By Nick Rizzo
November 16, 2011

An audit says that it’s nearly even money the FHA runs out of cash next year — WSJ

Struggling cities are paying more and more to ratings agencies — Bloomberg

Gingrich called Freddie Mac “insane,” was later paid $300K to lobby for them — Bloomberg

70% of the top 1% have been employed by their father’s firm — milescorak

Even Glenn Hubbard is calling for “radical change” — Washington Post

Even as one of their reporters is arrested by the NYPD, the Daily News says “Bravo” to Bloomberg’s eviction of Occupy Wall Street — NYDN

Short sellers are “waiting and watching” for a chance to all make a killing on Groupon — Reuters

And Netflix takes up 32.7% of all internet bandwidth — Mashable


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

“70% of the top 1% have been employed by their father’s firm”

That’s not what that link says. It says 70% of the sons of the top 1% have worked at the same firm as their father. That’s a completely separate metric, and says nothing about how the top 1% got their money.

Posted by dsfan | Report as abusive

Good point, dsfan. My father was a letter carrier, I am a lawyer. Different path, huh? But I was a substitute letter carrier a couple of summers in college, so I suppose I count as “same firm” on that chart. But there still seems to be some significance there.

Posted by kenjd | Report as abusive

“And Netflix takes up 32.7% of all internet bandwidth”
With the remaining 67% being pr0n. The last .3% is a combination of spam, facebook updates, and groupon offers.

Posted by OnkelBob | Report as abusive

Gingrich did not call Freddie Mac “insane” and then take $300,000. Rather, he took the $300,000 and then lied about calling them “insane.” Read the story, then write the blurb. It works better that way!

Posted by AlanVanneman | Report as abusive

dsfan, what’s interesting about the 70% figure is not so much the number itself, as the fact that it’s so much higher for the top 1% than for everybody else. Look at the graph in the full article — for most of the income scale, the percentage is 35-45%. Then suddenly at the very high end, it spikes. IOW, the very wealthy use their connections to help their kids get a good start. Not surprising, and not even necessarily immoral or anything like that — but it should make us doubt the “I got my wealth by lifting myself by my bootstraps” rhetoric that the wealthy use to justify their anti-tax zealotry. Nobody becomes wealthy SOLELY through their effort — they rely on many other factors, including the luck of being born into the right family, the physical and legal protections of the gov’t, and so on.

Posted by Auros | Report as abusive