Posts Tagged ‘stocks’

Trophies for everyone!

26 April 2009

“Too big to fail” evidently means “too big to fail a stress test,” too.  Although the results of the recently conducted stress tests on the nineteen largest U.S. banks won’t be made public until May 4, the advance word on Friday, April 24 was a Whole Lotta RosieFrom the NYT:

‘On Friday, the Federal Reserve reported that the banks whose books it had analyzed recently had enough capital to offset a raft of new losses, . . .’

So everybody’s solvent!  And those toxic assets are both nutritious and delicious!  I bet my students would love it if I could get Tim Geithner or the Fed to write my final exams — nobody would be allowed to fail.

‘. . . reinforcing the belief that the government would support the largest banks even if their financial health eroded, and buoying the stock market.’

Um, didn’t the government already do that, to the tune of $700 billion, not counting the Fed’s waves of loan/subsidies?  But of course those subsidies came with some conditions, from the understandable ($500,000 pay cap) to the asinine (don’t hire no foreigners), so the big banks are naturally eager to pay back those loans and return to looting.  As long as they can still count on a fresh round of bailouts when their losses become too gaping to hide, they’re in a perfect position.  The old mantra of “privatize the profits, socialize the losses” doesn’t quite convey the apparent duplicity at work here.  It leaves out the “fabricate the profits” and “hide the losses” steps.



Clinging to your stocks and bonds

29 December 2008

A useful personal investing article in the Dec. 26 New York Times about bonds, pointing out that bonds and bond funds have also fallen victim to the financial crisis and concluding with a helpful list of what’s available.  But hey, NYT, bonds aren’t just for old people!  (The headline: “Older Investors Should Examine the Risks in Bonds.”  Oh well, I’ve seen worse headlines — will somebody please inform their headline writers that “printing money” and “issuing Treasury bonds” are two different things?)

By now, the personal finances are way overdue for a rebalancing.   Burton Malkiel, author of the great A Random Walk Down Wall Street, suggests the following portfolio allocation for people my age (early 40s):

60% STOCKS (20% international, 20% growth & income, 10% small cap, 10% growth; all in stock funds, not individual stocks)

35% BONDS (12.5% GNMA mortgage bond funds, 12.5% high-grade bond funds, 10% T-bills)

5% CASH (money market funds or short-term bond funds)

I can’t follow that completely, as I derive too much pleasure from the lottery tickets known as individual stocks (and I figure it’s not too reckless as long as they’re a small part of the overall portfolio), and I’m not putting any money into Treasury bills while they’re paying 0% interest, but it still looks like sound advice.  Having a third of your stock holdings be international stocks sounds especially logical (not that European or Japanese stocks have been going gangbusters themselves lately).

Some stock-market links from a couple months ago, when the Wall Street crisis was in full roar: