5.43 pm GMT – Wednesday 1st February 2011

The 32nd day 2012, I’ve worked on the USA Economic analysis all morning, and its pretty good, scary but good.
I’m going to copy it below, then work on adding it, along with the Small business chapter, the property values graph and the new USA economic graph into the main paper before sending it to Lee Chazen’s. I will send to one person per day from the list of 16, made on the 16th.

Economic Analysis 2000 – 2012 (OBM Figures used for total debt, main source Wikipedia)

When President Bush was elected in 2000 the USA was $5,629 Trillion Dollars in Debt, which equated to 57.6% of GDP. GDP stands for Gross Domestic Product, put simply “what it sells” or in business terms “turnover”. A countries GDP can be considered as its “performance” as such regardless of inflation, it is a relatively good yard stick to measure against a countries debt.

If at the end of a year a countries debt to GDP ratio increases, it’s been a bad year, and on the other hand if it decreases it’s been a good year. It should be noted that economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff calculated that on average country with debt above 90 percent of GDP grow 1.3 % slower than others.

In 2000 the USA debt increased by only $18 Billion and by 2001 the GDP ratio was down to 56.6%. 2000 was a very good year, possibly the best financial year in American history .In hindsight, it would have made sense to simply “leave things as they were”, the old adage “if it’s not broke, why try to fix it” would have been well considered.

However no doubt spurred by electoral promises &the opportunity of turning the USA into profit, President Bush put into motion what is now known to be “The Bush Tax Cuts”. On the 7th June 2001 the Bush Administration introduced a tax aimed at economic growth which projected a $1.2288 profit over the next three years. This is what is known as “fiscal policy” the idea being that lower taxes equates to harder work, therefore more profit and a higher GDP and as such an overall higher tax yield.

However no one could have predicted what happened next and its effect on the USA economy as on September the eleventh 2001, a terrorist attack on the two world trade towers in New York destabilized the USA and Global economies. Not to be deterred however President Bush introduced another Tax cut in 2003 this time aimed at Jobs & Growth.

In 2005 a review showed that the projected $1.2288 profit had in effect made a loss of $581 Billion, with 22% attributed to 9/11 related spending. However the actual losses were worse as between 2002 and end 2005 the USA went a further $2,126 Trillion in debt, an average of 30 times more than 2000. The GDP ratio now stood at 63.6%, with total debt rising to $7,905 Trillion.

2006 & 2007 saw $539 and $500 Billion increases with the GDP up to 64.8%, at this point questions were being asked, most notably Ben Bernanke the Chairman of the Federal Reserve was asked: How urgently should the U.S. put plans in place to address its budget challenges? His reply: "The longer we wait, the more severe, the more draconian, the more difficult the objectives are going to be. I think the right time to start was about 10 years ago. Total debt rose to $8,951 Trillion.

2008 brought the banking crisis which saw a $1018 Trillion loss as tax receipts were significantly lower than expected. This increased the total debt to $9,986 Trillion: 69.6% of GDP.

One trouble that followed was for the governments to consider the global financial crisis in the same manner as all that had come before, “a simple rebalance that would pass in a year or two”. However this was not the case, the global crisis was due to first world debt, caused by social security, welfare and medical payments to an increasing large and aging population, further hampered by pharmaceutical bills became increasingly expensive. For example, the number of workers per retiree was 5.1 in 1960; this declined to 3.0 in 2010 and is projected to decline to 2.2 by 2030

Usual methods of fiscal policy (adjusting taxes) and monitory policy (spending on infrastructure to create jobs) did not apply as a solution, rather a quick fix. The problem is created by debt, and as such creating more debt cannot be the answer. Either severe austerity (saving/cuts) or an economic plan such as “American Butterfly” which requires no government borrowing yet increases both tax revenue and creates jobs, is needed. However as there was no “American Butterfly” on the table and severe austerity was an election looser, the status quo and the respective governments borrowed more money to try to spend themselves out of danger. We also saw some very poor estimating by bean counters as in....

2009 having lost significant income due to low tax receipts the year before the government increased their expected tax income to $2.7Billion, only to receive $2.1Billion. An unavoidable $400 billion expected loss was already forecast. However spending went $400 Billion over budget on this forecast. After which a further $470 Billion was spent on “Other” totaling a loss of $1,887 Trillion, with total USA debt at $11,898 Trillion, GDP: 84.4%.

In relative terms, from 2003-2007 the government spent roughly $1.20 for each $1.00 it collected in taxes. This increased to $1.40 in FY2008 and $1.90 in FY2009.

2010: The Obama Administration.

An election promise is an election promise and as such a 58.6% increase to welfare was enacted, alongside a host of other increases across the board totaling 20%, tax yields increases by one percent. All common sense would suggest that debt would have increased by more than the $1,887 created the year before, However it did not as 2010 debt was down to $1,654 Trillion.

In real terms however 2010 was another disastrous year as total debt rose to $13,529 Trillion, GDP: 93.4%. Now at the point where economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff calculated the USA will now grow 1.3 % slower than countries with lower debts.

In June 2010 in the Wall Street Journal, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan noted that "Only politically toxic cuts or rationing of medical care, a marked rise in the eligible age for health and retirement benefits, or significant inflation, can close the deficit and if significant reforms are not undertaken, benefits under entitlement programs will exceed government income by over $40 trillion”.

The “politically toxic” comment was probably directed at the “Bush Tax Cuts” that were due to end at the end of 2010

In August 2010, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that extending the tax cuts for the 2011-2020 time periods would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt, comprising $2.65 trillion in foregone tax revenue plus another $0.66 trillion for interest and debt service costs.

The Bush Tax Cuts, have been hotly debated for a decade, all be it not specifically from a democratic perspective. “The Heritage Foundation” alleges that the Bush tax cuts led to the rich shouldering more of the income tax burden than the poor. While the “Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities” concluded that the tax cuts have the largest benefits, by far on the highest income households.

As such with no political party wishing to stick their necks out on the 30th November the tax cuts were extended for a further 2 years

The 2011 budget indicated that: jobs, health care, clean energy, education, and infrastructure will be priorities; it further mentions investments in science and technology. These are of course the major components of “American Butterfly” The federal budget was increased from $3.6 to $3.8 Trillion, while total taxes and other revenues rose from $2,217 billion to $2,364 billion.

Figures are scarce on actual spending, total yearly loss and GDP ratio

However as of today 1st February 2012 the USA debt clock states that the USA is $15.3 Trillion of debt. Up $1,772 trillion from the end of 2010, (It appears OBM figures are calculated yearly not as per budget months) As such, in 2011 the USA debt increased by $1,635 Trillion.

Based on the 2010 U.S. budget, total national debt will nearly double in dollar terms between 2008 and 2015 and will grow to nearly 100% of GDP However, ahead of predictions, total national debt reached 100% by the third quarter of 2011

In May 2011 Economist Paul Krugman wrote: "What happened to the budget surplus the federal government had in 2000? The answer is three main things. First, there were the Bush tax cuts, which added roughly $2 trillion to the national debt over the last decade. Second, there were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which added an additional $1.1 trillion or so. And third was the Great Recession, which led both to a collapse in revenue and to a sharp rise in spending on unemployment insurance and other safety-net programs.”

Military spending: The military budget of the United States during FY 2011 was approximately $740 billion in expenses for the Department of Defense (DoD), $141 billion for veteran expenses, and $48 billion in expenses for the Department of Homeland Security, for a total of $929 billion.

The 2012 budget predicts an increase in tax from $2,364 Trillion to $2.627 Trillion, the interesting point to note is that for the first time in recent history, the federal budget has gone down, from $3.8 Trillion to $3.7 Trillion.
Actual figures for the 2012 budget will be available after September 2012
The “Office of Management and Budget” forecasts that, by the end of fiscal year 2012, gross federal debt will total $16.3 trillion.

Analyses

In July 2010 The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) reported several types of risk factors

- A growing portion of savings would go towards purchases of government debt, rather than investments in productive capital goods such as factories and computers, leading to lower output and incomes than would otherwise occur;
- If higher marginal tax rates were used to pay rising interest costs, savings would be reduced and work would be discouraged;
- Rising interest costs would force reductions in important government programs;
- Restrictions to the ability of policymakers to use fiscal policy to respond to economic challenges; and
- An increased risk of a sudden fiscal crisis, in which investors demand higher interest rates.

In June 2011 the CBO offered a solution called the “Extended baseline scenario” that aimed to reduce the yearly deficit to 1% of GDP by 2021 (about $140 Billion a year)

Eliminate all the Bush Tax Cuts in 2012; reduce Medicare rebates to doctors, try to increase tax revenues from the average 18% GDP to 23% GDP. Lower the cost of defence and many domestic programmes, to the lowest levels of GDP since before World War 2 and expect interest payments (now $164 Billion) to increase from one to 4% of GDP.
In other words, raise taxes, cut spending and hope for an economic miracle, which fortunately is available via “American Butterfly”

The CBO also offered the “alternative fiscal scenario” which considers keeping the Bush Tax Cuts, and expecting tax revenues to stay closer to their historical average, however this scenario sees Public debt at 190% by 2035 (Note Public debt is in effect only 70% of total debt) as such Total debt would be closer to 300% GDP.

In June 2011 the CBO reported: The explosive path of federal debt under the alternative fiscal scenario underscores the need for large and rapid policy changes to put the nation on a sustainable fiscal course."

Then in September 2011: "The nation cannot continue to sustain the spending programs and policies of the past with the tax revenues it has been accustomed to paying. Citizens will either have to pay more for their government, accept less in government services and benefits, or both.

Given the aging of the population and rising costs for health care, attaining a sustainable federal budget will require the United States to deviate from the policies of the past 40 years in at least one of the following ways:

- Raise federal revenues significantly above their average share of GDP;
- Make major changes to the sorts of benefits provided for Americans when they become older; or
- Substantially reduce the role of the rest of the federal government relative to the size of the economy.

Ben Bernanke 2007 comment: "The longer we wait, the more severe, the more draconian, the more difficult the objectives are going to be” starts to ring true!

Strategies:

- Promote economic growth and employment: A fast-growing economy offers the win-win outcome, of a larger proverbial economic pie to divide, with higher employment and tax revenues, lower safety net spending and a lower debt-to-GDP ratio.
- Make equitable trade-offs: For example, taking away benefits from those in or near retirement may be considered inequitable, while phasing out retirement benefits for younger workers may be considered less so.
- Keep short- and long-term issues in perspective: Healthcare cost inflation and an aging population are the primary long-term deficit drivers. Unemployment and various tax and spending policy choices are the primary short-term deficit drivers. Measures to encourage economic growth today can be implemented along with other measures to reduce future deficits
- Invest productively: Some spending can be categorized as investments that lower future deficits. For example, if infrastructure, education or R&D investments could make U.S. workers and products more competitive or generate a revenue stream, these could reduce future deficits. Examples might include installing windows that reduce energy costs, toll roads and bridges, or power plants

Specific Government proposals

- President Obama established a budget reform commission, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, which released a draft report in December 2010. It included various tax and spend adjustments to bring long-run government tax revenue and spending into line at approximately 21% of GDP, with $4 trillion debt avoidance over 10 years.

- President Obama announced a 10-year (2012–2021) plan in September 2011 called: "Living within Our Means and investing in the Future”: The President’s Plan for Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction." The plan included tax increases on the wealthy, along with cuts in future spending on defense and Medicare. Social Security was excluded from the plan. The plan included a net debt avoidance of $3.2 trillion over 10 years. If the Budget Control Act of 2011 is included, this adds another $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction for a total of $4.4 trillion.

- The House of Representatives Committee on the Budget, chaired by Rep. Paul Ryan (R), released The Path to Prosperity: Restoring America's Promise. The Path focuses on tax reform (lowering income tax rates and reducing tax expenditures or loopholes); spending cuts and controls; and redesign of the Medicare and Medicaid programs. It does not propose significant changes to Social Security.

- The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) proposed "The People's Budget" in April 2011, which it claimed would balance the budget by 2021 while maintaining debt as a % GDP under 65%. It proposed reversing most of the Bush tax cuts; higher income tax rates on the wealthy and restoring the estate tax, investing in a jobs program, and reducing defense spending.

- The Bipartisan Policy Centre sponsored a Debt Reduction Task Force, co-chaired by Pete V. Domenici and Alice M. Rivlin. This panel created a report called "Restoring America's Future," which was published in November 2010. The plan claimed to stabilize the debt to GDP ratio at 60%, with up to $6 trillion in debt avoidance over the 2011-2020 periods. Specific plan elements included defense and non-defense spending freezes for 4-5 years, income tax reform, elimination of tax expenditures, and a national sales tax or value-added tax (VAT).

Summing up

At the end of the 20th century USA borrowing was at an all time low, with national debt at $5,629 Trillion Dollars in Debt, which equated to 57.6% of GDP. Since that time debt has risen to $15.3 Trillion, over 100% of GDP.

This is largely due to a combination of “The Bush Tax Cuts”, The Obama Spending increases, wars and lower tax receipts due to the financial crisis, amplified by an increasing cost in social security, welfare and medical payments to an increasing large and aging population, further hampered by pharmaceutical bills becoming increasingly expensive.

The overwhelming consensus amongst economists and budgetary organizations is that “the Bush Tax Cuts” should not be extended past 2012, however certain individuals like anti tax activist Grover Norquist are making the sensible option increasingly difficult.

All agree that the cost of wars needs to be reduced, many suggest a dramatic reduction.

Without exception, it is agreed that the biggest long term threat is Medicaid & Medicare; the numbers on persons enrolled in the latter expected to increase from 47 Million to 80 Million by 2030. However it is more the rapidly rising costs of medical bills that see the predicted rise from 5.3% GDP to 10% in 2035 and 19% in 2082. By which time if paid in full, all tax revenue will be spent on Medicaid and Medicare; as such there would be no money for any other services, not even a salary for the President.

In 2007 Ben Bernanke the Chairman of the Federal Reserve was asked: How urgently should the U.S. put plans in place to address its budget challenges? His reply: "The longer we wait, the more severe, the more draconian, the more difficult the objectives are going to be. I think the right time to start was about 10 years ago.

In June 2010 in the Wall Street Journal, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan noted that "Only politically toxic cuts or rationing of medical care, a marked rise in the eligible age for health and retirement benefits, or significant inflation, can close the deficit and if significant reforms are not undertaken, benefits under entitlement programs will exceed government income by over $40 trillion”.

As such, no government, republican or democrat can implement the measures needed to reduce the yearly deficit to a manageable level without committing parliamentary suicide. As such, the essential tough decisions that are essential will not be made, the economists and the budget makers will be ignored, the USA will continue to loose over $1 Trillion a year, and within a year their credit rating will drop from its AAA rating. At which point borrowing will cost more.

If the global economy miraculously reverts to pre 2007 levels, interest rates will rise, and within a handful of years, the USA will be spending close to $1 Trillion a year on interest payments and according to statistics will grow slower than other economies due to its debt to GDP ratio being over 90%.

By the end of this decade, there will not be enough money to pay for most Medicare and Social Security obligations, this will cause deep distress as Medicare and Social Security are in effect social insurance programs into which US Citizens have contributed all their working lives.

At this point, the United States of America will be a very different land indeed, the effect on the Global economy, devastating, the effect to world peace and stability unimaginable.

It is extremely lucky, that there is a Plan B.

“American Butterfly”

Using a baseline figure of current losses at $1,635 Trillion, starting at February 2012’s $15,300 Trillion total debt, American Butterfly conservatively estimates, the USA will be in profit by 2015 and in the black (all debts paid) by 2027.

This allows for the “Bush Tax Cuts” and all other current tax rebates to remain in place in their entirety and does not touch Social Security, despite adding in that area.

So far nine areas of savings have been presented, no doubt, once the CBO, BEA and other institutions have added to the model, further savings and revenue streams will be made.

The only contentious issue is “8: Savings Wars” however, figures presented are simply in line with those currently on the table. Should these cuts not be made, it will have a negligible effect on the solution.

It is however highly likely, that as soon as the USA is making profit, more tax cuts will be offered to the public, American Butterfly wished to suggest, that future tax cuts be applied in the main, to companies that are using the Sienna.Gov software to calculate and pay tax. Implemented in the correct way, one could see a different attitude to tax, where one is proud to be in a higher tax bracket, and is boastful of their rebate, nationalist entrepreneurial capitalism at its finest.

Note the word’s “American Butterfly conservatively estimates” the word conservatively is used as the above figures are largely based on the initial investment round and companies created from said investment, it does not address the true ambitions which are to expand experientially, remember the land procurement stage aims to buy 7 times more land than is used in the initial $16 Trillion phase.

Further: After 2019 no increases are recorded, and whilst further savings are not necessary, increases across all tax creating sectors are expected.

Let’s analyze the 9 profit centers.

1. Tax not collected $350 Billion;
This is based on research gathered by the IRS in 2007, the Sienna.Gov software if free will save businesses money and time, whist offering increased efficiency and easy to read bottom line essential figures. The network will decrease costs and increase marketing opportunities, the advisory service will be of further benefit. If the IRS calculates that $350 Billion dollars was missing in 2007 whilst $2.57 Trillion was collected, this indicates that less that 86% of taxes are paid.

In most cases we expect that tax is not avoided rather not paid in full, by maybe a quarter of the yield, so 5% to 10% maximum, as such the savings on the system outweigh the extra tax that would be paid.

One does not need to be a part of the EEE business structure to use the software, and to use the network one needs to use the software, as such we believe it’s reasonable to assume that the software runs most businesses by 2018.

The IRS of course, will have less work to do, as such, they will concentrate fully on businesses not using the software, further consider the PQS (Predictive Quantum Software) that will me measuring the flow of money throughout the USA, and tax evasion will be incredibly difficult.

Further consider, future tax cuts being offered only to those using the software, and the public good will for companies that use the software as they have new hospitals and schools and the USA is no longer in financial danger, and a general air of suspicion will be cast on those not using the software.

Further consider a referendum for USA citizens regarding making the software mandatory, and lastly consider the concern of businesses that if a referendum is called and they are called to task, the software will easily pick up previous evasion.

Lastly consider a tax amnesty for all who start to use the software.

All in all, we believe a complete end to tax fraud and evasion in the USA, we expect in reality there will be more than $350 Billion extra collected.

2: Usual Business Restored

The totality of the “American Butterfly” initiative dictates that as soon as the first $4Trillion is raised GDP will sky rocket, and at the very least pre 2007 conditions will be restored. Further add the $4 Trillion in land acquisitions, effect of raising USA house prices back and past their 2007 levels.

Further consider the “American Butterfly” system being applied to Europe.

10.57 am GMT – Thursday 2st February 2011

Year, we don’t have lift off LOL

It went well, but as I started the explanations of the income streams, as I got to 2: Usual Business Restored, I was flagging, and considering, these explanations are the main part of the solution, or a main part, certainly the conclusions, more time and thought was needed.

I have decided to make the last 8 years fluctuate, and really present, not a worse case scenario, rather a “low estimate” and have workings for all figures, or a credible explanation. I’m also considering more info on the 8 software types, and adding links, then making and exec summary.

This will obviously take another week maybe two, however I can send to selected targets, explain that cooperation and help is needed rather than, look at this masterpiece.

I’ve adjusted the figures for revenue stream one, starting at $50 indicating an immediate worry by the electorate that they will be caught, then increasing 25% a year as such indicating it will take 13 years for the software to become the industry, or more to the point government standard. Which is more reasonable, it also shows the government and for that matter the USA citizens that a referendum (or Gov policy) on making it the official tax tool, i.e. using it is mandatory. With only 14% or so of evaluation and $350 plus to be gained, one could realistically expect a 95% yes vote in a referendum, all be it, the whole “big Brother” wariness syndrome, could knock it down some, further if Greece makes it mandatory, and its works there, it will assist in gaining the votes.

As for section 2: usual business restored, we need to realistically consider, as soon as USA butterfly is announced, the recession will end, as shares in mentioned company get bought and a land grab occurs. As such jive used the 2007 Total revenue 257 in and the 2009 211 in equaling a 460 loss as my baseline figure and shown that coming in force in 2013.

Revenue from new EEE businesses I will address now, in a number of formats, GDP effected by direct investment and the very difficult expected earnings, and then consider, what of these earnings is taken from usual GDP, absolute crazy random estimate, without the benefit of a team (100) of experts and a rudimentary PQS.
This is going to take a couple of days I can tell, it will need a dedicated spread sheet, and whatever figure I come to, I had better half for safety. I thing however it will be an essential and fun exercise, and without doubt something surprising will happen.

12.00 pm GMT – Thursday 2st February 2011

I’m very excited, I’ve just been processing the income from EEE in terms of Tax and GDP and its colossal, I’m going to make some sections, put rough estimates then go for a walk and process.

First, the effect to standard GDP, this initially will go up; however this is already accounted for in the “Usual Business” however over time it will reduce as more companies incorporate. I had better over estimate this section by about 35%.

Another exciting thought is that Corporate tax is only 10% of total tax yield, as such making EEE companies free of corporate tax will have only a 10% reduction in tax revenue, which is easily affordable. Such a rebate, will make using the software more appealing, as the only tax property taken that effects business is VAT, if the USA has VAT. Ahh they do, it’s called sales tax and food and medicine is exempt

Certainly removing or reducing Corporate tax will encourage use of Sienna.Gov financial software, EEE company or not. Maybe a 50% reduction for using the software and a 100% reduction for incorporated companies.
I’m going to make a new spread sheet
___________

1. $4T Investment from 75% USA companies and Individuals, 25% foreign let’s assume $ 1.5 Trillion would be diverted from usual USA spending, and so deduct $1.5 Trillion from overall effect. Let’s further assume given the think tank and rudimentary PQS, we can achieve the UK Railway figures of $1 spent $2 made as an effect of GDP.
What are today’s GDP figures, I struggled with this yesterday, IMF say in 2000 $14.5T, I’ll work on an even $15T
So in 2010 $14.5T generated and with the CBO realistically working on Tax = 18% of GDP whatever the GDP rises by receipts in will go up by 18%.

You know, I bet this is how the conservatives worked out their railway projections, no think tank, no rudimentary PQS, just some Muppet quoting figures from a text book on economics. This is the advantage of having no economic training, it makes you work things out for yourself, and as such you understand the process.

This is no doubt why the economists were saying the railway money could be better spent. The way I see it, it is payroll tax that makes the most money, if paid to earners over $50,000 as such the more jobs VS Company profits the higher the percentage of tax revenue from GDP, not to mention the saving in welfare, and effects to society.

Ok so let’s work it out, $4 Trillion minus the $1.5T = $2.5T set aside the $500 Billion as it is ring fenced for education years 5 to 8 = $2 Trillion x 18% = $360 Billion. Work this over 4 years including the next 3 $4Trillions and spread it as its not possible to spend all at the beginning 2012 – 2015 = 100, 280, 480, 580, from there on we can consider a further $4T per year in other investment. If you remember in the investment summary, I included a proviso to continue limiting investment to $4T, to make it exclusive and promote Global Investment. From 2016 I will insert a baseline $360, nope, I need to add the money from the ring fenced $500 B, = $125 per year on top. Thus 485T, returning to 360T on year 9 onwards. Note in the long run, we are expecting either deflation or a strengthening of the dollar, or both.

I’m going to make two columns one for the investment one for the GDP loss and lose the ring fenced education 16/19 adjustment. $4T x 18% = .72T

Take of the $1.5T x 18% = $270B

Next we need to consider both POP investment and tax on successful companies; this is going to mean I need to do an assessment of company success.

This has the danger of being random; however I have had some considerations, Cars for instance if we issue an order for 20 million electric cars between $4,000 and $8,000 with an average of $1,500 profit per car that’s $30 Billion profit as such 7.5 profitable EEE companies, or 4, creating a good POP. However we would need to repeat this exercise 276 times to make all USA EEE companies create a good POP.

If we consider 25% a good POP and move the profit to $2,500 we get 12.5 companies or 10 making 25%, I like the idea of automatic trade in after 2 to 4 years with cars being well priced in the first place, to stimulate the market, recalculating and the opportunity for drivers cars to keep up with technology, this may mean 20 Million a year, however it’s a tall order, so I will half to 10 Million as such EEE can sustain 6 car companies at 25% POP per year.

We could make the cars a part of the salary packages, as such guarantee the orders. And force the use of electric cars, something that will go down very well with most.

If we add sales to non EEE residents and exports, we can double the figure again, back to 12, plus, as the EEE cities grow past the initially planed 16 x 256 x 4 = 276 more cars will be needed, a lot more.

276/12 = 23, as such one only needs to make an argument for 23 industries doing as well and we can show a $4 Trillion profit per year. All to easy. Yes :)

Time for that walk its sunny but minus 1 degree outside.

Actually its not that simple as we wish a lot of interns, my head is however spinning with good ideas. My mind is of not the PQS HC1

3.46 pm GMT – Thursday 2st February 2011

You’re going to love this, first the construction.

Construction profit margin 20% with 5% contingency, no more, but if they go over budget they lose.

Construction jobs $2 Trillion a year so $400 Billion a year.

Add to this 10% of profit if houses sell for 110% of their minimum value which is $4 Trillion so add another $4 Billion a year, then go to a sliding scale when sold for more that 110% as such if sold for $120% 12% and so on. This should make another $200 Billion, and then have a residual resale price, lower again depending on profit, as such creating another $200 Billion. Total from construction $1.2 Trillion a year. Plus builders have utter motivation to make houses excellent.

Only use materials from EEE suppliers and laborers are EEE paid, working 3 days on the sites, one day on businessbook and one day learning.