Helping Homeowners In Michigan
Archive for March, 2010
Private Company Sensorship: CAT, Others Criticized by Obama Administration For Cost Etimates
March 27th, 2010 | 
Author:
This is unbelievable…..the other day we reported here and here about various companies (AT&T, CAT, 3M) having to re-estimate costs and earnings due to the new mandates and taxes associated with the Healthcare Bill. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that these companies were in some way being dishonest – to the contrary, the companies are gravely concerned about their earnings going forward in light of the REALITY of the new Healthcare Bill. As we all should be. Now the Obama administration wants them to shut up? My goodness….I THOUGHT we still had the right to free speech and I THOUGHT private companies had not only a duty to their shareholders but a responsibility for honest estimates of costs and earnings. Guess not. We all must not utter a disparaging word against any of the policies of this Administration apparently. Sig heil, comrades.
Cat, others criticized by Obama administration for cost estimates
PEORIA —Caterpillar Inc. and other large companies are being criticized by the Obama administration for reporting now that they will take millions of dollars in hits to their earnings because of one portion of the new health care legislation.
Caterpillar and Deere were accused of being “premature and irresponsible” by U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke for saying a change to Medicare Part D laws would hurt their earnings in the present quarter.
Those companies are also being questioned about the amounts they are claiming — amounts that seem to get larger with every company that makes a report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission about taking a one-time charge as a result of the legislation.
Caterpillar started it all by saying it would take a $100 million hit on its first quarter earnings. Deere & Co. followed with a report it would lose $150 million to its fiscal second quarter earnings.
The largest estimated hit yet, $1 billion, was announced Friday by AT&T.
At issue is what kind of hit corporate America will take because it is losing a tax deduction from Medicare Part D. Before, companies were paid subsidies of $1,330 a year, tax-free, for every retiree for whom it provided a prescription drug plan. Then, that amount could be deducted from the company’s taxes.
The new law still provides the subsidy tax free, but companies will no longer be able to deduct it from taxes.
Also on Friday the Wall Street Journal said in a published report that it calculates Caterpillar’s loss would be more like $7 million, based on the fact Caterpillar told the SEC it expected to receive about $20 million annually from the tax deduction and the 35 percent corporate tax rate that would now be applied to that deduction amount.
But Caterpillar on Friday defended itself, reiterating its belief it must, under accepted accounting rules and regulations, record any one-time tax charge in the quarter in which the legislation causing that charge is signed.
The $100 million, said Caterpillar spokesman Jim Dugan, “is our calculation of what that change in Medicare Part D will mean to the company.”
Dugan was pressed for further explanation of how the calculation was made, including whether the $100 million was an estimate of what the change will cost Caterpillar in perpetuity since it can only be charged once.
He said further details will be included in Caterpillar’s first quarter earnings report, which will be released April 26.
On the time of the filing, Dugan said, “We felt it was very appropriate and prudent to file the disclosure with the SEC immediately. We tend to take a conservative approach to SEC filings.”
Dugan declined to comment on the statement of Commerce Secretary Locke, which he made in a live interview Thursday on CNBC.
He also declined to say anything more about a telephone call made Thursday from the White House to Vice Chairman Doug Oberhelman, which Oberhelman revealed while speaking to the Morton Rotary Club later on Thursday.
While he acknowledged the call was regarding the health care legislation, Oberhelman would not say from it it came or what was said. He did describe the call as “productive.”
Paul Gordon can be reached at 686-3288 or pgordon@pjstar.com
UPDATE:
We have learned that AT&T has now been ‘requested’ by Congress to appear before the House Energy and Commerce Committee to ‘prove’ their earnings adjustment in response to the Healthcare Bill. Uh….apparently, this is more proof Congress has no idea what was in this thing in its final incarnation.
Posted in Administration, Barack Obama, Corruption, Economy, Sensorship, Unconstitutional | 
Comments Closed
On Deficits And Debt-Financed Government
On Deficits And Debt-Financed Government
Posted by Karl Denninger
The latest estimate is now out from the CBO, and is the usual practice, the deficit number keeps getting bigger:
President Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation’s economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.
Note that the CBO also estimates that GDP will climb to $22.5 trillion (from $14 trillion today); a compound growth rate of 5%. This is approximately the rate at which GDP has grown from 2000 onward but ignores the trend, which has been downward since the 1950s.
From the 1950s onward the compound growth rate of GDP is 6.81%. But from 1990 onward it is only 5.39%, and from 2000 onward 5.19%.
Why?
The decreasing marginal productivity of new debt issuance.
There is a good argument to be made that we are now in a place where we are getting negative GDP contribution from new debt issuance, as I have written on before.
IF this chart is accurate, then the gambit of politicians – that they will all be out of office before this blows sky-high (on the back of your children and grandchildren) will be proved inaccurate.
It will, in fact, blow up in their face – that is, they will not escape the consequence of their actions.
Worse, those consequences will not be simply political defeat, because the outcome will be the inability of The Federal Government to finance its operations. You’re free to extrapolate “what comes next”; I can assure you it will not simply be peaceful acquiescence by the roughly 100 million Americans who will suddenly find that the government tit has run dry – without warning.
The warning shots on this were fired during Carter’s administration. There was a crisis of confidence of sorts that forced rates much higher – Volcker followed with what he had to do, not what he wanted to do. Contrary to popular belief The Fed didn’t “break the back of inflation”; the market demanded that the BS stop here and now, or what would stop was the government.
This time around we do not have the luxury of “simply” accepting much higher government borrowing costs.
To put this in context you can look at the interest expense of The Federal Government. You will note that despite debt going up a lot in Fiscal 2009 the interest expense went down – a lot (about 15%.) But this year interest expense, if it tracks the five months thus far in the books, will rise from $383 billion to $434 billion, a 13% increase – almost erasing the “gains” from the zero interest-rate policy.
On September 30th 2009 the outstanding debt was $11.909 trillion dollars. That is an average interest coupon across the entire float of the public debt of 3.22%.
Now consider what happens if short rates go back to the 5% range – a historical reasonable point, and long rates go into the 7% range (a point that this chart’s inverted head-and-shoulders, by the way, says is likely within the next two years):
Assuming Treasury continues to try to shove toward the short end of the curve, a strategy that exposes it to extreme amounts of rollover risk, the average coupon would likely rise to about 5.5%.
This would drive interest expense to $780 billion by September 2011.
Note that if historical averages hold, Treasury would take in roughly $1.2 trillion in personal income taxes. Interest expense would rise to consume approximately 2/3rds of that amount.
Let’s further consider that interest expense would be about 80% of the entire budget deficit of fiscal 2011.
Two questions immediately arise from this data:
-
Do our Congressfolk (and the Administration) really think they will expire of natural causes before the spiral that, on the present path, will come, appears and those 100 million angry and (more importantly) hungry Americans decide to issue them an invitation to dinner?
-
Why are we debt-financing our government in the first place? Adding up the interest paid from 1988 to 2009 we find that $7.34 trillion of the $11.909 trillion, or sixty one percent, of our “debt” exists as a consequence of paying interest to private parties and foreign governments.
Consider the alternative. We have a $4.57 trillion “deficit” between interest and debt looking only at 1988 – 2009.
But from 1988 – 2009 we produced (GDP) approximately $210 trillion in net output.
We currently finance our “excess spending” through debt issuance.
What would happen if we instead decided to issue non-debt-backed currency from the Treasury directly into the economy?
That is, instead of selling Treasuries, what instead Treasury was to simply print dollars (backed by nothing more than Treasury’s ability to tax down the road) and thus paid zero interest?
Well, that’s easy to figure out. Since issuing currency is the definition of monetary inflation we can trivially compute the inflationary impact of printing the required $4.57 trillion in money to close the gap – in other words, for Treasury to simply issue and spend in the economy the net $4.57 trillion the government has instead paid in interest from the years 1988 to 2009.
The inflationary impact is 210 / 4.57 = or….
2.18% – and not per year either. Rather, that’s the total inflation as a consequence of this policy over the entire 22 year period of time!
Why is it that we are allowing debt merchants to “finance” our deficits?
We can stop this idiocy now, before it spirals out of control – and spiral out of control it will. It is highly unlikely that the current path will be able to be maintained until our children and grandchildren get the bill – rather, odds are that it will detonate within the next five years, resulting in the destruction of our society, political system, and civil order.
Or we can tell the debt merchants – that is, the banks – to get stuffed, and that we will not pay the so-called “existing debt.” They will, in turn tell us they won’t buy any future debt. We simply reply that we don’t care, since we have another option – the spending of deficit dollars directly into the economy without issuing debt!
Yes, managed improperly such a path runs the risk of a hyperinflationary debacle similar to Weimar or Zimbabwe. But as you can see from the above even with the profligacy of the last 22 years, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the net total inflationary impact over that entire period, had we done this for the 22 years previous, would be slightly more than 2% – over the entire 22 year period, or less than 0.1% annually.
There are transition details that I will outline in future Tickers, and I assure you that the “debt merchants” (banks, including foreign central banks) will not like the implications of same.
But this does not change the math or choice - our politicians can choose between this path forward or they can choose to take the risk of literally being dinner at the table of 100 million angry and hungry Americans.
Choose wisely.
Posted in Banks, Corruption, Debt, Economic Crisis, Economy, Federal Reserve, Financial System, Government, Money, Sovereign Debt, sovereign debt crisis, Sovereign Risk |
Comments Closed
On Politics, Vandalism And Violence
On Politics, Vandalism And Violence
Posted by Karl Denninger
Never has this nation been one of “peace” when it comes to political disagreements, and those who claim otherwise were asleep in history class – or got the sanitized government school version.
The truth is something else entirely.
There have been more than 20 attempts to kill the President or President-elect. Four have been successful: Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy. The most recent attempt resulting in injury was, of course, Ronald Reagan.
Most of those, however, have not been undertaken for truly-political reasons. But to deny that there was an element of politics in many of these is to deny history. Certainly, John Wilkes Booth (who shot Lincoln) was a known Confederate sympathizer. McKinley was shot by an avowed anarchist.
The Senate itself was the scene of a violent confrontation between a Senator and Representative in 1856 in which Senator Sumner was beaten within an inch of his life – with a cane.
In recent days we have heard of various acts allegedly aimed at Representatives and Senators. Two have had windows damaged in offices (vandalism, not “violence”) and a significant number of threats have been recorded.
Of course Democrats have tried to “spin” this as some element of the “radical right.” But their convenient fiction ignores the fact that influential Republican representatives have had their windows shot at or bricked too by “radical leftists” who don’t like their actions as well. Indeed, I’m willing to bet that Senator Jim Bunning (I haven’t talked to him) got a few nasty threats when he filibustered the extension of unemployment benefits.
Welcome to my world; take controversial positions and you will find this happens from time to time.
When I ran my Internet company in Chicago I used to receive death threats on a somewhat-regular basis. Most of them stemmed from my refusal to carry Usenet newsgroups that catered to child pornography and stolen computer software. Believe it or not, those who intend to break the law often threaten violence! Gee, is that a revelation or something?
Peggy Noonan has an interesting view on this in the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Page today. Most of what she has to say makes sense, and is good reading. However, there are a few points she tries to make that I believe are just plain backward if not outright dangerous, and therefore, worthy of comment. Specifically:
What I keep thinking of is a beehive. A modern, high tech, highly politicized democracy is a busy beehive, and sometimes the bees are angry, and sometimes someone comes by and sticks a big sharp stick in the hive. The biggest thing Washington should do right now is stop it, stop poking the stick.
Well, ok, but let’s talk about what constitutes “that stick” government has been poking the beehive with:
-
A government that allows the Treasury Secretary to come into the halls of Congress in the dark of night and threaten martial law unless it turns over $700 billion in what amounts to ransom – and the Treasury Secretary was one of the men who created and profited from the circumstances (to the tune of $500 million!) that led to the demand for the ransom!
Peggy continues:
The beehive was already angry about a million things a year ago, and most of those things, obviously, were not the fault of the administration. People are angry at their economic vulnerability. They are angry at the deterioration of our culture, angry at our nation’s deteriorating position in the world, at our debts and deficits, our spending and taxing, our threatened security in a world of weapons of mass destruction.
Oh I disagree that most of this was not the fault of the administration, if you include all administrations, past and present. Nearly all of these things in fact are government’s fault. Let’s take a look at a few:
-
Scams and frauds by “powerful people.” Take your pick, and start with the list of banksters who are under indictment or in prison for the collapse. You don’t even need the fingers on one hand for that thus far, never mind that in 2004 the FBI issued a formal warning on mortgage fraud and the Federal Government actually sued to prevent States from enforcing their own anti-predatory lending laws.
-
Pay disparity. And no, we’re not talking about “the rich get richer”; I’m talking about how government employees are literal queens and kings compared to the private sector, as the story from which this table was taken in the Wall Street Journal shows:
-
Government policies that have encouraged the destruction of private-sector jobs in the United States. We can start with policy toward China (sponsoring them for the WTO, for example) but it does not end there. The fact of the matter is that “globalism” never benefits the guys who have the higher standard of living – it always causes that standard of living to fall while the less-developed nation’s standard of living rises.
-
Illegal immigration. Illegal Mexican Invaders were and are allowed over the border by our government and contributed greatly to the housing boom. But those same people both depress American’s wages (since they’re off-book and thus are abused in general, paying no taxes and working under prevailing wage levels) and impose costs on our system that legal immigrants and citizens are forced to bear. The cause of this? Government policy. To those who say we can’t deport 20 million invaders, you’re right – but we can imprison anyone who hires one, we can build a physical fence, and we can post our military at the border with orders to shoot all invaders. Let them leave when their job prospects go to zero, and put a hard stop to any more coming into the country. We refuse to do any of the above because “big business” likes the cheap labor, along with, literally, our Speaker Of The House who, it is alleged, employs them on their family’s farms in California!
-
Debts and deficits? Who originates spending bills again? That would be The House of Representatives. $1.3 trillion annually in deficits over George W. Bush’s “war spending” for the last two years is about 9% of GDP – and is absolutely the responsibility of the government. Every dollar of “debt and deficit” is the direct and proximate consequence of one thing and one thing only: government policy.
-
Taxation? Health Care Bill anyone? Nor does it end there. Let’s cut the crap in this regard – we could end this problem tomorrow with The Fair Tax. But that puts the IRS out of business, it puts the Lobbying Interests on “K” Street out of business, and it prevents using the tax code as a social engineering tool. Neither political party likes that. Oh, and it can be advanced and passed tomorrow – it is and has been introduced legislation!
I agree with Peggy that Washington needs to quit poking the beehive with sticks.
But where I disagree is that in fact virtually everything that has made the bees in the hive angry are the direct and proximate consequence of government decisions, and that those decisions were and are both willful and intentional.
Finally, unlike Peggy who claims that the government “doesn’t understand” that they’re raising the temperature I instead maintain that they simply don’t give a damn, driven by the refusal of anyone in Washington DC to ever utter three little words that are the prerequisite to solving any problem one faces: “I screwed up.“
Health Care Passed; How will Individuals and Corporations React? Who will Opt Out?
Health Care Passed; How will Individuals and Corporations React? Who will Opt Out?
President Obama managed to arm-twist Congress into passing an unpopular healthcare bill. Not a single Republican voted for it.
Supposedly the bill will guarantee coverage of 94% of the US population.
Many corporations complain it will increase costs. For example: Deere says health care law will raise expenses
Deere & Co. said Thursday that changes to the health care law signed into law this week will raise related costs this year by $150 million.
The biggest U.S. maker of farm equipment became the second major company in as many days to say it would take a charge for fiscal 2010.
Deere and Caterpillar were among the 10 companies that sent a letter to Congressional leaders in December warning of cost increases. Others were: Boeing Co., Con-Way Inc., Exelon Corp., Navistar Inc., Verizon, Xerox Corp., Public Service Enterprise Group Inc., and Met Life Inc.
The companies say federal subsidies have covered 28 percent of the cost of retiree prescription drug coverage. The government offered the subsidies so that more companies would continue to offer coverage to retirees and keep them off of government-funded Medicare Part D.
Under the health care reforms passed this week, that subsidy will be taxed starting next year, which the companies predicted could significantly increase government health care costs because companies may drop coverage.
“Taxing the subsidy means that more companies will eliminate or reduce the coverage, and more retirees will shift to Medicare Part D, which will create more cost for both the government and the retirees,” the companies wrote in their letter.
How Will Corporations React?
Inquiring minds are reading interesting anecdotes about Healthcare on Silicon Investor. A well respected poster Hawkmoon writes …
Mish,
Had a VERY INTERESTING conversation this evening with a CFO for a local business who employs about 100 people total..
I asked him how this health care bill was going to affect the company he works for.
He told me that he had run the numbers based upon providing health care for all of their employees and realized that he could save the company 1/2 million dollars by just paying the $2000 per employee penalty and not offering any coverage at all.
Is this how the government plans on taking over all health care?
If it’s more cost effective for business to just pay the penalty rather than provide coverage, I wonder how many are going to opt for that strategy?
Any other business owners out there have a different view?
Would be interested to know.
Hawk
Another poster, “John M” responds …
I ran the same simulation for the company I retired from. As a retiree, I continue to be in their group plan, at my own expense.
They can save $607,000 by terminating the health insurance plan, offset by a fine of $200,000. The company may get an extra push to eliminate health insurance courtesy of penalties on “Cadillac” plans. A rate increase of 4.7% would push it into Cadillac territory, which is defined by costs, not by benefits.
If cost savings were distributed to employees as raises, employees would presumably be able to purchase non-Cadillac plans with better benefits, and some potential savings. If there are minimum benefit schedules, then price would be the major consideration in buying health insurance.
“The Reaper” responds …
I don’t know about companies but individually. I’m just going to pay the fine each year (which is minimal) until I need health insurance (with some kind of illness/accident) then buy the insurance since I can’t be excluded. With any luck I’ll make it to Medicare and I’ll have saved a bundle of cash.
Looking Down The Road
Little Joe writes …
It is only after this bill is law for 5 or 10 years that we will begin to understand its effects. I believe they will be:
1. Costs far greater than anyone is the Government is letting us know. I challenge to name 3 government programs that cost what the government claimed they would. I can’t think of one, except, I think I read, the prescription drug bill.
2. Like Mass. the costs will increase greatly on an annual basis.
3. The quality of medicine will drop drastically. Can you name me a single government program of this size that actually improves anything. Feds got into schools and they got worse, Feds got into energy and the situation is worse.
This is the governments track record:
1. Social Security we can’t pay for.
2. Medicare we can’t pay for.
3. Prescription drug we can’t pay for.
4. Spend more money on education than any other nation in the world and many kids, especially in inner cities can’t read their diploma.
5. Criminal justice system that produces criminal injustice.
6. Can’t defend our borders, even banana republics can do that.
7. Country hopelessly in Debt.
8. Economy on the verge of destruction.
9. Encourages lending to people who can’t pay loans back.
10. Encouraged casino risk taking by removing moral hazard, which is the trigger that set of the current catastrophe and now further eliminates moral hazard by guaranteeing bank loans to one another.Most Americans have apparently become aware of the ineptitude of government. Those who haven’t are the ones who think this health care bill will be a good thing for America.
For now ….
What will your company do and what will you do?
Large corporations will probably pony up. There would be an enormous backlash if they dropped benefits.
Smaller companies are another matter. I suspect many struggling companies will drop coverage if there is an economic benefit.
Looking at individuals, the annual penalty is $695 dollars or 2.5 percent of income. The penalty cap is $2,250 per family as of 2016.
Many of the young and healthy will simply opt out. After all, the bill will not allow discrimination based on preexisting conditions. Thus, it practically begs the young and healthy to opt out.
Moreover, if we can judge from “The Reaper” many healthy individuals approaching retirement will opt out as well.
Illegal aliens sure will not be buying coverage.
Finally, there are many who cannot afford, or believe they cannot afford anything at all. They too will opt out if the fine is lower.
94% coverage as a result of this bill? Don’t count on it.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List
Consequences Of Health Care: Valuations
Consequences Of Health Care: Valuations
Posted by Karl Denninger
eah, I know, Obama has said that there would be no “material” impact to finances until 2014.
Liar.
Truth: Caterpillar and John Deere already announced non-cash charges of $100 and $150 million, respectively, for this year based upon the impact of this bill on forward retiree health care costs.
The law says you must account for such changes when you become aware of them, and that would be now.
But today a 100-kiloton device landed on AT&T’s (NYSE: T) balance sheet – they announced a one billion dollar non-cash charge:
On March 23, 2010, the President signed into law comprehensive health care reform legislation under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (HR 3590). Included among the major provisions of the law is a change in the tax treatment of the Medicare Part D subsidy. AT&T Inc. (“AT&T”) intends to take a non-cash charge of approximately $1 billion in the first quarter of 2010 to reflect the impact of this change. As a result of this legislation, including the additional tax burden, AT&T will be evaluating prospective changes to the active and retiree health care benefits offered by the company.
Oh, there won’t be any material impacts until 2014 eh?
I told you that was BS, and now you’re seeing it. If you’re wondering how this stacks up, AT&T had revenue of $123 billion and a reported profit margin of 10.19%, for a net profit of $12.54 billion.
This represents about 8% – for this quarter.
Caterpillar (NYSE: CAT) reported $32.4 billion in revenue and a 2.76% profit margin, with a net income attributed to common of $895 million. Their $100 million charge amounts to 11% of that income.
John Deere (NYSE: DE) reported $22.8 billion in revenue, a 4% profit margin and $912.80 million in net profit; their $150 million charge amounts to 16% of net income.
Still think this is no big deal eh?
I will note that “EPS”, or Earnings Per Share, is how we value stocks. These valuation “hits”, if they are somewhat representative, imply that stocks instantly became overvalued by somewhere between 10-15% when President Obama’s pen hit the paper.
I hope (1) you have enjoyed the market rally and (2) have hedged yourself, as the efficient market hypothesis says that this new information will shortly appear directly in stock prices.
PS: The impact gets worse as current employee costs ratchet upward – these charges are only against retiree obligations for existing retired workers that remain as liabilities to the firm. To expect that the total impact could easily reach 20% or more of net profits over the next couple of years is not at all farfetched, and the market should soon start discounting that too.
Posted in Barack Obama, Economic Crisis, Economy, health care reform, income, taxes |
Comments Closed
CBO REPORT: Debt Will Rise to 90% of GDP
CBO REPORT: Debt Will Rise to 90% of GDP
President Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation’s economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.
In its 2011 budget, which the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released Feb. 1, the administration projected a 10-year deficit total of $8.53 trillion. After looking it over, CBO said in its final analysis, released Thursday, that the president’s budget would generate a combined $9.75 trillion in deficits over the next decade.
“An additional $1.2 trillion in debt dumped on [GDP] to our children makes a huge difference,” said Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “That represents an additional debt of $10,000 per household above and beyond the federal debt they are already carrying.”
The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it’s headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO’s deficit estimates.
That figure would equal 90 percent of the estimated gross domestic product in 2020, up from 40 percent at the end of fiscal 2008. By comparison, America’s debt-to-GDP ratio peaked at 109 percent at the end of World War II, while the ratio for economically troubled Greece hit 115 percent last year.
I will just note that this report does NOT include the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare, nor does it include Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, nor apparently the FDIC’s new guarantee of the debt of failed banks. If one were to add in these missing items, we are already far surpassing 100% of GDP.
Posted in Congressional Budget Office, Debt, Economic Crisis, Economy, GDP, Sovereign Debt, Sovereign Risk |
Comments Closed
proudly supports:
Bill Still For President
for Congress
Michigan 11th District
By Bill Still
There is only one answer for the world economic situation; monetary reform.
1. No More National Debt
2. No More Fractional Lending
PDF PowerPoint Congressional Patriots Federal Reserve Balance Sheet Paulson's Lies Bernanke's Lies FedUpUSA Archive Mathematics of Failure Media Kit Door Hanger Corruption Flier Bank Flier Made In America A list of products and services made right here in the USA. Choosing to buy American made products preserves and creates American jobs.