Here are the latest additions to my Instapaper for the ride home:

• Tim Geithner, Who Has Never Been Wrong About Anything, Rallies Markets (WSJ)
• Tax receipts & the Economy (Dr. Ed’s Blog)
• Nasar: How to Prevent Economic Crises (Bloomberg)
• Warning on Firms’ Pressure Warning on Firms’ (WSJ)
• That IPO Pop? Majority of 2011 U.S. Listings Are Underwater (WSJ)
• The Perils of Chasing Buffett (Deal Book)
• Meet Bank of America Merrill’s New US Stock Strategist, Savita Subramanian (WSJ)
• Can you believe Wall Street? (Market Watch)
• 8 Star Trek Gadgets That Are No Longer Fiction (Mashable)
• U.S. Probe Lays Gulf Spill Blame on BP, Contractors (Scientific American)

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.

17 Responses to “10 Wednesday PM Reads”

  1. Jojo says:

    America Is A Country In Debt

    While politicians bicker about debt ceilings and government spending, American families suffer under an increasingly hefty debt load.

    http://www.winkandwink.com/american-family-debt-infographic/

  2. arbitrage789 says:

    Regarding “Tax receipts & the Economy” (Dr. Ed’s Blog)…

    The graph provided therein shows a hefty increase in tax receipts during the period 2002-2006. There are many who argue that Bush’s “tax cuts for the rich” cost the IRS “X” amount of revenue. I don’t really understand how, from a statistical analysis perspective, one goes about making that case during this period (2002-2006).

    ~~~

    BR: What would tax receipts have been without the Bush tax cuts?
    According to CBO, much higher.

  3. Jojo says:

    Lawyer turns topless dancer to pay the bills
    Bob Sullivan

    When Carla graduated 10 years ago, she thought her law degree would be a permanent ticket to a high-paying job. But instead of selling her mind, Carla is selling her body. After student loans, debt, a layoff and unemployment battered her bank account, she now finds herself in an almost unbelievable position – dancing in a topless bar.

    “Did I ever think I’d be taking my top off for rent money? No. I was in my mid-30s and had never danced before,” said Carla, who asked that we use her stage name and withhold her identity and some personal details. “As a little girl, I never thought to myself, ‘I just want to grow up and be a stripper,’ or, ‘All I ever wanted to do in life is climb in the lap of sweaty stranger and take my top off.’

    “But, with our economy the way it is, especially in smaller cities … you strip or you starve,” she said.

    ….

    http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/13/7730301-lawyer-turns-topless-dancer-to-pay-the-bills

  4. Japan Earthquake: Six Months Later

    If you click on some of the pics you can see before and after images of the areas and the cleanup results. I am very impressed by the effort of the Japanese people to take their land back from devastation. What happened to Haiti? I do realize that Japan is a wealthy nation but Haiti did not lack the manpower and they received billions in donations.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/09/japan-earthquake-six-months-later/100146/

  5. mathman says:

    Holy Cow!:

    Abuse Victims Seek Court Case Against Pope

    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2093160,00.html

  6. TripleSigma says:

    Barry, are you a Keynesian?

  7. constantnormal says:

    this just slithered into the email slot … ya gotta chuckle …

    http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-3-day-stock-futures-2011-9

    … so what are the odds that you could do overlay charts of the past 3 days S&P 500 futures and have them match THIS closely?

    That’s what I call control of the game … like a player piano …

  8. swag says:

    PPP poll of those wacky Republican voters: Obama’s a “socialist” but ending Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid would be terrible.

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/ppp-republican-poll-obama-a-socialist-but-ending-social-security-medicare-medicaid-would-be-horrible.php

  9. constantnormal says:

    If somebody with the appropriate software tools could confirm that result, it would be interesting …

    … not comforting, but interesting.

  10. santamonica says:

    The question that the press needs to get out now and raise a stink over, is this one (worded to push his sensitivities):

    Should problems in Europe get worse (which they will), Mr Prez, do you think it’s acceptable for the Federal Reserve to lend money to European banks when 46 million Americans are living in poverty?

  11. “….I’ve written repeatedly about Apple’s move to dumb down OSX, which immediately worried me, because Microsoft has been copying Apple for decades. And now, guess what…

    If Apple’s transitioning of OSX to an iOS-like experience is dumb, Microsoft wants to be dumber with Windows 8. Apparently, Windows 8 is going to be a full-screen ‘app’ type experience from the start. I know, we will be able to make Windows 8 look like Windows 7 (which I make look like XP), but that’s not the point. The point is that the focus is shifting toward catering to zombies by default.

    Do you want to see what happens when people, who actually use these systems to do real work, run into this zombie app paradigm on the desktop? It’s called Final Cut Pro X:

    In the first week since its debut, Apple’s Final Cut Pro X was met by a spectacular disappointment and a list of harsh reviews calling the software “disastrous.”

    Disastrous.

    Yes. There are hundreds of articles like that.

    Apple users, who were working professionals, were hair-on-fire pissed. Competing companies have been feasting on people leaving Apple over it and, less than two weeks ago, Apple broke down and started selling the “old” Final Cut Studio product again:

    Apple has agreed to make older versions of Final Cut Studio 3 available for purchase, following several months of customer backlash against the radically redesigned Final Cut Pro X.

    When Final Cut Pro X was released in June, Apple touted the release as “the biggest advance in Pro video editing since the original Final Cut Pro.” Video professionals disagreed.

    After receiving negative reviews from customers, Apple promised to frequently update Final Cut Pro X in order to bring its features up to par with previous versions of the venerable editing software. Apple’s competitors in the space, including Avid and Adobe, used the opportunity to offer Final Cut Pro customers cheaper migration paths to their software.

    Since July, we’ve been hearing that existing Final Cut Studio customers could purchase additional licenses to the old program by calling Apple directly. MacRumors confirms that any customer can now obtain the legacy version of the video editor by calling Apple.

    Here’s why Apple is dumbing down: It likes zombies. It wants zombies. It needs zombies. Don’t take my word for it. Sachin Agarwal was an Apple developer on Final Cut Pro from 2002 to 2008:

    I worked on Final Cut Pro from 2002 to 2008. It was an amazing experience. The Final Cut Pro X project was just getting started when I left Apple. It was an ambitious and controversial move, but it made sense for Apple. Here’s why:

    Apple doesn’t care about the pro space….”
    http://cryptogon.com/?p=24838

  12. 4whatitsworth says:

    Bodies hanging from bridge in Mexico are warning to social media users

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/americas/09/14/mexico.violence/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

  13. Francois says:

    Reading the excellent debunking of NYT PR bullshit on behalf of BofA by Yves Smith.
    Man! She give them the richly deserved royal wedgie.

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/new-york-times-runs-pr-for-bank-headcount-cutting-profiteers.html

    ~~~

    BR: Note we linked to that this morning here

  14. Francois says:

    Forgot to mention:

    How a normal, healthy government behaves by Glennzilla

    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/09/13/turkey

    Let’s pray this doesn’t become worse, because oil could get pricier in a flash.

  15. eliz says:

    I’m a little behind in my reading – but John Hussman was spot-on in his post this week (they go up Sunday night). If you have never read Hussman, I encourage you to check him out for a few weeks.

    http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc110912.htm

    —–EXCERPT—————————–

    Fed Policy – No theory, no evidence, no transmission mechanism

    Undoubtedly, one of the main factors prompting a benign response to what is now virtually certain recession and virtually certain Greek default is the hope that the Fed will launch some new monetary intervention. While Wall Street appears to view the present weakness as a replay of 2010, it is strikingly clear that the evidence tells a different story, with a broad ensemble of data implying near-certainty of oncoming recession (see An Imminent Downturn ).

    While we have to allow for the possibility of a knee-jerk speculative response in the event of further Fed intervention, it is also much clearer now than it was in 2010 that quantitative easing does not work, and that even its marginal effects have reached the point of diminishing returns. To a large extent, the only basis for further Fed action here is superstition in the absence of either fact or theory.

    Ultimately, effective policy acts to relieve some constraint on the economy that is actually binding. Effective policy has some “transmission mechanism,” where changes in the policy target can be expected to translate into decisions that improve the allocation of resources and the level of activity in the economy. Effective policy is also preferably grounded in historical evidence that supports its effectiveness, or at the very least does not contradict the action. At present, the policy menu advocated by Ben Bernanke has none of these advantages.

    Consider, for example, a further round of quantitative easing through purchases of Treasury securities. With $1.6 trillion of excess reserves already sitting idle in the U.S. banking system, it is inconceivable that the U.S. faces any binding constraint that would be eased by the creation of more reserves (which is what QE does). With the 10-year Treasury yield already below 2%, it is also inconceivable that the U.S. faces any binding constraint that would be eased by further depressing that yield. Moreover, from an investment standpoint, it is difficult to envision a situation where long-term Treasuries purchased at current prices will not result in a loss for the Fed at some future date when the position is unwound – even a 0.25% increase in the 10-year Treasury yield presently would wipe out a full year of interest earnings. So the Fed would take a loss on newly purchased bonds even if it unwound them at a 3% Treasury yield four years from now. A failure to eventually unwind the position would be predictably inflationary. As for Bernanke’s baseless view that higher stock market values trigger a “wealth effect” and a “virtuous circle” of spending and income, it is well-established in decades of economic data that each 1% change in stock market value is associated with a transitory increase of only 0.03-0.05% in GDP.

    At best, a further round of QE would create an even larger pool of zero-interest assets that somebody would have to hold. That could prompt some of the same reaching-for-yield that we saw during QE2, misallocating resources, distorting markets, but ultimately producing no durable effect. So yes, by embarking on QE3, the Fed could try to engineer a brief burst of speculation in financial assets and commodities, and could put some additional downward pressure on the U.S. dollar on the foreign exchange markets. But to what real end other than the total loss of the Fed’s remaining credibility?

    A second option for Fed intervention would be a so-called Operation Twist, whereby the Fed would increase the maturity of its portfolio in an effort to further drive down long-term Treasury yields. Again – the 10-year Treasury yield is already below 2%. What binding constraint could the Fed possibly hope to ease through such an operation?