Gyroscopic Investing

Interesting...

NYTimes: Federal Employment at a 47-Year Low

For data, see: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/categories/32325

You might want to check those numbers before taking the word of Pravda, I mean the NY Times.  It is not exactly like they are unbiased on anything in this area. 

Benko wrote: You might want to check those numbers before taking the word of Pravda, I mean the NY Times.  It is not exactly like they are unbiased on anything in this area.

Umm... Did you not see the link to the raw data, from FRED, that I posted, above?

Here it is again...

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/categories/32325

[align=center][/align]

(The spikes each decade are for the census)

And here's US Government Employees as a percent of Non-Farm Payrolls — approaching a 50 year low...

[align=center][/align]

While it may be that the number of federal employees is down, I'll bet the number of contractors working for Uncle Sam is probably at an all time high.  I saw many DoD agencies hire contractors to do all the work for them.  The contractors do all the work while federal employees who used to do the work, now work mainly as contract monitors. 

FarmerD, I've seen the same thing.

Personally, my definition of "bloated government" has less to do with employment levels and more to do with the level of intrusiveness in my life. I couldn't care less if they hired a million people to dig ditches and fill them up again if there were far fewer laws criminalizing nonviolent actions.

Pointedstick wrote: Personally, my definition of "bloated government" has less to do with employment levels and more to do with the level of intrusiveness in my life. I couldn't care less if they hired a million people to dig ditches and fill them up again if there were far fewer laws criminalizing nonviolent actions.

I do care if the govt hires a million people to dig ditches since the govt also forces me to pay for all this silliness.

My definition of bloated govt also has to include the idiotic growth of bureaucratic regulatory powers and enforcement, the continuing govt takeover of healthcare, and devoting trillions to defense even though Mexico and Canada really aren't a big threat to invade us.  Another sign of a bloated govt occurs when vast realms of govt are devoted to spying on its own citizens without probable cause.

FarmerD wrote: While it may be that the number of federal employees is down, I'll bet the number of contractors working for Uncle Sam is probably at an all time high.  I saw many DoD agencies hire contractors to do all the work for them.  The contractors do all the work while federal employees who used to do the work, now work mainly as contract monitors.

I also agree with this.  When I worked at Los Alamos National Lab, my employer was "Los Alamos National Security, LLC."  I probably wouldn't have counted toward the government employee count, but my paycheck came 100% from the government.

Being the NY times, one has to wonder about what is implied in this reporting of so-called facts. They don't have a reputation, except in their own minds, of having an unbiased agenda.

So what does it mean? Federal employment is at an all time low so let's start hiring more people ASAP to save the world and the economy? To me, if true ( and as others have suggested, probably not), this would be good news. Let's have more of it.

Somehow I doubt that is their thrust.

FarmerD wrote: While it may be that the number of federal employees is down, I'll bet the number of contractors working for Uncle Sam is probably at an all time high.

It seems the all time US Federal contracting peak was between 2007-2011:

See: UsaSpending.gov: Total Federal Spending: Contract Spending

Looks like we are now back down to 2003-2006 levels.

Gumby wrote: It seems the all time US Federal contracting peak was between 2007-2011:

Because the administration that lies about gunruning, using the IRS against it enemies, spying on reporters, whether you can keep your insurance policy and your doctor, and routinely tinkers with the unemployment numbers/revises them, would never fudge any numbers like the ones your quoting?

Benko wrote:

Gumby wrote: It seems the all time US Federal contracting peak was between 2007-2011:

Because the administration that lies about gunruning, using the IRS against it enemies, spying on reporters, whether you can keep your insurance policy and your doctor, and routinely tinkers with the unemployment numbers/revises them, would never fudge any numbers like the ones your quoting?

Do you have some other independent source for these numbers?

moda0306 wrote:

Benko wrote:

Gumby wrote: It seems the all time US Federal contracting peak was between 2007-2011:

Because the administration that lies about gunruning, using the IRS against it enemies, spying on reporters, whether you can keep your insurance policy and your doctor, and routinely tinkers with the unemployment numbers/revises them, would never fudge any numbers like the ones your quoting?

Do you have some other independent source for these numbers?

Seriously, Benko. First you tell me to fact-check the NYTimes, because they couldn't possibly be right about such a claim. So, I show you the real employee data on FRED that shows the accuracy of the claim, and now you're saying that we can't trust the actual numbers that are required to be reported and validated by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act? That transparency law was passed by Congress specifically to track government spending on government contractors. The reported numbers from FFATA and Federal employees are all part of the Federal Budget.

See: https://www.fsrs.gov

USASpending.gov wrote:The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA or Transparency Act - P.L.109-282, as amended by section 6202(a) of P.L. 110-252) requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to maintain a single, searchable website that contains information on all Federal spending awards. That site is at www.USAspending.gov.

Source: http://www.usaspending.gov/learn?tab=FAQ

If you're unwilling to believe the accuracy of the legally mandated and validated data, then it sounds like you may have your own biases that need a reality check.

It is possible that the data presented is correct, it is just not likely. 

You know who has a well documented track record of growing the gov't, doing whatever he wants and using the gov't to cover things so people can't discover what has been done.  So I would suggest that one would have to be naive to at least consider that the data has been faked. 

moda0306 wrote:

Benko wrote:

Gumby wrote: It seems the all time US Federal contracting peak was between 2007-2011:

Because the administration that lies about gunruning, using the IRS against it enemies, spying on reporters, whether you can keep your insurance policy and your doctor, and routinely tinkers with the unemployment numbers/revises them, would never fudge any numbers like the ones your quoting?

Do you have some other independent source for these numbers?

Does this count?

http://youtu.be/t29E5UpgOqw

Benko wrote: It is possible that the data presented is correct, it is just not likely. 

You know who has a well documented track record of growing the gov't, doing whatever he wants and using the gov't to cover things so people can't discover what has been done.  So I would suggest that one would have to be naive to at least consider that the data has been faked.

Sounds like you've been watching a little too much Fox News.  The reason why Obama has such "a well documented track record of growing the government" is because of the Recovery Act that Congress approved — which allocated most of its spending from 2009-2011. But the Recovery Act has been mostly wound down and exhausted, which matches up perfectly with the official data being reported.

http://recovery.gov

Recovery.gov wrote:The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 distributes funds in three ways. Since its enactment in February 2009, $803.1B has been paid out.

Source: Recovery.gov

The Recovery Act approved $831 billion in spending to contractors and Federal employees, so the reduction of government employment all makes sense in the context of the exhaustion of the Recovery Act, now that $803.1 billion has already been paid out (and with the remaining $28 billion to be paid out through 2019).

The money just hasn't been approved to keep paying Federal employees and contractors like they were a few years ago.

Gumby, there's nothing wrong with Fox News. Seriously, it is the most fair and balanced mainstream news source that there is.

Sigh.

Faux News: We distort. You abide.

MSNBC is no better.  In fact, probably worse.

Simonjester wrote: the only reason to watch any mainstream news is to sharpen your skill at spotting BS, and bias, and agenda, and by noting what is completely absent, improving your understanding of what journalism should be..

i am not sure if it even has any "entertainment value" anymore...

All of the major news outlets are crooked and biased in their own way, but by the same token, they all have a few subjects they report on with some degree of skill. You need to diversify your news sources just like your investments. I like to briefly skim many sources just to see what the different factions find important from day to day. It's often pretty funny how different the focus is.

More fun numbers...

Federal government spending


See: About Our “Spending Problem”? (Revisited)

Reub wrote: Gumby, there's nothing wrong with Fox News. Seriously, it is the most fair and balanced mainstream news source that there is.

That's a good one, Reub! Thanks, I needed a good laugh today!