Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
STOCK MARKET WATCH -- Wednesday, 6 February 2013
[font size=3]STOCK MARKET WATCH, Wednesday, 6 February 2013[font color=black][/font]
SMW for 5 February 2013
AT THE CLOSING BELL ON 5 February 2013
[center][font color=green]
Dow Jones 13,979.30 +99.22 (0.71%)
S&P 500 1,511.29 +15.58 (1.04%)
Nasdaq 3,171.58 +40.41 (1.29%)
[font color=green]10 Year 2.00% -0.01 (-0.50%)
[font color=red]30 Year 3.21% +0.01 (0.31%)[font color=black]
[center][/font]
[HR width=85%]
[font size=2]Market Conditions During Trading Hours[/font]
[center]
[/center]
[font size=2]Euro, Yen, Loonie, Silver and Gold[center]
[/center]
[center]
[/center]
[/center]
[HR width=95%]
[font color=black][font size=2]Handy Links - Market Data and News:[/font][/font]
[center]
Economic Calendar
Marketwatch Data
Bloomberg Economic News
Yahoo Finance
Google Finance
Bank Tracker
Credit Union Tracker
Daily Job Cuts
[/center]
[font color=black][font size=2]Handy Links - Economic Blogs:[/font][/font]
[center]
The Big Picture
Financial Sense
Calculated Risk
Naked Capitalism
Credit Writedowns
Brad DeLong
Bonddad
Atrios
goldmansachs666
The Stand-Up Economist
The Automatic Earth
[/center]
[font color=black][font size=2]Handy Links - Essential Reading:[/font][/font]
[center]
Matt Taibi: Secret and Lies of the Bailout
[/center]
[font color=black][font size=2]Handy Links - Government Issues:[/font][/font]
[center]
LegitGov
Open Government
Earmark Database
USA spending.gov
[/center][font color=black][font size=2]Handy Links - Videos:[/font][/font]
[center]
Charlie Rose talks with Roubini
Charlie Rose talks with Krugman
William Black: This Economic Disaster
Bill Moyers with Kevin Drum and David Corn
[/center]
[div]
[font color=red]Partial List of Financial Sector Officials Convicted since 1/20/09 [/font][font color=red]
2/2/12 David Higgs and Salmaan Siddiqui, Credit Suisse, plead guilty to conspiracy involving valuation of MBS
3/6/12 Allen Stanford, former Caribbean billionaire and general schmuck, convicted on 13 of 14 counts in $2.2B Ponzi scheme, faces 20+ years in prison
6/4/12 Matthew Kluger, lawyer, sentenced to 12 years in prison, along with co-conspirator stock trader Garrett Bauer (9 years) and co-conspirator Kenneth Robinson (not yet sentenced) for 17 year insider trading scheme.
6/14/12 Allen Stanford sentenced to 110 years without parole.
6/15/12 Rajat Gupta, former Goldman Sachs director, found guilty of insider trading. Could face a decade in prison when sentenced later this year.
6/22/12 Timothy S. Durham, 49, former CEO of Fair Financial Company, convicted of one count conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud, 10 counts of wire fraud, and one count of securities fraud.
6/22/12 James F. Cochran, 56, former chairman of the board of Fair, convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud, one count of securities fraud, and six counts of wire fraud.
6/22/12 Rick D. Snow, 48, former CFO of Fair, convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud, one count of securities fraud, and three counts of wire fraud.
7/13/12 Russell Wassendorf Sr., CEO of collapsed brokerage firm Peregrine Financial Group Inc. arrested and charged with lying to regulators after admitting to authorities he embezzled "millions of dollars" and forged bank statements for "nearly twenty years."
8/22/12 Doug Whitman, Whitman Capital LLC hedge fund founder, convicted of insider trading following a trial in which he spent more than two days on the stand telling jurors he was innocent
10/26/12 UPDATE: Former Goldman Sachs director Rajat Gupta sentenced to two years in federal prison. He will, of course, appeal. . .
11/20/12 Hedge fund manager Matthew Martoma charged with insider trading at SAC Capital Advisors, and prosecutors are looking at Martoma's boss, Steven Cohen, for possible involvement.
[HR width=95%]
[center]
[HR width=95%]
[font size=3][font color=red]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.[/font][/font][/font color=red][font color=black]
48 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
http://www.travelchinaguide.com/intro/social_customs/zodiac/snake.htm
n the Chinese zodiac, the Snake is listed after the Dragon, but its place and its significance as a symbol of worship is far less than that of the Dragon. it carries the meanings of malevolence, cattiness and mystery, as well as acumen, divination and the ability to distinguish herbs. In some places, people believe that a snake found in their court can bring delight. During Spring Festival, people like to paste onto their doors and windows the paper-cut 'Fu' character (happiness), combined with a snake twisting around a rabbit onto their doors and windows as a popular pattern indicating wealth.
Strengths
They often have a good temper and a skill at communicating but say little. They possess gracious morality and great wisdom. They are usually financially secure and do not have to worry about money. They have tremendous sympathy for others and would like to take actions to help ther fellow human beings. They are determined to accomplished their goals hate to fail. Although they look calm on the surface, they are intense and passionate. They have a rich source of inspiration and understand themselves well. They are people of great perception. Women under the sign of the snake do well in housework but are irritable.
Weaknesses
They are likely to be jealous and suspicious. They should be cautious about what they discuss with others, as it might cause them to lose friendship and opportunities. They tend to overdo things. They prefer to rely on themselves and have doubts about other people's judgment. They are courteous with polite manners, but they can be headstrong. They are fickle and usually have problems in relationships or marriage problems.
n the Chinese zodiac, the Snake is listed after the Dragon, but its place and its significance as a symbol of worship is far less than that of the Dragon. it carries the meanings of malevolence, cattiness and mystery, as well as acumen, divination and the ability to distinguish herbs. In some places, people believe that a snake found in their court can bring delight. During Spring Festival, people like to paste onto their doors and windows the paper-cut 'Fu' character (happiness), combined with a snake twisting around a rabbit onto their doors and windows as a popular pattern indicating wealth.
Strengths
They often have a good temper and a skill at communicating but say little. They possess gracious morality and great wisdom. They are usually financially secure and do not have to worry about money. They have tremendous sympathy for others and would like to take actions to help ther fellow human beings. They are determined to accomplished their goals hate to fail. Although they look calm on the surface, they are intense and passionate. They have a rich source of inspiration and understand themselves well. They are people of great perception. Women under the sign of the snake do well in housework but are irritable.
Weaknesses
They are likely to be jealous and suspicious. They should be cautious about what they discuss with others, as it might cause them to lose friendship and opportunities. They tend to overdo things. They prefer to rely on themselves and have doubts about other people's judgment. They are courteous with polite manners, but they can be headstrong. They are fickle and usually have problems in relationships or marriage problems.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/06/germany-success-humanity-medium-firms
'The objective of every German business leader is to earn trust – from employees, customers, suppliers and society as a whole.' illustration by Belle Mellor
People talk too much about the economy and not enough about jobs. When economists, academics and bankers are allowed to lead the debate, the essential human element goes missing. This is neither healthy nor practical.
Unemployment should be our prime concern. Spain, with youth joblessness close to 50%, is in the gravest crisis, but there is hardly a government on the planet that is not wondering what it can do to guide school-leavers into work, exploit the skills of older workers, and avoid the apathy and alienation of the jobless, which undermines not just the economy but also the social fabric.
There may be no definitive answer but, over the past half-century, Germany has come closest to finding it. Its postwar economic miracle was impressive, but its more recent ability to ride out recessions and absorb the costs of reunification is, perhaps, even more remarkable. Germany was not immune to the economic crisis of 2008-9, but the jobless rate rose more slowly than elsewhere in Europe. Although in recent months it has edged up towards 6.9%, it remains well below the euro area's 11.7% average. Germany's resilience springs from the strength of its medium-sized, often family-owned manufacturing companies, collectively known as the Mittelstand, which account for 60% of the workforce and 52% of Germany's GDP. So what can we learn from the Germans?
The enduring success of the Mittelstand has been well documented but rarely emulated. The standard excuse is that it is rooted in German history and culture and therefore unexportable. At a time when so much business is conducted on a global scale, via globally accessible media, this excuse is wearing thin.
'The objective of every German business leader is to earn trust – from employees, customers, suppliers and society as a whole.' illustration by Belle Mellor
People talk too much about the economy and not enough about jobs. When economists, academics and bankers are allowed to lead the debate, the essential human element goes missing. This is neither healthy nor practical.
Unemployment should be our prime concern. Spain, with youth joblessness close to 50%, is in the gravest crisis, but there is hardly a government on the planet that is not wondering what it can do to guide school-leavers into work, exploit the skills of older workers, and avoid the apathy and alienation of the jobless, which undermines not just the economy but also the social fabric.
There may be no definitive answer but, over the past half-century, Germany has come closest to finding it. Its postwar economic miracle was impressive, but its more recent ability to ride out recessions and absorb the costs of reunification is, perhaps, even more remarkable. Germany was not immune to the economic crisis of 2008-9, but the jobless rate rose more slowly than elsewhere in Europe. Although in recent months it has edged up towards 6.9%, it remains well below the euro area's 11.7% average. Germany's resilience springs from the strength of its medium-sized, often family-owned manufacturing companies, collectively known as the Mittelstand, which account for 60% of the workforce and 52% of Germany's GDP. So what can we learn from the Germans?
The enduring success of the Mittelstand has been well documented but rarely emulated. The standard excuse is that it is rooted in German history and culture and therefore unexportable. At a time when so much business is conducted on a global scale, via globally accessible media, this excuse is wearing thin.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/the-endangered-fate-of-barnes-noble/272865/
Washington D.C.'s Union Station is a major point of entry for the nation's capital. Streams of daily commuters from the region, tourists, and business travelers on the Amtrak circuit from Boston and New York can choose from an especially ample array of shopping and dining opportunities. But, as of the end of February, one of the anchor retailers will be gone. Barnes & Noble is shutting down its bookstore in a main concourse after failing to reach terms with the landlord. Browsing the aisles at Barnes & Noble stores has been a core feature of the chain's strength in the forty years since Leonard Riggio purchased the assets of what was then a venerable seller mainly of textbooks and turned the enterprise into the country's most formidable shaper of a superstore culture for book selling.
It is hard to imagine a destination like Union Station without a fully stocked bookstore, even if it is also the case that an increasing percentage of the consumer traffic is carrying a mobile reading device that is loaded with books purchased elsewhere, mainly from Amazon. The sprawling Barnes & Noble on Georgetown's M Street is gone, and the company has closed superstores in New York, Dallas, Chicago, and Seattle (among other places) in similarly well-situated locales as part of a broader brick and mortar contraction that suggests--disturbingly--its long-term decline. Barnes & Noble's post-holiday report for 2012 reflected a drop in same-store sales of 3.1 percent, and despite a substantial push to expand its Nook line of e-readers, product sales for the devices were down 12.6 percent from a year ago.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Mitchell Klipper, chief executive of Barnes & Noble's retail group, said that, over the next decade, the chain will reduce its outlets by about twenty a year to reach a figure of about 450-to-500 consumer stores, down from a peak of 726 in 2008. A separate chain of 674 college bookstores (which thrive on tchotchkes and their exclusive franchises) is not part of that calculation. Even with so many fewer consumer stores, Klipper said, "It's a good business model. You have to adjust your overhead and get smart with smart systems. Is it what it used to be when you were opening 80 stores a year and dropping stores everywhere? Probably not. It's different. But every business evolves." Klipper disputes the notion that bookstores will be unable to hold their own in the digital era, despite the chain's need to downsize where rents or locations are hurting the prospect of acceptable profitability. Only a handful of the stores--fewer than twenty--are actually losing money, he told the Wall Street Journal's Jeffrey Trachtenberg. But the company's revenues have been significantly impacted by its commitment to build the Nook franchise.
While holding on to ownership of nearly 80 percent of its Nook division, a $300 million investment in Nook from Microsoft last fall, followed by an $89.5 million commitment from Pearson, which sees value in the growing electronic textbook market, are signs that Barnes & Noble can forge a way to secure enough of the digital business to offset the problems it faces in traditional bookselling.
Washington D.C.'s Union Station is a major point of entry for the nation's capital. Streams of daily commuters from the region, tourists, and business travelers on the Amtrak circuit from Boston and New York can choose from an especially ample array of shopping and dining opportunities. But, as of the end of February, one of the anchor retailers will be gone. Barnes & Noble is shutting down its bookstore in a main concourse after failing to reach terms with the landlord. Browsing the aisles at Barnes & Noble stores has been a core feature of the chain's strength in the forty years since Leonard Riggio purchased the assets of what was then a venerable seller mainly of textbooks and turned the enterprise into the country's most formidable shaper of a superstore culture for book selling.
It is hard to imagine a destination like Union Station without a fully stocked bookstore, even if it is also the case that an increasing percentage of the consumer traffic is carrying a mobile reading device that is loaded with books purchased elsewhere, mainly from Amazon. The sprawling Barnes & Noble on Georgetown's M Street is gone, and the company has closed superstores in New York, Dallas, Chicago, and Seattle (among other places) in similarly well-situated locales as part of a broader brick and mortar contraction that suggests--disturbingly--its long-term decline. Barnes & Noble's post-holiday report for 2012 reflected a drop in same-store sales of 3.1 percent, and despite a substantial push to expand its Nook line of e-readers, product sales for the devices were down 12.6 percent from a year ago.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Mitchell Klipper, chief executive of Barnes & Noble's retail group, said that, over the next decade, the chain will reduce its outlets by about twenty a year to reach a figure of about 450-to-500 consumer stores, down from a peak of 726 in 2008. A separate chain of 674 college bookstores (which thrive on tchotchkes and their exclusive franchises) is not part of that calculation. Even with so many fewer consumer stores, Klipper said, "It's a good business model. You have to adjust your overhead and get smart with smart systems. Is it what it used to be when you were opening 80 stores a year and dropping stores everywhere? Probably not. It's different. But every business evolves." Klipper disputes the notion that bookstores will be unable to hold their own in the digital era, despite the chain's need to downsize where rents or locations are hurting the prospect of acceptable profitability. Only a handful of the stores--fewer than twenty--are actually losing money, he told the Wall Street Journal's Jeffrey Trachtenberg. But the company's revenues have been significantly impacted by its commitment to build the Nook franchise.
While holding on to ownership of nearly 80 percent of its Nook division, a $300 million investment in Nook from Microsoft last fall, followed by an $89.5 million commitment from Pearson, which sees value in the growing electronic textbook market, are signs that Barnes & Noble can forge a way to secure enough of the digital business to offset the problems it faces in traditional bookselling.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/robots-wont-steal-your-job-next-decade-theyll-just-steal-your-raise/272885/
Forget Skynet, Hal, and every other dystopian tale of robot revolution -- the real machine menace isn't that we get overthrown, but rather replaced. At least some of us. That's the story Paul Krugman and Iza Kaminska of FT Alphaville have told about labor income collapsing to 60-year lows in the aftermath of the Great Recession. In other words, jobs are so scarce and pay so little, because machines are stealing them. That's great news for the people who own the robots, and horrible news for everybody else.
But not so fast. As my colleague Derek Thompson points out, our jobs crisis is one of too little demand, not too many robots. Technology has always obsoleted some jobs, but that doesn't exactly vindicate the Luddites. As long as there is sufficient demand, better machines free workers to do more productive things. It's the same logic for why free trade makes us better off. But in both cases, this happy story is based off a helluva caveat -- that there isn't a demand shortfall. That, unfortunately, is exactly what we have today, even three years removed from the end of the Great Recession.
But the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) thinks that will change over the next decade. The CBO expects that our economic Godot will finally show up -- the elusive catchup growth we've been waiting for will finally kick in, and bring with it not just more jobs, but more pay. (More on this in a bit). After recently hitting a 60-year low, the CBO projects labor's share of income will rebound to less horrific, but still pedestrian, levels by 2023, as you can see in the chart below from its latest outlook.
Forget Skynet, Hal, and every other dystopian tale of robot revolution -- the real machine menace isn't that we get overthrown, but rather replaced. At least some of us. That's the story Paul Krugman and Iza Kaminska of FT Alphaville have told about labor income collapsing to 60-year lows in the aftermath of the Great Recession. In other words, jobs are so scarce and pay so little, because machines are stealing them. That's great news for the people who own the robots, and horrible news for everybody else.
But not so fast. As my colleague Derek Thompson points out, our jobs crisis is one of too little demand, not too many robots. Technology has always obsoleted some jobs, but that doesn't exactly vindicate the Luddites. As long as there is sufficient demand, better machines free workers to do more productive things. It's the same logic for why free trade makes us better off. But in both cases, this happy story is based off a helluva caveat -- that there isn't a demand shortfall. That, unfortunately, is exactly what we have today, even three years removed from the end of the Great Recession.
But the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) thinks that will change over the next decade. The CBO expects that our economic Godot will finally show up -- the elusive catchup growth we've been waiting for will finally kick in, and bring with it not just more jobs, but more pay. (More on this in a bit). After recently hitting a 60-year low, the CBO projects labor's share of income will rebound to less horrific, but still pedestrian, levels by 2023, as you can see in the chart below from its latest outlook.
Last edited Thu Feb 7, 2013, 07:39 AM - Edit history (1)
time. Its called psychology. Good economic news in any major country or block tends to lift most stocks worldwide -- its that globalization thing you know -- if the U.S. economy has good news for example, not only do U.S. stocks do well, but stocks in other countries that see more export opportunities to the U.S.. Conversely bad news. I also was perplexed when you said bond funds "follow the S&P 500 to the letter" in #43.
[font color = blue]"So does VMMSX, VFSVX and every other stock fund. "[/font]
No, "so does every other fund" is not true. Try AIA (-1.5%), AAXJ (-0.1%), VGPMX (-3.1%) in January and compare to S&P 500 (+5.0%). I guess the banks didn't get around to rigging those in January.
[font color = blue]"However, the gnma fund is flat as is an inflation-adjusted fund VTAPX"[/font]
Oh. So they don't "follow the S&P 500 to the letter".
[font color = blue]"Sorry to burst your view of what are supposed to be free markets."[/font]
Nobody claimed they were "free". Sorry to burst your view of what I think
[font color = blue] "If anyone is trading individual stocks" [/font]
Yes, there are people trading individual stocks. Lots and lots of them.
[font color = blue] "it's at the whim of the big banks too, as are ETFs and commodities."[/font] 
You can wallow in your conspiracy theories all you want and put your money under the mattress or a 2% CD (controlled by a big bank). I prefer the 38-fold increase of the S&P 500 over 36 years. If this is at the whim of the big banks, I think I'll take a ride right along with them.
