- advertisements -
CITI is down 1.84%
BAC is down 2.04%
JPM is down 1.64%
AXP is down 1.67%
WFC is down 2.16%
GS is down 1.71%
what am I missing here?
This excerpt from wsj.com today on the financials’ reponse to the lack of passage yesterday of the financial reform bill indicates, IMO, just who is dependent on continued ” financial reform” largesse for its daily feed:
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Uncertainty around the U.S. Senate's version of a financial reform bill will likely continue to weigh on bank stocks Thursday after the Senate failed to put an end to debate on the bill late Wednesday…
Worries about the proposed regulation have been pressuring the stocks recently,
In recent premarket trading, Citigroup Inc. (C) fell 1.8% to $3.74, Bank of America Corp. (BAC) declined 2.1% to $15.97, Morgan Stanley (MS) dipped 2% to $26.50, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) was off 1.9% to $38.64 and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) slid 1.7% to $137.67.
And here is how the leadership in the Senate spins its bait and switch message for the public ear via the MSM: “Although two Democrats defected (on the cloture vote to block debate), Reid blasted Republicans for the defeat. 'They voted to protect the big banks on Wall Street -- these Wall Street firms who led to the loss of 8 million jobs in America and thousands and thousands of homes in foreclosure,' he said." ~ The Washington Post
Said Dr. Elaina George this week on Big Government: “With the proposed financial regulations, there seems to be a movement towards the consolidation of power in a few institutions, systematically removing free competition, setting up the too big to fail phenomenon, thereby giving people less choice that will ultimately cost everybody more in the long run…
“The demise of Lehman Brothers and the consolidation of other large financial companies have led to very few winners in the financial industry – the biggest of which is Goldman Sachs. The banking industry has seen a few surviving large institutions such as Chase and Citibank. What the larger banks didn’t acquire in mergers, the FDIC removed by taking over and closing hundreds of smaller and community banks. Makes you wonder if the credit unions will be next on the list.” (emphasis mine)
They are already forcing mergers in the Credit Union space to fix problems with some of the weaker players. It is wreaking havoc on systems and customer service in several cases. IOW, no institution is safe.
VXX up 3.25%, LOL - the world is going to HELL. The Bear soldiers are raping the
bullish hookers and bikini girls, drinking the stashes of fine aged wine, making
the bullish kids spit shine their shoes... oh man, Sgt Yogi just shot one of the
massage girls for not having a smile on her face, can someone say "War Crime!?!"
The purpose of MArkets?
1. Social Mood manipulation - Psy Ops.
2. Political Tool: wnat to drill baby drill ? Get oil prices higher. etc. need emergency funds handed to banks - crash the stock market. etc.
3. Keeps a lot of people off the streets - trying to game the markets on their home computers. This is good. Because , sadly, we dont need most people to operate the world economy. ( Look up info on the Lexus plant in japan - run by robots) . 3% of American workers in agriclture - produce more than enough food to fee the US twice over - and does!
Actually this is the big underlying reality - most average people with good hearts and a willingness to work 8 hrs a day, with average skills in english and arithmetic - Just Are Not Needed.
This is why ZH needs an OpEd tab ... if you simply report the inanities of the markets, with perhaps a little editorial flair, then you are still in the realm of news, but if you start tossing around phrases like "Markets need to be fair" then you are clearly in the realm of opinion, which is far less entertaining.
Let's face it, aside from the Hokey Pokey, entertainment is what it is all about. If markets were fair, there would be little reason for us to seek to find thousands of angles to extract the little rents that will help us pay our bigger rents, and there would be no reason for ZH.
When reading this morning about having "market orders" eliminated during chaotic trading I about choked on my oatmeal.
What will these goofballs come up with next?
If stock prices are set "at the margin" may my market order be the margin. What a farce this is!
"Markets need to be fair and instill confidence"
Sorry to inform you that your piece is about 20 years too late...
The FED has become the godfather of the worldwide central bank mafia
The ratings agencies have been bought and now serve the ones they rate
The executive branch of government is now run by bank goons, the President is bought and paid for
Congress has been bribed and infiltrated by banking, corporate and realestate criminals
Regulatory agencies at every level of government have been corrupted and neutralized
The stock market is manipulated by computerized front running that is sanctioned by the FED, corrupt regulators and a bribed Congress
again sorry to inform you of these developments...
The purpose of markets? WTF? Markets don't have a defined purpose. A market exists when one person voluntarily engages in an exchange of something with another person at a mutually agreed price. Markets are not some engineered system like socialism. And that goes for capital markets too.
Your beloved regulator's whole job is to screw with that simple dynamic and introduce distortion upon distortion. Obviously, insiders capture the regulator and harness its power for their own purposes. The typical response to the results of regulatory capture MORE power for the regulator - to be captured by a decreasing number of insiders to eventually form a powerful oligopoly and more distortion and abuse. Sal is bemoaning all this lack of confidence.
The "confidence" that most people want is that they won't lose money on a trade. That's what's behind the anti-shorting rules, the who can trade what, when and what price is all about. All those rules do is distort the market, but it doesn't deliver that elusive and impossible security sought by capital providers because most of them don't want to do the work to figure out how to hedge themselves. As people like Sal seek a "stronger regulator" to achieve this poorly defined market confidence, he'll get more distortion, a more rigged market.
The SEC was established around 75 years ago and it has done absolutely NOTHING to "restore confidence" or execute any part of its mission statement. And it never will. The incentives aren't there. It is an excellent job if you like porn, though.
The only people who will restore confidence are people working in the industry who are interested in establishing and building are real business - and there are plenty of those. We in this business are in a game that requires confidence in our name and the only way to build that is by always dealing fairly with our investors and our clients. Private rating companies who naturally lack incentive to back unethical businesses. Sure, there will continue to be thieves in every business. Obviously, the regulator can't change that. But, the regulator protects them rather than roots them out and destroys them while providing a false sense of confidence to the investing public.
Markets simply need a level playing field. Same rules for all. The one thing the Smart Money won't tolerate.
For several days I have been warning of EURUSD buying support as detected by my indicators, and this has been confirmed by the recent break out.
The proprietary indicators I use can identify trend changes before they occur.
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertise With Us
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
How to report offensive comments
Notice on Racial Discrimination.