07-18-2016, 10:45 PM
Cramer frequently refers to the Standard & Poor's proprietary short-range oscillator to take the pulse of the market. Typically the short-range oscillator stays within five points of zero, which is neutral. When it goes over five, Cramer becomes nervous. On Tuesday night, the oscillator hit 10. It indicated a level of danger to Cramer, that stocks are severely overbought. "When it goes over 10, I get downright fearful because when the market looks so great, like it has lately, you tend to be the least prepared for a big decline," Cramer said.
Cramer's warning: How the market's hot streak will end
No, no. I wasn't in debt. I think it's a bit far to say it was a crisis point, but you know, basically I was just sick of being a consumer. I was sick of being on a treadmill earning money to spend money on things that I don't need. We are consumers. Advertising is a huge part of our lives. You can't step out of the door without people trying to sell something to you. Personally, I'm fed up with being sold to. I'm fed up with just being a consumer because I don't think it made me happy.
How to live in London on £35 per week - Business Insider
In theory, “pay for performance” — linking executive pay to a company’s stock price — aligns the interests of executives and shareholders. It’s supposed to ensure that executives are not tempted to enrich themselves at the expense of shareholders, who are too numerous and far-flung to influence a company’s behavior. In practice, it hasn’t quite worked that way. Instead, beginning around the 1970s and becoming increasingly common since the leverage-buyout era of the ’80s, the defining characteristic of pay for performance has been an explosion in chief executive pay that exceeds the value that any human being who isn’t Midas could reasonably be credited with producing. In 2015, the median pay package for chief executives at 200 large United States companies was almost $20 million per year, nearly 400 times the pay of a typical worker.
How Excessive Executive Pay Hurts Shareholders - The New York Times
The study, by Wintergreen Advisers, a money management firm, looked at two hits that shareholders absorb from executive stock awards. The first hit is well known. When a company issues shares under an executive-pay agreement, the increase in the number of shares outstanding dilutes the value of existing shareholders’ stakes. The second blow, involving share buybacks, is less obvious. Buybacks, in which management reduces the number of publicly held shares by repurchasing the company’s stock, are often pitched as a way to boost a company’s earnings per share. But the study points out that buybacks are aimed not necessarily at benefiting shareholders, but rather at offsetting the dilution that results from awarding stock to executives.
How Excessive Executive Pay Hurts Shareholders - The New York Times
Etsuro Honda, who has emerged as a matchmaker for Abe in corralling foreign economic experts to offer policy guidance, said that during an hour-long discussion with Bernanke in April the former Federal Reserve chief warned there was a risk Japan at any time could return to deflation. He noted that helicopter money -- in which the government issues non-marketable perpetual bonds with no maturity date and the Bank of Japan directly buys them -- could work as the strongest tool to overcome deflation, according to Honda. Bernanke noted it was an option, he said.
Bernanke Floated Japan Perpetual Debt Idea to Abe Aide Honda - Bloomberg