Today's weakness is undoubtedly linked to this Morgan Stanley call on a dividend cut Wednesday. I don't think it will happen, but I can't believe it would surprise anybody if it did.
Post from Cramer, life long Democrat and Sierra Club member
Posted at 1:33 p.m. EDT on Thursday, Nov. 13, 2014
Does the president EVER consider the economic impact of his statements? Ever?
The other day he threw a whole industry off guard, the telco industry, with his impromptu rant on net neutrality. The big service provider carriers are regulated by the FCC and try to spend in line with what the FCC wants. The FCC knows they have to have some financial incentives or they won't build out their broadband networks. You don't build them out to lose money.
But as Cisco (CSCO) CEO John Chambers said on his call last night, now that the president has weighed in on the matter, two or three of the service providers are simply pausing in their spending and, believe me, their spend puts tens of thousands of people to work.
Did the president even weigh that employment issue?
Must Read: BP Could Be Up for Grabs, but Who Can Buy the British Oil Behemoth?
Or how about the Keystone pipeline. You may hate the pollution that's going to come from that dirty oil, even as we now have the chemicals to make it clean, but the fact is that oil will be used by us and burned cleanly or be used by the Chinese and burned horribly, with the pollution arriving on schedule in Los Angeles about five days later.
We all know this.
But what's galling about the upcoming vote for Keystone is that the president never comes out and says, "You know what? We are doing a cost-benefit analysis of the jobs created vs. the potential environmental destruction if done right and we will act on the answer." Does it get considered? When I ask Labor Secretary Tom Perez about these issues I usually get an answer that has NOTHING to do with the question. Just a script. Like an actor. Painful.
Just like as Matt Horween, my writing colleague, reminds me, the president railed against Vegas junkets when he first came in office. Like it or not, Vegas is a huge job creator. Unless you put a damper on it, as he did.
Must Read: What You Need to Know About Obamacare Enrollment
When I was in college I did my senior thesis on the economic impact of what an environmental impact statement could mean. In other words, when single interest groups, in this case the environmentalists, used federal environmental policies enacted under Nixon, they were able to hold up projects that had never been able to be put on hold before. I tried to measure the hours lost, the jobs lost and the economic downside to see if it was being adequately represented in the process. It wasn't. Lots of jobs had been lost and others never created because of the power of that law in the hand of environmentalists. I was hoping that wasn't the case because I would like to consider myself an environmentalist.
I think the president is a single-issue person who doesn't take into account the jobs created or lost. For those on his side it must feel real good.
But for those without a job, it just must feel rotten.
Sick of this guy and his anti-GMO rants. He continues to use as "evidence" the fact that other developed countries don't allow them. I would argue they're just trying to protect their uncompetitive ag sectors.
These guys are brilliant. I don't suppose it occurs to them that with over a 17% yield, the actual surprise to the market would be if the dividend wasn't cut.
All I can think of is that he would have had some performance based incentive in jeopardy if the error came to light. Now he's forfeited $35 million and basically ruined his life. I guess he didn't do a risk reward analysis of his fraud.
Not to mention the legal costs they're about to incur. That CFO is probably going to jail after knowingly signing off on incorrect numbers. What the hell are these people thinking?
How much of discount do you want? More than twice the yield of O while trading well below book and O trades at twice book.