In a letter focusing on what has been well known to Zero Hedge readers for about two years now, Bill Gross’ latest investment outlook does the usual attack of Beltway stupidity (as if Congress is in any way competent of making math-related decisions – they do what Wall Street – that’s you Bill! – tell them to do, and you know it), emphasizing the impossible math of total US entitlement liabilities (on a net present value basis), which Gross estimates at $75 trillion. That Gross conclusion is predetermined from the onset is not surprising: “Unless entitlements are substantially reformed, I am confident that this country will default on its debt; not in conventional ways, but by picking the pocket of savers via a combination of less observable, yet historically verifiable policies – inflation, currency devaluation and low to negative real interest rates.” Then again, that America is bankrupt is not really news to anyone. Neither is it news, that Gross, as we first reported, no longer has any US bonds to dispose of. What will be news is the inflection point at which Gross starts purchasing Treasuries once again. And after all with $220 billion in AUM in the Total Return Fund, what else will he do: hold on to cash? Buy Netflix? Then the only question will be how Gross spins the inevitable capitulation of the re-hypocrisy trade, validating that he, in a narrow sense, and PIMCO in a broad one, is perhaps the biggest cog in the very system that Bill spends so many hours writing letters about and complaining against. But yes, even that won’t be all that surprising to us. After all, in this bizarro world absolutely everything is now priced in.
Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security now account for 44% of total federal spending and are steadily rising.
Previous Congresses (and Administrations) have relied on the assumption that we can grow our way out of this onerous debt burden.
Unless entitlements are substantially reformed, the U.S. will likely default on its debt; not in conventional ways, but via inflation, currency devaluation and low to negative real interest rates.
That adorable skunk, Pepé Le Pew, is one of my wife Sue’s favorite cartoon characters. There’s something affable, even romantic about him as he seeks to woo his female companions with a French accent and promises of a skunk bungalow and bedrooms full of little Pepés in future years. It’s easy to love a skunk – but only on the silver screen, and if in real life – at a considerable distance. I think of Congress that way. Every two or six years, they dress up in full makeup, pretending to be the change, vowing to correct what hasn’t been corrected, promising discipline as opposed to profligate overspending and undertaxation, and striving to balance the budget when all others have failed. Oooh Pepé – Mon Chéri! But don’t believe them – hold your nose instead! Oh, I kid the Congress. Perhaps they don’t have black and white stripes with bushy tails. Perhaps there’s just a stink bomb that the Congressional sergeant-at-arms sets off every time they convene and the gavel falls to signify the beginning of the “people’s business.” Perhaps. But, in all cases, citizens of America – hold your noses. You ain’t smelled nothin’ yet.
I first published this essay in the Summer of 2009. At that time the whole world believed Obama’s Stimulus Program was working at that the stupid greenshoot recovery was underway. Today I’d like to reprint this essay because the same structural issues that plagued the US in 2009 are still valid and because this piece proved, two years ahead of time, that the US would suffer a massive economic collapse.
The seeds of today’s crisis were first sown in 1971 when the US formally opened up trade with China. In an effort to boost profits, large scale US manufacturers and other multinational firms began outsourcing their manufacturing jobs to the People’s Republic soon after.
1.) The law expands entitlement spending by over $1 TRILLION in order to “cover” $30 Million more people. What will that do to State Budgets? We only need to look at history to find out. Cases in point?
2.) It adds $500 Billion in new tax increases at a time in our nation’s history when a RECORD number of American’s pay NO INCOME TAXES! And if you believe the lie told by President Obama that your taxes will NOT increase if you make less than $200,000 as an Individual or $250,000 as a Married couple, you need to know the TRUTH!
Speaking of NEW taxes, if you are a Small Business owner. Here’s what’s coming for you thanks to Obamacare:
Research cited by the Obama administration as proof that it can cut wasteful healthcare spending and improve treatment at the same time proves no such thing, The New York Times reports.
The work by a group atDartmouth Collegesupposedly showed which hospitals charge more and give worse care than others.
But that’s not the case. “The Dartmouth researchers themselves acknowledged in interviews that in fact it mainly shows the varying costs of care in the government’sMedicareprogram,” The Times reports.
“Measures of the quality of care are not part of the formula.”
The Dartmouth group produced color-coded maps in the Dartmouth Atlas ofHealth Careto show where the wasteful spending is. Brown indicated hospitals and regions that offered expensive and inadequate care, and beige showed hospitals and areas where the reverse is true.
I have a friend that tends to express his ideas about everything in the jargon of a securities trader. Of course, this is probably because he has been a very successful trader, both in bull and bear markets, for many years. “Every trend in history, even liberty, can be charted like a stock,” he has often observed. I tend to agree.
What in the world are the Senate Democrats thinking? Isn’t this supposed to be about “health care reform”? Apparently their idea of reform is to take a system that has trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities and expand it without ever addressing the underlying reason for the huge future debt?
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
But apparently winning the process (passing something called “health care reform”) has become more important than the original purpose of “reform”.
Now, it appears, negotiators are making headway to ensure that the [Medicare] expansion would take place at a far quicker pace than any proposed public option. According to the well-placed source, Democrats are rallying behind a proposal that would allow a portion of the 55-64 year old age group to buy in to the Medicare system as early as 2010. By contrast, a public plan forinsurance coverage would not come into being until 2014.
That group which would get immediate access, of course, would the the high-risk group that will cost the most to treat.
In addition to debating a potential start date for a Medicare buy-in proposal, Senate Democrats are also in negotiations over who, exactly, should be allowed to qualify for the expanded Medicare program. At this juncture, it doesn’t appear that everyone in the 55-64-age bracket would be granted access. Negotiators are considering limiting consumers to those who would qualify for high-risk insurance pools already set up under the Senate’s health care legislation. This would mean primarily those who have been uninsured for a certain amount of time, have a history of poor health or are unable to get insurance because of a preexisting condition. The Senate has already earmarked $5 billion for subsidies for this group to buy insurance and may increase that total to help them pay for Medicare coverage — should it become available to those under 65 and above 55 years of age.
Note that the subsidy is only to help this group buy insurance coverage under Medicare. It says nothing about the cost of that pool to Medicare. And, don’t forget, they’re cutting Medicare payments by $500 billion over then next 10 years.
Then, in 2014, they’re going to bring in the rest of that age group in total. And they’re going to tell you this will save money and “reform” health care?
* Medicare’s expected future obligations exceeded premiums and dedicated taxes by $89 trillion.
* In other words, Medicare’s liability is about 5 1/2 times the size of Social Security’s ($18 trillion) and about six times the size of the entire U.S. economy.
* Throw in Medicaid, and health care spending alone will crowd out every other thing the federal government is doing by mid-century, says Goodman.
Quite a bold statement if true. But a report released Friday by the non-partisan and independent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the agency in charge of running Medicare and Medicaid, blows the lid off of every one of Obama’s claims. All of the following quotes are from the report itself:
Reacting in part to Friday’s CMS report, Robert J. Samuelson writes in today’s Washington Post:
The disconnect between what President Obama says and what he’s doing is so glaring that most people could not abide it. The president, his advisers and allies have no trouble. But reconciling blatantly contradictory objectives requires them to engage in willful self-deception, public dishonesty, or both.
As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the ’09 elections, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these – and the other endorsements – his package has received are all bought and paid for.
Here are the deals:
The American Medical Association(AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians‘ reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5 percent to 6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill…or else!
By Representative John Boehner (R-OH), Washington, Oct 29 Members ofCongressand the American people are just beginning to look at Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) 1,990-page government takeover of health care, but it’s already becoming clear just how costly and unsustainable this proposal is. From higher taxes on middle-class families to job-killing mandates on small businessesto cuts in Medicare benefits for seniors, here are 10 facts every American should know about Speaker Pelosi’s 1,990-page government takeover of health care:….
I have a friend that tends to express his ideas about everything in the jargon of a securities trader. Of course, this is probably because he has been a very successful trader, both in bull and bear markets, for many years. “Every trend in history, even liberty, can be charted like a stock,” he has often observed. I tend to agree. 
December 9th, 2009 | 
Author: 
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_a.png?x-id=041537a4-6c6f-4cc0-95e1-d2b7c2e042a2)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_a.png?x-id=08d9df83-ef6d-4878-851c-c31e60a5df9e)