THE DON JONES INDEX…	GAINS POSTED in GREEN LOSSES POSTED in RED
	2/5/14… 15,140.24
	1/29/14… 15,142.76
	6/27/13… 15,000.00

(THE DOW JONES INDEX: 2/5… 15,445.24; 1/29… 15,738.79; 11/19/12… 12,592.22)

LESSON for FEBRUARY 5, 2014

Well, they held the Superbowl in New Jersey last Sunday and, although it wasn’t much of a game, at least the weather co-operated. Snow and ice and freezing temperatures on Saturday, more of the same on Monday… but, in between, it was a fairly normal evening. Even though the game was over after seven seconds!

Wall Street, on the other hand, has had no such respite. The bad news came in with January’s snows and has hung around all week. Only reason that the one percent aren’t jumping out of windows is that they’d likely as not land in a snowdrift and just break their necks – after which they’d have to go on Obamacare for the rest of their lives. It was a bad week on Wall Street.

Bad.

And who do we blame when things go bad? Why… the Chinese, of course. Them Peking duck dynasty fellows… they can’t catch a break. Their e-con’my gets to motorvating at a rate of eight or nine percent growth per year, they’re stealing American jobs. Then they slump down to about five, six percent and they’re a bunch of no good slackers. Atlas shrugs and the world falls off his shoulders and goes bouncing away.

Just can’t catch a break!

Actually, the declining Dow was not that much of a surprise… stock prices rise and fall and rise again based on circumstances (sometimes real, sometimes hallucinatory) and the economic loss was partially offset by a (weakly) recovering housing market. Things seemed a little better in Washington, too, the President and Congress joining to pass an agriculture bill. It was a bad bill… cutting off billions in food stamps from hungry Americans already facing massive hikes in heating bills and targeting the cream of the subsidies to the 1% of the 1% of the 1%, but it could’ve been worse and, at least, they got something done to show for their fat paychecks. Consequently, while debts and deficits continued rising, the bright side was that they were not rising quite so fast as previously.

As incoming Fed chair Yellen was sworn in, the usual gang of experts predicted that the Fed would soon start to ease up on stimulus incentives. Being as lagging factory production and sales were blamed for the Dow, we’ll have to see if upcoming unemployment stats go into negative turnaround and, if so, whether the tighter money policies can even get off the ground.

The Don lost only a couple of points on a quiet, cold week as Americans, already enthralled and distracted by celebrity awards and heroin, the Superbowl that was competitive for seven seconds and the approaching prospect of a massive Olympics disaster, stayed in their homes and watched television while President Obama bemoaned long-term unemployment and promised… more Federal job-training programs that benefit only the program lobbies! Might we revive the WPA and set the unemployed to digging a canal through the Rockies so that all the ice and snow runoff in the spring (a real disaster on the horizon for some parts of the country) can flow through to the parched and periled West?

_______

THE DON JONES INDEX

CHART of CATEGORIES w/ VALUE ADDED to EQUAL BASELINE of 15,000.00

(REFLECTING… approximately… DOW JONES INDEX of June 27, 2013)

See a further explanation of categories here…

Simply recording gains or losses is deceptive, because some of the indices here represent GOOD things (like incomes and life expectancy) while others represent BAD things (unemployment, terror). So, increases in good things and decreases in bad things are considered GOOD (and are depicted in GREEN) – decreases in good things and increases in the bad are considered BAD (and are depicted in RED).

The sum of good things, less the sum of bad things, equals the gain (or loss) to Don Jones.

DON JONES’ PERSONAL ECONOMIC INDEX (45% of total Index points)
INCOME		(24%)			BASE 6/27/13		RECKONINGS LAST CHANGE NEXT			DON 1/29		DON 2/5	OUR SOURCE(S)
Wages (per cap.)		10%			1500 points		1/1/14	-0.3%	2/12/14	1512.49		1512.49	http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wages 10.30 n/d
Equality		5			750		9/10/13	n/d	?	711.55		711.55	http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=IDD .038 nd
Unemployment		9			450		1/22/14	n/d	Feb. 2014	523.46		523.46	http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 6.7 nd
Official					450		1/29/14	-0.3%	2/12/14	523.46		525.08	http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 9999
Unofficial					450		1/29/14	-0.16%	2/12/14	523.46		524.30	http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 19,914.98
WEALTH		6%
Dow Jones		2			300		2/5/14	-1.9%	2/12/14	307.00		301.27	Dow Jones index 15,445.24
9Home Valuations		2			300		2/5/14	sales +1.0 price +0.87	2/12/14	177.12 188.22		178.89 189.85	http://www.realtor.org/topics/existing-home-sales +1.0 http://www.realtor.org/research-and-statistics prices 196.3 nd 198
Debt (Personal)		2			300		2/5/14	+.02%	2/12/14	287.94		287.88	http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/data_indicators/household_index.html and http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 51508 51528 51539
OUTGO		15%					(See a – below)
Inflation		9			1350		1/15/14	+0.3%	Feb. 2014	1336.95		1336.95	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm +0.3 n/d
Food		2%			300		1/15/14	+0.1%	Feb. 2014	297.15		297.15	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm +0.1 n/d
Gas		2%			300		1/15/14	+3.0%	Feb. 2014	265.47		265.47	http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm +3.0 n/d
Taxes		2%			300		variable	n/d	?	300		300
UNITED STATES ECONOMIC INDEX (15%)
ANNUAL		5%
Income (per cap.)		1%		150		4/23/12		n/d	Yearly	151.08		151.08		http://bber.unm.edu/econ/us-pci.htm
Expends. (cnsmr.)		1%		150		12/24/13		n/d	Feb. 2014	149.70		149.70		http://www.bls.gov/cpi
U.S. Debt		3%		450		2/5/14		+0.1%	2/12/14	433.87		433.42		http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 17322
CUMULATIVE		5%
Revenues		1%		150		2/5/14		+0.15%	2/12/14	159.76		160.00		http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 2845
Expenditures		1%		150		2/5/14		+0.03%	2/12/14	151.54		151.39		http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 3493.9
Total Debt		3%		450		2/5/14		+0.03%	2/12/14	436.29		436.15		http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 60836
WORLD TRADE		5%
Exports		1%		150		1/22/14		n/d	Feb. 2014	157.48		157.48		http://www.census.gov/foreign- trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html 1949.1 n/d
Imports		1%		150		1/22/14		n/d	Feb. 2014	147.99		147.99		http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html 2291 n/d
Trade Deficit		1%		150		1/22/14		n/d	Feb. 2014	171.87		171.87		http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html 343 n/d
Foreign Debt		2%		300		1/29/14		+0.2%	2/12/14	316.42		315.77		http://www.usdebtclock.org/ 5854.3
EDUCATION INDEX (10%)
World Standard		4%	600			2010		n/d	Yearly		599	599
Test Scores		2%	300			2010		n/d	Yearly +		300	300
Dropout Rate		2%	300			2010		n/d	Yearly +		300	300
Costs		2%	300			8/15/12		n/d	?		286.36	286.36		http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76
HEALTH INDEX (10%)
Life Expectancy		4%	600			2012		n/d	unknown		600	600		n/d
Medical Costs		2%	300			1/22/14		n/d	Feb. 2014		297.90	297.90		http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm -.8 nd
Environment		3%	450			2/5/14		+0.2%	2/12/14		440.48	441.36		No appreciable disasters – a volcano somewhere in Indonesia, filthy water in Sochi. On the other hand…
Natural Disasters		1%	150			2/5/14		+0.5%	2/12/14		137.57	136.88		More rounds of massive snowstorms over the eastern 2/3 of America, drought and fires in the West mitigated by a few raindrops.
SECURITY INDEX (5%)1204
Crime Rates		3%	450			2013		+0.1%	unknown		447.80	447.80		n/d
Prison Population		1%	150			2013		-0.1%	unknown		155.15	155.15		n/d
Terrorism		1%	150			2/5/14		-0.2%	2/12/14		145.81	146.10		No reports of Olympic terrorism, but the Russians… with their dirty water and Potemkin hotels… seem to be making a fine enough disaster without help from Chechnya.
LIBERTY INDEX (5%)
Freedom	3%		450			11/26/13		n/d	As occurs		460.82	460.82		n/c
Corruption	1%		150			11/26/13		n/d	As occurs		170.28	170.28		n/c
World Peace	1%		150			2/5/14		-0.1%	2/12/14		143.95	143.81		Unrest in Ukraine a sleeper issue. Heavyweight champ Klitschko urgest calm, gets fire-extinguished by growing neo-Nazi militants
TRANSIENT INDEX (10%)
All	10%		1000			2/5/14		-0.1%	2/12/14		983.95	982.97		Experts say the sinking Dow is merely a correction – and long overdue. Retirees are not amused.

SUMMARY:

The Don Jones Index for the week of January 21^st through 28^th was DOWN 2.52 points.

The Don Jones Index is sponsored by the Coalition for a New Consensus: retired Congressman and Independent Presidential candidate Jack “Catfish” Parnell, Chairman; Brian Doohan, Administrator/Editor. The CNC denies, emphatically, allegations that the organization, as well as its officers (including former Congressman Parnell, environmentalist/America Firster Austin Tillerman and cosmetics CEO Rayna Finch) and references to Parnell’s works, “Entropy and Renaissance” and “The Coming Kill-off” are fictitious or mere pawns in the e-serial “Black Helicopters” - and promise swift, effective legal action against all parties promulgating this and other such slanders.

Comments, complaints, donations (especially SUPERPAC donations): feedme@generisis.com

(a) Curiously, the McClatchy news conglomerate released an attack on the concept of income inequality by “mainstream conservative thinkers” the day before the State of the Union address, published in the Biloxi Sun Herald and Anchorage Daily News, and excerpted here…

The most commonly cited income inequality numbers come from researchers Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez. They’ve used data from tax returns dating back decades to calculate the distribution of national income across the population. Their most recent data found that national income overall grew by 1.7 percent in 2011 but by 11 percent for the top 1 percent of earners.

They base their findings on pre-tax income reported by tax filers, and that’s where the debate begins.

“The rise in American inequality has been exaggerated both in magnitude and timing,” wrote Robert Gordon, a Northwestern University professor who shook things up with his 2009 study “Misperceptions About the Magnitude and Timing of Changes in American Income Inequality.”

That study was published by the lofty National Bureau of Economic Research, and it set in motion other research offering alternative measures of inequality.

*****

“There is a significant measurement issue,” said Donald Marron, a former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and member of the Bush administration’s Council of Economic Advisers.

*****

Other prominent economists, including Harvard University’s Martin Feldstein, say that government data tells an incomplete picture about both rich and poor. His criticism dates to 1998, when the Federal Reserve hosted a panel on income inequality and he argued that poverty was a better focus.

“The difference is not just semantics. It is about how we should think about the rise in incomes at the upper end of the income distribution,” he said, arguing then as today that a change in income at the top doesn’t decrease the income of others.

“I think those issues are still there,” Feldstein told McClatchy, noting that data on consumption by the bottom 20 percent of earners tells a very different story from what’s derived from tax filings.

“At the bottom there is this strange discrepancy between what they appear to spend and what their cash income should allow them to spend,” said Feldstein.

This consumption beyond stated income could reflect a growing informal economy, where the poor are paid off the books in cash. Many extended families, especially immigrants, also pool resources.

“If we’re concerned about distribution, it ought to be about the poor, and reducing the number of poor and raising their incomes, and not about inequality per se,” said Feldstein, pointing to problems with tax data about the rich too. (emphasis added)

We’ll leave it to your imagination as to how supply-siders in their “lofty” think tanks plan to reduce the numbers of the poor! (Members of the NBER include past and present Fed chairs Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen, as well as a basket of Nobel economists.) See the full article at http://www.sunherald.com/2014/01/28/5293294/gap-between-rich-and-poor-may.html or http://www.adn.com/2014/01/28/3295855/gap-between-rich-and-poor-may.html.

(B) This, between Daily Show correspondent Samantha Bee and Schiff as reported by the left-wing Huffington Post…

Schiff: "If we eliminated the minimum wage law then individuals would be free to accept jobs at whatever pay they're able to get."

Bee: "Paint me a picture of a person whose work would be worth $2 an hour."

Schiff: "You know somebody who might be? Maybe somebody who is, uh, you know, what's the politically correct word? Uh, you know, uh, for, uh, you know, mentally retarded?"

Bee: [...]

Schiff, later on: "I'm not going to say that we're all created equal... you're worth what you're worth."