STOCK MARKET WATCH -- Wednesday, 15 April 2015

[Tansy_Gold]

[font size=3]STOCK MARKET WATCH, Wednesday, 15 April 2015[font color=black][/font]

SMW for 14 April 2015

AT THE CLOSING BELL ON 14 April 2015
[center][font color=green]
Dow Jones 18,036.70 +59.66 (0.33%)
S&P 500 2,095.84 +3.41 (0.16%)
[font color=red]Nasdaq 4,977.29 -10.96 (-0.22%)


[font color=red]10 Year 1.90% +0.02 (1.06%)
30 Year 2.54% +0.02 (0.79%) [font color=black]


[center][/font]

[HR width=85%]

[font size=2]Market Conditions During Trading Hours[/font]
[center]
(click on link for latest updates)
Market Updates
[/center]

[font size=2]Euro, Yen, Loonie, Silver and Gold[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.
08/01/13 Fabrice Tourré convicted on six counts of security fraud, including "aiding and abetting" his former employer, Goldman Sachs
08/14/13 Javier Martin-Artajo and Julien Grout charged with wire fraud, falsifying records, and conspiracy in connection with JP Morgan's "London Whale" trade.
08/19/13 Phillip A. Falcone, manager of hedge fund Harbinger Capital Partners, agrees to admit to "wrongdoing" in market manipulation. Will banned from securities industry for 5 years and pay $18MM in disgorgement and fines.
09/16/13 Javier Martin-Artajo and Julien Grout officially indicted on charges associated with "London Whale" trade.
02/06/14 Matthew Martoma convicted of insider trading while at hedge fund SAC (Stephen A. Cohen) Capital Advisors. Expected sentence 7-10 years.
03/24/14 Annette Bongiorno, Bernard Madoff's secretary; Daniel Bonventre, director of operations for investments; JoAnn Crupi, an account manager; and Jerome O'Hara and George Perez, both computer programmers convicted of conspiracy to defraud clients, securities fraud, and falsifying the books and records.
05/19/14 Credit Suisse, which has an investment bank branch in NYC, agrees to plead guilty and pay appx. $2.6 billion penalties for helping wealthy Americans hide wealth and avoid taxes.
09/08/14 Matthew Martoma, convicted SAC trader, sentenced to 9 years in prison plus forfeiture of $9.3 million, including home and bank accounts







[HR width=95%]


[center]

[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]

[Tansy_Gold]

1. For many of us . . . .

. . . filling out the forms isn't so difficult. It's the pain of knowing how much more of a burden working folks bear than those who need full-time accounts to avoid paying hardly anything on their outrageous 0.01% incomes.

So I filed for an extension.

[Demeter]

2. Oil-Rich Nations Are Selling Off Their Petrodollar Assets at Record Pace

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-13/oil-rich-nations-burn-through-petrodollar-assets-at-record-pace

In the heady days of the commodity boom, oil-rich nations accumulated billions of dollars in reserves they invested in U.S. debt and other securities. They also occasionally bought trophy assets, such as Manhattan skyscrapers, luxury homes in London or Paris Saint-Germain Football Club.

Now that oil prices have dropped by half to $50 a barrel, Saudi Arabia and other commodity-rich nations are fast drawing down those “petrodollar” reserves. Some nations, such as Angola, are burning through their savings at a record pace, removing a source of liquidity from global markets.

If oil and other commodity prices remain depressed, the trend will cut demand for everything from European government debt to U.S. real estate as producing nations seek to fill holes in their domestic budgets.

“This is the first time in 20 years that OPEC nations will be sucking liquidity out of the market rather than adding to it through investments,” said David Spegel, head of emerging markets sovereign credit research at BNP Paribas SA in London.

MORE BELT-TIGHTENING AT LINK

[Demeter]

9. China goes on another oil-buying spree By Eric Yep

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/china-goes-on-another-oil-buying-spree-2015-04-14?siteid=YAHOOB

China is on an oil-buying spree again.

China National United Oil Corp., the trading unit of state-run China National Petroleum Corp. known as Chinaoil, has bought a total of 19 physical oil cargoes for delivery in June or July so far in April, Singapore-based traders said. That is equal to 9.5 million barrels of oil, and is Chinaoil’s largest spot market purchase since October last year, when it bought a country record 47 cargoes, or 23.5 million barrels of oil.

With over half a month of trading still left, Chinaoil could surpass its October volumes if it keeps up its current buying pace.

Chinaoil’s record purchases in October last year contributed to China’s oil imports in December hitting a record of around 7.3 million barrels a day.

Analysts have suggested that large oil purchases by Chinese trading firms are part of efforts to build the country’s emergency stockpiles during a time of low oil prices. However, traders say stockpiling may not be the only motive for them to participate in a public oil-trading mechanism like the one Platts operates.

[Demeter]

3. Canada reveals it’s actively considering joining China-led Asian bank AIIB, despite U.S reservations

OH, CANADA! ET TU?

http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/canada-reveals-its-actively-considering-joining-china-led-asian-bank-aiib

Canada broke its silence on Tuesday over whether it would take part in the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, signalling it was actively considering joining the institution despite U.S. and Japanese reservations. A senior Canadian finance official revealed the stance to reporters ahead of meetings in Washington of the Group of 20 (G20) leading economies, saying Ottawa welcomed the idea of a new Asian infrastructure investment bank.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Ottawa wanted to make sure the AIIB’s governance met the high standards expected of such an institution and would take the time needed to ensure it was something Canada would want to join.

Britain surprised some allies last month in deciding to join the AIIB, and was quickly followed by Germany, France and Italy. Among the Group of Seven (G7) industrialized countries, only the United States, Japan and Canada remain as absentees. Washington had urged countries to think twice before signing up to the bank, which it sees as a rival to the U.S.-dominated World Bank.

The Canadian official also said the G20 would talk about the increased risks from foreign exchange volatility, including legitimate worry of the impact of the U.S. dollar’s rise on emerging markets. The G20 has pledged not to target exchange rates for competitive purposes, but the official said he didn’t see countries deliberating moving their currencies but rather the currencies moving in response to monetary policies and economic conditions.

[Demeter]

4. Lawrence Summers says U.S. may just have lost its role as underwriter of the global economic system

HE SAYS THAT LIKE IT'S A BAD THING

http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/canada-reveals-its-actively-considering-joining-china-led-asian-bank-aiib

In a new column, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers delivers a scathing message (emphasis ours):

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/a0a01306-d887-11e4-ba53-00144feab7de.html#axzz3WX4sXQ7O

“This past month may be remembered as the moment the United States lost its role as the underwriter of the global economic system. True, there have been any number of periods of frustration for the U.S. before, and times when American behaviour was hardly multilateralist, such as the 1971 Nixon shock, ending the convertibility of the dollar into gold. But I can think of no event since Bretton Woods comparable to the combination of China’s effort to establish a major new institution and the failure of the US to persuade dozens of its traditional allies, starting with Britain, to stay out of it.”

Summers is referencing the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, China’s 18-month-old plan to start the first new multilateral development lender in decades. More than 40 countries applied to be founding members including China, Australia, Egypt, Ukraine, the U.K., France, Switzerland, India, and South Korea. Mohamed El-Erian voiced similar concerns in a Bloomberg View column late last month.

Through the combination of the proposed AIIB, a new development bank and mushrooming bilateral arrangements, China is slowly building small pathways to bypassing the longstanding institutional arrangement. No wonder the U.S. is again worried about the erosion of the existing Western-dominated multilateral system (in this particular case, the World Bank) where its influence is still considerable, if not determinant.

There are still some unknowns in how the bank will operate, but we should learn more when after the final round of talks among founding members, which is scheduled for May. The AIIB is expected to be fully established by the end of the year.

Summers puts much of the blame on the current U.S. political environment:

This failure of strategy and tactics was a long time coming, and it should lead to a comprehensive review of the U.S. approach to global economics… Political pressures from all sides in the U.S. have rendered it increasingly dysfunctional. Largely because of resistance from the right, the U.S. stands alone in the world in failing to approve the International Monetary Fund governance reforms that Washington itself pushed for in 2009… Meanwhile, pressures from the left have led to pervasive restrictions on infrastructure projects financed through existing development banks, which consequently have receded as funders, even as many developing countries now see infrastructure finance as their principle external funding need.

[Demeter]

13. Michael Pettis: Will China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Eventually Matter?

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/04/michael-pettis-will-chinas-asian-infrastructure-investment-bank-eventually-matter.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NakedCapitalism+%28naked+capitalism%29

Yves here. The financial media has attributed considerable importance to the fact that many of America’s close allies, including the UK, Australia, and Israel, have joined China’s new infrastructure bank against the clearly-stated desires of the US. While these moves seem to signal America’s declining influence, it does not necessarily follow that the infrastructure bank is destined to become a major international institution any time soon.

Michael Pettis deflates some of the hype surrounding this initiative, arguing that it is less significant from a geopolitical and practical perspective than virtually all commentators assume. China is simply not about to become the issuer of the reserve currency any time soon, and that limits how much financial clout it will have.

By Michael Pettis, a Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a finance professor at Peking University’s Guanghua School of Management. Cross posted from China Financial Markets

When Isaac, an editor at Foreign Policy, sent me an email two weeks ago asking if I could write a piece on the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), I quickly wrote back promising 1,200 words within a few days. I thought it would be pretty easy to come up with the points I wanted to make, and all I would need was one uninterrupted day to pull them together into a coherent article...As I see it, the creation of the AIIB is not nearly as important as everyone seems to think, and if Beijing’s decision to create the AIIB, and Washington’s decision to oppose it, was part of the struggle for future geo-political dominance in Asia, let alone the world, they were both going to be wrong. There were only two useful parts to this story, it seemed to me. First, it showed that neither Washington nor Beijing understood very well either the functioning of the global balance of payments or the reasons why the West, and especially the US, dominates the regime that governs global trade and capital flows (but I guess we already knew that). Second, Washington had handled this whole process so ineptly that it had managed to transform a minor initiative by Beijing into a huge symbolic disaster for Washington and a great victory for Xi Jinping.

I thought it would be easy to explain this because the discussion over the AIIB was almost a caricature of the discussion over a number of other finance-related topics during the last decade or two, in which an overwhelming consensus quickly develops around some event concerning both its unprecedented nature and the nature of its transformative impact – the sustainability of China’s astonishing growth miracle, the creation of the euro, the abolishing of credit cycles by Washington, the consequences of the reserve status of the US dollar, the rise of the RMB, and so on. Both assumptions always turn out to be wrong – the event under discussion does have a very deep and very useful historical context, and this context suggests that many of the assumptions underlying the discussion are, in fact, quite implausible.

In the case of the AIIB I assume that readers of my blog are quite familiar with these assumptions, but on March 16 Singapore-based academic Kishore Mahbubani published an article that, perhaps predictably, exemplifies the more excited version of the consensus. He described the decision by Great Britain to join the AIIB as an “epochal event” signaling nothing less than “the end of the American century and the arrival of the Asian century”. He goes on to say:

Any objective and calm assessment of the Chinese decision to launch the AIIB would show that this is a bank whose time has come. The Asian Development Bank has estimated that Asia needs to spend at least $8 trillion in infrastructure investment. The American-dominated World Bank and related institutions cannot possibly fulfill this demand. China’s decision to use its reserves to boost Asian infrastructure investment was clearly welcomed in Asia. Given its spectacular success with developing world-class infrastructure in record time, China has a lot of expertise in this area. Asia needs this.

In spite of the fact that I disagree with nearly every part of this paragraph, and I think there are many, and very varied, precedents for Beijing’s initiative that show just how questionable many of these assumptions are, it actually turned out to be very difficult to write the article...

AND HE PROVES IT, AT LENGTH, AT THE LINK

[Demeter]

5. Poverty Slashed in Ecuador Under President Correa

A new survey reveals that 1.3 million Ecuadoreans have been lifted out of poverty in the past eight years.

Ecuador has lifted 1.3 million people out of poverty in the past eight years, a new survey revealed Monday. The results of the first “Survey of Living Conditions in Ecuador” showed that poverty has fallen by one third.

It also revealed that 900,000 individuals have been lifted out of extreme poverty, whilst the Gini coefficient, which measures wealth gaps, has dropped 4.8 points since 2006.

"Extreme poverty has reduced by 7.1 percentage points … which means that extreme poverty has been reduced by half the level which we had in 2006 nationally,” said the Director of the National Institute of Census and Statistics Jose Rosero.

With the highest public investment in Latin America at 15 percent of GDP, the results of the Survey of Living Conditions demonstrate the success of policies by the Ecuadorean state focused on poverty reduction and increased access to public services.

"I would say that in Ecuador access to basic services has improved in the past 10 years, since 2004, 2005. But there are still areas that need coverage, mostly in rural areas,” said Rene Patricio Larenas, a lawyer from Quito in an interview with teleSUR English.

Michelle Cardenas, a student from the southern province of Loja, said that she has noticed improvements in quality of life in her region. She said, “Education is much better, and we have all our basic services. The quality of life is good, things are not like how they were before.”

In addition to poverty levels, the year-long survey, the first such national survey released in Ecuador on poverty, access to public services and quality of life since 2006, showed improvements in all measured areas such as access to health and education. Secretary of the National Secretary of Planning and Development Pabel Muñoz told the press that it was the "effective policies” of the process known in Ecuador as the Citizen’s Revolution have had a “greater weight than favorable oil prices” witnessed in recent years.

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address:
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Poverty-Slashed-in-Ecuador-Under-President-Correa-20150413-0034.html. If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

[Demeter]

6. Is Russia's "Bullet Proof" Economy Ready to Blast Off?

http://russia-insider.com/en/mainstream-cracked-russias-bullet-proof-economy/5626

Newsweek and other western mainstream media are turning the corner on anti-Russia unreason. The massive santions on Russia have led to a reversal of fortunes, but not the result western leadership envisioned.

Watching the tide of foreign policy, influence, and business turn concerning Russia, it’s a rewarding experience for all the moderates of the world. Bill Powell at Newsweek assures the journalistic faithful of Earth there’s even hope for mainstream media today. Despite US and EU sanctions aimed at crippling the Russian economy, Vladimir Putin’s economic endeavors of late have apparently saved the Russian nation’s day.

The Newsweek article, “What Sanctions? The Russian Economy Is Growing Again,” is symbolic of a break in the negative trend toward Russia in many ways. Powell takes something of a leap of faith and credibility in outlining how recent detente was "not exactly what the West was hoping for." Against what seemed like insurmountable economic odds, Putin’s ruble has rebounded, the stock market has out performed most competing ones, foreign exchange reserves are up, and the Russian government’s revenue has even exceeded expectations.

Russia May Be Bulletproof Economically

While crude oil and energy prices have hit Russia companies hard, they’ve empowered Russia industry to some of the highest profits in recent history. This and other “unexpected” stimulus as a secondary result of sanctions spell a kind of policy disaster in Washington, London, and Brussels.The meat of this story from Newsweek can be found in the MICEX index, as well as on the micro level with companies like steelmaker Severstal (New Renault-Nissan deal) . For those unfamiliar with heavy industry, steel for auto makers and other markets depend, price-wise, on the costs of energy used to produce. When I was at Nucor Steel in America, other than the costs of scrap and other raw materials, the electricity to power steelmaking was enormous and critical, a make-or-break commodity. The long and short, in competitive manufacturing price, opens or closes markets. The dive in energy costs, combined with other cost/revenue benefits Powell describes, have helped Putin’s finance ministers’ make a fiscal shift toward growth....

[Demeter]

7. Greece is getting ready to default

http://uk.businessinsider.com/report-greece-is-getting-ready-to-default-2015-4?r=US

Greece is getting ready to default on at least some of its debt payments, according to the Financial Times. The country has entered a pretty dire fiscal situation. It desperately needs to unlock bailout funds from its creditors, but progress negotiating that cash is shaky at best. If Athens doesn't get its next €7.2 billion ($7.58 billion) bailout tranche by the April 24 Eurogroup meeting of European finance ministers, default becomes a lot more likely, and it seems as if the government is already preparing for the worst. Here's the FT:

Greece is preparing to take the dramatic step of declaring a debt default unless it can reach a deal with its international creditors by the end of April, according to people briefed on the radical leftist government’s thinking.

The government, which is rapidly running out of funds to pay public sector salaries and state pensions, has decided to withhold €2.5bn of payments due to the International Monetary Fund in May and June if no agreement is struck, they said.

"We have come to the end of the road ... If the Europeans won't release bailout cash, there is no alternative [to a default]," one government official said.

Quickly after the FT's story emerged, the Greek government denied that it was planning for a default. But given the country's financial situation, it would probably be careless if it was not at least looking at the scenario.

The International Monetary Fund makes a point of never restructuring debts it's owed. If Greece doesn't make a payment, it has a grace period of about a month to transfer the money, at which point it would have undoubtedly defaulted.

Greece's talks with its creditors have started again, but according to German media reports at the weekend, eurozone officials said Greek representatives were acting like a "taxi driver" in the talks. So that may not have kicked things off in the best way. The lenders want a more solid and detailed plan of reforms and to see how they're going to progress through the country's parliament. So far, what has been presented by Greece is not enough.

Below, a chart from Morgan Stanley shows why eurozone officials may be less bothered about a Greek default this time around. The risk of contagion into the rest of Europe is reduced, so Greece may be able to sink without dragging other countries on Europe's periphery down with it:



The situation is now so grim that Morgan Stanley analysts think "full membership" of the eurozone is no longer the most likely outcome for Greece, with a 45% chance of a Greek exit from the eurozone, or Grexit:

Unfortunately, continued full membership of the euro now has become an outside scenario for us with a subjective probability of only 40% (see What Are the Implications of Grexit for Europe, March 17, 2015). Either an exit from the euro or a suspension of the membership via the introduction of capital controls instead seem more likely to us, with a subjective probability of 25% and 35%, respectively. Given that we see the risk of Grexit rising to 60% once the country is forced to impose capital controls, we compute a total probability of 45% for a Grexit.

And it's worth remembering the bailout deal on the table is only a stopgap. The bailout was meant to last four months (though it will probably not last that long, even if it's dispensed soon), and then the country will be back in this position again.

Read more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/report-greece-is-getting-ready-to-default-2015-4?r=US#ixzz3XKTQNKt6

[Demeter]

8. Here's what happens if Greece is forced out of the euro

Rampant inflation, political unrest, debt defaults and a possible "contagion" within Europe's financial sector — that's what Greece's new government might trigger if it does not get its way in its negotiations with the rest of Europe's finance ministers right now. Greece is taking a hard line, saying it won't compromise, so it's worth asking, what exactly will happen if Greece walks away without a deal, and runs out of euro-backed cash in a few weeks time?

The election of far-left Syriza in Greece has started a game of chicken with the rest of Europe. Syriza want Greece's debt burden reduced, and an abandonment of its current bailout deal (with its austerity conditions). Much of the rest of Europe wants nothing of the sort — they want Greece to honor its debts. That deal is incredibly unpopular in Greece, where many people blame it for their current economic depression. But the agreement is also what keeps the government funded, and without it there's really not much money left. Greece's finance minister is mired in negotiations with his counterparts from the rest of the eurozone, but they're not looking promising right now.

Morgan Stanley gives these probabilities of what will happen in the days and weeks ahead:

• Greece eventually goes back to the bailout programme: 55% likelihood. In this scenario Greece gets no haircut on its debts (which the government wants), it gets its international funding but also has to implement continued austerity and economic reforms.
  
  
• Greece has a "staycation": 25% likelihood. This would mean Greece implements capital controls - strict rules that halt the outflows of money from banks - like Cyprus did during its 2013 crisis.
  
  
• Greece leaves the eurozone: 20% likelihood. Without European assistance, the life support Greece's banks are on is pulled away. It's hard to say exactly what the risk of a Greek banking collapse is to the rest of Europe.

The Economist Intelligence Unit puts the Grexit risk at more like 40%. No country has ever left the euro before, so there are huge unknowns here. What we do know is that Greece has a lot of repayments to make in the next few months. Here's how that looks (the numbers mean millions of euros):



On top of the possible sudden disappearance of the bailout money, Greek tax revenues have also tumbled, down 23% below the budget target in January. So what happens if Greece can't fulfil these payments? Capital Economics, a consultancy that won the Wolfson prize in 2012 for its plan of how Greece could leave the euro, Barclays and Oxford Economics have all discussed this in recent research notes:

• The drachma would be back. The euro would be effectively abandoned, and Greece would return to the drachma, its previous currency (it might take a new name). The drachma would likely tumble in value against the euro as soon as it was issued, and how much the government could print quickly would be a big issue.
  
  
• It would have to be fast, with capital controls. There would be people trying to pull their money out of Greece's banks en masse. The Greek government would have to make that illegal pretty quickly. The European Central Bank drew up Grexit plans in 2012, and might be dusting them off now.
  
  
• European life support for Greek banks would be withdrawn. Greek banks can currently access emergency liquidity assistance from the ECB, which would be removed if Greece left the euro.
  
  
• Likely unrest and disorder. Barclays expects that this sudden economic collapse would "aggravate social unrest", and notes that historically similar moves have caused a 45-85% devaluation of the currency. Capital Economics suggests that the drop could be more mild, closer to 20%, and Oxford Economics says 30%.
  
  
• Greece would resume economic policymaking. Greece's central bank would probably start doing its own QE programme, and the government would likely return to running deficits, no longer restrained by bailout rules (though investors would probably want large returns, given the risk of another default).
  
  
• Inflation would spike immediately, but both Capital Economics and Oxford Economics say that should be temporary. It might look a bit like Russia this year — with the new currency in freefall until it finds its level against the euro, prices inside Greece would rise at dramatic speed. The inflation might be temporary, however, because with unemployment above 20%, Greece has plenty of spare labour slack to produce more.

The short-term effects would be painful and fast, but Oxford Economics analysts note that Greece "might be better off leaving the Eurozone in the long term". Capital Economics similarly argues that a well-managed exit "could even end up as a favourable economic development for both Greece and the rest of the euro-zone". And for the rest of Europe and the world, Wells Fargo analysts think that the effects may be manageable:

Obligations to “official” creditors such as the IMF, the ECB and the governments of other European economies account for the vast majority of Greece’s $500 billion worth of external debt, so these institutions would bear the brunt of foreign losses from a Greek default. Foreign bank exposure to Greece totals only $46 billion, which is widely dispersed among countries, so the direct effects of Grexit on the private sector in other countries should be manageable, at least in theory. Of course, financial markets may react negatively if Greece were indeed to leave the Eurozone, and we worry that contagion could spread to other European countries.

In 2011 and 2012, Greece's fate seemed closely tied to the rest of Europe. Losing Greece would have signalled the first domino falling, followed by perhaps Portugal, perhaps Spain or Italy, unravelling the whole project. Right now, however, Greece looks like its own separate case, and very few people think that Grexit would force that chain reaction.

Read more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/grexit-if-greece-leaves-the-euro-2015-2#ixzz3XKURh9Gm

THEY ARE DELUSIONAL IF THEY THINK THAT--THERE WILL BE A CHAIN REACTION AND THE EUROZONE WILL NEED TO BE COMPLETELY REWORKED, OR ABANDONED ENTIRELY.

[Demeter]

10. Banks see talent flee amid healthcare M&A boom

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/14/us-healthcare-bankers-insight-idUSKBN0N50AR20150414?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews

Several high-ranking bankers have left their jobs at major investment banks in the last 13 months amid a surge in U.S. healthcare deal activity to seek better compensation at boutique investment banks as well as to participate in the growth of the industry at biotech companies themselves. JPMorgan Chase & Co and Bank of America have both lost senior healthcare investment bankers to boutique investment bank Guggenheim Partners, showing that banks face challenges in being able to pay competitive rates. The biggest U.S. banks are under pressure from regulators to preserve more capital, rather than use M&A fees to pay higher bonuses.

"The volume of transactions across healthcare is extreme and so the banker merry-go-round begins," said Paul Heller, the leader of executive recruiting firm Caldwell Partners' financial services practice.

There's been $92.5 billion worth of U.S. healthcare merger activity so far this year, 73 percent more than in the same period last year, driven by 242 deals. Healthcare has been the busiest sector for deals so far this year, fueled by transactions such as Pfizer Inc's (PFE.N) $17 billion offer for Hospira Inc (HSP.N) and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Ltd's (VRX.TO) $11 billion acquisition of Salix Pharmaceuticals Ltd. U.S. healthcare investment banking fees, meanwhile, have topped $1.9 billion since January, up more than 37 percent from the same period last year.

Average annual pay for a healthcare investment banking managing director – the most typical role for a senior banker -- is roughly $1.5 million to $2 million, according to recruiters and bankers, and hasn’t budged much in recent years despite the rise in M&A activity. Wall Street compensation rose about 4 percent on average last year, according to financial industry recruiting firm Options Group.

Some large banks are hoping to stem the flow of banker departures by offering one-year pay guarantees for top performers, according to industry bankers....

MORE, AND MORE, AND STILL MORE!

[Demeter]

11. These Are The 10 Best Jobs Of 2015

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/14/best-jobs-2015_n_7056118.html?utm_hp_ref=business&ir=Business

If you’re a math whiz, you’re in luck when it comes to job prospects.

Math skills are a requirement for most of the 10 best jobs of 2015, according to the latest report from CareerCast. The site’s annual ranking of the top 200 jobs weighs four factors: work environment, income, stress and hiring outlook.

“There’s a real shortage of qualified people with math skills,” said Tony Lee, publisher of CareerCast.com. “And that’s offset by higher salaries. So not only do you have the opportunity to do what you love, you get paid really well and will likely have a pretty bright hiring prospect.”

Actuaries, who analyze financial risk, locked in the top spot this year, followed closely by audiologists (health care professionals who treat hearing disorders), mathematicians and statisticians. Science and health care jobs are also represented, with dental hygienists and occupational therapists breaking into the top 10.

Many of the high-ranking jobs offer a decent amount of autonomy and control over working hours, Lee noted.

“Jobs tend to be rated higher when you don’t have tight deadlines or your boss looking over your shoulder,” he said. But if employees are working long days and taking meetings at night, that only increases stress, resulting in a dip in CareerCast’s rankings.

One new entry on this year’s list is data scientist, or someone who analyzes data. It came in sixth in the ranking.

“It’s a hot job,” Lee said. “Everybody wants to figure out how to slice and dice data.”

Here are the 10 best jobs this year, according to CareerCast.

1. Actuary
2. Audiologist
3. Mathematician
4. Statistician
5. Biomedical Engineer
6. Data Scientist
7. Dental Hygienist
8. Software Engineer
9. Occupational Therapist
10. Computer Systems Analyst

FUNNY, I WOULD HAVE LISTED: PRESIDENT, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, CONGRESS-CRITTER, BANKSTER, PRO ATHLETE, MOVIE STAR....

I MEAN, IT SAYS "BEST", DOESN'T IT?

[Demeter]

12. Ilargi: The American Consumer Will Never Be Back

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/04/ilargi-american-consumer-will-never-back.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NakedCapitalism+%28naked+capitalism%29

Lambert here: And some factions in the powers that be want to throw deflation into the mix, it seems. That should give demand a boost!

By Raúl Ilargi Meijer, editor-in-chief of The Automatic Earth. Originally published at Automatic Earth

That title may be a bit much, granted, because never is a very long time. I might instead have said “The American Consumer Won’t Be Back For A Very Long Time”. Still, I simply don’t see any time in the future that would see Americans start spending again at a rate anywhere near what would be required for an economic recovery. Looks pretty infinity and beyond to me. However, that is by no means a generally accepted point of view in the financial press. There’s reality, and then there’s whatever it is they’re smoking, and never the twain shall meet. Admittedly, my title may be a bit provocative, but in my view not nearly as provocative, if not offensive, as Peter Coy’s at Bloomberg, who named his latest effort “US Consumers Will Open Their Wallets Soon Enough”.

I know, sometimes they make it just too easy to whackamole ‘em down and into the ground. But even then, these issues must be addressed time and again until people begin to understand, and quit making the wrong decisions for the wrong reasons. People have a right to know what’s truly happening to their lives, and their societies. And they’re not nearly getting enough of it through the ‘official’ press. So here goes nothing:

US Consumers Will Open Their Wallets Soon Enough

People are constantly exhorted to save, but as soon as they do, economists pop up to complain they aren’t spending enough to keep the economy growing. A new blogger named Ben Bernanke wrote on April 1 that there’s still a “global savings glut.” Two days later the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced the weakest job growth since 2013, which economists quickly attributed to soft consumer spending.

The first problem with Coy’s thesis is that even if people open their wallets, far too many of them will find there’s nothing there. And Bernanke simply doesn’t understand what savings are. His ideas through the past decade+ about a Chinese savings glut were always way off the mark, and his global – or American – savings glut theory is, if possible, even more wrong. In the minds of the world’s Bernankes, there’s no such thing as people opening their wallets to find them empty. If they don’t spend, they must be saving. That there’s a third option, that of not having any dollars to spend, is for all intents and purposes ignored.

The U.S. personal savings rate—5.8% in February—is the highest since 2012. “After years of spending as if there were no tomorrow, consumers are now saving like there is a tomorrow,” Richard Moody, chief economist at Regions Financial, wrote to clients in March. Saving too much really can be a problem when spending is weak

.

The little man inside, when I read things like that, tells me this is nonsense. So I decided to look up how the US personal savings rate is calculated. Turns out, it’s another one of those whacky goal-seeked government numbers. At least, that’s what I make of it. Mainly, though not even exclusively, because of things like this, from a site called Take A Smart Step:

The personal savings rate in November 2012 was 3.6%, this is not even close to where we need to be for financial health. This savings rate barely gives us enough to handle emergencies, and makes us as a nation weaker. The government calculates the personal savings rate as the difference between the after tax income and consumption of Americans. So they include not only retirement savings, but debt repayments, college savings, emergency fund savings, anything that was not spent.

Making paying off your debt (i.e. money you’ve already spent) count towards your savings is a practice fraught with questionable consequences. But useful for economists, and accountants alike, no doubt. The problem with it is that it hides reality behind a veil. Because debt repayments are not really savings at all; people are not free to spend what they put into paying off debt, on something else, like iPads, cars or trinkets. Not even on hookers or crack cocaine, for that matter. For the vast majority of what is paid off in debt, there’s no such thing as free choices. People pay off debt because they must. Or, to look at it from another, wide lens, angle, Americans would have to stop servicing their debt payments if they want to ‘start spending’ again. Going through the numbers from various sources, I can see that the US personal savings rate is presently some 5.8% of pre-tax income, and debt repayment is close to 10% of disposable -after tax – income. I’m still trying to make those stats rhyme. But no matter how you read and interpret them, it should be clear that debt repayments are a large part of ‘official’ savings. Even if they really shouldn’t be counted as such.

Of what remains in real savings, retirement/pension savings must necessarily be a substantial percentage, and it would be weird to call those things ‘saving like there is a tomorrow’, if only because they are about, well, tomorrow. But that seems to be the new normal: creating the impression that saving any money at all is somehow detrimental to the economy. A truly crazy notion, if you ask me. Let’s get back to Bloomberg’s Coy:

There are only two things you can do with a dollar, after all: spend it or save it. If you spend it, great—that’s money in someone else’s pocket.

In someone else’s pocket, but no longer in yours. Why would that be so great? It’s only great if that someone has added value to something by doing productive work, not if you simply swap paper assets.

If you save it, the financial system is supposed to recycle your dollar into productive investment with loans for new houses, factories, software, and research and development.

That notion of ‘the financial system is supposed to’ refers to theories such as those that Bernanke and his ilk ‘believe’ in. Theories that have no practical value. What is normal for many everyday Americans is crippling debt levels, and no such thing is recognized in these theories. After all, according to them, whatever amount of dollars you get in, you either spend or save them. And if you use them to pay off previously incurred debt, you’re supposedly actually saving, even though you no longer have possession of the money in any way, shape or sense, nor a choice of what to spend it on.

But if no one’s in the mood to invest more and interest rates are already as low as they can go (as they are in much of the world), the compulsion to save can sap demand and throw people out of work. For the U.S. economy, the good news is that the jump in the personal savings rate is probably no more than a blip. Three economists from Deutsche Bank Securities in New York explained why in a March 25 report called ‘U.S. Consumers: Still Shopping, Not Dropping’. While noting a “deceleration” in consumer spending, they wrote, “we think that concerns about the outlook for the consumer are overstated.” Their model of the U.S. economy predicts the savings rate will fall to 3% to 3.5% by 2017.

Oh sweet lord. Now a falling savings rate has become a beneficial thing, even when and where savings are very low. Not saving will allegedly save the economy. How did that happen? If we may presume that debt repayments will continue virtually unabated, and there seems to be little reason to think otherwise, this means that by 2017 there will be just about nothing saved at all anymore in America. Which means there’d be very little left of the ‘If you save it, the financial system is supposed to recycle your dollar into productive investment’.

The only ‘growth’ perspective America has left is to grow its debt levels continually, continuously and arguably exponentially.

Other economists have also concluded that the spending dropoff is temporary, which is why the slowdown in job growth, to just 126,000 in March, didn’t set off many alarm bells. “Consumer spending is starting to look more and more like a coiled spring,” says Guy Berger, U.S. economist at RBS Securities. One sign that consumers aren’t retrenching: On April 7 the Federal Reserve reported that consumer credit rose $15.5 billion in February, in line with the recent past.

They got deeper into debt, and this is a sign they’re not ‘retrenching’? A coiled spring? Really?

According to Deutsche Bank Securities, the first reason to think consumers will resume spending is that their incomes are rising. Annual growth in average hourly earnings has averaged about 2% since 2010, which isn’t great but does exceed inflation. With more people working as well, aggregate payroll outlays are up 4.9% from the past year, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

The rises in stock and home prices should make consumers more willing to live a little, say the Deutsche Bank authors. They calculate that households’ net worth is almost 6.5 times consumers’ disposable personal income. That’s the highest ratio since before the housing crash.

But that last bit is arguably all due to QE induced asset bubbles. Not an argument the author would make, I know, but nevertheless. Coincidentally, another Bloomberg article published the same day as the one we’re delving in here is called: Why Your Wages Could Be Depressed for a Lot Longer Than You Think. Perhaps the respective authors should have a sit down.

No question, the high savings rate depresses spending in the short run. Purchases of durable goods, from cars to couches, remain well below their 60-year average share of GDP. But all that saving helps consumers get their finances in order, which will allow them to satisfy pent-up demand for that sweet new Ford F-150.

No no no: they just paid off part of their debts. How can that possibly mean they’ll go out and get a new F-150? In real life, they spent their money instead of saving it. Either way, they don’t have it any longer to spend on a F-150. It would mean they need to get into new debt. On top of what they still have left over even AFTER paying down part of it.

Fed data show that financial obligations including debt service, rent, and auto leases are about their lowest in comparison to disposable income since 1981.

Hmm. According to Wikipedia, “Household debt as a % of disposable income rose from 68% in 1980 to a peak of 128% in 2007, prior to dropping to 112% by 2011.” It’s about 105% today. So that’s just a very weird statement. Someone’s wrong, very wrong, and I think I know who that would be. Maybe Peter Coy conveniently ignores mortgage payments when he talks about “financial obligations including debt service, rent, and auto leases”?!

When consumers are ready to borrow more, it won’t hurt that, according to the Fed’s survey of banks’ senior loan officers, banks are easing lending standards.

See? That’s what I said: they can only spend if they acquire new debt. They’re just getting rid of the last batch, and it’s going mighty slowly at that. Lest we forget, when debt as a percentage of income falls, that is due to quite an extent to people failing to make any debt payments at all, and losing their homes and cars. This is a dead economic model. This model is pining for the fjords.

These factors add up to an optimistic consumer.

Oh, c’mon. What is that statement based on? That ‘sky high’ savings rate that is really just poor slobs paying off what they can in debt repayments so they won’t get hit with even more fees and fines? What I think these factors add up to, is a delusional reporter. There is no excess saving. It’s ludicrous. As far as people have any money at all, they’re using it to pay down their previously incurred debts. And that gets tallied into their savings rate by the government’s creative accounting methods. That’s all there is to the whole story. But it will, regardless, induce a few more poor souls to sign up for more mortgages and car loans and feel like happy American consumers on their way down into the maelstrom. It’s sad, it really is. Maybe we should first of all stop referring to the American people as ‘consumers’. That might help.


I DO LOVE A PROPER SAVAGING OF AN IDIOT!

[Demeter]

14. Important Keiser Report

[Demeter]

16. Richard Wolff: Scapegoat Economics 2015

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/04/richard-wolff-scapegoat-economics.html

By Richard D. Wolff. Wolff is Professor of Economics Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, Amherst where he taught economics from 1973 to 2008. He is currently a Visiting Professor in the Graduate Program in International Affairs of the New School University, New York City. He also teaches classes regularly at the Brecht Forum in Manhattan. Earlier he taught economics at Yale University (1967-1969) and at the City College of the City University of New York (1969-1973). In 1994, he was a Visiting Professor of Economics at the University of Paris (France), I (Sorbonne). His work is available at rdwolff.com and at democracyatwork.info.

Leading German politicians saw the “bailout of Greece” as an opportunity to serve their big-bank supporters with a second but indirect bailout that was disguised as “for Greece.”... Germany’s recent history has featured reduced wages (especially via increasing part-time jobs), fewer social welfare protections, major bank bailouts in the crisis of 2008, rising inequality of income and wealth, austerity policies and so on. Its leaders around Merkel have responded by carefully rescripting their recent financial maneuvers as “Europe’s bailout of Greece” in a classic exercise in scapegoat economics. Three institutions (the “troika” of the European Central Bank, the European Commission and the International Monetary Fund) lent the Greek government money since 2010. Those loans were used chiefly to pay off the Greek government’s accumulated debts to private European banks (including especially German, French and Greek banks). The “bailout of Greece” was thus really an indirect bailout of those private banks.

Without that indirect bailout, those private banks would have suffered the usual losses that come when banks make loans that cannot be repaid. Those losses would have been costly for shareholders in those banks. The major shareholders among them include some of Germany’s richest and biggest capitalists. With their usual political power, they might have gotten the German government to bail them out directly again (since the German government had already done that directly a few years earlier in the 2008/2009 crisis). But such a second direct bank bailout would have been wildly unpopular with German voters and therefore politically dangerous for Germany’s top politicians. Leading German politicians saw the “bailout of Greece” as an opportunity to serve their big-bank supporters with a second but indirect bailout that was disguised as “for Greece.” This gambit protected their political careers from voters’ wrath while getting all of Europe to share the cost of loans to Greece. German leaders then took the lead in insisting loudly that Greeks pay dearly for Europe’s loans. Merkel imposed a crushing austerity regime – with the cooperation of Greece’s two mainstream political parties – that shifted massive resources away from Greece’s public services for use instead to secure interest on and repayment of the troika’s loans.

The opportunism of German leaders was also an exercise in scapegoat economics. German bankers and political leaders – supported by many other European leaders – distracted and deflected their own people’s resentments over growing economic problems. Instead of popular anger turning against German, French and other European bankers, capitalists, their political servant and the capitalist system itself, it was redirected against Greece and Greeks. German media dutifully led the way in recasting the European loans to Greece (that ended up mostly in private European big banks) as supports for “lazy, overpaid and over-pensioned” Greeks that were unfair and costly burdens for hardworking German and other European taxpayers. Politicians demonize public employees as lazy, greedy and overpaid – all remarkably similar to German depictions of Greeks. By means of this heavily staged public “Greek” drama, Germany added international economic scapegoating to the domestic scapegoating already widespread in Europe. It had repeatedly targeted communities of immigrants. Typically, the immigrants first arrived to provide employers (who often encouraged immigration) with lower-paid workers and thus higher profits. Then when the inevitable next capitalist business-cycle downturn arrived, the resulting discontent of unemployed and recession-burdened people was deflected and turned against immigrants. They were blamed as if they “took away jobs” from nonimmigrants rather than unemployment being the periodic burden, for immigrants and nonimmigrants alike, imposed by the profit-driven, fundamentally unstable capitalist system.

The United States has repeatedly displayed the same blame game with immigrants and with ethnic minorities....Capitalism’s relocation deepens economic inequality at both poles. Scapegoat economics this time also serves capitalism’s global relocation. For decades, existing factories, offices and stores have been moving from old capitalist growth centers (western Europe, north America, and Japan) to new centers (China, India, Brazil, etc.). Similarly, enterprises are growing more in the new rather than the old centers. Headquarters sometimes remain in the old centers even as enterprise facilities locate elsewhere. Jet travel, computers and telecommunications make all this manageable. The capitalist competition that impels this relocation also means that the old centers lose many well-paid occupations with ample benefits and job security. Workers in places like Germany and the US are increasingly forced to settle for lower-paid, insecure jobs with fewer benefits. While jobs and wages grow more quickly in the new centers, wages there remain so low that huge profits reinforce capitalism’s global relocation. As capitalists relocate, populations everywhere must adjust to and accommodate all the usually attendant frictions, sufferings and costs. In the old centers, unemployment and lower-paid jobs undermine governments’ tax revenues. Given resistance to tax increases, governments turn increasingly to expenditure cuts in their accommodation to capitalism’s relocation. This often worsens unemployment and wage rates. More importantly it further depresses mass standards of living. Consumption, household finances and relationships, marriage and career decisions: All are caught up painfully in the adjustment process. The same applies, likely more traumatically, to capitalism’s new centers. There, formerly agricultural and rural people are transformed quickly into industrial and urban populations living in extremely overcrowded and poorly provisioned slums. A new politics organized around scapegoat economics appeals to voters by promising to “protect” them from austerity policies...

LOTS MORE AT LINK

[Demeter]

15. U.S. Congress approves formula fixing Medicare doctors pay

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/04/15/usa-congress-medicare-idINL2N0XB27220150415

Congress on Tuesday approved a bill to repair the formula for reimbursing Medicare physicians, marking a rare bipartisan achievement just in time to head off a 21 percent cut in the doctors' pay. Final action came as the Senate voted 92-8 to approve the so-called "doc fix". The House of Representatives had acted over two weeks ago. The bill now goes to President Barack Obama, and he is expected to sign it into law.

The measure, drafted last month by Republican House Speaker John Boehner and Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, appeared to be the first major legislative accomplishment of the 2015-2016 Congress, suggesting some progress toward easing years of gridlock on Capitol Hill. In a statement, Obama applauded lawmakers for passing the bill, saying it would strengthen the U.S. healthcare system. "I will be proud to sign it into law," he said.

The bill would replace a 1990s formula that linked Medicare doctor pay to economic growth, with a new formula more focused on quality of care. It also would require means-testing of Medicare beneficiaries so higher income people pay higher premiums.

One of the government's largest social safety net programs, Medicare is health insurance that serves 54 million elderly and disabled people. The old formula for paying Medicare doctors has been a problem for years as health care costs outpaced economic growth. Congress had repeatedly addressed the problem with a long series of temporary "doc fix" patches. The new formula is intended to be a lasting change...


SO, THE STUPID 1990'S CAP ON MEDICARE IS OFF. AND SO ARE CONTROLS ON DOCTOR INCOMES AND PRICING.

IN RETURN, THE RICH ARE SUPPOSED TO PAY HIGHER PREMIUMS, THROUGH MEANS TESTING, ADDING A POVERTY CUSHION WHICH THE RICH WILL BITTERLY RESENT. I SURE HOPE THOSE MEANS ARE INDEXED FOR INFLATION...OR PRETTY SOON, IT WILL BE "MEAN"-INGLESS. WE'LL ALL BE PAYING MORE.

IT IS THE NEW FORMULA THAT IS THE CONCERN. QUALITY OF CARE IS SUCH A BEAR-PIT OF A TERM...ANYTHING CAN FALL INTO IT. INCLUDING DEATH PANELS AND EUTHANASIA....

[Demeter]

17. Breaking: Leading House Democrat Will Oppose TPP Fast Track

http://www.thenation.com/blog/204185/breaking-leading-house-democrat-will-oppose-tpp-fast-track#

As legislation to fast-track congressional approval of the Trans-Pacific Partnership gets ready to finally make its debut in Congress this week, a top Democratic member of the House announced he would oppose the bill. Representative Chris Van Hollen, the ranking member of the House Budget Committee, wrote in a letter to Representative Sandy Levin, the ranking member of the House Ways & Means Committee, that he would oppose fast-track authority, also known as Trade Promotion Authority or TPA. The letter was obtained by The Nation and its authenticity was confirmed by an aide to Van Hollen.

Van Hollen opposed a previous iteration of fast-track legislation last year, as did most other top Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. But so far, many of those Democrats (including Van Hollen) had not yet announced a position on the new TPA legislation being hammered out by Senators Ron Wyden, Orrin Hatch, and Representative Paul Ryan. (Levin opted out of those talks, and believes Congress should see at least the outline of a trade deal before taking up legislation to fast-track its approval.) Pelosi still remains publicly undecided. If Van Hollen—a visible member of the Democratic caucus and ranking member of a major committee—ultimately supported the Wyden-Hatch-Ryan bill, it would have been a signal that House Democrats were ready to go along with the Obama administration’s trade agenda. But in his letter, Van Hollen wrote “it is clear that many [of my concerns] will not be included in a revised TPA.”

While the legislation remains behind closed doors for now, Van Hollen said continuing public opposition from Republicans made it clear that the TPA legislation wouldn’t include additional currency, labor, and environmental provisions. Moreover, he wrote that since TPA was being unveiled so close to the conclusion of the overall trade talks, “it is clearly too late for TPA to have any meaningful impact on the shape of TPP negotiations.”

Like virtually all Democrats, Van Hollen cited concerns that enforceable currency manipulation obligations would not be included in the trade deal...

AND THAT'S NOT ALL! SEE LINK

[Demeter]

18. Greece's Varoufakis to meet Obama, ECB's Draghi amid debt talks

AS IF MEETING WITH OBAMA WILL DO ANYTHING...IT'S JACK LEW HE REALLY WANTS TO TALK TO

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/14/us-eurozone-greece-varoufakis-idUSKBN0N522H20150414

Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis will meet U.S. President Barack Obama and European Central Bank President Mario Draghi during a trip to Washington this week for meetings of the IMF and the World Bank, his ministry said on Tuesday.

The meetings come as Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras' leftist government seeks to negotiate a deal with its lenders from the European Union and the International Monetary Fund that will unlock further aid under its 240 billion euro bailout. Last Thursday euro zone deputy finance ministers gave Athens a deadline of six working days to present a revised economic reform plan. Euro zone finance ministers will meet on April 24 to decide whether to unlock emergency funding to keep Greece afloat. While EU officials have said that April 24 is not a formal deadline for a deal, Greece is fast running out of cash and its financial needs are pressing as it has not received any funds under its bailout since last August.

Varoufakis, who made a habit of being interviewed frequently after taking office in January, has been notably absent over the past month, though in recent days he has started to make more public appearances again.

He will meet Obama on Thursday and Draghi on Friday, when he is also due to meet U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Italian Economy Minister Pier Carlo Padoan.

[Demeter]

19. Another beautiful day, 5th in a row, and I have broken a crown, I think

There's never a balance point on the high side...

[mother earth]

20. K & R.