Corporate Executives cashing out from Wall street? ... Mexico, serán posibles reformas profundas? ... How many rights have Americans lost?

The Big Dogs On Wall Street Are Starting To Get Very Nervous

Michael Snyder

Economic Collapse
Feb 22, 2013

Why are some of the biggest names in the corporate world unloading stock like there is no tomorrow, and why are some of the most prominent investors on Wall Street loudly warning about the possibility of a market crash?  Should we be alarmed that the big dogs on Wall Street are starting to get very nervous?  In aprevious article, I got very excited about a report that indicated that corporate insiders were selling nine times more of their own shares than they were buying.  Well, according to a brand new Bloomberg article, insider sales of stock have outnumbered insider purchases of stock by a ratio of twelve to one over the past three months.  That is highly unusual.  And right now some of the most respected investors in the financial world are ringing the alarm bells.  Dennis Gartman says that it is time to “rush to the sidelines”, Seth Klarman is warning about “the un-abating risks of collapse”, and Doug Kass is proclaiming that “we’re headed for a sharp fall”.  So does all of this mean that a market crash is definitely on the way?  No, but when you combine all of this with the weak economic data constantly coming out of the U.S. and Europe, it certainly does not paint a pretty picture.
According to Bloomberg, it has been two years since we have seen insider sales of stock at this level.  And when insider sales of stock are this high, that usually means that the market is about to decline…

Corporate executives are taking advantage of near-record U.S. stock prices by selling shares in their companies at the fastest pace in two years.
There were about 12 stock-sale announcements over the past three months for every purchase by insiders at Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (SPX) companies, the highest ratio since January 2011, according to data compiled by Bloomberg and Pavilion Global Markets. Whenever the ratio exceeded 11 in the past, the benchmark index declined 5.9 percent on average in the next six months, according to Pavilion, a Montreal-based trading firm.

But it isn’t just the number of stock sales that is alarming.  Some of these insider transactions are absolutely huge.  Just check out these numbers…

Among the biggest transactions last week were a $65.2 million sale by Google Inc.’s 39-year-old Chief Executive Officer Larry Page, a $40.1 million disposal by News Corp.’s 81- year-old Chairman and CEO Rupert Murdoch and a $34.2 million sale from American Express Co. chief Kenneth Chenault, who is 61. Nolan Archibald, the 69-year-old chairman of Stanley Black & Decker Inc. who plans to leave his post next month, unloaded $29.7 million in shares last week and Amphenol Corp. Chairman Martin Hans Loeffler, 68, sold $27.5 million, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Google Chairman Eric Schmidt, 57, announced plans to sell as many as 3.2 million shares in the operator of the world’s most-popular search engine. The planned share sales, worth about $2.5 billion, represent about 42 percent of Schmidt’s holdings.

So why are all of these very prominent executives cashing out all of a sudden? CONTINUE READING

México: Camino de convertirse en el “tigre azteca”

Drew Ringley

El presidente mexicano Enrique Peña Nieto, recién instalado en el cargo, está buscando la forma de renovar la economía de México y una de las herramientas que ya ha buscado es la puesta en marcha de una reforma laboral.

Se trata de una medida esperada desde hace mucho tiempo. Según el Índice 2013 de Libertad Económica, publicado por la Fundación Heritage y el Wall Street Journal, México se sitúa por debajo del promedio mundial en lo que respecta a libertad laboral, pues los poderosos intereses particulares que existen en México han hecho que las firmes reformas anteriores resultaran insuficientes e ineficaces.
Como se observa en el Índice, una legislación laboral inflexible hace difícil que los empleadores prescindan de los empleados que, por las razones que sean, no están sobresaliendo en su trabajo. El resultado: una menor productividad y unos márgenes de beneficios demasiado reducidos como para que las empresas se mantengan en pie en los momentos difíciles.

El sindicato de profesores de México (el mayor de Latinoamérica, con cerca de 650,000 miembros) nos brinda un ejemplo de cómo unos arraigados intereses particulares dan como resultado dichas ineficiencias. El sindicato promociona a los profesores según su lealtad y antigüedad, no por sus méritos. La legislación laboral mexicana tampoco hace que los educadores tengan que rendir cuentas por la calidad de su enseñanza. Al final, estas normativas sólo perjudican a los estudiantes a los que los educadores dicen que están tratando de ayudar.

NECESITA ASISTENCIA TEMPORAL? AET del Banco Social...$500 YA

Peña Nieto ya ha convencido a los líderes de su partido político (el Partido Revolucionario Institucional, históricamente el partido político “pro-sindicatos” de México) para que apruebe una ley que restrinja el poder sindical dentro del sistema educativo y que promocione a los profesores según sus méritos. Reformas estructurales como estas son las que se necesitan para transformar la lenta economía mexicana en el “tigre azteca” que están previendo muchos economistas.

A medida que los beneficios de las nuevas reformas laborales se empiecen a reflejar en el desempeño económico de México, el país se encontrará en una posición excelente para “saltar” sobre sus competidores globales. Su proximidad a Estados Unidos y la participación en numerosos acuerdos de libre comercio deberían permitir que México se convierta en un centro industrial global de primer orden en los próximos cinco años.

Peña Nieto tiene un largo y duro camino por delante, pero sus reformas podrían posicionar a su país como una economía de mercado emergente aún más fuerte y en el camino hacia una prosperidad y una libertad económica mayores.

Scorecard: How Many Rights Have Americans REALLY Lost?

Washington’s Blog
Feb 22, 2013

Preface: While a lot of people talk about the loss of our Constitutional liberties, people usually speak in a vague, generalized manner … or focus on only one issue and ignore the rest.
This post explains the liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights – the first 10 amendments to the United States Constitution – and provides a scorecard on the extent of the loss of each right.

First Amendment

The 1st Amendment protects speech, religion, assembly and the press:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

However, the government is arresting those speaking out … and violently crushing peaceful assemblies which attempt to petition the government for redress.

A federal judge found that the law allowing indefinite detention of Americans without due process has a“chilling effect” on free speech. And see this and this.

The threat of being labeled a terrorist for exercising our First Amendment rights certainly violates the First Amendment.   The government is using laws to crush dissent, and it’s gotten so bad that even U.S. Supreme Court justices are saying that we are descending into tyranny.

For example, the following actions may get an American citizen living on U.S. soil labeled as a “suspected terrorist” today:

• Being young (if you live near a battle zone, you are fair game; and see this)

• Using social media

• Reporting or doing journalism

• Speaking out against government policies

• Protesting anything (such as participating in the “Occupy” movement)

• Questioning war (even though war reduces our national security; and see this)

• Criticizing the government’s targeting of innocent civilians with drones (although killing innocent civilians with drones is one of the main things which increases terrorism. And see this)

• Asking questions about pollution (even at a public Congressional hearing?)

• Paying cash at an Internet cafe

• Asking questions about Wall Street shenanigans

• Holding gold

• Creating alternative currencies

• Stocking up on more than 7 days of food (even though all Mormons are taught to stockpile food, and most Hawaiians store up on extra food)

• Having bumper stickers saying things like “Know Your Rights Or Lose Them”

• Investigating factory farming

• Infringing a copyright

• Taking pictures or videos

• Talking to police officers

• Wearing a hoodie

• Driving a van

• Writing on a piece of paper

• (Not having a Facebook account may soon be added)

And holding the following beliefs may also be considered grounds for suspected terrorism:

• Being frustrated with “mainstream ideologies”

• Valuing online privacy

• Supporting Ron Paul or being a libertarian

• Liking the Founding Fathers

• Being a Christian

• Being anti-tax, anti-regulation or for the gold standard

• Being “reverent of individual liberty”

• Being “anti-nuclear”

• “Believe in conspiracy theories”

• “A belief that one’s personal and/or national “way of life” is under attack”

• “Impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

• “Insert religion into the political sphere”

• “Those who seek to politicize religion”

• “Supported political movements for autonomy”

• Being “anti-abortion”

• Being “anti-Catholic”

• Being “anti-global”

• “Suspicious of centralized federal authority”

• “Fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

• “A belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in … survivalism”

• Opposing genetically engineered food

• Opposing surveillance

Of course, Muslims are more or less subject to a separate system of justice in America. READ MORE