Unemployment

Obama Fires Acting IRS Commissioner — Obama The Liar — When Will Congress Impeach Obama? — Videos

Posted on May 15, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Communications, Computers, Crime, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, IRS, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Rants, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Unemployment, Video, Wisdom | Tags: AP Scandal, Benghazi, Covert Action Operations, Finding, IRS Commissioner, IRS Scandal, Obama The Liar, Tyrant |

President Obama Announces Resignation of Acting IRS Commissioner: I Am Angry About It

Obama the Liar

Glenn Beck Ties Together Benghazi, IRS, & AP Scandals ‘Fundamental Transformation’

MUST SEE VIDEO!!! Who is the REAL Barack Obama – The Liar Deceiver Puppet Satan

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Robert Littell — The Company: A Novel of the CIA — Videos

Posted on May 13, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: Book, Books, Cambridge Spies, Central Intelligence Agency, Film, Kim Philby, Robert Littell, Spies, The Company, Videos |

The Company [2007] 1/3

THE COMPANY [2007] 2/3

THE COMPANY [2007] 3/3

Background Articles and Videos

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy: 1 – Return To The Circus

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy: 2 – Tarr Tells His Story

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy: 3 – Smiley Tracks The Mole

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy: 5 – Tinker Tailor

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy: 6 – Smiley Sets A Trap

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy: 7 – Flushing Out The Mole

Cambridge Spies | Sub. ITA Episodio 1 di 4

Cambridge Spies | Sub. ITA Episodio 2 di 4

Cambridge Spies | Sub. ITA Episodio 3 di 4

Cambridge Spies | Sub. ITA Episodio 4 di 4

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

James Grant Interviewed by James Turk–Federal Reserve, National Debt, Money, Gold — Videos

Posted on May 11, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Politics, Video, Technology, Taxes, Books, Raves, Economics, Links, People, Life, Investments, Education, Employment, Communications, Law, Philosophy, Wisdom, liberty, Monetary Policy, Fiscal Policy, government spending, media, Psychology, Demographics, Federal Government, College, Money, Banking, Wealth, Inflation, Unemployment, Macroeconomics, Federal Government Budget, Radio | Tags: national debt, deficit spending, gold, Money, The Federal Reserve System, Stocks, Bonds, The Fed, USA, James Grant |

James Grant and James Turk discuss gold, the Fed and the fiscal situation of the USA

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Virtue of Capitalism — Videos

Posted on May 4, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, government, government spending, history, Inflation, Investments, Law, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Talk Radio, Unemployment, Video, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: Bill Gates, Microsoft, Morals of Capitalism, The Case for Capitalism, Yaron Brook |

Capitalism Without Guilt – Yaron Brook on morals of capitalism.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Skyrocketing U.S. National Debt and Unfunded Liabilities For Medicare and Social Security — Videos

Posted on May 4, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Climate, College, Constitution, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Public Sector, Raves, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: Bankruptcy of the United States, Business, deficit spending, deficits, Federal Reserve System, government, Gross National Debt, Jobs, Money, national debt, Politics, Publicly Held Debt, Unfunded Liabilities, Who Holds The Publicly Held Debt |

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

What Are the Dangers of Too Much Debt?

Economy Is Still Americans’ Top Concern

http://www.gallup.com/poll/146708/americans-worries-economy-budget-top-issues.aspx

Most Important Problem

http://www.gallup.com/poll/146708/americans-worries-economy-budget-top-issues.aspx

Democrats Split On How To Deal With Nation’s Debt, Key Leaders Come Out Against Spending Cuts

Chairman Hensarling Opening Statement at Hearing with Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke

Chairman Hensarling’s Opening Statement at Hearing with FHFA Director Edward J. DeMarco

US Debt A Threat To National Security

U.S. National Debt Documentary Part 1

U.S. National Debt Documentary Part 2

U.S. National Debt Documentary Part 3

U.S. National Debt Documentary Part 4

U.S. National Debt Documentary Part 5

U.S. National Debt Documentary Part 6

‘US hides real debt, in worse shape than Greece’

Does Government Have a Revenue or Spending Problem?

What If the National Debt Were Your Debt?

How Big Is the U.S. Debt?

Funding Government by the Minute

Why Not Print More Money?

Yaron Answers: Can The U.S. Go Bankrupt?

US Debt Crisis – Perfectly Explained

Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending

Capitalism Without Guilt – Yaron Brook on morals of capitalism.

The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2013 to 2023

Economic growth will remain slow this year, CBO anticipates, as gradual improvement in many of the forces that drive the economy is offset by the effects of budgetary changes that are scheduled to occur under current law. After this year, economic growth will speed up, CBO projects, causing the unemployment rate to decline and inflation and interest rates to eventually rise from their current low levels. Nevertheless, the unemployment rate is expected to remain above 7½ percent through next year; if that happens, 2014 will be the sixth consecutive year with unemployment exceeding 7½ percent of the labor force—the longest such period in the past 70 years.

If the current laws that govern federal taxes and spending do not change, the budget deficit will shrink this year to $845 billion, or 5.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), its smallest size since 2008. In CBO’s baseline projections, deficits continue to shrink over the next few years, falling to 2.4 percent of GDP by 2015. Deficits are projected to increase later in the coming decade, however, because of the pressures of an aging population, rising health care costs, an expansion of federal subsidies for health insurance, and growing interest payments on federal debt. As a result, federal debt held by the public is projected to remain historically high relative to the size of the economy for the next decade. By 2023, if current laws remain in place, debt will equal 77 percent of GDP and be on an upward path, CBO projects (see figure below).

Such high and rising debt would have serious negative consequences: When interest rates rose to more normal levels, federal spending on interest payments would increase substantially. Moreover, because federal borrowing reduces national saving, the capital stock would be smaller and total wages would be lower than they would be if the debt was reduced. In addition, lawmakers would have less flexibility than they might ordinarily to use tax and spending policies to respond to unexpected challenges. Finally, such a large debt would increase the risk of a fiscal crisis, during which investors would lose so much confidence in the government’s ability to manage its budget that the government would be unable to borrow at affordable rates.

Under Current Law, Federal Debt Will Stay at Historically High Levels Relative to GDP

The federal budget deficit, which shrank as a percentage of GDP for the third year in a row in 2012, will fall again in 2013, if current laws remain the same. At an estimated $845 billion, the 2013 imbalance would be the first deficit in five years below $1 trillion; and at 5.3 percent of GDP, it would be only about half as large, relative to the size of the economy, as the deficit was in 2009. Nevertheless, if the laws that govern taxes and spending do not change, federal debt held by the public will reach 76 percent of GDP by the end of this fiscal year, the largest percentage since 1950.

With revenues expected to rise more rapidly than spending in the next few years under current law, the deficit is projected to dip as low as 2.4 percent of GDP by 2015. In later years, however, projected deficits rise steadily, reaching almost 4 percent of GDP in 2023. For the 2014–2023 period, deficits in CBO’s baseline projections total $7.0 trillion. With such deficits, federal debt would remain above 73 percent of GDP—far higher than the 39 percent average seen over the past four decades. (As recently as the end of 2007, federal debt equaled just 36 percent of GDP.) Moreover, debt would be increasing relative to the size of the economy in the second half of the decade.

Those projections are not CBO’s predictions of future outcomes. As specified in law, CBO’s baseline projections are constructed under the assumption that current laws generally remain unchanged, so that they can serve as a benchmark against which potential changes in law can be measured.

Revenues

Federal revenues will increase by roughly 25 percent between 2013 and 2015 under current law, CBO projects. That increase is expected to result from a rise in income because of the growing economy, from policy changes that are scheduled to take effect during that period, and from policy changes that have already taken effect but whose full impact on revenues will not be felt until after this year (such as the recent increase in tax rates on income above certain thresholds).

As a result of those factors, revenues are projected to grow from 15.8 percent of GDP in 2012 to 19.1 percent of GDP in 2015—compared with an average of 17.9 percent of GDP over the past 40 years. Under current law, revenues will remain at roughly 19 percent of GDP from 2015 through 2023, CBO estimates.

Outlays

In CBO’s baseline projections, federal spending rises over the next few years in dollar terms but falls relative to the size of the economy. During those years, the growth of spending will be restrained both by the strengthening economy (as spending for programs such as unemployment compensation drops) and by provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25). Although outlays are projected to decline from 22.8 percent of GDP in 2012 to 21.5 percent by 2017, they will still exceed their 40-year average of 21.0 percent. (Outlays peaked at 25.2 percent of GDP in 2009 but have fallen relative to GDP in the past few years.)

After 2017, if current laws remain in place, outlays will start growing again as a percentage of GDP. The aging of the population, increasing health care costs, and a significant expansion of eligibility for federal subsidies for health insurance will substantially boost spending for Social Security and for major health care programs relative to the size of the economy. At the same time, rising interest rates will significantly increase the government’s debt-service costs. In CBO’s baseline, outlays reach about 23 percent of GDP in 2023 and are on an upward trajectory.

Changes from CBO’s Previous Projections

The deficits projected in CBO’s current baseline are significantly larger than the ones in CBO’s baseline of August 2012. At that time, CBO projected deficits totaling $2.3 trillion for the 2013–2022 period; in the current baseline, the total deficit for that period has risen by $4.6 trillion. That increase stems chiefly from the enactment of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-240), which made changes to tax and spending laws that will boost deficits by a total of $4.0 trillion (excluding debt-service costs) between 2013 and 2022, according to estimates by CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation. CBO’s updated baseline also takes into account other legislative actions since August, as well as a new economic forecast and some technical revisions to its projections.

Looming Policy Decisions May Have a Substantial Effect on the Budget Outlook

Current law leaves many key budget issues unresolved, and this year, lawmakers will face three significant budgetary deadlines:

Automatic reductions in spending are scheduled to be implemented at the beginning of March; when that happens, funding for many government activities will be reduced by 5 percent or more.
The continuing resolution that currently provides operational funding for much of the government will expire in late March. If no additional appropriations are provided by then, nonessential functions of the government will have to cease operations.
A statutory limit on federal debt, which was temporarily removed, will take effect again in mid-May. The Treasury will be able to continue borrowing for a short time after that by using what are known as extraordinary measures. But to avoid a default on the government’s obligations, the debt limit will need to be adjusted before those measures are exhausted later in the year.

Budgetary outcomes will also be affected by decisions about whether to continue certain policies that have been in effect in recent years. Such policies could be continued, for example, by extending some tax provisions that are scheduled to expire (and that have routinely been extended in the past) or by preventing the 25 percent cut in Medicare’s payment rates for physicians that is due to occur in 2014. If, for instance, lawmakers eliminated the automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect in March (but left in place the original caps on discretionary funding set by the Budget Control Act), prevented the sharp reduction in Medicare’s payment rates for physicians, and extended the tax provisions that are scheduled to expire at the end of calendar year 2013 (or, in some cases, in later years), budget deficits would be substantially larger over the coming decade than in CBO’s baseline projections. With those changes, and no offsetting reductions in deficits, debt held by the public would rise to 87 percent of GDP by the end of 2023 rather than to 77 percent.

In addition to those decisions, lawmakers will continue to face the longer-term budgetary issues posed by the substantial federal debt and by the implications of rising health care costs and the aging of the population.

Economic Growth Is Likely to Be Slow in 2013 and Pick Up in Later Years

The U.S. economy expanded modestly in calendar year 2012, continuing the slow recovery seen since the recession ended in mid-2009. Although economic growth is expected to remain slow again this year, CBO anticipates that underlying factors in the economy will spur a more rapid expansion beginning next year.

Even so, under the fiscal policies embodied in current law, output is expected to remain below its potential (or maximum sustainable) level until 2017 (see figure below). By CBO’s estimates, in the fourth quarter of 2012, real (inflation-adjusted) GDP was about 5½ percent below its potential level. That gap was only modestly smaller than the gap between actual and potential GDP that existed at the end of the recession because the growth of output since then has been only slightly greater than the growth of potential output. With such a large gap between actual and potential GDP persisting for so long, CBO projects that the total loss of output, relative to the economy’s potential, between 2007 and 2017 will be equivalent to nearly half of the output that the United States produced last year.

The Economic Outlook for 2013

CBO expects that economic activity will expand slowly this year, with real GDP growing by just 1.4 percent. That slow growth reflects a combination of ongoing improvement in underlying economic factors and fiscal tightening that has already begun or is scheduled to occur—including the expiration of a 2 percentage-point cut in the Social Security payroll tax, an increase in tax rates on income above certain thresholds, and scheduled automatic reductions in federal spending. That subdued economic growth will limit businesses’ need to hire additional workers, thereby causing the unemployment rate to stay near 8 percent this year, CBO projects. The rate of inflation and interest rates are projected to remain low.

The Economic Outlook for 2014 to 2018

After the economy adjusts this year to the fiscal tightening inherent in current law, underlying economic factors will lead to more rapid growth, CBO projects—3.4 percent in 2014 and an average of 3.6 percent a year from 2015 through 2018. In particular, CBO expects that the effects of the housing and financial crisis will continue to fade and that an upswing in housing construction (though from a very low level), rising real estate and stock prices, and increasing availability of credit will help to spur a virtuous cycle of faster growth in employment, income, consumer spending, and business investment over the next few years.

Nevertheless, under current law, CBO expects the unemployment rate to remain high—above 7½ percent through 2014—before falling to 5½ percent at the end of 2017. The rate of inflation is projected to rise slowly after this year: CBO estimates that the annual increase in the price index for personal consumption expenditures will reach about 2 percent in 2015. The interest rate on 3 month Treasury bills—which has hovered near zero for the past several years—is expected to climb to 4 percent by the end of 2017, and the rate on 10-year Treasury notes is projected to rise from 2.1 percent in 2013 to 5.2 percent in 2017.

The Economic Outlook for 2019 to 2023

For the second half of the coming decade, CBO does not attempt to predict the cyclical ups and downs of the economy; rather, CBO assumes that GDP will stay at its maximum sustainable level. On that basis, CBO projects that both actual and potential real GDP will grow at an average rate of 2¼ percent a year between 2019 and 2023. That pace is much slower than the average growth rate of potential GDP since 1950. The main reason is that the growth of the labor force will slow down because of the retirement of the baby boomers and an end to the long-standing increase in women’s participation in the labor force. CBO also projects that the unemployment rate will fall to 5.2 percent by 2023 and that inflation and interest rates will stay at about their 2018 levels throughout the 2019–2023 period.

Updated February 5, 2013, to correct an error in note “a” to Table 1-7.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43907

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Employment Level Still 3 Million Jobs Less Then Peak Level in November 2007 Plus Short 9 Million Jobs For Population Growth in Last 65 Months — 12 Million Job Shortage — Stagflation — DOW hits 15000, NASDAQ hits 12 year high — Buy Low–Sell High — Sell Your U.S. Bonds and Stocks Now — Videos

Posted on May 3, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Homes, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, Math, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, Philosophy, Politics, Public Sector, Rants, Raves, Tax Policy, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: BLS, Buy Low, Civilian Labor Force, Discourages Workers, DOW hits 15000, Economics, Employment Level, Employment Situation Summary, Labor Force Participation Rate, NASDAQ hits 12 year high, New Entrants, Politics, Sell High, Stagflation, Stock Rallly, Teenage Unemployment Rate, U-3, U-6, Unemployment Level, Unemployment Rate, Videos |

DOW hits 15000, NASDAQ hits 12 year high

May 3rd 2013 CNBC Stock Market Squawk Box (April Jobs Report)

Jobless Rate Falls to Four-Year Low, and More

Jobs Pop, Unemployment Rate Drops

Data extracted on: May 3, 2013 (11:51:32 AM)

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Employment Level

143,579,000

Series Id:           LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	136559(1)	136598	136701	137270	136630	136940	136531	136662	136893	137088	137322	137614
2001	137778	137612	137783	137299	137092	136873	137071	136241	136846	136392	136238	136047
2002	135701	136438	136177	136126	136539	136415	136413	136705	137302	137008	136521	136426
2003	137417(1)	137482	137434	137633	137544	137790	137474	137549	137609	137984	138424	138411
2004	138472(1)	138542	138453	138680	138852	139174	139556	139573	139487	139732	140231	140125
2005	140245(1)	140385	140654	141254	141609	141714	142026	142434	142401	142548	142499	142752
2006	143150(1)	143457	143741	143761	144089	144353	144202	144625	144815	145314	145534	145970
2007	146028(1)	146057	146320	145586	145903	146063	145905	145682	146244	145946	146595	146273
2008	146378(1)	146156	146086	146132	145908	145737	145532	145203	145076	144802	144100	143369
2009	142153(1)	141644	140721	140652	140250	140005	139898	139481	138810	138421	138665	138025
2010	138439(1)	138624	138767	139296	139255	139148	139167	139405	139388	139097	139046	139295
2011	139253(1)	139471	139643	139606	139681	139405	139509	139870	140164	140314	140771	140896
2012	141608(1)	142019	142020	141934	142302	142448	142250	142164	142974	143328	143277	143305
2013	143322(1)	143492	143286	143579
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Civilian Labor Force Level

155,238,000

Series Id:           LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	142267(1)	142456	142434	142751	142388	142591	142278	142514	142518	142622	142962	143248
2001	143800	143701	143924	143569	143318	143357	143654	143284	143989	144086	144240	144305
2002	143883	144653	144481	144725	144938	144808	144803	145009	145552	145314	145041	145066
2003	145937(1)	146100	146022	146474	146500	147056	146485	146445	146530	146716	147000	146729
2004	146842(1)	146709	146944	146850	147065	147460	147692	147564	147415	147793	148162	148059
2005	148029(1)	148364	148391	148926	149261	149238	149432	149779	149954	150001	150065	150030
2006	150214(1)	150641	150813	150881	151069	151354	151377	151716	151662	152041	152406	152732
2007	153144(1)	152983	153051	152435	152670	153041	153054	152749	153414	153183	153835	153918
2008	154063(1)	153653	153908	153769	154303	154313	154469	154641	154570	154876	154639	154655
2009	154232(1)	154526	154142	154479	154742	154710	154505	154300	153815	153804	153887	153120
2010	153455(1)	153702	153960	154577	154110	153623	153709	154078	153966	153681	154140	153649
2011	153244(1)	153269	153358	153478	153552	153369	153325	153707	154074	154010	154096	153945
2012	154356(1)	154825	154707	154451	154998	155149	154995	154647	155056	155576	155319	155511
2013	155654(1)	155524	155028	155238
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Labor Force Participation Rate

63.3%

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	67.3	67.3	67.3	67.3	67.1	67.1	66.9	66.9	66.9	66.8	66.9	67.0
2001	67.2	67.1	67.2	66.9	66.7	66.7	66.8	66.5	66.8	66.7	66.7	66.7
2002	66.5	66.8	66.6	66.7	66.7	66.6	66.5	66.6	66.7	66.6	66.4	66.3
2003	66.4	66.4	66.3	66.4	66.4	66.5	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	65.9
2004	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.9	66.0	66.1	66.1	66.0	65.8	65.9	66.0	65.9
2005	65.8	65.9	65.9	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.0	66.0
2006	66.0	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.3	66.4
2007	66.4	66.3	66.2	65.9	66.0	66.0	66.0	65.8	66.0	65.8	66.0	66.0
2008	66.2	66.0	66.1	65.9	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.9	65.8
2009	65.7	65.8	65.6	65.7	65.7	65.7	65.5	65.4	65.1	65.0	65.0	64.6
2010	64.8	64.9	64.9	65.1	64.9	64.6	64.6	64.7	64.6	64.4	64.6	64.3
2011	64.2	64.2	64.2	64.2	64.2	64.0	64.0	64.1	64.2	64.1	64.1	64.0
2012	63.7	63.9	63.8	63.6	63.8	63.8	63.7	63.5	63.6	63.8	63.6	63.6
2013	63.6	63.5	63.3	63.3

Unemployment Level

11,659,000

Series Id:           LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status:  Unemployed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	5708	5858	5733	5481	5758	5651	5747	5853	5625	5534	5639	5634
2001	6023	6089	6141	6271	6226	6484	6583	7042	7142	7694	8003	8258
2002	8182	8215	8304	8599	8399	8393	8390	8304	8251	8307	8520	8640
2003	8520	8618	8588	8842	8957	9266	9011	8896	8921	8732	8576	8317
2004	8370	8167	8491	8170	8212	8286	8136	7990	7927	8061	7932	7934
2005	7784	7980	7737	7672	7651	7524	7406	7345	7553	7453	7566	7279
2006	7064	7184	7072	7120	6980	7001	7175	7091	6847	6727	6872	6762
2007	7116	6927	6731	6850	6766	6979	7149	7067	7170	7237	7240	7645
2008	7685	7497	7822	7637	8395	8575	8937	9438	9494	10074	10538	11286
2009	12079	12881	13421	13826	14492	14705	14607	14819	15005	15382	15223	15095
2010	15016	15078	15192	15281	14856	14475	14542	14673	14577	14584	15094	14354
2011	13992	13798	13716	13872	13871	13964	13817	13837	13910	13696	13325	13049
2012	12748	12806	12686	12518	12695	12701	12745	12483	12082	12248	12042	12206
2013	12332	12032	11742	11659

Unemployment Rate U-3

7.5%

Series Id:           LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	4.0	4.1	4.0	3.8	4.0	4.0	4.0	4.1	3.9	3.9	3.9	3.9
2001	4.2	4.2	4.3	4.4	4.3	4.5	4.6	4.9	5.0	5.3	5.5	5.7
2002	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	5.8	5.8	5.8	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	6.0
2003	5.8	5.9	5.9	6.0	6.1	6.3	6.2	6.1	6.1	6.0	5.8	5.7
2004	5.7	5.6	5.8	5.6	5.6	5.6	5.5	5.4	5.4	5.5	5.4	5.4
2005	5.3	5.4	5.2	5.2	5.1	5.0	5.0	4.9	5.0	5.0	5.0	4.9
2006	4.7	4.8	4.7	4.7	4.6	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4
2007	4.6	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4	4.6	4.7	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.7	5.0
2008	5.0	4.9	5.1	5.0	5.4	5.6	5.8	6.1	6.1	6.5	6.8	7.3
2009	7.8	8.3	8.7	9.0	9.4	9.5	9.5	9.6	9.8	10.0	9.9	9.9
2010	9.8	9.8	9.9	9.9	9.6	9.4	9.5	9.5	9.5	9.5	9.8	9.3
2011	9.1	9.0	8.9	9.0	9.0	9.1	9.0	9.0	9.0	8.9	8.6	8.5
2012	8.3	8.3	8.2	8.1	8.2	8.2	8.2	8.1	7.8	7.9	7.8	7.8
2013	7.9	7.7	7.6	7.5

16-19 Years (Teenage) Unemployment Rate

24.1%

Series Id:           LNS14000012
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate – 16-19 yrs.
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 to 19 years

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	12.7	13.8	13.3	12.6	12.8	12.3	13.4	14.0	13.0	12.8	13.0	13.2
2001	13.8	13.7	13.8	13.9	13.4	14.2	14.4	15.6	15.2	16.0	15.9	17.0
2002	16.5	16.0	16.6	16.7	16.6	16.7	16.8	17.0	16.3	15.1	17.1	16.9
2003	17.2	17.2	17.8	17.7	17.9	19.0	18.2	16.6	17.6	17.2	15.7	16.2
2004	17.0	16.5	16.8	16.6	17.1	17.0	17.8	16.7	16.6	17.4	16.4	17.6
2005	16.2	17.5	17.1	17.8	17.8	16.3	16.1	16.1	15.5	16.1	17.0	14.9
2006	15.1	15.3	16.1	14.6	14.0	15.8	15.9	16.0	16.3	15.2	14.8	14.6
2007	14.8	14.9	14.9	15.9	15.9	16.3	15.3	15.9	15.9	15.4	16.2	16.8
2008	17.8	16.6	16.1	15.9	19.0	19.2	20.7	18.6	19.1	20.0	20.3	20.5
2009	20.7	22.2	22.2	22.2	23.4	24.7	24.3	25.0	25.9	27.1	26.9	26.6
2010	26.0	25.4	26.2	25.5	26.6	26.0	26.0	25.7	25.8	27.2	24.6	25.1
2011	25.5	24.0	24.4	24.7	24.0	24.7	24.9	25.2	24.4	24.1	23.9	22.9
2012	23.4	23.7	25.0	24.9	24.4	23.7	23.9	24.5	23.7	23.7	23.6	23.5
2013	23.4	25.1	24.2	24.1

Average Weeks Unemployed

36.5%

Series Id:           LNS13008275
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Average Weeks Unemployed
Labor force status:  Unemployed
Type of data:        Number of weeks
Age:                 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	13.1	12.6	12.7	12.4	12.6	12.3	13.4	12.9	12.2	12.7	12.4	12.5
2001	12.7	12.8	12.8	12.4	12.1	12.7	12.9	13.3	13.2	13.3	14.3	14.5
2002	14.7	15.0	15.4	16.3	16.8	16.9	16.9	16.5	17.6	17.8	17.6	18.5
2003	18.5	18.5	18.1	19.4	19.0	19.9	19.7	19.2	19.5	19.3	19.9	19.8
2004	19.9	20.1	19.8	19.6	19.8	20.5	18.8	18.8	19.4	19.5	19.7	19.4
2005	19.5	19.1	19.5	19.6	18.6	17.9	17.6	18.4	17.9	17.9	17.5	17.5
2006	16.9	17.8	17.1	16.7	17.1	16.6	17.1	17.1	17.1	16.3	16.2	16.1
2007	16.3	16.7	17.8	16.9	16.6	16.5	17.2	17.0	16.3	17.0	17.3	16.6
2008	17.5	16.9	16.5	16.9	16.6	17.1	17.0	17.7	18.6	19.9	18.9	19.9
2009	19.8	20.1	20.9	21.6	22.4	23.9	25.1	25.3	26.7	27.4	29.0	29.7
2010	30.4	29.8	31.6	33.2	33.9	34.4	33.8	33.6	33.4	34.0	34.1	34.8
2011	37.3	37.4	39.2	38.6	39.5	39.6	40.4	40.3	40.4	38.9	40.7	40.7
2012	40.2	39.9	39.5	39.1	39.6	39.7	38.8	39.3	39.6	39.9	39.7	38.1
2013	35.3	36.9	37.1	36.5

Unemployment Level New Entrants

1,280,000

Series Id:                  LNS13023569
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:               (Seas) Unemployment Level – New Entrants
Labor force status:         Unemployed
Type of data:               Number in thousands
Age:                        16 years and over
Unemployed entrant status:  New entrants

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	394	420	429	406	466	427	433	499	415	402	419	490
2001	444	396	378	457	468	467	448	485	473	481	495	515
2002	484	507	538	527	497	549	545	612	536	479	591	535
2003	599	584	630	635	630	661	669	652	686	636	593	693
2004	676	666	631	652	718	649	702	704	695	734	700	702
2005	621	753	712	764	710	650	630	626	607	638	673	633
2006	616	711	636	591	517	646	639	646	612	572	591	586
2007	622	599	615	620	530	640	602	588	668	696	678	679
2008	677	656	704	625	797	786	835	821	815	819	763	803
2009	779	999	874	901	965	1002	1004	1085	1150	1100	1326	1240
2010	1199	1192	1155	1188	1201	1170	1207	1279	1211	1277	1272	1308
2011	1352	1289	1308	1301	1220	1231	1278	1260	1370	1289	1271	1286
2012	1258	1382	1421	1362	1347	1316	1299	1268	1253	1302	1326	1291
2013	1287	1279	1316	1280

Not in Labor Force, Search For Work and Available

2,347,000

Series Id:                       LNU05026642
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:                    (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Searched For Work and Available
Labor force status:              Not in labor force
Type of data:                    Number in thousands
Age:                             16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force:  Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force:      Available to work now

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Annual
2000	1207	1281	1219	1216	1113	1142	1172	1097	1166	1044	1100	1125	1157
2001	1295	1337	1109	1131	1157	1170	1232	1364	1335	1398	1331	1330	1266
2002	1532	1423	1358	1397	1467	1380	1507	1456	1501	1416	1401	1432	1439
2003	1598	1590	1577	1399	1428	1468	1566	1665	1544	1586	1473	1483	1531
2004	1670	1691	1643	1526	1533	1492	1557	1587	1561	1647	1517	1463	1574
2005	1804	1673	1588	1511	1428	1583	1516	1583	1438	1414	1415	1589	1545
2006	1644	1471	1468	1310	1388	1584	1522	1592	1299	1478	1366	1252	1448
2007	1577	1451	1385	1391	1406	1454	1376	1365	1268	1364	1363	1344	1395
2008	1729	1585	1352	1414	1416	1558	1573	1640	1604	1637	1947	1908	1614
2009	2130	2051	2106	2089	2210	2176	2282	2270	2219	2373	2323	2486	2226
2010	2539	2527	2255	2432	2223	2591	2622	2370	2548	2602	2531	2609	2487
2011	2800	2730	2434	2466	2206	2680	2785	2575	2511	2555	2591	2540	2573
2012	2809	2608	2352	2363	2423	2483	2529	2561	2517	2433	2505	2614	2516
2013	2443	2588	2326	2347

Not in Labor Force, Searched for Work and Available,

Discouraged Reasons For Not Currently Looking

835,000

Series Id:                       LNU05026645
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:                    (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Searched For Work and Available, Discouraged Reasons For Not Currently Looking
Labor force status:              Not in labor force
Type of data:                    Number in thousands
Age:                             16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force:  Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force:      Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Annual
2000	236	267	258	331	280	309	266	203	253	232	236	269	262
2001	301	287	349	349	328	294	310	337	285	331	328	348	321
2002	328	375	330	320	414	342	405	378	392	359	385	403	369
2003	449	450	474	437	482	478	470	503	388	462	457	433	457
2004	432	484	514	492	476	478	504	534	412	429	392	442	466
2005	515	485	480	393	392	476	499	384	362	392	404	451	436
2006	396	386	451	381	323	481	428	448	325	331	349	274	381
2007	442	375	381	399	368	401	367	392	276	320	349	363	369
2008	467	396	401	412	400	420	461	381	467	484	608	642	462
2009	734	731	685	740	792	793	796	758	706	808	861	929	778
2010	1065	1204	994	1197	1083	1207	1185	1110	1209	1219	1282	1318	1173
2011	993	1020	921	989	822	982	1119	977	1037	967	1096	945	989
2012	1059	1006	865	968	830	821	852	844	802	813	979	1068	909
2013	804	885	803	835

Total Unemployment Rate U-6

13.9%

Series Id:           LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status:  Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over
Percent/rates:       Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

2000	7.1	7.2	7.1	6.9	7.1	7.0	7.0	7.1	7.0	6.8	7.1	6.9
2001	7.3	7.4	7.3	7.4	7.5	7.9	7.8	8.1	8.7	9.3	9.4	9.6
2002	9.5	9.5	9.4	9.7	9.5	9.5	9.6	9.6	9.6	9.6	9.7	9.8
2003	10.0	10.2	10.0	10.2	10.1	10.3	10.3	10.1	10.4	10.2	10.0	9.8
2004	9.9	9.7	10.0	9.6	9.6	9.5	9.5	9.4	9.4	9.7	9.4	9.2
2005	9.3	9.3	9.1	8.9	8.9	9.0	8.8	8.9	9.0	8.7	8.7	8.6
2006	8.4	8.4	8.2	8.1	8.2	8.4	8.5	8.4	8.0	8.2	8.1	7.9
2007	8.4	8.2	8.0	8.2	8.2	8.3	8.4	8.4	8.4	8.4	8.4	8.8
2008	9.2	9.0	9.1	9.2	9.7	10.1	10.5	10.8	11.0	11.8	12.6	13.6
2009	14.2	15.1	15.7	15.9	16.4	16.5	16.5	16.7	16.7	17.1	17.1	17.1
2010	16.7	17.0	17.0	17.1	16.6	16.5	16.5	16.5	16.8	16.7	16.9	16.6
2011	16.2	16.0	15.8	16.0	15.8	16.1	16.0	16.1	16.3	16.0	15.5	15.2
2012	15.1	15.0	14.5	14.5	14.8	14.8	14.9	14.7	14.7	14.5	14.4	14.4
2013	14.4	14.3	13.8	13.9

Background Articles and Videos

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed                   USDL-13-0785
until 8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, May 3, 2013

Technical information:
 Household data:       (202) 691-6378  *  cpsinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/cps
 Establishment data:   (202) 691-6555  *  cesinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact:         (202) 691-5902  *  PressOffice@bls.gov

                       THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- APRIL 2013

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 165,000 in April, and the unemployment 
rate was little changed at 7.5 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 
reported today. Employment increased in professional and business services, 
food services and drinking places, retail trade, and health care.

Household Survey Data

The unemployment rate, at 7.5 percent, changed little in April but has 
declined by 0.4 percentage point since January. The number of unemployed 
persons, at 11.7 million, was also little changed over the month; however, 
unemployment has decreased by 673,000 since January. (See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult women
(6.7 percent) declined in April, while the rates for adult men (7.1
percent), teenagers (24.1 percent), whites (6.7 percent), blacks (13.2
percent), and Hispanics (9.0 percent) showed little or no change. The
jobless rate for Asians was 5.1 percent (not seasonally adjusted),
little changed from a year earlier. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

In April, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27
weeks or more) declined by 258,000 to 4.4 million; their share of the
unemployed declined by 2.2 percentage points to 37.4 percent. Over the
past 12 months, the number of long-term unemployed has decreased by
687,000, and their share has declined by 3.1 percentage points. (See
table A-12.)

The civilian labor force participation rate was 63.3 percent in April,
unchanged over the month but down from 63.6 percent in January. The
employment-population ratio, 58.6 percent, was about unchanged over
the month and has shown little movement, on net, over the past year.
(See table A-1.)

In April, the number of persons employed part time for economic
reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers)
increased by 278,000 to 7.9 million, largely offsetting a decrease in
March. These individuals were working part time because their hours
had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.
(See table A-8.)

In April, 2.3 million persons were marginally attached to the labor
force, essentially unchanged from a year earlier. (The data are not
seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force,
wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime
in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because
they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.
(See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 835,000 discouraged workers
in April, down by 133,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not
seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently
looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them.
The remaining 1.5 million persons marginally attached to the labor
force in April had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the
survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. 
(See table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 165,000 in April, with
job gains in professional and business services, food services and
drinking places, retail trade, and health care. Over the prior 12
months, employment growth averaged 169,000 per month. (See table B-1.)

Professional and business services added 73,000 jobs in April and has
added 587,000 jobs over the past year. In April, employment rose in
temporary help services (+31,000), professional and technical services
(+23,000), and management of companies (+7,000).

Within leisure and hospitality, employment in food services and
drinking places rose by 38,000 over the month. Job growth in the food
services industry averaged 25,000 per month over the prior 12 months.

Retail trade employment increased by 29,000 in April. The industry
added an average of 21,000 jobs per month over the prior 12 months. In
April, job growth occurred in general merchandise stores (+15,000) and
in health and personal care stores (+5,000).

Health care added 19,000 jobs in April. Within the industry, employment 
rose in ambulatory health care services (+14,000). Over the prior 12 
months, job growth in health care averaged 24,000 per month. In April, 
employment also continued its upward trend in social assistance (+7,000).

Employment changed little over the month in construction, with small
offsetting movements in the residential and nonresidential components.
Construction gained an average of 27,000 jobs per month over the prior 
6 months. Manufacturing employment was unchanged in April.

Employment in other major industries, including mining and logging,
wholesale trade, transportation and warehousing, financial activities,
and government, showed little change over the month.

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls
decreased by 0.2 hour in April to 34.4 hours. Within manufacturing, 
the workweek decreased by 0.1 hour to 40.7 hours, and overtime declined 
by 0.1 hour to 3.3 hours. The average workweek for production and
nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls decreased by 0.1
hour to 33.7 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

In April, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm
payrolls rose by 4 cents to $23.87. Over the year, average hourly
earnings have risen by 45 cents, or 1.9 percent. In April, average
hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory
employees edged up by 2 cents to $20.06. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was
revised from +268,000 to +332,000, and the change for March was
revised from +88,000 to +138,000. With these revisions, employment
gains in February and March combined were 114,000 higher than
previously reported.

____________
The Employment Situation for May is scheduled to be released on
Friday, June 7, 2013, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).

Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]

CategoryApr.
2012Feb.
2013Mar.
2013Apr.
2013Change from:
Mar.
2013-
Apr.
2013Employment status Civilian noninstitutional population242,784244,828244,995245,175180Civilian labor force154,451155,524155,028155,238210Participation rate63.663.563.363.30.0Employed141,934143,492143,286143,579293Employment-population ratio58.558.658.558.60.1Unemployed12,51812,03211,74211,659-83Unemployment rate8.17.77.67.5-0.1Not in labor force88,33289,30489,96789,936-31 Unemployment rates Total, 16 years and over8.17.77.67.5-0.1Adult men (20 years and over)7.57.16.97.10.2Adult women (20 years and over)7.47.07.06.7-0.3Teenagers (16 to 19 years)24.925.124.224.1-0.1White7.46.86.76.70.0Black or African American13.113.813.313.2-0.1Asian (not seasonally adjusted)5.26.15.05.1-Hispanic or Latino ethnicity10.39.69.29.0-0.2 Total, 25 years and over6.86.36.26.1-0.1Less than a high school diploma12.511.211.111.60.5High school graduates, no college7.97.97.67.4-0.2Some college or associate degree7.56.76.46.40.0Bachelor’s degree and higher4.03.83.83.90.1 Reason for unemployment Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs6,8806,5226,3296,41081Job leavers989956986864-122Reentrants3,3363,3403,1763,151-25New entrants1,3621,2791,3161,280-36 Duration of unemployment Less than 5 weeks2,5672,6672,4642,474105 to 14 weeks2,8412,7822,8382,8481015 to 26 weeks1,9841,6951,7371,96723027 weeks and over5,0404,7974,6114,353-258 Employed persons at work part time Part time for economic reasons7,8967,9887,6387,916278Slack work or business conditions5,2105,1364,9065,129223Could only find part-time work2,3932,5782,5762,527-49Part time for noneconomic reasons18,86818,90818,74518,908163 Persons not in the labor force (not seasonally adjusted) Marginally attached to the labor force2,3632,5882,3262,347-Discouraged workers968885803835– Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data.
NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted

ESTABLISHMENT DATA
Summary table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Category	Apr. 2012	Feb. 2013	Mar. 2013(p)	Apr. 2013(p)
EMPLOYMENT BY SELECTED INDUSTRY (Over-the-month change, in thousands)
Total nonfarm	112	332	138	165
Total private	120	319	154	176
Goods-producing	6	75	15	-9
Mining and logging	0	4	0	-3
Construction	-4	48	13	-6
Manufacturing	10	23	2	0
Durable goods(1)	8	12	7	1
Motor vehicles and parts	1.0	6.4	4.1	2.4
Nondurable goods	2	11	-5	-1
Private service-providing(1)	114	244	139	185
Wholesale trade	13.2	4.7	2.9	4.1
Retail trade	30.4	25.8	-3.9	29.3
Transportation and warehousing	-15.1	-5.3	-6.7	4.2
Information	0	18	2	-9
Financial activities	5	15	5	9
Professional and business services(1)	45	93	64	73
Temporary help services	14.7	27.5	25.5	30.8
Education and health services(1)	22	31	46	28
Health care and social assistance	20.7	37.0	26.5	26.1
Leisure and hospitality	14	63	38	43
Other services	0	-1	-8	4
Government	-8	13	-16	-11

WOMEN AND PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES(2) AS A PERCENT OF ALL EMPLOYEES
Total nonfarm women employees	49.4	49.3	49.3	49.3
Total private women employees	47.8	47.8	47.8	47.9
Total private production and nonsupervisory employees	82.6	82.6	82.6	82.6

HOURS AND EARNINGS ALL EMPLOYEES
Total private
Average weekly hours	34.5	34.5	34.6	34.4
Average hourly earnings	$23.42	$23.82	$23.83	$23.87
Average weekly earnings	$807.99	$821.79	$824.52	$821.13
Index of aggregate weekly hours (2007=100)(3)	96.3	97.9	98.3	97.9
Over-the-month percent change	0.1	0.5	0.4	-0.4
Index of aggregate weekly payrolls (2007=100)(4)	107.6	111.2	111.7	111.5
Over-the-month percent change	0.2	0.7	0.4	-0.2

HOURS AND EARNINGS PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES
Total private
Average weekly hours	33.7	33.8	33.8	33.7
Average hourly earnings	$19.72	$20.03	$20.04	$20.06
Average weekly earnings	$664.56	$677.01	$677.35	$676.02
Index of aggregate weekly hours (2002=100)(3)	103.6	105.6	105.7	105.5
Over-the-month percent change	0.1	0.9	0.1	-0.2
Index of aggregate weekly payrolls (2002=100)(4)	136.4	141.2	141.4	141.3
Over-the-month percent change	0.3	1.1	0.1	-0.1

DIFFUSION INDEX(5) (Over 1-month span)
Total private (266 industries)	58.3	61.7	56.2	53.9
Manufacturing (81 industries)	54.9	56.8	51.9	44.4
Footnotes (1) Includes other industries, not shown separately. (2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries. (3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours. (4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls. (5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment. (p) Preliminary

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Ben Bernanke Boom Bubble Blower Busted By The Bubble Film — Videos

Posted on May 1, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Homes, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, Math, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: Austrian School of Economics, Banking, Ben Bernanke, Boom, Bubble, Bubble Busting, Bust, Creating Money, David Stockman, economic growth, Economics, Federal Funds Rate, fiscal policy, Friedrick Hayek, Housing, Housing Bubble, inflation, Jim Grant, Jim Rogers, Joseph Salerno, Keynesians, Ludwig von Mises, Marc Faber, Misallocation of Resources, monetary policy, Money, Peter Schiff, Quantitative Easing, Recession, Robert Murphy, Roger Garrison, Savings, Tom Woods, Videos |

Ben Bernanke Is The Most Dangerous Man In US History

BREAKING 2013 Economic Collapse Peter Schiff

The Bubble film official trailer

Raw footage of Jim Rogers interview – The Bubble film

Raw Footage of Doug Casey Interview from The Bubble

Raw footage of Jim Grant interview from The Bubble film

Raw footage of Peter Schiff Interview from The Bubble

The Bubble – Raw footage of Marc Faber interview

Raw Footage of Peter Wallison Interview from The Bubble

Raw Footage of Joseph Salerno Interview from The Bubble

Raw Footage of Robert Murphy interview from The Bubble

Raw footage of Roger Garrison Interview from The Bubble

Raw footage of Ron Paul interview from The Bubble film

The Bubble film panel at Freedom Fest 2012

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Background Articles and Videos

The American Dream By The Provocateur Network

Slow “growth”,GDP makeover, Keynesians demand more debt and inflation

The Fed, Ben Bernanke & the Economy (4/30/13)

Coming Economic Collapse Peter Schiff RT America

Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle | Roger W. Garrison

Tom Woods Discusses his New Documentary, The Bubble

Director of “The Bubble” Jimmy Morrison interview with ManifestLiberty.com Part 1/2

Director of “The Bubble” Jimmy Morrison interview with ManifestLiberty.com Part 2/2

Fed Keeps Interest Rates Low, Continues Bond Buying Program

The Federal Reserve held fast to its ultra-accommodative monetary policy Wednesday, solidified by what board members described as an economy weakened by fiscal policy.

Interest rates will remain at historically low levels while the U.S. central bank will not alter its $85 billion a month asset purchasing program, the Fed’s Open Markets Committee decided at this week’s meeting.

While recent meetings have been remarkable for signs of dissent over the long-standing Fed policy, the sentiment this month turned towards concerns about “downside risks” to growth, though the FOMC made no mention of the recent set of weak economic data.

The Federal Reserve held fast to its ultra-accommodative monetary policy Wednesday, solidified by what board members described as an economy weakened by fiscal policy.

While stocks have soared to new highs, the economy remains in slow-growth mode as it has throughout Chairman Ben Bernanke’s term, which began just before the onset of the financial crisis.

The stock market reacted little to the 2 pm news, maintaining an earlier selloff spurred over jobs fears.

Fed officials have long bemoaned Washington fiscal policy, with Congress and the White House in a continued stalemate that has resulted in a raft of mandated tax increases and spending cuts known as the sequester.

The May FOMC statement kept up the heat.

“Household spending and business fixed investment advanced, and the housing sector has strengthened further, but fiscal policy is restraining economic growth,” the statement said.

The Fed’s decision came the same day as a report on private payrolls fell well below expectations, indicating just 119,000 new jobs created, a seven-month low.

While critics worry about inflation, the Fed continued to conclude that “expectations have remained stable.”

The Fed has vowed to keep interest rates exceptionally low until unemployment falls to 6.5 percent from its current 7.6 percent and until inflation reaches 2.5 percent from its current 1.5 percent.

-By CNBC.com Senior Writer Jeff Cox.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100695681

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Paul Kengor — The Communist — Frank Marshall Davis: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor — Videos

Posted on April 29, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, College, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Tax Policy, Unemployment, Video, Wealth | Tags: arack Obama's Mentor, Barack Obama, Books, Frank Marshall Davis, Glenn Beck, Is Barack Obama a Communist, lies, Marxist, Obama, Obama is a Marxist-Lenist, Paul Kengor, Photos, President Barack Obama, The Communist, The Untold Story of B, Videos |

Paul Kengor & Glenn Beck “The Communist” on GBTV Frank Marshall Davis Barack Obama’s Mentor

WATCH The Communist author Paul Kengor w/ Glenn Beck on the Radio Frank Marshall Davis Obama Mentor

Paul Kengor (1 of 3)

Paul Kengor (2 of 3)

Paul Kengor (3 of 3)

Paul Kengor on Frank Marshall Davis

Frank Marshall Davis Interview

Who is the REAL Barack Obama?

Is Barack Obama a communist?

“If I wanted America to fail”

Background Articles and Videos

Who was Frank Marshall Davis? (This is a 32-page analysis of the FBI file by Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein.) PDF
The Frank Marshall Davis Network in Hawaii (Andrew Walden examines the remnants of the Davis network in Hawaii). PDF
Pages from the FBI File (This 40-page report includes selected pages from the FBI file which document Davis’s Communist history and pro-Soviet and anti-white views). PDF
FBI File #1 (PDF)
FBI File #2 (PDF)
FBI File #3 (PDF)
FBI File #4 (PDF)
FBI File #5 (PDF)
FBI File #6 (PDF)
The Communist Party of Frank Marshall Davis (PDF)

Frank Marshall Davis – Rice & Roses Documentary (part 1/3)

Frank Marshall Davis – Rice & Roses Documentary (part 2/3)

Frank Marshall Davis – Rice & Roses Documentary (part 3/3)

Obama’s Real Father is Communist Frank Marshall Davis?

Michael Savage on Obama’s REAL Father; Dreams From My Real Father DVD; Savage Nation

Glenn Beck – Presidential Lies “Do You Know Anybody Like Barack Obama?”

Barack Obama 1995 Interview on Dreams From My Father Part 1

Barack Obama 1995 Interview on Dreams of My Father Part 2

Background Articles and Videos

Meltdown (pt 1-4) The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse 2010

Meltdown (pt 2-4) The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse 2010

Meltdown (pt 3-4) The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse.2010

Meltdown – pt 4-4 The Secret History of the Global Financial Collapse (2010)

The Fall of Lehman Brothers

Goldman Sachs: Power and Peril – Documentary

The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of The World by Niall Ferguson Epsd. 1-5 (Full Documentary)

The Fall of the Dollar – The Death of a Fiat Currency part 1

The Fall of the Dollar – The Death of a Fiat Currency part 2

The First 12 Hours of a US Dollar Collapse

LIFE HIDDEN TRUTH 2013 GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS

Billionaires Dumping Stocks, Economist Knows Why

Despite the 6.5% stock market rally over the last three months, a handful of billionaires are quietly dumping their American stocks . . . and fast.

Warren Buffett, who has been a cheerleader for U.S. stocks for quite some time, is dumping shares at an alarming rate. He recently complained of “disappointing performance” in dyed-in-the-wool American companies like Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and Kraft Foods.

In the latest filing for Buffett’s holding company Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett has been drastically reducing his exposure to stocks that depend on consumer purchasing habits. Berkshire sold roughly 19 million shares of Johnson & Johnson, and reduced his overall stake in “consumer product stocks” by 21%. Berkshire Hathaway also sold its entire stake in California-based computer parts supplier Intel.

With 70% of the U.S. economy dependent on consumer spending, Buffett’s apparent lack of faith in these companies’ future prospects is worrisome.

Unfortunately Buffett isn’t alone.

Fellow billionaire John Paulson, who made a fortune betting on the subprime mortgage meltdown, is clearing out of U.S. stocks too. During the second quarter of the year, Paulson’s hedge fund, Paulson & Co., dumped 14 million shares of JPMorgan Chase. The fund also dumped its entire position in discount retailer Family Dollar and consumer-goods maker Sara Lee.

Finally, billionaire George Soros recently sold nearly all of his bank stocks, including shares of JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs. Between the three banks, Soros sold more than a million shares.

So why are these billionaires dumping their shares of U.S. companies?

After all, the stock market is still in the midst of its historic rally. Real estate prices have finally leveled off, and for the first time in five years are actually rising in many locations. And the unemployment rate seems to have stabilized.

It’s very likely that these professional investors are aware of specific research that points toward a massive market correction, as much as 90%.

One such person publishing this research is Robert Wiedemer, an esteemed economist and author of the New York Times best-selling book Aftershock.

Editor’s Note: Wiedemer Gives Proof for His Dire Predictions in This Shocking Interview.

Before you dismiss the possibility of a 90% drop in the stock market as unrealistic, consider Wiedemer’s credentials.

In 2006, Wiedemer and a team of economists accurately predicted the collapse of the U.S. housing market, equity markets, and consumer spending that almost sank the United States. They published their research in the book America’s Bubble Economy.

The book quickly grabbed headlines for its accuracy in predicting what many thought would never happen, and quickly established Wiedemer as a trusted voice.

A columnist at Dow Jones said the book was “one of those rare finds that not only predicted the subprime credit meltdown well in advance, it offered Main Street investors a winning strategy that helped avoid the forty percent losses that followed . . .”

The chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor’s said that Wiedemer’s track record “demands our attention.”

And finally, the former CFO of Goldman Sachs said Wiedemer’s “prescience in (his) first book lends credence to the new warnings. This book deserves our attention.”

In the interview for his latest blockbuster Aftershock, Wiedemer says the 90% drop in the stock market is “a worst-case scenario,” and the host quickly challenged this claim.

Wiedemer calmly laid out a clear explanation of why a large drop of some sort is a virtual certainty.

It starts with the reckless strategy of the Federal Reserve to print a massive amount of money out of thin air in an attempt to stimulate the economy.

“These funds haven’t made it into the markets and the economy yet. But it is a mathematical certainty that once the dam breaks, and this money passes through the reserves and hits the markets, inflation will surge,” said Wiedemer.

“Once you hit 10% inflation, 10-year Treasury bonds lose about half their value. And by 20%, any value is all but gone. Interest rates will increase dramatically at this point, and that will cause real estate values to collapse. And the stock market will collapse as a consequence of these other problems.”

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola#ixzz2RhO2R5ey
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Murray Rothbard: Six Stages of the Libertarian Movement — Videos

Posted on April 24, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Culture, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Private Sector, Public Sector, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: Economics, freedom, Fund Raising, Libertarian Movement., liberty, Murray Rothbard, Poltics |

Murray Rothbard: Six Stages of the Libertarian Movement

Libertarianism | Murray N. Rothbard

The Future of Austrian Economics | Murray N. Rothbard

Lew Rockwell and Tom Woods discuss Rothbard and the Koch Brothers

Lew Rockwell.com Podcast #20 – Memories of Murray

Murray Rothbard Gives a Tribute to Ludwig von Mises

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Masters of Money — Keynes — Hayek — Marx — Videos

Posted on April 24, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Rants, Raves, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Unemployment, Wisdom | Tags: BBC, capitalism, CPI, depression, economic growth, Economic Thought, Economics, freedom, Friedrick A. Hayek, GDP, GDP Inflator, government intervention, Gross Domestic Product, John Maynard Keynes, Karl Marx, Masters of Money, Photos, Politics, Recession, Videos |

Masters Of Money: 1/3 – John Maynard Keynes (BBC Documentary Series)

Masters Of Money: 2/3 – Friedrich Hayek (BBC Documentary Series)

Masters Of Money: 3/3 – Karl Marx (BBC Documentary Series)

Keynes the Man: Hero or Villain? | Murray N. Rothbard

Modern Myths of Keynesian Economics | Jeffrey M. Herbener

Deck the Halls with Macro Follies

Keynesianism Part I – It’s All About Spending

What GDP Leaves Out: An Austrian Look

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Where is Gold Prices Going? Peter Schiff vs. Larry Kudlow: Gold & The Dollar — Videos

Posted on April 23, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Constitution, Economics, Education, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: Gold Prices, Larry Kudlow, Peter Schiff |

Peter Schiff vs. Larry Kudlow: Gold & The Dollar

Peter Schiff: I’ve Been Buying Gold for 13 Years

Bloomberg’s Alix Steel Analyzes Why Peter Schiff & Gold Mining Stocks Are Massive Losers

Clown Solidarity – Jim Cramer Supports Peter Schiff On Gold (You Know What This Means…)

Keiser Report: Correlation & Causation of Gold Price (E434, ft. Paul Craig Roberts)

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) Created “Event File” For Deportation of Saudi National, Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi, Under Section 212 3b for Security and Related Grounds — Terrorist Activities — Videos

Posted on April 22, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Diasters, Economics, Education, Energy, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Natural Gas, Oil, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Strategy, Talk Radio, Unemployment, Video, Wisdom | Tags: " For Deportation of Saudi National, Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi, Created "Event File, ecurities and Related Grounds, Event File, National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), President Barack Obama, Saudi Arabia Connection, Terrorist Activities, Terrorist Activity, Under Section 212 3b |

Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi

National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) Overview

Saudi National held by police after Boston Marathon bombing. Person of interest

The Glenn Beck Program Saudi Suspect/Boston Bombing Air Date: 4-24-13.

Glenn Beck- Big Sis Lied: New Info On Saudi National In Boston Attacks Confirms Cover Up.

The Saudi – U.S. Relationship – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Radio Program – 2013.04.22

The Saudi Arabia Connection – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Program – 2013.04.22

New Evidence On Boston Bombings Government Cover-Up

From TV Glenn updates on the Saudi national — Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck detailed new update on the Boston bombing 23/04/2013

Glenn Beck Reveals More about Saudi National

“…Monday on radio, Glenn Beck revealed further details about the Saudi national who was the first suspect in the Boston marathon bombing. Despite denials from Janet Napolitano and officials from the U.S. Immigrations and Customs (ICE) that a Saudi national was taken into custody in connection to the Boston marathon bombing, several sources have confirmed that Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi was set to be deported for proven terrorist activity.

According to two FBI sources, Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi was taken “into custody” Monday April 15th at a Boston after he was injured in the blast.

A source within the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) told TheBlaze that on Monday night Al-Harbi’s Revere, Massachusetts apartment was searched and property was taken out.

At 4:00pm ET on Tuesday April 16th, The NCTC Field Watch Commander created an “event file” calling for Al-Harbi’s deportation using Section 212 3b, which is proven terrorist activity. According to TheBlaze’s sources, tagging someone as 3b requires solid evidence.

Fox News reporter Todd Starnes has also reported, “The Saudi national who was initially detained and then ruled out as a suspect in the Boston Marathon terrorist attack had been flagged on a terror watch list and was granted a student visa without being properly vetted, sources have told me.”

Starnes report no longer appears on the Fox News website, but can be found on Townhall.

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) has told TheBlaze that he has detailed information on the Saudi national and confirmed that Al-Harbi was to be deported under Section 212 3b of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Alongside three other Congressmen, Rep. Duncan has requested a classified briefing on the Saudi national and the deportation order. …”

http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/04/22/exposed-congressional-sources-confirm-saudi-national-was-to-be-deported-for-security-related-grounds-have-files-in-their-possession/

Glenn Beck- Saudi National Is An Al Qaeda Recruiter Behind Boston Marathon Bombing

Obama’s “Catch & Release” of Saudi Boston Marathon Bombing Suspect

Jeff Duncan Questions Napolitano On Deportation Of Saudi National. Boston Bombing

Terror in Boston – Saudi Being Deported For National Security Reason? – What The Hell Is This?

Still think the FBI is telling you the truth? CHECK THIS OUT

Abdul Rahman Ali Al-Harbi, Bombing ‘Person Of Interest’ Has 6 Saudi ‘Terrorists’ In Family,5 More Are In Gitmo -

Obama Buries Boston Massacre Saudi Connection

Boston Bombing Suspects Were Gov’t Assets

National Counterterrorism Center’s Role in Counterterrorism

Pres. Obama Remarks to National Counterterrorism Center Staff

Pres. Obama Remarks to National Counterterrorism Center Staff
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
President Obama traveled to the National Counterterrorism Center in Washington, DC. He met with NCTC leadership and delivered remarks to staff members.

Background Articles and Videos

Briefing on Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi Requested by Congressional Committee; Was on “Terror” Watch List

Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi was the Saudi national and initial “person of interest” in the Boston Marathon bombing that killed three and injured scores of others, some critically.

It turns out that he was “flagged on a terror watch list”, as reported by Todd Starnes of Town Hall. What a coincidence! Soon after the terror attack, a brave citizen tackled Ali Alharbi when he spotted the 22-year-old running away from one of the explosive devices. It would be very interesting to speak to the vigilant citizen(s) who spotted the Saudi National, but he (or they) are yet to be named. Why? John Miller, former Assistant Director to the FBI and CBS News correspondent stated, “this person was pretty close to wherever this blast went off, but not so close as to suffer the serious injuries that other people did.” Police initially denied all reports of having a Saudi in custody, but later relented.

The man was transferred to the hospital, but not as a “suspect,” insisted officials. Regardless, a warrant was issued to search the Saudi National’s apartment, where “bags of evidence” were removed and his roommate questioned “for hours.” One would imagine that the police would have cause to get a warrant in the first place. It would be interesting to see the warrant. It turns out that it was NOT the police, but “federal authorities” who made the decision to drop the case against Ali Alharbi. According to the Boston Herald, Revere police Lt. Amy O’Hara said that federal authorities “are telling us he’s no longer a person of interest.” Another interesting fact from the Boston Herald article was that the roommate said he was “forbidden to speak about the home search by both the FBI and the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia.” Why?

Janet Napolitano Dismisses Deportation “Rumors”

Previous reports that Ali Alharbi was to be deported were roundly disregarded (and even mocked) by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. She roundly dismissed deportation concerns during a “heated exchange”, which occurred on Thursday regarding the Saudi National with Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC). She said,

“I am unaware of anyone who is being deported for national security concerns at all related to Boston…I don’t know where that rumor came from.”

When Duncan questioned the wisdom of deporting “someone who was reportedly at the scene of the bombing”, Napolitano dodged the question by mocking it. She said,

“It is so full of misstatements and misapprehensions, that it is just not worthy of any answer…There has been so much reported on this that has been wrong. I can’t even begin to tell you, congressman.”

The condescending answer is a knee-jerk response to uncomfortable questions.

House Committee on Homeland Security Wants Answers

Despite Napolitano’s faux outrage, Key members of the House Committee on Homeland Security says it has “copies of the original deportation order” and have sent a letter to Janet Napolitano that says in part, “We request the Department provide a detailed overview of the records associated with this individual to include his law enforcement and immigration records prior to April 15, 2013, as well as his current status.” The letter was signed by Chairman Michael T. McCaul, Chairman Jeff Duncan of the subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency, Chairman Peter King of the subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, and Chairman Candice Miller of the subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security as reported by theBlaze.

House Committee on Homeland Security Requests More Info on Saudi National From Napolitano

Is Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi involved in any way in the Boston Bombings? One thing is for sure, when the federal government dodges questions, it is not reassuring, adds to speculation, and fuels conspiracy theories. Add the inconsistent and conflicting media coverage; not to mention their endless and irresponsible speculation about the motives of the bombers before facts emerged, and it is no wonder that the mainstream media is losing credibility.

Background Articles and Videos

Making the Federal Budget

How do you spend four trillion dollars? Turns out, you don’t; it takes the President and the Congress to allocate, authorize, appropriate, resolve, outlay, sequester, impound, and just plain spend that much in 2011. Such a process is baffling at times. It’s so complex that you may marvel that Washington can get any action accomplished and paid for at all. So how does the federal budget happen?

Join the Mercatus Center’s Capitol Hill Campus and Senior Research Fellow Jason J. Fichtner for a walk through the process of making the federal budget. He explains the process from its beginnings in the halls of the White House, highlight the many roles Congress takes to authorize and enforce the budget, and navigate the twisting, puzzling conglomeration of bureaucratic steps, political goals, and accountancy rules that go into making our government function.

Changing the Budget Process to Promote Fiscal Responsibility

A Sustainable Approach to Entitlement Reform

Foundation for Growth: Restoring the Promise of American Opportunity

The Fiscal Year 2014 Senate Budget builds on the work done over the last two years to create jobs, invest in broad-based economic growth, and tackle our deficit and debt responsibly.

This budget takes the balanced and responsible approach to our fiscal challenges that every bipartisan group has endorsed and that the American people support. It includes responsible spending cuts made across the federal budget, as well as significant new savings achieved by eliminating loopholes and cutting wasteful spending in the tax code that benefits the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations.

The Senate Budget is grounded in the understanding that our country’s long-term fiscal and economic goals will only be met with policies that support a strong and growing middle class. And it keeps the promises we have made to our seniors, our families, and our communities.

The American people are sick and tired of watching their government lurch from crisis to crisis. The Senate Budget offers a serious and credible path away from this gridlock and dysfunction and toward a long-term plan to create jobs, lay down a strong foundation for broad-based economic growth, replace sequestration, and tackle our deficit and debt responsibly and credibly.

This budget reflects the values of a diverse Senate serving a diverse nation, and it is guided by the principles and priorities that are strongly supported by the constituents we were elected to represent

http://www.budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/senatebudget

Foundation for Growth: Restoring the Promise of American Opportunity

The Fiscal Year 2014 Senate Budget builds on the work done over the last two years to create jobs, invest in broad-based economic growth, and tackle our deficit and debt responsibly.

The highest priority of the Senate Budget is to create the conditions for job creation, economic growth, and prosperity built from the middle out, not the top down.

The Senate Budget takes the position that trickle-down economics has failed as an economic policy and that true national prosperity comes from the middle out, not the top down. We believe that deficit reduction at the expense of economic growth is doomed to failure, and policies that promote a strong middle class are essential to tackling our long-term deficit and debt challenges.

The policies President Barack Obama and Congress put in place in response to the Great Recession pulled our economy back from the brink and helped to add back jobs. But with an unemployment rate that remains stubbornly high, and a middle class that has seen their wages stagnate for far too long, we simply cannot afford any threats to our fragile recovery. Therefore, the Senate Budget:

• Fully replaces the harmful cuts from sequestration with smart, balanced, and responsible deficit reduction, which would save hundreds of thousands of jobs while protecting families, communities, and the fragile economic recovery.

• Invests in long-term economic growth and national competitiveness by tackling our serious deficits in infrastructure, education, job training, and innovation to create jobs now and lay down a strong foundation for broad-based growth.

• Includes a $100 billion targeted jobs and infrastructure package that would start creating new jobs quickly, begin repairing the worst of our crumbling roads and bridges, and help train our workers to fill 21

st century jobs. This jobs investment package is fully paid for by eliminating loopholes and cutting wasteful spending in the tax code that benefits the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations.

• Protects and continues tax cuts for the middle class and low-income working families.

The Senate Budget builds on the work we have done over the last two years to tackle our deficit and debt responsibly.

At the end of 2010, the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles Commission report laid out a responsible goal of reducing our deficit by $4 trillion over ten years. Since that time, Congress and the administration have implemented $2.4 trillion in deficit reduction, with $1.8 trillion coming from spending cuts and $600 billion coming from new revenue from the wealthiest Americans. The Senate Budget:

• Surpasses the bipartisan goal of $4 trillion in 10-year deficit reduction and puts our deficit and debt on a downward, sustainable, and responsible path.

• Builds on the $2.4 trillion in deficit reduction already done with an additional $1.85 trillion in new deficit reduction for a total of $4.25 trillion in deficit reduction since the Simpson-Bowles report.

• Includes an equal mix of responsible spending cuts and new revenue raised by closing loopholes and ending wasteful spending in the tax code.

• Achieves $975 billion in deficit reduction through responsible spending cuts made across the federal budget:

$493 billion saved on the domestic spending side, including $275 billion in health care savings made in a way that does not harm seniors or families.

$240 billion saved by carefully and responsibly cutting defense spending to align with the drawdown of troops in our overseas operations.

$242 billion saved in reduced interest payments.

• Achieves $975 billion in deficit reduction by closing loopholes and eliminating wasteful spending in the tax code that benefits the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations.

• Includes reconciliation instructions, a fast-track process that makes sure that the new revenue from the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations cannot be filibustered in the Senate.

The Senate Budget keeps the promises we have made to our seniors, families, veterans, and communities.

The Senate Budget takes the position that the promises we made to our seniors, families, veterans, and communities ought to be fulfilled. This budget:

• Preserves and protects Medicare so that it is strong for seniors today and will be there for our children and grandchildren.

• Rejects calls to dismantle, privatize, or voucherize Medicare.

• Builds on the responsible changes made in the Affordable Care Act to continue reducing health care costs while protecting patients.

• Protects the expansion of health insurance to nearly 30 million Americans and ensures the federal-state partnership on Medicaid is preserved.

• Rejects efforts to simply shift health care costs to states or make cuts that harm seniors and the most vulnerable families.

• Maintains the key principle that deficit reduction should not be done on the backs of the most vulnerable families and communities.

• Continues to make the investments we need in national defense, homeland security, and law enforcement to keep our country and our communities strong and secure.

• Keeps the promise we have made to our veterans that their country will be there for them and provide the resources and support they need when they come home.

The House Republican approach would hurt middle class families and the economy and break the promises we have made to our seniors.

The Senate Budget offers a very different vision than the approach taken by House Republicans.

Their proposals would cut the legs out from under our fragile economic recovery and threaten millions of jobs. They would slash the investments in infrastructure, education, and innovation that we need to lay down a strong foundation for broad-based growth and that would position us to compete and win in the 21

st century global economy.

House Republicans would dismantle Medicare and cut off programs that support the middle class and most vulnerable families. And they would do all that while refusing to ask the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to contribute their fair share.

We believe that the American people strongly support the pro-growth, pro-middle class approach taken in the Senate Budget. And we look forward to engaging with families and seniors across the country as we work to pass the responsible, fair, and bipartisan budget deal the American people expect and deserve.

April 2013

March 2013

The following timetable is used to guide the federal budget process each year (see 2. U.S.C. 631)

Date	Action
1st Monday in February	President’s budget submission (includes OMB sequester preview report and adjustments to spending caps).
February 15	CBO budget and economic outlook report
Within 6 weeks of President’s budget	Committees submit views and estimates to the Budget Committees
April 1	Senate Budget Committee reports resolution
April 15	Congress completes budget resolution. If not, Chairman of House Budget Committee files 302(a) allocations; Ways and Means is free to proceed with pay-as-you-go measures
May 15	Appropriations bills may be considered in the House
June 10	House Appropriations reports last bill
June 15	Congress completes action on reconciliation reconciliation (if applicable)
June 30	House completes action on annual appropriation bills
July 15	President submits mid-session review
October 1	Fiscal year begins Home / Committee Resources / Glossary A B C D E F I J M N O P R S T U Appropriations Act: A statute, under the jurisdiction of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, that generally provides authority for Federal agencies to incur obligations and to make payments out of the Treasury for specified purposes. An appropriation act is the most common means of providing budget authority. Currently, there are 13 regular appropriations acts for each fiscal year. From time to time, Congress also enacts supplemental appropriations acts. (See Appropriations under Budget Authority; Continuing Resolution; Supplemental Appropriation.) Authorizing Committee: A committee of the House or Senate with legislative jurisdiction over laws that set up or continue the operations of Federal programs and provide the legal basis for making appropriations for those programs. Authorizing committees also have direct control over spending for mandatory programs since the Government’s obligation to make payments for such program is contained in the authorizing legislation (See Entitlement.) Authorizing Legislation: Legislation enacted by Congress that sets up or continues the operation of a Federal program or agency indefinitely or for a specific period of time. Authorizing legislation may limit the amount of budget authority which can be appropriated for a program or may authorize the appropriation of “such sums as are necessary.” (See Budget Authority; Entitlement.) return to top B Backdoor Spending: (See Direct Spending or Mandatory Spending.) Budget Authority: The authority Congress gives to Government agencies, permitting them to enter into obligations which will result in immediate or future outlays. Budget authority may be classified in several ways. It may be classified by the form it takes: appropriations, borrowing authority, or contract authority. Budget authority may also be classified by the determination of amount: definite authority or indefinite authority. Finally budget authority may be classified by the period of availability: 1-year authority, multi-year authority, or no-year authority (available until used). Forms of Budget Authority Appropriations.–An act of Congress that permits Federal agencies to incur obligations and to make payments out of the Treasury for specified purposes. An appropriations act is the most common means of providing budget authority. Borrowing Authority.–Statutory authority that permits a Federal agency to incur obligations and to make payments for specified purposes out of money borrowed from the Treasury, the Federal Financing Bank, or the public. The Budget Act in most cases requires that new authority to borrow must be approved in advance in an appropriation act. Contract Authority.–Statutory authority that permits a Federal agency to enter into contracts in advance of appropriations. Under the Budget Act, most new authority to contract must be approved in advance in an appropriation act. Offsetting collections and receipts.–Income from the public which is displayed in the budget as negative budget authority. (See Offsetting Collections and Offsetting Receipts. Budget Baseline: Projected Federal spending, revenue and deficit levels based on the assumption that current policies will continue unchanged for the upcoming fiscal year. In determining the budget baseline under Gramm-Rudman-Hollings, the Directors of OMB and CBO estimate revenue levels and spending levels for entitlement programs based on continuation of current laws. For estimating discretionary spending amounts (both defense and non- defense), the Directors assume an adjustment for inflation (GNP deflator) added to the previous year’s discretionary spending levels. The baseline also includes sufficient appropriations to cover a Federal pay comparability raise (without absorption). Budget Deficit: The amount by which the Government’s total outlays exceed its total revenues for a given fiscal year. (See Outlays; Revenues.) Budget Resolution: A concurrent resolution passed by both Houses of Congress setting forth, reaffirming, or revising the congressional budget for the U.S. Government for a fiscal year. A budget resolution is a concurrent resolution of Congress. Concurrent resolutions do not require a presidential signature because they are not laws. Budget resolutions do not need to be laws because they are a legislative device for the Congress to regulate itself as it works on spending and revenue bills. (Unified) Budget Surplus: The amount by which the Government’s revenues exceed its outlays for a given fiscal year. The “on-budget surplus” excludes spending and revenues of the Social Security Trust Fund, and the Postal Service. (See Outlays; Revenues.) return to top C Capital Budget: A budget that segregates capital spending from all other spending, what is usually considered the “operating budget.” In a capital budget, spending and receipts in the capital budget are excluded from the operating budget and are not included in the operating budget’s deficit or surplus calculations. A capital budget would include spending only for capital assets. Capital assets are usually defined to be limited to land, structures, equipment, and intellectual property that are owned and used by the Federal government and have a useful life of more than 2 years. However, some proponents of capital budgeting have suggested that capital should be defined to include Federal “investment” spending that yields long-term benefits. President Clinton established a Commission to Study Capital Budgeting by issuing Executive Order 13037 on March 3, 1997. The Commission is required to issue its report by December 17, 1998. Congressional Budget: (See Budget Resolution.) Continuing Resolution: Appropriations legislation enacted by Congress to provide temporary budget authority for Federal agencies to keep them in operation when their regular appropriation bill has not been enacted by the start of the fiscal year. A continuing resolution is a joint resolution, which has the same legal status as a bill. A continuing resolution frequently specifies a maximum rate at which obligations may be incurred, based on the rate of the prior year, the President’s budget request, or an appropriation bill passed by either or both chambers of Congress. However, there have been instances when Congress has used a continuing resolution as an omnibus measure to enact a number of appropriation bills. A continuing resolution is a form of appropriation act and should not be confused with the budget resolution. Credit Authority: Authority to incur direct loan obligations or to incur primary loan guarantee commitments. Under the Budget Act, new credit authority must be approved in advance in an appropriation act. Crosswalk: Also known as “committee allocation” or “section 302 allocation.” The means by which budget resolution spending totals are translated into binding guidelines with respect to budget authority and outlays for committee action on spending bills. The Budget Committees allocate the budget resolution totals among the committees by jurisdiction, Crosswalk allocations of budget authority and outlays to the committee appear in the joint explanatory statement accompanying a conference report on the budget resolution. Current Services Budget: A section of the President’s budget, required by the Budget Act, that sets forth the level of spending or taxes that would occur if existing programs and policies were continued unchanged through the fiscal year and beyond, with all programs adjusted for inflation so that existing levels of activity are maintained. (See Baseline.) return to top D Deferral of Budget Authority: An action by the executive branch that delays the obligation of budget authority beyond the point it would normally occur. Pursuant to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the President must provide advanced notice to the Congress of any proposed deferrals. A deferral may not extend beyond the end of the fiscal year in which the President’s message proposing the deferral is made. Congress may overturn a deferral by passing a law disapproving the deferral. Deficit: The amount by which the government’s total budget outlays exceeds its total receipts for a fiscal year. Direct Spending: A term defined in the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 to include entitlement authority, the food stamp program, and budget authority provided in law other than appropriations acts. From the perspective of the appropriations process, all direct spending is classified as mandatory as opposed to discretionary spending. New direct spending is subject to pay-as-you-go requirements. Direct spending is synonymous with mandatory spending. (See Mandatory Spending and Entitlement.) Discretionary Spending: A category of spending (budget authority and outlays) subject to the annual appropriations process. (See Appropriations Acts.) return to top E Entitlement: Programs that are governed by legislation in a way that legally obligates the Federal government to make specific payments to qualified recipients. Payments to persons under the Social Security, Medicare, and veterans’ pensions programs are considered to be entitlements. (See Direct Spending and Mandatory Spending.) Emergency Spending: As provided in the Budget Enforcement Act, a provision of legislation designated as an emergency by both the President and the Congress. As a result, this additional spending is not subject to the discretionary caps or the pay go requirements and thus will not cause a sequester. In addition, emergency legislation is effectively exempt from Budget Act points of order. There is no specific criteria in the law for emergency spending. However, the following criteria were contained in a June 1991 report prepared by the Office of Management and Budget–as required by Pub. L. No. 102-55 for the determination of whether to designate spending as an emergency spending: Necessary expenditure.–an essential or vital expenditure, not one that is merely useful or beneficial; Sudden.–quickly coming into being, not building up over time; Urgent.–pressing and compelling need requiring immediate action; Unforseen.–not predictable or seen beforehand as a coming need (an emergency that is part of an aggregate level of anticipated emergencies, particularly when normally estimated in advance, would not be “unforseen”); and Not permanent.–the need is temporary in nature. Expenditures: (See Outlays.) return to top F Federal Debt: Consists of all Treasury and agency debt issues outstanding. Current law places a limit or ceiling on the amount of debt. Debt subject to limit has two components: debt held by the government and debt held by the public. Debt held by the government.–Represents the holdings of debt by federal trust funds and other special government funds. For example, when a trust fund is in surplus as is presently the case with Social Security, the law requires that this surplus be invested in government securities. Debt held by the public.–Represents the holdings of debt by individuals, institutions, other buyers outside the federal government, and the Federal Reserve System. The change in debt held by the public in any given year closely tracks the unified budget deficit for that year. Fiscal Policy: Federal government policies with respect to taxes, spending, and debt management intended to promote the nations’ macroeconomic goals, particularly with respect to employment, gross national product, price level stability, and equilibrium in balance of payments. The budget process is a major vehicle for determining and implementing Federal fiscal policy. The other major component of Federal macroeconomic policy is monetary policy. (See Monetary Policy.) Fiscal Year: A fiscal year is a 12-month accounting period. The fiscal for the Federal Government begins October 1 and ends September 30. The fiscal year is designated by the calendar year in which it ends; for example fiscal year 1997 is the year beginning October 1, 1996, and ending September 30, 1997. Functional Classification: A system of classifying budget resources by major purpose so that budget authority, outlays, and credit activities can be related in terms of the national needs being addressed (for example, national defense, health) regardless of the agency administrating the program. There are currently 20 functions. A function may be divided into two or more subfunctions depending upon the complexity of the national need addressed by that function. (See Budget Authority; Outlays.) return to top IImpoundment: A generic term referring to any action or inaction by an officer or employee of the U.S. Government that precludes the obligation or expenditure of budget authority in the manner intended by Congress. (See Deferral of Budget Authority; Rescission of Budget Authority.) return to top JJoint Committee on Taxation (JCT): Section 8001 of the Internal Revenue Code authorized the creation of the Joint Committee on Taxation. By statute, it is composed of five members from the Committee on Finance (three majority, two minority) chosen by such Committee and five members from the Committee on Ways and Means (three majority, two minority) chosen by such Committee. In practice, the Chairmanship and Vice Chairmanship of the Joint Committee on Taxation has rotated between the Chairman of the Committee on Finance and the Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means with each new Congress. Among other things, the JCT’s duties are to investigate the operation and effects of the federal tax system. return to top M Mandatory Spending: Refers to spending for programs the level of which is governed by formulas or criteria set forth in authorizing legislation rather than by appropriations. Examples of mandatory spending include: Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ pensions, rehabilitation services, Members’ pay, judges pay and the payment of interest of the public debt. Many of these programs are considered entitlement. (See Direct Spending.) Mark-Up: Meetings where congressional committees work on language of bills or resolutions. At Budget Committee mark-ups, the House and Senate Budget Committees work on the language and numbers contained in budget resolutions and legislation affecting the congressional budget process. Monetary Policy: Management of the money supply, under the direction of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve system, with the aim of achieving price stability and full employment. Government actions in guiding monetary policy, include currency revaluation, credit contradiction or expansion, rediscount policy, regulation of bank reserves and the purchase and sale of Government securities. (See Fiscal Policy.) return to top NNet Deficit Reduction: Savings below the defined budget baseline achieved for the upcoming fiscal year because of laws enacted or final regulations promulgated since January 1. CBO and OMB independently estimate these savings in their initial and final sequester reports. return to top O Offsetting Collections: Income from the public that results from the government engaging in “business-like” activities with the public, such as the sale of products or the rendering of a service. Examples include proceeds funds derived from the sale of postage stamps. Offsetting collections are credited against the level of budget authority or outlays associated with a specific program or account. (See Offsetting receipts.) Offsetting Receipts: Income from the public that results from the government engaging in “business-like” activities with the public such as the sale of products or the rendering of services. Examples include proceeds from the sale of timber from Federal lands or entrance fees paid at national parks. Rather than being credited against the spending of a particular program or account, (as in the case with offsetting collections) offsetting receipts are deducted from total budget authority and outlays rather than added to Federal revenues even though they are deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. Generally offsetting receipts are associated with mandatory spending. (See Offsetting collections.) Off-budget Federal Entity: Any Federal fund or trust fund whose transactions are required by law to be excluded from the totals of President’s budget submission and Congress’ budget resolution, despite the fact that these are part of the government’s total transactions. Current law requires that the Social Security trust funds (the Federal Old Age, Survivors, and Disability trust fund) and the Postal Service be off-budget. However, these entities are reflected in the budget in that they are included in calculating the deficit in order to derive the total government deficit that must be financed by borrowing from the public or by other means. All other federal funds and trust funds are on budget. (See Unified Budget.) Outlays: Outlays are disbursements by the Federal Treasury in the form of checks or cash. Outlays flow in part from budget authority granted in prior years and in part from budget authority provided for the year in which the disbursements occur. Outlay Rates: The ratio of outlays (actual government disbursements) in a fiscal year relative to new budgetary resources in that fiscal year. In estimating the budget baseline and baseline deficit for their sequestration reports, CBO and OMB use outlay rates for projecting levels of spending resulting from available budget authority. return to top P Pay-as-you-go: Arises in two separate contexts: a point of order in the Senate and a sequester order from OMB. Pay-as-you-go in the Senate.–Since fiscal year 1994, the budget resolution has included a pay-as-you-go rule in the Senate. The rule provides a 3/5ths vote point of order in the Senate against consideration of legislation that would cause a net increase in the deficit over a ten year period. It applies to all legislation except appropriations legislation. To determine a violation, CBO measures the budget impact of a direct spending or revenue bill combined with the budget impact of all direct spending and revenue legislation enacted since the latest budget resolution’s adoption to see if the legislation would result in a net deficit increase for any one of three time periods (the first year, the sum of years 1 through 5, and the sum of years 6 through 10.) The pay-go rule sunsets at the end of fiscal year 2002. Pay-as-you-go and sequestration under the BEA.–The Budget Enforcement Act requires OMB to also enforce a “pay-as-you-go” requirement which has a similar effect as the Senate’s point of order: Congress is required to “pay for” any changes to programs which result in an increase in direct spending, or in this case risk a sequester. If OMB estimates that the sum of all direct spending and revenue legislation enacted since 1990 will result in a net increase in the deficit for the fiscal year, then the President is required to issue a sequester order reducing all non-exempt direct spending accounts by a uniform percentage in order to eliminate the net deficit increase. Most direct spending is either exempt from a sequester order or operates under special rules that minimize the reduction that can be made in direct spending. Social Security is exempt from a pay-as-you-go sequester and Medicare cannot be reduced by more than 4 percent. President’s Budget: The document sent to Congress by the President in January or February of each year, requesting new budget authority for Federal programs and estimating Federal revenues and outlays for the upcoming fiscal year. return to top R Revenues: Collections from the public arising from the Government’s sovereign power to tax. Revenues include individual and corporate income taxes, social insurance taxes (such as social security payroll taxes), excise taxes, estate and gift taxes, customs duties and the like. Reconciliation Process: A process by which Congress includes in a budget resolution “reconciliation instructions” to specific committees, directing them to report legislation which changes existing laws, usually for the purpose of decreasing spending or increasing revenues by a specified amount by a certain date. The legislation may also contain an increase in the debt limit. The reported legislation is then considered as a single “reconciliation bill under expedited procedures.” Reserve Fund: A provision in a budget resolution that grants the Chairman of the Budget Committee the authority to make changes in budget aggregates and committee allocations once some condition or conditions have been met. Since a budget resolution establishes a binding ceiling on aggregate budget authority and outlay levels and a binding floor on revenues, budget resolutions frequently include reserve funds for deficit-neutral legislation that would otherwise violate the budget resolution and be subject to a point of order under the Budget Act. For example, the FY 1997 budget resolution included a tax reduction reserve fund that allowed the Chairman to reduce the revenue floor and the relevant spending allocations to accommodate legislation that reduced taxes if that legislation also contained offsetting spending reductions. Rescission of Budget Authority: Cancellation of budget authority before the time when the authority would otherwise cease to be available for obligation. The rescission process begins when the President proposes a rescission to the Congress for fiscal or policy reasons. Unlike the deferral of budget authority which occurs unless Congress acts to disapprove the deferral, rescission off budget authority occurs only if Congress enacts the rescission. (See Deferral of Budget Authority; Impoundment.) return to top S Scoring or Scorekeeping: The process for estimating budget authority, outlay, revenue and deficit levels which result from congressional budgetary actions. Scorekeeping data prepared by the Congressional Budget Office include status reports on the effect of congressional actions and comparisons of these actions to targets and ceilings set by Congress in budget resolutions. These reports are published in the Congressional Record on a regular basis. OMB is responsible for scoring legislation to determine if a sequester is necessary. Sequester: Pursuant to Gramm-Rudman-Hollings, a presidential spending reduction order that occurs by reducing spending by uniform percentages. Sequestrable Resource: Pursuant to Gramm-Rudman-Hollings federal funding authority (budgetary resources) subject to reductions under a presidential sequester order for achieving required outlay reductions (in non-exempt programs). Supplemental Appropriation: An act appropriating funds in addition to those in the 13 regular annual appropriations acts. Supplemental appropriations provide additional budget authority beyond the original estimates for programs or activities (including new programs authorized after the date of the original appropriation act) in cases where the need for funds is too urgent to be postponed until enactment of the next regular appropriation bill. (See Appropriations Act.) return to top TTax Expenditures: Revenue losses attributable to a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or to a special credit, preferential rate of tax, or deferral of tax liability. return to top U Unfunded Mandates: A Federal Intergovernmental Mandate is any provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local or tribal government, except as conditions of assistance or duties arising from participation in a voluntary federal program. Exceptions to this rule are: enforcing constitutional rights; statutory prohibitions against discrimination; emergency assistance requested by states; accounting/auditing for federal assistance; national security; Presidential designated emergencies; and Social Security. Provisions that increase stringency of conditions of assistance or decrease federal funding for large state entitlement programs (greater than $500 million) if states lack authority to decrease their responsibilities are considered mandates as well. A Federal Private Sector Mandate is any provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector. The exceptions are a condition of Federal assistance or a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program. Unified Budget: A comprehensive display of the Federal budget. This display includes all revenues and all spending for all regular Federal programs and trust funds. The 1967 President’s Commission on Budget Concepts recommended the unified budget and it has been the basis for budgeting since 1968. The unified budget replaced a system of the budgets that existed before 1968 (an administrative budget, a consolidated cash budget, and a national income accounts budget). http://www.budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/glossary

Budget Control Act

The Budget Control Act Serves as the Budget for 2012 and 2013

The Budget Control Act states: “For the purpose of enforcing the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 through April 15, 2012 … the allocations, aggregates, and levels set in subsection (b)(1) shall apply in the Senate in the same manner as for a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2012.” In many ways, the Budget Control Act is even more extensive than a traditional budget resolution. Number one, it has the force of law, unlike a budget resolution that never goes to the President. A budget resolution is purely a Congressional document; the Budget Control Act is a law. Number two, it sets discretionary caps for 10 years, instead of the one year normally set in a budget resolution. Number three, it provides enforcement mechanisms, including two years of “deeming resolutions,” which allow budget points of order to be enforced. And fourth, it creates a reconciliation-like “Super Committee” process to address both entitlements and tax reform. And it backs that process up with a $1.2 trillion sequester.

Budget Control Act Legislative Text

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Tory! Tory! Tory! — Videos

Posted on April 12, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Communications, Computers, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, European History, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, History of Economic Thought, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Private Sector, Public Sector, Raves, Security, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Water, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: BBC, Economics, Margaret Thatcher, Pollitics, Thatcher, Tory! Tory! Tory!, Videos |

Tory! Tory! Tory! – Ep 1: Outsiders – BBC 2007

Series exploring the history of the people and ideas behind what became known as Thatcherism. When Thatcher became Prime Minister, the monetarist policies used to combat inflation created large-scale unemployment and weakened the unions. As riots broke out across Britain, there was growing dissent even inside the government. How would Mrs Thatcher survive her plummeting popularity?

Tory! Tory! Tory! – Ep 2: The Road to Power – BBC 2007

Tory! Tory! Tory! – Ep 3: The Exercise of Power – BBC 2007

Speech to Conservative Party Conference

Document type:	speeches
Document kind:	Speech
Venue:	Winter Gardens, Blackpool
Source:	Thatcher Archive: speaking text
Journalist:	-
Editorial comments:	1045. MT spoke for 41 minute 16 seconds; the BBC Sound Archive has a complete recording. Evening Standard (10 October 1975) noted that the audience applauded every passage of the speech – not one was delivered without interruption. Parts of the text have been checked against material broadcast on ITN during the day.
Importance ranking:	Key
Word count:	3722
Themes:	Conservative Party (organisation), Autobiographical comments, Conservative Party (history), Economy (general discussions), Labour Party and Socialism, Economy (general discussions), Employment, Public spending and borrowing, Economy (general discussions), Labour Party and Socialism, Foreign policy (USSR and successor states), Foreign policy (Central and Eastern Europe), Economy (general discussions), Labour Party and Socialism, Higher and further education, Industry, Science and technology, Conservatism, Social security and welfare, Labour Party and Socialism, Industry, Conservatism, Labour Party and Socialism, Agriculture, Employment, Labour Party and Socialism, Conservatism, Secondary education, Health policy, Private health care, Labour Party and Socialism, Trade unions, British constitution (general discussions), Law and order, Labour Party and Socialism, Northern Ireland

Note by MT: “Relax. Low Speaking Voice. Not too slow”.

The first Conservative Party Conference I attended was in 1946.

I came to it as an undergraduate representing Oxford University Conservative Association (I know our Cambridge supporters will not mind.) That Conference was held in this very hall and the platform then seemed a long way away, and I had no thought of joining the lofty and distinguished people sitting up there.

But our Party is the Party of equality of opportunity—as you can see. (Laughter).[fo 1]

You will understand, I know, the humility I feel at following in the footsteps of great men like our Leader that year, Winston Churchill a man called by destiny who raised the name of Britain to supreme heights in the history of the free world. (Applause).

In the footsteps of Anthony Eden , who set us the goal of a property-owning democracy—a goal we still pursue today.(Applause).

Of Harold Macmillan whose leadership brought so many ambitions within the grasp of every citizen. (Applause).[fo 2]

Of Alec Douglas-Home whose career of selfless public service earned the affection and admiration of us all. (Applause).

And of Edward Heath who successfully led the Party to victory in 1970 and brilliantly led the nation into Europe in 1973. (Applause).

During my lifetime, all the leaders of the Conservative Party have served as Prime Minister. I hope the habit will continue. (Laughter)

Our leaders have been different men with different qualities and different styles. But they have one thing in common. Each met the challenge-of-his-time.[fo 3]

What is the challenge of our time?

I believe there are two—to overcome the country’s economic and financial problems, and to regain our confidence in Britain and ourselves.

The Economic Challenge

The economic challenge has been debated at length in this hall.

Last week it gave rise to the usual scenes of cordial brotherly strife.[fo 4]

Day after day the comrades called one another far from comradely names, and occasionally, when they remembered, they called us names too.

Some of them, for example, suggested that I criticised Britain when I was overseas. They are wrong.

It wasn’t Britain I was criticising. It was-Socialism. (Applause).

And I will go on criticising Socialism, and opposing Socialism because it is bad for Britain—and Britain and Socialism are not the same thing.[fo 5]

As long as I have health and strength, they never will be. (Applause).

But whatever could I say about Britain that is half as damaging as what this Labour Government have done to our country?

Let’s look at the record.

It is the Labour Government that have caused prices to rise at a record rate of 26 per cent a year.[fo 6]

They told us that the Social Contract would solve everything. But now everyone can see that the so-called contract was a fraud—a fraud for which the people of this country have had to pay a very high price.

It is the Labour Government whose policies are forcing unemployment higher than it need have been—thousands more men and women lose their jobs every day.

There are going to be men and women many of them youngsters straight out of school—who will be without a job this winter because Socialist Ministers spent last year attacking us, instead of attacking inflation.[fo 7]Beginning of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975:

And it’s the Labour Government that have brought the level of production below that of the 3-day week in 1974. W’ve really got a 3-day week now,—only it takes five days to do it. (Applause).

It’s the Labour Government that have brought us record peace-time taxation. They’ve got the usual Socialist disease—they’ve run out of other people’s money. (Laughter).

And it’s the Labour Government that have pushed public spending to record levels.

And how’ve they done it? By borrowing, and borrowing and borrowing.

Never in the field of human credit has so much been owed. (Laughter).End of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975.[fo 8]

But serious as the economic challenge is, the political and moral challenge is just as grave, perhaps more so.

POLITICAL AND MORAL CHALLENGE

Economic problems never start with economics. They have deeper roots—in human nature and in politics.

They don’t finish at economics either.

Labour’s failure to cope, to look at the nation’s problems from the point of view of the whole nation, not just one section of it, has led to loss of confidence and a sense of helplessness.[fo 9]

With it goes a feeling that Parliament, which ought to be in charge, is not in charge—that the actions and the decisions are taken elsewhere.

And it goes deeper than that. There are voices that seem anxious not to overcome our economic difficulties, but to exploit them, to destroy the free enterprise society and put a Marxist system in its place.

Today those voices form a sizeable chorus in the Parliamentary Labour Party. A chorus which, aided and abetted by many Constituency Labour Parties, seems to be growing in numbers.[fo 10]

Anyone who says this openly is promptly accused of seeing Reds Under the Bed.

But look who’s seeing them now!

On his own admission, Mr Wilson has at last discovered that his own Party is infiltrated by extreme left-wingers—or to use his own words it is infested with them.

When even Mr Wilson gets scared about their success in capturing key positions in the Labour Party, shouldn’t the rest of us be?[fo 11]

And shouldn’t the rest of us ask him “Where have you been while all this has been going on, and what are you doing about it?” (Applause). The answer is nothing.

I sometimes think the Labour Party is like a pub where the mild is running out. If someone doesn’t do something soon, all that’s left will be bitter. (Laughter). And all that’s bitter will be Left. (Laughter).

Whenever I visit Communist countries, their politicians never hesitate to boast about their achievements.[fo 12]

They know them all by heart and reel off the facts and figures, claiming that this is the rich harvest of the Communist system.

Yet they are not prosperous as we in the West are prosperous, and they are not free as we in the West are free.

Our capitalist system produces a far higher standard of prosperity and happiness because it believes in incentive and opportunity, and because it is founded on human dignity and freedom. (Applause).[fo 13]

Even the Russians have to go to a capitalist country, America to buy enough wheat to feed their people. And that aftermore than 50 years of a State controlled economy.

Yet they boast incessantly while we, who have so much more to boast about, forever criticise and decry.

Isn’t it time we spoke up for our way of life? (Applause) After all, no Western nation has to build a wall round itself to keep its people in. (Applause).[fo 14]

So let us have no truck with those who say the free enterprise system has failed. What we face today is not a crisis of capital ism, but of Socialism. No country can flourish if its economic and social life is dominated by nationalisation and state control.

The cause of our shortcomings does not therefore lie in private enterprise. Our problem is not that we have too little socialism. It is that we have too much.

If only the Labour Party in this country would act like Social Democrats in West Germany. If only they would stop trying to prove their Socialist virility by relentlessly nationalising one industry after another.[fo 15]

Of course, a halt to further State control will not on its own restore our belief in ourselves, because something else is happening to this country. We are witnessing a deliberate attack on our values, a deliberate attack on those who wish to promote merit and excellence, a deliberate attack on our heritage and great past. (Applause).Beginning of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975:

And there are those who gnaw away at our national self-respect, rewriting British history as centuries of unrelieved gloom, oppression and failure.

As days of hopelessness—not Days of Hope.[fo 16]

And others, under the shelter of our education system, are ruthlessly attacking the minds of the young. Everyone who believes in freedom must be appalled at the tactics employed by the far Left in the systematic destruction of the North London Polytechnic. (Applause).

Blatant tactics of intimidation, designed to undermine the fundamental beliefs and values of every student.

Tactics pursued by people who are the first to insist on their own civil rights while seeking to deny them to the rest of us. We must not be bullied and brainwashed out of our beliefs. (Applause).[fo 17]

No wonder so many of our people—some of the best and brightest—are depressed and talk of emigrating.

Even so, I think they are wrong at giving up too soon. Many of the things we hold dear are threatened as never before, but none has yet been lost.

So stay here. (Applause). Stay and help us defeat Socialism, so that the Britain you have known may be the Britain your children will know. (Applause).End of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975.[fo 18]

Those are the two great challenges of our time.

The moral and political challenge, and the economic challenge.

They have to be faced together—and we have to master them both.

POTENTIAL

What are our chances of success? It depends what kind of people we are. Well, what kind of people are we?[fo 19]

We are the people that in the past made Great Britain the Workshop of the World. The people who persuaded others to buy British not by begging them to do so, but because it was best.

We are a people who have received more Nobel prizes than any other nation except America, and head for head we have done better than America. Twice as well, in fact.

We are the people who, among other things, invented the computer, refrigerator, electric motor, stethoscope, rayon, steam turbine, stainless steel, the tank, television, penicillin, radar, jet engine, hovercraft, float glass and carbonfibres. Oh, and the best half of Concorde. (Laughter).[fo 20]

We export more of what we produce than either West Germany, France, Japan or the United States.

And well over 90%; of these exports come from private enterprise. It’s a triumph for the private sector and all who work in it. Let us say so, loud and clear. (Applause).

With achievements like that who can doubt that Britain can have a great future? What our friends abroad want to know is whether that future is going to happen.

Well, how can we Conservatives make it happen?[fo 21]

Many of the details have already been dealt with in the various debates. But policies and programmes should not be just a list of unrelated items. They are part of a total vision of the kind of life we want for our country and our children. [Beginning of section checked against ITN Early Evening News, 10 October 1975] Let me give you my vision.

THE FREE SOCIETY AND THE ECONOMY

A man’s right to work as he will to spend what he earns to own property to have the State as servant and not as master these are the British inheritance.

They are the essence of a free economy. And on that freedom all our other freedoms depend. (Applause).End of section checked against ITN Early Evening News, 10 October 1975.[fo 22]

But we want a free economy, not only because it guarantees our liberties, but also because it is the best way of creating wealth and prosperity for the whole country.

It is this prosperity alone which can give us the resources for better services for the community, better services for those in need. (Applause).

By their attack on private enterprise, this Labour Government have made certain that there will be next to nothing available for improvements in our social services over the next few years.[fo 23]

We must get private enterprise back on the road to recovery, not merely to give people more of their own money to spend as they choose, but to have more money to help the old and the sick and the handicapped.

The way to recovery is through profits. Good profits today, leading to high investment, well-paid jobs and a better standard of living tomorrow. (Applause).

No profits mean no investment, and a dying industry geared to yesterday’s world.

Other nations have recognised that for years now. They are going ahead faster than we are; and the gap between us will continue to increase unless we change our ways.[fo 24]

The trouble here is that for years the Labour Party have made people feel that profits are guilty-unless proved innocent.

But when I visit factories and businesses I do not find that those who actually work in them are against profits. On the contrary, they want to work for a prosperous concern. With a future—their future. (Applause).

Governments must learn to leave these companies with enough of their own profits to produce the goods and jobs for tomorrow.

If the Socialists won’t or can’t there will be no profit making industry left to support the losses caused by fresh bouts of nationalisation.[fo 25]

And if anyone says I am preaching laissez-faire, let me say this.

I am not arguing, and never have argued, that all we have to do is to let the economy run by itself.

I believe that, just as each of us has an obligation to make the best of his talents so governments have an obligation to create the framework within which we can do so. Not only individual people, but individual firms and particularly small firms. (Applause).

Some of these will stay small but others will expand and become the great companies of the future.[fo 26]

The Labour Government have pursued a disastrous vendetta against small businesses and the self-employed. We will reverse their damaging policies. (Applause).

Nowhere is this more important than in Agriculture—one of our most successful industries made up entirely of small businesses. We live in a world in which food is no longer cheap or plentiful. Everything we cannot produce here must be imported at a high price.

Yet the Government could not have destroyed the confidence of the industry more effectively if they had tried deliberately to do so, with their formula of empty promises and penal taxation.[fo 27]

So today what is the picture? Depressed profits, low investment, no incentive, and overshadowing everything government spending, spending far beyond the taxpayers means. (Applause).

To recover, to get from where we are to where we want to be, will take time.

“Economic policy” wrote Maynard Keynes “should not be a matter of tearing up by the roots but of slowly training a plant to grow in a different direction.”[fo 28]

It will take time to reduce public spending, rebuild profits and incentives, to benefit from the investments which must be made. The sooner that time starts, the better for Britain’s unemployed.

One of the reasons why this Labour Government has incurred more unemployment than any Conservative Government since the War is because they have concentrated too much on distributing what we have, and too little on seeing that we have more. (Applause).[fo 29]

We Conservatives hate unemployment.

We hate the idea of men and women not being able to use their abilities. We deplore the waste of national resources, and the deep affront to peoples’ dignity from being out of work through no fault of their own. (Applause).

It is ironic that we should be accused of wanting unemployment to solve our economic problems by the very Government which has produced a record post-War unemployment, and is expecting more.[fo 30]

The record of Mr Wilson and his colleagues on this is unparallelled in the history of political hypocricy.

We are now seeing the full consequences of nearly twenty months of Labour Government.

They have done the wrong things at the wrong time in the wrong way.

They have been a disaster for this country.[fo 31]

EQUALITY

Now let me turn to something I spoke about in America.

Some Socialists seem to believe that people should be numbers in a State computer. We believe they should be individuals.

We are all unequal. No one, thank heavens, is like anyone else, however much the Socialists may pretend otherwise.

We believe that everyone has the right to be unequal but to us every human being is equally important.[fo 32]

Engineers, miners, manual workers, shop assistants, farm workers, postmen, housewives—these are the essential foundations of our society. Without them there would be no nation. (Applause).

But their are others with special gifts who should also have their chance, because if the adventurers who strike out in new directions in science, technology, medicine, commerce and industry the arts are hobbled, there can be no advance.

The spirit of envy can destroy. It can never build.[fo 33]

Everyone must be allowed to develop the abilities he knows he has within him, and she knows she has within her, in the way they choose.

CHOICE

Freedom to choose is something we take for granted—until it is in danger of being taken away.

Socialist governments set out perpetually to restrict the area of choice, Conservative governments to increase it.

We believe that you become a responsible citizen by making decisions yourself, not by having them made for you.[fo 34]

But they are made for you under Labour all right.

Take education.

Beginning of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975:

Our education system used to serve us well. A child from an ordinary family, as I was, could use it as a ladder as an advancement.

But the Socialists are better at demolition than reconstruction, are destroying many good grammar schools.

Now this is nothing to do with private education. It’s opportunity and excellence in our State schools that are being diminished under Socialism.

And naturally enough, parents don’t like this. But in a Socialist society parents should be seen and not heard. (Laughter).[fo 35]

And another denial of choice is being applied to health.

The private sector helps to keep some of our best doctors here, and so are available part time to the National Health Service. It also helps to bring in more money for the general health of the nation.

But under Labour, private medicine is being squeezed out, and the result will be to add to the burden on the National Health Service without adding one penny to its income.[fo 36]

Let me make this absolutely clear.

When we return to power we shall reverse Mrs Castle ‘s stupid and spiteful attack on hospital pay beds. (Applause).

We Conservatives do not accept that because some people have no choice, no one should have it.

Every family should have the right to spend their money, after tax, as they wish, not as the Government dictates.End of section checked against ITN News at Ten, 10 October 1975.

Let us extend choice, the will to choose and the chance to choose.[fo 37]

TRADE UNIONS

I want to come now to the argument which Mr Wilson is trying to put across the country: namely that the Labour Party is the natural party of Government because it is the only one that the Trade Unions will accept.

From what I saw on television last week, the Labour Party did not look like a party of Government at all, let alone a natural one.

But let’s examine the argument.Beginning of section checked against ITN First Report, 10 October 1975

If we are to be told that a Conservative Government could not govern because certain extreme leaders would not let it, then General Elections are a mockery we’ve arrived at[fo 38] the one party state, and parliamentary democracy in this country will have perished. (Applause).

The democracy for which our fathers fought and died is not to be laid to rest as lightly as that.

When the next Conservative Government comes to power many Trade Unionists will have put it there. Millions of them vote for us at every Election.

I want to say this to them, and to every one of our supporters in industry.[fo 39]

Go out and join in the work of your Union.

Go to its meetings—and stay to the end.

Learn the Union rules as well as the Far Left know them, and remember this. If Parliamentary democracy dies, free Trade Unions die with it. (Applause).End of section checked against ITN First Report, 10 October 1975.[fo 40]

RULE OF LAW

I come last to what many would put first. The Rule of Law.

The first people to uphold the law should be governments. It is tragic that the Socialist Government, to its lasting shame, should have lost its nerve and shed its principles over the People’s Republic of Clay Cross. And that a group of the Labour Party should have tried to turn the Shrewsbury pickets into martyrs.

On both occasions the law was broken. On one, violence was done.[fo 41]No decent society can live like that. No responsible party should condone it. (Applause).

The first duty of Government is to uphold the law. If it tries to bob and weave and duck around that duty when its inconvenient, if government does that, then so will the governed, and then nothing is safe—not home, not liberty, not life itself.

There is one part of this country where tragically defiance of the law is costing life day after day.[fo 42]

In Northern Ireland our troops have the dangerous and thankless task of trying to keep the peace and hold the balance. We are proud of the way they have discharged their duty.

This Party is pledged to support the unity of the United Kingdom. To preserve that unity and to protect the people, Catholic and Protestant alike, we believe that our armed forces must remain until a genuine peace is made.

Our thoughts are with them, and our pride is with them too. (Applause).[fo 43]

I have spoken of the challenges that face us here in Britain. The challenge to recover economically. The challenge to recover our belief in ourselves.

I have shown our potential for recovery.

I have dealt with some aspects of our strength and approach.

And I have tried to tell you something of my personal vision, my belief in the standards on which this nation was greatly built, on which it greatly thrived, and from which in recent years it has greatly fallen away.[fo 44]

We are coming, I think, to yet another turning point in our long history.

We can go on as we have been going and continue down.

Or we can stop—and with a decisive act of will we can say “Enough”.

Let us, all of us, here today and others, far beyond this hall who believe in our cause make that act of will.

Let us proclaim our faith in a new and better future for our Party and our people.[fo 45]

Let us resolve to heal the wounds of a divided nation.

And let that act of healing be the prelude to a lasting victory. (Prolonged applause).

http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/102777

Note by MT: “It’s over!”

Background Articles and Videos

Audio » Mark Levin – CPAC 2013 & William F. Buckley Jr. 1955 Conservatism

Charles Krauthammer Calls Chris Christie’s CPAC Snub A ‘Mistake’

Ron Meyer Analysis of CPAC Invites with Monica Mehta & Julie Roginsky on Neil Cavuto – 3-4-13

Christie Says He’s Not Bothered By Lack of Invite to Conservative Conference

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Federally Sponsored Jailbreak of 2,228 Criminal Aliens Released By Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — Videos

Posted on March 14, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Crime, Economics, Immigration, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Philosophy, Radio, Unemployment, Video, Wisdom | Tags: Criminal Aliens Released, Criminals Released, Detention Centers, Economics, ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Politics |

2,000 criminal illegal aliens released from prison.

Judge Jeanine Pirro reports on the Obama administrations releasing of 2,000 illegal invaders.

Goodlatte Talks ICE’s Release of Detainees on Lou Dobbs Tonight

Congressman Bob Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, appeared on “Lou Dobbs Tonight” on Fox Business to discuss ICE’s release of detainees. An internal U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) document obtained by the House Judiciary Committee reveals that the agency planned to release thousands of criminal aliens onto the streets to reduce the agency’s costs in light of sequestration. As of February 15, 2013, the document shows that ICE had roughly 31,000 illegal immigrants and criminal aliens in detention — already below the 34,000 mandated by Congress — and planned to reduce that number to less than 26,000 by March 31, 2013. According to sources, roughly 2,000 criminal aliens may have already been released so far.

Border Battle – Startling Info On Release Of Illegal Aliens Across U.S. -

Limbaugh Rips Release Of Immigrants (Audio)

Illegal Immigrants Released from Detention Centers…

Inside Tacoma’s Northwest Detention Center

Fox News Says Sequester Will Lead To Murder By Freed Immigrants

Geraldo Calls Release Of Immigrants A ‘Spiteful Move’ By Obama: He’s Throwing A ‘Tantrum’

Operation Cross Check: 3,100 arrests

Federal spending cuts underway

Democrats: Term “Illegal Immigrants” OFFENSIVE – Use Out of Status/ New Americans/Undocumented

Rick Perry Slams McCain, Romney At CPAC, Says They Aren’t Conservative

“…”The popular media narrative is that this country has shifted away from conservative ideals, as evidenced by the last two presidential elections. That’s what they think. That’s what say. That might be true if Republicans had actually nominated conservative candidates in 2008 and 2012,” Gov. Rick Perry (R-Texas) said in his address at CPAC this afternoon.

Perry also slammed President Obama for undocumented illegal immigration being released from detention centers due to sequestration cuts.

“This president’s posture, it’d be laughable if he hadn’t taken it one step too far, dangerously releasing criminals onto our streets to make a political point,” Perry told the crowd at CPAC. “When you have a federally-sponsored jailbreak, and don’t get confused, that’s exactly what that is — when you’ve had a federally-sponsored jailbreak, you’ve crossed the line from politics of spin to politics as a craven form of cynicism.” …”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/03/14/rick_perry_slams_mccain_romney_at_cpac_says_they_arent_conservative.html

“…The Obama administration reversed itself Thursday, acknowledging to Congress that it had, in fact, released more than 2,000 illegal immigrants from immigration jails due to budget constraints during three weeks in February.

The director of U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, John Morton, said his agency had released 2,228 illegal immigrants during that period for what he called “solely budgetary reasons.” The figure was significantly higher than the “few hundred” immigrants the Obama administration had publicly acknowledged were released under the budget-savings process. He testified during a hearing by a House appropriations subcommittee.

Morton told lawmakers Thursday that the decision to release the immigrants was not discussed in advance with political appointees, including those in the White House or Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. He said the pending automatic cuts known as sequestration was “driving in the background.”

“We were trying to live within the budget that Congress had provided us,” Morton told lawmakers. “This was not a White House call. I take full responsibility.”

The Associated Press, citing internal budget documents, reported exclusively on March 1 that the administration had released more than 2,000 illegal immigrants since Feb. 15 and planned to release 3,000 more in March due to looming budget cuts, but Napolitano said days later that the AP’s report was “not really accurate” and that the story had developed “its own mythology.”

“Several hundred are related to sequester, but it wasn’t thousands,” Napolitano said March 4 at a Politico-sponsored event.

On March 5, the House Judiciary Committee publicly released an internal ICE document that it said described the agency’s plans to release thousands of illegal immigrants before March 31. The document was among those reviewed by the AP for its story days earlier.

The immigrants who were released still eventually face deportation and are required to appear for upcoming court hearings. But they are no longer confined in immigration jails, where advocacy experts say they cost about $164 per day per person. Immigrants who are granted supervised release – with conditions that can include mandatory check-ins, home visits and GPS devices – cost the government from 30 cents to $14 a day, according to the National Immigration Forum, a group that advocates on behalf of immigrants.

Morton said Thursday that among the immigrants released were 10 people considered the highest level of offender. Morton said that although that category of offender can include people convicted of aggravated felonies, many of the people released were facing financial crimes. Four of the most serious offenders have been put back in detention. Other people released include immigrants who had faced multiple drunken driving offenses, misdemeanor crimes and traffic offenses, Morton said.

After the administration challenged the AP’s reporting, ICE said it didn’t know how many people had been released for budget reasons but would review its records.

Texas Department of Public Safety

News Release
Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Public Safety Commission discusses Border Security report
and the Criminal Alien threat to Texas

During today’s Public Safety Commission (PSC) meeting, Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) Director Steven C. McCraw discussed the border security strategic assessment that was conducted by General Barry McCaffrey (Ret.) and Retired Major-General Robert Scales as a part of HB 4 from the 82^nd Session.

The report highlighted the efforts that Texas has put in place in order to combat the threat from the Mexican cartels and commended Texas for being “the most aggressive and creative in confronting the threat.”

The report further determined that “criminality spawned in Mexico is spilling over to the U.S. and Texas is the tactical close combat zone and frontline of this conflict.”

The Commission also discussed the impact criminal aliens were having on communities in Texas. Director McCraw stated that criminal aliens were responsible for a significant amount of crime and constituted a serious threat.

As of September 15, 2011, 6,508 illegal aliens have been identified in Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) units. These 6,508 criminal aliens are responsible for 27,880 total crimes over their criminal careers.

Furthermore, from October 2008 through August 2011, Texas has identified a total of 88,080 unique criminal alien defendants in Texas. These defendants are responsible for 344,398 individual criminal charges over their criminal careers, including 2,245 homicides and 46,412 sexual assaults. Director McCraw provided a detailed breakdown of the violations committed by the 88,080 criminal aliens.

Breakdown of 15 of the 50 Criminal Justice Information Systems (CJIS) crime categories committed by the 88,080 criminal aliens

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Neoconservative Progressive Interventionists Attack Classical Liberals — Libertarians — What is new? — So Did Progressive Republican Roosevelt and Progressive Democrat Wilson — Videos

Posted on March 11, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Tax Policy, Taxes, Unemployment, Video, War | Tags: Barry Goldwater, Debt Limit, Drones, Jack Hunter, John McCain, Neoconservatives, Progressives, Rand Paul, Ronald Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, Theodore Roosevelt, U.S. Constitution, Woodrow Wilson |

“If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms.”

– Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., speaking on the Senate floor, quoting a Wall Street Journal editorial attacking Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.

I supported Senator Barry Goldwater for President in 1964 as a classical liberal or libertarian, as did Ronald Reagan.

Today I support Senator Rand Paul for President in 2016.

Senators McCain and Graham remind me of Governor Nelson Rockefeller, another progressive Republican.

Mike Huckabee: Thank you, Rand Paul

Rand Paul Fires Back At Filibuster Critics, Shocks Glenn Beck With Revelation

Shep Smith Offends John McCain W Interventionist Comment Grills Him Over Rand Paul

SA@TAC – What’s a ‘Neoconservative?’

SA@TAC – Ronald Reagan: Isolationist

SA@TAC – John McCain Supports Al-Qaeda

John McCain ATTACKS Rand Paul’s Filibuster

Laura Ingraham: Neoconservative view has clearly hurt the GOP (Rand Paul interview 3/08/13)

STAND WITH RAND

Rand Paul: Time To Bring Troops Home, Cut Foreign Aid, And Fix Entitlements – CNN 3/11/2013

“I Don’t Think We Should Go To War On ONE Person’s Authority” Rand Paul

What is classical liberalism?

Background Articles and Videos

Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America

Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican National Convention

Barry Goldwater: On the Failed Liberal Agenda

“A Time for Choosing” by Ronald Reagan

Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Economic Consequences of the Minimum Wage — Videos

Posted on March 10, 2013. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, Communications, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, government, government spending, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Microeconomics, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Public Sector, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Security, Unemployment, Unions, Wealth | Tags: Economics, Good Intentions, Minimum Wage |

Does the Minimum Wage Hurt Workers?

Dan Mitchell Explains Why Boosting the Minimum Wage Is Bad for Low-Skilled Workers

John Stossel – The Minimum Wage and Consequences

John Stossel – The State Against Blacks

Good Intentions 2of3 Minimum Wage, Licensing, and Labor Laws with Walter Williams

John Stossel – Real World Effects Of Minimum Wage

Increasing Minimum Wage Good or Bad for Small Business?

The Truth about the Minimum Wage

Milton Friedman on Minimum Wage

[yourtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca8Z__o52sk]

Power of the Market – Minimum Wage

The Job-Killing Impact of Minimum Wage Laws

Both Sides of The Minimum Wage Debate

Walter E Williams – Davis Bacon Sellout

Williams with Sowell – Minimum Wage

Walter E Williams – Minimum Wage as a Racist Tool

Walter Williams: Up From the Projects

State Against Blacks – Conservative Dr. Walter Williams

Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2011

In 2011, 73.9 million American workers age 16 and over were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.1 percent of all wage and salary workers.¹ Among those paid by the hour, 1.7 million earned exactly the prevailing Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 2.2 million had wages below the minimum.² Together, these 3.8 million workers with wages at or below the Federal minimum made up 5.2 percent of all hourly-paid workers. Tables 1 through 10 present data on a wide array of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics for hourly-paid workers earning at or below the Federal minimum wage. The following are some highlights from the 2011 data.

Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented only about one-fifth of hourly-paid workers, they made up about half of those paid the Federal minimum wage or less. Among employed teenagers paid by the hour, about 23 percent earned the minimum wage or less, compared with about 3 percent of workers age 25 and over. (See table 1 and table 7.)
About 6 percent of women paid hourly rates had wages at or below the prevailing Federal minimum, compared with about 4 percent of men. (See table 1.)
About 5 percent of White hourly-paid workers earned the Federal minimum wage or less, compared with about 6 percent of Blacks and about 3 percent of Asians. Among hourly-paid workers of Hispanic ethnicity, about 5 percent earned the minimum wage or less. (See table 1.)
Among hourly-paid workers age 16 and over, about 11 percent of those who had less than a high school diploma earned the Federal minimum wage or less, compared with about 5 percent of those who had a high school diploma (with no college) and about 2 percent of college graduates. (See table 6.)
Never-married workers, who tend to be young, were more likely than married workers to earn the Federal minimum wage or less (about 9 percent versus about 2 percent). (See table 8.)
Part-time workers (persons who usually work less than 35 hours per week) were more likely than full-time workers to be paid the Federal minimum wage or less (about 13 percent versus about 2 percent). (See table 1 and table 9.)
By major occupational group, the highest proportion of hourly-paid workers earning at or below the Federal minimum wage was in service occupations, at 13 percent. About 6 in 10 workers earning the minimum wage or less in 2011 were employed in service occupations, mostly in food preparation and serving related jobs. (See table 4.)
The industry with the highest proportion of workers with hourly wages at or below the Federal minimum wage was leisure and hospitality (22 percent). About one-half of all workers paid at or below the Federal minimum wage were employed in this industry, primarily in restaurants and other food services. For many of these workers, tips and commissions supplement the hourly wages received. (See table 5.)
The states with the highest proportions of hourly-paid workers earning at or below the Federal minimum wage were Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas (all between 8 and 10 percent). The states with the lowest percentage of workers earning at or below the Federal minimum wage were Oregon, California, Washington, and Alaska (all under 2 percent). It should be noted that some states have minimum wage laws establishing standards that exceed the Federal minimum wage. (See table 2 and table 3.)
The proportion of hourly-paid workers earning the prevailing Federal minimum wage or less declined from 6.0 percent in 2010 to 5.2 percent in 2011. This remains well below the figure of 13.4 percent in 1979, when data were first collected on a regular basis. (See table 10.)

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). These data on minimum wage earners are derived from the Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly nationwide survey of households. Data in this summary are 2011 annual averages.

1 Data are for wage and salary workers age 16 and over and refer to earnings on a person’s sole or principal job. Hourly earnings for hourly-paid workers do not include overtime pay, commissions, or tips received. All self-employed persons are excluded whether or not their businesses are incorporated.

2 The presence of a sizable number of workers with wages below the Federal minimum does not necessarily indicate violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as there are exemptions to the minimum wage provisions of the law. The estimates of the numbers of minimum and subminimum wage workers presented in the accompanying tables pertain to workers paid at hourly rates; salaried and other non-hourly workers are excluded. As such, the actual number of workers with earnings at or below the prevailing Federal minimum is undoubtedly understated. Research has shown that a relatively small number and share of salaried workers and others not paid by the hour have earnings that, when translated into hourly rates, are at or below the minimum wage. However, BLS does not routinely estimate hourly earnings for non-hourly workers because of data concerns that arise in producing these estimates.

Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2011, Tables 1 – 10

Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2011 (PDF)

Table 1. Employed wage and salary workers paid hourly rates with earnings at or below the prevailing Federal minimum wage by selected characteristics, 2011 annual averages
Characteristic	Number of workers (in thousands)				Percent distribution				Percent of workers paid hourly rates
	Total paid hourly rates	At or below minimum wage			Total paid hourly rates	At or below minimum wage			At or below minimum wage
	Total paid hourly rates	Total	At minimum wage	Below minimum wage	Total paid hourly rates	Total	At minimum wage	Below minimum wage	Total	At minimum wage	Below minimum wage
AGE AND SEX
Total, 16 years and over	73,926	3,829	1,677	2,152	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	5.2	2.3	2.9
16 to 24 years	14,436	1,896	893	1,003	19.5	49.5	53.2	46.6	13.1	6.2	6.9
16 to 19 years	3,936	899	491	408	5.3	23.5	29.3	19.0	22.8	12.5	10.4
25 years and over	59,490	1,933	784	1,149	80.5	50.5	46.8	53.4	3.2	1.3	1.9
Men, 16 years and over	36,457	1,433	648	785	49.3	37.4	38.6	36.5	3.9	1.8	2.2
16 to 24 years	7,290	787	388	399	9.9	20.6	23.1	18.5	10.8	5.3	5.5
16 to 19 years	1,872	373	212	161	2.5	9.7	12.6	7.5	19.9	11.3	8.6
25 years and over	29,167	647	260	387	39.5	16.9	15.5	18.0	2.2	0.9	1.3
Women, 16 years and over	37,469	2,395	1,029	1,366	50.7	62.5	61.4	63.5	6.4	2.7	3.6
16 to 24 years	7,147	1,109	505	604	9.7	29.0	30.1	28.1	15.5	7.1	8.5
16 to 19 years	2,064	526	279	247	2.8	13.7	16.6	11.5	25.5	13.5	12.0
25 years and over	30,323	1,286	524	762	41.0	33.6	31.2	35.4	4.2	1.7	2.5
RACE, SEX, AND HISPANIC OR LATINO ETHNICITY
White (1)	59,314	3,006	1,258	1,748	80.2	78.5	75.0	81.2	5.1	2.1	2.9
Men	29,743	1,108	484	624	40.2	28.9	28.9	29.0	3.7	1.6	2.1
Women	29,571	1,898	774	1,124	40.0	49.6	46.2	52.2	6.4	2.6	3.8
Black or African American (1)	9,523	577	324	253	12.9	15.1	19.3	11.8	6.1	3.4	2.7
Men	4,252	222	117	105	5.8	5.8	7.0	4.9	5.2	2.8	2.5
Women	5,271	356	208	148	7.1	9.3	12.4	6.9	6.8	3.9	2.8
Asian (1)	3,037	99	36	63	4.1	2.6	2.1	2.9	3.3	1.2	2.1
Men	1,425	41	13	28	1.9	1.1	0.8	1.3	2.9	0.9	2.0
Women	1,612	58	23	35	2.2	1.5	1.4	1.6	3.6	1.4	2.2
Hispanic or Latino (1)	13,264	720	340	380	17.9	18.8	20.3	17.7	5.4	2.6	2.9
Men	7,703	326	154	172	10.4	8.5	9.2	8.0	4.2	2.0	2.2
Women	5,561	394	186	208	7.5	10.3	11.1	9.7	7.1	3.3	3.7
FULL- AND PART-TIME STATUS AND SEX
Full-time workers (2)	53,594	1,274	522	752	72.5	33.3	31.1	34.9	2.4	1.0	1.4
Men	29,292	501	205	296	39.6	13.1	12.2	13.8	1.7	0.7	1.0
Women	24,302	773	317	456	32.9	20.2	18.9	21.2	3.2	1.3	1.9
Part-time workers (2)	20,199	2,545	1,153	1,392	27.3	66.5	68.8	64.7	12.6	5.7	6.9
Men	7,103	932	443	489	9.6	24.3	26.4	22.7	13.1	6.2	6.9
Women	13,096	1,615	711	904	17.7	42.2	42.4	42.0	12.3	5.4	6.9
Footnotes: (1) Estimates for the above race groups (White, Black or African American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented for all races. Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. (2) The distinction between full- and part-time workers is based on hours usually worked. These data will not sum to totals because full- or part-time status on the principal job is not identifiable for a small number of multiple jobholders. Full time is 35 hours or more per week; part time is less than 35 hours.

NOTE: Data exclude all self-employed persons whether or not their businesses are incorporated.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011tbls.htm#1

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id: LNS14000012
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate – 16-19 yrs.
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 to 19 years

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
1948	8.5	10.0	10.5	9.5	7.0	9.3	9.7	9.6	8.8	8.5	9.1	8.5
1949	10.0	10.6	11.9	13.2	13.4	13.8	14.3	15.0	14.6	15.8	14.0	15.4
1950	15.2	15.2	14.3	12.0	13.3	12.2	11.2	10.7	10.9	10.3	9.5	11.1
1951	8.5	8.1	8.3	7.9	6.7	8.3	8.7	8.2	8.3	7.7	9.5	7.6
1952	9.3	8.3	8.2	7.6	8.9	8.4	8.8	8.5	8.9	8.4	8.2	7.6
1953	6.9	6.7	6.7	7.1	6.4	6.9	7.3	7.4	7.3	9.7	8.6	11.8
1954	12.1	13.5	13.0	13.6	13.4	10.5	12.9	14.0	14.0	12.2	11.4	12.6
1955	11.7	11.3	11.0	10.7	10.9	10.8	10.4	11.5	11.3	11.0	11.7	11.0
1956	10.6	11.4	11.5	10.9	11.9	12.2	11.2	10.1	9.8	10.1	12.6	9.7
1957	11.6	10.5	11.2	11.1	11.4	11.7	11.8	11.5	11.0	10.9	13.4	13.1
1958	14.4	14.6	14.7	17.2	16.3	15.4	17.9	16.0	17.9	16.0	15.9	14.9
1959	14.0	12.9	13.6	15.0	14.3	13.9	14.5	16.1	14.9	15.8	15.1	15.3
1960	14.6	13.1	15.6	14.2	13.9	14.6	13.9	15.3	14.5	16.1	14.7	16.4
1961	17.1	17.4	17.1	16.4	15.8	16.6	17.3	17.1	18.0	16.9	16.0	15.3
1962	16.2	16.0	15.1	15.1	14.2	13.6	13.9	14.1	14.5	14.3	16.3	14.4
1963	15.8	17.7	17.1	16.8	18.7	17.2	18.1	16.1	17.4	17.1	17.7	16.3
1964	16.7	15.8	16.3	17.0	16.4	16.8	14.7	16.7	15.7	15.8	15.6	17.1
1965	16.8	16.7	15.8	16.2	14.8	15.3	14.5	13.9	14.7	14.5	13.0	13.3
1966	13.0	12.4	13.1	13.0	13.6	13.0	12.9	12.4	12.8	12.6	11.8	12.1
1967	11.9	12.9	11.6	12.1	12.8	12.9	13.0	13.4	12.9	13.7	13.8	13.0
1968	12.0	12.9	12.7	11.8	12.5	13.9	13.8	12.0	12.0	11.8	12.2	12.7
1969	12.0	11.9	12.3	12.0	12.4	12.2	12.8	12.2	12.6	12.6	11.6	11.8
1970	13.5	13.3	13.4	14.7	14.2	16.3	14.7	15.7	16.2	16.7	17.4	17.1
1971	16.8	16.3	16.9	16.3	16.8	17.7	17.7	16.8	16.7	16.9	16.9	16.9
1972	16.9	18.0	17.2	16.5	15.3	15.9	15.6	16.5	16.3	15.8	15.7	15.6
1973	13.7	15.3	14.3	15.5	14.9	13.8	14.3	14.0	14.7	14.4	15.0	14.6
1974	14.6	14.9	14.9	14.3	15.4	16.3	16.8	14.9	17.0	17.2	17.8	18.2
1975	19.5	19.4	19.9	19.9	20.4	20.9	20.7	20.7	19.5	19.8	19.0	19.8
1976	19.6	19.0	18.9	19.5	18.6	18.5	18.3	19.6	18.6	19.0	19.2	19.1
1977	18.9	18.4	18.6	18.0	17.8	18.8	17.5	17.4	18.0	17.2	17.2	15.5
1978	16.7	17.2	17.3	16.6	16.0	15.4	16.5	15.7	16.4	16.1	16.3	16.7
1979	16.1	16.1	15.9	16.3	16.1	15.7	15.6	16.5	16.5	16.5	15.9	16.2
1980	16.5	16.6	16.3	16.2	18.6	18.9	19.1	18.9	18.0	18.4	18.5	17.6
1981	19.1	19.3	19.2	18.8	19.1	19.8	18.6	18.8	19.7	20.3	21.3	21.1
1982	22.0	22.6	21.8	22.8	22.8	22.9	24.0	23.7	23.6	23.7	24.1	24.1
1983	23.1	22.8	23.5	23.4	22.8	24.0	22.8	22.9	21.7	21.4	20.2	19.9
1984	19.5	19.4	19.8	19.2	18.7	18.2	18.8	18.7	19.2	18.6	17.7	18.8
1985	18.8	18.3	18.2	17.5	18.5	18.5	20.2	17.9	17.9	20.0	18.3	19.1
1986	18.1	18.8	18.2	19.2	18.6	19.2	18.4	18.0	18.4	17.7	18.1	17.5
1987	17.7	18.0	17.9	17.3	17.4	16.5	15.8	15.9	16.2	17.3	16.6	16.0
1988	16.1	15.6	16.6	16.0	15.3	14.2	14.8	15.4	15.5	15.1	13.9	14.8
1989	16.4	15.0	13.9	14.6	14.8	15.7	14.2	14.6	15.2	15.0	15.5	15.3
1990	14.8	15.0	14.3	14.7	15.0	14.3	15.0	16.3	16.4	16.5	17.1	17.4
1991	18.6	17.4	18.3	17.8	18.8	18.5	19.4	18.9	18.8	19.1	19.0	20.3
1992	19.2	20.1	20.3	18.5	20.1	23.0	20.8	19.9	21.0	18.3	20.5	19.8
1993	19.9	19.7	19.7	19.5	19.8	19.9	18.4	18.4	18.2	18.7	18.5	17.9
1994	18.3	18.0	18.0	19.1	18.0	17.6	17.6	17.3	17.5	17.5	15.6	17.0
1995	16.5	17.4	16.1	17.5	17.5	17.1	18.2	17.3	17.6	17.4	17.5	18.0
1996	17.7	16.8	17.1	17.1	16.8	16.2	17.1	16.8	15.6	16.3	16.8	16.6
1997	16.8	17.1	16.4	15.9	16.0	16.8	17.1	16.1	16.1	15.1	14.8	14.0
1998	13.9	14.5	14.8	13.5	14.8	14.9	14.6	14.7	15.0	15.7	14.7	13.5
1999	15.2	13.9	14.2	14.2	13.3	13.9	13.4	13.3	14.8	13.8	13.9	13.4
2000	12.7	13.8	13.3	12.6	12.8	12.3	13.4	14.0	13.0	12.8	13.0	13.2
2001	13.8	13.7	13.8	13.9	13.4	14.2	14.4	15.6	15.2	16.0	15.9	17.0
2002	16.5	16.0	16.6	16.7	16.6	16.7	16.8	17.0	16.3	15.1	17.1	16.9
2003	17.2	17.2	17.8	17.7	17.9	19.0	18.2	16.6	17.6	17.2	15.7	16.2
2004	17.0	16.5	16.8	16.6	17.1	17.0	17.8	16.7	16.6	17.4	16.4	17.6
2005	16.2	17.5	17.1	17.8	17.8	16.3	16.1	16.1	15.5	16.1	17.0	14.9
2006	15.1	15.3	16.1	14.6	14.0	15.8	15.9	16.0	16.3	15.2	14.8	14.6
2007	14.8	14.9	14.9	15.9	15.9	16.3	15.3	15.9	15.9	15.4	16.2	16.8
2008	17.8	16.6	16.1	15.9	19.0	19.2	20.7	18.6	19.1	20.0	20.3	20.5
2009	20.7	22.2	22.2	22.2	23.4	24.7	24.3	25.0	25.9	27.1	26.9	26.6
2010	26.0	25.4	26.2	25.5	26.6	26.0	26.0	25.7	25.8	27.2	24.6	25.1
2011	25.5	24.0	24.4	24.7	24.0	24.7	24.9	25.2	24.4	24.1	23.9	22.9
2012	23.4	23.7	25.0	24.9	24.4	23.7	23.9	24.5	23.7	23.7	23.6	23.5
2013	23.4	25.1

Federal Minimum Wage Rates, 1955–2012

	Value of the minimum wage			Value of the minimum wage			Value of the minimum wage
Year	Current dollars	Constant (1996) dollars¹	Year	Current dollars	Constant (1996) dollars¹	Year	Current dollars	Constant (1996) dollars¹
1955	$0.75	$4.39	1983	3.35	5.28	2011	7.25	5.06
1956	1.00	5.77	1984	3.35	5.06	2012	7.25	4.97
1957	1.00	5.58	1985	3.35	4.88
1958	1.00	5.43	1986	3.35	4.80
1959	1.00	5.39	1987	3.35	4.63
1960	1.00	5.30	1988	3.35	4.44
1961	1.15	6.03	1989	3.35	4.24
1962	1.15	5.97	1990	3.80	4.56
1963	1.25	6.41	1991	4.25	4.90
1964	1.25	6.33	1992	4.25	4.75
1965	1.25	6.23	1993	4.25	4.61
1966	1.25	6.05	1994	4.25	4.50
1967	1.40	6.58	1995	4.25	4.38
1968	1.60	7.21	1996	4.75	4.75
1969	1.60	6.84	1997	5.15	5.03
1970	1.60	6.47	1998	5.15	4.96
1971	1.60	6.20	1999	5.15	4.85
1972	1.60	6.01	2000	5.15	4.69
1973	1.60	5.65	2001	5.15	4.56
1974	2.00	6.37	2002	5.15	4.49
1975	2.10	6.12	2003	5.15	4.39
1976	2.30	6.34	2004	5.15	4.28
1977	2.30	5.95	2005	5.15	4.14
1978	2.65	6.38	2006	5.15	4.04
1979	2.90	6.27	2007	5.85	4.41
1980	3.10	5.90	2008	6.55	4.77
1981	3.35	5.78	2009	7.25	5.30
1982	3.35	5.78	2010	7.25	5.22

1. Adjusted for inflation using the CPI-U (Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers).

Source: U.S. Department of Labor. Web: http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/.

Wage and Hour Division (WHD)

History of Federal Minimum Wage Rates Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 1938 – 2009

The table of federal minimum wage rates under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 1938 – 2009 is also available in a PDF Version. In order to view and/or print PDF documents you must have a PDF viewer (e.g., Adobe Acrobat Reader v5 or later) available on your workstation.

Effective Date	1938 Act ¹	1961 Amendments ²	1966 and Subsequent Amendments³
			Nonfarm	Farm
Oct 24, 1938	$0.25
Oct 24, 1939	$0.30
Oct 24, 1945	$0.40
Jan 25, 1950	$0.75
Mar 1, 1956	$1.00
Sep 3, 1961	$1.15	$1.00
Sep 3, 1963	$1.25
Sep 3, 1964		$1.15
Sep 3, 1965		$1.25
Feb 1, 1967	$1.40	$1.40	$1.00	$1.00
Feb 1, 1968	$1.60	$1.60	$1.15	$1.15
Feb 1, 1969			$1.30	$1.30
Feb 1, 1970			$1.45
Feb 1, 1971			$1.60
May 1, 1974	$2.00	$2.00	$1.90	$1.60
Jan. 1, 1975	$2.10	$2.10	$2.00	$1.80
Jan 1, 1976	$2.30	$2.30	$2.20	$2.00
Jan 1, 1977			$2.30	$2.20
Jan 1, 1978	$2.65 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Jan 1, 1979	$2.90 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Jan 1, 1980	$3.10 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Jan 1, 1981	$3.35 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Apr 1, 1990⁴	$3.80 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Apr 1, 1991	$4.25 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Oct 1, 1996	$4.75 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Sep 1, 1997⁵	$5.15 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Jul 24, 2007	$5.85 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Jul 24, 2008	$6.55 for all covered, nonexempt workers
Jul 24, 2009	$7.25 for all covered, nonexempt workers

Where to Obtain Additional Information

This publication is for general information and is not to be considered in the same light as official statements of position contained in the regulations.

For additional information, visit our Wage-Hour website: http://www.wagehour.dol.gov and/or call our Wage-Hour toll-free information and helpline, available 8am to 5pm in your time zone, 1-866-4USWAGE (1-866-487-9243).

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Century: America’s Time — Videos

Posted on March 10, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, European History, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Films, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Music, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Security, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Weather, Wisdom | Tags: American history, history, The Century: America's Time |

The Century: America’s Time – The Beginning: Seeds of Change

The Century: America’s Time – 1914-1919: Shell Shock

The Century: America’s Time – 1920-1929 Boom to Bust

The Century: America’s Time – 1929-1936 Stormy Weather

The Century: America’s Time – 1936-1941 Over the Edge

The Century: America’s Time – 1941-1945 Civilians at War

The Century: America’s Time – 1946-1952 Best Years

The Century: America’s Time – 1953-1960 Happy Daze

The Century: America’s Time – 1960-1964 Poisoned Dreams

The Century: America’s Time – 1965-1970 Unpinned

The Century: America’s Time – 1971-1975 Approaching the Apocalypse

The Century: America’s Time – 1976-1980 Starting Over

The Century: America’s Time – 1981-1989 A New World

The Century: America’s Time – 1990-1999 – Then and Now

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Unemployment Rate Falls To 7.7% As Labor Participation Rate Falls To 63.5%–Lowest in Three Decades–296,000 of Discouraged Americans Leave Labor Force In February –Videos

Posted on March 8, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government spending, history, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Rants, Raves, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Unemployment, Video, Wisdom | Tags: BLS, March 2013, Unemployment Rate |

Jobless Rate Hits Four-Year Low: Sequester Lurks

US recovery too slow to create jobs, say analysts

Huge Jobs Numbers, US Unemployment Lowest in 4 Years

Unemployment rate falls to 7.7 percent

America Live | New Concerns Over High Jobless Rate for Young Veterans, 8 MAR 2013

US Adds 236K Jobs, Unemployment Falls to 7.7 Pct

The Jobs Report: Bad News Amid Good

8 March 2013 Breaking News Mass economic protests Portugal & Spain – End Times News Update – 3-8-13

Employment Level

143,492,000

Data extracted on: March 8, 2013 (2:50:17 PM)

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Series Id: LNS12000000 Seasonally Adjusted

Series title: (Seas) Employment Level

Labor force status: Employed Type of data: Number in thousands Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	136559(1)	136598	136701	137270	136630	136940	136531	136662	136893	137088	137322	137614
2001	137778	137612	137783	137299	137092	136873	137071	136241	136846	136392	136238	136047
2002	135701	136438	136177	136126	136539	136415	136413	136705	137302	137008	136521	136426
2003	137417(1)	137482	137434	137633	137544	137790	137474	137549	137609	137984	138424	138411
2004	138472(1)	138542	138453	138680	138852	139174	139556	139573	139487	139732	140231	140125
2005	140245(1)	140385	140654	141254	141609	141714	142026	142434	142401	142548	142499	142752
2006	143150(1)	143457	143741	143761	144089	144353	144202	144625	144815	145314	145534	145970
2007	146028(1)	146057	146320	145586	145903	146063	145905	145682	146244	145946	146595	146273
2008	146378(1)	146156	146086	146132	145908	145737	145532	145203	145076	144802	144100	143369
2009	142153(1)	141644	140721	140652	140250	140005	139898	139481	138810	138421	138665	138025
2010	138439(1)	138624	138767	139296	139255	139148	139167	139405	139388	139097	139046	139295
2011	139253(1)	139471	139643	139606	139681	139405	139509	139870	140164	140314	140771	140896
2012	141608(1)	142019	142020	141934	142302	142448	142250	142164	142974	143328	143277	143305
2013	143322(1)	143492
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Civilian Labor Force Level

155,524,000

Series Id: LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status: Civilian labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over

ear	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	142267(1)	142456	142434	142751	142388	142591	142278	142514	142518	142622	142962	143248
2001	143800	143701	143924	143569	143318	143357	143654	143284	143989	144086	144240	144305
2002	143883	144653	144481	144725	144938	144808	144803	145009	145552	145314	145041	145066
2003	145937(1)	146100	146022	146474	146500	147056	146485	146445	146530	146716	147000	146729
2004	146842(1)	146709	146944	146850	147065	147460	147692	147564	147415	147793	148162	148059
2005	148029(1)	148364	148391	148926	149261	149238	149432	149779	149954	150001	150065	150030
2006	150214(1)	150641	150813	150881	151069	151354	151377	151716	151662	152041	152406	152732
2007	153144(1)	152983	153051	152435	152670	153041	153054	152749	153414	153183	153835	153918
2008	154063(1)	153653	153908	153769	154303	154313	154469	154641	154570	154876	154639	154655
2009	154232(1)	154526	154142	154479	154742	154710	154505	154300	153815	153804	153887	153120
2010	153455(1)	153702	153960	154577	154110	153623	153709	154078	153966	153681	154140	153649
2011	153244(1)	153269	153358	153478	153552	153369	153325	153707	154074	154010	154096	153945
2012	154356(1)	154825	154707	154451	154998	155149	154995	154647	155056	155576	155319	155511
2013	155654(1)	155524
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate

63.5%

Series Id: LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	67.3	67.3	67.3	67.3	67.1	67.1	66.9	66.9	66.9	66.8	66.9	67.0
2001	67.2	67.1	67.2	66.9	66.7	66.7	66.8	66.5	66.8	66.7	66.7	66.7
2002	66.5	66.8	66.6	66.7	66.7	66.6	66.5	66.6	66.7	66.6	66.4	66.3
2003	66.4	66.4	66.3	66.4	66.4	66.5	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	65.9
2004	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.9	66.0	66.1	66.1	66.0	65.8	65.9	66.0	65.9
2005	65.8	65.9	65.9	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.0	66.0
2006	66.0	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.1	66.2	66.3	66.4
2007	66.4	66.3	66.2	65.9	66.0	66.0	66.0	65.8	66.0	65.8	66.0	66.0
2008	66.2	66.0	66.1	65.9	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.9	65.8
2009	65.7	65.8	65.6	65.7	65.7	65.7	65.5	65.4	65.1	65.0	65.0	64.6
2010	64.8	64.9	64.9	65.1	64.9	64.6	64.6	64.7	64.6	64.4	64.6	64.3
2011	64.2	64.2	64.2	64.2	64.2	64.0	64.0	64.1	64.2	64.1	64.1	64.0
2012	63.7	63.9	63.8	63.6	63.8	63.8	63.7	63.5	63.6	63.8	63.6	63.6
2013	63.6	63.5

Unemployment Level

12,032,000

12,

Series Id: LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number in thousands

Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	5708	5858	5733	5481	5758	5651	5747	5853	5625	5534	5639	5634
2001	6023	6089	6141	6271	6226	6484	6583	7042	7142	7694	8003	8258
2002	8182	8215	8304	8599	8399	8393	8390	8304	8251	8307	8520	8640
2003	8520	8618	8588	8842	8957	9266	9011	8896	8921	8732	8576	8317
2004	8370	8167	8491	8170	8212	8286	8136	7990	7927	8061	7932	7934
2005	7784	7980	7737	7672	7651	7524	7406	7345	7553	7453	7566	7279
2006	7064	7184	7072	7120	6980	7001	7175	7091	6847	6727	6872	6762
2007	7116	6927	6731	6850	6766	6979	7149	7067	7170	7237	7240	7645
2008	7685	7497	7822	7637	8395	8575	8937	9438	9494	10074	10538	11286
2009	12079	12881	13421	13826	14492	14705	14607	14819	15005	15382	15223	15095
2010	15016	15078	15192	15281	14856	14475	14542	14673	14577	14584	15094	14354
2011	13992	13798	13716	13872	13871	13964	13817	13837	13910	13696	13325	13049
2012	12748	12806	12686	12518	12695	12701	12745	12483	12082	12248	12042	12206
2013	12332	12032

Unemployment Rate U-3

7.7%

Series Id: LNS14000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	4.0	4.1	4.0	3.8	4.0	4.0	4.0	4.1	3.9	3.9	3.9	3.9
2001	4.2	4.2	4.3	4.4	4.3	4.5	4.6	4.9	5.0	5.3	5.5	5.7
2002	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	5.8	5.8	5.8	5.7	5.7	5.7	5.9	6.0
2003	5.8	5.9	5.9	6.0	6.1	6.3	6.2	6.1	6.1	6.0	5.8	5.7
2004	5.7	5.6	5.8	5.6	5.6	5.6	5.5	5.4	5.4	5.5	5.4	5.4
2005	5.3	5.4	5.2	5.2	5.1	5.0	5.0	4.9	5.0	5.0	5.0	4.9
2006	4.7	4.8	4.7	4.7	4.6	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4
2007	4.6	4.5	4.4	4.5	4.4	4.6	4.7	4.6	4.7	4.7	4.7	5.0
2008	5.0	4.9	5.1	5.0	5.4	5.6	5.8	6.1	6.1	6.5	6.8	7.3
2009	7.8	8.3	8.7	9.0	9.4	9.5	9.5	9.6	9.8	10.0	9.9	9.9
2010	9.8	9.8	9.9	9.9	9.6	9.4	9.5	9.5	9.5	9.5	9.8	9.3
2011	9.1	9.0	8.9	9.0	9.0	9.1	9.0	9.0	9.0	8.9	8.6	8.5
2012	8.3	8.3	8.2	8.1	8.2	8.2	8.2	8.1	7.8	7.9	7.8	7.8
2013	7.9	7.7

Teenage Unemployment Rate

25.1%

Series Id: LNS14000012
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Unemployment Rate – 16-19 yrs.
Labor force status: Unemployment rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 to 19 years

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	12.7	13.8	13.3	12.6	12.8	12.3	13.4	14.0	13.0	12.8	13.0	13.2
2001	13.8	13.7	13.8	13.9	13.4	14.2	14.4	15.6	15.2	16.0	15.9	17.0
2002	16.5	16.0	16.6	16.7	16.6	16.7	16.8	17.0	16.3	15.1	17.1	16.9
2003	17.2	17.2	17.8	17.7	17.9	19.0	18.2	16.6	17.6	17.2	15.7	16.2
2004	17.0	16.5	16.8	16.6	17.1	17.0	17.8	16.7	16.6	17.4	16.4	17.6
2005	16.2	17.5	17.1	17.8	17.8	16.3	16.1	16.1	15.5	16.1	17.0	14.9
2006	15.1	15.3	16.1	14.6	14.0	15.8	15.9	16.0	16.3	15.2	14.8	14.6
2007	14.8	14.9	14.9	15.9	15.9	16.3	15.3	15.9	15.9	15.4	16.2	16.8
2008	17.8	16.6	16.1	15.9	19.0	19.2	20.7	18.6	19.1	20.0	20.3	20.5
2009	20.7	22.2	22.2	22.2	23.4	24.7	24.3	25.0	25.9	27.1	26.9	26.6
2010	26.0	25.4	26.2	25.5	26.6	26.0	26.0	25.7	25.8	27.2	24.6	25.1
2011	25.5	24.0	24.4	24.7	24.0	24.7	24.9	25.2	24.4	24.1	23.9	22.9
2012	23.4	23.7	25.0	24.9	24.4	23.7	23.9	24.5	23.7	23.7	23.6	23.5
2013	23.4	25.1

Total Unemployment Rate U-6

14.3

Series Id: LNS13327709 Seasonally Adjusted

Series title: (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers

Labor force status: Aggregated totals unemployed

Type of data: Percent or rate Age: 16 years and over

Percent/rates: Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

Year	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2000	7.1	7.2	7.1	6.9	7.1	7.0	7.0	7.1	7.0	6.8	7.1	6.9
2001	7.3	7.4	7.3	7.4	7.5	7.9	7.8	8.1	8.7	9.3	9.4	9.6
2002	9.5	9.5	9.4	9.7	9.5	9.5	9.6	9.6	9.6	9.6	9.7	9.8
2003	10.0	10.2	10.0	10.2	10.1	10.3	10.3	10.1	10.4	10.2	10.0	9.8
2004	9.9	9.7	10.0	9.6	9.6	9.5	9.5	9.4	9.4	9.7	9.4	9.2
2005	9.3	9.3	9.1	8.9	8.9	9.0	8.8	8.9	9.0	8.7	8.7	8.6
2006	8.4	8.4	8.2	8.1	8.2	8.4	8.5	8.4	8.0	8.2	8.1	7.9
2007	8.4	8.2	8.0	8.2	8.2	8.3	8.4	8.4	8.4	8.4	8.4	8.8
2008	9.2	9.0	9.1	9.2	9.7	10.1	10.5	10.8	11.0	11.8	12.6	13.6
2009	14.2	15.1	15.7	15.9	16.4	16.5	16.5	16.7	16.7	17.1	17.1	17.1
2010	16.7	17.0	17.0	17.1	16.6	16.5	16.5	16.5	16.8	16.7	16.9	16.6
2011	16.2	16.0	15.8	16.0	15.8	16.1	16.0	16.1	16.3	16.0	15.5	15.2
2012	15.1	15.0	14.5	14.5	14.8	14.8	14.9	14.7	14.7	14.5	14.4	14.4
2013	14.4	14.3

mployment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed USDL-13-0389
until 8:30 a.m. (EST) Friday, March 8, 2013

Technical information:
Household data: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * http://www.bls.gov/cps
Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 * cesinfo@bls.gov * http://www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION — FEBRUARY 2013

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 236,000 in February, and the
unemployment rate edged down to 7.7 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported today. Employment increased in professional and business
services, construction, and health care.

Household Survey Data

The unemployment rate edged down to 7.7 percent in February but has shown
little movement, on net, since September 2012. The number of unemployed
persons, at 12.0 million, also edged lower in February. (See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for whites (6.8 percent)
declined in February while the rates for adult men (7.1 percent), adult women
(7.0 percent), teenagers (25.1 percent), blacks (13.8 percent), and Hispanics
(9.6 percent) showed little or no change. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.1
percent (not seasonally adjusted), little changed from a year earlier. (See
tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

In February, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks
or more) was about unchanged at 4.8 million. These individuals accounted for
40.2 percent of the unemployed. (See table A-12.)

The employment-population ratio held at 58.6 percent in February. The civilian
labor force participation rate, at 63.5 percent, changed little. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons, at 8.0 million,
was essentially unchanged in February. These individuals were working part
time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to
find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)

In February, 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force,
the same as a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These
individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work,
and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not
counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks
preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 885,000 discouraged workers in
February, down slightly from a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally
adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work
because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.7
million persons marginally attached to the labor force in February had not
searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as
school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 236,000 in February, with
job gains in professional and business services, construction, and health
care. In the prior 3 months, employment had risen by an average of 195,000
per month. (See table B-1.)

Professional and business services added 73,000 jobs in February; employment
in the industry had changed little (+16,000) in January. In February,
employment in administrative and support services, which includes employment
services and services to buildings, rose by 44,000. Accounting and
bookkeeping services added 11,000 jobs, and growth continued in computer
systems design and in management and technical consulting services.

In February, employment in construction increased by 48,000. Since September,
construction employment has risen by 151,000. In February, job growth
occurred in specialty trade contractors, with this gain about equally split
between residential (+17,000) and nonresidential specialty trade contractors
(+15,000). Nonresidential building construction also added jobs (+6,000).

The health care industry continued to add jobs in February (+32,000). Within
health care, there was a job gain of 14,000 in ambulatory health care services,
which includes doctors’ offices and outpatient care centers. Employment also
increased over the month in nursing and residential care facilities (+9,000)
and hospitals (+9,000).

Employment in the information industry increased over the month (+20,000),
lifted by a large job gain in the motion picture and sound recording industry.

Employment continued to trend up in retail trade in February (+24,000). Retail
trade has added 252,000 jobs over the past 12 months. Employment also
continued to trend up over the month in food services and drinking places and
in wholesale trade. Employment in other major industries showed little change
over the month.

In February, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls
edged up by 0.1 hour to 34.5 hours. The manufacturing workweek rose by 0.2
hour to 40.9 hours, and factory overtime edged up by 0.1 hour to 3.4 hours.
The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private
nonfarm payrolls increased by 0.2 hour to 33.8 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

Average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose
by 4 cents to $23.82. Over the year, average hourly earnings have risen by 2.1
percent. In February, average hourly earnings of private-sector production
and nonsupervisory employees increased by 5 cents to $20.04. (See tables B-3
and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for December was revised from
+196,000 to +219,000, and the change for January was revised from +157,000 to
+119,000.

____________
The Employment Situation for March is scheduled to be released on Friday,
April 5, 2013, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).

Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

HOUSEHOLD DATA Summary table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

[Numbers in thousands]
Category	Feb. 2012	Dec. 2012	Jan. 2013	Feb. 2013	Change from: Jan. 2013- Feb. 2013
Employment status
Civilian noninstitutional population	242,435	244,350	244,663	244,828	165
Civilian labor force	154,825	155,511	155,654	155,524	-130
Participation rate	63.9	63.6	63.6	63.5	-0.1
Employed	142,019	143,305	143,322	143,492	170
Employment-population ratio	58.6	58.6	58.6	58.6	0.0
Unemployed	12,806	12,206	12,332	12,032	-300
Unemployment rate	8.3	7.8	7.9	7.7	-0.2
Not in labor force	87,611	88,839	89,008	89,304	296

Unemployment rates
Total, 16 years and over	8.3	7.8	7.9	7.7	-0.2
Adult men (20 years and over)	7.7	7.2	7.3	7.1	-0.2
Adult women (20 years and over)	7.6	7.3	7.3	7.0	-0.3
Teenagers (16 to 19 years)	23.7	23.5	23.4	25.1	1.7
White	7.4	6.9	7.0	6.8	-0.2
Black or African American	14.1	14.0	13.8	13.8	0.0
Asian (not seasonally adjusted)	6.3	6.6	6.5	6.1	-
Hispanic or Latino ethnicity	10.6	9.6	9.7	9.6	-0.1

Total, 25 years and over	6.9	6.5	6.5	6.3	-0.2
Less than a high school diploma	12.9	11.7	12.0	11.2	-0.8
High school graduates, no college	8.3	8.0	8.1	7.9	-0.2
Some college or associate degree	7.3	6.9	7.0	6.7	-0.3
Bachelor’s degree and higher	4.2	3.9	3.7	3.8	0.1

Reason for unemployment
Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs	7,187	6,408	6,637	6,522	-115
Job leavers	1,035	983	981	956	-25
Reentrants	3,341	3,587	3,515	3,340	-175
New entrants	1,382	1,291	1,287	1,279	-8

Duration of unemployment
Less than 5 weeks	2,563	2,676	2,766	2,667	-99
5 to 14 weeks	2,817	2,838	3,028	2,782	-246
15 to 26 weeks	1,974	1,895	1,858	1,695	-163
27 weeks and over	5,392	4,766	4,708	4,797	89

Employed persons at work part time
Part time for economic reasons	8,127	7,918	7,973	7,988	15
Slack work or business conditions	5,440	4,928	5,126	5,136	10
Could only find part-time work	2,397	2,616	2,630	2,578	-52
Part time for noneconomic reasons	18,868	18,763	18,464	18,908	444

Persons not in the labor force (not seasonally adjusted)
Marginally attached to the labor force	2,608	2,614	2,443	2,588	-
Discouraged workers	1,006	1,068	804	885	-
- Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data. NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted

ESTABLISHMENT DATA Summary table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Category	Feb. 2012	Dec. 2012	Jan. 2013(p)	Feb. 2013(p)
EMPLOYMENT BY SELECTED INDUSTRY (Over-the-month change, in thousands)
Total nonfarm	271	219	119	236
Total private	265	224	140	246
Goods-producing	51	58	41	67
Mining and logging	7	7	4	5
Construction	15	38	25	48
Manufacturing	29	13	12	14
Durable goods(1)	26	11	6	6
Motor vehicles and parts	5.8	1.4	1.4	0.7
Nondurable goods	3	2	6	8
Private service-providing(1)	214	166	99	179
Wholesale trade	11.9	6.5	15.5	5.9
Retail trade	-24.3	6.2	29.0	23.7
Transportation and warehousing	17.9	34.8	-20.4	-1.3
Information	11	-9	1	20
Financial activities	10	9	6	7
Professional and business services(1)	76	35	16	73
Temporary help services	47.3	12.3	-3.0	16.0
Education and health services(1)	69	36	9	24
Health care and social assistance	46.2	42.9	19.3	39.1
Leisure and hospitality	47	40	30	24
Other services	-4	6	11	1
Government	6	-5	-21	-10

WOMEN AND PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES(2) AS A PERCENT OF ALL EMPLOYEES
Total nonfarm women employees	49.4	49.3	49.3	49.3
Total private women employees	47.8	47.9	47.9	47.8
Total private production and nonsupervisory employees	82.6	82.6	82.6	82.6

HOURS AND EARNINGS ALL EMPLOYEES
Total private
Average weekly hours	34.6	34.5	34.4	34.5
Average hourly earnings	$23.33	$23.75	$23.78	$23.82
Average weekly earnings	$807.22	$819.38	$818.03	$821.79
Index of aggregate weekly hours (2007=100)(3)	96.3	97.5	97.3	97.8
Over-the-month percent change	0.5	0.5	-0.2	0.5
Index of aggregate weekly payrolls (2007=100)(4)	107.2	110.4	110.4	111.1
Over-the-month percent change	0.8	0.8	0.0	0.6

HOURS AND EARNINGS PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES
Total private
Average weekly hours	33.8	33.7	33.6	33.8
Average hourly earnings	$19.64	$19.93	$19.99	$20.04
Average weekly earnings	$663.83	$671.64	$671.66	$677.35
Index of aggregate weekly hours (2002=100)(3)	103.6	104.9	104.6	105.5
Over-the-month percent change	0.3	0.2	-0.3	0.9
Index of aggregate weekly payrolls (2002=100)(4)	135.9	139.6	139.7	141.2
Over-the-month percent change	0.4	0.5	0.1	1.1

DIFFUSION INDEX(5) (Over 1-month span)
Total private (266 industries)	62.2	65.2	64.7	63.3
Manufacturing (81 industries)	57.4	58.0	57.4	60.5
Footnotes (1) Includes other industries, not shown separately. (2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries. (3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours. (4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls. (5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment.

White House cancels tours over sequester cuts, as lawmakers call decision political

“…Sorry, Washington-bound spring-breakers. Your White House tours have been canceled.

The Obama administration announced Tuesday that it will cancel all tours starting this weekend, due to sequester cuts. The move prompted swift condemnation from Republican lawmakers, who described the decision as the latest attempt to make the sequester seem worse than it is.

“It’s politically motivated,” Rep. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., told Fox News. “It seems childish — take my ball and go home.”

Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, declared in a statement that “the people have been banned from the people’s house.”

The announcement is the latest from the administration about the impact of the cuts that went into effect last Friday. Congressional staffers received a terse email saying White House tours would be canceled effective this Saturday.

The email cited “staffing reductions” from the sequester.

“Unfortunately, we will not be able to reschedule affected tours,” the notice said. “We very much regret having to take this action, particularly during the popular Spring touring season.”

White House tours, which are self-guided, are typically scheduled through members of Congress. Visitors can request a tour through their representative up to six months in advance.

Anyone arriving after Saturday, though, is in for a disappointment.

A recorded message on the White House visitor’s hotline Tuesday confirmed that the tours will soon be nixed until “further notice.”

A senior administration official later explained to Fox News that the cancellation arose from Secret Service staffing decisions. According to the Secret Service, officers normally assigned to the public tours are being reassigned to other posts. The Service says the move will reduce costs and “ultimately reduce the number of potential furloughs necessary by our agency.”

Cramer said if he were to give the administration the benefit of the doubt, he could see White House tours being on the list of nonessential items. He said he doesn’t think they’ll close the White House to the public forever.

Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, said the decision is just a bid to pressure Republican members to change course on the sequester — he said it would not be successful.

But Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, told Fox News this is another reason why both sides should figure out a compromise. She said the closure of White House tours will be “alarming” for children coming to D.C. for spring break.

The annual National Cherry Blossom Festival also attracts droves of tourists in late March and early April, though the White House can no longer be on their itinerary.

The administration has announced a raft of expected cutbacks in response to the sequester. The Defense Department, and other federal agencies, are planning to furlough thousands of workers to save money. Congress also announced that it would cut back on foreign travel.

Unemployment

Audio Excerpts of High Court Gay Marriage Case

Supreme Court Hears Prop. 8 Case (Full Audio)

Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Gay Marriage

The Century: America’s Time – 1929-1936 Stormy Weather

The Century: America’s Time – 1936-1941 Over the Edge

The Century: America’s Time – 1941-1945 Civilians at War

The Century: America’s Time – 1946-1952 Best Years

The Century: America’s Time – 1953-1960 Happy Daze

The Century: America’s Time – 1960-1964 Poisoned Dreams

The Century: America’s Time – 1965-1970 Unpinned

The Century: America’s Time – 1971-1975 Approaching the Apocalypse

The Century: America’s Time – 1976-1980 Starting Over

The Century: America’s Time – 1981-1989 A New World

The Century: America’s Time – 1990-1999 – Then and Now

Raymond T. Pronk

Email Subscription

Pages

RSS Links

Categories

Search

Search

Blog Stats

Calendar

Archives

Pages

Email Subscription

Search

Blogroll

Follow “Pronk Palisades”