(Photo:fr.wikipedia.org)

This recession has put the proverbial shackles on the aspirations of people both rich and poor. The availability of credit is still moving at the pace of a slow crawl, while consumer spending is still searching for a way to pick itself up off the floor. But of course, it won’t truly be able to do that until the question of job security becomes less a hot button and more background scenery. Until money and credit begin flow as they did 10 years ago, the stock market will continue to show only modest gains at best. People are looking for help, whether it is the temporary assistance of cash advance loans or the more permanent change in which wages actually begin to keep pace with inflation.

Most of know just how the recession has taken a bit out of our finances. But did you know just how much even those who would have been “untouchable” have been hurt by the downturn? A recently New York Times articles takes a look at John McAfee, founder of the software company that produces McAfee Antivirus. His $100 million fortune has dwindled by an astounding 96 percent. Sure, that still means that he’s worth about $4 million and won’t need a cash advance, but what a drop!

“Horrific news”

Yes, Gawker jests when they call this “horrific news,” brought to us by “those tireless chroniclers of the plight of the rich, the New York Times,” but this cautionary tale does give us some idea of just how far America’s economic dealings have run aground. The number of super-rich in the United States may just be at its ebb tide. Yes, there are those who have already recovered to their pre-recession salaries, but there are many more that have not.

John McAfee is certainly not one of those who have recovered. He founded his company in the late 1980, and then sold his stock a couple of years after the antivirus giant had its initial public offering on Wall Street. He made $100 million in the deal, and he went on to invest much of it in real estate and bonds through the Lehman Brothers brokerage. At the time, it seemed like a great way to keep his fortune safe. Everyone in his income tax bracket was doing it.

Then the bubble burst

And John McAfee’s real estate holdings dropped in value like crazy. A 10,000-square-foot home in Colorado with a view of Pike’s Peak cost him $25 million to buy and build. In 2007, it sold for only $5.7 million. Then Lehman Brothers went belly up and his bonds were suddenly worth pennies on the dollar. Other stock investments cost him millions more in lost revenue.

Wait, there’s more. John McAfee has sold his 10-passenger Cessna and now flies like the rest of us. I wonder if he used the JetBlue unlimited pass when he went to visit his Hawaii oceanfront estate for the last time. That estate is gone too. It sold at auction for $1.5 million (much less than he paid for it), and there were only a handful of bidders. Apparently the former antivirus software mogul is going to high-tail it to Belize, where tax laws are more favorable to sinking millionaires like him.

What’s in store for John McAfee?

Let’s be realistic. I’m sure he’s going to land on his feet in Belize just fine. However, he’ll have to make do with much less than before. We who get cash advance loans when we need a cash advance will surely weep for him, particularly after ANOTHER estate (this one in New Mexico) goes up for a no-floor auction. In other words, no matter how low the top bid is, John McAfee has agreed to accept.

(Photo: glyphjockey.com)

I bring all of this to your attention not because John McAfee deserves a pity party. I’m sure he was aware that he was taking some risks with his money, and he certainly isn’t hurting with $4 million left over and likely a nice home in Belize. What I’m saying is that we can no longer allow the game players who manipulated the levers and knobs of the U.S. economy to carelessly speculate with our money. They walk away with something left over, but what of the less sophisticated investors? Like Tommy Wilhelm in Saul Bellow’s “Seize the Day,” they’re left with nothing. Financially, it’s a perpetual funeral.

Related Video:

Small businesses are going to need to look into installment loan options as the economy balances itself out. According to Camden Fine, president of the “community banks account for 45 percent of all small business loans. They are the engines of Main Street.” Unfortunately community banks’ reputations were tarnished with the focus on bigger financial institutions who were managing unscrupulous lending policies during last year’s loan explosion. Small banks are protesting, stating they had nothing to do with the excess of Wall Street firms and risky investments but they are under the same criticisms, and even bigger penalties.

Small banks are under scrutiny

Community banks are also feeling a backlash of bad behaviors of Wall Street investment firms. They are under the same tight analysis as the entire banking industry but the $767 bailout package is catering to large banking institutions. Small banks are under the same microscope, but with a much smaller benefit. In addition, there is an assessment the government wants to charge all members of the banking community to build the Federal Deposit Insurance Fund; the same fund that large banks drained.

According to Fine, many community banks are choosing to wait out the economic downfall in lending. They are turning to other revenue-generating practices to make ends meet, but staying far away from lending practices. Businesses who formerly looked to small business loans as a means of underwriting, now have to look to installment loan options for additional resources.

Critics of government handling of the banking industry

Bank consultant Bert Ely claims that there is a “disconnect between Washington and banks across America.” Although the government is encouraging banks to lend, good borrowers are not the ones applying. Because of the economy, everyone is cutting back, including the perfect applicant for a business or personal loan. Needs are being put off until the economy improves and qualified borrowers are few and far between.

Ely also notes that over $10 billion of the $17.8 billion loss of the FDIC last year came from IndyMac bank in California. To recharge the FDIC all banks are being charged an emergency assessment. The FDIC needs to maintain 1.15% of the total deposits and is looking to the entire banking industry to compensate. However the entire banking industry did not drain the fund in the first place, leaving pundits to ask, “Why are community banks paying for the sins of Wall Street banks?”

The little banking woes

Vice president of Brenham National Bank in Texas, Connie Rohde says, “For years we community bankers have fiercely competed with big guys for every deposit to remain in business. These irresponsible banks were making big profits, while we struggled to stay alive…and now you are demanding us to bail them out.” Small bank’s frustration levels are running high. The assessment they are being asked to pay will be 20¢ on every $100 of deposits, up from the average of 6.3¢.

What this means to the small business

To the small businesses in the community, this means that borrowing will be difficult. Even good-credit borrowers will have to wait in line to see if their applications are accepted. In the interim, there are small businesses who still need funding to manage and will need to look to alternative methods of getting money, such as installment loans, to make it through. These may provide business-saving answers to organizations struggling to outlast the harsh economy.

While unsecured personal loans have been around for a while, there are other options investment firms are trying to bring to the economy. Wall Street has plans to save the market, invigorate the economy and quell peoples’ fears of investing. But are they realistically able to reach the novice investor or help his financial situation? A lot of their solutions play on people’s need for security and impulsive nature, rather than truly create ways for everyday people to pay off their soaring bills.

Wall Street and the common man

Chief Investment officer of GenSpring Offices, Andrew Mehalko said, “When people are fearful, Wall Street comes out with products that try to make them feel good by promising safety.” He states that this year ‘principal-protected notes’ are expected to be hot-selling investments. The big promise is that they protect your initial investment and may produce an increase in value. Taking a closer look at these notes however, brings to light their true nature. Sure they will return your investment, but they also have hefty fees that can cut into a large part of the ROI you may have gained. Remember the old rule of thumb when investing: low-risk, means low returns. Though the promised security of principle-protected notes can be attractive, they probably won’t give you the investment value you are looking for. If your purpose was for them to grow your money so you can pay off more bills, you may be sadly disappointed.

Typical reactions to the local news

A lot of casual investors are obsessed with the latest financial news. It’s good to be informed, but focusing on every change in the market can be detrimental. Trying to navigate every up and down the economy brings can be tiring and can cause you to lose money. We have a volatile stock market, a fluctuating bond market and a recession to deal with. Keeping up with all three can prove a harrowing experience for even the most seasoned investor, much less the novice. If you’re trying to respond to immediate changes, you may be left with an investment, less huge deductions in trading expenses. Do yourself a favor and stop watching TV and reading newspapers in an effort to find a way to pay your bills.

How do you pay bills in this economy?

An unsecured personal loan may be the most reasonable way to go. Let’s say that you took a pay decrease at work. Though you’re bringing in less money, your bills are the same. What should you do? Or, let’s say that your car breaks down and you need to find the cash to pay for it immediately? More and more people are looking to personal cash loans, rather than trying to play the market, to meet their financial needs. Although Wall Street is trying everything they can to help consumers, many of their solutions are one-sided and force the investor to use any money they would have earned, on fees. It’s a better option to look for loans that have reasonable interest rates, clear-cut rules and can still adequately pay off your bills.

Will the economy revive?

Although the economy is in a recession, it will revive but not without a lot of restructuring and rethinking investment processes. A lot of people relied on Wall Street for their investments, and this is proving to be a trap in today’s market. Wall Street has its own agenda that isn’t necessarily looking out for individuals who need to pay their bills. To truly meet your financial needs and stay at an advantage, an unsecured personal loan can be a much more reliable solution.

Don’t be like that. Be on solid ground. Check out parts ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR and FIVE.

Jon Stewart set his sights squarely on why Jim Cramer and CNBC didn’t see this financial disaster coming. Why weren’t they prepared? Why couldn’t they prepare us? Read this article series, watch the interview, and you’ll understand what Stewart suggests: that TV investing advice isn’t for the average investor. The average investor may look for personal loans on occasion.

It’s for the traders. In fact, the existence of such networks flies in the face of the traditional “buy and hold” strategy of mom and pop investors. The fast-paced buy-and-sell on a dime of day trading is not for the average investor. It’s dangerous if you don’t know exactly what you’re doing, unlike 2009 NCAA bracket predictions…

The big problem that Stewart takes issue with is whether Cramer, CNBC and similar networks are responsible for raising the market up too high on toothpicks. It picked food from the teeth of Joe Investor, then shattered under its own unsustainable weight and sent them crashing down. CNBC and the like may or may not have been complicit in this tsunami, but they certainly should have been in a position to warn the public of what could happen.

Investing upstream

First of all, Cramer appears to have been too comfortable with his sources. “These people were my friends” was what he had to say about the CEOs and Wall Street insiders who lied to him. This, suggests Poniewozik, is deadly to impartial, informative journalism. “If I do that (or say that), they’ll never talk to me again” should never play into the equation.

And don’t be a lemming. It may be safe to say what the last guy said – that the stock market is up – but it takes courage and commitment to comment on where the bus is headed rather than where it’s been. Pundits like Jim Cramer would have garnered much more respect and trust if they had looked up the road and recognized the signs. Not as feel-good or exciting as screaming and throwing rubber toys around, but it’s the right thing to do. Go against the crowd.

Related Videos:

Pound out your frustrations over dough

The Jim Cramer/Jon Stewart ride ends here now for us. Wall Street punditry has done the average American investor wrong. Keep your eyes open and do your due diligence before taking anyone’s investing advice. Even if you take investing advice – or advice on where to find payday loans – from your dog. But if your investment adviser can’t pass a Turing test, you should be put away…

If you missed parts ONE, TWO, THREE or FOUR, check them out.

Cramer: Your ultimate goal should be to expose these shenanigans.”

Stewart: “(How can we trust) shows like “Fast Money” anymore?”

Cramer: “Jon, you and I, we’re entertainers. There’s a market for it.”

Stewart: “Yes, but there’s a market for cocaine and hookers. So what? What is the responsibility of people who cover Wall Street? Who are you responsible to? 401k and pension holders, the general public or Wall Street traders who are working hard but getting fu*&ed in this too?”

Cramer (dodging the real question): “Should we have constantly been pointing out the mistakes? Absolutely. I’m a commentator. I’m a guy trying to do an entertainment show about business. It’s tough; what am I going to do?

Stewart: “I’m under the assumption that you don’t just take (Wall Street CEOs) words at face value, that you check things out. Jim, this is unfortunate, because you’re not “the face” of this. I don’t mean to direct this solely at you. There are larger powers at work. We are both snake oil salesmen…”

Cramer: “I do not disagree with that.”

(Gulp!)

We must force these “higher powers” to be accountable for their actions. Playing with other people’s money is no game; it is a marathon that few can truly afford to lose. While the Jon Stewart/Jim Cramer interview is now several days old, the memory in the collective consciousness of the entertainment media still burns. Time magazine TV critic James Poniewozik blogs for “Tuned In” that we should remember that while the battle was between two men, they’re simply footsoldiers in a larger war.

As Poniewozik puts it, “There’s a big temptation to frame last night’s head-to-head between Jon Stewart and Jim Cramer as a battle between two guys. But as Stewart told Cramer, to his credit, ‘This song isn’t about you.’” It certainly wasn’t a banner moment in Cramer’s career. However, the focus of this exchange was an outing. How America does (in the same way that Debbie does…) journalism is at issue. Business journalism most specifically. To finish off, do THIS…

Related Video:

This is part three of my study of Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer… check out PART ONE and PART TWO first if you haven’t already. Perhaps instead of taking the investing advice of someone like Cramer, you’ll end of using cash advance loans when you’re in a pickle…

The conversation between Stewart and Cramer continues:

Cramer (vlog): “I wouldn’t purge anyone who was in the hedge fund. I would encourage anyone in the hedge fund to do it (short-sell), because it’s legal, it’s a very quick way to make money and very satisfying. No one else in the world would admit that, but I don’t care. I’m just not going to say that on TV.”

Stewart (Daily Show): (gives Cramer the business)

Cramer (on Daily Show): (shrugs shoulders) “It’s on TV now!”

Stewart: “It feels like we’re capitalizing your adventure with our money (via how we’re told to invest)… it’s a game you know is going on, but you go on television as a financial analyst and pretend it isn’t happening.”

Cramer: “Absolutely we could do better. There are shenanigans and we should call them out…”

Stewart: “The gentleman in the (vlog) is a sober, rational individual. However, the gentleman on “Mad Money” is throwing plastic cows through his legs and shouting ‘SELL! SELL! SELL!”, then coming on two days later and saying ‘I was wrong.’ I can’t reconcile your brilliance in the market with the crazy BS I see you do every night.”

Cramer: I’m (an entertainer). I’m trying to draw in an audience that might not be interested in all the details.”

Stewart: But (the rational you) sounded like plain English to me. Treat us like adults. It’s unbelievable that (you and others) had Bear Stearns and all other kinds of CEOs… you had the chance to call them to the carpet… but (Santelli and) CNBC blame the mortgage holders!”

Cramer (vlog): “You can’t create for yourself an impression that a stock is down, but you do it anyway because the FCC doesn’t understand it.”

Stewart (Daily Show): “I understand you want to make finance entertaining, but it’s not a fu*&ing game. When I watch that, I can’t tell you how angry that makes me. What it says to me is you all know what’s going on. Draw a straight line from those shenanigans to the stuff that was being pulled at Bear Stearns, AIG and all this derivative market stuff that is all this weird Wall Street side bet…”

Somebody loses that bet, and that somebody is you and me. CLICK HERE and see how good television investing advice could be better…

Related Video:

This continues my look at Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer, the overhyped battle that teaches us that, if nothing else, investors should stay far away from television if they’re seeking sound investment advice. If you missed part one, CLICK HERE.

Jon Stewart took issue with Rick Santelli’s classification of foreclosed home buyers as “losers.” Not only is it easy for Santelli say that – he is far from the demographic at risk in this economic stew of trouble – but Stewart touched upon a serious issue. CNBC (and other TV network) Wall Street analysts like Santelli who dance about the airwaves with their bluster and decorated history, telling consumers when to buy and sell, knew that the crash was coming but said nothing. They knew how the tricks of the market – derivatives, short selling – worked, but failed to warn people who could ill afford to lose so much that they’d need more payday loans than they’re comfortable with.

Jim “Mad Money” Cramer came to CNBC’s defense

Jim Cramer, the man who bears the albatross of the moniker “In Cramer We Trust” on CNBC network commercials, called out Stewart as a mere “comedian,” someone who couldn’t possibly understand how Wall Street really works. He thought was ready to stand against the Doctor of the “Daily Show.” A war of words from a distance ensued.

On the night of Thursday, March 12, 2009, the distance was bridged. Cramer agreed to appear on “The Daily Show” to debate Stewart over whether CNBC is serving or slamming the masses with its stock market advice.

So begins the conversation

Here are some of the telling highlights of a conversation that says much about both the behind-the-scenes manipulation of Wall Street and the sorry state of what some still continue to call journalism…

The “smoking gun,” so to speak, that Stewart offers against Cramer and similar TV financial pundits is a December 2006 video interview  from a financial blog in which Cramer speaks freely about what he did as a hedge fund manager:

Cramer (vlog interview): “A lot of times when I was short at my hedge fund, I would create a level of activity beforehand. It doesn’t take much money. (It’s) short selling. I didn’t do it, but I’m trying to explain this to you.”

Stewart (on Daily Show): “It’s sounds like you’re saying you did this (you shorted).”

Note: The manipulative nature of short-selling is largely responsible for sinking investor confidence and keeping the Market in the doldrums.

Cramer (on Daily Show): “If so, then I was inarticulate.”

Find out what else Cramer and his brethren were inarticulate about by clicking HERE.

Related Video:

For those of you who don’t know this already, journalism is dead. Or at least mostly dead. The boundary between clear, unbiased reporting and entertainment has been shattered, and too few of us realize that we’ve been walking on broken glass for some time. At least clean up the place a little and bandage your feet. Then you can focus on or block out what’s been bombarding you. Think critically and create from the rubble the reality you’ve been denying yourself for lack of time, imagination, effort or courage. Think of it as a cash advance for your future.

There are too few members of the global edutainment media with the skill and determination to approach issues like the meltdown of Wall Street and get straight to the point. Jon Stewart, a self-professed entertainer and host of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” has the focus that so many self-professed journalists lack. In recent weeks, Stewart has taken issue with the role of financial news networks like CNBC in the current economic crisis. But a fire started – mostly edutainment media-fueled – when CNBC pundit Rick Santelli announced a little Chicago Tea Party…

The guilty throwing stones?

During a CNBC broadcast, Santelli proclaimed from the floor of CME Group in Chicago that the mortgage bailout package President Obama has put into action is an example of “government promoting bad behavior”

He went on to ask why we should subsidize “losers’” mortgages, and proposed that that kind of financial assistance should be given to “people who might actually have a chance down the road; people who can carry the water instead of drinking it.”

The well-paid CME Group analysts around Santelli applauded his elitist missive. Santelli crowed about how this “statistical cross-section of America, the silent majority” had spoken, as if financial analysts at a large firm in any way represent average Americans who were put out on the street because they dreamed of home ownership. CLICK HERE to see how Jon Stewart replied and began a “little war” with CNBC “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer!

Related Videos:

H. Rodgin Cohen

President Obama’s trouble filling his cabinet appears to be far from over. Three candidates for top positions in the United States Treasury have withdrawn from consideration.

Deputy Treasury Secretary pick H.Rodgin Cohen was the most recent to drop out of the process before he was even officially nominated.

Tangled web

There’s no official word on why he is out of the running, but its possible that his role as counselor to just about every major player on Wall Street, which complicates his relationship with the Treasury. He was a partner in the New York law firm Sullivan & Cromwell LLP.

Because the Treasury is involved with Wall Street through purchases of shares in big banks and mortgage companies, some may view Cohen’s former role as a conflict of interest. The Treasury is backing personal loans and mortgages by buying securities.

Those that came before

Cohen rose to the top of the list of candidates for Deputy Treasury Secretary after another pick, Anette Nazareth, stepped down earlier this week. Nazareth worked for the Securities and Exchange Commission during the time Bernie Madoff conducted his . She dropped off the list after it was made clear that she’d be extensively questioned about that time period.

Help still wanted

Also this week, Caroline Atkinson was in line to be nominated to serve in the Treasury as Undersecretary for International Affairs. Atkinson had to withdraw, per officials’ requests, after a tax problem was revealed during the vetting process.

About that economy problem …

Critics have argued that leaving empty positions in the Treasury must be hampering the Obama administration’s response to the economic crisis. The Treasury is heavily involved in implementing the economic stimulus package and the foreclosure prevention plan, among other economic efforts.

The Obama administration says they have come far in the appointment process and made ample progress on housing, stimulus and bank stabilization.

President Obama may have spoken out against executive pay raises and exorbitant bonuses, but that doesn’t mean that the mavens of Wall Street aren’t still trying to squeeze the money train for all it’s worth.

Joseph Giannone reports for Reuters that annual salaries for bankers, traders and staff on the Street could jump “as much as 100 percent in 2009.” Amazingly, this comes after the public outcry against paying huge salary increases to CEOs of companies that received government bailout money. And to think the same fat cats decry payday loans!

Bonuses are verboten, but apparently banks must continue to boost salaries in order to “retain and recruit the best.”

No! I’ll tell you what they should do!

The conditions that exist across America’s economic landscape are treacherous. We stand on the brink of collapse; desperate measures are needed. This is why I would insist that the banking and investment industry enact temporary wage controls. If they are normalized across the board, there won’t be as much worry about losing talent to the bank that pays that much more. For the most part, if young investment bankers are working on Wall Street, it’s because they like the New York atmosphere, not simply because they make a bit more money there.

Consultant Alan Johnson predicts that an executive who received $250,000 in salary in 2008 could now be paid as much as $600,000. This… is… ludicrous!

And… they’re still cutting jobs!

Bonuses are predicted to fall 20 percent in 2009, reflecting “political pressures and continued weakness in financial markets,” said Johnson. I say no bonuses until companies no longer require bailouts! You CAN live on your salary just fine. Suck it up, Americans. This isn’t pat-on-the-back time.

Unfortunately, job cuts also will continue, to the tune of 15 to 20 percent, he predicted. OK, all the more reason to freeze salaries and stop bonuses until we’re out of trouble. People should all pitch is so that unemployment doesn’t continue to grow like mushrooms on a bedraggled lawn.

Don’t explain, don’t justify

Oh, good. Johnson says he advises banks structure bonuses carefully. Provide risk provisions and clawback provisions. With a clawback, a company could – get this – take back money from an employee is they commit wrongdoing. I see slime everywhere in this industry!

“The current model cannot be explained or justified. It is necessary to have a compensation system that is both rational and can be explained and defended,” Johnson said. You’ve got that right, sir. You cannot explain or justify salary increases or bonuses as long as people are being punted into the street.

Related Videos:

He is protecting his wife

Bernard Madoff has pled guilty to all 11 charges surrounding a $50 billion ponzi scheme, BBC News reports. The charges include four counts of fraud, three counts of money laundering, making false statements, perjury, making a false filing to the US financial watchdog, and theft from an employee benefit plan. Prosecutors are seeking a 150-year sentence for the 70-year-old financier. The exact sentence will not be known for a few months.

Madoff perpetrated a pyramid scheme where early investors were paid off with the money of new clients. He pled guilty before New York Judge Denny Chin on the morning of Thursday, March 12.

He would not plea, would not cooperate

What prosecutors had hoped for is a plea bargain where Madoff would agree to reveal others who were involved in this unprecedented operation. Madoff refused, which may exempt his wife Ruth Madoff, Bernard L Madoff Investment Securities employees and others from severe penalty.

Since his December arrest, Madoff had been confined to his luxury Manhattan apartment. Now, he’s enjoying the amenities of jail, a personal loan of his freedom for… what? Show them the money, Bernie!

“The greatest con artists in history”

Madoff, a former NASDAQ chairman, has been a big name on Wall Street for 40 years. He knows the ins and outs, all of the angles. ” Defrauded investor and former Fort Lee, New Jersey mayor Burt Ross referred to him as “the greatest con artist in the history of the world.”

Ross told the BBC he “did not expect to recover a single cent of the $5 million” he invested.

“(Madoff) created a mystique and associated with extraordinarily well-respected and revered people, and so he was given the benefit of the doubt by financial regulators who blew it badly.”

What about all the money?

Investigators continue their efforts to recover the stolen money. Unfortunately, experts predict that a large percentage of the money will never be recovered. It is hidden so well that only a confession would reveal it, and Madoff refused to do this so as not to implicate people close to him.

Madoff’s rich investors will feel the sting, but ultimately not destroy them financially. However, many of Madoff’s investors were average working people who were conned into investing their savings. For them, picking up the pieces will be excruciating. Mark Raymond, a lawyer representing some of Madoff’s victims, point to victims like on retired couple from Atlanta.

“He’s 82, she’s 78, and they are both looking for work because they have lost everything,” he said.

Picking up the pieces… in a down economy… during your final years? Madoff should at least be their butler. Prison isn’t good enough…

Related Videos:

Marcy Gordon reports for the Associated Press that Mary Schapiro has settled into her new role as SEC Chairman and is ready to take a serious step to restore investor confidence in a flailing stock market.

In April, federal regulators may reinstate the “uptick rule,” with Schapiro’s support. In short, the uptick rule mean restricting certain trades where investors are betting against a stock. This former Depression-era regulation could go a long way toward restoring investor confidence in the stock market and curbing the extreme volatility that has been the norm of late.

Betting against a stock

This practice is legal and has been widely used on Wall Street since the uptick rule was removed in 2007. According to Gordon, it involves “borrowing a company’s shares, selling them, and then buying them when the stock falls and returning them to the lender. The short-seller pockets the difference in price.”

Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, who is the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said he had spoken with Schapiro and she told him the agency would take up the issue soon. “I’m hopeful that the uptick rule will be restored within a month,” he told reporters.

Look for long term profit, not a quick fix that won’t hold

According to Gordon, Democratic Rep. Gary Ackerman of New York has previously proposed legislation that “would order the SEC to reinstate the rule, saying it was essential to rein in such abuses of the market and restore much-needed stability and confidence to America’s financial markets.”

In a letter delivered to Schapiro on her first day in office with the SEC, Ackerman even urged her to action:

Members of Congress, financial industry executives such as Charles Schwab and NYSE Euronext Chief Executive Duncan Niederauer, and former SEC Chairman Christopher Cox all support the reinstatement of a price test to curb volatility in our exchanges. Although you have only just been sworn in as Chairman, I urge you to support the immediate reinstatement of the uptick rule, or some variation of the uptick rule, and to push for consideration of such measures by the Commission as soon as possible.

Now, will Wall Street buy into long term deregulation like this? It could be just what an ailing Wall Street needs…

Related Videos:

Read the fine print on a pre-1933 bill: these promissory notes were redeemable for gold! (image by: geocities.com)

It’s turmoil as usual these days on Wall Street.

Sara Lepro reports for the Associated Press that gold prices are winding down as the dollar increases in value.  Oil prices are up, cash advance loans are steady and agriculture futures are down.

The United States dollar’s rise in comparison with the European Union’s euro and the British pound is what is pulling the value of gold downward. Gold is typically used as a “hedge against inflation” when the dollar is weak. Gold prices are also tied to what’s happening in equity markets. As Wall Street has been pessimistic in that regard, gold has suffered. April delivery is down $24.70 at $918 an ounce on the New York Mercantile Exchange. It is largely a lack of investing which translates into such a decrease in gold pricing.

Gold used to work differently

Bill Bonner of the Daily Reckoning gives us a historical perspective of the gold vs. paper debate. A gold coin at least retains its value over time, much as gold denari from Biblical literature would. “Images on printed in green ink on special paper,” however, tend to lose two to five percent of their purchasing power yearly. What will a crisp 2009 bailout dollar cost 2,000 years from now?

Production also speaks to the relative value, Bonner writes. Gold is scarce and must be unearthed. The scarcity makes it valuable. Paper money, however, is being printed like crazy to “save America.” Worldwide, American dollars have lots of competition, too. There is no scarcity of paper money since the invention of the printing press. Compared with finding gold and the costs of unearthing it, the cost of printing money is negligible. It doesn’t cost much to increase the money supply as President Obama has done, either. Adding zeroes does not create added value, Bonner asserts.

Fiat cars and money lose value

Most paper currencies are ruined within a few years. Some take longer, but even the world’s two most successful – the American dollar and the British pound – have lost over 95 percent of their value in the last century by Bonner’s count. Two events in American history – when President Franklin Roosevelt outlawed private gold ownership in 1933 and when President Richard Nixon severed U.S. ties to the Bretton Woods System in 1971 – sounded the death knell for the dollar’s true value. It had been tied to value in terms of real commodities before, namely gold. Now dollars are fiat money. They lose value FAST, which is not something we need – particularly now.

Related Videos:

With the collapse of Wall Street, we, Americans, suffer from financial worries and the need for Cash Advances here and there. Wherever we go, recession is the word of mouth. Large companies are shut down, jobs are lost, credit cards balances are multiplying, and lifestyles, if not lives themselves, are ruined.

Uncertainty is today’s plaque

We live at a time where uncertainty is a plague that devastates the land. It knocks on our doors at night, it looms over us even when we sleep, and it follows our every footstep, becoming a constant shadow that does not leave even when daylight is gone. Wherever we go, whatever we do, the unsettling fact remains: the world is witnessing a financial crisis bigger than it ever has over the past years. How are we then supposed to survive it?

How to overcome our financial worries

The first step we must take is to clear our minds and stay focused. The more we worry about losing our jobs, the more our performance dwindles, thus creating a bigger chance for our worries to come true. We must analyze our financial situation and think of the next step from there. Instead of asking questions that are impossible to answer (e.g. What if I can’t pay my debts? What will my future be?), ask yourself questions that you can solve with some thinking (e.g. What can I do to earn more money? What should I do to spend less?). Little by little, by asking yourself the right questions, you’ll find solutions to the problems you face.

What can you live without?

The next step is to review your current lifestyle. What is excessive? What can you do without? What needs immediate attention? What can you put off until later? Prioritize your needs to know which ones have to be solved first. Again, don’t focus on losing whatever comfortable lifestyle you had before. Focus on adapting. What’s done is already over with, and the only things you should deal with are what you have at hand. After that, study your possible options. Would debt consolidation make it easier for you to pay cash advances/debts? Do you need the advice of a professional? Is there a relative or a friend you can borrow money from in desperate times? What alternative sources of money are available out there?

Monetary resources

Believe it or not, there are many alternative sources that we can rely on. One source is opting for cash advances through a reputed company.  Cash advances are very easy to obtain these days and can be received by spending a few minutes in front of the computer. Oftentimes we limit ourselves to the sources we are already used to, but we must never forget money comes to the ingenious. For example, holding garage sales may be an old remedy, but with today’s technology, doors to better opportunities are opened. You never know, your old cassette tape or LD may be a collector’s item to others. Auctioning it over the internet might bring you more money than you expect.

You can also consider taking part-time jobs. They don’t have to be physical, or as stress-inducing as your main job. You can make use of simple skills, like data entry and writing. There may even be freelance opportunities online. Knowledge and experience in voice acting, video editing, programming, and the like can earn you even bigger bucks.

Positive attitude is a must for survival

Finally, the last step to surviving the financial turmoil is to keep a positive, and at the same time realistic, attitude. No matter how many problems arise, as long as you have the proper mindset, solutions will be found.

The world has faced countless economic downturns before. Maybe not be as big as the one we have right now, but each situation provides us with the same relevant lesson: those with a will strong enough to survive it come out triumphant. Let today and now be the triumph for you.  Take President Obama’s advice, when he spoke about the banking system and indicated more cash advances will be needed to get credit flowing again.

All he ever wanted to be was a banker... (image byflickr)

Many Americans have found that during a financial emergency, payday loans can help bridge the distance between paychecks. Some have even used the product for educational materials that help them retrain for better jobs. However, in New York (where pay day loans aren’t legal, to the state’s detriment), the state gives $45 million in state funds away for worker training. But you have to be a former Wall Street employee to enjoy a piece of that pie.

Wait a minute. New York City is spending $45 million to retrain former Wall Street employees for the workforce? Aren’t these employees already well-educated and skilled in a number of disciplines? In general, don’t they have to be before they’re even hired by a high-powered investment firm? Why do they merit $45 million in government funds for retraining, while other workers who couldn’t afford Wall Street educations continue to subsist from paycheck to paycheck?

Give them more rope

And so it goes. Patrick McGeehan of the New York Times reports that New York City Mayor Bloomberg has announced this training investment plan. In addition to the $45 million, the program will also “provide seed capital and office space for new businesses those laid-off bankers might create.”

Not only that, but Bloomberg’s plan includes the hope that foreign banks will come to New York and open up shop. Seems to me that would entail work being done in America by non-Americans, with significant portions of the profit being funneled out of America. Is that what the country needs right now? Keep profits here, keep Americans working and then perhaps consumers could afford to take fewer payday loans.

Small business? I agree in principle

Yes... a BANKER!

Bloomberg’s ideas about funding for small startups (the “new businesses”) could work well. A complex in SoHo will serve as a nest for new startups, which might employ some of these laid-off Wall Street professionals. However, what many would like to see is training that would enable non-Wall Street workers with a head for numbers to join exciting new companies like the ones Bloomberg envisions. Not counting private investment, New York City plans to spend $15 million on such programs for small business development. Federal money would also be involved. Over 10 years, the estimate given is the creation of 25,000 jobs and $750 million injected back into the local economy.

Wall Street is headed into the sunset

McGeehan relates that New York City officials expect to see a significant drop in the number of jobs in capital markets. Thus, Bloomberg feels that the New York economy must shift toward other areas to soften the blow and change the city’s disastrous financial course. What we’ll see is more talented people remaining in New York instead of flocking to other areas or other countries. Nothing wrong with that, but let’s go further. Let’s increase that talent base by making the necessary education affordable. More people deserve the chance to live lives free of financial worry. Payday loans help, but they are not a long-term financial plan. Learning and improving one’s standing in life is a time-tested recipe. School systems fail too many young people… money needs to be funneled into the kind of education they need to be successful.

Related articles

• Banks: Beyond the Citi Carnage (businessweek.com)

[/caption]

Executives in Kazakhstan probably will be able to get by without payday loans, but many of them are facing a big pay cut.

Prime Minister Karim Masimov has said that salaries for executives at state-run firms and banks should not be paid more than him. Masimov says he makes $4,700 a month, in U.S. dollars, or 700,000 tenge.

Following a leader’s lead

The move is similar to the one U.S. President Barack Obama made last week when he capped salaries for Wall Street executives. Obama said any executives at banks who get bailout money should not get  more than $500,000  per year in total compensation. Obama’s annual salary is $400,000.

However, Kazakhs affected by Masimov’s edict will take home far less than American executives. The new rule means Kazakh executives’ salaries will be capped at $56,400 a year. Still, probably the only executives who will need payday loans are those who want to make payments on their private jets on time. The new executive salaries in Kazakhstan are 12 times the average wage.

American comparison

Kazakhstan's flag

Masimov

The average wage in Kazakhstan is about $392. That’s close to the average amount for most payday loans in the U.S.

Median income in the United States was $50,233 in 2007, or about $4,186 a month. The executive salary cap of $500,000 is  about 10 times the country’s median income, and Obama’s salary is about eight times the average.

No questions asked

Criticizing the government is rare in Kazakhstan. Reuter’s writes that the Prime Minister’s orders will be carried out swiftly.

His decision is likely to be implemented immediately because state companies follow government orders. -Reuters

Kazakhstan is facing a major economic crisis, much like the one in the U.S. The financial crisis we are facing quickly became a global phenomenon when the U.S. economy began to fail. Unfortunately, most Kazakhs struggling with finances don’t have the same options we have in the United States, like payday loans.

Importer/exporter

Most people see problems that are immediately in front of them and use short-term payday loans to cover against small financial shocks. If they have been laid off, their primary focus is how they’re going to meet expenses and get back on the job track. It’s completely understandable. However, as 24/7 Wall St. shows us, we should have reason to be concerned not just for job loss in America, but overseas as well.

Their loss is our loss

The list of major companies in Asia that are experiencing profit downturn and employee layoffs seems to grow by the day. For instance, Panasonic will lose $4.2 billion for their current fiscal period. This will lead to 15,000 layoffs. Sony is experiencing something similarly disturbing. And while numbers are well-guarded secrets, Chinese manufacturers are in the same boat.

In Europe, it’s worse. SAP and Siemens are slashing and burning; others are on a similar course.

Importing/exporting needs a cash advance?

This is a foreign trade issue. When the middle class faces extended job loss in countries that sell exports, product flow decreases. As a major importing nation, many Americans depend upon jobs within that industry. As exports slow, imports slow, making job cuts necessary. At the same time, America’s middle class is saving instead of spending during this dark financial night, so the world economy is at a standstill. In America, citizens use cash advance services to eclipse temporary setbacks. But what comes after that?

Change is needed beyond what payday loans can do

Fixing the financial and auto sectors is great, but consumer spending has to increase. President Obama seems a rebuild of America’s infrastructure as the solution, but many believe that won’t be enough. Sure, it will create jobs over the long haul, but the country needs quicker action.

This quagmire of consumer spending affects the entire world. People need a reason to spend more instead of continuing to think that this is all one great rainy day. Tax credits and inexpensive credit could be hallmarks of a new system, but whatever the avenue, world governments have to sell it hard. Payday loans may be a temporary aid, but the solution is to break the system and remake it.

Related articles

• Corporate gloom hits Tokyo shares (news.bbc.co.uk)
• The Reverse Hundred Days: Depressionism Grips America (firedoglake.com)

I wonder how much money Wall Street executives made during the Great Depression.

OK, truth is, Wall Street executives will not need payday loans. But they might feel like they’re scrambling for extra cash now that President Barack Obama has put a limit on bonuses and salaries at banks that receive bailout money. Don’t worry, they won’t starve. They are allowed to take home $500,000 a year.

Kudos to good sense

So, the president is saying that the government can’t use the hard-earned money of middle- and low-income families who do need payday loans to support millionaire and billionaire bank executives. Is it just me, or is someone making sense around here?

Not-quite-so-high life

Top dogs whose banks get bailed out will still be making more money than I’ll ever see. In fact, they’ll still make more than the president, whose salary is $400,000 per year. But they’ll still be cutting corners like us “regular people” because for many it will be a huge pay cut. For instance, Bank of America head Kenneth Lewis made $20 million in 2007. In 2008 his bank borrowed $45 billion from the Bush administration. If his bank gets more bailout money this year, he’ll have to settle for a piddly half a million.

Banker pay versus payday loans

Just a quick comparison on “how the other half lives.” The average amount people borrow for payday loans is about $500. That is .001 percent of $500,000. It’s only slightly comforting to know that total includes bonuses.

“If the taxpayers are helping you, then you’ve got certain responsibilities to not be living high on the hog,” Obama said Tuesday.

Ah, there’s the catch

I was a little dismayed to learn that these rules only apply to banks who take bailout money from the Obama administration. The banks who already got hundreds of billions of dollars from the Bush administration don’t have to follow the rules unless they come back for more bailout money from Obama. So it’s possible that Kenneth Lewis could still take home another $20 million while those of us who are, um, “living low on the hog?” are contemplating payday loans.

Related articles

• Obama Looks To Boost Middle Class (cbsnews.com)
• Wall Street Execs Defend Bonuses (gothamist.com)
• Obama calls on banks to lend (telegraph.co.uk)
• The GOP Grapples with Obama’s Charm Offensive (time.com)
• Some Banks Say `No Thanks’ to Bailout (abcnews.go.com)

A cash advance can rescue you from one of life’s little financial emergencies. However, when it comes to the recent banking system bailout, “little” is not the operative word.

Lemon Socialism

Rescuing the United States banking system – for which both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations are responsible – is what New York Times Op-Ed columnist Paul Krugman calls “lemon socialism.” In other words, “taxpayers bear the cost if things go wrong, but stockholders and executives get the benefits if things go right.” His recent column “Bailout for Bunglers” shows that the more things change, the more things stay the same.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner put the prevailing attitude in no uncertain terms when he said that “We have a financial system that is run by private shareholders, managed by private institutions, and we’d like to do our best to preserve that system.” Looks like taxpayers will be picking up the bill for bankers gone wild.

Mr. President, bankers need to be leashed

Now, something must be done to shore up the financial system. A number of major institutions are dangerously close to the edge and they need more operating capital. Since taxpayer money will be pumping them back up, isn’t it logical to assume that said banks will become publicly owned enterprises?

Yet as Krugman sees it, the Obama Administration is doing everything it can to avoid banks being “of the public, for the public.” Government will buy the most troubled assets of banks and guarantee that the banks will not take hits on the rest. This guarantee serves bank stockholders greatly but does nothing for the public but take their money.

Payday Loans for extra money in emergencies

President Obama was tough on Wall Street firms giving exorbitant bonuses to their CEOs during this crisis, yet he has been relatively silent about the same practice for banks. Too much money is going to be spent fixing the system to allow things to be “business as usual” for executives mostly lacking in restraint, accountability or common sense. Cash Advance Mojo says that Mr. Obama needs a serious gut check. Bankers must be held accountable. With a financial system in good repair, the public won’t have to worry about opportunistic special interest groups reaching into their lives and telling them whether or not they can use payday loans for extra money in emergencies.

Related articles

• Why Your Bank is Broke (time.com)
• Salins on Wealth and Political Power (democracyforvancouver.org)
• David Calhoun Mendelsohn: Transparency, Justice and Clarity in the Economic Crisis (huffingtonpost.com)

As promised, your fast payday loan store delivers news on today’s layoffs.

Macy’s heads the pack as far as number of jobs to be cut today. The department store chain announced today that it will ax 7,000 positions. The jobs lost will be a mixture of corporate and staff positions.

The store is still planning to shut down 11 stores, as it announced in December, but not more. Not yet. Analyst Stevan Buxbaum is not surprised by Macy’s announcement.

“Reality is department stores are dinosaurs. You have to ask yourself how long can this model work as a viable business?” Buxbaum said.

Chili’s positions going cold

If you’re a fan of Chili’s Restaurant you might want to grab a fast payday loan and head to the nearest one right away. Soon, it might not be there. The company announced today that it will shut down 35 restaurants.

Chili’s has already laid off 160 workers, and that total is bound to reach phenomenal levels before the restaurant closings finish up in March. According to my calculations, if each restaurant employs 50 people, almost 2,000 people are out of a job. To read up on layoffs announced during the weekend, check out this article from your fast payday loan source.

Out on The Street

More Wall Street workers will become fallout of the financial system meltdown as Morgan Stanley cuts between 1,500 and 1,800 jobs. The company hasn’t confirmed the number, but layoffs are expected later this month.

This announcement comes amid the merger between Morgan Stanley and Citigroup’s Smith Barney. The Wall Street Journal says this merger will lead to more layoffs outside the company.

Keep up on layoffs, unemployment and businesses shutting down through your fast payday loan source.