<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Wall Street Examiner &#187; Contrary</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/tag/contrary/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wallstreetexaminer.com</link>
	<description>Be prepared. Stay ahead of the herd.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 18:04:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Employers could save billions by dropping workers from health plans, report shows &#124; Fox News</title>
		<link>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2012/05/01/employers-could-save-billions-by-dropping-workers-from-health-plans-report-shows-fox-news/</link>
		<comments>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2012/05/01/employers-could-save-billions-by-dropping-workers-from-health-plans-report-shows-fox-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 00:22:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Newswires</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Latest Business Headlines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Billions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cmty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Company Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fortune 100 Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox New]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foxnews Com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[House Ways And Means Committee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Survey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Perverse Incentives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ways And Means]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ways And Means Committee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?p=83132</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new survey of Fortune 100 companies finds that the health care overhaul, contrary to the claims of its authors, created some perverse incentives for employers to drop workers from company insurance plans.  Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee surveyed the top 100 companies about how much they spent on health care &#8212; a total of 71, covering 5.9 million employees, responded. The results suggested it would be far more attractive for companies to drop workers from those plans than keep them. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/01/employers-could-save-billions-by-dropping-workers-from-health-plans-report/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn#ixzz1tfQZBA7t via Employers could save billions by dropping workers from health plans, report shows &#124; Fox News.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetthis" style="text-align:left;"><p> <a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" class="tt" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Employers+could+save+billions+by+dropping+workers+from+health+plans%2C+report+shows+%7C+Fox+News+http%3A%2F%2Fis.gd%2F1QgWih" title="Post to Twitter"><img class="nothumb" src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/en/twitter/tt-twitter-micro3.png" alt="Post to Twitter" /></a></p></div><p><span style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; text-align: left;">A new survey of Fortune 100 companies finds that the health care overhaul, contrary to the claims of its authors, created some perverse incentives for employers to drop workers from company insurance plans. </span></p>
<p style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; font-size: 12px; font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: normal; text-align: left; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee surveyed the top 100 companies about how much they spent on health care &#8212; a total of 71, covering 5.9 million employees, responded. The results suggested it would be far more attractive for companies to drop workers from those plans than keep them.</p>
<p><span style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; text-align: left;"><br style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;" /><br style="background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;" />Read more: <a style="outline-width: 0px; outline-style: none; outline-color: initial; color: #003399; text-decoration: none; cursor: pointer;" href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/01/employers-could-save-billions-by-dropping-workers-from-health-plans-report/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn#ixzz1tfQZBA7t">http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/01/employers-could-save-billions-by-dropping-workers-from-health-plans-report/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn#ixzz1tfQZBA7t</a></span></p>
<p>via <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/01/employers-could-save-billions-by-dropping-workers-from-health-plans-report/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn">Employers could save billions by dropping workers from health plans, report shows | Fox News</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2012/05/01/employers-could-save-billions-by-dropping-workers-from-health-plans-report-shows-fox-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jim Rogers: &quot;The Fed is Lying to Us&quot;</title>
		<link>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/12/08/jim-rogers-the-fed-is-lying-to-us/</link>
		<comments>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/12/08/jim-rogers-the-fed-is-lying-to-us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 10:00:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Zeiler</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Money Morning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Article]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creeping Inflation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debtor Nation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDIC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fed Chairman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve Chairman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal reserve conspiracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fomc Meeting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History Of The World]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jim Rogers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legend Jim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Low Interest Rates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[M2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money Supply]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Printing Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quot]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trillion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trillions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[what is the federal reserve bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[what is the federal reserve rate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Who Owns The Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo Finance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://moneymorning.com/?p=60194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite statements to the contrary, the U.S. Federal Reserve  has continued to pump money into the economy, says investing legend Jim Rogers.<br /><br />
The resulting low interest rates and creeping inflation, he  says, are destroying the wealth of millions.<br /><br />
"[Federal Reserve Chairman Ben] Bernanke said last August he  was keeping interest rates artificially low," <a target="_blank" href="http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout/fed-ruining-entire-class-investors-says-jim-rogers-153315477.html">Rogers  told <strong><em>Yahoo!  Finance</em></strong></a>on Tuesday. "The only way you can do that is to go into the  market."<br /><br />
As proof, Rogers pointed to the rise in the broad M2 measure  of the U.S. money supply, which has increased more than 5% since the Fed's  second quantitative easing program (QE2) ended on June 30, and 20% since  November 2008.<br /><br />
"Since August - well, this whole year - the M2 has jumped  up," Rogers said. "They're in the market. They're lying to us."<br /><br />
A well-known critic of the Fed who has called for it to be  abolished, Rogers warned that the central bank's policies would lead to  disaster.<br /><br />
"Right now what the Federal Reserve is doing is ruining an  entire class of people in America," Rogers said. "The people who saved and  invested for the past 10, 20, 30 years are now being ruined because interest  rates are [too] low."<br /><br />
He added that if he were Fed chairman, he'd raise interest  rates to slow down inflation. <br /><br />
In a separate <a target="_blank" href="http://www.thestreet.com/story/11334734/1/jim-rogers-abolish-the-fed-buy-commodities-short-stocks.html">interview  with <strong><em>The  Street</em></strong></a>yesterday (Wednesday), Rogers said he considered the Fed to be  the greatest risk to the U.S. economy in 2012.<br /><br />
"They don't seem to understand economics or finance or  currencies or much of anything else except printing money," Rogers said.<br /><br />
<h3>Painful Remedies</h3>

The other major concern that Rogers has is the soaring  federal debt, which recently passed $15 trillion.<br /><br />
"We are the largest debtor nation in the history of the  world and the debts are going higher and higher by trillions, every two or  three years," Rogers said. "We're all  paying the price for it. And wait till 2013 - we're really going to pay the  price."<br /><br />
<strong><em><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2011/12/08/jim-rogers-the-fed-is-lying-to-us/" target="_self">To continue reading, please click here...</a></em></strong><br /><br />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
					<div id="cfct-build-60194" class="cfct-build">
						
				<div id="cfct-row-d1ddb4117f973f7a4296f8545f71414e" class="cfct-row cfct-row-abc">
					<div class="cfct-row-inner"><div id="cfct-block-43177b4bdd4046d7db7233f1653cf432" class="cfct-block block-0 cfct-block-abc">
			<div class="cfct-module cfct-html ">
				<div class="cfct-mod-content">Despite statements to the contrary, the U.S. Federal Reserve  has continued to pump money into the economy, says investing legend Jim Rogers.<br /><br />
The resulting low interest rates and creeping inflation, he  says, are destroying the wealth of millions.<br /><br />
"[Federal Reserve Chairman Ben] Bernanke said last August he  was keeping interest rates artificially low," <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout/fed-ruining-entire-class-investors-says-jim-rogers-153315477.html">Rogers  told <strong><em>Yahoo!  Finance</em></strong></a> on Tuesday. "The only way you can do that is to go into the  market."<br /><br />
As proof, Rogers pointed to the rise in the broad M2 measure  of the U.S. money supply, which has increased more than 5% since the Fed's  second quantitative easing program (QE2) ended on June 30, and 20% since  November 2008.<br /><br />
"Since August - well, this whole year - the M2 has jumped  up," Rogers said. "They're in the market. They're lying to us."<br /><br />
A well-known critic of the Fed who has called for it to be  abolished, Rogers warned that the central bank's policies would lead to  disaster.<br /><br />
"Right now what the Federal Reserve is doing is ruining an  entire class of people in America," Rogers said. "The people who saved and  invested for the past 10, 20, 30 years are now being ruined because interest  rates are [too] low."<br /><br />
He added that if he were Fed chairman, he'd raise interest  rates to slow down inflation. <br /><br />
In a separate <a href="http://www.thestreet.com/story/11334734/1/jim-rogers-abolish-the-fed-buy-commodities-short-stocks.html" rel="external nofollow">interview  with <strong><em>The  Street</em></strong></a> yesterday (Wednesday), Rogers said he considered the Fed to be  the greatest risk to the U.S. economy in 2012.<br /><br />
"They don't seem to understand economics or finance or  currencies or much of anything else except printing money," Rogers said.<br /><br />
<h3>Painful Remedies</h3>

The other major concern that Rogers has is the soaring  federal debt, which recently passed $15 trillion.<br /><br />
"We are the largest debtor nation in the history of the  world and the debts are going higher and higher by trillions, every two or  three years," Rogers said. "We're all  paying the price for it. And wait till 2013 - we're really going to pay the  price."<br /><br /></div>
			</div></div></div>
				</div><div id="cfct-row-afbf538d8f08d02e9bb525a154c4cafb" class="cfct-row cfct-row-float-c"><div id="cfct-block-d531b4adbdf4f529d59cda828bf83c8f" class="cfct-block cfct-block-float-c">
			<div class="cfct-module cfct-widget-module-cfox_preload ">
				<div class="cfct-mod-content"></div>
			</div></div><div id="cfct-block-3b869434afae27b9c6c0c0c2a13d7413" class="cfct-block cfct-block-abc">
			<div class="cfct-module cfct-html ">
				<div class="cfct-mod-content">The answer, he says, is for Americans to vote out the  current batch of leaders for a group that will make the tough choices necessary  to restore the nation's fiscal health. But Americans might find that medicine  hard to swallow.<br /><br />
"The risk is... after six months or a year or two of serious  pain, those guys will get voted out, too," Rogers says. "Because the public  will say, "We didn't want <em>this</em> much  pain.'"<br /><br />
<h3>Jim Rogers' Recommendations</h3>

With such a grim outlook, Rogers' investing positions are  mostly defensive at the moment.<br /><br />
"I'm long on commodities and currencies, short on emerging  markets stocks, U.S. technology stocks and European stocks," he said. "If the  world economy gets better, I'm going to make money on commodities because of  the shortages. If it doesn't get better, they're going to print more money -  and you'd better own real assets."<br /><br />
Regarding currencies, Rogers said he is long on the Japanese  yen and the Swiss franc, but would probably buy only the franc. He said he also  has some exposure to the euro because in the near-term, he expects the Eurozone  politicians "to do something to make everybody feel better about the euro." <br /><br />
Rogers said he's long on the U.S. dollar, as well.<br /><br />
Rogers likes commodities in general as a play on the  economic growth in China.<br /><br />
"The Chinese need everything," he said. "They have 1.3  billion people and they all want to live like you, so, you know, everything:  cotton, wheat, oil, everything."<br /><br />

<strong><u>News and Related  Story Links</u></strong>:<br /><br />
<ul>
  <li><strong>Money Morning: </strong><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2011/10/30/jim-rogers-says-new-greece-deal-cant-save-europe/" title="Permanent link to Jim Rogers Says New Greece Deal Can't Save Europe"><br />
  Jim       Rogers Says New Greece Deal Can't Save Europe</a></li>
  <li><strong>Money Morning: </strong><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2011/12/01/why-the-feds-latest-rescue-effort-is-doomed/" title="Permanent link to Why the Fed's Latest Rescue Effort is  Doomed"><br />
  Why       the Fed's Latest Rescue Effort is Doomed</a></li>
  <li><strong>Money Morning: <br />
  </strong><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2011/11/30/its-time-to-overhaul-fed/" title="Permanent link to It's Time to Overhaul the Fed">It's Time to       Overhaul the Fed</a></li>
  <li><strong>Money Morning: <br />
  </strong><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2011/12/02/bailout-bandits-biggest-borrowers-from-u-s-federal-reserve/" title="Permanent link to Bailout Bandits: The Biggest Borrowers From the U.S. Federal Reserve">Bailout       Bandits: The Biggest Borrowers From the U.S. Federal Reserve</a></li>
  <li><strong>Money Morning: </strong><a href="http://moneymorning.com/2011/09/15/the-insidious-truth-about-federal-reserve-policy/" title="Permanent link to The Insidious Truth About Federal Reserve Policy"><br />
  The       Insidious Truth About Federal Reserve Policy</a></li>
  <li><strong>Money Morning: </strong><a target="_blank" href="http://moneymorning.com/2011/11/04/the-inside-story-of-how-our-financial-regulators-let-us-all-down/"  title="Permanent link to The Inside Story of How Our Financial Regulators Let Us All Down"><br />
  The       Inside Story of How Our Financial Regulators Let Us All Down</a></li>
</ul>

</div>
			</div></div></div>
					</div>
					
	<br /> <strong>Tags: </strong><a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/fdic/" title="FDIC" rel="tag">FDIC</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/federal-reserve/" title="Federal Reserve" rel="tag">Federal Reserve</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/federal-reserve-act/" title="federal reserve act" rel="tag">federal reserve act</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/federal-reserve-conspiracy/" title="federal reserve conspiracy" rel="tag">federal reserve conspiracy</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/fomc-meeting/" title="FOMC Meeting" rel="tag">FOMC Meeting</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/jim-rogers/" title="Jim Rogers" rel="tag">Jim Rogers</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/what-is-the-federal-reserve-bank/" title="what is the federal reserve bank" rel="tag">what is the federal reserve bank</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/what-is-the-federal-reserve-rate/" title="what is the federal reserve rate" rel="tag">what is the federal reserve rate</a>, <a href="http://moneymorning.com/tag/who-owns-the-federal-reserve/" title="who owns the federal reserve" rel="tag">who owns the federal reserve</a><br />
<div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?a=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:yIl2AUoC8zA"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"/></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?a=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:7Q72WNTAKBA"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"/></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?a=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:V_sGLiPBpWU"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?i=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"/></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?a=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:qj6IDK7rITs"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"/></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?a=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:l6gmwiTKsz0"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"/></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?a=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:gIN9vFwOqvQ"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?i=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:gIN9vFwOqvQ" border="0"/></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?a=xRkVR8R5lpc:CLTYyPSSrgg:TzevzKxY174"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/USMoneyMorning?d=TzevzKxY174" border="0"/></a>
</div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/USMoneyMorning/~4/xRkVR8R5lpc" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/12/08/jim-rogers-the-fed-is-lying-to-us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some Speculative Charts for Weekend Discussion</title>
		<link>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/10/22/some-speculative-charts-for-weekend-discussion/</link>
		<comments>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/10/22/some-speculative-charts-for-weekend-discussion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 11:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pretzel Logic</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Pretzel Logic E Wave Analysis and Market Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Audience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Friggin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Head And Shoulders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loop 3]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minyanville]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nbsp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neckline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Possibilities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rally]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Speculation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spx]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?guid=7487ad8057414a8611937140b9ca7acc</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The regular Weekend Update will be posted before the open.

Important note for the general public:&#160; These charts are for speculation and discussion, they are&#160;not preferred counts.&#160; In other words, they are possibilities/potentials which ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="color: yellow; font-size: large;">The regular Weekend Update will be posted before the open.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: yellow;"><span style="color: red;"><u>Important note for the general public:</u></span>&nbsp; These charts are for speculation and discussion, they are&nbsp;not preferred counts.&nbsp; In other words, they are possibilities/potentials which exist, but which I am <u>not</u> currently favoring as the most likely.&nbsp; It helps to be aware of as many potentials as possible, because if/when a&nbsp;move starts behaving contrary to your previously held view, you know what to look for, and&nbsp;are thus able&nbsp;to adapt to&nbsp;the changes&nbsp;much more quickly.&nbsp; They are posted mainly for academic discussion;&nbsp;<span style="color: red;">if these charts confuse you too much, just ignore them</span>. ;)</span><br />
<br />
Here's a few charts I've been working on here and there.&nbsp; This stuff isn't really fit for the general public (i.e.- my Minyanville articles), but I wanted to share them for the other technicians in the audience.&nbsp; Two of them are different/speculative interpretations of the market, one's just a monthly SPX chart.<br />
<br />
Comments and feedback would be very welcome!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
This first chart is a completely different interpretation of the move since August, using the NYA for form:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kDeYALTbaEs/TqKhFF2tLoI/AAAAAAAAANw/0szoAZQVfW8/s1600/nya+wave+iv+2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="478" rda="true" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kDeYALTbaEs/TqKhFF2tLoI/AAAAAAAAANw/0szoAZQVfW8/s640/nya+wave+iv+2.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />
A couple things I like in this chart:<br />
<br />
1)&nbsp; It accounts for why this rally has felt like a C Wave, without introducing Minor (2)/(3) into the equation yet.<br />
<br />
2)&nbsp; It would throw just about everyone for a loop.<br />
<br />
3)&nbsp; It allows the SPX (et al)&nbsp;to travel down to 1000 +/- to bounce at the neckline and&nbsp;complete the head of&nbsp;a large daily/weekly (potential)&nbsp;head and shoulders top before we get&nbsp;the Minor (2) rally (see monthly chart).<br />
<br />
Okay, so that's three things, not a couple.&nbsp; The alternate count would run&nbsp;counter to&nbsp;my preferred&nbsp;long-term count, and change the&nbsp;red iv&nbsp;to B and the red iii to A.&nbsp; <br />
<br />
<br />
The next&nbsp;one is just a&nbsp;monthly SPX chart, which shows the potential head and shoulders at the turquoise line.&nbsp; That's some friggin' monthly candle we're on!&nbsp; At its current size, it's the largest white candle <u>body</u> in the entire history of the SPX.&nbsp; Kinda argues for a correction soon...<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-eX8rVn6Vh3E/TqKiF74MjCI/AAAAAAAAAOA/dTX9rtzgRBY/s1600/spx+lt+monthly.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="478" rda="true" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-eX8rVn6Vh3E/TqKiF74MjCI/AAAAAAAAAOA/dTX9rtzgRBY/s640/spx+lt+monthly.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<br />
The&nbsp;last chart shows a potential expanding triangle in the Nasdaq.&nbsp;&nbsp;Haven't thought much about&nbsp;how this would fit into anything, just thought it was worth sharing:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zEqF6yNV2-g/TqKhl858wMI/AAAAAAAAAN4/UoCih7Ktn1U/s1600/nas+expanding+triangle.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="478" rda="true" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zEqF6yNV2-g/TqKhl858wMI/AAAAAAAAAN4/UoCih7Ktn1U/s640/nas+expanding+triangle.png" width="640" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/947237681666122369-3671934289299422159?l=pretzelcharts.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LWtoxwjwwSoY_edhTIi-8af88YY/0/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LWtoxwjwwSoY_edhTIi-8af88YY/0/di" border="0" ismap="true"/></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LWtoxwjwwSoY_edhTIi-8af88YY/1/da"><img src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LWtoxwjwwSoY_edhTIi-8af88YY/1/di" border="0" ismap="true"/></a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/PretzelLogicsMarketChartsAndAnalysis/~4/bvZfSC9ylxw" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/10/22/some-speculative-charts-for-weekend-discussion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="" length="" type="" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Retail Sales No Reason for Market Party</title>
		<link>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/06/14/retail-sales-no-reason-for-market-party/</link>
		<comments>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/06/14/retail-sales-no-reason-for-market-party/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:01:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Lee Adler</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Today's Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adjusted Basis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Census Bureau]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divergence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gas Prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gasoline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inflation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Market Technicians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mid 1990s]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Momentum Indicator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[No Doubt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rest Of The World]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail Sales Data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sales Momentum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stock Market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stock Prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weak Dollar]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?p=51753</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today&#8217;s retail sales report was far from a reason for the market to party. The media are reporting that on a seasonally adjusted basis, nominal retail sales fell less than expected. An analysis of real retail sales suggests that the underlying trend is weakening, and that contrary to the market&#8217;s reaction today, the outlook may be less than rosy for stocks. In order to filter out the effect of sharply higher gas prices and their impact on sales, I looked at the data on a historical basis ex gas prices. According to a breakdown of the retail sales data provided by the Census Bureau, actual, not seasonally manipulated data for nominal retail sales ex gasoline rose by 6.2% on an annual basis. That sounds great, aided no doubt by the weak dollar drawing shoppers to the US from the rest of the world. However, adjusted for inflation, the gain was only 2.9%. The growth rate fell from 3.4% in April and a peak of 7.6% in November 2010. This 6 month decline in the rate of growth of real retail sales suggests that the stimulus driven recovery is ending. If I am right, the numbers should turn negative in July [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetthis" style="text-align:left;"><p> <a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" class="tt" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Retail+Sales+No+Reason+for+Market+Party+http%3A%2F%2Fis.gd%2FC1q2MW" title="Post to Twitter"><img class="nothumb" src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/en/twitter/tt-twitter-micro3.png" alt="Post to Twitter" /></a></p></div><p>Today&#8217;s retail sales report was far from a reason for the market to party. The media are reporting that on a seasonally adjusted basis, nominal retail sales fell less than expected. An analysis of real retail sales suggests that the underlying trend is weakening, and that contrary to the market&#8217;s reaction today, the outlook may be less than rosy for stocks.</p>
<p>In order to filter out the effect of sharply higher gas prices and their impact on sales, I looked at the data on a historical basis ex gas prices. According to a breakdown of the retail sales data provided by the Census Bureau, actual, not seasonally manipulated data for nominal retail sales ex gasoline rose by 6.2% on an annual basis. That sounds great, aided no doubt by the weak dollar drawing shoppers to the US from the rest of the world.</p>
<p>However, adjusted for inflation, the gain was only 2.9%. The growth rate fell from 3.4% in April and a peak of 7.6% in November 2010. This 6 month decline in the rate of growth of real retail sales suggests that the stimulus driven recovery is ending. If I am right, the numbers should turn negative in July after the Fed ends QE2. That ship has sailed.</p>
<p><a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/uploads/graphic788.png" target="_blank"><img class="alignnone" title="Real Retail Sales Ex Gas Chart" src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/uploads/graphic788.png" alt="Real Retail Sales Ex Gas Chart - click to enlarge" width="685" height="458" /></a></p>
<p>Changes in the annual growth rate of real retail sales excluding gasoline have led the stock market since the mid 1990s. A change in the momentum of retail sales has led stock prices typically by anywhere from a month to a year, although in the 2004-07 cycle, the stock market kept rising in spite of slowing in this indicator throughout the period. At the 2000 market top, the decline in the growth rate of real retail sales preceded the breakdown in the S&amp;P 500 by about 6 months. At the 2009 bottom the reversal in stock prices was nearly simultaneous with the turn in the retail sales momentum indicator, although by the time stocks bottomed in March retail sales momentum had turned up from a higher low, creating what market technicians call a positive divergence.</p>
<p>The relationship between the growth rate of retail sales and stock prices is too haphazard to hang your hat on this one indicator, but the break in the growth rate and the formation of a negative divergence versus stocks beginning last December should be taken as an early warning that the uptrend in stocks is now on the time clock. I view the June 2010 low of 2% in the growth rate as a benchmark. A drop below that level may be a signal that stocks are about to enter a major decline. That drop could come as early as July, the month after Fed money printing ends. The ending of government stimulus and Fed propping of the economy will contribute to both declining real retail sales and falling stock prices.</p>
<p><em>Stay up to date with the machinations of the Fed, Treasury, Primary Dealers and foreign central banks in the US market, along with regular updates of the US housing market, in the Fed Report in the Professional Edition, Money Liquidity, and Real Estate Package. Try it risk free for 30 days. Don&#8217;t miss another day. Get the research and analysis you need to understand these critical forces. Be prepared. Stay ahead of the herd.  <a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?page_id=19">Begin your risk free trial NOW!</a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/06/14/retail-sales-no-reason-for-market-party/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Economy Is Nearly Back to Normal&#8230;..NOT!</title>
		<link>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/942761-the-economy-is-nearly-back-to-normalnot/</link>
		<comments>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/942761-the-economy-is-nearly-back-to-normalnot/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 13:03:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>a Wall Street Examiner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bears Chat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Best of the Forums]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Armageddon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Awkwardness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bulls And Bears]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Embarrassment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Empathy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Images]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/942761-the-economy-is-nearly-back-to-normalnot/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good piece from the Financial Armageddon website....

Although the images featured in the following four reports might make  you blush with embarrassment, they are not titillating at all. On the  contrary, any red-faced awkwardness you experience after...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Good piece from the Financial Armageddon website....<br />
<br />
Although the images featured in the following four reports might make  you blush with embarrassment, they are not titillating at all. On the  contrary, any red-faced awkwardness you experience after looking at them  likely stems from a fleeting sense of knee-jerk empathy for those  highly-paid idiots (experts) who keep saying the economy is nearly back to normal, when clearly it is not.<br />
<br />
<a href='http://www.financialarmageddon.com/' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.financialarmageddon.com/</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/03/08/the-economy-is-nearly-back-to-normal-not/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Incredible Absence of Fear in the Markets</title>
		<link>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/936858-the-incredible-absence-of-fear-in-the-markets/</link>
		<comments>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/936858-the-incredible-absence-of-fear-in-the-markets/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>a Wall Street Examiner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bears Chat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Best of the Forums]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Absence Of Fear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bulls And Bears]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crash]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow 14000]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow Jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow Levels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Jack Bogle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Participants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quote]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safehaven]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stock Market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stocks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/936858-the-incredible-absence-of-fear-in-the-markets/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does Dow 12000+ Feel Like the Days of Dow 14000+?

If you have trouble imagining a 20% loss in the stock market, you shouldn't 	be in stocks. - John (Jack) Bogle 

Isn't the above quote exactly the current problem? Majority of participants   can't even...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<strong class='bbc'>Does Dow 12000+ Feel Like the Days of Dow 14000+?</strong><br />
<em class='bbc'><br />
If you have trouble imagining a 20% loss in the stock market, you shouldn't 	be in stocks.</em> - John (Jack) Bogle <br />
<br />
Isn't the above quote exactly the current problem? Majority of participants   can't even factor in a 2% loss let alone a 20% fall! - BRING out the Contrarian!<br />
<br />
 Near the end of August the Dow Jones sat at 10000 and the crash talk was extremely   high. Contrary to this we now have Dow Jones hitting 12300+ today and the crash   talk is relatively dead.<br />
<br />
 So by hitting the current Dow levels have we obtained the same feel as 14000?<br />
<br />
<a href='http://www.safehaven.com/article/20023/does-dow-12000-feel-like-the-days-of-%20dow-14000' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.safehaven...ys-of-dow-14000</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2011/02/18/the-incredible-absence-of-fear-in-the-markets/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>China&#8217;s Real Estate Bubble Economy in Big Trouble</title>
		<link>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/916781-chinas-real-estate-bubble-economy-in-big-trouble/</link>
		<comments>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/916781-chinas-real-estate-bubble-economy-in-big-trouble/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>a Wall Street Examiner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bears Chat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Best of the Forums]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[5 Million]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Assumptions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Trouble]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bubble Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bulls And Bears]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cnbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cnbc Interview]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Driven Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gdp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hedge Fund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Incentives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jim Chanos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kynikos Associates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate Bubble]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Residential Buildings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Residential Units]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[S Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uble]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/916781-chinas-real-estate-bubble-economy-in-big-trouble/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jim Chanos, founder of hedge fund Kynikos Associates, is arguably the  most well-known short-seller in the world, having predicted the  high-profile demise of companies like Enron. Now, Chanos is setting his  sights on China, the world's second largest...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Jim Chanos, founder of hedge fund Kynikos Associates, is arguably the  most well-known short-seller in the world, having predicted the  high-profile demise of companies like Enron. Now, Chanos is setting his  sights on <a href='http://uk.ibtimes.com/topics/detail/227/china/' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>China</a>, the world's second largest economy. In a CNBC interview, he makes a compelling case for why the country is in big trouble.<br />
<br />
First, contrary to popular assumptions, <a href='http://uk.ibtimes.com/topics/detail/227/china/' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>China</a> is a real estate-driven economy, not an export-driven one. He said real estate construction accounts for over 60 percent of the <a href='http://uk.ibtimes.com/topics/detail/379/gdp/' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>GDP</a>  while exports make up about only 5 percent of it. Moreover, this real  estate construction isn't done to meet actual demand from the market.  Instead, they are propped up by distorted incentives and result in empty  offices and residential buildings.<br />
<br />
Chanos said China has constructed 12 to 15 million residential units in 2010. The United States, meanwhile, constructed only 2.5 million units at the height of the 2006 housing boom.  <br />
<br />
<a href='http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/91204/20101211/china-s-real-estate-bubble-economy-%20is-in-big-trouble-chanos.htm' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://uk.ibtimes.co...uble-chanos.htm</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2010/12/13/chinas-real-estate-bubble-economy-in-big-trouble/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Were the Bush Tax Cuts Good for Growth?</title>
		<link>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/910294-were-the-bush-tax-cuts-good-for-growth/</link>
		<comments>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/910294-were-the-bush-tax-cuts-good-for-growth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 20:23:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>a Wall Street Examiner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bears Chat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Best of the Forums]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bulls And Bears]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bush Tax Cuts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Leonhardt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Importance Of Economic Growth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Promises]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spirit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World War Ii]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/910294-were-the-bush-tax-cuts-good-for-growth/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[November 18, 2010, 8:45 am 
Were the Bush Tax Cuts Good for Growth?
By DAVID LEONHARDT

Liz Peek at FoxNews.com congratulates me for writing about the importance of economic growth. So in the spirit of maximizing growth, I want to pose a question: Why ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[November 18, 2010, 8:45 am <br />
Were the Bush Tax Cuts Good for Growth?<br />
By DAVID LEONHARDT<br />
<br />
Liz Peek at FoxNews.com congratulates me for writing about the importance of economic growth. So in the spirit of maximizing growth, I want to pose a question: Why should we believe that extending the Bush tax cuts will provide a big lift to growth?<br />
<br />
Those tax cuts passed in 2001 amid big promises about what they would do for the economy. What followed? The decade with the slowest average annual growth since World War II. Amazingly, that statement is true even if you forget about the Great Recession and simply look at 2001-7.<br />
---------------<br />
<br />
Every available piece of evidence seems to suggest that the Bush tax cuts did little to lift growth. I have yet to hear a good argument to the contrary, but I’d be fascinated to see another blogger or an economist take a crack at it.<br />
<br />
<a href='http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/were-the-bush-tax-cuts-good-for-growth/?src=busln' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/were-the-bush-tax-cuts-good-for-growth/
?src=busln</a><div id='attach_wrap' class='rounded clearfix'>
	<h4></h4>
	<ul>
		
			<li class=''>
				<a class='resized_img' rel='lightbox[963166]' id='ipb-attach-url-2572-0-64496600 1290112255' href="http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=2572" title="economix.jpg -  44.21K,  1"><img src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/forums/uploads/monthly_11_2010/post-4672-065946700%201290111758_thumb.jpg" id='ipb-attach-img-2572-0-64496600 1290112255' style='width:505;height:415' class='attach' width="505" height="415" alt=": economix.jpg" /></a>
			</li>
		
	</ul>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2010/11/18/were-the-bush-tax-cuts-good-for-growth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tax cuts: Small biz fact check</title>
		<link>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/898713-tax-cuts-small-biz-fact-check/</link>
		<comments>http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/898713-tax-cuts-small-biz-fact-check/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Sep 2010 13:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>a Wall Street Examiner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bears Chat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Best of the Forums]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Assertions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bear Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Black And White]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brackets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bulls And Bears]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Owners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Section]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cnn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cnnmoney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fact Check]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Job Creation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nonsense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politicians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rental Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shades Of Gray]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Small Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Small Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uniform Definition]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/898713-tax-cuts-small-biz-fact-check/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tax cuts: Small biz fact check


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Republicans say raising taxes on the wealthy would cause small businesses to pull back on hiring. Many leading Democrats say that's nonsense. Who's right?

The answer isn't black and white, de...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Tax cuts: Small biz fact check<br />
<br />
<br />
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Republicans say raising taxes on the wealthy would cause small businesses to pull back on hiring. Many leading Democrats say that's nonsense. Who's right?<br />
<br />
The answer isn't black and white, despite politicians' confident assertions to the contrary. It's more like multiple shades of gray.<br />
============================================================<br />
Does anyone know how many jobs are created by small businesses at the top brackets?<br />
<br />
Nope. And here are three reasons why:<br />
<br />
First, there's no uniform definition for what constitutes a small business. Someone may have income from a rental property that generates business income. Is that a job-creating small business?<br />
<br />
Second, there's no indication of what kinds of businesses are represented by the owners filing at the top 2 rates. So it's hard to assess whether their job creation patterns might be similar to other small businesses or how many businesses one taxpayer may represent.<br />
<br />
Lastly, there's no neat box that business owners check on their returns that says, "I employ 40 workers and hired 3 new employees this year."<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href='http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/20/news/economy/bush_tax_cuts_small_business/?section=money_latest' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/20/news/economy/bush_tax_cuts_small_business/?section=money_latest</a>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2010/09/20/tax-cuts-small-biz-fact-check/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More Little Lies and Big Spin- Gains or Blips?</title>
		<link>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2009/09/01/more-little-lies-and-big-spin-gains-or-blips/</link>
		<comments>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2009/09/01/more-little-lies-and-big-spin-gains-or-blips/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:34:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Lee Adler</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Housing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Today's Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract Activity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contrary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Quarter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[First Time Buyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glut]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Housing Market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Housing Recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Infomercial Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inventories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Little Lies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nar Realtors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Purchasing Managers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Realtors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reo Sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seasonal Adjustment Factors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Significant Sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Zillow]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?p=5740</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The FIM (Financial Infomercial Media) has gifted us with more nonsense today in the form of Pending Homes Sales data from the NAR (Realtors) and the Purchasing Managers Manufacturing Index from the ISM (Purchasing Managers). Bloomberg was positively ecstatic about the housing data, proclaiming &#8220;The number of contracts to buy previously owned homes rose more than forecast in July and increased for a record sixth consecutive month, reinforcing signs that the housing market is steadying.&#8221; Here&#8217;s what the NAR had to say. &#8220;Contract activity for pending home sales has risen for six straight months, a pattern not seen in the history of the index since it began in 2001.&#8221; There&#8217;s just one problem. It&#8217;s all a lie. The rise was only due to seasonal adjustment factors. In fact, unadjusted pending home sales (sales contracts) were actually DOWN 7% month to month. True, that&#8217;s not as bad as last year when the index dove by 10%, but is this difference significant? Sales are higher than last year, but still below July 2007 when the housing recession was already under way. And last year there was no first time buyer tax credit. The question is where the market will be when this [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetthis" style="text-align:left;"><p> <a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" class="tt" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=More+Little+Lies+and+Big+Spin-+Gains+or+Blips%3F+http%3A%2F%2Fis.gd%2FbhZhNv" title="Post to Twitter"><img class="nothumb" src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/en/twitter/tt-twitter-micro3.png" alt="Post to Twitter" /></a></p></div><p>The FIM (Financial Infomercial Media) has gifted us with more nonsense today in the form of Pending Homes Sales data from the NAR (Realtors) and the Purchasing Managers Manufacturing Index from the ISM (Purchasing Managers).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601068&amp;sid=aT80nhnFzzvw">Bloomberg was positively ecstatic</a> about the housing data, proclaiming &#8220;The number of contracts to buy previously owned homes rose more than forecast in July and increased for a record sixth consecutive month, reinforcing signs that the housing market is steadying.&#8221;</p>
<p><span id="more-5740"></span></p>
<p>Here&#8217;s what the NAR had to say. &#8220;Contract activity for pending home sales has risen for six straight months, a pattern not seen in the history of the index since it began in 2001.&#8221;</p>
<p>There&#8217;s just one problem. It&#8217;s all a lie. The rise was only due to seasonal adjustment factors. In fact, unadjusted pending home sales (sales contracts)  were actually DOWN 7% month to month.</p>
<div id="attachment_5741" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/phsi.png" target="_blank"><img class="size-medium wp-image-5741 " title="phsi" src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/phsi-300x144.png" alt="Click to enlarge" width="300" height="144" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Click to enlarge</p></div>
<p>True, that&#8217;s not as bad as last year when the index dove by 10%, but is this difference significant? Sales are higher than last year, but still below July 2007 when the housing recession was already under way. And last year there was no first time buyer tax credit. The question is where the market will be when this artificial prop is removed. Lawrence Yun of the Realtors admits as much. “Unless the tax credit is extended, no one should be surprised to see home sales drop in the first quarter of next year.”</p>
<p>As he knows, they are already dropping, and they will continue to drop well into the first quarter as they always do. At the same time, inventories are rising, contrary to Bloomberg&#8217;s claim that the data shows the sales recovery &#8220;helping to trim the property glut weighing on the economy.&#8221;</p>
<p>So the truth is that the news isn&#8217;t as bad as last year. Sales do appear to be at a higher level than last year. But are they?</p>
<p>Maybe not.</p>
<p><a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/zillowhomesales.png"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-5742" title="zillowhomesales" src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/zillowhomesales.png" alt="zillowhomesales" width="399" height="412" /></a></p>
<p>According to <a href="http://www.zillow.com/local-info/#metric=mt%3D24%26dt%3D1%26tp%3D6%26rt%3D14%26r%3D102001">data from Zillow</a>, which they say excludes REO sales, the downtrend in the rate of sales was still very much in force at the end of June. Current sales levels are well below those of last year at the same time. So, who to believe?</p>
<p>The Mortgage Bankers Association data on new purchase mortgage applications, which is featured in the  Wall Street Examiner Professional Edition Fed Reports (<a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?page_id=19">subscribers only</a>),  is consistent with the Zillow data. The Realtors data may be overstating just how much the market is improving because it does include some bank REO sales. Whether those sales should be included to make the case that the market is improving is arguable. To the extent that many of these REO sales are to investors and speculators, that does not help the inventory overhang situation one iota.</p>
<p>One thing is not arguable, however. The market is getting help from the artificial stimulus of the first time home buyer credit, and that&#8217;s going away. </p>
<p>Continued below<br />
_______________________________________________________________________</p>
<form style="text-align: center;" action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post">
<input name="cmd" type="hidden" value="_s-xclick" />
<input name="hosted_button_id" type="hidden" value="7747291" />
<input alt="PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!" name="submit" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif" type="image" /> <img src="https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif" border="0" alt="" width="1" height="1" /><br />
</form>
<h5 style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #0000ff;">Like this article? Say thanks by contributing!<br />
Even better, <a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?page_id=19">subscribe to the Wall Street Examiner Professional Edition.</a></span></h5>
<p>_______________________________________________________________________</p>
<p>The only forces that will ultimately help the market are destruction of inventory and an increase in new household formation.  The latter is going in the wrong direction as singles double up and nuclear families expand to take in relatives. Recent data reported by the Commerce Department showed housing starts to be at a seasonally adjusted rate of 581,000 units which seems extremely low on a historical basis. But the Census Bureau reported new household formations dropped from an annual rate of 1.63 million in 2007  to just 772, 000 in 2008. The data isn&#8217;t out for 2009 yet, but the trend would suggest that there&#8217;s still no meaningful net reduction in the housing overhang.</p>
<p>The second little lie &#8211; big spin in the media today was the ISM PMI index. <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601068&amp;sid=aKvzpGFqyGjY"> Bloomberg reported</a> that &#8220;Factories in the U.S. expanded in August for the first time in 19 months, helping lead the economy out of the worst recession since the 1930s.&#8221;  There wouldn&#8217;t be any overstatement there now, would there?</p>
<div id="attachment_5744" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/ism.png" target="_blank"><img class="size-medium wp-image-5744 " title="ism" src="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/ism-300x196.png" alt="Click to enlarge" width="300" height="196" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Click to enlarge</p></div>
<p>The truth is that this index actually started turning up in January and it continued to rise rapidly as industrial production fell through the first quarter. An increasing number of  purchasing managers began reporting improving business early in the first quarter, and that trend accelerated in the second quarter.</p>
<p>The index is a diffusion index of several components including new orders, inventories, order backlog, and prices paid, among others, on a scale from 0 to 100 .  When the index is above 50 it means that more survey respondents are reporting expanding conditions than contracting.</p>
<p>The index turned up beginning in January  which, by the way, was well ahead of the turn in the stock market. The ISM also preceded the stock market&#8217;s downturn in 2000. Industrial Prodution was concurrent. Both the ISM and industrial production led the stock market upturn in 2003 by turning up nearly a year in advance of stock prices. The weakness in the ISM throughout 2006 and 2007 was a harbinger of the trouble ahead in the market that began in 2007. The ISM again turned up ahead of stock prices at the lows this year.  So much for the stock market as a &#8220;discounting mechanism.&#8221; In fact, it is the exception for the market to lead the economy, rather than the norm, as is so fervently touted by the perpetrators of the great Wall Street fraud. So is the market guessing right this time?</p>
<p>The biggest part of the upturn this year in both the ISM and the stock market coincided exactly with the month the Fed began its massive pumping operations via its direct purchases of securities rather than by the targeted alphabet soup programs.  This again relates to content in the Wall Street Examiner Professional Edition Fed Reports. The evidence is clear that not only the market, but economic activity, responds instantly to direct Fed liquidity expansion.</p>
<p>Economists like to pretend that there&#8217;s a lag because they have no grasp of what&#8217;s really going on. It&#8217;s called &#8220;manipulation&#8221; and its carried out by central bankers. There is no lag between those machinations and economic and financial market responses. There may be differences in degree of response, but not of timing. When the Fed pumps via direct permanent open market operations, it&#8217;s like mainlining amphetamines into the bloodstream of the markets and the economy.  How they respond depends on how strung out they already are, but the fact that they do respond is not in question.</p>
<p>By the same token, Mr. Wizard Ben&#8217;s alphabet soup operations were an abject failure, only serving to hasten and exacerbate both the market&#8217;s and the economy&#8217;s collapse. Only the direct injections of cash via the Primary Dealers works. The Primary Dealers are the markets. The Primary Dealers are the economy.</p>
<p>Naturally, Bloomberg has it wrong. Industrial production turned up in July. August was not the first time factories expanded. Secondly, industrial production was also up slightly in October of 2008. But why quibble? These are just little lies, most likely the result of the typical lazy, sloppy reporting we get from the FIM on a regular basis, right? The reason we quibble is that because when the media gets away with so many little &#8220;errors&#8221;, then it&#8217;s not much of a leap when it comes time to promulgate the Big Lie. We make it easy for them by not taking them to task on their non existent journalistic standards.</p>
<p>The upturn in the ISM certainly looks impressive until you compare it with the actual turn in the Industrial Production Index.  The turn in that index is minuscule and does not come close to breaking the downtrend. We technicians would classify it as a dead cat bounce. Admittedly, this index is a month behind the ISM, so it will be interesting to see if it zooms higher for August.  Chances are that the big jump in the ISM survey is exaggerating the actual gains in production.  It&#8217;s like looking in a funhouse mirror. Things are not as big as they seem. So we must ask ourselves again, what happens when the artificial stimulus of government programs like cash for clunkers, and the Fed&#8217;s direct liquidity injections end. Will these &#8220;gains&#8221; be self sustaining?</p>
<p>Looking at the data touted by the media and the pundits as more evidence that the economy has bottomed, I&#8217;m just not impressed. Put the data up on a chart and compare it to something meaningful, and less biased, and the so called &#8220;gains&#8221;, &#8221; evidence of a turn&#8221;, &#8220;evidence of stabilization&#8221;  look suspiciously like blips, blips caused by massive government support. Once that support is withdrawn, those blips should disappear.</p>
<p><em>Stay up to date with the machinations of the Fed, Treasury, and foreign central banks in the US market in the Fed Report in the Professional Edition, Money Liquidity, and Real Estate Package.  Try it risk free for 30 days. Don&#8217;t miss another day. Get the research and analysis you need to understand these critical forces. Be prepared. Stay ahead of the herd.  <a href="http://wallstreetexaminer.com/?page_id=19">Click this link and get in RIGHT NOW! </a></em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://wallstreetexaminer.com/2009/09/01/more-little-lies-and-big-spin-gains-or-blips/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

