STOCK MARKET WATCH, Friday July 9

Source: du

STOCK MARKET WATCH, Friday July 9, 2010

---

Euro, Yen, Loonie, Silver and Gold

---

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

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

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

Handy Links - Videos:
The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class    Charlie Rose talks with Roubini    Charlie Rose talks with Krugman
    William Black: This Economic Disaster    Bill Moyers with Kevin Drum and David Corn

Bush Administration Officials Convicted = 2
Names: David Safavian, James Fondren

Bush Administration Officials Charged = 1
Name(s): Richard Lopez Razo

Financial Sector Officials Convicted since 1/20/09 = 11

---

---

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

Read more: du

I won't say "Good morning" for fear of jinxing it. After a week of heat wave, I'm not fit for human company.

What's the next prize, after unicorns? Good thing the lilies are in bloom--I wouldn't know what else to feed it. (Cite that literary reference).

:donut: :donut: :donut:
I had a helluva time getting on the Internet this morning. Either my connection was a bit dodgy or Safari had some bugs.

Anyway - time to get to work.

I slept in (4:45).

I had a TERRIBLE day yesterday.

My thought for the day is crash, baby, crash.




Tansy Gold, in a REALLY crappy mood today

I hear you. I'm planning on staying in the air conditioning with a cold compress. And I hate air conditioning.

Had a meeting on the wrap up of conversion for 2.5 hours yesterday; talk about torture. It may happen within the next 15 years....or it may not. GAH!

take refuge in being able to sleep in, head to the beach, mow some grass, drink some wine...


oh...that's what *I'm* doing. Hope you find a sunnier side of life today and beyond!

and only about 10 minutes of rain for over a week--the grass is brown and dormant already...

and another good shower this morning. won't need to water the garden today!

By 8:00am, it's already too hot to stay around the dog park. And little miss cute face was bound and determined that she was sleeping with me last night. She got in the bed after we did, and took over the whole thing. I was having pains, and trouble getting comfortable, so I headed for the couch. 10 minutes later, she's laying across my feet. So I get up, and get on the sofa in the guest room, which is too small to fit me and her both. At 4:30, this little beast comes walking across my chest, and lays down on it.

I finally bit the bullet, and made an appointment with an Orthopedic Surgeon. I haven't been able to walk too well for the last month, and these oxycodones suck. They work, but if I take them, I'm shot for the day.

Now, if can move a little better later, and it's nice and hot, I can mow the back yard. It's getting so tall, that I may have to hire some of those guys to beat on pots and pans to drive the tigers out.

Anyway, have a good day, and watch out for the bears. And lions and tigers, oh my.

Orthopedic surgeons can do wonders. I know from first-hand experience. That kind of pain can obliterate any other thoughts. My sympathies.

The SMW thread will get posted there at the usual time. But my involvement during the week will be limited. We leave this afternoon - set to arrive around 9pm. I will miss quite a bit over the weekend. My time will be cut short this morning with many preparatory tasks that need doing.

I know I couldn't pull off SMW for any extended period...and don't think anyone else could, either. We need you Ozy!

The last time I was in Savannah - Nixon was president. I suspect it has changed a bit. We are meeting family there who are flying from Los Angeles.

My brain is fried.....

Can one recommend their own postee???

Anyhow, Nice to see your chiseled charts and bring on the gambling...

Have a good one folks - It's off on a mini-trip I go.

Just as you cannot unrec your own thread. Good morning! :donut:

10:00 Wholesale Inventories May
Briefing.com 0.3%
Consensus 0.4%
Prior 0.4%

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

SINGAPORE – Oil prices rose to near $76 a barrel Friday in Asia, following stock markets higher as confidence rose the global economic recovery remains intact.

Signs the global economic recovery remains on track eased fears of a new recession and helped boost investor confidence.

The Labor Department said Thursday that initial jobless claims fell last week to the lowest level since early May, and the International Monetary Fund raised its 2010 world growth forecast to 4.6 percent from 4.2 percent.

U.S. crude supplies dropped last week, suggesting oil demand could be improving. Crude inventories plunged 5.0 million barrels, the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration said Thursday, more than a drop of 3.5 million barrels forecast in an analyst survey by Platts, the energy information arm of McGraw-Hill Cos.

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

The next may have it's oily seeds in the Gulf States. That umbilical cord between DC and Lower Manhattan is getting to be a real eyesore.

:donut:

but I can't see it actually doing anything. Too many flags to wave.

:spray:

Nothing like back-flushing the nasals with black coffee

and these are said to be what signs, exactly?

THOSE signs!

Introduced in 1897, the concept became controversial as "subliminal messages" in 1957 when marketing practitioners claimed its potential use in persuasion. Subsequent scientific research, however, has been unable to replicate most of these marketing claims beyond a mere placebo effect. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subliminal_stimuli

I hope you've seen this movie...it's a trash cult favorite....



as for the gif, it's a lot faster on DU...I'm not sure why.

TD, name names please.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096256/plotsummary

Nada, a down-on-his-luck construction worker, discovers a pair of special sunglasses. Wearing them, he is able to see the world as it really is: people being bombarded by media and government with messages like "Stay Asleep", "No Imagination", "Submit to Authority". Even scarier is that he is able to see that some usually normal-looking people are in fact ugly aliens in charge of the massive campaign to keep humans subdued.




John Carpenter is good at subversive social commentary.....

and this film features one of the best (read: longest, most realistic) fight scenes in film. Just two out of shape middle aged guys beating on each other and tiring themselves out in the process. No glam. No kung fu.

Sounds like something I would love. It is on my list.

LAS VEGAS (Reuters) – President Barack Obama defended his handling of the U.S. economy and blasted Republicans on Thursday for "peddling snake oil" as he went on a two-day campaign swing for fellow Democrats going into November's congressional elections.

Obama has come under fire for bank and auto bailouts and a $787 billion stimulus package whose effectiveness is a subject of debate. He is under election-year pressure to reduce a 9.5 percent unemployment rate but said he was confident Americans would "dig ourselves out of this hole".

Obama said Republicans promote a "you're on your own" philosophy and would bring back policies that he believes have been discredited, such as tax cuts for all including the richest Americans.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100709/pl_nm/us_usa_politics_obama

If you have to lift the dirt, you are shoveling in the wrong direction.

May I recommend that the task would be a bit easier if you start filling the already excavated pit with your economic team, the heads of the TBTF, a bunch of congress critters etc, etc.

Please use a liner so their toxicity won't foul more groundwater.

Not sure he knows which end of a shovel is which, though.

Does it matter which end of the shovel he uses to smack Geithner? I mean, as long as he gets him to fall in the pit.

you fill the hole in. When you realize that, it gives his remarks an entirely different meaning. It is even more freudian when you realize we have a huge hole and corporate America has given the middle class a teaspoon to fill it in. And you know it is the Middle Class that will have to fill it in.

But he is right when he says "You're on your own." And it isn't just the GOP peddling that snake oil.

I recommed we fill the hole with Timmy Geitner. Will that get me on the watch list. I may be going deep into the nation if it does.

Goldman Sachs Investment Management is recommending to its high net worth clients that they keep a long-term focus and stay fully invested, even amid the growing correction in equity markets and the louder calls for a double-dip recession.

In a report entitled 'Double Dip or Double Up?' that is being bandied about on trading-room floors today amid the rally, Goldman’s strategy group (not associated with their research division) cites the rarity of a double dip retrenchment, flaws in bearish technical analysis, policy overhang and cheap valuations as reasons for its bullish long-term view.


“Even slow 1-2 percent GDP expansion would be sufficient to generate positive earnings growth from current levels,” states the report. “We believe that clients should continue to use market weakness to build toward or maintain their strategic equity allocation.”

more...

Now, most of you remain convinced we're doomed, but Goldman makes money by calling things right. That doesn't mean any of you will be convinced, because most of you are closed to the possibility things might improve. This is selective of course, it's not as if the unemployed will all suddenly find work, but improved market strength is probably a prerequisite for hiring to begin anew, IMO.

The Council on Foreign Relations is believed to be the headquarters of the Economic Elites...so be warned!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/08/AR2010070804272.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

By Amity Shlaes (senior fellow in economic history at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression." )



President Obama may be about to repeat Franklin D. Roosevelt's mistakes -- but not the ones (most discussed). By fixating on the debt and stimulus plans, Obama and Congress are overlooking challenges to the economy from taxes, employment and the entrepreneurial environment. President Roosevelt's great error was to ignore such factors -- and the result was that sickening double dip.

Taxation is an obvious area the Obama administration ought to reconsider. Income taxes, the dividend tax and capital gains taxes are all set to rise as the Bush tax cuts expire. The Obama administration portrays these increases as necessary for budgetary and social reasons. A society in which the wealthy pay their share, the message goes, has a stronger economy. The administration and congressional Democrats are also striving to ensure that businesses pony up. The carried-interest provision in the tax extender bill seeks to raise rates on gains by private equity and hedge funds. If that were not enough, a so-called enterprise value tax would be levied on partnerships that sought to elude the new high taxes by selling their companies.

Roosevelt, too, pursued the dual purposes of revenue and social good. In 1935 he signed legislation known as the "soak the rich" law. FDR, more radical than Obama in his class hostility, spoke explicitly of the need for "very high taxes." Roosevelt's tax trap was the undistributed-profits tax, which hit businesses that chose not to disgorge their cash as dividends or wages. The idea was to goad companies into action.

The outcome was not what the New Dealers envisioned. Horrified by what they perceived as an existential threat, businesses stopped buying equipment and postponed expansion. They hired lawyers to find ways around the undistributed-profits tax. In May 1938, after months of unemployment rates in the high teens, the Democratic Congress cut back the detested tax. That bill became law without the president's signature.

Then there is labor policy. Obama announced this year that the federal government would award contracts to firms with more generous pay and benefit packages. With its support of private- and public-sector unions -- recall its treatment of the automakers' unions in the 2009 bailout -- the administration generally wants wages or compensation to be high.

Roosevelt's flamboyant pursuit of a similar goal cost the economy dearly. The National Industrial Recovery Act and, later, the Wagner Act gave workers the power to demand higher wages. They got them. But employers struck back, choosing not to hire or rehiring many fewer workers than they otherwise might have. In the later 1930s, the divide deepened between those with jobs and the unemployed. Economists Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian wrote in the Journal of Political Economy that the politically driven wage increases were the most important factor in the double-digit unemployment of the later 1930s. A popular Gershwin song of the period, "Nice Work If You Can Get It," captured the bitterness.

What about the third factor, the entrepreneurial environment? The Obama administration places a premium on action. When it comes to spending, the idea seems to be that any spending is better than none. Big new laws -- financial reform -- are put forward to inspire confidence.

But change that is too arbitrary and too frequent petrifies firms, especially before their rules have been tested in the courts. As Verizon Communications chief executive Ivan Seidenberg noted recently in a Business Roundtable speech: "By reaching into virtually every sector of economic life, government is injecting uncertainty into the marketplace and making it harder to raise capital and create new businesses."

This analysis echoes those of Depression-era entrepreneurs. In 1938 Lammot du Pont, head of the eponymous chemical concern, spoke of a "fog of uncertainty" slowing business and noted in the company's annual report that arbitrary government always slowed business down: "by land and sea the universal practice under conditions of fog is to slacken speed."

What about the old spend-or-save debate? The evidence suggests that easier money did indeed help end this second slump. But a larger factor was Roosevelt's decision to stop attacking business and turn to foreign policy. When Republicans made gains in the 1938 midterms, it became clear that the New Deal era of mega-intervention was ending.

It is that backtracking of the later '30s that is relevant to recovery today.

YES, PEOPLE LIKE DUPONT....THE OVERLORDS HAVE SPOKEN!

Be they Democratic or be they Republican, all tend to come from the Council of Foreign Relations?

Talk about a shadow, one-party system.

Did I miss that event?

And FDR's "foreign policy" was, um, getting us into a huge global war.




Can I :puke: now???


My terrible no good day yesterday consisted partly of totally unnecessary and blood-pressure-raising hassles at the DMV, at the feed store over the price of a bag of dog food, at the pharmacy over prescriptions not ready when promised, and at the grocery check-out over a stupid cashier's rude and inane comments about my purchases (a loaf of bread, a pound of salami, and an onion).

Those stresses, however, didn't hold a candle to the "casual" conversation with a now former "friend" who smilingly admitted he didn't believe in global warming because if he did he might have to change his lifestyle; who defended the nuclear power industry against claims that it might have contributed to the 40% rise in women's thyroid dysfunction (that would include yours truly) because he's getting a very fat pension from his years working for the IAEA and if he admitted nuclear power MIGHT have caused harm, it might make him feel a bit guilty; and who said he really doesn't give a shit about anyone else, including the troubled teen-aged grandson he abandoned after three years of custody because he didn't want to have to take care of someone else when what he really wanted was someone to take of him.

My outrage was compounded by -- during a break in the first harangue over the virtual of selfishness, and yes, I know where that phrase comes from -- another "friend" whining vociferously that Obama should be impeached because "he's giving all those parties in the White House." No, of course, that doesn't make sense, but before one could even formulate a response, this same person whined, blaming Obama because she has to pay $1,000 a year for her supplemental Medicare policy. $1,000 a year!

When I politely told her that she should be grateful to have insurance because some of us don't have any and CAN'T GET ANY, she snapped right at me that yes I can too get insurance and I can get it free under Obama's plan. I made the mistake of trying to set this ignorant twit straight by explaining that Obama's plan doesn't fully go into effect for another almost four years, that insurance is only available now to those who have been turned down for insurance by a private company, and that the available insurance is far from free. I can, I told her, actually GET insurance, which means I'm not eligible for the Obama plan, but mine would cost approximately $1,200 A MONTH and it would have huge copays and deductibles AND IT WOULD NOT COVER MY PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS.

I did not point out to her that she shouldn't be whining about her $1,000 annual premium because she is sufficiently well off to pay it with no hardship. Nor did I point out to her that she is living quite comfortably as a widow on the proceeds of her late husband's well-paid job, quite in contrast to others who struggle to make ends meet either with or without partners.


Perhaps, like Obama, I chose my "friends" badly. Perhaps, like Obama, I merely wished to be liked, to have a social life. Apparently, also like Obama, I chose poorly.

If I remember correctly, Amity Shlaes entered into some kind of debate a number of years ago with Eric Alterman. Alterman, to my shame and his, seemed to be totally tongue-tied at the image of an attractive redhead debating him on some serious issue. what a waste. what a waste.

I no longer have one ounce of sympathy for them, the idle rich. Their comfort derives from the misery of the poor. May they all eat shit and die.




Tansy Gold, NTY

May they all eat shit and die.
Yeh, that's good!

Hope today is better, :hug:

after too many years working as an RN, sicker than most of my patients and unable to afford basics like health insurance. I'm finally middle class, except for that insurance thing that I still can't afford on the income from the portfolio my dad surprised me with when he died 4 years ago. I'm not a member of the plutocracy by any measure, just a garden variety parasite and grateful for it.

What differentiates me from your "friend," in quotes because she'll disappear at any moment if the slightest whisper of guilt intrudes into her charmed life, is a sense of entitlement. She's entitled to all the good things of the world, everyone else be damned. I know how easily I can still fall back into poverty so I lack that particular constituent of the idle "rich."

Oh, I'm not terrified of poverty any more, I got quite good at it. It's more like a totally disgusting freeloader relative who shows up periodically because he has nowhere else to go and you're guilted into taking him in until times improve. You don't want him around but you have little choice in the matter and hope the stay isn't a permanent one.

Sadly, your friend is about to experience it too, if pensions start to do what I think they will.

when there's so much radical grassroots psycho-socio-political and eco-economic organising to do?

so my days of doing anything particularly active are over.

Sorry to disappoint.

:)

the idle rich.

And as you pointed out, it's that sense of entitlement. (from "entitled," meaning one with a title that carries with it certain unearned wealth, status, and privileges that CANNOT, in fact, be earned but must be bestowed by an accident of birth).

I also know that even though my financial condition is not as cushy as that of many of my acquaintances, it is still far better than that of many other people. And even so, it could change abruptly for the worse. I take nothing for granted.

The flip side of the entitlement attitude, which I don't think applies ro you, Warpy, is that the poor (working or not), are NOT entitled to anything AND they exist only to serve the needs/wants of the idle rich.

For instance, this same acquaintance was carrying on a few weeks ago about a childhood friend of his who grew up in relative poverty, but clawed his way up to CEO of a fairly large corporation. Now retired and quite wealthy, he gives nothing to charity and resents all welfare, all taxes (other than what is spent on the military), believes all government services should be privatized. His attitude, as related by this former friend, was "if I can do it with no help from anyone, anyone else can, and I have no obligation to help them."

Most of us, of course, understand that this man did NOT do it all on his own without any help. He was born into a lower middle class but white, English speaking environment. He had public schools to educate him through college (graduated from the University of Illinois, which at the time he attended probably cost him about $125/semester in tuition, <$400/semester room and board). And he had access to an urban area where jobs in large companies with opportunities for advancement were plentiful.

When I pointed this out, my acquaintance insisted none of that mattered. "Anyone who wants to do it, who really wants to do it and doesn't mind what they have to do to accomplish it CAN do it."

And he firmly believes this, and admires his childhood friend for having the drive to do it and the lack of scruples that would have prevented him from doing otherwise distasteful, immoral, or unethical things all of which are acceptable if they lead to the desired end.

Yesterday, when I dared to suggest to this guy that his attitude of "I don't care, I'm going to do what I want because I can, and fuck everyone else" was very right wing, he snapped at me that I was trying to put a label on him that he didn't deserve. To me, his umbrage at the labeling was a sign that he KNEW his position was antithetical to what he would like to see himself as -- enlightened, liberal, moral. As they say, the truth hurts. He did say he would espouse liberal views if they allowed him to continue to be all about himself, and therefore because of that openness to liberal views, he could not be right wing. I told him he was full of shit.

And once again, the other side of that ruthlessness is the attitude that one has the RIGHT to do to others whatever one wants to do, and it is the responsibility of the OTHERS to escape. One has no obligation to be fair to anyone else; it is their fault if they're unlucky enough to get stepped on.

The sad thing, of course, is that people like this DON'T CARE. And there is nothing that can be done with a person who doesn't care, except to smile at them and say, "Eat shit and die, wanker."

:hi: Warpy. I still haven't tried spinning that black alpaca wool. . . . but one of these days. . . .



Tansy Gold, NTY

do learn to spin on something a little easier. You can get wool rovings, fully prepared wool ready to pull apart and spin, from all sorts of places. Online, I use www.halcyonyarn.com. You'll want to start on an easy one, like corriedale. When you're spinning thread instead of rope, you'll be ready to tackle that alpaca, which has to be spun very finely to take full advantage of the fiber's quality.

As for the self made men, I know the type all too well, blind to all the assisted living they receive every day, from the wife who does all their shitwork to wait staff to car repair guys to farmworkers to the unseen people at the office who clean up after them. Because they're so utterly oblivious to all of that, they will never admit that their work is utterly dependent on a cast of many thousands.

Were they ever left to their own devices, they'd be utterly helpless, like roaches on their backs, legs waving in the air.

She thinks Arthur Schlesinger got it all wrong in his triple volume history of the Depression.

Perhaps she should have read the Nye Report, which had some fairly unflattering things to say about Lammot du Pont, including his use of bribery to promote his company, both domestically and abroad, using company agents to destabilize South American regimes to promote the sale of armaments by his company, as well as the covert rearming of Germany beginning in 1924.

http://astro.temple.edu/~rimmerma/nye_commission_report.htm

Other than that, he seems to be a pretty good guy to quote when you want to determine the future of the nation.

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

Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul said Thursday that harsh criticism of BP by President Barack Obama's administration could contribute to the oil giant's demise and harm its ability to pay for cleanup of the massive Gulf of Mexico oil spill....

REALLY? HOW?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100708/bs_yblog_upshot/surprise-so-far-tarp-is-a-moneymaker

If you had qualms about the federal government's decision to react to the financial crisis by taking billions of your tax dollars and handing them over to the highly compensated people who helped create the financial crisis, perhaps you can find solace in the news that we've actually made money on the deal. A new study reported on by Reuters today says the largest component of the TARP fund has netted the U.S. more than $10 billion in profit so far...

THERE ARE LIES, DAMNED LIES, AND STATISTICS--TODAY WE'VE GOTTEN ONE OF EACH ALREADY. THE PROPAGANDISTS ARE OUT IN FULL FORCE.

...So far, 61 banks have completely repaid their debt under the program, and the U.S. earned a 10 percent return on those investments, totaling $13 billion. There's still $65 billion in debt outstanding, but Treasury has only taken a $2 billion loss on the program thus far, and a KBW analyst told Reuters that "unless the economy just craters, the bank portion of TARP will be profitable." In other words, the bank bailout was less of a bailout than a loan that's been unexpectedly repaid....

THAT'S IF YOU COMPLETELY IGNORE THE CARLOADS OF FREE FINANCING THAT THE FED HAS SHOVELED OUT THE DOOR, TO THE DETRIMENT OF ALL EXCEPT THOSE BANKS...

Wouldn't you agree?

not with data, not with emotion, not with anything. They have to be thoroughly chewed up and spit out by the Wheel of Fortune, and even then, the odds are poor that they will have a revelation and a change of heart.

The inability to empathize, to take even a couple of steps in another man's shoes, is what will kill off the human race. unfortunately, US culture encourages that kind of selfishness, more now than probably ever before since the frontier was closed. The Class system has arrived, and it's not going to give up gracefully.

It's like going back to Victorian times--not the high point of Western history. Or France, before the revolution.

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Stock index futures edged higher on Friday after Wall Street recorded third straight winning sessions and as investors braced for the start of earnings next week.

* However, sentiment remained negative going into the Friday session, with many investors concerned the global economy could slip back into recession. Even with gains in the holiday-shortened week that has been characterized by volatility and lagging trading volume, the S&P 500 is still down 12 percent since April.

* S&P 500 futures rose 1.2 points and were above fair value, a formula that evaluates pricing by taking into account interest rates, dividends and time to expiration on the contract. Dow Jones industrial average futures up 2 points, and Nasdaq 100 futures adding 0.25 points.

* Data that will be in focus includes U.S. wholesale inventories for May at 10:00 a.m. EDT and the weekly measure of future economic growth by the Economic Cycle Research Institute at 10:30 a.m. Economists in a Reuters poll expected inventories to rise 0.4 percent in May, unchanged from the prior month.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100709/bs_nm/us_markets_stocks

my co-worker mentioned having watched Flatliners on TV the other day. Now if only we could get people like Bernanke, Geithner, et al to play that game (but not have someone nearby to resuscitate them! :evilgrin: )

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

LONDON (AFP) – Europe's main stock markets rose on Friday at the end of a largely solid week for share prices caused by increased optimism over the economy, traders said.

London's benchmark FTSE 100 index of top companies won 0.13 percent to 5,111.83 points, Frankfurt's DAX 30 climbed 0.47 percent to 6,070.84 points and in Paris the CAC 40 gained 0.40 percent to stand at 3,551.89.

The Stoxx 50 index of leading eurozone shares advanced by 0.43 percent to 2,677.85 points.

On Friday, Japanese shares firmed in a narrow range with many investors staying on the sidelines ahead of a weekend Upper House election likely to pose challenges to the ruling party, dealers said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100709/bs_afp/stockseurope

as if awaiting a sign.

FRANKFURT, July 9 (Reuters) - It is too early to declare that the financial crisis is over and budget cuts by governments will not hinder economic growth, European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet said on Friday.

...

'We (ECB) are totally against the view that reducing public expenditures will hinder economic growth'

'Consolidation measures will help turn the current upturn into sustained growth.'

'Just like consumers and countries, governments cannot live beyond their means forever. Fiscal authorities need to look beyond the current cyclical upturn. There is no alternative to that.'

/... http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nachrichten-2010-07/17367742-highlights-trichet-slams-calls-that-cuts-will-undercut-growth-020.htm

"Consolidation" measures?

Who is the Consolidator, and who are the Consolidated?

does it not?

McLEAN, Va. – Shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will begin trading over-the-counter Thursday, nearly a month after the government-sponsored mortgage buyers said they could no longer meet the requirements of companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

Freddie Mac's common stock, now unlisted, will trade under the symbol "FMCC." Investors will be able to trade Freddie Mac's 20 classes of preferred stock.

Fannie Mae's common stock will trade under the symbol "FNMA." Its preferred shares also will be listed.

Last month, the companies' regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said that Fannie's shares have been below the $1 average price level for 30 trading days. NYSE rules require a company to take action to boost its shares or delist. Freddie's shares have hovered close to the $1 mark.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100707/ap_on_bi_ge/us_freddie_fannie_delisted

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/workers-salaries-lost-ground-in-past-decade-2010-07-07

...stagnating wages.

Median weekly wages, when adjusted for inflation, fell slightly for both high school and college graduates from 2000 to 2009, according to a recent analysis by the Economic Policy Institute, a Washington think tank.

"The story is often told that college graduates have done well and everyone else has not. But that's not true," said Josh Bivens, an economist at EPI.

For high school graduates, median inflation-adjusted wages were $626 per week in 2009, compared with $629 in 2000, according to EPI. If you assume a worker gets paid for a full year, that adds up to $32,552 in 2009, down from $32,708 in 2000.

For college graduates, weekly wages were $1,025 in 2009, compared with $1,030 in 2000, according to EPI. Over one year, that works out to $53,300 last year, down from $53,560 in 2000.

But the recent recession isn't to blame for the "prolonged period of wage stagnation," according to EPI.

"Between 2002 and December of 2007, the country was in a period of economic expansion and for most of that time, from 2003 through 2007, wages fell," the study said. "Wages had improved in the early part of the decade on the momentum of the rapid wage growth of the 1990s, but that progress was halted by the spike in unemployment during the 2001 recession, and never reestablished itself."

Going forward, there could years of bad wage growth and possibly declines as the unemployment rate remains high, Bivens said.

"Even with low inflation over the past year we have seen wages lagging," Bivens said. "The recession is so deep and widespread that even those close to the top of the income scale will do much worse than they have been accustomed to doing. The pain will not be spread evenly, but it will be the very fortunate worker who does not see slower wage growth."

Separate research from Hay Group, a global management consulting firm, found that planned salary increases for 2011 are at 3% for clerical, supervisory, middle management and executive positions. That 3% gain is below the 4.5% to 5% increases seen at the beginning of the decade, and the steady 4% from 2005 to 2008, according to Hay.

"The past three years have seen the lowest base salary increases that most employees have ever experienced," the study said.

The recession continues to cause businesses to be restrained when it comes to salaries, said Tom McMullen, Hay's North American reward practice leader, in a statement.

"HR executives are looking for ways to balance the cost of reward programs and limited pay increases with the need to attract, retain and engage key talent," he said. "Many organizations are emphasizing 'total' reward programs as a result -- engaging employees in non-monetary ways through more meaningful work experiences, clearer career paths, global mobility and targeted development opportunities."

Hay's forecast is based on data provided from March through June by more than 300 small to large U.S. companies.

What's a family to do?

The high unemployment rate is limiting many workers' bargaining power. How to deal with stagnating, or even falling, incomes?

If you're not doing so already, start living within your means, said Eric Tyson, author of "Personal Finance for Dummies."

"The silver lining is that it forces consumers to cut out the fat and the unnecessary spending that doesn't provide much value," Tyson said.

Different people have different vices. Some eat out too much, while others smoke or buy pricey drinks at bars. Some have stretched their wallet too much for a house or went overboard remodeling.

And some spend on their kids....

One important place not to cut is retirement saving, said Ric Edelman, author and financial adviser.

"My concern is that someone who gets a 10% pay cut may cancel their 401(k) -- that would be disastrous," Edelman said. "If you are putting away enough for retirement, it doesn't matter how much you are spending as long as you are not creating additional debt."

It can be tough to find excess spending to eliminate. But if a family's income falls 10%, they need to cut expenses 10%, Edelman said.

"There will be some pain. You may have to cancel cable TV. Many families are spending $100 a month or more on cell phone contracts. It may mean eliminating an automobile, or eating out less often," Edelman said. "Don't cancel your insurance so that you can keep watching HBO."

AFTER ALL, WALL STREET NEEDS YOUR 401K. WHAT A CROCK

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I don't feed the animals in the wild or at the zoo.

Damn. I needed some cheering up today.

:-(

DUCK AND COVER!

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/republicans-and-democrats-endorse-major-changes-to-social-security.php?ref=tn

Is there a new, bipartisan consensus forming on Capitol Hill about whether (and how) to scale back Social Security benefits? A surprising number of signs point to "yes" -- and that has many progressives looking ahead a few months to what they believe could become a serious fight.

Several of the most powerful members of the House -- Republicans and Democrats -- have recently voiced real support for the idea of raising the retirement age for people middle-aged and younger as part of a larger plan to reduce long-term deficits, inching closer to what not too long ago was the third rail of American politics.

The strongest backer of this plan is House Minority Leader John Boehner, who recently told a Pennsylvania newspaper, "I think raising the retirement age going out 20 years so you're not affecting anyone close to retirement, and eventually getting the retirement age to 70 is a step that needs to be taken."

There's no big surprise there. The Republican minority in the House doesn't have a lot of power, but if Boehner had his druthers, he might well take things quite a bit further. He's the one, after all, who won't take Social Security privatization off the table if Republicans retake the House.

It's the Democrats who have progressives feeling queasy.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer explicitly put the idea on the table as well in a speech last month. "We should consider a higher retirement age or one pegged to lifespan," Hoyer said.

He echoed House Majority Whip James Clyburn, who put it this way: "With minor changes to the program such as raising the salary cap and raising the retirement age by one month every year, the program could become solvent for the next 75 years." One month a year may not sound like much, but if you're 30 years away from retirement, that adds up to almost three years.

In the House, though, Nancy Pelosi is the linchpin, and she's not nearly as enthusiastic as her colleagues. But, notwithstanding the enthusiasm gap, she also left the possibility of raising the retirement age on the table. When asked about it by TPMDC at her press conference last week, she criticized the plan, but mainly to say she disagrees with putting Social Security on the chopping block ahead of other measures. "Why they would start talking about a place that could be harmful to our seniors -- 70 is a relative age," Pelosi said. "Around here, there's not a lot of outdoor work or heavy lifting. But for some people it is, and 70 means something different to them. So in any event let's talk about growth, lets talk about how we can reduce spending, lets put everything, those initiatives: promoting growth, tightening the belt, looking at entitlements. But let's not start on the backs of our seniors."

There's one catch, though. Last week, Democrats included a rider to the supplemental war spending bill that will likely force the House to vote on a forthcoming fiscal reform plan, if the Senate passes it first. That package is being put together by President Obama's deficit and debt commission, and will be ready to go after the midterms. Pelosi had already pledged to give the package a vote, so perhaps nothing has really changed. But in a way, she also tied her own hands: if the Senate passes a broad tax-and-entitlement reform package at the end of this Congress and her own caucus is willing, she'll be hard-pressed to stop the Social Security reforms she thinks should come last.

Of course, that puts the onus on the Senate, which can't pass much of anything these days, especially if it includes tax hikes -- and any serious effort to pull the country back from the brink of fiscal crisis will have to include some of those. But if there's a fluke, or an unexpected decision on the part of 60 senators to hold hands and jump together, it could happen swiftly, with very little notice.

AS NOTED IN DAILY KOS: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/7/7/882332/-Is-consensus-in-Congress-merging-behind-major-Social-Security-changes?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo


The Congress, with it's relative geezerdom, isn't a particularly fair reflection of life in the real world, where few 70 year-olds have multiple staff people to get them through their days. That's true now, and it will be true for the now middle-aged people who will be facing a longer working life if these guys get their way.

Here's something our Members of Congress should be occupying their noggins with: the middle-aged and older are the largest group of the long-term unemployed. A little job creation could potentially go a long way here. Maybe if they actually were working, and contributing into the system by paying both income and Social Security taxes, our economic picture would be a little less bleak. Telling these people now--who want to be working--that they'll have an extra 15 years to be stigmatized by being unemployed is just cruel.

I REPEAT, CONSIDERING UNEMPLOYMENT PATTERNS, THIS IS JUST PLAIN CRUEL.

Why can't they just cut the military/defense budget instead?
Leave Social Security alone.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/7/7/882277/-WaPo:-Dont-tax-the-rich!?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Here is the supposed "liberal" Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus in today's edition:

I'm all for a more progressive tax code. But consider: The Tax Policy Center examined what it would take to avoid raising taxes on families earning less than $250,000 a year while reducing the deficit to 3 percent of the economy by decade's end. The top two rates would have to rise to 72.4 and 76.8 percent, more than double the current level. You don't have to be anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist to think this would be insane.

Why is this insane? In the 1950's, a time of prosperity, the top rate was 90%. Were Eisenhower and Nixon insane? No Ms. Marcus, you do have to be a Grover Norquist to find 70+ rates insane. There is nothing insane about it at all. The government needs money. Rich people have plenty of it. Why rob banks? Because that's where the money is. This isn't insanity. In fact, it's sanity.

You see, in Ruth Marcus' world, tax rates never begins with "how much do we need to meet our obligations and who can afford to pay it?" It begins with "how can we shirk our responsibilities so I don't have to pay?" That is why she is all for cutting social security benefits and other catfood commission measures. You see, in her world, just because a guy can make a billion dollars in a year is no reason to leave him with a paltry $250 million. It doesn't matter how much revenue is needed. It's what Ruth thinks she ought to pay and not a penny more. Can you imagine how tough it's going to be for a Washington pundit to get by on $250,000 of a million dollar salary? Oh, the humanity! And all for poor schmucks on social security? No way, man!

Just another day at the "Bipartisan" Bastion of BS, the Washington Post.

heh

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/business/economy/09rich.html?_r=1&hp

LOS ALTOS, Calif. — No need for tears, but the well-off are losing their master suites and saying goodbye to their wine cellars.

The housing bust that began among the working class in remote subdivisions and quickly progressed to the suburban middle class is striking the upper class in privileged enclaves like this one in Silicon Valley.

Whether it is their residence, a second home or a house bought as an investment, the rich have stopped paying the mortgage at a rate that greatly exceeds the rest of the population.

More than one in seven homeowners with loans in excess of a million dollars are seriously delinquent, according to data compiled for The New York Times by the real estate analytics firm CoreLogic.

By contrast, homeowners with less lavish housing are much more likely to keep writing checks to their lender. About one in 12 mortgages below the million-dollar mark is delinquent.

Though it is hard to prove, the CoreLogic data suggest that many of the well-to-do are purposely dumping their financially draining properties, just as they would any sour investment.

“The rich are different: they are more ruthless,” said Sam Khater, CoreLogic’s senior economist.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Las Vegas, Ken Lowman, a longtime agent for luxury properties, said four of the 11 sales he brokered in June were distressed properties.

“I’ve never seen the wealthy hit like this before,” Mr. Lowman said. “They made their plans based on the best of all possible scenarios — that their incomes would continue to grow, that real estate would never drop. Not many had a plan B.”

The defaulting owners, he said, often remain as long as they can. “They’re in denial,” he said.

Here in Los Altos, where the median home price of $1.5 million makes it one of the most exclusive towns in the country, several houses scheduled for auction were still occupied this week. The people who answered the door were reluctant to explain their circumstances in any detail.

At one house, where the lender was owed $1.3 million, there was a couch out front wrapped in plastic. A woman said she and her husband had lost their jobs and were moving in with relatives. At another house, the family said they were renters. A third family, whose mortgage is $1.6 million, said they would be moving this weekend.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In a recent column on Freddie Mac’s Web site, the company’s executive vice president, Don Bisenius, acknowledged that walking away “might well be a good decision for certain borrowers” but argues that those who do it are trashing their communities.

The CoreLogic data suggest that the rich do not seem to have concerns about the civic good uppermost in their mind, especially when it comes to investment and second homes. Nor do they appear to be particularly worried about being sued by their lender or frozen out of future loans by Fannie Mae, possible consequences of default.

The delinquency rate on investment homes where the original mortgage was more than $1 million is now 23 percent. For cheaper investment homes, it is about 10 percent.

With second homes, the delinquency rate for both types of owners was rising in concert until the stock market crashed in September 2008. That sent the percentage of troubled million-dollar loans spiraling up much faster than the smaller loans.

“Those with high net worth have other resources to lean on if they get in trouble,” said Mr. Khater, the analyst. “If they’re going delinquent faster than anyone else, that tells me they are doing so willingly.”

Willingly, but not necessarily publicly. The rapper Chamillionaire is a plain-talking exception. He recently walked away from a $2 million house he bought in Houston in 2006.

“I just decided to let it go, give it back to the bank,” he told the celebrity gossip TV show “TMZ.” “I just didn’t feel like it was a good investment.”

The rich and successful often come naturally to this sort of attitude, said Brent T. White, a law professor at the University of Arizona who has studied strategic defaults.

“They may be less susceptible to the shame and fear-mongering used by the government and the mortgage banking industry to keep underwater homeowners from acting in their financial best interest,” Mr. White said.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Hey all you ass-wipe, tea-bag loving, self-loathing traitors to your class: News Flash! Your rich masters are the real parasites. Where is your God now?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

( and note:

1950s - top rate 90%
1980s - 2000s ~~ 35% - what are the bands and rates, exactly?
).

What of capital gains tax (where most of the income of the rich comes from)?

What of all the (legal for the rich) tax avoidance measures?

... And what of corporations incorporated in offshore jurisdictions, or close to it?

What shall the WEEKEND bring?

What area of popular culture has yet to be exploited? What corner of history needs to be unearthed? Which principles need dusting off and showcasing?

Do I hear any nominations from the floor?

One of the hot topics this week is John Boehner's America. We could explore the 50's--although frankly, I wasn't even born for half of it...I'd need help from the early Boomers among us.

DU can get into serious trouble. This thread can also get locked. The limit is four paragraphs. Exceptions are press releases and some blog posts but not serious news articles such as Talking Points Memo and mainline DailyKos features.

Thank you.

from EconomPic -

BusinessWeek details:

Consumer borrowing in the U.S. dropped in May more than forecast, a sign Americans are less willing to take on debt without an improvement in the labor market.
Borrowing that’s increased twice since the end of 2008 shows consumer spending, which accounts for about 70 percent of the economy, will be restrained as Americans pay down debt. Banks also continue to restrict lending following the collapse of the housing market, Fed officials said after their policy meeting last month.

“The trend in consumer deleveraging is clear as credit has declined 11 of the last 13 months,” Joseph LaVorgna, chief U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. in New York, said in a note to clients. “Credit card debt continues to be paid down at a heady pace.”

The key in the chart below is the blue line (total). Notice that besides a blip in the early 90's overall levels of consumer debt went one direction for 60+ years and we have never seen both revolving (i.e. credit cards) and non-revolving debt decrease (let alone crash) simultaneously.

Go to source link to see the dramatic chart.

...
I had been wondering why we hadn’t seen more reports of CRE related losses. Banking experts like Chris Whalen and Josh Rosner have been talking for some time about the time bombs sitting on the books of medium sized and smaller banks (well big banks too, but CRE is is usually a bigger % of equity at smaller banks).


Most of it is construction lending, and construction lending is close to Ponzi finance: interest on the loan is simply paid out of proceeds. Cash is going out the door all through the building process, and builders usually can sign up tenants only when the project is fairly far along.

Even worse, CRE projects that go bad often deliver loss severities in excess of 100%. Not only does the lender lose his principal, but he usually has to pay to demolish the project in order to sell the land.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Banks hold some $176 billion of souring commercial-real-estate loans, according to an estimate by research firm Foresight Analytics. About two-thirds of bank commercial real-estate loans maturing between now and 2014 are underwater, meaning the property is worth less than the loan on it, Foresight data show. U.S. commercial-real-estate values remain 42% below their October 2007 peak and only slightly above the low they hit in October 2009, according to Moody’s Investors Service.

More at Naked Capitalism

by CalculatedRisk

From Sharon Bernstein at the LA Times: Jobs outlook for small businesses may be getting bleaker:

Intuit's data show that small businesses hired just 18,000 additional workers last month. That's still positive territory, but it's less than a third of the 60,000 that were added in February, when it seemed that an employment recovery was imminent. Additional hiring dropped steadily during the spring, to 40,000 in April and 32,000 in May. Another payroll company, Automatic Data Processing Inc., painted an even gloomier picture, saying that small businesses lost 1,000 jobs nationwide in June.

According to surveys by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), the problem isn't lack of financing or government regulation - the problem is a "shortage of customers".

Additional information: NFIB Report at Calculated Risk

9:36
Dow 10,137.18 1.81 (0.02%)
Nasdaq 2,178.18 2.78 (0.13%)
S&P 500 1,069.94 0.31 (0.03%)
10-Yr Bond 3.05% 0.34
NYSE Volume 155,066,968.75
Nasdaq Volume 58,330,097.66

She had me at Hello:

http://wholeearth.com/issue/2091/article/27/places.to.intervene.in.a.system


Consider the national debt. It's a negative bathtub, a money hole. The rate at which it sinks is the annual deficit. Tax income makes it rise, government expenditures make it fall. Congress and the president argue endlessly about the many parameters that open and close tax faucets and spending drains. Since those faucets and drains are connected to the voters, these are politically charged parameters. But, despite all the fireworks, and no matter which party is in charge, the money hole goes on sinking, just at different rates.

The amount of land we set aside for conservation. The minimum wage. How much we spend on AIDS research or Stealth bombers. The service charge the bank extracts from your account. All these are numbers, adjustments to faucets. So, by the way, is firing people and getting new ones. Putting different hands on the faucets may change the rate at which they turn, but if they're the same old faucets, plumbed into the same system, turned according to the same information and rules and goals, the system isn't going to change much. Bill Clinton is different from George Bush, but not all that different.



An interesting framework. Now if we could just get the people with the poles to start poking at those leverage points.

Spain’s Cabinet approved changes to rules governing savings banks in a bid to reduce the influence of regional politicians on their management.

...

Elected politicians won’t be able to serve in the lenders’ management, even as regional parliaments will choose officials to represent them in the savings banks, Finance Minister Elena Salgado told a news conference after a weekly Cabinet meeting.

...

As part of the overhaul, the cajas will be able to sell shares known as “cuotas participativas” with voting rights that give an investor as much as 50 percent control. Salgado said she expects those shares to be “attractive,” allowing the lenders to raise capital.

A series of mergers backed by 11.2 billion euros ($14.2 billion) of loans from the government’s bank-rescue fund known as the FROB has reduced the number of savings banks to 19 from an initial 45, Salgado said.

/... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-09/spanish-savings-bank-measure-that-reduces-political-influence-is-approved.html

7/9/10 The Con of the Decade Part II by Charles Hugh Smith

The con of the decade (Part II) involves sheltering the Power Elites' income while raising taxes on the debt-serfs to pay the interest owed the Power Elites.

The Con of the Decade (Part II) meshes neatly with the first Con of the Decade. Yesterday I described how the financial Plutocracy can transfer ownership of the Federal government's income stream via using the taxpayer's money to buy the debt that the taxpayers borrowed to bail out the Plutocracy.

In order for the con to work, however, the Power Elites and their politico toadies in Congress, the Treasury and the Fed must convince the peasantry that low tax rates on unearned income are not just "free market capitalism at its best" but that they are also "what the country needs to get moving again."

The first step of the con was successfully fobbed off on the peasantry in 2001: lower the taxes paid by the most productive peasants marginally while massively lowering the effective taxes paid by the financial Plutocracy.

The second part of the con is to mask much of the Power Elites' income streams behind tax shelters and other gaming-of-the-system so the advertised rate appears high to the peasantry but the effective rate paid on total income is much much lower.

Step three is to convince the peasantry that $600 in unearned income (capital gains) should be taxed in the same way as $600 million. The entire key to the U.S. tax code is to tax earned income heavily but tax unearned income (the majority of the Plutocracy's income is of course unearned) not at all or very lightly.

The last step of the con is to raise taxes on the productive peasantry to provide the revenues needed to pay the Plutocracy its interest on Treasuries. If the "Bush tax cuts" are repealed, the actual effective rates paid on unearned income will remain half (20%) of the rates on earned income (wages, salaries, profits earned from small business, etc.) which are roughly 40% at higher income levels.

lots more...
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogjuly10/con-of-decade-pt2-07-10.html


from yesterday
7/8/10 The Con of the Decade Part I
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogjuly10/con-of-decade07-10.html

Thankyou.

I looked for it in its usual place but couldn't find it.
Is there a WEE edition this week? Thanks.

:shrug:

I have to worry if there's no WEE.

(Up a little. Good day.)
Swam in Lake Michigan and sat behind a bleak factory both without internet access.
(Debt under Obama seems to jump up big then drop slowly maybe up a little and down a little for days--repeat.)
= Held by the Public + Intragovernmental(FICA)
= 8,627,557,422,121.00 + 4,554,434,292,010.18
UP 13,416,608.65 + UP 4,333,522,940.90

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

THINKING IN BILLIONS: Think 3 or 4 dollars per billion in a 310-Million person America.
If every American, man, woman and child puts in $3.23 THAT'S 1B$, and $3,229.70 makes 1T$.
A family of three: Mom, Dad, Child: $9.69, ABOUT TEN BUCKS for a 1B$ federal program.
I hope that is clear. However, I'd suggest using $3 per 1B$ to underestimate it.
Use $4 per 1B$ to overestimate the cost when thinking: Is the federal program worth it?
Aid to Dependant Children: 2B$/yr =$8/yr(a movie a year) Family of 3: $24/yr(an hour of bowling)

PERSONALIZED DEBT:
Every 13 seconds we net gain another American, so at the end of the workday of the report, there should be 309,626,577 people in America.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html ON 04/09/2010 15:49 -> 309,034,742
Currently, each of these Americans owe $42,573.84.
A family of three owes $127,721.51. (And that is IN ADDITION to their mortgage.)

ANALYSIS:
There were 22 reports in the last 30 days.
The average for the last 22 reports is 5,899,401,629.29.
The average for the last 30 days would be 4,326,227,861.48.

There were 252 reports in 365 days of FY2007 averaging 1.99B$ per report, 1.37B$/day.
There were 253 reports in 366 days of FY2008 averaging 4.02B$ per report, 2.78B$/day.
There were 75 reports in 112 days of GWB's part of FY2009 averaging 8.03B$ per report, 5.38B$/day.
There were 174 reports in 253 days of Obama's part of FY2009 averaging 7.33B$ per report, 5.07B$/day so far.
There were 249 reports in 365 days of FY2009 averaging 7.57B$ per report, 5.16B$/day.
There were 191 reports in 280 days of FY2010 averaging 6.66B$ per report, 4.54B$/day.
Above line should be okay

PROJECTION:
There are 928 days remaining in this Obama 1st term.
By that time the debt could be between 14.5 and 18.0T$.
It could be higher. It could be lower.

HISTORICAL:
President's term begins and ends on Jan 20.
(Guess who might want to hide the Reagan Bush years. Jan 20 data is missing before 1993.)
01/20/1993 _4,188,092,107,183.60 WJC Inaugural
01/22/2001 _5,728,195,796,181.57 WJC (UP 1,540,103,688,997.97)
01/20/2009 10,626,877,048,913.08 GWB (UP 4,898,681,252,731.43)
07/07/2010 13,181,991,714,131.18 BHO (UP 2,555,114,665,218.10 so far since Obama took office.)

FISCAL YEAR DEBT CHANGE, Sep 30 prior year to Sep 30 named year:
(One "* " for each 40B$ reached)
FY1994 +0,281,261,026,873.94 ------------* * * * * * * WJC
FY1995 +0,281,232,990,696.07 ------------* * * * * * * WJC
FY1996 +0,250,828,038,426.34 ------------* * * * * * WJC
FY1997 +0,188,335,072,261.61 ------------* * * * WJC
FY1998 +0,113,046,997,500.28 ------------* * WJC
FY1999 +0,130,077,892,735.81 ------------* * * WJC
FY2000 +0,017,907,308,253.43 ------------WJC
FY2001 +0,133,285,202,313.20 ------------* * * C&B
01-WJC +0,053,598,528,417.78 ------------* WJC 31% of FY, 40% of FY-Debt
01-GWB +0,079,686,673,895.42 ------------* GWB 69% of FY, 60% of FY-Debt
FY2002 +0,420,772,553,397.10 ------------* * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2003 +0,554,995,097,146.46 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2004 +0,595,821,633,586.70 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2005 +0,553,656,965,393.18 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2006 +0,574,264,237,491.73 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2007 +0,500,679,473,047.25 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2008 +1,017,071,524,649.92 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2009 +1,885,104,106,599.30 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * B&O
09GWB +0,602,152,152,000.60 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB 31% of FY, 32% of FY-Debt
09-BHO +1,282,951,954,598.70 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BHO 69% of FY, 68% of FY-Debt
FY2010 +1,272,162,710,619.40 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BHO
Endof10 +1,658,354,962,057.43 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Linear Projection

LAST FIFTEEN REPORTS OF ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC DEBT(NOT FICA):
06/16/2010 +000,179,185,558.18 ------------********
06/17/2010 -040,132,025,764.65 -
06/18/2010 +000,218,467,463.90 ------------********
06/21/2010 -000,091,646,713.41 ---- Mon
06/22/2010 -000,064,399,407.68 ----
06/23/2010 +000,605,957,540.69 ------------********
06/24/2010 -003,383,268,122.91 --
06/25/2010 +000,258,141,060.04 ------------********
06/28/2010 -000,856,644,286.03 --- Mon
06/29/2010 +000,753,506,197.45 ------------********
06/30/2010 +077,231,903,487.92 ------------**********
07/01/2010 -006,671,631,742.50 --
07/02/2010 +000,460,030,174.48 ------------********
07/06/2010 +000,075,213,990.44 ------------******* Tue
07/07/2010 +000,013,416,608.65 ------------*******

28,596,206,044.57 Total of 15 above reports.

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

For a prettier and more explanatory view of our nation's debt:
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
DUer primer on National debt

(Debt to the penny keeps changing. Stuff is missing. Best to keep our own history.) LAST REPORT:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4457029&mesg_id=4457099

(Up some. Good day.)
Talked and talked and talked all night long, now I'm tired and way behind on my reading with so much other stuff to do. But, a few minutes in a Great Lake after a hot day out over the industrial expanse of concrete on a sweltering day felt like tried and true relief known in simpler ancient times for me bundled into a few of what should be more minutes of ecstasy in what was then the now.
(Debt under Obama seems to jump up big then drop slowly maybe up a little and down a little for days--repeat.)
= Held by the Public + Intragovernmental(FICA)
= 8,639,388,337,726.93 + 4,552,846,512,587.28
UP 11,830,915,605.93 + DOWN 1,587,779,422.90

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

THINKING IN BILLIONS: Think 3 or 4 dollars per billion in a 310-Million person America.
If every American, man, woman and child puts in $3.23 THAT'S 1B$, and $3,229.63 makes 1T$.
A family of three: Mom, Dad, Child: $9.69, ABOUT TEN BUCKS for a 1B$ federal program.
I hope that is clear. However, I'd suggest using $3 per 1B$ to underestimate it.
Use $4 per 1B$ to overestimate the cost when thinking: Is the federal program worth it?
Aid to Dependant Children: 2B$/yr =$8/yr(a movie a year) Family of 3: $24/yr(an hour of bowling)

PERSONALIZED DEBT:
Every 13 seconds we net gain another American, so at the end of the workday of the report, there should be 309,633,224 people in America.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html ON 04/09/2010 15:49 -> 309,034,742
Currently, each of these Americans owe $42,606.01.
A family of three owes $127,818.02. (And that is IN ADDITION to their mortgage.)

ANALYSIS:
There were 22 reports in the last 30 days.
The average for the last 22 reports is 6,148,990,948.22.
The average for the last 30 days would be 4,509,260,028.69.

There were 252 reports in 365 days of FY2007 averaging 1.99B$ per report, 1.37B$/day.
There were 253 reports in 366 days of FY2008 averaging 4.02B$ per report, 2.78B$/day.
There were 75 reports in 112 days of GWB's part of FY2009 averaging 8.03B$ per report, 5.38B$/day.
There were 174 reports in 253 days of Obama's part of FY2009 averaging 7.33B$ per report, 5.07B$/day so far.
There were 249 reports in 365 days of FY2009 averaging 7.57B$ per report, 5.16B$/day.
There were 192 reports in 281 days of FY2010 averaging 6.68B$ per report, 4.56B$/day.
Above line should be okay

PROJECTION:
There are 927 days remaining in this Obama 1st term.
By that time the debt could be between 14.5 and 18.0T$.
It could be higher. It could be lower.

HISTORICAL:
President's term begins and ends on Jan 20.
(Guess who might want to hide the Reagan Bush years. Jan 20 data is missing before 1993.)
01/20/1993 _4,188,092,107,183.60 WJC Inaugural
01/22/2001 _5,728,195,796,181.57 WJC (UP 1,540,103,688,997.97)
01/20/2009 10,626,877,048,913.08 GWB (UP 4,898,681,252,731.43)
07/08/2010 13,192,234,850,314.21 BHO (UP 2,565,357,801,401.13 so far since Obama took office.)

FISCAL YEAR DEBT CHANGE, Sep 30 prior year to Sep 30 named year:
(One "* " for each 40B$ reached)
FY1994 +0,281,261,026,873.94 ------------* * * * * * * WJC
FY1995 +0,281,232,990,696.07 ------------* * * * * * * WJC
FY1996 +0,250,828,038,426.34 ------------* * * * * * WJC
FY1997 +0,188,335,072,261.61 ------------* * * * WJC
FY1998 +0,113,046,997,500.28 ------------* * WJC
FY1999 +0,130,077,892,735.81 ------------* * * WJC
FY2000 +0,017,907,308,253.43 ------------WJC
FY2001 +0,133,285,202,313.20 ------------* * * C&B
01-WJC +0,053,598,528,417.78 ------------* WJC 31% of FY, 40% of FY-Debt
01-GWB +0,079,686,673,895.42 ------------* GWB 69% of FY, 60% of FY-Debt
FY2002 +0,420,772,553,397.10 ------------* * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2003 +0,554,995,097,146.46 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2004 +0,595,821,633,586.70 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2005 +0,553,656,965,393.18 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2006 +0,574,264,237,491.73 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2007 +0,500,679,473,047.25 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2008 +1,017,071,524,649.92 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB
FY2009 +1,885,104,106,599.30 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * B&O
09GWB +0,602,152,152,000.60 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * GWB 31% of FY, 32% of FY-Debt
09-BHO +1,282,951,954,598.70 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BHO 69% of FY, 68% of FY-Debt
FY2010 +1,282,405,846,802.50 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BHO
Endof10 +1,665,758,484,280.83 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Linear Projection

LAST FIFTEEN REPORTS OF ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC DEBT(NOT FICA):
06/17/2010 -040,132,025,764.65 -
06/18/2010 +000,218,467,463.90 ------------********
06/21/2010 -000,091,646,713.41 ---- Mon
06/22/2010 -000,064,399,407.68 ----
06/23/2010 +000,605,957,540.69 ------------********
06/24/2010 -003,383,268,122.91 --
06/25/2010 +000,258,141,060.04 ------------********
06/28/2010 -000,856,644,286.03 --- Mon
06/29/2010 +000,753,506,197.45 ------------********
06/30/2010 +077,231,903,487.92 ------------**********
07/01/2010 -006,671,631,742.50 --
07/02/2010 +000,460,030,174.48 ------------********
07/06/2010 +000,075,213,990.44 ------------******* Tue
07/07/2010 +000,013,416,608.65 ------------*******
07/08/2010 +011,830,915,605.93 ------------**********

40,247,936,092.32 Total of 15 above reports.

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

For a prettier and more explanatory view of our nation's debt:
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
DUer primer on National debt

(Debt to the penny keeps changing. Stuff is missing. Best to keep our own history.) LAST REPORT:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4458316&mesg_id=4459712