jobs had increased by 227,000.

While these signs of growth are during an election year and the U.S. economy is still on a long path to full recovery since the 2007 recession began, these positive signs re-enforce my view America is back on the right track.

Sources: AP.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hWdSXd8-vuWc0f14K6w4cW5iAqyw?docId=d1017724a4be4014934f945248bc1fe9

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5izcL8QJnJ9nKdqi3U_pQTqh4JZTA?docId=ee0f8ae4921341669a1002e60ab269f5

LulzSec / Anon Demolition Day

The leader of the LulzSec / Anonymous had been working with the FBI for the past seven months, all in a plan to take down the online hacking community. The hacker who goes by "Sabu" in the world of hackers and Hector Xavier Monsegur in the real world was captured and turned by FBI agents upon the threat of spending years in federal prison, without the chance to see his young children. Upon that, Sabu, protecting himself, gave up his hacker community leaders and today arrests were made, effectively striking the biggest blow to the group ever.

Will this be the end of LulzSec / Anonymous, probably. Is it the end of hacking and a group that is going to band together like this again? Probably not. What how has permanently changed is that their psychological aspect is completely destroyed. No longer can they pretend to be invincible or unbreakable. So maybe we will see another hacker group in the future, but probably not at the level seen with Anon / LulzSec.


http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/03/06/hacking-group-lulzsec-swept-up-by-law-enforcement/#ixzz1oLNwgxdp

http://gizmodo.com/5890825/lulzsec-leader-betrays-all-of-anonymous

http://gizmodo.com/5890886/read-the-full-lulzsec-indictments-right-here

Neil deGrasse Tyson Warns of the Costs of Cutting NASA

Neil deGrasse Tyson elements exactly what types of positive externalities come out of funding NASA. Currently we fund NASA half a penny for every tax dollar collected. Tyson suggests that a doubling of the funding of NASA to just 1 penny for every tax dollar would change the culture of a nation. I agree. In economics, reference the Romer Model. Furthering on the Solow Model, a landmark model in macroeconomics, Romer pointed to technology being not only the determinant of growth, which Solow suggested, but that the function of technology growth is based upon the population of a nation, the percentage of people focused on research, and then the direct improvements based upon that technology.

Positive macroeconomic growth in the nation is based on a shift in focus from just short run growth with sales, to making the investment in research for tomorrow. I agree 100% with Neil deGrasse Tyson, and I disagree with the trend of defunding NASA that President Obama is continuing. If our future generations are to compete, NASA, education, and infrastructure are what we need to focus on. Give a free market the tools to succeed, and let this nation bloom, that is a strong government mindset.

Watch the interview with Neil deGrasse Tyson on Fox Business:
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1483676909001/the-costs-of-cutting-nasas-budget/

Use of Social Media Information As A Gauge

Many of us post stuff online, Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, you name it. Most of us have some form of online presence. That trend is starting to become very popular in other nations as well. Notably this past Arab Spring was a showing of just how powerful social media can be when it aided in the organizing of thousands to topple governments. Additionally, back here in the United States, the Occupy Movement used social media as a way to connect its followers to local rallies and to spread its ideology. All said, social media is a powerful tool.

This powerful tool is not going un-noticed either. The Central Intelligence Agency actually has developed an inner agency task force to monitor social media around the world, using it to determine possible threat levels and the overbidding feel of a culture at any given moment. Here's how it works. C.I.A. analysts capture almost infinite amounts of data off social networking sites, and run it through advanced algorithms that determine what it means going along with the general trend of that culture. For example, during a time when many people are posting information about sports, daily life, other seemingly normal things, it is considered that there is general stability in the region. Now lets say that the mood of these messages gets more intense, or that more and more people post about the same things, a certain trend is extracted. It's a pretty novel idea, and requires extremely high amounts of data processing, but nevertheless, it has been known to be a generally accurate means to paint a picture of a region.

So as more and more of us post information around the world, know that its probably not just being read by your directly intended people, but possibly is crunched as some level to determine stability. It's a brave new world for the balance of security and freedom.

For more on this story visit this link to

Government and The People In It

I just had a great conversation with one of my friends about the future of China and the United States. Something I find very interesting and have had with many people in the past. In our conversation today, he mentioned something that struck me as quite interesting. How he loves the policy of the government in China, but hates the government itself. This struck me as odd, how could one love and hate essentially the same thing? But what he described as the difference is important. Many of the policies in China are things he believes are necessary for China's future and current stability, while those who carry out these policies at the middle levels are corrupted by the need to achieve and because they need the benefits of their corruption to survive. He pointed to the point that the President of China, Hu, is not corrupt, but those at the middle level in the party can be due to their use of power as party officials, but not their lack of absolute power such as that of the party leader leaves them somewhat limited in ways. This advantage of being a party official can make themselves a cut above the nonofficial population, but still, does not always give them the ability to live a lifestyle appropriate for that position. It is essentially a system that encourages and promotes this incentive to corruption, most likely inadvertently.

Then I thought about our current political climate here in the United States. What makes this interesting to me is how we associate ourselves with politicians here in the United States. When we vote for a candidate here in the U.S. are we voting for the person or what their policy is? Last night in South Carolina, a traditionally conservative and Christian dominated state, Newt Gingrich won the Republican Primary. This is despite the negatives and blemishes of his past years and multiple transgressions of infidelity. Or the recent weeks exposure of his desire for an "open" marriage as described by his former wife. Is this the case that we love the policy of our politicians but disapprove of them as human beings? If that is true, then what are we to call a leader? A policy maker and their personal life aside, or should they be blended together when this spotlight position is taken?  At some point, we need a balance between good policy and strong personal leadership attributes of a politician right? Or have we just come to accept that politicians are all corrupt at some level and what we have left is to just rely on the policy they promote? Does it really make a difference if the man vying for President of the United States have a transitionally considered good character as a husband and how he would lead the United States through an economic recovery? Thomas Jefferson wrote in our constitution "all men are created equal" but even he had slaves within his household. He was considered one of the best politicians of all time, at least in western culture. Is character and the person themselves different from the policy they promote? Has this always been the same way? Good leaders to me are both good policy makers and those who lead people in their nation based on their own personal integrity. It is hypocritical to me to call on others to be better people when you yourself can't follow your own preaches. Maybe thats why we are where we are...  

Standard & Poor Lays a Smack-down to U.S. Government

Wall Street had of its worst weeks, losing nearly all gains in 2011. 

As many of you have probably already heard about, Standard and Poor (S&P) has downgraded the U.S. credit rating from the highest rating of AAA to a AA+ rating this past Friday. This is the first time the United States has faced a downgrade and it has sent tidal waves throughout the financial market. Given that Europe is suffering major levels of adversity with Greece possibly heading for a default just months after it receive a major bailout by the IMF, and with unemployment in Spain for youth at nearly 46%, this is just another piece of bad news for the Western World. China, the United State's largest creditor was quick to criticize the United States, saying that "the U.S. government has to come to terms with the painful fact that the good old days when it could just borrow its way out of messes of its own making are finally gone," this according to an official Chinese news agency. (For more click here) Additionally this rating drop only fuels the international debate for a change in base currency from the dollar. These may be the signs that the fall of U.S. hegemony is coming faster than we thought and possibly China's surge may quickly take over the financial leadership of the world. Of course, they have problems of their own, which is a story for a later time. 


Now, who is to blame for this debacle we are in? Keeping in mind there is no single entity. One very important agency in the financial sector has an opinion. In an interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper last night, John Chambers the Chairman of S&P's Committee on Sovereign Nation Ratings quietly, and in a very calm demeanor delivered some harsh criticism of U.S. policy makers (watch interview here). Chambers is a very technical and calm man, not much of a T.V. personality type, and if there were any doubts about what he was saying with his tone, they were immediately cleared up by the official memorandum released by S&P (read the document here). Here is quote from the rational section of the memo: "the political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed." Not to lay any more criticism, but it is followed by "our (S&P) opinion is that elected officials remain wary of tackling the structural issues required to effectively address the rising U.S. public debt burden in a manner consistent with a 'AAA' rating." Ouch, for a very technical document, made by guys that have many friends in Washington and on Wall Street, those are some direct and stinging words. The thing about it, S&P couldn't be any closer to the truth. 


This really has become a major wake up call for the U.S. Government. So while they are on summer holiday, they really need to be managing their constituent bases, communicating with each other, and finding the correct policy to align this nation out of this momentous hole we have dug ourselves into. Now, that is unlikely to happen. Grudges don't die easily in Washington and with the 2012 election year ramping up, the pundits on both sides fueling the fire, I can only hope that we as a nation are better at the end of the day, and not just the political career of some so called representative. 


   

Protection Has It's Price

It is of utmost necessity to protect our heads of state, such as the President, Vice President, cabinet members, and in some cases their immediate family members. That is not my qualm, what I do find ironic and inflammatory is that the Secret Service, the agency charged with the duty to protect these people have been actually paying Vice President Joseph Biden to rent his cottage home in his home state of Delaware. The cottage home is a property of the Biden family, located adjacent to his main home. Listed as a "vendor" and not by his name, Biden collects about $2,000 a month with additional payments from the Secret Service for their use of the property. The lease has been signed until January 2013, the end of the Obama Administration first and possibly only term. During which, Biden, who was on the deficit committee as a U.S. Senator, will receive about $66,000 from the agency. Now in the grand scheme of how much there may be in wasteful spending, a mere $66,000 dollars may not be very much, but it does amount to something.

To me, I feel that during a time where all American's are feeling it in the pocket and the Biden family receiving nearly $380 thousand in income last year according to their tax returns, maybe they should just let the Secret Service get a break. What are your thoughts? Is this greed or is this just an issue with too much spotlight? 

Here is an article giving more details: (click here)