emblem of US Industry Forum on LInked In

rpsoft 2000


Graphs, Charts

From USA Data






Most of us by now believe that most of what the media tells us is fiction.  Good.  But even beyond that, as some of you know, I have been studying US Financial information - data directly from US records as recorded by the US BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis).  I take that data as is, and graph it, study it, and try to look for trends.  Now my first disappointment will ALL of media including even Fox News, is that seldom do I see ANY official US Financial Records data graphed or shown.  I see some charts on Glen Beck, but even there, not enough for my tastes.  And so my question is - if we all agree that the US is in great peril financially, why is no one looking at real data or doing trend analysis or looking for the real issues?  I for one do not get it. 

First a statement of the problem.  Using US BEA data or even just simply using the US Debt Clock (http://www.usdebtclock.org/) and setting it to 2008 also and looking at the difference, we would see that the giant US issue is that Obama is increasing debt $1.5 trillion a year.  Now this amount of money is so huge that not only can the US not cover it, but it is beyond what even bond loans can fix.  For example, the two largest holders of US debt, China and Japan only hold approximately $870 billion and $840 billion each.  That amount of money is of course less each than one year of new US financial debt under Obama, so bonds and loans will not do it.  That leaves the US only with very bad answers - such as printing more money, thereby causing inflation, and damaging many US citizens and even many worldwide.  That is what the US is doing now.  Or as we business people know, the alternative is to sell off assets, perhaps as the State of Hawaii.  Anyway, as I say, no good alternatives. 

But also as business people we know a profit issue can be either loss of income, or increased expenses.  The media seems to be guessing expenses, and they may be accurate in part.  But I have been suspicious that income is even a bigger problem.


We can see this on the above graph, or you can look at a more full set of graphs on the full 1990 to 2010 period at:  http://www.rpsoft2000.com/consulting/US-Statistics/Profit-1990-2010.htm.

The above graph shows a few things that the media does not tell us.  The media tells us first of all that the Bush tax cuts did not work.  Secondarily they tell us that if they extend the tax cuts for the rich that it would cost the US $700 billion dollars.  Both are clearly not true on this graph from official US records.  IRS income went up from 2003 to 2007.  In fact, IRS income went up over $1 trillion dollars over that period meaning that the politicians claiming a $700 billion loss by not taxing the rich ARE WRONG BY OVER $1.7 TRILLION DOLLARS.  But equally as interesting, if I were to draw a straight trend line on the IRS income due to the Bush tax cuts, the blue line, note that it would cover most of the US expenses today - if it had not been for the housing mortgage recession of 2008 and the total lack of recovery afterwards.  Well, of course one could say that this line is a little optimistic and that one might draw the line a little bit lower.  Perhaps.  But it still says the current US recession is MOSTLY due to damage to US Industry - at least $1 trillion of the $1.5 trillion, and not due to even the Obama excess spending, which is perhaps $0.5 trillion a year - and likely due to his non working stimulus package - that as you can see has stimulated nothing. 

And so the answer should be clear.  Get rid of the recent restrictions the last two years on US industry by 7500 pages of new regulations, new taxes including Public Health, and let industry do its job, recover, get the IRS income up and also hire back US workers in unemployment.  And the IRS income increase therefore would come from not only the new businesses, but also income tax on more Americans employed.  If someone objects, I would like to see the real data.  As I say, real data for real people.