10 REASONS THE MARKET IS IN TROUBLE ?

10 reasons the market is in trouble:

The Sunday paper costs more than New York Times stock
The Citi ATM fee costs more than Citi stock
The paper that a mortgage is written on costs more than Freddie Mac stock
A subscription to Sirius Satellite radio would cost more than Sirius stock
A gallon of gas costs more than Ford stock
One ride costs more than Six Flags stock
A bottle of soda costs more than Jones Soda stock
A 5 minute long distance phone call costs more than Vonage stock
A 5 stick pack of gum costs more than Rite-Aid stock
The strawberries in a smoothie cost more than Jamba Juice

USA Economy Falls off a Cliff ? Warren Buffet States on CNBC ! Watch Here for free !

Linn Pops Up Higher Today !

NEW YORK, Dec 28 (Reuters) - Despite plummeting natural-gas and oil prices in the past six months that sent Linn Energy's stocks falling, and frozen capital markets that could make it hard for the company to make acquisitions, concerns about the oil and gas driller are probably unwarranted, Barron's wrote in its Dec. 29 edition.

Linn, which is a master limited partnership that pays out about 60 percent to 70 percent of its quarterly cash flow to shareholders in tax-advantaged distributions, has used hedging to lock in the high prices of last summer's energy price bubble for the next three to four years, Barron's wrote.

on its third-quarter distribution of 63 cents per unit, the company is offering a current yield of more than 20 percent, Barron's wrote.

One Citigroup (nyse: C - news - people ) analyst said Linn's distribution level is 'relatively secure,' and has a one-year price target on its stock of $22, while another, at RBC Capital Markets, has a target price of $27, Barron's wrote.

Linn Energy shares closed at $11.98 on Friday in trading on the Nasdaq.
Linn Energy, LLC (Linn Energy) is an independent oil and gas company focused on the development and acquisition of long-lived properties in the United States. The Company’s oil, gas and natural gas liquids (NGL) properties are located in three regions in the United States: Mid-Continent, which includes the core operating areas Texas Panhandle and Oklahoma; Appalachian Basin, which includes fields in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, and Western, which includes the Brea Olinda Field of the Los Angeles Basin in California. The Company’s proved reserves, at December 31, 2007, were 1,616.1 billion cubic feet equivalent (Bcfe), of which approximately 64% were gas, 20% were oil, and 16% were NGL. Approximately 73% were classified as proved developed. At December 31, 2007, Linn Energy operated 5,638, or 77%, of its 7,305 gross productive wells

Big Three failure may be catastrophe ?? or Worse ??

Big Three failure may be catastrophe
Blow to economy could be costlier than bailout, automaker CEOs say
By S. CARTY and B HAGENBAUGH USA Today

When the heads of General Motors, Chrysler and Ford went to Capitol Hill last week, they tried to persuade lawmakers that if they go under, an already fragile U.S. economy will be dealt a blow far costlier than the $25 billion in aid the companies are seeking.


As lawmakers wrestled, then decided to head home and not quickly approve a bailout, foremost in their thinking was a question the Big Three CEOs apparently failed to answer: If we let these guys fail, how bad will it really be for the economy?

Critics say Detroit created its own problems with poor planning and inferior products, and cite a healthier foreign auto industry operating mostly in southern states that isn't seeking a taxpayer bailout. But even Toyota said over the weekend it fears the impact on the parts suppliers it uses if the U.S. auto industry collapses.

Moody's Economy.com chief economist Mark Zandi estimates that 2.6 million jobs -- about 1.9 percent of the U.S. work force -- would be lost if GM, Chrysler and Ford were to go under.

That includes more than 255,000 people directly tied to the three companies and another 2.3 million whose jobs are indirectly dependent -- everything from people who work in the steel, glass, fabric, tire and electronic industries to the barista who makes $4 cappuccinos for the ad executive who'll be out of work when his auto industry business ceases to exist.

Zandi argues the economy is too weak to absorb that fallout.

"This could be the thing to push us over," he says. "The ripple effect is like throwing a big boulder into the economic pond."

The auto industry is woven into the grass roots of the U.S. economy, through its dealer networks, the advertising it buys in newspapers and local TV and radio stations, the health care it buys for its workers and their families and the retirees it supports.

The domestic auto industry supports nearly 800,000 retirees and spouses with pensions and, until recently, health care for everyone. Now that's being cut back for white-collar retirees, but if the automakers file for bankruptcy, they could shed their pension costs and force the government to pick up the tab.

Advocates of a bailout argue that if one of the Big Three fails, it could take down the entire supply chain that cuts a wide swath from Wisconsin to Ontario, Canada, and south from Florida to Texas. As Toyota officials pointed out, the effect would be on all companies making vehicles in the USA.

The impact of the industry woes already is being felt beyond Detroit. Saturday, a Chrysler-Dodge dealer in North Brattleboro, Vt., closed after 20 years, citing slumping sales. It became one of the projected 700 dealers nationwide expected to have closed by the end of this year.

Advertising agencies and media from New York to local TV stations in New Mexico are seeing revenue dry up because the automakers and their dealers are spending less money hawking cars. Suppliers in North Carolina, host to roughly one-quarter of the parts-manufacturing base for the auto industry, are declaring bankruptcy at an alarming rate.

'Very difficult judgments'
The ripple effect of an industry collapse could further trim consumer confidence and unemployment, said Lyle Gramley, a former Federal Reserve Board governor who is senior economic adviser at the Stanford Group.

"As a general principle, I don't think that bailing out individual companies is a good idea," said Gramley. However, "You have to contemplate the possibility of 1 million employees losing their jobs and the entire industry at risk" if an automaker were to fail.

Comerica Bank chief economist Dana Johnson said there are some "very difficult judgments" for lawmakers to make about the potential impact an auto industry failure would have on the economy. If one or more of the companies were to go under, the U.S. government would be on the hook for unemployment benefits, retraining and pension obligations while receiving less in taxes, he said.

"There are roughly two parts producers for every employee at the car companies, and there are a lot of vendors -- steel producers, paint producers, glass producers, business services, accounting, advertising," he said. "There's no question that it is an important industry, that there are linkages to employment elsewhere."

Zandi and other economists argue there is a better way to aid the auto sector than to provide bailout loans.

There is growing support for allowing the companies go into bankruptcy, using government funds to guarantee financing from banks. That would allow the automakers to restructure, including tearing up old labor contracts and reducing their sizes. Government support could give consumers confidence that the car companies would exist after bankruptcy, soothing worries about car warranties and availability of replacement parts.

"Like the airlines, I think they should go into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and start with a clean slate," said Michael Cusumano, a professor at MIT's Sloan School of Management who has written two books on the auto industry. He said reorganization should include replacing management.

But then, there are two auto industries in the U.S. The first, based in and around Detroit, is GM, Ford and Chrysler. The second is sprinkled around the Southeast and includes foreign automakers Toyota, Honda, Subaru, Nissan, BMW and Mercedes-Benz.

Parts suppliers are spread out between them "like pearls on a necklace" along the highways connecting the South and the Midwest, said Thomas Klier, senior economist with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

Suppliers in the past tended to focus on one customer, but now almost all have overlapping customer bases. That's why Toyota is worried about the Big Three. About 75 percent of Toyota's suppliers here are North American companies who also make parts for the Detroit companies.

"We are concerned with the industry in general, but we're mostly concerned about our suppliers," Toyota spokesman Mike Goss said. "If the worst happens in Detroit and these companies suffer, we're worried about their longevity as well."

Mr. Marriott, Says Tough Year Ahead 2009 !!!!!!

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Hotel operator Marriott International Inc (MAR.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) on Thursday said third-quarter profit fell as its time-share business slowed and the company warned that 2009 would be tough.
Marriott, which typically manages hotels instead of owning them, reported income from continuing operations of $94 million compared with $122 million in the year-ago quarter.
The company reported diluted earnings per share from continuing operations of 26 cents compared with 31 cents in the third quarter of 2007.
Third-quarter Revenue rose 1 percent to $3 billion.
Looking ahead, Marriott said it expects the 2009 business environment to remain "unusually challenging."
The company expects its worldwide revenue-per-available room (RevPAR), a key industry measure, to decline 1 percent to 3 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008.

Are we in a Recession???

The American economy expanded more slowly than expected from April to June, the government reported Thursday, while numbers for the last three months of 2007 were revised downward to show a contraction — the first official slide backward since the last recession in 2001.


The New York Times


Economists construed the tepid growth in the second quarter, combined with a surge in claims for unemployment benefits, as a clear indication that the economy remains mired in the weeds of a downturn. Many said the data increased the likelihood that a recession began late last year.
The next major piece of data comes Friday, when the government is to release its monthly snapshot of the job market. Analysts expect the report to show a loss of 75,000 jobs, signifying the seventh straight month of declines.
“We already knew the economy was weak, and now you have both a negative growth number coupled with job losses,” said Dean Baker, a director of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research. “There’s a lot of real bad times to come.”
President Bush zeroed in on the positive growth in the second quarter — a 1.9 percent annual rate of expansion, compared with an anticipated 2.3 percent rate. That follows growth of 0.9 percent in the first quarter. He claimed success for the $100 billion in tax rebates sent out by the government this year in a bid to spur spending, along with $52 billion in tax cuts for businesses.
“We got some positive news today,” the president said in West Virginia, addressing a coal industry trade association. “It’s not as good as we’d like it to be but I want to remind you a few months ago, there were predictions, and — that the economy would shrink this quarter, not grow.”
But the snapshot of disappointing economic growth released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis on Thursday morning provided no comfort to Wall Street, where a broad sell-off commenced. By the end of business, the Dow Jones industrial average was down 206 points to close at 11,378, a drop of nearly 2 percent.
The rout may have been explained in part by significant changes the government made to historical data on the profitability of American businesses. According to the revised numbers, corporate profits earned in the United States by American companies rose much more swiftly than previously recorded from 2005 through 2007, making the recent decline appear much steeper.
That the economy grew at all this spring is a testament to two bright spots — increased consumer spending fueled by the tax rebates, and the continuing expansion of American exports.
Consumer spending, which amounts to 70 percent of the economy, grew at a 1.5 percent annual rate between April and June, after growing at a meager 0.9 percent clip in the previous quarter.
“Clearly the tax rebates did give some oomph to the economy,” said Robert Barbera, chief economist at the research and trading firm ITG.
Exports expanded at a 9.2 percent annual pace in the second quarter, up from 5.1 percent in the first three months of the year. Foreign sales have been lubricated by the weak dollar, which makes American-made goods cheaper on world markets.
Adding to the improving trade picture, imports dropped by 6.6 percent, as Americans tightened their spending. Imports are subtracted from economic growth, so the effect was positive.
Over all, trade added 2.42 percentage points to the growth rate from April to June. Without that contribution, the economy would have contracted.
But many economists are dubious that consumer spending and exports can keep growing robustly in the face of substantial challenges that are now entrenched in the United States and are gathering force in many other major economies. Japan and much of Europe appear headed into downturns, damping demand for American-made products.
“The trade improvement doesn’t look sustainable,” said Jan Hatzius, an economist at Goldman Sachs in New York. “In an environment where the global economy is clearly slowing, you’re not being able to get that export growth in future quarters.”
Economists said the sharp drop in imports was largely a function of retailers delaying wholesale purchases in the midst of acute fears about declining American spending power — a dynamic that will eventually give way to new spending.
“This reflects sheer panic by retailers about what the next Christmas buying season is going to look like,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com.
The tax rebates have mostly been distributed. While the checks appear to have bolstered spending, they have failed to generate activity that is likely to carry on even after the cash has cycled through the economy, say economists.
“They slowed the downturn, but it’s clear they didn’t really provide any spark,” Mr. Baker said.
Employers have not hired much, even as shopping has picked up, cognizant that the rebate checks are a one-time event. Businesses have not shelled out for new machinery. Indeed, investment for equipment fell 3.4 percent in the spring months, dropping for the second consecutive quarter.
Rather than stockpile more goods, businesses generally tried to sell what they already had on hand. Business inventories declined in the second quarter by $62 billion, a factor that shaved nearly 2 percent off the overall rate of economic growth.
As the impact of the rebate checks continues to wear off in the coming weeks, households will be left confronting the same set of troubles that have been dragging on the economy for many months: a deteriorating job market, rising prices for food and gas and plummeting housing values.
Tens of millions of Americans have in recent years borrowed aggressively against the value of their homes to finance trips to the mall, dinners out, vacations and new cars. As housing values continue to fall, that artery of finance is rapidly constricting.
Since last summer, when the mortgage crisis provoked panic on Wall Street and many Americans saw access to credit diminish, consumer spending on so-called durable goods like appliances, cars and furniture has been sliding. This spending barely grew in the last three months of 2007, fell at a 4.3 percent clip in the first three months of this year and dropped at a 3 percent pace in the second quarter.
Meanwhile, joblessness is growing, with new unemployment claims filed in the week that ended July 26 swelling to 448,000 — up 44,000 from the previous week. And the purchasing power of wages is being eroded by higher prices for food and energy. Prices paid for goods by Americans surged at a 4.2 percent annual rate in the second quarter, after climbing at a 3.5 percent annual clip over the first three months of the year, according to the report on Thursday.
Higher prices, fewer paychecks and less household wealth: It is not a recipe for free-spending abandon.
“Now, consumers have to sing for their supper,” said Alan D. Levenson, chief economist at T. Rowe Price Associates in Baltimore. “Spending growth is slowing and income growth is slowing.”
Democrats in Congress have begun devising a second package of measures to stimulate the economy, centered on aid to struggling states. But the Bush administration has resisted such proposals, and the political stakes of a presidential election year make compromise especially tricky.
The Federal Reserve has lowered interest rates in recent months to encourage businesses to invest and households to spend. But with concern growing about high prices — a trend fueled by lower interest rates — the Fed may not be able to deliver another round, even if growth slows further.
“Looking forward, I don’t think there’s anything to change the lousy trend for the domestic economy,” said Joshua Shapiro, chief domestic economist at MFR, a research firm.
With the last three months of 2007 now officially revised down — from an initial 0.6 percent annual rate of growth to a 0.2 percent decline — many economists expect that these tough times will officially be declared a recession. That label is affixed by a panel of economists at a private research institution, the National Bureau of Economic Research, though typically well after the fact.
President Bush derided such characterizations, along with the academic discipline known as the dismal science.
“You can listen to these economists,” Mr. Bush said in West Virginia. “On the one hand, they’ll say, and then on the other hand. If they had three hands, it would be on the one hand, the second hand and the third hand.”
But for many, the old debate about whether this is a recession has become purely academic, and eclipsed by the troubles at hand.
“All my cousins already know it’s a recession,” said Mr. Barbera, the ITG economist. “They have the luxury of not having Ph.D.’s. The auto companies are in dire straits, the airlines have been shutting down flights and firing pilots. The truckers are in near hysteria because of the price of diesel. If you round up the usual suspects, this is a bad circumstance. And the word we usually use for a bad circumstance is a recession.”