The "up-to-the-minute Market Data" thread

Well, for all the people who are scratching their heads saying how did we get here - here's a little history lesson to show you, WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE

From Angry Bear

That crash came in 1873 and lasted more than four years. It looks much more like our current crisis.


The problems had emerged around 1870, starting in Europe. In the Austro-Hungarian Empire, formed in 1867, in the states unified by Prussia into the German empire, and in France, the emperors supported a flowering of new lending institutions that issued mortgages for municipal and residential construction, especially in the capitals of Vienna, Berlin, and Paris. Mortgages were easier to obtain than before, and a building boom commenced. Land values seemed to climb and climb; borrowers ravenously assumed more and more credit using unbuilt or half-built houses as collateral. The most marvelous spots for sightseers in the three cities today are the magisterial buildings erected in the so-called founder period.

But the economic fundamentals were shaky. Wheat exporters from Russia and Central Europe faced a new international competitor who drastically undersold them. The 19th-century version of containers manufactured in China and bound for Wal-Mart consisted of produce from farmers in the American Midwest. They used grain elevators, conveyer belts, and massive steam ships to export trainloads of wheat to abroad. Britain, the biggest importer of wheat, shifted to the cheap stuff quite suddenly around 1871. By 1872 kerosene and manufactured food were rocketing out of America's heartland, undermining rapeseed, flour, and beef prices. The crash came in Central Europe in May 1873, as it became clear that the region's assumptions about continual economic growth were too optimistic. Europeans faced what they came to call the American Commercial Invasion. A new industrial superpower had arrived, one whose low costs threatened European trade and a European way of life.

As continental banks tumbled, British banks held back their capital, unsure of which institutions were most involved in the mortgage crisis. The cost to borrow money from another bank — the interbank lending rate — reached impossibly high rates. This banking crisis hit the United States in the fall of 1873. Railroad companies tumbled first. They had crafted complex financial instruments that promised a fixed return, though few understood the underlying object that was guaranteed to investors in case of default. (Answer: nothing).

The bonds had sold well at first, but they had tumbled after 1871 as investors began to doubt their value, prices weakened, and many railroads took on short-term bank loans to continue laying track. Then, as short-term lending rates skyrocketed across the Atlantic in 1873, the railroads were in trouble. When the railroad financier Jay Cooke proved unable to pay off his debts, the stock market crashed in September, closing hundreds of banks over the next three years. The panic continued for more than four years in the United States and for nearly six years in Europe.

The long-term effects of the Panic of 1873 were perverse. For the largest manufacturing companies in the United States — those with guaranteed contracts and the ability to make rebate deals with the railroads — the Panic years were golden. Andrew Carnegie, Cyrus McCormick, and John D. Rockefeller had enough capital reserves to finance their own continuing growth. For smaller industrial firms that relied on seasonal demand and outside capital, the situation was dire. As capital reserves dried up, so did their industries. Carnegie and Rockefeller bought out their competitors at fire-sale prices. The Gilded Age in the United States, as far as industrial concentration was concerned, had begun.


As the panic deepened, ordinary Americans suffered terribly. A cigar maker named Samuel Gompers who was young in 1873 later recalled that with the panic, "economic organization crumbled with some primeval upheaval." Between 1873 and 1877, as many smaller factories and workshops shuttered their doors, tens of thousands of workers — many former Civil War soldiers — became transients. The terms "tramp" and "bum," both indirect references to former soldiers, became commonplace American terms. Relief rolls exploded in major cities, with 25-percent unemployment (100,000 workers) in New York City alone. Unemployed workers demonstrated in Boston, Chicago, and New York in the winter of 1873-74 demanding public work. In New York's Tompkins Square in 1874, police entered the crowd with clubs and beat up thousands of men and women.

The most violent strikes in American history followed the panic, including by the secret labor group known as the Molly Maguires in Pennsylvania's coal fields in 1875, when masked workmen exchanged gunfire with the "Coal and Iron Police," a private force commissioned by the state. A nationwide railroad strike followed in 1877, in which mobs destroyed railway hubs in Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Cumberland, Md.


In Central and Eastern Europe, times were even harder. Many political analysts blamed the crisis on a combination of foreign banks and Jews. Nationalistic political leaders (or agents of the Russian czar) embraced a new, sophisticated brand of anti-Semitism that proved appealing to thousands who had lost their livelihoods in the panic. Anti-Jewish pogroms followed in the 1880s, particularly in Russia and Ukraine. Heartland communities large and small had found a scapegoat: aliens in their own midst.

The echoes of the past in the current problems with residential mortgages trouble me. Loans after about 2001 were issued to first-time homebuyers who signed up for adjustablerate mortgages they could likely never pay off, even in the best of times. Real-estate speculators, hoping to flip properties, overextended themselves, assuming that home prices would keep climbing. Those debts were wrapped in complex securities that mortgage companies and other entrepreneurial banks then sold to other banks; concerned about the stability of those securities, banks then bought a kind of insurance policy called a credit-derivative swap, which risk managers imagined would protect their investments.

More than two million foreclosure filings — default notices, auction-sale notices, and bank repossessions — were reported in 2007. By then trillions of dollars were already invested in this credit-derivative market. Were those new financial instruments resilient enough to cover all the risk? (Answer: no.)

As in 1873, a complex financial pyramid rested on a pinhead. Banks are hoarding cash. Banks that hoard cash do not make short-term loans. Businesses large and small now face a potential dearth of short-term credit to buy raw materials, ship their products, and keep goods on shelves.
If there are lessons from 1873, they are different from those of 1929. Most important, when banks fall on Wall Street, they stop all the traffic on Main Street — for a very long time. The protracted reconstruction of banks in the United States and Europe created widespread unemployment. Unions (previously illegal in much of the world) flourished but were then destroyed by corporate institutions that learned to operate on the edge of the law. In Europe, politicians found their scapegoats in Jews, on the fringes of the economy. (Americans, on the other hand, mostly blamed themselves; many began to embrace what would later be called fundamentalist religion.)


The post-panic winners, even after the bailout, might be those firms — financial and otherwise — that have substantial cash reserves. A widespread consolidation of industries may be on the horizon, along with a nationalistic response of high tariff barriers, a decline in international trade, and scapegoating of immigrant competitors for scarce jobs. The failure in July of the World Trade Organization talks begun in Doha seven years ago suggests a new wave of protectionism may be on the way.

More on the Panic of 1873

LAYOFF DAILY
4-10-2009

Pinnacle Mine Cuts Coal Production -290
Pratt and Whitney -500
Intuit Real Estate Solutions -40
Buckhorn Group -58
Kobelco -66
Bristol Metals -37
FedEx Services in Akron -74
Maine maritime Academy -9
Viking Yacht Tally -800
Marana Schools -133
CB and I -250
Johnson and Johnson -900
Sailboat Maker Beneteau -600
Evraz Steel Mill -250
GE Healthcare Milwaukee -179
Finning International -170

TOTAL 4,350+

Crowd Of 10,000 Overwhelms N.H. Job Fair

Traffic Gets Backed Up For Miles, And Organizers Forced To Shut Down Early
www.cbsnews.com...

The Real Estate Bust Is Far From Over
mises.org...

For those thinking that the real-estate bust is all over with — think again. The residential market has hit the ditch and continues to sink lower, but now the commercial property market is rolling over and will take many lenders down the drain with it. America's small and regional bankers are pointing their fingers at the big banks, claiming the big money center banks "have tarred and feathered us," City National Bank chief executive Bill McQuillan told the Wall Street Journal during the Independent Community Bankers of America convention in Phoenix. But banks — large and small — all over the country are loaded with commercial real-estate loans, and that collateral is heading south according to a Deutsche Bank report.

The folks at Deutsche Bank see price declines of 35 to 45 percent and maybe more in commercial property, due to the large number of loans coming due between now and 2012 that will not be able to be refinanced. Not only are loan delinquency rates up and rents down, but the go-go years of aggressive loan underwriting are gone. The interest-only, high low-to-value loans that drove capitalization (cap) rates to the five-percent range are history. Property buyers who are required to put more money down will offer significantly less for the same net operating income to achieve the required return on investment. Thus, cap rates for properties in Las Vegas, for instance, are closing in on 9 percent according to a local appraiser and may be on their way to 10 percent.

But bankers are in a state of denial, according to real-estate pro Andy Miller, who spoke at Doug Casey's Crisis & Investment Summit in Las Vegas recently. Miller's been in the business for 30 years and hasn't seen a property financing market this tight. But the current note holders are saying "don't worry, be happy." Miller told the capacity Casey crowd that bankers show him the door when he rains on their parade.

More at Link...

reply to post by Hx3_1963


Shades/echoes of Gerald Celente for certain...

His latest video, part 1 of 2

www.youtube.com...

Double blow for US pensions as values crash
www.ft.com...

The collapse in value of US state and local government pension plans is a disastrous double blow for them: they are being forced to sell off assets at huge discounts to pay out pensions, and are at the same time seeing their funding levels plummet to dangerous new lows.

In the past year the funds, whose collective $2,000bn-plus in assets make them key investors in every asset class, have lost about 40 per cent of their value through investment losses.

The 2,600 pension plans provide retirement savings for 22m public employees in towns and cities across the US, and range in size from the giant Calpers, with $120bn (€91bn, £81bn) in assets, to tiny small town funds which pay pensions for local garbage collectors and police.

Phillip Silitschanu, a senior analyst at Aite Group, a consultancy, says the pensions “could face a cash flow collapse, they are liquidating assets to meet their monthly cash flow needs . . . instead of selling positions that are down 10 per cent, they are being forced to liquidate positions down 40 per cent. It is a firesale liquidation of assets to have the cash on hand to meet obligations”.

Bill Atwood, the executive director of the Illinois State Board of Investments, says: “Right now it’s very bad. For the full year 2009 (ending in June) we will have $270m negative cash flow on $8.5bn in assets.”

State pension benefits are protected by law, and must be paid even if the fund is making a loss. Calpers, the largest fund, has lost $70bn in value in the past eight months, but still has to pay $11bn in benefits this year. Unless the fund starts recouping its losses soon, the California state government, which is already mired in a huge deficit, will have to lift contributions to Calpers starting from next year.

Bad as the cashflow crisis is, the accompanying collapse in funding levels – an issue largely outside the control of the pension managers – is considered by most in the industry to be of greater significance.

US pension plans are in generally worse shape than those in Europe. They were more underfunded, meaning they did not have the money to meet future pension commitments, even before the financial crisis hit, and their losses over the past year have been greater because they had larger allocations to equities. Funding has now fallen to about 50 per cent, according to industry estimates.

Mr Silitschanu said: “As terrible a predicament that everyone thought these pension funds were in three or four years ago, they are much worse now.”

More at Link...

reply to post by Hx3_1963



This has been of great concern to me as my Mom and others close to me (hard working,cvil-servants) depend on these pensions and still BELIEVE that "their money is safe..." OMG,Mom,it's not but they are basically powerless to access the funds because they are "held and managed" for them.
I can absolutely see the need to help my Mom,an incredibly hard-working womam,Mother of 8 who was a freakin' 911 dispatcher for over 40 years(often going to work at 11pm in a snowstorm) in the near future because the chitload of money she paid out will be gone when she needs it.
She had also been receiving part of my Dad's pension (he was a Teamster...yes,I know the unions have outlived thier usefullness but his jobs gave us a decent life "back then.") and they have literally cut what she was getting in half.
Now THIS is an example of someone who did it alllllll by the book,paid everything that was demanded,educated her children with savings,paid off her modest home, and now when it's all said and done,she will need more to survive on than is available and it SUCKS!!! It's her damn money!

SO many out there who simply "get it for nothing..."
I am disgusted.I bet everyone here knows someone in a similar postion.


Soooooo...what happens when "they" file for bankruptcy protection???:

By ANDREW EDWARDS and JOHN KELL
As the government increased pressure on General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC to be tougher on creditors, Standard & Poor's ratcheted down its recovery projections for lenders to the auto makers.

S&P on Friday reduced its recovery rating for Chrysler's $7 billion of first-lien loans held by major banks and institutions, saying they can expect a payout of 30 to 50 cents on the dollar if the auto maker files for bankruptcy. That may be lower, S&P said, if Chrysler gets debtor-in-possession financing because those lenders typically get paid back first.

Some lenders are hoping for Chrysler recoveries closer to 70 cents on the dollar. The Treasury Department has indicated lenders may get just 15 cents.

The prognosis for GM's secured debt holders was better; they can expect payments of 70% to 90% in event of default. However, the ratings firm said its estimates exclude the possibility of debtor-in-possession financing.

GM has until the end of May to strike a deal with stakeholders; Chrysler has until the end of April. Bankruptcy experts have called a filing by the two companies likely.

S&P cut ratings on the companies' secured debt, which is backed by the rights to the auto makers' assets should they default. S&P warned that large parts of Chrysler likely would be broken up and sold if it files for bankruptcy.

S&P said a Chrysler bankruptcy filing likely would occur at the end of April or soon after if the company can't finalize a pact with Italy's Fiat SpA, win concessions from its main union and secured lenders, or otherwise satisfy the White House.

Meanwhile, the Treasury market was closed for the Good Friday holiday. On Thursday, the 10-year note fell 23/32, or $7.1875 per $1,000 face value, to 98 15/32. Its yield rose to 2.930%, from 2.847% Wednesday, as yields move inversely to prices.

Write to Andrew Edwards at [email protected] and John Kell at [email protected]


[edit on 11-4-2009 by irishchic]

Originally posted by Tentickles
Where as a normal/sane leader would lower spending and cut departments of the government to save money, Obama has increased spending (by how ever many fold it is... like 10 times?) and made the government bigger.

Not realistic. Those Departments have friends in Congress. Reagan promised to abolish the Department of Energy and the Department of Education. 30 years later, look at how that turned out.

Expect to see a socio-political collapse before the government relinquishes powers or makes itself smaller.

Would Chrysler filing for bankruptcy increase , decrease, or have no effect on the likelyhood of General Motors filing for bankruptcy as well?



I see Chrysler's bankruptcy as an almost sure thing. They have very little to offer a potential buyer in terms of market strength/position, as Daimler-Benz, and apparently Ceberus, have discovered to their dismay. I don't see Fiat SpA all to willing to risk its neck in a tightening market on a third place, "also ran", firm like Chrysler.

(A GM-Fiat merger might make more sense, don't you think?)


However, If Chrysler were to bankrupt, I fear that it might make a GM filing more likely as well. The financial blow to Chrysler's suppliers, most of whom also supply GM, would force many of them to fold as well. Without suppliers on board, I don't see how GM will be able to form a reliably workable recovery plan.


On the other hand, the "psychic shock" (as opposed to the actual, financial impact) a GM bankruptcy would have on the US economy, at this time, could be enough to, finally, collapse the market.


Recognizing this possibility, might the US government be coerced into taking further, more drastic measures? And what impact will those "panic attacks" have on an already over-burdened system?

[edit on 11-4-2009 by Bhadhidar]

You're right about the suppliers. If Chrysler goes into bankruptcy, then they're almost certainly taking GM with them. If both of them go, there's a decent chance that they take Ford with them (this is why Ford was lobbying for the bridge loans, even though they didn't need any money).

The domestic automakers are an integral part of the military-industrial complex, so I wouldn't be shocked if the .gov came up with some sort of handwaving, skittle-spraying, magic to keep them afloat. Right now, though, it looks like the plan may be to let Chrysler go bankrupt, and see what happens (Chrysler is more expendable than Ford or GM).

[edit on 11-4-2009 by theWCH]

Originally posted by Bhadhidar

However, If Chrysler were to bankrupt, I fear that it might make a GM filing more likely as well. The financial blow to Chrysler's suppliers, most of whom also supply GM, would force many of them to fold as well. Without suppliers on board, I don't see how GM will be able to form a reliably workable recovery plan.

This all depend under which Chapter would Chrysler file for. "Bankrupt" doesn't mean necessarily "out of business." There are other options apart from Chapter 7 under which a company ceases all operations and its property is being sold off where the proceeds go to the creditors.

I'm in Canada and bankrupt means that the company is dead... so when will we know that GM or Chrysler are dead for real? Those going down would be quite something, about 1 in 11 jobs are related to the car business.... Michigan would be even worse than now, and they are already over 20% unemployment.

About the tax receipts... anyway to have a rundown of all states/big cities tax receipts?

If for the federal government the receipts are down 15%... wouldn't be the same for the states? Or worse?

Originally posted by Vitchilo
I'm in Canada and bankrupt means that the company is dead... so when will we know that GM or Chrysler are dead for real?

Aha.
Well, if Chrysler files for Chapter 7, then the company doesn't intend to reorganize and goes out of business. The way out must be somewhat organized; it needs a judicial oversight so the creditor wouldn't fight over who gets what.

But Chapter 7 is not the first option. Here is a word from folks over at Motortrend forum who got the whiff of trouble ahead for Chrysler almost a year ago:
forums.motortrend.com...

Chapter 11 seems to be most likely option. Look it up what that means.

Some good comments,as always!

I am "seeing" the demise of these giants of industry as a swan-song of sorts and although I totally understand the hows and whys of it all,it "represents" the end of not only an era in American history to me but also the end of jobs,benefits,and security for many people.

It's just all un-raveling faster than I expected and although I do understand the "protections" Chap 7 or 11 can offer,I believe few every really DO re-organize and come back stronger,it's more like a seperation before the inevitable and final divorce as I've seen it.

Sad overall.

[edit on 11-4-2009 by irishchic]

The last 2 banks cost the FDIC a lot of money... how much money do they have left? Is it me or the more we avance in this crisis, the more it costs in terms of FDIC money?

New Frontier Bank: 670 million
Cape Fear Bank: 131 million

Omni National Bank: 290 million
Teambank: 98 million
Colorado National Bank: 9 million
Northeast Georgia Bank: 36.2 million
FirstCity Bank: 100 million

Big bank that failed:
Indymac Federal Bank: 10.7 billion$

See? What would have cost bailing out Indymac? Much more than 10.7 billions.

[edit on 11-4-2009 by Vitchilo]

How are the markets reporting profits?

Guys, the fall off in tax revenue collection combined with the ramp in spending is EPIC! Corporate income tax receipts fell 90%!?!

U.S. Budget Disaster Strikes – March Outlays 2.5 Times Income!!

Yes we had two more banks fail today… one the FDIC could not sell and simply told depositors to take their money and move it to other banks. The reality, of course, is that the FDIC does not actually possess any money to guarantee anything. All of that money must be fabricated. But bank failures are NOTHING in comparison to what’s happening to our government’s budget.

I’ve been YELLING about the relationship of rising government expenditures coupled with falling income/revenue. It’s been a disaster and now it’s just unfathomable. Read and think about the following numbers carefully:

Budget deficit triples to $957 billion for year

March deficit hits $192 billion has receipts drop 28%, outlays rise 41%

By Rex Nutting, MarketWatch

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. federal budget deficit rose to a record $956.8 billion in the first six months of the fiscal year after the government stepped up spending to cope with a recession that has depressed tax receipts, the Treasury Department reported Friday.

The deficit is well on its way to the $1.75 trillion -- or 12.3% of gross domestic product -- that the White House has estimated for the full fiscal year, which ends in September.

The deficit through the first six months is more than three times higher than it was at this time last year. The government has borrowed $1 trillion from the public so far this fiscal year.

In March, the deficit widened to $192.3 billion from $48.2 billion in March 2008. Outlays rose 41% to $321.2 billion from $227 billion, while receipts dropped 28% to $129 billion from $178.8 billion.

Receipts from individual income taxes fell 27% in March, versus year-earlier figures. Individual refunds are up 14% so far this year. Compared with a year earlier, corporate income tax receipts fell 90% to $3.4 billion.

Much of the increase in outlays in March came from extraordinary investments by the government in banks and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, loans to credit unions, and increased spending from the stimulus package for unemployment insurance and Medicaid. Some of those investments should be repaid over time, but the government is booking them as cash expenses for now.

In March, Fannie Mae received $15.2 billion, Freddie Mac received $30.8 billion, and unemployment benefits totaled $10.6 billion.

Through the first six months of the fiscal year, outlays are up 33% to $1.95 trillion. Receipts are down 14% to $989.8 billion. Corporate income taxes are down 57% to $56.2 billion, while individual income taxes are down 15% to $429.7 billion. Payroll taxes are up 0.3% to $430 billion.


This is truly an EPIC collapse of government receipts, and maybe one of the most important stories of this time. Failing banks are one thing, failing governments are another.

Remember, deficit spending leads to debt. The only way to service debt is with income. Thus, in the long run what matters is debt to income. But if you really want to create a crisis in the here and now, the best way to do it is to run out of cash! How does one do that? Simply by taking in less cash than you pay out. Right now we’re talking about outflows that are 2.5 TIMES income for the U.S. Government!

Outlays = $321 billion in March

Receipts = $129 billion

Shortfall = $192 billion for the MONTH

Annualized, that shortfall adds up to $2.3 TRILLION

Forget about GDP comparisons, they are meaningless. We simply are piling debt on top of debt and we do not have the cash to pay our current bills much less those of the past. And none of our government’s budgets use the same GAAP accounting rules that they mandate you and your company use, they do not count future obligations as deficits – thus the term “CURRENT account deficit.” Check the BIG RED NUMBERS at the bottom of this blog. That number is VASTLY understated. Heck, they won’t even dream of adding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debt to their own balance sheet – I mean OUR own balance sheet – because the amount of debt is staggering.

MUCH, much more at link!

When this all falls down, it's gonna happen so fast we won't know what hit us.

And yet another post about what we heading to

BEST OF BILL BUCKLER

April 9, 2009

The Real US Bottom Line:

This week, the US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that the US budget deficit will balloon to $US 1.8 TRILLION or 13.1 per cent of GDP this year. The Obama budget is $US 3.55 TRILLION. That means that more than half (50.7 percent) of the budget will be borrowed.

The Global Bottom Line:

All of the rest of the world sees this bottom line clearly. If the US budget were to be funded solely out of incoming tax revenues and therefore brought into balance, about $US 1.8 TRILLION in artificial "stimulus" would be withdrawn. The US economic and financial house of cards would instantly cave in. Were the US budget to be honestly funded by US taxes actually paid, then US spending would instantly be cut in half ( by $US 1.8 TRILLION). That would be like taking the US economy out and shooting it.

The Obama administration is in a position where it cannot raise taxes and cannot cut spending. It can only borrow, Borrow and BORROW and spend the borrowed money to stave off a debacle.

The rest of the world now knows this. They are no longer prepared to go along and to pay the costs.

Again, much, much more at link

This week, the US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that the US budget deficit will balloon to $US 1.8 TRILLION or 13.1 per cent of GDP this year.

It will be much more than that because they'll need another stimulus and other bailouts pretty soon, before the year is out.

So even if we ``only`` have a 1.8 trillion deficit this year, it will be way over 2.5 trillion NEXT YEAR if the spending is not cut by 50%...

Imagine that... the federal government cutting it's spending by 55% next year to have no deficit... IMO they won't do it and will just spend us into oblivion.

Or they'll have to raise taxes... people can't afford them... or increase corporate taxes... which will cripple the economy even more... yep, the US is screwed and it won't be long now that it will lose it's AAA status.

Anywhere to find states tax receipts/spending numbers compared to last year?

[edit on 11-4-2009 by Vitchilo]

reply to post by Vitchilo


Ya , and the troops will be out in 6 months

2nd line not neccessary

reply to post by Seany


The troops? Those in Iraq that will stay there for eternity or those 31.000 about to surge in Afghanistan or those all around the world doing nothing? Those troops? Let's hope that they bring the troops home.

Cancel Iraq, cancel Afghanistan, get out of all countries the US is in, except South Korea. That'll make you save money... but you'll still be in deficit.

When the US get out of those countries, China will expand and Israel might be in for a fight.

And Obama wants to ``reform`` the whole health system... yeah right. You'll actually have to cut medicare by at least 50% and the military by 50%... then you would save 645 billions... still in deficit. Cut 50% in social security, save 306 billions. Now you're at 951 billions... still in deficit. Rise income tax to those who make more than a million a year to 50%... in the green.

EDIT: I'm joking about the troops. There's NO WAY IN HELL Obama will withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan. He'll only FAIL FORWARD. If he does, I'll eat my hat. IMO he'll call for a draft or make a false-flag to do it before withdrawing. Draft = jobs + stay in the middle-east.

[edit on 11-4-2009 by Vitchilo]

reply to post by Vitchilo


Yes sir, those troops, out in 6 months......Big O

Deficit reduced by 50% next year ..........Big O