My morning reads:

• Economy in U.S. Shrinks as Defense Spending Slumps (Bloomberg) see also U.S. Economy Unexpectedly Contracts in Fourth Quarter (WSJ)
• Meaning is Expensive (Above the Market)
• 3 Bond Strategies for 2013 (iShares Blog) see also Why is There Still a Shortage Safe Assets? (Macro and Other Market Musings)
• MF Global’s Bankruptcy Nears a Happy Less Terrible Conclusion (DealBook)
• Bernanke Seen Buying $1.14 Trillion in Assets in 2014 (Bloomberg) see also Fed’s Long-Running Show Goes On and On (WSJ)
• Record Profits No Job Creator on Farms as Owners Automate (Bloomberg)
• It’s Too Soon to Celebrate a Recovery (Bloomberg) see also The power and the terror of Irrational Expectations (Noahpinion)
• Advisor Retirement Product Picks Vary By Channel, Survey Says (Financial Advisor)
• How Productivity Tools Can Waste Your Time (WSJ)
• Amazon Profits Fall 45 Percent, Still the Most Amazing Company in the World (Slate)

What are you reading?
 

Post-Financial Crisis Rally 5 Stock Market Indexes

Source: Chart of the Day

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.

18 Responses to “10 Mid Week AM Reads”

  1. mad97123 says:

    Who would have thought, contracting government spending impacts GDP. Who seeing any more of that on the horizon?

    Not to worry the nation appears to still be on a mild growth path if “unusual factors” are stripped out. Kind of like earnings were good if you take out all the bad stuff….

    Rising taxed, rising interest rate (the great rotation theme), reduced government spending – sound like the perfect backdrop for a new secular bull market too start.

  2. VennData says:

    “…Economy in U.S. Shrinks as Defense Spending Slumps…”

    I hope all the Teahadists are in the stocks that are dropping due to any austerity, and ride ‘em to ground Zero.

    Yeah Teahadists, we don’t need any military, right?

  3. willid3 says:

    not sure if any one else noticed or knows about this

    but it seems if you work for a company they could be selling your data to others, even if they have never said any thing about it. and that includes not just prospective employers, but debt collectors, finance companies, and insurers. and this includes salary, salary history, and more!

    http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/30/16762661-exclusive-your-employer-may-share-your-salary-and-equifax-might-sell-that-data?lite

  4. willid3 says:

    king of CEO pay. earns about %14 of profits, and coming soon, probably, the CEO who earns %5 of revenue.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323829504578271881429537930.html?mod=ITP_moneyandinvesting_0

  5. DeDude says:

    Can you compare the “lets deal with the problem later when it arrives” attitude toward the projected “catastrophe” in entitlement programs, to the same attitude towards green house gases and global warming?

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/paul-krugman-vs-the-world-86822.html?hp=l9

    Actually you cannot. Even if you presume that the negative effects of greenhouse gases have not yet arrived (although they have), there is no way to influence (positive or negatively) the size of the earth, so the greenhouse gas problem is ALWAYS one of reducing them with no concern for any negative feedbacks from that reduction. Indeed all the feedbacks in global warming are positive and that in itself argues for early rather than late action.

    In contrast, the deficits and debt issue is not about the absolute numbers but about their ratio to the size of the economy. Many of the proposed ways to reduce the debt and deficits have negative effects on the size of the economy. So you have to be very careful about when and how you reduce the deficit in an economy that operates way below capacity (therefore being particularly vulnerable to negative effects of austerity).

  6. GZR says:

    Where are the Achuthan haters today?

  7. VennData says:

    “…RescueTime posts an alert on your computer screen if he spends too much time on blogs. On the second offense RescueTime locks him out of nonwork programs and apps…”

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2405112,00.asp

    This looks like an interesting progr

  8. czyz99 says:

    Where are the Achuthan haters today?

    Great work by ECRI. Put a bottom in the S&P 500 at 1100 on Sept 30. 2011! So 16 months later and 36% higher. Yeah that’s useful.

  9. farmera1 says:

    Modern row crop farming is truly something to behold. It is amazing how much it has changed in the last 40 years.
    Technology drives modern farming and the point of the above Bloomberg article is that the same amount of labor can farm multiple acres of land compared to 40 years ago. Hence tremendous increases in productivity, and profits but no jobs.

    Examples of modern technology in row crop farming (corn and soybeans):

    GPS guided tractors and combines. These are so much more accurate and precise vs anything a human can do. Hence it saves labor, fuel, fertilizers and herbicides. GPS guided equipment makes ever larger farm equipment possible.

    Grid sampling of fields for soil testing. Then the fertilizers are applied using GPS and computers. Productivity is greatly enhanced by using fertilizer where it is needed. In a 640 acres field (one square mile) this makes a huge difference.

    On board yield moniters tell you what the yields are on a continuous basis. This provides information on future changes that may need to be done.

    Things coming include self guided tractors (no drivers needed), soil builders to improve yields, the ever changing genetics in seeds and on and on.

    I think agriculture is changing just as manufacturing is changing.. Robots and computers decrease the need for labor, improve productivity and leave large numbers of people unemployed. Read that by 2040 the unemployment rate could be 40% in this country just due to robots/automation. Now that is a problem. Where are the Luddites when we need them.

  10. willid3 says:

    can’t imagine that all of the debt ceiling fight, the fiscal cliff moronic episode or the on rushing sequester could have any thing to do with the economy declining could it? after all so many say that austerity will actually do the reverse that things will get better.

    just note they never say when that is.

  11. Pantmaker says:

    MAD97123 nailed it.

    The economy unexpectedly contracted huh? We’ve heard that one before…

  12. Moss says:

    I thought this was an interesting use of public pressure, or dollars.

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/73fedbf2-6af2-11e2-9871-00144feab49a.html#axzz2JPyKHe3q

  13. James Cameron says:

    I wonder.

    “The pros can play this game, and make money at it.”

    Wanna Make Real Money? Buy Risk

    http://goo.gl/Uzriq

  14. rd says:

    Re Jon Corzine:

    “While investigators have long doubted their ability to file criminal charges against him, suspecting that chaos and lax controls were at play, rather than outright fraud…”

    What is the point of SarbOx if you can’t prosecute for “chaos and lax controls”? Why would any company spend the money it takes to fully comply with SarbOx if there is no consequence to not complying, other than possible corporate bankruptcy?

  15. willid3 says:

    oh oh. some senators are wondering DOH (Aka DOJ) doesnt prosecute banksters. because the markets might not like that
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/30/us-financial-crime-doj-idUSBRE90T01K20130130?feedType=RSS&feedName=PersonalFinance

    and there in making 2 sets of of laws. on for business and wall street. and the one for the rest of us

    hm

    can’t see why that would be a problem can you?

  16. Jojo says:

    Vast majority of wage earners are working harder, and for not much more: Trends in U.S. work hours and wages over 1979-2007
    By Lawrence Mishel | January 30, 2013
    Issue Brief #348

    As is well-documented in The State of Working America, 12th Edition (Mishel et al. 2012), the U.S. economy over the past decade has worked primarily to the advantage of a small sliver of winners. Meanwhile, the vast majority of workers have not fared well–a trend that stretches back to the late 1970s. Contrary to some political rhetoric of late, this is not due to lack of effort; the broad middle class has increased its productivity, upgraded its educational attainment, and worked more hours.

    Key findings include:

    * The average worker worked 1,868 hours in 2007, an increase of 181 hours from the 1979 work year of 1,687 hours. This represents an increase of 10.7 percent–the equivalent of every worker working 4.5 additional weeks per year.
    * Annual work hours grew more among women (20.3 percent) than among men (4.4 percent) from 1979 to 2007, primarily because women increased their weeks per year in the paid workforce.
    * At 22.0 percent, the increase in annual hours between 1979 and 2007 was greater among workers in the lowest fifth of the wage distribution than among workers in the middle fifth (10.9 percent). It was also greater among middle-wage workers than among the top 5 percent of earners (7.6 percent).
    * Real annual wages grew from 1979 to 2007, but for the bottom 60 percent of wage earners, this stemmed roughly as much from increased work hours as increased real hourly wages.
    * Over 1979-2007, real hourly wages for middle-wage workers (those in the middle fifth of earners) grew 15.8 percent. Most of this wage growth occurred in the late 1990s boom (1995-2000). From 1979 to 1995 and from 2000 to 2007, the total real wage growth among this group was just 5.3 percent, equivalent to annual growth of about 0.25 percent.
    * Over 1979-2007, real hourly wages for low-wage workers (those in the bottom fifth of earners) grew 7.7 percent, with most of this wage growth occurring in 1995-2000. From 1979 to 1995 and from 2000 to 2007, real wages among this group actually fell 3.2 percent.
    * Over 1979-2007, the real hourly wages of the top 5 percent of earners grew by 30.2 percent–and by 14.8 percent if one excludes the 1995-2000 period.

    Table 1Table 1

    http://www.epi.org/publication/ib348-trends-us-work-hours-wages-1979-2007/

  17. CSF says:

    Before we blame the GDP print on the Pentagon:
    1. Much of the drop in defense spending was a reversal of a Q3 increase in DOD spending.
    2. Domestic investment also made a negative contribution.
    3. Exports dropped more than imports: this didn’t help.

    It’s too soon to tell, but 1 and 2 might be fiscal cliff related (inventory move up and “uncertainty”). Number 3 may well be the deepening European recession (though I don’t have the regional breakdown of trade data.