How Long Can the Stock Market Defy Economic Gravity?

As the pragmatic conservative economist Herbert Stein once said, “If something cannot go on forever, it won’t.” I’ve been thinking about that saying a lot in relation to today’s bull market and the complacency with which investors seem to view it.

The VIX, or fear index—which measures investors’ expectations of volatility in the stock market—is at its lowest ebb since 2007, before the financial crisis. Prices for all sorts of assets, even things like junk bonds, are soaring in a way that would seem to indicate blue skies over the global economy. All this despite the fact that we’re still facing the debt ceiling debate, the resolution of the Eurozone crisis, and a real estate bubble in China that could make the Middle Kingdom go “pop.”

(MORE: How Dr. Dre Made $300 Headphones a Must-Have Accessory)

Part of the bullishness may be a reaction to the fact that things have been tough in the global economy for so long, investors believe they can’t get tougher. But it also reflects history. According to Ruchir Sharma, the head of emerging markets and global macroeconomics for Morgan Stanley Investment Management, who has examined the past 100 years of bull-market history, we’re exactly where we?ought to be in the economic cycle. Typically, by the fourth year of a recovery, stocks have more than doubled. In the fifth year, markets tend to rise about 10%, which is what many analysts predict for this year. In this context, the low fear index and bullish sentiment seem perfectly reasonable.

But there’s a problem: While markets are reacting just as history tells us they should, the real economy is not. Putting aside a better-than-expected fourth quarter last year, we are still in the middle of the second weakest recovery in a century and the weakest one of the post–World War II era. McKinsey Global Institute estimates that it will take another 25 months for employment to reach prerecession levels.

Just as worrisome is the disconnect between the fortunes of companies and the fortunes of workers, which has never been greater. Stock prices are far from a perfect proxy for the economy; they ultimately reflect the earnings and earnings potential of large corporations. While 60% of the profits of the S&P 500 today come from large multinational manufacturing firms, those companies account for only about 15% of U.S. employment, far less than when outsourcing to nations with cheaper labor costs began on a large scale in the 1980s. Many of these companies get an increasing share of their sales from abroad, some of them as much as half, while wages paid to U.S. workers remain flat.

(MORE: What the Current Economic Outlook Means for American Families)

Put these facts together and it’s clear that global gains for American multinationals are no guarantee of economic growth and job creation at home. This is an important—and often overlooked— risk factor in the markets right now. At some point, as Sharma puts it, “you need stronger growth in the real economy for corporate earnings to go up.” We may already be at a breaking point. For more on that, check out my Curious Capitalist column in the latest issue of TIME magazine.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Fed Survey: US Economy Picked Up at End of Year

(WASHINGTON) — Holiday shopping, strong auto sales and a recovering housing market helped boost the U.S. economy from the middle of November through early January, according to a Federal Reserve survey released Wednesday.

The Fed said 12 of its regional banking districts reported “modest or moderate” growth in the final weeks of 2012. Of those, only St. Louis said growth had slowed from the previous survey, which covered October through early November.

Consumers increased spending at the end of the year in every district. Auto sales were steady or stronger in 10 districts. Nearly all of the districts reported increases in home construction and home sales.

(MORE: What the Current Economic Outlook Means for American Families)

Still, employers in some parts of the country delayed hiring because of uncertainty over the fiscal cliff. Congress and the White House reached a deal on Jan. 1 to prevent sharp income tax increases from hitting most Americans. But they put off decisions on government spending cuts.

The report, called the Beige Book, provides anecdotal information on economic conditions through Jan. 4. Overall, analysts said the survey showed the economy looked better at the end of the year. “Despite concerns about the dreaded fiscal cliff, the economy looks to have improved slightly in recent months,” said Sal Guatieri, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets. He said the latest survey probably had not fully captured the improvement in business sentiment that has occurred with the January deal to avoid most income tax increases.

Congress must still decide what to do about automatic spending cuts that are now set to take effect in March.

The survey showed that companies in six districts — Boston, Richmond, Atlanta, Chicago, Kansas City and San Francisco — held off on hiring because of those looming cuts. Many of the companies are in the defense industry, which is slated for some of the cuts.

The information collected for the Beige Book survey will be used as the basis for the Fed’s policy discussion at the Jan. 29-30 meeting. Many economists believe the Fed will take no new steps at its January meeting.

(MORE: The Trillion Dollar Coin Fantasy: GOP Extremism Can’t Be Wished Away)

The Fed last month said it planned to keep its key short-term interest rate at a record low even after unemployment falls close to a normal level — which it said might take three more years. And it said it would keep buying $85 billion a month in Treasurys and mortgage bonds to try to keep borrowing costs low and encourage more spending.

The economy has shown some signs of improvement, according to recent government and private data.

U.S. automakers finished 2012 with their best sales in five years. The housing recovery has helped lift home prices in most parts of the country. Retail spending grew in December from November, led by higher sales of cars, furniture and clothing. And factory output has increased in the past two months.

Job growth has been modest but steady. In December, employers added 155,000 jobs, roughly matching the monthly average in 2011 and 2012.

Still, unemployment remains high at 7.8 percent. Wages are barely increasing. And many consumers are likely to pull back on spending at the start of the year because lawmakers and President Barack Obama allowed a two-year reduction in Social Security payroll taxes to lapse.

Most Americans will start seeing less money in their paychecks this month. A person earning $50,000 a year will see take-home pay shrink by roughly $1,000 in 2013. That’s likely to slow consumer spending and weigh on economic growth.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Virginia Is Worried Cars Are Becoming Too Fuel-Efficient

The average fuel economy of new vehicles rose 6% in 2012, and cars are expected to use less and less gas going forward. Isn’t that a good thing?

Well, not if you’re a state hoping to bump up revenues collected on gasoline sales. Less gas sold means less gas taxes collected by states—and therefore, less money the states have to build highways, patch roads, and do all of the other things normally funded by gas taxes.

To increase gas tax revenues, or at least maintain their current levels, one simple solution is to hike gas tax rates. As a New York Times magazine story recently detailed, many economists think higher gas taxes—at least $1.25 per gallon, more than double the current national average—are necessary for a wide range of reasons, including the reduction of traffic and offsetting the environmental impact of driving.

Curiously, in Virginia, Governor Bob McDonnell is suggesting just the opposite as a solution. McDonnell is proposing that Virginia eliminate its gas tax, which is now 17.5￠ per gallon. Since gas tax revenues are bound to decline as drivers buy less fuel, McDonnell suggests that the state drop this tax entirely, while jacking up another tax—one that’s paid by everyone, not just drivers, and that’s never expected to decline. If the proposal passes (it’s quite a long shot), road projects in Virginia would no longer be funded by gas taxes, but by a 0.8% increase in state sales tax, which would rise from 5% to 5.8% (still lower than neighboring Maryland‘s 6% rate).

(MORE: Not Your Grandpa’s Mercedes: Luxury Car Makers Aim for Younger, Less Rich Customers)

The Richmond Times-Dispatch quoted McDonnell’s attempts at explaining the proposed “solution”:

“We have a problem in Virginia and it’s a math problem,” McDonnell said in announcing his proposal. “When you look at what is happening with the primary sources of transportation funding, the fuels tax, that it is on a downward slope.”

Perhaps even more curiously, McDonnell is also suggesting that the owners of alternative-fuel vehicles—who are accustomed to receiving bonuses (rebates, free charging stations, access to special highway lanes) for their green choice of vehicles—should pay a $100 annual fee. And here’s how the governor explained this part of his plan:

“I’m a strong supporter of alternative fuel vehicles, and I’ve directed that we convert the state vehicle fleet to natural gas, but these vehicles generate little federal gas tax revenue and therefore need to contribute their share to fund the roads they use,” McDonnell said.

(MORE: Why the Car of the Future Will Be Powered by … Gasoline)

The proposal has support in certain circles—like among taxi companies and other businesses that spend a lot out of pocket on fuel costs and would obviously benefit if gas was cheaper. A Washington Post story recently offered their point of view, as well as that of the Virginia Retail Federation, which swore that it has “not found a pushback yet for the increase in the sales tax” among its members. Supporters also argue that the disappearance of the state gas tax may trickle down, so that prices would decrease for all sorts of goods and services priced partially based on the cost of fuel.

Regardless, everyday consumers may not like the idea of paying for services they don’t necessarily use. “There’s no need for people that don’t drive a car to pay higher taxes on consumer goods in order to subsidize those people who do drive cars,” Virginia Sen. J. Chapman Petersen said, according to the Times-Dispatch.

The point here is figuring out how to fund road infrastructure, right? Interestingly enough, surveys show that the majority of drivers actually support higher taxes on gasoline (a theoretical 10￠ increase) so long as the funds raised are used to improve roads. Think about that: How often are the majority of Americans behind the idea of increases taxes on anything?

(MORE: Top New Cars of 2013)

Nonetheless, McDonnell wants to eliminate the gas tax and spread the burden of funding road improvements to all consumers, while simultaneously decreasing incentives for drivers to purchase more fuel-efficient and alternative-fuel vehicles and to stay off the roads more, perhaps by using public transportation. But hey, gas would be cheaper!

Brad Tuttle covers business and personal finance for TIME. He lives in Massachusetts with his wife and four sons, and also teaches journalism at UMass-Amherst.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Today’s Young Adults Will Never Pay Off Their Credit Card Debts

When we talk about Americans barely into adulthood who are saddled with debilitating levels of debt, the conversation is almost always about student loan debt. But there’s a growing body of evidence suggesting that today’s young adults are also drowning in credit-card debt — and that many of them will take this debt to their graves.?

More than three-quarters of renters between the ages of 18 and 24 spend more than they earn every month, according to a survey of 1,000 renters (of all ages) by Rent.com. This is the case even though 17% of respondents in that age bracket say they’re willing to live with roommates to save money.

More than 20% overspent their income by more than $100. That’s every single month. And since they haven’t built up their credit histories yet, it’s a safe bet that these young adults are paying relatively high interest rates on the resulting credit card debt.

Although more young people than older adults blame “socializing” as a barrier to saving money, most young people aren’t knocking back $20 drinks in trendy lounges. They’re struggling with much more prosaic financial demands. For 42%, rent is their top expense, while 18% say transportation costs eat up the biggest chunk of their earnings and 22% say paying for food eats up the greatest share of their monthly budget.

(MORE: Why More Americans Will Fall Behind on Credit-Card Bills This Year)

To a disturbingly large extent, the young and the broke are relying on credit cards to make it until their next payday. This obviously isn’t sustainable in the long run, and it’s going to put a huge drag on this demographic’s spending power even after they reach their peak earning years, because they’ll still be paying interest on that carton of OJ or box of spaghetti they bought a decade earlier.

A new study out of Ohio State University found that young adults are racking up credit card debt at a more rapid rate than other age groups, and that they’re slower at paying it off.?”If what we found continues to hold true, we may have more elderly people with substantial financial problems in the future,” warns Lucia Dunn, co-author and professor of economics at Ohio State University. “If our findings persist, we may be faced with a financial crisis among elderly people who can’t pay off their credit cards.

(MORE: The Verdict Is In: Tackle Smaller Debts First)

People born between 1980 and 1984, for instance, already have an average of $5,689 more in credit card debt than their parents did at that age. And remember, those parents are members of the generation that’s now starting to worry about whether or not they’ve saved enough for their impending retirements. Their kids are going to be able to save even less since they’re funneling so much more into servicing their burgeoning debt.

Along with more debt, this age cohort is paying off those debts at a sharply lower rate than their parents. Dunn says a lot of these young people are never going to get out from under their credit card debt. “Many people are borrowing on credit cards so heavily that payoff rates at these levels are not sufficient to recover their credit card debt by the end of their life, “ she writes in the study. “We can expect more people to carry credit card debt at death, which could have loss implications for the credit card issuing banks.”

Banks can file a claim against someone’s estate if they die with both debt and assets, but if the deceased doesn’t have any assets, banks can’t go after their heirs and have to just eat the loss. This is bad news for the banks, but sympathy may also be in order for the people who literally live their lives under a cloud of credit card debt.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

At Under $19K for a Nissan Leaf, Does the Math on Electric Cars Finally Add Up?

YASUYOSHI CHIBA / AFP / Getty Images Nissan's Leaf, an all electric car.

Nissan’s Leaf has a long way to go to expand beyond its status as a niche commuter car. Sales have been underwhelming, even with cheap lease offers, leading some to declare the Leaf an overpriced, impractical flop. Will this change now that the Leaf isn’t quite so overpriced?

For a while now, we’ve heard that the new Nissan Leaf will have a cheaper sticker price than older models. Now we know just how much cheaper it’ll be.

Impressively, the retail price of the 2013 Nissan Leaf will drop by over six grand.

This week at the Detroit Auto Show, Nissan announced that the new Leaf S series will start with an MSRP of $28,800, which undercuts the previous least expensive Leaf by $6,400, representing a drop of 18%. Add up the incentives for buyers—$7,500 in federal tax credits, plus a $2,500 rebate in certain states, including California—and drivers can essentially pay “full price” for a Leaf for as little as $18,800.

(MORE: Electric Cars: More Models, Cheaper Prices Coming in 2013)

A drop of more than $6,000 in a vehicle’s sticker price is undeniably a big deal. Normally, an automobile model’s MSRP only goes in one direction: up. Any official dip in price can make news, and when the decline is substantial, like whenVolkswagen dropped the starting price of the Jetta by $2,400, it can provide a major boost to sales.

Is that what we can expect from the new Leaf? Surely, the lower price will push some buyers into getting off the fence in the consideration of an electric vehicle. But Leaf sales have underwhelmed before, falling well short of sales goals in each of its first two years on the market, and they may do so again. Nissan anticipated a 50% rise in Leaf sales in 2012, only to see sales increase by 22%, even as the automaker rolled out discounted lease deals toward the end of the year. Before that, Leaf sales were often down compared to corresponding months in 2011.

For 2013, Nissan is projecting a sales increase of at least 20% for the Leaf, thanks to the newly cheaper price. “Now customers won’t have to pay a premium for owning a green car that’s really fun to drive, and that’s exciting,” Billy Hayes, global vice president of Leaf sales, stated via press release. That statement, of course, basically owns up to the idea that anyone buying a Leaf in the past was indeed paying a high premium for the privilege.

(MORE: Is It Time to Declare the Nissan Leaf a Flop?)

While the new lower-priced S model Leaf is getting all the attention, the 2013 versions of the SV and SL Leaf are also cheaper than preceding models, by $3,380 and $2,410 respectively. How can Nissan cut prices like this? Lower costs for batteries and other parts help. Nissan may also be willing to eat some of the potential profits in order to get more Leafs on the road; that wouldn’t be surprising given the speculation that surfaced last year that Chevy loses tens of thousands of dollars on each Volt sold.

Regardless of how Nissan gets to the price point for the Leaf, has it reached the point that mainstream buyers will bite? A report from the Congressional Budget Office published last fall estimated that when comparing a pure battery-powered vehicles like the Leaf to a similar gas-powered car, “tax credits would still need to be about 50 percent higher than they are now to fully offset the higher lifetime costs of an all-electric vehicle.” In other words, instead of a $7,500 tax credit, something like $11,250 would cut it.

The math changes, however, now that the cheapest Leaf is $6,000 less. State rebates help put the math in the Leaf’s favor too, of course. Based on the new math, it would seem that it’s less expensive to own a Leaf rather than a similar traditional car like the Nissan Versa, all things being equal.

The problem, of course, is that all things aren’t equal. After adding up initial price, insurance, “fuel” and other expenses, a Leaf owner may pay less out of pocket than a Versa owner over the course of five to seven years, but over that time period the Versa owner is never subjected to so-called “range anxiety.” The Leaf owner can only make it 70 or 80 miles without having to stop for hours (overnight, probably) to recharge. The Versa owner, on the other hand, can embark on serendipitous road trips without carefully plotting mileage and charging stations and without having to pause for huge chunks of the day to refill the tank.

(MORE: Why the Car of the Future Will Be Powered by … Yep, Gasoline)

For drivers in search of a vehicle strictly for mid-size commuting purposes, the Leaf makes more sense than ever. Yet for drivers who demand more in a car, the Leaf probably isn’t the solution — at any price.

Brad Tuttle covers business and personal finance for TIME. He lives in Massachusetts with his wife and four sons, and also teaches journalism at UMass-Amherst.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

US Jobless Aid Applications Fall to 5-Year Low

(WASHINGTON) — The number of Americans seeking unemployment aid plummeted to a five-year low last week, a hopeful sign the job market may be improving. But much of the decline reflects seasonal volatility in the data.

Weekly unemployment benefit applications fell 37,000 to a seasonally adjusted 335,000, the Labor Department said Thursday. That’s the lowest level since January 2008, just after the recession began. The four-week average, a less volatile measure, fell to 359,250.

(MORE: US Unemployment Aid Applications Tick Up to 371K)

The applications data can be uneven in January. Job cuts typically spike in the second week of the month as retailers, restaurants and other companies lay off temporary workers hired for the winter holidays.

The department seasonally adjusts the numbers to account for such trends, but the data can still be choppy.

Last week, the layoffs weren’t as large as expected, a department spokesman said. That caused a steep drop in the seasonally adjusted data.

The broader trend will become clearer in the coming weeks. Applications were declining slightly at the end of last year, pushing the four-week average to a four-year low in the last week of December.

The applications figures “suggest the labor market is getting better, the issue remains the extent of the improvement,” said Joseph LaVorgna, an economist at Deutsche Bank.

Applications are a proxy for layoffs. Overall, applications remain at a level that suggests employers are hiring at a slow but steady pace. Applications fluctuated between 360,000 and 390,000 for most of last year. At the same time, employers added an average of 153,000 jobs a month.

That’s just been enough to slowly push down the unemployment rate, which fell 0.7 percentage points last year to 7.8 percent.

(MORE: U.S. Economy Adds 155K Jobs; Jobless Rate Unchanged)

Employers added 155,000 jobs last month, nearly matching the average for the year. December’s steady job gain suggests employers didn’t cut back on hiring in the midst of the debate over the tax and spending changes known as the fiscal cliff. Many economists feared that the prospect of higher taxes and steep cuts in federal spending would cause a slowdown in job gains.

That’s a good sign, since more budget showdowns are expected. Congress must vote to raise the government’s $16.4 trillion borrowing limit by sometime between mid-February and early March. If not, the government risks defaulting on its debt. Republicans will likely demand deep spending cuts as the price of raising the debt limit.

More than 5.8 million people received unemployment aid in the week ended Dec. 29, the latest data available. That’s about 465,000 more than the previous week. The figure includes about 2 million people who receive extended benefits paid for by the federal government. The rest receive aid under state unemployment programs, which usually last 26 weeks.

The overall economy grew at an annual rate of 3.1 percent in the July-September quarter. But economists believe activity slowed considerably in the October-December quarter to a rate below 2 percent or less, in part because companies cut back on restocking.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Is Walmart’s Buy American/Hire Veterans Initiative Anything More Than a PR Stunt?

FREDERIC J. BROWN / AFP / Getty Images Police man the front of a Walmart store amid heightened Black Friday security in Paramount, Calif., on Nov. 23, 2012

Bill Simon, president and CEO of Walmart U.S., made a big splash yesterday when he announced two new initiatives the firm will launch this year: One focusing on putting returning veterans to work, with a promise to hire 100,000 veterans over the next five years, as well as a push to increase the dollar amount of American-made products the firm purchases by $50 billion over ten years.

The programs received praise from the likes of First Lady Michelle Obama; Jim Knotts, CEO of the veteran-support group Operation Homefront;?as well as Scott Paul,?president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing. But before we fall over each other to join these luminaries in their praise of the world’s biggest retailer, it’s worth taking a moment to dig deeper into the numbers.

First, though, let it be said that the goal of hiring veterans is a noble one, and one that should in many cases?make business sense as well. As Simon said yesterday in his speech announcing the initiative, “Veterans have a record of performance under pressure. They’re quick learners, and they’re team players.” But many veterans have struggled to find work in a tough economy. Though the overall employment rate for veterans is below the national average, the unemployment rate for post-9/11 vets sits at 10.8%, versus 7.9% for the nation as a whole, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs. Especially for this group, Simon’s pledge to, “offer a job to any honorably discharged veteran within his or her first twelve months off active duty” must sound like a good deal.

(MORE:?10 Ways Walmart Changed the World)

But what exactly is Simon promising, and will he be helping veterans in a big way by fulfilling it? Walmart employs 1.3 million sales associates in the U.S. and claims an average annual turnover rate of 37%. At that rate, the company has to hire some 480,000 sales associates in the U.S. per year. If Walmart ends up hiring 100,000 veterans over five years, or 20,000 per year, that would account for only?4.2% of its total hiring. But according to the Veterans Administration and the Labor Department, veterans make up 9.3% of the civilian working population. To actually make a dent in veteran unemployment, Walmart would have to increase its annual hiring of veterans to 65,000, or 325,000 over five years — and hope other employers in the U.S. adopt similar hiring policies.

What about Walmart’s new efforts to “buy American”? Surely the American manufacturing sector could use a boost from the world’s largest retailer making a concerted effort to spend more on its products. And $50 billion over ten years probably sounds pretty concerted to most ears. But in Walmartland, most numbers are large and impressive. And when you compare that $5 billion per year in additional product purchases to what Walmart would likely be doing anyway, it’s reasonable to wonder whether it represents any special effort on behalf of veterans at all.

According to Walmart’s 2012 annual report, the firm increased its cost of sales (an accounting term that basically tells you what it pays its suppliers for products) by more than $21 billion from 2011 to 2012. This figure is more or less in line with annual increases in Walmart’s recent history. In other words, in a typical year of late, Walmart buys $21 billion more products than it did the previous year. Walmart doesn’t break out what percentage of these incremental costs are attributed to Walmart U.S., Walmart International, or Sam’s Club, but if we assume that the proportions mirror those of the firm’s operating profits, that would mean Walmart U.S. spends about $15 billion more each year on products than it did the year before.

(MORE:?The Corporate Tax Rate Is Lowest in Decades; Is Business Paying Its Fair Share?)

So by promising to buy $5 billion more each year in U.S. sourced products, Walmart is promising to spend one-third of its annual new spending on U.S.-sourced products. Not bad, right? But Simon claimed in his speech yesterday that “items that are made here, sourced here, or grown here account for about two-thirds of what we spend to buy products at Walmart U.S.” If this is true, then shouldn’t Walmart promise — at the very least — to maintain that two-thirds proportion in its new spending?

This is just back-of-the-envelope number crunching, but these calculations suggest that rather than creating new initatives to help solve social problems, Walmart is merely dressing up what it already planned to do. Perhaps that’s why the firm is obviously underestimating itself when it set these goals. In all likelihood, Walmart will end up surpassing these benchmarks by a large margin as the U.S. economy improves and more manufacturing comes back to America due to higher fuel costs and rising labor costs abroad. And then it will be in a position to drive home it’s PR coup by bragging about how the firm greatly exceeded its goals for hiring veterans and increasing its purchases of U.S.-sourced products.

Walmart tried something like this before, in fact — and it didn’t end particularly well. The company launched a “Buy American” campaign in 1985, but ended it?after Dateline NBC discovered?that some Walmart stores were advertising clothing made in Bangladesh as American-made.

When I presented these figures to Walmart spokesperson Randy Hargrove, he said that these goals of $50 billion in new buying of U.S.-sourced products and 100,000 new veterans are floors, not ceilings, and that in each case the numbers could go higher. But he was unable to say whether $5 billion per year in new spending on U.S.-sourced products represents an increase from what it’s done in previous years because the company “doesn’t break out those numbers.”

In Walmart’s defense, we perhaps should not expect the company to tackle social problems in a meaningful way. Walmart is good at doing a lot of things, but above all else it excels at offering products to the American public at ridiculously low prices, and thereby raising our standard of living. But private corporations aren’t all that great at solving social problems. That’s because curing social problems more often than not involves sacrificing something of value. And what does Walmart value more than anything else? Low prices for its customers. And Walmart won’t give up those low prices for anything, not the American manufacturing sector, the environment, or even veterans employment.

(MORE:?Which States Have the Most Economic Mobility?)

Christopher Matthews is a Reporter for TIME Business.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.