Wall
Street Loves the Mushy Jobs Report
by
Sinclair Noe
DOW
– 5= 14968
SPX + 3 = 1617
NAS + 14 = 3392
10 YR YLD + .02 = 1.77%
OIL + .18 = 95.79
GOLD - .40 = 1471.30
SILV - .09 = 24.14
SPX + 3 = 1617
NAS + 14 = 3392
10 YR YLD + .02 = 1.77%
OIL + .18 = 95.79
GOLD - .40 = 1471.30
SILV - .09 = 24.14
Friday's
jobs report was great for Wall Street. The Dow Industrials briefly
topped 15,000 and managed to close at a record high. The S&P 500
hits new records as well. The actual jobs report was only semi-good.
The economy added 165,000 net new jobs in April. The February and
March reports were revised higher. That's certainly better than
losing 700,000 jobs, but it wasn't enough to get the economy up to
cruising speed. Wall Street loved it; just enough job growth to avoid
recession; not enough job growth to cause the Fed to exit QE to
infinity.
Wages
are still basically flat. Since the financial collapse of 2008, 9.5
million Americans have simply left the workforce. Once you leave the
workforce, you stop being counted, you become invisible. About 22
million Americans are unemployed or under-employed or working
part-time because they can't find full-time work. The Federal Reserve
last week told us they are pretty well tapped out as far as their
ability to fix things; they said: “fiscal policy is restraining
economic growth.”
A
new report from the Brookings Institute puts numbers on fiscal
policy. In the 46 months since the official end of the Great
Recession, state, local and federal governments have cut about
500,000 jobs. In contrast, in every other U.S. recession since 1970,
the government hired approximately 1.7 million people, on average.
That means the U.S. is an estimated 2.2 million jobs in the hole. An
extra 2.2 million jobs added to the labor force would mean the
unemployment rate would be about 6.1% instead of 7.5%.
President
Obama set a goal of 1 million new manufacturing jobs in his second
term. Last month we added zero.
Not one. Nada. Zip. We did add low-wage jobs, though. Maybe we can
talk about a national manufacturing strategy now?
In
the 2012 campaign President Obama set a goal of creating 1 million
new manufacturing jobs. (This goal comes after the country lost 5.5
million manufacturing jobs between 2000 and 2009.) Manufacturing jobs
bring money into the economy. Manufacturing jobs also bring along
with them many jobs in other sectors that support manufacturing, from
the supply chain to the maintenance to the marketing and sales of the
goods. This is what the president understood when he set this goal.
But with the March jobs numbers the economy has created a total of
only 39,000 manufacturing jobs this year -- zero in March. That
leaves the country with 961,000 manufacturing jobs to go in the time
remaining.
So,
today, President Obama headed out on a jobs tour, touting who knows
what, trying to build suport for who knows what. He's going to Austin
Texas. He'll visit a high school and a technology company, and will
talk with entrepreneurs and workers about proposals he made earlier
this year to boost jobs and training. In
February, Obama said he wanted to invest in manufacturing "hubs"
around the country, spend $50 billion on roads, bridges and other
infrastructure, and raise the minimum wage to $9 per hour from the
current $7.25. Most of the proposals require Congressional approval,
but that's not going to happen.
And
for now, Wall Street loves the slightly mushy, slightly tepid jobs
reports. One hallmark of a bull market is that the money doesn't
leave the market. Over the past seven weeks or so, there were ample
opportunities for the market to correct. It didn’t, and now it has
broken higher once more.
All the indexes have broken higher at this juncture. It will correct at some point, but a lack of selling dooms those looking for a correction. Until that fact changes, it is more of the same.
Bull markets rotate, especially as they age. What was outcast becomes vogue and that which was hot becomes cold. The past couple of months has seen this process at work, with the safety sectors of health care, consumer durables, and utilities beginning consolidations while technology became hot once more.
Remember
the National Mortgage Settlement? A little over a year ago, 5 major
US banks worked out a deal with 49 state attorneys general to cut
mortgage debt amounts and restructure troubled loans; it was a $25
billion dollar deal, although the banks were allowed to count things
like short sales as part of their penalties. The banks were supposed
to improve their services and not leave people in limbo when
requesting loan mods or other services. So, how are they doing?
Well,
New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman says that Bank of
America and Wells Fargo “have
flagrantly violated those obligations, putting hundreds of homeowners
across New York at greater risk of foreclosure,"
and he intends to sue them for violating the terms of the settlement.
Schneiderman
said he would seek injunctive relief and an order requiring the two
banks to comply with the settlement. His statement did not say he was
seeking damages or penalties. No word on how the other
banks (JPMorgan Chase, Citi, and Ally) were performing.
There
was a monitor assigned to track the banks' performance or lack
thereof, and they are expected to issue a report in the next couple
of months; then attorneys general have a chance to file enforcement
claims following a 21-day notice to the monitoring committee.
Meanwhile,
there was a New
York Times report over the weekend that said there was a 70-page
government document that the Federal Energy Regulatory Committee, or
FERC, sent to JPMorgan in March, alleging the bank manipulated
the power market in California and Michigan in 2010 and 2011. FERC
investigators found JPMorgan devised "manipulative schemes"
that transformed "money-losing power plants into powerful profit
centers." The Times report indicates the bank has until mid-May
to respond.
FERC
has already put together a case against Barclays which includes $470
million in proposed penalties.FERC has jurisdiction over physical
power and trading in natural gas, but several of its recent cases -
including the one against Barclays - hinge on demonstrating that
traders may have manipulated physical prices in order to profit on
derivatives. Barclays has disputed the FERC allegations and said it
will defend itself in court if FERC issues a final order seeking to
impose the fine. To date, FERC has not issued a final order.
FERC
has not moved publicly to charge JPMorgan, but it looks more and more
likely. FERC normally does not disclose investigations but last
summer they subpoenaed internal emails and other documents as part of
an ongoing investigation focused on bidding practices that may have
raised electricity prices about $73 million in California and
Midwestern power markets.
In
November, FERC imposed a temporary ban on JPMorgan's ability to trade
physical power at market-based rates for six months, starting in
April, for failing to disclose information to the FERC and the
California ISO in a market manipulation investigation.
The
70-page
document took aim at Blythe Masters, a top executive who is known on
Wall Street for helping expand the boundaries of finance. The
document cites her supposed “knowledge and approval of schemes”
carried out by energy traders in Houston. The investigators claimed
she had “falsely” denied under oath her awareness of the
problems.
In
addition, the bank faces showdowns with other agencies, like the
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which is considering new
enforcement actions against JPMorgan over how it collected credit
card debt and that the bank relied on faulty documents when pursuing
lawsuits against delinquent customers; who may or may not have been
delinquent.
In
a recent report examining a $6 billion trading loss at the bank,
Senate investigators faulted JPMorgan for briefly withholding
documents from regulators. The trading loss has spawned several law
enforcement investigations into the traders who created the faulty
wager.
Also
under investigation is the bank's possible failure to alert
authorities to suspicions about Bernard L. Madoff. The Times reports
at least eight federal agencies are investigating the bank.
Meanwhile,
Bank of America has reached a settlement with MBIA. Here is the basic
situation at the heart of the dispute; prior ot the meltdown in 2008,
MBIA wrote insurance on many mortgage securitizations and credit
default swaps that ultimately went bad, including obligations that
seemed likely to force it to pay as much as $3 billion toMerril
Lynch. The insurer claimed that it had been misled by Countrywide
Financial regarding the quality of mortgages it was insuring, and
sought as much as $5 billion from Countrywide.
The
settlement calls for BofA to pay $1.6 billion in cash and return
about $100 million in bonds.
In
an interview on CNBC, Charlie Munger, Warren Buffet's right hand man,
said that Cyprus demonstrates, “an old truth, you can’t trust
bankers to govern themselves. A banker who’s allowed to borrow
money at X and loan it out at X plus Y will just go crazy and do too
much of it, if the civilization doesn’t have rules that prevent
it.” Munger added, “What happened in Cyprus was very similar to
what happened in Iceland, it was stark raving mad in both cases. And
the bankers, they’d be doing even more if the thing hadn’t blown
up. I do not think you can trust bankers to control themselves.
They’re like heroin addicts.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.