World Unemployment to Hit Record High in 2013: ILO

  

  Published: Tuesday, 22 Jan 2013 | 12:00 AM ET

By: Katy Barnato

World unemployment could top record levels this year and continue rising until 2017, the International Labour Organization (ILO) said on Tuesday in its annual employment report.
2009 currently stands as the worst recorded year for world unemployment, with 198 million people across the globe without work.

In its 2013 Global Employment Trends report, the ILO forecasts unemployment numbers will rise by 5.1 million in 2013 to reach 202 million, topping 2009's record.  The report also predicts unemployment will rise further in 2014 to reach 205 million."Unemployment remains as dire as it was during the crisis in 2009," Ekkehard Ernst, chief of the employment trends unit at the ILO, which wrote the report, told CNBC.

While the crisis may have originated in the developed world, the report noted that 75 percent of 2012's newly unemployed came from outside it, with East Asia, South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa being the worst affected.

Ernst attributed this to the "spillover effect" of weak growth in advanced economies, and in particular, the recession in Europe.  "The main transmission mechanism of global spillovers has been through international trade, but regions such as Latin America and the Caribbean have also suffered from increased volatility of international capital flows," the report said.  It also blamed incoherence between monetary and fiscal policies and a "piecemeal approach to financial sector and sovereign debt problems, in particular in the euro area."

"The indecision of policy makers in several countries has led to uncertainty about future conditions, and reinforced corporate tendencies to increase cash holdings or pay dividends, rather than expand capacity and hire new workers," the report said.

Ernst added that labor markets can lag other economic indicators, meaning they might not reflect recent upturns in the world economy.  "Labor markets reflect what has happened in the last year… it takes some time for improvement in output to be reflected," Ernst said.

In addition, the ILO is recording rising numbers of people who choose not to search for jobs because they think the situation is hopeless. These people, officially classified as discouraged workers, may choose instead to rely on a partner's earnings or claim welfare benefits, if available.   "The labor market situation has been so bad for so long, discouragement has grown out of proportion," he said.
Despite the gloomy forecast from ILO, some people see a turnaround for the global economy. Pimco CEO and co-CIO Mohamed El-Erian said the world economy could be nearing the end of its "new normal" of high unemployment and slow growth.

"We said in 2009: three to five years," El-Erian told CNBC on Thursday, referring to how long the phenomenon of "new normal" might last. El-Erian coined the term in 2009.

 -By CNBC's Katy Barnato

Super-Rich Shun Banks, Advisers for Next Big Deal

Tycoons are shunning banks and wealth managers, preferring to put a flood of money from selling stakes in companies into property and new ventures rather than trust industries whose reputations have been battered by the global financial crisis.

Thomson Reuters data show that proceeds for shareholders selling stakes in companies, excluding governments, have tripled since 2008 to $183 billion last year, creating new millionaires and making many wealthy people much richer.

But little of that cash appears to have made its way to the wealth-management industry, which specializes in looking after - and increasing - the riches of the world's multi-millionaires.
The average increase in assets run for clients by wealth managers and banks was 6.55 percent for the 100 largest institutions in the sector, according to the most recent analysis by finance industry consultants Scorpio Partnership which based its research on published company earnings for 2011.
"Forgetting all the other ways of getting new money (for banks and wealth management firms), there is a deficit there," said Cath Tillotson, managing partner at Scorpio.

Wealth managers argue that people enriched by share sales are often serial entrepreneurs, and so more likely to invest in another business venture than bank the proceeds or put them in the care of an investment manager.

"They would tend to look for a relatively liquid and short-term cash position while they look for the next long-term opportunity, as opposed to saying:'I'm an entrepreneur, I've made a lot of money, I'm going to cash out and become a typical wealth client'," said Paul Patterson, deputy chairman at RBC Wealth Management's 'ultra high net worth' international division servicing the bank's richest clients.
However, strong growth in other sectors favoured by the super-rich, such as London's property market, suggests there may be a problem for banks and wealth managers.

Research from property consultant Savills shows the amount spent on London homes worth more than 5 million pounds reached 4.1 billion pounds ($6.6 billion) in 2012, with the number of transactions nearly doubling since 2008.

Property in stable jurisdictions appeals more than conventional investments offered by banks, in part because of the reputational damage they suffered in the financial crisis, said Yolande Barnes, a research director at Savills.

"You could put it down to they (the super-rich) just don't trust banks to make them or keep their money," Barnes said.

Banks have sought to access new clients through the rush to luxury London property by offering rich buyers mortgages on their Mayfair townhouses, but most of the clients at that end of the market are cash buyers, she added.

Read more on "Remarkable Growth"

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100387475/

Think Only the Rich Will Pay More Taxes? You're Wrong

Mike Kemp | Getty Images

Think Only the Rich Will Pay More Taxes? You're Wrong
 
Because neither the Democrats nor the Republicans wanted to defend it, the temporary payroll tax cut enacted under Obama died at the end of 2012, which means that everyone in the country will see a bigger tax bite out of their paychecks this year.




You followed all of the debate over the fiscal cliff and were relieved to hear that taxes were only going up for the rich this year.
Well, you were wrong.
Because neither party wanted to defend it, the temporary payroll tax cut enacted under Obama died at the end of 2012, which means that everyone in the country will see a bigger tax bite out of their paychecks this year. So when you get your first check of the year, look at the amount charged under "FICA" – you're going to be paying more than you did in December.
How big a bite is it? For many middle class workers, it will work out to a trip to the grocery store or a tank of gas less every two weeks this year.
Here are the numbers.
For a single person making $60,000 per year who's paid bi-weekly, gross income in a paycheck is $2,307.69.
In December, you would have had to subtract from that federal withholding taxes of $403. 56. FICA taxes were $96.93. Medicare was $33.46. State withholding for a person living in Maryland was $177.35.
That gives the taxpayer net pay in one check in December of $1,596.39.
So what happens this month?
Gross pay is the same, as are the Medicare and state taxes. But FICA taxes go up sharply – to $143.08. That's a $46.15 bite from the political decision to allow the payroll tax cut to expire.
But here's the good news – federal withholding from this paycheck are down by about 4 bucks, to $399.18, due to the way the federal government calculates inflation.
That gives our taxpayer net pay of $1,554.62, or $41.77 less than he or she made for each paycheck in December. And that's money that could have gone to that bag of groceries or tank of gas.
 Read More: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100372837/

CNBC.com Article: Boomers Stand to Benefit Most from Health-Care Act

Boomers Stand to Benefit Most from Health-Care Act
Hit hardest by unemployment, shrinking nest eggs and rising health care costs, the Baby Boom generation will be the main beneficiaries of the Affordable Care Act, according to experts.



With the presidential election and Supreme Court decision behind us, the federal government is moving forward with the Affordable Care Act. Baby Boomers stand to gain the most.
Since the recession, Boomers have been hard hit by unemployment, shrinking nest eggs and rising health care costs. During those years, about 8.6 million Boomers were without health insurance, according to a special 2009 report by Commonwealth Fund.
As the Boomer generation approaches retirement, many hope that the health care law will fill the void. "It is a game changer," says Ron Fontanetta, a health care group practice leader at Towers Watson. "It will provide health care access to pre-65 retirees in a very significant way."
Retirees who have not reached age 65 are more at risk -- they don't qualify for Medicaid, and if their former employers don't offer retiree health benefits, they will not have a group discount.
Also, it doesn't take much for a health insurance company to say that they have a pre-existing condition and deny them coverage, says Paul Fronstin, head of health benefits research at EBRI. Even if Boomer retirees can get a private health insurance plan, it will be very costly.
Based on their age alone, Boomers have to pay prices that are five to seven times higher than younger Americans, according to AARP. But if early retirees can wait until the ACA takes effect, it will change the playing field, says Fronstin.
-- Beginning in 2014, the law is supposed to prevent insurers from denying coverage to those who have a pre-existing condition. On Nov. 20, the Obama administration said that it was moving forward to implement provisions to ban discrimination and protect consumers from possible insurance abuses.
--The ACA also will do away with lifetime and annual dollar limits on benefits, and it will limit the age rating so that a Boomer can only pay three times as much as younger person.
--Health insurance will not necessarily be less costly. It will be operated by state health insurance exchanges, which will offer a competitive private health insurance market that should provide one-stop shopping.

Read More About This... 


http://www.cnbc.com/id/100343188/

Bye Bye Dollar Bill?

The following article was from Yahoo News...

 

What do you think?  Would you use it?

 

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — American consumers have shown about as much appetite for the $1 coin as kids do their spinach. They may not know what's best for them either. Congressional auditors say doing away with dollar bills entirely and replacing them with dollar coins could save taxpayers some $4.4 billion over the next 30 years.

Vending machine operators have long championed the use of $1 coins because they don't jam the machines, cutting down on repair costs and lost sales. But most people don't seem to like carrying them. In the past five years, the U.S. Mint has produced 2.4 billion Presidential $1 coins. Most are stored by the Federal Reserve, and production was suspended about a year ago.

The latest projection from the Government Accountability Office on the potential savings from switching to dollar coins entirely comes as lawmakers begin exploring new ways for the government to save money by changing the money itself.

The Mint is preparing a report for Congress showing how changes in the metal content of coins could save money.

The last time the government made major metallurgical changes in U.S. coins was nearly 50 years ago when Congress directed the Mint to remove silver from dimes and quarters and to reduce its content in half dollar coins. Now, Congress is looking at new changes in response to rising prices for copper and nickel.

Read rest of article here:

http://news.yahoo.com/congress-looks-doing-away-1-bill-083418974--politics.html

Social Security Overhaul: An Obama Legacy?

CNBC.com Article: Social Security Overhaul: An Obama Legacy?

Getty Images

Among the fires that President Barack Obama must beat back immediately in his second term, Social Security reform isn’t in the mix. But if the president studies past administrations — and aims to enhance his legacy, as presidents do — Social Security may well rise to the top.

The question for a president is, “how willing you are to be a leader and make a name for yourself,” said Christian Weller, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and an associate professor of public policy at the University of Massachusetts Boston. “I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama gives it [Social Security revamping] a try.”

 

Read rest of this CNBC Article Here

Is Social Security a Good Deal or Not?

Is Social Security a good deal? Many Americans worry that they will put more money into the system via payroll taxes during their working years than they will ever get back in benefits — and their concerns help fuel the ongoing push by Republicans to transform Social Security into a privatized system of personal accounts.

ImagesBazaar | Getty Images

Mitt Romney has supported privatization in the past (see his book, "No Apology"), and running mate Paul Ryan argued for it as recently as last week's vice presidential debate: "Let younger Americans have a voluntary choice of making their money work faster for them within the Social Security system."

Could workers make their money grow more quickly with personal accounts? The actuaries at the Social Security Administration (SSA) ran an analysis recently that simulated real (after inflation) annual rates of return on payroll tax contributions for beneficiaries who were born between 1920 and 2004.

It showed that some workers might beat Social Security's returns in some years if they took risks in the stock market. But over a lifetime, Social Security's consistent, risk-free and inflation-adjusted returns would be very tough to beat.

 

Read the rest of the CNBC article here.