Three
Strikes
by
Sinclair Noe
DOW
– 104 = 15,739
SPX – 6 = 1775
NAS – 5 = 3998
10 YR YLD + .03 = 2.88%
OIL - .06 = 97.38
GOLD – 27.10 = 1226.20
SILV - .81 = 19.60
SPX – 6 = 1775
NAS – 5 = 3998
10 YR YLD + .03 = 2.88%
OIL - .06 = 97.38
GOLD – 27.10 = 1226.20
SILV - .81 = 19.60
Stocks
down for a third day in a row, and except for that big gain on the
news of the monthly jobs report, this has been a nasty start to
December. Weekly jobless claims jumped to 368,00 from 300,000 the
week before. Overall
retail sales climbed a seasonally adjusted 0.7% last month, the most
since June. Auto sales jumped 1.8% in November, the most since
June. Meanwhile, there were drops in retail sales of 0.2% for
clothing and accessories stores, and 1.1% at gasoline stations.
Online and other non-store retailers saw sales rise 2.2% in November,
the most since July 2012. Over the past year, retail sales have grown
4.7%. Inventories at US businesses rose 0.7% in October. Maybe
businesses are expecting a great holiday shopping season but it isn't
looking good.
Neither
the jobless claims nor the retail sales will move the Fed’s current
position on tapering. Markets have been focused on the timing and the
slope of Fed bond-buying tapering and not on anything else. Most
likely, the Fed will meet next week and not taper, but they will
likely communicate clearly their intent to taper.
The
just agreed 2014-2015 US budget deal faces a crucial test today when
the House of Representatives votes on the bill, with Speaker John
Boehner urging skeptical conservatives to back it. The agreement
sealed between top Democratic and Republican negotiators is seen as a
chance to end the brutal cycle of fiscal crises that have plagued
Washington in recent years. The legislation, which sets spending caps
at $1.012 trillion for 2014 and $1.014 trillion for 2015, and repeals
billions in a package of arbitrary cuts known as sequestration,
appears likely to pass the Republican-led House. It would then go to
the Senate for a vote, likely next week before the chamber adjourns
for the year-end holiday.
Pemex is the pride of Mexico. Part of the reason may be that it is ubiquitous. Every gas station in Mexico has the green and white sign of the state owned oil company. When all else failed, Pemex was the economic lifeblood of the Mexican government. Today, the Mexican Congress passed legislation declaring that Mexico still owns its oil, but allowing private companies to drill for oil and natural gas in partnership with Pemex, or on their own, returning international oil companies to territory they were kicked out of 75 years ago.
The
stated goal is to stimulate Mexico’s sliding oil production and
vault the country into the developed world by tapping vast pockets of
oil and natural gas deep under the earth and sea. Foreign oil
companies have long been eager to gain access to Mexico’s oil and
have quietly lobbied the government to open up for years, while Pemex
is known for inefficiency at best, and corruption at worst.
Mexico’s
oil production has declined by 25 percent from its 2004 peak, to just
over 2.5 million barrels a day. Pemex is spending more to pump less:
investment has more than doubled in the same period to more than $20
billion a year. It may not be the best run oil company
but Mexicans tend to consider it their oil company. In
a country where controlling oil is often equated with sovereignty and
national pride, the plan has set off furious debate.
And
it's just part of a bigger plan. President Pena Nieto is also pushing
to break up telecommunication monopolies, raise taxes and weaken the
teachers union grip on faltering public schools. Two decades after
Mexico sold off banks and the telephone monopoly, Mexicans pay more
for credit and phones service than other Latin Americans, and they
suspect they will pay more for gas under the new law, too.
Five
years ago, Bernie Madoff was arrested in New York for running a Ponzi
scheme. Madoff's banker was JPMorgan. Federal authorities suspect
JPMorgan continued
to serve as Madoff’s primary bank even as questions mounted about
his operation, with one bank executive acknowledging before the
arrest that Madoff’s “Oz-like signals” were “too difficult to
ignore.” And so now, the authorities are going after JPMorgan;
apparently close to a settlement that would involve about $2 billion
in penalties and criminal action, or what passes as criminal action
in the world of Wall Street bankers.
The
government would use a chunk of the money, probably less than half to
compensate Madoff's victims. The settlement would include a deferred
prosecution agreement, which would list the bank’s criminal
violations in a court filing but stop short of an indictment as long
as JPMorgan pays the penalties and acknowledges the facts of the
government’s case. The deferred prosecution agreement is expected
to fault JPMorgan for a “programmatic violation” of the Bank
Secrecy Act, which requires banks to maintain internal controls
against money laundering and to report suspicious transactions to the
authorities. And just to be clear, this case involves money
laundering by JPMorgan.
The
government has been reluctant to bring criminal charges against large
corporations, fearing that such an action could imperil a company and
throw innocent employees out of work. Those fears trace to the
indictment of Enron's accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, which went
out of businesses after its 2002 conviction, taking 28,000 jobs with
it. Ever since, prosecutors have increasingly relied on deferred
prosecution agreements, which is a slap on the wrist and allows the
bank to continue, as long as they don't continue with their illegal
activities. So the basic idea is that JPMorgan can break the law, pay
off the government and promise not to do it again. Prosecutors insist
that no one is too big to indict or too big to jail. It will be
interesting to see if JPMorgan can indeed clean up its business and
manage to stop breaking the law; and if they can't keep their nose
clean, it'll be interesting to see if the prosecutors actually have
the fortitude to enforce the law.
Two
years ago JPMorgan entered an “non-prosecution agreement” to
settle antitrust charges. I'm sure there is some sort of fine
distinction between a “non-prosecution agreement” and a
“deferred-prosecution agreement” but they sound similar; no
criminal charges as long as they kept to the straight and narrow for
2 years. Then there was that problem of manipulating electricity
markets between 2010 and 2012. The head of their commodities trading
division, Blythe Masters, was accused of making false and misleading
statements to federal energy regulators. No criminal charges were
filed.
Pope
Francis is at it again. Francis, who was named Time magazine's Person
of the Year on Wednesday, has urged his own Church to be more fair,
frugal and less pompous and to be closer to the poor and suffering. A
couple of weeks ago he published an apostolic exhortation title, The
Joy of the Gospel, where he attacked unfettered capitalism, as “a
new tyranny” and condemned the "idolatry of money".
Now
in a new message for the Roman Catholic Church's World Day of Peace,
marked around the world on Jan. 1, he also called for sharing of
wealth and for nations to shrink the gap between rich and poor, more
of whom are getting only "crumbs". And he says that huge
salaries and bonuses are symptoms of an economy based on greed
and inequality.
Titled
"Fraternity, the Foundation and Pathway to Peace", the
message also attacked injustice, human trafficking, organized crime
and the weapons trade as obstacles to peace.
Francis
said many places in the world were seeing a "serious rise"
in inequality between people living side by side. He attacked the
"widening gap between those who have more and those who must be
content with the crumbs", calling on governments to implement
"effective policies" to guarantee people's fundamental
rights, including access to capital, services, educational resources,
healthcare and technology. The Pope says: "The grave financial
and economic crises of the present time ... have pushed man to seek
satisfaction, happiness and security in consumption and earnings out
of all proportion to the principles of a sound economy."
I'm
going to take a little vacation time over the next couple of weeks.
Don't worry, I'll continue to update the blog on a kind of regular
basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.