Let's see here: The Trade deficit is up, though Everyone is not sure what the exact increase is; it is only known it did not shave 1.49% off of GDP in the last Quarter, only a silly little 0.9%. There were 274,00 new Hires, nobody need mention that total disbursed income on the new Hires is unlikely to equal the lost income coming to Those filing new Claims for Unemployment over the same Period. We are back at a GDP economic growth rate of 3.5%, forget about the silly initial 3.1% economic growth projection (even though Some expect even the initial economic projection was scaled).
What is the relevance of the above Data?
No criticism, else the Stock Market might drop again! Liberal Economists could explain that a 3.1% economic growth rate will not generate the 3% Breakeven Return to make George W. Bush's Private Accounts Plan for Social Security viable. A 3.5% economic growth rate, on the other hand, can make some Conservative Economists fantasize that the 3% Breakeven Return can be attained. One less-educated like this Author considers Transition Costs, Handling Charges, alongside the average Market flux estimated by decade, and conclude that economic growth must be at least 3.7% per year in order for the Bush Plan to obtain the Breakeven Return, and this for a sustained Period of 24 Years duration. Addendum: The Inflation rate cannot exceed 1.4% per year.
This Author has yet to see any response to a Challenge he made privately. This was a statistical Model projection of what the National Debt would be over the next 75 Years, if the Debt grew continually at the same average rate in which it has grown in the later Bush years. lgl
No comments:
Post a Comment