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, 8 May 2013
[font size=3]STOCK MARKET WATCH, Wednesday, 8 May 2013[font color=black][/font]
SMW for 7 May 2013
AT THE CLOSING BELL ON 7 May 2013
[center][font color=green]
Dow Jones 15,056.20 +87.31 (0.58%)
S&P 500 1,625.96 +8.46 (0.52%)
Nasdaq 3,396.63 +3.66 (0.11%)
[font color=black]10 Year 1.78% 0.00 (0.00%)
30 Year 2.99% 0.00 (0.00%)[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
Wall Street on Parade
[/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.
02/14/13 Gilbert Lopez, former chief accounting officer of Stanford Financial Group, and former controller Mark Kuhrt sentenced to 20 yrs in prison for their roles in Allen Sanford's $7.2 billion Ponzi scheme.
03/29/13 Michael Sternberg, portfolio mgr at SAC Capital, arrested in NYC, charged with conspiracy and securities fraud. Pled not guilty and freed on $3m bail.
04/04/13 Matthew Marshall Taylor,fmr Goldman Sachs trader arrested, charged by CFTC w/defrauding his employer on $8BN futures bet "by intentionally concealing the true huge size, as well as the risk and potential profits or losses associated."
04/04/13 Matthew Taylor admits guilt, makes plea bargain. Sentencing set for 26 June; faces up to 20 years in prison but will likely only see 3-4 years. Says, "I am truly sorry."
04/11/13 Ex-KPMG LLP partner Scott London charged by federal prosecutors w/passing inside tips to a friend in exchange for cash, jewelry, and concert tickets; expected to plead guilty in May.
[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]
25 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
See good material here (when you've time). Use headphones. Start with "It Felt Like a Kiss", then view "The Trap". Find "Machines of Loving Grace" somewhere.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7D59157A7EBA548E
(See also: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=43055 )
http://www.offthechartsblog.org/todays-jobs-report-in-pictures-25/
Today’s jobs report shows that labor markets still bear the scars of the Great Recession despite 38 straight months of private-sector job growth and a drop in the unemployment rate from 7.9 percent to 7.5 percent since January. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and many people who would likely have a job in a stronger economy are not even looking for work. Consequently, the share of the population with a job remains well below what it was over the two decades before the recession started in December 2007.
Below are some charts to show how the new figures look in historical context...
Statement by Chad Stone, Chief Economist, on the April Employment Report
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3961
Today’s jobs report shows that labor markets still bear the scars of the Great Recession despite 38 straight months of private-sector job growth and a drop in the unemployment rate from 7.9 percent to 7.5 percent since January. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and many people who would likely have a job in a stronger economy are not even looking for work. Consequently, the share of the population with a job remains well below what it was over the two decades before the recession started in December 2007 (see chart).
Some of the recent decline in labor force participation — the percentage of people 16 or older who are working or actively looking for work — reflects the aging of the population. Baby boomers are starting to retire and the share of people in their prime working years is falling. But the decline also reflects to an important extent an ongoing dearth of good job prospects. Some people retire earlier than they otherwise would or go on disability when they might be able, in a stronger job market, to find a job that accommodates their disability. Others become discouraged about their job prospects and stop looking until conditions improve. The unemployment rate doesn’t reflect those decisions; to be counted as officially unemployed a person must be actively looking for work. But many of those people would start looking for work again if they thought jobs were available.
A robust jobs recovery that both reduces unemployment and brings people back into the labor force requires much faster economic growth than we have seen over the past few years. On the monetary policy side, the Federal Reserve remains committed to accommodating faster growth without raising interest rates at least as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6½ percent and inflation remains contained. The problem is on the fiscal policy side. As the Fed’s monetary policymaking committee this week stated flatly, “fiscal policy is restraining economic growth.”
MUCH MORE AT LINK
Chad Stone is Chief Economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, where he specializes in the economic analysis of budget and policy issues.
Today’s jobs report shows that labor markets still bear the scars of the Great Recession despite 38 straight months of private-sector job growth and a drop in the unemployment rate from 7.9 percent to 7.5 percent since January. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and many people who would likely have a job in a stronger economy are not even looking for work. Consequently, the share of the population with a job remains well below what it was over the two decades before the recession started in December 2007.
Below are some charts to show how the new figures look in historical context...
Statement by Chad Stone, Chief Economist, on the April Employment Report
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3961
Today’s jobs report shows that labor markets still bear the scars of the Great Recession despite 38 straight months of private-sector job growth and a drop in the unemployment rate from 7.9 percent to 7.5 percent since January. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and many people who would likely have a job in a stronger economy are not even looking for work. Consequently, the share of the population with a job remains well below what it was over the two decades before the recession started in December 2007 (see chart).
Some of the recent decline in labor force participation — the percentage of people 16 or older who are working or actively looking for work — reflects the aging of the population. Baby boomers are starting to retire and the share of people in their prime working years is falling. But the decline also reflects to an important extent an ongoing dearth of good job prospects. Some people retire earlier than they otherwise would or go on disability when they might be able, in a stronger job market, to find a job that accommodates their disability. Others become discouraged about their job prospects and stop looking until conditions improve. The unemployment rate doesn’t reflect those decisions; to be counted as officially unemployed a person must be actively looking for work. But many of those people would start looking for work again if they thought jobs were available.
A robust jobs recovery that both reduces unemployment and brings people back into the labor force requires much faster economic growth than we have seen over the past few years. On the monetary policy side, the Federal Reserve remains committed to accommodating faster growth without raising interest rates at least as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6½ percent and inflation remains contained. The problem is on the fiscal policy side. As the Fed’s monetary policymaking committee this week stated flatly, “fiscal policy is restraining economic growth.”
MUCH MORE AT LINK
Chad Stone is Chief Economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, where he specializes in the economic analysis of budget and policy issues.
http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/05/02/more-services-means-longer-recoveries/
Recovery from recessions takes longer than it has in the past.
The current crisis aside, this change has not happened because recessions themselves are longer. Nor has it occurred because recessions are deeper than in the past. Instead this change is the result of slower economic growth following the end of a recession. And slower growth means longer recoveries. As shown below, the four longest recoveries in recent history, as measured by the number of months it took until the economy recovered all of the jobs lost during the recession, also have been the four most recent recoveries—those that followed the recessions of 1981, 1990, 2001, and 2007.
Why is it taking longer and longer for the U.S. economy to recover from recessions?
We argue that the shift from being a goods-producing, manufacturing-based economy to a service economy — what some have termed “deindustrialization” — is causing the pace of economic recoveries to slow. As is typical of economies recovering from the bursting of an asset bubble and a financial crisis, the recovery from the 2007 recession would be longer than usual. But our research suggests that the rise of the service sector has made it even longer than in the past. For example, the recovery from the 2007 recession will last about one year longer than it would have half a century ago. The U.S. economy is much more service-dependent today than it was back then. Since 1950, services have risen from 40 percent to 65 percent of output and from 48 percent to 70 percent of jobs. Yet the rise of the service sector is not necessarily a bad thing. Although there are many “bad” service jobs that pay low wages and are insecure, there are also many “good” service jobs. The service sector runs the gamut from serving fast food to conducting brain surgery.
Also, the rise of services can be partially attributed to faster productivity growth in manufacturing and rising incomes. These are trends to cheer. Nevertheless, we find that there are large negative macroeconomic externalities from having a service-based economy—slower growth and longer recoveries—that portend a gloomy future.
We can think of two complementary reasons why a service-dependent economy might experience slower recoveries: goods can be produced in anticipation of demand, and goods can be exported. At this stage, our research doesn’t distinguish between these two possibilities. But both possibilities share one idea: Because services can’t be inventoried nor, for the most part, exported, services are only produced when domestic demand exists.
Goods-producing businesses are not dependent on domestic demand to increase production as the economy comes out of a recession. They can produce in anticipation of increasing demand or in response to increased external demand. Either way, domestic demand need not increase before goods production increases. Service producers are not so lucky....
Recovery from recessions takes longer than it has in the past.
The current crisis aside, this change has not happened because recessions themselves are longer. Nor has it occurred because recessions are deeper than in the past. Instead this change is the result of slower economic growth following the end of a recession. And slower growth means longer recoveries. As shown below, the four longest recoveries in recent history, as measured by the number of months it took until the economy recovered all of the jobs lost during the recession, also have been the four most recent recoveries—those that followed the recessions of 1981, 1990, 2001, and 2007.
Why is it taking longer and longer for the U.S. economy to recover from recessions?
We argue that the shift from being a goods-producing, manufacturing-based economy to a service economy — what some have termed “deindustrialization” — is causing the pace of economic recoveries to slow. As is typical of economies recovering from the bursting of an asset bubble and a financial crisis, the recovery from the 2007 recession would be longer than usual. But our research suggests that the rise of the service sector has made it even longer than in the past. For example, the recovery from the 2007 recession will last about one year longer than it would have half a century ago. The U.S. economy is much more service-dependent today than it was back then. Since 1950, services have risen from 40 percent to 65 percent of output and from 48 percent to 70 percent of jobs. Yet the rise of the service sector is not necessarily a bad thing. Although there are many “bad” service jobs that pay low wages and are insecure, there are also many “good” service jobs. The service sector runs the gamut from serving fast food to conducting brain surgery.
Also, the rise of services can be partially attributed to faster productivity growth in manufacturing and rising incomes. These are trends to cheer. Nevertheless, we find that there are large negative macroeconomic externalities from having a service-based economy—slower growth and longer recoveries—that portend a gloomy future.
We can think of two complementary reasons why a service-dependent economy might experience slower recoveries: goods can be produced in anticipation of demand, and goods can be exported. At this stage, our research doesn’t distinguish between these two possibilities. But both possibilities share one idea: Because services can’t be inventoried nor, for the most part, exported, services are only produced when domestic demand exists.
Goods-producing businesses are not dependent on domestic demand to increase production as the economy comes out of a recession. They can produce in anticipation of increasing demand or in response to increased external demand. Either way, domestic demand need not increase before goods production increases. Service producers are not so lucky....
