People are starting to bring up inflation talk, which isn't surprising considering what has happened to the money supply over the past year.  It's counter-intuitive to think that having an interest rate environment this aggressively-low won't cause at least a temporary spike in inflation.

Dr. David Burton and Cesar Conda have this to say today:

The money supply is measured several different ways. They all show alarming increases. The monetary base (coins, currency and bank reserves) has doubled over the past year. It is increasing at a rate 12 times the average since 1981. M1 (the monetary base plus checking deposits) increased last year by roughly 16 percent, a near record and three times faster than average since 1981. M2 (M1 plus most savings deposits and money market funds) increased 9 percent in the past 12 months (a rate more than 50 percent higher than the average since 1981)...Interest rates are low because of the massive credit and money creation. But as it dawns on investors that significant future inflation is virtually certain, long-term rates are starting to creep up. Long-term Treasury bond rates already have risen from 3.5 percent to 4.5 percent over the past eight weeks. They will continue to rise as investors demand larger premiums to compensate for inflation and the tax on purely inflationary gains.

Permalink | Comments

A new and interesting study is out by the American Academy of Actuaries which has some interesting findings on cost savings in HSA-style (that is, high deductible health plans with accounts) plans, otherwise known as consumer-driven health (CDH) plans:

With regard to first-year cost savings, all studies showed a favorable effect on cost in the first year of a CDH plan. CDH plan trends ranged from -4 percent to -15 percent. Coupled with a control population on traditional plans that experienced trends of +8 percent to +9 percent, the total savings generated could be as much as 12 percent to 20 percent in the first year. All studies used some variation of normalization or control groups to account for selection bias.

For savings after the first year, at least two of the studies indicate trend rates lower than traditional PPO plans by approximately 3 percent to 5 percent. If these lower trends can be further validated, it will represent a substantial cost-reduction strategy for employers and employees.

Generally, all of the studies indicated that cost savings did not result from avoidance of inappropriate care and that necessary care was received in equal or greater degrees relative to traditional plans. All of the studies reviewed reported a significant increase in preventive services for CDH participants. Three of the studies found that CDH plan participants received recommended care for chronic conditions at the same or higher level than traditional (non-CDH) plan participants. Two studies reported a higher incidence of physicians following evidence-based care protocols.

Permalink | Comments | Tags: HSA

Permalink | Comments

Permalink | Comments

Permalink | Comments

If a company repays its bailout funds, 61% of Americans say the government should not regulate the company’s executive pay and bonuses. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 31% disagree...Investors (72%) feel even more strongly that the government should bow out once the money is repaid, but only 49% of non-investors agree.

Permalink | Comments

Major elements of their plan include:

• no more bailouts
• allow federal regulators to consult on bankruptcy cases
• privatize the GSEs
• provide more oversight of the Federal Reserve

Permalink | Comments

House Ways and Means Select Revenue Measures Subcommittee Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., has introduced legislation that would require greater disclosure of fees in 401(k) and other employer-sponsored retirement accounts by companies and plan administrators, coupled with tax penalties for failure to comply...Failure to provide such notices would result in a tax of $100 per day, capped at the lesser of $500,000 or 10 percent of a plan's assets.

There's nothing wrong with disclosure or transparency, but didn't the Department of Labor settle this last year?  Talk about grandstanding by Congress.

Permalink | Comments

Permalink | Comments

From the category, "some things need to be talked about before getting married," this from Fidelity Investments:

• 60 percent of couples don't agree on their respective retirement ages, 44 percent are not in agreement on whether they will work in retirement, and 42 percent have different ideas regarding their expected lifestyle in retirement.

• Only 15 percent of couples feel confident that both of them could assume responsibility for their joint finances if necessary.

You can read the full report here.

Permalink | Comments | Tags: HSA

Permalink | Comments

For the past several years, "shareholder terrorist" groups have been hijacking, or seeking to hijack, shareholder meetings, corporate boards, and even CEOs.  There's an interesting article today in Investment News which lays out their game plan:

Among those reforms: disclosure of broker compensation; repeal of Section 22(d) of the Investment Company Act, which allows funds to set fixed sales charges; 12(b)-1 fee reform; and improved disclosure of revenue-sharing payments. The groups also pushed for a suitability obligation to ensure that brokers recommend the best mutual fund share class and for redefining anyone who offers personalized advisory services as investment advisers.

These shareholder terrorist groups won't stop until the investor class is controlled and dominated by Big Labor and trial lawyers.

Permalink | Comments (1)

The hits on private markets keep coming.  This from today's Congress Daily AM:

***

It is almost a given that hedge funds, private investment vehicles for the wealthy that engage in risky strategies such as short-selling and derivatives, will be further regulated. Lawmakers at a minimum are likely to require hedge funds to register with the SEC after a federal appeals court threw out such a mandate.

Lawmakers are concerned that the funds operate with little oversight and transparency. The industry does have some scars: In 2007 Amaranth Advisors LLC collapsed after losing $6 billion quickly in the natural gas trading market, and Bear Stearns' troubles began after two of its hedge funds invested heavily in the subprime mortgage market.

But some lawmakers are pushing for tougher regulations. Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, have sponsored legislation that would require naming the beneficial owner of the hedge fund, explain its ownership structure, spell out the names of any financial institutions with which the hedge fund is affiliated and disclose the minimum investment commitment required from an investor, as well as the total number of investors in the fund.

The measure is likely to be opposed by the industry, led by the Managed Funds Association, where former Rep. Richard Baker, R-La., serves as its president. But Grassley and Levin are influential legislators who enjoy taking on populist causes against Wall Street. In addition, lawmakers will have to decide whether to include industries beyond hedge funds for any registration requirement, such as private equity and venture capital firms. Those groups oppose being lumped in with hedge fund regulations.

Permalink | Comments

This post originally appeared on ATR's Center for Fiscal Accountability

***

According to the Wall Street Journal

Connecticut is poised to become one of the first states to impose transparency rules on the hedge-fund industry, after giving up on waiting for the federal government to do so.

The state's Senate this week passed the measure, which would require fund managers and other investment advisers that haven't voluntarily registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission to alert investors to any material conflicts of interest. Firms that are SEC-registered already are required to abide by such guidelines.

Let's leave the fact that shareholders - and not the government - should be the ones demanding disclosure from hedge-fund managers aside for a minute.

What's interesting is that Connecticut, a state that has for the past three years failed to join more than twenty other states that have passed legislation providing greater transparency in government finances is now calling for more transparency in the private sector.

I guess that's what you would file under "the pot calling the kettle black."

Permalink | Comments

Permalink | Comments