We must reach back to the Great Depression to find the last time there was a large-scale banking crisis in which leverage and excess credit were the main cause of a recession. Too much credit (sometimes called leverage) is the “Achilles heel” of any economic system. Unfortunately, neither government nor the private sector has much experience in dealing with the aftermath of an economic credit binge. Instead, we have all tended to try and jump start the economy using the same tools we have been using since WWII. It won’t work.

Up until the aftermath of WWII, real private lending had grown about the same pace as economic activity. But in the early 1970s, credit began to grow at about twice the rate of economic activity and it continued expanding from there. Economists think that the credit binge was ignited by the collapse of the Breton Woods international monetary system. That agreement, established in 1944, was forged in an effort to reconstruct the world’s economy after the war.

Forty-four allied nations agreed to peg their currencies to the U.S. dollar. In turn, the dollar was pegged to the price of gold. The U.S. took the world off this dollar/gold standard on August 15, 1971. Currencies from that point on were allowed to fluctuate based on the economic fortunes of each nation and that’s where credit came in.

Governments and their economists figured out that the more credit (leverage) you used, the higher the growth rate of your economy and the longer that growth could be sustained. If you wanted a strong currency, the ability to borrow, and be able to make a name for yourself on the global block, the expansion of credit was a good way to do that. The challenge was balancing that credit growth with the underlying capital base of your financial sector. Up until then, that had not been a problem, but times change.

During 2004-2007, we expanded credit further and faster than anyone really understood. Like children with a new but dangerous toy, our financial wizards had no idea what excessive credit could do to an economy. Anyone that had first-hand experience (during the 1930s) had long since retired. Readers are now intimately aware of the sub-prime mortgage debacle, our credit collapse and its resulting impact on our financial system.

As a result of the crisis, a large fraction of the global banking systems’ capital base was erased almost overnight. In Europe it continues to unfold today. When something like that happens, it takes a long time to rebuild that capital base. In the meantime, lending is put on the back burner as banks struggle simply to survive. Without lending, the life blood of economic growth, the economy will and has experienced a deeper recession and slower recovery. That is the natural result of a credit crisis and there’s not much a government can do about it.

In the past, it took at least five years before lending (and investment) once again approached pre-recession levels. Credit, after all, has much to do with the trust and faith by the lender that the borrower will be able to repay the loan. A credit crisis like the one we experienced in 2008-2009, destroys that faith. No matter how low the Federal Reserve forces interest rates, lenders won’t lend until that faith is restored and they feel their capital base is once again secure. That takes time. The on-going turmoil in Europe’s banks simply delays that from happening.

In the meantime, ignore all the promises of both candidates. “Getting America back to work again” and similar slogans would require an understanding of the nature of the slowdown and an entire new set of tools to address it. Neither party’s candidate appears ready to recognize that this Great Recession is truly different from any in their lifetime. I doubt they or the armies of experts advising them will ever recognize the truth, except in hindsight.

The good news is that time does go by. It’s been three years since we have officially entered a “recovery”. In another two years or so we should be getting back to normal. I hope.

John McClane (Bruce Willis): Hey, what’s a fire sale?

Matt Farrell (Justin Long):  It’s a three-step… it’s a three-step systematic attack on the entire national infrastructure. Okay, step one: take out all the transportation. Step two: the financial base and telecoms. Step three: You get rid of all the utilities. Gas, water, electric, nuclear. Pretty much anything that’s run by computers which… which today is almost everything. So that’s why they call it a fire sale, because everything must go.”

 Live Free or Die Hard

There is a war being waged today in this country, one that could have severe repercussions for each and every one of us. It is costing us billions of dollars a year and yet neither business nor government wants to spend the money necessary to fight back.

This week on Capitol Hill lawmakers are getting down to debating the pros and cons of passing one of several versions of a cyber-security bill. Everyone hopes the eventual legislation will launch a counterattack on an army of highly sophisticated hackers bent on some serious mayhem. The debate boils down to who is going to pay for a defense system that will prevent the bad guys from accomplishing a “fire sale,” a la the last Die Hard film.

The Obama Administration backs a Senate bill sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman, (I- CT) and Susan Collins, (R-ME) that would implement new rigorous standards and require companies to notify the government when their networks have been breached. The business community opposes it as just more intrusion into the private sector which will mean more costly regulations on top of more regulation. Instead, they would prefer a bill promoted by Senator John McCain (R, AZ), which wants the government to issue alerts about imminent cyber-attacks but would not require a company from acting on the information unless they thought it was a threat to their business.

Unlike other wars the United States has fought this one is on our territory and the frontline troops are increasingly the IT departments of American Corporations. To date, those troops have been both outnumbered and out-fought by the enemy. The rates of infiltration by organized gangs or state-sponsored hackers are escalating. In a multinational study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies the three countries ranked as most vulnerable to attacks were the U.S., Russia and China, while the biggest potential source of attacks was our own country.

 Today, we only hear of the biggest cyber-attacks such as the 2011 theft of over 200,000 customer names, account numbers and contact details from Citigroup or the 100 million accounts pilfered from Sony Online Entertainment’s PlayStation Network. I was on the receiving end of the Citigroup theft, and believe me, it drives home the danger like nothing else.

These attacks are costing American companies big money. It costs on average over $7.2 million in costs (lost business, legal defense and compliance) or $214 per customer record in costs. If it is a first time breach, it can cost 30% more, not to mention the inconvenience to its customers like me. Yet, the real danger is not in the consumer sector. It is in the potential for a breach in the nation’s infrastructure system.

As you read this, for example, our natural gas pipeline companies are currently battling a major cyber-attack from a single source, which was launched in December, 2011. Don’t dismiss this threat. As early as 1982, the U.S. CIA managed to blow up a Siberian gas pipeline by using what was called a “logic bomb” involving the insertion of a portion of code into a Russian computer system overseeing the pipeline.

Those involved in cyber security worry that our infrastructure companies (power, water, nuclear, etc.) do not realize how vulnerable their systems are to outside invasion. Computer systems and safeguards that were originally installed years ago are out-of-date. But managements are loathed to upgrade their systems simply on a bet that someday maybe their company might be targeted by hackers. It is a persuasive argument since to safe-guard a company against all possible dangers—earthquakes, tornados, floods, nuclear fallout, to name a few—would be cost prohibitive.

On the other hand, no one wants another 9/11. Maintaining a head-in-the-sand attitude until something happens is just the kind of strategy that has organizations such as Homeland Security experiencing perpetual nightmares. It is a tough one but somewhere in the debate lurks a compromise. I just hope we can find it.

The oil and gas boom in this country has had some serious side effects. Everything from earthquakes to polluted water has been blamed on the industry. Residents near the areas of hydraulic drilling and exploration are fighting back using the Environmental Protection Agency, lawsuits, lobbying and the media.  The challenge is separating fact from fiction in this on-going fight.

There is no question that there has been a remarkable increase in the number of earthquakes in the middle of the country, for example, or that an entire neighborhood of homes in Dimock, PA claimed it was threatened with explosive levels of methane gas. Twenty water wells in the same area, the site of natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale, showed the presence of sodium, methane, chromium or bacteria.

A recent documentary, “Gasland”, on HBO featured another Pennsylvania village caught in the controversy over America’s oil and natural gas boom. The movie allegedly uncovered the “secrets, lies and contamination” of natural gas drilling. As a result of the growing controversy three states—New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania—have called a moratorium on any further drilling or hydraulic fracturing for the time being. That is a big deal because the Marcellus Shale sits below those states and has enough natural gas to fuel this country for the next twenty years.

Environmentalists and people living near drilling sites are saying not in my backyard. They believe that attitude is justified since the risks are great and who can blame them?  I’m sure I would feel the same way if someone proposed to drill a well in the parking lot of my condo. The moratorium is needed, so its advocates argue, simply to study the impact of this drilling before people get hurt or sick. Naturally, the energy industry is arguing that the risks are small and that thousands upon thousands of wells have been drilled with no negative impact whatsoever. They have a point.

Take the earthquake issue, where a study by the U.S. Geological Survey identified a six- fold increase in man-made quakes in an area including Arkansas, Colorado, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas. All the headlines pointed to natural gas drilling as the culprit. The gas guys were found guilty, strung up and buried before the survey team could come to a conclusion. Only then did the scientists admit that the quakes were not directly caused by hydraulic fracturing with one exception, one lone well in Arkansas.

The twenty “contaminated” wells in Pennsylvania I mentioned were later found by the EPA to present no threat to human health and the environment. As for the earth beneath the affected homes in Dimock, it did contain methane among other elements, but the EPA could not prove a connection between the contaminants and the oil and gas developments. In fact, they concluded that the presence of these elements could just as easily have been caused by naturally-occurring background levels or other unrelated activities.

I have learned that most studies tend to reflect the bias of those conducting them. In other words, you can make a study say anything you want given enough samples.  This battle, in my opinion, has already been won by the weight of public opinion.  A cessation of exploration will have a negative impact on the economies of all three states. At the same time, the declining price of gas will not justify continued drilling in a land of litigation. 

Free market capitalists might moan and argue that a person has the right to do whatever he wants with his property including fracking. On the other side, advocates will contend (rightfully so) that there is no such thing as zero-impact drilling. One’s decision to allow fracking in your backyard can and does directly impact my property next door.

The industry heightens the paranoia surrounding it by refusing  to disclose what potentially toxic chemicals (if any) are used in the drilling process. The regulations do not require disclosure so they won’t provide it. They are also exempt from EPA regulation thanks to the Bush Administration’s 2005 loophole legislation dubbed the “Halliburton Loophole” by opponents.

 As a result, all sorts of fears can be invoked (real or imagined) by any blogger or tree-hugging anarchist that wants to invent their own bizarre plot against humanity.  Is the nation’s watershed in jeopardy of contamination? Many environmentalists claim it could be impacting millions of unsuspecting Americans. Without the data, we don’t know. Others worry that in the vacuum caused by the absence of Federal regulation, undermanned and revenue starved state regulators are turning a blind eye to industry regulation.

Back in the day, when the United States was still a powerhouse  of industry, a growing and vocal group of concerned citizens began uncovering the seamier side of this formidable industrial base. We discovered that the by-products of these industries were causing enormous amounts of air and ground water pollution. At the same time, workers were coming down with all sorts of ailments from asbestos poisoning to cancer. Instead of helping the industrial sector transform itself into something more acceptable, we drove it away.

Politicians swooped in to pass bill after bill creating new safety standards, stricter codes and of course higher taxes on these bad boy industries. Industrial companies found themselves spending more time and money defending their practices from lawsuits, sit-ins and protests. In the end it wasn’t worth it.  They started looking for less hostile manufacturing locations abroad and found them.

Americans today lament the loss of that U.S. industrial base. We conveniently forget that part of the reason for that exodus was caused by a sea change in how we viewed those industries. Although the present challenges facing further gas drilling in our country should be taken seriously, let’s try not to apply the same “not in my backyard” attitude towards gas drilling that sent our industrial base packing in the past.

As recently as five years ago in the U.S., natural gas was in short supply using traditional exploration and drilling methods. Then, engineers had a breakthrough. Two key technologies were discovered—horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking) — were discovered. Horizontal drilling allows gas developers to drill vertical wells that turn and snake more than a mile sideways under the ground. Fracking, which was actually invented more than 60 years ago, involves pumping millions of gallons of chemically-treated water into deep shale formations at enormous pressure. The fluid cracks or widens existing cracks in the shale freeing hydrocarbons to flow toward the well.

As a result of these technologies, vast caches of natural gas trapped in deeply buried rock have been made accessible leading to an eight-fold increase in shale gas production. One of these deposits, the Marcellus Shale sprawls beneath West Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York. This deposit alone could produce enough energy to fuel every natural gas fueled device in the nation for the next 20 years.

Natural gas prices have plummeted as a result of all this new supply and are now trading at ten year lows ($1.94 per 1,000 cubic feet). The prognosis by experts is that prices aren’t going to rise anytime soon since there is so much gas still in the ground that the energy industry, policy makers, economists and natural gas customers can’t figure out what to do with it.

 It has already been a great boom to both residential and commercial users of the fuel. The typical consumers spent $868 on average this winter, a 17% decline from last year. Utilities that generate electric power consume 34% of the nation’s natural gas output. Decline in gas prices are being passed through to customers, who are beginning to see their utility bills decline throughout the Northeast.

Another 30% of natural gas is consumed by industries to heat boilers or make chemicals, fertilizers and plastics. Prices have come down and supplies have reached a level that major corporations are announcing large-scale expansion projects close to the sources of these new natural gas discoveries.

Dow Chemical has announced plans to build a multibillion dollar plant to convert natural gas into the building blocks of plastic in Freeport, Texas. Royal Dutch Shell is building a similar $2 billion chemicals plant near Pittsburg, PA, close to the output from the Marcellus Shale. These are but two of thirty chemical plant projects that are ear-marked for the U.S. over the next five years.

Steel and iron producers are also excited at the prospect of saving over $11 billion annually through 2025. Steel maker Nucor is switching from coking coal to natural gas production of their iron products in a new $750 million plant in Louisiana. The trucking industry that now consumes just 0.1% of natural gas production is looking at a crash program to build natural gas refueling stations along America’s interstate highway system to refuel new long-haul trucks that will burn natural gas.

 All of this expansion means jobs. Economists predict as many as 500,000 new jobs by 2025. At the same time, if we can build the infrastructure to transport and convert our nation’s existing oil-based economy to consuming natural gas over the long run, we no longer need fear turmoil in the Middle East. The whims of OPEC will be a thing of the past. At the very least, America could join the league of energy producers/exporters and begin to export our surplus gas to foreign buyers. Europe, for example, pays 75% more for their natural gas than we do.

All of this sounds wonderful, yet there is a darker side to this “Gas Rush.” Homeowners across the nation in those regions where natural gas is being exploited have witnessed their once-pristine communities become industrial sites. In place of their willow trees or pastures, sprawling plants lit by huge flares late into the night blotting out the moon and stars.

Trucks rumble through neighborhoods spewing noxious fumes that mingle with other possibly toxic substances.  Neighbors keep children and pets behind fences away from containment ponds filled with unknown chemicals. They worry about the drinking water and hold their breath as earthquakes make the windows and china tremble where no such quakes had occurred before.

In our next column we will examine the darker lining within this pink cloud of natural gas abundance. Opponents of fracking argue that the risks outweigh the rewards in any further development of natural gas. Here we are on the verge of a possible renaissance in American manufacturing and yet New York, New Jersey and an increasing number of municipalities and local governments are ordering a halt to further development.

Is that wise or is America once again shooting itself in the foot? What do you say?

Which way the economy?

I say again because the same thing happened last year at around the same time. Economists call that a stop and start economy, something we haven’t seen since 1967. The mild winter and warmer early spring in two-thirds of the country this year has also added some confusion to the economic picture. Confusion in terms of how much of the strength in America’s fourth quarter of 2011 and into the first quarter of 2012 was due to abnormally mild weather?

On the surface everything was looking just ducky at the start of this year. The manufacturing cycle seemed to be catching fire. There appeared to be pent-up demand, coupled with massive liquidity injections by our Federal Reserve (QE 2.5) and the European Central Bank’s money giveaway as part of their bail out of Europe’s financial system. As a result, economic activity exploded at the end of last year (as did the stock market).

And then came the Ides of March.

Most of the manufacturing data for March indicates a less sanguine portrait of America’s economic health.  Industrial reports ranging from the Chicago Fed’s national activity Index, The ISM Composite Index, and the Richmond, Dallas and Kansas  Manufacturing indexes released monthly by the Federal Reserve all say the same thing.  The economy is slowing for the second time in 12 months.

 Just recently the Economic Output Composite Index marked its first decline in March since August, 2011 and this week’s National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) Index confirmed that March was a real stinker.   The NFIB Index is important because it gives us a better view of what is going among small businesses, which are the backbone of our country. Over the last 6 months, the NFIB Index has grown steadily, like the rest of the economic data. But In March, nine of the NFIB’s 10 index components hit the wall, declining markedly with the largest drops in hiring plans and expected real sales growth.

The gloomy prognosis for sales and hiring is especially important because small businesses hire the majority of workers in America. They are also completely dependent upon the consumer. Between fuel savings from the mild winter and lower gas prices at the pump last summer, those windfall savings generated $30 billion for American consumers. That was money they could and obviously did spend on other things. Now that the weather cycle has returned to more normal temperatures the impact of those economic “tax credits” have dissipated.

The stop and start performance of the economy should come as no surprise to readers. After all, it is something we have been living with since the end of the recession back in 2009. Back then, In order to “jump start” the economy, the Federal government, along with our Federal Reserve, has thrown money at the problem again and again. The resultant record deficits we now endure have put an end to the government’s giveaway programs but not those of our central bank.

 We have printed and then poured trillions upon trillions of dollars into the economy. After each spending splurge, we have seen a rise in economic activity but as the next round of quantitative easing ran its course, that activity began to sputter once again. This bout of stimulus is scheduled to end in June. Last year we witnessed a similar phenomenon at the end of QE II.

The government and the Fed have hoped that at some point once enough money is in the system that “organic” (real) economic activity will pick up where their stimulus left off. So far that has not been the case. Given that it an election year, I doubt that the Fed or the government will allow the unemployment rate to rise or the economy to slow once again. If the numbers continue to decline we can expect yet another round of stimulus, regardless of its impact.

Bottom line: What do you call someone who does the same thing over and over again and still expects a different outcome?

Peter Cottontail – by Steve Nelson & Jack Rollins

This year’s early spring could mean a little extra cash in retailer’s Easter baskets. Despite gasoline prices approaching $4.00/gallon, consumers are shopping for everything from hams to hydrangeas. 

Overall revenues are expecting to increase by 11-14%. That would make three years in a row where retail revenues have risen in the March/April period. The unseasonably warm weather we have been enjoying has helped chain store sales post their best weekly gains in more than 11 years.  Easter also happens to have arrived 16 days early this year. The combination of the two developments could mean as much as $16.9 billion more this year, according to the National Retail Federation.

Easter is the 4^th largest spending holiday in America after Christmas, Back-to-School, and only slightly smaller than Valentine’s Day. The average consumer is expected to spend $145.28 (up 10.9% from 2011) and 25% higher than the dark days of 2009. The average male shopper will outspend women, with shoppers in the 25-44 years age category spending the most.

Almost 19% of Americans will shop online this year while as many as 46% of shoppers will at least use their mobile devices to comparison shop and/or research product and retailer  information. Yet, Americans are still looking for a deal. Over 63% of spenders are heading to discount stores as their first stop for Easter purchases, followed by department stores (42%) and specialty stores (25.4%)

My first stop will be at the supermarket where I will pick up a free turkey or ham as a result of accumulating $300 in shopping points over the last two months. It is no surprise to me that food is the top category of spending for Easter and Passover with 87.7% of shoppers buying $5.11 billion in ham, lamb, turkey, and fish with all the trimmings. Ham prices have been higher than usual over the last two years, thanks to high feed costs. A typical ham is selling wholesale for 75 to 80 cents per pound this spring, well above the 55 cents per pound it has averaged for the previous five years.

Candy is also a big item. Easter comes in second after Halloween as the top candy selling event of the year, according to the National Confection Association. We will spend $2.346 billion to fill our children’s Easter baskets this year spending an average of $20.35 each for sweets.  Flowers and greeting cards on the other hand, while experiencing healthy sales, are not as important during this holiday. Still, Hallmark Cards reports Americans will send $57 million greeting cards this season, which makes Easter the fifth highest holiday sales period for them.

More than 7,500 warm temperature records were set last month. The warmest March on record was set for Chicago, Oklahoma City, Milwaukee, Detroit, Kansas City, Nashville, Indianapolis and Tampa, while it was the second warmest month in the history of New York City and Philadelphia. The warm, dry weather in two-thirds of the country spurred additional sales in a host of product lines. Spending for lawn and garden supplies was up 39% in March over last year. My wife, Barbara, had a hard time buying a rake at our local Tractor Supply store because the sales clerk said they had been sold out weeks before.

Spring clothing sales are also benefiting from the demand for new Easter outfits, while young and old alike are shedding overcoats and scarves to hunt for that perfect pair of shorts or tank top.

All in all, Easter this year should be gangbusters. What retailers worry about now is whether the strong sales now are only pulling demand forward. Will the heavier spending carry over into the summer or will shoppers, having depleted their spending limit, simply put their hands back in their pockets until the fall? I suspect additional consumer spending will depend upon how strong the economy will be and how fast unemployment will fall during the next several months. In the meantime, I wish you my readers a Happy Easter and Passover.

Obesity-related illnesses cost us $179 billion annually, with obese Americans spending 42% more per year for medical care than the non-obese to treat everything from type 2 diabetes to heart disease. Breaking that down into individual dollars and cents, it costs $4,879 for women and $2,646 for men every year in various costs associated with being overweight or obese.

It means that obese women pay nine times more and obese men pay six times more in associated costs than do individuals at a healthy wright. Besides the obvious individual health costs associated with this American epidemic, there are also work-related costs that you may not realize.

A study by Duke University concluded that it is costing business $73.1 billion/annually in absenteeism, work productivity and other costs for obese, full-time employees. Lost productivity alone is costing us $12.1 billion/year, which is twice as much as the medical costs. It works out that it is costing business $16,900 per capita for females and $15,500 for men in the 100 pounds overweight category of worker.

Other non-medical costs include wage loss, higher premiums for life insurance, short-term disability and disability pension insurance, sick leave (obese men miss two more days of work than healthy men) and early mortality.

 Much of the statistical data on how many of us are overweight or worse is derived from measuring the Body Mass Index, a cheap and simple formula to determine a rough estimate of body fat. You use your weight and height to compute a score. Those over a certain score are considered overweight and as your score increases so does the obesity factor.

Let’s take me for example, for most of my adult life my weight fluctuated between 185-190 pounds. At six-foot, two, I smoked and worked out like a fiend (love those contradictions). Seven years ago, I quit smoking, stopped exercising, and subsequently ballooned in weight to 255 pounds. My BMI soared from 24 to 33. I avoided standing on the scale and hated getting my yearly physical for obvious reasons. What I didn’t know, won’t kill me (yep, another contradiction).

In the meantime, my brother, who is three years younger than I and about the same height and weight, came down with Type II diabetes because of his weight. It was only a question of time before my added pounds was going to show up as serous health issues.  I started back to the gym but continued to eat what I wanted. I gained even more.  It was at that point, I realized that I had been kidding myself. I wasn’t overweight, I was officially obese.

Almost 55 pounds later (and lighter), the years seem to have have fled and I feel better than I have in a decade. The point to this “true confessions” is that although I knew all the obesity statistics, I never considered myself anything but overweight. I suspect we are all the same until something happens that allows us to take a bite out of reality.

There is good news and bad news about the obesity epidemic in this country. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that after two decades of steady increases, obesity rates in adults and children in the U.S. have remained unchanged during the last 12 years. Either we have reached the saturation level in the population where everyone that is prone to gaining weight has done so, or that the constant drum beat of public education on the dangers of obesity has made an impact That’s the good news.

The bad news is that a recent study by the New York University School of Medicine indicates that obesity in America might be far worse than we think. The culprit is the same BMI that we all use to determine obesity. Although the BMI is cheap and the starting point for measuring a weight problem is also one of the least accurate medical tests in existence. The study concluded that the number of obese Americans may actually be much higher than we think.

The researchers believe the problem with the BMI is that it estimates rather than measures body fat. The study used two other measures along with BMI —the amount of Leptin, a protein which regulates the body’s metabolism and Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry that tests body fat, muscle mass and bone density. Thirty-nine percent of those patients in the study who were classified as overweight were actually obese.

The bottom line is that we are killing ourselves. Our children are entering adulthood heavier than they’ve ever been at any time in human history. The way our food is processed, American’s addiction to fast food, our increasingly sedentary life style, an aversion to pain or discipline—all have been offered as reasons for this state of the nation.  It doesn’t matter who or what is to blame, in my opinion. Fat is fat and until each of us understands and takes responsibility for his or her own part in this epidemic there is little anyone can do outside of food rationing. My advice is get on the scale. And take it from there.

Don’t get me wrong, things have improved for returning Gulf War Era Veterans over the last two years. In 2010 their unemployment rate was 11.6% and spiked to 12.1% in 2012, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fortunately, the economy has improved since then and both the public and private sectors have pitched in to aid our returning vets in their job search.

However, more needs to be done. Although 1.9 million of these ex-soldiers hold private sector jobs today, another 90,000 troops are expected to return from Afghanistan by 2014. The good news is that the economy seems to be healing and the jobless rate has come down to 8.5% Say what you want about the Obama Administration, they are doing a good job at getting the word out that our veterans come first, in my opinion.

The president has launched a “Veterans Job Corps” and has offered tax breaks for companies that hire Vets under his VOW to Hire Heroes Act.  The White House’s “Joining Forces” initiative, led by the First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden, is also telegraphing the nationwide message- to “Hire a Vet, Hire a Vet.”

In addition, the Veterans Administration (VA) is doing all they can to convince America’s corporate world that Veterans should be a prime ingredient of their workforce.

The VA has put on job fairs to woo private and public sector employers into interviewing more vets with some success. The VA’s selling points, when pitching the strengths of veterans, are their self-discipline, problem-solving skills, decision-making under stressful circumstances and their attention to detail. It also helps that most veterans are team players. I happen to agree with all of the above.

Back in the day, (when I returned home from a stint in Vietnam) I needed and found a job as an apprentice machinist in my home town of Philadelphia. It was a culture shock. A factory floor replaced the jungle canopy that was my home for almost two years. I knew nothing about cutting bars of steel into aircraft nuts and bolts, but I was willing to learn.

Granted, I was no longer making life and death decisions on a day-to-day basis as leader of my Marine unit, but it was a job and I was grateful to have one. After all, no one was shooting at me. To be honest, it was monotonous, boring, dirty work, but I stuck with it and did a commendable job (according to my boss) until it was time to start my college education. Believe me, Vets know they have to start over and learn from the bottom.

Since all the focus seems to be on Gulf war soldiers, for those pre-9/11 veterans who may feel left out, The Veterans Retraining Assistance Program (VRAP), which is part of the VOW to Hire Heroes Act, will begin offering 12 months of GI Bill benefits for older unemployed vets by this summer. Vets who qualify may be able to receive as much as $17,600 for education and training.

And don’t believe all that malarkey about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Rand Corporation’s 2008 study indicated that almost one in five returning vets suffered from PTSD may be true but that still leaves over 80% of Gulf War Vets without PTSD. I‘m almost sure all front line soldiers (regardless of their war era) suffered from some PTSD. I know I did when I returned from Vietnam. Remember too, our home-coming was much different from today’s treatment of returning soldiers. Call me lucky, but the trauma of war plus the ostracism I felt from Americans at home never interfered with my job performance and, overtime, I got over it without medical assistance. Most Vets do.

Today’s exodus of soldiers after ten years of war in the Middle East reminds me of a similar time in America’s history. I wrote about it in a past column:

“When WW II ended in 1945, 16 million Americans (one out of eight) were serving their country in some capacity.  With returning vets looking for work, many feared we were heading for massive unemployment and another Depression unless Washington did something about it. In 1944, the GI Bill of Rights was passed. It gave servicemen unemployment checks, low-interest housing, business loans and a free college education.

Nearly eight million vets took advantage of that benefit and in the process drove the U.S. illiteracy rate to 3%, the lowest level in American history. It also transformed our economy, creating a massive Technocracy, while introducing the age of information.”

We may be on the verge of yet another such experience (if smaller) that could boost our future economic prospects simply by harnessing the power of these returning heroes today. I say we have nothing to lose and a whole lot to gain by hiring a Vet.

Back in the day, you were either clean shaven or grew a beard. During the Hippie Era, it was all long hair and beards, which sent many a barber to the poor house. Hair length gradually shortened, beards and moustaches were trimmed and barbers breathed a sigh of relief. Over a decade ago, American men grew older and fatter. To add insult to injury, their hair started to thin as well. The fashion industry quickly came to the rescue and convinced the nation that bald was beautiful.

 I, for one, embraced the idea and quickly learned to shave my own head. For me, an avid jock, no hair was both convenient and saved a trip to the barber. However, maintaining that clean shaven pate is no easy job and many men sought out the barbershop to maintain the new style. But the fashion industry was not done with the masculine ego. Enter the man’s man.

 First, let me confess my ignorance. In my naivety, I had long assumed that the facial hair that had sprouted up among male actors in a variety of television and movie roles was simply the result of not shaving for a day or two. How wrong could I be? These new facial hair styles demand a lot of time, effort and expense and have spawned a plethora of trimmers, shavers and masks to give the customer just the right look,

Today, facial hair is part of what the fashionistas call the Retrosexual Revolution. It is an era where men are looking back to the styles, values and pastimes of traditional masculinity, albeit with a heightened discernment about brands, aesthetics and lifestyle. Sort of “Mad Men” with a dash of political correctness.

This new flannel-clad urban woodsman (for those who can afford it) will normally sport a carefully clipped or trimmed five o’clock shadow across his jowls while displaying his single malt scotch collection or his fixed-gear touring bike. The image appears to resound mightily among American males.

 As a result, more men than ever before are visiting the barbershop. Last year there were more than 235,000 barbers in over 100,000 shops in the United States. That is the highest in recent memory and is predicted to jump again this year according to the National Association of Barbers Boards of America. 

Sales of beard and stubble trimmers (as they are now called) advanced 14% in 2010, 17% last year and should top that again in 2012. And stubble trimmers aren’t cheap. A top-of –the-line stubble model will set you back $60, about twice as much as your old fashioned beard trimmer.  Grooming companies such as Conair, Phillips Norelco and Wahl have taken special care to deal with facial hair at close range and have succeeded in segmenting the market.

Now, if you have the desire, you can get just the right length of stubble each day by picking up the stubble trimmer. But if instead you like a slightly longer look called Scruff (the George Clooney look) you can buy another trimmer that will convince one and all that you could grow a full beard if you wanted to, but choose not to. Full beards require a heavy-duty trimmer while goatees, moustaches and side burns all require different trimmers. Of course, if that is not enough, one can always go “feral” and grow your beard until you look like Heidi’s grandfather. 

Yet self-barbering takes effort, practice and often less than satisfactory results.  Many men have opted instead to visit their neighborhood barbershop breathing new life into the staid and sometimes stuffy local hair emporium. Unisex is out. Barbers have reinvented their industry by offering customers what they want, the way they want it. The top ten barbershops in the U.S. all have one thing in common—ambience. Masculinity, tradition, and a variety of services is what distinguish barbershops today from those of my childhood.

Barber schools grew at a 29% rate last year and becoming a barber has appeared on several new career lists. Opening a barbershop has also become a” hot start-up” area given that the barriers to entry are low, start-up costs are reasonable and competition tame.

A simple survey of barbershops in the Northeast confirmed that “business is good” as Patty, a barber at The Clip Joint Barbers in Portsmouth, NH said.

Bob McGiffert, who owns Bob’s Barber Shop in Greenport, NY, also agreed that haircuts were doing well, although he “doesn’t see much traffic in stubble and such.”

In Rutland, VT, Steve, a barber since 1988, works at Henry’s, an establishment celebrating 57 years in business. He is seeing a “lot more goatees” in his business lately. “It just adds to the product line.”

And finally Nancy Donovan, who has been cutting hair for over a decade at Ken’s Barber Shop in Great Barrington, MA, is seeing a lot of facial hair trim requests, especially in the summer.

“We have a lot of city people that vacation here in the summertime,” she said,” and we get all sorts of requests.”

She says she has done everything from shaving heads, to regular haircuts to even cutting a “B” for Boston on one customer’s head after the World Series over the last few years.

As for the barbering business, she enjoys her line of work and would recommend that anyone wanting a great career should look into becoming a barber. Take that George Clooney!

It has been estimated that same-sex couples denied marriage benefits in the U.S. will incur additional expenses of $41,000 to $467,000 over their lifetime, compared to heterosexual couples. Since there are roughly 594,391 gay couples (1.2 million people) living in the U.S., we are talking as much as $2.5 billion to $277 billion in expenses. Assuming gay marriage was legalized throughout the country, that money would be available to be spent on more productive pursuits.

Most of the stories I read focus on the immediate economic benefits to those states that have legalized same-sex marriages. Things like marriage licenses, wedding halls, photographers, etc.

New York, for example, is home to over 42,000 same-sex couples. Since gay marriage became legal in July of last year, the state estimates they have made $190,000 in marriage fees alone. Overall the state estimates they will generate about an additional $210 million in marriage and wedding-related revenues alone.

In neighboring New Jersey, where almost 17,000 gay couples reside, legalizing gay marriage could generate up to $119 million over three years once legislation is passed. The same was true in the other states where gay marriage is legal (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York, Washington, Maryland and the District of Columbia).

Yet, these numbers are infinitesimal compared to the potential costs that we the taxpayer would incur if gay marriage were legalized throughout the country, argues the anti-gay marriage community.  They argue that gay marriage would entitle gay couples to typical marriage benefits including claiming a tax exemption for a spouse, receiving social security payments from a deceased spouse and coverage by a spouse’s health insurance policy.

No one knows for sure what that bill would be if the country did legalize same –sex marriage, but we can at least gather hints. For example, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the cost to the federal government of extending employment benefit to same-sex domestic partners of federal employees (ex the post office) would be $596 million in mandatory spending and $302 million in discretionary spending between 2010 and 2019. That’s really a drop in the bucket when talking about the Federal Government’s budget.

A joint study by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation and the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies analyzed the cost to American businesses of same-sex marriages. They looked at health care benefits and concluded that at most 190,000 businesses out of approximately 2.9 million firms would experience a health plan enrollment of a new gay spouse. In a large business, where employee benefit costs are in the millions of dollars, the company might see an average rise in costs of just under $25,000/year. In small businesses the dollar impact would be very small, possibly as low as $40/year at most.

Defined contribution plans, which make up over 80% of all retirement plans, would not be affected at all since employer contributions are not based on family status. Defined benefit plans (pension plans) are more complicated although they only represent about 20% of all employees and only 8% of small businesses. The costs to a pension plan, depending on the employee’s choices, would not change much either.

As far as social security benefits, the number of new surviving spouses receiving benefits would not be large enough to make much of a difference to overall benefits. As for the income tax benefits of being married, we all know that blade cuts both ways. Some couples would benefit depending upon their income, but others in a higher tax bracket, would actually pay more taxes.

Overall, the economic impact of gay marriages, in my opinion, would be a net positive for our nation, for the taxpayer and for the future productivity of our economy. The moral issues involved are a completely different topic and one that this writer will leave to the hot heads on either side. I’m too old to judge anyone, even myself.