STOCK MARKET WATCH, Thursday September 24

[ozymandius]

Source: du

STOCK MARKET WATCH, Thursday September 24, 2009

Bush Administration Officials Under Indictment = 2
Financial Sector Officials In Prison = 6

AT THE CLOSING BELL ON September 23, 2009

Dow... 9,748.55 -81.32 (-0.83%)
Nasdaq... 2,131.42 -14.88 (-0.69%)
S&P 500... 1,060.87 -10.79 (-1.01%)
Gold future... 1,014 -1.10 (-0.11%)
10-Yr Bond... 3.41 -0.03 (-0.93%)
30-Year Bond 4.20 +0.00 (+0.02%)

---

U.S. FUTURES & MARKETS INDICATORS
NASDAQ FUTURES..............................................S&P FUTURES

Market Conditions During Trading Hours

GOLD, EURO, YEN, Loonie, Silver and US$

---

Handy Links - Market Data and News:
Economic Calendar    Marketwatch Data    Bloomberg Economic News    Yahoo! Finance
    Google Finance    LayoffDaily    Bank Tracker    Credit Union Tracker

Handy Links - Economic Blogs:
The Big Picture    Financial Sense    Calculated Risk    Naked Capitalism    Credit Writedowns
    Brad DeLong    Bonddad    Atrios    goldmansachs666

Handy Links - Government Issues:
LegitGov    Open Government    Earmark Database    USA spending.gov

Handy Links - Videos:
The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class    Charlie Rose talks with Roubini    Charlie Rose talks with Krugman    William Black: This Economic Disaster

---

This thread contains opinions and observations. Individuals may post their experiences, inferences and opinions on this thread. However, it should not be construed as advice. It is unethical (and probably illegal) for financial recommendations to be given here.

Read more: du

[ozymandius]

1. Market Observation

Beware of Geeks Bearing Stats
BY RICHARD A. ECKERT

“Neat, plausible—and wrong!”

I recently came across an article in the New York Times (September 6, 2009: “How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?”) penned by Princeton economist Paul Krugman pillorying the economic and financial models, as well as the theoretical constructs on which they rested, that failed to predict the financial crises and recession that continue to wrack the U.S. and global economies despite the “green shoots” reportedly espied by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and equity market participants whose continued livelihood—indeed, existence—relies on bull markets. Worse, yet, Mr. Krugman concludes, very few of the models, theories and schools of thought offer any kind of guidance or illuminate a path out of the current morass. While I don’t necessarily concur with all of the conclusions reached in “How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?”, I do believe Mr. Krugman hit the nail on the head when he opined that the “economics profession went astray because economists, as a group, mistook beauty, clad in impressive-looking mathematics, for truth.”

Unlike Mr. Krugman’s article—which evaluated the merits and, especially, the weaknesses of various theoretical frameworks and the models they spawned in an effort to identify the most efficacious in terms of both their explanatory and predictive powers—this piece attempts to more precisely describe what is wrong with all of them. In short, the failure of most, if not all, economic and financial models currently in use is that they exist in a vacuum, they are self-contained—of little or no use outside a laboratory or incubator, where the variables, both endogenous and exogenous, are finite, identifiable and quantifiable—and are composed as a paean to the genius of the “rocket scientists” formulating them. Powerful trends and obvious real-world relationships are excluded—or assumed away—if they are inconsistent with the datasets used as the building blocks of the models, existing assumptions or parameters, and the precepts of the gurus to whom the rocket scientists pay homage. There is too much emphasis on creating, nice, tight, normal—or log normal--distributions with high correlations between the input and output variables, but low correlation among the input variables themselves.

There are two major issues with making this the goal. The first is best articulated in a quote from H.L. Mencken contained in the Krugman article: “ There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.” The second is that the objective of providing a powerful, positive (descriptive) and predictive model becomes subordinated to one of providing a simple, neat, internally consistent model reflecting the beliefs and biases of those specifying them. Indeed, the goal becomes lost in the process. All energies become committed to building a better mousetrap, not catching mice.

http://www.financialsense.com/Market/wrapup.htm

[tclambert]

20. It's the bad assumptions they make that discredit economists' calculations.

A pet hypothesis of mine is that raising the minimum wage has a positive effect on the economy. It seemed to my memory that minimum wage increases were mostly followed by upturns in the overall economy. I'm scientifically inclined enough, though, to accept that this hypothesis could be wrong, that minimum wage hikes in fact hurt the economy. Perhaps my memory was faulty and/or selectively biased. Maybe my memory had it right, but I had cause and effect backwards. Maybe we only rasised the minimum wage when we expected the economy to do well, and the minimum wage held it back a little.

We have many decades of historical data. Surely economists have found a way to tease meaningful information out of the confusing mess of variables over so much time. So I thought. Then I tried to look it up and found, to my horror, that when discussing the effects of the minimum wage, economists focused almost exclusively on the effect it had on the number of jobs, and to simplify their models, they assumed that changing the minimum wage had exactly zero effect on the overall economy.

The very question I wanted an answer to, they assumed away! And the assumption they made was the one answer I cannot, cannot, can not accept. The positive and negative effects of raising the minimum wage exactly, perfectly cancel out? Such a miraculous balancing act is ludicrous on the face of it. Yet that's the assumption they base their minimum wage models on.

[Dr.Phool]

32. I keep this article bookmarked, and post it from time to time.

From Scientific American.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-economist-has-no-clothes

From the April 2008 Scientific American Magazine | 74 comments
The Economist Has No Clothes
Unscientific assumptions in economic theory are undermining efforts to solve environmental problems

By Robert Nadeau


The 19th-century creators of neoclassical economics—the theory that now serves as the basis for coordinating activities in the global market system—are credited with transforming their field into a scientific discipline. But what is not widely known is that these now legendary economists—William Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, Maria Edgeworth and Vilfredo Pareto—developed their theories by adapting equations from 19th-century physics that eventually became obsolete. Unfortunately, it is clear that neoclassical economics has also become outdated. The theory is based on unscientific assumptions that are hindering the implementation of viable economic solutions for global warming and other menacing environmental problems.

The physical theory that the creators of neoclassical economics used as a template was conceived in response to the inability of Newtonian physics to account for the phenomena of heat, light and electricity. In 1847 German physicist Hermann von Helmholtz formulated the conservation of energy principle and postulated the existence of a field of conserved energy that fills all space and unifies these phenomena. Later in the century James Maxwell, Ludwig Boltzmann and other physicists devised better explanations for electromagnetism and thermodynamics, but in the meantime, the economists had borrowed and altered Helmholtz’s equations.

The strategy the economists used was as simple as it was absurd—they substituted economic variables for physical ones. Utility (a measure of economic well-being) took the place of energy; the sum of utility and expenditure replaced potential and kinetic energy. A number of well-known mathematicians and physicists told the economists that there was absolutely no basis for making these substitutions. But the economists ignored such criticisms and proceeded to claim that they had transformed their field of study into a rigorously mathematical scientific discipline.

(snip) more

[Joe Chi Minh]

34. You're kidding us! We know the economics establishments are crooks

and imbeciles, but how DELIBERATELY, WILFULLY blind are we going to find out they have been?

I think their "take" on Adam Smith, whose idea of a "free market" was simply the immemorial Christian axiom of allowing grace to build upon nature, gives us a good idea. Like the Marxists, not only did they grotesquely misinterpret his words (and selectively ignore other hyper-Socialist/Christian tenets of his, but could not have been more doctrinaire in their bombast.

[tclambert]

46. My take on Adam Smith is that the competitive market he favored constitutes a Darwinian system.

Smith interpreted it all in Christian terms because that was about all he had. He wrote his treatise almost a hundred years before Darwin so he didn't have the vocabulary to describe it in evolutionary terms, and 200 years before computers so he didn't have emergent phenomena terms. Yet the "invisible hand" he celebrates is an "emergent phenomenon," a higher level pattern emerging from the action of many, many small participants making lower level decisions, in his case, purchasers choosing between competing products. These myriads of purchasing decisions "select" which products and companies will survive. The surviving competitors then produce variations on their products--mutations--that they then expose to the forces of "market selection" and the "fittest" products then survive to "spawn" the next generation of products.

Adam Smith didn't know it, but he stumbled onto the extreme power of evolutionary design systems, IF you have plenty of competitors to produce many mutations for purchasers to choose from. Monopolies and cartels (companies "too big to fail" for instance)form evolutionary dead ends. Without competition, they don't need to make "superior" mutations of their products to address customers' desires, and they won't die when they should. Evolution works best with lots of variations competing, and lots of death and renewal.

[Joe Chi Minh]

57. That was a mistake the neocons made, apparently. Borrowing wholesale a discredited

scientific explanation. In any case the dynamic of the polarisation of companies in terms of their size, comes into play, and is open-ended, as is the cynicism with which profits are sought, and you end up where we are now: the monster of an extremely select and powerful corporatocracy, which snuffs out the competition and is a cancer on society, the very antithesis of the healthy competition Smith advocated.

Moreover, Smith believed unequivocally in a mixed economy, Big Government, and taxation as closely proportionate to income as possible. He was singularly mistrustful of businessmen, and indeed cast them as inveterate malefactors, who would use the most innocent occasions "to conspire against the common good". So, you see, Smith was as far from Milton Friedman and his Chicago Boys as it is possible to be. For Friedman, the businessman's greatest profit was the sole good, and indeed was identical with the good of everyone concerned. If they conspired against the common good ... it was for the common good! Shades of "burning down the villages to save them".

Smith would have had a fit with his leg up, if he'd read Friedman's garbage. Smith's Hidden Hand is grace building upon nature, so that "all things work together for good, to those who love God". Don't throw the baby out with the bath-water. Men are not pure spirits. We form a continuum between carnality and spirituality, a recogniton of the role of the range between the poles of that continuum is necessary.

Almost to this day, "trade" is looked down on by the upper and upper-middle class, despite the fact their funds are heavily invested in it. It has been looked down on partly because the wealth of the merchant gives the lie to the notion that there is an inherently superior level of nobility in the aristocracy, money and status having quite a nexus. However, it happens that in fact many of the real "old-money" types much further down the line than the Viking warlords are, indeed, much nicer, more noble types than most "new rich", though that is not necessarily saying much, in itself. In many respects they resemble working-class folk more than they do, the middle class. "Noblesse oblige" is not without some truth, either. Accusations by the left of paternalism are absurd. Paternalism, fraternalism, what's the difference? We are our brother's keeper. Which however, is not to say that the economic structures should remain as skewed against most of mankind as they remain to this day. Even in the US and UK.

The old nobility had made their money - treasure - from rapine and plunder. The Normans were so-called because they were Norsemen, Vikings, and evidently became envious of the merchant class, who were proving so successful in their trading, and consequently acted against them to stifle the competition they presented. Arms, war, was the aristocracy's game, not vulgar trade. "Miles", the latin for "soldier" was a particularly honourable title in the Middle Ages. Our liberal professions, at least until recently, used the title Esquire, rather than Mister, and haughtily disdained "advertising", so emblematic of "trade". I actually have some sympathy with the concept of "the purity of arms". Civil society is far more cynical and cold-blooded than any army, particularly when either extreme of the political wings is in power.

No. It is as simple as the doctrine of grace building upon nature, which HAD seen the light of day, unlike Darwin's one that you cite. It was Stalin's failure to understand the ineluctable demand for grace to build upon nature which led to the catastrophic out come of the collectivization of Russian farming. Easy to see why he would have been turned down for training as a priest, on the ground of his ignorance of nature and grace, alone.

But, to digress, in any case, why are you unaware of the absolutely pivotal points made by these top academics in evolutionary biology and genetics, etc:

The precept of grace building upon nature is one which neither the far-right, nor the far-left understand or heed. The former don't recognise the evil of fallen man, and the need for sanctfying grace to remedy it, and the latter recognise it but are fatalistic about it, and speak and act as though it could not be transcended; religion being a personal thing having no relevance to anything or anyone but oneself - which of course, is the antithesis of Christ's teachings.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0803/S00051.htm )

[tclambert]

58. When it comes to science vs. religion, science wins.

I do reject your religious arguments completely. Evolutionary design and emergent phenomena work quite well without an intelligent designer. Friedman's errors and Republican errors arise from ignoring the requirements for a truly competitive market, instead slipping into the notion of a "free" market that allows businessmen the freedom to let their worst monopolistic instincts loose.

As far as the evolutionary model and emergent phenomena go, humans have a unique ability to sometimes look up and see the larger patterns that will emerge from myriad small actions, and choose the larger pattern they would like to emerge. We leave that mostly to advertisers, but occasionally to governments.

The real problem with an evolutionary model is that evolution does not always lead to "improvement." It's kind of a hit or miss process, with a lot of misses. And misses can result in extinction. Along the way there can arise many interesting peculiarities. The anatomy of the human eye has many dubious aspects. (For instance, the blood vessels supplying the retina are in FRONT of the retina, getting in the way of clear vision, and sometimes making an astronomer think there are canals on Mars.)

Some benevolent guidance of an economy seems like a good idea. Like, "Let's get people jobs," or "Let's reduce pollution." Deciding what "benevolent guidance" means is the real trick. In some Muslim countries, women are not allowed to work outside the home, or even to learn to read. In America, women and most minorities are not paid as much as white men for the same work, and poor people don't get medical insurance.

If you're saying we need to add the mythical concept of "Divine Grace" to the economy, I don't see how you could even attempt it.

[Joe Chi Minh]

59. Just your first contention is absurd. So I wouldn't press the matter with you at all.

Let's get this out of the way, right at the beginning:

"But he (Kauffman) reminded me in our phone conversation that Darwin doesn't explain how life begins, "Darwin starts with life. He doesn't get you to life."

You really need to meditate on that until you can grasp its significance with regard to your worship of Science with a capital tee, and your scorn for religion, when much brighter men than you or I have and do today espouse a belief in divine creation. The reason for the reticence of scientists on the subject, today, is explained in the article very witheringly.

"But" Mazur's article continues, "Kauffman also describes genes as "utterly dead". However, he says there are some genes that turn the rest of the genes and one another on and off. Certain chemical reactions happen. Enzymes are produced, etc. And that while we only have 25,000 to 30,000 genes, there are many combinations of activity."

"Here's what (Kauffman) told me over the phone", continues Mazur:

'Well there's 25,000 genes, so each could be on or off. So there's 2 x 2 x 2 x 25,000 times. Well that's 2 to the 25,000th. Right? Which is something like 10 to the 7,000th. Okay? There's only 10 to the 80th particles in the whole universe. Are you stunned?'..."

UTTERY DEAD. Notwithstanding the evidently bizarre disquisition upon "the selfish gene", etc, of the Blessed Richard Dawkins.

Next, I'll merely point out your simple incomprehension of very basic words of the English language. The very word, "design", predicates "intelligence"; in its absence, the applicable word is "pattern", a random arrangement. I expect it's possible to use, "pattern" as an object of human thought and action in some cases (fabric design), but never, "design" as an unthinking process.

There are no schools of Art and Pattern. We speak of a design engineer, but not a pattern engineer. That would be insulting. Yet, so far, no scientist has yet managed to create so much as the most primitive plankton from its constituent chemicals. Does that mean that the plankton is smarter than all of today's leading-edge scientists. I expect it's that enigmatic and elusive Mother Nature who is responsible.

If you read that article by the evolutionary biologists, you will note that Kauffman refers to "self-organisation", citing snowdrops, but a mindless object can no more "organise" or "arrange" itself than fly to the moon.

Likewise "natural selection" is a self-evident misnomer. Not a quasi-tautology, like Intelligent Design, but an oxymoron. What is clearly referred to is the product of natural attrition. There really is no such thing as Mother Nature. Any more than Father Christmas or the Tooth Fairy.

Really, how can you secular fundamentalists, who stand in such bizarre awe of science, hope to grasp anything beyond the most pedantic, incremental steps of a mechanistic laboratory, testing process. No wonder Einstein said that scientists made poor philosophers.

Stanley Salthe, a natural philosopher with a degree in zoology (evidently, obliged to at least use the absurd term, "natural selection", though he still can't get published in the mainstream media) commented as follows:

"Oh sure natural selection's been demonstrated. . . the interesting point, however, is that it has rarely if ever been demonstrated to have anything to do with evolution in the sense of long-term changes in populations. . . . Summing up we can see that the import of the Darwinian theory of evolution is just unexplainable caprice from top to bottom. What evolves is just what happened to happen."

I'm going to leave the field to you at this point, because I believe you are highly likely to have an emotional attachment to your beliefs regarding science. What no secular fundamentalist is able to grasp is the very first point: "Darwin starts with life. He doesn't get you to life."

We choose our most basic assumptions with our heart not our head, because they are too abstruse and subtle for the worldly human intellect. I can no more prove my faith to you, than you can yours, to me. All I can do, is point out the infinity of persuasive evidence, but it is not binding, because you have to want to know the truth; not just want to know what you want to know. What we see is trivial compared to what we can't, although this is particularly true of the materialist, the secular fndamentalist, of course.

[fasttense]

35. Interesting that you would say that.

My pet theory is that the slight upticks we have been seeing in consumer spending are due to the recent increase in the minimum wage from $6.55 to $7.25 this July. And that this 2nd Republicon Great Depression would have started sooner and been deeper if minimum wage had not increased from $5.85 to $7.25. during these last 3 years.

[tclambert]

47. Yeah, possibly. To me, an increase in minimum wage is "the rising tide that lifts all boats."

But economists assume that right out of existence.

The only historical studies I could find on the effects of minimum wage found that increasing it actually increased the number of jobs, the exact opposite of what economic models expected, and depriving opponents of minimum wage increases of their only argument against it. Critics of the original study, sponsored by groups politically opposed to minimum wage hikes, rightly pointed out that the author didn't eliminate the possibility that national or regional economic improvements skewed his results. (The author studied the effect of increases in individual states.) In a follow-up study, the author did address these issues by comparing pairs of neighboring states, one that increased the minimum wage while the neighbor did not. His results still showed increasing the minimum wages led to an increase in jobs.

Now in real science, data trumps theory--if the data contradicts your theoretical model, it means you need to change your theory. In economics and politics, it often means you try to deny the data.

[ozymandius]

2. Today's Reports

08:30 Initial Claims 09/19
Briefing.com 560K
Consensus 550K
Prior 545K

08:30 Continuing Claims 09/12
Briefing.com 6100K
Consensus 6183K
Prior 6230K

10:00 Existing Home Sales Aug
Briefing.com 5.20M
Consensus 5.35M
Prior 5.24M

http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/Calendars/EconomicCalendar.htm

[UpInArms]

28. Initial Claims @ 530,000 - last week rev'd up 6,000

U.S. continuing claims down 123,000 to 6.14 mln
8:30am Today

U.S. 4-week avg. claims down 11,000 to 553,500
8:30am Today

U.S. weekly jobless claims down 21,000 to 530,000
8:30am Today

[tclambert]

48. Did you say continuing claims are down?

That sounds good. But, could it be a statistical fluke? Could it be from people exhausting benefits and rolling off the lists? We don't have a weekly source for number of jobs, do we? The Bureau of Labor Statistics only publishes those monthly. The next one comes out October 2nd.

Sigh. Seems like statistics never give you the whole truth clearly and easily. You always have to waterboard them to get any satisfaction. And, like people, with enough torture statistics will tell you whatever you want to hear.

[ozymandius]

3. Oil falls to near $68 as US crude supplies jump

SINGAPORE – Oil prices dropped to near $68 a barrel Thursday in Asia as an unexpected jump in U.S. crude inventories suggested consumer demand remains in the doldrums.

Benchmark crude for November delivery was down 76 cents at $68.21 a barrel by late afternoon Singapore time in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract tumbled $2.79 to settle at $68.97 on Wednesday.

.....

Crude supplies grew by 2.8 million barrels and gasoline by 5.4 million barrels last week, according to the Energy Information Administration on Wednesday. Analysts had expected crude levels to decline by nearly that much, according to a survey by Platts, the energy information arm of McGraw-Hills Cos.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/oil_prices

[rfranklin]

4. Good morning, Ozy...

Does the carnival continure today? Or did it leave on the late night train?

[ozymandius]

6. Good morning.

:donut: :donut: :donut:

Carnival? I'm sorry. What do you mean?

[rfranklin]

11. The Wall Street "recovery," which is happening without any jobs

being created. Somehow, we are expected to keep spending and prop up the consumer economy with no increase in spending power and often without an income. And the wizards in Washington are helping Wall Street paper over the panic of a few months ago with magic money and pretend that everything is honky dory once more. That's the metaphorical carnival to which I refer.

[ozymandius]

14. Thanks. And yes, I do believe so.

The rhetorical carnival to which you refer will continue. Honestly those making public policy statements really have nothing left to say. The economic conditions and patterns remain so moribund, even with massive infusions of government cash, that any real recovery, including an expanding job market at living wages, remains elusive inside this election cycle. Yet this rhetoric will continue until something new takes hold.

The fact that our substantive problems problems with consumer spending (being that current conditions upset the GDP equation through its weakness) remain unresolved adds some plausibility to a detectible sense of panic among our political leaders. Republicans are hoping for gains in the next election cycle based on the shit storm they created and from which we have not yet recovered under Democratic leadership. The seemingly immovable nature of these economic conditions have moved the rhetorical frame at the G-20 meeting that convenes today in Pittsburgh. This is obviously the new direction - to have other nations fill the void of America's diminishing and lackluster consumption habits.

I think that another stimulus in the form of tax rebates is a given. Many in Washington lack the political will to embrace this idea yet. There is still too much hope that previous stimulus initiatives will have some effect to spur consumption. Politically, to call for another stimulus right now would be very bad form when the ink on the cash for clunkers receipts is barely dry.

[Roland99]

19. I keep having this thought in my head....

An intended major recession leading to an extension and deepening of the Bush tax cuts leading to a forced major cutback in gov't programs (esp. of the social variety...gawd forbid we touch the military budget). Now, imagine if McCain had become President what cuts in gov't programs we'd be looking at. Wow...how close were we to Norquist's wet dream?

[tclambert]

51. Well, I know the GOP wants to eliminate the Department of Education.

So no college for poor kids, or middle class kids. And public schools would get worse, 100 to 150 kids per class.

The EPA--gone. All that environmental gobbledygook? Al Gore made it all up.

Privatizing Social Security would mean billions in fees for investment fund managers. Of course, many investments would have gone into Lehman Brothers-type companies, or Bernie Madoff-type hedge funds. Those retirees get to go back to work!

Their idea of fixing health care would be to shrink Medicare and Medicaid. So tens of millions more Americans would lose their medical insurance or end up under insured.

Roads, bridges, canals, dams, levees, etc. would get no maintenance. They figure if infrastructure really matters, then private enterprise will step in and build it.

Likewise police departments. Government shouldn't pay for that. For-profit vigilante companies could provide law and order. Remember Omni Consumer Products (OCP) from the movie Robocop? Just like that.

And do we really need all those weather satellites? Sure you'd like to know if a hurricane is coming, but you can always look out the window.

FDA? FTC? NHTSA? OSHA? Department of Agriculture Meat Inspectors? Surely we can trust businesses to provide safety for their customers and employees. Oh, and eliminate liability lawsuits. And malpractice.

[Demeter]

21. The Greatest Dismay Comes From Realizing that Neither Party

can bear the thought of actually giving support to people--any and all people. They want to target (limit) the expenses AND the rewards so that only those deemed DESERVING get anything. And the DESERVING are those that will funnel those dollars into their re-election campaigns.

But the economy consists of ALL the People. So does the Electorate. If Washington, DC cannot bear to deal with the great unwashed and undifferentiated masses, then Washington DC will fall.

I also have a really hard time with the DC concept of deserving. Aside from the unreformed, unrepentant, and unincarcerated crooks, EVERYBODY deserves a home, an income, an occupation and healthcare. Once the crooks are indicted, prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned, they too can have the same. But in the meanwhile, can we please stop shoveling taxpayer largess into their bottomless pockets? It's not like the crooks are going to spend it--at least, not in this country.

[DemReadingDU]

25. You're right

But I've come to believe the government nowadays is all about keeping the status quo for those bankers, politicians, lobbyists, big business. It's going to take lots more people waking up and getting angry to take back our country.

[Hugin]

29. On your point about helping the 'deserving'.

I've been reading about how the FDIC is reluctant to dig into the $100 Billion or so fund established in the Treasury for use in it's operations and the reason given in the Media for this reluctance is a fear that it would be seen as another bailout.

How is this so... The FDIC covers the REAL deposits of depositors... Those are real people and their money. The money the FDIC uses to shutter insolvent banks is NOT a bailout of the banks themselves. It's a safety net established to protect consumers from the convulsions of a failing institution.

Those depositors DESERVE to be protected. So, why the reluctance? Is it that the average depositor isn't as DESERVING of Treasury money than the 'Too-Large-To-Fail' Corporate Banks?

I don't get it... It rings hollow to me. :shrug:

[Ghost Dog]

10. Well, World stocks fall ahead of G20

LONDON (Reuters) - World stocks slipped from the previous day's 11-month high on Thursday after oil prices fell and caution grew ahead of the Group of 20 summit meeting, prompting investors to cut back on risky assets.

U.S. stocks fell on Wednesday as investors grew worried that the Federal Reserve may be closer to pulling back on extraordinarily loose monetary policy.

However, the Fed promised on Wednesday to hold interest rates very low for a long time after leaving them close to zero percent as expected, which supported government bonds across the board in Europe.

The timing for exit strategy -- or plans to unwind emergency economic support -- is a key issue for investors as the two-day G20 summit in Pittsburgh starts on Thursday. G20 leaders are seeking ways to nurture the recovery from the recession and build safeguards against future catastrophes.

...

Thursday's decline in world stocks follows a near 27 percent rise since January in the benchmark MSCI world equity index, recouping more than half of last year's losses.

"It's a dose of reality. Although there is cash out there, investors are saying no thank you, we have gone high enough and want to take money out of the market," said Justin Urquhart Stewart, director at Seven Investment Management. The MSCI world index fell 0.3 percent while the FTSEurofirst 300 index (^FTEU3 - News) fell more than 1 percent. Emerging stocks (^MSCIEF - News) fell 0.9 percent.

/... http://finance.yahoo.com/news/World-stocks-fall-ahead-of-rb-3461269287.html?x=0&.v=4

Banks, commods drag European shares lower

LONDON, Sept 24 (Reuters) - European shares fell in early trade on Thursday, with lower crude prices weighing on energy stocks and banks under pressure.

By 0828 GMT, the pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 .FTEU3 index of top shares was down 1.3 percent at 993.12 points.

The index has soared 54 percent since tumbling to a record low last March, but is still down 39 percent for a multi-year peak reached in mid-2007.

/... http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCALO4496120090924?rpc=44

Banks, miners lead FTSE lower after Fed comments

LONDON, Sept 24 (Reuters) - Britain's top share index fell 0.8 percent in early trade on Thursday, tracking losses in the U.S. and Asia overnight, as markets reacted cautiously to positive comments made by the U.S. Federal Reserve.

By 0802 GMT, the FTSE 100 .FTSE was down 39.43 points at 5,099.94, having closed down 0.1 percent at 5,139.37 on Wednesday.

The Fed on Wednesday upgraded its assessment of the U.S. economy, saying growth had returned after a deep recession, while reiterating its promise to hold interest rates very low for a long time.

The Fed also said it would slow its purchases of mortgage debt to extend that programme's life until the end of March, in a move toward withdrawing the central bank's extraordinary support for the economy and markets during the contraction.

Manus Cranny, head of sales at spreadbetter MF Global, said investors were disappointed that the Fed didn't give a more accurate picture of when they might be looking to start unwinding their current stimulus plan.

"It would have been nice for an absolute timeline but history has taught us that that is just not the nature of the Fed ... they're not going to show all of their hands all at once," he said.

Banks were the biggest casualties as investors remained bearish ahead of a two-day G20 meeting, as world leaders look set to discuss banking reform.

...

Investors were further chastened as Bank of England Governor Mervyn King urged caution as Britain's economy enters the recovery stage.

He asked for people not to get too carried away, cautioning any improvement is likely to be small compared to the sharp drop in output caused by the global financial crisis, in an interview published on Thursday.

/... http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCALO54644920090924?rpc=44

[Demeter]

22. THERE IS NO EXIT!

And therefore no need for an exit strategy. They want out, they better grab shovels and start digging one.

[CountAllVotes]

39. maybe you can help me

I lost all of my bookmarks in a system crash - that includes my links to futures - esp. yahoo.com futures. Please provide some links to futures if you happen to have any handy.

Thanks very much!! :D

CountAllVotes

:kick:

[Ghost Dog]

40. World central banks trimming U.S. dollar infusions

Uff. Sorry, this is the only kind of source on futures I know about (reading between lines)...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Major world central banks announced on Thursday that they planned to scale back massive injections of U.S. dollars into their banking systems as financial markets stabilise after a devastating crisis.

The U.S. Federal Reserve said it would begin to scale back short-term cash auctions in early 2010, while the European Central Bank, the Swiss National Bank, and the Bank of England announced they would curtail steps taken to ensure dollar liquidity.

The joint actions signalled a gradual removal of extraordinary measures central banks around the world have taken to prop up banks and financial systems during the worst period of instability since the Great Depression in the 1930s.

"These emergency financing programs have done their jobs to stabilise credit markets," said Alex Roever, a strategist for J.P. Morgan Securities in New York.

...

Analysts said the move shows central banks see less pressure on banks for short-term cash, but should not be seen as a move to begin to withdraw the monetary policy stimulus to economies that remain fragile.

"This isn't part of the exit strategy per se," said Chris Rupkey, an economist for Bank of Tokyo/Mitsubishi UFJ in New York. "It just recognizes that banks have less need for liquidity."

The Fed said it will trim the sizes and maturity lengths of auctions, while continuing Term Auction Facility (TAF) short-term cash auctions at least through January.

/... http://uk.biz.yahoo.com/24092009/325/world-central-banks-trimming-u-s-dollar-infusions.html


BOE's King: Pound weakness aids rebalancing

LONDON (MarketWatch) -- The British pound's fall in foreign exchange markets has aided a "rebalancing" of the U.K. economy, but a shift is still required into exports, Bank of England Governor Mervyn King said in an interview published Thursday by the Newcastle Journal newspaper. "That rebalancing of the UK economy that I have been talking about for about 10 years, is very necessary. I think the fall in the exchange rate that we have seen will be helpful to that process but there's no doubt that what we need to see now is a shift of resources into net exports -- whether directly or in producing things that compete with imports that help to reduce the trade deficit," he said, according to the report.

/.. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/boes-king-pound-weakness-aids-rebalancing-2009-09-24

I think the same is supposed to apply to the US dollar and trade deficit.

[CountAllVotes]

41. thanks

What I was looking for is the tables that show where the stock markets abroad are going (they change by the moment when open).

However, thanks for your links. They do help. :)

[Ghost Dog]

42. Ah, if you find them, let us know, would you?

I look around this page from time to time: http://www.reuters.com/finance/markets but there's at least a 15 minute delay there, I believe.

[CountAllVotes]

43. will do

I'm so mad! I don't know how I managed to lose them. I'll email someone that probably knows and pass it on to ya'll. :)

Thanks again!!

:kick:

[ozymandius]

5. Fed slows housing market plan; rates to stay low

WASHINGTON – Signaling confidence in a recovery, the Federal Reserve decided Wednesday to stretch out the pace of a program intended to lower mortgage rates and prop up the housing market.

Even so, rates on home loans are expected to remain low.

To foster the recovery, the Fed also decided to hold the target range for its key bank lending rate at a record low of between zero and 0.25 percent.

.....

With the economy on the mend, the Fed said it now plans to reach its goal of buying $1.45 trillion in mortgage-backed securities and debt by the end of March, rather than by the end of this year as originally scheduled. It's the second time since August that the Fed has opted to slow emergency programs designed to encourage spending and boost the economy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090923/ap_on_bi_ge/us_fed_interest_rates

[ozymandius]

9. Fed's exit strategy may use money market funds: report

LONDON (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Reserve is studying the idea of borrowing from money market mutual funds as part of eventual steps to withdraw stimulus, the Financial Times reported on Thursday.

The Fed would borrow from the funds via reverse repurchase agreements involving some of the huge portfolio of mortgage-backed securities and U.S. Treasuries that it acquired as it fought the financial crisis, the newspaper reported, without citing any sources.

This would drain liquidity from the financial system, helping to avoid a burst of inflation as the economy recovered.

.....

The central bank is now considering dealing with money market funds because it does not think the primary dealers have the balance sheet capacity to provide more than about $100 billion, the Financial Times said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousivMolt/idUSTRE58N1CU20090924

[Demeter]

23. Watch Money Markets Cash Out

and mattresses get a little fluffier.

[DemReadingDU]

26. Borrow from MMF, omg

What kind of guarantee that the FED would put back that money into those MMF! This is shocking. But really, nothing should be shocking anymore.

[CountAllVotes]

44. Bernanke is a fool

I cannot stand him and I sure wish that Pres. Obama had not reappointed this shill! :argh:

:kick:

[Hugin]

31. Am I to take it that all of this 'Fed Borrowing' talk I've been hearing means the Fed is...

Broke?

Oh, and Timmeh is out of money, too.

Unless Congress raises the debt ceiling once again.

[ozymandius]

7. Report: Citigroup to scale back US footprint

NEW YORK – Citigroup Inc., one of the biggest recipients of government bailout funds, is looking to scale back its U.S. retail footprint to just six major metropolitan areas and limit most lending to wealthy customers, according to a published report.

Citi's management is looking to reduce the bank's U.S. consumer lending to mainly credit cards and "jumbo" mortgages, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday, citing unnamed people familiar with the situation.

.....

Citi is looking to sell its 120 branches in Texas and is mulling whether it should continue to maintain a large footprint in cities like Boston and Philadelphia, the paper said. Citi holds few deposits in those locations compared with competitors.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090924/ap_on_bi_ge/us_citigroup_scaling_back

[Karenina]

16. ..."Citi executives are concerned

that the U.S. government, which owns a 34% stake in Citi, could balk at branch closings."

Ya think?

[ozymandius]

17. and sharply curtail lending

In a phrase: Citi will do exactly the opposite of what the bailout funds were intended to promote. More balk will be had by all.

[Dr.Phool]

36. Citi needs a footprint on it's ass.

[ozymandius]

8. Japan mired in slump as exports, imports tumble

TOKYO – Japan's exports tumbled 36 percent in August — with car shipments falling by half — and imports also contracted sharply, the government said Thursday, showing the world's No. 2 economy remains mired in a deep slump.

Declines in automobile and steel exports were especially pronounced, the Ministry of Finance said. Exports fell for the 11th straight month to 4.5 trillion yen ($49 billion).

.....

Imports, meanwhile, dropped 41.3 percent from a year earlier to 4.3 trillion yen, reflecting weak consumption within Japan, where the jobless rate is at a record high as companies shed workers. Consumer finance company Aiful Corp. said Thursday it will cut 2,000 jobs, or about 44 percent of its work force.

.....

Auto exports in August plunged a staggering 50 percent, while shipments of steel products dropped 43.3 percent, the ministry said. Exports of light oil products fell 59.9 percent due to faltering demand in China and Vietnam, it said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090924/ap_on_bi_ge/as_japan_economy

[ozymandius]

12. Financial meltdown tops agenda as G20 summit convenes in Pittsburgh

The US is winning international support for an ambitious plan to rebalance the global economy as leaders convene for a G20 summit at a heavily fortified Pittsburgh with the global financial meltdown at the top of the agenda.

Fresh from the UN general assembly in New York, heads of government and a vast diplomatic entourage will descend on Pittsburgh today to kick off two days of talks on economic stability, financial regulation, climate change and bankers' bonuses.

.....

On the eve of the summit, China indicated it was willing to countenance an initiative by President Barack Obama to smooth the flow of capital around the world in the hope of securing greater long-term economic stability.

The US proposal calls on rapidly expanding economies such as China, Brazil and India to boost domestic consumption in order to lower their trade surpluses, while the US and Europe would encourage more saving to reduce long-term budget deficits.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/24/g20-financial-crisis-un-pittsburgh

[Ghost Dog]

13. The hills are alive... with the sound of hedge funds

Funds seeking lower taxation and lighter regulation - and a base far from public anger about bonuses - are fleeing to the shores of lake Zurich

* Elena Moya
* guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 22 September 2009 18.43 BST

Grindelwald, Switzerland

Hedge funds are setting up in the mountains of Switzerland. Photograph: Getty

Visitors to Pfäffikon, a small Swiss town on the shores of lake Zurich, would never suspect that they were in a hedge fund hot spot. But many have followed in the wake of London-based Man Group, the world's largest publicly traded hedge fund, which set up a base in the Swiss mountains several years ago. They are coming from the UK, seeking lower taxes, less regulation and a friendly welcome, far from public anger about bonuses.

"I moved when it became obvious that government spending was getting silly. I knew the culture would translate into higher taxes and more problems," says the boss of a fund with more than $500m under management, who recently moved from London to Pfäffikon.

This mobility and freedom enjoyed by hedge funds will be scrutinised during the forthcoming G20 summit in Pittsburgh. World leaders are looking to keep them under control: US President Barack Obama publicly blamed them for blocking a restructuring deal at Chrysler, sending the auto maker into administration, while the British government was aghast to see them making millions by betting on a fall in RBS shares during the worst of the credit crunch.

But chances are that whatever politicians do, the hedgies, as they are known, are likely to be a step ahead. In Switzerland, some of them are forming small communities outside the traditional financial centres of Geneva and Zurich. "If they doubled my taxes in Switzerland I wouldn't go back to London," said the hedge fund manager who recently moved to Pfäffikon. "I don't want to spend my life commuting through the Blackwall tunnel and I don't particularly appreciate paying my tax when I get nothing back."

...

"There's no recession here – there's no empty office space," said Marcel Jouault, a former hedge fund manager, who now runs local developments. Jouault's fund moved from Frankfurt to Pfäffikon four years ago, when only a few firms had followed Man Group into town. He quit the industry last year "because I could see all the trouble coming", he says, and stayed to enjoy the fresh air, personal business ventures, and to drive his Porsche – by no means the only one in town.

"The relationship with the tax person here is very personal and open," Jouault said. "If there's anything wrong, they'll rap your knuckles, but they treat you as if you're paying their salary. This tax competition (between Cantons) is beautiful because everywhere you go, you are the king."

...

Other funds have chosen a bigger town, Zug, a few miles away, to settle in. Looking at the nearby mountains, sitting on a sofa on the roof terrace of an office building that hasn't been completed yet, Karsten Schroeder said: "We wanted to get out of London – we didn't like London; personally, I strongly dislike London. It's very unattractive for me, dirty, disgusting, they have no sense of service mentality, the public transport is bad – living there is not great. Now I live by a lake and the mountains."

...

Since April, about 15 funds have expressed an interest in relocating to Switzerland following the British government's announcement of a higher rate of tax, according to David Butler, a founding member of Kinetic Partners, a London-based consultant to hedge funds. The firm had already moved 23 funds to Switzerland in the past 18 months, Butler said.

While regulators around the world fight over how to tackle them, hedge funds are still in business. And they have a new home.

/... http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/sep/22/hedge-funds-switzerland

[Festivito]

15. Debt: 09/21/2009 11,811,086,447,487.95 (UP 3,419,329,190.28) (Down a bit, and up a bit.)

(Debt down nearly one-third billion, FICA rises nearly three-and-three-quarters billion. Not very interesting.)

= Held by the Public + Intragovernmental(FICA)
= 7,504,401,248,855.73 + 4,306,685,198,632.22
DOWN 319,092,626.95 + UP 3,738,421,817.23

Source: Debt to the penny:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

THINKING IN BILLIONS: Think 3 or 4 dollars per billion in a 308-Million person America.
If every American, man, woman and child puts in $3.25 each THAT'S 1B$.
A family of three: Mom, Dad, Child: $9.76, ABOUT TEN BUCKS for a 1B$ federal program.
I hope that is clear. However, I'd suggest using $3 per 1B$ to underestimate it.
Use $4 per 1B$ to overestimate the cost when thinking: Is the federal program worth it?
Aid to Dependant Children: 2B$/yr =$8/yr(a movie a year) Family of 3: $24/yr(an hour of bowling)

PERSONALIZED DEBT:
Every 10 seconds we net gain a another American, so at the end of the workday of the report, there should be 307,504,821 people in America.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html ON 08/24/2009 13:24 -> 307,261,605
Currently, each of these Americans owe $38,409.44.
A family of three owes $115,228.31. (And that is IN ADDITION to their mortgage.)

ANALYSIS:
There were 20 reports in the last 30 to 31 days.
The average for the last 20 reports is 4,591,412,747.45.
The average for the last 30 days would be 3,060,941,831.63.
The average for the last 31 days would be 2,962,201,772.55.
There were 252 reports in 365 days of FY2007 averaging 1.99B$ per report, 1.37B$/day.
There were 253 reports in 366 days of FY2008 averaging 4.02B$ per report, 2.78B$/day.
There were 75 reports in 112 days of GWB's part of FY2009 averaging 8.03B$ per report, 5.38B$/day.
There were 167 reports in 244 days of Obama's part of FY2009 averaging 7.05B$ per report, 4.85B$/day so far.
There were 242 reports in 356 days of FY2009 averaging 7.38B$ per report, 5.02B$/day.

PROJECTION:
There are 1,217 days remaining in this Obama 1st term.
By that time the debt could be between 13.5 and 17.9T$.
It could be higher. It could be lower.

HISTORICAL:
President's term begins and ends on Jan 20.
(Guess who might want to hide the Reagan Bush years. Jan 20 data is missing before 1993.)
01/20/1993 _4,188,092,107,183.60 WJC Inaugural
01/22/2001 _5,728,195,796,181.57 WJC (UP 1,540,103,688,997.97)
01/20/2009 10,626,877,048,913.08 GWB (UP 4,898,681,252,731.43)
09/21/2009 11,811,086,447,487.95 BHO (UP 1,184,209,398,574.87 so far since Obama took office.)

Fiscal Year ends: Sep 30
Borrowed in FY1993: (Maybe later.)
Borrowed in FY1994: 281,261,026,873.94
Borrowed in FY1995: 281,232,990,696.07
Borrowed in FY1996: 250,828,038,426.34
Borrowed in FY1997: 188,335,072,261.61
Borrowed in FY1998: 113,046,997,500.28
Borrowed in FY1999: 130,077,892,735.81
Borrowed in FY2000: _17,907,308,253.43 Bill alone
Borrowed in FY2001: 133,285,202,313.20 Bill and George
Borrowed in FY2002: 420,772,553,397.10 All George
Borrowed in FY2003: 554,995,097,146.46
Borrowed in FY2004: 595,821,633,586.70
Borrowed in FY2005: 553,656,965,393.18
Borrowed in FY2006: 574,264,237,491.73
Borrowed in FY2007: 500,679,473,047.25
Borrowed in FY2008: 1,017,071,524,650.01
Borrowed in FY2009: 1,786,361,550,575.50 so far this fiscal year, broken down below:
Borrowed in FY2009: 0,602,152,152,000.59 in part from time during Bush reign.
Borrowed in FY2009: 1,184,209,398,574.87 in part since Obama takes over.


LAST FIFTEEN REPORTS OF ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC DEBT(NOT FICA):
08/28/2009 +000,123,059,531.85 ------------********
09/01/2009 +087,210,147,628.98 ------------********** Tue
09/02/2009 +000,313,556,741.81 ------------********
09/03/2009 -005,471,580,596.27 --
09/04/2009 +000,000,664,126.38 ------------*****
09/08/2009 -000,191,031,319.46 --- Tue
09/09/2009 +000,137,837,081.44 ------------********
09/10/2009 +012,326,876,265.82 ------------**********
09/11/2009 +000,017,033,887.43 ------------*******
09/14/2009 -000,193,915,837.32 --- Mon
09/15/2009 +034,695,222,864.03 ------------**********
09/16/2009 +000,121,771,969.62 ------------********
09/17/2009 -017,941,949,432.55 -
09/18/2009 -000,312,998,363.37 ---
09/21/2009 -000,319,092,626.95 --- Mon

110,515,601,921.44 Total of 15 above reports.

Heavy borrowing seems to start after 09/18/2008 while Bush was in power JUST BEFORE fiscal year end.
Bush admin borrowed $962,245,245,654.01 in those last 124 days in office crossing two fiscal years.
$360,093,093,653.42 in last 12 days of FY2008, and $602,152,152,000.59 in subsequent 112 days before leaving office.

For a prettier and more explanatory view of our nation's debt:
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock

(Debt to the penny keeps changing. Stuff is missing. Best to keep our own history.) LAST REPORT:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4071184&mesg_id=4071224

[Festivito]

49. Debt: 09/22/2009 11,819,629,178,802.28 (UP 8,542,731,314.33) (Debt down 5, Up 8.)

(Missed a day again. Yikes. Need an extra report.)

= Held by the Public + Intragovernmental(FICA)
= 7,504,395,560,786.57 + 4,315,233,618,015.71
DOWN 5,688,069.16 + UP 8,548,419,383.49

Source: Debt to the penny:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

THINKING IN BILLIONS: Think 3 or 4 dollars per billion in a 308-Million person America.
If every American, man, woman and child puts in $3.25 each THAT'S 1B$.
A family of three: Mom, Dad, Child: $9.76, ABOUT TEN BUCKS for a 1B$ federal program.
I hope that is clear. However, I'd suggest using $3 per 1B$ to underestimate it.
Use $4 per 1B$ to overestimate the cost when thinking: Is the federal program worth it?
Aid to Dependant Children: 2B$/yr =$8/yr(a movie a year) Family of 3: $24/yr(an hour of bowling)

PERSONALIZED DEBT:
Every 10 seconds we net gain a another American, so at the end of the workday of the report, there should be 307,513,461 people in America.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html ON 08/24/2009 13:24 -> 307,261,605
Currently, each of these Americans owe $38,436.14.
A family of three owes $115,308.41. (And that is IN ADDITION to their mortgage.)

ANALYSIS:
There were 21 reports in the last 30 to 32 days.
The average for the last 21 reports is 4,779,570,774.44.
The average for the last 30 days would be 3,345,699,542.11.
The average for the last 32 days would be 3,136,593,320.73.
There were 252 reports in 365 days of FY2007 averaging 1.99B$ per report, 1.37B$/day.
There were 253 reports in 366 days of FY2008 averaging 4.02B$ per report, 2.78B$/day.
There were 75 reports in 112 days of GWB's part of FY2009 averaging 8.03B$ per report, 5.38B$/day.
There were 168 reports in 245 days of Obama's part of FY2009 averaging 7.06B$ per report, 4.87B$/day so far.
There were 243 reports in 357 days of FY2009 averaging 7.39B$ per report, 5.03B$/day.

PROJECTION:
There are 1,216 days remaining in this Obama 1st term.
By that time the debt could be between 13.5 and 17.9T$.
It could be higher. It could be lower.

HISTORICAL:
President's term begins and ends on Jan 20.
(Guess who might want to hide the Reagan Bush years. Jan 20 data is missing before 1993.)
01/20/1993 _4,188,092,107,183.60 WJC Inaugural
01/22/2001 _5,728,195,796,181.57 WJC (UP 1,540,103,688,997.97)
01/20/2009 10,626,877,048,913.08 GWB (UP 4,898,681,252,731.43)
09/22/2009 11,819,629,178,802.28 BHO (UP 1,192,752,129,889.20 so far since Obama took office.)

Fiscal Year ends: Sep 30
Borrowed in FY1993: (Maybe later.)
Borrowed in FY1994: 281,261,026,873.94
Borrowed in FY1995: 281,232,990,696.07
Borrowed in FY1996: 250,828,038,426.34
Borrowed in FY1997: 188,335,072,261.61
Borrowed in FY1998: 113,046,997,500.28
Borrowed in FY1999: 130,077,892,735.81
Borrowed in FY2000: _17,907,308,253.43 Bill alone
Borrowed in FY2001: 133,285,202,313.20 Bill and George
Borrowed in FY2002: 420,772,553,397.10 All George
Borrowed in FY2003: 554,995,097,146.46
Borrowed in FY2004: 595,821,633,586.70
Borrowed in FY2005: 553,656,965,393.18
Borrowed in FY2006: 574,264,237,491.73
Borrowed in FY2007: 500,679,473,047.25
Borrowed in FY2008: 1,017,071,524,650.01
Borrowed in FY2009: 1,794,904,281,889.80 so far this fiscal year, broken down below:
Borrowed in FY2009: 0,602,152,152,000.59 in part from time during Bush reign.
Borrowed in FY2009: 1,192,752,129,889.20 in part since Obama takes over.


LAST FIFTEEN REPORTS OF ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC DEBT(NOT FICA):
09/01/2009 +087,210,147,628.98 ------------********** Tue
09/02/2009 +000,313,556,741.81 ------------********
09/03/2009 -005,471,580,596.27 --
09/04/2009 +000,000,664,126.38 ------------*****
09/08/2009 -000,191,031,319.46 --- Tue
09/09/2009 +000,137,837,081.44 ------------********
09/10/2009 +012,326,876,265.82 ------------**********
09/11/2009 +000,017,033,887.43 ------------*******
09/14/2009 -000,193,915,837.32 --- Mon
09/15/2009 +034,695,222,864.03 ------------**********
09/16/2009 +000,121,771,969.62 ------------********
09/17/2009 -017,941,949,432.55 -
09/18/2009 -000,312,998,363.37 ---
09/21/2009 -000,319,092,626.95 --- Mon
09/22/2009 -000,005,688,069.16 -----

110,386,854,320.43 Total of 15 above reports.

Heavy borrowing seems to start after 09/18/2008 while Bush was in power JUST BEFORE fiscal year end.
Bush admin borrowed $962,245,245,654.01 in those last 124 days in office crossing two fiscal years.
$360,093,093,653.42 in last 12 days of FY2008, and $602,152,152,000.59 in subsequent 112 days before leaving office.

For a prettier and more explanatory view of our nation's debt:
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock

(Debt to the penny keeps changing. Stuff is missing. Best to keep our own history.) LAST REPORT:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4074898&mesg_id=4074925

[Festivito]

50. Debt: 09/23/2009 11,813,723,781,466.43 (DOWN 5,905,397,335.85) (Wed)

(Nice drops. Time for the day of the week to be on the title.)

= Held by the Public + Intragovernmental(FICA)
= 7,504,209,459,912.53 + 4,309,514,321,553.90
DOWN 186,100,874.04 + DOWN 5,719,296,461.81

Source: Debt to the penny:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

THINKING IN BILLIONS: Think 3 or 4 dollars per billion in a 308-Million person America.
If every American, man, woman and child puts in $3.25 each THAT'S 1B$.
A family of three: Mom, Dad, Child: $9.76, ABOUT TEN BUCKS for a 1B$ federal program.
I hope that is clear. However, I'd suggest using $3 per 1B$ to underestimate it.
Use $4 per 1B$ to overestimate the cost when thinking: Is the federal program worth it?
Aid to Dependant Children: 2B$/yr =$8/yr(a movie a year) Family of 3: $24/yr(an hour of bowling)

PERSONALIZED DEBT:
Every 10 seconds we net gain a another American, so at the end of the workday of the report, there should be 307,522,101 people in America.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html ON 08/24/2009 13:24 -> 307,261,605
Currently, each of these Americans owe $38,415.85.
A family of three owes $115,247.56. (And that is IN ADDITION to their mortgage.)

ANALYSIS:
There were 22 reports in the last 30 to 33 days.
The average for the last 22 reports is 4,293,890,405.80.
The average for the last 30 days would be 3,148,852,964.25.
The average for the last 33 days would be 2,862,593,603.86.
There were 252 reports in 365 days of FY2007 averaging 1.99B$ per report, 1.37B$/day.
There were 253 reports in 366 days of FY2008 averaging 4.02B$ per report, 2.78B$/day.
There were 75 reports in 112 days of GWB's part of FY2009 averaging 8.03B$ per report, 5.38B$/day.
There were 169 reports in 246 days of Obama's part of FY2009 averaging 6.98B$ per report, 4.82B$/day so far.
There were 244 reports in 358 days of FY2009 averaging 7.33B$ per report, 5.00B$/day.

PROJECTION:
There are 1,215 days remaining in this Obama 1st term.
By that time the debt could be between 13.5 and 17.9T$.
It could be higher. It could be lower.

HISTORICAL:
President's term begins and ends on Jan 20.
(Guess who might want to hide the Reagan Bush years. Jan 20 data is missing before 1993.)
01/20/1993 _4,188,092,107,183.60 WJC Inaugural
01/22/2001 _5,728,195,796,181.57 WJC (UP 1,540,103,688,997.97)
01/20/2009 10,626,877,048,913.08 GWB (UP 4,898,681,252,731.43)
09/23/2009 11,813,723,781,466.43 BHO (UP 1,186,846,732,553.35 so far since Obama took office.)

Fiscal Year ends: Sep 30
Borrowed in FY1993: (Maybe later.)
Borrowed in FY1994: 281,261,026,873.94
Borrowed in FY1995: 281,232,990,696.07
Borrowed in FY1996: 250,828,038,426.34
Borrowed in FY1997: 188,335,072,261.61
Borrowed in FY1998: 113,046,997,500.28
Borrowed in FY1999: 130,077,892,735.81
Borrowed in FY2000: _17,907,308,253.43 Bill alone
Borrowed in FY2001: 133,285,202,313.20 Bill and George
Borrowed in FY2002: 420,772,553,397.10 All George
Borrowed in FY2003: 554,995,097,146.46
Borrowed in FY2004: 595,821,633,586.70
Borrowed in FY2005: 553,656,965,393.18
Borrowed in FY2006: 574,264,237,491.73
Borrowed in FY2007: 500,679,473,047.25
Borrowed in FY2008: 1,017,071,524,650.01
Borrowed in FY2009: 1,788,998,884,554.00 so far this fiscal year, broken down below:
Borrowed in FY2009: 0,602,152,152,000.59 in part from time during Bush reign.
Borrowed in FY2009: 1,186,846,732,553.35 in part since Obama takes over.


LAST FIFTEEN REPORTS OF ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC DEBT(NOT FICA):
09/02/2009 +000,313,556,741.81 ------------********
09/03/2009 -005,471,580,596.27 --
09/04/2009 +000,000,664,126.38 ------------*****
09/08/2009 -000,191,031,319.46 --- Tue
09/09/2009 +000,137,837,081.44 ------------********
09/10/2009 +012,326,876,265.82 ------------**********
09/11/2009 +000,017,033,887.43 ------------*******
09/14/2009 -000,193,915,837.32 --- Mon
09/15/2009 +034,695,222,864.03 ------------**********
09/16/2009 +000,121,771,969.62 ------------********
09/17/2009 -017,941,949,432.55 -
09/18/2009 -000,312,998,363.37 ---
09/21/2009 -000,319,092,626.95 --- Mon
09/22/2009 -000,005,688,069.16 -----
09/23/2009 -000,186,100,874.04 ---

22,990,605,817.41 Total of 15 above reports.

Heavy borrowing seems to start after 09/18/2008 while Bush was in power JUST BEFORE fiscal year end.
Bush admin borrowed $962,245,245,654.01 in those last 124 days in office crossing two fiscal years.
$360,093,093,653.42 in last 12 days of FY2008, and $602,152,152,000.59 in subsequent 112 days before leaving office.

For a prettier and more explanatory view of our nation's debt:
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock

(Debt to the penny keeps changing. Stuff is missing. Best to keep our own history.) LAST REPORT:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4074898&mesg_id=4075754

[DemReadingDU]

56. that helps having the day of the week

over a trillion since Obama took office

[ozymandius]

18. As Banks Retreat, Lawmakers Press Attack

The U.S. banking industry's signs of retreat on certain account fees mightn't satisfy Washington lawmakers, including some who said Wednesday they are pushing ahead with broad restrictions on fee policies at banks.

.....

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) said in an interview that he supports the moves by Bank of America and J.P. Morgan. Rep. Frank still plans to push forward with legislation requiring changes in overdraft policies at banks. The Federal Reserve also is considering strict curbs on overdraft fees that could be finalized later this year.

The softened stance on overdraft fees at the two giant banks "confirms that it's doable," Rep. Frank said. "No one else will be able to argue that it's too burdensome." A spokeswoman from Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd's office said the Democrat from Connecticut is moving forward with legislation.

.....

Some banks maximize penalties by processing the largest purchase a customer makes first, draining accounts faster and creating the potential for multiple fees on smaller purchases. J.P. Morgan said it is ending this practice for most transactions.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125373195407234819.html

[Demeter]

24. Fed increases scrutiny over bank bonuses

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c3619788-a797-11de-b0ee-00144feabdc0.html

By Francesco Guerrera in New York

Published: September 22 2009 22:24 | Last updated: September 23 2009 02:11

US regulators have intensified efforts to gather intelligence on banks’ trading positions in a move that could herald a drive to ensure traders’ bonuses are based on real profits rather than unrealised gains.

(TALK ABOUT MICROMANAGING! WHY NOT JUST CAP IT AT 10X MINIMUM WAGE? OR EVEN 100X)

Wall Street executives said regulators, led by the Federal Reserve, had been asking banks in recent weeks to provide a breakdown of their balance sheets, with particular attention to trading books.


The authorities wanted to know what proportion of a bank’s balance sheet was held in more liquid positions and how much was held in derivatives and other trading positions whose profitability might not be known for years, they said.

The behind-the-scenes request surprised some executives until news broke last week that the Fed planned to ask for veto powers over traders’ pay packages.

New rules could enable an overhaul of the tradition of paying traders bonuses based on paper gains on positions at the end of each year before it is known whether they have made a loss or a profit in cash terms.

By determining the extent of realised and unrealised gains, regulators would be able to judge whether traders’ bonuses were in line with the profitability and risk profile of their institution, bankers said.

Critics say pay structure contributed to the crisis by giving traders incentives to focus on high-risk, short-term strategies.

Bankers’ pay is under intense scrutiny from governments and is set to be a central topic of this week’s meeting of the Group of 20 industrialised nations in Pittsburgh.

“Bankers’ pay has been out of whack for the last four or five years,” said Jonathan Finger of Finger Interests, which owns shares in financial groups including Bank of America. “Traders got the money, but shareholders were left holding the bag.”

The Fed declined to comment.

[Hugin]

30. Considering some of these...

speculators traders have run up the stocks in defunct corporations in some cases over $600 Million... I'd say theres quite a bit of churning going on out there. So, yeah, I agree a cap would be wise. Or simply a 'cash out' clause. They don't get a bonus until all of their positions for the year have been 'cashed out'. If they want to stay-and-play... No pay.

Radical idea... But, maybe it would result in real long term Investment in companies and a shocking return to the majority of players actually giving a crap about what products a company produces... Y'know, that long scorned idea of long-term thinking and planning, rather than gaming the system based on whether the stock charts resemble a 'pimple' or not. :eyes:

Of course, this would mean returns would settle at a historically sustainable 3% to 5% instead of growth rates reserved for bacteria, certain cancers, or disaster species.

Damn, I'm in a mood today.

[Demeter]

45. You Aren't Alone in Your Mood Indigo

I have the flu, or the next best thing. Probably comes from crawling around the hospital for a week. Aside from the headache, chills, and slime in the nasal system, there's this urge to KILL, KILL, KILL....

so I'm following in Tansy's footsteps today, and staying far away from everyone.

The Kid is so chipper, I want to deck her. Which would b ea terrible waste of Medical procedures.

[tclambert]

52. She's still got those staples, right? Get a neodymium magnet

and you can stick her to the fridge.

[Demeter]

53. ROFLMAO!

Oh, that was not a good idea for my head....:crazy: :spank: :cry: :rofl: :spray:

[UpInArms]

27. dollar watch

http://quotes.ino.com/chart/?acs=NYBOT_DX&v=i

Last trade 76.203 Change -0.253 (-0.33%)

Dollar Traders Wonder if the Fed is Moving up Its Time Frame for Hikes

http://www.dailyfx.com/story/topheadline/Dollar_Traders_Wonder_if_the_1253753916806.html



The Economy and the Credit Market



After a temporary bounce, the dollar was put back on pace to push new lows for the year. As long as the battered currency is directly linked to risk appetite through its record low market rates, the selling pressure will persist. However, with time, either the correlation between the currency and yield demand will fade or the all-consuming trends in sentiment will give way to diversification (or both). Over the past few weeks and months, it has been the single-minded surges in risk appetite and plunges of risk aversion that have been tempered. Through the recovery following the worst financial crisis on recent record, capital markets have risen in concert as sidelined capital was reinvested into traditional asset classes. There is still a substantial glut of wealth that is squirreled away in ‘risk-free’ assets; and in the near-term, the redistribution of this capital will mean selling US Treasuries and money market funds (and therefore the dollar). However, with time, the intense desire for yield will balance out with the low levels of expected returns; and US based assets will be seen as more competitive. In the meantime, the dollar can improve its own circumstances by shedding its status as the currency market’s primary funding currency. Comments from the Fed’s rate decision today signify the first steps towards withdrawing monetary stimulus and contemplating rate hikes.

...more...

British Pound Falters Following BoE King's Comments, Euro Rallies as Business Confidence Improves

http://www.dailyfx.com/story/bio1/British_Pound_Falters_Following_BoE_1253791254727.html

The British pound weakened across the board following dovish commentary from Bank of England Governor Mervyn King, and the currency may continue to face increased selling pressures going into the U.S. trade as investors speculate the central bank to cut the deposit rate for commercial banks. The Daily Telegraph said policy makers have invited economists to a ‘crisis meeting’ next week to discuss the depreciation in the exchange, along with the BoE’s asset purchase program, and it looks as though the markets have begun discounting expectations for further easing as the banking system remains weak.

Cable slipped to a fresh yearly low against the euro, and remains weighed against the greenback, with the GBP/USD poised to test the weekly low at 1.6134. Meanwhile, BoE Governor Mervyn King said that the depreciation in the exchange has been “very helpful” to stabilize the economy, and stated that “the UK is pretty well set for a recovery” as the government takes unprecedented steps to stem the downside risks for growth and inflation. However, the central bank head noted that the financial system “is not in good shape” and said “it will take a long time before the balance sheets of the banks are fully repaired.” At the same time, Mr. King warned that the government will need a “a credible plan for how the budget deficit will be reduced” as he expects to see a slow and steady recovery going forward, and fears of protracted growth may continue to weigh on the exchange rate as investors weigh the prospects for a sustainable recovery.

The euro advanced against the greenback to retrace the previous day’s decline, but the overnight rally looks to be losing steam ahead of 1.4800, and the pair may fall back during the US trade as the RSI approaches overbought territory. Nevertheless, business confidence in Germany improved for the sixth consecutive month in September, with the headline reading increasing to 91.3 from 90.5 in the previous month amid expectations for a rose to 92.0. At the same time, the IFO’s gauge for future expectations increased to 95.7 from 95.0, with the current assessment advancing to 87.0 from a revised reading of 86.2 in August, and the data encourages an improved outlook for the nation as the economy emerges from the worst recession since the post-war period. As Bundesbank President Axel Weber holds an enhanced outlook for the region and projects economic activity to fall at a slower pace than initially expected, businesses confidence is likely to improve throughout the second half of the year as policy makers anticipate the economy to return to growth in 2010.

US dollar price action was mixed overnight as the reserve currency weakened against most of its currency counterparts however, the greenback managed to rally against the loonie as Canadian policy makers continued to see a risk for a slower recovery following the marked appreciation in the exchange rate. Meanwhile, economists forecast existing home sales in the US to increase for the fifth consecutive month in August following the tax-credit for first time homebuyers, with the annualized rate projected to increase to 5.35M from 5.24M in the previous month, and the data may drive the greenback higher as policy makers see the economy emerging from the recession.



...more...

[Joe Chi Minh]

33. It's strange that with a few pen-strokes, quite a few cartoonists regularly

show themselves to be pre-eminent satirists. Reading most of the cartoons heading this thread from week to week is sometimes almost like experiencing satori - so dry and perfectly-aimed is the satire.

[DemReadingDU]

37. Schiff: Bernanke Is Wrong! The Economy Is Getting Worse, Not Better

9/24/09 Bernanke Is Wrong! The Economy Is Getting Worse, Not Better, Schiff Says

The Fed upgraded its view of the economy Wednesday, declaring: "Economic activity has picked up following its severe downturn."

But forget all the talk about recovery, V-shaped or otherwise. The economy is actually worse today vs. during the depths of the recession, according to Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of Crash Proof 2.0.

"Ben Bernanke is keeping his record of perfection intact of never getting anything right. Once again he's gotten it wrong," Schiff says. "If the Fed really thought the economy was sound, why does he have it on life support? If he pulls the plug, our sick economy is going to die."

Although the Fed never said the economy is "sound", Schiff is referring to the FOMC's renewed pledge that "economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period."

Nothing that's occurred in the past six months has changed Schiff's view that America's economy is headed for disaster. In fact, he's even more convinced a true "currency crisis" awaits, and that China will soon stop enabling our reckless borrowing, the basis our "phony" economy. The coming collapse of the dollar and bursting of the Treasury bubble will have devastating consequences for ordinary Americans, and any investors based in dollars, he says.

The economy today is "worse we are much more deeply indebted than in March," Schiff declares. "We've dug ourselves a deeper hole."

click to watch short video
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/342659/Bernanke-Is-Wrong!-The-Economy-Is-Getting-Worse-Not-Better-Schiff-Says?tickers=^DJI,^GSPC,SPY,DIA,TBT,UDN,GLD&sec=topStories&pos=9&asset=&ccode=

[DoBotherMe]

38. K&R n/t

[tclambert]

54. Traders Give A123 Systems IPO a Charge

By LYNN COWAN

An unprofitable clean-tech company that would have been spurned by U.S. investors six months ago turned in the second-best IPO performance of the year Thursday, proof that the U.S. new-issuance market is well on the road to recovery -- and still can produce a bit of froth.

Electric car-battery maker A123 Systems Inc. jumped 54% on its first day of trading as a public company, putting it right behind online restaurant reservations site OpenTable Inc.'s 59% pop in May. Its strong launch occurred even after underwriters Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. boosted the number of shares and price on the deal, increasing its size by more than 50% to $380 million.

more at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125380577003137963.html
________________________

Oh, my wife and I have been looking for this one to happen. She wants to put this year's IRA contribution into it. Seemed to happen without any warning. Give a guy a clue, wouldja?

A123systems has the symbol AONE. Marketwatch says it had a low of $16.56, high of $21.14, and closed at $20.15. The offering price was $13.50 per share, but it started trading at $17. (How does that work?) Anyway, I added AONE to my watch list.

They call it a "clean-tech" company in the article, but there are some wicked nasty chemicals involved in battery manufacture.

[Dr.Phool]

55. I've been watching A123 for a couple of years now.

I wanted to get in on the IPO, but as usual, I'm a day late and a dollar short.

I didn't learn about it until about 1:00 pm, while I was on the treadmill at the gym. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: