STOCK MARKET WATCH, Friday January 22

[ozymandius]

Source: du

STOCK MARKET WATCH, Friday January 22, 2010

Bush Administration Officials Convicted = 1
Name(s): David Safavian

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

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

AT THE CLOSING BELL ON January 21, 2010

Dow... 10,389.88 -213.27 (-2.01%)
Nasdaq... 2,265.70 -25.55 (-1.12%)
S&P 500... 1,116.48 -21.56 (-1.89%)
Gold future... 1,103 -9.60 (-0.86%)
10-Yr Bond... 3.59 -0.06 (-1.62%)
30-Year Bond 4.49 -0.04 (-0.90%)

---

U.S. FUTURES & MARKETS INDICATORS
NASDAQ FUTURES..............................................S&P FUTURES

Market Conditions During Trading Hours

GOLD, EURO, YEN, Loonie, Silver and US$

---

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

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

---

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

[ozymandius]

1. Market Observation

Correction in Progress
BY MARTIN GOLDBERG

The market has entered into a correction and I think it is likely that there will be more correction to follow. The first part of the correction thus far has lasted only two (2) days and is less than 3% in magnitude. The reason why I think there will be more correction to follow is that the market is still overbought in the short term. Momentum appears to be weak. And the latest up-leg hasn’t seen any significant correction in 2-2/3 months (until this week). Since the market bottom in March, even though corrections have been relatively short in both duration and magnitude, they still tended to be greater than the small 3% that we have seen so far. Many a professional and amateur technician pointed to narrow range bound market which began in early December and continued most of that month. They suggested that the direction of the “breakout” from that narrow range would indicate the market’s longer term trend. At that time a sharp technician and friend, Ike Iossif, pointed out that because a lot of folks were carefully watching this very thing, we should be on the lookout for a false break out. This was similar to early July, when practically the entire financial community saw and called the breaking of the apparent head-and-shoulders reversal as a signal of the beginning of a new downtrend. In addition, there was another clue of a fake out when the apparent breakout to the upside occurred during the winter holiday season on exceptionally low trading volume. The New Year started off with a week long rally but again, the relative volume was tepid. And most recently, Monday’s rally was on particularly low volume compared to its surrounding high volume down days. ...

Ultimately interest rates must rise; but that is not to say that a bond market in the short to intermediate term rally does not present the long bond with the 2nd greatest selling opportunity of a lifetime.

Finally, it will be important to see how those stocks which, although great companies, are trading on bullish sentiment only. Apple, Google and Amazon would be a quick study. Google, in the midst of a correction has a market cap of $185 billion and is reporting their results after the close. Amazon sits on support and the pattern is head-and-shoulders; we just don’t know whether it is the continuation or the reversal type. As shown below, $125/share is a serious technical level with serious Nasdaq market implications.

http://www.financialsense.com/Market/wrapup.htm

[ozymandius]

2. no goobermental reports today n/t

[ozymandius]

3. Oil hovers near $76 in Asia amid weak demand

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia – Oil prices hovered near $76 a barrel Friday in Asia, with gains tempered by evidence of weak demand after government figures showed the United States continues to use less energy than last year. ...

Oil spent most of Asian trading below $76 a barrel, partly due to a tumble in stock marets after President Barack Obama proposed tougher bank regulations, which may see less hot money flowing into commodities markets. ....

America is consuming less petroleum than the same time last year, and refineries, which have struggled to pass higher crude costs along to consumers, are now operating at the lowest levels since September 2008. Natural gas supplies dropped more than expected to 2.6 trillion cubic feet and are now slightly lower than the five-year average.

In other Nymex trading in February contracts, heating oil rose 0.7 cent to $1.99 a gallon, while gasoline rose 1.2 cent to $1.995 a gallon. Natural gas futures gained 5 cents to $5.665 per 1,000 cubic feet.

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

[ozymandius]

4. Obama hits Wall Street, pushes for bank limits

WASHINGTON – Embracing Depression-era policy and populist politics, a combative President Barack Obama chastised big Wall Street banks Thursday and urgently called for limits on their size and investments to stave off a new economic meltdown.

Investors responded by dumping bank stock.

Obama's rhetoric covered the whole financial industry, but the key changes will affect only a few high-profile players, including JPMorgan Chase & Co., while sparing investment banks like Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The move could undercut Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's strategy of maintaining close ties with the financial industry as part of the administration's overhaul efforts. ....

Obama's announcement included changes that have been advocated for over a year by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker — who appeared with the president at the White House — particularly by endorsing Volcker's proposal to ban banks that take deposits from also trading stocks for their own profit. The change would separate commercial banks from investment banks, a line that was blurred a decade ago by the repeal of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100122/ap_on_bi_ge/us_financial_overhaul

---

This article brushes into editorializing with what I consider to be an unfair extrapolation. There is an accusation that Obama's regulatory overhaul would provide automatic support for failing institutions. As for me: I have seen no evidence of this effect. I would extrapolate that if this is Volcker's plan then automacity in providing support for failing institutions would be outside the realm of what I would expect from Volcker.

Oh - one last thing: click through to see the photo of Geithner behind Obama. His expression and distance from the podium says volumes.

[ozymandius]

7. Geithner voiced concern on US bank limits-sources

....
Geithner is concerned that the proposed limits on big banks' trading and size could impact U.S. firms' global competitiveness, the sources said, speaking anonymously because Geithner has not spoken publicly about his reservations.

He also has concerns that the limits do not necessarily get at the root of the problems and excesses that fueled the recent financial meltdown, the sources said. ...

The White House official said Obama's economic team considered the concern that proprietary trading was not at the heart of the problems that fueled the financial crisis.

But it concluded that reform needed to be about more than just fighting the last war, it needed to address sources of future risk as well, the official said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100121/pl_nm/us_obama_financials_rift

---

I am willing to bet that this legislation is just a start. Volcker appears to be driving this thing. That says to me that regulations will begin to work on the outside of the banking periphery and move towards core structures which allowed the biggest banks to become too complex.

[Joe Chi Minh]

18. Is it just me, or did that heading make anyone else burst out laughing?

It sounds a bit like me saying, 'I'm not sure about Einstein's theories of relativity. They sound a bit too conjectural to me'. (I dropped physics after my second year at high scool and only passed 'O' Level Maths the second time. Not that Albert was a hot-shot at Maths - but a bit better than me, many would have it, I dare say.

[ozymandius]

21. I laughed.

Because this is what I would expect Geithner to say (while he wears his favorite trollop costume with super deluxe kneepads) and signaling to his bankster buddies that he really, really wants that posh gig in the private sector when his time in government is served.

[TalkingDog]

105. Yeah, Mrs. E. doesn't get nearly the credit she deserves

for walking him through the tough bits of the maths for E=MC2.

He was a visionary. He understood the relationship of things. Translating that into precise formulas is a bit too workman like for people to find it sexy. We have that monkey tendency to look for alphas. Mrs. E was a 2nd in command at best.

But at least he gave her they money from the Nobel Prize long after they were divorced. He kept the trophy.

[Joe Chi Minh]

108. But the odd thing is, a chap on here posted a page of mathematics

as if only this computation, rather than Einstein's theory and its quite simple if bizarre, logical implications, could not only describe what happens, but explain its implications! Obviously, the very notion of 'inter-subjectivity', rather than 'objectivity' was beyond him. But he was quite confident his page of maths explained the implications of the special theory.

I'm sure he thinks Einstein's theories would have proceeded from the mathematics, and not vice versa.

[TalkingDog]

111. Theories and genesis.

Many people think maths preceed concept.

That is why they mistakenly think learning "facts" is more important than having experience. They end up full of information, but without working knowledge.

[Joe Chi Minh]

112. Spot on. Ironically, on here, the young atheist 'scientismificists' who posture as the only

people who are rational, are the soul of stupidity.

They sneer at Intelligent Design (a tautology, if ever there was one), despite the fact that science is now almost entirely devoted to intelligent design for commercial production.... Even theoretical physics, for the reason you state.

Invoking Einstein's express disbelief in a personal god, it is arguable (at least, dumbing down for contemporary received opinion) that he was an atheist, despite his also express, indeed, emphatic denial of that tag. He was transparently a theist.

As for his aesthetic criterion when choosing his hypotheses, I wonder what magical explanation our materialist friends have come up with for that. All chemical processes....

[TalkingDog]

113. Are we twin children of different mothers?

American "skepticism" is anything but. As for the atheist/skeptics - I've always wanted to find one that could answer the question: If the definition of skepticism is: withholding judgement without substantial proof, how can they be both atheist and skeptic? A skeptic who actually adhered to the tenet would, at best, be agnostic = I don't know. Atheism flatly declares: There is no god.

So they can make a irrevocable and definitive declaration on a subject which cannot be studied scientifically (yet?), but don't see the irony of saying they practice skepticism.

[ozymandius]

8. UPDATE 1-Bank curbs hit Europe firms with US exposure hardest

LONDON, Jan 22 (Reuters) - European bank shares slid on Friday on fears they will be hit by far-reaching U.S. plans to limit bank activity in lucrative operations and by the threat that other countries will back similar curbs on the industry.

Some European banks could see a small bite taken out of profits by the proposals, but the main impact is the threat that political and regulatory clouds will continue to hang over the sector for months. ...


European banks also fell on the news in late trading on Thursday, and by 0815 GMT the DJ Stoxx European Bank index .SX7P was down 1.6 percent at 213 points.

Hardest hit were European banks with big U.S. businesses, but shares of HSBC, Europe's biggest bank, were less affected because of the institution's greater focus on Asian markets.

Credit Suisse (CSGN.VX), Deutsche Bank (DBKGn.DE), Barclays (BARC.L) led fallers, with shares in each down about 4 percent. UBS (UBSN.VX), Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS.L), Societe Generale (SOGN.PA) and Santander (SAN.MC) shed over 2 percent.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60L0IE20100122?type=marketsNews

[Po_d Mainiac]

22. Boy it will really suck when they have to bet with their own money

:donut: Good Morning

[ozymandius]

10. Obama Bank-Plan Impact Hinges on How to Define Client Trades

Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- President Obama’s plan to curb risk- taking by banks hinges on how rigidly regulators define proprietary trading at firms such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Goldman Sachs, which generated at least 76 percent of 2009 revenue from trading and principal investments, gets the “great majority” of transactions from customers, according to Chief Financial Officer David Viniar. About “10-ish percent” of the New York-based firm’s revenue comes from “walled-off proprietary business that has nothing to do with clients,” he said on a conference call yesterday. ....

The White House defines proprietary trades as those not done for the benefit of customers, according to a senior administration official. Regulators would have the power to ask banks whether certain trades are related to client business, the official said. If they’re not, the regulators could order firms to exit the positions. ....

Obama also proposed expanding a 10 percent cap on banks’ market share of deposits to curtail increases in liabilities. He said he wants to protect taxpayers from further bailouts, such as those provided through the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, passed under former President George Bush in late 2008. Obama voted for the program.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aKJuUZlozezE&pos=11

[ozymandius]

13. "Clearly This is Their First Rodeo" - Mark Thoma draws distinctions between trades

From Economist's View:

• Obama has proposed banning banks' prop trading desks and internal hedge funds. I'm fine with that, as long as it's done properly. From a P&L perspective, this is obviously bad for the Street. From a public policy perspective though, there's really no compelling reason why the banks need to have prop trading desks or internal hedge funds. ...

Some people will claim that it's impossible to distinguish between market-making trades and proprietary trades, but that argument is completely baseless. The banks themselves already distinguish between their market-making trades and their proprietary trades, as there's a whole different set of rules for proprietary versus market-making trades. So don't be fooled by that argument.

• This, from John Taylor, is just sad:

"(N)ot one counterparty, derivative counterparty to Lehman, filed for bankruptcy after the Lehman case. The major creditors who did not fail. So it's hard to find a direct knock on effects from that in the data."

What?! First of all, Lehman's biggest derivatives counterparties — the other dealers — were virtually all bailed out by their governments. Second of all, there were lots of hedge funds that failed because of their open derivatives positions with Lehman, and especially with Lehman Brothers International (Europe). The fact that John Taylor didn't know about these hedge fund liquidations at the time doesn't mean they never occurred. They occurred. Oh believe me, they occurred.
more here

---

Thoma is very pessimistic about anything getting through Congress that achieves the intent of these proposals. He has a point - given the ineffectual meandering that we have become accustomed to seeing in House and Senate banking committees.

[Demeter]

26. another good paragraph

In any event, I don't even know why I took the time to write about this, because there's zero chance the proposals Obama announced today will ever be law. This was a fairly transparent political stunt — the White House needed to do something to take the media's focus off of health care 24/7, so they flew in Volcker and announced some proposals that sound good to the media. The two Senate staffers I talk to regularly both said their offices were basically ignoring Obama's proposals, because even if the White House fights for them (which they won't), Chris Dodd has no intention of inserting them into his committee's bill. I like how some people think Obama's proposals represent a fundamental turning point on financial reform, because....well, clearly this is their first rodeo. (Hence the uber-quixotic language they use to describe financial reform.)

http://economicsofcontempt.blogspot.com/2010/01/few-more-assorted-thoughts-on-financial.html

[Joe Chi Minh]

64. Obama's words have sounded so hollow for so long now (in political terms), even

if he does come up with the goods which the words are intended to signify, at least to Joe Public, it will be his deeds not his words that will be the oxygen for his regime's life-support for some time now, I dare say. And I mean people-oriented actions, not corporate people(!)-oriented. Oh, I do beg your pardon, Messrs corporations, Sirs....

[Ghost Dog]

14. The man behind Obama's war on Wall Street (UK Tory view)

...Obama’s latest plan to prevent a repeat of the financial crisis and the ensuing taxpayer-funded bailout has considerable policy substance to back it up. Whatever the machinations surrounding the timing, the man behind the plan, Paul Volcker, has been arguing the case for tougher contraints on the activities of big, systemically important banks for months.

This is what the former Federal Reserve chairman said in a statement to the House of Representatives banking and financial services committee in September, for example:

“As a general matter, I would exclude from commercial banking institutions, which are potential beneficiaries of official (i.e., taxpayer) financial support, certain risky activities entirely suitable for our capital markets.

Ownership or sponsorship of hedge funds and private equity funds should be among those prohibited activities. So should in my view a heavy volume of proprietary trading with its inherent risks. Some trading, it is reasonably argued, is necessary as part of a full service customer relationship. The distinction between “proprietary” and “customer-related” may be cloudy at the border. But surely by the active use of capital requirements and the exercise of supervisory authority, appropriate restraint can be maintained.

The point is not only the substantial risks inherent in capital market activities. There are deep-seated, almost unmanageable, conflicts of interest with normal banking relationships – individuals, businesses, investment management clients seeking credit, underwriting and unbiased advisory services. I also think we have learned enough about the challenges and distractions for management posed by the risks and complexities of highly diversified activities.”

Although his argument for radical action, rather than a series of more technical changes to capital requirements, for example, has not, until now, been the prevailing force, it is certainly not a fringe view. Others, include Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, believes even more drastic action – a total separation of investment and commercial banking – is required.

This would amount to a re-writing of the Glass-Steagall act, which came in four years after the 1929 Wall Street Crash, and Mr Volcker does not go this far, focusing instead on activities which create obvious conflicts of interest and put the stability of the banks involved at risk.

It is far from clear what legislation will eventually pass through Congress, let alone how other governments will react. And there is plenty of scope to mess up the execution.

But the logic of the move is sound. If banks are underwritten by the state, they should not be allowed to conduct risky activities which are not essential to their core business, and in fact may be against the interests of their clients. Because if things go horribly wrong, the taxpayer picks up the tab.

/... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/tracycorrigan/100003205/the-man-behind-obamas-war-on-wall-street/

[ozymandius]

17. Krugman supports the basic claim of taxpayer liability.

As I’ve written repeatedly, I don’t think that too-big-to-fail is at the heart of our financial problems. Nor do I think a sharp separation between narrow banking depository institutions and other financial players is a silver bullet: unless the shadow banking system is really reined in, financial institutions will create things that look like deposits, act like deposits, but don’t have an FDIC guarantee; yet in crisis, there will be strong incentives to bail them out anyway.

There's a bit more at Krugman's blog.

[Ghost Dog]

19. The Economist:

...With details yet to be hammered out, the plan’s effects are hard to gauge. Commercial banks may be unfazed by curbs on trading. Most have already pared their prop-trading desks. JPMorgan Chase derives a mere 1% of its revenues (and 3-5% of its investment bank’s) from such business. But having to divest Highbridge, a big hedge-fund firm, would be “horrible”, says a JPMorgan insider. The bank thinks that may not be necessary since its capital is not invested directly in Highbridge’s funds. But no one is sure.

Things could be trickier for investment banks that became bank holding companies during the crisis. Having built up its deposit base, Morgan Stanley would face a hard choice between remaining a bank and going back to being a broker that can trade freely. Goldman, which gets 10% or more of its revenue from prop-trading, will surely do the latter. That raises an awkward question: once it is cut loose from banking restrictions, and from Fed funding, would it not continue to enjoy implicit state backing? Would it really be allowed to fail if it blew up? Officials argue that other reforms, such as central clearing for derivatives, will make it easier to let such firms die. Convincing markets of that will be difficult.

Enforcement could be tricky, too. Regulators will struggle to differentiate between proprietary trades and those for clients (someone is on the other side of every trade) or hedging. Getting it wrong would be counter-productive: preventing banks from hedging their risks would make them less stable.

Moreover, the plan is unlikely to help much in solving the too-big-to-fail problem. Even shorn of prop-trading, the biggest firms will still be huge (though also less prone to the conflicts of interest that come with the ability to trade against clients). As for the new limits on non-deposit funding, officials admit that these are designed to prevent further growth rather than to force firms to shrink.

They may, in any case, be pointed at the wrong target. Curbing the use of deposits in “casino” banking is an understandable impulse, but some of the worst blow-ups of the crisis involved firms that were not deposit-takers, such as American International Group and Lehman Brothers. And much of the losses stemmed not from trading but from straightforward bad lending (think of Washington Mutual, Wachovia and HBOS).

That just leaves the question of whether the plan will make it through Congress. Scott Garrett, a congressman, captured the mood on the resurgent right when he branded the proposals “a transparent attempt at faux populism.” Republicans are torn between distaste for government heavy-handedness and reluctance to be seen giving scorned bankers an easy time.

/... http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15374543&source=features_box_main

[Po_d Mainiac]

23. Any closer and he'd be out in the hall ROFL n/t

[ozymandius]

5. Bank, economy fears weigh on global stocks

....
Obama laid out a tough programme on Thursday to limit "excessive" risk-taking and "protect" US taxpayers by preventing banks or financial institutions from owning, investing in or sponsoring hedge fund or private equity funds. ...

Blaming the banks for causing the economic crisis, he said: "My resolve to reform the system is only strengthened when I see a return to old practices at some of the very firms fighting reform." ...

In early European trade, Frankfurt slid 0.31 percent, Paris lost 0.26 percent while London was flat.

The Tokyo stock market closed down 2.56 percent, Sydney shed 1.59 percent and Hong Kong recovered from early heavy losses to finish 0.65-percent lower. ...

The concern with China came against a backdrop of investor nerves over the global economy as a whole, with the IMF and the United Nations this week both warning of a possible "double-dip recession" this year.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100122/ts_afp/stocksworldeconomy

[ozymandius]

6. Railroads signal a tepid US economic recovery

OMAHA, Neb. – The nation's railroad operators expect a tepid recovery for the U.S. economy in 2010, as both businesses and consumers continue to wrestle with the effects of the recession. ...

Union Pacific Corp., Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. and CSX Corp. — the nation's top three railroad companies — all say demand for coal, once a lucrative segment, is slumping as U.S. factories and homeowners use less electricity. And as people continue to spend sparingly, shipments of consumer goods will show a slight increase at best. ...

Burlington Northern says on its Web site that it transports enough lumber each year to build more than 500,000 homes and enough newsprint each year to print 1 billion Sunday newspapers.

Union Pacific reported a 17-percent drop in fourth-quarter net income Thursday to $551 million, or $1.08 per share. The Omaha-based company handled 5 percent fewer carloads during the quarter.

CSX on Tuesday said fourth-quarter net earnings rose 23 percent compared to a year ago. Burlington Northern's quarterly earnings fell to $536 million, or $1.55 per share, compared with $615 million, or $1.78 per share. Revenue fell 16 percent. The company expects any economic turnaround to be gradual.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100121/ap_on_bi_ge/us_earns_railroads

---

Transports are always a good way to gauge economic activity. Railroads and the Baltic Dry Index are two of the best examples. The corrugated cardboard manufacturing index is another sterling measure of economic health. Though for the latter - I have not seen any stats for many months.

[ozymandius]

9. Obama Proposal May Force JPMorgan, Goldman to Sell Buyout Units

Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. may have to sell some private-equity businesses and stop investing in buyouts under a proposal by President Barack Obama to limit bets made by banks with their own capital.

Obama asked Congress yesterday to prohibit banks from owning or making investments in private-equity and hedge funds that “are unrelated to serving customers.” While financial institutions could still manage the assets on behalf of clients, they wouldn’t be able to invest in their own funds or those run by firms such as Blackstone Group LP and KKR & Co.

The proposed rules may alter Wall Street’s role in private equity, where banks and investors commit money to buy companies, real estate and other assets. Banks also invest with buyout firms to help deepen their lending relationships. ....

JPMorgan may seek to divest its OneEquity Partners private- equity unit, according to a person familiar with the New York- based bank. OneEquity Partners manages $8 billion in direct investments, with holdings that include TV Guide.

The rules may affect Goldman Sachs’s principal investment group, which includes the New York-based company’s stake in Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd. and real estate. The group reported revenue of $1.17 billion last year.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=arBnX2c_SlkA&pos=1

---

Funny that a University of Chicago Booth School of Business professor would be sought to provide a contrarian point-of-view on this banking divestiture plan.

[icee]

45. Why don't you continue this thread? What does the market hate

the most? What happens as a result of financial structural changes during a nascent recovery?

[Demeter]

56. There Are Known Unknowns, and Unknown Unknowns

To quote a famous philosopher/war criminal...

[Festivito]

11. Debt: 01/20/2010 12,327,380,804,696.82 (UP 5,273,212,343.86) (Wed)

(Up a little. Debt seems to jump up big then drop slowly maybe up a little and down a little for days--repeat. Good day all.)

= Held by the Public + Intragovernmental(FICA)
= 7,814,389,191,716.30 + 4,512,991,612,980.52
UP 1,498,198,188.82 + UP 3,775,014,155.04

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 309-Million person America.
If every American, man, woman and child puts in $3.24 each THAT'S 1B$.
A family of three: Mom, Dad, Child: $9.72, ABOUT TEN BUCKS for a 1B$ 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 10 seconds we net gain another American, so at the end of the workday of the report, there should be 308,521,758 people in America.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html ON 11/07/2009 08:19 -> 307,879,272
Currently, each of these Americans owe $39,956.28.
A family of three owes $119,868.83. (And that is IN ADDITION to their mortgage.)

ANALYSIS:
There were 21 reports in the last 30 to 33 days.
The average for the last 21 reports is 10,923,697,301.44.
The average for the last 30 days would be 7,646,588,111.01.
The average for the last 33 days would be 6,951,443,737.28.
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$/day.
There were 75 reports in 112 days of FY2010 averaging 5.57B$ per report, 3.73B$/day.
Above line should be okay

PROJECTION:
There are 1,096 days remaining in this Obama 1st term.
By that time the debt could be between 13.8 and 19.9T$.
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)
01/20/2010 12,327,380,804,696.82 BHO (UP 1,700,503,755,783.74 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 +0,417,551,801,185.10 ------------* * * * * * * * * * BHO
Endof10 +1,360,771,494,933.59 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Linear Projection

LAST FIFTEEN REPORTS OF ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC DEBT(NOT FICA):
12/29/2009 -015,034,724,927.64 -
12/30/2009 +007,596,599,767.56 ------------*********
12/31/2009 +083,831,281,729.66 ------------**********
01/04/2010 -007,102,898,314.32 -- Mon
01/05/2010 +000,354,346,864.84 ------------********
01/06/2010 +000,123,816,367.19 ------------********
01/07/2010 -022,790,950,811.50 -
01/08/2010 -000,177,723,158.27 ---
01/11/2010 -000,226,209,166.36 --- Mon
01/12/2010 +000,163,748,521.92 ------------********
01/13/2010 -000,144,326,167.15 ---
01/14/2010 -025,105,278,682.17 -
01/15/2010 +057,080,501,160.91 ------------**********
01/19/2010 -000,292,818,574.91 --- Tue
01/20/2010 +001,498,198,188.82 ------------*********

79,773,562,798.58 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=4235273&mesg_id=4235289

[Festivito]

106. Debt: 01/21/2010 12,300,163,248,044.69 (DOWN 27,217,556,652.13) (Thu)

(Down big enough. Debt seems to jump up big then drop slowly maybe up a little and down a little for days--repeat. Good day all.)

= Held by the Public + Intragovernmental(FICA)
= 7,783,227,771,568.19 + 4,516,935,476,476.50
DOWN 31,161,420,148.11 + UP 3,943,863,495.98

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 309-Million person America.
If every American, man, woman and child puts in $3.24 each THAT'S 1B$.
A family of three: Mom, Dad, Child: $9.72, ABOUT TEN BUCKS for a 1B$ 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 10 seconds we net gain another American, so at the end of the workday of the report, there should be 308,530,398 people in America.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html ON 11/07/2009 08:19 -> 307,879,272
Currently, each of these Americans owe $39,866.94.
A family of three owes $119,600.82. (And that is IN ADDITION to their mortgage.)

ANALYSIS:
There were 21 reports in the last 30 to 31 days.
The average for the last 21 reports is 9,567,629,586.67.
The average for the last 30 days would be 6,697,340,710.67.
The average for the last 31 days would be 6,481,297,461.94.
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$/day.
There were 76 reports in 113 days of FY2010 averaging 5.14B$ per report, 3.45B$/day.
Above line should be okay

PROJECTION:
There are 1,095 days remaining in this Obama 1st term.
By that time the debt could be between 13.8 and 19.4T$.
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)
01/21/2010 12,300,163,248,044.69 BHO (UP 1,673,286,199,131.61 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 +0,390,334,244,532.90 ------------* * * * * * * * * BHO
Endof10 +1,260,814,152,694.77 ------------* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Linear Projection

LAST FIFTEEN REPORTS OF ADDITIONS TO PUBLIC DEBT(NOT FICA):
12/30/2009 +007,596,599,767.56 ------------*********
12/31/2009 +083,831,281,729.66 ------------**********
01/04/2010 -007,102,898,314.32 -- Mon
01/05/2010 +000,354,346,864.84 ------------********
01/06/2010 +000,123,816,367.19 ------------********
01/07/2010 -022,790,950,811.50 -
01/08/2010 -000,177,723,158.27 ---
01/11/2010 -000,226,209,166.36 --- Mon
01/12/2010 +000,163,748,521.92 ------------********
01/13/2010 -000,144,326,167.15 ---
01/14/2010 -025,105,278,682.17 -
01/15/2010 +057,080,501,160.91 ------------**********
01/19/2010 -000,292,818,574.91 --- Tue
01/20/2010 +001,498,198,188.82 ------------*********
01/21/2010 -031,161,420,148.11 -

63,646,867,578.11 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=4237515&mesg_id=4237542

[ozymandius]

12. HAMP Changes Coming

From Calculated Risk...

But what changes isn't exactly clear ...

From Peter Goodman at the NY Times: Treasury Weighs Fixes to a Program to Fend Off Foreclosures

The changes by the Treasury Department are expected to include greater assistance for homeowners no longer able to make mortgage payments because their paychecks have shrunk ... The Treasury was still debating the method ... looking at either direct cash assistance or a grace period in which borrowers could postpone payments. That component may not be announced next week, but would follow soon after.

...
This sounds like another delaying tactic.

More to read at CR.

[ozymandius]

15. Questions That Ben Bernanke Must Now Answer

From The Baseline Scenario

There are three specific questions that Bernanke must answer, in some convincing detail, if he is to shore up his weakening cause in the Senate.

• Does he support the President’s proposed emphasis on limiting the scope and scale of big banks?

• With regard to the key detail, is it his view that the size of big banks can be capped “as is” or – more reasonably – should we require these banks to contract or divest so as to return to the profile of system risk that prevailed say 15 or 20 years ago?

• If Congress cannot act in the short-term, because of opposition from Republicans and some Democrats, does he see the Fed’s role as taking the initiative in this arena – or will he wait passively for the legislature to act?

As running hard against the “too big to fail” banks is now a major theme of 2010 and beyond for the Democrats, how can any Democratic Senators feel comfortable voting for Ben Bernanke unless they know exactly what his position is on all of these points?

More at link, including the full proposal...

[Demeter]

16. What a Cartoon!

I heard tell that they polled some actual voters in Massachusetts.

Some that voted for Obama intentionally voted for the Tea Party candidate out of disgust. Others didn't go vote at all. And they listed the Health Care Deform specifically as their motivation.

They only have to put up with Brown until 2012. Let us salute the heroic Democrats of Massachusetts, willing to sacrifice their reps. to send a VERY CLEAR, UNMISTAKABLE, GENUINE THREAT to the President and his Chief of Staff.

[ozymandius]

20. I have come to accept the idea that Brown's victory was a shot across the bow.

I still, too, believe that there was complacency among Massachusetts democratic party bosses regarding the reliability of their base. Pure arrogance among the party, in other words, doomed Coakley as she waged an ineffectual and lackluster campaign. The same dynamic has afflicted Democrats in Georgia over the past three election cycles.

But I digress.

Polling data shows that voters, even Brown's voters, want earth shaking healthcare reform. If the beltway bubble people have any sense - they will take Tuesday's election results as a mild lump over doing essentially nothing. And in comparison - Tuesday's lump will be quite mild, indeed, to the severity of losses one can portend for November should Congressional Dems achieve nothing over the next months.

[tclambert]

24. Brown's voters want health care reform, but voted for a guy openly opposed to it?

The stupid! It burns!

American politics seems to have become dominated by the stupid. (I blame Bush. But I also blame the American people.) How worse will this get now that the Supreme Court says corporations and their lobbyists can spend however much they want to buy elections?

Sadly, I don't have a lobbyist or billions of dollars to look out for my interests. So I guess I don't count any more.

[Demeter]

28. What Congress and Obama and Dear Old Rahm Offered Was NOT Reform

so in the TRUE spirit of the Boston Tea Party, they threw this insane bill into the harbor. Tea Party agitators, take note.

[Tansy_Gold]

38. Absolutely. In fact the Rahm bill (or whatever the fuck you wanna call it)

apparently differs only slightly from the Romney care system in place in MA and not so well liked. The MA voters apparently knew more than "we" did about how the pending HRC bill would affect real people, and they wanted no more of it. At least that was my take on it.

But I could be wrong.




TG

[Demeter]

39. My Sister Who Lives in Massachuestts Says It's So

The state deficit is ballooning because there's no cost controls. And that's not counting the problems individuals are facing getting coverage.

[mbperrin]

55. One of the folks I attended college with says the same. Lives in Boston.

He thought then and thinks now that single payer is the only real solution.

[AnneD]

32. The Health Care reform....

was not health care reform. Dems failed to get the job done. They were too busy kissing GOP and Ins Co ass.

[Demeter]

40. Kucinich Shreds Democrats for Betraying the Promise of Change

http://rawstory.com/2010/01/exclusive-kucinich-shreds-democrats/

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) on Wednesday said the Massachusetts election was a "wake up call" for Democrats and that his party had better change course or it could suffer devastating losses come November.

"People elected Democrats in 2008 to change the direction," he told Raw Story in a nearly hour-long interview.

"And the same entrenched interests that George Bush could not shake, this current White House is having great difficulty in shaking. One could suggest they might be more entrenched than ever."

Kucinich staunchly defended liberalism but alleged that Democrats are not behaving like liberals.

"There's nothing liberal about the bailouts. There's nothing liberal about standing by and watching banks use public money to get their executive bonuses. There's nothing liberal about giving insurance companies carte blanche to charge anything they want for health care... Since when did that become liberal?"

"There's nothing liberal about letting coal and oil write climate change legislation," he added. "Are you kidding me?"

MORE AT LINK

[Tansy_Gold]

42. Exactly

And we told them that right here in SMW and WEE.

How stupid can they be????


(Answer: pretty amazingly, incomprehensibly stupid. . . . . )



TG, who did not get washed away in a flood, blown away by the wind, or sucked up into a tornado last night (And the dogs are all okay too!)

[Demeter]

57. Glad to Hear You're All Right

out in peaceful, perfect weather Arizona...

which reminds me of a joke.


I knew a man whose last name was Phenix "Just like Arizona," he'd say, "but without the 'O'."

And people who heard this would go around saying "Arizna?"

Buncha Densans.

[Tansy_Gold]

74. Kinda like my favorite, which I've posted here before but . . ..

There are only 10 different kinds of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.


Tansy Gold, lover of stupid but clever jokes

[bread_and_roses]

47. exactly - see AFL-CIO for an interesting poll

http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/01/21/the-working-class-has-spoken-will-democrats-listen/#more-24779

The Working Class Has Spoken. Will Democrats Listen?

...Our polling results show the election was not an endorsement of a Republican agenda or a call to abandon health care reform. Voters strongly disapprove of the job being done by congressional Republicans (26 percent approve and 58 percent disapprove), a much lower rating than they give to congressional Democrats (37 percent approve and 51 percent disapprove).

Other polls show the need for Democrats in Congress to take immediate action to create jobs, reform health care, stop catering to Wall Street and address the needs of America’s working class. As John Judis wrote, the election showed Democrats have lost ground primarily among white working and middle-class voters and senior citizens...

[Robbien]

66. A vote for Coakley was a vote in favor of the proposed insurance exec wet dream of a bill

A vote for Brown (or a stay home vote) meant the awful bill was dead and insurance execs have to go looking elsewhere to royally soak the public.



I believe that this special election was a godsend because it sent the message the public is not happy but only cost one seat in Congress. If DC is paying attention Dems have a chance of avoiding a bloodbath in Nov.

[AnneD]

31. Morning Marketeers...

:donut: and lurkers, I think the loss of Ted's seat was a lose the battle win the war sacrifice. Texas lost it's once Democratic majority the same way.

Yesterday I told you about the pastor that claimed Houston was another San Francisco. After reading the www.boycotthouston.com website, I realized these folks in Abilene have never even been to San Francisco. Well I have so I thought I would point out the differences as a public services.

1. We have a gay mayor, SF does not. I think Milk was on the Board of Supervisor-that seem to be the like the difference between the CEO vs the board of directors.
2. We have a 6 story Planned Parenthood center, SF does not. It is easier to get legally available abortions in California that it is in Tx, Okla., LA., Ak., NM., so we have to have a larger facility.
3. Beer is the drink of choice in Houston, wine is the choice in SF, Although wine is becoming more popular due to the growth of Texas wines grown in the area of Abilene-which is a dry county .
4 SF has hills, the only hills we have are the man made dirt or concrete recycling sites.
5.SF had Ghiardelli, Houston has taken over coffee importing and roasting since Katrina destroy the NOLA coffee industry.
6.Houston has more musicians, the only SF group that stands out is the Jefferson Airplane.
7.Houston is in Texas, SF is in California. We carry concealed weapons in Texas-they don't in SF. Enough said

I hope this clears up the confusion

Happy hunting and watch out for the bears.

[Po_d Mainiac]

25. Cross post .....Bair on the hot seat

Denninger and Zero Hedge are also posting it up

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x74891

[Demeter]

27. Everything We Do Has Just Become Pointless, Anyway

NOW can we impeach the Supremes? They have given away the country's government to the highest bidder.

[DemReadingDU]

29. I have been so upset since that decision yesterday

We people are nothing anymore. We really have been bought and sold to corporations.

[Demeter]

30. Campaign Launched to Amend Constitution, Overturning Today's Supreme Court Decision

Free Speech Rights Are For People, Not Corporations

http://www.freespeechforpeople.org

WATCH AND SHARE THIS VIDEO:
http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/35

A coalition of public interest organizations strongly condemned today's ruling by the US Supreme Court allowing unlimited corporate money in US elections and announced that it is launching a campaign to amend the United States Constitution to overturn the ruling. The groups, Voter Action, Public Citizen, the Center for Corporate Policy, and the American Independent Business Alliance, say the Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC poses a serious and direct threat to democracy. They aim, through their constitutional amendment campaign, to correct the judiciary's creation of corporate rights under the First Amendment over the past three decades. Immediately following the Court's ruling, the groups unveiled a new website – http://www.freespeechforpeople.org – devoted to this campaign.

"Free speech rights are for people, not corporations," says John Bonifaz, Voter Action's legal director. "In wrongly assigning First Amendment protections to corporations, the Supreme Court has now unleashed a torrent of corporate money in our political process unmatched by any campaign expenditure totals in US history. This campaign to amend the Constitution will seek to restore the First Amendment to its original purpose."

AND WE NEED TO IMPEACH THE ROBERT'S COURT, PRONTO

Passing a constitutional amendment is a long-term project that requires hard work and grassroots organizing before it will succeed. You can help the campaign reach its goal by helping educate others and spread the word. Here are some easy ways to get started:

Sign on:
http://www.freespeechforpeople.org

[DemReadingDU]

34. Good luck with that

Now that corporations can spend unlimited amounts of money, they will spend the money to defeat anything that is against their interests.

We need people in the streets, millions of people, a national protest against corporations and banksters.

Maybe when the financial Ponzi implodes and people have no money, no job, no house, no credit card, and are hungry because there will be no organizations to deliver food and water, then they will protest.

[Demeter]

37. In Any Event We Must Try

or take the advice of JB's wife: "Curse God and die".

JB by Archibald MacLeish is a dramatic retelling of the book of Job.

"J.B., published in 1958, is a play in verse based on the biblical story of Job. It represents Archibald MacLeish's responses to the horrors he saw during two world wars, including the Holocaust and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The author explains in the foreword to the acting edition of his play that turning to the Bible for a framework seems sensible ''when you are dealing with questions too large for you which, nevertheless, will not leave you alone." J.B. tells the story of a twentieth-century American banker-millionaire whom God commands be stripped of his family and his wealth but who refuses to turn his back on God. MacLeish wondered how modern people could retain hope and keep on living with all the suffering in the world and offered this play as an answer. J. B. learns that there is no justice in the world, that happiness and suffering are not deserved, and that people can still choose to love each other and live.

MacLeish had been earning his living as a poet for fifty years before this, his third verse play, was published. Shortly after the publication of the book, the play was produced on Broadway and underwent substantial revisions. There are, therefore, two versions of the play available for readers: the original book published by Houghton Mifflin and the acting script available from Samuel French. Both were published in 1958, and neither has ever gone out of print. J.B. won the Pulitzer Prize for drama in 1959 (MacLeish's third Pulitzer), as well as the Tony Award for best play. More important, the play sparked a national conversation about the nature of God, the nature of hope, and the role of the artist in society. " http://www.enotes.com/j-b/

[bread_and_roses]

44. Book of Job maybe for WE theme? Or maybe Sisyphus?

Seems apt. Or maybe, myth of Sisyphus, given the nature of our tasks in this century? I couldn't make it at all last weekend - working - so missed all the WE goodies - and since the news just keeps rolling, no time to go back. Besides, I've been obsessed with Haiti, the way I was with Katrina - I can't stop reading about it. Hoping to get to this weekend's edition, though.

[Demeter]

69. Next Weekend

This weekend is dedicated to the Native Americans (see post below)

[Dr.Phool]

46. Roberts flat out lied to their faces during his confirmation.

And they knew it. And they still confirmed him.

He denied ever hearing of the Federalist Society. And it was pointed out (before he was confirmed) that he was, in fact, One of it's leaders.

[Tansy_Gold]

48. And that was the point I made yesterday. Is resistance really futile?

I don't now. I'm depressed and also confused right now, so I'm not sure where to go with anything at the moment.

But I will tell you this, and I sure as hell hope AnneD is payin' attention: ;-)


Several years ago, when in my real life I played around with the idea of a real grassroots campaign of running for the presidency, I told friends that it would only work -- in terms of being a foil for the "real" candidates -- if we followed Margaret Mead's dictum. We gotta be committed, we gotta do this, and we gotta not give up. And none of the above is easy.

But IF -- IF -- Mead was correct and a small committed group of individuals is the only thing that has ever changed the world, then why not go ahead and try it?

We may not have the academic legal expertise of a Barack Obama or a Jonathan Turley, we may not have the political connections, and we sure as hell don't have the money, but don't we have enough passion to do this? Was it all wiped out by Citizens United V FEC? Did Dred Scott stop the abolition movement? Did the Comstock laws stop Margaret Sanger (or Hugh Hefner)?

I do get depressed over these things, and then I get angry. As I watched Alan Grayson on KO last night, all I could think of was Peter Finch/Howard Beale. We have a choice -- we can go to our windows and shout into the air that we're mad as hell, or we can actually do something about it.

I have a day job, so does AnneD. We can't spend all our time on DU writing essays about how we want to change the world, about what's wrong with it, about how spineless the existing Democratic party apparatus is, about what we'd do if we were in charge. But surely there's something all of us can do together??? Isn't there?

Remember -- Daily Kos started out as one person's blog.



Tansy Gold, poor but passionate

[fasttense]

51. Yes, there is something we can do.

Break out the torches and pitchforks and head for DC to march on the Dancing Supremes. If you can't go you can send money to help others go.

And we need to be there for weeks and months.

[Tansy_Gold]

52. How long do you think we'd last?

Serious question.

How many would we have to be to avoid arrest/silencing/slaughter by the Administration?

[Demeter]

58. That Depends on How Tight They Screw Us Down

The tighter the screw, the more people who have nothing to lose anyway, the bigger the movement, the better it gets.

It may take a generation. It may take three. But failure is impossible. Even death is an improvement over the hell on earth this ruling can create, if the PTB are stupid enough to push it.

Just ask South America.

[Dr.Phool]

60. Who cares?

I'm up for it.

My worst case scenario is coming to fruition. I think the US, as we know it, will dissolve in the next two years. Police state? Civil war? Succession?

The campaign cash machine kicked in yesterday. They're already auditioning and buying the next Congress. They won't have to buy more than a few Senators, seeing as how they've already got 41 repukes and a whole bunch of middle of the road fascists, AKA Conservadems.

They would have to impeach those 5 members of the SC tomorrow to put an end to this, and we know the likelihood of that happening, right.

The only thing that could derail this train, short of revolution, would itself spark revolution or civil war.

We're fucked.

[Loge23]

91. We're just witnessing the decline.

The country is shot. It died a long time ago really.
The people stopped being free and brave and essentially sold off their rights for the illusive prosperity of crumbs and the false security that a thing called Homeland Security wrought.
Into that breach stepped the corps. They still have shit to sell, so why not just run things in the absence of any credible leadership? Small businesses? Fuck 'em! In today's WSJ a right-wing lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, is quoted as saying that yesterday's coronation "rips the duct tape off the mouths of the American people" !!! That's how bizarro this country has become!
And now it's law. It has become "constitutional" for comglomerates to rule!
You want to protest? March on DC?
Me too. But know that we will become the "terrorists" as soon as we arrive en masse on the Mall.
Believe me, they have the whole thing figured out already.
If you are frustrated, upset, and feel hopeless - leave. Leave now while you can. Costa Rica, France, Mexico, Canada, wherever - just leave. Save what's left of your life and your assets and leave. This country is not coming back anytime soon.

[DemReadingDU]

94. But is any country safer?

For about 50 years, the whole world has been in a global financial Ponzi. When it implodes, it will affect everyone, around the world. some countries worse than others, but still, I can't think of anyone being truly safe.

[Dr.Phool]

95. That free speech is a funny thing.

I could get arrested in 5 minutes for walking around with a sign with a distasteful (or tasteful) message on it. A corporation can buy billboards, full-page ads, radio and tv ads, and whatever. Even if it had the same message that I had. They're unaccountable.

[alterfurz]

78. time for some inspiration from Marge Piercy!

What can they do
to you? Whatever they want.
They can set you up, they can
bust you, they can break
your fingers, they can
burn your brain with electricity,
blur you with drugs till you
can't walk, can’t remember, they can
take your child, wall up
your lover. They can do anything
you can’t stop them
from doing. How can you stop
them? Alone, you can fight,
you can refuse, you can
take what revenge you can
but they roll over you.

But two people fighting
back to back can cut through
a mob, a snake-dancing file
can break a cordon, an army
can meet an army.

Two people can keep each other
sane, can give support, conviction,
love, massage, hope, sex.
Three people are a delegation,
a committee, a wedge. With four
you can play bridge and start
an organization. With six
you can rent a whole house,
eat pie for dinner with no
seconds, and hold a fund raising party.
A dozen make a demonstration.
A hundred fill a hall.
A thousand have solidarity and your own newsletter;
ten thousand, power and your own paper;
a hundred thousand, your own media;
ten million, your own country.
It goes on one at a time,
it starts when you care
to act, it starts when you do
it again after they said no,
it starts when you say We
and know who you mean, and each
day you mean one more.

[Tansy_Gold]

82. yes yes yes a thousand times yes and thank you

i'm so frustrated so angry so frightened so ignorant and so filled with feelings that i don't know what to do next or how i'll do it or who will help me and we're all so scattered and we're not real just people and words and avatars and smileys and nonsense and no more alive to each other mostly than the corporations that are real and people and they'll eat us alive or hurt us and i don't think any of us is ready for that and we know what happened before and we know what they can do and they know it too and we're afraid and we're angry but we aren't afraid enough and we aren't angry enough and we still have something to live for and they know that too because orwell knew it and we're controlled by our fears and we who love life don't want to take another's or give up our own and so we will do what it takes to survive at any cost except except except something but we don't know what it is and we can't stop the finding out because they know they know they know and they can do it and we can't because they are are are the powers that be and we aren't even when some of them tell us we are but it's a lie always a lie always always but we believe it because we want to believe it because we are frustrated and angry and frightened and alone

[Ghost Dog]

102. You refer to social solidarity.

Something, once forgotten, sometimes relearned

The hard way.

[Robbien]

67. Corporations already spend hundreds of millions each quarter

on lobbying and campaign support. But going to Open Secrets one just doesn't see it. It is all hidden by corporations finding creative ways to give money.

The Supremes should be impeached and this verdict sucks, but I don't see how this verdict really changes anything Corporates will be doing.

[DemReadingDU]

96. We will see more of what corporations have bene doing

Instead of a 30 second political attack ad, corporations could spend money for a 30 minute attack ad, maybe a whole day of political attack ads! Perhaps that will anger people seeing their favorite TV program cancelled for a political advertisement and protest.

[Demeter]

33. UnitedHealth Group's 4Q profit rises 30 percent

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100121/ap_on_bi_ge/us_earns_unitedhealth_group

Managed care company UnitedHealth Group Inc. wrapped up 2009 with a third-straight quarterly profit increase, but it starts 2010 still hampered by high unemployment, which hurts its biggest insurance segment.

The Minnetonka, Minn., insurer said Thursday its fourth-quarter profit rose 30 percent, due in part to premium increases and a big legal charge that weighed down results in the last quarter of 2008.

But UnitedHealth's commercial enrollment — which includes higher-margin business like employer-based and individual health plans — fell by 1.7 million people compared with the year-earlier period.

The insurer ended 2009 with commercial enrollment of 24.6 million, a drop of 6.5 percent. Partially offsetting those losses was a 12.5 percent increase in enrollment for Medicare and Medicaid plans to just under 7.4 million people.

CEO Stephen J. Hemsley said attrition, or job cuts, accounted for more than half of the commercial enrollment loss.

"Attrition continues to run at a high level and will be a concern all year in this economy," he said.

The losses slowed in each quarter of 2009, and the insurer said it expects to lose between 500,000 and 950,000 members from that segment in 2010 as the job market slowly recovers.

The commercial enrollment loss is a concern, Miller Tabak analyst Les Funtleyder said. But he noted that UnitedHealth hasn't lost its client base, and its business diversity helps soften the losses.

[Demeter]

35. Moscow buys Canadian dollars and bonds to diversify reserves

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1751bda6-062e-11df-8c97-00144feabdc0.html

...Although not officially confirmed, traders said other emerging market central banks, including some in Asia with large foreign exchange reserves, have also been active in the foreign exchange market in recent weeks, buying Canadian and Australian dollars...

Before the announcement, Russia's foreign exchange reserves were evenly split between dollars and euros.

Alarmed at the plummeting value of the dollars in its holdings, Russia has been at the vanguard of countries calling on US authorities to stem the fall.

Last year, with China, Russia called for a new supra-national currency to replace the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

[Demeter]

36. Nation-Building Should Begin At Home By Richard C. Cook

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24464.htm

I have been writing for the last two years or so that the strategy of the Federal Reserve has been to engineer a “soft landing” from the horrendous financial bubbles that were created during the disastrous presidency of George W. Bush. Since President Obama came to power in January 2009, his administration has been partners with the Federal Reserve in trying to do this.

It’s nonsense for anyone to say that the crash of 2008 had not been foreseen. A number of analysts, myself included, were predicting a crash by mid-2007. Actually, it was apparent that a serious decline would take place by the end of 2005 when the U.S. economy was still dependent on housing for half its growth over a year after the Federal Reserve had begun to raise interest rates. By early 2008 the economy was officially in a recession, though I actually dated it to December 2006 when the money supply measured by M1 became stagnant. That meant that consumer spending wasn’t even keeping up with inflation.

Now, over the last year, the recession has begun to bottom out due to the huge quantities of credit injected by the Federal Reserve into the failed banking system and by the relatively undersized economic stimulus asked for by President Obama and approved by Congress. A “recovery” has been declared, with stock prices making up for about half their previous losses, even though the official (and understated) unemployment rate is not likely to fall below 9.5-10 percent for the foreseeable future.

The current uptick has been projected by some analysts to continue through May-June 2010, when we will be in danger of another downturn that could be quite serious. Obviously the Democrats will be doing what they can to bolster confidence, at least until the 2010 Congressional elections.

The Republicans, with the victory of their candidate Scott Brown in the race for the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in Massachusetts, are jubilant, even though they have absolutely nothing to offer as an alternative. How soon we forget that it was Republican policies, starting with Reaganomics and ending with the George W. Bush catastrophe, that has been the prelude to where we are today.

The prognosis for the U.S. economy is dim. From a larger perspective, we are at the end of the era of Keynesian economics, when the government thought all it had to do was run up more debt to stimulate the economy. When you add to that a generation of outsourcing of manufacturing jobs abroad, completely irresponsible and out-of-control behavior by the financial industry, and the cancerous growth of the military-intelligence-industrial complex and their pet wars, you have all the signs of an empire in precipitous decline.

For those who are habitually against everything the government does, I’d like to say that there are actually a few caring and intelligent people in authority these days who don’t want to see the total collapse of the U.S. as a nation, an economy, and a society. The U.S. remains the world’s largest consumer economy and the dollar the predominant currency. But the rest of the world has caught up. The Anglo-American Empire is seeing the sunset, and the choice now to be made is whether it will end peacefully or in a bang.

We can all hope for a peaceable conclusion, though it will take patience and hard work for the U.S. even to become a functioning economy on the same level as the rest of the world’s developed nations. So we can hope that the “soft landing” will work. But we still have a gigantic debt load to deal with, amounting to $60 trillion from all sources–business, government, and consumer.

We also have a gutted manufacturing sector, the huge overhead of a bloated financial industry (and their obscene bonuses), bankrupt governments at all levels, and way too many people with no real work to do like lawyers, health insurance executives, national security analysts, financial and educational bureaucrats, etc.

The short and simple answer is that we have to rebuild our economy, and our lives, from the bottom-up. We have to relearn how to do manual work like what we have mainly been asking immigrants to do for the last couple of decades. We should rebuild our local farming sector and get rid of bloated monstrosities like Monsanto. We should launch a major assault on the automobile culture and begin to revitalize cities and towns so that people can bike or walk to work or take public transportation.

It will not be easy to do these things. It may not even be possible. We have forgotten how to work because we have wanted our money to “work for us.” But that money, which only ever existed on paper, is gone. Our population is aging and not too healthy, making care of the sick and dying the only growth industry. And the young people who come out of our schools have few practical skills with which to earn a living. This must change too.

And what of investment capital? Loans are harder than ever to get. The small business sector, which could be an economic engine, is in dismal shape with lack of credit, high costs, and weakened markets for their products. Half of all new small businesses fail within one to two years of start-up.

Some say that a nation armed to the teeth and under this much pressure is likely to start a really big war out of frustration and not knowing what else to do. In other words, roll the dice. But World War II ended a long time ago. Since then, except for Vietnam, we have had our way bullying small nations. But that era has ended too. We won’t be able to do to China, Russia, and India what we did to Iraq and are trying to do to Afghanistan.

World War III would be a really bad choice. What we should do instead is take a positive attitude and sit down together and figure out ways to work our way out of this mess. But it will take a heap of humility, leadership, and willingness to face the pain of starting over again. But it could also be an adventure. After all, nation-building should begin at home.

Richard C. Cook is the author of We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform, scheduled to appear by September 2007. A retired federal analyst, his career included service with the U.S. Civil Service Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Carter White House, and NASA, followed by twenty-one years with the U.S. Treasury Department. He is also author of Challenger Revealed: An Insider’s Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age.

[Demeter]

41. Google aims to stay in China

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f9ff5bcc-06ce-11df-b058-00144feabdc0.html

Google on Thursday gave the first indication that it would seek to stay in China even if it was forced to close down its local search service over its refusal to continue to bow to censorship.

“We have lots of other business opportunities in China – we would like them to be successful,” Eric Schmidt, chief executive, said in an interview with the Financial Times. “That’s not the only thing we’re doing in China.”

He was speaking shortly after Google had reported a solid rebound in its core search advertising business in the final quarter of last year, and revealed that it had increased hiring and marketing spending as it prepares for a renewed burst of growth coming out of the recession.

Mr Schmidt refused to comment on the progress of discussions with the Chinese authorities, though he stressed that Google was still intent on stopping censoring results on its local Chinese search service, and said the company would act “in a relatively short time”.

“It’s very important to know we are not pulling out of China,” Mr Schmidt said. “We have a good business in China. This is about the censorship rules, not anything else.”...

[icee]

43. A close today above 10, 634 would be okay for the bull. A close

below 10,375 gives the bear a knockout and puts us on track for 1932.

[FarCenter]

49. Looks like your low estimate is pretty likely

If both Geithner and Bernanke are fired, you could easily see unemployment go to 15-20% by mid-2010.

[icee]

50. I'm selling everything. Sounds like you understand.

[FarCenter]

53. What I don't understand in these proposals is how they fix the money market fund problem

The separation of commercial banking from proprietary trading may decrease the risk associated with bank deposits.

However, that's not where most people keep cash. They keep it in non-bank MMFs. These are generally stuffed with short-term commercial paper, bills, and structured finance products, many of which are obligations of special purpose vehicles.

The height of the financial crises was when the first MMF "broke the buck" and there was the beginning of a run on MMFs. At that point, the government had to step in with guarantees that went beyond the commercial banking system.

An approach that says we will prop up the commercial banking system, but allow large players in the rest of the financial system to fail seems headed for disaster.

[icee]

54. Yep. But the common man does not understand this. I just sold

all my stocks and am going place orders to sell my wife and my IRA mutual funds right now. Beware of responses on this board when you question Obama's action on the banks of: oh, you're just a wall streeter and don't like anything Obama does. Don't you know what he did for Lily Ledbetter? Good luck, my friend. I am feeling somewhat relieved and sad at the same time. I have been in the market since 1970. I have seen Presidents since Eisenhower. I have never seen anything like what is happening right now.

[Demeter]

59. How Much Did You Get for Your Wife?

I'm wondering what the market rate for spouses is, these days...

[icee]

61. She's the DON of a hospital, so pretty good. No, I just left out

the appostrophe. Shouldn't have tried to carry the possessive case to two disparate nouns.

[Dr.Phool]

62. Not much, if my wife was selling me.

And I think it was Hennie Youngman who was begging people to take his.

[Po_d Mainiac]

80. I got a new fly rod for my wife

:hide:
I thought it was a pretty fair trade

[DemReadingDU]

97. lol, I think spouse might trade me for extra gokarts

:P

[FarCenter]

81. I'd like to see another 150 points off the S&P

Plus a little sanity in Washington, before starting to average back in.

[mnhtnbb]

84. I sold all my stocks--including held in IRA--last week. I could start

withdrawing from my IRA by next September without penalty, although I'd rather wait.

The IRA was back to within $1500. of where it stood before the market tanked, and at its low
was down almost 50% from where it was when I sold last week.

Definitely time not to be greedy and be concerned about protecting capital.

I am very concerned that we're headed for the W recession and we're looking at the start
of the next leg down--and who knows how long it will take to come back up?

[icee]

87. I agree. I'm going to study real hard where I'm going to put

our retirement money.

[Robbien]

63. Goldman had police barricades and bomb-sniffing dogs outside of 85 Broad St

The public outrage over Wall Street’s rich bonus culture apparently had Goldman Sachs so rattled that the bank had police barricades and bomb-sniffing dogs outside of 85 Broad St. Thursday, as it prepared to release earnings, The New York Post reported.

Rage and record earnings at Goldman
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/rage_and_record_earnings_at_goldman_2r8mQO9LXxLxAFjSyXa4VK

CFO David Viniar told reporters in a call yesterday morning that the firm could not ignore the public ire.

"The people of Goldman Sachs performed extremely well this year," he said "But in addition to that, we're not blind to the economic environment and the pain and suffering that's still going on around the world."

[Demeter]

65. The Guilty Flee When No Man Pursueth

The Proverbs (Chapter 28)

Well, folks, if you've been able to read this far down, you are in GREAT shape for the WEEKEND, when we contemplate the history, future, and fate of Native Americans, while reviewing the ruins of a once-great nation and its economy...

Now normally, the category of "Native Americans" would apply to peoples descended from the inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere prior to 1492, or 1001, if you want to go back to Leif Ericson instead of ole Christopher Columbus. I'm not going back to Kon-Tiki or the Siberian land bridge, so don't ask.

But I'm wondering if the descendants of these venerable Ancestors might be willing to include us all in their status. After the Supreme folly of yesterday, we are all native peoples, to be abused, enslaved, and driven off our land by the Overlords, the soi-disant Masters of the Universe, and to fight them with our utmost strength and ingenuity. We may be individually puny, and not particularly overflowing with wealth and paper power, but we outnumber them; and as their creators, we can destroy them. And don't they know it! Take the above post, if you don't believe in us! Goldman Sachs obviously does.

In the battles to come, we have as potential allies not only Europe, which despises the Overlords and keeps them in check, but also Chavez, Morales, and others in South and Central America, who are well versed in guerrilla warfare and have achieved a measure of independence on their own. Let's see if TPTB can subvert two continents simultaneously while dealing with the most ingenious, nefarious, bloody-minded people on the planet--damn Yankees, Rebels, Borderers, etc. It's time to get Ugly, Americans! Ugly is what we do best. Sigh.

See you all tonight!

[FarCenter]

68. Aren't they in the process of moving to 200 West Stree?

From both 85 Broad and 1 NY Plaza. Wonder what happens with that real estate? More glut?

[Joe Chi Minh]

109. "....we're not blind to the economic environment and the pain and suffering

that's still going on around the world."

Imagine having the gall to admit that! Are they mocking us?

[Demeter]

70. Betcha the DOW Hits 6000 By July.

5 cents. Any takers?

[icee]

76. Here. From my friend Binve.

[reformist]

110. What's a "Minuette 2"?! TIA

[mnhtnbb]

85. Three hours later and no takers for a nickel bet. That is NOT good.

[Demeter]

71. Here We Go Around Dead Man's Curve! 96 points in 2 hours

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anq4wdZc2Ow

[Ghost Dog]

72. This is about program-traders (aka 'investment'-banksters) selling

in order to force Obama to reconsider and once more marginalise the likes of Volcker and make sure there's no way this could get through the chop-licking Congress, already anticipating more lucrative bribes rewards than ever.

[icee]

77. No. This is everyone selling. I've been in the market since

1970.I sold everything this morning. And I'm a retail investor.

[Po_d Mainiac]

83. How long for the trades to be finalized? n/t

[icee]

86. 27th

[Po_d Mainiac]

90. Are u stuck with the close on the 26th?

That 5-7 WD delay can suck rocks.

[icee]

93. No. I get it on the stocks for whatever the sell prices were for

today. On the MF's I get todays ending price for the fund, which I will know in about one hour. I'm looking to go into ALSK, an Alaska utility stock that pays an 11% dividend yield. I have to wait until the 27th for the cash proceeds to hit the account. Now I think I'll go in the living room and have some Baileys. 39 long years in the market. I was averaging about 12% until 2008. Ended up losing about 18% because of the dip. I actually would no recommend young peope to go into the stock market. It is not a level playing field anymore. Well, sorry I talked your ear off Po'd.

[DemReadingDU]

92. Yeh, that's my spouse, hobby is racing cars

He's always had the racing bug. Open wheel racing, at that. Currently racing go-karts, but those karts go FAST. Here is a pic of my son's kart, but spouse has one just like it.





edit to add spouse's race car from 25 years ago

[Robbien]

73. Chris Dodd demanding everyone vote for Bernanke, or else disaster will reign

From Dow Jones:

A top Senate Democrat said Friday that failing to confirm Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke for a second term could have "huge economic implications,". . .

Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.) cited the impact that rejecting Bernanke would have on financial markets.

"I think if you wanted to send the worst signal to the markets right now in the country and send us in a tailspin, it would be to reject this nomination," Dodd told a group of reporters. "This is not naming someone to be an assistant secretary to something. This is the most important central banker in the world."

Dodd warned that rejecting the president's choice for the Fed chairman would have "huge economic implications, and people need to think about that." Speaking of Democrats who plan to vote against Bernanke, Dodd said he appreciated their frustration but argued that "they're missing the larger point. "That's a short-term answer," Dodd said. "And the short-term is going to create far many problems than it's going to solve."

---------

and Zero Hedge's response to that:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/here-comes-todays-fire-and-brimstone-speech-facilitate-bernanke-vote-courtesy-political-corp

We, for one, and the entire United States of America for another, now call bullshit on your empty threats, which will only impair the billionaires who should be in jail and not in corner offices south of Canal Street.

---------

Amen

[Tansy_Gold]

75. If Chris Dodd is in favor of it, I'm against it.

That's just the mood I'm in today.


Bullshit empty threats is right.





Tansy Gold

[Dr.Phool]

79. I thought the disaster was resigning in January.

Not running again.

[Po_d Mainiac]

101. Disaster for the banksters

in the meantime the rest of us have been getting violated with the wet end of the shit stick.

definition of "shit stick" aka tunk stick......stout piece of wood used to break the tip off the pile in the outhouse during the winter months

[ozymandius]

98. Failure to confirm Bernanke means that we fail to confirm Bernanke.

Jeebus! There's that circular logic again. Kind like - "The King is dead. Long live the King." It sounds like Dodd is bitching because Bernanke has not anointed his heir-apparent.

We can at least take heart that Dodd is a man of resolve: remembering to take his Stupid Pills.

[TalkingDog]

88. If nobody else is going to say it, I will:

[ozymandius]

99. What a lovely shade of red.

It is absolutely medieval how modern logic says that a little bleeding is good for you. But then I find myself oddly in agreement with said logic.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

107. Lol.

[fan of the arts]

89. Fascism, rigged markets, torture camps, perma-war, criminal banks, propaganda

There's no reason to debate it, it's all true. Our system of deregulated and manipulated capitalism completely failed last year and nothing has been done to repair it. All that's been done is a further ripoff of the American people by the very same criminals that did it the 1st time.

Either the U.S. starts holding criminals responsible or we get fascist S. Court rulings, continued job losses, endless propaganda, worthless markets and a total world-wide loss of confidence in the U.S. system.

People debate the effectiveness of arresting a few biggies like Rice, Gonzales and Yoo but it would send shock waves around the world and send the clear message that the U.S. really does believe in "Change".

[ozymandius]

100. I have a couple of things that are waiting for the WEE thread.

I'm looking forward to Demeter getting that started. :hi:

[Demeter]

104. Okay!

[Ghost Dog]

103. Wall St sinks on bank, political jitters

Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:53pm GMT NEW YORK, Jan 22 (Reuters) ... "Between uncertainty over Bernanke, Obama's bank regulation proposal and the election in Massachusetts, the market is like a cork in the water and the Democrats just hit the flush," said Jack Ablin, chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank in Chicago. "It looks like we're headed really low."

Since the Democrats lost their 60-vote hold in the Senate with the election of a Republican in Massachusetts on Tuesday, there is a growing sense among investors that political uncertainty has all but ended the rally that began in March.

Financials and technology shares endured the brunt of the selling, with JPMorgan (JPM.N: Quote, Profile, Research) off 3.4 percent at $39.16, Goldman Sachs (GS.N: Quote, Profile, Research) down 4.2 percent at $154.12 and Google sliding 5.7 to $550.01, a day after the Web search company posted quarterly revenue that missed some forecasts.

The Dow Jones industrial average .DJI dropped 216.90 points, or 2.09 percent, to 10,172.98. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index .SPX slid 24.72 points, or 2.21 percent, to 1,091.76. The Nasdaq Composite Index .IXIC fell 60.41 points, or 2.67 percent, to 2,205.29.

For the week, the Dow dropped 4.1 percent, the S&P 500 lost 3.9 percent and the Nasdaq tumbled 3.6 percent. It was the worst week for the S&P 500 and Nasdaq since October and the worst week for the Dow since March.

Stocks hit session lows within the last half-hour on news that Britain had raised its international terrorism threat level to its second highest alert.

The S&P 500 registered its worst 3-day slide since March 2009, around the start of the recent rally that sent both the S&P 500 and the Dow to 15-month highs as recently as Tuesday.

The Dow and the S&P 500 are now off more than 2 percent year-to-date, while the Nasdaq has shed almost 3 percent.

The selling of the past three days left the market's technical picture looking bleak after major indexes cratered below key support levels and broke below their 50-day moving averages, a move considered a bearish signal. Continued...

/... http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN2217463120100122