Eighteen months ago, Goldman Sachs, AIG, CitiGroup and other big Wall Street players were on the verge of bankruptcy. So a reasonable question is "How are they doing today?"
The answer is "Extremely Well, Thank you."
In 2009, the members of the New York Stock Exchange earned profits of $61.4 Billion, an all time record high.
Wall Street banks have hired 2,000 new employees since February.
So how are the rest of us doing? See post below for the answer.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Fix Congress First
One million school children are homeless.
More Vietnam veterans are now homeless than were killed in action. (58,267)
Fifteen million Americans are unemployed and five million of them are out of unemployment benefits.
And Congress won't do a damn thing!!
Every member of the House of Representatives is up for re-election as well as one-third of the Senate.
Go to fixcongressfirst.org and sign on. We have to do something.
More Vietnam veterans are now homeless than were killed in action. (58,267)
Fifteen million Americans are unemployed and five million of them are out of unemployment benefits.
And Congress won't do a damn thing!!
Every member of the House of Representatives is up for re-election as well as one-third of the Senate.
Go to fixcongressfirst.org and sign on. We have to do something.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
A Badge of Shame
During the 2008-2009 school year there were more than 956,000 homeless children, a 20% increase over the previous year.
If that is not shameful for the world's richest country, I don't know what is!
If that is not shameful for the world's richest country, I don't know what is!
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
I am not the only one wondering about Washington
The unemployment emergency
By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, July 6, 2010; A13
The good news is that unemployment has fallen to "only" 9.5 percent. The bad news is that the jobless rate is down only because so many people have given up hope of finding work. Perversely, the jobless who aren't actively looking for jobs are not counted as "unemployed." Perhaps there should be a new category: "mired in existential despair." If anyone in Washington wants to know why people in the hinterlands are angry, one simple answer is that our political leaders seem to be so calculating and unmoved about the parlous state of the economy.
The disheartening employment figures released Friday quickly became fodder for the kind of political to-and-fro that has become standard operating procedure. President Obama quickly put his spin on the numbers, noting that the private sector added 83,000 jobs in June. The president's Republican opponents noted that overall, the economy lost 125,000 jobs -- taking into account not just the private-sector gain but the end of 225,000 temporary jobs for census workers.
Last month, it was the other way around. The overall number, showing what happened in May, indicated a healthy-looking gain in jobs -- so that was what Obama wanted to talk about. But the increase reflected mostly census hiring, with the private sector adding a paltry 41,000 jobs -- which was the number the Republicans wanted to highlight.
All the spinning and counterspinning drives people crazy. And why shouldn't it? The employment numbers aren't just a monthly set of partisan talking points. They represent actual lives. They represent mortgages that might not be paid and college educations that have to be deferred; they tally mental health crises and broken marriages. Those sterile, emotionless figures speak of pain and anxiety. They mock our faith in the American dream.
Let me put it in terms that Washington understands: The party that begins to treat the unemployment crisis with the hair-on-fire urgency that it deserves is the party that will do well in November.
In the past, a steep fall into recession has often led to an equally steep climb back to prosperity. Clearly, that's not the case this time. In relatively short order, the economy lost about 7 million jobs. So far this year, we've gained back more than 600,000 -- not bad, given that in early 2009 we were shedding that many jobs each month, but not nearly enough to have the kind of impact the nation can really feel.
The debate among economists about whether or not this will prove to be a "double-dip" recession is beside the point. For most people, this feels more like one long, uninterrupted dip -- with no end in sight. Adding 83,000 private-sector jobs in June sounds like something of an accomplishment, until you realize that the U.S. economy has to add more than 125,000 jobs a month just to accommodate the natural growth of the workforce. With a gain of 83,000 jobs, we actually lost ground.
Our political leaders know that unemployment is on their constituents' minds, so they talk about it. A lot. But we're not seeing either party show the kind of courage that's really needed.
Republicans block an extension of unemployment benefits, rail about the deficit and complain that Democrats don't understand that economic renewal will come when the private sector is unleashed. The problem is that since Republicans are in the minority, they have to work with the Democrats to get anything done. I suspect that their strategy -- standing on the sidelines and yelling, "The Democrats are doing it all wrong!" -- will not win as much favor from voters as the GOP hopes.
Democrats, on the other hand, do have the power to enact an agenda. But individual members of Congress act as if they are more concerned about their own electoral prospects than about bringing those unemployment numbers down. If a second economic stimulus is the answer, then that's what Democrats should do. If the answer is something else, fine. But they should know that whether they call themselves progressives or Blue Dogs or whatever, voters see them as one party and will hold them accountable.
Washington gets all excited when someone commits an embarrassing or impolitic gaffe. Beyond the Beltway, people cannot understand why our leaders can't be similarly focused and energetic about the most tragic spasm of economic dislocation in eight decades.
By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, July 6, 2010; A13
The good news is that unemployment has fallen to "only" 9.5 percent. The bad news is that the jobless rate is down only because so many people have given up hope of finding work. Perversely, the jobless who aren't actively looking for jobs are not counted as "unemployed." Perhaps there should be a new category: "mired in existential despair." If anyone in Washington wants to know why people in the hinterlands are angry, one simple answer is that our political leaders seem to be so calculating and unmoved about the parlous state of the economy.
The disheartening employment figures released Friday quickly became fodder for the kind of political to-and-fro that has become standard operating procedure. President Obama quickly put his spin on the numbers, noting that the private sector added 83,000 jobs in June. The president's Republican opponents noted that overall, the economy lost 125,000 jobs -- taking into account not just the private-sector gain but the end of 225,000 temporary jobs for census workers.
Last month, it was the other way around. The overall number, showing what happened in May, indicated a healthy-looking gain in jobs -- so that was what Obama wanted to talk about. But the increase reflected mostly census hiring, with the private sector adding a paltry 41,000 jobs -- which was the number the Republicans wanted to highlight.
All the spinning and counterspinning drives people crazy. And why shouldn't it? The employment numbers aren't just a monthly set of partisan talking points. They represent actual lives. They represent mortgages that might not be paid and college educations that have to be deferred; they tally mental health crises and broken marriages. Those sterile, emotionless figures speak of pain and anxiety. They mock our faith in the American dream.
Let me put it in terms that Washington understands: The party that begins to treat the unemployment crisis with the hair-on-fire urgency that it deserves is the party that will do well in November.
In the past, a steep fall into recession has often led to an equally steep climb back to prosperity. Clearly, that's not the case this time. In relatively short order, the economy lost about 7 million jobs. So far this year, we've gained back more than 600,000 -- not bad, given that in early 2009 we were shedding that many jobs each month, but not nearly enough to have the kind of impact the nation can really feel.
The debate among economists about whether or not this will prove to be a "double-dip" recession is beside the point. For most people, this feels more like one long, uninterrupted dip -- with no end in sight. Adding 83,000 private-sector jobs in June sounds like something of an accomplishment, until you realize that the U.S. economy has to add more than 125,000 jobs a month just to accommodate the natural growth of the workforce. With a gain of 83,000 jobs, we actually lost ground.
Our political leaders know that unemployment is on their constituents' minds, so they talk about it. A lot. But we're not seeing either party show the kind of courage that's really needed.
Republicans block an extension of unemployment benefits, rail about the deficit and complain that Democrats don't understand that economic renewal will come when the private sector is unleashed. The problem is that since Republicans are in the minority, they have to work with the Democrats to get anything done. I suspect that their strategy -- standing on the sidelines and yelling, "The Democrats are doing it all wrong!" -- will not win as much favor from voters as the GOP hopes.
Democrats, on the other hand, do have the power to enact an agenda. But individual members of Congress act as if they are more concerned about their own electoral prospects than about bringing those unemployment numbers down. If a second economic stimulus is the answer, then that's what Democrats should do. If the answer is something else, fine. But they should know that whether they call themselves progressives or Blue Dogs or whatever, voters see them as one party and will hold them accountable.
Washington gets all excited when someone commits an embarrassing or impolitic gaffe. Beyond the Beltway, people cannot understand why our leaders can't be similarly focused and energetic about the most tragic spasm of economic dislocation in eight decades.
Monday, July 5, 2010
A Rock and a Hard Place
Small businesses have no cash and no customers. Big businesses have lots of cash and no confidence. Where do we go from here?
Obama's CEO problem -- and ours
By Fareed Zakaria
Monday, July 5, 2010
The American economy is sputtering and we are running out of options. Interest rates can't go any lower. Another burst of government spending -- whether a good or bad idea -- looks politically impossible. Can anything protect us from the dangers of stagnation or a double dip? Actually, there is a second stimulus that could have a dramatic effect on the economy -- even more so than government spending. And it won't add to the deficit.
The Federal Reserve recently reported that America's 500 largest nonfinancial companies have accumulated an astonishing $1.8 trillion of cash on their balance sheets. By any calculation (for example, as a percentage of assets), this is higher than it has been in almost half a century. Yet most corporations are not spending this money on new plants, equipment or workers. Were they to loosen their purse strings, hundreds of billions of dollars would start pouring through the economy. These investments would probably have greater effect and staying power than a government stimulus.
To be clear: There is a strong case for a temporary and targeted government stimulus. Consumers and companies are being very cautious about spending. Right now, government spending is keeping the economy afloat. Without a second stimulus, state and local governments will have to slash spending and raise taxes, which will produce a downward spiral of higher unemployment, slower growth, lower tax revenue and a larger deficit. Joel Klein, the New York City schools chancellor, told me that when the stimulus money runs out at the end of this year, he will be forced to lay off 5,000 teachers. Multiply that example a thousand times to get a sense of what 2011 could look like.
But government spending can only be a bridge to private-sector investment. The key to a sustainable recovery and robust economic growth is to get companies investing in America. So why are they reluctant, despite having mounds of cash? I put this question to a series of business leaders, all of whom were expansive on the topic yet did not want to be quoted by name, for fear of offending people in Washington.
ad_icon
Economic uncertainty was the primary cause of their caution. "We've just been through a tsunami and that produces caution," one told me. But in addition to economics, they kept talking about politics, about the uncertainty surrounding regulations and taxes. Some have even begun to speak out publicly. Jeffrey Immelt, chief executive of General Electric, complained Friday that government was not in sync with entrepreneurs. The Business Roundtable, which had supported the Obama administration, has begun to complain about the myriad laws and regulations being cooked up in Washington.
One CEO told me, "Almost every agency we deal with has announced some expansion of its authority, which naturally makes me concerned about what's in store for us for the future." Another pointed out that between the health-care bill, financial reform and possibly cap-and-trade, his company had lawyers working day and night to figure out the implications of all these new regulations. Lobbyists have been delighted by all this activity. "[Obama] exaggerates our power, but he increases demand for our services," superlobbyist Tony Podesta told the New York Times.
Most of the business leaders I spoke to had voted for Barack Obama. They still admire him. Those who had met him thought he was unusually smart. But all think he is, at his core, anti-business. When I asked for specifics, they pointed to the fact that Obama has no business executives in his Cabinet, that he rarely consults with CEOs (except for photo ops), that he has almost no private-sector experience, that he's made clear he thinks government and nonprofit work are superior to the private sector. It all added up to a profound sense of distrust.
Some of this is a product of chance. The economic crisis forced the government to expand its authority in dozens of areas, from finance to automobiles. But precisely because of these circumstances, Obama needs to outline a growth and competitiveness agenda that is compelling to the business community. This might sound like psychology more than economics, and the populist left will surely scream that the last thing we need to do is pander to business. But the first thing we need is for these people to start spending their money -- soon. As a leading New York businessman who publicly supported Obama during the campaign told me, "their perception is our reality."
Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International. His e-mail address is comments@fareedzakaria.com.
Obama's CEO problem -- and ours
By Fareed Zakaria
Monday, July 5, 2010
The American economy is sputtering and we are running out of options. Interest rates can't go any lower. Another burst of government spending -- whether a good or bad idea -- looks politically impossible. Can anything protect us from the dangers of stagnation or a double dip? Actually, there is a second stimulus that could have a dramatic effect on the economy -- even more so than government spending. And it won't add to the deficit.
The Federal Reserve recently reported that America's 500 largest nonfinancial companies have accumulated an astonishing $1.8 trillion of cash on their balance sheets. By any calculation (for example, as a percentage of assets), this is higher than it has been in almost half a century. Yet most corporations are not spending this money on new plants, equipment or workers. Were they to loosen their purse strings, hundreds of billions of dollars would start pouring through the economy. These investments would probably have greater effect and staying power than a government stimulus.
To be clear: There is a strong case for a temporary and targeted government stimulus. Consumers and companies are being very cautious about spending. Right now, government spending is keeping the economy afloat. Without a second stimulus, state and local governments will have to slash spending and raise taxes, which will produce a downward spiral of higher unemployment, slower growth, lower tax revenue and a larger deficit. Joel Klein, the New York City schools chancellor, told me that when the stimulus money runs out at the end of this year, he will be forced to lay off 5,000 teachers. Multiply that example a thousand times to get a sense of what 2011 could look like.
But government spending can only be a bridge to private-sector investment. The key to a sustainable recovery and robust economic growth is to get companies investing in America. So why are they reluctant, despite having mounds of cash? I put this question to a series of business leaders, all of whom were expansive on the topic yet did not want to be quoted by name, for fear of offending people in Washington.
ad_icon
Economic uncertainty was the primary cause of their caution. "We've just been through a tsunami and that produces caution," one told me. But in addition to economics, they kept talking about politics, about the uncertainty surrounding regulations and taxes. Some have even begun to speak out publicly. Jeffrey Immelt, chief executive of General Electric, complained Friday that government was not in sync with entrepreneurs. The Business Roundtable, which had supported the Obama administration, has begun to complain about the myriad laws and regulations being cooked up in Washington.
One CEO told me, "Almost every agency we deal with has announced some expansion of its authority, which naturally makes me concerned about what's in store for us for the future." Another pointed out that between the health-care bill, financial reform and possibly cap-and-trade, his company had lawyers working day and night to figure out the implications of all these new regulations. Lobbyists have been delighted by all this activity. "[Obama] exaggerates our power, but he increases demand for our services," superlobbyist Tony Podesta told the New York Times.
Most of the business leaders I spoke to had voted for Barack Obama. They still admire him. Those who had met him thought he was unusually smart. But all think he is, at his core, anti-business. When I asked for specifics, they pointed to the fact that Obama has no business executives in his Cabinet, that he rarely consults with CEOs (except for photo ops), that he has almost no private-sector experience, that he's made clear he thinks government and nonprofit work are superior to the private sector. It all added up to a profound sense of distrust.
Some of this is a product of chance. The economic crisis forced the government to expand its authority in dozens of areas, from finance to automobiles. But precisely because of these circumstances, Obama needs to outline a growth and competitiveness agenda that is compelling to the business community. This might sound like psychology more than economics, and the populist left will surely scream that the last thing we need to do is pander to business. But the first thing we need is for these people to start spending their money -- soon. As a leading New York businessman who publicly supported Obama during the campaign told me, "their perception is our reality."
Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International. His e-mail address is comments@fareedzakaria.com.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
The Health Care Travesty
In the U.S. we spend 16-18% (it depends slightly on who is counting) of our Gross National Product on health care. That is more than DOUBLE what any other country spends. What we get for that is infant mortality like a third world country, a mother in-birth mortality double any other developed country (and growing instead of shrinking like every other country in the world), and a shorter life span than any European country, to name just a few "benefits".
Health care spending is forecast to grow 9% next year because of that travesty of a health care bill that Congress just passed and the President signed.
And here is the really bad news. There is not one single thing in the bill to reduce the total costs or to slow down the growth rate.
And, to make it even worse, Congress specifically forbids the use of any of the findings of Peter Orzag's comparative cost studies by any government agency.
Every dollar that is wasted on unproductive health care is a dollar that cannot be spent on schools, roads, research, or any of the things that make life better.
Health care spending is forecast to grow 9% next year because of that travesty of a health care bill that Congress just passed and the President signed.
And here is the really bad news. There is not one single thing in the bill to reduce the total costs or to slow down the growth rate.
And, to make it even worse, Congress specifically forbids the use of any of the findings of Peter Orzag's comparative cost studies by any government agency.
Every dollar that is wasted on unproductive health care is a dollar that cannot be spent on schools, roads, research, or any of the things that make life better.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
The New Gangs of New York-Join One
http://www.thereformedbroker.com/2010/06/24/econ-gangs-of-new-york/
Econ Gangs of New York
* *Joshua M Brown
* June 24th, 2010
http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-1024x373.jpg
The factions that are shaping the economic dialog these days are becoming every bit as colorful and distinct as the proto-gangs that once ruled New York's notorious Five Points area. Their leaders, every bit as bellicose and recognizable.
Here's a quick idea of who's who so you can keep up with the discussion:
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/butcher.jpg**_The
Austerians_* - These are newly-minted deficit hawks, many of whom voted for tax cuts and massive spending bills under the Bush administration without so much as a peep. Dubbed 'Austerians' by blogger *Mark Thoma (Economist's View)*, this gang has found a sudden (upcoming
election-related) pang of concern over deficits and our ability to finance them. Critics say the Austerians' premature tightness will send the economy off a cliff, a la the 1930's. Their rival gang is the New Jack Keynesians.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-2.jpg**_The
New Jack Keynesians_* - Politically they tend to be from the left and it's been said that they've never met an expenditure they didn't like - unless it was for tax cuts to business owners or something that might actually lead to non-government hiring. The gang's leader is Nobel Prize-winning economist *Paul Krugman*, they can often be found at their stronghold (Krugman's soapbox column in the *New York Times*) chanting 'Spend, Baby, Spend' or 'Deficits Don't Matter'.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/leo-gangs.jpg*
*_The
V-Shapers_* - A wild-eyed mob of rabble rousers, the V-Shapers may scatter after a particularly messy economic report, but will reappear anytime the S&P 500 closes in the green. The gang is led by *Liz Ann Sonders (Charles Schwab)* with *Larry Kudlow (CNBC)* assuming Sergeant-at-Arms duties during most turf wars. V-Shapers are most powerful during corporate earnings season as manipulated bottom-line profit reports against easy comps are their weapon of choice these days.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-1.jpg**_The
Double Dippers_* - The nomenclature "Double Dipper" can be a bit misleading as many gang members never agreed that the /single/ dip was actually over. Rather, they've insistently maintained that minus the effects of quantitative easing, fiscal stimulus and theater-of-the-absurd monetary policy, there never really was a recovery. *Michael Pento (Greenfaucet)* throws on the leathers and leads this pack, flanked by *David Rosenberg (Gluskin Sheff)* and *Meredith Whitney (eponymous firm)*. It should be remarked that this gang is growing faster than the others as of this guide's creation.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-3.jpg**_The
1 Percenters_* - This syndicate is united around the belief that the Federal Reserve should immediately raise interest rates to 1 percent from their current level, /Eternal Zero/. This move, they argue, will demonstrate confidence, pull hesitant home buyers off the sidelines and jolt the banks off of their government debt-spread binge and back to consumer lending. The ringleader here is Kansas City Federal Reserve honcho *Thomas Hoenig*.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/hellcat-maggie.jpg*
*_The
Inflationsitas_* - Gang leader *Dr. Allan Meltzer (Carnegie Mellon)* sees the potential for inflation everywhere he looks. Disregarding the actual data, which shows that we are in fact caught in the throes of a deflationary death spiral in many categories, the Inflationistas have instead decided to "look through the valley" to some point in the future in which the dreaded "printing presses" will cause a severe spike in costs. Meltzer is backed up by the likes of *Marc Faber (Gloom, Boom & Doom Report)* and virtually every prominent hedge fund manager in the world.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Monk-McGinn.png*
*_The
New Normalers_* - The mantra that we are in a low growth, high tax, heavily regulated investment world originated with gang leader *Bill Gross (Pimco)* and his second-in-command *Mohamed El-Erian*. Many a newsletter writer has flocked to the New Normal standard, most notably *John Mauldin (Thoughts From The Frontline)*. The New Normalers can typically be found casting a wary eye on the European debt turmoil or hard at work at the keyboard, prolifically pecking out multi-thousand word epistles on how things will never be the same again. And they're probably right.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-bald.jpg*
*_The
Nihlists_* - Believe in nothing, man. The core belief here is that nothing can be believed in, not government, not capitalism, not paper money, not brick-and-mortar. There is a hopelessness in this crew's rhetoric that is so potent that it frightens off even the Double Dippers when their paths cross. Spiritual and intellectual leadership comes from *Dow Theorist Richard Russell*, who pens such heartwarming chestnuts as "Sell everything you own except your gold" and "Go kiss your relatives goodbye for the last time". Splinter factions within this group worship gold, guns and potable drinking water, they've been stockpiling for nearly 4 years now.
***
Econ Gangs of New York
* *Joshua M Brown
* June 24th, 2010
http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-1024x373.jpg
The factions that are shaping the economic dialog these days are becoming every bit as colorful and distinct as the proto-gangs that once ruled New York's notorious Five Points area. Their leaders, every bit as bellicose and recognizable.
Here's a quick idea of who's who so you can keep up with the discussion:
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/butcher.jpg*
Austerians_* - These are newly-minted deficit hawks, many of whom voted for tax cuts and massive spending bills under the Bush administration without so much as a peep. Dubbed 'Austerians' by blogger *Mark Thoma (Economist's View)*, this gang has found a sudden (upcoming
election-related) pang of concern over deficits and our ability to finance them. Critics say the Austerians' premature tightness will send the economy off a cliff, a la the 1930's. Their rival gang is the New Jack Keynesians.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-2.jpg*
New Jack Keynesians_* - Politically they tend to be from the left and it's been said that they've never met an expenditure they didn't like - unless it was for tax cuts to business owners or something that might actually lead to non-government hiring. The gang's leader is Nobel Prize-winning economist *Paul Krugman*, they can often be found at their stronghold (Krugman's soapbox column in the *New York Times*) chanting 'Spend, Baby, Spend' or 'Deficits Don't Matter'.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/leo-gangs.jpg*
V-Shapers_* - A wild-eyed mob of rabble rousers, the V-Shapers may scatter after a particularly messy economic report, but will reappear anytime the S&P 500 closes in the green. The gang is led by *Liz Ann Sonders (Charles Schwab)* with *Larry Kudlow (CNBC)* assuming Sergeant-at-Arms duties during most turf wars. V-Shapers are most powerful during corporate earnings season as manipulated bottom-line profit reports against easy comps are their weapon of choice these days.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-1.jpg*
Double Dippers_* - The nomenclature "Double Dipper" can be a bit misleading as many gang members never agreed that the /single/ dip was actually over. Rather, they've insistently maintained that minus the effects of quantitative easing, fiscal stimulus and theater-of-the-absurd monetary policy, there never really was a recovery. *Michael Pento (Greenfaucet)* throws on the leathers and leads this pack, flanked by *David Rosenberg (Gluskin Sheff)* and *Meredith Whitney (eponymous firm)*. It should be remarked that this gang is growing faster than the others as of this guide's creation.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-3.jpg*
1 Percenters_* - This syndicate is united around the belief that the Federal Reserve should immediately raise interest rates to 1 percent from their current level, /Eternal Zero/. This move, they argue, will demonstrate confidence, pull hesitant home buyers off the sidelines and jolt the banks off of their government debt-spread binge and back to consumer lending. The ringleader here is Kansas City Federal Reserve honcho *Thomas Hoenig*.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/hellcat-maggie.jpg*
Inflationsitas_* - Gang leader *Dr. Allan Meltzer (Carnegie Mellon)* sees the potential for inflation everywhere he looks. Disregarding the actual data, which shows that we are in fact caught in the throes of a deflationary death spiral in many categories, the Inflationistas have instead decided to "look through the valley" to some point in the future in which the dreaded "printing presses" will cause a severe spike in costs. Meltzer is backed up by the likes of *Marc Faber (Gloom, Boom & Doom Report)* and virtually every prominent hedge fund manager in the world.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Monk-McGinn.png*
New Normalers_* - The mantra that we are in a low growth, high tax, heavily regulated investment world originated with gang leader *Bill Gross (Pimco)* and his second-in-command *Mohamed El-Erian*. Many a newsletter writer has flocked to the New Normal standard, most notably *John Mauldin (Thoughts From The Frontline)*. The New Normalers can typically be found casting a wary eye on the European debt turmoil or hard at work at the keyboard, prolifically pecking out multi-thousand word epistles on how things will never be the same again. And they're probably right.
*http://www.thereformedbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/gangs-bald.jpg*
Nihlists_* - Believe in nothing, man. The core belief here is that nothing can be believed in, not government, not capitalism, not paper money, not brick-and-mortar. There is a hopelessness in this crew's rhetoric that is so potent that it frightens off even the Double Dippers when their paths cross. Spiritual and intellectual leadership comes from *Dow Theorist Richard Russell*, who pens such heartwarming chestnuts as "Sell everything you own except your gold" and "Go kiss your relatives goodbye for the last time". Splinter factions within this group worship gold, guns and potable drinking water, they've been stockpiling for nearly 4 years now.
***
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)