Monday, August 31, 2009

HEALTH BILL BREECHES IRS PRIVACY

on August 31, 2009

As if Obama’s health care proposals were not flawed enough, CBS News reports a previously unnoticed provision of the bill which makes a shambles of any privacy surrounding your federal tax returns.

Under the House bill, the IRS is required to make available to the new government Health Choices Commissioner” established by the legislation and to each state health program all of your personal tax information.

In a blog, CBSNews’ Declan McCullagh reports that “Section 431 (a) of the bill says that the IRS must divulge taxpayer identity information, including the filing status, the modified adjusted grow income, the number of dependents, and ‘other information as is prescribed by’ regulation” to the “new Health Choices Commissioner and state health programs.”

And, McCullagh also reports that, under Section 1801(a) “the Social Security Administration can obtain tax return data on anyone who may be eligible for a ‘low-income prescription drug subsidy’ but has not applied for it.”

So the Health Choices Commissioner and anyone in his office, the fifty state health programs and their staffs, and the vast Social Security Administration will all now have access to your personal tax information.

It might as well be published in the newspapers!

The rationale for providing this confidential tax information to all these people is not only to check on the eligibility of those who are seeking federal subsidy – a possibly appropriate use of it – but, also, to those who have not applied but might be eligible.  This later provision essentially authorizes the Social Security Administration to seek and obtain anyone’s income tax information under the guise of determining if they should have applied for a subsidy.

In his blog, McCullagh quotes Tom Giovanetti of the Institute for Policy Innovation as saying “How many thousands of federal employees will have access to your record?  The privacy of your health records will be only as good as the most nosy, most dishonest, and most malcontented federal employee.”  And not just your health records, your financial records too!

This legislation requiring an agency-to-agency transfer of confidential tax information runs against the general policy of the Privacy Act which prohibits such a paper flow.  Generally, information has to come from the individual involved and cannot simply be passed from one government bureau to another.  The IRS takes particular pains to keep tax returns confidential and leaks are rare.  But this legislation will end any hope or pretense of privacy.

Saturday, August 29, 2009

REGRESSION TO THE MEAN AND HEALTH CARE ... DON'T TAKE TWO ASPRINS AND DON'T CALL IN THE MORNING

The conditions under which regression toward the mean occurs depend on the way the term is mathematically defined. Sir Francis Galton first observed the phenomenon in the context of simple linear regression of data points. However, a less restrictive approach is possible. Regression towards the mean can be defined for any bivariate distribution with identical marginal distributions. Two such definitions exist.[3] One definition accords closely with the common usage of the term “regression towards the mean”. Not all such bivariate distributions show regression towards the mean under this definition. However, all such bivariate distributions show regression towards the mean under the other definition.


What is simply means is that the majority of those with health care will be giving up their health care for something that is regressive and not innovative.  Why you ask?  Because lowering the age of passing equates to a big savings; and what would lower that age?  Listen to the video clip.  You decide.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Bill would give president emergency control of Internet ... ARE YOU ALARMED?


August 28, 2009 12:34 AM PDT

Bill would give president emergency control of Internet


Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.

They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.

The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.

"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness," said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill."

Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.
A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.

When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs--from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records," Rockefeller said.

The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government's role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.

Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.

The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. "As soon as you're saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it's going to be a really big issue," he says.

Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. ("Cyber" is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)

"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."

Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
The Internet Security Alliance's Clinton adds that his group is "supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective."

Declan McCullagh is a correspondent for CBSNews.com who writes a daily feature called Taking Liberties focused on individual and economic rights. You can bookmark his CBS News Taking Liberties site here, or subscribe to the RSS feed. You can e-mail Declan at declan@cbsnews.com.
 Declan McCullagh, CBSNews.com's chief political correspondent, chronicles the intersection of politics and technology. He has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C., for more than a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says, "We oughta have a new federal law against this." E-mail Declan.

FORD ... FOUNDATION OF REPUBLICAN DEMOCRACY ... NOT FOUND ON ROAD DEAD

UNFORTUNATELY THIS IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME ... 2010 MODEL.  AND JUST THINK FORD WAS THE ONE THAT DIDN'T TAKE GOVERNMENT STIMULUS MONEY ... REFRESHING!!!  BEST PART IS IT ALL MADE IN AMERICA!!! CAN'T WAIT TO GET ONE.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

NY FED IS A PUPPET OF THE ADMINISTRATION ...


Bear in mind that the head of the NY Fed often considered the most important is now an ex-AFLCIO executive so he can report how and what he wants!

Real US unemployment rate at 16 pct: Fed official
Aug 26 02:25 PM US/Eastern
The real US unemployment rate is 16 percent if persons who have dropped out of the labor pool and those working less than they would like are counted, a Federal Reserve official said Wednesday.

"If one considers the people who would like a job but have stopped looking -- so-called discouraged workers -- and those who are working fewer hours than they want, the unemployment rate would move from the official 9.4 percent to 16 percent, said Atlanta Fed chief Dennis Lockhart.

He underscored that he was expressing his own views, which did "do not necessarily reflect those of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market Committee," the policy-setting body of the central bank.

Lockhart pointed out in a speech to a chamber of commerce in Chattanooga, Tennessee that those two categories of people are not taken into account in the Labor Department's monthly report on the unemployment rate. The official July jobless rate was 9.4 percent.

Lockhart, who heads the Atlanta, Georgia, division of the Fed, is the first central bank official to acknowledge the depth of unemployment amid the worst US recession since the Great Depression.

Lockhart said the US economy was improving but "still fragile," and the beginning stages of a sluggish recovery were underway.

"My forecast for a slow recovery implies a protracted period of high unemployment," he said, adding that it would be difficult to stimulate jobs through additional public spending.

"Further fiscal stimulus has been mentioned, but the full effects of the first stimulus package are not yet clear, and the concern over adding to the federal deficit and the resulting national debt is warranted," he said.

President Barack Obama's administration has resisted calls for more public spending, arguing that the 787-billion-dollar stimulus passed in February needs time to work its way through the economy.

Lockhart noted that construction and manufacturing had been particularly hard hit in the recession that began in December 2007 and predicted some jobs were gone for good.
Prior to the recession, he said, construction and manufacturing combined accounted for slightly more than 15 percent of employment. But during the recession, their job losses made up more than 40 percent of all US job losses.

"In my view, it is unlikely that we will see a return of jobs lost in certain sectors, such as manufacturing," he said.

"In a similar vein, the recession has been so deep in construction that a reallocation of workers is likely to happen -- even if not permanent."

Payroll employment has fallen by 6.7 million since the recession began.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

EVERYDAY IS HALLOWEEN ... THE MORE THINGS CHANGE, ...


THE MORE THEY REMAIN THE SAME ... THE EMPEROR IS MERELY CHANGING HIS CLOTHES?

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): Main Page

Cover of the 2009 Code of Federal Regulations.The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) is the codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the Federal Government. It is divided into 50 titles that represent broad areas subject to Federal regulation. Each volume of the CFR is updated once each calendar year and is issued on a quarterly basis.

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and The New World Order

- By William Blase
For those who may be confused by the controversies surrounding the "New World Order", a One-World-Government, and American concern over giving the UN more power; those unaware of the issues involved; and those wishing more background, I offer the following.
Originally presented for an Honors Class, "Dilemmas of War and Peace," at New Mexico State University, the paper was ridiculed and characterized by Dr. Yosef Lapid, (an acknowledged and locally quoted "expert" on Terrorism and Middle Eastern affairs) as "paranoid... possibly a symptom of mental illness." You may judge for yourself.
Citing source data is the "scientific method," but does not seem to apply to "Conspiracy Theories." A thousand sources may be quoted, yet will not convince the "skeptics," the "realists." It seems to me the "symptoms of mental illness" are on their side, if they refuse to look at evidence ("There are none so blind as those who WILL not see"); or perhaps something more sinister is at work, such as a knowledge of the truth, that does not want YOU to know.
To be paranoid means to believe in delusions of danger and persecution. If the danger is real, and the evidence credible, then it cannot be delusional. To ignore the evidence, and hope that it CANNOT be true, is more an evidence of mental illness.
The issue involves much more than a difference of philosophy, or political viewpoint. Growing up in the midst of the "Cold War," our generation were taught that those who attempted to abolish our national sovereignty and overthrow our Constitutional government were committing acts of treason. Please judge for yourself if the group discussed is guilty of such.
If one group is effectively in control of national governments and multinational corporations; promotes world government through control of media, foundation grants, and education; and controls and guides the issues of the day; then they control most options available. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and the financial powers behind it, have done all these things, and promote the "New World Order", as they have for over seventy years.
The CFR is the promotional arm of the Ruling Elite in the United States of America. Most influential politicians, academics and media personalities are members, and it uses its influence to infiltrate the New World Order into American life. Its' "experts" write scholarly pieces to be used in decision making, the academics expound on the wisdom of a united world, and the media members disseminate the message.
To understand how the most influential people in America came to be members of an organization working purposefully for the overthrow of the Constitution and American sovereignty, we have to go back at least to the early 1900's, though the story begins much earlier (depending on your viewpoint and beliefs).
That a ruling power elite does indeed control the U.S. government behind the scenes has been attested to by many americans in a position to know. Felix Frankfurter, Justice of the Supreme Court (1939-1962), said: "The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes." In a letter to an associate dated November 21, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt wrote, "The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson." February 23, 1954,
Senator William Jenner warned in a speech: "Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government, a bureaucratic elite which believes our Constitution is outmoded."
Baron M.A. Rothschild wrote, "Give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws."
All that is needed to effectively control a government is to have control over the nation's money: a central bank with a monopoly over the supply of money and credit. This had been done in Western Europe, with the creation of privately owned central banks such as the Bank of England.
Georgetown professor Dr. Carroll Quigley (Bill Clinton's mentor while at Georgetown) wrote about the goals of the investment bankers who control central banks: "... nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole... controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences."
The Bank of the United States (1816-36), an early attempt at an American central bank, was abolished by President Andrew Jackson, who believed that it threatened the nation. He wrote: "The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government, the distress it had wantonly produced...are but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."
Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution...if the American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
Does that not describe the situation in America today?




A ROSE IS A ROSE AND BY ANY OTHER NAME IS A ROSE ...

White poster board $1.29
Colored markers $2.99
Froster Grant Sun glasses $9.99


The nerve to be seen in the public with grandma ...
PRICELESS!

Saturday, August 22, 2009

XMAS IS AROUND THE CORNER ... SO WHAT CAN WE SPEND?


China must keep buying US Treasuries for now-paper

Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:07pm EDT


BEIJING, Aug 20 (Reuters) - China has no choice but to increase its holdings of U.S. government debt for now, an official newspaper said on Thursday, adding that diversifying the nation's foreign exchange holdings would be a painstaking shift.
The editorial in the overseas edition of the People's Daily, the ruling Communist Party's chief newspaper, said a drop in China's holdings of U.S. Treasuries in June showed that "China is seeking to diversify its foreign exchange (holdings)".
China owned $776.4 billion of U.S. government debt in June, down 3.1 percent from $801.5 billion in May, according to official U.S. Treasury figures.
The percentage fall was the largest in nearly nine years, but China's holdings were still up from $763.5 billion in April and $767.9 billion in March. [ID:nN17370347]
The overseas edition of the People's Daily is a low-circulation offshoot of the main, domestic version of the paper. It generally echoes official thinking, sometimes in clearer words than domestic media, and this editorial highlighted the caution shaping China's currency policies.
It stressed that Beijing would need a long time to curb its appetite for U.S. debt and learn to handle a more diverse range of assets.
"Achieving foreign exchange diversification and settling on a scientific and reasonable structure [of forex holdings] is a step we must complete," said the editorial.
"Prior to this China has no choice but to increase holdings of U.S. government bonds."
Losses incurred on more adventurous foreign currency investments showed that for now China lacked the expertise needed to manage a more complex portfolio, the paper said.
"It must be admitted that we're still not well-versed in the international rules of the game," it said. "In using capital, we are still elementary school students."
The composition of China's foreign exchange reserves is a state secret. Analysts estimate that up to 70 percent of the $2.13 trillion stockpile, the world's largest, is invested in dollar-denominated assets, mainly in U.S. government debt.
The U.S. Treasury data do not capture government debt bought through intermediaries, notably brokers in London.
If these are included, as well as China's holdings of other U.S. bonds and equities, the country owns an estimated $1.6 trillion of U.S. securities, Standard Chartered said in a report on Tuesday. (Reporting by Chris Buckley; Editing by Alan Wheatley and Ken Wills)

Friday, August 21, 2009

THE NEW McCarthyism COMING OUT OF CONGRESS!!!

Health Insurers Fear Probe By House Dems Is Reprisal for Opposing Part of Obama's Plan


Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Bart Stupak, D-Mich., sent a letter warning health insurers that the House Energy and Commerce Committee is "examining executive compensation and other business practices of the health industry."


FOXNews.com
Wednesday, August 19, 2009

In a move some fear is a reprisal for opposing President Obama's health care plan, Democrats sent 52 letters to health insurers requesting financial records for a House committee's investigation.


Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Bart Stupak, D-Mich., sent a letter warning health insurers that the House Energy and Commerce Committee is "examining executive compensation and other business practices of the health industry."


Waxman, chairman of the committee, and Stupak, chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee did not inform their Republican counterparts of their plans.


Health insurers have until Sept. 4 to provide Congress a detailed list of every employee who made over a $1 million dollars a year between 2003 and 2008. Democrats also want documents about conferences and any events held off company property as well as the types of transportation, lodging, food, entertainment and even gifts exchanged.


Raising the intimidation stakes: the Waxman letter offers insurers no explanation of what is being investigated or why.


Industry insiders fear the beginning of reprisals for anyone daring to dissent from the Obama agenda. One said it feels like a reprisal audit by the IRS.


With raucous health care town halls unfolding nationwide during the August congressional recess and polls showing increased opposition to a government-run insurance program or "public option," neither Waxman nor Stupak nor their staffs would comment on this story. But it's no secret that Democrats blame anti-reform ads on the private health insurance industry and its supporters.


Private health insurers warn that a public option could put them at a competitive disadvantage and even out of business, but they insist they support health care reform in general.


A spokesman for Stupak told The Associated Press Tuesday night that 52 letters had been sent to health insurers with $2 billion or more in annual premiums. He said letters were not dispatched to other industry groups, some of which have been airing television advertising in support of Obama's call for legislation. HMMMMMMM!


But Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for the American Health Insurance Plans, said Democrats on the panel hoped to "silence the health insurance industry and distract attention away from the fact that the American people are rejecting a government-run plan" as part of Obama's planned overhaul.


Zirkelbach said it would be up to individual companies to decide whether to turn the records over.


Spokesmen for three large insurance companies, Aetna, UnitedHealth Group Inc. and WellPoint Inc., confirmed the firms had received the letters but declined comment.


FOX News' Carl Cameron and The Associated Press contributed to this report

A CHARMING LAIR ... OR PERHAPS TOO MANY MOVING PARTS?

OBVIOUSLY IN OVER HIS HEAD ... OR PERHAPS TOO 
MANY BALLS IN THE AIR AT ONCE!










Saturday, August 15, 2009

MONTY, MONTY, MONTY DOOR TWO, NO DOOR THREE! ... PLEASE!!!

There's one in every family.  What we have here is the inability to handle the truth ... that was a great line from "A Few Good Men". The truth in this case is what's behind door three.  DOOR 1: A recovering economy, DOOR 2: Happy Days with the Fonz, and DOOR 3: the ugly head of the monster "INFLATION".  For those of you from Pharma Land, or as they say in Texas Hold'm ... double up ... but first a refresher from "A Few Good Men" ... and the winner is ... let's check the Academy Awards, no let's not  ... because the real winner is: 


Studio: Columbia


Release Date: December 11, 1992
Domestic Gross: $141,340,178
Prod. Budget: $40 million
Running Time: 138 mins.
Genre: Drama / Thriller
MPAA: R (language)




So what about that crazy aunt who's been yelling from the closet ... 
what has she been yelling? Well, let's see!


Treasury Inflation Protected Securities - TIPS

What Does TREASURY INFLATION PROTECTED SECURITIES - TIPS MEAN?
A special type of Treasury note or bond that offers protection from inflation.  Like other Treasuries, an inflation-indexed security pays interest every six months and pays the principal when the security matures.  The difference is the the coupon payments and underlying principal are automatically increased to compensate for inflation as measured by the consumer prince index (CPI).
Also referred to as "Treasury inflation-indexed securities".
So why do these investment vehicles exist and why are they doing sooooooo well.   Guess somebody knows WHAT'S BEHIND DOOR THREE!

Friday, August 14, 2009

ATLAS IS ABOUT TO SHRUG ... A TIPPING POINT ... THEN WHAT?




The Gartman Letter is a daily commentary on the global capital markets subscribed to by leading banks, broking firms, hedge funds, mutual funds, energy and grain trading companies around the world.

The Letter each day deals with political, economic and technical circumstances from both a long and short term perspective, and is available to our clients and prospects at approximately 10:30 - 10:45 GMT each business day of the year. Mr Gartman has been producing his commentary on a continuous basis since 1987, and has taught courses on capital markets creation and derivatives for banks, broking firms, governments and central banks all the while.


For example (and we are using data from taxable ’05 supplied by the IRS, for only now is the data sufficiently vetted to be useful), the top 1% of the nation’s income earners… of which there were 1.327 million and it required an income of just over $400 thousand to make it into this bracket… earned 21.8% of the nation’s income but paid in 38.4% of the nation’s taxes. The top 5% but not including the top 1%... of which there were 5.309 million, requiring an income of just over $152 thousand… earned 15.4% of the nation’s income but paid out 58.8% of the taxes. The top 50% of the nation’s income earners... and this time we are including everyone from from 50% and above, requiring income of just barely under $35,600… paid in 96.8% of all of the federal taxes while earning, by definition, only half of its income; that is, the bottom 50% of the nation’s income earners paid in only 3.2% of the nation’s federal taxes while making 50% of the nation’s income. Half the people paid effectively all of the taxes; the other half effectively paid in nothing. It is this that makes us most fearful about the future of the country, for under the Obama Administration the “skew” will become even worse. We are very, very near to the point where the majority of income earners… the majority of voters for all intents… pay nothing for their government and vote into positions of leadership those who will be intent upon making the skew even more severe. As Maggie Thatcher once said, “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of the other man’s money.” Or as we believe it was Winston Churchill who said, “If you rob Peter to pay Paul you earn Paul’s undying support.” At some point, you also earn Peter’s enmity. This is the problem that is facing the US most directly: the majority soon shall pay nothing to their government, other than their Social Security “contributions,” and they will want even more to be done for them. They think they pay taxes, but they don’t, and they believe, with their hearts… for after all, their President has told them that this is so…”The rich do not pay their fair share.” The fact is, however, that the rich and productive pay far more than their fair share, and the Left wants more. Atlas is about to shrug.


“A man younger than 30 who’s not a liberal has no heart and a man older than 30 who’s not a conservative has no brain” - Winston Churchill.

Monday, August 10, 2009

WHY THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT



United Nations Demographics - World Wide
Fertility Rate by Country - Graphic
CIA World Factbook Country Growth Rates
THERE IS BUT ONE SAVING GRACE ... THE UNITED
NATIONS STATISTICS ARE SELF SERVING IN THAT
EACH COUNTRY GETS FUNDING ON A PER CAPITA 
BASIS ... AND THE COMPLETE ENUMERATION OF THE
WORLD POPULATION IS ABOUT 20%. SOOOOO, ALL
THE NUMBERS ARE GUESSIMATES ... BUT THE M.E. 
COUNTRIES DO EXHIBIT A TREND THAT SUPPORTS 
THE VIDEO.





COUNTRY COMPARISON :: POPULATION GROWTH RATE
The average annual percent change in the population, resulting from a surplus (or deficit) of births over deaths and the balance of migrants entering and leaving a country. The rate may be positive or negative. The growth rate is a factor in determining how great a burden would be imposed on a country by the changing needs of its people for infrastructure (e.g., schools, hospitals, housing, roads), resources (e.g., food, water, electricity), and jobs. Rapid population growth can be seen as threatening by neighboring countries.
Syria :: 50DOWNLOAD DATA
RANK
COUNTRY( %)DATE OF INFORMATION
1United Arab Emirates
3.69
2009 est.
2Niger
3.68
2009 est.
3Kuwait
3.55
2009 est.
4Yemen
3.45
2009 est.
5Gaza Strip
3.35
2009 est.
6Mayotte
3.32
2009 est.
7Burundi
3.28
2009 est.
8Congo, Democratic Republic of the
3.21
2009 est.
9Ethiopia
3.21
2009 est.
10Oman
3.14
2009 est.
11Burkina Faso
3.10
2009 est.
12Sao Tome and Principe
3.09
2009 est.
13Madagascar
3.00
2009 est.
14Benin
2.98
2009 est.
15Western Sahara
2.83
2009 est.
16Somalia
2.82
2009 est.
17Rwanda
2.78
2009 est.
18Comoros
2.77
2009 est.
19Mali
2.77
2009 est.
20Congo, Republic of the
2.75
2009 est.
21Togo
2.71
2009 est.
22Senegal
2.71
2009 est.
23Equatorial Guinea
2.70
2009 est.
24Uganda
2.69
2009 est.
25Kenya
2.69
2009 est.
26Gambia, The
2.67
2009 est.
27Liberia
2.67
2009 est.
28Afghanistan
2.63
2009 est.
29Eritrea
2.58
2009 est.
30Guinea
2.57
2009 est.
31Turks and Caicos Islands
2.56
2009 est.
32Iraq
2.51
2009 est.
33Mauritania
2.40
2009 est.
34Cayman Islands
2.39
2009 est.
35Solomon Islands
2.39
2009 est.
36Malawi
2.39
2009 est.
37Paraguay
2.36
2009 est.
38Laos
2.32
2009 est.
39Northern Mariana Islands
2.29
2009 est.
40Sierra Leone
2.28
2009 est.
41Anguilla
2.27
2009 est.
42Jordan
2.26
2009 est.
43Kiribati
2.24
2009 est.
44Cameroon
2.19
2009 est.
45West Bank
2.18
2009 est.
46Libya
2.17
2009 est.
47Belize
2.15
2009 est.
48Sudan
2.14
2009 est.
49Cote d'Ivoire
2.13
2009 est.
50Syria
2.13
2009 est.
51Angola
2.10
2009 est.
52Marshall Islands
2.08
2009 est.
53Chad
2.07
2009 est.
54Papua New Guinea
2.07
2009 est.
55Guatemala
2.07
2009 est.
56Tanzania
2.04
2009 est.
57Timor-Leste
2.03
2009 est.
58Guinea-Bissau
2.02
2009 est.
59Nigeria
2.00
2009 est.
60Macau
2.00
2009 est.
61Philippines
1.96
2009 est.
62Honduras
1.96
2009 est.
63Pakistan
1.95
2009 est.
64Botswana
1.94
2009 est.
65Gabon
1.93
2009 est.
66Djibouti
1.90
2009 est.
67Ghana
1.88
2009 est.
68Tajikistan
1.88
2009 est.
69Saudi Arabia
1.85
2009 est.
70Haiti
1.84
2009 est.
71British Virgin Islands
1.84
2009 est.
72Mozambique
1.79
2009 est.
73Nicaragua
1.78
2009 est.
74Bolivia
1.77
2009 est.
75Cambodia
1.77
2009 est.
76Brunei
1.76
2009 est.
77Nauru
1.75
2009 est.
78Malaysia
1.72
2009 est.
79Israel
1.67
2009 est.
80El Salvador
1.66
2009 est.
81Egypt
1.64
2009 est.
82Zambia
1.63
2009 est.
83Tuvalu
1.62
2009 est.
84India
1.55
2009 est.
85Zimbabwe
1.53
2009 est.
86Venezuela
1.51
2009 est.
87Panama
1.50
2009 est.
88Ecuador
1.50
2009 est.
89Mongolia
1.49
2009 est.
90Central African Republic
1.49
2009 est.
91Dominican Republic
1.49
2009 est.
92Tonga
1.48
2009 est.
93Morocco
1.48
2009 est.
94Aruba
1.48
2009 est.
95Vanuatu
1.40
2009 est.
96Kyrgyzstan
1.40
2009 est.
97French Polynesia
1.39
2009 est.
98Fiji
1.38
2009 est.
99Colombia
1.38
2009 est.
100Costa Rica
1.36
2009 est.
101Samoa
1.35
2009 est.
102Turkey
1.31
2009 est.
103Antigua and Barbuda
1.30
2009 est.
104Bangladesh
1.29
2009 est.
105Bahrain
1.29
2009 est.
106Nepal
1.28
2009 est.
107Bhutan
1.27
2009 est.
108Peru
1.23
2009 est.
109American Samoa
1.22
2009 est.
110Brazil
1.20
2009 est.
111Algeria
1.20
2009 est.
112Australia
1.20
2009 est.
113Luxembourg
1.17
2009 est.
114World
1.17
2009 est.
115San Marino
1.15
2009 est.
116Turkmenistan
1.14
2009 est.
117Indonesia
1.14
2009 est.
118New Caledonia
1.14
2009 est.
119Andorra
1.14
2009 est.
120Mexico
1.13
2009 est.
121Ireland
1.12
2009 est.
122Lebanon
1.11
2009 est.
123Suriname
1.10
2009 est.
124Argentina
1.05
2009 est.
125Seychelles
1.00
2009 est.
126Singapore
1.00
2009 est.
127Tunisia
0.98
2009 est.
128Vietnam
0.98
2009 est.
129United States
0.98
2009 est.
130Qatar
0.96
2009 est.
131Namibia
0.95
2009 est.
132New Zealand
0.94
2009 est.
133Uzbekistan
0.94
2009 est.
134Sri Lanka
0.90
2009 est.
135Iran
0.88
2009 est.
136Chile
0.88
2009 est.
137Saint Kitts and Nevis
0.85
2009 est.
138Canada
0.82
2009 est.
139Burma
0.78
2009 est.
140Mauritius
0.78
2009 est.
141Azerbaijan
0.76
2009 est.
142Jamaica
0.76
2009 est.
143Iceland
0.74
2009 est.
144Netherlands Antilles
0.73
2009 est.
145Liechtenstein
0.70
2009 est.
146China
0.66
2009 est.
147Bermuda
0.65
2009 est.
148Thailand
0.62
2009 est.
149Cape Verde
0.56
2009 est.
150France
0.55
2009 est.
151Albania
0.55
2009 est.
152Bahamas, The
0.54
2009 est.
153Isle of Man
0.52
2009 est.
154Cyprus
0.52
2009 est.
155Hong Kong
0.50
2009 est.
156Grenada
0.47
2009 est.
157Uruguay
0.47
2009 est.
158Saint Helena
0.45
2009 est.
159Palau
0.43
2009 est.
160Korea, North
0.42
2009 est.
161Saint Lucia
0.42
2009 est.
162Netherlands
0.41
2009 est.
163Malta
0.40
2009 est.
164Faroe Islands
0.40
2009 est.
165Monaco
0.39
2009 est.
166Kazakhstan
0.39
2009 est.
167Montserrat
0.39
2009 est.
168Barbados
0.38
2009 est.
169Wallis and Futuna
0.35
2009 est.
170Norway
0.34
2009 est.
171Puerto Rico
0.34
2009 est.
172Bosnia and Herzegovina
0.34
2009 est.
173South Africa
0.28
2009 est.
174Denmark
0.28
2009 est.
175United Kingdom
0.28
2009 est.
176Switzerland
0.28
2009 est.
177Portugal
0.28
2009 est.
178Korea, South
0.27
2009 est.
179Macedonia
0.26
2009 est.
180Cuba
0.23
2009 est.
181Taiwan
0.23
2009 est.
182Jersey
0.21
2009 est.
183Guernsey
0.21
2009 est.
184Dominica
0.21
2009 est.
185Guyana
0.18
2009 est.
186Sweden
0.16
2009 est.
187Slovakia
0.14
2009 est.
188Greece
0.13
2009 est.
189Lesotho
0.12
2009 est.
190Gibraltar
0.11
2009 est.
191European Union
0.11
2009 est.
192Finland
0.10
2009 est.
193Belgium
0.09
2009 est.
194Saint Pierre and Miquelon
0.09
2009 est.
195Spain
0.07
2009 est.
196Greenland
0.06
2009 est.
197Austria
0.05
2009 est.
198Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas)
0.01
2009 est.
199Norfolk Island
0.01
2009 est.
200Holy See (Vatican City)
0.00
2009 est.
201Cocos (Keeling) Islands
0.00
2009 est.
202Christmas Island
0.00
2009 est.
203Pitcairn Islands
0.00
2009 est.
204Tokelau
-0.01
2009 est.
205Svalbard
-0.02
2009 est.
206Virgin Islands
-0.03
2009 est.
207Armenia
-0.03
2009 est.
208Niue
-0.03
2009 est.
209Italy
-0.05
2009 est.
210Poland
-0.05
2009 est.
211Croatia
-0.05
2009 est.
212Germany
-0.05
2009 est.
213Moldova
-0.08
2009 est.
214Czech Republic
-0.09
2009 est.
215Trinidad and Tobago
-0.10
2009 est.
216Slovenia
-0.11
2009 est.
217Romania
-0.15
2009 est.
218Maldives
-0.17
2009 est.
219Japan
-0.19
2009 est.
220Micronesia, Federated States of
-0.24
2009 est.
221Hungary
-0.26
2009 est.
222Lithuania
-0.28
2009 est.
223Georgia
-0.33
2009 est.
224Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
-0.34
2009 est.
225Belarus
-0.38
2009 est.
226Swaziland
-0.46
2009 est.
227Russia
-0.47
2009 est.
228Serbia
-0.47
2009 est.
229Latvia
-0.61
2009 est.
230Estonia
-0.63
2009 est.
231Ukraine
-0.63
2009 est.
232Bulgaria
-0.79
2009 est.
233Montenegro
-0.85
2009 est.
234Cook Islands
-3.30
2009 est.