TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says there are problems, but nothing looks dire.

The setup is pretty good here. We've got a mildly oversold market with lots of June money expected to come in as CDs roll over and people realize that the cash rates are so bad. We have no earnings news, which is good, given that unless you do a lot of business overseas without a lot of raw cost escalation (think everything from Emerson (NYSE: EMR) (Cramer's Take) to Heinz (NYSE: HNZ) (Cramer's Take)) or you transport or mine oil, minerals and agricultural goodies, you aren't doing all that well.

We have the possibility of some stability in energy, as $130 has been difficult to punch through, even though we have not been able to build any inventories yet despite all we hear about how people are driving less. And the expectations for the employment number are so weak that if we get any job creation we are going to begin to hear that maybe the economy is on the mend.

Again, that's considered antithetical given the sinking home price/escalating food and oil price one-two punch. But, as I said last week, there is a finite nature to the bad loans.

Chuck Carlson is the newsletter industry leader in DRIPs, or dividend reinvestment plans. Not surprisingly, then, his newsletter is called The DRIP Investor.

For those unfamiliar with these programs, DRIPs are dividend reinvestment plans, which are set up by companies to make it easier and more cost-effective for individual investors to buy and accumulate long-term positions by reinvesting dividends back into additional shares.

Usually, the commissions and other related costs of DRIPs are low, and in some cases, free. Says Carlson, "All things equal, a DRIP with no fees is better than one that charges fees."

He continues, "To be sure, I'm not suggesting investors should automatically discard a DRIP because it charges fees. Still, fees erode investment returns, so taking fees into account in your selection process makes sense."

To help investors find the most cost-effective way of building portfolios, the advisor has conducted a review of "fee-free" plans. Using a proprietary system that ranks 5,000 stocks based on over 100 metrics, he has developed a "starter portfolio" for those with limited investment funds. Such a starter portfolio, he notes, could be developed with as little as $1,000 to start.

He notes, "If I were constructing a reasonably diversified starter portfolio of six "fee-free" stocks, I would focus on the following issues: