coolhand's Account Talk

[coolhand]

Markets About to Turn Nasty, Buy Barbed Wire: Advisor

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37549417

 

[coolhand]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/4/ftc-floats-drudge-tax/

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking ways to "reinvent" journalism, and that's a cause for concern. According to a May 24 draft proposal, the agency thinks government should be at the center of a media overhaul. The bureaucracy sees it as a problem that the Internet has introduced a wealth of information options to consumers, forcing media companies to adapt and experiment to meet changing market needs. FTC's policy staff fears this new reality.

"There are reasons for concern that experimentation may not produce a robust and sustainable business model for commercial journalism," the report states. With no faith that the market will work things out for the better, government thinks it must come to the rescue.

The ideas being batted around to save the industry share a common theme: They are designed to empower bureaucrats, not consumers. For instance, one proposal would, "Allow news organizations to agree jointly on a mechanism to require news aggregators and others to pay for the use of online content, perhaps through the use of copyright licenses."

In other words, government policy would encourage a tax on websites like the Drudge Report, a must-read source for the news links of the day, so that the agency can redistribute the funds collected to various newspapers. Such a tax would hit other news aggregators, such as Digg, Fark and Reddit, which not only gather links, but provide a forum for a lively and entertaining discussion of the issues raised by the stories. Fostering a robust public-policy debate, not saving a particular business model, should be the goal of journalism in the first place.

The report also discusses the possibility of offering tax exemptions to news organizations, establishing an AmeriCorps for reporters and creating a national fund for local news organizations. The money for those benefits would come from a suite of new taxes. A 5 percent tax on consumer electronic devices such as iPads, Kindles and laptops that let consumers read the news could be used to encourage people to keep reading the dead-tree version of the news. Other taxes might be levied on the radio and television spectrum, advertising and cell phones.

The conflict of interest in having the government pay or contribute to a newsman's salary could not be more obvious. Reporters and columnists would have little incentive to offer critical analyses of tax increases that might mean a boost in the pocketbook. Once Congress has the power to fund the news, it can at any time attach "strings" designed to promote certain viewpoints - in the name of fairness, of course. Each year at budget time, the Fourth Estate would scramble to be worthy in the eyes of Capitol Hill for increased support. It is hardly a surprise that the heavily subsidized National Public Radio frequently presents issues in a way favorable to Washington's tax-and-spend agenda.

Self-respecting journalists must reject this tempting government bribe as the FTC brings its proposals to a round-table discussion scheduled for June 15. When it comes to the media, consumers lose most when government suppresses innovation in the name of "saving" old business models.

 

[vegasmith]

Traditional newspaper business is dying and nothing the FTC can do will save it. Unfortunately you got a bunch of old-timers in charge who can't imagine a world without their Saturday morning newspaper.

IPODs > CD's > cassette tapes > 8 tracks
wireless > lan line
dvd > VHS
digital > analog
car > horse and buggy

:cheesy:

 

[nnuut]

I still get the daily newspaper. Up until last week I only received Friday, Saturday and Sunday, but I got a call from them and offered an every day subscription for an additional $1.30 more every 3 Months thats about $28 for 3 months, $2.33 a week. They are really getting desperate!

 

[coolhand]

I still get the daily newspaper. Up until last week I only received Friday, Saturday and Sunday, but I got a call from them and offered an every day subscription for an additional $1.30 more every 3 Months thats about $28 for 3 months, $2.33 a week. They are really getting desperate!

That's the come-on rate. They'll try to bump it up down road after you've discovered you can't live without it. :laugh:

 

[nnuut]

That's the come-on rate. They'll try to bump it up down road after you've discovered you can't live without it. :laugh:

The Wife likes the coupons and sale brochures. The person I talked to said it wasn't anything like that and was permanent not a com-on! This is NOT the New York Times here, we will see.

 

[coolhand]

Traditional newspaper business is dying and nothing the FTC can do will save it. Unfortunately you got a bunch of old-timers in charge who can't imagine a world without their Saturday morning newspaper.

IPODs > CD's > cassette tapes > 8 tracks
wireless > lan line
dvd > VHS
digital > analog
car > horse and buggy

:cheesy:

Yeah, I don't know what's keeping them afloat except for staff cuts. I don't like the paper for numerous reasons. One of which is don't like having it sitting on my driveway when I'm not going to be around for a few days. If I ask them to stop delivery while a take a 2 week vacation, they give me all 2 weeks worth of papers when I get back.

 

[crws]

Ok, quick note before I hit the road.
I've been doing research on BlackRock, our illustrious fund manager.
Apparently they are the "go-to" value asset manager for the Fed. I posted some excellent links on RuffRyders' account, but here is what they have to say going forward-
https://www2.blackrock.com/webcore/...serviceName=publicServiceView&ContentID=27825

I may test my sell by Wednesday theory this week (this will be the week of the Friday rally), but set my IFT to F this am.

Good luck to ya.

 

[coolhand]

Sentiment does not appear to support a lasting rally. The SS are also hanging by a thread. I'm out today going to 50/50 GF. Good luck everyone.

 

[WorkFE]

Not looking good CH, I don't blame you.

 

[crws]

I hate to say it, but I think there will be more opportunity down the road shortly-
the EU nixed stimulus and went for austerity- good for long term, not-so-good for short term.
I am conflicted on what this will do for the Euro, prob more of the same...
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/786776b4-708f-11df-96ab-00144feabdc0.html

 

[coolhand]

I hate to say it, but I think there will be more opportunity down the road shortly-
the EU nixed stimulus and went for austerity- good for long term, not-so-good for short term.
I am conflicted on what this will do for the Euro, prob more of the same...
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/786776b4-708f-11df-96ab-00144feabdc0.html

I'm looking for lower prices in the short term. How low I don't know. But I have one more IFT left, so I'm not without an ability to get back in again should the economic landscape change.

 

[crws]

look at the chart for gold. Ha!
Straight up.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=GCM10.CMX

 

[Birchtree]

I get the Wall Street Journal six days a week - it's the best. There was a time when I received the Wall Street Transcript but was so over whelmed with information and with work didn't have time to absorb it all - but it's a great paper. I've even gone to the University library where it is kept under lock and key to read it on occasion. There is no reason for anyone to remain uninformed in this game - it just takes time and energy and now I have both.

 

[nasa1974]

CH, Congratulations on your daughters graduation. Getting closer to becoming an empty nester. :laugh:

 

[coolhand]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=afwB7INWExaM

Risks to the global economic outlook have “risen significantly” and policy makers have limited room to provide support to growth, International Monetary Fund Deputy Managing Director Naoyuki Shinohara said.

Most advanced economies are experiencing a “subdued” recovery, Shinohara said in a speech in Singapore today. “A key concern is that the room for continued policy support has become much more limited and has, in some cases, been exhausted.”

 

[coolhand]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aPA0AOOMqwUA

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro said the agency will expand a proposal that would halt trading of stocks after they’ve risen or fallen 10 percent during a five-minute period.

The SEC intends to add “thousands” of companies to a plan that would initially affect companies listed on the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, Schapiro said during a speech today. Trading curbs are being proposed in response to the May 6 stock plunge, which erased $862 billion from U.S. equities in 20 minutes and drove the Dow Jones Industrial Average down 1,000 points.

Regulators are trying to restore investor confidence in markets by proposing new rules. SEC commissioners plan to vote this week on circuit breakers for S&P 500 stocks and implement the trading curbs as soon as next week, agency spokesman John Nester said in a June 4 statement.

 

[coolhand]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37573330

The kickoff to the summer job season is not looking so hot for teens.

Employment among 16-to 19-year olds in May grew by just 6,000, the smallest increase since 1969, when teen jobs fell by 14,000, according to government data analyzed by employment firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. In May 2008 and 2009, teen employment grew by over 110,000.

“It’s certainly a preliminary strong indication that it’s going to be a tough job market for teens,” said John Challenger, CEO of Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Jobs traditionally given to teens are apparently going to older workers who are willing to take low paying job to make ends meet. Employment among 20- to 24-year-olds grew by 270,000 in May, an unusual spike, considering that employment in the same age group fell by 261,000 in May 2009.

 

[coolhand]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/business/global/09blogger.html?ref=business&pagewanted=all

For years, almost nobody paid attention to the sky-is-falling alarms of Edward Hugh, a gregarious British blogger and self-taught economist who repeatedly predicted that the euro zone could not survive.

Living a largely hand-to-mouth existence here on his part-time teacher’s salary, he sent one post after another into the Internet wilderness. It was the height of policy folly, he warned, to think that aging, penny-pinching Germans could successfully coexist under one currency umbrella with the more youthful, credit-card-wielding Irish, Greeks and Spaniards who shared the euro with them.

But now that the European sovereign debt crisis is rattling world markets, driving the euro lower almost every day and raising doubts about the future of the monetary union, his voluminous musings have become a must-read for an influential and growing global audience, including policy makers in the White House.

He has even been courted by the International Monetary Fund, which recently asked him to fly to Madrid to assist in its analysis of the Spanish economy.

“It’s quite nice, actually,” Mr. Hugh, 61, said with amusement as he leaned back in a plush town car that was taking him to his latest speaking engagement organized by the Círculo de Economía, an influential business lobbying group in Barcelona. “I am meeting all sorts of interesting people and they are paying me to have lunch with them.”

 

[coolhand]

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/enough-of-it-stop-543748.html

Runaway federal spending has emerged as the chief issue on the minds of voters heading into the fall election season — and for good reason.

In 2000, the federal government spent $1.8 trillion while debt held by the public stood at $3.4 trillion. A mere decade later, the federal government is on pace to spend $3.7 trillion while publicly held debt is approaching $10 trillion.

There’s no blame game left to be played. President George W. Bush left office having presided over one of the largest expansions of federal spending in history.

President Barack Obama appears intent on pulling off the amazing feat of making Bush look like a relative tightwad.

And Congress has become so addicted to spending that the new Capitol Visitor Center — itself a $600 million fiscal boondoggle — might need to be converted into a giant methadone clinic.

So what hope do taxpayers have left?

On the Democratic side of the aisle, it appears that there isn’t any. While the European welfare states are beginning to collapse under their own weight, the Obama administration and Democrat-controlled Congress are pushing the U.S. full steam ahead toward a similar fate of unsustainable social welfare spending.

Obama’s latest budget would push publicly held debt as a percentage of GDP to 90 percent by 2020 — a height last seen at the end of World War II.

Back then the ending of hostilities and a post-war economic boom led to a steady and precipitous drop in the debt as a share of the economy.

In the present day, it is entitlement spending that’s driving the debt explosion. Unfortunately, the president’s expansion of the government’s role in health care will exacerbate the problem, despite the administration’s claims otherwise.

Meanwhile, House Democrats just pushed through another $102 billion in spending for allegedly “stimulative” activities. The measures “only” add $54 billion to the deficit, thanks to $48 billion in tax increases.

For their part, Republicans are getting pretty good at halfheartedly objecting to the Democrats’ spending orgy. But at a time when citizens are warning both parties to stop their fiscally profligate ways, Republicans need to do more than just say “no.” They need to point out the underlying problems with federal spending — for example, that continuing to extend unemployment benefits helps keep unemployment high.

But Republicans, just as much as their Democratic counterparts, are afraid of offending potential voters by threatening to take away their subsidies.

Republican lack of credibility on cutting spending can be seen in the House Republican leadership’s new YouCut Web site. Each week the Web site lists five possible spending cuts for citizens to vote on. The “winning” cut proposal then goes to the House floor for a vote.

Engaging citizens in the government’s spending crisis is a good idea. The problem: the cuts the Republican leadership has selected thus far are minuscule.

For instance, one item recently proposed for cutting was $1 million in mohair subsidies. In the world of federal agriculture subsidies, this cut represents chump change.

Republicans can’t be considered serious about restraining the budget unless they put subsidies for wheat, corn, soybeans, rice and cotton on the chopping block.

The Republicans’ anti-spending initiative has caught the attention of House Democrats. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer recently told Democratic chairmen that they “all need to find some programs to cut.”

Unfortunately, the paltry cuts offered up by the YouCut Web site allow the Democrats to keep the bar low when trotting out their own gimmicks.

While neither party’s leadership offers taxpayers much hope of ending the spending madness, a few rank-and-file Republicans do appear to understand that their party needs to take bolder steps.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has introduced a blueprint for reining in runaway federal entitlement programs. Rep. Lamar Smith’s (R-Texas) SAFE Act would cap annual growth in the federal budget to inflation plus population growth. In the Senate, Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) has repeatedly offered measures to eliminate unneeded federal programs.

The Republican leadership needs to embrace these efforts, which would signal to apprehensive voters that the party is ready to atone for its big-spending ways of the past decade. Saying “no” to Obama and congressional Democrats’ bankrupting policies is fine.

But Republicans need to recognize that voters understand the difference between having one’s own agenda and simply being against the other guy’s.