Archive

Posts Tagged ‘finance and economics’

Retail analyst: “Obama depression continues to explode”

July 11, 2011 Leave a comment

Even the dollar stores aren’t immune to the failures of Keynesianism on steroids, porkulus, Obamanomics and Decmocratic economic stewardship:

While the demand at stores like the 99-Cent Store or Dollar Tree is still relatively high, the biggest chains in the nation have fallen short of Wall Street’s expectations for several months, a trend that may prove even more ominous for the economy at large.

“I think what’s going on in those stores is that we are in a depression for 80 percent of Americans,” top retail analyst Howard Davidowitz told KNX 1070.

America’s three largest discount chains — Dollar General Corp., Family Dollar Stores Inc. and Dollar Tree Inc. —  all recently missed their quarterly earnings targets.

Davidowitz pointed to the weakness of the dollar and a gloomy consumer outlook as some of the factors behind the stores’ slump.
“In other words, the economy is continuing to be worse, the Obama depression continues to explode,” he added.

Here’s hoping Peggy Joseph was able to get her mortgage and gas money before the cash runs out.

Goldman Sachs lowers earnings expectations for S&P companies

July 8, 2011 Leave a comment

More depressing economic news:

Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the bank with the highest equities-trading revenue, said its rivals are too enthusiastic about second-quarter earnings prospects for Standard & Poor’s 500 Index companies.

Operating profit will total $23.75 a share for the period, or 2.3 percent less than the average Wall Street estimate, said David Kostin, an equity strategist at New York-based Goldman Sachs. He said 2011 and 2012 earnings-per-share forecasts will be reduced by 2 percent and 8 percent, respectively.

[…]

U.S. corporations are set to report the slowest earnings gain since the recession ended as companies from Ford Motor Co. to McDonald’s Corp. struggled with rising oil and commodity prices and a slowdown in consumer confidence that may continue to hamper spending this year.

 If people wouldn’t use those darn ATMs so much, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

FinReg adds mountains of bureaucracy

July 23, 2010 Leave a comment

This is what “reform” looks like:

Before the financial reform law, the SEC already had a full plate. It is working to implement or finalize nearly 20 new regulations covering areas ranging from money market funds to high-speed electronic trading. It is also conducting numerous investigations growing out of the financial crisis and is in the early stages of implementing many internal reforms in its enforcement and examination divisions.

The agency’s new tasks are just as onerous. Schapiro said at a congressional hearing Tuesday that the SEC will have to hire 800 new employees.

“The act requires the SEC to promulgate a large number of new rules, create five new offices, and conduct multiple studies, many within one year,” Schapiro told Congress in prepared testimony. “The importance and complexity of the rules coupled both with their timing and high volume and the rule writing agenda currently pending will make the upcoming rule writing process both logistically challenging and extremely labor intensive.”

Do Democrats have solutions to any issue that doesn’t require tax increases or increased bureaucracy?

The idea that multiplying the number of bodies in a federal office, or legislating reams of new regulations on existing regulatory bodies, will prevent these crises from happening is insane.

But it does provide a sense of accountability, right?

The next time a market bubble bursts or there is some sort of financial crisis to deal with, we’ll know who to call.  Just look up the number of your nearest Democratic representative or Senator and ask them to fix the mess with the massive, new layers of regulation they just dumped onto the financial system.

FinReg passes, bubble-less and crash-less markets await us all

July 16, 2010 Leave a comment

The Senate has passed FinReg by a vote of 60-39, with three Republican helping the Democrats.

The scope of the “reform” is staggering–a 2,000+ page bill, creating some 243 new bureaucratic offices.  Like most reform packages to come from Congress, it will hardly be a model of efficiency.

But perhaps the most alarming aspect is the broad, new powers it gives to existing regulators, regulators who should have been minding the store back in the 2000s, when the financial system was ready to implode.

When politicians begin to take notice of an issue, and start whining about “reform” and “action” to be taken, it’s usually too late, and is really just an indication that said politicians have no clue about what they are trying to do.

Such is the case with Wall Street reform.  Since the 1930s, with the establishment of the SEC and the creation of our modern financial regulatory state, politicians have deemed themselves the white knights and saviors of bubbles and crashes, wrought by “evil and greedy” Wall Street bankers.

And anyone who actually believes that this is the case, is being extremely ignorant:

This isn’t the first time Congress has expanded the Fed’s role. After the Great Depression, it passed the Employment Act in 1946, charging the Fed with averting the huge unemployment seen in the 1930s. After the double-digit inflation of the 1970s, the Fed was formally given a dual mandate of promoting both price stability and maximum sustainable employment. In the wake of the latest financial crisis, the Fed is effectively being told to add the maintenance of financial stability to its responsibilities.

The risks, however, are that the Fed still won’t be able to prevent another crisis, and that it will be an even clearer target for blame if that occurs. “The bill has good intentions, but I’m worried about its implementation. If I were the Fed, I’d be seriously worried about being left holding the bag,” said Anil Kashyap, a professor at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business.

As long as there are free markets, and market participants free to engage in those markets, there will be bubbles and crashes, peaks and troughs–such is the nature of the system.

The problem is and never was lack of regulation–the banking industry is one of the most heavily regulated in the country.  It comes down to who is doing the regulating.

When you see Dodd, Frank, Reid, Pelosi, and all the rest up there patting themselves on the back for passing yet more “reform” of the industry, ask yourselves who is the real problem here.

Why does anyone watch CNBC? Or, why Old Media blows…

July 14, 2010 Leave a comment

An interesting bit from Tyler Durden at Zero hedge:

…[F]ormerly reputable channels such as CNBC are in the process destroying their credibility and causing an exodus of viewers, with the few remaining viewers remaining primarily for the opportunity to heckle the openly lying talking heads.

This made me laugh because pointing out the idiocy and heckling the stooges at CNBC is the only reason I watch the network anymore.

Read the entire post.