THE DO NOTHING SPEAKER GOES

Well I for one do not shed a tear for the retirement of the Speaker of the House Of Representatives John Boehner.  What he will go down in history for is presiding over the worst two years of passing bills in the post-WWII history of the House. In 2013, the House only passed 57 bills that became law for the least productive year.  My only reserve is that Boehner's replacement might be even worse.  Well, lets see what Paul Ryan actually does.  Let's be optimistic unless he proves otherwise.

I had hoped that Boehner would have given us a vote on the Senate immigration reform bill, but no luck.  It seems Republicans don't want to try to solve the problem but just use immigration as a whipping boy.  We are supposed to be happy that he avoided a government shutdown again.

This record was preceded by a number of years that set records for non-productivity at the time since 1947: 2012-61, 2011-90, and 2009-129.*  You will note that 2010 is an exception with 258 bills passed which was not a record at the time; however.  And so it was during administration of Barack Obama.  Some want to blame Obama. He entered the Presidency as a conciliator, but found that, to get 20% of he wanted, he had to give the Republicans 80% of what they wanted.  Furthermore the Republicans would then beat Obama over the head with things that he compromised on like delaying the tax increase on the wealthy.  Otherwise it was pretty much a slash and burn Congress.  For the House record see the Huffington Post article (quotes in italics):*

As 2012 comes to a close, the 112th Congress [Jan. 5 2011-Jan. 3 2012] is set to go down in American history as the most unproductive session since the 1940s.
According to a Huffington Post review of all the bills that hit President Barack Obama's desk this session, Obama has signed 219 bills passed by the 112th Congress into law [Reference two** says 284 total for the two year period]. With less than a week to go in the year, there are currently another 20 bills pending presidential action. In comparison, the last Congress passed 383 bills, while the one before it passed 460. [Note: Reference two** says 385 bills passed.]

The 104th Congress (1995-1996) currently holds the ignominious distinction of being the least productive session of Congress, according to the U.S. House Clerk's Office, which has records going back to 1947. Just 333 bills became law during that two-year period, [Reference two** says 337] *** meaning the 112th Congress needs to send nearly 100 more bills to Obama's desk in the next few days if it wants to avoid going down in history -- an unlikely prospect, considering that both chambers are squarely focused on averting the "fiscal cliff" before the new year.
The 112th Congress has done far less than the 80th Congress (1947-1948), which President Harry Truman infamously dubbed the "Do-Nothing Congress." Those lawmakers passed 906 bills that became law.

The 213th congress (Jan. 3, 2013 to Jan. 02, 2015) was only slightly better  than the 212th with 296 bills enacted. They did spend a lot of time passing bills to repeal the so-called Obamacare (the ACA)- 37 times to be exact in an exercise of futility.  And most things past were things like naming new post offices and naming special days.  I agree that Obamacare could be much improved - single payer for one example rather than the personal mandate, but they didn't even try this.**  But the House did not just vote against Obamacare, they didn't vote to replace it with anything.  They don't want government sponsored health insurance at all.

And in 2014, the House initiated the fewest bills since at least 1984.  Lest you think that President Obama has been vetoing a lot of bills, there were no vetoes in any of these 4 years.

* http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-08-14/unproductive-congress-not-passing-bills/57060096/1
**http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/congress-unproductive_n_2371387.html
*** It should be pointed out that even the 385 bills passed by the 111th Congress is probably also a record low up to then because the only two worst numbers were for Congresses in effect for less than two years: the 107 Congress (Jan. 3, 2001-Nov. 22, 2002) and the even shorter 104th Congress (Jan. 4, 1995 - Oct. 4, 1996).

LAYOFFS UP UNEMPLOYMENT CLAIMS DOWN IN 2015

There is a dichotomy going on where layoffs are increasing but new jobless claims continue to decline.  The number of jobless claims are now below where they were prior to the "Great Recession."  In contrast, job layoffs are up for the 3rd quarter of 2015, but according to the figure below, they are less than before the "Great Recession."

In fact, the four-week moving average of claims, considered a better measure of labor market trends as it strips out week-to-week volatility, slipped 2,000 to 263,250 last week, the lowest level since December 1973. * [!]

..................................................
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the average duration of unemployment was 26.3 weeks in September, compared with 31.8 weeks for the same period in 2014.
..................................................
The third quarter of 2015 was the worst in terms of job cuts since the third quarter of 2009, the report found. So far this year, there have been more layoffs announced than in the full year of 2014. (Note: the figure below shows that the job cuts are less than the 3rd quarter of 2011.  I do not know the reason for the conflict.)

..................................................
The odds are especially bright for skilled workers, he said. "Skilled workers are the fuel of this economy." says Christopher.

(Click to enlarge)

* http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/22/layoffs-dont-necessarily-spell-trouble-challenger.html

WAGES IN 2014

The average American took in $44,569.20 last year, according to data released Tuesday by the Social Security Administration. It marks an increase of 3.5 percent from 2013.*
A problem with averages is that the average can be skewed by adding in a few very large number and Median wage is a better measure, i.e. half the workers earned more and half earned less.  See the next quote that shows how skewed the average wages are compared to the median:
Still, 67 percent of wage earners made less than or equal to the average. Median compensation came in at $28,851.21 for the year, up from $28,031.02 in 2013. *
The Median Wage is given in the picture below:

(Click to enlarge)
You can see what is skewing the average to the high side from the following quotes:

Some 134 Americans raked in more than $50 million last year, according to data released Tuesday by the Social Security Administration. The total rose about 20 percent from 110 in 2013.**

The  number of Americans making between $20 million and $50 million also jumped, hitting 776 in 2014. That marked an increase from 565 in the previous year.**

Wages of those making $20 million to $50 million are graphed below:**

(Click to enlarge)
Though 2012 was the peak year for those making over $50 million (at 166), the general trend is upward from 2010 at 81 vs 134 in 2014.  The figure shows, however, that 2014 was the peak year for those making $20 million to $50 million (at 776, close to doubling 2011 at 406).

At the same time there are jobs disappearing.  The most in hazard are mail carrier (expected to decrease by 28% by 2022), meter reader and farmer (expected to decrease by 19% by 2022), among others, narrowing job opportunities.***

* http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/20/the-average-american-made-446k-last-year.html

 **http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/20/rich-americans-got-a-lot-richer-last-year.html

*** http://www.careercast.com/jobs-rated/most-endangered-jobs-2015

DEBATE DIFFERENCES

There is a curious difference between the Republican and Democrat debates.  Except for John Kasich who is clearly the best qualified person to be president (and look where he is in the polls), Republicans emphasize their lack of qualifications to be president whereas in the recent Democratic debate, every candidate emphasized their qualifications to be president.  Frankly I found the latter to be a more satisfying debate.

There seems to be a dichotomy in the response to the Democratic debate whereas all the pundits feel that Hillary was the clear winner whereas focus groups right after the debate favored Bernie Sanders.  I think the focus groups much appreciated Bernie Sanders comment that the American people are sick and tired of Hillary's e-mail, and that he wants to discuss the major issues.

Curiously, a number of pundits, including the liberal Mika Brzezinski (who I guess feels she must bend over backwards to be "fair."), said that Bernie flubbed his comment which, they say was actually to be an insult,  that if it wasn't for Hillary's personal e-mail server we could be discussing the real issues.  I've now listened to Bernie's comment three times, and I believe he said it as he meant to as there was no hesitation in his voice in saying it.  And does anyone believe that the Republicans wouldn't find something to assassinate Hillary with if she hadn't done the e-mails on her own server, even if it wasn't true?  I'm sure that Bernie's comment the way he said it led to the large influx of donations as I believe that the public is sick and tired of politicians continuously assassinating their competitors.

The media seems to like Marco Rubio among the Republican candidates for president in spite of his stand of no exception to no abortions and a tax plan that favors the rich the most.*

As the candidates plans on the issues come out, it seems that Donald Trump isthe best of a bad lot of Republican candidates (with the exception of John Kasich) in spite of his crazy immigration plan and a tax plan that favors the rich.

* Mr. Rubio, [who was brought up in a family living "paycheck to paycheck'] in New York for fund-raising at the time of the interview, offers an example. He proposes a significant new tax credit for households with children. But he would also cut the top federal income tax rate to 35 percent, from nearly 40 percent, and eliminate levies on capital gains, dividends and multimillion-dollar estates. (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/14/us/politics/tax-plans-of-gop-favor-the-rich-despite-populist-talk.html?_r=0)

KEVIN MCCARTHY DEOPS OUT OF HOUSE SPEAKER RACE

I don't know how good of a speaker Kevein McCarthy would have been, but, in his first speech, he seemed illiterate.  He even kept making the same grammatical mistakes over and over.  Of course from a Republican standpoint, his worst offense was that he reinforced, what we already knew, that the Benghazi committee's purpose was to harm Hillary Clinton's Presidential aspirations.

So it looks like John Boehner will stay as Speaker for the foreseeable future.  I hoped as a parting gift that he would let the Senate Immigration Bill be voted on in the House, but no such luck.  I view him as a weak speaker, caving in again and again to a vocal nihilistic group in his Party, but maybe he is better than any alternative.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION - 2014

On net, illegal immigration to the U.S. per year seems to be leveling off.  There is an official drop in illegal immigrants of about 100/yr between 2009 and 2013, perhaps within the rounding errors.*  You are urged to read the entire article taken from a Pew report in 2014 (quotes are in italics).

In 2012, children with at least one unauthorized immigrant parent accounted for 6.9% of U.S. students in kindergarten through 12th grade.
...................................................................
From 2009 to 2012, according to new Pew Research Center estimates, the population of unauthorized immigrants rose in seven states and fell in 14.
...................................................................
More than half the 2012 unauthorized immigrant population (60%) lived in the six states with the largest numbers of such immigrants—California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York and Texas. At the opposite end, six states (Maine, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and West Virginia), had fewer than 5,000 unauthorized immigrants each in 2012.


(Click on figure to enlarge)

(Click on picture to enlarge)

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2014/11/18/unauthorized-immigrant-totals-rise-in-7-states-fall-in-14/

JOBLESS CLAIMS NEAR 42 YR LOW

I must say I find the jobs picture to be confusing.  On the one hand , things don't look good (see italics below).*

It wasn't just, then, that September was bad, with its meager addition of 142,000 jobs that was way below the Street's estimate of 203,000. There were plenty of other issues.
..........................................................
Instead, the [August] report got knocked down to a paltry 136,000. Ditto for July, with the robust 245,000 print coming down to 223,000. Six of the past eight reports have been revised lower in subsequent months.
..........................................................
The establishment survey's diffusion index is a fairly simple sentiment measure of whether more companies are hiring or laying off. A reading above 50 denotes expansion; a reading below signifies that hiring is contracting.
The level for September was 52.9. Yes, that represents that more companies are hiring than not, but it's down from 55.5 in August, 60.1 from July and 61.4 a year ago. 

On the other hand, layoffs continue to be very low (see italics below):**

The number of Americans filing new applications for jobless benefits fell more than expected to a near 42-year low last week, pointing to ongoing tightening in the labor market despite the recent slowdown in hiring.

...........................................................
Initial claims for state unemployment benefits dropped 13,000 to a seasonally adjusted 263,000 for the week ended Oct. 3, the Labor Department said.
That was the lowest since mid-July when the number of claims was at its lowest since 1973. Hitting such a historical low is remarkable considering the U.S. workforce has grown considerably since the 1970s.
It was also the 31st straight week that claims remained below the 300,000 threshold, which is usually associated with a strengthening labor market.

(Click on the figure to enlarge)

* http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/02/why-the-jobs-picture-is-even-worse-than-you-think.html
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/08/us-weekly-jobless-claims-oct-3-2105.html

ARE STOCK BUYBACKS WORTH IT?

I have long been against stock buybacks by companies except in the most unusual cases.  I feel companies do this because they have nothing better to do with the money.  I don't understand why they don't just give a special dividend.  As it is, I believe stock buybacks are a huge waste of money.  I personally know of no company that is buyback stocks with flat or declining earning that have a positive return after stock buybacks.  I might say that in case I am wrong, I have bought an ETF that invests in companies doing stock buybacks.  Currently this fund is down 4.88%, although it was positive earlier in the year.  There are analyses now coming out questioning the value of stock buybacks and that they are "returning value to the investor" (see excerpts from the article in italics).  You are urged to read the whole article.

In 2014, buybacks represented 2.9% of the S&P 500 Index’s market capitalization. When this distribution of cash is added to the 1.9% dividend yield of the S&P 500, it produces a dividend-plus-buyback yield of 4.8%. For yield-thirsty investors, this combination appears to be an oasis in the capital market desert. To be that oasis, however, buybacks must not be diluted by net new issuance.
............................................
Dilution of earnings can also occur because a company issues debt, funneling earnings away from dividend payments to shareholders and toward principle and interest payments to the company’s lenders. Aggregate net debt issuance by public companies was $693 billion in 2014, almost equivalent to the $696 billion of buybacks in the same year. Our analysis of U.S. publicly held companies’ cash flow statements for the 2014 fiscal year reveals a similar story: often a company’s repurchase of its stock was accompanied by a net increase in debt.
............................................
The dilution rate for the U.S. equity market in 2014 was 1.8%, equivalent to roughly $454 billion. Companies thus issued significantly more shares than they repurchased. The historical rate of dilution, 1.7%, for the 80-year period from 1935 to 2014. The 2014 dilution rate of 1.8% for U.S. equity market investors, in aggregate, was essentially the same. We find no evidence of a reduction in net dilution coincidental with the recent increase in buybacks.
.............................................
Alas, like the cool pool of water shimmering on the desert horizon that turns out to be only the refraction of light from blue sky onto hot sand, the 4.8% dividend-plus-buyback yield in the U.S. equity market is a cruel mirage. The reality is that publicly traded companies in the United States are issuing far more new securities than they are buying back, diluting existing investors’ ownership and reducing growth in earnings and dividends per share well below the growth of their reported profits. There is, in fact, no net transfer of cash from the coffers of U.S. corporations to the wallets of U.S. equity investors

* http://www.barrons.com/articles/are-stock-buybacks-an-oasis-or-a-mirage-1443805658?tesla=y&mod=djemb_dr_h

BENGHAZI - WHO CARES?

Well it turns out that that there is still a Benghazi committee in congress.  There was a committee long ago that made 29 recommendations to the Secretary of State.  Hillary Clinton, who was Secretary at the time, said that she was accepting all recommendations.  Maybe because of this or other reasons, there have been no more embassy, consulate, or other foreign service locations since then and now 3 9/11's have gone by without incident.  Of course it turned out that the spark for the Benghazi attack was the anti-Mohammad movie trailer after all.*  Although the Benghazi attack was probably not the State Department's finest hour, it was one of the smaller attacks as attacks on State Department and DOD facilities go.*

Of course, now  it is leaked that the committee's true function is to hurt Hillary Linton's presidential bid.***

For other comments on Benghazi, see**

* http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2013/09/it-was-movie-trailer-after-all.html
** http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/11/potpourri-medical-expenses-benghazi.html
http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2013/05/benghazi-irs-associated-press.html
*** http://time.com/4055534/kevin-mccarthy-hillary-clinton-benghazi/

JOBS WHERE THE WIND BLOWS

Here are some excerpts from an interesting article on opportunities in the wind energy field:

In 2012, there were 3,200 wind tech jobs; by 2022, it is expected to jump to around 4,000.*

"We have the jobs, but we can't find the people," said Ron Widup, CEO of Irving, Texas-based Shermco Industries, which provides maintenance and repair services to the wind industry, among others. "There's a tremendous demand for that classification of technician and engineer." *

"You are coming in as an entry-level job probably $40,000 to $45,000 a year and with overtime very quickly can get to $60,000 to $80,000," he said. "Then in a few years it's not uncommon to get to six figures pretty quickly in this field."*

The school also makes sure the students can handle a critical part of the job, working a couple of hundred feet off the ground. You can't have a fear of heights if your career takes you where the wind blows. *

* http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/02/jobs-being-created-through-the-winds-of-change.html