Daily news sites

The way these guys talk about GOLD and SILVER without even showing whether they have any skin in the game is very suspicious.  I actually met some cool "stackers" on YOU TUBE but these guys are just plain wannabees.  They have no clue:

Congratulations Tacos for a good trade on GMCR.  Pray for me too that I bag a big one like that one of these days...:-)...

Tacos UPDATES BELOW.  I always like to watch Tacos videos:

Tacos explains fiduciary responsibility.  You don't hear much about that anymore. 





Chris Duane never tells the truth...




...developing...

Click to enlarge.

It would seem that banks are not going to be paying people to take out mortgages after all. Who knew?

Strike one more economic tailwind off the list.

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Origination Fees and Discount Points for 30-Year Fixed Rate Mortgage

The following chart compares ADP's version of employment (in blue) with the government's establishment survey version (in red, minus government jobs).


Click to enlarge.

There is a clear divergence lately. Let's take a closer look.


Click to enlarge.

I haven't been following this divergence long enough to form a theory on why it is there, and without that it is difficult to offer useful commentary. Won't stop me from trying though! Here are two potential reasons off the top of my head.

1. The divergence is always there but it gets revised away over time (the older data is corrected). If that's the case, no big deal.

2. The divergence is valid and the establishment survey is coming down to close the gap. There was a weak establishment report in December and, as seen in the chart, that certainly closed the gap to some degree.

In any event, I would suggest that there is headline risk for tomorrow's employment report. If the gap closes more, then the report will disappoint.

Here's the most optimistic thing I've said on this blog in a long time. If the report is much weaker than expected (big if) and if everyone points out how exceedingly weak the report therefore is, then I would say that they may be overreacting. It might just be a correction to close a divergence and little more. It's not like the ADP report itself looks all that awful (not great either for that matter).

That said, no single straw on a camel's back thinks it is responsible for the collapse. Things could get ugly. Real ugly. Perhaps all it takes is an illusionary straw to break the camel's illusionary prosperity? Who can say for sure?

This is definitely not investment advice, nor is it a prediction of any sort. I can say that I have never been more interested in a government payroll report though. Never.

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart

Stradivarius violin

The following chart shows the quarterly average of civilian employment divided by those not in the labor force.


Click to enlarge.

Maybe it is different this time.

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart

The following chart shows the natural log of imports from China divided by disposable personal income. When using natural logs, constant exponential growth is seen as a straight line.


Click to enlarge.

Can you say market saturation?

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart

THE NEWS UNIT ECONOMIC BULLETIN/BRIEFING BELOW:

CURRENTLY MONITORING CNBC, ETC...MARKET ACTION RESPONDING RATHER UNSTABLE AT THE MOMENT...

ECB PRESS CONFERENCE CURRRENTLY IN PROGRESS LIVE ON CNBC...

LONG TERM INFLATION EXPECTATIONS ARE FIRMLY ANCHORED; ECONOMIC RECOVERY CONTINUES...

ECB RATE .25% UNCHANGED
BoE RATE .50% UNCHANGED

U.S. JOBLESS CLAIMS and CONTINUING JOBLESS CLAIMS, NON-FARM PRODUCTIVITY ALL IMPROVED;  TRADE BALANCE and UNIT LABOR COSTS DECLINED.  LINK TO DATA (LOOK FOR THE U.S.A. FLAGS):
http://www.investing.com/economic-calendar/

U.S. FUTURES NOW FALLING IN PRE-MARKET.  MEDIA FOCUSED ON GMCR, KO, SODA, and TWTR STOCKS CURRENTLY ACTIVE IN PRE-MARKET TRADING....

...DEVELOPING...

This country needs to return to what this man stood for...
before President Obama, Democrats, and establishment Republicans shred it beyond recognition.

NY Daily News reports City Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña has had internal discussions with her staff about placing most of the 1,200 educators in full-time teaching jobs even though about half have disciplinary histories or unsatisfactory ratings, sources said.

A pool of teachers whom principals don’t want to hire may be headed back into the classroom, the Daily News has learned.

City Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña has had internal discussions with her staff about placing most of the 1,200 educators in full-time teaching jobs even though about half have disciplinary histories or unsatisfactory ratings, sources said.

The move would be a sharp reversal of a policy instituted under Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2005 to have the teachers rotate as subs instead of foisting them on principals who didn’t want them

But moving the teachers back into classrooms would save the city an estimated $100 million a year — money that could be allocated elsewhere.

The unassigned teachers lost their full-time jobs for a variety of reasons — 25% committed wrongdoing, 25% received an “unsatisfactory” rating, 40% worked in schools that closed or downsized and 10% teach subjects that are no longer offered in schools.

They are different from the so-called rubber room staff who are banned from the classroom.

More here

Republicans Flirting with Disaster
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
***************
From WOP's to Wet-Backs to illegal aliens to undocumented immigrants,  the fact remains -- they broke the law.  (By the way, for the young amongst us, WOP is an acronym.  It stands for WithOut Papers.)

Recently US Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is reported to have said that referring to illegal aliens as "criminals" seems insulting to her.  That may be, but the fact remains they broke US law, therefore they ARE criminals.

Consider this from an article entitled:  Sotomayor: Labeling Illegal Immigrants Criminals Is Insulting:  "Sotomayor was asked at a talk at Yale Law School later in the day about her use of the term “undocumented immigrants” rather than the traditional illegal alien. Sotomayor characterized the issue as a regulatory problem and said labeling immigrants criminals seemed insulting to her.

I think people then paint those individuals as something less than worthy human beings and it changes the conversation,” Sotomayor said."  -- SOURCE:  http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/02/04/sotomayor-labeling-illegal-immigrants-criminals-is-insulting/

Here's the thing:  WHICH "conversation" is Justice Sotomayor listening to, and/or taking part in?  Because, you see,  the conversation I most often hear is the one about the criminals breaking and entering our country across our southern border with Mexico.  Oh, and I might add that silly politically correct nomenclature used by Justice Sotomayor as in: "undocumented immigrants" incites belly laughs of derision for the leftist airheads who insist on using such infantile language to justify illegal activities by the less fortunate of other countries who choose to compound their current station in life by becoming criminals in an adjoining country.
The conversation I most often hear decries the cost to US taxpayers of supporting the illegal aliens. 

In an article entitled:  "The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer" written by Robert Rector and Jason Richwine, Ph.D. at heritage.org we learn this:  "In 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes. This generated an average annual fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $14,387 per household. This cost had to be borne by U.S. taxpayers. Amnesty would provide unlawful households with access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. The fiscal deficit for each household would soar."  -- SOURCE:  http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/05/the-fiscal-cost-of-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-to-the-us-taxpayer   

From that same article we learn this:  "The typical unlawful immigrant is 34 years old. After amnesty, this individual will receive government benefits, on average, for 50 years. Restricting access to benefits for the first 13 years after amnesty therefore has only a marginal impact on long-term costs.

If amnesty is enacted, the average adult unlawful immigrant would receive $592,000 more in government benefits over the course of his remaining lifetime than he would pay in taxes.

Over a lifetime, the former unlawful immigrants together would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay $3.1 trillion in taxes. They would generate a lifetime fiscal deficit (total benefits minus total taxes) of $6.3 trillion. (All figures are in constant 2010 dollars.) This should be considered a minimum estimate. It probably understates real future costs because it undercounts the number of unlawful immigrants and dependents who will actually receive amnesty and underestimates significantly the future growth in welfare and medical benefits." -- SOURCE:  http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/05/the-fiscal-cost-of-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-to-the-us-taxpayer

Not only is the US being invaded by a virtual army of illegal aliens, the US taxpayer is being taken to the cleaners as well. 

While Congressmen are reassuring their electorate back home that no immigration reform bill will pass the House this year, it seems Republicans and Democrats, from the House and Senate,  are meeting secretly in an attempt to reach an agreement on immigration reform, which will, no doubt, provide a pathway to citizenship.

Consider this from politico.com:  "It sometimes seems like House Republicans are in their own universe when it comes to rewriting the nation’s immigration laws. But since late last year, key House Republicans have been meeting with House and Senate Democrats as they try to reach a deal." -- SOURCE:  http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/immigration-chuck-schumer-paul-ryan-103057.html#ixzz2sN1cUXOW

It is important to note, I think, that Speaker  Boehner and Congressman Paul Ryan have both advocated for some form of legislation this year. Read more here: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/immigration-chuck-schumer-paul-ryan-103057_Page2.html#ixzz2sN3LbaSL

According to the article at politico.com: "Activists from United We Dream, a broad network of young immigrants, fanned out all over Capitol Hill and visited roughly 50 House Democratic and Republican offices, distributing a list of their own principles for immigration reform. Topping their list: a “meaningful and inclusive path to citizenship for undocumented Americans.”  -- SOURCE: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/immigration-chuck-schumer-paul-ryan-103057_Page2.html#ixzz2sN4EJb57

OK.  So, the GOP wants us to believe there will be no agreement this year.  But do you trust them?  I don't.

And why, in the world does the GOP think Hispanics and Asians are going to vote for republicans?  What the deuce are they smoking up there on the hill?

Reading a few nationally recognized polls should shed some light on the liberalism of Hispanics and Asians and their dislike of capitalism.  For instance, in this article from National Review we learn the following:  "The 2008 National Annenberg Election Survey found that 62 percent of immigrants prefer a single, government-run health-care system. The 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study found that 69 percent of immigrants support Obamacare. Pew also found that 53 percent of Hispanics have a negative view of capitalism, the highest of any group surveyed. This is even higher than the 47 percent among self-identified supporters of Occupy Wall Street.

The Pew Research Center has also found that 75 percent of Hispanics prefer a “bigger government providing more services,” and only 19 percent prefer a smaller government. Pew also reported that 55 percent of Asians prefer “bigger government providing more services,” and only 36 percent prefer a smaller government. So it’s no surprise that in 2012, 71 percent of Hispanics and 73 percent of Asians voted for Obama." -- SOURCE:  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/370166/liberal-newcomers-phyllis-schlafly
Let me be clear:  If the House passes an immigration  reform bill before November, the Republicans can write off the 2014 election. It will be over.  The GOP will lose its chance to win control of the Senate and may, in fact, lose control of the House, because conservative republicans -- and independents -- will stay home in utter disgust. 

J. D. Longstreet

Transgender people need the proper credit and they deserve credit for their creativity.  She definitely has a spark.  She has this positive energy and she will make history...





We need to be very careful not to offend transgender people and should respect them.   Piers Morgan supports the LGBT community and yet he's offended them.  But he cannot figure out why or how he offended them.

This is confusion below.  God is not the author of confusion.  But in this present evil world this is what we will be dealing with more and more:



...developing...

Jaime Vargas, aka, Jimmy Bauer