Geithner: $135B left for bank bailouts

March 29, 2009: 9:56 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- U.S. Treasury Secretary Geithner said Sunday the government has about $135 billion left for bank bailouts and refused to say whether it will ask Congress for more this year.

"We have roughly $135 billion left of uncommitted resources. The rest is out the door," he said on ABC Television's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos."

Geithner said that figure included "a very conservative judgment about how much money is likely to come back from banks that are strong enough not to need this capital now to get through a recession."

Congress approved $700 billion last fall for rescuing banks that had gotten into trouble when the U.S. housing boom crashed, but lawmakers and ordinary Americans show signs of becoming increasingly unhappy over the program.

Geithner wouldn't specify whether he expects to ask Congress for more money this year, though he didn't rule it out. "The important thing is we are going to work with the Congress to make sure we have the resources needed to do this right," he said.

"We have substantial resources, we're going to use them quickly, as carefully as we can...to get credit flowing again and we'll cross that bridge when we come to it in terms of whether we'll need additional resources," Geithner added.

He conceded that banks likely will need "large amounts of assistance" before the credit crisis is resolved and said it would be "a mistake" to think that they can earn their way out of the current downturn.

"To get through this, governments need to act. There's a great obligation and responsibility for government to act to solve these things," Geithner said. "The market will not solve this and the great risk for us is that we do too little, not that we do too much."

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/29/news/economy/bailout_funds.reut/index.htm?postversion=2009032909

-----

The portion in bold is critical, esp when banks are all reporting out that they are making profits. When the 1st quarter results are out, we will probably determine whether the markets will be moving north or south again.

Bankers: Take your TARP money back

Some banks say the government's stabilization plan is actually weighing them down.

By Allan Chernoff, CNN senior correspondent

Obama aides flunk GM and Chrysler

Latest news from US, which caused a massive plunge in most of the markets.

------

By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com senior writer

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Obama administration gave General Motors and Chrysler LLC failing grades Monday for their turnaround efforts and promised a sweeping overhaul of the troubled companies. The government plans to give the automakers more money, but it is also holding out the threat of a "structured bankruptcy."

The federal government will provide operating funds for both automakers for several weeks, during which time the companies will have to undergo significant restructuring, administration officials said late Sunday night.

At GM, part of that restructuring began early Monday when CEO Rick Wagoner announced his resignation, which he said came at the request of the Obama administration.

President Obama is expected to make a formal announcement later in the day about his plans for the companies, which have already been given $17.4 billion.

GM (GM, Fortune 500) will get 60 days and Chrysler 30 days in which to make a final push toward proving they can run viable businesses. If Chrysler succeeds, it will receive a $6 billion loan. In GM's case, the officials would not specify how much money the carmaker might receive.

In the case of both companies, the officials said, stakeholders - and particularly debt holders in both companies - had not done enough to relieve the automakers of ongoing financial burdens.

"We have made very clear that we expect a very, very substantial reduction in liability for both companies," one official said.

The administration also said a structured bankruptcy is possible.

"While Chrysler and GM are different companies with different paths forward, both have unsustainable liabilities and both need a fresh start," according to an administration document. "Their best chance at success may well require utilizing the bankruptcy code in a quick and surgical way."

In order to help assuage consumer fears about buying cars from these companies as they restructure, the government is also setting aside funds to back up warranties on vehicles GM and Chrysler sell.

GM: Changes at the top

The administration officials were far more positive in their tone regarding the prospects for GM than for its smaller rival.

"We are very confident GM can survive and thrive as a company," one official said, noting the company's global reach, the strength of its research and development and the power of its various brands.

Nevertheless, significant changes are on the table.

One was the resignation of chief executive Wagoner, a 32-year veteran of the company who has served in the top post since 2000.

"On Friday I was in Washington for a meeting with administration officials. In the course of that meeting, they requested that I 'step aside' as CEO of GM, and so I have," Wagoner said in a statement posted to the GM Web site.

Wagoner will be replaced by GM's chief operating officer, Fritz Henderson. Kent Kresa will serve as interim chairman.

"Having worked closely with Fritz for many years, I know that he is the ideal person to lead the company through the completion of our restructuring efforts. His knowledge of the global industry and the company are exceptional, and he has the intellect, energy, and support among GM'ers worldwide to succeed," Wagoner said.

"We view our approach to GM as starting with a clean sheet of paper," the Treasury official said.

The officials said they had committed to working with GM to create a leaner, more competitive company. Administration officials will be in Detroit working very closely with the GM executives on a plan to restructure the company and its debt obligations, the officials said.

The administration officials would not say how much more money they might ultimately lend to GM or how much working capital the automaker would need to make it through the next 60 days.

Chrysler: Fiat or bust

For its part, Chrysler was too reliant on the domestic auto market, according to the officials. In addition, a significant "hollowing out" of the company by its past owners had left it unable to compete effectively as a stand-alone company, the officials said.

Any restructuring for Chrysler would have to involve a partnership, most likely a deal with Fiat which has had an "agreement in principal" with Chrysler since January.

Chrysler is getting 30 days to work out a deal with Fiat, which is the only way the officials believe the carmaker will survive. If that can happen, the administration is prepared to lend Chrysler $6 billion dollars more.

While government officials said it was their "goal, hope and ambition" for a Chrysler-Fiat deal to work, the agreement terms would need to be modified from what the companies had previously announced.

Fiat had originally planned to take a 35% stake in Chrysler, but that stake would have to be lower. Fiat would also not be allowed to own a majority stake in Chrysler until after all government loans have been repaid.

There is sufficient money in existing funds to finance these plans, the officials said, who added that there would be no immediate need to ask Congress to appropriate more.

CNNMoney.com senior writer Jennifer Liberto contributed to this report.

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/29/news/companies/gm_bailout/index.htm?postversion=2009033010

Three examples of good debt

Do take note that this is taken as an example of being in USA.

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

Home, school and your chariot qualify


Debt is not always a bad thing. In fact, there are instances where the leveraging power of a loan actually helps put you in a better overall financial position.

Buying a home

The chance that you can pay for a new home in cash is slim. Carefully consider how much you can afford to put down and how much loan you can carry. The more you put down, the less you'll owe and the less you'll pay in interest over time.

Although it may seem logical to plunk down every available dime to cut your interest payments, it's not always the best move. You need to consider other issues, such as your need for cash reserves and what your investments are earning.

Also, don't pour all your cash into a home if you have other debt. Mortgages tend to have lower interest rates than other debt, and you may deduct the interest you pay on the first $1 million of a mortgage loan. (If your mortgage has a high rate, you can always refinance later if rates fall. Use our calculator to determine how much you might save.)

A 20 percent down payment is traditional and may help buyers get the best mortgage deals. Many homebuyers do put down less - as little as 3 percent in some cases. But if you do, you'll end up paying higher monthly mortgage bills because you're borrowing more money, and you will have to pay for primary mortgage insurance (PMI), which protects the lender in the event you default.

For more on financing a home, read Money 101: Buying a home.

Paying for college

When it comes to paying for your children's education, allowing your kids to take loans makes far more sense than liquidating or borrowing against your retirement fund. That's because your kids have plenty of financial sources to draw on for college, but no one is going to give you a scholarship for your retirement. What's more, a big 401(k) balance won't count against you if you apply for financial aid since retirement savings are not counted as available assets.

It's also unwise to borrow against your home to cover tuition. If you run into financial difficulties down the road, you risk losing the house.

Your best bet is to save what you can for your kids' educations without compromising your own financial health. Then let your kids borrow what you can't provide, especially if they are eligible for a government-backed Perkins or Stafford loans, which are based on need. Such loans have guaranteed low rates; no interest payments are due until after graduation; and interest paid is tax-deductible under certain circumstances.

For more on educational financing, read Money 101: Saving for College and "Beating the Financial Aid Trap."

Financing a car

Figuring out the best way to finance a car depends on how long you plan to keep it, since a car's value plummets as soon as you drive it off the lot. It also depends on how much cash you have on hand.

If you can pay for the car outright, it makes sense to do so if you plan to keep the car until it dies or for longer than the term of a high-interest car loan or pricey lease. It's also smart to use cash if that money is unlikely to earn more invested than what you would pay in loan interest.

Most people, however, can't afford to put down 100 percent. So the goal is to put down as much as possible without jeopardizing your other financial goals and emergency fund. Typically, you won't be able to get a car loan without putting down at least 10 percent. A loan makes most sense if you want to buy a new car and plan to keep driving it long after your loan payments have stopped.

You may be tempted to use a home equity loan when buying a car because you're likely to get a lower interest rate than you would on an auto loan, and the interest is tax-deductible. But before going this route make sure you can afford the payments. If you default, you could lose your home. And be sure you can pay it off while you still have the car since it's painful to pay for something that has been consigned to the junkyard.

Leasing a car might be your best bet if the following applies: you want a new car every three or four years; you want to avoid a down payment of 10 percent to 20 percent; you don't drive more than the 15,000 miles a year allowed in most leases; and you keep your vehicle in good condition so that you avoid end-of-lease penalties.

Whatever route you choose, shop for the best deals. Remember, it's in the car dealer's best interest to finance at the highest rate possible, so look at what you'll pay overall, not just the monthly amount. If you tell your car dealer you can spend $400 a month, you could end up with a new car for $400 a month based on an uncompetitive interest rate.

Link: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson9/index3.htm

-----

Strangely, buying a car is a good debt. However, in Singapore context, it seemed warped as our cars can only last us for 10 years before our COE expires. Furthermore, I guess our parking fees in the long run may even be more expensive than the car itself! Imagine the season parking fees in Capital Towers is $350 per month!

Good debt vs. bad debt

Some useful article for money management.

Sometimes it makes sense to borrow - a lot of times it doesn't.

It's almost impossible to live debt-free; most of us can't pay cash for our homes or our children's college educations. But too many of us let debt get out of hand.

Ideally, experts say, your total monthly long-term debt payments, including your mortgage and credit cards, should not exceed 36 percent of your gross monthly income. That's one metric mortgage bankers consider when assessing the creditworthiness of a potential borrower.

It's far too easy to spend more than you can afford, especially when you pay by credit card. The average U.S. household with at least one credit card carries nearly a $10,700 balance, according to CardWeb.com, and personal bankruptcies have hit record highs in recent years.

Of course, avoiding debt at any cost is not smart either if it means depleting your cash reserves for emergencies. The challenge is learning how to judge which debt makes sense and which does not and then wisely managing the money you do borrow.

Good debt includes anything you need but can't afford to pay for up front without wiping out cash reserves or liquidating all your investments. In cases where debt makes sense, only take loans for which you can afford the monthly payments.

Bad debt includes debt you've taken on for things you don't need and can't afford (that trip to Bora Bora, for instance). The worst form of debt is credit-card debt, since it usually carries the highest interest rates.

Sometimes the decision to borrow doesn't hinge on how much cash you have but on whether there are ways to make your money work harder for you. If interest rates are low, compare what you'll spend in interest on a loan versus what your money could earn if it were invested. If you think you can get a higher return from investing your cash than what you'll pay in interest on a loan, borrowing a small amount at a low rate may make sense.

Link: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson9/index2.htm

----------

I will put what they claim as a good debt in a short while.

Does Wall Street need bonuses now?

An interesting article to ponder on. Especially when we, the workers are involved.
------------

People are angry about the AIG bonuses, but do executives really need incentives to stay on the job in this environment? Here's where the financial sector jobs and paychecks are -- and where they aren't.


By Jennifer Reingold, senior writer

Oil speculation: It's back

With the recovery everyone is anticipating, this is something that I worry again. US$200 per barrel for oil once more? Even though this article is quite some time back, but it brings good reflection on where our economy is going, especially the rising prices of commodities.

------

There's more of it today than there ever was this summer. And this time around, it really is making oil more expensive.

By Jon Birger, senior writer
Last Updated: December 5, 2008: 1:55 PM ET

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- With oil now at $50 a barrel, you no longer hear Congress complaining about oil speculators. The irony is there's probably more real speculation going on today than there ever was back in June and July.

I'm talking about the type of speculation that involves hoarding oil today so it can be sold for more down the road. Today's speculators are actually buying oil. They're not merely flipping futures contracts without taking delivery - which is what hedge funds and commodities index funds were doing when they were in the crosshairs of Congress this summer. As I've argued before, investors who trade futures but never take delivery of actual oil can't have a material impact on oil prices because their trading affects neither supply nor demand.

What's different now is the structure of the futures market, which is giving big investors an incentive to buy and hold huge sums of crude. Specifically, the November 2009 price of oil is considerably higher ($12 a barrel higher, to be precise) than the spot price - a scenario futures traders call a "contango" market. (The opposite scenario - spot prices higher than futures prices - is known as "backwardation.")

"The steepening of the contango has opened up carry-trade arbitrage opportunities that are slow to be closed due to constrained credit conditions," Goldman Sachs wrote in a recent research report. Translation: this is a great time for investors to be hoarding oil.

Today's market is giving Goldman clients and other well-heeled investors an opportunity to buy oil in the spot market for $50 a barrel, sell it forward in the futures market for $62, and then pocket the $12-a-barrel difference, less storage costs.

This type of oil investing was quite popular in 2005 and 2006 when, like today, the price of oil one year out was much higher than the spot price. Back then, contango trades were so popular that one of Morgan Stanley's top energy traders, Olav Refvik, leased so much oil storage that he earned the nickname "the King of New York Harbor."

There's no question the investing strategies pursued by Refvik and others were pushing up oil prices. By putting large sums of oil into storage, they reduced the supply available to consumers. By 2007, however, the gap between spot prices and futures vanished, and so did the opportunity to profit from that difference. And the amount of oil held in inventory began to fall.

Nevertheless, Congress needed a scapegoat for rising oil prices and an easy target proved to be hedge funds and other investors dabbling in oil futures. But these pseudo-speculators were simply making a bet on the direction of prices; they weren't driving them. Their gains (or losses) came out of the hides of the investors or airlines or oil companies on the other sides of their trades, not the oil-consuming public. Moreover, a lot of commodities hedge funds were actually making the wrong bets: According to Merrill Lynch, the average commodities hedge fund had a negative trailing 12-month return through June.

Unlike futures flippers, contango traders really do impact oil prices, yet they're getting a free pass. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, domestic oil inventories have risen 9% since oil prices peaked in early July. While some of that is attributable to the weak economy and slack energy demand, gasoline consumption declined only 5% over the same period and gasoline inventories have risen only 4%. (If you're wondering why contango traders would target crude oil but not gasoline, vaporization issues make gasoline harder to store.)

Demand for oil storage is so keen today that some big investors who can't secure storage on land have resorted to leasing supertankers and using them as floating oil tanks. For example, the U.S. oil trading firm Koch Supply & Trading recently leased the 2-million-barrel-capacity Dubai Titan, a Koch spokesperson confirms, the third supertanker Koch has leased this year.

It's hard to quantify exactly much lower gas prices might be were it not for the current speculation. In the United States alone, crude oil inventories have increased by 27 million barrels since early July, the equivalent of about 200,000 barrels a day being pulled off the market. Based on the estimates I've seen, a 200,000 barrel-a-day decrease in supply could raise gasoline prices by anywhere from 20 to 40 cents a gallon.

For the average consumer, that's real money. But I bet you a barrel or two that actual oil investors like Koch never get targeted by Congress the same way the hedge funds and index funds did this past summer.

After all, who needs a scapegoat when gas is $1.90 a gallon?

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/26/news/economy/oil_speculation.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008120109

Consumer sentiment rises

Optimism about the government's efforts to prop up the economy improved consumers' attitudes in March.

March 27, 2009: 11:37 AM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- Consumers' mood brightened a bit in March, nudged up by increased confidence in government economic policy, but overall sentiment remained near an all-time low, a survey showed Friday.

The Reuters/University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers said its final index of sentiment rose to 57.3 in March from 56.3 in February. This was a touch above economists' median expectation of a 56.6 reading, according to a Reuters poll.

The survey hit a record low of 51.7 in May, 1980.

The index of consumer expectations rose to 53.5 from 50.5. Survey director Richard Curtin said confidence in the Obama administration's economic policies improved consumers' mood, with 22% of those surveyed rating policy favorably in March, compared with 7% in January.

Americans' view of their present situation remained dim, with the index of economic conditions slipping to 63.3 in March from 65.5 in February.

"Although the data indicate that the downward momentum in confidence ended in the closing months of 2008, there is no evidence that consumers expect their finances to improve any time soon," Curtin said.

While the survey showed 44% of consumers expected government policy to improve their personal finances, an all-time record number of consumers said incomes had declined compared with a year ago.

They also anticipated the smallest annual income gains ever recorded - 0.2% compared to 2.5% a year ago.

Stocks pared losses after the sentiment data, while the dollar held its gains against the euro.

Inflation signals were mixed. The report's reading on one-year inflation expectations rose to 2% from from 1.9% in February, but five-year inflation expectations fell to 2.6% from 3.1%.

"Overall, there has not been another period in the past quarter century that deflation was more widely anticipated," Curtin said.

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/27/news/economy/Mich_consumer_sentiment.reut/index.htm

-----

The big bold words are key words, which indicates consumer confidence improving ever since the day the world stood still when lehman brothers collapsed. I will take a look at more key indicators to see how market sentiments are moving. For S-Shares in Singapore unfortunately, it seems that trust has probably been destroyed at this point of time.

Unchanged: The new positive

For the most part, bonds and credit market indicators have remained stagnant this year. Experts say that may be a good sign.

By David Goldman, CNNMoney.com staff writer

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/27/markets/bondcenter/credit_market/index.htm?postversion=2009032711

Earth hour is today!

Have you done your part for earth hour?

So what can you do when there is no power? Well, its kinda hard cos the fact that almost every entertainment needs electricity!

For more information on earth hour, here is the link:
http://www.earthhour.org/home/

Americans spending more

Government report shows spending by individuals rises for the second month in a row even as incomes fall.

By Ben Rooney, CNNMoney.com staff writer

AIG's wind-down has $1.6 trillion left

Some news on AIG again. Last rumour I heard was AIA Asia will be listed separately from AIG. Let me dig some news on this portion.

Retention payments cloud the real issue: Ed Liddy has a long way to go in 'de-risking' the company.


By Carol J. Loomis, senior editor at large

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/25/news/companies/loomis_aig.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009032609

Highlights of China Premier Wen JiaBao's gov't work report

Here are the highlights of China Premier Wen Jiabao's govt's work report (from China Xinhau Net) :
MAJOR TARGETS for 2009

-- GDP will grow by about 8 percent;

-- Economic structure will further improve;

-- Urban employment will increase by more than 9 million persons;

-- Urban registered unemployment rate will be held under 4.6 percent;

-- Urban and rural incomes will grow steadily;

-- Rise in the CPI will be around 4 percent;

-- Balance of payments will continue to improve.

  DEFICIT

-- The central government deficit is set at 750 billion yuan, 570 billion yuan more than last year. The total deficit will become 950 billion yuan as local governments plan to issue 200 billion yuan worth of government bonds, accounting for less than 3percent of the GDP.

REAL ESTATE SECTOR

-- Even more vigorous and effective policies and measures will be adopted to stabilize market confidence and expectations, keep real estate investment stable, and promote steady and orderly development of the real estate industry.

POST QUAKE RECONSTRUCTION

-- The central government will allocate 130 billion yuan to accelerate recovery and reconstruction of areas hit by the Wenchuan earthquake.

AGRICULTURE, RURAL AREAS & FARMERS

-- Central government allocations for agriculture, rural areas and farmers will total 716.1 billion yuan, a year-on-year increaseof 120.6 billion yuan.

INDUSTRIAL RESTRUCTURING

-- The government will conscientiously implement plans for adjusting and invigorating key industries such as the automobile, steel, shipbuilding, petrochemical, textile, nonferrous metals, equipment manufacturing, information technology, modern logistics, and light industries.

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION

-- The central government will allocate 146.1 billion yuan to the science and technology sector, up 25.6 percent from last year.

FOOD SAFETY

-- The government will implement strict market access rules and product traceability and recall systems so that the people buy food and drugs with confidence and consume them with satisfaction.

SOCIAL SAFETY NET

-- The central government plans to spend 293 billion yuan on the social safety net, up 17.6 percent or 43.9 billion yuan over the estimated figure for last year. Local governments will also increase funding in this area.

EMPLOYMENT

-- The government will implement a more proactive employment policy, and the central government will allocate 42 billion yuan for this purpose.

EDUCATION

-- The government will formulate the Outline of the National Medium- and Long-Term Program for Education Reform and Development to make comprehensive arrangements for education reform and development in China through 2020.

HEALTH CARE REFORM

-- Governments at all levels will allocate an additional 850 billion yuan in the next three years, including 331.8 billion yuan from the central government, to ensure smooth progress in the reform of the medical and health care system.

NATIONAL DEFENSE

-- The government will improve defense-related research, the weapons and equipment production system, the military personnel training system, and the army's logistics support system that integrate civilian with military purposes and combine military efforts with civilian support.

TAIWAN ISSUE

-- The mainland will remain committed to the goal of peaceful development of cross-Straits relations, and work actively to builda framework for and strive to achieve new progress in the peaceful development of cross-Straits relations.

-- The mainland will continue to comprehensively strengthen cross-Straits economic cooperation to jointly respond to the global financial crisis.

-- The mainland will accelerate normalization of cross-Straits economic relations and facilitate the signing of a comprehensive agreement on economic cooperation, and gradually establish economic cooperation mechanisms tailored to both sides of the Straits.

-- The mainland will work on the basis of the one-China principle to enhance mutual political trust between the two sides.

Some joke for the day

Too much work and little play makes jack a boring person. Some quickie for a quick laugh.

Chocolate better than men:

1. Eating chocolate is always an orgasmic experience.
2. Chocolate is dark, rich, and satisfying.
3. Chocolate is mentally stimulating.
4. Chocolate always smells good.
5. Chocolate doesn’t complain when you want to cuddle up with it.
6. Chocolate doesn’t care how many pieces you’ve had before.
7. You can suck on a piece of chocolate for a really long time.
8. Your friends always like chocolate.
9. Chocolate never leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
10. You always know if someone else has eaten any of your chocolate.
11. One taste and you can’t help but want more.
12. Chocolate doesn’t just think it’s smooth.
13. You’re never disappointed when you open the wrapper.
14. Chocolate satisfies every time.
15. When chocolate melts in your mouth it tastes good.
16. You can tell just by looking at it, that it’s not been in someone
else’ mouth.
17. It doesn’t sulk if you don’t want it first thing in the morning.
18. If it gets soft, a few seconds in the refrigerator will make it
hard again.
19. Chocolate knows how to be chocolate, you don’t have to teach it.
20. You can read the label and know what it’s made of.
21. You can get it 24 hours a day but sometimes you have to wait till
10 A.M. for the really good stuff.
22. Chocolate always hits the spot.

Economy: Worst in 26 years


The nation's gross domestic product declined by 6.3% in the fourth quarter -- the biggest drop since 1982.

By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer

The Great Recession

Economists generally agree this is the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, but they say despite pain, another depression isn't likely.

By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Is this the worst economy since the Great Depression? And what are the chances of the economy falling into another depression?

The answer to the first question is fairly clear. In most ways that matter to economists and average Americans, this is the worst economic crisis since the Depression.

The answer to the second question is not as clear. While the National Bureau of Economic Research officially declares the beginning and end of recessions, nobody does that for depressions.

Still, the general consensus of economists is that another depression is not likely. But the risks are greater than they were only a few months ago.

Why this recession is so bad

First things first: Even though it may seem obvious to most that this is the worst downturn since the Great Depression, the economy has experienced other serious recessions in the past, particularly in the mid-1970s and early 1980s.

But this recession dwarfs those two for several reasons.

In terms of length, the longest post-Depression economic decline was 16 months, which occurred in both the 1973-75 and 1981-82 recessions. This recession began in December 2007, which means that it will enter its 17th month next Wednesday.

The current recession is also more widespread than any other since the Depression. The Federal Reserve's readings show that 86% of industries have cut back production since November, the most widespread reduction in the 42 years the Fed has tracked this figure.

What's more, every state reported an increase in unemployment this past December, the first time that has happened in the 32 years that records for unemployment in each state have been kept.

"This is important because there's nowhere you can move to find a job," said Gus Faucher, director of macroeconomics for Moody's Economy.com.

Finally, during the past nine months, the drop in household wealth has been larger since anything on record in the post-World War II period.

Why this won't be another depression

So far during this recession, the nation's gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic activity, has dropped about 1.7%. Forecasts of experts surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics work out to about a 3.4% decline in GDP over the life of this recession.

To be sure, there already have been some quarters where the drop was much more severe. The government will report its final revision of GDP for the fourth quarter of 2008 and economists are expecting that report to show an annual rate of decline of 6.6%. And some economists think the drop in the first quarter could be even greater.

But measuring the drop in economic activity from top to bottom is how economists judge a recession's depth. And a 3.4% drop would be the worst since World War II, and far worse than the average recession in that period.

Still, that's a long way from the 26.5% drop in GDP that took place between 1929 and 1933.

One of the main reasons why economists think another depression could be avoided is that it will take more than just a sharp decline in consumer spending and household wealth to spark a depression.

Even though household net worth has fallen a record $11 trillion, or 18%, during the course of this recession, the broader economy can weather such a shock.

Historically, stock market crashes and bursting housing bubbles haven't necessarily led to depressions. It takes a variety of economic factors and policy decisions to turn a recession into something even more serious.

"I don't know if you can make a causal link between a loss of wealth and a depression," said Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of Economic Cycle Research Institute.

Learning lessons of the 1930s

Significant policy changes since the 1930s will also cushion the blow.

Unemployment insurance, Social Security payments and larger government at the federal, state and local levels keep money flowing into the economy even as consumers and businesses pull back on their own spending.

"There's a lot more safeguards in place," said Keith Hembre, chief economist at First American Funds.

Hembre said the $787 billion stimulus bill passed by Congress in February will also spur more economic activity down the road.

In addition, the Federal Reserve, led by Great Depression expert Ben Bernanke, has pumped trillions of dollars into the economy with new lending programs the central bank has never tried before. That has swelled the supply of money. By way of contrast, the money supply tightened during the Great Depression.

There were many other policy mistakes made in the 1930s that economists say are not being repeated today, including stiff tariffs that killed international trade and government imposed limits on prices and production levels.

Even if Congress imposed "Buy American" provisions in the public works paid for by the stimulus bill, there is no call to move back to the strict protectionism of the 1930s or production and price controls.

"I'd like to think we've learned something, so in terms of policy we're doing better," said Achuthan.

Still, even if the United States does not enter another depression, that doesn't make the current economic crisis any less painful for many Americans. Also, few economists are predicting an end to the recession anytime soon.

Hembre said he is worried that the country could be in a period of prolonged economic stagnation similar so the so-called lost-decade that Japan suffered starting in the 1990s. He said continued weakness in housing and high debt levels by households and governments could hold the economy back for some time.

And some economists aren't completely ruling out another depression.

In a paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research last month, Harvard University professors Robert Barro and Jose Ursua put the chance of a minor depression (which they defined as a GDP decline of at least 10%) at about 20% and a 3% chance of a major depression (defined as a GDP drop of at least 25%). Moody's Economy.com is forecasting a 10% chance of a depression.

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/25/news/economy/depression_comparisons/index.htm?postversion=2009032517

Obama to meet with bank CEOs

The President will ask the leaders of the largest banks in the country and to consider the needs of America as a country.


From Dan Lothian, CNN White House Correspondent

Article from DBS Group Research (23rd March 2009)

Investors should capitalize on anticipated final downward move to 1275-1300 and continue to accumulate early cyclical plays

We maintain our technical view for the STI to trend lower to 1275-1300 before reversing up. The technical rebound by US indices during the past two weeks has fizzled out. We see the Dow and S&P500 heading for 6070 and 570 respectively, before a bottom occurs. STI should begin its final down-leg to 1300 before a strong upward reversal lifts it to a 38.2% upward retracement level at 2030 in coming months. Investors should capitalize on this anticipated final downward move and continue to accumulate early cyclical plays such as basic resource, banks, real estate and technology.

While our STI 1300 view remains unchanged, the chance of it heading there is also lowered given the strength exhibited by other Asian bourses. STI 1300 will be negated if the index is able to rise above 1685. If this scenario occurs, the bottom would have occurred at 1455 on March 10th and the 38.2% upward retracement should reach 2145 in coming months. A rise in the S&P500 above the 806 level will also weaken the case for STI to go down to 1300.

...

Markets have rallied beyond the 1700 mark at this point of time, will we see STI below 1400 again? Hmm.. current sentiments seems to be turning slightly, esp with markets cheering on all sorts of news.

Top hedge fund managers still raking in the money

Despite market turmoil, top 25 earners took home $11.6 billion in 2008, according to ranking by Alpha magazine.

By CNNMoney.com staff

LONDON (CNNMoney.com) -- Despite turbulence in the financial markets and the global economic downturn, the world's 25 top-earning hedge fund managers raked in a staggering $11.6 billion last year, according to a ranking released Wednesday.

On average, the managers took home $464 million each, Alpha magazine's annual list of top hedge fund earners showed. By comparison, the average take home pay in 2007 was a whopping $892 million.

Leading the pack was James Simons of New York's Renaissance Technologies, who took home $2.5 billion in 2008. He was followed by John Paulson, who held the No. 1 spot in 2007. Paulson earned $2 billion last year.

In the No. 3 spot was John Arnold, founder of Centaurus Energy, who earned the bulk of his $1.5 billion through natural gas trading, according to Alpha. George Soros, who raked in $1.1 billion, and Raymond Dalio of Bridgewater Associates came in fourth and fifth, respectively.

Hedge funds are private investment funds that are targeted mainly at wealthy individuals and large institutions. They use a variety of investment methods, ranging from bets on currencies and mergers to traditional stockpicking.

The industry has come under scrutiny in recent years, however, for its secretive nature and for a particular strategy some funds employ known as short selling, or betting against a company.

Alpha compiles its list by measuring the share of the performance and management fees the managers receive and the gains they reap from their own investment in their funds.

------
Seems that rich people are still getting richer in bad times.
With USD/YEN currently at 97.77 - 97.80 -0.51, it has been hovering near the $100 mark but still weakening as US prints more and more of the USD. I overheard this comment, saying that US is eating gold and spitting out US dollars! Something that I see at times but didn't post here is the gold spot price:

Gold Spot Price*923.85

Link: http://www.sgx.com/psv/securities/etf/ETF_Gold.shtml

In my opinion, it's really not realistic buying "paper gold". Why? It's gonna be overtraded as gold is a sacred resource, and when you remove technology and money out of our earth's equation, only real gold and butter trade stands out. Who cares about this paper gold? Commodities in our era probably has been overpriced for how many decades and eventually inflation is gonna cause another deflation of our currencies.

AIG shows 'broad failures' of system

Geithner and Bernanke say the government did not have means to deal with AIG, and more regulatory power could help prevent a similar incident in future.


By David Goldman and Jennifer Liberto, CNNMoney.com staff writers


WASHINGTON (CNNMoney.com) -- The officials managing the bailout of AIG, venting their own frustration about huge bonuses paid to company executives, told Congress Tuesday the government had no choice but to effectively seize control of the troubled insurer last September.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner called on Congress to reorder how companies such as AIG are regulated to prevent a similar collapse in the future.

"AIG highlights broad failures of our financial system," Geithner said. "Compensation practices encouraged risk-taking and rewarded short-term profits. ... The U.S. government does not have the legal means today to manage the orderly restructuring of a large, complex, non-bank financial institution."

Geithner, Bernanke and New York Fed President William Dudley appeared at a House Financial Services Committee hearing on the government's rescue of AIG (AIG, Fortune 500).

The officials, entertaining an onslaught of questions from angry lawmakers, called on Congress to grant regulators so-called resolution authority. That would give the government power to reorganize or wind down a non-bank company. Such powers would include selling off assets and subsidiaries, imposing limits on executive compensation and taking action on risky holdings.

They said that the government could have been better equipped to stem AIG's risky business practices before its failure threatened to bring down the financial system.

"If a federal agency had such tools on Sept. 16, that outcome would have been far preferable to the situation we find ourselves in now," Bernanke said.

Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., agreed, arguing that the government regulates banks well but has very little regulation of non-bank financial institutions like insurance companies.

"When non-bank major financial institutions need to be put out of their misery, we need to give somebody the authority to do what the FDIC can do with banks," said Frank. "It is giving somebody a form of the bankruptcy power given under the Constitution. It allows us to avoid the choice of all or nothing -- nothing in the case of Lehman Brothers, all in the case AIG -- equally unacceptable alternatives."

Geithner will again appear before the committee on Thursday to further discuss the administration's proposals for regulatory reform.

Fed wanted to sue over AIG bonuses

Bernanke and Geithner also faced tough questions about the hundreds of millions of dollars of bonuses that went out to executives at AIG's financial products division. In testimony before the committee last week, AIG Chief Executive Edward Liddy said that Bernanke knew about the bonuses for at least three months and Geithner knew of them since the first week of March.

Bernanke acknowledged that he became concerned about AIG's bonuses "last fall," and asked that they be stopped.

Geithner initially said he first heard of the controversial bonuses from his staff on March 10. He later qualified that statement, saying he only learned of the "full scope" of the bonuses on March 10.

On Tuesday, Bernanke testified that he wanted to sue AIG to prevent the payment of millions of dollars of retention bonuses to executives from the division that brought the firm to its knees.

But Bernanke said that he was advised against filing a lawsuit, because the government would have needed to pay "substantial punitive damages" if the Fed lost the case, essentially awarding extra benefits to the executives from the troubled financial products division.

"My reaction upon becoming aware of these specific payments was that ... it was highly inappropriate to pay substantial bonuses to employees of the division that had been the primary source of AIG's collapse," Bernanke said. "[But] legal action could have [had] the perverse effect of doubling or tripling the financial benefits to the AIG-FP employees."

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/24/news/economy/geithner_bernanke_hearing/index.htm?postversion=2009032411

5 Ways To Take Charge Of Our Finances

An interesting article I happen to read:

Link: http://www.fundsupermart.com/main/research/viewHTML.tpl?articleNo=3339
Author : Jean Paul Wong

Are we doing the right things when it comes to managing our finances? Ask yourself five questions to know if you’re on the right track.

1. Do I have sufficient emergency funds?

Each one of us needs to make sure we have sufficient funds to meet our daily expenses. Financial advisers typically recommend that we set aside emergency funds worth at least six to twelve months of our monthly expenses. This rule of thumb varies among all of us, but the right thing to do is to have more emergency funds if we are less confident of our job security or if we have more commitments and dependents.

Monthly expenses in this case refer to the sum required to meet the daily basic necessities. The costs of food and transport will likely form a large part of these daily expenses. Besides the emergency funds to cover our daily expenses, we may have plans that require a large outlay in the next couple of years. For those who are preparing to get a home, we will have to plan for the expenses (which can be used from cash and/or CPF funds), including the deposits, stamp duties, lawyer fees, housing agent commissions (which depend on whether the home purchase is an HDB flat or not), as well as renovation – it goes without saying that all these could add up to a hefty sum.

So if getting a home is in the pipeline, set aside some money beyond your emergency funds in a financial product that is relatively safe and liquid, e.g. money market funds, fixed deposits with a shorter maturity period or shorter-term Singapore government securities (SGS) bonds. Fixed deposits and SGS bonds are seen as particularly safe; in Singapore, the government guarantees all Singapore dollar and foreign currency deposits in banks and other financial companies licensed by the MAS to 31 December 2010. SGS bonds typically have a high credit rating of AAA or Aaa, based on the ratings given by agencies such as Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch.

2. Have I planned for my dependents?

Dependents are the people who depend on our financial income. For example, when we start working in our mid-20s, it is likely some of us give a monthly pocket money to our parents. This could be due to our Asian upbringing, where filial piety leads us to give back to our parents, or it could be due to very practical reasons such as the parents earning little, and therefore having to rely on their children’s income to meet their daily expenses.

For people who have to set aside a portion of their salaries for their parents, it is paramount that we have insurance coverage. Insurance plans which cover hospital bills, critical illness, total or permanent disability (TPD), or death, as well as income replacement plans which provide a regular stream of income if the victim is unable to work (due to an accident or an illness, other than the critical illnesses), are important.

They are must-haves in our financial plans as they will ensure a sum of money is given out to meet the medical costs (in the event of critical illness or TPD), or simply to ensure the victim’s dependents have some financial cushion to fall back on.

We must make sure our insurance plans’ sum assured is sufficient to meet our expenses and the needs of our dependents. For example, I know quite a few friends who have purchased their insurance plans after they landed their first job from friends or relatives who work in the insurance agencies. Check out the sum assured of these plans, because the coverage may no longer match your objectives now. For example, if the sum assured is S$100,000, this is likely insufficient to meet our daily expenses, not to mention the medical costs, in the event of a critical illness. In the event of death, dependents would find that $100,000 will not last very long. If we include inflation in the equation, the real value of the sum assured would decline as time goes by. This is why financial advisers often take into account the inflation rate into the amount of coverage we need.

Upping the sum assured could lead to higher premiums, if we stick to whole life policies. The other alternative to whole life insurance policies is term policies. These policies enable us to have a higher coverage for the same amount of premium paid, but they do not have a surrender value – we will receive nothing from the policies if there we terminate them or wait for them to mature, unless the insured event arises.

Typically, insurance policies which combine investments and insurance – investment-linked insurance policies – are not the greatest way to achieve our financial objectives. Killing two birds with one stone may seem like a good idea, but aiming to achieve both investment returns and insurance coverage with one product would typically mean one of the two objectives is not being fully met. The cost is likely to be less effective as, say, investing in a regular savings plan or RSP (solely for investments) and purchasing an insurance policy (for whatever objectives we have in mind, e.g. coverage for income replacement, critical illness, TPD and death).

Making sure we have the right insurance policies will ensure there is a lifeline for the victims and their dependents to ride out the difficult periods.

3. What commitments do I have?

The more financial commitments we have, the more we must ensure our financial plans are in order.

For example, for those of us who have bought a property, we must be sure that we have insurance to cover the mortgage instalments in the event that an unfortunate event occurs, e.g. inability to work because of an accident or poor health, ongoing medical treatments or death.

For parents of young children, there is a need to review your insurance plans, to make sure that there is sufficient coverage in the event that one or both parents pass away. Furthermore, it is crucial to plan for the children’s education costs as early as possible.

Endowment plans have been a rather popular option when it comes to planning for education needs. These plans require the parents to save a sum of money regularly and they will provide a sum of money by the time the child starts university. There is an additional element of insurance in the endowment plans too. However, if the parent has a long-term investment horizon and is confident he/she can stick to an investment plan, the other option is to invest into a portfolio of stocks and unit trusts, with the aim of beating the returns of endowment plans.

4. Do I invest in a disciplined way?

2008 was a lesson to many of us and it was the very first time many of us saw markets tumble so fast and so furiously in a matter of months. To describe last year as shocking would be an understatement. Portfolios tanked and despondency could have led us to lose faith in investing. But that is a mistake, especially for those of us who have an investment time horizon which is at least three years or longer.

Business cycles turn up and down. While markets currently remain mired in uncertainty, there will come a time when markets pick up. Some economists are predicting an upturn in the second half of this year, while the more cautious ones believe the recovery will only happen in 2010. However, these predictions should not stop us from sitting on the fence. Markets are forward-looking and typically move ahead of the economies.

If you have spare funds to invest, this is a good time to nibble back into the markets. A regular savings plan (RSP) would be a disciplined way of achieving that. An RSP requires us to invest, with a total disregard to whether markets are rising or tumbling or moving sideways. It requires us to be disciplined in that sense, but it also makes great financial sense. Over time, an RSP allows us to dollar cost average – meaning that the average cost of our investments actually declines, enabling us to enjoy better returns.

For example, during the last few months, an RSP would have enabled us to accumulate more units of a fund, because of declining stock or unit trust prices. When markets rise again, these additional units will make a positive difference. The same applies when markets rise. We buy lesser units – which is clearly not a good thing because we want more – but it also means we are not tempted to buy more when markets shoot up. Often, even the more rational investors fall prey to their greed and they keep buying when markets rise, even when financial measures such as the price to book ratio scream ‘sell’.

5. Do I review my financial plans?

We must review our portfolios periodically, e.g. once every six to twelve months.

For example, if we are a balanced investor (in between conservative and aggressive), our allocation between equities and bonds could be in the region of 60% in the former and 40% in the latter. What would have happened to the portfolio if that was the asset allocation at the start of 2008? Bonds – based on the performance of global sovereign bonds – outperformed equities – based on that of global equities – last year, meaning the asset allocation between equities and bonds would no longer be 60:40; it could have shifted to 50:50, as a result of the better performance from the sovereign bonds.

A 50:50 asset allocation would mean our portfolio is teetering toward a moderately conservative risk profile, rather than a balanced one. Rebalancing is the trick here as it requires us to sell our bond units and buy back equity units, so that the equity to bond asset allocation returns to 60:40.

Our research team usually recommends a different asset allocation every year, depending on the outlook for the different asset classes. For 2009, in the case of a balanced investor, the recommended equity to bond asset allocation is 70:30, because of our research team’s preference to equities, relative to bonds.

For those of us who are very conservative when it comes to investing, it doesn’t mean we should not invest altogether after the events from 2008. There are funds which are less risky, as reflected in financial measures such as the volatility data or the Sharpe ratio. Typically, bonds are less risky than equities, but even within these two asset classes, there are differences in risk characteristics too. For example, within the bonds universe, investment grade bonds are seen as less risky than the high yield ones, while the sovereign bonds from the developed markets are seen as less risky than those issued by the emerging markets.

Conclusion

It is never too early or too late to take charge of our finances. The key thing here is that all of us must plan because if our financial plans are not in order, a lot of our other plans in life could well be in jeopardy. For investments, take charge by making sure you stick to a disciplined way of investing which is devoid of emotion-driven decisions. When it comes to insurance, find a financial adviser who can give you a comparison of insurance plans from as many different insurance companies as possible. You may find that company A’s plan suits some of your needs better, e.g. income replacement, but company B’s plan may be more appropriate to cover critical illness – so don’t analyse the plans from one insurance company only. Remember to check out the fine prints, when it comes to investing or purchasing an insurance plan. For example, critical illness insurance plans typically cover only 30 types of illnesses (which vary from one company’s plan to another), and the definition for TPD is very strict.

Summary: Five ways to take charge of our finances

Sufficient emergency funds to cover our daily expenses over a period of at least six months to one year

Sufficient insurance coverage to cover unforeseen circumstances, including inability to work, critical illness, hospital bills, TPD, death

Sum assured must be sufficient to meet dependents’ needs and other financial commitments we have, e.g. mortgage instalments, children’s education plans

Have an RSP, which ensures we stick to a disciplined way of investing

Rebalance our investment portfolios every six months to one year to ensure their asset allocation is in line with our investment objectives.

Jean Paul Wong is the Head of Content at iFAST Financial Pte Ltd.
=====

Kinda insightful, esp on the disciplined way of investing. I used to go through the stage where I got freaked out when it goes down too fast too furious! Nevertheless, I hope this article brings some ideas to your investment plans in the future.

Initial market reaction to bad asset purchases appears bullish.

By CNNMoney.com staff

Treasury plan: The U.S. government said late Sunday that it will initially commit up to $100 billion to subsidize private investors' purchase of the so-called toxic assets on bank books that have led to the seizure of the credit markets.

"Over time, by providing a market for these assets that does not now exist, this program will help improve asset values, increase lending capacity by banks, and reduce uncertainty about the scale of losses on bank balance sheets," Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner wrote in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.

The aim of the public-private partnerships is to buy up at least $500 billion of bad assets, and possibly up to $1 trillion over time. Geithner will unveil details of the plan at 8:45 a.m. ET.

Peter Cardillo, chief market economist for Avalon Partners, said that futures are responding positively to the notion that the Obama administration is "being less hostile toward the private sector."

"We're headed for a nice open," said Cardillo, adding that an unexpectedly positive housing sales report could further drive the stock markets.

Economy: After the open, investors will focus on the monthly figures for existing home sales. Sales are expected to slip to an annual rate of 4.45 million for February, according to a consensus of economist opinion from Briefing.com. That would be down from the January rate of 4.49 million.

Deals: Suncor Energy (SU) agreed to buy rival Petro-Canada (PCZ) for about $14.86 billion. The deal will expand the company's oil sand reserves and create Canada's biggest energy company.

World markets: Stocks around the world rallied as investors awaited full details of Geithner's plan. Japan's Nikkei gained 3.4% while the Hang Seng in Hong Kong surged 4%. In Europe, the FTSE 100 added 1.7% in early trading. The CAC-40 in France and Germany's DAX were also both up more than 1%.

Oil and money: Oil rose 48 cents a barrel to $52.55. The dollar dipped versus the euro and the British pound, but rose against the yen.To top of page

---------

Markets have been reacting positively for the past 2 weeks. Does this mark that the bear market is coming to an end? Is the bulls coming back again? Well, noone really knows..

USD/YEN trading at 96.76 - 96.78 +1.29, edging slowly upwards. The high yen rate has probably killed alot of jap exporters and this coming months will probably be exciting as more companies will be reporting their 2008 full year results.