Trading Stocks in One-Billionth of a Second:

http://stockmarketchartanalyst.blogspot.com/

John C. Ogg - June 14, 2011

The pace at which the market trades stocks, bonds, currencies, and futures seems to have once again become faster than anyone could have ever imagined. Forget a few hundred automated trades a second impacting the markets … If all claims are true, trading in the sub-nanosecond barrier is reality.

High Frequency Trading, what is called HFT on Wall Street, is a mystery to most investors. Its aim is to make money from market inefficiencies via programs that analyze data and which make automated trading decisions that can last for fractions of a second or which can last for a fraction of day. Any market from currencies, to stocks, to futures and options, and other financial instruments can have heavy amounts of HFT influence.

HFT has been a target of Main Street and Washington D.C. for an obvious reason. HFT often excludes Joe Public, leaving the typical investor at a huge disadvantage against the professionals. That’s not the entire story, however. Some successful independent active traders use many tools and tricks of HFT. If the claims are real, those who can afford it will be able to trade stocks, currencies and other electronic market securities in less than one-billionth of a second.

Yes, under 1/1,000,000,000… This is under the nanosecond barrier and that is what has been claimed by an outfit called Fixnetix.

Demonstrations of the technology are taking place this week at the SIFMA Financial Services Technology Expo 2011 in New York. The company has announced its iX-eCute, a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) microchip for “ultra-low latency trading” that is called “the world’s fastest trading appliance for the financial markets.” It says that customers are now seeing latencies as low as 740 nanoseconds through the stack, or wire-to-wire.

The company also noted that this is not just for speed but also for regulatory use. It claims that 20+ pre-risk checks take less than 100 nano seconds.

Fixnetix claims that iX-eCute has no detrimental impact on trading performance with the necessary risk controls as it enforces pre-market risks at nano-second time frames yet still prevents trade latency. It noted that ” Unlike other solutions, the iX-eCute microchip has near zero impact on latency for governing the required checks directed by the recent SEC Rule 15c3-5 and anticipated declarations from other regulatory governing bodies.”


The company has also noted, “Fixnetix iX-eCute microchip can be utilized as a standalone trading gateway which clients can connect to via 1/10 or 40gig Ethernet or as an integrated system in your own x86 or P-series systems to access iX-eCute via PCIe direct memory drivers to gain the ultimate trading speed.” In short, this is a trading gateway that acts as a single interface for multiple financial markets around the globe in multiple asset classes.

Securities Technology Monitor noted on June 10, “Hanweck Associates of New York said its Volera trading and risk management system is capable of calculating 8 million prices a second, using graphics processors in combination with general purpose central processors. The engine is in use at the International Securities Exchange, an all-electronic options exchange.” Effectively, it noted that it has an analytics engine that can price 150 million options in just 17 seconds.

Some firms must have this, whether the argument about “how much advantage comes at what cost” has to be brought up. Here are some scenarios to consider:

Imagine being the fund manager for a high-volume leveraged ETF that uses derivatives, futures, stocks, and options as buy and sell orders come in throughout the day. These funds cannot say that they will reconcile hourly or at the end of the day even if they are honest about the risks of tracking error.

You run a global fund that simultaneously trades currencies, equities via futures and e-minis, bonds, and commodities. Imagine the day that the machines decide to unload $10 billion in bonds to suddenly rotate into equities and hard commodities.

And lastly, the “hope”…. You are a regulatory agency or a risk management professional, and suddenly you can track millions of transactions in literally seconds that flag unusual trading patterns or which put a firm’s capital outside of the legal risk parameters.

With most benefits or advantages, risks follow. Markets can move faster than humans can react, often without rhyme or reason. The Flash Crash was the most recent example that will stand out. The benefit is that institutions could exit or enter positions for billions of dollars in literally a fraction of a second. The bad news is that it could happen so fast that the investment community from retail to most institutional investors to exchanges to regulators might not even notice in time to react.

If a transaction can occur in under one-billionth of a second, then in theory more than one-billion transactions could be transacted in one second as well. Imagine a scenario where the DJIA rallies 100 points in just a few seconds and then sells off by the same amount or more in the following few seconds. It sounds grossly exaggerated, but it might not be.

http://agoracom.com/ir/ECU/forums/discussion/topics/488407-latest-computer-trades/messages/1564145#message

The Folly Of Investing Today...

http://stockmarketchartanalyst.blogspot.com/

by Karl Denninger - Posted 2010-09-21 20:45

Investing is all about trying to determine a longer-term direction for the market such that risk and reward align in some meaningful way.

Yesterday, on Blogtalk, I stated that I was pulling all of my long-term investments that were market-related, and for an indeterminate time forward I would be only short-term trading this market.

That deserves an explanation, and toward this end, I would like to present the following 10 year weekly chart.



The regular "trace" is the S&P 500 price. The white trace is the 10 year Treasury yield as a comparative.

You need to pay attention to this.

"This time it's different" is often said.

It is almost always wrong, and believing in it will almost always make you broke.

Here's reality folks. Over the previous 10 years the TNX has never declined meaningfully without the S&P 500 following it, and declining to near or below it on a comparative basis.

The TNX almost always leads on declines too, sometimes by as much as six months.

Well, it's been six months.

In 2007, the TNX peaked in late June, after which it began a dive. The market peaked in the middle of October of that year at 1576. The decline essentially reached the comparative bottom.

Now the TNX has peaked the first week of April of this year, and is quite close to the March 2009 lows. Yet the S&P, after it took a swoon, has recovered.

Exactly as it did in 2007.

We all know what came next.

The same thing happened in 2000, when the market peaked and fell apart. Again, the TNX led. It in fact peaked almost exactly at the end of the year in 1999. Three months later "it" began.

Continued at: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=167162

On More Stimulus Spending – by Dr. Ron Paul

http://stockmarketchartanalyst.blogspot.com/



Faced with continuing economic decline and an impending election, the administration, predictably, is entertaining the idea of another stimulus package. To explain why the last one didn't work, adherents to the Keynesian economic philosophy are claiming that they actually did work – it just looks like they didn't because we don't realize how much worse off we would be right now without trillions of dollars of public spending. The last administration bought into Keynesianism just as much as this one does, unfortunately. Until we have leaders who understand that debt is not the way to prosperity, there will be no stopping runaway government spending.

While it is nice to hear about business tax breaks, the positive results of these tax cuts will be dwarfed by its negative effects. First of all, $200 billion or so in temporary tax cuts and credits to businesses are nothing compared to the $3.8 trillion in tax hikes that will hit the economy like a ton of bricks on January 1, 2011 if the Bush tax cuts are not extended by Congress.

Second of all, businesses are reluctant to hire and invest, not because they are looking for temporary credits, but because of future uncertainty; they simply don't know what the government is going to do next and how future government policies will affect decisions they make now. What new costs and regulations will be placed on them with healthcare reform and financial services reform? Will Congress convene a lame-duck session this winter to pass cap-and-trade and other destructive legislation? What will the cost of compliance be for hiring new employees, and will that force them to simply lay off anyone they hire now? Worse, will the government come up with fines or additional costs if businesses have to lay people off in the future? Right now, the safest thing for businesses to do is nothing. Until we regain respect for the rule of law and remove some of this uncertainty, I'm afraid none of these temporary promises, made right before an election, will do much towards any economic improvement.

The other glaring problem with this proposed stimulus package is that it couples tax cuts with spending increases, which makes no sense when we are already heavily indebted to foreign countries. We should be cutting taxes and slashing government spending dramatically. The private sector simply cannot bear the burden of our engorged public sector. In fact, one reason earlier stimulus programs did not result in any private sector growth is because large amounts went to the public sector. Indeed, the spending that the administration is now proposing arguably constitutes a bailout of the public sector and various union allies of the administration.

This administration is falling into the same dangerous trap we fell into during the Great Depression, as did the Germans leading into their hyperinflation of the 1920's. The temptation is to do something, anything, proactive to attempt to stimulate the economy, but history has shown us that governments cannot spend their way into prosperity. The best thing government could do is get back to its Constitutional limitations and let the economy stabilize, heal and recover without the crushing burden of government holding it back.

http://www.thedailybell.com/1375/Ron-Paul-On-More-Stimulus-Spending.html

NEWS - From "Alternative" Sources - NOT the Mainstream Propaganda Machine...

http://stockmarketchartanalyst.blogspot.com/

Here are a number of articles I read this morning, from my favorite "alternative" news sources:

--------------------------------------------------------

Shadow Government Statistics:
Analysis Behind and Beyond Government Economic Reporting

http://www.shadowstats.com/

If you've watched my last few updates on the market, you'll notice that I'm quite cynical when it comes to any economic report put out by the government (and I'm also very skeptical that earnings reports aren't continually being fudged. Just look at the recent SEC case against Dell as an example). This site gives you the REAL scoop when it comes to the government's reports of economic data...

--------------------------------------------------------

Show Me the Recovery:
While second-quarter sales increases are encouraging, weak cash generation is worrisome.

http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/14522495

--------------------------------------------------------

Claims of Recovery But Results Nowhere To Be Found:
A weekly excerpt from the subscription issue of The International Forecaster, taken from Bob Chapman's weekly publication.

http://theinternationalforecaster.com/International_Forecaster_Weekly/Claims_of_Recovery_But_Results_Nowhere_To_Be_Found

--------------------------------------------------------

Economists Cut U.S. Growth Forecast - AGAIN!:
Projected U.S. economic growth for the rest of this year and next was revised down for a third month in a row by a panel of about 50 economists.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Economists-cut-US-growth-rb-1119878296.html?x=0

--------------------------------------------------------

Hell Yes It’s Class Warfare! Part 1:
There is an intentional misconception out there in the market place of talking points and political discussion – it is that liberals are waging class warfare on the wealthy.

http://cons-lie.com/2010/09/07/hell-yes-its-class-warfare-part-1/

Hell Yes It’s Class Warfare! Part 2:

http://cons-lie.com/2010/09/08/hell-yes-its-class-warfare-part-2/

--------------------------------------------------------

The Wholly Fallible Ben Bernanke:
Despite three crucial errors at the Federal Reserve, its chairman is still revered as if he is the pope – while we pay the price.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/sep/08/ben-bernanke-federal-reserve

--------------------------------------------------------

Rome is Burning:
There is a critical point that I fear the commentariat is just not getting.

http://modeledbehavior.com/2010/09/07/rome-is-burning/

--------------------------------------------------------

In The Headlights:
The toils of summer are bygone now. The days grow shorter and America stands in the darkling road of its own prospects like a dumb animal frozen in the blinding light of approaching fury.

http://www.kunstler.com/blog/2010/09/in-the-headlights.html#more

--------------------------------------------------------

Death By Globalism:
Have economists made themselves irrelevant? If you have any doubts, have a look at the current issue of themagazine, International Economy, a slick publication endorsed by former Federal Reserve chairmen Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan, by Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank, by former Secretary of State George Shultz, and by the New York Times and Washington Post, both of which declare the magazine to be “ahead of the curve.”

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts09012010.html

--------------------------------------------------------

And finally, the winner of the "Doom and Gloom Award" goes to this piece, which I found to be a fascinating read...

Doomsdayers Not Cynical Enough:
[Like your editor, Rick’s Picks forum regular Wayne Razzi (aka “Red Will”) is a veteran floor-trader who grew up in South Jersey. When I asked him if he would like to contribute a guest commentary, I was not expecting the provocative tour de force that unfolds, step by step, below. In the essay, Will asserts nothing less that that the impending collapse of our economic system was meticulously engineered by financial and political sociopaths. Let me attest that his is not some whack-o conspiracy theory; rather, it is the closely-reasoned argument of a highly intelligent person who values truth sufficiently to have searched for it, in the form of an answer to a profoundly disturbing question, for many years. Judge for yourself whether his conclusions tally with your own thoughts as to why the American Dream is about to go bust. RA]

http://news.goldseek.com/RickAckerman/1284012060.php

--------------------------------------------------------

That's it for today...
I hope you enjoy reading these articles as much as I did!

Happy Trading!...
the zigzagman

Stocks Surge after Alcoa, CSX Report Strong Profits:

Stephen Bernard, AP Business Writer, On Tuesday July 13, 2010, 4:53 pm

NEW YORK (AP) -- The stock market got a shot of confidence and adrenaline from the start of second-quarter earnings season.

Investors were enthusiastic Tuesday about better-than-expected profits from aluminum maker Alcoa Inc. and railroad operator CSX Corp. The Dow Jones industrial average rose more than 145 points and the major indexes were up well over 1 percent.

There was more good news from Intel Corp. after the close of trading. The chip maker reported earnings and revenue that beat analysts' expectations, and it also raised its forecast for the year. Its stock shot up more than 5 percent in after-hours trading.

The companies, among the first to report second-quarter earnings, also issued upbeat forecasts for the rest of the year. That was heartening news for investors who have been concerned that the recovery was stalling, or that the economy might even fall back into recession.

"When we go back to earnings and fundamentals, companies are delivering," said Tom Karsten, senior managing partner at Karsten Financial in Fort Worth, Texas.

Alcoa's earnings reports are closely watched because its varied customer base provides a snapshot of a broad range of other industries. It is also a component of the Dow Jones industrial average. CSX also provides insight into economic activity because it ships a wide range of products.

Alcoa said global consumption of aluminum will grow this year by more than it had forecast just three months ago. There have been concerns that the global economic recovery will end as many European nations face mounting government debt problems and high unemployment slows growth in the U.S.

CSX, meanwhile, said it sees its the economy's upward momentum continuing this year.

Intel's results are considered a good gauge of the health of the economy since its sales are driven by consumers and businesses buying computers.

Frank Ingarra, co-portfolio manager of Hennessy Funds in Stamford, Conn., said Alcoa and CSX's results lifted the market because they hit on the two themes that traders are looking for in earnings: revenue growth and optimistic outlooks.

"That's why the earnings were so good," Ingarra said. "You saw that top-line growth and good guidance."

During the recession, companies that made money often did so by cutting costs rather than bringing in sales. So sales growth is a sign that business is indeed picking up.

The Commerce Department reported Tuesday that the U.S. trade deficit increased to its widest level in 18 months as an increase in exports was outpaced by rising imports. A jump in both imports and exports is a sign that the economy is growing.

Earnings will likely continue to dictate trading over the next few weeks as hundreds of companies release results.

According to preliminary calculations, the Dow rose 146.75, or 1.4 percent, to 10,363.02. The Standard & Poor's 500 index rose 16.59, or 1.5 percent, to 1,095.34, while the Nasdaq composite index rose 43.67, or 2 percent, to 2,242.03.

http://yhoo.it/bbZZat

Fed Strikes More Cautious Tone On Recovery, Noting Risks Overseas; Holds Rates At Record Lows:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Fed-strikes-more-cautious-apf-2953770810.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=4&asset=&ccode=

Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer, On Wednesday June 23, 2010, 5:35 pm EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Federal Reserve struck a more cautious tone about the strength of the U.S. economic recovery, indicating Europe's debt crisis poses a risk to it.

Wrapping up a two-day meeting Wednesday, the Fed in a 9-1 decision retained its pledge to hold rates at record-low levels for an "extended period." Doing so is intended to energize the rebound.

The Fed expressed confidence that the recovery will stay intact despite threats from abroad and at home. But Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues offered a slightly more reserved outlook than the last time they convened.

The Fed said the economic recovery is "proceeding." That was a bit less upbeat than the view at the April meeting when the Fed said economic activity continued to "strengthen." The Fed also said the labor market is "improving gradually."

While not mentioning Europe by name, the Fed said "financial conditions have become less supportive of economic growth ... largely reflecting developments abroad."

The fragile economic picture increases pressure on President Barack Obama and lawmakers in Washington. Near-double-digit unemployment is certain to factor into the way Americans vote in congressional midterm elections this fall. If it fails to come down after that, the jobless rate could play a significant role in the 2012 presidential election.

At the same time, the president has limited options. Congress has run into opposition on extending unemployment benefits and providing more aid to cash-strapped states. While some liberal Democrats maintain that government spending is the best way to stimulate the economy, a growing number of moderate and conservative Democrats share Republican concerns that the government's exploding budget deficits pose a greater risk.

The subtle shift in the Fed's outlook drew little reaction from stock investors. The Dow Jones industrial average was essentially flat after announcement.

The decision to keep rates at record lows boosted demand for safe-haven assets like Treasurys, sending interest rates lower. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note, a widely used benchmark for mortgages and other consumer loans, fell to 3.13 percent from 3.25 percent late Tuesday. The 10-year note hasn't closed at that level in more than a year. Rates had already fallen earlier in the day after the government said new-home sales dropped 33 percent last month.

Thomas Hoenig, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, for the fourth straight meeting was the sole member to dissent from the Fed's decision to retain the "extended period" pledge.

Hoenig fears keeping rates too low for too long could lead to excessive risk-taking by investors and feed new speculative bubbles in the prices of stocks, bonds and commodities.

He's also expressed concern that low rates could eventually unleash inflation. And Hoenig said he worries that keeping the "extended period" pledge will limit the Fed's stated "flexibility" to start modestly bumping up rates.

Given the risks to the recovery, the Fed left a key bank lending rate at between zero and 0.25 percent. The rate has remained at that level since December 2008.

That means rates on certain credit cards, home equity loans, some adjustable-rate mortgages and other consumer loans will remain low. Commercial banks' prime lending rate would stay at about 3.25 percent, the lowest point in decades.

Low rates serve borrowers who qualify for loans and are willing to take on more debt. But they hurt savers. Low rates are especially hard on people living on fixed incomes who are earning scant returns on their savings.

Still, if the rates spur Americans to spend more, they would help invigorate the economy. That's why the Fed maintained its pledge, in place for more than a year, to keep rates at record lows for an "extended period."

Because the fragile recovery is more vulnerable to shocks, from home and overseas, economists increasingly say the Fed probably won't start boosting rates until next year -- or possibly into 2012. That's a change from a few months ago, when economists thought the Fed would begin raising rates at the end of this year.

"Increased market volatility and uncertainty on the economic outlook may cause the Fed to delay raising rates until well into next year," said Kurt Karl, chief U.S. economist at Swiss Re.

The Fed has leeway to hold rates at record lows because inflation is essentially nonexistent. In fact, the Fed noted that the price of energy and other commodities have dropped in recent months, and that underlying inflation has "trended lower." That seems to suggest that Fed policymakers are a bit more concerned about the remote prospect of deflation, versus inflation.

T.J. Marta, a market strategist at Marta on the Markets, called the Fed's policy statement "more dovish" and reinforces the belief that the central bank won't need to start boosting rates any time soon to fend off inflationary pressures.

After suffering the worst recession since the 1930s, the economy has been growing again for nearly a year. Manufacturing activity is picking up. Businesses are spending more. And Bernanke has expressed confidence that the nation won't fall back into a "double dip" recession.

Still, the strength of the recovery could be affected by the European debt crisis, an edgy Wall Street, cautious consumers, a fragile housing market and high unemployment.

If the U.S. recovery were to flash signs of a relapse, the Fed would likely take other steps to get it back on course. The Fed has left the door open to resuming purchases of mortgage securities, a move that would drive down mortgage rates and bolster the housing market. It ended a $1.25 trillion mortgage-buying program in March.

Dead On Arrival: Financial Reform Fails:

http://stockmarketchartanalyst.blogspot.com/

By Simon Johnson - June 21, 2010 at 7:04 am

The House-Senate reconciliation process is still underway and some details will still change. But the broad contours of “financial reform” are already completely clear; there are no last minute miracles at this level of politics. The new consumer protection agency for financial products is a good idea and worth supporting – assuming someone sensible is appointed by the president to run it. Yet, at the end of the day, essentially nothing in the entire legislation will reduce the potential for massive system risk as we head into the next credit cycle.

Go, for example, through the summary of “comprehensive financial regulatory reform bills” in President Obama’s letter to the G20 last week.

The president argues for more capital in banking – and this is a fine goal, particularly as the Europeans continue to drag their feet on this issue. But how much capital does his Treasury team think is “enough”? Most indications are that they will seek tier one capital requirements in the range of 10-12 percent – which is what Lehman had right before it failed. How would that help?

“Stronger oversight of derivatives” is also on the president’s international agenda but this cannot be taken seriously, given how little Treasury and the White House have pushed for tighter control of derivatives in the US legislation. If Senator Lincoln has made any progress at all – and we shall see where her initiative ends up – it has been without the full cooperation of the administration. (The WSJ today has a more positive interpretation, but even in this narrative you have to ask – where was the administration on this issue in the nine months of intense debate and hard work prior to April? Have they really woken up so recently to the dangers here?)

“More transparency and disclosure” sounds fine but this is just empty rhetoric. Where is the application – or strengthening if necessary – of anti-trust tools so that concentrated market share in over-the-counter derivatives can be confronted. The White House is making something of a show from Jamie Dimon falling out of favor, but all the points of substance that matter, Dimon’s JP Morgan Chase has won. The Securities and Exchange Commission is beginning to push in the right direction, but the reconciliation conference looks likely to deny them the self-funding – CFTC and FDIC, for example, collect fees from the industry – that could help build as a regulator. At the same time, the conference legislation would send a large number of important questions to the SEC “for further study”. None of this makes any sense – unless the goal is to block real reform.

The president also asks for a “more effective framework for winding down large global firms” but his experts know this is politically impossible. The G20 (and other) countries will not agree to such a cross-border resolution mechanism – and this was an important reason why Senators Sherrod Brown and Ted Kaufman argued so strongly that big banks had to become smaller (and be limited in how much they could borrow). Now administration officials brag to the press, on the record, about how they killed the Brown-Kaufman amendment. These people – in the White House and around the Treasury – simply cannot be taken seriously.

And as for “principles for the financial sector to make a fair and substantial contribution towards paying for any burdens”, this is a sad joke. This is not an oil spill, Mr. President. This is the worst recession since World War II, a 40 percentage points increase in government debt (attempting to prevent a Second Great Depression), loss of at least 8 million jobs in the United States, and a painfully slow recovery (in terms of unemployment) – not to mention all the collateral damage in so many parts of the world, including Europe. Could someone in the White House at least come to terms with this issue and provide the president with a sensible and clear text? Honestly, as staff work, this is embarrassing.

There is great deference to power in the United States, and perhaps that is appropriate. But those now calling the shots should remember that they will not be in power for ever and – at some point in the not too distant future – there will be a more balanced assessment of their legacies.

Simply claiming that the president is “tough” on big banks simply will not wash. There are too many facts, too much accumulated evidence, pointing exactly the other way. The president signed off on the most generous and least conditional bailout in world financial history. This is now widely understood. The administration has scrambled to create some political cover in terms of “reform” – but the lack of substance here is already clear to people who follow it closely and public perceptions will shift quickly.

The financial crisis of fall 2008 revealed serious dangers have developed in the heart of the world’s financial system. The Bush-Obama bailouts of 2008-09 confirmed that our biggest banks are “too big to fail” and the left, center, and right can agree with Gene Fama when he says: “too big to fail” is perverting activities and incentives.

This is not a leftist message, although you hear people on the left make the point. But people on the right also increasingly understand what is going on – there is excessive and abusive power at the heart of our financial system that completely distorts markets (and really amounts to a hidden, unfair and dangerous taxpayer subsidy).

This administration and this Congress had ample opportunity to confront this problem and at least wrestle hard with it. Some senators and representatives worked long and hard on precisely this issue. But the White House punted, repeatedly, and elected instead for a veneer of superficial tweaking. Welcome to the next global credit cycle – with too big to fail banks at center stage.

http://baselinescenario.com/2010/06/21/dead-on-arrival-financial-reform-fails/#more-7767

Jobless Claims, Manufacturing Numbers Hit Stocks.:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Jobless-claims-manufacturing-apf-1070019902.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=

Stock traders question rebound after jobless claims increase, Philly manufacturing disappoints:

Tim Paradis, AP Business Writer, On Thursday June 17, 2010, 12:08 pm

NEW YORK (AP) -- Stocks fell Thursday after a surprise increase in new claims for jobless benefits and a weaker regional manufacturing report raised concerns about the economy.

The Dow Jones industrial average fell about 40 points in midday trading after rising four the last five days. Broader indexes also dropped. Treasury prices rose, pushing down interest rates, after traders became more cautious.

The government said that the number of people putting in new claims for unemployment benefits rose unexpectedly last week. Initial claims for jobless benefits increased 12,000 to 472,000. That's the highest level in a month and follows three straight weeks of declines. Economists had forecast another drop.

A plunge in the Philadelphia Federal Reserve's index of regional manufacturing also hit stocks. The Philly Fed said manufacturing continued to expand in June but at a slower pace than in May. Its index of manufacturing activity dropped to 8 from 21.4 the month before. Traders are concerned that the slowdown signals that a recovery is fading in one of the strongest parts of the economy.

The reports provided more reminders that the economy isn't bouncing back quickly.

"It adds up to a modest, uneven recovery," said Paul Ballew, chief economist at Nationwide Insurance in Columbus, Ohio, and a former senior economist with the Federal Reserve. "We're not expecting some light switch being turned on here."

The jobs report is often the most closely watched number of the week because a recovery in the labor market is crucial to a sustained rebound in the economy. The government's most recent monthly jobs report found that employers added only 41,000 private-sector jobs in May. That was far weaker than expected and raised concerns that a pickup in hiring was slowing. The unemployment rate fell to 9.7 percent from 9.9 percent, however.

A stronger euro helped contain some of the selling. The euro rose after a bond offering by Spain's government drew solid demand. Traders have been concerned that European countries like Spain with high debt loads would have trouble raising money because of worries about defaults. A stronger euro is seen as a sign of confidence in Europe's ability to cut its debt without jeopardizing an economic rebound. The euro climbed to $1.2357.

At midday, the Dow fell 40.06, or 0.4 percent, to 10,369.10. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 2.55, or 0.2 percent, to 1,112.06, and the Nasdaq composite index fell 1.69, or 0.1 percent, to 2,304.24.

Bond prices rose, pushing down interest rates. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell to 3.21 percent from 3.27 percent late Wednesday.

Crude oil fell 70 cents to $76.96 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Gold rose.

Shares of BP PLC rose 31 cents, or 1 percent, to $32.16 after CEO Tony Hayward told a House panel that he was "deeply sorry" for the Gulf of Mexico rig explosion and oil spill.

Hayward's appearance on Capitol Hill came a day after BP agreed to put $20 billion into a fund for victims of the spill and to suspend dividend payments for the rest of the year. BP had been scheduled to pay $2.6 billion in first-quarter dividends next week. The company's shares have lost about half their value since the rig it operated exploded in April.

The government also reported that consumer prices fell for the second straight month, as expected. The Consumer Price Index dropped 0.2 percent because of a decline in the cost of gasoline and other energy expenses. However so-called core prices, which excludes often volatile food and energy costs, ticked up 0.1 percent in May. A tight job market and excess capacity at the nation's factories are some of the forces helping to keep inflation under control.

Three stocks fell for every two that rose on the New York Mercantile Exchange, where volume came to 400 million shares compared with 429 million shares traded at the same point Wednesday.

The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 1.50, or 0.2 percent, to 664.63.

Britain's FTSE 100 rose 0.3 percent, Germany's DAX index rose 0.5 percent, and France's CAC-40 gained 0.2 percent. Japan's Nikkei stock average fell 0.7 percent.

SEC Launches 'Circuit Breaker' Rules For Stocks:

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-80.htm

by The Associated Press - June 10, 2010

Federal regulators have put in place new rules aimed at preventing a repeat of last month's harrowing "flash crash" in the stock market.

Members of the Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday approved the rules, which call for U.S. stock exchanges to briefly halt trading of some stocks that have big swings.

The exchanges will start putting the trading breaks into effect as early as Friday for six months.

The plan for the "circuit breakers" was worked out by the SEC and the major exchanges following the May 6 market plunge that saw the Dow Jones industrials lose nearly 1,000 points in less than a half-hour.

"Under the proposed rules, which are subject to Commission approval following the completion of the comment period, trading in a stock would pause across U.S. equity markets for a five-minute period in the event that the stock experiences a 10 percent change in price over the preceding five minutes. The pause would give the markets the opportunity to attract new trading interest in an affected stock, establish a reasonable market price, and resume trading in a fair and orderly fashion. Initially, these new rules would be in effect on a pilot basis through Dec. 10, 2010."

"Warning: Crash Dead Ahead. Sell. Get Liquid. Now"...

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/crash-is-dead-ahead-sell-get-liquid-now-2010-05-25

MarketWatch: by Paul B. Farrell May 25, 2010

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "This game's in the refrigerator! The door's closed, the lights are out, the eggs are cooling, the butter's getting hard and the Jell-O is jiggling ..."

That was legendary Lakers' radio announcer Chick Hearn's signature way of calling a game early, telling fans the home team won ... you can head for the exits before the final buzzer. Chick wrote the book with popular sports phrases like "slam dunk," "air ball," "charity stripe," and a "bunny hop in the pea patch" for a traveling violation.

Niall Ferguson: Investing amid uncertaintyEconomic historian and author of The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World, Niall Ferguson gives his predictions on gold prices, emerging markets and the Swiss franc. Ferguson also tells Dow Jones Veronica Dagher where he's investing his money amid the uncertainty.

Chick's our inspiration today: Last March I wrote "6 reasons I'm calling a bottom and a new bull." Today it's time for a new call. We've had a good year. Net gains over 50% in 2009. But now: "Game over, head for the exits." Bears beating bulls.

No, no, "it's a buying opportunity," says another legend, hedge fund manager, Barton Biggs. Buying opportunity? For who? Remember, Biggs isn't advising Joe Lunchbox about what to do with his little 401(k). Biggs' customers are mega-millionaires in his $1.5 billion Traxis Partners Fund. Main Street investors like Joe are prey in his casino.

Read on, you decide: As you stare from high up in the nose-bleed bleachers watching the game, staring at a Dow that not long ago was above 11,000 and heading for 12,000. Now the Dow's sitting on the bench, ready for the showers, weak after a couple air balls around 10,000. No more timeouts. "This game's in the refrigerator."

How bad is your bookie's point spread in this game? A blowout? Will the Dow drop below 9,000 again? Now that it's broken technical supports, will it drop below 6,470, where the last bull rally started in early 2009? Can you handle the nerve-racking volatility generated by Wall Street's high-frequency traders playing the game at warp-speed with algorithms making thousands of micro-bets in milliseconds, betting billions daily?

So who should you listen to? Barton and I arrived at Morgan Stanley about the same time. He stayed decades longer, became one of the world's leading strategists, advising the kind of high-rollers who also bet at private tables in a Vegas casino.

You remember Biggs: In his book "Wealth, War & Wisdom" he advises his high rollers to prepare for a "breakdown of the civilized infrastructure." Buy a farm: "Your safe haven must be self-sufficient and capable of growing some kind of food ... It should be well-stocked with seed, fertilizer, canned food, wine, medicine, clothes, etc. Think Swiss Family Robinson." Biggs is not advising small investors on what to do with their 401(k)s.

If you're gambling at Wall Street's casino, folks, the odds-makers are betting against Biggs. It's "game over."

Main Street lost 20% last decade ... yet like sheep keep going back.

Yes, if you're channeling Chick, here's your "mixed metaphor" cue card: "This game's in the refrigerator ... Wall Street won (proof, Goldman's $100-million-profit trading days and Blankfein's $68 million bonus) ... Main Street's headed for another losing streak ... Congress' lights are out ... the refrigerator door's closing on financial reforms ... the lobbyists are laying some rotten eggs, poisoning capitalism ... the Tea Party-of-No-No ideologies are hardening ... the bull's Jell-O is jiggling to a flat line ... and this market's going into hibernation, with the bears ... run, don't walk, to the exits, folks."

But will Main Street exit? Will we ever learn? No. The Wall Street casino makes mega-billions for insiders like Blankfein and the Goldman Conspiracy. Yet "The Casino" is still below the 2000 record of 11,722. So after accounting for inflation, Wall Street lost over 20% of Main Street's 401(k) retirement money between 2000 and 2010. Yes, Wall Street's a big loser the past decade. Their advice is self-serving. Period.

Given their miserable track record, only a fool would bet with Wall Street. Betting odds are Wall Street will lose another 20% in the next decade from 2010-2020. Yes, today's market is a "buying opportunity," but only for Wall Street casino insiders like Biggs, Blankfein and even low-level staffers inside "The Casino." But not for our 95 million Main Street investors, there's more pain ahead, this market's dropping.

Correction? New crash imminent, worse than 2008
More proof: Earlier economist Gary Shilling said price-to-earnings ratios are at a "nosebleed 22.5 level." The Dow was around 11,000. Money manager Jeremy Grantham recently said the market's overvalued 40%. That could mean a collapse to 6,600. Last week in Reuters' "Markets Could Be Derailed Again," George Soros echoed a "game over" warning with a "stark warning ... that the financial world is on the wrong track and that we may be hurtling towards an even bigger boom and bust than in the credit crisis."

Now Dow Theory's Richard Russell is warning the public of an imminent crash:

"Sell ... get liquid ... by the end of this year they won't recognize the country."

A bigger meltdown than the credit crisis? Yes, Bush's team drove America into a ditch. But now Obama and his money men, Summers, Geithner, Bernanke, are digging the hole deeper. Soros says we have not learned "the lessons that markets are inherently unstable." As a result, "the success in bailing out the system on the previous occasion led to a super-bubble." Now "we are facing a yet larger bubble." Worse than 2008?

Yes, the game may be "in the refrigerator," the lights will go out, but as Soros hints, the electricity may get turned off too. Get it? This may not be a correction. Not even a bear. What's coming could be worse than the 2000 dot-com crash and the 2008 meltdown combined, a "Super-Bubble" says Soros. And the biggest reason, Nouriel Roubini and Stephen Mihm tell Newsweek, is that "the president's half-measures won't fix our failed financial system" because he refuses to "bust up the too-big-to-fail banks."

Yes, Congress will pass something. But unfortunately, as reported on MSNBC, Senator Dodd, the reform bill's sponsor, is a turncoat, working overtime with Wall Street lobbyists "to weaken financial reform," leave us vulnerable to a new, bigger crash in the near future. And Wall Street lobbyists are spending hundreds of millions to kill reform.

'White Swans:' 2000 and 2008 crashes were predictable, next one too.

Recently Roubini was interviewed by Charlie Rose in BusinessWeek. His message confirms the worst. Roubini was questioned about his new book, "Crisis Economics." Rose began by asking, "what have we learned from these crises of capitalism?" Roubini could easily have said, "nothing, we learned nothing." His actual reply:

"The first lesson is that crises are not 'black swan' events ... they're not just random outcomes. They are the result of a buildup of financial and policy vulnerability and mistakes -- excessive risk-taking, leverage, debt, and so on." They are 'White Swans' "because these events are predictable. But generation after generation, we seem to forget the past. When there's a bubble, there's euphoria. There's irrational exuberance. Consumers can use their homes like ATM machines. Governments and policy makers are happy because they get reelected. Wall Street makes billions of dollars of profits. Everybody's delusional."

Sound familiar? Yes indeed, in "This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly," economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff pinpoint the key signal that will blow the whistle and call the game: The "90% ratio of government debt to GDP is a tipping point in economic growth." For 800 years "you increase it over and beyond a high threshold, and boom!"

Warning, fans, the numbers on the game-clock are flashing wildly. America's ratio is now 92%, thanks to Obama's $1.7 trillion budget, future deficits, exploding debt. Soon, Ka-Booom! Another great nation bites the dust. Depression follows. Goodbye retirement.

Warning: 800 years of history are calling 'game over'
But can't we change destiny? Or are Dodd, Congress, Obama, Wall Street, the Party of No-No and 300 million Americans all just playing their parts in a historical script well-known to historians like Reinhart and Rogoff, Kevin Phillips, Niall Ferguson and others? The message of "This Time Is Different" is very simple:

"We have been here before. No matter how different the latest financial frenzy or crisis always appears, there are usually remarkable similarities from past experience from other countries and from history. ... no country, irrespective of its global importance, appears to be immune to it. The fading memories of borrowers and lenders, policy makers and academics, and the public at large do not seem to improve over time, so the policy lessons on how to 'avoid' the next blow-up are at best limited."

So please listen closely: All the TARP bailouts, stimulus debt and Fed loans won't work. Neither will a new conservative government. This is not a basketball game. We are not channeling Chick Hearn, calling this game before the final buzzer. While we prefer the illusion that "this time really is different," eight centuries of history suggest otherwise:

"The lesson of history, then, is that even as institutions and policy makers improve there will always be a temptation to stretch the limits. ... If there is one common theme to the vast range of crises ... it is that excessive debt accumulation, whether it be by the government, banks, corporations, or consumers, often poses greater systemic risks than it seems during a boom. ... Highly indebted governments, banks, or corporations can seem to be merrily rolling along for an extended period, when bang -- confidence collapses, lenders disappear and a crisis hits. ... Highly leveraged economies ... seldom survive forever ... history does point to warnings signs that policy makers can look to access risk -- if only they do not become too drunk with their credit bubble-fueled success and say, as their predecessors have for centuries, 'This time is different'."

No, "this time" it's never different. Get it? In the end, it doesn't matter what happens to the Dodd-Obama financial reforms. The endgame's never a Black Swan, it's a very White Swan well known to historians -- guaranteed, inevitable and inescapable. This time is never different.

The clock's flashing. Huge point spread. Think bear, think crash, think end of capitalism, think Great Depression II ...

This is no buying opportunity, this game's in the refrigerator, call it...

The US Intelligentsia and Middle Class Are In the Firm Grip of Fear, Fraud and Denial:

Posted by Jesse at 11:27 AM May 16, 2010

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2010/05/us-is-in-grip-of-fraud-and-denial.html

The lie is comfortable, an illusion easy to live with, familiar, and safe.

Writing from the 'disgraced profession' of economics, James K. Galbraith speaks of the unspoken, the many frauds and deceptions underlying the recent financial crisis centered in the US. Many will read this and shake their heads in agreement, but will be unable to take the next logical step and internalize the implications of the depth and breadth of the dishonesty that enabled it then, and continues to sustain it, even today. Galbraith is asking 'why' and framing a further inquiry into the consequences of this unwillingness to reform.

"Some appear to believe that "confidence in the banks" can be rebuilt by a new round of good economic news, by rising stock prices, by the reassurances of high officials – and by not looking too closely at the underlying evidence of fraud, abuse, deception and deceit. As you pursue your investigations, you will undermine, and I believe you may destroy, that illusion."
It is easier to go with the flow, relax, rationalize, and be diverted and entertained by 'the show.' The truth may set you free, but before that it can make you feel very insecure and uncomfortable, especially when it requires challenging the 'official story' and policy decisions. Better to say nothing offensive to the oligarchs, and even occasionally to utter intelligent sounding condemnations of those who dare to question the very things you wonder about, and fear, in order to prove your loyalty and to reassure yourself that you are a right-thinking, practical individual. For the disparity that is unavoidably noticed between what is seen and what is said makes one uneasy, fearful that they are losing their bearings, if not reason. And the vested interests play on those fears. See Techniques of Propaganda

The consequences of 'extend and pretend' will be to worsen the final outcome, the day of reckoning.

"The initial deviation from the truth will be multiplied a thousandfold." -Aristotle
The banks must be restrained, the financial and political system reformed, and balance restored to the economy, before there can be any sustained recovery.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Why the 'Experts' Failed to See How Financial Fraud Collapsed the Economy:

By James K. Galbraith
May 16, 2010

Editor's Note: The following is the text of a James K. Galbraith's written statement to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee delivered this May.

Chairman Specter, Ranking Member Graham, Members of the Subcommittee, as a former member of the congressional staff it is a pleasure to submit this statement for your record.

I write to you from a disgraced profession. Economic theory, as widely taught since the 1980s, failed miserably to understand the forces behind the financial crisis. Concepts including "rational expectations," "market discipline," and the "efficient markets hypothesis" led economists to argue that speculation would stabilize prices, that sellers would act to protect their reputations, that caveat emptor could be relied on, and that widespread fraud therefore could not occur. Not all economists believed this – but most did.

Thus the study of financial fraud received little attention. Practically no research institutes exist; collaboration between economists and criminologists is rare; in the leading departments there are few specialists and very few students. Economists have soft- pedaled the role of fraud in every crisis they examined, including the Savings & Loan debacle, the Russian transition, the Asian meltdown and the dot.com bubble. They continue to do so now. At a conference sponsored by the Levy Economics Institute in New York on April 17, the closest a former Under Secretary of the Treasury, Peter Fisher, got to this question was to use the word "naughtiness." This was on the day that the SEC charged Goldman Sachs with fraud.

There are exceptions. A famous 1993 article entitled "Looting: Bankruptcy for Profit," by George Akerlof and Paul Romer, drew exceptionally on the experience of regulators who understood fraud. The criminologist-economist William K. Black of the University of Missouri-Kansas City is our leading systematic analyst of the relationship between financial crime and financial crisis. Black points out that accounting fraud is a sure thing when you can control the institution engaging in it: "the best way to rob a bank is to own one." The experience of the Savings and Loan crisis was of businesses taken over for the explicit purpose of stripping them, of bleeding them dry. This was established in court: there were over one thousand felony convictions in the wake of that debacle. Other useful chronicles of modern financial fraud include James Stewart's Den of Thieves on the Boesky-Milken era and Kurt Eichenwald's Conspiracy of Fools, on the Enron scandal. Yet a large gap between this history and formal analysis remains.

Formal analysis tells us that control frauds follow certain patterns. They grow rapidly, reporting high profitability, certified by top accounting firms. They pay exceedingly well. At the same time, they radically lower standards, building new businesses in markets previously considered too risky for honest business. In the financial sector, this takes the form of relaxed – no, gutted – underwriting, combined with the capacity to pass the bad penny to the greater fool. In California in the 1980s, Charles Keating realized that an S&L charter was a "license to steal." In the 2000s, sub-prime mortgage origination was much the same thing. Given a license to steal, thieves get busy. And because their performance seems so good, they quickly come to dominate their markets; the bad players driving out the good.

The complexity of the mortgage finance sector before the crisis highlights another characteristic marker of fraud. In the system that developed, the original mortgage documents lay buried – where they remain – in the records of the loan originators, many of them since defunct or taken over. Those records, if examined, would reveal the extent of missing documentation, of abusive practices, and of fraud. So far, we have only very limited evidence on this, notably a 2007 Fitch Ratings study of a very small sample of highly-rated RMBS, which found "fraud, abuse or missing documentation in virtually every file." An efforts a year ago by Representative Doggett to persuade Secretary Geithner to examine and report thoroughly on the extent of fraud in the underlying mortgage records received an epic run-around.

When sub-prime mortgages were bundled and securitized, the ratings agencies failed to examine the underlying loan quality. Instead they substituted statistical models, in order to generate ratings that would make the resulting RMBS acceptable to investors. When one assumes that prices will always rise, it follows that a loan secured by the asset can always be refinanced; therefore the actual condition of the borrower does not matter. That projection is, of course, only as good as the underlying assumption, but in this perversely-designed marketplace those who paid for ratings had no reason to care about the quality of assumptions. Meanwhile, mortgage originators now had a formula for extending loans to the worst borrowers they could find, secure that in this reverse Lake Wobegon no child would be deemed below average even though they all were. Credit quality collapsed because the system was designed for it to collapse.

A third element in the toxic brew was a simulacrum of "insurance," provided by the market in credit default swaps. These are doomsday instruments in a precise sense: they generate cash-flow for the issuer until the credit event occurs. If the event is large enough, the issuer then fails, at which point the government faces blackmail: it must either step in or the system will collapse. CDS spread the consequences of a housing-price downturn through the entire financial sector, across the globe. They also provided the means to short the market in residential mortgage-backed securities, so that the largest players could turn tail and bet against the instruments they had previously been selling, just before the house of cards crashed.

Latter-day financial economics is blind to all of this. It necessarily treats stocks, bonds, options, derivatives and so forth as securities whose properties can be accepted largely at face value, and quantified in terms of return and risk. That quantification permits the calculation of price, using standard formulae. But everything in the formulae depends on the instruments being as they are represented to be. For if they are not, then what formula could possibly apply?

An older strand of institutional economics understood that a security is a contract in law. It can only be as good as the legal system that stands behind it. Some fraud is inevitable, but in a functioning system it must be rare. It must be considered – and rightly – a minor problem. If fraud – or even the perception of fraud – comes to dominate the system, then there is no foundation for a market in the securities. They become trash. And more deeply, so do the institutions responsible for creating, rating and selling them. Including, so long as it fails to respond with appropriate force, the legal system itself.

Control frauds always fail in the end. But the failure of the firm does not mean the fraud fails: the perpetrators often walk away rich. At some point, this requires subverting, suborning or defeating the law. This is where crime and politics intersect. At its heart, therefore, the financial crisis was a breakdown in the rule of law in America.

Ask yourselves: is it possible for mortgage originators, ratings agencies, underwriters, insurers and supervising agencies NOT to have known that the system of housing finance had become infested with fraud? Every statistical indicator of fraudulent practice – growth and profitability – suggests otherwise. Every examination of the record so far suggests otherwise. The very language in use: "liars' loans," "ninja loans," "neutron loans," and "toxic waste," tells you that people knew. I have also heard the expression, "IBG,YBG;" the meaning of that bit of code was: "I'll be gone, you'll be gone."

If doubt remains, investigation into the internal communications of the firms and agencies in question can clear it up. Emails are revealing. The government already possesses critical documentary trails -- those of AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve. Those documents should be investigated, in full, by competent authority and also released, as appropriate, to the public. For instance, did AIG knowingly issue CDS against instruments that Goldman had designed on behalf of Mr. John Paulson to fail? If so, why? Or again: Did Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac appreciate the poor quality of the RMBS they were acquiring? Did they do so under pressure from Mr. Henry Paulson? If so, did Secretary Paulson know? And if he did, why did he act as he did? In a recent paper, Thomas Ferguson and Robert Johnson argue that the "Paulson Put" was intended to delay an inevitable crisis past the election. Does the internal record support this view?

Let us suppose that the investigation that you are about to begin confirms the existence of pervasive fraud, involving millions of mortgages, thousands of appraisers, underwriters, analysts, and the executives of the companies in which they worked, as well as public officials who assisted by turning a Nelson's Eye. What is the appropriate response?

Some appear to believe that "confidence in the banks" can be rebuilt by a new round of good economic news, by rising stock prices, by the reassurances of high officials – and by not looking too closely at the underlying evidence of fraud, abuse, deception and deceit. As you pursue your investigations, you will undermine, and I believe you may destroy, that illusion.

But you have to act. The true alternative is a failure extending over time from the economic to the political system. Just as too few predicted the financial crisis, it may be that too few are today speaking frankly about where a failure to deal with the aftermath may lead.

In this situation, let me suggest, the country faces an existential threat. Either the legal system must do its work. Or the market system cannot be restored. There must be a thorough, transparent, effective, radical cleaning of the financial sector and also of those public officials who failed the public trust. The financiers must be made to feel, in their bones, the power of the law. And the public, which lives by the law, must see very clearly and unambiguously that this is the case. Thank you.

James K. Galbraith is the author of The Predator State: How Conservatives Abandoned the Free Market and Why Liberals Should Too, and of a new preface to The Great Crash, 1929, by John Kenneth Galbraith. He teaches at The University of Texas at Austin.

VIDEO - Fundamental & Technical Analysis of the S&P 500's Daily & Weekly Charts:

Technical Analysis of the S&P 500's daily and weekly charts, plus a look at the important Economic and Earnings Reports due out next week...

This video is viewed best in Full-Screen Mode...Click the four arrows in the bottom right corner...Press the Escape key on your keyboard to exit back to Normal Mode...

Happy Trading this week...
zigzagman