Monday, June 23, 2014 - Calm Before the Storm

Calm Before the Storm
by Sinclair Noe

DOW – 9 = 16,937
SPX – 0.26 = 1962
NAS + 0.64 = 4368
10 YR YLD un = 2.62%
OIL  - .13 = 106.04
GOLD + 3.60 = 1319.30
SILV + .02 = 21.00

The economic data today from the National Association of Realtors shows existing home sales picked up in May. Total sales rose 4.9% to 4.89 million units from an upwardly revised 4.66 million in April. While that marks a month to month increase, sales are down from the 5.15 million level of May one year ago.  Total housing inventory increased 2.2% in May. Unsold inventory is 6% higher than a year ago.

Meanwhile, Markit's US Flash manufacturing PMI report for June, increased to 57.5 from 56.4 in May.

The stock market has drifted slightly higher over the past couple of months. Yes we hit record highs last week, but the movement has been very slow, volume has been light, and volatility is almost non-existent. Volume is down about 50% since 2008. The VIX, or volatility index, sometimes known as the fear index, is down below 12, which means that the only people in the options market are all maxxed out on Ambien, or Valium. The S&P 500 hasn’t had a daily move of 1% in more than 2 months. Russia invades Ukraine – wake me when it’s over. Radical militants threaten to tear apart Iraq – we’ve seen this story before. The US economy is weak right now but growth is right around the corner – rinse, lather, repeat. The US plays Portugal in the World Cup and it’s a tie, of course.

The Federal Reserve looked at monetary policy and cranked up the old Xerox to publish their statement. Maybe this is the result of all that Federal Reserve fiddling; maybe they have created the boring stock market, which lulls everyone into a false sense of complacency. Of course, that’s not how markets work, no matter how much central bank finesse is applied. Markets are risky, always have been, always will be. I think it’s safe to say this is the calm before the storm, because there is always a storm in the markets.

There was some merger activity today. General Electric struck a deal to acquire France-based Alstom's power business for $16.9 billion after a lengthy pursuit. There was another utility deal, Wisconsin Energy announced a deal to acquire Integrys Energy for $9.1 billion. Oracle also announced a deal to acquire MICROS Systems for $4.6 billion.

The price of oil has been one of the few markets to show movement, which is not good news for drivers. Rising oil prices translate to rising gasoline prices, but there is lag of several weeks. Given the recent jump in oil prices, gasoline prices are poised to increase in coming weeks. Higher prices at the pump serve as a tax on consumers, whose purchasing power is still questionable. It’s estimated that an increase of $10 a barrel subtracts 0.4% from real GDP growth. Of course, for that to apply, the price increase has to stick.

The Supreme Court is in session and today they ruled on limiting the Environmental Protection Agency’s power to regulate facilities that emit carbon dioxide. The decision would reduce the number of carbon-emitting facilities the EPA can regulate, but it is a limited ruling, and even Justice Scalia said: "It bears mention that EPA is getting almost everything it wanted in this case."

Meanwhile a statement from the EPA claims victory, "The Supreme Court’s decision is a win for our efforts to reduce carbon pollution because it allows EPA, states and other permitting authorities to continue to require carbon pollution limits in permits for the largest pollution sources." Industry groups, such as the American Petroleum Institute, also claimed victory. The group said in a statement that the decision was a "stark reminder that the EPA's power is not unlimited."

The decision won't have a huge impact on US climate policy, as the decision only modestly changed the number of large facilities subject to certain permitting requirements. It also won't affect the Obama administration’s proposal to reduce emissions from power plants, which is a separate program.

When the EPA classifies something (like carbon dioxide) as a harmful pollutant, it triggers a number of legal requirements under the Clean Air Act. One of them, known as a "prevention of significant deterioration" (PSD) rule, requires factories, power plants, and other large facilities to get the EPA's approval before they make changes that would lead to higher pollution. These facilities also must use the "best available control technology" to reduce the effects of pollution they emit. Another provision requires any facility that is a "major source" of pollution to get a permit from the EPA.

Under the Clean Air Act, facilities become subject to these regulations if they emit more than 250 tons (or in some cases as little as 100 tons) of pollution per year. Traditional pollutants such as sulfur dioxide or lead can be harmful even if they are only emitted in trace amounts, so a relatively low threshold makes sense. Only large factories and power plants emit that much of these conventional pollutants.

But carbon dioxide is different. Factories produce vastly more carbon dioxide than other pollutants regulated by the EPA. Under existing rules, about 15,000 facilities are required to get permits under the Clean Air Act based on their emissions of non-carbon pollutants. If the EPA had used the same 250-ton threshold for carbon dioxide emissions, 6.1 million facilities would suddenly have needed permits. The agency estimated it would cost $21 billion per year just to process all that paperwork.

So the agency effectively re-wrote the law, exempting facilities that emitted less than 100,000 tons of carbon dioxide from getting a permit. Several states and business groups challenged this decision, arguing that the EPA had no authority to unilaterally re-write the law.

Almost everyone agrees that a literal reading of the Clean Air Act would lead to madness. The EPA has warned that "decade-long delays in issuing permits would become common, causing construction projects to grind to a halt nationwide." The Supreme Court didn't want that to happen.

But a majority of the court, led by Justice Scalia, also didn't like the EPA's approach. The court said that if Congress set a threshold of 250 tons, the EPA can't just unilaterally change it to 100,000 tons. Instead, the court's majority held that the term "air pollutant" can have different meanings in different parts of the Clean Air Act. While the "Act-wide definition" of air pollutant includes carbon dioxide, Scalia wrote, "EPA has routinely given it a narrower, context-appropriate meaning" in certain parts of the Clean Air Act. Scalia used the same trick to avoid subjecting millions of facilities to burdensome permitting requirements. He held that the definition of "air pollutant" didn't include carbon dioxide in sections of the Clean Air Act where including it would lead to a vast expansion in regulation.

The court's four liberals, led by Justice Stephen Breyer, preferred a different approach. Rather than selectively interpreting "any air pollutant" to exclude carbon dioxide, Breyer would instead have interpreted another phrase in the same section of the law, "any source" to exclude power plants that produce only modest amounts of carbon dioxide.

Two of the court's conservatives, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, wrote a separate opinion arguing that the Supreme Court had been wrong to push the EPA into regulating carbon dioxide in the first place in 2007.

While the EPA can't impose regulations on new power plants based on their carbon dioxide emissions, the court ruled that the courts can regulate the carbon dioxide emissions of facilities that are already subject to regulations based on their emissions of conventional pollutants. So the EPA will still do what the EPA does; it’s estimated that 83% of greenhouse gas emissions that could potentially be regulated under the Environmental Protection Agency's interpretation of the law would still be covered as a result of the ruling, compared with the 86% of emissions that the EPA says it wants to regulate.

What today’s ruling really shows is that Congress has been out of touch and dysfunctional in dealing with pollution and climate change; rather than deal with issues, they stick their heads in the sand and hope the problem goes away, but it doesn’t; it simply shifts to another part of government that may or may not manage to resolve the problem, but in either case, is not held accountable to the voters; and then finally, if the problem persists, it goes to the courts. It’s a bad way to make and enforce laws.

A couple of other cases today: in Loughrin v. US; the court declined to reduce the scope of a federal criminal law against bank fraud, ruling that prosecutors do not need to prove that defendants intended to defraud a bank. The decision came in an appeal brought by Kevin Loughrin, who was convicted of six counts of bank fraud for stealing checks that he then altered so he could buy merchandise at Target stores.

Loughrin told police he meant to buy the items using the checks, then return the items for cash refunds. He was charged with using altered checks totaling $1,184.  Loughrin appealed his conviction. He argued that the bank fraud statute required prosecutors to prove that he intended to defraud the banks on which the checks were drawn. He said his intent was only to deceive Target. In other words, this was run of the mill fraud, and the use of a check was incidental. Loughrin did not appeal his related convictions for identity theft and possession of stolen mail. Between 2006 and 2010, the government sought to prosecute nearly 3,000 cases using the statute. Meanwhile, no major bankers have gone to jail for the crimes associated with the financial crisis; I’m just saying.

One more decision today: New Jersey wanted to institute legalized gambling on football, passing a law that the NFL and other sports leagues quickly fought in court.  The NFL won (as it often seems to do in court) at the federal appellate level, forcing New Jersey to take the case to the Supreme Court. The Supremes declined to review the case, so if you are in New Jersey, or any other state except Nevada, you’ll have to continue to call your bookie, or you can play fantasy football in a league set up through the NFL’s website.

Monday, June 09, 2014 - Record Highs and a Few Crumbs

Record Highs and a Few Crumbs

by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 18 = 16,943
SPX + 1 = 1951
NAS + 14 = 4336
10 YR YLD + .02 = 2.61%
OIL + 1.73 = 104.39
GOLD - .30 = 1253.00
SILV + .05 = 19.16

The major indices are now up for 4 consecutive sessions. The Dow Industrials hit a record high close for the 10^th time this year. The S&P is now up 14 of the last 17 trading sessions. The last time the Dow experienced a 10% correction was back in October 2011; since then, the Dow has gained almost 60% over 32 months without a 10% correction. Typically, you can expect a correction about every 12 months on average. The longest period without at least a 10% pullback was an 82 month run from 1990-1997. The S&P 500 hit a record high close for the 19th time this year. The S&P bull market is now at 62 months and counting, the best run since 1994 to 2000.

The CBOE Volatility Index moved a little higher today to 11.34. On Friday, the VIX hit a low of 10.73, the lowest level since January 2007. The VIX can go low and stay low for an extended period of time. In 2007, after hitting a low, the VIX steadily rose for the remainder of the year but stock prices didn’t peak until the end of 2007. The VIX measures options trades, but does it really mean investors are dangerously complacent? The Murdoch Street Journal reports: “Last week, 39% of respondents to a long-running weekly survey from the American Association of Individual Investors said they were bullish about stocks. That is well above readings of just over 27% in both February and April, when violence in Ukraine weighed on sentiment. But it is far from giddy. In fact, it is in line with the average since the poll's inception in 1987.”

Today had all the signs of a bull market, in addition to record highs, we had a good old fashioned Merger Monday. Tyson foods agreed to buy Hillshire for $8.5 billion, or $63 a share cash. That follows a bidding war between Tyson and Pilgrim’s Pride that pushed Hillshire from $37 a share on May 23 to the current bid.

Drugmaker Merck paid $3.9 billion, or $24.50 a share in cash for Idenix Pharmaceuticals, a 240% premium to Friday’s close of $7.23. Idenix has three drugs to treat Hepatitis C in clinical trials, but none on the market. Chipmaker Analog Devices agreed to buy Hittite Microwave Corp for $2.5 billion, or $78 a share, a mere 29% premium to Friday’s close.

Depending on the source, deal volume is up about 65% to 70% this year. Worldwide, companies are sitting on about $7.5 trillion of cash. With organic top line growth hard to come by in sluggish economies, many are turning to acquisitions.

You can buy a share of Apple for about $93; that following a 7 for 1 split; the first split for Apple in 9 years. A split is generally a non-event. If you owned 100 shares of Apple on Friday, you now own 700 shares, but the price was divided by 7. The financial structure and value of the company doesn’t change.

The yield on a 10-year US Treasury note was up a couple of basis points today to 2.61%. Meanwhile, the yield on the 10-year Spanish government bonds dropped 5 basis points to yield 2.59%. Normally, you would expect a government bond yield to correspond to demand and overall safety of the bond and the country backing the bond. Things are a little upside down. The good news is that investors aren’t expecting the Eurozone to disintegrate; the bad news is that investors aren’t expecting any growth in the Eurozone.

James Bullard, president of the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, speaking at a conference in Florida today, said the US macroeconomy is much closer to a normal state than it has been in 5 years and only weak labor markets and low inflation is keeping the Fed’s accommodative monetary policy in place. Last month, Bullard said that while the housing and labor markets remain weak, he expects recovery through the rest of the year, and said inflation would likely move towards the Fed's desired 2% rate.

Bullard told reporters after his speech: “If you get 3% growth for the rest of this year, if you get unemployment coming down below 6%, if you continue to have jobs growth at 200,000, if you continue to see inflation moving back up toward target, I think if we get to the fall of the year and all of those things are transpiring as I’m suggesting they will, that will change the conversation about monetary policy, and there will be more sentiment toward an earlier rate hike.”

The housing market may not be as strong as some Fed policymakers believe. On Friday, the jobs report showed the economy had regained all the jobs lost in the recession, but that isn’t the case for the home building sector. The number of construction jobs has been climbing, rising about 7% in May from a year earlier, to 2.6 million, including electricians and other specialty trade contractors; but that's way down from the high of 3.45 million in April 2006. While jobs overall are back to their pre-recession peak, residential construction jobs are 34% below their peak.

Even five years after the housing meltdown, a sizeable chunk of homeowners remain underwater. About 6.3 million homes, or 12.7% of all properties with a mortgage, were underwater as of the first quarter.  About 1 in 10 homeowners are almost underwater, with less than 10% equity in their homes, meaning it would probably cost them to sell, when including selling related expenses.

A survey released last week by the MacArthur Foundation found that 43% of those polled said it is no longer the case that owning a home is an excellent long-term investment and one of the best ways for people to build wealth. More than half said that buying a home has become less appealing than it once was. And 70% believe the nation is still in the middle of a crisis and that the worst is yet to come.

One major demographic group that isn’t buying homes is the Millennials; they are just trying to pay off student loans. President Obama announced Monday that he will expand a federal program designed to reduce student loan payments. The program, called “Pay As You Earn”, will give as many as five million more Americans with federal student loan debt the ability to cap their monthly student loan payments at 10% of their income and to have their remaining debt forgiven after either 10 years (for government and some non-profit workers) or 20 years (for other workers).

The current program is only available to Americans who began borrowing after October 2007 and kept borrowing after October 2011; the new order will allow students who borrowed money before October 2007 and those who have not borrowed since October 2011 to participate. The new program will begin in December 2015.

Of course, like so much consumer debt, if you pay the smallest monthly minimum, you just string out the loan and end up paying more over time; so, the new plan might not work for everybody. The best idea is to work some numbers, comparing monthly payments and lifetime costs; there are calculators for this at the Department of Education website.

The housing market is just one factor in an economy that doesn’t seem quite as strong as Fed President Bullard suggests. This was supposed to be a breakout year for economic growth but it started with negative GDP in the first quarter. And even though we have regained the jobs lost in the recession we still have nearly 10 million unemployed, and that’s more than 2 million more than in January 2008; and the quality of the jobs, and the pay has gone downhill for most workers. Income growth is at its lowest point since 2007. When people are shopping, they’re using borrowed money.

Corporations and Wall Street raked in profits unseen in their history. At the end of 2013, corporate profits hit an all-time high of $1.9 trillion. Those profits were largely achieved not by growing, but by cutting jobs and investments; and relying instead on mergers, buybacks, stock splits, QE, and other financial legerdemain.

The economy hasn’t really turned positive. It could change. Maybe the Fed will quit QE and try something that actually helps the economy. Until then, enjoy your milk and cookies, or whatever crumbs might come your way.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - Record Highs and Dow Theory

Record Highs and Dow Theory

by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 19 = 16,715
SPX + 0.8 = 1897
NAS – 13 = 4130
10 YR YLD - .03 = 2.62%
OIL + 1.38 = 101.97
GOLD – 1.00 = 1295.70
SILV + .03 = 19.63

Record highs are seldom pretty; they tend to be sloppy affairs, much like our celebrations. You would like a nice neat procession, but people are marching in different directions, candles blow out, hot wax is spilled.

It doesn’t seem like we should be having record highs in the first place, but there it is:  the S&P 500 hits 1900 for the first time ever; the Dow Industrials at record highs; the Dow Transportation Average confirms with record highs. This is important because it goes back to one of the more important technical indicators in the US stock market, the Dow Theory.

The Dow Theory is based on the writings of Charles Dow, the founder and editor of the Wall Street Journal, and dates back more than 100 years. There are actually several tenets of the theory that examine the major trends in the market and posit that the market is efficient, that it incorporates and discounts all news with greater accuracy than any individual. Once a trend is in place it is likely to continue until there is definitive evidence of a reversal; in this light, the slog through the first quarter might be considered as nothing more than market noise. Dow Theory also holds that volume confirms price trends.

And the theory also holds that the Dow Transports should confirm the Dow Industrials. The idea was that the Industrial average reflected the factories scattered around the country and the transportation average consisted of the companies that hauled the goods from the manufacturer to the market. If manufacturers are producing more, they have to ship goods to consumers, so if you want to know about the health of manufacturers, look to the performance of the companies that ship the goods. The two averages should be moving in the same direction; that is, they should confirm. So, if the Transportation average hits record highs, which it did, the Industrials should also hit new highs, which happened yesterday.

In mid-March, the transports broke above prior 2014 highs while the Industrials still lagged below their corresponding 2014 high. This could have been interpreted as a divergence, and even a signal to sell the industrials. However, Dow Theory tells us that industrials lag transports. It makes sense, because goods need to be transported before they can be sold.

Now, if you want to try and front-run Dow Theory, you want to pay attention to sales. Today, the Commerce Department released April sales figures, and they were flat, up just 0.1%, but this follows a revised 1.5% increase in March; that was the largest increase since March 2010 and reflected pent-up demand after a brutally cold winter. So, March sales were spectacular, and that was reflected in the Dow Transportation Average, and eventually the Dow Industrial Average confirmed the Transports. And now, the April numbers look weak despite data like employment, as well as manufacturing and services industries surveys, suggesting the economy regained strength early in the second quarter.

A second report from the Commerce Department showed that retail inventories excluding automobile stocks barely rose in March. The government had assumed a big increase in these stocks when it made its advance growth estimates last month for gross domestic product at 0.1% growth. March trade, construction spending and factory inventory data, which the government did not have in hand for the GDP estimate, suggest downward revisions to output; likely showing the economy contracting slightly. Core sales were down 0.1% in April; core sales strip out automobiles, gasoline, building materials and food services, and correspond most closely with the consumer spending component of the GDP.

Meanwhile, the Fed reported today that Americans racked up more debt in the first quarter, the third straight quarterly increase, thanks in large part to heftier mortgages. The report on household debt and credit showed however that mortgage originations dropped to their lowest level since the third quarter of last year. Outstanding household debt rose by $129 billion from the previous quarter, boosted by a $116 billion jump in mortgage debt and smaller rises in student and auto loans.

And in the sometimes twisted logic of Wall Street, this might be considered good news, the economy isn’t collapsing but it certainly isn’t growing enough to warrant a change in interest rate policy from the Fed. Any increase in interest rates could hobble consumers, businesses, and even the government.

Prices and wages been have sluggish since the 2007-2009 recession, and especially so in the past couple of years. Inflation remains low, and it undershot the Fed’s 2% target for the 23^rd consecutive month in March, based upon the personal consumption expenditures price index. Stubbornly elevated unemployment puts downward pressure on inflation. We still have slack in the labor market, so we’ll likely have very low interest rate targets for quite some time.

Meanwhile, we’re wrapping up earnings reporting season and according to Bloomberg research, almost 76% of the 453 companies in the S&P 500 that have reported earnings had results that were higher than analysts' estimates and approximately 53% of them exceeded revenue estimates. I know this is a rigged game between corporations and analysts, but companies are making money and sitting on piles of cash.

The corporate cash pile reached $2.02 trillion in the latest quarterly filings of 2,300 non-financial companies in the Russell 3000 Index. According to Bloomberg, the total rose about 13% from a year earlier in each of the two latest quarters, the fastest six-month gain since mid-2011.  If investors aren't applying some sort of haircut to the valuations of companies with hefty amounts of cash overseas, perhaps they should be; that is the mantra of activist shareholders. And so companies are beginning to pick up M&A activity as well as share buybacks and dividend increases. Capital spending on structures, equipment and intellectual property by all US companies in 2013 increased 3.9%, the slowest pace in three years. Eventually there will be value in reinvesting in the company to grow revenue; we’re not there yet, but we’re getting closer.

Again, one of the tenets of Dow Theory is that a trend in place is likely to continue until there is definitive evidence of a reversal; we’re not there yet. The trend is bullish; the supporting data is only mildly positive. In this instance, you stay in the market and remain alert to possible reversals. The level of support for the Dow, now moves up to the 16,550 range. On the upper end, there really is no level of resistance when you hit new highs, with the possible exception of Fibonacci expansion levels, which could put a ceiling around 16,800.

Meanwhile, if you’re looking for a negative divergence, you need look no further than the Russell 2000 Index of small and mid-cap stocks. The Russell has been persistently below its 50 day moving average since early April, and last week it dipped below the 200 day moving average; yesterday it bounced up above the 200 day and remained above the average today, despite losing 12 points. So, if you are looking for an early warning, this is a good place to look. If the Russell can move above the 200 day average here, it would have to be considered positive and also confirmation of the blue chips. If there is a breakdown from here, it might drag the blue chips lower.

Now, even if the market moves lower from here, it doesn’t mean we’re crashing back down to the 2009 levels; there is no definitive evidence for that kind of a move; there is plenty of fear mongering; there are plenty of perma-bears and they are about as accurate as a broken clock. The world is not coming to an end, at least not today; the market is not crashing, at least not today. In fact, we’ve been going through one of the best five year bull runs in market history. The VIX, the volatility index is at its lowest levels in more than a year. The major trend is bullish but this is no time for complacency. One of the tricks to profitable trading is knowing when to let winners run, and when to lock in profits.

These are the days of milk and cookies. Enjoy it while you can.

Thursday, November 29,2012 - Place Your Bets

Place Your Bets

by Sinclair Noe

Let's start with the important numbers today: 5, 16, 22, 23, 29, and the Powerball 6. And I did not win.

Somebody in Missouri and somebody in Phoenix are holding the winning tickets. Not me. All I'm holding is a $10 piece of paper which is my donation to the tax fund for the mathematically challenged.

DOW + 36 = 13,021
SPX + 6 = 1415
NAS + 20 = 3012
10 YR YLD un = 1.62%
OIL + 1.23 = 87.72
GOLD + 6.00 = 1726.80
SILV + .50 = 34.27

The U.S. economy grew at a 2.7 percent annual rate from July through September, much faster than first thought. The Commerce Department said growth in the third quarter was significantly better than the 2 percent rate estimated a month ago. And it was more than twice the 1.3 percent rate reported for the April-June quarter. The main reason for the upward revision to the gross domestic product was businesses restocked at a faster pace than previously estimated. That offset weaker consumer spending growth.

The fourth quarter GDP is expected to drop back down below 2 percent because of Hurricane Sandy, which put the brakes on all sorts of business activity along the East Coast. And then the other reason cited for the possible fourth quarter slowdown is the fiscal cliff. (Sorry, we just can't get through the day without talking about it.) So, here is the annotated version of today's fiscal cliff report: a little partisan sniping, a few snarky comments; no substantive progress, but talks are ongoing. Despite all the hype about the fiscal cliff, the markets appear to be treating it more like a fiscal bunny hill. The VIX, the volatility index is scraping along bottom at about 15, indicating a broad based complacency. And if you're actually paying attention to one of those countdown clocks, you really need to be doing something different.

Anyway, back to the GDP report. Consumers and businesses appeared to be more cautious over the summer. Consumer spending grew at a weaker 1.4 percent rate in the third quarter, down from the 2 percent rate estimated a month ago and nearly in line with the 1.5 percent rate in the second quarter. Businesses spending on equipment and software fell at an annual rate of 2.7 percent in the third quarter, the first decline since the depths of the recession in April-June 2009. The report showed continued strength in homebuilding, which rose at an annual rate of 14.2 percent. And government spending expanded at an annual rate 3.5 percent, marking its first positive contribution to overall economic growth in two years. The increase was driven by a big jump in defense spending.

Consumer spending will be a big part of the fourth quarter GDP, and it looks like we are still consuming. The National Retail Federation reports the number of shoppers in stores and on websites rose 9% over the Black Friday weekend to 247 million. Spending per shopper rose 6% to $398 and total spending was up 13% to $59 billion. Retailers were very promotional as we have to come expect during the kickoff of the holiday season. Deals were offered earlier with many stores opening on Thanksgiving and seeing good traffic. Online retailers were at least matching in-store deals and offering many of their own promotions even before Cyber Monday. Black Friday and Cyber Monday promotions appear to be holding for at least an extra week; that's not great for margins but overall it looks like a pretty strong start to the shopping season.

If you've been doing most of your shopping online Microsoft has launched a holiday season offensive against Google, claiming that search results on its rival's shopping site are bought and paid for. Microsoft says: "Google’s new redesigned shopping vertical now decides what to show you -- and how prominently to display what product offers they show -- based partially on how much a merchant selling the product has paid Google.”

This refers to new rules that Google adopted for its shopping site. Google Shopping now charges merchants who participate in its Product Listing Ads program fees on a per-click or cost-per-acquisition basis. Google makes no bones about the program. They say their relationship with merchants results in accurate and timely pricing information. Microsoft begs to differ. Google's pay-to-play program means the results that potential shoppers get will be based more on what merchants are willing to pony up than on query relevancy.

The point here is that if you are shopping online, it might pay to comparison shop by using different search engines, at least that's what Microsoft wants us to believe.

Back to the GDP report. The report reveals a dichotomy between consumers and businesses. Consumers have gone from being cranky and tight-fisted to slightly positive and mildly optimistic. Businesses, meanwhile, appear to be hunkering down in like a gaggle of doomsday preppers.

The most recent Conference Board consumer sentiment survey released earlier this week showed consumer confidence at its highest level since February 2008, while the University of Michigan consumer sentiment index is up 30% from a year earlier as of late November. The Michigan survey revealed more optimism about the employment situation than at any point since 1984. Of course any measure of consumers' feelings is bound to be subjective. And consumers have been beaten like a drum over the past few years. The surge in morale might be nothing more than a pause in the beatings.

So while the surveys show the most positive results in years, it’s possible that they are only positive relative to how negative people were in 2009, 2010 and 2011, and that compared to the 1980s and 1990s, people aren’t actually feeling so confident. The same goes for income: More people than at any point since early 2008 say their finances are improving; that raises the index. But given that most incomes have been stagnant for the past decade or more, improvement does not necessarily translate into objectively good.

On the flip side, business executives can't seem to get past this idea that uncertainty is the boogie man that lurking in the shadows. The big fear is the fiscal cliff, of course. And frankly it is disconcerting to see the captains of industry cowering like an abused dog. There is a real good chance that the CEO who is afraid of the fiscal cliff, doesn't have the stuff of a real entrepreneur. An entrepreneur will put a second mortgage on the house. An entrepreneur will max out the credit cards to keep the business afloat for another week, or another month. (truck full of canaries)

An entrepreneur sees a fiscal cliff and straps on the bungee cord. A CEO sees a fiscal cliff and breaks down in flop sweat.

From 2009 to 2012, the companies of the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index generated double-digit profits and even healthier revenue gains. Yes, it looks like corporate profits are slowing slightly but corporate coffers are bulging; there seems to be a little resolution to the crisis in Europe, even if it is just kicking the can out a year or two; emerging markets may not be booming but Brazil, and India, and China are still rolling along.

So, who is right, the consumer or the business exec? Income levels tend to be a better predictor of what people will spend, along with the value of their homes and the ease of obtaining credit. Given that incomes are stable and slightly growing, homes values are on the rise and credit is easing, it’s a good bet that people will spend a bit more and the overall economic picture will brighten.

Business execs are lousy economic prognosticators. While spending by companies is a key component of economic vitality, spending plans are much more elastic than they were decades ago and can be adjusted more rapidly. That may not be true for building a manufacturing plant, but it is certainly true for hiring and marketing and inventory. So present concerns and stated intentions to cut back could change quickly to exuberance and plans to spend more freely.

A separate report today showed the number of Americans seeking unemployment benefits fell 23,000 to a seasonally adjusted 393,000 last week, the Labor Department said. It was the second straight drop after Hurricane Sandy had driven applications to 451,000 three weeks ago. Millions of Americans are unemployed and underemployed, but tens of millions more are gainfully employed,and although they might be feeling some anxiety about their job, most of the deepest corporate cost cutting has already been done. If you still have a job, it's probably because you're good at it, and the company you work for is about as lean as it can get. If it could be outsourced, it probably was. When people feel gainfully employed, they tend to spend and demand increases, businesses respond to demand, not to sentiment.

Expectations have undoubtedly come down in recent years, as people reconcile themselves to more modest changes and more realistic horizons. Business sentiment matters, but it is the consumer and the demands of the consumer that push the economy. The smart business execs will be on the lookout for indications of increased demand, and they will be well suited to go out on the far end of the curve and they should be ready to gamble just a little, ready to invest to meet demand. Americans have shown a remarkable and consistent predilection to spend over the years, with only a few notable pullbacks such as during the worst periods of the past few years.

Take it from someone who knows a lousy bet. You shouldn't bet against the American consumer.

Years ago, the late Mexican dictator Porfirio Diaz utter a famous line about his country: “Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United States.”

Next week the leaders of North America’s two most populous countries are due to meet for a neighborly chat in Washington, DC. According to The Economist The re-elected Barack Obama and Mexico’s president-elect, Enrique Peña Nieto, have plenty to talk about: Mexico is changing in ways that will profoundly affect its big northern neighbour, and unless America rethinks its outdated picture of life across the border, both countries risk forgoing the benefits promised by Mexico’s rise.

The White House does not spend much time looking south. During six hours of televised campaign debates this year, neither Mr Obama nor Mr. Biden mentioned Mexico directly. That is extraordinary. One in ten Mexican citizens lives in the United States. Include their American-born descendants and you have about 33m people (or around a tenth of America’s population).

Mexico's GDP ranks higher than South Korea. It's economy is growing faster than the Brazil's. Can you name the largest exporter of flat screen TV's? It's Mexico. And the place where you will likely see signs of the growing Mexican economy is in the shopping malls. In addition to TVs, they are the top exporter of BlackBerrys and fridge-freezers, and is climbing up the rankings in cars, aerospace and more. On present trends, by 2018 America will import more from Mexico than from any other country. “Made in China” is giving way to “Hecho en México”.

The doorway for those imports is a 2,000-mile border, the world’s busiest. Yet some American politicians are doing their best to block it, out of fear of being swamped by immigrants. They could hardly be more wrong. Fewer Mexicans now move to the United States than come back south.

Undervaluing trade and overestimating immigration has led to bad policies. Since September 11th 2001, crossing the border has taken hours where it once took minutes, raising costs for Mexican manufacturers (and thus for American consumers). Daytrips have fallen by almost half. More crossing-points and fewer onerous checks would speed things up on the American side; pre-clearance of containers and passengers could be improved if Mexico were less touchy about having American officers on its soil (something which Canada does not mind). After an election in which 70% of Latinos voted for Mr Obama, even America’s “wetback”-bashing Republicans should now see the need for immigration-law reform.

Mexico is poised to become America’s new workshop. If the neighbors want to make the most of that, it is time for them to take another look over the border.

You know who Rupert Murdoch is? Owns Fox News. The same Rupert Murdoch who scandalized England with phone hacking, influence peddling and bribery. The same Rupert Murdoch who stays up late Saturday nights pondering things on Twitter, like what to do about "the Jewish-owned press".

Murdoch already owns the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Fox News Channel, Fox movie studios, 27 local TV stations, and much more. And there are reports that he really wants to buy the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune - the bankrupt-but-still-dominant newspapers (and websites) in the second- and third-largest media markets, where Murdoch already owns TV stations. Under current media ownership limits, he can't buy them. It's illegal ... unless the Federal Communications Commission changes the rules.

Just by pure coincidence, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has been circulating an order at the FCC to lift the longstanding ban on one company owning both daily newspapers and TV stations in any of the 20 largest media markets. And he wants to wrap up this massive giveaway just in time for the holidays.

If these changes go through, Murdoch could own the Los Angeles Times, two TV stations and up to eight radio stations in L.A. alone. And he's not the only potential beneficiary: These changes could mean more channels for Comcast-NBC, more deals for Disney and more stations for Sinclair Broadcasting.

For anyone who actually cares about media diversity and democracy, the gutting of media ownership limits will be a complete disaster. These rules are one of the last barriers to local media monopolies. Without them, we will lose competing voices for local news. We will see the mainstream media get even more monotone, monochrome and monotonous, and more than likely, even more inaccurate.

Genachowski's proposal is essentially indistinguishable from the failed policies that millions rallied against in 2003 and 2007. Ninety-nine percent of the public comments received by the FCC opposed lifting these rules when the Republicans tried to do it. Genachowski's proposal is nearly identical to the one the Senate voted to overturn with a bipartisan "resolution of disapproval" back in 2008. The federal courts have repeatedly - and as recently as 2011 - struck down these same rules, noting the FCC's failure to "consider the effect of its rules on minority and female ownership." The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the FCC to study the impact of any rule changes before changing the rules. The FCC has done nothing of the kind.

Yet if Genachowski gets his way, according to reports, the FCC will vote on this major overhaul "on circulation" - that is, in secret and behind closed doors - with no public participation or accountability.