Diego Maradona's crisis management appears to have worked well enough for Argentina to regain some pride and win their friendly against a committed if average Scotland.

Kids. They never know how to be humble in victory.

You'd think after besting all other celebrity babies on Forbes' list of Hollywood's Hottest Tots, Suri Cruise would thank the magazine, say some gracious words about her competition (consisting primarily of Brangelina's 29 kids) and call it a day.

No.

Out with mom Katie Holmes yesterday, Suri responded to celebrity news reporters' questions about her victory with a one-finger salute to the tots she vanquished ...

IN YOUR FACE! She's got the money, power and adorableness, but the victorious Suri Cruise could show a little more class next time. [Photo Credit: Splash News Online]

The number of U.S. workers filing new claims for unemployment benefits soared again last week to its highest level in 16 years, suggesting more pain ahead for already struggling labor markets.

Meanwhile total claims lasting more than one week cracked the four-million mark, rising to fresh 25-year highs in a sign of just how hard it is for the unemployed to find new work as the economy struggles with the aftermath of the housing collapse.

Initial claims for jobless benefits jumped 27,000 to a seasonally-adjusted 542,000 in the week ended Nov. 15, the Labor Department said Thursday. That’s the highest since July 1992. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had expected claims to drop 11,000.

There was nothing unusual affecting the data, a Labor Department analyst said, explaining “the claims just came in higher than seasonal factors predicted.”

The four-week average of new claims, which aims to smooth volatility in the data, rose 15,750 to 506,500, the highest since January 1983 and well above recessionary levels typically associated with further increases in the unemployment rate. The four-week average was below 400,000 as recently as July.

Nonfarm payrolls have fallen 10-straight months, pushing the unemployment rate to a 14-year high of 6.5% in October. Thursday’s weekly claims data — which include the survey week for the November employment report — point to another sizable payroll drop this month and further increase in the unemployment rate.

In quarterly forecasts released Wednesday, the Federal Reserve said the central tendency of officials’ unemployment rate forecasts for the end of 2009 was 7.1% to 7.6%, though individual forecasts went as high as 8%.

Meanwhile according to Thursday’s report the tally of continuing claims, those drawn by workers collecting benefits for more than one week in the week ended Nov. 8, rose 109,000 to 4,012,000. That’s the highest level since December 1982.

The unemployment rate for workers with unemployment insurance rose 0.1 percentage point to 3%, the highest since June 2003.

Not adjusted to reflect seasonal fluctuations, California reported the largest increase in new claims during the Nov. 8 week, 15,532. It didn’t provide industry detail.

Kentucky reported the largest decrease in claims, due to fewer layoffs in the automobile industry. –Brian Blackstone

Following the fresh declines in markets, Peter Boone and Simon Johnson argue that the TARP is no longer succeeding in stabilizing markets. Below they lay out the government’s options. Boone is chairman of Effective Intervention, a U.K.-based charity, and a research associate at the Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics, and Johnson is a former IMF chief economist, and is currently a professor at MIT Sloan School of Management and a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. They run the economic crisis Web site http://BaselineScenario.com.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced earlier this week that the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) has succeeded in stabilizing the U.S. banking system. This unfortunately no longer appears to be the case.

It is true that immediate financial meltdown was averted in mid-October through a dramatic bank recapitalization program. This convinced the market that leading banks were less likely to default and turned around debt prices.

But the share prices of major banks have declined steadily since that intervention and fell again sharply yesterday. The numbers now are remarkable. The market capitalization for Citigroup is below $40 billion. This is a bank with a $2.05trillion balance sheet, plus substantial off-balance-sheet liabilities that yet may come back on balance sheet. And it is not alone. For example, the market capitalization yesterday for Bank of America was under $70 billion, while its balance sheet is around $1.7 trillion. Some top banks are now worth less than their Tier 1 capital, which means that investors expect large or at least uncertain future losses.

The market view is clear: a severe recession is coming and big banks need a lot more capital. The private sector won’t provide enough. Despite the G-7 statement in October that systemic banks will no longer fail and despite the promises implicit in the TARP, no one knows what will happen as the economic outlook worsens. The particularly worrying development on Wednesday was that credit default swap spreads jumped (again) for some major banks — in at least one case, rising to over 350 basis points for the first time since the bank recapitalization program took effect. There is a real danger that access to private finance for major banks will dry up completely.

In effect, the market is testing the government, pushing to find out how far it will let market conditions for banks deteriorate. The situation is analogous to that of a fixed exchange-rate regime, in which investors test how long a government is willing to hold a particular exchange rate. Eventually, the costs of holding the exchange rate may be too high and there will be devaluation, so why not get out now? Selling the currency, in that situation, is a one way bet. U.S. bank stocks and debt currently feel like the same sort of one-way bet to many. The solution to such crises requires two key ingredients: a credible plan, and actions to ensure that investors betting against the plan lose money. What is the right plan?

Doing nothing is not really an option. There is a risk that corporations, hedge funds and others will reduce their exposure to the most problematic banks, and this would effectively be a run. You can forestall collapse with massive quiet Fed support, but this is not even a band-aid. Problems easily spread to other banks and exacerbate problems on Main Street, as banks scramble to raise capital and liquidity by contracting credit, selling assets and competing with high deposit rates to find funds.

There are no good options, but three of the less bad choices are:

1. Repeat a TARP-type injection of capital, on similar financial terms, to all systemically important institutions. This will achieve a great deal: investors betting against the major banks in credit markets lose money, and — since the TARP terms are generous to current owners — some bank equity prices likely rally. Next time everyone will be more reluctant to bet against the banks. This plan is expensive — the entire remaining $410 billion in TARP may need to be deployed in this fashion. But the real problem is that, because the TARP terms were so favorable and the debate over auto makers has exacerbated bailout fatigue, there is dangerously little political will to support such actions.

2. Recapitalize the most troubled banks, but make the financial terms tougher. Banks cannot afford to pay much higher interest rates, but the government could take more warrants (i.e., options to buy common stock). This heads towards nationalization — if the government invests $50 billion in Citigroup on the same terms that Warren Buffett invested in Goldman Sachs, the tax payer will effectively get control. The message to markets will be: sell equities now because the government is set to effectively nationalize, but at least creditors would feel safe.

3. Some banks go into conservatorship, while all other banks get large new injections on original TARP terms. This would prevent contagion from failed banks to others, and it would penalize equity investors betting against “good” banks. However, some massive banks would probably see their business go under and this would prove highly costly for the government.

What is the least bad option? You need to keep the major banks private and able to raise capital again when the economy recovers, so option 3 is not appealing and this also puts a cap on the warrants in option 2. You can only keep the purely private route open with terms similar to what TARP offered, which is option 1. This will be unpopular. The only way to make this intervention at all palatable is by capping executive pay and benefits (perhaps they should sell their private jets and fly commercial?), and encouraging departures (without parachutes) at banks where confidence in management has been lost.

The message from a new TARP capital injection will be that America stands behind its commitment to systemically important financial institutions. But there is a good chance these commitments will need to be reinforced with still further TARP-type capital rounds in the future. This is the cost of the administration’s growing lack of market credibility, helped by the numerous abrupt (often warranted, but poorly explained) policy changes emanating from the Treasury, and the prospect of a very severe recession.

One longer term approach may now appeal to the Federal Reserve, i.e., a more expansionary monetary policy steepens the yield curve, raising profitability for banks and generating sufficient inflation. This is not without substantial risks, but house prices recover. Most large banks can and should survive in that scenario.

Reuters - Pakistan summoned U.S. ambassador Anne Patterson on Thursday to protest over missile strikes launched by pilotless drone aircraft against militant targets in Pakistan.

AP - Michael Jackson's lawyer says the pop star has agreed to come to London to respond to a Bahraini sheik's $7 million lawsuit.

Filed under: Robots

Caption contest: cat driving Roomba -- is not so impressed, actually originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:49:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Today was the first day recounting in Minnesota. And Al Franken made up some decent ground against Norm Coleman. The day started with Coleman ahead by 215 votes. And after recounting 18% of the precincts, Franken had picked up 41 votes, bringing the deficit to 174. As you can see, that's about the pace Franken has to keep up if he's going to catch up with Coleman. But of course there's no reason to think that the 'pace' tomorrow will be better or worse than today. So there's still really no telling what's happening.

Another point to keep in mind is that these shifts are in ballots that neither side disputed. In other words, these were changes based on based on ballots where the voter intent was clear enough that neither campaign questioned it. There's a whole other pile of ballots that one or the other campaign challenged. And those won't get looked at until mid-December.

According to the Star-Tribune, Coleman's people challenged 146 today and Franken's 123.

Reuters - U.S. auto executives went to Capitol Hill on Wednesday for a second day to plead for $25 billion in government aid, but legislators tried to fashion a last-minute compromise bailout bill that could pass both Congressional and White House muster.

AFP - French judicial officials on Wednesday charged a longtime comrade-in-arms of Rwanda's president over an assassination in the run-up to the 1994 genocide, as anti-European protests unfolded in Kigali.

One of the nation's largest rebate processing firms, CPG (RebateStatus.com) has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. What does that mean for you? Well, if you happened to mail-in a rebate form with a company that CPG works with, your check may be in limbo because they don't have the money to cash it. At this point, exactly how the situation will be handled is unclear—but there are a few things you can do to get things under control. Dealnews is recommending that anyone who has a rebate check or is expecting one not cash it because it may bounce and result in an NSF fee. Instead, you should hang on to it until more details become available (this goes for rebates that have not been submitted as well). If you are not sure whether or not your rebate is invovled, a partial list of affected companies is available after the break.

Partial list of companies that have dealt with CFG in recent months:

Acronis Software
ACTIVSION
Advance Auto Parts
Antec
AVG
Bed Bath & Beyond
BIC Corporations US - Shaver Division
BFG
Bridgevine
Canon
Citibank
costco
Fujitsu
Home Depot
Logitech
Motorola (Surfboard cable modems)
Natures Earth Products
Nero
Panda Distribution
Pandigital
PC Tools
PriceGrabber
Rosewill (Newegg house brand)
Samsung
Smith Micro Software
Tabletops Unlimited
TrendNET
Westinghouse
XFX
ZeroTherm
Zyxel

Naturally, the best way to tell whether or not you are affected is to head on over to rebatestatus.com and check on your submission. You may also want to try and call any of the numbers listed on your rebate form on the off chance they can provide more information. I would expect an official announcement from CPG (or something from the company you purchased the item from) with details on how to proceed sometime in the next few days. [Dealnews and Fatwallet and Tampa Bay Business Journal Thanks Luis!]

And that's exactly what Suri Cruise thinks of this shit! Forbes.com came out with their second annual Hollywood's 10 Hottest Tots list and Suri came out on top. I think Pedo Bear co-sponsored this shit. I mean, hottest? Maybe they are referring to the fact that Suri's never wearing a jacket, so she must be hot literally. Unfortunately, that's not what they mean.

Forbes came up with their list by looking at each celebrity kid and how much media attention they get. Suri beat out all the Jolie-Pitt messiahs, because she was in more magazines and blogs than them. Only 3 out of the ten thousand Brangelina deities made the list: Shiloh, Pax and Zahara. Forbes will probably be shut down by the powers above next week for not including Brangelina's golden twins on that list.

Here's the Top 10:

1. Suri Cruise (daughter of Katie Holmes and Chris Klein Tommy Girl)
2. Shiloh Jolie-Pitt (you know who her parents are)
3. Zahara Jolie-Pitt (see above)
4. Pax Jolie-Pitt (see above)
5. Sam Alexis-Woods (daughter of Tiger Woods)
6. Cruz Beckham (son of Posh & Becks)
7. Matilda Rose Ledger (daughter of Michelle Williams & Heath Ledger)
8. David Banda (son of Vadge & Guy Ritchie)
9. SPF (son of Brit Brit & KFed)
10. Sam Sheen (daughter of Denise Richards & Charlie Sheen)

I can't wait for Forbes annual Sexiest Celebrity Fetuses list!

Source

Thanks Heather

(Credit: CBS Interactive)

As someone who's never been a big fan of AM/FM radio, I never really saw the advantage of HD Radio. At first, the all-digital format promised little more than CD-quality digital transmission of existing stations. Then the broadcasters added multicasting, offering "HD2" stations that weren't available at all on analog hardware. They even sweetened the deal by temporarily reducing or suspending commercials on those HD2 stations (though that program has recently ended).

But the thing that most retarded the growth of HD Radio adoption was the price of the hardware. The earliest tabletop HD Radios, for instance, cost upwards of $500--not exactly an impulse purchase. In the years since, prices have tumbled: tabletop and in-car models hit $200 last year, and newer HD-enabled clock radios can be found for under $100 now. Still, as far as in-home options none of the models we'd tested had really blown us away.

That's finally changed with the Sony XDR-F1HD. ...

Suri Cruise is cooler than Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt's kids, and not just because we don't have to hear about her being breast-fed every frickin' day.

The TomKat spawn topped the list of Forbes' "Hollywood's 10 Hottest Tots."

The li'l tyke, 2, won the annual honor, which is based on the amount of media attention celebrity babies garner, as well as their parents' popularity.

Suri Cruise appeared in more news articles and blogs than any of the Jolie-Pitt children, though Shiloh, Zahara and Pax were ranked 2-4, respectively.

Suri Cruise rules the world of celebrity babies, and you can see why.

Rounding out the (adorable) top 10 were Sam Alexis Woods, Cruz Beckham, Matilda Rose Ledger, David Banda, Sean Preston Federline, and Sam Sheen.

Here's some pics of celebrity babies 2-10, just so they don't feel like they got totally bitch-slapped by Suri, which they pretty much did. Click to enlarge!