Despite the title is is only fair to point out that both sides of the aisle are responsible for the outcome….

Full video article

A whole lot to consider 

GDP grew by 0.3%

Singapore’s industrial output fell for the first time in six months….

Pump, pump the jam, keep it pumpin’

“John C. Bogle counted himself among the 1 percent of wealthiest Americans a couple decades ago. You might not guess that today, when you hear the 82-year-old founder of mutual fund company Vanguard rail against economic inequality.

He can sound almost like an Occupy Wall Street protester: “Our markets have gone crazy, and there is 200 times as much speculation as there is investing,” he says.

It has been 15 years since the low-cost investing pioneer stepped down as CEO of Vanguard. It was Bogle who launched the first index mutual fund in 1976. Vanguard Group has since grown into the largest fund company, managing nearly $1.7 trillion in U.S. fund assets.

Bogle remains wealthy, but his income is a fraction of what he earned when he ran Vanguard. He’s paid a modest retainer to run Vanguard’s Bogle Financial Markets Research Center, a think tank in Valley Forge, Pa.

He resists a label that applies to most people his age: “I’m so far from retired, it’s almost an embarrassment. I’m here in the office every day.” He’s also writing his 10th book, “The Clash of Cultures: Investment vs. Speculation.” And he continues to deliver speeches.

Bogle says he’s paying close attention to tax policies he considers unfair, including one that’s favorable to the fund industry and investors with taxable accounts. The top rate for dividends and long-term capital gains is historically low at 15 percent, as a result of the extension of Bush era tax cuts that Congress and President Barack Obama agreed to a year ago. In contrast, top earners pay 35 percent on regular income. He doesn’t like that disparity.

Here are excerpts from a recent interview with Bogle:  “

By ANNIE LOWREY

Published: December 21, 2011

WASHINGTON — As the fourth quarter draws to a close, a spate of unexpectedly good economic data suggests that it will have some of the fastest and strongest economic growth since the recovery started in 2009, causing a surge in the stock market and cheering economists, investors and policy makers.

In recent weeks, a broad range of data — like reports on new residential construction and small business confidence — have beaten analysts’ expectations. Initial claims for jobless benefits, often an early indicator of where the labor market is headed, have dropped to their lowest level since May 2008. And prominent economics groups say the economy is growing three to four times as quickly as it was early in the year, at an annual pace of about 3.7 percent.

But the good news also comes with a significant caveat. Many forecasters say the recent uptick probably does not represent the long-awaited start to a strong, sustainable recovery. Much of the current strength is caused by temporary factors. And economists expect growth to slow in the first half of 2012 to an annual pace of about 1.5 to 2 percent.

Read the rest here.

Jobless claims down for a third month in a row. A much better analysis of employment than the overall unemployment number.

Full article

Taxable sales up 38%. Guess there will be no muni problems there….

Despite a recovery and better than expected data Greenhaus feels we could instantly be in recession given the stars align…

Full article

will the economy prevail or will negative forecast call the shots ?

Full article

Remember when you had to write your orders on a ticket ?

Full article

GDP came in by 0.2%

A slowdown in Europe has caused Japanese exports to fall for a second month. Exports fell 4.5% vs consensus of 4.3%.

Also adding pain to the data point was a strong Yen hurting profits for Japanese companies.

Full article

Read here:

The stock market rose sharply on Tuesday in part on the strength of a solid government report on new housing starts and permits. Housing starts in November checked in at an annual rate of 685,000, up 9.3 percent from October 2011, and up 24.3 percent from October 2010.

This would seem to be a strange time for a housing construction boom. As blogger Barry Ritholtz Tweeted: ” Yeah, more inventory! Just what we need!” Indeed, a sharply higher amount of unsold homes would seem to fall near the bottom of the long list of things the U.S. economy needs. Existing home sales, while up this year, are way below their recent peaks. And so at the end of October, there were “3.33 million existing homes available for sale, which represents an 8.0-month supply at the current sales pace,” according to the National Association of Realtors. That figure probably estimates the impending supply given the number of homes that are in foreclosure and likely to be puked onto the market by banks. Meanwhile, new home sales are running at a low pace — an annualized rate of 307,000 — which means it would take 6.3 months to clear the 162,000 new homes from the market. A four-month supply of new and existing homes would be much more healthy.

So why are housing starts rising? A look inside the data reveals the answer. Builders have learned their lesson. They aren’t foolishly building amenity-rich McMansions and Tudors with four-car garages to sell to highly indebted aspirational consumers. Rather, they’re building smaller, practical abodes that they plan to rent out. Indeed, recent housing data help flesh out a post-crisis cultural, societal and financial shift toward housing: less owning and more renting. Thanks to foreclosures, walking away and a general inability to get financing, the homeownership rate has fallen in the U.S. from 69 percent in the third quarter of 2006 to 66.3 percent in the third quarter of 2011. That translates into several million households that used to own homes that are now renting.

Builders have reacted to this shift. They’re building fewer family homes and more multifamily buildings. Look at the data. Yes, in November, the headline housing starts number was up sharply from October 2011, and from November 2010. (See Table 3 in the above document) But single-family starts haven’t done much: They were up only 2.3 percent from October 2011, and down 1.5 percent from November 2010. But the market for structures with five units or more is going gangbusters. In November 2011, starts in this sector came in at an annual rate of 230,000, up 32 percent from 174,000 in October 2011, and up an eye-popping 180 percent from November 2010. Through the first 11 months of the year, single family housing starts are off about 10 percent from the first 11 months of 2010. By contrast, starts of structures with five or more units were up 60 percent in the same time period, from 97,700 to 156,200. The sharp rise in apartment construction is more than compensating for the continuing decline in house construction. The data on permits (Table 1) tells a similar story. Through first 11 months of 2011, permits for free-standing houses are off 7.7 percent from the first 11 months of 2010, while permits for 5+ unit structures are up 36.4 percent.

Rather than indicating optimism about the housing sales market, the data on housing starts and permits point to optimism about the apartment rental market. Builders, and the lenders who enable them, are looking ahead and concluding that it makes more sense to build multifamily units, which tend to be more efficient, smaller and less expensive than single-family homes. In addition, this type of housing offers developers far more flexibility. Depending on market conditions, they may decide to sell the units as condos, or rent them out. In recent years, as in the single-home market, the bias has shifted away from ownership. Check out the Census Bureau data that breaks down completed housing by purpose and design. (See Table Q6) In 2007, only 62 percent of the housing units in buildings with two or more units were built for rent; the percentage rose to 84 percent in 2009 and 87 percent in 2010. In the first three quarters of 2011, 90 percent of such units completed were built for rent.

Everyone expects bad news for the first half of next year, but some analysts a pointing to a surprise in 2012.

Full article

SOURCE

Chow down bearshitters

Along with predictions of escaping, Germany had a second month of business sentiment  not fall and thus you have a rally sparked across Europe.

Full article

It was four years ago that a punishing recession officially began. The financial pressure drove many companies out of business, while the survivors generally adapted and got stronger.

But some firms are still struggling, whether from delayed effects of the recession, relentless competition, fresh strategic blunders or a turnaround plan that hasn’t panned out. While a double-dip recession seems unlikely in 2012, CEOs are intently watching for a financial crisis in Europe or policy mistakes in the United States that could weaken the economy. And consumer spending, surprisingly strong in 2011, could decline once again, as overspent consumers get nervous. There’s plenty that could go wrong, in other words, even though the economy is supposedly recovering.

To identify companies with the thinnest margin for error, I analyzed data on stock prices, expected 2012 earnings and other financial measures provided by S&P Capital IQ, a financial-information firm. The companies I’ve highlighted had a weak year-to-date stock performance through mid-December 2011, indicating deep investor worry. These are also firms likely to have weak earnings in the future, according to Capital IQ’s summary of analyst forecasts for 2012 and beyond.

There probably will not be a fresh surge of bankruptcies in 2012, but in some industries there’s likely to be consolidation as weak firms succumb to stronger ones. Plus, the usual forces of competition always produce winners and losers. Here are 11 prominent firms likely to struggle in 2012:

Eastman Kodak. Stock decline in 2011: 85 percent. It’s never a good sign when a firm denies that it’s heading for bankruptcy, as Kodak has been doing. Kodak was slow to join the revolution in digital photography, while taking several wrong turns into fields such as pharmaceuticals and document management. The firm is now seeking to sell assets and find other ways to raise cash so it can return to profitability after five consecutive money-losing years. Investors are clearly worried: Kodak stock has recently traded below $1 per share, a threshold at which companies are sometimes delisted from major exchanges.

Research in Motion. Stock decline: 76 percent. The once-ubiquitous Blackberry commanded 55 percent of the U.S. smartphone market in 2009, according to research firm Canalys. Today, its market share is less than 10 percent. Blackberry-maker RIM has failed to counter ruthless competition from Apple’s iPhone and the many Android phones now available, with total Blackberry shipments falling recently even though the overall smartphone market is still exploding. Plus RIM’s PlayBook tablet device–meant to take on Apple’s iPad–has been a flop. A key Blackberry upgrade has been pushed back until late 2012. By then, RIM might be gobbled up by a goliath such as Microsoft or Samsung.

OfficeMax. Stock decline: 75 percent. If the economy were booming, maybe three office-supply chains–OfficeMax, Office Depot and Staples–would all be able to thrive. But the tough economy, plus competition from discounters like Walmart and Costco, has put pressure on the whole group. Investors seem to have the strongest doubts about OfficeMax, whose stock has fallen significantly more than its two competitors over the last 12 months.

Monster Worldwide. Stock decline: 67 percent. If the economy springs back and hiring picks up, this job-placement firm could thrive. But the economic rebound, of course, is painfully slow, with CEOs basically waiting to see whether another crisis is coming. It could be 2013 or later before they’re convinced the clouds have passed. Meanwhile, new competitors are going online, hoping to cash in on the same hiring boom Monster is waiting for.

Bank of America. Stock decline: 61 percent The whole banking sector is beaten down due to fears of a European crisis. Bank of America is under special scrutiny because of its disastrous 2008 purchase of Countrywide Financial, which has saddled the bank with billions in losses on bad mortgages, many of which may to sour. Investors worry that B of A hasn’t fully revealed its full exposure to troubled counterparties in Europe or stressed mortgage holders. But if B of A skirts disaster, it may recover sooner than expected.

To see the final 6 companies, go here.