<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Recession harder on singles -- go get hitched!]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/02/recession-harder-on-singles-go-get-hitched/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/02/recession-harder-on-singles-go-get-hitched/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/02/recession-harder-on-singles-go-get-hitched/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/employees/" rel="tag">Employees</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/federal-reserve/" rel="tag">Federal Reserve</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/03/mnlaidoff200.jpg" />If you're single, you're 50% more likely to lose your job, according to a study published Friday by the <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/FederalReserve/">Federal Reserve</a> Bank of St. Louis. <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-10-01-recession-singles-unemployment_N.htm" target="_blank">This is no different from most recessions</a>, but neither the stat nor the trend loses its shock value with each downturn. Now that the <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/tag/unemploymentrate/">unemployment rate</a> has edged higher, to 9.8% last month, the plight of singles is worsening.</p>
<p>Single employment fell 4.8% from December 2007 through June, with the married folks losing their jobs at a rate of only 3.1%. In August, the single jobless rate reached 13.5%, while those encumbered with spouses fared much better at 6.3%.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/02/recession-harder-on-singles-go-get-hitched/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Recession harder on singles -- go get hitched!</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/02/recession-harder-on-singles-go-get-hitched/">Recession harder on singles -- go get hitched!</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/02/recession-harder-on-singles-go-get-hitched/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19182310/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/02/recession-harder-on-singles-go-get-hitched/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>banks</category><category>federal reserve</category><category>inthenews</category><category>jobless rate</category><category>married</category><category>missouri</category><category>single</category><category>st louis</category><category>unemployed</category><category>unemployment rates</category><category>unmarried</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Fewer job cuts in September, is relief coming?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/01/fewer-job-cuts-in-september-is-relief-coming/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/01/fewer-job-cuts-in-september-is-relief-coming/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/01/fewer-job-cuts-in-september-is-relief-coming/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/management/" rel="tag">Management</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/employees/" rel="tag">Employees</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/indices/" rel="tag">Indices</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/headline-news/" rel="tag">Headline News</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/03/wantadspic.jpg" alt="" />Layoff announcements hit their lowest level since March 2008 last month, signaling market stabilization. Global outplacement consulting firm <a target="_blank" href="http://www.challengergray.com/">Challenger, Gray &amp; Christmas Inc.</a> put the number of cuts at 66,404 for September, a 13% decline from July's 76,456. Year-over-year, the number of layoffs announced is down 30%, and September was the fourth month in a row in which job cuts fell relative to the same month a year earlier. </p>
<p>Planned job cuts reached 240,233 for the third quarter of 2009, according to Challenger, its lowest level since the first quarter of 2008, when there were 200,656 planned layoffs. For the third quarter of this year, job cuts fell 24.5% from the previous quarter's 318,165, and it's off 16.3% from 287,142 in the third quarter of 2009. At the beginning of 2009, the planned layoff rate reached a seven-year high of 578,510. Since then, the planned layoff rate fell 58.5%.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/01/fewer-job-cuts-in-september-is-relief-coming/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Fewer job cuts in September, is relief coming?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/01/fewer-job-cuts-in-september-is-relief-coming/">Fewer job cuts in September, is relief coming?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/01/fewer-job-cuts-in-september-is-relief-coming/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19180598/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/10/01/fewer-job-cuts-in-september-is-relief-coming/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>auto</category><category>auto industry</category><category>automotive</category><category>automotive industry</category><category>challenger</category><category>challenger gray christmas</category><category>government jobs</category><category>inthenews</category><category>jobless claims</category><category>jobless rate</category><category>layoffs</category><category>retail industry</category><category>retail jobs</category><category>retailers</category><category>unemployed</category><category>unemployment rates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Goldman Sachs ramps up the hiring machine]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/goldman-sachs-ramps-up-the-hiring-machine/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/goldman-sachs-ramps-up-the-hiring-machine/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/goldman-sachs-ramps-up-the-hiring-machine/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gs/" rel="tag">Goldman Sachs Group (GS)</a></p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/10/gs-goldman-sachs-logo.jpg" />Here's something we haven't seen in a while: a financial firm looking to hire people to fill positions that don't involve repossessing houses.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7e2a3312-ab90-11de-9be4-00144feabdc0.html"><em>The Financial Times </em>reports</a> that <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;ct=res&amp;cd=3&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffinance.aol.com%2Fquotes%2Fthe-goldman-sachs-group-inc%2Fgs%2Fnys&amp;ei=4EnASoL7F9KX8AaXq7HBAQ&amp;usg=AFQjCNGrfipWkZ64uLQ7324x_ZgF4wCGZw&amp;sig2=VM6f7LpP_090PJ2jw9n6mg">Goldman Sachs</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;ct=res&amp;cd=3&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffinance.aol.com%2Fquotes%2Fthe-goldman-sachs-group-inc%2Fgs%2Fnys&amp;ei=4EnASoL7F9KX8AaXq7HBAQ&amp;usg=AFQjCNGrfipWkZ64uLQ7324x_ZgF4wCGZw&amp;sig2=VM6f7LpP_090PJ2jw9n6mg">GS</a>) "will hire up to 200 staff across all regions in an attempt to establish a dominant position as one of the world's leading asset managers. In 2007 Goldman was ranked 17th in the world in terms of assets under management."<br /><br />Of course, up to 200 new hires isn't exactly going to drive up employment numbers -- nor is it even especially significant for a company of Goldman's size. Two hundred fresh faces would represent an increase in Goldman's head count of 0.68%. The fact that this is news is actually indicative of just how horrible the job market in the financial services industry is right now.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/goldman-sachs-ramps-up-the-hiring-machine/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Goldman Sachs ramps up the hiring machine</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/goldman-sachs-ramps-up-the-hiring-machine/">Goldman Sachs ramps up the hiring machine</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 28 Sep 2009 09:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7e2a3312-ab90-11de-9be4-00144feabdc0.html>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/goldman-sachs-ramps-up-the-hiring-machine/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19175779/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/28/goldman-sachs-ramps-up-the-hiring-machine/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Goldman Sachs</category><category>GS</category><category>inthenews</category><category>unemployment rates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 09:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[House may extend unemployment benefits]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/18/house-may-extend-unemployment-benefits/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/18/house-may-extend-unemployment-benefits/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/18/house-may-extend-unemployment-benefits/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/employees/" rel="tag">Employees</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/politics/" rel="tag">Politics</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/financial-crisis/" rel="tag">Financial Crisis</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/09/capitol.jpg" />It appears that the House may be ready to <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/17/news/economy/unemployment_benefits/index.htm?postversion=2009091718">extend unemployment benefits for another 13 weeks</a>. </p>
<p>On Wednesday, September 23, Congress will consider legislation to add 13 weeks to unemployment benefits in what are termed "high-unemployment states." In order to be considered a high-unemployment state, the unemployment rate must be greater than 8.5%. With unemployment at record highs nationwide, this status includes 26 states and the District of Columbia. What about the other 24 states? The unemployed workers there could qualify if their state is expected to hit 8.5% unemployed or it meets other criteria.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/18/house-may-extend-unemployment-benefits/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>House may extend unemployment benefits</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/18/house-may-extend-unemployment-benefits/">House may extend unemployment benefits</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/18/house-may-extend-unemployment-benefits/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19166093/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/18/house-may-extend-unemployment-benefits/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Congress</category><category>employment</category><category>inthenews</category><category>jobless</category><category>jobless American</category><category>unemployment benefits</category><category>unemployment rates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Counting on a recovery? The answer's a resounding MAYBE]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/counting-on-a-recovery-the-answers-a-resounding-maybe/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/counting-on-a-recovery-the-answers-a-resounding-maybe/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/counting-on-a-recovery-the-answers-a-resounding-maybe/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/housing/" rel="tag">Housing</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/financial-crisis/" rel="tag">Financial Crisis</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" alt="" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/07/icelandhouse.png" />The economy is sending mixed signals right now. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/07/21/jobs-will-follow-a-recovery-not-spark-one/" target="_blank">Unemployment is up</a>, and <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/15/world-consumer-confidence-follows-u-s-down/" target="_blank">consumer sentiment is down</a>. Plenty of <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/profits-are-up-but-for-how-long/" target="_blank">companies are posting profits</a>, but they're taking advantage of lower expectations and cost-cutting rather than revenue growth from an economic recovery. Rents are under pressure - both residential and <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/17/commercial-real-estate-vacancies-surge-above-12-in-manhattan/" target="_blank">commercial</a>.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/counting-on-a-recovery-the-answers-a-resounding-maybe/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Counting on a recovery? The answer's a resounding MAYBE</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/counting-on-a-recovery-the-answers-a-resounding-maybe/">Counting on a recovery? The answer's a resounding MAYBE</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/counting-on-a-recovery-the-answers-a-resounding-maybe/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19109825/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/07/26/counting-on-a-recovery-the-answers-a-resounding-maybe/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>consumer sentiment</category><category>consumer spending</category><category>financial crisis</category><category>home sales</category><category>housing</category><category>housing market</category><category>inthenews</category><category>new home sales</category><category>recession</category><category>stimulus</category><category>stimulus plan</category><category>unemployment</category><category>unemployment rates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Johansmeyer]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Tell-tale stat: States' unemployment compensation funds running low]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/11/tell-tale-stat-states-unemployment-compensation-funds-running/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/11/tell-tale-stat-states-unemployment-compensation-funds-running/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/11/tell-tale-stat-states-unemployment-compensation-funds-running/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bad-news/" rel="tag">Bad News</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/employees/" rel="tag">Employees</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/05/unemploymentpicture.jpg" />It's a sign of the times: an increasing number of states are running out of money to pay unemployment compensation benefits. <br /><br />Seven states have already depleted their employment insurance trust funds, according to the <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/standcomm/sclaborecon/EmploymentSituation.htm#StateUnemployRates">National Conference of State Legislatures</a> (NCSC). Another 11 states are in danger of running out of money by the end of 2009.<br /><br />What's more, states have borrowed $2.3 billion in emergency money from the U.S. government - - money that must be paid back - - to pay for unemployment compensation.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/11/tell-tale-stat-states-unemployment-compensation-funds-running/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Tell-tale stat: States' unemployment compensation funds running low</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/11/tell-tale-stat-states-unemployment-compensation-funds-running/">Tell-tale stat: States' unemployment compensation funds running low</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/11/tell-tale-stat-states-unemployment-compensation-funds-running/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1457247/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/11/tell-tale-stat-states-unemployment-compensation-funds-running/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>continuing claims</category><category>full employment</category><category>inthenews</category><category>jobs</category><category>National Conference of State Legislatures</category><category>U.S. Labor Department</category><category>unemployment</category><category>unemployment compensation</category><category>unemployment rates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Lazzaro]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Why did the Dow fall 385 points this week?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/09/why-did-the-dow-fall-385-points-this-week/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/09/why-did-the-dow-fall-385-points-this-week/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/09/why-did-the-dow-fall-385-points-this-week/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/major-movement/" rel="tag">Major Movement</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/privateequity/" rel="tag">Private Equity</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/djia/" rel="tag">DJIA</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/financial-crisis/" rel="tag">Financial Crisis</a></p><p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/10/arrow_down_down_240.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />The Dow lost 385 points this week with a 315 point election day rally on Tuesday, two consecutive days which totaled 929 points down, and a Friday rally of 248 points. Did the market rise on hopes of a McCain upset only to fall due to disappointment that Obama won? Did the market rally Friday because the <a href="http://www.freep.com/article/20081108/BUSINESS07/811080340?imw=Y">6.5% unemployment rate</a> was not as bad as expected? It could be, but I doubt it.</p>
<p>More likely, the markets are moving because of the trading behavior of endowments, pension funds, and hedge funds. They make decisions for very different reasons. But some reporting on daily market movements looks like a joke -- nobody knows why the market goes up or down, but commenters use price movements as a daily barometer of the national mood. So how do endowments, pension funds, and hedge funds move the markets? Here's how:</p>
<ul>
    <li><strong>Endowments.</strong> Big university endowments, such as Harvard's, are desperately trying to unload billions of dollars worth of illiquid interests in venture capital and private equity firms. Harvard is reportedly trying to dump <a href="http://www.clusterstock.com/2008/11/harvard-yale-et-al-down-25-30-">$1.5 billion worth</a> of such interests into a market where there is likely to be very little interest. Not only that, these private equity firms are demanding that endowments <a href="http://online.barrons.com/article/SB122610188023510005.html?mod=ba_car_twm&amp;page=sp">fork over the money</a> they committed to them so they can make new investments. And with the S&amp;P 500 down 36.6% so far this year, many endowments are selling anything liquid to meet these commitments and to pay shorter-term obligations -- such as paying professors and keeping the lights on. </li>
</ul><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/09/why-did-the-dow-fall-385-points-this-week/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Why did the Dow fall 385 points this week?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/09/why-did-the-dow-fall-385-points-this-week/">Why did the Dow fall 385 points this week?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Sun, 09 Nov 2008 08:16:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/09/why-did-the-dow-fall-385-points-this-week/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1366506/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/09/why-did-the-dow-fall-385-points-this-week/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>calpers</category><category>citadel</category><category>citadel investment group</category><category>citadelinvestmentcorp.</category><category>citadelinvestmentgroup</category><category>harvard</category><category>harvard university</category><category>mccain</category><category>mccainvs.obama</category><category>obama</category><category>obama administration</category><category>unemployment</category><category>unemployment rate</category><category>unemployment rates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Cohan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 08:16:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Second half looks dark]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/02/second-half-looks-dark/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/02/second-half-looks-dark/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/02/second-half-looks-dark/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/major-movement/" rel="tag">Major Movement</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gs/" rel="tag">Goldman Sachs Group (GS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/personalfinance/" rel="tag">Personal Finance</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/oil/" rel="tag">Oil</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/sandp-500/" rel="tag">S and P 500</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/housing/" rel="tag">Housing</a></p><p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/09/bear.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />In the first half of 2008, the S&amp;P 500 fell 12%. June's stock market was the worst since 1930. So are stocks now a screaming buy or are they poised to plunge further? Nobody knows. But my guess is that stocks will move based on how well they perform compared with expectations. And the risk of negative surprises in most industries exceeds the chance of positive ones. So stocks will probably keep falling.</p>
<p>Here's a quick review of six negatives:</p>
<ul>
    <li>
    <div><strong>Oil prices.</strong> With oil at $142, up 492% since January 2001, consumers are paying about $4.10 a gallon for gas and companies that use oil are getting squeezed while trying to raise prices. An attack on Iran, a big oil supplier, looms on the horizon. This and other geopolitical uncertainties could put further pressure on oil.</div>
    </li>
    <li>
    <div><strong>Housing.</strong> Three million people are expected to face foreclosure on their homes. And prices have dropped <a href="http://nahnopenotquite.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/home-prices-down-15-percent/">15%</a>. Since people were using home equity to finance their purchasing, their negative equity is sucking the wind out of the economy.</div>
    </li>
</ul><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/02/second-half-looks-dark/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Second half looks dark</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/02/second-half-looks-dark/">Second half looks dark</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:35:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/business/02jobs.html?adxnnl=1&amp;ref=business&amp;adxnnlx=1214991749-VL9MZRei6BNEFxRYUEI0mg&amp;pagewanted=print>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/02/second-half-looks-dark/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1243301/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/02/second-half-looks-dark/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>credit crunch</category><category>CreditCrunch</category><category>earnings</category><category>featured</category><category>housing</category><category>housing market</category><category>HousingMarket</category><category>oil prices</category><category>oil prices reach new...</category><category>OilPrices</category><category>OilPricesReachNew...</category><category>unemployment</category><category>unemployment rate</category><category>unemployment rates</category><category>UnemploymentRate</category><category>UnemploymentRates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Cohan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:35:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Unemployment rate spikes to 5.5% as income tumbles]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/06/unemployment-rate-spikes-to-5-5-as-income-tumbles/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/06/unemployment-rate-spikes-to-5-5-as-income-tumbles/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/06/unemployment-rate-spikes-to-5-5-as-income-tumbles/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/employees/" rel="tag">Employees</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/economic-data/" rel="tag">Economic Data</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/personalfinance/" rel="tag">Personal Finance</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/oil/" rel="tag">Oil</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/recession/" rel="tag">Recession</a></p><p><img height="228" alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/01/not-hiring.jpg" width="215" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />As Joe Lazzaro <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/06/economy-sheds-more-jobs-as-unemployment-rockets-to-5-5/">posted earlier</a>, the unemployment rate rose to 5.5% last month. And for the fifth straight month, payrolls fell.</p>
<p>Specifically, in May employers shed 49,000 jobs and the unemployment rate rose significantly from the April rate of 5% -- far higher than economists had expected. The <em><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121275530706251713.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">Wall Street Journal</a></em> reports that Wall Street economists had expected a 60,000 decline in payrolls last month and only a 5.1% unemployment rate</p>
<p>What's also of concern is that workers' income shrank in relation to booming inflation. Although workers' wages grew nominally at 0.3% in May to $604.58 a week, and for the 12-month period posted a 3.4% gain, inflation is running at 4% officially. So on an inflation-adjusted basis, workers' wages are dropping. <br /></p>
<p>With gasoline prices up 100% in the last year, a worker who fills up a 20 gallon tank twice a week now pays $160 -- 26% of that paycheck -- compared to 13% last year. And if that worker gets fired, it will be awfully expensive to drive around looking for a job.</p>
<p>With 70% of GDP growth coming from those workers and gasoline prices topping $4 a gallon, those deficit enhancing rescue checks from the government don't seem to be doing their job all that well. What will the government cook up next?<br /></p>
<p><em>Peter Cohan is President of</em> <a href="http://petercohan.com/"><em><font color="#0072bc">Peter S. Cohan &amp; Associates</font></em></a><em>.</em><em> He also </em><a href="http://www3.babson.edu/Academics/Divisions/management/facultyprofile.cfm?pageid=391236"><em><font color="#0072bc">teaches management at Babson College</font></em></a><em> and edits </em><a href="http://petercohan.blogspot.com/2007/01/cohan-letter-up-15-in-2006.html"><em><font color="#0072bc">The Cohan Letter</font></em></a><em>. </em></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/06/unemployment-rate-spikes-to-5-5-as-income-tumbles/">Unemployment rate spikes to 5.5% as income tumbles</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:22:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121275530706251713.html?mod=googlenews_wsj>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/06/unemployment-rate-spikes-to-5-5-as-income-tumbles/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1217731/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/06/unemployment-rate-spikes-to-5-5-as-income-tumbles/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>inflation</category><category>inflation rate</category><category>inflationrate</category><category>inflationrates</category><category>inthenews</category><category>job cuts</category><category>JobCuts</category><category>unemployment</category><category>unemployment rate</category><category>unemployment rates</category><category>UnemploymentRate</category><category>UnemploymentRates</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Cohan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:22:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
