November 2010

Gretchen Morgenson: Banks Bad Mortgage Paperwork Isn’t Blowing Away

November 21, 2010

KUDOS to the Congressional Oversight Panel for publishing a thoughtful and thorough report last week on the mortgage documentation mess. It argued that, yes, in fact, these paperwork problems may have significant implications for banks, investors and the stability of the financial system.

Read the full article →

PHOTOS: America’s Fastest-Growing States

November 20, 2010

For Americans forced to combat the lagging economy, it may be better to live in the Midwest and Southwest than on either of America’s coasts. The fastest-growing states in America last year, according to a new report from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, are concentrated in the Great Plains and in the Southwest, where natural resources have buoyed local growth. States like Oklahoma, which was particularly helped by growth in mining, Louisiana and South Dakota have seen growth rates that would put much of the rest of the nation to shame. Unfortunately, and perhaps not surprisingly, states that relied on the manufacturing of durable goods and construction saw some of the biggest drops in local GDP. The BEA notes that one of these two industries was the prime cause of declines in economic growth in 34 states in 2009. All told, 38 states saw declines in real GDP in 2009. Though GDP has been criticized for providing an incomplete picture of economic well-being — including by Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz — it’s still the most widely-used gauge of aggregate economic activity. Which states saw the biggest jumps in economic activity last year? Check out the fastest-growing states below:

Read the full article →

Robert Lenzner: Goldman Sachs Likes Copper and Gold for 2011

November 20, 2010

Load Up On Copper and Gold; The Best Commodity Plays for 2011 My sources report that there’s only 4 days copper inventory on the LME and in Shanghai. And China desperately needs copper for her economy. You can buy the December 2011 copper contract and expect to copper rise from $8200 a ton to $11,000 a ton. Or you can buy the copper ETF, CU, managed by JP Morgan Chase. Or you can buy the common stocks, Freeport McMoran, or Chinese mining stocks traded in Hong Kong. like Jiangxi Copper and Philex Mining. Or take a flyer in the December 2011 COMEX gold contract for the move from $1350 to $1650. Don’t sneer at 22% profit. GLD and CDX, two gold ETFs are another path. China needs iron ore; try BHP Billiton. All this and more in my Streettalk column up now. Link is below. “Stick With Commodities But Be Nimble In 2011 Says Goldman Sachs”

Read the full article →

Millionaires To Obama: Tax Us

November 20, 2010

More than 40 of the nation’s millionaires have joined Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength to ask President Obama to discontinue the tax breaks established for them during the Bush administration, as Salon reports.

Read the full article →

Euro: How Will Traders React to an Irish Bailout?

November 20, 2010

Euro: How Will Traders React to an Irish Bailout?

Read the full article →

Japanese Yen Losing its Safe Haven Status and Thereby its Buoyancy

November 20, 2010

Japanese Yen Losing its Safe Haven Status and Thereby its Buoyancy

Read the full article →

Dollar and Risk Appetite Teeter on Trend as Irish Bailout Faces Low Liquidity

November 20, 2010

Dollar and Risk Appetite Teeter on Trend as Irish Bailout Faces Low Liquidity

Read the full article →

Editorial: Bhutto murder report

November 20, 2010

Editorial: Bhutto murder report

Read the full article →

Gold to Follow Risky Assets Lower as Profit-Taking Resumes

November 20, 2010

Gold to Follow Risky Assets Lower as Profit-Taking Resumes

Read the full article →

Dollar Ready to Respond to a Clear Sentiment Trend but Liquidity may be an Issue Next Week

November 20, 2010

Dollar Ready to Respond to a Clear Sentiment Trend but Liquidity may be an Issue Next Week

Read the full article →

Ireland debt woes dominate the European theme throughout the week

November 20, 2010

Ireland debt woes dominate the European theme throughout the week

Read the full article →

More developments in Japan and Australia during the week

November 20, 2010

More developments in Japan and Australia during the week

Read the full article →

A mixed week for the superpower…

November 20, 2010

A mixed week for the superpower…

Read the full article →

South Korea restricts transactions with Iran

November 20, 2010

South Korea restricts transactions with Iran

Read the full article →

Philippine Airlines posts $28m income in Q3

November 20, 2010

Philippine Airlines posts $28m income in Q3

Read the full article →

Spanish PM unveils plan for economic recovery

November 20, 2010

Spanish PM unveils plan for economic recovery

Read the full article →

9 Of The Most Mismanaged Charities In America: 24/7 Wall Street

November 20, 2010

By Wall Street 24/7 : Rating the non-profit sector is tricky. The main ratings services Charity Navigator and BBB Wise Giving Alliance are both flawed. Moreover, some in the non-profit world object to the idea of assigning grades to the sector because the organizations vary so much in size and scope. That’s nonsense. There clearly are some non-profits that are superior to others. The question is how to do it in the fairest way possible. Charity Navigator, which bills itself as the largest rating service, analyzes a number of factors related to a charity’s financial health including how efficiently it raises funds and the amount it spends on administrative expenses. Charities interested in receiving the BBB Wise Giving Alliance certification must pass the organization’s standards for financial accountability and transparency. In addition, they pay an annual fee of as much as $15,000 to display the group’s seal. GuideStar, another service, provides access to charity financial documents but does not offer any qualitative analysis. For donors, though, there is a fourth alternative, The American Institute of Philanthropy (AIP), which we found to be superior. AIP rates more than 550 charities, and boasts that its reviews are the toughest in the industry. The watchdog’s reports are more in-depth than its rivals and go beyond the information the groups report to the IRS through its Form 990 because charity accounting rules give organizations lots of leeway. As AIP notes on its website, ” … (we) make adjustments to better reflect the goals of most donors who want their cash donations to be used efficiently. We do not allow charities to count the funds they spend on direct mail or telemarketing in their program spending, or to include large amounts of undisclosed and often overvalued donated goods in their expenses, even if their accountants allow them to do so.” Charities may be unfairly penalized for complying with complex accounting rules under ratings that are derived from financial calculations derived from data the organizations report to the federal government, according to AIP. Other experts in the non-profit world expressed similar sentiments. In determining its list of the worst-run charities, 24/7 Wall St. relied on the AIP’s ratings. We also considered data from Charity Navigator and BBB along with media reports. The charities on the list were either rated “F” by AIP or were held in low regard by other raters. Moreover, they were heavily dependent on telemarketers for their fund-raising. Though most non-profits are run by responsible managements and boards of directors, a select few are not. One way that these organizations get tripped up is because of nepotism. Though having family members working in the same organization is not necessarily a bad thing, it can be a warning sign. “It’s definitely a red flag” says AIP analyst Laurie Styron in an interview. “It crowds out the best available people from landing jobs based on their merits. It promotes a lack of oversight.” There is no better poster child for nepotism and mismanagement run amok than Feed the Children, which reportedly collects $1 billion and became famous for its gut-wrenching TV commercials and rated “F” by AIP for years. In 2009, Feed the Children fired Larry Jones who founded the charity 30 years earlier after he admitted to installing hidden microphones in the offices of three executives who opposed to him. He is fighting for his job back and the charity has struck back claiming that Jones took kickbacks from vendors, kept a hidden stash of pornography in his office and gave himself and his wife, who also worked for Feed the Children, unauthorized raises. His daughter Larri was fired in August. Son Allen has filed a defamation suit against his sister and several board members because she said he was bipolar during a Feed the Children board meeting. A federal appeals court recently ruled against him. Though Allen Jones didn’t work for the charity, its board Feed The Children has accused him in a lawsuit of taking materials from a charity food distribution warehouse in Elkhart, Ind, according to the Oklahoman newspaper. Members of 24/7 Wall St. list of mismanaged charities all solicit donations nationally and all are either poorly rated or not held in high regard by the charity raters. The fact that some of these charities operate as if they were family businesses should make donors cautious. These are the most mismanaged non-profits in America — and check out 24/7 Wall Street for more information:

Read the full article →

Report: U.S. Preparing Sweeping Insider-Trading Charges

November 20, 2010

Federal authorities, capping a three-year investigation, are preparing insider-trading charges that could ensnare consultants, investment bankers, hedge-fund and mutual-fund traders and analysts across the nation, according to people familiar with the matter. The criminal and civil probes, which authorities say could eclipse the impact on the financial industry of any previous such investigation, are examining whether multiple insider-trading rings reaped illegal profits totaling tens of millions of dollars, the people say. Some charges could be brought before year-end, they say. The investigations, if they bear fruit, have the potential to expose a culture of pervasive insider trading in U.S. financial markets, including new ways non-public information is passed to traders through experts tied to specific industries or companies, federal authorities say.

Read the full article →

Sheriff Who Refused To Evict Foreclosed Homeowners Forced To Resume

November 20, 2010

CHICAGO — An Illinois sheriff who halted foreclosure evictions last month because some bank employees weren’t following the proper procedures said Friday he’s been forced to order his deputies to carry them out, but he will continue investigating the matter and could charge banks and their employees with crimes. Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart said he is only ordering evictions to resume because county prosecutors told him that he was legally bound to carry out foreclosure eviction orders signed by a judge. “For the people who have been involved with this and think now that because the (Cook County) State’s Attorney’s office has ordered me to go ahead with the evictions that everything’s fine . . . No, we are going to be looking at you for criminal violations,” Dart said. “You may have got through one storm now, the other one is coming.” Dart singled out Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and GMAC/Ally Financial last month for problems with eviction notices. He said Friday that investigators continue to find problems with bank employees signing off on foreclosure documents they haven’t read, although he did not single out individual companies. “When we asked a month ago . . . send me an affidavit to say that everything was done legally, not one organization, law firm handling these cases, not one of them sent in one document,” Dart said. “Not one, and they had over a month to do it.” The sheriff said that if anything, his office’s investigation has shown the problems that prompted the moratorium were even more widespread than he first thought. “We are being overwhelmed with abundant evidence that there are irregularities,” he said, adding that just a cursory investigation by his financial crimes unit has shown problems in eviction order after eviction order. “Irregularities are going on all over the place here. It’s the norm.” Tom Kelly, a spokesman for Chase, said that steps have been taken to ensure that foreclosure documents don’t have any problems in anticipation for the resumption of evictions later this month. Gina Proia, a spokeswoman for Ally Financial, said her company has been examining foreclosure documents carefully and has not found any cases of inappropriate notices being sent. A spokesman for Bank of America did not immediately return calls for comment. Dart said investigators found clear evidence of “robo-signing,” in which lenders’ employees sign scores of documents in a day that they could not have possibly have read to determine whether the foreclosures were legal. Investigators have, for example, come across documents signed by employees who have admitted in depositions in other parts of the country that they were taking part in “robo-signing,” he said. He also said that law school students have agreed to examine a total of 2,200 cases that have been submitted to his office, including the 1,800 that are ready for evictions to be carried out, to determine whether there were any irregularities. Cases where problems are spotted will be investigated further by his office to determine if criminal charges should be filed, he said. Dart also hinted that just because he is being forced to resume evictions, the banks shouldn’t expect his deputies to start carrying out the 1,800 evictions he said are ready to be executed. “We will move ahead with those cases, but we’ll do it in a thoughtful way,” he said, adding that the deputies would do things like put notices on doors and suggesting to homeowners places they might go for legal help. “We’re going to make sure all their rights are being looked after and we are proceeding in a lawful way where the due process people deserve is being looked after.”`

Read the full article →

Video: Leeb Says He’s `Very Bullish’ on Gold, Likes Nova Gold

November 20, 2010

Nov. 19 (Bloomberg) — Stephen Leeb, president of Leeb Capital Management, Chuck Lieberman, chief investment officer at Advisors Capital Management LLC, and Joan Lappin, president of Gramercy Capital Management, talk about their investment strategies. Leeb, Lieberman and Lappin also discuss Federal Reserve monetary policy and China’s economy. They talk with Pimm Fox on Bloomberg’s “Taking Stock.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Nelson Davis: What Small Business Owners Really Want

November 20, 2010

We are in that hazy netherworld that seems to sneak up on us near the end of every year. We wonder where the time went, what the New Year will hold and how we can take our enterprise to what we euphemistically call the next level. This year there is an extra bit of haze in the picture because the mid-term elections have sent a lot of rookies to various legislatures and embracing small business may not be their #1 priority. This is a good time to share some thoughts on what the business sector and small business in particular really want and need. I think that the biggest thing small business owners want from all levels of government is simply respect. With over 60% of all jobs created in the country coming from the small business community, won’t politicians and others simply say “nice job” to the men and women who hustle and risk every day to build and grow various enterprises. It is my contention that small business gets only lip service in the corridors of congress because the heavy hitter lobbyists represent other interests. That respect has to begin at the local level. Last week I received a nice note from Bob Foster, the Mayor of Long Beach California regarding a pilot program they’ve been working on for greater small business development. He and his council want more city contracts to go to small and even very small businesses. He says this will help generate job growth and sales tax revenue, and ensure that their tax dollars are spent locally. Are your local politicians building real bridges to entrepreneurs? If so, please let me know about it and be sure to thank them for it. The next thing the owner of a growing business wants to have is a clear set of rules regarding taxes, and health care costs that will hold steady for at least a few years. The top layer of clouds blotting out the sun for business is that a massive expansion of government has created an equivalent amount of uncertainty for the private sector. Uncertainty means that money goes to the mattress and many expansive thoughts are put away for a while. Big business in America is sitting on about $1.8 trillion in cash, waiting for a sign that the federal government won’t do a snatch & grab on their resources. Carl Schramm, head of the Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City has a clear idea about how the country can build a path to greater economic growth. In a Forbes Magazine interview he said “The single most important contributor to a nation’s economic growth is the number of startups that grow to a billion dollars in revenue within twenty years.” He went on to say that in the U.S. we need to see 75 to 125 of those billion dollar babies every year to feed a post WWII rate of growth. The owners of growing businesses need care, feeding and specific education on how to get where they want to go. From our twenty years of producing television stories of small business owners for Making It! we’ve seen about five (out of 1000) rise to the billion bucks level. They were all headed by hungry and even driven people who probably consume big dreams for breakfast! One of the exciting aspects of this for me is that this superstar level of entrepreneur comes from all known ethnicities and genders! Most business owners simply want to make an independent living that can take care of their families and help the kids through college. Many don’t have the iron constitution, discipline and raw ambition that it takes to go from very small to large, but that isn’t what they want. I know that you can find your own comfort level of enterprise building and it may have three, six or nine zeroes after the first three digits. Business owners don’t want to feel that they are being treated as pawns in some sort of class warfare. President Obama and his administration have acquired a reputation as being anti-business. A lot of the energy of the Tea Party seems to have come from small business owners who feel that Washington simply doesn’t understand them or their place in reviving the American economy. Politicians sometimes inject haves versus have-nots notes that imply business owners have some sort of unfair advantage. Some Wall Street barons may indeed have that advantage, but Main Street America certainly does not. Notice that I didn’t put easier loans or money in general on the wish list. Money has never been cheaper and it seems that loans for going enterprises are available. I believe that what small business owners really want is very much what all humans crave. That would be understanding, appreciation, encouragement and respect. Those ingredients are the food of dreams and no country can be great without entrepreneurs who harbor big dreams.

Read the full article →

Bernanke Calls On Congress To Help The Economy — For At Least The Fourth Time In Five Months

November 20, 2010

NEW YORK — For at least the fourth time since June, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke publicly urged Congress to combat the lackluster recovery by increasing government spending, a recommendation that has gone unheeded by lawmakers. In a speech at a conference of central bankers in Frankfurt, Bernanke once again said the Fed cannot save the economy on its own. The Fed’s recent move to add to its ballooning balance sheet by committing to buy up to $600 billion of government debt faces “limits” to its effectiveness, Bernanke said. The rest of the government, the chairman added, could aid the Fed’s efforts by hammering out a plan for stimulative spending. The right kind of spending, he noted, could help reduce the budget deficit over the long-term by first boosting economic growth. “[I]n general terms, a fiscal program that combines near-term measures to enhance growth with strong, confidence-inducing steps to reduce longer-term structural deficits would be an important complement to the policies of the Federal Reserve,” Bernanke said Friday, according to his written remarks. The fiscal policy recommendation came directly after Bernanke acknowledged it isn’t his job to make such policy proposals. “The Federal Reserve is nonpartisan and does not make recommendations regarding specific tax and spending programs,” the chairman noted. The official parameters of his job, though, have not stopped Bernanke from engaging in backseat driving. At least four times since June — on June 9, July 21, July 22 and now Friday — he has urged lawmakers to increase spending to jumpstart the lagging economy. But policy makers have proved to be unable to agree upon such a plan — or even propose one that’s viable. The rest of the nation has suffered as a result, as near-10 percent unemployment continues to hobble the economy. Democrats recently lost control of the House of Representatives, and a substantial part of their majority in the Senate. Voters said the dismal economy was their top concern. To combat an ineffectual Washington establishment, the Fed has taken matters into its own hands. By buying up to $600 billion of government debt, the central bank hopes to increase the flow of money through the economy. Critics of the program, which is intended to lower interest rates and encourage corporate spending, have said the cheap money will not convince businesses to create jobs. Companies are already sitting on about $1.8 trillion in cash and other liquid assets, according to the most recent quarterly data from the Fed. Only an increase in consumer demand and business confidence, critics say, will spur a robust recovery. Bernanke, too, has said the Fed’s actions won’t be enough. While its actions determine interest rates and the money supply, in order to be effective, Bernanke has said, it must be combined with expansionary fiscal policy. In other words, the government has to ramp up spending. By law, the Federal Reserve’s function is to “maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates” in order to promote “maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.” As Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.) reminded Bernanke during a July hearing, “it would be an unconstitutional role for the Fed to engage in fiscal policy.” The central banker has not publicly supported actual bills pending in Congress. But over the past year, he hasn’t been shy about giving his opinion, and nudging Congress along: June 9, before the House Committee on the Budget : “Achieving long-term fiscal sustainability will be difficult. But unless we as a nation make a strong commitment to fiscal responsibility, in the longer run, we will have neither financial stability nor healthy economic growth. And he went on : “Right now I don’t think is the time — this very moment is not the time — to radically reduce our spending or raise our taxes because the economy is still in recovery mode and needs that support.” Fiscal stimulus, he said, is necessary. “I think, you know, right now we have a broadly stimulative fiscal policy which, at the moment, is helping, is needed, that includes lower taxes and probably higher spending as well.” July 21, before the Senate Banking Committee : “At the current moment the large deficits, as unattractive as they are, are important for supporting economic activity.” July 22, before the House Financial Services Committee : “More generally, certainly both the Fed, the Treasury, the Congress and everyone should try to focus on growth-oriented policies. It’s important to take steps, including control the fiscal deficit, that will support longer-term growth, which will increase confidence in the present, and to do what we can to reduce uncertainty, about policies and about the economy. … [I]n general, as I said, I think that maintaining the current level of fiscal support is important because the economy is still quite weak.” Bernanke, though, also wants Congress to get a handle on the federal government’s ballooning yearly deficits and overall debt. A growing chorus of experts believe that the government’s bulging debt endangers long-term growth. Among Bernanke’s statements: April 7, Dallas, Tex. : “Indeed, a credible plan that demonstrated a commitment to achieving long-run fiscal sustainability could lead to lower interest rates and more rapid growth in the near term.” April 14, before the Joint Economic Committee : “In other words, addressing the country’s fiscal problems will require difficult choices, but postponing them will only make them more difficult.” April 27, at the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform : “Thus, the reality is that the Congress, the Administration, and the American people will have to choose among making modifications to entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security, restraining federal spending on everything else, accepting higher taxes, or some combination thereof. ” August 2, Charleston, S.C. : “Thus, state governments may wish to revisit their criteria for accumulating fiscal reserves. Building a rainy-day fund during good times may not be politically popular, but it can pay off during the bad times.” He continued, “The states have the opportunity to serve as role models for effective long-term fiscal planning.” October 4, Providence, R.I. : “What we do know, however, is that the threat to our economy is real and growing, which should be sufficient reason for fiscal policy makers to put in place a credible plan for bringing deficits down to sustainable levels over the medium term.” The Republican economist appears to believe that the best way to encourage economic growth and reduce the near-record unemployment rate is to increase government spending in the short-term; create a credible plan to tackle record deficits in the medium-term; and deploy that plan (and stick to it) over the long-term. Whether the White House and Congress can formulate such a plan — and agree to it — is a matter beyond Bernanke’s control. ************************* William Alden is the business writer for The Huffington Post. He can be reached at alden@huffingtonpost.com. Shahien Nasiripour is the business reporter for The Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail ; bookmark his page ; subscribe to his RSS feed ; follow him on Twitter ; friend him on Facebook ; become a fan ; and/or get e-mail alerts when he reports the latest news. He can be reached at 646-274-2455.

Read the full article →

Rep. Luis Gutierrez: BP: Busy Promoting a culture of recklessness

November 19, 2010

In just five short months, on April 20, 2011, we will commemorate the anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion and we will honor the 11 individuals who lost their lives that day. These 11 brothers, fathers, sons, and husbands died because BP’s culture of recklessness, a corporate approach willingly accepts significant risk to BP’s employees, the environment, and countless innocent individuals whose livelihoods could be lost by the company’s actions. However, the national attention has been caught by elections and power shifts and we seem to have forgotten Deepwater Horizon – a very clear example of how big oil’s impressive lobbying power can impact lives. Today, we are no longer inundated with images of the oil slick or shuttered businesses. Today, the nightly news no longer contains B roll of cleaning crews and oil booms attempting to contain this massive spill. Personally, I can’t forget the pained face of Mike Williams, Chief Electronics Technician for the Deepwater Horizon, as he recounted the terrors of his escape from the burning rig. As he recalled thinking, “all these things that are supposed to protect us are failing. And nothing is going right.” And I can’t get the images of oil soaked birds, weighed down and choking, stranded on the Louisiana shoreline, out of my mind. Mistakes can happen and can have serious consequences as a result. But, this is not simply a case of one rig, one blowout preventer, one bad batch of cement or one bad call. The reason why so much went so wrong is because BP is guilty of encouraging a culture of recklessness on its rigs. We don’t have to dig too deep to find alarming evidence of their recklessness. On another deepwater drilling rig, BP’s Atlantis, a whistleblower alerted the Minerals Management Service that he believed that BP did not have proper documentation and approval of its subsea components. BP itself acknowledged that this could “lead to catastrophic operator errors.” And the list goes on: In March of 2005, an explosion and fire at the BP Texas City refinery resulted in 15 deaths and 180 injuries. Investigators from the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) believe this explosion could have been avoided had it not been for the “organizational and safety deficiencies at all levels of the BP Corporation.” Since safety does not appear to be a valued part of their mandate, BP refused to change its practices. And it’s not as though BP is deterred by the costs of these errors: In 2009 the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) fined BP $87 million for hundreds of safety violations at the Texas City refinery, many of which were originally identified after the 2005 explosion at the facility but never addressed. As recently as March 2010, BP was fined another $3 million dollars for violations at a Toledo, Ohio refinery similar to those that contributed to the 2005 Texas City refinery explosion. Again, just like in 2005, no steps were taken to correct the safety violations. And the culture of recklessness is prevalent at BP’s operations all across our country: In 2006, failure to conduct necessary pipeline maintenance resulted in spills of over 200,000 gallons of crude in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. Once again, BP did not follow established safety regulations, ignored warning signs, and was reluctant to make the necessary fixes once the problem was discovered. Major problems continued in 2008 and 2009 in the region, some of which resulted in major gas leaks, oil spills, injuries, and deaths. All of this following a $500,000 fine in 2000 for failing to report illegal dumping of hazardous materials by one of its contractors between 1993 and 1995. I say enough is enough, which is why I introduced and won an amendment to the Department of Defense Authorization bill which would require that the Secretary of Defense consider debarring BP from Defense Department contracts if he finds that BP is not a “responsible source.” The definition of “responsible source” includes the provision that a prospective contractor must have “a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics” and I am confident that the evidence will show that BP does not meet this requirement. Barely a month has passed since the Obama Administration lifted the deepwater drilling moratorium and already the oil companies believe that the Department of the Interior (DOI) should have an express lane for approving permits. The DOI has even been taken to court over this matter. What’s the rush? I support Secretary Salazar in taking his time to review and approve these permits. We have seen what rushing ahead brings us and we have seen what too many permits and too few investigators bring us. The oil companies need to chill and acknowledge that the pre- Deepwater Horizon status quo is unacceptable. We simply cannot continue approving permits that are rife with false claims such as support from experts who have long since passed away or environmental impact reports on animals that don’t even reside in the region. Imagine if we accepted this kind of recklessness in other industries. Would it be acceptable if the airline industry was allowed to build planes out of materials that had not completed stress tests? What if the pilot on the plane you take home for Thanksgiving decided only to lower half the plane’s wheels during landing? While the limelight on the Deepwater Horizon and BP’s culture of recklessness has faded, we must do everything we can to ensure that we are never again faced with another massive oil spill. Even if BP refuses to learn the necessary lessons and insists on repeating costly mistakes, we must know better and do better. Part of moving away from BP’s culture of recklessness is to understand and accept that the DOI must have the tools and time it needs to properly review permit requests. I strongly support Secretary Salazar’s efforts to make the permit review process more demanding and I hope that the oil companies will step up and realize that rig safety starts with them.

Read the full article →

Jeff Sweat: Is Twitter Social?

November 19, 2010

I’m supposed to like Twitter. I tweet for Yahoo! and myself, but Twitter mostly leaves me cold. I’ve been wondering why — I mean, I’m a social media guy, after all — and it struck me: Maybe it’s because Twitter isn’t really social. That’s pretty rich coming from a guy whose company is sponsoring a Twitter conference this week, I know. Twitter has a lot of value for marketers, and that’s why we invest in it. It’s just that as a social network, as a platform, Twitter doesn’t do a lot of the things that marketers need from social media. It helps us broadcast and gather information, but it doesn’t necessarily help us get closer to our customers, or help us to build community. And if that’s your definition of social — and it happens to be mine — then no, it’s not quite social. Get it out there “Twitter’s strengths and limitations are both based in its structure, “says Edelman SVP and Director of Insights Steve Rubel, a long-time Twitter user. I couldn’t agree more. So let’s start with what Twitter does really well: spreading information and building thought leadership. With Twitter, we can get our message out to a whole universe of readers, not just the ones at our blog or on our email lists, at no additional cost. And because millions of people are out there tweeting, unfiltered, we can spot patterns in the tweets for trends that we should be watching. Twitter’s good at getting to the people who might be your customers one day. And that’s the difference between a fan and a follower. Our Yahoo! Advertising Facebook fans — er, likers — tend to be people who already know that they like us. Our Twitter followers are usually people who didn’t know they liked us until they saw what we tweeted. But here’s the thing: Most of the activity I see on Twitter is really broadcasting. With the exception of a few dozen of our followers, we’re not talking with each other. We’re all talking at each other. If a Tweet falls in the woods… Twitter small talk is its own kind of conversation, little trivial interactions that deepen social bonds, says Laura Fitton, social media consultant and founder of oneforty.com . “Like when you walk around town,” she adds. “You don’t stop and have a deep conversation, you just chat.” But the biggest problem with Twitter is all that chatter, and the impossibility of making sense of the 100 million Tweets each day. “Content on Twitter decays instantaneously,” Rubel says. “Tweets are falling in the forest, and nobody’s hearing them.” I have a different analogy: It’s as if you’re trying to feed someone by shooting pieces of a sandwich — bread, tomatoes, meat — past their head at 90 miles an hour. And half of the things flying by them aren’t even food, they’re garbage. Or toasters. The odds of someone eating your sandwich are pretty slim. If you’re a marketer with a message, you have to hope that your followers are looking at their Tweet stream at that very second. In a place like Facebook, or even Yahoo!’s new social integration, things from people you care about have a way of sticking around. There’s one obvious thing you can do to make sure that followers click on your content: “Make sure you matter. Make sure you have something at your core that they need,” Fitton says. But they have to be watching you in the first place. Hashtags, lists, and social media tools can help people pay better attention to you, but you can’t control who’s using them. Function follows form Twitter’s received a lot of deserved attention for customer service — for helping businesses monitor what customers are saying, and then responding. But what we really need on Twitter is to go beyond these sorts of reactionary encounters to deeper, extended interactions. That requires things like threaded conversations and the ability to easily create more intimate groups where not everyone in the world can hear what you have to say. Fitton points out that ” social CRM ” tools, categorized on oneforty.com, help bring order to Twitter relationships. Twitter’s open platform makes all of those tools possible. But because it doesn’t yet build that type of order into its platform, it also means that those tools are necessities. And finally, for the sacred cow: Tweets are just Too. Damn. Short. Maybe not for everybody, but when you’re trying to talk to a customer who does thousands or millions of dollars worth of business with you, you need a little room to expand. For example, we tried to compress complicated responses to Twitter questions during our transition to Microsoft search, sometimes to comical results. As long as you’re limited to 140 characters, there are limits to what you can say to someone. The Tweet has passionate defenders, of course. “It makes people make a point in a very crisp way. “In an attention-starved world, it benefits the users,” Rubel says. I like Tweets, too — they appeal to the writer in me. But then, I also like haikus: Twitter seems a good Way to get close to people. Not quite ready yet. For more from Jeff, visit the Yahoo! Advertising Blog or follow @YahooAdBuzz .

Read the full article →

Video: U.S. Stocks Rise as Dell, Nike Overshadow China Concern

November 19, 2010

Nov. 19 (Bloomberg) — Bloomberg’s Elizabeth Faublas reports on the performance of the U.S. equity market today. Stocks advanced, sending the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index up for a third day, as higher-than-estimated profit at Dell Inc. and a dividend increase at Nike Inc. overshadowed concern China’s steps to slow inflation will stifle global economic growth. Bloomberg’s Pimm Fox also speaks. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Applied Materials’ Splinter Sees `Strong Year’ in 2011

November 19, 2010

Nov. 19 (Bloomberg) — Michael Splinter, chief executive officer at Applied Materials Inc., talks about the outlook for semiconductor demand and the company. Splinter also discusses Applied Materials’ solar energy unit. He speaks with Julie Hyman on Bloomberg Television’s “Street Smart.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Siegel Doubts 10-Year Treasury Yields Will Fall Further

November 19, 2010

Oct. 19 (Bloomberg) — Jeremy Siegel, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, talks about the outlook for the U.S. Treasury market. Siegel also discusses the Bush-era tax cuts and the Troubled Asset Relief Program. He talks with Julie Hyman on Bloomberg Television’s “Street Smart.” Larry Shover of Efficient Capital Management also speaks. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

WATCH Pulitzer Prize Winner: Huge Corporate Subsidies Lead To Middle Class ‘Wealth Destruction’

November 19, 2010

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston says it’s no accident that the middle class has been shrinking. In fact, in a recent conversation with Aaron Task and Daniel Gross on Yahoo’s Tech Ticker , Johnston argues that the middle class is a direct result of a maze of subsidies and sweetheart deals that states and cities have doled out to big companies. (Johnston is the author of “Free Lunch: How The Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves At Government Expense (And Stick You With The Bill.” ) “We’ve changed the government rule book in tremendous ways this enormous growth of incomes at the top is not the result of market forces,” Johnston says, “it’s the result of all these rules nobody knows about.” Among the questionable benefits that Johnston identifies are the deals received by teams in America’s biggest four sports which, he says, get subsidies that are worth more than their combined profit. Cabelas, a sporting goods store, got $1.37 in subsidies for every dollar of profit it brought in, he notes. States are spending approximately $70 billion on these type of corporate subsidies, but that may be understating the case. “Is that capitalism?,” Johnston argues. “Go compete in a competitive arena. Don’t go to Washington and say ‘Give me money’ either by saying ‘I don’t have to pay taxes’ or forcing other people to pay taxes that go to me. Go earn your money in the marketplace.” He added: “Every community is doing this Every state is doing this… the net effect is wealth destruction and concentrating money in the hands of those who are politically connected.” WATCH the interview — and check out Yahoo Tech Ticker for more information:

Read the full article →

Michael W. Hudson: Alan Greenspan, Animal House and the Scandal That Never Ends

November 19, 2010

As I’ve tried to make sense of the Robo-Signing, Document-Backdating Foreclosure Scandal That Never Ends , a couple of things have popped in my head: Animal House and Alan Greenspan. Stay with me here. Imagine Greenspan as Flounder, the callow freshman trying to pledge Delta House. The Delts persuade Flounder to loan them his father’s car, then take it on a spree, smash it up and return it much worse for wear. The only explanation they have for Flounder: “Hey, you fucked up. You trusted us .” Greenspan was no neophyte back in the 1980s when, between government gigs, he signed on as a consultant to Charles Keating’s Lincoln Savings and Loan. But he did seem to have a sense of innocence about him, that same starry-eyed idealism he’d possessed a few years before when he’d penned an article in Ayn Rand’s journal declaring that no company could afford to risk its “reputation for honest dealings and a quality product” by “letting down its standards for one moment or for one inferior product; nor would it be tempted by any potential ‘quick killing.’ ” As Lincoln Savings came under fire, Greenspan wrote a letter to regulators pronouncing the management of Keating’s S&L as “seasoned and expert.” The S&L, he said, was “a financially strong institution that presents no foreseeable risk” to the Federal Deposit Insurance Fund. Lincoln eventually perished in a conflagration of recklessness and fraud, costing taxpayers $2.66 billion. Now imagine Keating, before heading off to jail, taking Greenspan aside and explaining: “Hey, you fucked up. You trusted me .” In the for-real world, Greenspan told the New York Times : “I don’t want to say I am distressed, but the truth is I really am. I am thoroughly surprised by what has happened to Lincoln.” Despite his distress, the episode didn’t seem to have much of an impact on Greenspan’s thinking. As Fed chairman — the Dean Wormer, if you will, of the financial system — he still maintained a certainty that markets and bankers could be trusted to protect consumers and investors from fraud and folly. His inaction during the housing boom, many critics say, allowed predatory lending and wild speculation to cripple the economy. Greenspan is no longer in the picture. He spends his days as a sort of professor emeritus, explaining there was nothing he could have done to prevent what he calls a “once-in-a-century credit tsunami.” It’s hard, though, not to detect a whiff of Greenspanian idealism in the forces that have helped bring about the current controversy over the tactics used to speed the banking industry’s foreclosure machine. Foreclosure has traditionally been a laissez-faire activity. The feds have mostly left it up to the states to oversee foreclosures. Many state courts and administrative agencies, though, aren’t equipped to handle the flood of filings or to assess the propriety of the paperwork submitted by banks and other “loan servicers.” But why worry? Why worry whether brand-name banks will do the right thing when it comes to taking away people’s homes? Don’t they want to maintain “a reputation for honest dealings”? Why would they be tempted by the potential for a “quick killing” via foreclosure — instead of, say, modifying homeowners’ loans and helping to keep the stream of income from the loans coming in? There’s the problem. The banks often no longer own the mortgages they’re servicing. The rights have been sold off, through securitization, to investors around the world. The banks still service the mortgages, but they earn little simply collecting payments from month to month. The real money is in defaults: late fees, legal fees, inspection fees, pricey insurance. These add-ons can total thousands of dollars per loan, consumer groups say, and sink homeowners who are barely getting by so deep in default they have little chance of recovering. Which is why, consumer advocates claim, the honor system hasn’t worked well in terms of the Obama administration’s effort to get banks to rewrite borrowers’ loans on more affordable terms. It may also be why some banks may have given in to the temptation to flood courts with inaccurate or perjured documentation. The evidence suggests that the foreclosure scandal is more than a few procedural snafus. It’s a serious problem, driven by the “anything-goes” culture of fraud that’s permeated much of the mortgage industry over the past decade. Solving the problem will take more than putting banks on Double Secret Probation. It will take a change in philosophy: Trust — whether among frat boys or bankers and regulators — should be earned, rather than assumed. Michael Hudson is a staff writer at the Center for Public Integrity and author of THE MONSTER: How a Gang of Predatory Lenders and Wall Street Bankers Fleeced America – And Spawned a Global Crisis .

Read the full article →