My morning reading material:

How We Opt Out of Overoptimism: Our Habit of Ignoring What Is Real Is a Double-Edged Sword (Scientific American)
Bull versus Bear:
…..-Expect Stocks to Be Higher by Year End (Minyanville)
…..-A rally built on fairy tales (MSN Money)
When Bigger Isn’t Better: Profiling ETF Alternatives To DJP, FXI, GLD (ETFdb)
• Falling for the Lottery Trick (NYT) see also Are the Rich Driving Americans to Spend Too Much? (WSJ)
• Bernanke Returns to Academic Roots to Justify Fed’s Existence (Bloomberg)
• “Why I Left Goldman Sachs” (VERSION TWO) (Jacki Zehner) see also Three’s a Crowd (The Epicurean Dealmaker)
• Mayor Bloomberg’s crony capitalism (Market Watch)
• Crude drops after Saudi intervention (FT.com)
Bartlett: The Origin of Modern Republican Fiscal Policy (Economix)
• The Paul Clement Court (NY Mag) see also Could Corporations Take Tax Breaks on Political ‘Dark Money’? (ProPublica)

What are you reading?
>

Apple Pads Investor Wallets

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.

6 Responses to “10 Tuesday AM Reads”

  1. Joe Friday says:

    The Origin of Modern Republican Fiscal Policy” >>> Purple Kool-Aid

    If America had a supply-side economy, one could open a Skunk-Burger restaurant and expect to be successful, but since America is a demand economy, it would quite obviously be a disastrous failure.

  2. streeteye says:

    Bethany McClean has an interesting piece where she says there never was a binding 12-1 leverage rule on major banks. While they did change the rule in 2004 and leverage did go up, banks might have used various devices to do anything they wanted anyway.

    http://blogs.reuters.com/bethany-mclean/2012/03/19/the-meltdown-explanation-that-melts-away/

    Doesn’t mean the regulators were wrong to turn a blind eye to leverage, just that the 2004 rule change was maybe less of a watershed than has been claimed.

    Big speaking fees for financial journalists create appearance of conflict of interest
    http://www.cjr.org/feature/money_talks_marchapril2012.php

  3. Chad says:

    Jacki Zehner’s response to Greg Smith’s “Why I left Goldman Sachs” was worth the read. Unfortunately, the trust she talked about was and is shattered in Wall Street. It’s not coming back.

  4. bear_in_mind says:

    We Now Know With Near-Certainty That Wall Street Execs Committed Felonies
    Bruce Judson, New Deal 2.0
    March 20, 2012
    http://www.businessinsider.com/my-plan-to-finally-make-wall-street-pay-for-its-crimes-2012-3

  5. AHodge says:

    Im not bothering w Jacki Zehner any more
    i was a lot tamer than here but got Moderated out

    AHodge • March 20th, 2012 at 3:03 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    i agree with most. not a goldman demonizer, love their accounting. BUT they systematically sold bad stuff to the low end of their customer food chain. better than blowing up your own company and the customers for a bonus. then going to uncle sugar
    as chief corporate dealer, meaning salesman for Small New york of big eurobank. i admit i was
    some predatory, so this grabbed me
    QUOTE This is called a win/win. This approach worked when there was relationship and that relationship was based on telling the truth UNQUOTE
    did you forget this is you and your saleman making sure the cust did not get a two way price?
    strikes me as a really unwarranted moral victory lap?

    AHodge • March 20th, 2012 at 3:10 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    or to quote Bob Dylan
    dont get up gentlemen im only passin through..
    Only a fool here would think he’s got anything to prove..