July 2011

Chevron profit jumps with oil, output growth slow

July 29, 2011

By Matt Daily and Braden Reddall NEW YORK/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – Chevron Corp, the second-largest U.S. oil company, booked a 43 percent jump in quarterly profit, beating estimates as high oil prices and fat refinery margins offset weaker output. The numbers out on Friday were the latest in a string of huge profits from the industry, which got a boost from the highest oil prices in nearly three years. Exxon Mobil Corp and Royal Dutch Shell Plc also benefited from acquisitions and shifts into new projects. Chevron’s better-than-expected second-quarter performance was largely due to the strength of its U.S. and international refineries, according to Oppenheimer & Co analyst Fadel Gheit. Still, the oil and gas production business yielded nearly 90 percent of Chevron’s earnings. “This is the most leveraged company to oil price in the whole group,” Gheit said. Its profit rose to $7.7 billion, or $3.85 per share, from $5.4 billion, or $2.70 per share, a year earlier. Analysts had expected $3.56 a share, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S. Revenue rose 30 percent to $69 billion. Shares of Chevron were down 0.7 percent to $104.30 by midday on the New York Stock Exchange amid a broad sell-off. OIL OUTPUT SLIPS, OUTLOOK TRIMMED Chevron reported 2.69 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil-equivalent output, compared with 2.75 million a year-ago. Chevron trimmed its 2011 oil and gas production forecast to 2.76 million bpd due to a slower ramp-up of its Perdido project in the Gulf of Mexico and a pipeline problem in Thailand. Chevron had targeted 2.79 million bpd, or 1 percent growth. “The full-year production impact of these two items is about 30,000 barrels per day and they are approximately split between the two,” said George Kirkland, vice chairman and executive vice president for upstream and gas. But it stuck to its 2011-2014 average annual production growth target of 1 percent, and 4 percent to 5 percent for 2014-2017. European benchmark Brent oil prices averaged $117 per barrel in the second quarter, up from $79 in the same quarter in 2010 and $11 higher than the first quarter. Chevron said in April that it switched to Brent from the U.S. benchmark when calculating production-sharing changes. Higher crude prices mean Chevron must leave more production in the hands of state-owned partners. The new target still assumes oil prices of $79 per barrel, whereas with Brent at $111 per barrel Chevron sees output at 2.73 million bpd. On Thursday, Exxon reported a 41 percent rise in quarterly profit that missed analysts’ forecasts. Exxon has aggressively pushed into U.S. natural gas, while Chevron has made a more deliberate move with two deals in the Marcellus shale in the past year. Kirkland signaled there would be no more big deals. “We’re very close to putting together what we want in the Marcellus,” Kirkland said. “There will be additional additions, small additions there, where it makes sense.” As for Bulgaria, where the San Ramon, California-based company has added 1.1 million acres to its interests in Romania and Poland, he said seismic work would likely begin next year. In the Gulf of Mexico, while some operators have expressed frustration at the pace of permitting, Kirkland said its near-term drilling program was on track with two more deepwater rigs due to join its three already working there now. Chevron shares are up 15 percent in 2011, outpacing an 8 percent rise in the Chicago Board Options Exchange oil companies index and a 10 percent rise in Exxon’s stock. (Reporting by Matt Daily in New York and Braden Reddall in San Francisco, editing by Dave Zimmerman, Phil Berlowitz)

Read the full article →

Channelinsight Experiences Exponential, Year Over Year Customer Growth; Expands Management Team

July 29, 2011

DENVER, CO–(Marketwire – Jul 29, 2011) – Companies nationwide, including Enterasys Networks, Brocade and Fairchild Semiconductor, are demanding a better way to manage their indirect sales. Channelinsight , a leading provider of cloud-based channel sales management solutions , is responding to this market demand and as a result has seen 183 percent Year over Year new bookings growth in the first half of 2010. New customers have turned to Channelinsight to improve channel management and in turn, eliminate excess inventory and the overpayment of incentives. On average, Channelinsight’s customers decrease the time spent tracking sales by 20 percent, while increasing revenue up to 10 percent by reducing excess channel inventory.

Read the full article →

Eric Cantor’s District May Lose AAA Credit Rating

July 29, 2011

WASHINGTON — Moody’s Investors Service is warning 162 local governments that they risk a downgrade of their AAA credit rating because of the federal government’s inability to come to an agreement on a plan to raise the debt ceiling. The affected local governments are most heavily concentrated in Virginia and Massachusetts. One of the counties, Hanover, falls squarely in House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) district . Parts of two more counties, Chesterfield and Henrico, are in his district as well. “The ratings of these local governments, particularly those with a high economic dependence on federal activity, would be vulnerable to a downgrade of the U.S. government,” said Moody’s Senior Vice President Matt Jones. Cantor’s office said that the warning was a further indication of the need for substantial budget cuts. “Moody’s announcement further demonstrates why it is so important to take serious steps to cut spending and get our fiscal house in order,” said Cantor spokesperson Laena Fallon. “House Republicans have said all along that we want to achieve spending cuts that exceed the debt limit increase and put in place binding budget reforms to change the way Washington spends taxpayer dollars. No one wants to default on our debt, and with so many people still out of work we have to focus on getting the economy going again.” Last week, Moody’s said that five states — Maryland, New Mexico, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia — risked downgrades in their credit ratings if Congress and the president were unable to work out a debt ceiling deal. The states were put at risk because of their high percentages of federal employment and levels of state expenditures devoted to Medicaid. The federal government has also been put on notice by Moody’s, “given the rising possibility that the statutory debt limit will not be raised on a timely basis, leading to a default on US Treasury debt obligations.” Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R-Va.) recently sent a letter to President Obama and the state’s congressional delegation, imploring them reach a compromise and raise the debt limit, giving an indication of the wrath that federal lawmakers may face from the public back home if Aug. 2 comes and goes without an agreement. Another county at risk is New Castle County in Delaware, where Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) previously served as county executive. In a statement, he placed the blame for the stalemate on “Tea Party Republicans.” “It’s disheartening to think that years of extremely difficult work at New Castle County maintaining our AAA bond rating could be tossed aside by weeks of reckless stubbornness by Tea Party Republicans. While we have record annual deficits and a dangerous national debt that need to be urgently addressed, defaulting on America’s mortgage is not the way to do it,” he said. “The announcement from Moody’s today affects municipalities in 31 states, including those of the very Tea Party Republicans who are insisting on steering our nation’s economy off this cliff. I hope that this sobering news will instead help steer them instead to a responsible compromise.” Check here for additional debt ceiling updates.

Read the full article →

Greece’s Dismal Economy Leaves Some Feeling They’ve Lost ‘Quality As A People’

July 29, 2011

A sovereign debt crisis has left Greece with riots and the worst credit rating in the world. And day-to-day life outside the capital can be equally dismal. Some Greeks living near the ruins of Athens’ ancient rival city Sparta feel they are paying the price for the choices made by politicians in the capital, BBC World reports. Small business owners across multiple industries say they are barely surviving even though the government’s latest round of austerity measures has yet to take effect. From pastry chefs to orange farmers to luxury furniture salesman, times are tough and the outlook does not look good — that’s if you’re lucky enough to even have a job with unemployment ratings rising 40 percent in March. And maybe worse, the joblessness casts a pessimistic malaise even over the most qualified of Greek citizens. “You lose your quality as a people, as a citizen,” one business school graduate who was forced to move back in with his parents after losing his job in Athens told BBC World. “Because you can’t offer [anything] in the community, you can’t offer [anything] for yourself, for your family.”

Read the full article →

Beth Kobliner: How Would a U.S. Default Affect Consumers?

July 29, 2011

As recently as last week, the story about Washington’s wrangling over the debt limit seemed like inside-the-Beltway baseball. But now, with the week nearly over, and yet still no agreement, the potential ramifications of political dickering are hitting all too close to home for many Americans. We all know the basics: If the government doesn’t approve an increase in the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt ceiling by next Tuesday — August 2 — the U.S. will be perilously close to defaulting on some of its loans. And even if Congress manages to pass the ceiling hike, rating agencies like Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s (which, might I add, have suddenly decided to do their jobs, after being asleep at the switch throughout the mortgage crisis!) seem ready to downgrade the triple-A rating on U.S. Treasury bonds at any moment. President Obama summed it up best when he used the word “dysfunctional” in describing the way Congress is handling this admittedly avoidable situation. To me, it conjures up a couple loudly arguing in the mall about whether they should use another credit card when they have so many bills that they’ve already racked up. Debt can be overwhelming to anyone, but talk about airing one’s dirty laundry in public. Not a proud moment for America, for sure. What’s been particularly interesting about this recent situation is that expert investors have reacted to these developments with what can be called a big yawn. “The bond market has been saying this is a non-event,” says Peter Crane, president of Crane Data and the country’s leading expert on money market mutual funds. Fair enough. But as more and more news reports raise red flags about the meaning of a default or downgrade for Main Street, now is the time to pay attention to the following: 1. Your investments Although I think the doomsday scenario is overblown — there is little chance that the government will allow itself to default — many people are beginning to ask questions. My biggest piece of advice: Stay the course. If you’ve been checking in yearly with your 401(k) and IRA statements, for instance, hopefully you have made sure that your investments are spread among the appropriate mix of stocks, bonds, and money funds. If so, whatever happens in the short term shouldn’t have a big impact on your long-term retirement goals. If not, now is the time to make sure that you are truly diversified. Here’s an example. About 10 years ago, analysts recommended that individuals with retirement accounts put only 10 percent of their stock holdings into an international mutual fund. Today, a growing number of advisors I admire recommend that you put closer to 20 percent of your total stock holdings in a broad mix of international stock mutual funds. “It’s smart to include Europe, the Pacific, and emerging markets,” says Jason Scott, managing director of the research center at Financial Engines, the retirement advisory firm founded by Nobel laureate William Sharpe. One of the big worries right now: What if I’m holding long-term Treasury bonds and the U.S. government defaults or the bonds get downgraded? The answer, in either case, is that yields will be pushed up to attract new investors to these bonds, which will no longer be considered as safe. When yields go up, bond values fall. That’s just how bonds work. However, most analysts I spoke to say that they are not worried about super-safe money market funds “breaking the buck,” despite what some articles claim. The reason: If the rating agencies decide to downgrade Treasury bonds, they would be doing so to the long-term bonds. This would not impact money market funds, which hold very short-term IOUs. So if you keep a chunk of money in money funds, your investment is safe, according to Gus Sauter, Chief Investment Officer of the Vanguard Group. “The U.S. money markets continue to be the deepest and most liquid in the world, and will remain a safe and stable place for investors,” he said. Even if there’s a downgrade, he and others note, it’s still among the highest quality credit available. “We believe that Treasury bills will remain liquid under any scenario — even the extraordinarily unlikely scenario of a default,” he added. Although true diversity can mean exposure to all asset classes, despite the temptation, you may want to steer clear of gold. Since it’s considered the “go-to” asset in severely troubled economic times, gold has recently hit its all-time nominal high of $1,600 per ounce. Buying at a high tends to be a bad move. And, as in the case with all investments, research shows that it’s impossible to outguess the market over time. Those who try end up making big, losing bets — and incurring expensive transaction costs since they are charged fees every time they buy or sell on a hunch. 2. Your bank account and your cash One prominent writer recently said that it was time to pull money out of the bank to avoid long lines and panic at the ATM if Congress doesn’t increase the debt ceiling. Although it makes an interesting visual, no one expects a run on the banks any time soon. Unless you have more than $250,000 in any one federally insured account at a bank or credit union, your money is protected by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). So in order for you to lose your money, the institution would have to fail and the FDIC would have to go belly up, as well. Even a so-called “technical default” by the U.S., which is the term given to a situation in which the government is unable to pay its bills, or a downgrade of our bonds by one of the rating agencies, would not result in this type of financial catastrophe, experts say. It’s possible, however, that your dollar may not stretch as far in the supermarket or at the mall if the government doesn’t get its act together. If the dollar becomes weaker relative to other currencies, the cost of imports — including cars, gas, toys, furniture, even food — increases. In the case of a default, you may experience a cash crunch if you are expecting a check from Social Security or Medicare, or if you’re receiving unemployment insurance, Pell Grant payments, or disbursements from any other federal programs. 3. Your loans Whether or not the debt ceiling gets lifted, or bonds get downgraded, there’s a strong likelihood that interest rates will rise on all loans — including mortgages, credit cards, car loans, and many types of student loans. That’s because interest rates on these types of loans are closely correlated to the yields on long-term bond rates, which are in turn influenced by the market’s expectations of how well the economy will do in the future. These days, the outlook is weak, and so many analysts expect yields and interest rates to rise. So what does this mean? If you’re locked into a home loan, currently at 4.5 percent, lucky you. But if you’re just starting to house hunt, or trying to refinance your current mortgage, you should hurry to lock in a low rate as quickly as possible. Credit card interest rates will go up, too. The average rate is currently 14 percent, but credit card companies love to use any excuse to raise rates for customers. Beverly Blair Harzog, credit expert for Credit.com, guesses rates could rise as much as 1 percent or a couple of percentage points. If you have a good credit record, look for a low-rate card at Bankrate.com. For college and grad students, rates on private student loans will go up. Typically those loans haven’t gone above 25 percent, but legally speaking, there’s no real limit to the interest they can charge, says Mark Kantrowitz, founder of FinAid.org, a terrific site offering the best information on financial aid. The good news for students with federal loans is that they do have caps: 6.8 percent for Stafford loans and 8.5 percent for PLUS loans. A tip for grad students: Stick with the Grad PLUS loan, which is also capped at 8.5 percent, but does not have a maximum on the amount you can borrow. That’s a real advantage of the federal program — and an example of how, sometimes, the government really can do the right thing. Of course, in the end, it’s the best guess of analysts, observers, and pundits that the powers that be will not allow the U.S. to default on its obligations. After all, losing the value of “the full faith and credit” of the U.S. would be more than a big loss to our wallets. * * * * * Beth Kobliner is a personal finance commentator and journalist, the author of the New York Times bestseller ” Get a Financial Life: Personal Finance in Your Twenties and Thirties ,” and a member of the President’s Advisory Council on Financial Capability. Visit her at bethkobliner.com , follow her on Twitter , and fan her on Facebook .

Read the full article →

Obama: Time Is Running Out For A Debt Deal

July 29, 2011

WASHINGTON, July 29 (Reuters/Richard Cowan and Deborah Charles) – With four days remaining until the United States hits its debt limit, President Barack Obama on Friday told deeply divided Republicans and Democrats to stop bickering and find a way “out of this mess.” Obama said a deficit-reduction plan being advanced by the top Republican in Congress would be defeated in the Democratic-led Senate and was simply wasting time. He called for compromise and said both parties were not that far apart on spending cuts. “There are plenty of ways out of this mess but we are almost out of time,” he said, warning that the country’s top-notch triple-A credit was at risk. The United States will be unable to borrow money to pay its bills if Congress does not raise the debt limit by August 2. That could result in an unprecedented default that could push the already fragile economy back into recession. Fears about the health of America’s economy multiplied on Friday after a government report showed weaker-than-expected growth in the second quarter, raising the risk of recession. Obama spoke as Republican leaders scrambled to rescue their debt plan, which was thrown into doubt on Thursday night when some conservatives refused to back their leader’s legislation. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner’s failure to round up enough support exposed a rift in the Republican Party that could complicate efforts to reach a compromise to raise the U.S. debt ceiling before Tuesday’s deadline. World leaders have been stunned by the dysfunction in Washington that has led the United States to the brink of default. World Bank President Robert Zoellick on Friday said the United States was playing with fire. America’s largest foreign creditor, China, has repeatedly urged Washington to protect its dollar investments and its state-run news agency on Friday said the United States had been “kidnapped” by “dangerously irresponsible” politics. Investors had been betting for weeks that Washington would raise the debt limit in time, but with the deadline now just four days away, markets are getting rattled. The U.S. dollar plunged to all-time lows against the safe haven Swiss franc on Friday due to debt worries and poor economic growth. In short-term lending markets, investors dumped holdings over fears about the talks, driving rates on Treasury debt that matures in August to six-month highs. The House inaction prompted Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, to warn that the country could not wait any longer and he vowed to take steps to move legislation in the Senate. Reid also called on Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell to immediately work with him on a compromise bill that could be enacted before the August 2 deadline. With just four days left, the Treasury has said it will unveil an emergency plan explaining how the government would function and pay its obligations if Congress does not agree to raise its borrowing limit beyond $14.3 trillion. But that announcement will not come until at least after markets close on Friday. The Republican-led House will try to pass on Friday a revised bill to raise the nation’s debt limit for the short term, a senior Republican told reporters. House Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier said the retooled bill would place tougher requirements on Congress for passing a balanced budget constitutional amendment. (Writing by Caren Bohan; Editing by Vicki Allen) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Bob Beaty: Should You Become a Freelancer? Probably Not

July 29, 2011

I have noticed, as the economy implodes and jobs are hard to come by, lots of young folks — many right out of college or with limited work experience — think that freelancing looks like a good career move. With few exceptions — very few — they would be wrong. Here’s why: freelancers, especially writers and the ubiquitous ‘consultant’ must have a significant amount of real world experience. To merely apply book learnin’ to your freelance offerings will expose you as a lightweight. And no, I am not trying to stifle competition. They usually take care of themselves. As well, some direct office or corporate work will allow you to understand the dynamics that motivate your potential clients. All the successful freelancers I know came from several years of a solid career background; communications, IT, television production, etc. Almost as bad are the newly downsized who decide that they can also be a freelancer. Treating freelancing as a stopgap or avocation might keep you somewhat busy, but if you go in at the deep-end without water wings, you’ll likely drown. And you can likely forget grabbing clients from a previous employer. They tend to be a bit humourless and even litigious about that sort of thing. Plan for a year before you strike out on your own. Do some work on the side for friends’ companies, family or some charities. Get some experience that showcases your talent while you hone your craft, client patter and realize that working for oneself can be both fabulous and soul-destroying. And of course, keep an eye on your motivation and self-discipline. Most freelancers work for quite a while before they get into a rhythm that works for them. Personally, I work better in the early morning and on weekends. I’m a bit strange like that, but it means that come Monday morning I can deliver work, usually early, which tends to lead to more work during the week. While there is a place for a journeyman/woman/person freelancer, a specialized area usually works best. That’s where the previous experience comes into play. If, like me, you specialize in financial content, understand and keep abreast of relevant issues of interest to your clients. Be prepared to discuss topics with clients that are applicable, even though they may not result in direct business. Being knowledgeable in an area simply ups your stock as an expert. You want to become the go-to person for clients and referrals as not only being worth the money, but also interesting and a respected resource point. If I had a nickel for every sentence from a client that started: “You might not know this, but…” If you don’t know, admit it, but find out fast and take the information back to the client. Maybe even go a bit further and consult a peer who may be an expert you can access to expand on the client query. The client will definitely appreciate your diligence. An informed client is a repeat client. Might want to repeat that in the mirror a few times, as there is no greater truth to a freelancer and his/her business. Finally, here’s a bit of inside baseball; most clients don’t understand or even like freelancers. Consider that for the most part, you are talking to decision makers in an organization that may have three people or 30,000. They have real jobs. You are a freelancer. Be sensitive to them, as they will initially be suspicious of you. To most people, the thought of freelancing is as scary as public speaking. Or climbing the Matterhorn without a safety rope. Once again, your value is not your abilities; it is your previous real-world experience that colour your abilities. While that helps to establish you as an ‘expert’ it also allows you to understand and be sensitive to those all-important client office dynamics. And always encourage a client to steal your ideas and proffer them to the company as his/her own. The long-term payback is well worth the ‘theft’. And stay humble. Even if you aren’t. And never, ever, let a client think you are smarter than they are. Even if you are. It’s just not good business.

Read the full article →

Innovation Demands A Diverse Workforce, Study Says

July 29, 2011

Workplace diversity programs — derided by some as politically correct pandering or little more than public-relations stunts — have become key to driving innovation among the world’s most prominent businesses, says a study from Forbes Insights . “For global companies, diversity is no longer simply a matter of creating a heterogeneous workforce, but using that workforce to innovate and give it a competitive advantage in the marketplace,” the report states. “Competition for talent is fierce in today’s global economy, so companies need to have plans in place to recruit, develop, and retain a diverse workforce.” The survey is a sign that globalization may have had a positive, if unplanned, benefit: An increasingly multicultural workforce within the world’s major multinationals. Of the 321 companies with more than $500 million in revenue surveyed, 85 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that diversity is key to driving innovation in the workplace. The survey lists AT&T, L’Oreal USA and Mattel as sponsors. Among the survey’s other findings: A diverse and inclusive workforce is crucial for companies that want to attract and retain top talent. Competition for talent is fierce in today’s global economy, so companies need to have plans in place to recruit, develop, and retain a diverse workforce. Nearly all respondents reported that their companies have diversity and inclusion strategies in place. However, not all of the plans are identical. About a third said their companies have global strategies that allow for minimal regional deviation, while half said that their organizations have a global plan that also allows for different strategies and programs in order to address regional needs or cultural differences. But many of the surveyed executives also reported that progress on diversity has been uneven. While gender diversity has largely been successful, respondents said that they have had less success in areas such as age and disability. Yet many observers still voice suspicions that “diversity” is little more than a publicity tool for companies wishing not to offend various demographics. “[W]ithout embracing the reason behind the need for diversity, the how and the why of it all go painfully unnoticed,” writes William Powell at the Business2Community blog . “What good is diversity if the things brought to the table by the diverse nature of people has no voice or outlet for expression within your organization?” In North America and some other high-immigrant regions, workplace diversity is also a reflection of growing racial and ethnic diversity within the broader community. In the U.S., “from 1980 to 2020, the white working-age population is projected to decline from 82 per cent to 63 per cent,” the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education reported in 2005. “During the same period, the minority portion of the workforce is projected to double (from 18 per cent to 37 per cent), and the Hispanic/Latino portion is projected to almost triple (from 6 per cent to 17 per cent).” But the Center also noted the minority groups that are growing fastest also have the lowest education levels, posing an obstacle to increasing workforce diversity. The Forbes survey addressed the education gap as well: According to one estimate, by 2020 close to three quarters of all American jobs will require advanced skills and offer high pay. It will take approximately 123 million American workers to fill these positions, but at current high school and college graduation rates, only 50 million Americans will be qualified for them. In addition, the United States currently ranks only 20th out of 28 industrialized democracies in high school graduation rates. These statistics illustrate an astonishing shortfall that threatens the ability of American business to find and develop the talent that is critical to our country’s long-term economic competitiveness in the world marketplace. Workplace diversity has also exploded in recent decades in Canada, where “society has undergone profound change since the 1960s in how it views the role of women, celebrates cultural diversity and the contribution of visible minorities, and recognizes the strong contribution of Aboriginal Peoples in shaping Canada’s culture,” a Royal Bank of Canada report asserted in 2005. Canada’s cities “have become rich centres of creativity and places that attract talented people from around the world because of the vibrancy that successful pluralism brings.” But RBC noted that “Canada’s track record in successfully integrating immigrants is slipping. On average, immigrants arrive in this country better educated, in better health, and at similar stages of their careers as those born in the country, but the evidence suggests that during the past two decades, they have been much less successful in achieving success than earlier waves of immigration.” The report also noted that “while women have made significant progress in the workplace in terms of equal pay for equal work and opportunities for advancement, there is more that can be done to facilitate the role of women, including more family-friendly workplaces.”

Read the full article →

McDonald’s China Plans To Open A New Store Every Day

July 29, 2011

The fast food wars in China are fierce. In a country where Colonel Sanders is more omnipresent than Mao , McDonald’s has some serious competition. That’s why within the next four years, McDonald’s plans to open a new outlet daily in China. By 2013, McDonald’s hopes to add 700 outlets to its already existing 1,300. The chain isn’t exactly dragging its feet in the meantime — it currently opens a new restaurant every other day . In order to achieve such massive growth, McDonald’s wants to focus more on franchising in China. Although 75% of McDonald’s worldwide are owned by franchisees, only six stores in China are franchised. McDonald’s has been planning its Chinese expansion for some time , but the rate at which it plans to open stores is somewhat staggering. There are about 3,200 KFC stores in China, so even with McDonald’s ambitious growth plans, catching up to the Colonel remains a daunting challenge.

Read the full article →

Digagogo Ventures Corp. Announces Appointment of Shane Macaulay to Advisory Board

July 29, 2011

DETROIT, MI–(Marketwire – Jul 29, 2011) – Digagogo Ventures Corp . (“Digagogo” or the “Company”) ( OTCBB : DOGO ), a provider of information and communications technology, is pleased to announce the appointment of Mr. Shane Macaulay to serve as a member of the Advisory Board, effective July 24 2011.

Read the full article →

Kellogg’s Q2 profit up 14%

July 29, 2011

(MENAFN) Kellogg’s Co. CEO, John Bryant, said that due to growing prices, new products and better cereal sales, in the second quarter, the company’s profit grew 14 percent to USD343 million from …

Read the full article →

Goodyear Q2 net income up to USD40m

July 29, 2011

(MENAFN) Goodyear Tire & Rubber’s Co. Chairman and CEO, Richard J. Kramer, said that due to a 24 percent growth in the company’s revenue in the second quarter, the world’s third largest tire …

Read the full article →

Starwood Q2 net income up 15%

July 29, 2011

(MENAFN) Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc. CEO, Frits van Paasschen, said that in the second quarter, net income went up 15 percent as a result of increasing room rates, constant growth …

Read the full article →

Colgate Q2 net income up 3% to USD622m

July 29, 2011

(MENAFN) Colgate-Palmolive’s Co. CEO, Ian Cook, said that as a result of growing revenue from emerging markets, mainly in South America, the company’s second quarter earnings surged notably, where …

Read the full article →

Rebecca Thiess: Five Things to Remember in the Debt Ceiling Debate

July 29, 2011

Each day brings seemingly dozens of updates on the budget negotiations surrounding the debt ceiling debate. Over the last few weeks, there have been major addresses to the nation by President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner; the progress and then dissolution of Vice President Joe Biden’s negotiation group; various iterations of plans proposed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Boehner, the Gang of Six, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Reid and McConnell combined; and the passage of House Republicans’ “Cut, Cap and Balance” bill. President Obama has pushed for a “big deal” — at one point calling for deficit reduction of $4 trillion over 10 years. The debate has been exhausting and at times too confusing. It has put a dent in the approval ratings of all lawmakers. And, as our country staggers toward the August 2 deadline — the date by which Congress must approve of a debt limit increase or greatly compromise our nation’s abilities to function — now is the time to see the forest through the trees. With that in mind, here are five important points to remember about the debt ceiling. 1. A default would be terrible for our country The budget negotiations of the past month have sought to secure the votes of those members of Congress who are opposed to passing a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling, and who have stated they will not vote in favor of an increase without also passing significant reductions in the deficit or spending. The debate over deficit reduction aside, failure to sufficiently increase the debt limit by Treasury’s deadline would cause our country to default on our obligations. From an economic standpoint, a failure to increase the debt limit would further hobble our already feeble economic growth. As 235 leading economists stated in a letter to Congressional leaders, failure to raise the debt limit could have “potentially grave long-term consequences.” This includes “undermin[ing] the full faith and credit of the United States government,” which would lead to higher interest rates for the government as well as businesses and consumers, and would negatively impact job growth. 2. A balanced budget amendment is bad economics Many of the demands coming from conservatives have included a call for a balanced budget amendment. Though responsible-sounding in rhetoric, a constitutional balanced budget amendment would be disastrous in practice, particularly during times of recession. A balanced budget amendment would debilitate what are called automatic stabilizers — policy tools that kick in to provide support during recessions by limiting the decline of consumer purchasing power. A balanced budget amendment would thus make recessions deeper and more prolonged. A balanced budget amendment would require a super-majority vote in each chamber of Congress to adopt an unbalanced budget – something that Congress has done in all but five of the last 50 years. Requiring a super-majority vote for something that has been common practice would almost certainly lead to an increase in the type of legislative gridlock we are seeing today. Once again, there is strong agreement among renowned economists that a balanced budget amendment is a bad idea. 3. Immediate spending cuts would cost, not create, jobs One myth being perpetuated is that high deficits impede job creation; therefore, cutting spending will create jobs. From a macroeconomic standpoint, this is simply not true. In fact, immediate cuts to spending levels would lead to job losses, with the severity of job losses dependent on the size and scope of proposed cuts. Taking money out of the economy is never a recipe for creating jobs; in fact, the opposite is true. Stimulative spending during a recession fills the hole caused by a contraction of business and consumer spending, keeping jobs in the economy and staving off layoffs. By the end of 2010, for example, the Recovery Act was responsible for creating or saving between three million and four million jobs. In the past year congressional Republicans have introduced a number of spending cuts packages that would negatively impact jobs. Last fall, Speaker Boehner proposed reducing non-security discretionary spending to 2008 levels, which would have caused the reduction of over one million jobs. This spring, House conservatives proposed cutting spending by $100 billion relative to President Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget proposal, which would have produced an estimated loss of 994,000 jobs. The House-passed Republican leadership budget, estimated at the time to cut $61.5 billion this year alone, would have cost roughly 600,000 jobs (when estimated relative to the CBO January baseline). 4. Revenues are essential to a balanced deficit-reduction approach There are ways to reduce the deficit while maintaining both public investments and a strong and reliable social safety net. Investing in America’s Economy, a budget blueprint compiled by the Economic Policy Institute, Demos, and The Century Foundation, achieved long-term debt stabilization while both investing in national priorities and avoiding harmful cuts to important social programs. The current debate has, for the most part, lacked the balance seen in the blueprint by largely insisting that all deficit reduction be achieved through spending cuts. The reality is that smart deficit reduction must address our lack of revenues as well. Revenues are projected to be 14.8% of GDP this year, the lowest level seen over the last 60 years. Deficit reduction must include increasing revenue levels as well as decreasing spending levels. Furthermore, revenues are something we can afford to increase, if done wisely. The George W. Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 disproportionately benefited the top one percent of earners (who received more benefit than the lower 80 percent of income earners) while doing little for low-income families. Making all of the Bush tax changes permanent, which would largely and unnecessarily benefit those making over $250,000 annually, would cost an estimated $4.6 trillion over the 2012-2021 period. Repealing those tax cuts is something high-income individuals can afford, and would impact only those who have reaped the majority of economic gains over the past decade, as well as the past 30 years. From 1979-2007, the top 10 percent of income earners claimed 64 percent of gains to overall incomes, while the bottom 20 percent saw 0.4 percent of all gains to income. In 2007, alone, the top 1 percent of earners took home around 20 percent of pre-tax national income, while the bottom 90 percent of earners took home around 58 percent. Wages for those at the high end have been growing significantly faster than for those at the bottom of the wage scale, yet taxes on both income and assets have fallen at the top. Additionally, in poll after poll the American public has consistently called for putting revenue increases on the table. A recent poll analysis by Capital Gains and Games blogger Bruce Bartlett found that people support higher taxes to reduce the deficit by a 2-1 margin. This is truly a case of Congress rejecting the will of the people. 5. This debate has distracted from what remains our country’s biggest problem — a lack of jobs The fact is, the U.S. labor market remains terribly weak. Disappointing monthly jobs numbers are demonstrating that our current pace of overall job growth will mean unemployment and underemployment for millions of Americans for years to come. Policymakers, however, have turned to austerity at a time when they should be prioritizing job creation. Americans want a fiscally responsible government, but even more than that, we want to be productive members of a strong and growing economy. Our deficits will not shrink without strong growth, and strong growth will not occur without millions of new jobs. Americans have been led to believe that fiscal austerity is a key ingredient to job creation in the short-term; it is not. A focus on spending cuts has instead greatly detracted from what should be a strong effort by policymakers from both parties to work together toward job creation and economic growth. Economic Policy Institute Research and Policy Director John Irons co-authored this post

Read the full article →

From The Outside Looking In: How The Debt Debate Could Affect You

July 29, 2011

As lawmakers in Washington work to advance a plan to raise the debt ceiling, local leaders and residents from across the country have something to say about the contentious debate unfolding inside the Beltway. Should the United States begin the process of defaulting on its debts, the fallout from such an economic scenario would not be confined to the nation’s capital. It would likely be felt across the country. What would it mean for you and your hometown if Democrats and Republicans fail to lift the deficit limit? Check out the slideshow below from Patch reporters highlighting local perspectives and reaction to the situation in Washington.

Read the full article →

Richard Barrington: Ask the Expert: Does the Debt Ceiling Debate Threaten Deposit Insurance?

July 29, 2011

Q: Of all the things said to be threatened by the debt ceiling debate — bond payments, social security checks, etc. — one thing I haven’t heard mentioned is FDIC deposit insurance. Since this is a federal program, couldn’t our deposit insurance be at risk if the government runs out of money? After all, owners of savings accounts, money market accounts, and CDs have gotten the short end of the stick from government policies so far. A: Even though FDIC deposit insurance is a federal program, it is not likely to be an immediate victim of a possible federal government default. In the long run though, anything is possible if things reach such a dire outcome. The reason why deposit insurance wouldn’t be immediately affected by a federal government default is that deposit insurance is funded by an assessment on banks, and not directly by the federal government. Although the FDIC is a federal agency, it does not receive any Congressional appropriations for its operations. However, that does not mean that deposit insurance would be completely immune if the federal government fails to live up to its responsibility to find a budget solution. For one thing, while the vast majority of FDIC funding comes from bank assessments, the agency does receive a minute portion of its revenues from interest on U.S. Treasury securities. A bigger worry might be that if the U.S. government actually defaults on some securities, it is possible that the financial chaos that would follow could cause a spike in bank failures that would overwhelm the insurance fund. After all, this fund is just over 1 percent of insured deposits. It is predicated upon failures being rare exceptions, not a widespread epidemic. In short, savings accounts , CDs and money market accounts don’t seem especially vulnerable to a federal default, but like a surprising number of things we count on every day, deposit insurance could be subject to disruptions if the government cannot pay its bills. Got a financial question about saving, investing, or banking? MoneyRates .com invites you to submit your questions to the “Ask the Expert” feature. Just go to the MoneyRates .com home page and look for the “Ask the Expert” box on the lower left. The original article can be found at Money-Rates.com: ” Ask the expert: Does the debt ceiling debate threaten deposit insurance? ”

Read the full article →

Gold Vulnerable as EU Debt Fears Boost Dollar, Oil Facing Headwinds

July 28, 2011

Talking Points Crude Oil May Bounce with Stocks But Major Headwinds Remain Gold Pressured as US Dollar Gains on Renewed EU Debt Fears WTI Crude Oil (MENAFN)in overall risk appetite, but a …

Read the full article →

Gold Price Action Could Suggest Near-Term Debt Ceiling Resolution

July 28, 2011

USD finally showing signs of recovery in negative sentiment environment Gold pulls back from record highs and closes lower despite risk off markets US debt ceiling discussions could see …

Read the full article →

John Kerry: China ‘Laughing All The Way To The Bank’ Over Prospect Of U.S. Credit Downgrade

July 28, 2011

The global impact of the American debt crisis – and the likelihood of permanent damage to American interests – are already visible to Senator John Kerry (D-MA) from his perch as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Indeed he is not only seeing but hearing those effects. “The Chinese are laughing all the way to the bank,” said the former Democratic presidential nominee, because a downgrading of US Treasury securities will mean enormous and completely unnecessary increases in our interest payments to the nation’s largest creditor — and our most important competitor in the international arena.

Read the full article →

Goldman Traders Quit As Big Bonuses Dry Up

July 28, 2011

NEW YORK, July 28 (Lauren Tara LaCapra) – More than a dozen traders have quit Goldman Sachs Group Inc’s (GS.N) North American government bonds and derivatives trading desk in New York in recent months as the bank takes fewer risks and big bonuses for ambitious traders dry up. Goldman has been handing out promotions and better pay to its salespeople, rather than the traders who manage the bank’s inventory of securities and derivatives, people familiar with the bank’s operations said. The changes reflect Goldman’s shift toward client trading and away from making money by betting for its own account, those sources said. Weak trading in general has compounded Goldman’s difficulties as it struggles to earn profits from clients without the help of its market bets, analysts said. It makes sense for Goldman management to reward sales staff over traders these days, said Susquehanna Financial Group analyst David Hilder. “The client franchise is paramount,” said Hilder. “You need sales people to deal with and talk to the clients. Over the long term, that’s more important than a few guys trading bonds.” Among the recent departures is Brian Mooney, an interest-rate derivatives trader who spent 22 years at Goldman before joining Bank of America Corp’s (BAC.N) Merrill Lynch this week, according to three sources who know about the move. Mooney’s exit follows that of Glenn Hadden, the former head of Goldman’s U.S. Treasury bond trading desk, who left last year to run Morgan Stanley’s (MS.N) global rates trading group in January. At least nine other traders from the rates desk have left for jobs at competitors this year, including UBS AG (UBSN.VX), Nomura Holdings Inc (8604.T), Jefferies Group Inc (JEF.N) and JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), or hedge funds like Stark Investments near Milwaukee. Among their ranks were more junior traders, some of whom were seen as rising stars at Goldman. Goldman has been laying off traders since March, but there has also been a flood of voluntary exits that began late last year and continued through the second quarter, sources said. Colin Corgan, a respected partner on the rates desk, retired in late 2010. In March, Craig Reynolds, a former top interest-rate swaps trader at Goldman, left to become head of Bank of America-Merrill Lynch’s North American interest-rate trading desk. Some traders that have left the bank said they fear Goldman may turn into just another investment bank, and they wanted to leave while it was still seen as prestigious on Wall Street. “Working for Goldman is no longer different than working for anybody else,” said one former Goldman trader who left this year. “At the same time, if you have Goldman on your resume, that’s still a premium. People are monetizing the Goldman premium now because two years from now you won’t be able to.” “Goldman Sachs is totally committed to the interest rate products business,” said spokesman Michael DuVally. The bank is staffed appropriately for the business, he added. SPECTER OF THE VOLCKER RULE Goldman’s North American rates-trading desk handles some of the most actively traded markets in the world, including U.S. Treasury bonds and U.S. dollar interest-rate swaps. The desk is to some degree shielded from a financial reform provision called the Volcker rule that will prevent banks from gambling on market direction. The rule is not in effect yet, but even once it is implemented, banks will still be allowed to take proprietary positions in the Treasury market and hedge against risk using related derivatives. Nonetheless, traders who left Goldman’s rates desk complained they were hamstrung by aggressive risk managers who limited position sizes and second-guessed trades. They also said they were being asked to take on more responsibilities with less pay as Goldman tries to cut costs. In announcing quarterly results last week, Chief Financial Officer David Viniar said Goldman plans to lay off about 1,000 people this year to reduce expenses by $1.2 billion and may slash employee pay if business doesn’t pick up. The rates-trading desk is among the largest in Goldman’s enormous fixed income, currency and commodities trading business, known as FICC. Over the last six quarters, FICC trading has suffered as clients pulled back from the market. Goldman detailed a 53 percent decline in second-quarter FICC revenue last week. Revenue there has dropped by 46 percent, on average, in each of the past four quarters. Goldman does not break out rates trading numbers, but said revenue there dropped “significantly.” Goldman’s client business has gained traction in some rates-trading areas — for example, the bank boosted market share in U.S. Treasury trading this year to 12.2 percent from 10.7 percent, according to a Greenwich Associates survey. Yet higher market share does not always amount to better profits, Greenwich said. Narrowing bid-ask spreads, increasing use of electronic trading and competition for big institutional clients’ business are pressuring rates-trading profits. “The market’s shift in emphasis from structured products to rates products has already reduced the profitability of fixed income for sell-side firms,” said Greenwich Associates consultant Woody Canaday. (Editing by Dan Wilchins and Robert MacMillan) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

The Rapture Profiteers

July 28, 2011

For nearly a year, nonagenarian preacher and radio personality Harold Camping predicted the world would end on May 21. Locusts would blanket the earth and millions would die while Camping and his flock would rise up to the sky, rendezvous with Jesus, and ascend to the Kingdom of Heaven. Instead, May 22 happened, Camping postponed the end of the world by five months, and then suffered a debilitating stroke — leaving a huge vacuum in the Rapture market. The meltdown came at a propitious moment for apocalypse followers. A proliferation of earthquakes, a plague that may or may not be sweeping Brazil, the Greeks, and Kim Kardashian, among other things, may be conspiring to create a Rapture bubble. In addition to Camping’s revised forecast — the world is definitely going to end on Oct. 21 — many Rapture-seekers now believe the Aug. 2 debt-ceiling deadline signals that the end may be very, very near.

Read the full article →

Verizon Wireless To Pay $10 Billion Dividend To Owners

July 28, 2011

NEW YORK — Verizon Wireless on Thursday said it will pay a dividend of $10 billion in January to its owners, Verizon Communications Inc. and Vodafone Group PLC, ending a strategy of reducing debt that has frustrated Vodafone. Vodafone, a British cellphone company with wide international interests, owns 45 percent of Verizon Wireless, yet hasn’t received any cash from the U.S. carrier in years. Vodafone shares initially rose $1.40, or 5.2 percent, in aftermarket trading in New York. Verizon gained 20 cents to $35.86. New York-based Verizon owns the other 55 percent of Verizon Wireless and controls its operations. It will receive $5.5 billion of the dividend while Vodafone will get $4.5 billion. Analysts have seen Verizon’s strategy denying Vodafone a dividend as a way to squeeze the British company into selling its stake in the wireless carrier to Verizon. But no deal has materialized, and Verizon itself started getting squeezed. Without dividends from Verizon Wireless, it would soon have run out of cash for its own dividend to shareholders, according to analysts. Verizon spends about $5.5 billion a year on its dividend.

Read the full article →

WATCH: Union Files Complaint Over Hyatt Heat Lamp Incident

July 28, 2011

Unite Here Local 1, a union representing some 170 Park Hyatt Chicago hotel workers who have been without a contract for nearly two years, announced Thursday that they filed a National Labor Relations Board complaint against the Hyatt for turning heat lamps on protesters during a demonstration last Thursday. The complaint alleges that ten heat lamps in the awning above the hotel’s front entrance were turned on the striking workers early during the protest and were left on for about an hour on a day when the city’s heat index topped 100 degrees. The union claimed the Hyatt “assaulted the employees and tried to fry them by shining heat lamps on them in the middle of what was already a hot, humid day” in a statement. “They put the heat lamps on us, like we were nothing,” said one of the striking workers in a statement. “If the heat didn’t kill us, the heat lamps would.” (Scroll down to watch video taken at last Thursday’s Hyatt protest in Chicago.) In response, the Hyatt appears to have filed their own charges against the union — federal labor practice charges ” for unlawful picketing in addition to the existing charges its refusal to negotiate in good faith ,” the Chicago Tribune reports. “If Unite Here leaders were serious about completing these negotiations, they would have accepted our highly competitive offers that would provide Hyatt associates with higher hourly wages, Hyatt-paid family health care coverage and enhanced retirement contributions,” a hotel spokesman said in a statement, according to the Tribune . “Instead, Unite Here continues to prioritize its growth in other markets above the interests of its members in Chicago.” In response to the heat lamp incident, a Hyatt spokeswoman told Huff Post Chicago last week that the hotel had turned off the heat lamps “as soon as the fact came to our attention” and that the hotel offered water and “other relief” to guests and employees gathered in front of the hotel. In an apology the hotel issued late Friday, the hotel said “the decision to turn on the heaters was made by a manager. It was clearly a decision that was not in line with our values or with our corporate policies.” The Park Hyatt Chicago protest last week coincided with protests that took place at Hyatt hotels in nine other cities throughout the country, including a demonstration in San Francisco where 80 people were arrested and another in Cambridge, Mass., where 35 were arrested. The Chicago union previously launched a one-day protest in June against the Hyatt . The union argues that Hyatt housekeepers have been abused and that management has not adequately addressed the workers’ concerns about their high workloads and fears of subcontractors being hired in their place. View more videos at: http://nbcchicago.com .

Read the full article →

Clifford Winston: The U.S. May Need More Lawyers!

July 28, 2011

“The trouble with law is lawyers,” famous civil rights lawyer Clarence Darrow once said of his profession. Lawyers have been derided since the dawn of time, for many reasons. What most people don’t realize is that lawyers have cleverly created many restrictions on their industry’s size and services through their governing organization, the American Bar Association (ABA). Thus, the solution to the “trouble with lawyers” is counter-intuitive: we may need more of them — or, at least, we must spur more competition among them by busting the lawyer monopoly! ABA occupational licensing requirements have allowed lawyers to create a club with a limited membership that is able to raise prices to consumers, which is how top lawyers can get away with charging upwards of $1000 per hour for their time. In addition to licensing rules, the ABA accredits law schools, keeping the number of slots available artificially low. In turn, all but a few states today require would-be lawyers to graduate from those ABA-accredited law schools, and all but one state require would-be lawyers to pass the bar exam. In its natural lawyer-like way, the ABA also uses a very loose interpretation of terms to prevent non-lawyers from selling such services as simple, standard-form wills. It hasn’t always been this way. Abraham Lincoln, who neither attended college or law school, practiced law for nearly 25 years, and he turned out to be a good lawyer and a great president. Clarence Darrow also did not graduate from either college or law school, and he is regarded as one of the greatest criminal defense lawyers in American history. But neither Lincoln nor Darrow, nor countless other great legal minds of the past, would likely be allowed to practice today. While the supply of lawyers has been constrained, the demand for lawyers in the public and private sector has experienced continual growth, thanks in part to government policies that require private firms to retain legal counsel or encourage them to engage in litigation. Many of those policies are drafted and administered by lawyers themselves in Congress and the Executive Branch. For example, environmental standards governing pollution are determined by teams of lawyers in various administrative agencies and by additional private-sector lawyers. The demand for lawyers to write patent applications and to adjudicate the resulting patent conflicts increased dramatically following the establishment in 1982 of a new U.S. Court of Appeals for intellectual property disputes. State laws, such as consumer protection acts, which in practice have greatly expanded the scope of consumer litigation beyond well-established avenues of consumer protection, have also increased the demand for lawyers. And government policy has done little to stem the excessive growth in the past few decades of liability suits, particularly class-action suits that largely benefit lawyers. Clearly this supply and demand mismatch has caused wage distortions. With $200 billion spent on lawyers every year in America, the cost to consumers from those inflated prices is in the tens of billions of dollars. Regulations that impede competition and restrict operations have also curtailed potential innovations in legal products and services, such as publications of legal analyses, contracts, and software codes, which could assist middle-income consumers. One firm, LegalZoom.com, which sells simple legal documents like do-it-yourself wills, uncontested divorce documents, patent applications and the like — documents that should not require pricey lawyers to prepare — has just been accused of illegally practicing law in the state of Missouri in a class-action lawsuit . Do LegalZoom and firms like it represent more of a threat to consumers or lawyers? Let’s open up the legal field. Non-lawyers and LegalZoom-type companies should be allowed to provide simple services, just as physician’s assistants are capable of stitching up a wound so that doctors can focus on more complicated cases. And private corporations that have been prevented from competing with law firms should be allowed to establish their own legal services divisions to offer advice along with, for example, financial and accounting services. The price of a lawyer can indeed be reduced without sacrificing the quality of legal services. The argument that occupational licensing protects consumers from being harmed by unlicensed practitioners is weak during an era where information is so readily disseminated. A lawyer-specific Angie’s List or other places on the internet could easily give consumers information about a practitioner’s track record, level of experience, education, and certification, allowing potential customers to quickly and efficiently determine that individual’s competence. Instead, today’s licensure requirements may create only the perception of quality, thus increasing the demand for credentialed lawyers even in situations where the credential does not add value. The states could lead the way in a lawyer revolution. A few have already had the audacity to rebuff the ABA and have started to make it easier to enter into the legal services industry. If some states formally eliminate the licensure requirement, and if they express their support for all types of businesses to offer legal services, then the potential benefits to consumers of deregulating lawyers would become transparent and eventually spread nationally. Lawyers themselves, the subject of jabs over millennia — from the Bible to Shakespeare to Will Rogers — may even gain from an improved reputation with the public. ### Winston is a Senior Fellow and Crandall a Non-Resident Senior Fellow in the Economic Studies Program of the Brookings Institution. They are co-authors, along with Vikram Maheshri, of the new book First Thing We Do, Let’s Deregulate All the Lawyers (2011, Brookings Press).

Read the full article →

Fed Will Provide Banks With Guidance If Country Defaults

July 28, 2011

(Mark Felsenthal) – The Federal Reserve plans to provide guidance to banks soon on how to handle the potentially turbulent financial waters if the United States exhausts its borrowing authority. “We have been engaged in operational planning with the Treasury,” Fed spokeswoman Barbara Hagenbaugh said on Thursday. “We expect to be able to give additional guidance to financial institutions when there is greater clarity from the Congress and when Treasury outlines its specific operational plans.” The Treasury has said it will not be able to borrow more funds after Tuesday if Congress does not raise the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt ceiling by then, raising the prospect of a government default. Lawmakers on Thursday were still deadlocked over how to move forward. Officials say a debt default would damage both the U.S. and global economy for years to come and would likely provoke a severe financial crisis, but they have been hesitant to discuss contingency planning. “No one in Washington wants to do anything to relieve the pressure on lawmakers to get this done by the deadline,” said Chris Low, chief economist for FTN Financial in New York “If the Fed starts to say we’re going to do things to mitigate the financial repercussions, you’re giving them some leeway you don’t want to give.” Low said a Fed contact had been unable to provide details about what the central bank’s plans are. U.S. officials said on Wednesday that the Treasury would lay out a plan in the next few days about how the government will operate if it appears Congress may miss the August 2 deadline. This would pave the way for the Fed, which acts as the government’s bank, to make its plans clear. “We haven’t heard much from the Fed,” said Ray Stone, an economist at Stone & McCarthy in Princeton, New Jersey. “A default has such severe consequences for the financial markets and the real economy that they have to do something.” Fed officials have acknowledged preparations have been taking place behind the scenes on operational issues to be ready for any financial breakdown. Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank President Charles Plosser told Reuters last week the Fed has been locked in discussions with Treasury about cash management and other technical issues that would arise in the event of a default. The Treasury needs to decide who would get paid if the government runs out of enough cash to meet all its obligations, and analysts expect it would seek to ensure holders of U.S. government debt are first in line. While the Fed would likely step in to provide liquidity if financial markets appeared at risk of seizing up, the guidance for banks is likely to be more mundane. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency said it plans to advise the national banks it regulates that when assessing customer overdrafts, they should consider whether a customer failed to receive a government check due to the debt ceiling impasse. The Fed could be expected to follow suit. However, the central bank would likely face some momentous decisions if a default sparks a crisis. For one, they may need to decide whether to continue to accept Treasury debt as collateral for emergency bank loans if the United States loses its vaunted AAA credit rating. Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker said on Thursday the Fed may need to reevaluate how it values government debt it accepts as collateral, possibly making banks take steeper “haircuts” on the debt. Some analysts have speculated the Fed could step in to keep government checks flowing in the event the Treasury runs out of cash. However, Fed officials have sought to quash that notion. The Fed is the fiscal agent and the depository for the Treasury. It receives bids for Treasury securities sold at auctions, issues the securities and clears government checks. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke told a hearing on July 13 the Fed would do what it could to keep the financial system functioning. However, he said it would not be a financial backstop to help the government pay bills if it cannot borrow. “We would do what we could to preserve the operationality of the system,” Bernanke said. “But I want to eliminate any expectation that the Fed through any mechanism could offset the impact of a default on the government debt.” (Additional reporting by Emily Flitter in New York; Editing by James Dalgleish) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

John Boehner Yanks Debt Ceiling Bill, House Vote Postponed

July 28, 2011

WASHINGTON — House GOP leadership announced abruptly on Thursday evening that they were suspending a vote on Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) debt ceiling proposal, signaling in the process that the GOP lacked the votes to pass the package. The news came just minutes before party leadership was set to hold a 5:30 p.m. vote on the proposal, which would cut roughly $915 billion in spending over the next ten years but only raise the debt ceiling through the end of the calendar year. Congressional aides were scrambling to figure out just when the vote would be rescheduled for — the House for now will consider eight smaller measures first — but a spokesman for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said that a vote on Boehner’s proposal would still take place on Thursday night. Whether that is enough time for the Speaker to convince a few more Republicans to support him is unclear. Informal whip counts had 25 Republicans and the full Democratic caucus opposing the measure, which would put it short of the 216 votes needed for passage. The bill’s delay, and the continued unlikelihood of its passage, gave Democrats yet another hook to argue that the entire enterprise was fruitless. As one aide emailed, with respect to Boehner’s bill: “we’re wasting precious time so he can twist more arms for a bill that is dead [in the Senate].”

Read the full article →

Jeff Gitterman: Financial Advisors and the Recession

July 28, 2011

In the wake of the recession, people are finding financial advisors, especially good ones who have really deep relationships with their clients, more necessary than ever. Many advisors are greatly weighed down by their own internal panic about what happened and therefore have very little capacity to deal with their clients’ fears and concerns. This crisis has called on all of us to re-evaluate our lives. I think it’s starting to become clearer to all of us that the endless accumulation of material wealth is not a sustainable way to live. We need to refocus our values and beliefs on things that are ultimately much more satisfying and attainable. We need to focus on what we can do and give to the world rather than what we can just take from it. My own understanding of the power of giving came about many years ago, when I was going through a personal “recession” of my own. Back in 1997, I was just starting out as a financial advisor, trying to support a wife and two kids on less than $20,000 a year, falling months behind with the mortgage payments, scared and unsure of my future. I hid my car every night in a different part of the neighborhood because the finance company told me they were coming to repossess it. The debt collectors were calling every day. I had credit card debt, mortgage debt, car loans. Things looked pretty bleak. One day, I was getting out of my car and about to walk into a prospect’s house to try and sell a term life policy. I was way behind on my bills, and my mind was going on and on about how much I needed the sale. Desperation poured out of me as I caught my reflection in the car window. I stopped, looked hard at that reflection and said to myself, “Who would want to buy anything from you? Look at how desperate you look!” I decided in that moment that I needed to drop my desperate, needy attitude and walk into this prospect’s house with the confidence of someone who didn’t want anything. I took one last look at my reflection and saw that I had taken on an air of serenity, and that’s when I began to realize that I really didn’t need anything, that deep down there was nothing for me to get. I dropped my need to make a sale. I became still and quiet. I soon began to approach more of my clients this way, putting all my attention on them, without any desire or expectation for myself personally. And to my amazement, my meetings really started to transform and my success as a financial advisor grew exponentially. Although it sounds like a bit of a cliché, I was able to see firsthand as I was going through my own crisis around wealth and success that the more I gave to others; the more I received in return. In turn, I quickly began accomplishing more in the world and my income grew substantially. In the wake of this most recent recession, it’s going to be very difficult for advisors who do not have the complete trust of their clients to continue to make smart decisions, and many have and will continue to lose business. My number one piece of advice is this: under any and all circumstances, be honest. It’s critical that we maintain a very open and honest relationship with our clients, as the worst thing any of us could do would be to mislead them right now. I believe that now is the time for extra special service. We need to be calling our clients before they call us. We need to be out there in front. We need to show our clients that we’re confident in the direction we’re moving. Any lack of confidence in our own ability to navigate the current investment climate is going to make it really difficult for them to follow us. Too many of us spend our lives waiting to get something from the world so that we can show up as the person we always knew we could be. Deep in our hearts we think there’s something missing. But when we flip that mindset, we can discover that by becoming a giver rather than a taker, we can become agents for change in the world. In the end, it was only through giving to others that I was able to find the kind of happiness that I was really looking for. Partly adapted from Beyond Success: Redefining the Meaning of Prosperity © 2009 Jeffrey L. Gitterman. All rights reserved. Published by AMACOM Books www.amacombooks.org. A Division of the American Management Association for The Business Leaders Book Club, Lessons Learned from The Recession www.thebusinessleadersbookclub.com

Read the full article →

10 Things That Are Getting Cheaper

July 28, 2011

We live in a time when the costs of things like gas and gold have soared, just as a laundry list of everyday expenses such as coffee, rent, health care, used cars, and bacon are approaching or have already reached all-time high prices. But not everything’s getting more expensive. Here are 10 things that are actually getting cheaper.

Read the full article →

WATCH: The Wood-Powered Car That Runs On Any Organic Material

July 28, 2011

We’re all aware that, if we don’t shift to more renewable sources of energy, we’ll eventually deplete the reserves of fossil fuels that power our vehicles today. If only there was a car that could run on any organic material…and took its name from an adorable semiaquatic North American mammal.

Read the full article →

Carl Pope: Could We Lose the Auto Industry Again?

July 28, 2011

Detroit — With GM and Chrysler seemingly bouncing back from their bankruptcies, and the federal government largely repaying its loans, losing the auto industry may seem unlikely — and it still is, but it is no longer impossible. First, the conventional wisdom that the auto industry would make major sales gains from a conventional recovery in 2011 has been smashed by the failure of the recovery to follow a conventional path. Both Chrysler and Ford reported soft results and declining profits for the second quarter . GM didn’t report. These reports came just as the Big 3 entered contract negotiations with the United Auto Workers ; the union had been hoping to recover some of the lost jobs and wages that workers surrendered when Chrysler and GM were going into bankruptcy, but that calculus becomes more complicated if sales slow further because of the depressed, jobless economy. The American companies have been hiring new workers at very low wages, arguing that this is necessary to enable them to make profits on small cars . But Detroit’s recovery to date has in fact been based its new success in marketing small cars . And the reason it is forced to use such low wages in small car plants has little to do with the economics of making those cars — it is driven by the continued burden American manufacturers face from the way in which pensions and health care are financed in the U.S. by employers, not the government. The current approach taken in the budget and deficit discussions — shrink the government’s role still further — is going to be lethal not only to autos, but to all heavy U.S. manufacturing, particularly legacy companies in industries like steel, autos, and other rust-belt specialties. You have to wonder if the U.S. auto companies can continue to make better small cars while being forced to pay lower wages. The economics do not seem terrific. And the companies are quickly slipping back into their old assumption that they must profit by having the ability to sell large, inefficient, and outmoded vehicles at the top of the market — trucks and SUVs. They fought vigorously to prevent the Obama Administration from establishing new emission and fuel economy standards that would help get the U.S. off its addiction to foreign oil. Today the Administration announced a proposal that is going to keep the pressure on the industry to keep innovating, move to electric vehicles, and cut emissions and fuel use. While short of the 60mpg standard that was feasible and that environmentalists favored at 54.5mpg by 2025, it’s still a strong standard and ensures ongoing progress. It will cut about 1 million barrels a day off of current U.S. oil consumption. But the auto industry negotiated for and received special treatment for what they call “work trucks,” arguing that these cannot be electrified and are harder to make lighter in weight than cars. (True.) The danger, however, is that the auto industry may choose to exploit this loophole once again, to make vehicles that are really intended for family and passenger use, not genuine work vehicles. This would result in a larger proportion of the fleet being sold with poor fuel economy because of the opportunity for Detroit to once again game the fuel economy rules. So while the Obama Administration deserves a great deal of credit for both rescuing the U.S. auto industry and keeping pressure on it to innovate and move forward, and while the UAW is sending very strong signals that they think such innovation is a key to the survival of the U.S. manufacturers, there are alarming signals coming out of Detroit that the industry is tempted to bet on low oil prices and heavy, outmoded clunkers. Let’s hope they resist the temptation, and that Obama makes such resistance easier by writing tough rules that limit the ability of Detroit to game the new standards.

Read the full article →

Sarwar Kashmeri: The European Union’s Fort Sumter Moment

July 28, 2011

In 1776, the founding fathers of the United States made a grand bargain to ensure the birth of a new republic. They agreed to sideline the new country’s black population, even though the Constitution they were about to endorse proclaimed that all men are created equal. This compromise ensured approval of the constitution and the emergence of the United States, but it also left unresolved the existential issue of racial equality which would eventually light a fuse that would explode at Fort Sumter and launch the American civil war. Likewise, the architects of the European Union launched their single currency, the euro, with a grand bargain — currency union without a matching fiscal union. The first ever single currency zone in which monetary policy would be centrally controlled by a European Central Bank, but fiscal policies — prudent matching of revenue and expenses, budgetary responsibility with central oversight, and the ability to intervene if a euro-zone country ran into trouble — were left out of the euro equation. That bargain too left a festering sore — a half-baked single currency — and ensured a day of reckoning. Now, with the economic collapse of Greece, that day of reckoning has arrived. The EU stands at the brink of its Fort Sumter moment. The problems of Greece are truly Olympian. The gentleman’s agreement that underpins the euro requires euro-zone countries to keep their budget deficits to under 3% of their GDP. Greece’s stands at 150%. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Tax collection systems are virtually non-existent, its infrastructure is in shambles and the unemployment for Greeks under 25 is a staggering 43%. The country’s economic growth is moving backwards. Its productivity is among the worst in Europe, so its products are uncompetitive, and it is incapable of paying its huge debt or growing out of its present situation. Putting it bluntly, just lending Greece money will not accomplish much. Unless the markets sense a collective EU will to stand behind it, Greece is on track to become the European Union’s first failed state. Greece doesn’t just need loans, it needs help in re-building its infrastructure, in creating jobs, it needs governmental guidance, budgetary and tax oversight. It needs a prolonged period of expensive hand-holding. Greece needs to become a ward of the euro-zone whose members must collectively nurse the patient back to health by setting up European Union level organizations not just to prescribe the medicine, but ensure that it is taken. And that is the crux of the matter. The European Union’s currency union did not envisage using the wealth of well to do parts of the euro-zone to bail out a failing euro-economy. There is only one alternative for the EU, if it wishes to save the euro — a progressively deeper fiscal union. The EU’s success is directly related to the willingness of its member countries’ to give up pieces of their sovereignty for the common European good. 17 EU countries gave up their national currencies to establish the euro. Now it is time for them to finish the job with a fiscal union. The other alternative is to continue to transfer money from richer euro countries’ taxpayers to Greece through loans with little chance of being repaid. And then stand ready to do the same for the other countries such as Portugal, Spain, and Italy, that may soon be on the EU dole. I do not believe European taxpayers from wealthy, largely northern countries will allow this to happen. When they put on the brakes it will mean the end of the euro. And what then? The EU is the product of treaties between sovereign countries. It is not a Federal Republic like the United States was at the time of Fort Sumter. President Lincoln could rally the North with all its industrial might to help preserve the Union. A European Fort Sumter would see the EU melt away like ice on a summer’s day. The EU is arguably the most important geopolitical development of our time. The breakup of the EU would be a disaster for Europe, and for the world. Let’s hope the EU’s leaders use their August recess to think about Fort Sumter, and come back determined to continue on their path of an ever closer European Union.

Read the full article →

April Rudin: Facebook’s Value? — Is It a Bubble Which Might Mean Trouble?

July 28, 2011

Ahead of filing its IPO, Facebook is feeling the pressure of its valuation. What are the underlying assets that Facebook has gathered? You can’t touch or see the assets. In this case, its “booty” is at least 650 million email addresses and a zillion other data points of personal information on likes, buying patterns, etc., all of which hold intellectual insight into the consumer’s mind. Since the Facebook public offering will mostly likely take place in the first quarter of 2012, there is still much time for lively conversation. Although this was expected, it was also speculated that Goldman Sachs had set-up a “special purpose vehicle” to keep Facebook under the 500 shareholder mark thereby avoiding the SEC “500 Rule.” Word on the street is that the value could top $100 billion. Can that be “real?” And, what does it mean for other social media sites going public? Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook’s meteoric rise and impending IPO is a real-life Cinderella story. Mark Zuckerberg was a literal “ugly duckling,” who became a swan. Just like Bill Gates a generation prior, Zuckerberg has proven that being a nerd is ‘cool.’ Beyond Gates, he is movie star material, having his early life memorialized and romanticized in the popular film, The Social Network . Apropos, one my favorite Bill Gates’s quotes: “Be nice to nerds, you might work for one someday.” But, if this story seems a bit familiar, you may be right. The 1990s on Wall Street was known as the dot-com bubble era. It was the infancy of the Internet in which new “apps or websites” were so groundbreaking that each spurred investment bankers to put together a public offering and attempt to value companies for their future value. Like a bubble, countless start-ups grew exponentially and burst just as quickly, leaving many companies (and their investors) financially damaged. Clearly, there was no agreement on the valuation of Internet firms as they were unlike firms that investment bankers were used to valuing: they had no tangible assets. These Internet firms had no brick and mortar buildings, nor warehouses filled with inventory. How to value a website/social network? Plenty of discussion ensued. Facebook as a social media platform has proven its value as by becoming successful at defining and carving a new online playground/business model called social networking. New, modern and more esoteric assets are almost impossible to value as intellectual property grows. As often happens with me, all of the talk about Facebook’s value and IPO reminded me of a story from 2006. Instead of Mark Zuckerberg, think of Dany Levy — hardly a nerd, more like your “BFF.” Her brainchild was named DailyCandy — a daily email sent by Dany. Daily Candy was most accurately described by Michael Idov in his New York magazine article in April of 2006, “How Sweet Is It?” He said DailyCandy’s daily emails “[were] Written in a cliquish chick-lit chirp, the dispatches appear(ed) to come from a gossipy, mysteriously connected friend somewhere (in NYC).” While a much smaller scale, DailyCandy paved the way for creating value for these types of “warehouse-less” firms. By her own admission, Dany Levy’s “rickety business plan” was written on two pages of paper in 2000. By 2003, Bob Pittman and the Pilot Group bought a controlling interest in Daily Candy for $3 million, leading to DailyCandy’s eventual sale for to Comcast in 2008 for $125 million. What was the value of DailyCandy predicated on? Its subscriber list which was the key to crowd-sourcing the buying power of young women. The “typical” DailyCandy [reader] was somewhere between 24 and 35, loved her city (at one time 12 city-specific editions), loved going out, shopping and being in the know. Comcast paid $125 million for this email list! Similarly, in valuing Facebook, one of its most valuable assets is its robust collection of over 650 million email addresses and assorted other pieces of personal information. This is information that can be curated, culled and counted for its valuable market data. Facebook (like DailyCandy) has the bulk of its value of underlying assets in the form of email lists and insight into the consumer mind. The same valuation principles that applied to Daily Candy apply to Facebook. They are collectors of information from over 650 million active users. They have troves of data, research etc. Additionally, they maintain market leadership and dominance (underlying assets) in creating a new social relationship/business model online. Facebook has its place in social networking history as the first and most widely used platform as currently being the most popular social network in the world. It’s given way to social culture behaviors and terminology like “liking” something, and “Facebooking” as a verb. These elements must be “counted” in measuring the value of Facebook. Its influence and impact on our culture and this generation of teenagers is immense in both positive connective fashion, as well as being used negatively as a cyber-bullying platform (its downside). Almost unquestionably, this is the top-line value to Facebook: an outlier which was novel, timely, social and authentic that allowed like-minded people to congregate around topics of interest. The unintended output of this social network was an asset base of email addresses and personal information unlike any other before it. Next, will be anyone’s guess but Google + is a contender! FB’ers virally began peer networking groups around such diverse interests as: high school and college groups, interests in consumer brands (example: Coca-Cola) health issues (gluten-free) and millions more. As a result, crowd-sourcing was born. These crowds influenced brands by providing feedback, creating communication between brands and their consumers which was measurable. Liking a brand and asking others to group with you on Facebook was the precursor of another evolved crowd-sourcing concept called Groupon. Groupon jumped into crowdsourcing in its early stages and used the aggregated numbers to gain buying power with brands hyper-locally. Groupon has garnered its own assets in email addresses and associated buying patterns. As recently as June 2 of this year, Groupon was valued at $30 billion in its own quest for an IPO. So what is Facebook’s value? Let’s take a look at the value of its asset: email addresses and other personal information. For Facebook, they have millions of active users who have used their site even occasionally. Additionally, it’s a slightly older and more loyal demographic than some of the latest social networking platforms. Adding to FB’s value is the ability to segregate users into groups thereby creating smaller parts with focused hyper-locality and thus greater value proposition to marketers. They have global data and can also look at retrospective trending. “Facebook is still growing towards 700 million users, having reached 687 million monthly actives by the start of June,” said Eric Eldon of Inside Facebook, a research and marketing group, in a report about the world’s most popular social network’s Web traffic. “Most of the new users continue to come from countries that are relatively late in adopting Facebook, as has been the trend for the past year,” Eldon said. “But overall growth has been lower than normal for the second month straight, which is unusual.” The social media giant gained 11.8 million new users worldwide in May, down from 13.9 million new accounts in April, Eldon said. Previous to those two months, Facebook had grown by an average of 20 million new users a month for the last 12 months, he said. So what is Facebook really worth? Obviously, no one has a real answer but the market will demonstrate its value shortly. Ahead of the that, the following points need to be considered: 1. Facebook’s valuable asset of email addresses and personal information, 2. Facebook’s far-reaching and global cultural impact, and 3. Facebook’s room for growth after partnering with Skype for video chats among friends and the impending addition of Netflix accounts to the Facebook platform, among other improvements Facebook is making. They know that they must constantly evolve and add features especially given the apparent early adoption numbers which Google + has achieved. For me, I became an early adopter to Facebook to keep a watchful eye on my teenage sons. They are my “friends” and they must “Like” me! I confess that I enjoyed reconnecting with people from my past but the truth is its a passing fancy and I don’t have the time to keep up with them every day! And as a business tool, its not huge on my radar screen of competing social media outlets and the time required to create visibility around my wealth marketing practice. However, under pressure, I did create a business Facebook page. Just to create a placeholder, I did it. For others, Facebook remains an important platform to reach millions easily. What might the future hold? It is certain to happen where social media becomes a more integrated function in our lives and less of cumbersome tool which requires “work” to keep up-to-date.

Read the full article →

Washington Federal Announces Appointment of Liane Pelletier to Its Board of Directors

July 28, 2011

SEATTLE, WA–(Marketwire – Jul 28, 2011) – Washington Federal, Inc. ( NASDAQ : WFSL ), today announced the appointment of Liane Pelletier to its board of directors. Pelletier most recently served eight years as CEO, President and Chairman of Alaska Communications ( NASDAQ : ALSK ), a telecommunications firm headquartered in Anchorage from which she retired in April 2011. Prior professional experience includes 17 years with Sprint Corporation where her last position was Chief Strategy Officer. She earned a BA in Economics from Wellesley College, and an MS in Management from the Sloan School at M.I.T. Pelletier currently serves on the board of directors of Icicle Seafoods, Inc. and as a Trustee at the Nature Conservancy.

Read the full article →

MRC Board Election Results

July 28, 2011

SEATTLE, WA–(Marketwire – Jul 28, 2011) – The Merchant Risk Council (MRC), a global, merchant-led trade association focused on e-Commerce payments, security and risk, has announced the results of its 2011 Global Board of Directors and Advisory Board elections.

Read the full article →

Marty Zwilling: Google Executives Are Exceptions Worth Emulating

July 28, 2011

I tell entrepreneurs that Google was an “exception” to all the investment and startup rules, but I’ve always wondered what it takes to be an exception. Since every business is built by unique individuals, I’m totally convinced that exceptional people are the key to an exceptional company. To check out the Google founders, and because I still see so many business plans that are modeled after Google (more search engines, and more billion dollar growth models), I had to take a look at the definitive book about them, called ” Inside Larry & Sergey’s Brain ,” by Richard L. Brandt. It didn’t disappoint me. This book was not sanctioned by Larry Page and Sergey Brin , so it’s not a love story. All the controversy is highlighted, but the message still seems to be that these guys were and are exceptional in their efforts to build a company. Here are some lessons from the book that all entrepreneurs should wish they could emulate: Independently outstanding, but complementary founders. Larry is the primary thinker about the company’s future direction, and weighs in heavily on key hiring decisions. Sergey, a mathematical wizard, is the arbiter of Google’s technological approach. Both have a deep sense of moral values and ethics, and work well together. Unique business tactics. Technology alone does not make a great company. Business tactics do. Google developed the most profitable form of advertising anyone had ever seen, ads selected real-time based on search terms. They focused on small advertisers looking for bargains. The model was a perfect fit for the Internet Age. Survived phenomenal growth. In 2003, just four years old, sales hit $1.5 billion, profit was $100 million, and it had taken over some 80 percent of the world’s search queries. Google now employs about twenty thousand people. Most founders don’t survive this kind of growth and change, but Larry and Sergey are still a well-balanced machine. Loved and hated at the same time. Larry and Sergey have been wickedly clever. They break the mold. They challenge old industries and make a lot of enemies. They’re ruthless businessmen. Yet through it all, they’re idealists, believers in the power of the Internet to make the world a better place. Surround themselves with the best people. Early on, they were able to get money from the likes of Andy Bechtolsheim and John Doerr . They convinced Eric Schmidt to take the reins with them for growth as CEO and now Executive Chairman, and had Dr. Larry Brilliant for the philanthropic arm for several years. Amazing. Continue to think big. According to the book, both founders continue to think big. Some of their ideas are as flighty as space travel; others are as grounded as the DNA that makes them who they are. No one proclaims to know where its leaders will take Google next, but everyone expects more great things. Even the pros should probably pay attention here, to sharpen their game and to improve the accuracy of their assessments about people in general, as well as Google’s motivations and intentions. I think Larry and Sergey have shown a relentless focus on innovation that puts them miles ahead of competitors on all fronts. I challenge each of you, as you reflect on your own vision and entrepreneurial plans, to take a lesson from Larry and Sergey. Do you have the intestinal fortitude to walk away rather than be “corrupted by financial interests,” or to ignore conventional wisdom and follow your own instincts? If so, then you too may be the exception that even the best and the brightest will line up to support. This world needs more exceptional people. Act like one and you too may beat the odds.

Read the full article →

American Children Receiving Less Money From Tooth Fairy: Report

July 28, 2011

It looks like American businesses aren’t the only ones hoarding cash these days. According to a survey recently released by Visa , so is the fabled Tooth Fairy. Last year, children who left teeth under their pillow received an average of $3 per tooth, according to the report. This year, in comparison, that amount plunged to $2.60. The total number of kids getting swindled by the winged home invader has also drastically increased. This year, 5 in 50 received no compensation for their missing teeth. Compare that to last year, when only 2 in 50 were passed over. The Tooth Fairy also seems to handing out varying amounts according to region. The further west one goes, the higher the rate of return kids are receiving for their dentures, with Northeast kids getting, on average, $2.10 a tooth, while their West and Midwestern counterparts are receiving $2.80. Melissa Hourigan of Denver didn’t know what to do for her 9-year-old when the Tooth Fairy failed to show, the Denver Post reports . Instead, she and her husband purchased a target card for their daughter “because we felt bad and wanted to do something,” Hourigan said. The below video shows how some parents justify ripping off their kids:

Read the full article →

Who Put Them In Charge?

July 28, 2011

WASHINGTON — The chances that credit-ratings agencies will downgrade U.S. debt have been exaggerated, a senior analyst for an investment bank wrote in a research note Thursday. Ratings giant Standard & Poor’s has threatened to lower the U.S.’s AAA bond rating not only if Congress fails to increase the debt ceiling, but also if an agreement on a substantial and credible deficit-reduction deal isn’t reached. Moody’s has similarly warned of a possible downgrade. S&P has repeatedly said the deal needs to reduce the deficit by about $4 trillion over the next decade. That’s not only an enormous amount, it’s also considerably more than either of the major debt-and-deficit plans currently in contention could achieve. But Brian Gardner of boutique investment bank Keefe, Bruyette and Woods wrote on Thursday that as long as the debt ceiling is raised and there are “enforceable cuts” like a cap on spending, the agencies won’t go through with a downgrade. “While many think a downgrade of US debt is likely, we take a more sanguine view,” he wrote. The idea that the agencies’ threats could be empty ones is just the latest of many criticisms over their intervention into domestic politics. By warning of a possible downgrade, S&P and Moody’s have played a major role in transforming the manufactured political crisis over raising the nation’s debt ceiling into a full-blown debate about the deficit and austerity. Those actions go well beyond the agencies’ traditional purview, which is to rate the chance that a creditor, in this case the United States, won’t have the ability to pay back its debts. When pressed, agency officials insist their rating threat has nothing to do with politics, just risk. “The long-range issue is stabilizing the debt,” Standard & Poor’s spokesman John Piecuch told The Huffington Post on Tuesday. S&P president Deven Sharma reaffirmed at a House Financial Services subcommittee hearing on Wednesday that a $4 trillion dollar deal on deficit reduction would bring the nation’s debt threshold to “within the range” to avoid a downgrade. Rep. Francisco Canseco (R-Texas) posed the most fundamental question, asking Sharma: “Do you honestly believe that the U.S. could default on the debt?” “Our analysts don’t believe they would,” Sharma replied. Changing the rating “means that the risk levels have gone up, it doesn’t mean they’re going to default,” he said. Should the GOP temporarily balk at raising the debt ceiling, the possibility of a significant and dangerous default hiccup becomes more likely. But the idea that the U.S. government would actually refuse or be unable to pay back its debt is the stuff of conspiracy theories. With no risk of actual default, the rating agencies have no business inserting themselves into this debate, said Dean Baker, co-director of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research. “I think it’s really been outrageous,” he said. “Where the hell does that come from? It’s just their politics.” In June, Moody’s warned that the lack of a “credible agreement on substantial deficit reduction” could prompt a change in its outlook on the U.S. credit rating. Back in April, S&P declared that there was “at least a one-in-three likelihood that we could lower our long-term rating on the U.S. within two years” based on “the increased risk that the political negotiations over when and how to address both the medium- and long-term fiscal challenges will persist until at least after national elections in 2012.” Then on July 14, the company dramatically lowered the odds and moved up the timeline , declaring that “owing to the dynamics of the political debate on the debt ceiling, there is at least a one-in-two likelihood that we could lower the long-term rating on the U.S. within the next 90 days.” It threatened to lower the long-term rating on the U.S. “by one or more notches into the ‘AA’ category.” A few days later, the urgency was ratcheted up yet again . Without a grand bargain in the neighborhood of a $4 trillion deficit reduction, S&P said it “might lower the U.S. sovereign rating to ‘AA+/A-1+’ with a negative outlook within three months and as soon as early August.” Some observers of the economic scene were outraged by the agencies’ threats. Jared Bernstein, a former top White House economic adviser, wrote in a blog post : Lemme get this straight: if these credit raters, whose razor-sharp assessments graded toxic mortgage-backed securities as triple-A, don’t think the deficit-reduction plan goes far enough, they’re going to take us down a notch!? That’s nuts. Even amidst the turmoil of the last few months, markets are still treating US debt as the safest investment out there. And the debt ceiling is a totally manufactured crisis. Once we get it behind us, no one should have any doubt that the US will back its obligations as reliably as it has for hundreds of years. David Dayen wrote on the progressive Firedoglake blog : “The rating agencies, which played a major role in the financial meltdown, ha[ve] just up and put a gun to the head of the country and demanded austerity in the middle of a jobs crisis. Are you kidding me?” And former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich wrote on Wednesday: “With Republicans in the majority in the House, there’s no way to lop $4 trillion of the budget without harming Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, as well as education, Pell grants, healthcare, highways and bridges, and everything else the middle class and poor rely on.” As Bernstein noted, just four years ago, the nation’s big ratings agencies were giving AAA ratings to toxic mortgage-backed securities to keep their Wall Street clients happy. An April report from the Senate’s permanent subcommittee on investigations determined that Moody’s and S&P set off the financial collapse when they were forced to downgrade the ratings they had knowingly inflated. Over 90 percent of the securities backed by subprime mortgages that got AAA ratings were eventually downgraded to junk status. Despite all the dire predictions about deficits, there has been no sign of a potential loss of demand for U.S. debt — until now. Longterm Treasury bills continue to be snapped up by buyers around the globe though they only pay 3 percent or less in interest . Their resilience, in fact, has been a powerful argument against austerity and deficit reduction: With interest rates so low, the argument goes, now looks like a great time to borrow and stimulate demand, create jobs and grow the economy. By contrast, abruptly lowering the U.S.’s credit rating would likely create a sell-off and drive interest rates up — while at the same time doing incalculable damage not just to the U.S. government but to a global financial system that uses U.S. Treasuries to establish a benchmark for no-risk investments. Although the ratings agencies’ assertiveness paints both political parties into a corner, neither Democrats nor Republicans are pushing back. Instead, they have been using the threat of a downgrade to bolster their arguments in favor of their preferred debt plans and to beat up their opponents. On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) bragged that the “rating agencies have said as late as last night that the plan I have introduced will not cause a downgrading of our credit.” The smaller plan offered by House Speaker John Boehner, by contrast, “gives the credit agencies no choice but to downgrade U.S. debt,” Reid said. Baker, the liberal economist, said many Washington politicians aren’t even upset by the ratings agencies pronouncement — far from it. “From the point of view of Republicans and much of the Democratic leadership, they’re delighted,” Baker said. “This gives them more leverage in saying we have to do things that are incredibly unpopular, such as cutting Medicare and Social Security.” The downgrade threats do hamstring some progressives, however, who are worried that disputing the authority of the ratings agencies will look like arguing with the umpire, Baker said. “But these guys aren’t the umpire,” he said. “They’re on the make. We know. We just saw it.”

Read the full article →

NuVasive Announces Appointment of Peter Leddy, Ph.D., to the NuVasive Board of Directors

July 28, 2011

SAN DIEGO, CA–(Marketwire – Jul 28, 2011) – NuVasive, Inc. ( NASDAQ : NUVA ), a medical device company focused on developing minimally disruptive surgical products and procedures for the spine, announced today that Peter Leddy, Ph.D., has been named to the NuVasive Board of Directors. Leddy is Senior Vice President of Global Human Resources at Life Technologies Corp.

Read the full article →

The Medicines Company Appoints Glenn P. Sblendorio to Board of Directors

July 28, 2011

PARSIPPANY, NJ–(Marketwire – Jul 28, 2011) – The Medicines Company ( NASDAQ : MDCO ) today announced the appointment of Glenn Sblendorio to the Company’s Board of Directors. Mr. Sblendorio has been Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President of The Medicines Company since 2006.

Read the full article →

David Isenberg: Trust But, Incompetently, Verify

July 28, 2011

In August 2009, the Pentagon awarded five Theater-wide Internal Security Services (TWISS) contracts for site security in Iraq. These contracts, awarded to EOD Technology, Inc.; Torres Advanced Enterprise Solutions, LLC; Special Operations Consulting-Security Management Group; Triple Canopy, Inc.; and Protection Strategies Inc., have a combined value of $485 million. U.S base commanders nominate contracting officer’s representatives (CORs), who are responsible for verifying the U.S. government receives what it pays for. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) appoints and trains CORs and manages their activities. DCMA uses Quality Assurance Representatives (QARs) to monitor the CORs’ and contractors’ performance. Yet although COR duties are critical to the U.S. government’s oversight of the TWISS contracts, almost 40% of the CORs it surveyed said the training they received did not prepare them for their duties and 25% said they lack sufficient time to conduct effective oversight, according to an audit report ” Control Weaknesses Remain in Oversight of Theater-wide Internal Security Services Contracts ,” released today by the Office of the Special Inspector General For Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR). Why is this important? Without adequate training, CORs may not be conducting sufficient oversight of the TWISS contractors’ services and invoice payments. This training is particularly important since 24 of 28 CORs we surveyed stated they had no previous COR experience. Considering that as of June 9, 2011, more than half the total value of these TWISS contacts, about $258 million had been disbursed under the contracts this is, to put it mildly, not good news. This is similar to what SIGIR found the last time it looked at the TWISS contracts in 2009. After that report, DCMA increased training requirements but recognized in an April 2011 internal review that not all training was being conducted and documented. To get a sense of how nothing has changed note that in April 2009, SIGIR reported that 11 of 27 CORs surveyed stated their COR training did not fully prepare them to oversee the TWISS contractors. In the new audit 11 of 28 CORs SIGIR surveyed stated their training did not prepare them to perform COR duties on the TWISS contracts. SIGIR also found that CORs are not completing, or DCMA is not maintaining, all monthly review checklists, which DCMA developed to help CORs review contractor compliance with task order requirements. Even when completed, SIGIR noted most reviews appeared to be of questionable value or provided little assurance that CORs’ oversight was adequate, a fact DCMA officials acknowledge. As irony goes, this is hard to beat. In plain English it means DCMA, the agency which is charged with providing proper oversight on military contracts, is itself guilty of not providing proper guidance to its own employees, thus impeding them from doing an effective job. Furthermore, even if DCMA did provide proper guidance some of the CORs are not particularly good at their jobs. According to DCMA officials, some TWISS CORs provide excellent oversight and others provide weak oversight. To verify this statement, SIGIR examined the 81 COR Performance Work Statement reviews available from February through April 2011. SIGIR’s examination noted that five appeared comprehensive in nature, 21 appeared adequate, and the remaining 55 appeared of questionable value.12 In the auditors’ judgment, reviews of “questionable value” provided no reasonable assurance the COR’s oversight was sufficient to guarantee the U.S. government received all services for which it paid.

Read the full article →

Robert Reich: Don’t Fall for the GOP Lie: There Is No Budget Crisis — There’s a Job and Growth Crisis

July 28, 2011

A friend who’s been watching the absurd machinations in Congress asked me “what happens if we don’t solve the budget crisis and we run out of money to pay the nation’s bills?” It was only then I realized how effective Republicans lies have been. That we’re calling it a “budget crisis” and worrying that if we don’t “solve” it we can’t pay our nation’s bills is testament to how successful Republicans have been distorting the truth. The federal budget deficit has no economic relationship to the debt limit. Republicans have linked the two, and the Administration has played along, but they are entirely separate. Republicans are using what would otherwise be a routine, legally technical vote to raise the debt limit as a means of holding the nation hostage to their own political goal of shrinking the size of the federal government. In economic terms, we will not “run out of money” next week. We’re still the richest nation in the world, and the Federal Reserve has unlimited capacity to print money. Nor is there any economic imperative economic to reach an agreement on how to fix the budget deficit by Tuesday. It’s not even clear the federal budget needs that much fixing anyway. Yes, the ratio of the national debt to the total economy is high relative to what it’s been. But it’s not nearly as high as it was after World War II — when it reached 120 percent of the economy’s total output. If and when the economy begins to grow faster – if more Americans get jobs, and we move toward a full recovery — the debt/GDP ratio will fall, as it did in the 1950s, and as it does in every solid recovery. Revenues will pour into the Treasury, and much of the current “budget crisis” will be evaporate. Get it? We’re really in a “jobs and growth” crisis – not a budget crisis. And the best way to get jobs and growth back is for the federal government to spend more right now, not less — for example, by exempting the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes this year and next, recreating a WPA and Civilian Conservation Corps, creating an infrastructure bank, providing tax incentives for small businesses to hire, expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit, and so on. But what happens next week if Congress can’t or won’t deliver the president a bill to raise the debt ceiling? Remember: This is all politics, mixed in with legal technicalities. Economics has nothing to do with it. One possibility, therefore, is for the Treasury to keep paying the nation’s bills regardless. It would continue to issue Treasury bills, which are our nation’s IOUs. When those IOUs are cashed at the Federal Reserve Board, the Fed would do what it has always done: It honors them. How long could this go on without the debt ceiling being lifted? That’s a legal question. Republicans in Congress could mount a legal challenge, but no court in its right mind would stop the Fed from honoring the full faith and credit of the United States. The wild card is what the three big credit-rating agencies will do. As long as the Fed keeps honoring the nation’s IOUs, America’s credit should be deemed sound. We’re not Greece or Portugal, after all. We’ll still be the richest nation in the world, whose currency is the basis for most business transactions in the world. Standard & Poor’s has warned it will downgrade the nation’s debt from a triple-A to a double-A rating if we don’t tend to the long-term deficit. But, as I’ve noted, S&P has no business meddling in American politics — especially since its own non-feasance was partly responsible for the current size of the federal debt (had it done its job the debt and housing bubbles wouldn’t have precipitated the terrible recession, and the federal outlays it required). As long as we pay our debts on time, our global creditors should be satisfied. And if they’re satisfied, S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch should be, too. Repeat after me: The federal deficit is not the nation’s biggest problem. The anemic recovery, huge unemployment, falling wages, and declining home prices are bigger problems. We don’t have a budget crisis. We have a jobs and growth crisis. The GOP has manufactured a budget crisis out of the Republicans’ extortionate demands over raising the debt limit. They have succeeded in hoodwinking the public, including my friend. Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America’s Future , now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org .

Read the full article →

Standard & Poor’s removes Bahrain’s bni ratings

July 28, 2011

(MENAFN) Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services said that since Bahrain National Insurance Company’s (bni) ratings were negative since February, the agency removed the insurer’s financial ratings from …

Read the full article →

Richard Zombeck: Mass AG Martha Coakley will not Join in Giving MERS and Banks a Deal

July 28, 2011

There are some rumblings that the Department of Justice is putting the pressure on state attorneys general to sign onto the controversial $20 billion mortgage settlement deal this week that could release banks from legal claims in state investigations and law suits. Monday, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley joined a handful of dissenters in announcing that she will oppose the inclusion of the issues surrounding MERS in any deal. MERS ( Mortgage Electronic Registration System ) as pointed out by Abigail Field in a recent post on Reality Check: … was set up thoughtlessly, without regard to its basic legality, and designed with only two objectives: lowering the mortgage industry’s costs and maximizing its convenience. As a result, MERS has none of the advantages of the centuries-old system it was intend to replace, and largely has. MERS is not accurate, not transparent, and not accountable to the public. To let MERS continue simply allows it to continue wreaking havoc on property records and the legal morass it’s created to continue tangling foreclosure and bankruptcy cases nationwide. Homeowner advocates and activists have long argued that mortgages transferred via the MERS system but not recorded with local registries of deeds are invalid and that land titles on thousands of homes are “clouded”. Homeowners with clouded titles could find it impossible to sell or refinance their properties without going to court to clean up problems. Register John O’Brien, of the Southern Essex County Registry of Deeds has been pushing Coakley to investigate these issues and asked that she not agree to settle with the big banks. Once again I am asking Attorney General Martha Coakley and the other state Attorney’s General to follow the lead of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and stop any settlement talks with the banks. The results of this report are only for my registry, but I can assure you that this type of criminal fraud is rampant across the nation. This leaves me to question why anyone would consider settling with these banks until we know the full extent of the damage that they have caused to the homeowners chain of title across this country and the amount of money they have bilked the taxpayers for their failure to pay recording fees. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman launched his own investigation in April. He said he was “stunned” to find the multi-state probe so lacking that no documents or witness depositions had been obtained. “We have no leverage,” Schneiderman said in an interview with the Democrat and Chronicle. Elizabeth Warren, a senior adviser to President Barack Obama agrees. She recently told a congressional panel that government agencies may not have fully investigated claims that borrowers’ homes were illegally seized by banks. “I think there’s a real question about whether there’s been adequate investigation,” said Warren, also the temporary custodian of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection at the time – a new federal agency created to protect borrowers from abusive lenders. In addition to O’Brien’s communications with Coakley, Massachusetts residents have also been active in voicing their concerns. In a letter, signed by 24 Massachusetts homeowners, Senka Huskic, a Peabody MA resident and a blogger at Home Preservation Network wrote on behalf of Massachusetts homeowners: The results of Wall Street’s fraud are numerous foreclosures, topped with the ignorance that works well for those who committed the biggest financial crime in the history of the world. Nothing will change until those responsible for this scam are prosecuted! We must do that, and we should not rest until the truth is out and the correct people are held responsible. We have had enough of being robbed blind, of paying inflated mortgages, of rescuing criminals with our tax money! We have to stand up for our kids, and Register O’Brien is there to stand up for us and with us! Monday, we finally decided to stop being a statistic, to stop being just a number in the books of the rich and powerful. Monday, we stood up and realized that the future of our lives lies in our hands and no one else’s. Our search for American Dream is becoming an all-out battle for our basic needs. The big dream is dispersing before our eyes and we’re left to face the biggest financial disaster ever. We would like to use this opportunity to ask you to join Register O’Brien, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, and many others who stood up to the “too big to fail,” realizing that only the American people are too big to fail. We would like to ask you to immediately cease negotiations with the perpetrators of the mortgage fraud securitization who are not able to prove that they own the houses on which they are foreclosing upon. The only way for a homeowner to prove that is to sue the bank. We all know that this means if you don’t have money, very soon you won’t have your house either. You, as the state’s chief legal prosecutor, must stand up for us and demand answers, demand justice. The very word NEGOTIATION describes communication between at least two sides with the intent to achieve an agreement among everyone involved. So how can we expect that the side which created, implemented, and is still proceeding with the biggest financial crime in the history of this country could have anyone’s best interest in mind, other than their own? Fortunately for us, here in Massachusetts, Martha Coakley has no problem going after banks and mortgage servicers. Coakley slammed MERS in a Boston Herald interview on Tuesday. “From predatory loans to ‘robo-signing’ to servicing fraud, the banks continue to go merrily on their way while consumers, the real estate industry and the commonwealth of Massachusetts are being cheated,” Coakley said. “The inability to get a handle on the instability in the real estate market continues to affect Massachusetts and the entire national economy,” she said. Massachusetts, once again is leading the charge and forging ahead into uncharted waters. From the Supreme Judicial Court having handed down an important decision in the Ibanez case to O’Brien relentlessly advocating for homeowners, the securitization industry’s argument that the pooling and servicing agreement was sufficient grounds to transfer of the mortgages to the trust has suffered some significant blows in Massachusetts. Taking into consideration that the Massachusetts Supreme Court is widely considered one of the best courts in the country, these are not insignificant acts. Coakley promised to exclude the MERS issue from any deal until she fully investigates the problem’s scope. “Massachusetts will not sign on to any global agreement with the banks if it includes a comprehensive liability release regarding securitization and the MERS conduct,” she wrote in a letter Monday to all 21 Massachusetts county registers of deeds. O’Brien, who spearheaded the drive against the paperwork flaws, was pleased with the announcement. “I think this sends a message loud and clear to MERS and their shareholder banks that Massachusetts will hold them accountable,” O’Brien said. In the wake of the scandal in Florida (one of the hardest hit areas in the country), whose Attorney General, Pam Bondi, fired two investigators for actually doing their job and going after foreclosure mills, it gives me hope to live in a state where public officials take their job of protecting and defending the public seriously.

Read the full article →

Rep. Hansen Clarke: Congress Is Obsessed With the Wrong Kind of Debt

July 28, 2011

Congress is now completely focused on reducing debt. This would be a positive development, if not for one detail: it’s focused on the wrong kind of debt. With over a quarter of all American homeowners “underwater” — owing more on their homes than their homes are worth — and total student loans slated to exceed $1 trillion this year, it is household debt, not government debt, that is constraining spending, undermining confidence, and precluding sustainable long-term growth. For all the hysteria about government debt, one simple fact remains: the cost of government borrowing remains extremely low. The federal government can raise funds in the short term at interest rates of almost zero; the benchmark 10 year U.S. Treasury bond yields is just three percent, an extremely low long-term rate. This is a powerful statement that international markets have confidence in the US government’s finances. In stark contrast, a hardworking American who lost his or her job in the recession and fell behind on a credit card payment might be subjected to usury-level interest rates of up to 30 percent. Something is wrong with this picture. Such high interest rates — and high levels of household debt more generally — have more of an impact on most Americans’ real disposable income than higher European-style levels of taxation. They reduce Americans’ purchasing power, which means they reduce demand for American goods and services and, in turn, worsen our employment situation. The situation is similar with mortgages and student loans. In 2009, average mortgage payments surpassed $1,000 per month . This year, the average borrower graduating from a four-year college left school with roughly $24,000 of student debt, despite the grim statistic that — according to a Rutgers University study — only 56% of 2010 graduates were able to find work following completion of their studies. It stands to reason: reducing consumer debt is necessary for stimulating the economy. But, there’s a further reason why Congress should focus on cutting the crippling burden of consumer debt. Congress is deeply responsible for creating the problem. I believe that the legislative branch played both a passive and active role in creating the consumer debt crisis by deregulating dangerous lending and securitization practices, creating incentives for banks to offer risky loan products, and rigging bankruptcy laws against everyday Americans. Consider the 2005 bankruptcy law , which made it harder for consumers to discharge credit card debt through bankruptcy proceedings. By eliminating the risk associated with targeting borrowers with questionable ability to pay, this legislation enabled many banks to have a field day preying on people with limited financial literacy, making as many loans as possible to maximize fees. Similarly, an opaque system of securitization — facilitated by Congress through the Commodity Futures Modernization Act and other legislation — empowered mortgage lenders to profit from processing fees regardless of whether or not the mortgages were sound. This further incentivized predatory lending. This deregulation also helped give rise to the mother of all bubbles, an $8 trillion bubble in the housing market. When this burst, millions of innocent people lost their jobs. Because of recklessness in Washington and gambling in the Wall Street casino, untold numbers of hardworking Americans were thrust into a situation in which they could no longer afford to make their payments and therefore faced massive fees, usury interest rates, and/or eviction. These people never received a bailout. But, then again, most are not asking for one. They are simply asking for a system that is not rigged against them. And Congress has a moral obligation to deliver that. Right now, Congress could take several important steps with minimal budgetary impacts. It could, for instance: Create the right incentives for banks to come to the table and negotiate with distressed lenders. This might mean applying “carrots and sticks” in the tax code to favor lenders that seek to avoid evictions. It could also mean legislation such as “Right to Rent,” which would enable foreclosed homeowners to stay in their homes by paying an independently-assessed monthly fair market rent. Provide tax credits for education expenses and for student loan debt Make private student loans — particularly those written under unfair terms — eligible for discharge in bankruptcy proceedings Swiftly confirm the new director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau so it can get to work restricting unfair and deceptive lending practices It’s time to change the national conversation. While relieving government debt should be a medium and long term priority, addressing consumer debt is a short-term imperative. Let’s get to work.

Read the full article →

Debt Ceiling Vote: Boehner’s Plan Faces Key Test

July 28, 2011

WASHINGTON — The endgame at hand, House Republicans lined up Thursday to pass legislation to prevent looming government default while slicing nearly $1 trillion from federal spending. Senate Democrats pledged to scuttle the bill swiftly in hopes of forcing a final compromise. “Let’s pass this bill and end the crisis,” said House Speaker John Boehner, the president’s principal Republican antagonist in a new and contentious era of divided government. “It raises the debt limit and cuts government spending by a larger amount.” President Barack Obama has threatened to veto the measure, and in debate on the House floor, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida savaged it as a “Republican plan for default.” She said the GOP hoped to “hold our economy hostage while forcing an ideological agenda” on the country. Despite the sharp rhetoric, there were signs that gridlock might be giving way. “Around here you’ve got to have deadlock before you have breakthrough,” said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. “We’re at that stage now.” Wall Street suffered fresh losses as Congress struggled to break its long gridlock. The Dow Jones industrial average was down for a fifth straight session. The Treasury Department moved ahead with plans to hold its regular weekly auction of three-month and six-month securities on Monday. Yet officials offered no information on what steps would be taken if Congress failed to raise the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt limit by the following day. Without signed legislation by Aug. 2, the Treasury will not have enough funds to pay all the nation’s bills. Administration officials have warned of potentially calamitous effects on the economy if that happens – a spike in interest rates, a plunge in stock markets and a tightening in the job market in a nation already struggling with unemployment over 9 percent. White House press secretary Jay Carney outlined White House compromise terms: “significant deficit reduction, a mechanism by which Congress would take on the tough issues of tax reform and entitlement reform and a lifting of the debt ceiling beyond … into 2013.” The last point loomed as the biggest obstacle. The House bill cuts spending by $917 billion over a decade, principally by holding down costs for hundreds of government programs ranging from the Park Service to the Agriculture Department and foreign aid. It also provides an immediate debt limit increase of $900 billion, which is less than half of the total needed to meet Obama’s insistence that there be no replay of the current crisis in the heat of the 2012 election campaigns. An additional $1.6 trillion in borrowing authority would be conditioned on passage of at least $1.8 trillion in further savings to be recommended by a newly created committee of lawmakers. Those deficit reductions would presumably come from cuts to benefit programs such as Social Security and Medicare, as well as an overhaul of the tax code generating additional government revenue. The GOP bill’s $917 billion in upfront spending cuts was trillions less than many tea party-backed rank-and-file Republican lawmakers wanted, but a total that seemed nearly unimaginable when they took power in the House last winter with an agenda of reining in government. Numerous Republicans grumbled that the legislation didn’t cut more deeply, and Boehner and the rest of the GOP leadership have spent their week cajoling reluctant conservatives to provide the votes needed to pass it. By most accounts, they were succeeding. “It gives us a little bit of heartburn because it doesn’t go big enough,” said Rep. Sean Duffy, R-Wis., a first-term lawmaker who said he would vote for the bill as the best one available. Another first-term Republican, Rep. Martha Roby of Alabama, said the bill was “far from perfect. But I don’t have the luxury of writing the plan by myself, and neither does Speaker Boehner.” While the White House and Democrats objected to the House bill, they readied an alternative that contained similarities. Drafted by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, it provides for $2.7 trillion in additional borrowing authority for the Treasury. It also calls for cuts of $2.2 trillion, including about $1 trillion in Pentagon savings that assume the end of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even before the House voted, Reid served notice he would stage a vote to kill the legislation almost instantly. “No Democrat will vote for a short-term Band-Aid that would put our economy at risk and put the nation back in this untenable situation a few short months from now,” he said. With the House and Senate focused on debt-limit legislation at opposite ends of the Capitol, eleven religious leaders protesting budget cuts were arrested in the Rotunda midway between the two chambers. Democratic Rep. Chellie Pingree of Maine said on the House floor that they were praying for those who will be “hurt the hardest” by the bill being considered. Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif., countered that he, too was praying – to avoid a default. The day’s events marked the climax of a struggle that began last winter, when the Treasury Department notified Congress it would need additional borrowing authority, and Boehner said any increase would have to include steps to reduce future spending. At first the White House balked at the terms, then relented. That gradually morphed into a series of bipartisan negotiations, one led by Vice President Joe Biden, then another by Obama, and finally, a round of golf that led to stab at a “grand bargain” between the president and Boehner. Boehner announced last Friday he was calling off the talks, setting in motion a frantic week of maneuvering as the default deadline grew near. ___ Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Donna Cassata, Stephen Ohlemacher, Larry Margasak, Martin Crutsinger, Charles Babington, Darlene Superville and Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

WATCH: How The DOJ Helped Birth A Massive Phone Scam

July 28, 2011

Recently, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and the Senate have all taken aim at “cramming,” a multibillion dollar industry that cheats phone customers by adding bogus fees to their bills. But the groundwork for this massive swindle — which affects an estimated 17% of all households — began with the much-ballyhooed breakup of AT&T (T). Now, almost 30 years after the Justice Department unwittingly opened the floodgates to a tidal wave of fraudsters, several other government organizations are trying to close them.

Read the full article →

Dollar rises against major currencies as a safe haven

July 28, 2011

The US dollar soared against the euro and other major currencies, but not for the strong U.S. economy, but rather as a safe haven after the steep drop in the American durable goods, which has …

Read the full article →

Rolls-Royce reports strong profit and raises dividends

July 28, 2011

Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC swung into first-half net profit of 842 million pounds compared to 334 million pounds loss a year earlier as reported today on Thursday which supported the company to …

Read the full article →

Shell profit bolstered by oil prices

July 28, 2011

Europe’s biggest oil company, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, said today second quarter earnings surged on high oil prices and bolstered by the beginning of projects in Canada and Qatar. The company …

Read the full article →