bbro

U.S. Weekly Jobless Claims: Why You Can't Trust Them

bring back goat entrails!!!


On Nov 25 01:27 PM User 514297 wrote:

> Agree 100% with author. Government is not truthful and often misleading.Not
> only are unemployment numbers fabricated but so are gdp and others
> as well. The government does not report m-3 anymore(too big to lie
> about!) They also insist upon fraudulent accounting practices in
> the banking industry.How anyone can rely on big brother for any truth
> at all is beyond accepted wisdom and may in fact be a fools gambit.
>
> Mr wizard take me home i dont want to rely on government for important
> economic data anymore...

Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation?

Thank you...excellent commentary....


On Nov 25 01:36 PM wcinvest wrote:

> The stress tests have clearly been proven wrong and overly pessimistic
> in their loan loss assumptions for a given rate of unemployment.
> Ken Lewis and BAC were 100% correct for strongly disputing the loan
> loss assumptions of the stress tests in the case of BAC. While the
> unemployment figure of the stress tests were reasonable and if anything
> low possibly so the American public wouldn't be scared, the other
> numbers were a very conservative somewhat doomsday farce that have
> proven to be wrong. Roubini has been proven wrong. He stated that
> many of the big banks would be out of business just about now from
> staggering loan losses. All except for Citigroup will be profitable
> for the year.
>
> The high unemployment rate has been reached and BAC is STILL going
> to be profitable for 2009 after being profitable for 2008. And ALL
> analysts covering BAC expect it to do at least OK in 2010.
>
> BAC should stick its middle finger up to the government and state
> that they will not pay back TARP by raising common or even preferred
> equity! Instead, simply pay it back from earnings in 2010 and 2011...
> By the second half of 2010, Bank regulators will come to their senses
> and realizes that BAC can pay back a substantial portion since they
> are overcapitalized and the stress tests were really for a truly
> nightmare scenario which obviously hasn't happened now that the country
> is out of the recession.
>
> From the government, BAC got zero credit for their earnings power
> and their ability to quickly reduce costs after acquisitions.
>
> There is a very good reason for sound regulation and limits to leverage
> but on the other hand, I don't think a single bank should trust the
> government or even the Fed as that entity becomes politicized.

U.S. Weekly Jobless Claims: Why You Can't Trust Them

Postive job growth in 2 months.....


On Nov 25 12:32 PM conceptwizard wrote:

> Job creation in the private sector is the real issue, at zero increase
> in 10 years. Big Government is controlling the job numbers right
> now.
>
> The stimulus has been pumped into the coffers of the state to prevent
> state jobs from declining and to extend unemployment benefits. These
> calculated two ways, new claims and those on extended benefits that
> would normally have expired their claims. The 20 week extended benefit
> bandaid has over 4 million people on life support.
>
> Many states are just starting their slashing of jobs, recently Arizona
> has announced cuts. These are the high paying jobs that make a huge
> difference.
>
> This is not over by a long shot, 48 of the states can't balance their
> budgets, and have tremendous tax receipt shortfalls. This can only
> result in more pain.

U.S. Weekly Jobless Claims: Why You Can't Trust Them

Jobless claims are not a sample...there is a difference....


On Nov 25 12:31 PM Donald Ingram wrote:

> The BLS numbers are highly suspect. Just the birth/death model adjustment
> is a complete joke now, having added 80,000 new jobs per month?
>
> Remember back in September BLS announced it's stats out by some 800,000
> jobs, that were counted in - instead of out? They are doing nothing
> about this discrepancy until February 2010, when it will be included
> in their updated revision.
> No. I'll believe these latest numbers when they have been baked in
> the oven a little longer!

U.S. Weekly Jobless Claims: Why You Can't Trust Them

You don't understand the jobless claims was exceptionally good if you
look at non seasonally adjusted numbers back 5 years you would see
there is a particular shape to non seasonally adjusted jobless claims
numbers.. we are not seeing that this year.....you are going to be surprised as these numbers will continue to drop.....

Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation?

You still didn't answer my question...you didn't know what the loss assumptions for each individual bank did you???

Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation?

Somebody please read the stress test in FULL!!!!!

Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation?

You don't get it do you....they raised their capital levels to meet those stress losses and they are not getting those losses...so they
have enough capital.....now the regulators might raise the target and
that is not related to performance just regulator fears....


On Nov 25 11:42 AM Graham and Dodd Investor wrote:

> That's the problem. Bank reserves would be higher (and earnings correspondingly
> lower) if they had to reserve to levels to meet the stress tests.
>

Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation?

As usual someone who only did a cursory read of the stress test....BAC is 15 billion dollars ahead to date ahead of the loss assumptions in the stress test. Using the macro assumptions is a Cliff Note version of
interpreting the Stress test. Please read the stress test in whole for
an accurate appraisal. I give an F for not rading the assignment in full.

HERE IS A HINT: BAC was stressed to 11.35 Billion per quarter in loan chargeoffs and 3 billion in trading losses per quarter. It has been nowhere near that....

Oct. New Home Sales: +6.2% to 430K vs. 398K expected and 402K in Sept. Median price -0.5% to $212,200.

Median new home price to Disposable Income per capita is cheap
cheap cheap,,,,,throw in interest rates and it is its cheapest in history.......everything is inventory and consumer sentiment....

Initial Jobless Claims: -35K to 466K vs. 495K expected. Continuing claims -190K to 5,423,000.

the continuing claims plus all the extended programs is going down too....in the case of jobless claims always applies...


On Nov 25 09:00 AM Myny wrote:

> Always is a word I wouldnt use in this environment. :) The only reason
> why bears keep talking about jobs is the consumer recovery. And what
> is the real situation here? It is that there might be some hiring
> for the initial wave of restocking and so on, but will it be sustainable?
> Not so sure here. Also, what about the millions that are running
> out of unempl. benefits? This is the real hit to the consumer and
> unless the hiring REALLY picks up, which i dont really see happening,
> the spending will be hit hard. Im staying sceptical...

Initial Jobless Claims: -35K to 466K vs. 495K expected. Continuing claims -190K to 5,423,000.

Improving jobless claims always leads the household survey and
establishment survey data....


On Nov 25 08:51 AM Myny wrote:

> OK, the trend is obvious, hopefully it lasts. It is not confirmed
> by other job stats, and it also still doesnt mean consumer recovery,
> because there is long way to go back where we were, but these are
> the steps in the right direction. (But, look at the Non seasonally
> adjusted data also.)
>
> Another thing, definitely worth looking, is the scary number in core
> durable orders.

Initial Jobless Claims: -35K to 466K vs. 495K expected. Continuing claims -190K to 5,423,000.

Kick ass numbers....confirmatio... companies are not laying off
as much as they would in this season...look out they are only going to get
better.....

S&P admits its damning ranking (.pdf) of banks' capital strength, which sparked concerns over low rankings at UBS (UBS) and Citigroup (C), failed to take into consideration actions banks have taken since June to clean up their books. Insiders say S&P will issue a supplementary statement in the next few days.

The report has no meat....we are supposed to accept it as Gospel.....
show us the numbers....

Wells Fargo, JPMorgan and Bank of America: Stock Prices Can Double

Hubris....

On Nov 24 04:44 PM Archman Investor wrote:

> It's amazing how a FED induced stock market rally can convince someone
> they are right about a subject.
>
> FACT: If the government withdrew all its easy money tomorrow and
> mark to market were brought back, most major banks in this country
> would fail the next day.
>
> But whatever, the FED has decided that destroying the next 3 generations
> wealth of this country is fine and our citizens seem pretty happy
> about that.