What Will ELECTION RESULTS mean for Wall Street?

 The election results have obviously given the Republicans a lot more clout. According to the following article, Republicans will have oversight of the agencies whose task is to implement the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Also, the House takeover and the GOP's strengthened position in the Senate will also give the party greater influence over the direction and independence of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Changes are coming!
     . . . June

----------------------
Election results: What they mean for Wall Street:
Tradeonlytoday.comPosted on November 03, 2010

The shift of the U.S. House of Representatives to Republican control is expected to give the GOP and Wall Street a fresh opportunity to reshape pending financial regulations.


Republicans will have oversight of the agencies whose task is to implement the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, The New York Times reports. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission will be working on more than 240 rules that govern items such as bank capital standards.

The House takeover and the GOP's strengthened position in the Senate will also give the party greater influence over the direction and independence of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Republicans say they will use the House Financial Services Committee to ensure that regulators such as the CFTC and the consumer protection bureau do not write rules for the banking industry that lawmakers consider overly restrictive, Bloomberg News reports.

Slower rule making or additional pressure on regulators could benefit companies such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Bank of America Corp., which lobbied against parts of the Dodd-Frank law and predicted it would hurt their financial results.

Democrats still control the Senate, and Republicans are unlikely to be able to fundamentally reshape or repeal the Dodd-Frank law or unwind the government's role in housing finance. But the Republican approach will mark a shift from Democratic policies.

Read entire article


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

Dodd-Frank: Gray Areas In Commodities Futures Trading?

 There are still some very gray areas about what the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Bill requires with reference to Commodities Futures Trading. According to the following article, the Commissioners voted to immediately begin requirements for daily reporting of swaps about a certain threshold by exchanges and market participants to determine position limits. It may still be some time before those limits can be put in place.
     . . . June


--------------------------
Dodd-Frank: What's An Energy Trader to Do?
Industry Verticals:  Jill Feblowitz 01.11.2010 kl 17:40 | IDC Energy Industry Insights Community


Ever since the signing of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in July, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has been working on building out the detailed regulations mandated by the bill. Recently, there have been two interesting developments in putting together regulations that energy companies will want to take note of in order to determine what to do next.

According to a Reuters article by Roberta Rampton and Christopher Doering on October 19, since this is the first time that the CFTC will be regulating the over the counter derivatives market, final regulations on position limits might be delayed until the CFTC has enough information to inform what those position limits may be; the initial deadline was January 2011.

To get that information, the Commissioners voted to immediately begin requirements for daily reporting of swaps about a certain threshold by exchanges and market participants. It is fairly clear that this reporting will not apply to commercial end users that want to hedge, but it may not rule out energy companies that are doing large volumes of swaps. So at this point, final position limits regulation may be delayed for a while.

Read entire article

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

Could All Money Transfers Face Anti-terrorism Scrutiny?

The Obama administration wants to require U.S. banks to report all electronic money transfers into and out of the country.It gets to the point where maybe it's all too much. Does it mean that if you're making a money transfer to a family member they will scrutinize it? Is it really necessary to put everyone under the microscope in order to possibly ferret out a few bad guys? Won't they just find a way around the rules? They always do
   . .. . .  June

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

Money transfers could face anti-terrorism scrutiny:

The Obama administration wants to require U.S. banks to report all electronic money transfers into and out of the country, a dramatic expansion in efforts to counter terrorist financing and money laundering.

Officials say the information would help them spot the sort of transfers that helped finance the al-Qaeda hijackers who carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. They say the expanded financial data would allow anti-terrorist agencies to better understand normal money-flow patterns so they can spot abnormal activity.

Financial institutions are now required to report to the Treasury Department transactions in excess of $10,000 and others they deem suspicious. The new rule would require banks to disclose even the smallest transfers.

Treasury officials plan to post the proposed regulation on their Web site Monday and in the Federal Register this week. The public could comment before a final rule is published and the plan takes effect, which officials say will probably not be until 2012.

The proposal is a long-delayed response to the 2004 Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, which specified reforms to better organize the intelligence community and to avoid a repeat of the 20S01 attacks. The law required that the Treasury secretary issue regulations requiring financial institutions to report cross-border transfers if deemed necessary to combat terrorist financing.

"By establishing a centralized database, this regulatory plan will greatly assist law enforcement in detecting and ferreting out transnational organized crime, multinational drug cartels, terrorist financing and international tax evasion," said James H. Freis Jr., director of Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).


Read More

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

Are Insurers Looking For Loopholes in Health Care Reform?

 Isn't it typical that the big insurers that Health Care Reform is trying to protect the public from are trying to figure out ways to get around the bill? According to the following article, it appears that a number of major insurance companies are planning to stop offering 'children-only' plans. Does this mean they would bypass the clause to protect kids under 19 with pre-existing conditions?
   . . . June


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


Health care reform starts, insurers look for loopholes
CBS 21 News - Breaking news, sports and weather for the Harrisburg Pennsylvania area:


A wave of changes will start Thursday as the new health care reform takes effect.

Yet, disturbing information is coming out about a number of major insurance companies planning to stop offering 'children-only' plans. A new 'Wall Street Journal' article details a number of big insurers attempting to create a loophole.

The article claims five top insurance companies will no longer sell child-only policies, but children already enrolled in a child-only plan will not be dropped.

When Pres. Obama signed health care reform into law six months ago, one of the new changes was to protect kids under 19 with pre-existing conditions. Under the law, insurers can no longer deny those children insurance. Adults with pre-existing conditions, though, have to wait until 2014.

"We're going to have to make sure the dialogue with the insurance companies is one that they know they have a responsibility for sick kids," said state Sen. Mike Stack (D-Philadelphia).

Stack is the Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee. He said that if the federal plan is unable to protect children, it's distressing, so keeping a dialogue with insurers is vital.

"We've been able to get that in the past and we'll be firm on this. But I'm confident we'll have that in the future," said Stack.




Read More . . .

Will Elizabeth Warren Be Wall Street Consumer Watchdog?

 Will Elizabeth Warren fill the post for Wall Street Consumer Watchdog? According to the following article,Warren has served as chairwoman of the Congressional Oversight Panel, a watchdog group for the financial bailout program. She has been championed by many left-wing Democrats, who see her outspokenness, intellect and sarcastic sense of humor a perfect fit to police Wall Street's shenanigans. Sounds good to me!
   . . . June


-----------

White House eyes Elizabeth Warren for Wall Street consumer watchdog post

By Kenneth R. Bazinet DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAUTuesday, September 14th 2010, 1:40 PM

WASHINGTON - The White House is considering its options for naming frontrunner Elizabeth Warren as the government's Wall Street consumer watchdog, sources told the Daily News Tuesday.

Warren has served as chairwoman of the Congressional Oversight Panel, a watchdog group for the financial bailout program. She has been championed by many left-wing Democrats, who see her outspokenness, intellect and sarcastic sense of humor a perfect fit to police Wall Street's shenanigans.

President Obama may still pick someone else to fill the post created by the new financial reform law. But he also is weighing whether to appoint Warren as temporary head of the Treasury Department's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau or avoid Senate confirmation by giving her a recess appointment, according to an administration official.
"If we do it as a recess appointment...she's out a short time later. There may be a way to get her in there now," said an administration official.
Warren, a Harvard law professor who specializes in finance and bankruptcy law and has long backed the new watchdog agency, has some strong boosters, including Obama, who has known her since his days at Harvard Law School. There are also senior aides who like the idea.
Read more:

Additional $1 Billion to Stabilize Neighborhoods Hard-Hit by Foreclosure

 In addition to the original funding, the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan awarded an additional $1 billion in funding to all states along with a number of counties and local communities struggling to reverse the effects of the foreclosure crisis. Let's hope that this works for those people who are still struggling.
    . . . June

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

Obama Administration Awards Additional $1 Billion to Stabilize Neighborhoods Hard-Hit by Foreclosure
RISMedia: September 13, 2010

U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan awarded an additional $1 billion in funding to all states along with a number of counties and local communities struggling to reverse the effects of the foreclosure crisis. The grants announced today represent a third round of funding through HUD’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) and will provide targeted emergency assistance to state and local governments to acquire, redevelop or demolish foreclosed properties.

“These grants will support local efforts to reverse the effects these foreclosed properties have on their surrounding neighborhoods,” said Donovan. “We want to make certain that we target these funds to those places with especially high foreclosure activity so we can help turn the tide in our battle against abandonment and blight. As a direct result of the leadership provided by Senator Chris Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, who played key roles in winning approval for these funds, we will be able to make investments that will reduce blight, bolster neighboring home values, create jobs and produce affordable housing.”

The funding announced today is provided under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. To date, there have been two other rounds of NSP funding: the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) provided $3.92 billion and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) appropriated an additional $2 billion. Like those earlier rounds of NSP grants, these targeted funds will be used to purchase foreclosed homes at a discount and to rehabilitate or redevelop them in order to respond to rising foreclosures and falling home values. Today, 95 cents of every dollar from the first round of NSP funding is obligated—and is in use by communities, buying up and renovating homes, and creating jobs.
State and local governments can use their neighborhood stabilization grants to acquire land and property; to demolish or rehabilitate abandoned properties; and/or to offer downpayment and closing cost assistance to low- to moderate-income home buyers (household incomes do not exceed 120% of area median income). In addition, these grantees can create “land banks” to assemble, temporarily manage, and dispose of vacant land for the purpose of stabilizing neighborhoods and encouraging re-use or redevelopment of urban property. HUD will issue an NSP3 guidance notice in the next few weeks to assist grantees in designing their programs and applying for funds.
Read on . . .

Financial Reform and Transparency in Hedge Fund Management

According to the article below, the Dodd-Frank Act seeks to restore trust and establish a sound regulatory framework for the financial services marketplace. It contains numerous components aimed at more transparency through the disclosure of relevant information and awareness of risk. Lets hope that it works that way.

   . . . June


--------------------
Press Release - Financial Reform Legislation and Transparency in Hedge Fund Management:
"September 11, 2010 /24-7PressRelease

With the economy sputtering, seeking to recover from the Great Recession that followed the financial meltdown of 2008, Congress worked for more than a year to develop comprehensive financial reform legislation. The result was the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which President Obama signed on July 21.

Dodd-Frank contains many features intended to require more transparency in financial transactions, so that elaborately packaged products do not create and disguise excessive risk that can harm unwary investors and consumers.

The concerns that led to the legislation reared their head during the 2008 crisis, but they had been building for years. Credit had been too easy to obtain for too many people. Subprime real estate loans, even for people with problematic credit histories or insufficient income, were the most obvious and egregious example. But the problems went beyond subprime loans. Investment banks and financial services firms package such loans and other forms of debt into numerous complex financial instruments that often were devoid of any transparency. And these same financial institutions took on more and more risk through credit default swaps and the use or ever-increasing leverage that placed the future existence of the institutions at great risk. Such risk is what led to the demise of investment banks like Lehman Brothers.

These financial problems infected the economy. Main Street, Wall Street and Washington spent much of 2008 and 2009 performing on-the-fly improvisation, trying to get credit flowing again in the midst of loan defaults, bankruptcies (including Lehman Brothers), rising foreclosures, high unemployment, and a huge government bailout of "too-big-to-fail" financial firms like AIG.

Read More . . .

Yes, Wall Street NEEDS To Change! Is It Pure Greed?

 It's refreshing to hear someone who's NOT blaming President Obama for every little thing. I've gotten so used to hearing this constant criticism that this article clearly jumped out at me. It's not as though Obama made all these decisions in a bubble. He had a team of apparently knowledgeable people helping him to decide what might possibly stop the country from going into total financial failure. Give him a break!
   .  . June


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

Wall Street needs to change, not Obama:
PostPartisan   By Katrina vanden Heuvel  |  September 9, 2010; 1:43 PM ET


While no one said that reforming Wall Street would be easy for President Obama, the big-money backlash against his proposals has been surprisingly swift and screechy. In 2008, high finance donated about $40 million to Obama's campaign. As a recent editorial in The Post discusses, though, the financial sector 'is suffering a massive case of buyer's remorse.' There is a perception on Wall Street, The Post surmises, that Professor Obama doesn't have enough real-world business savvy to understand how high finance works, and the newspaper urges the president to cozy up to his one-time benefactors for the good of the nation.


But Wall Street clearly remains far more out of touch than Washington, and after reading some of the words emanating from the Masters of the Universe, one might plausibly wonder if America's lords of finance have spent the last three years living on Saturn.

Stephen Schwarzman, co-founder of the private-equity firm Blackstone Group, recently compared Obama's plans to tax private-equity compensation to Hitler's invasion of Poland in 1939. (He later apologized for the "inappropriate analogy," but he’s nonetheless going to have trouble living that one down.) And in his second quarter 2010 letter to investors, distributed on Aug. 27, Daniel S. Loeb, founder of the hedge fund Third Point LLC, wrote, "Perhaps our leaders will awaken to the fact that free market capitalism is the best system to allocate resources and create innovation, growth and jobs.… Perhaps, too, a cloven-hoofed, bristly haired mammal will become airborne and the rosette-like marking of a certain breed of ferocious feline will become altered. In other words, we are not holding our breath." Andrew Ross Sorkin quipped that Loeb’s letter "sounded as if he were preparing to join [Glenn Beck's 'Restoring Honor' rally] in Washington."

Why such hysteria and hyperbole? Shining through the ridiculous rhetoric is pure greed.

Read on . . .

Federal Regulators Have Authority To Declare Wall Street Managers Compensation “Excessive.”

According to the article below, money managers and other financial firms will be required to disclose incentive-based compensation arrangements to federal regulators. The new law mandates that regulations be instituted to ban incentive-based compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risks. That seems to be pretty broad and could be open to interpretation. This is such a widely-used practice.

June

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

Regulators given broad powers over managers' pay
By Doug Halonen September 5, 2010 6:01 am ET

Investment News: "Money managers are jittery about a provision in the financial-reform law that gives the Securities and Exchange Commission and other federal regulators authority to decide whether their compensation is “excessive.”

The SEC, the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and other key federal agencies with financial industry oversight must jointly come up with compensation rules under Section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

By April, the new law mandates that regulations be instituted to ban “incentive-based compensation arrangements” that encourage “inappropriate risks” — either because those arrangements result in payment of “excessive compensation, fees or benefits” or could lead to “material financial loss” to the firm.

Money managers and other financial firms also will be required to disclose incentive-based compensation arrangements to federal regulators.


Incentive- or performance-based bonuses are widely used by money managers, according to David Tittsworth, executive director of the Investment Adviser Association. “The bonus structure is in play,” he said.
“It's a big deal,” said Timothy Bartl, senior vice president and general counsel for the Center on Executive Compensation, a lobbying group that opposes mandatory say-on-pay proposals. “It has prohibitions and controls over private-sector compensation.”

The new regulation “could hurt the [money management] industry by increasing costs and uncertainty,” said Alan Johnson, managing director of the executive compensation firm Johnson & Associates Inc.
Some money managers declined to comment on the record, contending that they want to reserve judgment until they see what form the SEC's regulations take.


Read On . . .

Obama Calls For A Growing Thriving Middle Class!

President Obama calls for Americans to recommit to time-honored values, to heal the economy with a healthy stock market, bustling main street and a growing thriving middle class. This as opposed to the past Wall Street practices at the expense of working Americans, who were fighting harder and harder just to stay afloat.…
    . . . June

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


Obama's call for help
Abby Phillip - POLITICO.com: 

President Barack Obama, in his weekly address to the nation, kicked off the Labor Day holiday weekend with a call to help rebuild the collapsing American middle class.

“This Labor Day, we should recommit ourselves to our time-honored values and to this fundamental truth: to heal our economy, we need more than a healthy stock market; we need bustling main streets and a growing, thriving middle class,” Obama said.

Obama said that the deep, lingering recession has dealt a hard blow to middle-income earners who had once made the American economy 'the envy of the world.” But he added that, even before the current recession began, “the values of hard work and responsibility that build this country had been given short shrift” in the recent past.

“For a decade, middle class families felt the sting of stagnant incomes and declining economic security,” Obama said. “Wall Street firms turned huge profits by taking, in some cases, reckless risks and cutting corners. All of this came at the expense of working Americans, who were fighting harder and harder just to stay afloat .…Ultimately, the house of cards collapsed.”

Read more: 

Someone Passed All This Legislation! Wasn't It President Obama?

 The article below reflects very much how I feel about President Obama's accomplishments since taking office. He may not have accomplished everything on everyone's to-do list, but he certainly has tried.   And he has indeed done more than any president in memory in a very short time. Below is a list of actual accomplishments. It's pretty impressive!
   . . . June



Too much irrational thinking about President Obama
 The Jackson Sun  August 29, 2010 

  "What are the underlying motivations causing so many Americans — partisan politicos aside — to blame President Barack Obama for every problem short of indigestion? Has the guy done anything right? Has he done what he said he would do when he ran for office? Has he done anything?

Hmmm, let's see. Based on a number of media reports, I have compiled a short list:

• Passed health care reform, which millions of Americans agreed needed to be done and was a major plank in his campaign.
   
• Passed a $789 billion economic stimulus package that saved millions of jobs and has been regarded a success by many economists who generally know a lot more about the economy than you and I do.
   
• Bailed out the auto industry, which saved more than 1 million American manufacturing jobs and enabled General Motors to return to profitability.
   
• Supported a Wall Street bailout that, had it not been completed, would have led to an economic depression like the one in the 1930, according to former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
   
• Passed the Wall Street reform and Consumer Protection Act to bring some order and new safeguards to the nation's financial system and consumer protection rules.
   
• Ended the U.S. combat mission in Iraq and withdrew combat troops as he promised he would do during the election.
   
• Won confirmation of two women, including the first Hispanic, to the U.S. Supreme Court with minimal political partisan bickering.
   
• Began phasing out the prison at Guantanamo Bay as he promised during the election.
   
• Deployed additional troops to Afghanistan that military leaders have been requesting for years.
   
• Removed many restrictions on embryonic stem cell research — currently stymied by a ruling from a conservative activist federal judge.

Read More . . . .

Hindenburg Omen Tripped. Does this mean Stock Market Crash?

This is my first taste of the Hindenburg Omen. According to the article below, it's a technical indicator which foreshadows a stock market crash. Whether it works in actual fact, I think I'm very tempted to be out of the market for the moment.


  . . . June

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

Yes Folks, Hindenburg Omen Tripped Again - MarketBeat - WSJ
"By Steven Russolillo

The Hindenburg Omen reared its ugly head late last week, signaling more doom and gloom as stocks plod along amid the dog days of summer.

The Omen, a technical indicator which uses a plethora of data to foreshadow a stock-market crash, was tripped again on Friday, marking the second time since Aug. 12 it has occurred. (It also came close on Thursday, but one of its criteria fell short.)"

The latest trigger has prompted the Omen’s creator, Jim Miekka, to exit the market. “I’m taking it seriously and I’m fully out of the market now,” Miekka, a blind mathematician, said in a telephone interview from his home in Surry, Maine. “I would’ve probably stayed in until the beginning of September,” depending on how the indicators varied. “That was my basic plan, until the Hindenburg came along.”

The Omen has been behind every market crash since 1987, but significant stock-market declines have followed only 25% of the time. So there’s a high likelihood that the Omen could be nothing more than a false signal.

But that isn’t stopping Miekka from taking any chances, especially as September, typically the market’s worst-performing month, sits only one week away.

Read More

Fees Levied On The Mortgage Industry Could Cost You More

According to the article below, the government may levy fees on the mortgage industry which will likely be passed along to the borrower in return for federal backing of mortgage loans. Sounds like business as usual.

   ... June


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

Reform of Fannie and Freddie Could Translate to Higher Costs For Borrowers

By Michael Kraus on August 24, 2010

Fairly interesting article by Deborah Solomon and Nick Timiraos in the Wall Street Journal today that says the government may levy fees upon the mortgage industry (which will likely be passed along to the consumer) in return for federal backing of mortgage loans.

Under the current system, mortgages are originated by mortgage companies, brokers, loan officers, etc.  These mortgage are then sold to investors or securitized and sold to investors.  Right now, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are pretty much the only investors who are purchasing mortgages.  Together they back more than 90 percent of single family mortgages in the United States.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were seized by the government in 2008 in order to avoid their financial collapse.  Since that time the Obama Administration has dumped $150 billion into the GSEs, and has pledged an unlimited amount of capital to backstop their losses.  The Congressional Budget Office estimates the total bailout could cost around $400 billion, and many analysts estimate the bailout could cost more, with a worse case scenario of almost $1 trillion.  In a nutshell, U.S. taxpayers back almost all of the mortgages in the country (congratulations, you’re an investor in the housing market!).

Read More

What Effect Will Credit Card Restrictions Have?

 It's finally the turn of the consumer to have some say in how their credit cards are managed - Or is it?  It seems to me that the credit card company have already implemented lots of changes in their favor while they waited for the changes to take place. It's for sure, the credit card companies aren't planning to suffer.
   . . . June


New credit card restrictions take effect - CNN.com 

"Washington (CNN) -- New rules designed to protect credit card users from 'unreasonable late payment and other penalty fees' come into force Sunday as a result of the Wall Street reform bill.

The rules block credit card companies from charging more than $25 for late payments except in extreme circumstances, prevent them from charging customers for not using their cards, and requires them to reconsider rate increases imposed since January 1, 2009, according to the Federal Reserve, which approved the regulations.

They are the final provisions of federal legislation that placed new restrictions on credit card interest rates and fees, completing the most comprehensive overhaul of the credit card industry in history.

The banking industry has already made changes in response to the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009, a spokesman said Sunday."

"The industry has moved swiftly to implement all of these changes and the final piece of the puzzle is now in place," said Kenneth Clayton of the American Bankers Association.
"It will still take some time before we can really see how the landscape has changed, but it is clear that consumer choice and control will ultimately drive further changes in the marketplace," he said in a statement.

The Fed's rules could result in lower interest rates for consumers
Read More

Ben Bernanke Says Feds Will Boost Economic Recovery

US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke 

So the Federal Reserve is going to help prop up the soft economic recovery. That's OK, since they plan on using some of the proceeds from the mortgage securities. I guess it's going to take a while longer before everyone can breathe a sigh of relief. It took a while getting here and it's not over yet. Below is an article from the BBC News on their reaction to this proposed change.

June

--------------------------------
US Federal Reserve Takes Step To Boost Recovery
 10 August 2010 Last updated at 16:24 ET

US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke The Fed said economic recovery was likely to be "more modest" in the short term

The US Federal Reserve has taken a step towards boosting economic recovery, by saying it will use proceeds from its investments in mortgage securities to buy longer-term government debt.

There had been speculation that it may choose to revive the "quantitative easing" (QE) scheme, pumping in more money to prop up a softening recovery.

The option it has taken has been dubbed "QE lite" by some commentators.

The Fed also kept interest rates unchanged at between zero and 0.25%.

Stock markets recovered some of their earlier losses after investors reacted positively but still cautiously to the news.

The Dow Jones index, down about 100 points before the Fed announcement, was only 15 points lower shortly afterwards. It closed down 54 to 10,644.

US government bond prices also rose.

Constraints on spending

In a statement, the Fed said the pace of recovery had slowed in recent months and is likely to be "more modest in the near term than had been anticipated".

"Household spending is increasing gradually, but remains constrained by high unemployment, modest income growth, lower housing wealth, and tight credit," the central bank said.

Some analysts say the move could mean that money can be borrowed cheaply for a longer period of time.

"The Fed's investments in longer-dated Treasury debt should... lower mortgage and other borrowing rates," Stephen Gallagher and Aneta Markowska from Societe Generale commented.

Others believe the Fed will have to take further steps in the coming months.

Read More

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

Should the Fed take more steps to boost the economic growth in the coming months?  Maybe lower the interest rates?


Leave a comment


June

Finally, A Bill To RESTORE UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS To Millions

President Obama is still going ahead with lots of reforms. I have to say that I admire his guts. Obviously, there are many things that American citizens are still skeptical about, but he just bulldozes ahead if he thinks it's going to help. This unemployment benefit is one of those really important items. That should help out many thousands of people who are still out of work. This article from the Liberal Examiner examines his efforts

June

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

Jobless benefit finally clears the Senate, no thanks to Republicans
July 20, 6:12 PMJacksonville Liberal ExaminerWendie Razon

Finally, a bill to restore unemployment benefits to millions who have been out of work for more than six months has cleared the Senate.

The 60-40 vote came moments after Carte Goodwin, a successor to late West Virginia Democrat Robert Byrd, was sworn in. Goodwin was the critical 60th vote needed to defeat a Republican filibuster that has led to 2.5 million people losing their unemployment.

"It shouldn't take a supermajority to help families afford the bare necessities while unemployment is rising," said Majority Leader Harry Reid after the vote. "It shouldn't take the slimmest of margins to do what is right."

Historically, Congress has never allowed federally-funded extended benefits to lapse when the national unemployment rate has been above 7.2 percent. The current rate is 9.5 percent, and that number is not likely to come down anytime soon.

Maine Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins were the sole Republicans to join Democrats on the 60-40 roll call.

Obama blasted Republicans for halting unemployment checks for people unable to find work. "The same people who didn't have any problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are now saying we shouldn't offer relief to middle class Americans," Obama said.

Read More

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

Do you think the republicans really wanted to keep these benefits from the unemployed? I don't, but darn it, politics shouldn't be played at the expense of people who are out of work. What do you think?

June

Will The Wall Street Reform Law Be Bad For Businesses?

Doyle Mitchell, CEO of D.C.-based Industrial Bank, argues that the financial reform law will discourage lending. Do you really think that it will in the long run? After all, once the law is in effect and people know what to expect, it seems to me that everything will go back to business as usual. Especially if they start having more confidence in the financial system.

Here's an article I found with a similar viewpoint.

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

Experts fear financial reform law will restrict credit to businesses
Washington Business Journal - by Bryant Ruiz Switzky

The landmark Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is meant to bring new stability to the financial system, but there’s not a lot of love for the legislation among local bankers, financial experts and business leaders, who say the law will reduce access to credit.

“The assumption lawmakers seem to have is that everybody in business is a crook, so we’re going to regulate you to death,” said Barbara Lang, CEO of the D.C. Chamber of Commerce. “It’s going to have a huge impact on businesses.”

Criticized by some as too weak, others as too far-reaching, the 2,300-page law, signed July 21 by President Barack Obama, is filled with new rules on everything from consumer mortgages to bank capital and liquidity to credit card swipe fees. The full impact of the law will take years to play out as federal agencies translate lawmakers’ language into actual regulations.

Whatever the outcome, it’s clear banks will have to spend a lot of money complying with the law — and they will no doubt pass those costs on to businesses and consumers. The net effect: It will probably be harder to get credit from a bank, and the cost of loans and other bank services will go up, experts say.

Read More

Do you agree with this article? Please leave a comment if you do - or if you disagree.

June

Can Obama Really Reform Wall Street?

Barack Obama did indeed sign in a very comprehensive reform bill today - but will it really be enforced? Already the opposition are lining up to criticize the new law. I really hope that sometime soon we give this new president some credit. He really IS trying!

When I read this article this morning I once again thought, "Wow, he may not always be right, but he's not afraid to move forward on something he thinks is right"

What do you think? leave your comments below

June

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

President Obama signs Wall Street reform bill

By Carrie Budoff Brown & Kendra Marr | 7/21/10 12:40 PM EDT

Almost two years after a near-collapse of the American economy, President Barack Obama signed into law a historic rewrite of the regulations governing the nation’s financial system, declaring the end to an era of antiquated rules that left Americans vulnerable.

Obama described the law as a triumph for consumers and a necessity for business, saying the financial system “only works – our markets are only free – when there are clear rules and basic safeguards that prevent abuse, that check excess, that ensure that it is more profitable to play by the rules than to game the system.”

“And that is what these reforms are designed to achieve: no more, no less,” Obama said during the ceremony at the Ronald Reagan Building “Because that is how we will ensure that our economy works for consumers, that it works for investors, that it works for financial institutions - that it works for all of us.”

Read More

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

There are lots of opinions around about this new bill. Tell me what you think

June