More Than a Third of Americans Aren't Saving for Retirement

To contact us Click HERE

SEATTLE, Dec. 3, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Getting older may not be easy, but taking a back seat with your retirement plan could lead to a destiny that is more glum than golden. A new survey from Capital One ShareBuilder reveals that while a majority (54 percent) of Americans plan to retire by age 65, many (36 percent) are not actively contributing to a retirement plan, and more than a quarter (26 percent) are unsure how much they need to save. The survey of American pre-retirees found that while confidence in the ability to save for retirement has improved (with 33 percent claiming to be more confident than they were a year ago), nearly one in four (23 percent) are concerned they may never save enough to retire.(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20121112/PH10741LOGO )"Now more than ever, it is important for Americans to take their retirement plans into their own hands to ensure they have an adequate nest egg," said Dan Greenshields, president of Capital One ShareBuilder, Inc. "While planning for a time that many see as a distant future can be a daunting task, people need to assess where they want and expect to be financially when they retire and take advantage of the various tools and resources available to plan for their financial future."Retirement Timing and Lifestyle: When and how do Americans plan to retire?

• More than half (54 percent) of Americans plan to retire by age 65, while 23 percent say they don't plan to ever fully retire.
• One in four (25 percent) Americans plan to work part-time during their retirement, and that percentage increases closer to retirement age, with 40 percent of Americans age 55-64 saying they'll work part-time.
• A third (33 percent) of Americans plan to maintain their current lifestyle, while 17 percent plan to make sacrifices and 11 percent plan to improve their lifestyle; 38 percent said they are unsure of what lifestyle they plan to lead.

Roadblocks to Retirement Savings: What's keeping Americans from saving?

• Paying for college tuition (20 percent), job loss (10 percent) and daily household bills (14 percent) are the top roadblocks for retirement savings, according to respondents.
• Only just over one third (37 percent) of Americans say nothing has impeded their ability to save for retirement.

"At any point in life, events can come up where even the best laid financial plans can be derailed," Greenshields said. "Having an adequate emergency or rainy day fund will help ease the financial burden of unexpected costs – and help keep you on track for retirement."The ING DIRECT Orange Savings Account, which can be directly linked to your ShareBuilder account, boasts features including automatic savings functionality and a My Savings Goals tool designed to help build a financial cushion, so you won't need to dip into or cease contributing to your retirement savings.Facing Retirement with an Arsenal of Tools:http://www.cnbc.com/id/100269511

Working Late, by Choice or Not

REPORT after report has made abundantly clear that job growth is weak, but there’s one wide swath of the population where employment growth is going gangbusters: older Americans.


A record 7.2 million Americans age 65 and older are working — double the number 15 years ago — partly because many older Americans love to work and partly because many feel too financially squeezed to retire.

With the value of many 401(k)’s and homes taking a beating during the recession and with energy and health care prices climbing, many who dreamed that retirementwas just around the corner have reluctantly kicked their retirement plans down the road.

While the overall number of Americans working has fallen by 4.4 million since the Great Recession began four and a half years ago — with many dropping out of the work force in frustration and some retiring early — the number of Americans 65 and older who are working has jumped by 1.4 million, a whopping 25 percent increase. Some work as doctors, some in retail, and some, with an entrepreneurial bent, start businesses in their 60s.

Americans are remaining healthier longer and living longer, making it easier to work past age 65. Moreover, it has grown easier for older Americans to continue working as the economy has shifted from physically taxing manufacturing jobs to less grueling service sector jobs.

In a survey done last year, the Society of Actuaries found that 55 percent of older Americans who continued working said they had done so to stay active and involved, while 51 percent said they had done so for additional income.

“One obvious reason people are working later is money,” said Steven A. Sass, program director at the Boston College Center for Retirement Research. “There’s a concern about what they have in their 401(k) and about Social Security.”

He said baby boomers were getting less than their parents did from Social Security because of the increase in the full retirement age — people cannot obtain full Social Security benefits until age 66, and for those born after 1957, the age will be 67. “Not only are they getting less from Social Security,” Mr. Sass said, “but many don’t have a pension that gives them a steady income after they retire.”

These factors help explain why 18.5 percent of Americans 65 and older remain in the labor force, up from 12.1 percent in 1995. Many have stayed in the work force past 60 because older Americans seem to be paying an ever-larger share of their incomes toward medical expenses and because many corporations have stopped providing health coverage to retirees, forcing many to work until Medicare is available at 65.

“Maybe people have recovered from the stock market plunge,” said Sara E. Rix, a senior policy adviser with the AARP Public Policy Institute. “But many people are still anxious about what may happen to the market, and that has caused many to delay retirement.”

Here are the stories of five Americans working well past age 65.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/business/retirementspecial/for-many-reasons-older-americans-remain-at-work.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

2013 Is Bernanke's Year: Unlimited QE And Total Control Of The Fed

To contact us Click HERE

Bernanke and several of his central bank colleagues around the world have unleashed a new era of monetary policy, marked by zero-bound nominal interest rates coupled with unprecedented and massive balance sheet expansion. In this post-financial crisis world, the Fed has taken a Keynesian edict and turned it on its head: instead of the government stepping in after a crisis to make up for the loss of aggregate demand from the private sector, it has fallen to central banks.

Through that process, the Federal Reserve has become the most important market participant, flooding markets with liquidity and owning more than a third of the Treasury market by the end of next year, according to Barclays’ economics team. The latest iteration of their asset purchases, or QE4, consists of $40 billion a month in RMBS purchases and $45 billion in unsterilized Treasury purchases, meaning the Fed’s balance sheet will grow at a rate of $85 billion until the Fed sees a substantial improvement in labor markets.

The Fed is set to turn even more bullish in 2013, as its natural rotation sees two centrists and Jeffery Lacker, head of the Richmond Fed and a lone dissenter in the FOMC, replaced. In their place will come Esther George of the Kansas City Fed (a moderate hawk, which means she’s mildly opposed to more accommodation) and James Bullard of the St. Louis Fed (who has the potential to be a dissenter, according to Barclays), along with ultra-doves Charles Evans and Eric Rosengren. Furthermore, Minneapolis Fed chief Narayana Kocherlakota, a former dissenter, has quietly moved to a more dovish stance, adding further support for the Chairman.

One can’t blame Bernanke for trying to spark growth in an economy that has struggled to get off the ground since the 2008 financial implosion. A divided government has created artificial threats like the fiscal cliff, while the fear of fiscal unsustainability has increased calls for austerity. After interest rates fell to zero, Bernanke and the FOMC pushed down longer-term rates through asset purchases. Flattening the yield curve, the Fed has sought to ease credit conditions. The intention is to help homeowners re-finance mortgages at lower rates, allow consumers cheaper financing to buy cars, and give firms favorable borrowing rates.

Bernanke’s low rates have effectively “helped housing and the auto industry,” according to Raymond James’ chief economist Scott Brown. Automakers like General Motors and Ford have seen sales recover, while homebuilders like KB Home and Lennar have been on a tear this year. But the Fed’s ultra-accommodative stance has been “a mixed bag for banks.” Major names like JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo have access to cheap money, but their lending margins end up being squeezed by a narrower spread between long- and short-term rates.

Detractors of the Fed have argued it has distorted market action. And indeed it has, interest rates have been at record lows for years, with yields on 10-year Treasuries hovering near all-time lows. The issue of the Fed’s exit strategy has been raised on several occasions, as observers note a balance sheet approximating $4 trillion (if asset purchases continue through all of 2013) has to be unwound at some point. Goldman Sachs’ research team estimates that economic growth will pick up in the second half of 2013, sparking a “gradual but steady rise in bond yields” that takes real rates on 10-year Treasuries to 2.2% by the end of 2016 and 3.75% by 2016.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2012/12/20/2013-is-bernankes-year-unlimited
-qe-and-total-control-of-the-fed/

Bill Moyers on the Fiscal Cliff Myth or Reality

To contact us Click HERE


It puts things in perspective. The second part is very touching and is with an author and poet Jim Autry who just wrote the book "Choosing Gratitude: Learning To Love The Life You Have."
Click below to go to Bill Moyers & Company website and below the video is the transcript. Sorry about all the confusion on that. I know many of you cannot watch videos.
http://billmoyers.com/episode/full-show-fiscal-cliffs-and-fiscal-realities/

This is on Jesse's but I think it should go viral. Go over to his site for the reading or watch this video about psychopaths.

The pros and cons of natural-gas vehicles

To contact us Click HERE
By Marcia Passos Duffy • Bankrate.com

Highlights

• Natural-gas cars have been zipping around foreign highways for decades.
• This type of car could help break the U.S. free of dependence on foreign oil.
• Natural gas is cheaper -- $1.50 to $2 less per gasoline gallon equivalent.

Clean. Abundant. Cheap. Domestic. What's not to like about natural gas? So why not use it to power a car?Most Americans think of natural gas as a fuel source to heat their homes or run their clothes dryers or stoves. But natural-gas cars have been zipping around foreign highways for decades. According to the industry group NGV Global, there are more than 15.2 million natural-gas vehicles on the road worldwide.However, natural gas has been slow to gain traction in U.S. passenger vehicles. Nationwide, there are only 120,000 natural-gas vehicles, or NGVs.

Game changers

The recent discoveries of massive natural-gas reserves in the U.S. may be a game changer, says Rich Kolodziej, president of Washington, D.C.-based Natural Gas Vehicles for America, or NGVAmerica, a trade association for the natural-gas vehicle industry.
NGVs could help to break the U.S. free of dependence on foreign oil, Kolodziej says. They are also better for the environment. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, NGVs pave the potential to emit 25 percent less greenhouse gases than diesel-powered vehicles.Best of all, natural gas is cheaper -- $1.50 to $2 less per gasoline gallon equivalent, according to NGVAmerica.Those significant savings have not gone unnoticed by businesses and municipalities.Today, 40 percent of new garbage trucks and 25 percent of new buses in the U.S. can run on natural gas, Kolodziej says. "In the city of Los Angeles, all the buses are now running on natural gas," he says.The potential of natural gas to fuel our cars has not gone unnoticed by the U.S. government. In February 2012, the U.S. Department of Energy announced a $30 million competition aimed at finding ways to "harness our abundant supplies of domestic natural gas for vehicles."The money has since been awarded to 13 research firms, which are working on breakthrough technologies to bring NGVs to the general public.

Advantages of NGV

Read more: http://www.bankrate.com/finance/auto/natural-gas-vehicles.aspx#ixzz2GUHR0zfK

Airline fees are adding up

To contact us Click HERE

By Joan Lowy THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON —  For many passengers, air travel is only about finding the cheapest fare. 
I cannot think of a dumber way to choose a flight. To me it is about comfort and timing. QB

But as airlines offer a proliferating list of add-on services, from early boarding to premium seating and baggage fees, the ability to comparison-shop for the lowest total fare is eroding. 

Global distribution systems that supply flight and fare data to travel agents and online ticketing services like Orbitz and Expedia, accounting for half of all U.S. airline tickets, complain that airlines won’t provide fee information in a way that lets them make it handy for consumers trying to find the best deal. 

“What other industry can you think of where a person buying a product doesn’t know how much it’s going to cost even after he’s done at the checkout counter?” said Simon Gros, chairman of the Travel Technology Association, which represents the global distribution services and online travel industries. 

The harder airlines make it for consumers to compare, “the greater opportunity you have to get to higher prices,” said Kevin Mitchell, chairman of the Business Travel Coalition, whose members include corporate travel managers. 

Now the Obama administration is wading into the issue. The Department of Transportation is considering whether to require airlines to provide fee information to everyone with whom they have agreements to sell their tickets. A decision originally scheduled for next month has been postponed to May, as regulators struggle with a deluge of information from airlines opposed to regulating fee information, and from the travel industry and consumer groups that support such a requirement. 
More unnecessary government regulations. QB
Meanwhile, Spirit Airlines, Allegiant Air and Southwest Airlines — with backing from industry trade associations — are asking the Supreme Court to reverse an appeals court ruling forcing them to include taxes in their advertised fares. The appeals court upheld a Transportation Department rule that went in effect nearly a year ago that ended airlines’ leeway to advertise a base airfare and show the taxes separately, often in smaller print. Airlines say the regulations violate their free-speech rights. 

At the heart of the debate is a desire by airlines to move to a new marketing model in which customers don’t buy tickets based on price alone. Instead, following the well-worn path of other consumer companies, airlines want to mine personal data about customers in order to sell them tailored services. You like to sit on the aisle and to ski, so how would you like to fly to Aspen with an aisle seat and a movie, no extra baggage charge for your skis, and have a hotel room and a pair of lift tickets waiting for you, all for one price? You’re a frequent business traveler. How about priority boarding, extra legroom, Internet access and a rental car when you arrive?
Now that is what I am talking about!

“Technology is changing rapidly. We are going to be part of the change,” said Sharon Pinkerton, vice president of Airlines for America, which represents most U.S. carriers. “We want to be able to offer our customers a product that’s useful to them, that’s customized to meet their needs, and we don’t think (the Transportation Department) needs to step in.” I agree.
http://www.telegram.com/article/20121230/NEWS/112309994/1002/business

Weekly Jobless Claims Rise More Than Expected

To contact us Click HERE

The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment aid rose last week, putting them back at the lower end of their pre-storm range and suggesting job growth remains moderate.Initial claims for state unemployment benefits increased 17,000 to a seasonally adjusted 361,000, the Labor Department said on Thursday. The prior week's figure was revised to show 1,000 more applications than previously reported.
Claims have now unwound the Superstorm Sandy surge. They rose as high as 451,000 in the aftermath of the late October storm, which struck the East Coast. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims rising to 357,000 last week.
The four-week moving average for new claims, a better measure of labor market trends, fell 13,750 to 367,750, the lowest since late October. The data covered the survey period for December nonfarm payrolls.
Job gains so far this year have averaged 151,000 per month, a pattern that is likely to hold through December amid fears the U.S. Congress and the Obama administration could fail to agree on a deal to prevent tighter fiscal policy next year.
About $600 billion in government spending cuts and higher taxes could be pulled out of the economy in early 2013, and tip it back into recession unless an agreement is reached on a less punitive plan to reduce budget deficits.
A Labor Department official said there were no special factors influencing week's claims data.The claims report showed the number of people still receiving benefits under regular state programs after an initial week of aid rose 12,000 to 3.23 million in the week ended Dec. 8.

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/2012/12/20/jobless-claims-november/#ixzz2FeT7W0Yt

The Magic Number for Obama and Boehner: $550,000

By Margaret Carlson Dec 20, 2012 3:07 PM ET
I try not to write anything with too many numbers in it, but I am making an exception for Cliffmas. Here is my prediction: The final cutoff for increased taxes will be $550,000, give or take $25,000.I derive this number not necessarily from reading op-eds, proposals and white papers offered by the likes of Warren Buffett, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and the Tax Policy Center. More to the point, I have been listening to the musings of legislators and reporters, sober and not so sober, at holiday cocktail parties.President Barack Obama has offered to raise taxes only on those earning more than $400,000, up from his initial offer of $250,000. House Speaker John Boehner needs today's vote to happen to so he can get to a number below his caucus's drop-dead number of $1 million. For that it helps to have a daylong stalemate and a vote -- it keeps his members occupied while negotiations (which they are shut out of) proceed quietly. They get to flaunt their majority by passing a bill, even one sure to be vetoed. Even Democrats play into the script by crying what a waste of time the vote is.A waste of time? That's just another day at the office for Boehner. A speaker has to have what a speaker has to have, if he's to be re-elected by his fractious caucus in the new Congress.Once Boehner has given them their roll call and his members have something with their name on it to take home to their districts, the House will be a sad place, reminded again how little power it actually has in this skirmish with Obama. Members will also be reminded by another day of poll numbers that they will be blamed more than Democrats if we go over the fiscal cliff.Now if I were king, I would stick with $250,000 as the cutoff above which taxpayers pay more. The poor have suffered enough in this recession, and the rich have come out of it sooner and richer than anyone else. Obama's concession is already a reminder of how much he doesn't like to go even near the edge of any cliff. It may be good statesmanship, but it's bad drama. He still has the stronger hand: Let the Bush tax cuts expire, come back with a middle-class tax cut and dare Republicans to vote against it.So today's Plan B vote is a blip on the way to Plan C. After today, Boehner will be freer to negotiate with Obama, but he will still give more than he gets. If you average the Republicans' number and Obama's -- $1 million and $400,000 -- you get $700,000. So with a final number of $550,000, Boehner comes out $150,000 behind.http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-20/the-magic-number-for-obama-and-boehner-550-000.html

Let Justice Be Done, Though a Huge Bank Falls

By Jonathan Weil Dec 20, 2012 6:46 PM ET
The U.S. Justice Department is getting the kind of glowing publicity it craves out of its $1.5 billion criminal settlement with the Swiss bank UBS AG. (UBSN) "Leniency Denied, UBS Unit Admits Guilt in Rate Case," the New York Times said in a headline.The reality is UBS's punishment was anything but strict.

About Jonathan Weil»

Jonathan Weil joined Bloomberg News as a columnist in 2007, and his columns on finance and accounting won Best ...MOREFOLLOW ON TWITTER

More from Jonathan Weil:

• Morgan Stanley’s Farcical Facebook SettlementQ
• Dr. Evil Would Love Morgan Stanley Facebook SettlementQ
• Other House of Morgan Spawns a Web of ScandalsQ

In February 2009, UBS -- the parent company, not a mere subsidiary -- entered into a deferred-prosecution agreement with the Justice Department in which the company admitted to helping U.S. taxpayers hide overseas bank accounts from the Internal Revenue Service.UBS promised to "comply with United States federal criminal laws" as part of that agreement. The government, in exchange, promised to dismiss all charges against UBS after 18 months, as long as UBS fulfilled its obligations under the deal. In October 2010, the complaint against UBS was dismissed with prejudice, meaning it couldn't be refiled later.Now consider this: UBS was committing federal crimes during the 18-month period when that deferred-prosecution agreement was in effect, according to documents released by the Justice Department this week. Two former UBS traders were charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud in a criminal complaint unsealed this week. The government accused the pair of boosting profits by manipulating interest ratesin a scheme that ran from September 2006 through June 2010.UBS's Japanese affiliate was required to plead guilty to wire fraud as part of the deal with the government. That's not anywhere near as damaging as a criminal charge against the UBS parent company, which entered into a nonprosecution agreement with the Justice Department. That agreement, too, said the scheme continued well into 2009 and 2010.It's unclear when the government became aware of UBS's Libor manipulations. UBS first disclosed in March 2011 that it had received subpoenas from U.S. authorities investigating Libor-rigging; the disclosure was contained in UBS's 2010 annual report and didn't say when the company had received the subpoenas.http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-20/let-justice-be-done-though-a-huge-bank-falls.html

Obama and family fly to Hawaii for Christmas

To contact us Click HERE

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama and his family are spending the Christmas holidays in Hawaii, where the president was born and raised.The first family left Washington aboard Air Force One on Friday night. They are to arrive in Honolulu early Saturday.White House officials say the president's vacation itinerary doesn't include any scheduled public events.No return date has been given by the White House. Obama himself said earlier Friday that, since a deal hasn't been reached to avert the so-called "fiscal cliff," he would be returning to Washington after Christmas. The president told reporters: "I'll see you next week."Obama and his family traditionally spend the end-of-year holidays in Hawaii.And how much does that cost the American Taxpayer? The man has no respect for the US taxpayer's money. QB

News Corp says publishing wing lost money

My heart bleeds for Lord VoldeMurdock and his newseaters. QB
(Reuters) - Rupert Murdoch's News Corp said the publishing arm it plans to spin off from its entertainment assets would have lost $2.08 billion in the last fiscal year if it were a standalone company.

News Corp filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Friday to separate its publishing and entertainment assets into two publicly traded companies. News Corp first announced the decision in June after shareholders pressed it to get rid of its troubled newspaper business.

"New News Corp," as the company dubs its publishing wing, will include newspapers, information marketing services, digital real estate, book publishing, digital education, and sports programming and pay-TV distribution in Australia, the company said on Friday.

News Corp's film and television businesses currently include the 20th Century Fox film studio, Fox broadcasting network and Fox News channel, which will be part of the renamed parent company that will be called Fox Group.

News Corp's stock fell 1.5 percent to $25.04 in morning trading on Friday.http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-rt-us-newscorp-splitbre8bk0hr-20121221,0,7790849.story

Boehner Says Republicans Didn’t Want Tax Increase

Of course they didn't. They all signed the Norquist pledge. QB
House Speaker John Boehner said some members of the Republican caucus refused to back his tax measure because they didn’t want to be accused of raising taxes. (Again the Norquist Pledge as they'd rather go off the cliff)
Boehner spoke to reporters in Washington a day after he scrapped a plan to allow higher tax rates on annual income above $1 million, throwing already-stalled budget talks into turmoil.It was “not the outcome I wanted, but it was the will of the House,” Boehner said. “They were dealing with the perception that someone might accuse them of raising taxes.”Until Dec. 17, President Barack Obama and Boehner had been edging closer to a deal that would have included $1 trillion each in tax increases and spending cuts.Now that Boehner has pulled his plan, House members and senators won’t vote on the end-of-year budget issues until after Christmas. That will give them less than a week to reach agreement to avert more than $600 billion in tax increases and spending cuts set to take effect in January.The speaker said he pushed his alternative tax plan in the House to “basically jump start and try to kick into gear some action by the Senate to avert these tax increases going into effect Jan. 1.”Boehner said he and Obama had traded “bottom line” offers on spending cuts and taxes. He urged the Senate to take up legislation the House passed Aug. 1 that would extend the current rates on all taxpayers.http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-21/boehner-republicans-didn-t-want-to-appear-to-raise-taxes.html