MA — Miss America?! Oh come on, I thought you are an adult! )By the way, I am really curious and all ears for your take on the euqity market and gold. Has SPX topped at 956 after almost 2 weeks of flatenned top?ThanksSean

Minsky postulated that when risk was ignored by an economic system, this leads to distortion and eventual decline until such time that risk has been squeezed out of the system. Stability leads to instability and instability eventually leads to purging and stability. This goes hand in hand with Austrian Business Cycle Theory. Sort of explaining why it works.I have seen/read no reasonable or even plausible explanation that nullifies these theories.As in sine waves, there are many different durations and lengths. I see what is happening as a large rounding top rather than a correction. We have not purged the system of risk. All we have done is shuffle the deck chair on a sinking ship. The risk was moved from the TBTF banks to the even bigger TBTF government but little of the debt has been wiped out and few of the imbalances have been rebalanced.None of what has been done has addressed the real underlying issue of consumer or business insolvency. Profits which should go to the stock holders (the public) or expansion or even R/D is being consumed by debt servicing. The debt is so huge, companies are forced to lay off workers which just exacerbates their and other company problems.What the elite do not want is rebalancing because the scale of imbalance is so large, it really means that many of them really have nothing and would be or will be insolvent also. Their policies are to transfer to the lower echelons of workers the cost of their follies (or lack of attention to real underlying risks). I believe we are at the top of a K wave.As Kondratieff discovered in his research. Nothing goes straight anywhere. Economies move in waves. Waves up and waves down. The waves up are longer and higher than the waves down but never the less we have to have corrections of the imbalances in order to build the next leg up. The longer the imbalances are papered over or ignored, the bigger the correction. Keynes, Kondratieff, Minsky, Mises and E.T.A.L. were all good at understanding the basis of economics. We have seen what is happening to us many times in history and after we get through this, it will happen again in the future. It is just human nature. Blind optimism leads to mistakes which if not corrected lead to massive imbalances and catastrophe. If you create debt, it must be serviced or repudiated because in the end, you can never inflate it away by using more debt because the more the debt, the more the service cost and when you take to much in service plus taxes there is a point where production fails under the load. The old last straw on a camel that breaks its back.So at this moment in time, we are stranded on the slight down side of a huge build up of debt and risk while those who pull the strings and push the buttons do absolutely everything they can to keep from moving down the other side of debt collapse, rebalance and in many of their cases, insolvency and bankruptcy.Why do I see this? Because on the way up, money that isn’t leveraged is losing value. So most of the big gainers are more than totally leveraged. They made the big gains. The trouble is that leverage in a deflationary cycle is a killer.Many of you believe that it is possible to fill the holes of debt with more debt or even by devaluing the currency. I say, no system has ever been able to do that in at least 3000 years of systems, and it is illogical that it can work because it will just create more imbalance and imbalance is one of the main problems. So if creating more of what caused the down turn is the answer then it will work but I say that is not logical nor in my world mathematically possible.But TPTB will try anyway because they have to in order to stay in power.But just like the up cycle wasn’t straight up, neither will the down cycle of deflation and debt collapse be. We will have false hope rallies and some things like commodities might even rise for much longer than anyone believe they can.

That wasn’t me.I’ve never done the “first” thing. I did one time mock it a year or two ago (when it first started showing up here), by saying “37th”, or something like that.That “MA” is an imposter.Miss America

Mark,Thanks. Good article.We have become too civilized – have lost touch with the dark side is the way I think about it.

Ahhhha!!!The U.S. Economy From the Lighter SidePosted by Larry Doyle on June 26th, 2009 2:23 pm | ShareThisSummer Friday afternoons on Wall Street trading desks were always entertaining propositions. Traders were figuring out who would cut out early. The jokes would fly. The older folks on the desk would welcome hearing the Thursday evening escapades of the younger crowd. Invariably, somebody would say, “have you heard the one about….”In that spirit, hat tip to RO for providing this quick overview of the current state of the U.S. economy. Funny how this snapshot is very much akin to the ’shell game’ analogy often used here at Sense on Cents.Enjoy!!It is a slow day in the East Texas town of Madisonville.It is raining, and the little town looks totally deserted.Times are tough, everybody is in debt and everybody lives on credit.On this particular day a rich tourist from the East is driving through town.He enters the only hotel in the sleepy town and lays a hundred dollar bill on the desk stating he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs in order to pick one to spend the night.As soon as the man walks up the stairs, the hotel proprietor takes the hundred dollar bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.The butcher takes the $100 and runs down the street to pay his debt to the pig farmer.The pig farmer then takes the $100 and heads off to pay his debt to the supplier of feed and fuel.The guy at the Farmer’s Co-op takes the $100 and runs to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has also been facing hard times and has lately had to offer her “services” on credit.The hooker runs to the hotel and pays off her debt with the $100 to the hotel proprietor, paying for the rooms that she had rented when she brought clients to that establishment.The hotel proprietor then lays the $100 bill back on the counter so the rich traveler will not suspect anything.At that moment the traveler from the East walks back down the stairs, after inspecting the rooms.He picks up the $100 bill and states that the rooms are not satisfactory . . . pockets the money and walks out the door and leaves town.No one earned anything. However, the whole town is now out of debt and looks to the future with a lot of optimism.That, ladies and gentlemen, is how the United States Government is conducting business today.If that doesn’t scare you, then I don’t know what will.http://www.senseoncents.com/

Sounds like our own govt doesn’t believe things will be better in the future (sell now before they lose even more value)-gee, that really makes me feel confident in trusting that they know what they’re doing!

In a report on deflation in Japan yesterday, Bloomberg noted that consumer prices fell 1.3% in May, the most since 1950.SWK

Great, it looks like formatting on this site is broken AGAIN.What is so hard about operating a web site.Hey guys, text scrolls off the page way to the right AGAIN. Please fix it or please start a new thread soon, because if this one stays up for long, you’re going to have lots of unhappy readers again (****keeps typing off the right hand side of the page until you have to scroll your browser…)

Going against nature is part of nature too.Love and Rockets

But if we don’t inflate and the debt obligations remain, they are unpayable. The economy will stop. People will starve. And then the debts won’t get paid back anyway.So the choices are(1) Jubilee: just cancel them. Seems radical, but it is the Biblical solution so it should at least be considered. There’s a lot of good stuff in the Bible.(2) InflationThere are just no other choices. You cannot fight gravity for very long.

I’m not having a problem here, using Internet Explorer.

Hyper Inflation is coming – a crystal ball prediction.I am not happy to make such a prediction as it will soon put us as retired folks in the poor house – which is already under water.The world is in for a real wake-up call – it is called suffering. The dark side of the force is indiscriminate – the only Good News for Modern Man in what is coming, be it financial, plague or war or any and all combinations of those re-balancing forces.Sorry about that, but I have a reputation to live up too.

Tell him (neighbor) the next big wave in is the carbon-credit market … that should get him to shore safely. http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/06/goldman-sachs-engineering-every-major.html

Try Firefox

I agree with Morbid. The courts will only enforce the law. The typical contract for credit cards allows the bank to modify the terms of the agreement unilaterally with thirty days’ written notice to the cardholder, whose only option is to disagree and pay off the card under the terms of the existing agreement with no further credit, or take the terms in order to keep the credit and continue using the card.The solution to this problem is legislative, not judicial. If the U.S. Congress would enact substantial reform to support consumer protection and step up to the plate to allow states to control usury again, we wouldn’t have unreasonable and inequitable corporate-drafted adhesion contracts that even most lawyers can’t understand and consumers can’t negotiate.SWK

That is surprising coming from Khatami, I thought he tried to stay middle-of-the-road. I guess at this point everyone has to choose sides clearly.But since it’s pretty clear Ahmadinejad won the election fairly (pre-election polls had him winning by about the same margin) one wonders how such unfounded militant protests would be dealt with elsewhere, for example in the United States.I think people would die here too in that scenario.

http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Featured+Market+Commentary/FF/2009/Global+Central+Bank+Focus+June+2009+Exit+Strategy.htmthis lunatic at pimco talking about FED targeting fed fund rate and FED has no exit strategy for a long long time. one word, FED need to stop creating credit, equity, commodity, real estate bubbles, let the free market work the thing out. and we dont need lunatic to support what FED is doing now.

@ SWKI somewhat concur.First, I think there is an important typo above individuals are UNWILLING TO HOLD currency because it will buy more later should have said individuals are UNWILLING TO HOLD currency because it will buy less later.Second , your comment about a Volkeresque decision to jack up interest rates, keeping the economy stagnant longer than we might like will actually tend to support the dollar as opposed to lead to a dollar crisis. So I think that there is a slight disconnect between that and your dollar crisis statement. I tend to agree with your dollar crisis statement and its concaminant rebirth of America and said so a few days ago here in replies to LB and softwareengineer or economicminor (I believe).Restated, I think everything you say will pretty much happen except the Volkeresque scenario. Quite simply, we can no longer operate our financial system so asymmetrically vs. the world. Things will become more symmetric as we go along. It is our fight against this symmetry that is causing the current problems. Profits and wealth stream directly from asymmetric knowledge and capabilities with the amount being directly proportional to the “traded” disparity.The real problem is that the real disparities are fading as the world in whole becomes ever so smarter and individuals more capable. The asymmetry is no longer as rooted in lack of knowledge, capability or material resources, but in the accessibility or availability to/of such factors. It’s all about control now!

It’s been a mystery to me for quite some time that We the Credit-Card-Carrying People have been so willing to enter into one-sided usurious contracts. Speaks volumes about our addiction to unsecured credit at any cost.

Not Ryskamp–he’s too busy scrutinizing housing.

If renminbi is added in the reserve currency, it will cause the currency’s appreciation and the deflation in china will persist like Japan during Yen appreciation in 1985-1990.

This is the right therapy for the “innocent” Robert Allen Stanford and many many others.In Germany they know how to handle.Go on.American retirees got robbed blind and do nothin.Use your guns, idiots.

Speaking of the future:<The Geithner-Summers “reform” proposals are a public relations scam designedto conceal the fact that the banks will continue to maintain their strangleholdon OTC derivatives trading while circumventing government oversight.Nothing will change. Bernanke and Geithner’s primary objective is to preservethe ability of the banks to use complex instruments to enhance leverage and maximize profits.The banks created the financial crisis, and now they are its biggest beneficiaries.They don’t need to worry about risk, because Bernanke has assured them thatthey will be bailed out regardless of the cost. Financial institutions thathave explicit government guarantees are able to get cheaper funding becauselending to the bank is the same as lending to the state.>http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14119Ho hum

you are sick, plz check yourself into a hospital before you become a problem for society. what Stranford and Madoff did was wrong, but illegal torture is wrong, plz dont justify wrong + wrong = right.

That, AJ, is a really good point. It speaks to more than our addiction to credit. It indicates a lack of competition and speaks to limitations of our “free markets”. There should be more choices, but the markets are rigged with “barriers to entry” that limit those. And the lack of choices is not just in credit. It’s pervasive.Small businesses can’t compete because they don’t have access to good financing. Banks lend to mortgages. Not to businesses (except CRE). Developing a business today requires crossing a scale threshold so large that it DEMANDS financing from the capital markets. Which are controlled by guess who? Markets are free only to those who are willing and able to get into that kind of financial structure. And there is a cost to that too. Meaning that it isn’t all that efficient – but the capital markets get their cut. And there are countless ways (fees) for them to bleed a little off. Parasitic.The systemically important part of the economy is the part that creates the wealth. Not that which collects a service fee from it. I’m not an educated person, but these things are clear even to me. I wish those learned persons at the FED had a clue. Maybe this clarity comes, not from education, but having had a real job.Ich bin österreichische.

The problem sometimes happens when someone types in a long word (ex. arghhh…) with no spaces. If the word happens to be in a reply to another post, you can solve the problem by hiding the response. Changing browsers in the described situation does not work. Agree with your assessment about running the web site.

The End of Crisis Dynamic:America and China to Expand Trade at New EquilibriumGlobal Recovery by Fall-Winter 2010by Lao XingThe depression and crisis will definitively end – and a halfway solid foundation for growth will be restored – when the dollar rises enough against the Chinese Yuan to enable debt-strapped and harried American consumers to begin buying Chinese goods once again.From the mid 1990′s until 2007 the imbalance in credit power and rates of pay between Chinese and American workers had fueled a production and consumption boom. Cheap Chinese labor allowed a deindustrialized, stagnant-real-wage America to go on a consumption binge. The foundation of the binge was real. It lay in a wage disparity. The binge was accompanied by an expansion of both global demand for raw materials, a rise in real productive output worldwide – and by a massive dollar credit expansion. The early part of the expansion coincided with the dot com boom, but the movement was more stable and more broadly based.By 2007 the flow of value from Chinese to American workers had reached its limit. Given the value relationships underpinning the dollar and the narrowing gap in living standards between the two countries, not enough value could be extracted from the Chinese economy to underpin the amount of dollar denominated paper that had accompanied the boom. A financial crash followed in the US and employment collapsed in both countries. In the productive economy China suffered the greater loss, though America took the greater hit in terms of financials.Though China had been inundated by an inflow of dollar denominated paper, it was relatively less burdened by the kind of worthless paper assets that sank the American financial system. Thus the Chinese government has been able to use the residual value of these dollar surpluses to embark on a substantial reinvestment program, even while its export sector was shrinking. In nominal terms China’s GDP was affected, but it suffered a ‘growth recession’ rather than an outright contraction.The Chinese reinvestment program, it’s continued undervaluation of the Yuan, and its industrial protectionism have are currently impacting the world system in ways that are distinctly unfavorable for the U.S. Commodity prices already outstrip values based on prospective worldwide demand. These policies are currently interacting in a negative synergy with the monetary expansion at the heart of American stimulus efforts.American policy has been in effect to stimulate production at home by cheapening the dollar. The mechanism of quantitative easing and a renewed credit expansion makes money relatively cheaper here but with side effects: it becomes relatively more expensive in the dollar zone outside American borders. The effects are also felt in China: to keep the Yuan from appreciating the Chinese central bank must put more and more resources into propping up the dollar.The result is that the Chinese are buying a stimulus – maintaining output – at a relatively high cost. The government budget is nominally in deficit, so the stimulus program is being financed by spending the accumulated dollar reserves.Over time, and not such a long time at that, the reduction in Chinese reserves will force an attenuation of the stimulus/restructuring which is the orientation of current economic policy there. The infrastructure spending does not immediately yield tangible profit or generate value, and isa drain. Nominal output continues to increase in China but the aggregate rate of profit is without a doubt declining. At some point, China must necessarily decrease the level of stimulus. As this occurs there will be a lull or valley in output and another growth-recessionary dip.Several events will coincide with this dip. These events will lay the foundation for a resumption of the export based growth dynamic. First, the Yuan will come under great pressure. This will boost the dollar in the entire Yuan – RMB zone. Second, there will be a falloff in Chinese demand for imported commodity products and the price of food and fuel will drop sharply, worldwide.This ‘great readjustment’ will restore the trade and consumption parity between the dollar and the Yuan at a new equilibrium. The export-based dynamic will then resume. Americans will once gain be able to buy Chinese goods. China will again be able to earn foreign exchange with reinvestment value and the level of bilateral and global trade will increase. Thus the renewed purchases of American consumers will lead the US, and the world, out of recession.China’s stimulus spending should begin to decline by the 4th quarter of 2009. The dip in production there, and the simultaneous fall in commodity prices and strengthening of the dollar should be pronounced by the second quarter of 2010. Measures of consumption in the US will begin to pick up at that time and the ripple effects will produce an exit of the depression in the US by the 4th quarter of 2010. The world will be out of the depression only at this time.

out of the frying pan

It’s on my screen, too, and it’s CAUSED by people posting links containing alotta characters without WRAPPING them.

You’ve got to be joking!

Are you an financial advisor?Seems so.Gettin nervous?

Free Tibet:War der letzte Satz von Ihrem Post literal oder nur metaphorisch?SWK

Quite so, Pete. I presume you saw the headline on Bloomberg yesterday stating banks made “record profits” of close to $10 billion in derivatives, I believe for 1Q. Despicable.

I think that shifting fom a dollar system to a SDR basket wouldn’t change the system but just the balance of power between big countries competing on the stage.Maybe we should include the ecologic theme into the monetary system in order to give a feedback to the economic actions taken by the agents of the market.I mean that all the current market economy relies on two postulates:a) there will be infinite commodities (as the physical resources are considered never ending thanks to the improvement in technologies that improve the final output)b) there will be always some human activity (or just a mere privatizaion of some common asset) that can be included into the market accountancy, so that the global GDP can expand without limits.As everybody can see without being a physical scientist, world is getting more and more little in an economic sense,couse the amount of commodities is limited, except the renewable resources.Moreover, the market system is expanding even in remote lands and in contexts where before there weren’t market accountability (such as making yoghurt at home instead of buying them in the stores).But what will happen when all human actvities will be accountable in a market global system and the further expansion will be possible just for the population growth, attending that for every man born there should be some resource to feed him, just merely to make him work and produce some income for the economic system?I mean, if we don’t put a feedback mechanism into the global monetary system, that could give an account about the consumption of the physical resources, this big train running (sometimes faster, other times slower as in these years) will be leading us nothing than towards a big crush, as i mean some war or some repressive system where somebody takes others’ men resources in order to improve his wealth, or even just to drink the last spill of drinking water on the surface of the Earth.I don’t like to threat people like many fanatic of ecology climate change, but we must be responsible toward other people and our son and future nephews.So i propose a global currency system not based on national currency(that at the end are an expression of mighty nations, as of politics),but on some physical measures:a) the Ecological Footprint (see the Living Planet Report)as the amount in tons of non-renewable carbon available for consumption on the Earth(see for example the works of Mathis Wackernagel)b) the amount of global populationThe current global value of the unit of this monetary system (we can call it ‘Eco’) will bethe result of A) divided by B), considering that it can increase if for example new technologies improve the efficiencyof the global output, and can decrease when global population grows.In this new monetary global system the stability is reached in itself, for the reference to a ‘fixed’ value,not subject to political and geopolitical considerations.Second point, moreover there is a feedbackinto the economy about the utilization of natural resources towards a sustainability growthgranted to every man living and working on the Earth.

http://news.163.com/09/0627/09/5CQAJ72Q0001124J.htmlShanghai!

@ kilgoresmetaphorischUS citizen who has kicked around a bit. I expect German is better than mine. Anybody’s would be.My study of economics is metaphorisch too.

china or holders of dollar/treasury is useless. it is useless cuz china cant buy anything with it.1>buy manufactured good? unrealistic, almost all goods are produced in asia? maybe america just ship tons od beef?2>buy sensitive/strategic/high tech companies? wont happen/allowed by congress.3>usd is not world reserve currency, is useless garbagewake up china.

Soaring Death Rate in Buenos Aires Raises Pandemic Concerns

It is the beginning of flu season in Argentina, and the potential for the evolution of a more virulent Pandemic H1N1 looms large.

SWK wrote:In any event, I suspect the rebalancing of the U.S. economy will necessitate the repatriation of certain manufacturing and service jobs that have been outsourced abroad in recent yearsI’ve been hung up on this point for a while now. Given the debt loads of the US, can it really look to produce for its own consumption?More so, I believe, it would have to be for export.What we’ve seen is that capital has moved outside of the US because it found a higher return. Why would it come back when it couldn’t, without a leveling of wages, earn as much? And then there’s the added costs of rising taxes in order to pay off public debt as well. In order to pay off debts the US has to export more than it imports, in which case bringing back manufacturing for export doesn’t sound like a good financial direction for businesses. NOTE: perhaps making other climates less stable might drive businesses back here; given the size of the US’s budget for stirring up trouble I’d have to think that this is what is going to transpire..Mark

Khatami is anything but middle-of-the-road. After reading this it should be clear that taking the opposite side of any stance that the US government takes is more likely to bring you closer to the truth…Stay Out of Iran’s Evolutionary ProcessMark

You’re welcome. By the way, I’m back in the US. I can mention “free” and “Tibet” in the same sentence without being immediately put down. It seems futile to resurrect the US-China pre-crash relationship, but it looks like the path of least resistance for both parties.

except russian currency is back by exporting natural resources, what is dollar? back by exporting funny security? (agency, ABS, RMBS, CMBS, CDS, now Treasury?) in case no one notice, these funny security are backed by USA people’s declining income and gov’s exploding budget/trade deficit. back by nothing.

Stimulation of an Economy by Global “leadership”: (as observed)1. Firstly, increase government and government spending on useless and nothing projects that onlybenefits those individuals in government voting on the respective legislations,2. Extract from the real economy force as much monetary credits as necessary to prop upall the well connected bankrupted and non-essential corporations and institutions andgrant unconditionally all funds and other measures to their survival. Include in thisPresidential Decrees that permit avoidance of established Law and Regulation.3. Invade as many countries as your favourite various lobby groups need for theirenteratinment and kill as many human beings out of uniform as possible; from theother collateral chattels impose applicational corruption biased towards whateveror whoever has your ear of convenience.4. Allow your body corporates to feed on the electorate free from regulation and Lawin as many aspects of essential living as possible including Credit Cards, Banking Fees,Telecommunication, Radio and TV, food, clothing and all and other items under theconsumer agenda.5. Increase taxation through inflation, stealth, theft, cheating, overcharging, GST,VAT, gouging, fees and any and all methods that increase capital transfer tobankrupt organizations,6. Force the takeover of small profitable businesses (SME’s)by preferred larger financialcorporations which make regular donations to the Party7. Reduce employment so as to reduce wages through employee competition8. Transfer of employment overseas to approved countries where employment is cheaperby employment arbitrage9. Defer claims by individuals against corporations through increased complexity inregulatory practises and laws.10. Instil fear though the above to bring compliance throughout the community.The above are the current (and past) practises of the inept and stupid known as “leadership” so that theycan remain as “leadership” while the ship burns and sinks aka the ‘presidon’.Forget the post mortem of the economic collapse – it is time to cast your gaze on that which”leadership” is bring to you via stealth and deception.Benanke would not be doing what he is doing, if he had a choice – he has seen where we are going (hell -your mileage will vary)and will damned well do everything he is being told to do to avoidthe global crash of the top financial wealthiest and most established, a priori,throughout the World; as is Geithner.I will say this to be clear: That which is being threatened are the established elitenot the politicians) and the old aged wealthy that is to say, well beyond the Banks and bankersand nouveau riche, prime ministers, kings and royalty; IOW the very roots of the past Epochof civilization as we know it – is being threatened with being eradicated in the fires of Hell.This is why the Federal Reserve is so important and this institution will tell mankind and theirstupid leadership to go to Hell! However, I don’t believe that they will get that opportunity, asthe collapse will come beforehand.”Too late she screamed”.Keywords: Caveat Emptor, fascism, Hanlon’s Razor, stupidity (that source ofenergy that empowers “leadership”), morons, hell, fires, Too Late,fools, cheats, liars, thieves, bankers, slicks, politicians, bureaucrats;depression, Dark Age, stimulus, Ha!Ho hum

Only one problem – no jobs.

Many Natural Options for Fighting Off Swine Flu:http://leifgrunseth.com/2009/04/many-natural-options-for-fighting-off-swine-flu/My own personal use of iodine supplementation has been amazing, I haven’t had a cold in over 3 years.

And, I will add,that there is a very simple reason why this is happening as it is,and simply put, it is the Osirian Principle.No “leader” today has the capacity to see, visualize and or project the ‘big picture’,thus leaving them all to act in terms of specialization, or, in terms that farbetter describes this behaviour, in their own ‘close’ and limitedinterests, albeit in reaction.These “leaders” do not have the capacity brought about through consilience;they act like barbarians grunting in the woods where they cannot see the forestfor the one particular tree where they pass wind.But this “stimulus activity” is about attempting to save theoldest monied of this Age and is hastening the global collapsethrough nothing but self-agenda, moral hazard and ignorance.Or, there is no intellect at play anywhere on the horizon justfrogs, in pans filled with water, sitting quietly on the fire,waiting to die while hyena scurry back and forth hunting in packs.We descend into the bowels of ubiquitous and pervasive fascism,er, again.Ho hum

Is the CDC aware of this?

you sound like that America caused all misery around the world?

One doesn’t even have to qualify currencies here to see that it doesn’t matter how cheap goods are, people in the US are BROKE. Further, the system requires that their be growth- this ain’t going to happen!Mark

No, just the majority of it (equal weighting applied- the US has the most influence).Mark

This Jefferson comment is apropos here:” … the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. “”

I didn’t see him say that the old wealthy are Americans. I would guess that whatever their formal nationality, they consider themselves international.Heck, even I consider myself international, and I’m not any kind of wealthy.

Interesting take on the Chinese “savings glut” as being driven by imbalances in the male/female ratio and later age for females marrying. The study referenced below finds that societies with disproportionate numbers of male children have higher savings rates as the males compete on the basis of family wealth to promote the chances of marriage.http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/why-do-chinese-save-boys-want-to-marry/This would imply that China’s one child policy, combined with a preference for male children and female education opportunities, has driven economic imbalances by promoting excess savings.The flip side – as many on this site can attest – is that there is nothing so conducive to excess expenditure as having several children. As soon as you have one child or more you feel the pressure for a suburban sprawl home, loads of electronic goods, never ending requirements for presents for your children and all their friends (birthday parties!), a bigger family-friendly car, holidays to Disney and visits to grandma, ballet/piano/drama/tennis lessons, etc.

probably not.If Cuba or Iran would openly start running a Guantanamo Bay type of prison, they would be condemned at least once a week by some of worlds largest english language news channels / papers.US can simply do stuff that other countries cannot. The same holds true also of budget deficits.I remember reading many years ago how some magazine had been told by a German automaker that if they wanted the automaker to run ads in the magazine they should not be running any articles that were negative about Germany (such as about the nazi era). I have sometimes been wondering how much agreements made in the background determine which countries are publicly criticized (and which are not). There are actually quite a few countries that are absolutely not even democratic but yet can do pretty much what they want and some of them are even good allies with USA…

MOTHER Nature broods over Her flock like a hen with little chicks. All are valuable in the economy of EVOL-ution. Help is on the way it seems.Medical Emergency in Buenos Aires Raises Pandemic Concerns

The sudden jump in cases and fatalities are cause for concern. In the country the number of confirmed fatal cases rose to 27, but there are reports of 15 more fatalities that are suspect. There have also been reports of travelers from Argentina testing positive at airport checks in multiple countries. These travelers should provide multiple samples for sequencing studies to determine if there have been changes in the virus.Recently PB2 E627K was reported in a traveler from the United States. However, the sequence suggested the change was acquired in China. Although the E627K was present in the original samples and confirmed in the initial clone, and subsequent sub-clone had reverted back to the wild type sequence, raising concerns that some key changes may not be stable under certain culture conditions, and important changes could be lost especially if the virus is cultured in chicken eggs, which could select against important changes associated with adaptation to human hosts.Therefore, analysis by multiple labs of these sequences would be useful. The flu season is just beginning in the southern hemisphere, providing a favorable environment for rapid adaptive changes. The movement of a swine H1N1 into a human host parallels the 1918 pandemic, which also was associated with mild infections in the later spring, followed by a much more virulent and lethal H1N1 in the fall.The rapid developments in Buenos Aires bear close scrutiny and active sequence analysis as H1N1 increases its gene pool transmitting through human hosts. Many countries worldwide, including those in the southern hemisphere are experiencing explosive growth, and the developments in Buenos Aires may signal a new wave of Pandemic H1N1.

Problem may be that most people are too lazy to take to the streets because of NO JOBS… not lazy per say in wanting work, but lazy in effectign change…

Matt Taibbi has written an article in Rolling Stone and several blogs have printed it.http://www.correntewire.com/great_american_bubble_machine_0“The Great American Bubble Machine” is worth a read!This is a follow up to the “The Big Takeover” whichhe wrote on March 19,2009.The “bubble #4″ section on the semi-secret Bona Fide Hedging Exemption CFTC letter is of extreme interest.Bubble #6 Why we should have a carbon tax and not cap-and-trade is extremely persuasive.I found that rereading “The Big Takeover” and this new piece was helpful in deciphering where Wall Street is heading.

About?Mark

When I was in the military I escaped one vaccination that ended up making everyone severely ill.But… I’d heard that the greatest accelerant was likely the returning soldiers from WWI. Our close quarters and easy movement allows a virus to move pretty quickly. This is likely to revert a bit as airline travel declines further (and as populations also decline).Mark

Mark:>How can the US with its massive (decaying) infrastructure, rising health costs (attributable to an aging population, questionable food and environmental decline), depleting resources (requiring more imports, imports, which, will become tighter and tighter as exporting nations will retain more of their resources for their own consumption), massive debts, declining consumption and high wages (relative to competitors) be attractive to investment?Let’s take these one at a time:1. Infrastructure. If there are masses of unemployed, they will flock to government-backed public works projects to rebuild and expand the current infrastructure. Foreign capital could be attracted to pay for improvements through public-private partnerships in which they could be extended long-term leases and rights to receive regulated tolls — user fees — to recoup their investment. The essential need of every advanced society for sound infrastructure would make such investments attractive, regardless of other circumstances surrounding the U.S. economy and the dollar.2. Rising health care costs. No real solution here. The aging population relative to a shrinking workforce will make this cost high regardless of whether we keep the current system, go to single payer, or whatever. About the only positive thing to say is that if we actually spend money keeping people healthier instead of merely taking money from providers to redistribute it to insurance company shareholders under the guise of “managed care,” this could reduce out-of-pocket costs to individuals and businesses, and make workers more productive. The French medical system is quite advanced and efficient, often producing better general outcomes (e.g., infant mortality rates), provides timely access to needed care, and though universal, costs the same or less that what we now spend in this country on health care premiums to private insurance companies. Might be a good thing to consider, instead of always suggesting the sole alternative to be the British National Health system, which is and has always been woefully underfunded, and would not provide the level of care Americans have come to expect.3. Depleting resources. Well, we’re always going to have to bring in commodity resources of one kind or another from abroad, and some of those resources, such as oil, could get quite expensive if the dollar does lose ground and credibility against other currencies in the future. Even so, the U.S. still covers a wide geographical area and does have substantial natural resources of many kinds on which to draw, some of which are, or can be made to be, renewable with good public policy backed by political will. Moreover, we can do a much better job educating our own people than we do. There remains a lot of technical innovation in the U.S., and we retain a very high rate of productivity per worker (when they have jobs). Folks in this country will still need things, and if they can’t buy them abroad because they are prohibitively expensive, they will find a way to produce them here. The added benefit of this is that it may improve our poor ecological habit of throwing everything away, since the cost to repair products will be more in line with the cost to produce them, which could actually lead to demand for longer-lasting products again because it’s no longer an option just to “buy a new one” (by way of example, my Dad has a Sunbeam toaster that he and my late mother received as a wedding present in 1956 — he still uses it, and it’s never had to be repaired!).4. Massive debts. Again, if they get too massive — if the cost of maintaining the value of the dollar becomes too great — they will either be defaulted on or paid out in inflated currency. The same is true for individuals and businesses, who can simply default on their debts or declare bankruptcy and see them discharged when they reach the point that it no longer makes sense to continue to service those debts.5. Declining consumption and high wages. If consumption declines and unemployment increases in the U.S., wages will go down with everything else. In my mind, this is part of the rebalancing of needs and wants that were artificially inflated by the debt bubble, which took thirty years to build. Wages will go down, but consumption will return to a non-bubble, normal, equilibrium level commensurate with the new lower wage scale. Even is U.S. wages remain a little higher than some other places in the world, our products may again come to be perceived as the best quality one can buy, justifying in part the higher cost of our exports to would-be purchasers abroad. There will always be small investors who live and work in the United States and will be inclined to invest their savings in this country and in the enterprise of their fellow citizens.>I’m not advocating/lobbying or wagering on a particular outcome. It’s not about “thinking” or “hoping” about some outcome, it’s about analyzing the probabilities. History strongly suggests the outcome: as empires unravel their currencies decline and wars become the norm. If you have a strong argument for why you don’t believe that things will go this way, then I’m all open to hear it.I’m not sure “history” suggests any such particular outcome. While it’s true, as Santayana said, that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” it is equally true that people often draw the wrong lessons from his through, among other things, the application of logical fallacies of composition (i.e., that something may have happened in one or more particular sets of historical circumstances does not necessarily apply to all historical circumstances, which can be quite dissimilar, sometimes in ways not immediately apparent).The demise of the British Empire and the loss of its many colonies to independence movements following WWII did not cause the British to foment wars with other nation states in order to acquire resources to replace those it had lost. Britain simply dealt with a reduction in its standard of living and tried to make the best of it. France, too, did not react by going to war all over the world. Rather, it came to embrace the EU, voluntarily relinquishing (as have all EU member countries) a portion of its sovereignty to seek economic benefits through union with other nation states.The U.S. could follow a different path, and might well if someone like Mr. Cheney were again to be in a position of power down the line, but I believe most Americans know there are better ways to tackle problems, including access to needed natural resources, than through the use of military force. Call me an idealistic optimist, but I am just not ready to write off America yet, even though I can find much room for criticism and improvement. I’ve lived abroad and have encountered people from many different cultural, political, and economic backgrounds over many years, and the perspective that comes from those experiences does not lead me to conclude that the U.S. will soon be at an end. That’s not an argument, but just an expression of my belief based on a lifetime of my own personal observations and learning, which I find has some value, even without further articulation.SWK

Responding point by point:1) Public works projects will occur with what capital? The US is massively in debt. This would be tantamount to telling my creditors that I can’t pay them because I’m going to landscape my yard;2) We’re in agreement. Though, really, this is a signifier that the US population is aging and will therefore become less productive as time rolls on;3) Basically agree here as well, but… TECHNOLOGY IS A PROCESS, it cannot overcome the lack of physical resources. Again, my primary point is that the cost of manufacturing will only be going up (factor in economies of scale here [as scale drops] and, declining resources);4) I don’t see how the US can default on its debts and at the same time ramp up its manufacturing base (for export);5) I’m not sure how the US worker is going to go for being more competitive as his/her wages plummet as their debts (public and private) weigh heavy on them AND as they age.Britain’s end to empire was an exception to the rule. One could say that there was a gentleman’s agreement that the US would take on the role in order to keep Britain from suffering absolute collapse. But, one could say that Britain WAS embroiled in war as its empire drew down: yes, it was Germany that was (the noted) aggressor, but Britain was headed into the dustbin of history’s empires and the war provided them with an out. France’s empire ended with joining the EU? I guess I don’t get this connection I too have read and traveled. And while I take all of this into consideration I do not let it cloud pure reason. Many folks abroad have a twisted understanding of what America is: twisted as in an over-idealistic understanding.Mark

Speaking of viri, let’s not forget or old(?) friend the Bird Flu:Baxter: Product contained live bird flu virusMark

They’re more like Boxer from Animal Farm. They’re hardworking, they’ll fight in wars, they’re easily manipulated and they will be marched off to the glue factory once they’re no longer producing.

Speaking of viri, let’s not forget that WE ARE THE EVIL!Where is our connection to the anima mundi, the soul of the world? We have lost our need to check in with the author of life to see if we should be conducting these kinds of “experiments.” Our spirituality has been hijacked by a bunch of old men in the Vatican in Christianity; by a bunch of Islamic hard-liners in Islam; and by all the others who seek power over the masses be it through politics, media or banksters.Mark, as usual, thanks for a significant article.

It’s all about concentrations of power.The “quiet lives of desperation” are concentrated into large-scale events now. The trade-off of postponing small daily lumps, of which we would more directly involve ourselves, are that someone else now tells us when we are to take our lumps, and the doling out is quite painful.In many cases this kind of thing is the direct result of a bunch of paranoids controlling everything. They see bad guys everywhere. And those “bad guys” are going to unleash some WMD or bacteria against “us,” in which case we’ve got to figure out an antidote. In the end it turns out (just like the overblown abilities of the Soviet Union’s military, and Saddam’s “weapons of mass destruction”) that we inflict upon ourselves the very thing that we’re stating that we’re trying to protect ourselves from. It’s either this, or, as an incredibly cynical person might suggest, the plan’s aims were always meant to be directed inward toward the populace.Somewhere the notion of Pandora’s Box just isn’t sinking in.Mark

Death by Swine Flu seems kinder.

China’s structural ills – so true, is focus entirely on cheap export, no domestic investment on all levels/aspects. china should take current crisis to focus investing in themselves and to reforming policies economically (workplace & benefits), socially (healthcare, education, and environment), and god forbid politically. cheap export era is over.

1 – Where did you get the Obama information from concerning this video?2 – The video is well produced and looks to be part of the PR kick-Off of that impotent Tea Party rouse a few months back.

do you see news about farmers on the top of food chain?What? What is this supposed to mean/imply?What I said is only nonsense to someone who is incapable of understanding reality.USA flattened iraq and afganistanWhat exactly are you implying here? Your arguments are a non-sequitor.You’re either a flag waver or your scared of TPTB.Mark

Mark:I just spent a good 45 minutes thinking about your comments and trying to respond thoughtfully, but the damn interface on this blog has been acting up for the last week or so, and I lost the whole thing (sometimes I can go back and find it again, other times–especially when there is a long thread under a single first author of a post, it just disappears into cyberspace. Sorry.Let me try to summarize briefly my comments:1) The capital for public works projects comes from the U.S. government. Your analogy about landscaping your house with creditors’ money rather than paying them back is misplaced. Unlike the U.S. government, you don’t control the supply of the world’s reserve currency. While most countries can only pay back their creditors, negotiate a reduction in debt, or default, U.S. debt to foreigners is denominated in U.S. currency, so the U.S. has the further option to monetize its debts and pay back foreign creditors in dollars that are worth less relative to other currencies. I’m not saying this is without consequence — we would certainly wind up paying more for imported foreign goods and services, including natural resources such as oil — but the government would always have plenty of money to pay for domestic infrastructure improvements. Moreover, there will always be plenty of Americans who live and work here that will be willing to invest in their own country for construction that directly benefits the U.S. public. Finally, even if the dollar were to decline relative to foreign currencies, I think foreign investors would likely still be interested in investing in U.S. infrastructure projects in public-private partnership arrangements in which they could recoup their investments through government-regulated user fees on long-term leases of roads, bridges, and similar public works projects for the construction of which they help pay (the government likes this because it means less taxes and debt to cover the costs of infrastructure improvements and maintenance).2) Populations are always rising and falling, and so is productivity. We’ll just have to deal with it.3) No question, technology can’t always overcome completely and painlessly the absolute problem of finite resources consumed by an ever-expanding population. These issues (resources allocation/use and population growth) must be addressed in tandem.4) See my response to 1) above.5) Wages are going to plummet, but that’s part of the rebalancing necessary to bring our consumption in line with our productivity. We’ll reach equilibrium at some point, and folks will simply have to adjust to a lower standard of living after living high on the hog from the illusion of wealth created by borrowing money to consume instead of actually producing things of value that offset consumption.My point about Britain and France is that following the decline of their respective empires and currency, they each embraced the notion of working within the post-WWII international legal framework to secure the resources they needed through treaty and multilateral cooperation, rather than by military force. While the U.S. is in the unique posture of having a military that is in a class by itself, well over and above that of other nation states, we cannot use the military to solve all our problems, nor can we continue to act more or less unilaterally in the face of substantial international opposition because the costs are simply too high (in human lives, in money, and in harm done to our foreign relations).Of course, when a nation state feels its survival is threatened, that’s when the potential is highest for stupid and costly misuse of the military. The Empire of Japan ultimately attacked Pearl Harbor in response to the Roosevelt Administration’s military embargo of oil in the 1930s. The U.S. is certainly capable of exercising military force in derogation of international law, but if the dollar does decline as Dr. Roubini intimates it might in the next decade, the U.S. would be better served by seeking to resolve its resource problems through international cooperation. Perhaps we should go back to the notion of having Congress actually DECLARE WAR before the U.S. intervenes militarily in foreign countries. Seems we might then work a lot harder to exhaust all peaceful remedies of dispute resolution before resorting to the use of military force.SWK

Eight Banks Fail in Two WeeksSeems like cracks are showing up in the Federal Reserve dam.http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/mirae.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/metropacific.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/horizon.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/neighbor.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/communityga.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/anthony.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/cooperative.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/scb.htmlhttp://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html

Hospitals Verging On Collapse In Argentina

…the concerns in Argentina center both on the state of the health care system in general, as well as the rapid increase in fatal infections, including those that rapidly deteriorate while develping symptoms similar to infected patients in the 1918 pandemic. Moreover, like the 1918 pandemic, the vast majority of infections and fatalities are in previously healthy young adults…

Well said Mark.Yes there is a fundamental question of fairness in “FREE TRADE”.What has to be done to ensure “Fair Exchange ,No Robbery”?When you try to create a balanced Global system you run up against the ENERGY CONVERSION question(Simply put ,Raw materials times Energy equals the finished product value.)If you truly want a physical exchange value you have to use the amount of energy that went into creating the product.That way every country is “Exchanging values with a common and fixed measurement “(The amount of energy in B.T.U,s etc that went into the process.)This real scientific figure cannot be manipulated by the Finance Industry and is the basis for a future Free and Fair Trade Concept amongst countries.Once you make the change from a flexible,everchanging money system,which is constantly subject to manipulation ,to using a known and irrefutable physical value,all sorts of solutions are possible.In the day of computers and science,what are we doing using this archaic and obsolete money system other than the fact we were all born into it and take it for granted.GOD did not create the existing money system,men did and it can be changed to suit new circumstances.The advent of the Internet and Computers (The spreading of hidden banking/finance knowledge to the worlds people)means the potential for real change for the betterment for all peoples on this earth…..

Bond Dealers Say Worst Over as Demand Soars at Saleshttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abfcxoyxoiswZhou Says China Won’t Change Reserve Policy Suddenlyhttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abfcxoyxoiswDollar to Rise Most Since 1981, Best Predictor Sayshttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=afH0UJDfj.GU(As for the third story, I hate it when Bloomberg puts a link on their home page to a story that isn’t posted yet.)

“Good by cruel world”. Would some one please hit the flush lever?

Commodities must rally to sun!

The one winter I took the flu vaccine was the darkest, sickest winter of my life.Never again.

“Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.” – Henry Kissinger

Control of oil is failing – with US influence weaker daily despite two wars. And control of food is likely to weaken substantially as more and more countries adopt domestic food security as a high political priority, rejecting reliance on Cargill and Monsanto.Kissinger was a master of the Cold War hidden agenda, and that agenda has driven US foreign policy ever since Nixon, but the US is now hollowed out and weakened at home so will not be able to project power under cover of moral authority abroad. Oil and food will be produced, but the lion’s share of revenues will not be streamed to US interests for much longer.

oops … elections of 1994.

Morbid, I saw plenty of PhDs who cashed in big time, so you obviously didn’t poke around the profitable part of the American Dream for PhDs … the most successful college profs are taking in tons of money through lucrative consulting deals and speeches (Larry Summers, anyone), and I know it because I’ve watched a number of dumb companies pay tons of money to this little cottage industry over the years to have them come in and conduct what were otherwise good presentations and give useful though-pieces that were generally wasted on the toad-underlings at whom they were directed.But just try to get in on the College Prof racket, even with a PhD. But it’s not too late to try, and with a few grey hairs you might actually have an edge.

You all laughed at me last year when I noted that the US was going to start marching people out of the cities and onto the farms a la Pol Pot, but just you wait and see. Green Jobs = Return to the Countryside.

Succinctly put Alarmist.Unwinding of the debt bubble=unwinding of the late 20th century and 21st century excesses= unwinding of the economy= green revolution= back to the farms.

zizzyz ji,,http://www.correntewire.com/great_american_bubble_machine_0.“That’s how audacious these assholes are,” says one hedge-fund manager. “At least with other banks, you could say that they were just dumb – they believed what they were selling, and it blew them up. Goldman knew what it was doing.” I ask the manager how it could be that selling something to customers that you’re actually betting against – particularly when you know more about the weaknesses of those products than the customer – doesn’t amount to securities fraud.”It’s exactly securities fraud,” he says. “It’s the heart of securities fraud.”…..peas.p.s.”..and the beat goes on..”

I don’t know for sure it the Obama call was done in reality. However,…Google Snopes Basso ObamaObama Calls Basso

Years ago we had a UV light system installed in our heating and ventilation system – cost about $500 – included hardware & installation. Great way to insulate your home from virus, mold, bacteria, etc. If you can hunker down during the outbreak it will shut down that disease vector. Stop all mail, etc. also necessary. Of course if your over 50 – apparently you would not be in the high risk group.Check out the following video,The Power Of UV LightI don’t know why such a thing is not installed on airplanes – it would cut down on the effectiveness of that disease vector.

Thanks for the thought.Sure enough I got screwed on the financial end – engineering is not the best path for large $$.But life compensates because I had more time to pursue spiritual development. Inner wealth also as important as outer wealth.There are seasons in a life, at least if you listen to their “calling” out to you. So I have had my day in the sun. Now it is about quiet time and the mystery of that which is to come next.

. and here, another curiosity worthy of some attention!Dear Dr. Science,While every man has one, why do most men refer to their prostate as “the prostate”from Jack H. of Talahasee, FL** For more info, click here or write to rick@drscience.com. ** It’s the right thing to do.**Men place an undue emphasis on the nobility of their body parts. They just assume that their organs, especially those connected with reproduction, are possessed of a grandeur, an aristocracy, that assures them a place in high society. Indeed, the term blue blood is related to another phrase combining blue with a reproductive organ. Accordingly, semantics recognizes the inherent grandeur of the prostate and its many cousins, who share in its peerage. Women, on the other hand, constantly bemoan their frail state. Witness the large feminine hygiene section in our drugstores. Have you ever seen a male hygiene section?.like i said, curious. no?

I saw an article headline about toxic assets this morning. I think they should be called fraudulent assets instead.

Econ & Softie,I think that you help bolster my side of the above debate with SWK.We no longer have the energy (and resources) to both maintain the existing infrastructure (demands) AND at the same time create some new mega-replacement. I think that TPTB are trying this through various insane measures (like cap and trade), drive down demand in order to save resources for applying to the new infrastructure (“new world order”?), but I think that it’s a bit too late. I don’t believe that they can control the descent any more than they could control the ascent (refer to bubbles and collapses thereof, not exactly the stuff of control).For all those doubters I offer this from Dimitry Orlov (who has studied all of this pretty thoroughly):Definancialisation, Deglobalisation, RelocalisationMark

Like I said, it’s in our own interest. THEIR existing system is failing. Either fail with it or seek out what really matters: Food, Shelter and Water. You might see it as being marched out to the fields, but in the future, once most people have regained some sense of awareness of nature, there’s a greater chance of becoming really free. Read Thoreau.Yes, one can point at China (or the article I posted about Japan) and say “look, see, TPTB are controlling the people.” In a sense yes, and in a sense no. Most people who live on/off the land aren’t really controlled by some governing types from far away.In the West people are totally reliant on TPTB for their infrastructure to get them to work for TBTB. It’s just that they don’t realize it: See The Century of the Self to better understand how we think that we’re in charge of making our decisions.Mark

The money is gone!No changes to regulation, no shifting of electronic bits is going to make the system fly again, because it only flew on fraud to begin with! (kill the fraud and you kill the system; so, yeah, I’d be for That! but those who wish for eliminating fraud and don’t want the system wiped out, beware of what you wish for)Mark

What, give others free shelter and food for wrecking the lives of thousands/millions of people? Mark

“The buck stops here.”–that evidently ended with Truman. Certainly did not apply to Mr. Notinhale. I would think any reasonable person would have questioned legislation introduced by that scoundrel Phil Gramm. The last thing Bill Clinton needs is more excuses. He’s really why we got George Bush for eight years. Deplorable man!

It’s that prostitute paying off her $100 hotel bill – something that came up earlier in this thread – The U.S. Economy From the Lighter Side. The VELOCITY of money is improving. The banksters must be lending again. A RECOVERY is imminent! I almost felt like Crammer for a second with that “outburst.”

Mark:Point well taken. We’ll need to return to the oceans or all live in super high-rise skyscrapers. I don’t think outer space presents a realistic option.SWK

Only thanks to subprime lending* could this happen:AIG Has ‘Excellent Chance’ To Repay U.S., Liddy Says“Chance”?* No collateral, no paperwork, low (no) interest (and probably no taxes!)…Mark

If we can stop and force ourselves to get to the heart of 9/11 then perhaps there’s a chance…Richard Gage on KMPH FOX 26 in Fresno, CAMark

@wolf@ mandrinsee michael pettis article linked on RGE front page

I’ll second the nomination.

@ Guest 2009-06-27 02:46:55 >A group of pensioners (in Germany) has been accused of kidnapping and torturing a financial adviser who lost over €2m of their savings.The pensioners, nicknamed the “Geritol Gang” by police after an arthritis drug (and including retired doctors aged 63 and 66), face up to 15 years in jail if found guilty of subjecting German-American James Amburn to the alleged four-day ordeal.<Man does not seek the law, but justice. Failing to find it, he is ever tempted to overturn or subvert the law. These men apparently could not get justice from a government whose organized force seemed confined only to suppressing justice. That’s what led the cowmen on America’s western frontier to find the horse thief and hang him, rather than wait endlessly for some corrupt or lax system to find the thief and allow him to escape; they wanted the horse thieving stopped! These frontiersmen had not yet reached that stage of “civilization” where they imagined that their relationship to the state was the same as that of the sheeple to the shepherd.Worshippers of government believe that free people will cease to act. That is not true. There is a limit on how many unjust laws free men can put up with.Wrote Frederic Bastiat in “The Law” in 1848: “The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!“If this is true, it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me to call the attention of my fellow-citizens to it.”It’s just that different people have different ways in getting one’s attention.

You know, over the past year or so, I quite simply haven’t met one person who has applauded the bailout of the banks and the financial sector. So on what basis is Congress continuing to vote for bailouts and rescues? It certainly ain’t the Will of The People.As my Dad would say, every member of Congress should be put on a slow boat in the Pacific headed north. I would add the members of Obama’s administration that are former lobbyists and employees of G-S. Then let them bicker amongst themselves about how best to get back to shore (given that they can’t get anything done now, doubtful they’d succeed in coming up with a survival plan), and allow the rest of us to try and clean up the destruction they have wrought.

where did all todays posts go?

where did all todays posts go?

I don’t know. I hope they are put back: I was just going to reference many that you posted in my document file. If yours don’t return, and if you still have them, perhaps you would be kind enough to repost them–and perhaps others will as well. Did this just happen?

In attempting to put a face on Goldman, perhaps this is a small beginning in “who” it is:Goldman Sachs Funds Paid $49.6 Million to Top Executives in ‘08BLOOMBERG – Christine HarperMarch 28 2009 (Bloomberg) — Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s top 10 executives received $49.6 million from their investments in hedge funds and private equity funds during 2008, more than most of them earned in compensation after agreeing to forgo bonuses.Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein’s $1.1 million in total compensation was dwarfed by the $11.3 million he received in profits and other income from his fund investments, the New York-based company’s proxy filing showed. Co-President Gary Cohn’s $3.7 million in pay contrasts with $7.4 million in fund income, the filing showed.While the payouts pale in comparison with Blankfein’s record-setting $67.9 million bonus for 2007, they illustrate that top executives had other sources of income at the sixth- biggest U.S. bank by assets. Two of the executives, Co-President Jon Winkelried and Co-General Counsel Gregory Palm, sold fund stakes back to the firm to raise money in the last four months of the year rather than sell stock in a rocky market.“Stock sales would easily have covered their liquidity requirements but given the turbulent market conditions, we, and they, were concerned that such sales would be misconstrued by the market as indicating a lack of confidence in Goldman Sachs,” said Lucas van Praag, a spokesman. “It was clearly in the long-term interests of the organization and our shareholders that we purchase these interests.” Goldman Sachs bought the holdings after consulting with the board, he said.Palm, 51, raised $38.3 million in cash, while Winkelried, 49, garnered $19.7 million, the proxy showed. Palm’s sale represented 25 percent of his total investments in the funds and Winkelried’s was 30 percent, said van Praag.Stock HoldingsAs of March 9, Winkelried owned 2.79 million Goldman Sachs shares, yesterday’s filing showed. At their most recent closing price of $108.08 apiece, the stock would be worth $301.1 million. Palm’s total shareholdings weren’t disclosed in the filing because he’s not a board member.Winkelried, paid $67.5 million in salary and bonuses in 2007 and $53 million in 2006, is leaving the firm this month. Last year, Winkelried listed his Nantucket, Massachusetts, estate for sale at $55 million. He cut the price to $38.5 million, the Wall Street Journal reported on its Web site in February.Palm, 60, received $9.1 million in restricted shares and options in 2007 and about $1.1 million in restricted stock and options in 2008. The company doesn’t disclose any information on cash bonuses he may have collected.Palm also received $10.9 million in profit and other returns from Goldman Sachs’s funds in 2008, the filing showed. Winkelried received $3.6 million in such distributions.The 10 executives whose fund income was disclosed in the filing were Blankfein, Cohn, Winkelried, Palm, Co-General Counsel Esta Stecher, Chief Financial Officer David Viniar, Vice Chairman Michael Evans, Vice Chairman Michael Sherwood, Vice Chairman John S. Weinberg, and Kevin Kennedy, who runs Goldman’s business in Latin America.Of the 10, only Palm, Stecher, and Kennedy didn’t forgo their bonuses in 2008.http://pimpinturtle.com/2009/03/28/goldman-sachs-funds-paid-496-million-to-top-executives-in-08.aspx

I thought I was going crazy, but there are some missing, aren’t there? Weird.

happened in the past few hours. kind of strange because thier was some heavy hitting on goldman sachs and of course the NO JOBS Theme… hopefully they will be back or I will repost them again soon. first thing I thought and something I have been thinking is Roubini possibly working or will be working for Team Obama. just based on his recent low volumne of his own posts and his seemingly ingoring of the bad data still occuring.

On Giving Goldman a Chanceby Matt TaibbiRecently by Matt Taibbi: The Great American Bubble MachineJuly 1, 2009 — After my recent piece about Goldman Sachs hit the newsstands last week, I started to get a lot of mail. Most of it was thoughtful and respectful criticism, although there was an amusingly large number of people writing in impassioned defense of their right, under our American system, to be ripped off by large impersonal financial companies. “If my pension fund is buying [crap mortgages] from Goldman, and my pension fund loses lots of value, that’s not Goldman’s fault,” wrote one reader. “No one is forcing anyone to buy anything. The only thing Goldman is guilty of is making profits.”I’m not even going to go there – the psychology of a human being who would take the time to actually write in a complaint like that is so bizarre that it would take more time than I have today to even begin discussing it. One other complaint that I will address quickly, though, is the notion that I didn’t tell Goldman’s side of the story. “Not exactly a balanced approach,” complained one reader. “You should take an ethics class. You have to give the other side a fair shot.”Actually I did contact Goldman and gave the bank every opportunity to respond to the factual issues in the article. I’m bringing this up because their decision not to comment on any of those questions was actually pretty interesting.We figured ahead of time that Goldman was probably not going to respond to many of the allegations in the article, since its MO in the past with regard to hostile journalists has usually either been to make bald denials or to simply avoid comment (that’s when they’re not using the carpet-bomb litigation technique, as in the case of GoldmanSachs666.com). So what I decided to do the first time I approached them was to send a short list of simple factual questions. If the bank decided to engage us and educate us as to its point of view on these simple questions, we would send more queries and expand the dialogue.Given this, I tried to make that first list of questions as basic as possible. I asked if Goldman would have turned a profit in Q1 2009 if it hadn’t orphaned the month of December 2008. Then I asked if Goldman had made changes to its underwriting standards during the internet boom years; if Goldman’s position was still that the steep rise in oil prices last year was due to normal changes in supply and demand; and if it could explain its 1991 request to the CFTC to have its subsidiary J. Aron classified as a physical hedger on the commodities market. Citing various sources, I also noted that some people had complained that its move to short the mortgage market in 2006 even as it was selling those same types of instruments proved that the bank knew the weakness of its mortgage products, and asked if the bank had an answer for that. And I asked if the bank supported cap-and-trade legislation, and if it was fair to say (as we planned to in the piece) that the bank would capitalize financially if such legislation was passed.I intentionally put a lot of yes/no questions on that list. If the underlying thinking behind any of those questions was faulty, it would have been easy enough for them to say so and to educate us as to the truth. Instead, here is the response that we got:“Your questions are couched in such a way that presupposes the conclusions and suggests the people you spoke with have an agenda or do not fully understand the issues.”You have to have swallowed half a lifetime of carefully-worded p.r. statements to see the message written between the lines here. That this is a non-denial denial is obvious, but what’s more notable here is that they didn’t stop with just a flat “no comment,” which they easily could have done. No, they had to go a little further than that and – and this is pure Goldman, just outstanding stuff – make it clear that both I and my sources are simply not as smart as they are and don’t understand what we’re talking about. So the rough translation here is, “No comment, but if you were as smart as us, you wouldn’t be asking these questions.”So now word filters through that Goldman has issued yet another statement in response to the piece, this one by amusingly-named mouthpiece Lucas Van Pragg. Again, the company does not take issue with any of the facts in the piece – not one. Here’s what he says:Taibbi’s bubble case doesn’t stand up to serious scrutiny either. To give just two examples, even with the worst will in the world, the blame for creating the internet bubble cannot credibly be laid at our door, and we could hardly be described as having been a major player in the mortgage market, unlike so many of our current and former competitors.Taibbi’s article is a compilation of just about every conspiracy theory ever dreamed up about Goldman Sachs, but what real substance is there to support the theories?We reject the assertion that we are inflators of bubbles and profiteers in busts, and we are painfully conscious of the importance of being a force for good.Okay, let’s look at that bit piece by piece. Van Pragg takes issue with the bubble argument by citing two “examples” of the case not holding water, the first being:… the blame for creating the internet bubble cannot credibly be laid at our door…I kept waiting for the “because…” clause here, but there wasn’t one. He just says so and leaves it at that. Now there is obviously some measure of hyperbole in solely blaming Goldman Sachs for something like the internet bubble, or any of the other recent Wall Street disasters, for that matter. But you’d have to be absolutely crazy (and you wouldn’t need “the worst will in the world,” either) not to accept the notion that Goldman shouldered a significant portion of the blame for the internet mess. They were, after all, the leading underwriter of internet IPOs during the internet boom years. In 1999, at the height of the boom, they underwrote 37 internet companies, most of which had little or no history and were losing money at the time of the launch. By late 1999 Goldman was underwriting one out of every five internet IPOs. They were repeatedly caught and punished for manipulating the prices of their IPOs, either via laddering or spinning. Van Pragg doesn’t deny any of this, and just blithely says that one can’t credibly blame them for the internet bubble. I’m almost insulted by the lameness and half-assedness of that comeback, but that might be part of the point, to be insulting. He moves on:…and we could hardly be described as having been a major player in the mortgage market, unlike so many of our current and former competitors.Again, not to beat this into the ground, but in 2006, at the height of the housing boom, Goldman underwrote over $75 billion in mortgages, over $59 billion of which were non-prime. That represented 7% of the entire market, which seems like a pretty “major” slice to me. It is true that they did not jump so completely ass-first into the market as Lehman and Bear did (note Van Pragg’s bemused reference to “former competitors”), but if you read the piece, we noted why that doesn’t take them off the hook at all. Because while their “former competitors” (one of whom is clearly “former” in large part because a former Goldmanite, Hank Paulson, elected to save Goldman’s hide instead of Lehman’s) were dumb enough to hold their mortgage paper and be sunk by it, Goldman shorted their own crap, which means (and I know I’m repeating myself here) they knew that what they were selling was a loser. So while they maybe weren’t the biggest player, they were still a major player, and one can easily make the case that they were the most obnoxious player, given that they dove into this muck with their eyes wide open, unlike so many other idiots on Wall Street.In the middle of this weirdly substanceless retort, Van Pragg then goes on complain about the lack of substance in the article, makes the predictable charge that the piece was a compendium of invented conspiracy theories, then moves on to “reject” the notion that the company inflates bubbles and profits in busts (about that last part: I recommend checking out Goldman’s profit/bonus numbers in 2002, 2008, and 2009 to date. I’m not sure how they can refute the notion that they have profited during the recent financial calamities). Lastly, he says that the bank is “painfully conscious” of the importance of being a force for good, which I noted with amusement is not quite the same thing as saying that that bank is a force for good, or wants to be.So to sum up, this all translates as:“Taibbi’s bubble case doesn’t hold water. To use just two examples, Taibbi’s internet bubble case doesn’t hold water, and we didn’t sell as many mortgages as Lehman Brothers. Taibbi’s article is a compendium of every other story about Goldman that doesn’t hold water. We reject these theories that do not hold water, and are aware of the difference between right and wrong, making us legally sane according to the law.”I’m aware that some people feel that it’s a journalist’s responsibility to “give both sides of the story” and be “even-handed” and “objective.” A person who believes that will naturally find serious flaws with any article like the one I wrote about Goldman. I personally don’t subscribe to that point of view. My feeling is that companies like Goldman Sachs have a virtual monopoly on mainstream-news public relations; for every one reporter like me, or like far more knowledgeable critics like Tyler Durden, there are a thousand hacks out there willing to pimp Goldman’s viewpoint on things in the front pages and ledes of the major news organizations. And there are probably another thousand poor working stiffs who are nudged into pushing the Goldman party line by their editors and superiors (how many political reporters with no experience reporting on financial issues have swallowed whole the news cliché about Goldman being the “smart guys” on Wall Street? A lot, for sure).Goldman has its alumni pushing its views from the pulpit of the U.S. Treasury, the NYSE, the World Bank, and numerous other important posts; it also has former players fronting major TV shows. They have the ear of the president if they want it. Given all of this, I personally think it’s absurd to talk about the need for “balance” in every single magazine and news article. I understand that some people feel differently, but that’s my take on things.This article originally appeared on True/Slant and is reprinted with permission.Matt Taibbi is the author of The Great Derangement and Spanking the Donkey.http://www.lewrockwell.com/taibbi/taibbi8.1.1.html

SF Fed President Yellen on the Economyby CalculatedRisk on 6/30/2009 09:05:00 PMSan Francisco Fed President Janet Yellen has been rumored to be one of the front runners to replace Chairman Ben Bernanke (although most consider Larry Summers the front runner, assuming Bernanke isn’t reappointed).Tonight Dr. Yellen spoke in San Francisco: A View of the Economic Crisis and the Federal Reserve’s Response. Here are some excerpts on her views going forward:“I expect the recession will end sometime later this year. That would make it the longest and probably deepest downturn since the Great Depression. …”I don’t like taking the wind out of the sails of our economic expansion, but a few cautionary points should be considered. I expect the pace of the recovery will be frustratingly slow. It’s often the case that growth in the first year after a recession is very rapid. That’s what happened as we came out of a very deep downturn in the early 1980s. Although I sincerely wish we would repeat that performance, I don’t think we will. In past deep recessions, the Fed was able to step on the accelerator by cutting the federal funds rate sharply, causing the economy to shoot ahead. This time, we already have our foot planted firmly on the floor. We can’t take the federal funds rate any lower than zero. I believe that the Fed’s novel programs are stimulating the flow of credit, but they simply aren’t as powerful levers as large rate cuts, so this time monetary policy alone can’t power a rapid recovery.”History also teaches us that it often takes a long time to recover from downturns caused by financial crises. In particular, financial institutions and markets won’t heal overnight. Our major banks have made excellent progress in establishing the capital buffers needed to continue lending even through a downturn that is more serious than we anticipate. But they are still nursing their wounds and credit will remain tight for some time to come.”I also think that a massive shift in consumer behavior is under way—one that will produce great benefits in the long run but slow our recovery in the short term. American households entered this recession stretched to the limit with mortgage and other debt. The personal saving rate fell from around 8 percent of disposable income two decades ago to almost zero. Households financed their lifestyles by drawing on increasing stock market and housing wealth, and taking on higher levels of debt. But falling house and stock prices have destroyed trillions of dollars in wealth, cutting off those ready sources of cash. What’s more, the stark realities of this recession have scared many households straight, convincing them that they need to save larger fractions of their incomes. In the long run, higher saving promises to channel resources from consumption to investment, making capital more readily available to retool industry and fix our infrastructure. But, in the here and now, such a rediscovery of thrift means fewer sales at the mall, and fewer jobs on assembly lines and store counters.”A fourth factor that could slow recovery is the unprecedented global nature of the recession. Neither we nor our trading partners can count on a boost from strong foreign demand. Finally, developments in the labor market suggest it could take several years to return to full employment. During this recession, an unusually high proportion of layoffs have been permanent as opposed to temporary, meaning workers won’t get called back when conditions improve. Also, we’ve seen an unprecedented level of involuntary part-time work, such as state workers on furlough a few days per month. Those workers are likely to return to full-time status before new workers are hired. To summarize, I expect that we will turn the growth corner sometime later this year, but I am not optimistic that the economy will spring back to normal anytime soon. What’s more, I expect the unemployment rate to remain painfully high for several more years.”That’s a dreary prediction, but there is also some risk that things could turn out worse. High on my worry list is the possibility of another shock to the still-fragile financial system. Commercial real estate is a particular danger zone. Property prices are falling and vacancy rates are rising in many parts of the country. Given the weak economy, prices could fall more rapidly and developers could face tough times rolling over their loans. Many banks are heavily exposed to commercial real estate loans. An increase in defaults could add to their financial stress, prompting them to tighten credit. The Fed and Treasury are providing loans to investors in securitized commercial mortgages, which should be a big help. But a risk remains of a severe shakeout in this sector.”Yellen also discusses Fed policy, the Fed balance sheet, the fiscal deficit and inflation: “I think the predominant risk is that inflation will be too low, not too high, over the next several years.”http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/

At least with the harlot you get a moment or two of pleasure for your money.

Finally, someone with a lick of sense. Good article.The Commodity Futures Trading Commission will use all of its regulatory power to ensure fair operations of futures markets for oil, agriculture, currencies and interest rates, the agency’s chairman said.CFTC Looking at All Options for Fair Markets, Gensler Says (link below)http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aGgrOsW.SAZA

So all the posts from yesterday are still gone.. anyone ever see that before on this site?

So consumer confidence tanked yesterday, today its a Mortgage Applications Collapse- the common thread being NO JOBS!Can’t apply for a mortgage when you dont have a job, plus who would actully buy as home values continue to plummet?Wheres the GREENSHOOTS? which is sort of like the old commercial “WHERES the BEEF”…Seems also that there are a lot of opinions, bloggers, commentors, even some POLS hot on the heals of Goldman Sachs..Goldman is corrput and needs to GO AWAY.Mortgage Applications CollapseAnother sign that the housing market isn’t in recovery mode, or anywhere close yet…The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) today released its Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey for the week ending June 26, 2009. The Market Composite Index, a measure of mortgage loan application volume, was 444.8, a decrease of 18.9 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis from 548.2 one week earlier. On an unadjusted basis, the Index decreased 18.5 percent compared with the previous week and decreased 7.4 percent compared with the same week one year earlier.The Refinance Index decreased 30.0 percent to 1482.2 from 2116.3 the previous week and the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index decreased 4.5 percent to 267.7 from 280.3 one week earlier. The Refinance Index is at its lowest level since November 2008.The four week moving average for the seasonally adjusted Market Index is down 9.2 percent. The four week moving average is unchanged for the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index, while this average is down 15.2 percent for the Refinance Index.As CNBC notes, new weekly mortgage applications are at a seven-month low, and of course they quote someone who thinks this needs to be “fixed” ASAPKenneth Rosen, chairman of the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics at the University of California, Berkeley, said mortgage rates are just one factor driving potential borrowers.”Rising unemployment, concerns about job security, potential buyers’ inability to sell their existing homes and problems with appraisals coming in too low are all weighing on demand,” he said.”The government needs to take more aggressive action to bring mortgage rates back down to below 5 percent as that seems to be a key level for the market,” he said.http://www.businessinsider.com/mortgage-applications-collapse-2009-7

hmmmm nice excuse… but….

Who feesl like they are being setup/goosed/BS to on why we need a second stimulus. how abotu soem ideas if thier is second one how it shoudl be structured? Who gets the money?Obama poll numbers starting to slide down rather quick these days. he will be at or near Bush poll levels by DecemebrA Forecast With Hope Built InThe New York TimesTimothy Geithner, left, Christina Romer, an economist, and Lawrence Summers, the top economics adviser. President Obama’s advisers have been overly optimistic about the jobless rate.In the weeks just before President Obama took office, his economic advisers made a mistake. They got a little carried away with hope.To make the case for a big stimulus package, they released their economic forecast for the next few years. Without the stimulus, they saw the unemployment rate — then 7.2 percent — rising above 8 percent in 2009 and peaking at 9 percent next year. With the stimulus, the advisers said, unemployment would probably peak at 8 percent late this year.We now know that this forecast was terribly optimistic. The jobless rate has already reached 9.4 percent. On Thursday, the Labor Department will announce the latest number, for June, and forecasters are expecting it to rise further. In concrete terms, the difference between the situation that the Obama advisers predicted and the one that has come to pass is about 2.5 million jobs. It’s as if every worker in the city of Los Angeles received an unexpected layoff notice.There are two possible explanations that the administration was so wrong. And sorting through them matters a great deal, because they point in opposite policy directions.The first explanation is that the economy has deteriorated because the stimulus package failed. Some critics say that stimulus just doesn’t work, while others argue that this particular package was too small or too badly constructed to make a difference.The second answer is that the economy has deteriorated in spite of the stimulus. In other words, the patient is not as sick as he would have been without the medicine he received. But he is a lot sicker than doctors realized when they prescribed it.To me, the evidence is fairly compelling that the second answer is the right one. The stimulus package does seem to have helped. But its impact has been minor — so far — compared with the harshness of the Great Recession.Unfortunately, the administration’s rose-colored forecast has muddied this picture. So if at some point this year or next the White House decides that the economy needs more stimulus, skeptics will surely brandish that old forecast.Worst of all, the economy really may need more help.There is no ironclad way to judge the stimulus, because we can’t rerun the last six months in an alternate universe. But you can get a pretty good sense by looking at the size of the gap between where the economy is today and where the administration thought it would be: those 2.5 million jobs that would still exist if the forecast had been right.This gap is just far too large to be explained by the stimulus. The plan that Mr. Obama signed definitely has its flaws. It spends money more slowly than is ideal and spends some of it on projects of little long-term value. But no stimulus package could have come close to preventing 2.5 million job losses over six months.For starters, a stimulus package doesn’t affect the job market immediately because most employers don’t hire or fire workers as soon as they sense their business shifting. That’s why economists refer to employment as a lagging indicator.When private economists began analyzing various stimulus proposals in January, they said that none would have a major effect on the jobless rate until the end of the year. By June, the effect would be only a few tenths of a percentage point, which translates into several hundred thousand jobs.The stimulus that passed may in fact be having an impact of roughly this scale. Consumer spending, after plummeting late last year, is up slightly this year, despite a continuing rise in the savings rate. This combination suggests that spending would still be falling if not for the tax cuts in the stimulus.“Early results,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Economy.com, “suggest the stimulus is performing close to expectations.” Obviously, though, the economy is not performing close to expectations.It’s not fair to expect Mr. Obama’s economists to be clairvoyant. But they did make one avoidable mistake that led directly to their overoptimism. They relied on the same forecasting models that had completely failed to see the crisis coming.These models, which are also used by Wall Street and various research firms, do a decent job most of the time. But they are notoriously bad at forecasting turning points because they are based on an assumption that the recent past will more or less repeat itself.Clearly, recent economic history is not going to repeat itself. It included two huge asset bubbles, first in stocks and then in real estate. The models came to treat those bubbles — and the additional consumer spending they caused — as the new normal. When asset prices began falling, the models couldn’t keep up, with either the pace of declines or the economic damage they were causing.“All sorts of relationships got completely out of whack, and models couldn’t cope with that,” says Joshua Shapiro, an economist at MFR, a research firm. MFR did not take the models too literally and was one of the few firms to have been appropriately pessimistic. The Obama administration believed the models.And what do these models say today? They are forecasting that the recession will end in the next few months. Administration officials aren’t quite so specific, but they are in a similar place.Christina Romer, a senior Obama economist, argues that businesses that have spent the last few months drawing down their warehouse inventories will eventually need to rebuild them. Lawrence Summers, the top economics adviser, says that many consumers who have been delaying the purchase of a new car will eventually take the plunge. The government, meanwhile, will be pumping out close to $30 billion in stimulus money every month for months to come.A big headline across the front page of Monday’s Financial Times summed up the position: “Romer upbeat on economy.”It’s an entirely reasonable prediction. Yet it’s hard not to look back on the last six months and worry that the administration is still underestimating the severity of the situation.Many consumers may not rush back to their old buying habits. Mr. Shapiro points out that household debt, relative to assets, remains far higher than historically normal. “It’s going to be a very long slog,” he predicts. That would certainly be consistent with the aftermath of other financial crises.The larger point is that, even if the optimists are right this time, the economy isn’t going to feel remotely healthy anytime soon. Since jobs (and incomes) are a lagging indicator, the unemployment rate will probably surpass 10 percent this year and remain above 9 percent well into next year. Long after the experts say the economy has turned, it is going to feel pretty bad.Another stimulus package may soften the blow, but it can’t prevent most of the pain. The problems are too big. So it would make sense for everyone — the administration and the rest of us — to have a sober view of what might lie ahead.

ADP June private sector jobs loss at 473K. also it seems the numbers are getting further and furthur away form BLSprojections the past few months… sounds like some GOVT number manipulation going on. if youcant fix the NO JOBS problem why not just lie about how bad it is.We have just wiped out all the jobs gained in the past deacade. That has never happened before.

USA has a political system that seems to require that adding of ridiculous non-related items to a bill to get it passed through the legislature (as shown in below text). Is this the case in Europe and Australia as well?http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/fortune/0906/gallery.dumbest_moments_midyear2009.fortune/11.html

President Obama signed a bill in May making it more difficult for credit card companies to increase fees and interest rates…and easier for people to bring loaded guns into national parks and wildlife refuges.While Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who backed the gun provision, said it wasn’t meant to be a “‘gotcha’ amendment,” Democrats in the House and Senate had to push it through in order to pass the high-profile credit card legislation.

Wow-what a market rally: they must love the job loss numbers of only 473k!!! Of course,they must be looking for big improvement by 3rd and 4th quarter-right!

If you read one article today, read this one i stumbled across… I could not say ti better myslef.I would say that with U6 approaching 20% we may indeed be at 30 million or so unemployed/underemployedalready. Also the 20 million unoccupied housing units is a number that is fact, but one you will neverhear much about, just liek the U6 number. I would go to work many times the past 10 years or so and wheni would hear on the radio productivity has risen again i wondered how you get 100% pordcutivity increasesover a period of time. it never made sense and it still doesnt. they have squeeze the life bloodout of the American worker.De Facto Socialism, 20 Million Vacant Houses and Squattertown, USAJune 30, 2009Combine rising foreclosures and unemployment with de facto Federal ownership of millions of homes and you eventually get de facto socialized housing.Correspondent Richard Metzger and I have been discussing the consequences of rising foreclosures/unemployment and the de facto government ownership of millions of U.S. houses via Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac and direct ownership/control of banks.There are a lot of threads to pull together on this topic, so please bear with me as we set up the contexts.The party line on the housing bust is that “the market” will solve everything. Millions of foreclosed homes and apartment buildings will be sold to millions of buyers, who will fix them up and rent them out for tidy profits.One little problem with that rosy scenario: how can unemployed households pay rent? Like all the other “green shoots” scenarios, this one depends on semi-full employment to pan out. But rather than semi-full employment, we’re facing a tidal wave of job losses which is far from being spent.Back in January, I posted this analysis which concluded job losses won’t stop at today’s 6.7 million but proceed on to 21 million or even 30 million: The End of (Paying) Work .Meanwhile, house prices continue their relentless decline. Home Prices Continued Their Decline in March (New York Times)The S&P/Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index – which covers all nine U.S. census divisions – recorded a 19.1% decline in the 1st quarter of 2009 versus the 1st quarter of 2008, the largest decline in the series’ 21-year history. The 10-City and 20-City Composites recorded annual declines of 18.6% and 18.7%, respectively. These are slight improvements from their returns reported for February. (from the report link in the NY Times story)Overwhelmed, the banks are now taking a different approach: dumping the properties to clear their books, making them “extremely motivated sellers,” as Mr. Havig calls them.Dumping properties has worked so far because the quantity dribbled onto the market by lenders has been modest and a pool of anxious-to-catch-the-bottom buyers had gathered. But once this shallow pool has been soaked up, then there is no long-term source of buyers.Indeed, buyers bidding up prices now will regret their impatience in a year as prices continue their inexorable slide downward.Richard also sent me this story on shrinking Rust Belt cities bulldozing suburbs:US cities may have to be bulldozed in order to survive: Dozens of US cities may have entire neighbourhoods bulldozed as part of drastic “shrink to survive” proposals being considered by the Obama administration to tackle economic decline.While this is a somewhat sensationalist headline, it does raise a number of complex issues.1. If an old house has been stripped or left vacant for long periods of time in locales with extreme summers and winters, then it may well be not worth fixing up. Its only value will be for scrap lumber, etc.2. If a house is still habitable, but outside the shrinking radius of city services, does that matter to someone unable to pay rent on a nicer, more central house? Perhaps not.3. If such free housing (abandoned, foreclosed and unsold, etc.) outside the shrinking city jurisdiction is occupied by informal residents, i.e. squatters, then what authority (if any) is in place?I have covered many troubling aspects of the housing bubble’s inevitable deflation for years. Just for context, let’s glance as the key points in the following stories:Can 4% of Homeowners Sink the Entire Market? (February 21, 2007)If 4% of all American homeowners fall into foreclosure, could that “small number” cause a collapse in the entire housing market? The Pareto principle says: yes.How 4% of Mortgages Have Brought Down the Entire Market (August 21, 2007)Back on February 21, 2007, I invoked The Pareto principle to suggest that a mere 4% of U.S. mortgages going bad could bring down the entire U.S. housing and mortgage markets. Seven months later, that call appears to be playing out in spades.It now seems likely that the 64/4 (80/20) rule is playing out globally–the “limited” subprime meltdown is set to take down the global mortgage market and the trillions in derivatives which have been written on trillions in real estate-based debt.Will Delinquencies Trigger a New American Revolution? (April 7, 2008)Two years ago I predicted we’d soon see 5 million foreclosed/distressed homes, 5 million REO/investment/2nd homes languishing on the market and lender/thrift losses of $500 billion. I seem to have undershot the losses…Interestingly, there are 20 million vacant dwellings in the U.S., of which only 7 million are vacation homes. So much for any perceived “shortage” of housing, of any type.Feedback Loop of Recession: Housing Bust, Debt and Layoffs (March 10, 2008)Could 50% of All Homes End Up in Foreclosure? (June 3, 2008)Just how bad could the housing bust get? How about half of all urban homes being in foreclosure? As stunning or unbelievable as that may sound, it already happened once in the U.S., in the Great Depression, as documented in this report: Lessons from the Great Depression (St. Louis Federal Reserve).The Great Fall: How Suburbs De-gentrify to Ghettos (November 20, 2007)A disturbing number of mainstream media stories are documenting the appearance of inner-city plagues such as gangs, drugs and graffiti in what were recently middle-class suburbs.The Company Store, Debt and Serfdom (October 24, 2008)Most astonishingly, the Ministry of Propaganda has succeeded in diverting the nation’s attention from the Company store/debt-serf realities to a bogus “debate” over “socialism” and “capitalism.” As Michael Hudson has pointed out, the rentier class which owns the mortgages, loans and credit card debt is not capitalist at all; it is essentially medieval in structure. It takes no risks, creates no innovations, invests no capital in new enterprises or indeed, performs any classical capitalist functions at all.It simply indebts the serfs, convinces them via doublespeak, propaganda and phony statistics that they are still gloriously “middle class” (that is, obscuring or reifying their true nature as mere miserable debt serfs) and then sits back and collects the interest and profits which the debt serfs will be struggling to pay until their last breath.This is the real context: a growing army of millions of unemployed, declining housing values and equity, a banking sector bloated with foreclosed/distressed houses which cannot be sold en masse and a Ministry of Propaganda in full-court press on reality.Unfortunately for Team Propaganda, Reality keeps sneaking through the full-court press and scoring easy dunks. (Shameless basketball analogy.)Let’s return to the key issue of no jobs=no income=no ability to pay rent or mortgage. The entire U.S. system of unemployment insurance is based on the premise that no recession can last longer than six months–thus unemployment runs out after 26 weeks. Now, as dark storm clouds gather, this is being extended to 39 weeks–nine months. But few observers are pondering what happens next year when that nine months’ of income expires and millions more lose their jobs.This raises a fundamental question which Richard poses thusly:With the news of California’s impending financial implosion, and the buzz about cutting off welfare, etc., in the state, I wonder where are they going to expect the tsunami of future homeless families to go? Under a bridge? Their front yards? The curb?I believe that more than 60% in Los Angeles county are renters. Let’s say for sake of argument that the non-bubble related, non-FIRE related industries can only really sustain 75% of CA workers and that there is 25% who are unable to find work. It’s not that far off from that now. No one believes the official statistics. When the state resources really get run down, will they still evict unemployed people unable to pay their rent or will there be something like “rent vouchers” like they had in the U.K. pre-Thatcher?We have no history of widespread government housing here unlike many European countries. How will concepts of private property –and laws– have to change to deal with something like “rent vouchers” being injected into the picture? It’s difficult for me to imagine any other practical method of keeping unemployed renters in their homes, but what of the landlord’s obligations to the banks with their mortgages? Does the voucher convert into money at some stage of the game?This seems to be a pretty toxic string to pull on the already threadbare sweater of the banking system. But for the life of me I cannot think of another way they can handle this situation without riots in the streets.And suppose if nothing is done and they are allowing evictions and the sheriff’s deputies still carry them out… picture up to 10% of renters and their landlords clogging up the courts system. Imagine the news stories about landlords hiring goons to crack the heads of tenants they want out, etc.When the landlords start walking away, too, that’s going to get interesting. It may be that “widespread government housing” in the US of A takes the form of abandoned properties being taken over by the nationalized banking system…It seems inevitable to me that as jobs vanish and incomes drop, rents will decline and vacancies will rise. This will trigger a wave of foreclosures of landlords who bought rental properties based on full occupancy and high (full employment) rents.As noted here before, that raise all sorts of other “interesting” issues; readers have recalled living in foreclosed apartment buildings during the late 1980s savings & loan bust and not knowing who even owned the building. There was thus no one to pay rent to.One key feature of the present is completely unprecedented in American history: the Federal government essentially owns millions of dwellings via its takeover of the GSEs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These two lenders were once quasi-governmentally owned; now the quasi has been dropped. Fannie and Freddie own $5 trillion in mortgages; so when the owner walks away or defaults, guess who ends up owning the house?You and me: the taxpayers.Add in trillions of dollars of FHA and VA loans which are in default/distressed–also government guaranteed and thus ultimately government-owned–and direct Federal ownership of shares in major banks (which absorbed mortgage lenders like Countrywide, WAMU and Wachovia in Federally overseen shotgun marriages) and you end up with Federal ownership of a significant portion of the entire U.S. mortgage/housing stock. (Fannie and Freddie alone account for half of all outstanding mortgages.)Back to Richard’s question: so exactly what will the U.S. do with 10 or even 20 million unemployed/no-income households? As noted above, there are already 20 million vacant dwellings. Even bulldozing 2 million of them won’t change the big picture, and it certainly won’t address the core issue of housing and feeding 10 million households with essentially zero prospects for formal employment in an economy burdened by staggering debt, losses and interest payments and a FIRE (finance, real estate and insurance) economy which has imploded, never to come back.The Ministry of Propaganda has an ironic task before it: it must continue its relentless cheerleading and its relentless attacks on “socialism” (whatever that means) even as the Federal government must somehow prepare to deal with 10 or 20 million homeless, broke households on a long-term basis.Even more ironically, that same Federal government now owns, via Federally backed mortgages, some 20 million dwellings. Now put all this together. Either we face up to 20 million households living in Squattertown, U.S.A. or the Federal government faces up to the obligations it now carries as reluctant owner of 20 million foreclosed/distressed/defaulted dwellings.Is providing low-cost housing for 20 million homeless people “socialist”? If so, bring it on, Ministry of Propaganda be damned.http://www.oftwominds.com/blog.html

This person expalins why JOB LOSSES will continue… cant say i disagree with him…http://www.oftwominds.com/blogjan09/endgame-work01-09.htmlThe End of (Paying) Work (January 21, 2009)The endgame isn’t limited to the global financial meltdown or the complete repudiation of existing debt, policies and financial structures; it includes the end of an entire consumer-based, resource-profligate paradigm of work.Various analysts have estimated the U.S. economy will shed about 2 millions jobs in 2009. Given that as of December 2008 there were over 137 million jobs, that doesn’t sound all that horrific. Here are the numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:Nonfarm employment…….| 137,331Goods-producing (1)……..| 21,351Construction ……… 7,141Manufacturing ……. 13,423Service-providing (1)……| 115,980Retail trade (2)……. 15,259Professional andbusiness services ….. 17,849Education and healthservices ………. 18,975Leisure andhospitality ……. 13,627Government ………. 22,504Setting aside the estimate of 2 million jobs lost, let’s look at each category and make a rough back-of-the-envelope estimate for how much paying work each category might support in, say, 18 to 24 months.Construction. While bridges being repaired will certainly support heavy-construction employment, the far larger categories of residential building and remodeling and commercial construction (office towers, malls, warehouses, etc.) are completely overbuilt for years to come. So let’s guesstimate that there will be 50% less demand for construction and a job loss of 3.5 million in this category.Manufacturing. Unfortunately, a tremendous amount of manufacturing is dependent on construction (glass, appliances, steel, etc.) and transportation (rubber, steel, components, semiconductors, etc.) both of which are in freefalls. Exports are falling as fast as imports. Let’s be charitable and only carve off 3.5 million jobs here, leaving 10 million intact.Retail. Does anyone doubt that fully 1/3 of all retail outlets are now surplus?We’re talking about fulltime positions here; so cutting hours from everyone on the floor may actually save jobs (i.e. hours cut will not show up in the above statistics) but the equivalent fulltime positions (that is, 40 hours of paid work a week) may well have vanished.Let’s guesstimate that 5 million retail positions will no longer be supported by sales/profits.Professional and Business Services. Legal and accounting services will suffer as businesses fold. Businesses will decide they need fewer contract workers, fewer consultants, fewer financial services and fewer software upgrades. Let’s guesstimate that 2.5 million jobs will eventually be lost in this category.Education and Health Services. These have been the growth industries, along with financial services, during the bogus “prosperity” of the past eight years. Once millions of jobs are shed, then millions of dollars of health insurance are no longer paid by employers, which means healthcare providers will get squeezed along with every other category.Here is California, college enrollments are being capped as deficits soar; the inevitable next step is to leave jobs unfilled as people retire–one way or another, a reduction in total education employment. Let’s guesstimate 1 million of these jobs get cut–perhaps not by layoffs but by retiring workers not being replaced.Leisure and hospitality. The sad fact is nobody needs to take a cruise or a vacation; both are the acme of discretionary expenditures. I would be shocked if the U.S. economy didn’t shed 3.5 million jobs in this category.Government. Local government (cities, counties, states and agencies) has added 12% more employees in the past eight years of bogus debt-based “prosperity,” and the freefall in tax revenues means those 12% of “new” government jobs will vanish–and that’s the best-case scenario. Let’s guess that a total of 2.5 million jobs will disappear as tax revenues plummet and then keep plummeting.The total: 21.5 million jobs–10 times the MSM-approved estimate of 2 million jobs lost. Very few have the stomach to consider the reality that perhaps 20+ million jobs are no longer supportable by private industry revenues and profits and the tax revenues which depend on those profits and jobs. 21.5 million jobs lost works out to about 15.6% unemployment–a full 10% lower than the 25% unemployment rate reached in the Great Depression.In other words, 21 million jobs lost is actually an optimistic guesstimate compared to what could transpire in the years ahead–a gradual evaporation of 30-35 million jobs. If Federal fiscal stimulis funds a couple million jobs–more likely retaining jobs in heavy construction and manufacturing that would otherwise be lost rather than adding jobs–then the total job loss might not be as severe until the “extra” Federal spending ends.Just off the top of my head, here are industries which are sure to be hard-hit: media, advertising, cruise ships (many if not most will be mothballed), professional sports (how many people will be able to afford $45 tickets for lousy seats plus $10 for parking and $25 for a few beers and hotdogs?), spas, auto detailing, non-profits, pricey venues like museums which depend on wealthy donors (far fewer of those suddenly)–the list is long indeed.Even worse, the deeper issue–the End of Work in a resource-profligate and consumer-based economy–isn’t even being addressed yet.Knowledgeable reader Matt S. who first recommended the seminal demographic study The Fourth Turning recently recommended The End of Work by Jeremy Rifkin.Rifkin’s primary point is that the “full employment” of the bubble eras (dot-com asset bubble followed by credit-housing bubble) was a temporary aberration from the underlying trend caused solely by unsustainable credit-based (borrow and spend) consumerism. The longterm trend is this: productivity is raised by the replacement of human labor (jobs) with automation/machines/software.As productivity rises, the number of jobs decreases.This reality has long been visible in manufacturing. The reality of competitive global forces lead to factories of robots assembling robot-assembled components with a few hundred humans to maintain the machines. There are already auto factories like this in Japan. The entire world’s auto industry will continue shedding workers even if the number of units produced increases.Rifkin points to the U.S. steel industry as another example. Since 1981, the industry has boosted production by about a third while reducing the number of jobs from 384,000 to 74,000.Many observers believe the answer is to pay all of us $25/hour for service work so we can all afford the high-priced services provided by each other. In other words, I prepare you a $5 coffee (plus $2 tax) and then spend my earnings on a haircut, downloading a song off iTunes, going to a club and buying a high-priced drink, playing golf, etc. etc.While this is certainly appealing–a high-wage service economy which is entirely self-supporting– the nations which most resemble this model (Japan, France, Germany and Scandanavia) all depend on exports and a trade surplus, and all live with a structurally high unemployment.In other words, their prosperity is still based on the old-fashioned model: make and sell more than than you buy/consume from others.The only nation which has run massive structural trade deficits during “prosperity” is the U.S., and now the painful reality is revealed: that deficit-borrow-spend model has essentially bankrupted the nation.Here is how the U.S. has gotten away with it: we have arbitraged our currency, in essence creating a “surplus” of chimerical value via the U.S. dollar.One way to think about this is: we have traded dollars for goods valued at X (in other currencies, in gold, whatever metric you want) and paid for them with currency worth X-$700 billion: the dollar. This is how we have been able to sustain trade deficits which have broken every other profligate nation’s economy throughout recorded history.Since the rest of the world depends entirely on the export/trade surplus model, they really have no choice: either accept the dollar arbitrage (in effect ceding $700 billion in excess value every year to the dollar) or face the end of the export/surplus model.Since nobody’s come up with a sustainable alternative to the export/surplus model, then the entire world accepted the dollar arbitrage: sell to the American consumer, pocket a surplus to support one’s economy, and accept the dollar arbitrage.The U.S. has “exported” two things in exchange for trillions of dollars of oil and other real goods: inflation via a depreciation of its own currency, and “financial instruments” based on the dollar arbitrage. It continues to be a wonderful scam: we print/create with fractional lending as much paper money as we want (X), and everyone continues to accept it as an IOU worth X when in fact it is worth X-Y (with Y being the U.S. trade deficit).Can this model of global prosperity continue essentially forever? It’s hard to see how, but to date it has proven extremely durable because nobody has a Plan B. So it might last for years to come–as long as the dollar arbitrage doesn’t become too onerous. At what point does it become too burdensome? Nobody knows.The Dollar Crisis: Causes, Consequences, Cures argues that this arbitrage/deficit is indeed unsustainable.When the scam breaks down, then the export/surplus model will break down, and global unemployment will skyrocket. There is a lot being written now about the “race to the bottom” in currencies, in which every nation/trading bloc is trying to devalue their currency faster than their rivals in order to support their exports. What makes this so laughable is the one currency which is rising is–drum roll, please–the U.S. dollar. Why?Because every other nation/trading bloc is still pursuing the export/surplus model: sell more than you buy. That requires they not only accept the dollar arbitrage, they must actively support it. Many observers are astounded by the dollar’s strength: this profligate nation’s currency should be plummeting like a stone, yet instead it rises!Once you understand the global dollar arbitrage–we buy your goods to support your export/surplus model, and you accept a dollar intrinsically worth less than the the goods sold, and everyone walks away happy–then this seeming impossibility makes sense.Were the dollar to fall, as many expect, from 86 on the DXY (dollar index) to say 45, then the global export/surplus model of everyone selling their surplus production to the U.S. will no long work. Since there is no Plan B, then it’s in everyone’s interest to keep the game going. It’s a lot less painful to accept a “hidden” loss via dollar arbitrage than it is to face structural unemployment and civil unrest if the export model breaks down.We also read how China is going to transition to a domestic economy, but a study of history finds virtually no examples of such a model. Wealth and thus prosperity has always been created by trade, and it precisely the point at which China turned away from global trade in the 16th century that its long decline began.I recently toured a 40-acre biodynamic vineyard in Sonoma County, California. Biodynamic is basically one step beyond organic: not only are no pesticides or chemical fertilizers used, virtually no outside inputs are used: the land supports itself, as it were, by careful shepharding of insects, mulching, a few animals which graze off the grass/ground cover, etc.Yes, the vineyard has machinery which operates on oil: there is certainly an enormous energy input from outside the system. But other than the cost of shipping the product (wine) to market and transporting visitors to the site, most of the work is manual labor.This model employs about a dozen people year-round. Most of the work is hard physical labor: pruning vines, spreading mulch, etc. This work cannot be entirely mechanized, and software can do little to add value/productivity. But then the question becomes: what is the tradable value of the resulting product? If the wine sells for $30+ a bottle, then the vineyard is a viable model in our high-cost economy. But if the tradable value of the product declines to say $10 a bottle, then the wages generated by the enterprise must likewise fall.Rifkin is an optimist, as he sees the possibility of a new model in which “paying work” is replaced by “work” in a high-tech hydrogen-based economy.While we work toward that goal–or some alternative vision, if you prefer–then we better be ready to fund food stamps and unemployment benefits for 20 million people without paying jobs, and find something productive for them to do–for idle hands eventually find employment with the Devil.What’s for dinner at your house? has been updated with four new recipes.

Speaking of “lost posts,” here’s another retrival:This is total BS…. So anyone think the BIG FIX is not in? GOLDMAN is CORRUPT!!!!http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/06/nyse-halts-transparency-feels-goldman.htmlTuesday, June 30, 2009NYSE Halts Transparency, Feels Goldman Program Trading Disclosure Is UnnecessaryPosted by Tyler Durden at 1:26 PMIn a move set to infuriate and send many Zero Hedge readers over the top, the NYSE has taken action to make sure that nobody will henceforth be able to keep track of the complete dominance that Goldman Sachs exerts over the New York Stock Exchange. This basically ends our weekly Program Trading updates disclosed every Thursday indicating that Goldman has singlehandedly captured all of NYSE’s program trading.In an information memorandum released on June 24 (09-31), the NYSE Regulation team has announced the Decommissioning of the Daily Program Trading Report (DPTR).From the memo:The New York Stock Exchange LLC (“NYSE”) will be decommissioning the requirement to report program trading activity via the Daily Program Trading Report (“DPTR”), which was previously approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”).1 The last trade date for which member organizations will be required to file the DPTR with the Exchange will be July 10, 2009 and therefore the last required date to submit the DPTR will be July 14, 2009.In the 2007 rule filing, the Exchange proposed to eliminate DPTR. The 2007 filing noted that there was some duplication between the DPTR data and the audit trail information that member organizations provide to the Exchange via account-type indicators at the time that they submit program trades to the Exchange… [A]fter consulting with the SEC, the Exchange announced that it would delay implementation of the two redefined account type indicators, and pending such implementation, member organizations would be required to continue filing the DPTR with the Exchange. The current delayed implementation date of the redefined J and K account type indicators is June 30, 2009. Accordingly, the Exchange still requires member organizations to submit DPTR.The Exchange has filed with the SEC to implement the decommissioning of the DPTRrequirement following the July 10, 2009 trade date. Accordingly, the last required submission of the DPTR will be on July 14, 2009, which is the second business day after the last trade date for which the DPTR is required.In addition, in connection with the decommissioning of the DPTR, the Exchange will not be implementing the proposed redefined program trading account type indicators (J and K) and will continue to use the existing J and K audit trail account types. Upon further analysis and based on industry input, the Exchange has determined that these redefined account type indicators do not enhance the regulatory audit trail because the proposed redefined J and K could subsume some of the other, more granular account type indicators that the Exchange currently receives. Accordingly, the Exchange has determined not to redefine the J and K account types in the manner previously proposed, and is instead leaving the J and K account-type definitions unchanged.The Exchange further notes that it will use the existing account type indicator data – which captures program trade information for those orders sent to and executed on the Exchange – to report to the Commission on a weekly basis the program trading statistics for portions of program trades executed on the Exchange. Accordingly, beginning on July 23, 2009, the Exchange will provide the Commission with its weekly statistics on program trading based on account type indicator data rather than DPTR data. Similarly, at the same time, the weekly statistics regarding program trades that the Exchange provides to media outlets will also be derived from account type indicator data rather than the DPTR.Basically this is the beginning of the end of unmodified data transparency. Going forward the NYSE will provide whatever data it feels comfortable, after sufficient internal “audits,” and media outlets such as Zero Hedge, which had presented its millions of readers the only data point about Goldman’s complete encroachment of not only NYSE but Program Trading, will be henceforth unreliable and likely will present no useful information at all.This is a travesty, as well as a complete obliteration and a mockery of the move for transparency that the Administration, Regulators and Exchanges have been posturing they support.We advise all readers to contact the provided staff on the memorandum and voice your incredulity with this brazen move to completely obfuscate Goldman’s behind-the-scenes take over the world’s biggest stock exchange.Robert Airo, Senior Vice President, NYSE Euronext at (212) 656-5663 orAleksandra Radakovic, Vice President, NYSE Regulation at (212) 656-4144

Nope just an average american who wonders what will happen to my kids and thier kids…plus all the current Americans who are suffering NOW and having a tough time… cant look furthur than that…I’m niether republican or democrat, I just want honest people leading.. and it seems there is dearth of themthese days and probably the past 20-30 years…I dont doubt for one second that Roubini’s blog is read by researhers, POL watchers, Banks, GS,etc… there are some highly intelligent people who have been posting here for along time and a lot of what they say is true, happens or is going to happen. So my message will continue and i will harder abotu NO JOBS until improves. Unfortunatley not I or many on here have come up with solid ideas on hwo to fix the problem.. I wish i could. If i had 1-2 trillion layign around under my control and some of the other posters on here control, i have no doubt i could create millions of “good” jobs (10-20M).

Obama gearing up to break his tax pledge. Again. Axelrod “softening us up” says NorquistJune 29, 2009 — Americans for Tax Reform today released the following:Appearing Sunday on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos, President Obama’s Senior Adviser David Axelrod refused to confirm that Obama’s central campaign promise not to raise taxes on families making less than $250,000 was still in effect. Given three consecutive opportunities to confirm the promise, Axelrod waffled each time.After being pressed for the third time, Axelrod stated: “One of the problems we’ve had in this town is that people draw lines in the sand and they stop talking to each other. And you don’t get anything done.”But a bright line in the sand is exactly what Obama drew repeatedly during his campaign:“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” (Barack Obama, September 12, 2008, Dover, NH) [Transcript] [Video clip]Americans for Tax Reform president Grover Norquist said Obama is using Axelrod to “soften us up” for a tax hike:“Axelrod was saying on national television that he believes Obama lied his way into office. Here you have one of Obama’s closest advisors saying he believes Obama’s central campaign promise was nothing but a lie. Obama is sending Axelrod out in an attempt to soften us up for a pledge breaking tax hike.”If Obama signs legislation taxing health care benefits, it would not be the first time he has broken his tax pledge. Obama previously broke his pledge on just the sixteenth day of his presidency when he signed into law a 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco, a hike of 61 cents per pack, which took effect on April 1. The tax increase falls squarely on the shoulders of the middle- and low-income Americans Obama said he would not raise taxes on.http://www.atr.org/obama-gearing-up-break-his-tax-a3456

I’d advise you to take all your money out of the stock market and let Goldman-Sachs go float.

We are now entering “year one” of the current economic downturn. do not be fooled by data andnumbers that compare to the previous year/month. example Ford sales down 11-14% form june 2008. Well June2008 sales were already way down from june 2007 (the downturn sarted in late 2007 most agree now). The same will apply for any data/number metric. just because something is down lower than year ago does not mean it is good news or an improvemnt. overall US car sales are on a annual pace of 8-8.7 million, signifcanlty lower than 15 million 2 years ago.

I had answered this post yesterday evening, and it’s gone too.

Strong and Wrong – Joni Mitchell.Strong and wrong you win–Only becauseThat’s the way its always been.Men love war!That’s what history’ s for.History…A mass–murder mystery…His storyStrong and wrongYou lose everythingWithout the heartYou needTo hear a robin singWhere have all the songbirds gone?Gone!All I hear are crows in flightSinging might is rightMight is right!Oh the dawn of man comes slowThousands of yearsAnd here we are…Still worshipingOur own egoStrong and wrongWhat is God’s will?Onward Christian soldiers…Or thou shall not kill…Men love war!Is that what God is for?Just a Rabbit’s foot?Just a lucky pawFor shock and awe?Shock and awe!The dawn of man comes slowThousands of yearsHere we areStill worshipingOur own egoStrong and Wrong!Strong and Wrong!

AMERICA’S EMPLOYMENT GLASS IS THREE QUARTERS FULLWith unemployment, giveups and severe underemployment still chronically sucking it dry.More hopeful green shoots?Are the green shoots really poison ivy?This month’s Times magazine had a good article on how Obama should learn from FDRs handling of the Great Depression.I think step one: start counting those that aren’t counted unemployed that can’t get employed, start countingseverely underemployed workers too. Like the Great Depression’s unemployment statistics did, under FDR. Then perhaps we can measure and compare the real historical scope of the problem.

Regarding my credit card with CHASE and their changing the terms as noted earlier in this thread.I have talked with my neighbor and he simply is going to stop making any more payments and default on his $20,000 of credit card debt.

Whatever is coming next will suck all the air out of your lungs.

Bankruptcies will soar as more people are considering this option… Credit scores by the time this diasasterhas run it’s full course will be meaningless and so will Trens union, experian, Equifax, Fico, they are jsut likethe cosprate Alphabet soup rating agenicies like Fitch, etc… USELESS and soon to be irrevalant.Im sure there are people running up whatever credit they have left to the max and will stick it to the CC companies… what a country we are becoming…

ADP Estimates U.S. Companies Cut Payrolls by 473,000This has got to be giving the ObamaNation of Desolation heartache. Question is – will employers over compensate – layoff more than needed to save capital?

MM CA — my post was not for YOU. It was for Guest 08:48:17. I do not agree with the dampening spirit of his restraint comment. I question his motives. This is no time to restain the truth: we get enough of that in the mainstream media. As for your posts, the more of them, the better!”The law of things is that they who tamper with veracity, from whatever motive, are tampering with the vital force of human progress.” JOHN MORLEY: On Compromise, 1874; Ch. 3 Intellectual Responsibility and the Political Spirit.

In other words, the banks aren’t getting their money back so the Obama neo-Libs and the Bush neo-Cons have decided to give it to them directly. America’s government-banker economy is going to break. It’s not only that working people will not pay for it, they CAN’T pay for it.Look at the country’s border-to-border and national budget crises. To start a policy of massive wealth transfer with a balanced budget is one thing, but to accelerate wealth transfer during a worldwide recession is quite another. With the Obama Democrats in the statehouses, and the Obama Democrats in Washington, we’re headed hellbent for insolvency.

What the Jump in the U.S. Savings Rate Really MeansDEBT DEFLATION ARRIVES | By MICHAEL HUDSONJune 30, 2009 — Happy-face media reporting of economic news is providing the usual upbeat spin on Friday’s debt-deflation statistics. The Commerce Department’s National Income and Product Accounts (NIPA) for May show that U.S. “savings” are now absorbing 6.9 percent of income.I put the word “savings” in quotation marks because this 6.9 per cent is not what most people think of as savings. It is not money in the bank to draw out in rainy-day emergencies like losing one’s job, as thousands are every day. The statistic means that 6.9 per cent of national income is being earmarked to pay down debt – the highest savings rate in 15 years, up from actually negative rates (living on borrowed credit) just a few years ago. The only way in which these savings are “money in the bank” is that they are being paid by consumers to their banks and credit card companies.Income paid to reduce debt is not available for spending on goods and services. It therefore shrinks the economy, aggravating the depression. So why is the jump in “saving” good news?It certainly is a good idea for consumers to get out of debt. But the media are treating this diversion of income as if it were a sign of confidence that the recession may be ending and that Obama’s “stimulus” plan is working. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Social Security recipients of one-time government payments “seem unwilling to spend right away,” while The New York Times wrotethat“many people were putting that money away instead of spending it.” It is as if people can afford to save more.The reality is that most consumers have little real choice but to pay. Unable to borrow more as banks cut back credit lines, their “choice” is either to pay their mortgage and credit card bill each month, or lose their homes and see their credit ratings slashed, pushing up penalty interest rates near 20 per cent To avoid this fate, families are shifting to cheaper and less nutritious food, eating out less or at fast food restaurants, and cutting back on vacation spending. So it seems contradictory to applaud these “savings” (that is, debt-repayment) statistics as an indication that the economy may emerge from depression in the next few months. While unemployment approaches the 10 per cent rate and new layoffs are being announced every week, isn’t the Obama administration taking a big risk in telling voters that its stimulus plan is working? What will people think this winter when markets continue to shrink? How thick is Obama’s Teflon?In the wreckage of the Greenspan bubble …Today, homeowners no longer can re-finance their mortgages and compensate for their wage squeeze by borrowing against rising prices for their homes. Payback time has arrived – paying back bank loans, whose volume has swollen to include accrued interest charges and penalties. New bank lending has hit a wall as banks are limiting their activity to raking in amortization and interest on existing mortgages, credit cards and personal loans.Many families are able to remain financially afloat by running down their personal savings and cutting back their spending to try and avoid bankruptcy. This diversion of income to pay creditors explains why retail sales figures, auto sales and other commercial statistics are plunging vertically downward in almost a straight line, while unemployment rates soar toward the 10 per cent level. The ability of most people to spend at past rates has hit a wall. The same income cannot be used for two purposes. It cannot be used to pay down debt and also for spending on goods and services. Something must give. So more stores and shopping malls are becoming vacant each month. And unlike homeowners, absentee property investors have little compunction about walking away from negative equity situations – owing creditors more than the property is worth.Over two-thirds of the U.S. population are homeowners, and real estate economists estimate that about a quarter of U.S. homes are now in a state of negative equity as market prices drop below the mortgages attached to them…Banks for their part are slashing credit-card debt limits and jacking up interest and penalty charges. (I see little chance that Congress will approve the Consumer Financial Products Agency that Obama promoted as a flashy balloon for his recent bank giveaway program. The agency is to be dreamed about, not enacted.) The problem is that default rates are rising rapidly. This has prompted many banks to strike deals with their most overstretched customers to settle outstanding balances for as little as half the face amount (much of which is accrued interest and penalties, to be sure). Banks are now competing not to gain customers but to shed them. The plan is to offer steep enough payment discounts to prompt bad risks to settle by sticking rival banks with ultimate default when they finally give up their struggle to maintain solvency.The trillions of dollars that the Bush and Obama administration have given away to Wall Street would have been enough to buy a great bulk of the mortgages now in default – mortgages beyond the ability of many debtors to pay in the first place… Instead, the government has made Wall Street virtually tax exempt, and swapped Treasury bonds for trillions of dollars of junk mortgages and bad debts. THE “REAL” ECONOMY’S GROWTH PROPSPECTS ARE BEING SACRIFICED IN AN ATTEMPT TO CARRY ITS FINANCIAL OVERHEAD. (emphasis mine)Banks and credit-card companies are girding for economic shrinkage. It was in anticipation of this state of affairs, after all, that they pushed so hard from 1998 onward to make what finally became the 2005 bankruptcy laws so pro-creditor, so cruel to debtors by making personal bankruptcy an economic and legal hell…The story that the media should be telling is how today’s post-bubble economy has turned the concept of saving on its head…Each business recovery since World War II has started with a higher debt ratio. Saving is indeed interfering with consumption, but it is not the result of rising incomes and prosperity. A rising savings rate merely reflects the degree to which the economy is working off its debt overhead. It is “saving” in the form of debt repayment in a shrinking economy. The result is financial dystopia, not the technological utopia that seemed so attainable back in 1945, just sixty-five years ago. Instead of a consumer-friendly leisure economy, we have debt peonage.To get an idea of how oppressive the debt burden really is, I should note that the 6.9 per cent savings rate does not even reflect the 16 per cent of the economy that the NIPA report for interest payments to carry this debt, or the penalty fees that now yield as much as interest yields to credit-card companies – or the trillions of dollars of government bailouts to try and keep this unsustainable system afloat. How an economy can hope to compete in global markets as an industrial producer with so high a financial overhead factored into the cost of living and doing business is another story.Michael Hudson is a former Wall Street economist. A Distinguished Research Professor at University of Missouri, Kansas City (UMKC), he is the author of many books, including Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (new ed., Pluto Press, 2002).http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson06302009.html

I think that we’re attempting to fill the massive void in our collective brains!Mark

From: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124638992043975185.htmlThe California Association of Realtors expects to make sharp downward revisions in its recent monthly reports of soaring home sales in the San Diego area, Robert Kleinhenz, deputy chief economist of the trade group, said in an interview. Those revisions will mean modest downward revisions in statewide sales, he added.The revisions are likely to be announced in late July, when the Realtor group reports home sales for June. The problem resulted from a glitch in data from a multiple-listing service in San Diego, Mr. Kleinhenz said. He said a change in computer systems used there resulted in incorrect data being sent to the Realtor association over the past year or so.Thomas Lawler, an independent economist in Leesburg, Va., who tracks home sales nationwide, raised questions about the San Diego data in a report last week. Mr. Lawler noted that the numbers reported by the Realtors vastly exceeded those from MDA DataQuick, a research firm in La Jolla, Calif., and other sources.The California Realtors have reported that San Diego sales in April were up about 63% from a year earlier. Mr. Kleinhenz said that is expected to be revised downward to a gain of about 20%. For May, the group reported an 89% increase in sales in San Diego; that will be slashed to about 6.5%, the economist said.As a result, he said, the state-wide sales gain for May — reported last week as 35% — also will be revised down, though it probably will remain above 30%, Mr. Kleinhenz said.

Here’s a clip from “Freddie, Fannie to Provide 125% LTV Mortgages, Worse Than Extremes of Subprime Frenzy” posted today on Naked Capitalism:From CNBC (hat tip reader Marshall):“Homeowners refinancing their mortgages through loans backed by government agencies will be able to borrow up to 125 percent of their homes’ value under new regulations enacted Wednesday.”The rule changes, part of the government’s attempts to restore housing affordability and stem the foreclosure crisis, apply to loans backed up by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”Yves here. Huh? This is beyond Orwell, it’s patently silly. “Housing affordability” has traditionally meant “let’s do things so people can afford to BUY houses.” It even once included stuff like Section 8 housing, giving tax breaks for rental housing targeted to lower income people. The intent is to prop up prices by keeping stressed borrowers from selling their houses and possibly also sending an information signal through the 125% figure, that housing really ought to be priced higher. That is anti affordability. And the concept of “affordability” to my knowledge has never before been extended to keeping homeowners in place. Back to the article:“Previously, homeowners could borrow up to 105 percent of their home’s value. The new loan-to-value ratio is set up at 125 percent in a further effort to address those mortgage holders who owe more than their homes are worth.”’By expanding refinance eligibility, we can bring relief to more struggling homeowners more quickly,’ Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a statement….”The new LTV rate will be offered only to borrowers who are current on their mortgages that are owned by either Fannie or Freddie.”’This is a change that will put affordable refinancing opportunities within reach of performing borrowers who have suffered the effects of local home price erosion,’ Freddie Mac Executive Vice President Don Bisenius said in a statement.”Home values in many markets have sunk by 18 percent in the last 12 months, according to Standard & Poor’s/Case Shiller home price index…..”In a separate move, the government is encouraging borrowers to take advantage of a chance to lower their mortgages from 30-year to 25-year in order to save on interest charges.”The government will reduce the processing fee for borrowers who take advantage of the 25-year option.”http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/

We must break the bonds of economic slavery and find a new way to liveIn these financial dog days, Ken Costa argues that our task is to ‘fix the character of our time’.By Ken CostaPublished: 7:18PM BST 30 Jun 2009Ken Costa: moral imperative In Westminster Abbey’s north choir aisle is a statue of a man who was one of the greatest statesmen of his age: a man who is my inspiration. As one would expect, the statue’s inscription has a prominent mention of the achievement for which William Wilberforce is best known.Less expected are the following words, referring to his neglected legacy of seeing the moral condition of the time changed: “In an age and country fertile in great and good men, he was among the foremost of those who fixed the character of their time.”Our task now is surely no less than to fix the character of our time. Our finances are broken. Our moral fabric is breaking. Our political system is beleaguered. And our society is broken. Many of us feel ill at ease; we know that all is not well. Secretly, we almost scream out loud for change.What is the moral and spiritual character of our times? Today, we are shocked by the slave trade’s evil economics. However, because we have given financial matters an exaggerated role in our lives, we often forget the enslavement of the human spirit that this has caused. The economics of slavery may have been a thing of the past, but the slavery of economics is very much of the present.How did things come to this? I have no doubt that divorcing economics from the moral and spiritual dimensions of life has been the single most important contributor to this financial crisis.Couple this with the collapse of trust in politics, with the breakdown of our social structure, and the lack of purpose felt by individuals, and we have a recipe for national despondency. There is an urgent need to discover afresh what it is to be human and how we will all benefit from recovering a vibrant moral spirit for our time.The times in which Wilberforce lived bore striking similarities to our own. There was moral and spiritual degeneracy, gin was destroying the fabric of society and crime was rampant. The economic condition was shaky, fraud was rife. The country had lost its way and was in need of personal and social reform.In politics the system was corrupt. Wilberforce, because he was merely following the rules, fiddled his expenses as an MP and bribed his electors, That was just the way it was.But something happened to Wilberforce. He found a living faith, and his life was transformed. He knew the underlying problems of his age had to be tackled. Then, as now, a whole way of thinking and behaving had to be turned upside down.He set out not only to win the causes about which he was passionate but to undertake a far more encompassing challenge – changing the fundamental character of his time. Two hundred years after Wilberforce, we need a new moral spirit for our time.We all know that our nation pigged out on unaffordable debt. But debt was only one part of the problem, in the same way that gin was only part of the moral crisis against which Wilberforce so passionately campaigned. Of course gin was at the heart of it, but the real question was why did so many people drink the stuff? Why did so many people get addicted to it? Today’s addiction is consumption, not debt itself. It seems everyone has been unhappy with their lot, and wanted more. But behind every addiction lurks debt. The evil of both times was unrestrained consumption. Gin then, rampant consumerism now.I believe that the big momentum of our times is widespread longing to live a fully integrated life marked by personal fulfilment and service to others. The moral spirit enables us to enjoy life, to add value through our work, to enjoy the benefits of financial reward while remaining responsive to the needs of others.The challenge is clear. We can, today, start to articulate the basis for a new moral spirit that willre-humanise our social, political and economic structures. Spur us on to create wealth, add value through our work, enjoy the benefits for taking risk and to do so with a good conscience.Wilberforce was an inspiring and epoch-changing man, and we could do with his like again today. But we don’t need to – indeed we must not – wait for another William Wilberforce. Rather, the responsibility lies on each and every one of us to help fix the character of the times.Wilberforce’s fellow abolitionists were a movement who covered the country gathering information, establishing contacts and building relationships for his cause. Today, our interconnected world means we have the power to communicate an alternative narrative, a new point of view or new way of living well.Towards the end of the inscription on Wilberforce’s statue are words which may prove to be prophetic for those attempting to fix 21st century Britain. “He relied, not in vain, on God; but in the progress he was called to endure great obloquy and great opposition.” There is, however, more than a little comfort for those who would rise to this challenge in the concluding five words of the inscription, “He outlived, however, all enmity.”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/5699858/We-must-break-the-bonds-of-economic-slavery-and-find-a-new-way-to-live.html

joni mitchellwoodstock circa 1969.”In her 2005 book Break, Blow, Burn, critic Camille Paglia wrote a chapter about the song, honoring it as “possibly the most popular and influential poem composed in English since Sylvia Plath’s ‘Daddy’.”A line from the chorus, “We are billion year old carbon,” was used by Corey Mesler as the title of a novel about the 1960s.”.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuISB2ksnMM.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6IDoxi9QsE&feature=related. lyric…I came upon a child of godHe was walking along the roadAnd I asked him, where are you going ?And this he told meI’m going on down to yasgur’s farmI’m going to join in a rock n roll bandI’m going to camp out on the landI’m going to try an get my soul free.We are stardustWe are goldenAnd we’ve got to get ourselvesBack to the garden.Then can I walk beside youI have come here to lose the smogAnd I feel to be a cog in something turningWell maybe it is just the time of yearOr maybe its the time of ManI don’t know who l amBut you know life is for learning.We are stardustWe are goldenAnd we’ve got to get ourselvesBack to the gardenBy the time we got to woodstockWe were half a million strongAnd everywhere there was song and celebrationAnd I dreamed I saw the bombersRiding shotgun in the skyAnd they were turning into butterfliesAbove our nation.We are stardustBillion year old carbonWe are goldenCaught in the devils bargain ( caught in some evil bargains )And we’ve got to get ourselves ( how we gonna’ get ourselves )Back to the garden. / ?……

These very lenders that force-fed credit down our throats with their exponential financial magic is forcing us to either gag on it and take the lumps or spit it back out. I applaud those that spit it back out and here’s why: People, especially the young, naive, or financially unsophisticated were sold a bill of goods that could never deliver. They were granted credit not understanding the terms and/or were allowed to borrow too much.These so-called “financial experts” were looked upon with respect and trust, and when these folks were approved for a loan that under normal lending conditions wouldn’t have even qualified, they either simply didn’t know any better or figured they could hurry and flip the house before they were buried with a 90% debt-to-income ratio.Certainly lots of folks took advantage of the loose lending standards, but the lenders, the ones we had for so long looked up to, made these poor lending decisions. Why should we question their ability (or lack thereof) to do their jobs? When in history have we ever questioned a lender’s credit approval? We only squabble when we’re denied.As far as I’m concerned, let the lenders choke on the write-offs. To hell with credit scores, they are becoming meaningless, maybe then we will start building relationships with our banks again and gain credit through reputation and integrity, not as a faceless and meaningless account number.

Would love to hear some comments about this, especially from known-name (non-”guest”) posters.http://www.investorsinsight.com/blogs/john_mauldins_outside_the_box/archive/2009/06/29/a-20-year-bear-market.aspxA 20-Year Bear Market?By David Galland, Casey ResearchfromJohn Mauldin’s “Outside the Box” e-letterOne excerpt:Finally, there is the Fourth Turning, called a Crisis. The recent Third Turning appears to be winding down, and we are currently on the cusp of a Fourth Turning. This is a time of great turmoil, when society’s basic institutions are torn down and rebuilt, and seemingly insurmountable problems are addressed. During Fourth Turnings, America engages in a struggle for its very survival and redefines its identity as a nation. Large wars are often a part of this process. The American Revolution, Civil War, Great Depression, and World War II were all features of past Fourth Turnings.In sum, Howe’s research has shown that, with remarkable predictability, history is not a straight line extending toward a better and brighter (or increasingly awful) future, but rather a repeating cycle of the four distinct social eras. These four turnings have recurred with remarkable consistency throughout Anglo-American history, as Neil Howe outlines at length in Generations and The Fourth Turning. It is therefore no accident that America has experienced great cataclysms or “Crises” about every 80 years. Travel back eighty years from Pearl Harbor Day, and you land in the middle of the Civil War. Eighty years before that takes you to the Revolutionary War. If the rhythms of history hold, America is now poised to enter another Fourth Turning.

GreenHouse gas:Carbon based GreenHouse gas makes up what share (percentage) of total (so called) GreenHouse gasses: <50% or >50%? And for the bonus round and/or keeners: What is the next most significant GreenHouse Gas and what is its share of the total?No answers will be provided, rather do some basic research and then ask yourself the question: Why is carbon the focus?

g,water vapor 72%, oh hell …wiki.”When these gases are ranked by their contribution to the greenhouse effect, the most important are:[6]* water vapor, which contributes 36–72%* carbon dioxide, which contributes 9–26%* methane, which contributes 4–9%* ozone, which contributes 3–7%The major non-gas contributor to the Earth’s greenhouse effect, clouds, also absorb and emit infrared radiation and thus have an effect on radiative properties of the greenhouse gases.[7][8]“.keener? the carbon choice.the reason is to extend banking, or markets, or credits aka political influenceglobally. presented as environmental protection, market compliant regimes receivepayment to maintain forests, not develop other resources, say food or ores, maybe lumber. industrial operations pay “dollars” of some kind past a certain allowanceof carbon emission. this we can see becomes a global affair and suggests mandated global compliance and obviously a global enforcement mechanism. the financing andimplementation opportunities of all this are irresistible for those seeking powerand sustained global wealth.just a guess.while i enjoy pop quizzes i request not an alternate answer as you stated nonewould be provided, but could you at least grade my efforts. if no i will be participating in no further examinations on such short notice.p.s.if water vapor and clouds were used as a basis it would just seem like fascism.no one likes that for the most part.p.s.s. it seems payments will result from the north and south to theequatorial latitudes. cities to the country? there is some logic to itbut the key is the administration and financing, where the debt, credit andmoney is to be had.

g,and i should add our bodies are made of “billion year old carbon”as expressed earlier in the thread, albeit, in verse. so the globaleconomy will have succeeded in comodifying our bodies and our mothers,thereby legalizing prostitution and making saints out of all we sinners.past transgressions forgiven by the new higher authority.as one of my favorite fictional characters, seth, the young boy in”reflecting skin” would say..”it’s wonderful”.p.s. see the movie if you have the time. it’s all about carbon and energyand the darkness of our age but maybe we know that too well?

I wish someone at RGE Monitor would just explain and put our beleaguered minds at rest. I mean, did we do somthing wrong? Aren’t we part of the family? Just one little “who” from RGE Whoville would make it all so much better (I think).

IT IS NOT ABOUT INFLATION!!This is not an entry to argue for deflation. Quite the opposite. The 2 scenarios facing the US economy and quite possible the global economy not deflation and inflation. It is deflation and HYPERINFLATION. A lot of mainstream economists still think the Taylor rule applies. It would in a NORAML economy without incessant monetisation. It however does not apply here. Let me give you all an example.Let use an economy with US$2trn in base money and US$10trn in total money supply. This means that tne money multiplier is 5x. Lets assume that all this economy has is mortgages. So the total value of the assets is US$10trn. Makes sense?Now lets assume the money multiplier collapses to 2 and the total money supply drops to US$4trn. This means total asset prices drop by 60%. This is deflationary. This is what happened in the last 2 years when the global financial system collapsed. Now lets assume the central bank of this economy decides to support asset prices by printing US$3trn. This will hold prices but base money has now increased to US$5trn.Now lets make a small change to the money multipler, from 2-3. Note that this is not a RECOVERY situation as the original economic activity had a multiplier of 5. This will change the TOTAL MONEY SUPPLY to US$15trn. That is a 50% inflation rate. THAT IS HYPERINFLATION. Notice that the Taylor Gap rule no longer applies?This is a simplification but the basic logic still applies. BASE MONEY HAS EXPONENTIAL EFFECTS ON MONEY SUPPLY. And this is the choice the Federal Reserve is faced with. And one thing about monetisation. It tends to be a a vicious cycle. History has proven that.To extend the analysis, the US is NOT going through a typical recession. Most recessions are triggered by over-expansion of production capacity in relation to demand growth. There is an adjustment process (reduced investment) while demand catches up. This time, we are looking at a BALANCE SHEET recession. We have one in recent history: JAPAN. Normal policies DO NOT WORK. We are looking at DEMAND DESTRUCTION from over expansion of demand and that balance sheet repair have very different ramifications on policy. Cutting rates to stimulate demand cannot work, because the balance sheet are shattered. And a normal recession, increased unemployment has a NEGATIVE FEEDBACK to this adjustment process: increased unemployment INCREASES balance sheet stress and actually exacerbates the situaltion. UNEMPLOYMENT IS NOT A LAGGING INDICATOR! IT IS A LEADING INDICATOR!! And the negative feedback loop has further implications on the financial strength of the banking system. Expect EVEN MORE WRITEDOWNS. Losses will mount further and the losses on those Level3 assets (which have not been addressed yet) will be crystallised. A second and far more severe financial crisis is looming. And it is one where the state will not be able to delay, as the state itself is in dire straits. Bad policy, years of deficit spending have taken away the ability of the federal government to starve off a crisis. By spending pointless money on bank bailouts, the government has wasted precious resources which could have been used to address the primary risk: UNEMPLOYMENT. In trying to protect bank stakeholders, the government and the Federal Reserve has doomed the country to a far more painful adjustment, one that can bring the global economy to its knees. We are on the cusp of global turmoil that will change the way the world works. I can elaborate further but I think by simply applying economics and common sense to the current situation, everyone can see the outcome. And numbers. Just focus on the numbers and forget the hype. Be realistic, and be rational. The future has, unfortunately, never been so clear.Do not miss the burning forest for the green shoots. Be prepared.

i think R.emmerich’s 2012 will be “felt” as real, not physically but emotionallythe environment, political scene, scarcity of a lot of things, global warming of our solar system, NASA warning of intense solar storm by 2012, record low sunspots, increase temperature on Mars, flu virus?? wow… and there’s a lot more..we can presumed something is coincidental if 1 or 2 things happened at once, but…

NOW THAT IT CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN!!!

g,mauldin is in the box, or is the box. he is promotingde evolution, saints be praised.ps. sorry for using the guest, one of my personal favorites (thoughi don’t use it) sign offs. but in this instance, i feel compelled.

@ blind x – I have to agree with your comment on our having lived with hyperinflation over these past years. If housing prices increasing by 10, 15, or more percent a year is not hyperinflation, I don’t know what is. I guess they strip this information out when they report inflation.

it is not about deflation either. look at commodity, it is in uptrend since bottom out in february. look at gold, it is still in uptrend. look at stock, it is also in uptrend since bottom out in march. look at credit spread on investment grade, high yield, emerging market, all come down -> positive indicator. companies having done necessary dieting, is becomming lean, competitive, and profitable in new economy without depending on excessive leveraging. shorting a market is a big mistake.

U.S. payrolls down 467k in June higher than the 325k expected by economists and unemployment rateticked higher to 9.5% and Market TANKS-no surprise, thanks to continual updates on job data byMM CA.

Is it economic news that’s causing the markets to tank this morning or something else? Only the Shadow knows…

from Marketwatch comments:To All My Valued Employees,There have been some rumblings around the office about the future ofthis company and, more specifically, your job.As you know,the economy has changed for the worse and presents manychallenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn’t pose athreat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is the changingpolitical landscape in this country.However, let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might helpyou decide what is in your best interest.First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers againstemployees, you have to understand that, for every business owner, thereis a Back Story. This back story is often neglected and overshadowed bywhat you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You’veseen my big home at last year’s Christmas party. I’m sure; all theseflashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life.However, what you don’t see is the BACK STORY:I started this company 28 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire living apartment wasconverted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into buildinga company, which by the way, would eventually employ you.My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I savedwent back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with adefective transmission. I didn’t have time to date. Often times, Istayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking andpartying. In fact, I was married to my business — hard work,discipline, and sacrifice.Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made amodest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashycars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes.Instead of hitting the Nordstrom’s for the latest hotfashion item, I was trolling through the discount store extracting anyclothing item that didn’t look like it was birthed in the 70′s. Myfriends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I,however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a businesswith avision that eventually, some day, I too, will be able to afford theseluxuries my friends supposedly had.So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9am, mentally check inat about noon, and then leave at 5pm, I don’t. There is no “off” buttonfor me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekendall to yourself. I unfortunately do not have the freedom.I eat, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is norest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day thisbusiness is attached to my hip like a 1 year old special-needs child.You, of course, only see the fruits of that garden — the nice house,the Mercedes, the vacations… you never realize the Back Story and thesacrifices I’ve made.Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all theright decisions and saved his money, have to bail-out all the people whodidn’t. The people who overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitledto the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed more than a decade ofmy life for.Yes, business ownership has is benefits but the price I’ve paid is steepand not without wounds.Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, isstarting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit and let me tellyou why:I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don’t pay enough.I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and use taxes.Payroll taxes. Workers compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes ontaxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and then guesswhat? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates andregulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most ofmy time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000for quarterly taxes. You know what my “stimulus” check was? Zero.. Nada.Zilch.The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guywho has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000people per year with a flourishing business? Or the single mother,sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her nextwelfare check? Obviously, government feels the latter is the realeconomic stimulus of this country.The fact is, if I deducted (Read: Stole) 50% of your paycheck you’d quitand you wouldn’t work here. I mean, why should you? That’s nuts. Whowants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree, whichis why your job is in jeopardy.Here is what many of you don’t understand … to stimulate the economyyou need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had suddenly, thegovernment mandated to me that I didn’t need to pay taxes, guess what?Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, Iwould have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantialeconomic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that taxcut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But – you can forgetit now.When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don’tdefibrillate and shock his thumb, thinking that will bring him back tolife, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at theheart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulateit, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe thepoor of America are the essential drivers of the American economicengine. Nothing could be further from the truth; this is the type ofchange YOU can keep.So where am I going with all this?It’s quite simple.If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will beswift and simple. I’ll fire you. I’ll fire your co-workers. You canthen plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, andyour child’s future. Frankly, it isn’t my problem any more.Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, andretire. You see, I’m done. I’m done with a country that penalizes theproductive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work, and toprovide jobs, will be destroyed and, with it, will be my citizenship.So, if you lose your job, it won’t be at the hands of the economy; itwill be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through thiscountry, steam-rolled the constitution, and will have changed itslandscape forever. If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach,retired, and with no employees to worry about….Goodbye

So to turn the data around on the GREEN SHOOTERS – this equates to a 31.5% increase in unemploymentthan what was expected. so let me ask how can they be off over 140K jobs? Also this confirms anygreen shoot estimate by anyone is nothign more than a shot in dark. Why not use 3, 6,12 monthtrends for any estimate, instead of guessing. Trends/avgerages, run rates always paint a TRUEcurrent picture.BLS currently has 14.2 million TOTALLY unemployed longer than 27 weeks. That means NOT WORKING.BLS has approx 6.8 Million collecting Benefits.So there are 7.4 Million Totally unemployed that are not collecting Benefits… pray for themBLS has 12 million more in part time and underemployed jobs. Underemlpoyed means your last job you made50K per say and now you make 30k or even minimum wage. Most of these folks are minimum wage.Oabma official spokes people are stumbling on their words trying to wiggle and posistion Obamaas trying to create jobs, but the problem is worse than they thought… Say what? If i knew 10 months agothere would be increasing NO JOBS how the F..K could they not now?

approx 70% of US GDP is linked to small and medium size buisness. they employapprox 70% of the people working. the consumer spends/generates 70% of US GDP.something about the 70% number.So when one looks at why unemployment is rising dont just look at fortune 500/5000 companies,its small and medium size buisness’es that are going under by the tens of thousands a month.The fortune 500/5000 companies are just conduits to line the pockets of the CEO’s, Banksters, etcanother words the very few, or less than 1/2 of one perecent of all working americans.

agree! The burdens on small business in this country are ridiculous and rather than let themammoth monopolies fail and be replaced by small businesses, thus stimulating job growth andthe economy, our govt decided to take 15 trillion dollars of taxpayer money to save the TBTFswhile watching millions lose their homes and small businesses. May God Bless America has becomeMay Goldman Bless America!

so another words the PTB and GS and the Banks and Wall Street and the Oil Companies stole 15 Trillion from300 Million americans? hmmmm

So BLS reported 467,000 jobs were lost in June. Again, they added 220,000 phantom jobs supposedly created by small businesses. BLS has reported that small businesses have added 900,000 jobs in the last 5 months -say what?. Evidently, construction must really be taking off as they have supposedly added 125,000 jobs. so does anyone beleive these numbers. seems the real number could easliy be 700-800K lost jobs for June but we will never hear that. it will only show up in the U6 number in the months to come when people say there are now only40 Million, then 50 million unemployed/underemployed…

Four Unfortunate Facts about the Job MarketPosted by: Michael Mandel on July 02After this morning’s report, here are four unfortunate facts about the job market.1) Manufacturing jobs are falling at their fastest rate since 1946, down -12.2% over the past year.2) Private sector jobs outside of manufacturing are also falling at their fastest rate since 1946, down -4.0% over the past year.3) Manufacturing jobs are falling much faster than the rest of the private sector. In fact, the ‘excess’ job decline in manufacturing (the difference between -12.2% and -4.0%) is the largest since 1975.4) The ten-year job growth in the private sector is down to only 559K jobs. At this rate, we will hit zero ten-year private job growth next month or the month after.One important question is whether there is a ‘floor’ for manufacturing jobs. So far, we haven’t seen one. Over the past three months, manufacturing jobs have been falling at a -13.6% annual rate.I would say that the evisceration of U.S. manufacturing may be our single biggest nonfinancial problem right now. I’m currently examining the extent to which this can be tied to trade.http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2009/07/four_unfortunat.html

The following supports MM CA’s NO JOBS Thesis:No Recovery in SightBy BOB HERBERTPublished: June 26, 2009 in the NY TimesHow do you put together a consumer economy that works when the consumers are out of work?One of the great stories you’ll be hearing over the next couple of years will be about the large number of Americans who were forced out of work in this recession and remained unable to find gainful employment after the recession ended. We’re basically in denial about this.There are now more than five unemployed workers for every job opening in the United States. The ranks of the poor are growing, welfare rolls are rising and young American men on a broad front are falling into an abyss of joblessness.Some months ago, the Obama administration and various mainstream economists forecast a peak unemployment rate of roughly 8 percent this year. It has already reached 9.4 percent, and most analysts now expect it to hit 10 percent or higher. Economists are currently spreading the word that the recession may end sometime this year, but the unemployment rate will continue to climb. That’s not a recovery. That’s mumbo jumbo.Why this rampant joblessness is not viewed as a crisis and approached with the sense of urgency and commitment that a crisis warrants, is beyond me. The Obama administration has committed a great deal of money to keep the economy from collapsing entirely, but that is not enough to cope with the scope of the jobless crisis.There were roughly seven million people officially counted as unemployed in November 2007, a month before the recession began. Now there are about 14 million. If you add to these unemployed individuals those who are working part time but would like to work full time, and those who want jobs but have become discouraged and stopped looking, you get an underutilization rate that is truly alarming.“By May 2009,” according to the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston, “the total number of underutilized workers had increased dramatically from 15.63 million to 29.37 million — a rise of 13.7 million, or 88 percent. Nearly 30 million working-age individuals were underutilized in May 2009, the largest number in our nation’s history. The overall labor underutilization rate in May 2009 had risen to 18.2 percent, its highest value in 26 years.”If it were true that the recession is approaching its end and that these startlingly high numbers were about to begin a steady and substantial decline, there would be much less reason for alarm. But while there is evidence the recession is easing, hardly anyone believes a big-time employment turnaround is in the offing.Three-quarters of the workers let go over the past year were permanently displaced, as opposed to temporarily laid off. They won’t be going back to their jobs when economic conditions improve. And many of those who were permanently displaced were in fields like construction and manufacturing in which the odds of finding work, even after a recovery takes hold, are not good.Another startling aspect of this economic downturn is the toll it has taken on men, especially young men. Men accounted for nearly 80 percent of the loss in employment in this recession. As the labor market center reported, “The unemployment rate for males in April 2009 was 10 percent, versus only 7.2 percent for women, the largest absolute and relative gender gap in unemployment rates in the post-World War II period.”Workers under 30 have sustained nearly half the net job losses since November 2007.This is not a recipe for a strong economic recovery once the recession officially ends, or for a healthy society. Young males, especially, are being clobbered at an age when, typically, they would be thinking about getting married, setting up new households and starting families. Moreover, work habits and experience developed in one’s 20s often establish the foundation for decades of employment and earnings.We’ve seen what happens when you rely on debt and inflated assets to keep the economy afloat. The economy can’t be re-established on a sound basis without aggressive efforts to put people back to work in jobs with decent wages.We also need to consider the suffering that is being endured by these high levels of joblessness, including the profound negative effect on the families of the unemployed. Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute, warned about the consequences for children. “What does it mean,” he asked, “when kids are under stress because there is no money in the household, or people have to move more, or are combining households, or lose their health insurance? I believe this is going to leave a permanent scar on a generation of kids.”The first step in dealing with a crisis is to recognize that it exists. This is not a problem that will evaporate when the gross domestic product finally begins to creep into positive territory.

ROOT CAUSE OF IDENTITY THEFTHere’s another little factoid Citi Cards sent me in writing:The three credit bureaus can give out your credit card number to American businessesthat request it. It happenned to me and then I started seeing identity theft [under $100items, below the radar scope level?]…in one case, the company was charging me for gamedownloads their webpage didn’t even advertise and wouldn’t credit my account. I reportedit to the FBI, IRS, local police and the company’s attorney….with written email evidencetoo…LOLWatch your CC online statements around Christmas time, that’s when they mix the identity theftitems in [when your statements are full of items and it gets lost, they think].I haven’t seen anymore monkey business by American companies tagging my CC like this since…LOLI hear very wealthy people can stop your CC # reporting to gangster American businesses,by the three Credit Bureaus, but you need attorneys [$$$$$]…

“Without guys like the one in the story,you’d have nothing.”You’re too funny! Stop making me laugh so hard!

Only on Roubini. “Binky,” indeed.

“Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of men? Only the Shadow knows.”Great post, FEDup. You always crack me up.

UPDATE TO BLOG ABOVEI checked the “1984″ book websites and its “Newspeak”, not “No Speak”. In part:”…Newspeak – The official language of Oceania. Newspeak is “politically correct” speech taken to its maximum extent. Newspeak is based on standard English, but all words describing “unorthodox” political ideas have been removed. In addition, there was an attempt to remove the overall number of words in general, to limit the range of ideas that could be expressed.The most important aim of newspeak was to provide a means of speaking that required no thought what-so-ever. It uses abbreviations or clipped conjunctions in order to mask or alter a word’s true meaning. For example, words such as Miniluv and joycamp, allow the speaker to speak without actually being force to think about what they were talking about.. or at least, not as much as if they were required to use complete phrases such as “Ministry of Love” or “Forced Labor Camp”. These words just roll right off the lips before the speaker can even contemplate what he is really saying.Reducing the number of words also removes any literary value to writing, because there would only be one distinct way to present any particular concept. It would be impossible to write a book like Common Sense , Uncle Tom’s Cabin, or even 1984 in Newspeak. Not only would the correct words for certain concepts not be available, but a lack of adjectives would cause the writing would be completely bland and unemotional, which in itself would keep people from reading at all.Here is the official definition from the Merriam-Webster dictionary:new•speak (‘nü-”spEk, ‘nyü-), noun, Usage: often capitalized. : propagandistic language marked by euphemism, circumlocution, and the inversion of customary meanings. Etymology: Newspeak, a language “designed to diminish the range of thought,” in the novel 1984 (1949) by George Orwell. Date: 1950…”The rest of the URL:http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns_frames.html

Promoting de-evolution? Sorry, only unless we, as humans, undertake some sort of selective breeding (cloning or whatever DNA altering device).If you’re referring to de-industrialization, then it’s an absolute that That WILL happen.Most big wars are about turnings. Underpinning all are struggles for resources, resources that maintain existing systems of control. What we are now on the cusp of learning is that our current system is incapable of continuing down the path that it was going without resorting to outright forced (read “war”) acquisitions of resources.The turning is about facing the fact that the path is no longer viable. Demonizing change by way of ascribing “de evolution” (or some other negative taint) acts only as a (temporary) prop for what will be a guaranteed failed system.I don’t believe in mapping cycles to past time lines, or in forecasting in general, but the concept of a Fourth Turning is absolutely rock solid; it is a basic acknowledgment of (system) overshoot.Mark

if we close below 8300 today -downward spiral will be in progress to 6500 by august.

A problem here is that it all implies increased consumption, something that Liu, as do almost ALL economists (from the very brightest to the very dumbest) fail to acknowledge is really at the heart of bubble-blowing.Mark

The traditional theory of inflation is based on money supply, increasing it. The problem with this definition is that it assumed that an increase was actually in circulation (adding to the velocity).And then there’s Consumer Price Index, which states inflation as increasing prices to the consumer. From a fundamentalist’s view this is meaningless as inflation is about the money supply.But, what happens when someone suddenly becomes unable to purchase things, doesn’t THEIR money supply decrease (deflation) resulting in an actual increase, as a percentage of their available wealth, in the price of goods?I think it’s all a meaningless debate. The rich will get richer and the poor poorer. This formula has not changed. However, the rich can only continue to maintain their position by way of appeasing the poor, and that appeasement is by way of enticing them back into the game. Such enticements are by way of bubble propaganda. Have the rich, however, miscalculated, have they run out of bubble bullets? Has their greed caused them to lose track of the fact that the world’s resources are depleting and that They will be seen as the place to extract resources?No, focusing on employment for employment sakes isn’t going to work any better than throwing money at banks is going to make the banks work. It’s resources (physical resources and energy) that make things work, two things that are deflating!Mark

Or… “A new low in new unemployment filings indicates that the economy is on the rise”The BLS reports that for last month only one person lost their job.There are now no longer any employed individuals. But darn! that was a great number now, wasn’t it?I’m beginning to see the brilliance/wisdom in Beavis’ comment: “Numbers make me angry!”Mark

Step 1 = emailStep 2 = twitterStep 3 = ?? New Speak – could be. Our collective attention span is just about short enough now.Independent Contractor

I and my pals were actually reading through the best things found on your web blog and then I got an awful feeling I never thanked the web site owner for those strategies. The boys happened to be as a result joyful to see them and have in effect simply been tapping into them. Appreciation for turning out to be indeed kind and for pick out variety of good subject areas most people are really eager to understand about. My personal sincere regret for not saying thanks to sooner.