Some interesting reads for your weekend pleasure:

• Return of the Gold Standard as world order unravels (Telegraph) see also Fed Official: It’s Time For Rates To Go Up (NPR)

• As a Watchdog Starves, Wall Street Is Tossed a Bone (NYT)

• Worried About Debt Limit? The Bond Market Isn’t (Bloomberg) see also Why Obama Has Already Won the Debt-Limit Fight (Bloomberg)

• Warning Signal? Dow Jones Transports Slumping (WSJ)

• Why Some Home Sellers Are More Delusional Than Others (Moneyland) see also Beginning of the end of the entire Housing crisis? (Market Watch)

• Dimon Says Mortgage Clash Swells as ‘Everybody Is Going to Sue’ (Businessweek)

• Murdoch’s (In-House) Legal Woes (Media Matters) see also Phone hacking: Rupert Murdoch’s American media empire ‘could unravel’ (Telegraph) and US AG Holder Considers News Corp. Probe (Daily Beast)

• Daniel Ek’s Spotify: Music’s Last Best Hope (Businessweek)

• Why Netflix Raised Its Prices (NYT)

• How Twitter tracked the News of the World scandal (Guardian)

What are you reading?

Category: Financial Press

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

15 Responses to “Weekend Reads”

  1. Trevor says:

    I found the chart in the linked FT article fascinating. I’ve little doubt that the details of the data would be even more interesting, especially the location of the sovereign debt in 2008 and 2009:

  2. Petey Wheatstraw says:

    “US AG Holder Considers News Corp. Probe”

    How much consideration could this possibly take? Murdoch, as a founding member of the corporatist cabal, is above the law. Holder is aptly named, as he has been on hold since he was appointed.

  3. Julia Chestnut says:

    Color me naive, but it is the last paragraph of that Netflix article that really gives the reason for the price hike: the competition has consolidated, and no one offers the mix that Netflix does any longer. They are charging more, because they can.

    Remember when the DOJ announced that it just wasn’t going to bother prosecuting Section 2 Sherman Act violations any more, because they weren’t very successful and a LOUD contingent of Chicago School and Law & Econ types were shouting that businesses can’t get too large – that monopolies are essentially harmless?

    Not so much. I constantly worry that the Sherman Act is going to go the way of Glass-Stiegall because it is inconvenient for our overlords.

  4. DeDude says:

    Warren is out no way to get past a repugnicant senate road-block.

    But at least that will save her to be available when Geithner leaves.

  5. RW says:

    The new book by Jeffrey Winters, Oligarchy, provides a more comprehensive historical framework for understanding the past forty years of political economy as well as the actions of a Murdoch, Pete Peterson, the Kochs et al.

    “For centuries, oligarchs were viewed as empowered by wealth, an idea muddled by elite theory early in the twentieth century. The common thread for oligarchs across history is that wealth defines them, empowers them, and inherently exposes them to threats. The existential motive of all oligarchs is wealth defense. How they respond varies with the threats they confront, including how directly involved they are in supplying the coercion underlying all property claims, and whether they act separately or collectively. These variations yield four types of oligarchy: warring, ruling, sultanistic, and civil. Oligarchy is not displaced by democracy but rather is fused with it. Moreover, the rule of law problem in many societies is a matter of taming oligarchs. Cases studied in this book include the United States, ancient Athens and Rome, Indonesia, the Philippines, Singapore, medieval Venice and Siena, mafia commissions in the United States and Italy, feuding Appalachian families, and early chiefs cum oligarchs dating from 2300 BCE.”

  6. streeteye says:

    Bond market isn’t worried about the debt ceiling because

    1) it’s all theater, debt ceiling will get raised. No one except some loony tea partiers and ‘burn the village to save it’ crackpots want to cause economic doom

    2) even if government gets shut down, interest payments will go out. for political and financial reasons would rather cut off Grandma’s social security than incur a permanent $100b a year in additional interest expense when rates go up after a default

    3) so if government gets shut down, you still get your interest, and you get a big economic slowdown and QE3, and no bond issuance til it all gets sorted out

    maybe it seems a little counterintuitive that this idiocy is driving the 10-year below 3% but also makes sense.

  7. willid3 says:

    i am thinking if they really go through with the debt limit lunacy, that they really won’t like the result. even if we keep paying interest, the rating agencies have already said they will treat it as a default. which of course could drive interest payments up a lot (some say 100 billion a year). and that the rest of us will pay for it also, since the government has the best rating and considered risk free, while the rest of us aren’t. so our interest rates will sky rocket. never mind the problem of what to pay. maybe they will just cut 1/2 what they pay out to match income exactly. might pay all of the interest or not. might have workers work 50% of what they do now, consider that we could have 2 weeks of air travel, all military on rotating schedules ( 2 weeks on 2 weeks off. and retreating from Iraq and Afghanistan, and other foreign locations), ss and medicare paying out only 1/2 what they did, who knows how they would deal with the prisons, and states, and local governments would see their budgets that some just passed, be trashed as they would only get 1/2 what they were expecting, and their borrowing costs sky rocket.
    these are just the minor issues that will happen.

  8. willid3 says:

    and i don’t get cutting the SEC, fixing it yes, but reducing funding of law enforcement in the wild west of investments, just encourages more of the same, and wall street is already games against investors as it is.

  9. DeDude says:


    The cuts were made with a reference to government deficits – despite the fact that SEC pays for itself with fees charged to Wall Street and actually makes money for government with the fines and settlements it gets from violators. So the cuts basically gives another handout to Wall Street without having any positive effects on the federal government debt and deficit. However, it will be very lucrative for the GOPster campaign donors to have a SEC that cannot perform its duties as a result of lack of people and computer resources. Only the crimes committed by little people should be investigated and punished – crimes against little people is just business as usual.

  10. kaleberg says:

    I agree with Julia Chestnut. Netflix realizes that it can make more money by raising prices. People will now have to choose DVDs, streaming or pay more. What is impressive is that the New York Times reporter writing the article is too stupid to grasp the obvious. Is a full frontal lobotomy a bona fide job requirement in journalism these days? It sure seems to be.

  11. streeteye says:

    Didn’t find Pogue too persuasive on Netflix either.

    Netflix had a free ride with the Starz deal that is coming to an end. They will have to shell out for content.

    They are dealing with the dumbest people on earth to get the content. It seems quite possible some of the content providers want to get paid by subscriber.

    So Netflix has to 1) raise prices and 2) separate the streaming-only subscribers from the DVD-only subscribers (they don’t want to be licensing streaming content for a user who only uses DVDs).

    Not too sure why they didn’t offer a discount bundle for both though.

  12. JimRino says:

    Ignoring Science can Cost You Money:

    Is it a good time to buy up Texas Ranch Land?
    Or will Global Warming make this land worthless for 100′s of years, until world population drops to some sustainable level?

  13. [...] Via Barry Ritholtz, a link to a post at Time Moneyland post which led to a post at the Zillow blog: Zillow recently compared the asking price of 1 million for-sale homes with those homes’ previous purchase price, then factored in the change in the Zillow Home Value Index at the ZIP code level to determine the home’s current market value. [...]

  14. [...] Read: Why Some Home Sellers Are More Delusional Than Others via The Big Picture [...]