text:
"I do not want to wake up!" I say to myself as I realize I am on the very verge of awakening. I snuggle deeper into the thick warm covers, wrapping them tightly around my head and ears. It's cold. No. It's more than that. It's freezing, hec it's like bloody Antarctica in our bedroom.
We sleep with the windows open. No matter what the weather is like outside, the windows in our bedroom are always tilted to let in fresh air. Hale, sleet, heat wave, snow storm or Arctic cold - we leave the windows open. I think the only time the windows are shut is when the temp outside reaches -20 degrees C and inside, our bedroom is a cozy 7 C!!
If it was up to me I'd shut the windows maybe a little more often - at say 0 degrees or when it's hailing outside. But I do not have much to say in this matter. You see I share the room and my bed with Nature Boy!
Tom is the type of man who goes camping with his friends when the landscape is covered in snow, he will bathe in his birthday suit in a freezing river (I have pictures to prove it) and goes jogging when it is cold and wet! I could go on with the list but I think you get the point - Nature Boy in all his purity.
But there are two worlds colliding when he meets me in the bedroom. I am a warm blooded gal and really warm up at temperatures around the 20 degrees C. So, at 8.5 degrees, the current temperature our bedroom has, my bedtime apparel features flirty flannel pajamas, enticing woolen socks and a provocative fleece sweater. I then bury myself in a thick winter duvet with an extra blanket thrown over the top.
Of course Nature Boy is wearing boxer shorts and a long-armed T-shirt. Mind you, the long armed T-shirt is only being worn because the short armed T-shirts are in the laundry basket.
Nature Boy even dares to look perplexed at the gear I am wearing. What happened to that sexy little lace nightie I was wearing in the summer?
Hey Nature Boy, if I have to make a compromise and sleep with open windows in the freezing cold, you have to make the compromise and share your bed with Flirty Flannel Girl!
It's no surprise I am turning to warming ingredients in the kitchen now. For this mac-a-month session of Mac Attack I flavored the macarons with a warming spiced chai latte mix from the Drink Me Chai range I brought back with me from London and made a thick salted caramel to fill them. The combination was explosive and hot! The recipe is "new" and comes from the Ottolenghi cookbook also a bring-back pressie from London.
Note: If you are making macarons for the first time please read my comprehensive collection of macaron tips. All the way from the prep work to removing macarons from the baking paper, you'll find valuable tips and tricks for perfect macaron making.
Spiced Chai Latte and Salted Caramel Macarons
Printable version of recipe here
For the macaron shells
Adapted from Ottolenghi - The Cookbook
110g icing sugar
60g almonds, very finely ground
60g egg whites, (about 2 eggs) aged for either 5 days in the fridge, then for 24 hours at room temperature or a little over 24 hours on the countertop
40g castor sugar
12g spiced chai powder*, see note
For the salted caramel
200g sugar
300 ml whipping cream
140g + 30g salted butter
For the macaron shells
- Prepare your baking tray and baking sheets with a stencil of circles. Draw circles on some baking paper using a (mathematical) compass about 2 cm in diameter. Then place some white parchment paper on the baking tray and flip the baking paper back around.
- In a large mixing bowl mix the egg whites with an electric hand beater (alternatively you can use a stand mixer with the whisk attachment) until it is thick and frothy. Gradually add the granulated sugar, whisking all the while, until the mixture turns into a thick glossy meringue. The consistency of the macaron batter should be similar to hair mousse or shaving foam. Make sure the meringue is not over-beaten or else it will be too dry.
- In a food processor pulse together icing sugar and almonds until the nuts are finely ground and powdery. Sift the mixture 2 or 3 times to make sure there are no lumps.
- Place the dry ingredients into a bowl and add the spiced chai powder. Add the meringue in three portions, giving it a quick fold using the macronnage technique described in my macaron tips section. Fold a few times to break the air. Continue until you get a smooth and supple mixture, thick in consistency so that when you lift the spatula it flows back in thick ribbons. Test a small amount on a plate – should the tops fall back and flatten by themselves then it is ready, if not give it a few more folds.
- Fill a piping bag with a plain tip with the batter and pipe small rounds (2 cm in diameter) on your prepared baking paper. Leave the macarons to rest and dry for about 30.
- In the meantime preheat the the oven to 170 degrees C (see verdict below). When the macarons are ready bake the shells for 12 minutes. Remove from the oven and allow to cool. Use a flat offset spatula to gently remove the shells from the baking paper and allow to cool further on a rack.
* Note: If you are unable to find a spiced chai powder mix why not make your own. You'll find a great recipe here.
For the salted caramel
- In a saucepan, melt sugar carefully without stirring and only swirling the pan occasionally. Allow the sugar to turn a gorgeous dark amber color. Remove from heat.
- Add 30g butter, then pour the cream. At this stage the mixture will bubble, spit and spatter furiously so take care. It will seize up and harden but place the saucepan back on the heat and cook until the mixture turns fluid again.
- Cook the mixture until it reaches approx. 110 degrees C on a candy thermometer.
- Transfer the salted caramel into a bowl and allow to cool. To avoid a skin developing on the top, cover with plastic wrap.
- With an electric whisk, beat the remaining butter for approx. 10 minutes. Add the caramel in two additions, beating to incorporate it into the butter.
- Store in air-tight jars if not using straight away.
Assembling the macarons
Using two spoons or a piping bag place/pipe small dollops of the salted caramel filling on one of the shells and gently cover with another shell. Do not press. Continue to do this until you have used up all of the filling and shells.
Storing Macarons
If you are not going to be using them right away you can store the shells in an airtight container at room temperature for 2-3 days.They freeze well too but it is recommended to freeze them unfilled. To fill them take the shells out of the freezer 48 hours prior to serving and without defrosting fill them. This way the flavors will be allowed to blend as they thaw.
The recipe itself came together very easily and with absolutely no hassle. I had the macaron mixture ready and piped within minutes. My only critique point was due to the fact that they were baked in the oven at 170 degrees C for 12 minutes they were a tad dryer in comparison to the previous macarons I made. Those macarons were baked at a lower, 140 degrees C, for 12-15 minutes resulting in a nice moist inner pastry with a crispy outer shell. Although I liked the overall texture of these macarons I think they should have been taken out of the oven maybe at 10 minutes. The recipe is fantastic and really works for me so I will be using it often, playing around with the oven temperatures to get the perfect bite.
As always Soeren adored the macarons. He literally gobbles them up and as I found that they were disappearing too fast I seriously had to put a lock to the jar to save a few for my girlfriend B. I took a few with me to lunch yesterday, where I met B. at our fave French Bistro run by my French friend, E. Both indulged in the macarons delicately and were seriously smitten with the flavor combination and loved the spicy aroma. E. however, agreed with me that the slightly dryer consistency might have been due to the higher temperature.
Make sure you check out the MacTweets blog for a collection of deliciously flavored macarons.
Enjoy your weekend and see you all next week!
More macarons from WFLH:
Lebkuchen Spice Macarons with Quince Jam and Candied Ginger | Saffron Macarons with Cardamom White Chocolate Ganache | Pistachio and Lemon Cream Macarons |
All photographs and written content on What's For Lunch, Honey? © 2006-2010 Meeta Khurana unless otherwise indicated. | All rights reserved | Please Ask First


text:
I first want to say thank you to Dana and Rae for hosting such an awesome event. If you haven't been indulging in all the fun already, go check out both of their blogs for lots of great inspiration. There has already been so many great ideas!
So I know, you're probably thinking, 'What? She has two girls, how'd she get in the mix?!' Well, I pretty much slipped Dana a twenty and told her I just had to join in on the fun. But really, I think there's a part of me that really clicks with all things boy. So here I am, onward with the tutorial…
- 1/4 yard fall suiting fabric (tweed, plaids, etc., usually made from wool and/or synthetic materials)
- 1/4 yard lining fabric
scrap of leather (optional)
- rivets, grommet (optional)
- scrap of medium weight fusible interfacing
{1/4″ seam allowance throughout unless otherwise noted}
Cutting the pieces:
From the exterior fabric:
– cut one piece 8.5″ wide by 4″ tall
From lining fabric:
– cut 1 piece 8.5″ wide by 4″ tall (this is the wallet lining piece)
– cut 1 piece 8.5″ wide by 3.75″ (this is the card holder lining piece)
– cut 1 piece 8.5″ wide by 9.75″ tall (this is for the card holder slots)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
10 Things You Should Know About Feeding Your Pet
Published on January 09, 2012
Skip To
If you're like most pet people, this post should strike a chord because, at some point in your life, you'll live with a pet whose weight or appetite is problematic.
"How much should I feed my dog?" That's one of the top questions clients ask me during well-puppy visits. It also happens to be a top Google search term, right after "How much should I weigh?"
Although Google can be a great resource for some things, it's not likely to help you much in this case. The answer, you see, is different for every pet. Sure, there are rules of thumb, but that's exactly how pet owners get into trouble. Case in point: If you assume the directions on the side of a bag of kibble are gospel, chances are you'll have a fat dog in no time.
The good news is that the right answer for how much to feed most pets can be boiled down to 10 simple rules.
1. Invest in a Nutritionally Balanced Diet
Whether it's a veterinary nutritionist's recipe or an off-the-shelf commercial formula recommended by your vet, stick to something that's nutritionally balanced. (It will usually say so on the side of the bag or can.)2. Add Moisture to Feline Food
This is currently a highly controversial topic in veterinary medicine, but one 2010 study conducted at the Waltham Center in the U.K. found that cats who were fed moistened diets — even if it was just kibble mixed with water — were more active and weighed less at the end of the study.3. Measure, Measure, Measure
This is fundamental when you're trying to figure out how much to feed, so use a proper measuring tool — a mug isn't going to cut it if you want to get your pet's portion just right.
4. Be Consistent
It may go without saying, but you need to make sure the food you give your pet is prepared more or less the same way every time, so, if you home cook, that means being careful about preparing consistent portions. You should also be vigilant about feeding your pet the same formula and brand of food, as well as keeping tabs on the calorie counts of different formulas and brands.5. Assess if You're Feeding Too Much or Too Little
Here's where you need to ask your vet to point blank tell you just how fat your pet really is through a body condition score. A high body condition score (BCS) means your pet needs to lose weight.6. Learn to Titrate
The right amount of food is almost always determined through trial and error. In other words, you may have to increase and decrease food amounts over time until you hit on the right daily portion. For example, you may start with one can of food a day, but your vet says your cat is too fat. So you reduce the food by 1/4 can a day, prompting her to lose weight. After about a month, you and your vet both think she's getting a tad skinny, so you add back in a tablespoon a day.7. Don't Forget That Treats Count
Treats are food, too, and they're usually more calorically dense.8. Factor in Exercise
Most of the above takes into account a regular amount of exercise (or lack thereof). If your pup is jogging along with you each morning as you train for a marathon, for example, you may want to increase the amount of food that tumbles into the food bowl — temporarily, anyway.9. Expect Age-Related Changes
As he gets older, a pet's metabolism (like our own) slows down — and that means a little less food every year. Or try switching to senior dog food, which contains less fat.10. Keep in Mind That Every Animal Is Different
I have three dogs. The smallest one is half the size of the other two yet he eats twice as much. The moral of the story: Don't let volume sway you; each organism has a distinct metabolism that runs at its own pace.More on Vetstreet.com:
- Protein in Pet Food: What You Need to Know and Why It Is Very Important
- 10 Dangerous Human Foods for Pets
- Common Myths About Pet Food Labels


text:
Why being a Pure DPS is harder than being a hybrid
We've all heard it before. Pure DPS classes have it so easy! They only have to worry about one set of gear (excluding PVP gear) while the poor hybrid classes have to carry two or three sets! They also only have to collect gear with their primary stat and DPS secondary stats, while hybrids have to worry about multiple primary stats, tanking/non-tanking secondary stats, etc. AND they even only have to collect ONE set of always-hard-to-obtain tier gear! What a life of luxury the Pure DPS player lives!
Well, I hate to [Shattering Throw] your bubble, but it's not quite so simple.
Oh, it's true that a Mage (for example) only has to worry about gear with Intellect on it. Her desired drops are very clear-cut: no Strength, no Spirit, no Dodge, no Expertise, nada. And yeah, there's only one set of tier Mage gear.
However, what many people do not understand is that this Mage still needs a second set of gear to play her offspec, just like a hybrid class.
Why? Because Frost =/= Fire =/= Arcane.
With the implementation of reforging, suddenly we were given endless new options when it comes to optimizing our equipment. Got a chestpiece packed with Mastery, but Mastery is your worst stat? No problem! We'll just reforge a chunk of that Mastery to juicy Crit instead.
But what if your offspec values its secondary stats differently? What if your offspec hates Crit but loves Mastery?
Do you see where the problem is?
It's not something people really think about, when dual-specced DPS classes switch specs. Most players simply assume that, in terms of gear, Rogue spec = Rogue spec. But in reality, most DPS specs value secondary stats quite differently. Even worse, some specs not only have different values, but completely different cap requirements (Hit, Expertise, Crit, etc). Some lucky class/spec combos might have the same stat weights, yes, but others are vastly different, some to the point of having a secondary stat that is essential in one spec and near-worthless in the other.
For example? Let's look at my Death Knight, who is dual-specced Frost / Unholy.
DW Frost requires reaching the melee Hit (8%) and Expertise (26) caps, which is 601 Hit and 781 Expertise. (601 Hit is only 5% hit, but the spec gets a free 3% from talents.) Frost prioritizes secondary stats as Haste > Mastery > Crit.
Unholy, on the other hand, requires reaching the 8% Hit cap without that bonus 3%, which means they need 961 Hit. Their stat priorities are Haste > Crit > Mastery.
Right away, there's a disparity with the amount of Hit I need in my two specs. And notice the lack of Expertise? That is because Expertise is actually the worst stat for Unholy (not counting obvious wrong stats like Spirit or Parry). The perfect Unholy setup would see a big fat zero in the Expertise column.
So even though these are both DPS specs, the only way I could use the same gear for both specs is if I was willing to be quite subpar at one of them. If I gear for Frost, then when I switch to Unholy I don't have enough Hit and have boatloads of pointless Expertise. But if I gear for Unholy, then my Frost spec has too much hit and not enough Expertise!
How big of a deal is this? Well, it's a total of 1141 wasted or missing stat points (360 Hit + 781 Expertise). This would basically be like playing completely ungemmed and unenchanted! To anyone serious about their DPS and performing at a high level, this is completely unacceptable.
Keep in mind these are just the stats related to my basic melee caps - I haven't even gotten into how Frost hates Crit, but Unholy quite likes it. That's yet another factor that will result in one of your specs underperforming.
Want another example? Frost Mages have a special Crit Cap requirement of 33.33% due to one of their talents, something neither Arcane nor Fire have to worry about. Or if you want to look at a really dizzying example, check out the Rogue stat priorities:
Assassination: 8% Melee Hit > 17% Spell Hit > Mastery > Haste > Expertise > Crit
Combat: 8% Melee Hit > 26 Expertise > Haste > 17% Spell Hit > Mastery > Crit
Subtlety: 8% Melee Hit > Haste > 26 Expertise > Crit > 17% Spell Hit > Mastery
Those stats are all over the place! There's no way a dual-specced Rogue could have a single set of gear that properly follows each spec's priorities.
You might be asking, um hello, isn't this what reforging is for? Tidying up your stats and min/maxing for optimal results? And the answer is yes!...sort of. Sure, I can reforge and adjust my stats and end up using the same gear for both specs - at the cost of hundreds of gold every time I wanted to switch. Literally! I checked, and it costs me about 250 gold to reforge from Frost to Unholy stats.
But even putting the steep financial cost aside, the most significant drawback to this reforging requirement is that I can't do it mid-raid. Let's say I wanted to be Frost on Warmaster Blackhorn so we could have Chilblains for the Twilight Sappers, but then wanted to be Unholy for Madness of Deathwing so we could have Anti-Magic Zone.
What am I supposed to do - delay the rest of the raid while I hearth and reforge?
Imagine how frustrating and annoying that would be, to both myself and my teammates, when all I want to do is utilize both my specs so I can best benefit the group. You know - the whole POINT of dual speccing!
Another problem with this dilemma is that utilizing both specs is one of the only ways a pure DPS class (or someone who is dual-specced DPS, such as my DK) can bring additional benefit to a raid group. A hybrid character can fill in as a tank or healer, but my DK, or a Rogue, or a Mage? All we can do is DPS. As a result, we want to be able to help out in other ways, such as providing the various buffs/debuffs/etc. available in our different specs, such as Chilblains/Anti-Magic Zone, as mentioned above.
But how are we supposed to do that when it requires holding up 9 (or 24) other players?
The only real solution is doing exactly what any hybrid character has to do to play their offspec - collect and prepare a second set of gear. However, this is harder than it sounds, because quite honestly, it looks really, really bad.
Let's say my Death Knight is in LFR as Frost, and I roll on the DPS plate belt from Hagara, when I already have that exact belt equipped. Do I have a legitimate use for it? Absolutely, I need it so I can have one belt for Frost and one for Unholy. But try explaining that to the furious players in the group who only see a greedy jerk stealing "their" gear, by needing on a piece that he already has equipped. Go ahead, try to tell them about the dual spec demands and stat priorities and all that.
I'll save you the trouble. You will never be able to explain. No one listens or cares that you need that belt for your offspec so you can be your best at both specs. They just rage, froth at the mouth, accuse you of being an asshole and slam their Vote to Kick buttons as fast as they can.
It's not just an LFR situation, either. If I already have the 397 Hagara belt as Frost, and it drops again during my guild run, and my Warrior tank would like to need on it for his DPS offspec? Do you have any idea how selfish it feels (and looks) if I also rolled need on it for MY offspec, considering I already have it? I mean, it's actually equal priority for both of us - we both legitimately need it for our offspec. But it comes across as extremely greedy and selfish. And in one sense, I COULD use the one I already have for Unholy. It would cost me gold and it would be a pain in the ass to do during raid time, but I COULD use it, while he simply could not since he doesn't actually own the belt.
Now obviously, it's a little different in a guild situation. I have no doubt that, after explaining just why I needed the belt, my tank guildie would be fine with me rolling on it. But you try doing this and winning the belt, and not feeling like an absolute boor for being so greedy. It's silly, since you really do need it, but the feeling of shame is unavoidable.
And that's why I've been finding it so difficult to consider my Frost/Unholy DK truly dual-specced during Dragon Soul. If I can't switch specs on the fly, and if switching costs me hundreds of gold and requires a bunch of tinkering back in town, then why even bother being dual-specced to begin with?
Now at this point, you might be saying, oh my god shut up already, just DPS at 100% capacity in Frost and at 75% capacity in Unholy and quit whining!
Well, if that's what you think, we clearly have different definitions of what it means to be a serious DPS player.
If you don't raid competitively and don't really care about your DPS, then that's fine. I REPEAT - THAT IS FINE. This post isn't really addressed at you. Don't be mad or insulted by this, it's just aimed at a different player demographic! You play your part of the game and I'll play mine.
But serious DPS players? They do not strive to be "good enough." They don't aim to be "adequate."
There is always room for improvement.
Unlike healers or tanks, for whom success CAN be measured in such terms, the pursuit of excellence is a never-ending quest for a DPS player. I'm not saying healers or tanks aren't as committed or don't spend as much time fine-tuning their performance. That's absurd. But their criteria (Did everyone live? How was my overhealing? My cooldown usage? How much damage did I take?) are a) harder to numerically measure, and b) often at least partially out of their hands. It's simply a different situation.
But for a DPS, your performance is right there as a number, staring you in the face, challenging you to surpass it the next time.
Now, I'm not talking about ignoring crucial mechanics to pad your numbers, or blowing up the boss 0.5 seconds into the fight, pulling aggro and dying, or other characteristics of terrible players. I mean, come on. We're talking about serious players, not baddies. Doing all the right things and taking care of your specific responsibilities - interrupting, using defensive cooldowns, clicking the Lightwell - these are all things that go without saying. Without question, they are absolutely just as important as the number flashing on Recount at the end of the fight.
I liken it to writing a test. Things like killing adds and avoiding unnecessary damage? These are the no-brainers that any decent player will do. They're like writing your name on the test or meeting a word requirement - things that are just expected.
But your actual DPS results? That's your grade, the number you take home afterward as a summary of how well you performed. It's why you're there, so why would you settle for anything other than your best? If you're not doing everything in your power to push out your optimal numbers, you're slacking and letting down the rest of your raid team. We've all had those 1% or 0% wipes - playing with suboptimal stats could absolutely be the difference in such cases between a heartbreaking wipe and a triumphant kill.
Don't get me wrong - I'll screw around in solo play as an ungemmed Ret Paladin or horrible Boomkin, because well, whatever. But when I'm in a raid? When 9 other people are counting on me? No way. It's my best or nothing.
Of course, collecting and gemming/enchanting two full sets of near-identical gear is time-consuming, expensive, and is a lot of extra work. It's not for everyone, and that's okay. But for a player who wants to be able to bring two different specs to their raid, and who is unwilling to accept suboptimal performance? Getting that offspec gear is your only real solution.
It's just frustrating that gearing your offspec makes you look like such a jerk.


text:
The stock market is back.
Five and a half years after the start of a frightening drop that erased $11 trillion from stock portfolios and made investors despair of ever getting their money back, the Dow Jones industrial average has regained all the losses suffered during the Great Recession and reached a new high. The blue-chip index rose 125.95 points Tuesday and closed at 14,253.77, topping the previous record of 14,164.53 on Oct. 9, 2007, by 89.24 points.
"It signals that things are getting back to normal," says Nicolas Colas, chief market strategist at BNY ConvergEx, a brokerage. "Unemployment is too high, economic growth too sluggish, but stocks are anticipating improvement."
The new record suggests that investors who did not panic and sell their stocks in the 2008-2009 financial crisis have fully recovered. Those who have reinvested dividends or added to their holdings have done even better. Since bottoming at 6,547.05 on March 9, 2009, the Dow has risen 7,706.72 points or 118 percent.
The Dow record does not include the impact of inflation. Adjusted for that, the Dow would have to reach 15,502 to match its old record.
The Standard and Poor's 500, a broader index, closed at 1,539.79, 25.36 points from its record.
The last time the Dow was this high, George W. Bush still had another year as president, Apple had just sold its first iPhone, and Lehman Brothers was still in business.
But unemployment was also 4.7 percent versus 7.9 percent today, a reminder that stock gains have proved no elixir for the economy.
Still, the Dow high is another sign that the nation is slowly healing after the worst recession since the 1930s. It comes as car sales are at a five-year high, home prices are rising, and U.S. companies continue to report big profits.
The stock gains have helped retirement and brokerage accounts held by many Americans recover. That, in turn, has helped push U.S. household wealth nearly back to its peak before the recession, though many in the middle class are still deep in the hole. Most middle-class wealth is tied up in home values, which are still a third below their peak.
Good economic news Tuesday helped lift stocks. Retail sales in the 17 European countries that use the euro rose faster than expected, China's government said it would support ambitious growth targets, and a report showed U.S. service companies grew last month at their fastest pace in a year.
"It feels great," says Marty Leclerc, chief investment officer at Barrack Yard Advisors, an investment firm. In early 2009, when stocks were plummeting, "it looked like Armageddon was nigh. It's a lot more fun to be in a rising market."
In the depths of the recession four years ago, few investors would have predicted such a fast recovery. Some feared another Great Depression. Banks were collapsing, lending was frozen, world trade was plunging, and stocks were in free fall.
"People thought we were going to relive the 1930s," says Robert Buckland, chief global stock strategist at Citigroup. He calls the stock gains since "pretty remarkable."
From its peak in October 2007 to its bottom in March 2009, the Dow fell 54 percent. That was far less than the nearly 90 percent drop in the Great Depression but scary nonetheless. There had been 11 previous bear markets since World War II and none had reached 50 percent.
One man who stayed calm and didn't sell was Jay Sachs, 70, a retired computer consultant. In fact, as others scrambled to exit stocks in late 2008, he plunged in more _ scooping up drug maker Ely Lilly and Co., health-care products giant Johnson & Johnson and food company General Mills.
What are today's top 50 stocks? This free list will share the big market movers on a daily basis to help you find trading opportunities.
"You have to be greedy when others are fearful," he says, quoting a famous line from billionaire Warren Buffett, who also bought in the panic. Sachs adds, "People are still fearful and that's a good sign. There's room for growth."
He says his portfolio has doubled in value in four years.
As stock rebounds go, this has been an unusually quiet and uncelebrated one. Typically, bull markets are accompanied by rising trading volume, a surge in young companies going public and Internet chatter over hot stocks.
The past four years, none of that has happened.
Adding to the chastened mood is lingering fear among many investors that stock gains can disappear in a flash. Burned by two stock-market crashes in less than a decade, Americans have sold more U.S. stocks than they've bought the past four years, nearly unprecedented in a bull market since World War II.
In this run-up, nearly all the buying has come from companies repurchasing their own stock in an effort to boost its value. Companies in the S&P 500 have bought $1.5 trillion since the Great Recession began in December 2007.
Dow records are dismissed by some investors as unimportant because the index comprises just 30 stocks. Many professional investors prefer to follow the S&P 500, which, as the name implies, tracks 500 companies. But the Dow has closely followed the ups and downs of its broader rival over the years, and is a good proxy for how big companies are doing.
The S&P 500 is up 128 percent from its March 9, 2009 low, about the same as the Dow.
The Dow record is a victory of sorts for Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Under his aegis, the Fed launched an unprecedented campaign to lift stocks by making their chief rival for investor money _ bonds _ less attractive.
Under a program called "quantitative easing," the Fed has bought trillions of dollars of bonds to drive their yields down. The idea was that the puny yields would so frustrate investors, they'd have no choice but to shift into stocks. That, in turn, would push up stocks and make people feel wealthier and more willing to spend, helping the economy.
Just as Bernanke had hoped, American household wealth, or assets minus liabilities, has risen, though the gains haven't been shared equally.
In the recession, household wealth fell $18.9 trillion, or 28 percent, as the prices of assets like stocks and homes tumbled. But after bottoming in the first quarter of 2009 at $48.5 trillion, wealth rose $16 trillion through the third quarter of last year and was within striking distance of its peak of $67.4 trillion, according to the latest data from the Federal Reserve. Gains since then may have pushed wealth to a new high.
Middle-class households have not recovered as much as those numbers suggest because most of their wealth is tied up in their homes, and home values haven't bounced back like 401(k) accounts.
Homes accounted for two-thirds of middle-class assets before the recession, estimates economist Edward Wolff of New York University. By contrast, they accounted for one-third of assets of all U.S. households. Stocks were 7 percent of middle-class assets, less than half the percentage for all.
The rich have been the biggest winners of this bull market. Eighty percent of all stocks are held by the wealthiest 10 percent of households.
The question now: Can the stock rally continue? Here are four reasons it could:
Plenty of cash: Companies have enough money to keep buying shares, which can push stocks up in the short term. Companies in the S&P 500 had more than $1 trillion in cash late last year, two-thirds more than in 2007.
Low inflation and interest rates: Two factors that typically spell the end of a bull market seem a long way off. Inflation has been 1.6 percent the past 12 months, below the Fed's 2 percent target. Interest rates are near record lows; the short-term rate the Fed controls is being kept between zero and 0.25 percent. The Fed has said it plans to keep the rate where it is until unemployment falls below 6.5 percent, or 1.4 points lower than it is today. Even when the Fed starts raising the rate, it could be years before it gets high enough to hurt the economy and stocks.
Four of the five previous bull markets since 1970 ended as investors got spooked by a recession, or the anticipation of one, and sold stocks. And what causes recessions? In three of the past five, it was the Federal Reserve hiking interest rates to slow inflation.
Economic expansion: The economic expansion that began 44 months ago in June 2009 is still relatively young. The previous three expansions lasted 73, 120 and 92 months. And this one may finally be getting traction: Sales of new homes in January hit the highest rate in 4 1/2 years. Home prices in January were up nearly 10 percent nationwide from a year earlier. And sales of autos, the second-biggest consumer purchase, reached a five-year high. Most important, hiring is picking up. Employers added an average 200,000 jobs each month from November-January, compared with 150,000 in each of the prior three months. More jobs means more money for people to spend, and consumer spending drives 70 percent of economic activity.
Stocks still seem reasonably priced based on the earnings that companies are generating. On average, stock prices are 17 times per-share earnings in 2012 versus 19.4 times in 2007. Today's price-earnings ratio is about the same as the average since World War II.
What are today's top 10 ETFs? This free list will share the big market movers on a daily basis to help you find trading opportunities.
If per-share earnings keep growing, stock prices could go up too, and the P/E ratio would stay the same. And there have been many periods in which the average P/E ratio rose well above the long-average. Such "multiple expansion," as market watchers refer to a rising P/E ratio, would mean stock prices would be even higher.
To stock bulls, the economy is on the verge of what Bernanke calls "escape velocity," a self-sustaining pace of growth and better than the sluggish 1-2.5 percent of the past three years. Faster economic growth would boost corporate earnings, which would lead to higher stock prices.
Of course, if investing was as simple as looking up interest rates and stock valuations, we'd all be rich. Plenty can go wrong.
For starters, future earnings, the biggest driver of stock prices, could prove disappointing. Financial analysts expect earnings for the S&P 500 to grow a healthy 8 percent this year, according to FactSet. Most of that increase is expected in the last half when they assume economic growth accelerates.
Will that happen? It's anyone's guess, and financial analysts are often too bullish. A year ago, they expected a 13 percent jump in earnings in the last three months of 2012. They got 4 percent instead.
Investors also need to pay attention to what's happening in the rest of the world. Big U.S. companies generate nearly half their revenue from overseas. The 17 European countries that use the euro as a currency have been in recession for more than a year. Japan, the world's third-largest economy, fell into one late last year. Stock markets tend to look ahead, so what matters is whether the recessions deepen in Europe and Japan or those economies start growing again.
Another worry is what will happen after the Federal Reserve stops stimulating the U.S. economy. Last month, minutes of the Fed's last policy meeting were released, and they showed members disagreeing on when to stop. The Dow lost 155 points in two days.
Jeff Sica, founder of money manager Sica Wealth Management, says the rising market is good because it's a sign of confidence. But he fears stocks could sink when the Fed stops buying bonds.
It's a big "psychological reason the market is going up," he says. "People know the Fed will continue to inflate assets."
The Fed stimulus was in response to the worst economic recession since the 1930s.
The Great Recession began in December 2007, two months after the Dow and S&P 500 reached their peaks in October. It was triggered by a drop in home prices that hammered consumers and banks. Nine months later, in September 2008, Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy and lending froze worldwide.
Panicked investors began pulling money out of stocks. Prices, which had been falling slowly, nosedived. By March 9, 2009, the Dow had fallen 54 percent and the S&P 500 57 percent.
In total, $11 trillion in stock wealth, or 12 years of stock gains, were wiped out in 17 months.
Despite widespread fear then, the history of bear markets was encouraging. In the second- and third-worst bear markets since World War II, the S&P 500 fell 49 percent in 2000-02 and 48 percent in 1973-74. Both times the climb back took less than six years.
But few people believed four years ago that the return would be so fast.
A few days after stocks bottomed, a BusinessWeek cover story laid out three scenarios for regaining the losses. The most pessimistic held that stocks would notch 6 percent gains each year and the Dow would return to its old high in 2022, 13 years later. The most optimistic assumed 10 percent annual gains and saw a return in 2017, eight years later. The Dow has rebounded in about half the time as the most optimistic case.
The climb hasn't been smooth, though.
Small cap markets make big moves on a daily basis. This free list will help you identify the hot symbols.
In May 2010, a trading glitch set off a so-called flash crash that sent the Dow plunging 600 points in five minutes. In August 2011, stocks yo-yoed for several days on fears that the U.S. would default on its debt. Over three weeks, the Dow plunged 2,000 points. Last October, the Dow fell 1,000 points over six weeks on worries that a budget deal wouldn't get passed and the economy would go over the "fiscal cliff."
But the Fed's bond buying and the ability of companies to produce record profits helped the market overcome every setback.
In the turbulent journey to new highs, Wall Street strategists and other experts have predicted many times that small investors were about to fall in love again with stocks. The "dry powder" of their money would set fire to an already hot market. After all, small investors had helped push stocks up in the great bull market of the `80s, which began in August 1982. Those who had left the market years earlier began buying again, and stocks more than tripled in five years.
They drove a bull market again in the 1990s. Stocks more than quintupled in 9 1/2 years.
But small investors have not only stayed away the past four years, they have sold hundreds of billions of dollars of stocks.
Then, in January, as the Dow inched closer to its record, individual investors seemed to have second thoughts. They put nearly $20 billion more into U.S. stock mutual funds than they took out in January, according to the Investment Company Institute, a trade group for funds.
It was just a trickle, but it may have helped stocks surge. In January, the Dow rose 5.8 percent, and the S&P 500 rose 5 percent. It was the best start to a year for the Dow since 1994.
For good or ill, it's possible the Dow's new high might convince investors to put more money into stocks.
"When you hear about new highs, the greed factor kicks in," says Colas, the BNY ConvergEx strategist. "It gets people to think, `Do I own enough stocks?'"
By BERNARD CONDON
AP Business Writer