Afternoon Train Reading:

• Kass: The ‘Wisdom’ of Jeremy Siegel (The Street)
• Greece faces death by a thousand cuts unless it leaves the euro (Telegraph) see also EU officials shelve Greece meeting (
• I.S.S. Adds to Criticism of Facebook’s Governance (DealBook)
• Repeat Until Happy (Behavior Gap)
• UBS issues $1bn debt for capital boost (
• MF Global: Where’s the Cash? Defective Commercial Land Titles (Institutional Risk Analyst)
• Valentine Day Two-fer:
…..-Cut Your Valentine Some Slack: Partner’s Efforts at Improving Your Relationship Should Not Be Ignored (Science Daily)
…..-Love, Chocolate Good for the Heart, Says Cardiologist (Science Daily)
• Man as Machine (Wilson Quarterly)
• The Thermostat Wars (Slate)
• The Ultimate Guide To Writing Incredible Headlines (Content Strategist) see also On the Web No One Cares If You Write Like a Dog (Bloomberg)

What are you reading?

America Inc. Faces Margin Stall

Source: WSJ

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.

19 Responses to “10 Tuesday PM Reads”

  1. reedsch says:

    Occupy the SEC: the dirty hippies roll out some policy firepower

    An oldie but goodie: Ron Paul PWNS the Neocons:

    I spent Saturday hanging around at CPAC. A surprisingly young crowd. The dominant vibe was righteous indignation against the Evils of Liberalism. Not a good party bunch though, waaaay too uptight.

  2. reedsch says:

    BR, from your link above: “MF Global, where’s the cash?”…

    “How JP Morgan And George Soros Ended Up With MF Global Customer Money”


    BR: As Counterparties to MFG

  3. MorticiaA says:

    The JC Penney website. Am spending money with them just to spite the sanctimonious in this country.

  4. Sechel says:

    About MF Global
    The biggest insult to one’s intelligence was to read the news report that the money simply vaporized.
    I agree that the money is most likely at JP Morgan or similar, and I also agree with Francine Mckenna of Re: The auditors that the money seems to have been taken in what I think would poorly describe as an act of heroism to buy time for a merger with the intent to put the money back(funny it didn’t work out that way). I also agree with Mckenna that the issue of who is handling the investigation is a side issue to the fact that money was stolen.
    I’m really hoping that the silence and lack of a formal charge is a sign that investigators are being thorough, but if not, I believe this will the the final nail in the coffin of investors having any faith that the system works. If those in gov’t believe that angry farmers can be bought off and compensated by some farm subsidies while giving clemency to Corzine they are sadly mistaken.

  5. farmera1 says:

    Texas Water District Acts to Slow Depletion of the Ogallala Aquifer

    The Ogallala the big aquifer that runs from South DAkota to Texas is being mined. National Geo has done a couple of articles on this source of water in the mid-lands of the US.

  6. Jack Damn says:

    - All navel oranges are grafted clones from a single tree mutation that occurred almost 200 years ago in Brazil.

    - Triple US Stock Market Check into the Zone

    - Five budget realities no politician will talk about (not even Ron Paul)

  7. VennData says:

    Honeywell suing competitors. Those SOBs are just like Apple, Microsoft and the rest of the patent trolls. You want to know what slows down innovation?

    Welcome to the Patent nonsense.

  8. Jojo says:

    Bloomberg BusinessWeek
    February 09, 2012

    Regulations Create Jobs, Too
    Vilified on the campaign trail, government rules often create as many jobs as they kill

    When the Obama Administration announced tough new pollution regulations for power plants last year, the industry loudly protested. The rules, which among other things will require coal-fired plants to make deep reductions in mercury and sulphur dioxide emissions by 2015, will cost utilities at least $12 billion, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates. Coal producers put the price tag at $21 billion. They say electricity prices will spike 12 percent, dozens of plants will close, and thousands of workers will lose their jobs. “This rule is the most extensive intervention into the power market and job market that EPA has ever attempted to implement,” says Scott Segal, a lobbyist at Bracewell & Giuliani, which represents the utility Southern Co. (SO) He argues the regulation will “undermine job creation in the United States.”

    Tell that to Cal Lockert, the vice-president of Breen Energy Solutions, a Pittsburgh manufacturer of equipment that absorbs acid gases to keep them from spilling out of smokestacks. Lockert spends his days persuading power companies that he can help them bring some of their oldest, dirtiest plants in line with the federal requirements. There’s been “a frenzy of engineering firms and utilities” calling him for demonstrations of his products, he says. He’s hired a dozen people in the past month and says he’s just getting started.

    Nol-Tec Systems in Lino Lakes, Minn., also expects a boom in sales of its equipment, which uses baking soda to pull pollutants out of plant exhaust. Meanwhile, Thermo Fisher Scientific (TMO) in Waltham, Mass., is building emission monitors that power plants will need to measure toxins under the new rules. The regulations “could easily add $50 million to $100 million dollars in revenue in a year or two years,” says Chief Executive Officer Marc Casper, “which is significant for a company like ours.” The Institute of Clean Air Companies, a trade association representing businesses that make products to reduce industrial emissions, forecasts the industry will add 300,000 jobs a year through 2017 as a result of the EPA rules.

    This is the side of the story that rarely gets mentioned in Washington or on the campaign trail. In an election year that hinges on the economy, government rules have become politically toxic. President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul, the massive Dodd-Frank financial reform law, and EPA clean air and water mandates come under frequent attack from Republicans who say burdensome regulations are stalling the nation’s recovery. In the GOP debates, the R-word is now habitually preceded by “job-killing,” as in Mitt Romney’s promise to put an end to “job-killing regulations.” Newt Gingrich refers to the EPA as a “job-killing regulatory engine.”

  9. mathman says:

    Pensions under siege as Bank of England rescue plan leaves a million savers facing poverty

    “More than one million pensioners have been consigned to a life of poverty because of the Bank of England’s strategy of pumping money into the economy.”

    what’s this, follow the Fed? this time will be different? sheesh!

  10. lunartop says:

    [AUDIO] William Black on Financial Fraud

    Given the consequences for millions of ordinary working people the above is 1 hour 22 minutes that will render you speechless.

  11. Lukey says:

    Are we seriously going to consider jobs “created” by regulation as a boon to the economy? I frankly do not get the “all jobs are equal” argument. When the government creates a job in a federal bureaucracy or a consultant is hired to provide advice to clients on the regulatory morass, that’s not the same thing as say, Apple hiring a new design technician. That’s the rough equivalent of saying the mob “creates” jobs for enforcers to collect the protection money. Sure it’s someone being paid to do something, but can anyone give me a coherent argument for how government or regulatory related jobs are creating wealth? I view it as simple redistribution of wealth every bit as odious as Obama’s increase of taxes on the rich specifically to fund a wage tax cut. This isn’t how you build a long term viable economy!!!

  12. Jojo says:

    @Lukey – You are over-complicating the question.

    Regs are necessary to protect us from unfettered big business, which w/o regs, has proven time and again that they will do what is most profitable regardless of damage to the environment, safety, the financial system or society in general.

    The point of the article was that there is too much angst regarding business regulation, especially on the dumbnut Republican side. Yes, stricter regs can cause job loss but those losses are made up by new jobs and the business opportunities created by the new/enhanced regulations.

  13. Lukey says:


    No, I’m keeping it real simple. There’s productive jobs (the kind that contribute to the national wealth) and there are non-productive jobs (the kind that just bleed off the producers and redistribute, rather than create wealth). Some people like to equate the two, and you appear to be among them. We are so far beyond the “unfettered” business stage in our regulatory apparatus that you can’t even see it from here. I might suggest that the “dumbnuts” are the ones suggesting that these “unproductive” non-wealth producing jobs are just as desirable (and in some cases MORE desirable) than the productive ones. If you believe that I have some Greek bonds I’d like to sell you at 100 cents on the dollar!

  14. southernboy says:

    heres’ what I’m reading: “AT&T Must Let Beastie Boy Vote on Net Neutrality”

  15. Jojo says:

    @Lukey – Did you actually read the article I referenced? Are willing to stand in front of Breen Energy Solutions or Nol-Tec Systems and tell them their new jobs and their whole business is made up of little value sham jobs?

    Regardless, whether the quality of the jobs produced by additional regulation are better or worse isn’t germane. Regulations are necessary and required. Just look at China which is light on regulation and what do we see – environmental pollution an order of magnitude or worse compared to here. Drugs and food that are often corrupted with dangerous chemicals. Buildings that easily fall down in earthquakes. Toys with lead paint. And so on.

    Can and should regs be optimized? Of course. Will it ever happen? Doubtful. Passing regulations and laws is what keeps politicians and government in business. There is probably as much chance of regs being really simplified as there is of the tax code being simplified. Around zero. So given this, at least in the big picture, we are not losing jobs as many seem to believe.

  16. hesslinkjr says:

    In reference to the Kass article I agree that the Siegel data seems questionable. While I haven’t heard back from Mr. Epstein I did bring to his attention that the median return reported from 1871 to 2011 averaged about 30% to 45% larger than the median data presented in Barron’s last year for the period 1871 to 2010. I wondered how the median return could go up so much given that 2011 was a relatively flat to nominal year. Without having access to the raw data set or any variance it is hard to know for sure but really……

    5yr 10 yr 20 yr 30 yr
    1871-2011 9.46% 8.75% 7.84% 9.22%

    1871 -2010 6.96% 6.81% 6.84% 6.29%

    Any math whizzes on the board that can explain this little gem?

  17. Lukey says:

    @ Jojo

    My (rather simple) point is that these jobs are not self sustaining. They don’t actually pay for themselves. The regulation that has led to their “creation” is no different than the mob protection racket “creating” jobs for bone-cracking collectors. They aren’t adding to the overall competitiveness and wealth of the economy. They simply drain off productive resources from self sustainable entrepreneurial activity. Are some regulations necessary? Of course. But the notion that the jobs it brings about are just as desirable as a job that designs or makes a product that we can sell to the developing nations is absurd. If I were you I’d watch where I get my economic “analysis” as sometimes it’s only worth what it’s (you know) worth: