Agencies furloughing workers include the Internal Revenue Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, Housing and Urban Development, and the Office of Management and budget.

Such large departments haven’t been affected by budget issues in Washington since Bill Clinton was in office, when, famously, he and Congressional Republicans were at an impasse that lead to the government shutting down.

While these cuts were supposed to be equal across the federal government, there have been talks of bonuses for high ranking government officials at the end of the year, and the poor, children, and elderly are being affected by the $85 billion in cuts first.

While children are losing clothing for school in some states, and seniors depending on the government for meals are kept waiting, Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill is set to make sure there are no bonuses this year. McCaskill has written a bill which would end bonuses for federal employees while the sequester is in effect, saying, “The idea that some of the highest paid federal government employees could be getting bonuses while others are being furloughed is outrageous.”

It’s not just the underprivileged who are facing adversity from the cuts, either.

Of the four departments shutting down from budget cuts, the IRS will furlough the most, letting its 90,000 person workforce go home for five days. This means taxpayers can expect delays in checking on their refunds, as help hotlines and offices will be closed nationwide.

The EPA claims it will be delayed in investigating environmental offenses, though, as it faces sending home 17,000 employees for a period of 10 days. Only White House appointees confirmed by the Senate are allowed to continue working at this time. However, Americans are mostly undecided on whether these cuts are good or bad.

A poll conducted by Gallup earlier this month found that Americans, even in the face of airline industry furloughs which led to delayed flights, are not particularly hostile towards the sequester. Asked if the sequester was good or bad for the country, 52 percent of those polled claimed they did not know enough to say, and another 17 percent claimed it was a good thing, with the remaining 30 percent declaring it bad.

This lack of a definitive response from the public has some questioning whether or not the threat of a sequester may not make it a successful tool for congressional motivation in the future, with Gallup noting, “Americans’ lack of outrage or discomfort may reveal that the threat of sequestration in the future will not prove to be an effective tool to motivate legislators to reach a budget compromise.”

Don’t Miss: Here’s Why Most Americans Will Work Past Retirement Age.

Not only will the diesel varient of GM’s best-selling small sedan be the most fuelefficient of the line, but it will also reportedly be the quickest. Zero to 60 is taken care of in about 8.6 seconds, while the top spec gasoline version — the Cruze Eco — takes 10 seconds.

More significantly, the Cruze diesel is the first American challenger in the diesel small car segment to take on Volkswagen, which has long enjoyed a monopoly on the American diesel market. However, as VW’s diesel models such as the Golf, Jetta, and Passat TDI lines have gained popularity, domestic companies have realized the potential market for the vehicles, which offer superior mileage, without a significant tradeoff in performance.

At $25,695, the Cruze diesel will come in about $630 less than the $26,325 that the VW Jetta goes for, with an automatic transmission, the Cruze’s only transmission option. The Jetta, when equipped with the manual, will be cheaper than the Chevy.

The car has been awarded a 46 mile per gallon average by the EPA, topping the 42 from the VW models (although in USA Today’s test run, that figure came to 41 — “eroded by a heavy right foot.”).

Pictured: Cruze Eco

“From a packaging standpoint what we offer in our vehicles, we think is a much more superior product,” Chevrolet Vice President of Marketing Chris Perry said. “As mentioned earlier, people getting into this marketplace are mostly concerned about performance and fuel economy. If you look at our numbers there, the Chevrolet clean turbo diesel offers better horsepower, better torque, more miles on tank of fuel, over 700 miles on tank of fuel. And the best news is we have achieved 46 miles per gallon highway.”

The car will return about 151 horsepower, with peak torque of 264 foot-pounds from the 2.0 litre unit under the hood. Finding fuel shouldn’t be an issue either, as about 52 percent of gas stations in the U.S. carry diesel. While diesels account for about 3 percent of U.S. vehicle sales today, analysts like firm LMC Automotive have predicted diesels will rise to 7.5 percent of U.S. sales in five years. This can be attributed to rising costs of gas and people searching for more fuel efficient cars, as well as manufacturers desperately racing to raise the average MPG figures for their fleets to meet the stringent new standards kicking in in 2020.

Investing Insights: Is General Motors the Great American Bailout Success Story?

The three criteria considered for ranking were income replacement, or average unemployment benefits (as of 4Q 2012) as a percentage of average state income per capita; unemployment rate (as of March 2013); and wealth disparity, the ratio of households with incomes of at least $200,000 to those with incomes of less than $10,000 (as of 2011 Census ACS). Each state was ranked on the three criteria and the ranks were averaged.

8. Alaska

We begin with Alaska. Though it is the 8th worst state for the unemployed, it bears a 6.2 percent unemployment rate that is more than a full percentage point below the national average of 7.5. What are Alaska’s other claims to fame? While it is the 15th worst state for minimum-wage workers, it also boasts the #1 spot for the most female senior workers. Careful inspection of where Alaska falls in the three criteria shows that its income replacement rank is what largely accounts for its status as #8 worst place to live. It bears a relatively low unemployment rate and its average income per capita isn’t significantly lower than the other seven. However, its income rank of #3 is what influences its bad reputation.

7. New Jersey

New Jersey holds down the stop at #7 and is also one of the five states on our list of havens for the unemployed. It does not tax the insurance benefits of its 414,973 unemployed persons, but unlike Alaska, the Garden State has a high unemployment rate, sitting at 9.0. New Jersey is also the second worst state for minimum-wage workers. Additionally, it is the sixth highest state with the most million-dollar tax filers, elucidating the state’s wealth disparity, the factor that helped it earn its #7 spot.

6. Illinois

Next on our list is Illinois, the state that also suffers from the second highest unemployment rate in the U.S. at 9.5, two full percentage points above the national average. While right below New Jersey, it is the 5th state with the most million-dollar tax filers. Unemployment insurance covers 36.4 percent of lost income.

5. Delaware

Delaware is next in line, holding the #5 spot. Its unemployment rate of 7.3 is only slightly lower than the national average and it ranks #7 on income replacement. The state’s average weekly unemployment benefits of $243 are also noticeably lower than its neighbors on the list. The two states that flank Delaware on the list, Illinois and New York, have weekly benefits much higher at $315 and $305, respectively.

4. New York

Speaking of New York, it’s next on the list at #4. Like its fellow neighbors on the list, it has an unemployment rate sufficiently above the national average, at 8.2. It is also ranked #8 on income replacement, right behind the aforementioned Delaware. The state that is home to the city that never sleeps is the second highest with the most million dollar tax filers. It also holds the #2 spot among states that earn the most tax revenue from alcohol, tobacco, and betting. It is the third worst state for minimum-wage workers.

3. California

California, ranked third, is the only state that falls into all three of our lists in that it suffers one of the highest unemployment rates, serves as a tax haven for those unemployed, but still remains one of the top worst places to be it. What is it about the Golden State that warrants it all these titles? Barring Nevada, California bears the highest employment rate of any U.S. state., but it is also the state with the greatest growth in jobs for techies, most showbiz jobs, and most million-dollar take filers. Thus, the wealth disparity and the high unemployment rate help earn it its #3 status.

2. Connecticut

Connecticut comes in second for worst places to be unemployed, with an 8.0 unemployment rate and 147,031 unemployed persons as of April. Not only is it ranked #6 on income replacement, but excluding the District of Columbia, it has the highest average income per capita. It also is the fifth worst place for minimum wage workers.

1. District of Columbia

Not only does Washington, D.C., rank #1 on income replacement, it also has the highest average income per capita, by far. It also blows its neighbors on the list out of the water. While each of the other seven states differ in their average rank of all three criteria by 1 or 1.5 points, District of Columbia differs from the #2 spot, Connecticut, by 2.3. Its average rank on the three criteria is 5.7, while Connecticut’s is 8.0. Alaska, the #8 state on our list, has a rank of 15.7, a full 10 points higher than D.C. Now, what else does the state hold the #1 spot for? Aside from the worst place to be unemployed, it has the greatest gain in associate-degree pay, largest wage increases, most male senior workers, highest pay for tech jobs, and is the worst place for minimum-wage workers. Moral of the story: if you’re unemployed, stay away from D.C.

Don’t Miss: How Long Can the Economy Support Rising Home Prices?

A total of 188 hedge funds own some amount of Apple stock, according to statistics provided by The Wall Street Journal. As of March 2013, the percentage of Apple’s equity capital owned by hedge funds was at 2 percent, which is the same percentage owned by hedge funds in the previous quarter. Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) came in second with 184 hedge funds owning 5 percent of its equity capital. Insurance giant AIG (NYSE:AIG) held the third place in the number of hedge funds that owned its stock. However, AIG also had a much higher percentage of its equity capital owned by hedge funds at a whopping 17 percent.

Apple also ranked high on a list of stocks that most frequently appear among the largest ten holdings of hedge fund portfolios. Apple was ranked number three with 55 funds including the Cupertino-based company’s stock in their top ten holdings. Apple’s average portfolio weight was 7 percent in these hedge funds.

Google was ranked second, with 74 hedge funds keeping the Mountain View-based tech company in their top ten. AIG took the number one spot, with 79 hedge funds claiming the insurance company’s stock for their top ten portfolio selections.

Here’s how Apple, Google, and AIG have traded so far this week:

Follow Nathanael on Twitter (@ArnoldEtan_WSCS)

Don’t Miss: Apple’s Newest Patent Target: Galaxy S4.

C = Catalyst for the Stock’s Movement

General Motors is a feel-good story. Americans love comebacks, and General Motors definitely fits the bill. Another feel-good aspect of this story is that based on employee reviews at Glassdoor.com, General Motors is a company that truly tries to do the right thing for its customers. And according to employees, it never cuts corners. In all, employees see the company they work for as the good guys. And an impressive 77 percent of employees approve of CEO Daniel F. Akerson.

It’s widely believed that corporate America is evil. However, in this case, the good guys are winning. Below is a quick look at April sales improvements:

Chevrolet: Increased 11 percent

Cadillac: Increased 34 percent

Buick: Increased 11 percent

GMC: Increased 7 percent

General Motors is also consistently launching new vehicles, which is an indication of confidence in future prospects. The company is performing well in emerging markets, such as Brazil, China, and India. Overall, Q1 global vehicle sales increased 3.6 percent. And General Motors increased its market share by 0.02 percent in Q1 to 11.4 percent.

General Motors isn’t just focused on growth; it’s also focused on cost reduction in Europe, which should help the bottom line. General Motors has strong exposure to Europe. For example, 17.6 percent of its 2012 revenue came from Europe.

It should also be noted that General Motors is on Goldman Sachs’s Hedge Fund VIP List. The companies on this list have outperformed the market year-to-date as well as last year. It’s a follow-the-smart-money approach for investors. However, this doesn’t guarantee future results. Furthermore, analysts love the stock: 16 Buy, 3 Hold, 1 Sell.

Now let’s get to some numbers. Below is a chart comparing basic fundamentals for General Motors, Ford Motor Co. (NYSE:F), and Toyota Motor Company (NYSE:TM).

Let’s take a look at some more important numbers prior to forming an opinion on this stock.

T = Technicals Are Strong

General Motors has been trading right along with the industry over the past year, which is a good thing – a very good thing! However, General Motors doesn’t offer any yield whereas Ford yields 2.70 percent and Toyota yields 1.10 percent.

At $32.84, General Motors is trading above its averages.

E = Equity to Debt Ratio Is Strong

The debt-to-equity ratio for General Motors is stronger than the industry average of 0.80.

E = Earnings Have Been Inconsistent

Annual earnings have been inconsistent, but they have been on the right side of the line. Annual revenue has consistently improved, but the rate of growth has slowed.

When we look at the last quarter on a year-over-year basis, we see declines in revenue and earnings.

Now let’s take a look at the next page for the Trends and Conclusion. Is this stock an OUTPERFORM, a WAIT AND SEE, or a STAY AWAY?

T = Trends Support the Industry (for now)        

Due to the Chinese/Japanese conflict over islands in the East China Sea, General Motors and Ford have gained market share in China. Chinese consumers are shying away from Toyota and Honda.

In a more overall sense, do you believe Europe is bottoming? Do you believe the American consumer is strengthening? Do you believe China is slowing? The answers to these three questions will give you your answer as to whether or not the auto industry will perform well over the next three to five years.

Conclusion

General Motors has potential to run higher, but since it looks more likely that Bernanke will unwind later this year, auto manufactures could become high risk. It would be wise to see how the broader market acts over the next few trading days prior to considering any positions in General Motors.

For now, General Motors is a WAIT AND SEE. This is a story of a now-great company trapped in a highly uncertain economic environment.

Using a solid investing framework such as this can help improve your stock-picking skills. Don’t waste another minute — click here and get our CHEAT SHEET stock picks now.

All content posted should not be considered professional advice. Please do your own research and consult with a professional financial advisor before making any investment decisions. I don’t have any positions in this stock.

While these states all had unemployment levels close to the national average at the end of 2006, the most recent U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics report shows that these four states are continuing to feel the devastation of the recession more so than others. From the West Coast, down to the South, up to the Midwest, and then back to the West, the four states with the highest unemployment rates show that slow recession recovery does not discriminate.

1. California

With a current unemployment rate of 9.0 percent, 1.5 percentage points higher than the national average, the Golden State bears the fourth highest unemployment rate in the U.S. Fortunately, California protects its 1,748,519 unemployed persons by exempting their unemployment insurance benefits from being taxed. California continues to stand as the most populous state in America. However, should these figures continue to stand, more people may be finding themselves seeking residence elsewhere. Though its direct neighbors are not faring much better, many states east of the state, including Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming boast unemployment rates almost half that of California.

2. Mississippi

Down South, Mississippi suffers the third highest unemployment rate at 9.1 percent. Though the rate continues to inch down, it still stands significantly higher than the national average.

In March, the state saw a decrease in unemployment after two months of increases. Mississippi continues to send mixed signals, as it demonstrates positive economic indicators and payroll rises, but still continues to face precarious jobless rates. It remains nearly 4 percent, or 45,000 jobs, short of its all-time peak.

3. Illinois

Up in the Midwest, Illinois also shows sign of struggle as it bears a 9.3 percent unemployment rate. While jobless rates have recently dropped in other states, the Prairie State is witnessing the opposite, reflecting the unevenness of the states’ recession recovery. Similarly, Delaware, Indiana, Wisconsin, Mississippi, and New Hampshire have also seen a rise in their jobless rate, rather than the expected fall. While Illinois suffers the second highest unemployment rate in the U.S., its direct Northwest neighbor, Iowa, claims the fifth lowest.

4. Nevada

The state suffers the highest unemployment rate of 9.6 percent, a two full percentage points higher than the national average. However, it’s not all bad news for Nevada. This gamblers’ paradise also registered the largest rate drop in unemployment of all the states over the year. While first-time claims for jobless benefits in Nevada rose in April, the number of claims is smaller than the ones filed last April.

Don’t Miss: Are Rising Interest Rates Hurting the Housing Market?

Retirement derailers have a significant impact and affect the majority of the population. Unexpected life events cost the average American $117,000 in savings, according to a new survey by Ameriprise Financial. This figure jumps to $177,000 for those with investable assets of $750,000 or more. The average respondent experienced four derailers, while 90 percent encountered at least one. Furthermore, 37 percent said they experienced five or more retirement derailers.

“The derailers we discovered in this study could throw a wrench into anyone’s retirement plans,” says Suzanna de Baca, vice president of Wealth Strategies at Ameriprise Financial. “Unfortunately, the chance of being hit by at least one of these risks is extremely high.”

To little surprise, the survey of 50- to 70-year olds with at least $100,000 to invest said the top six derailers were related to the recent financial crisis and the lingering side effects.

The top retirement derailer event — with 63 percent of the vote — was the low interest rate environment our economy now finds itself in, courtesy of the Federal Reserve. Record low interest rates have resulted in lower-than-expected asset growth. Fifty-five percent of people in the survey said market declines caused by the recession derailed their retirement.

With home prices plunging from their bubblicious peaks, 33 percent named lower home equity than expected as a derailer event. Meanwhile, 23 percent took a financial hit by having to support grown children or grandchildren. With defined benefit plans becoming extinct, 23 percent said their pension plan was not worth as much as anticipated or discontinued.

Suzanna de Baca adds, “Expecting the unexpected is clearly more important than ever in preparing for retirement. We know the recession had a huge impact on American pre-retirees and retirees, but families are realizing that other unexpected events like supporting a grown child or grandchild can also hit the bottom line – both immediately and long-term. The good news is that these unanticipated events don’t always have to be retirement derailers – they can be addressed with a plan in place.”

Americans remain mostly positive about their trip to retirement, but their expectations may be different from reality. Sixty-four percent of those surveyed described their road to retirement as smooth, instead of bumpy. Yet, only 18 percent said their savings are ahead of where they thought they would be a decade earlier. Even more concerning, 42 percent admit they are behind prior expectations.

More than half of respondents who have experienced at least one derailing event say the impact has been extremely or somewhat serious. However, 33 percent blame themselves for being behind on savings, and many wish they learned about proper money management sooner. Fifty-six percent blame others for being behind on savings.

Naturally, you are the person that cares the most about your money, but seeking the help of a well-researched financial advisor can greatly improve your chances of an ideal retirement. In the survey, nearly three out of four people with a financial advisor have a written financial plan, compared to only 39 percent of those without a financial advisor. People with written financial plans are more likely to feel confident about affording essentials and unexpected expenses.

Don’t Miss: You Should Listen to Warren Buffett On Economic Moats

Follow Eric on Twitter (@Mr_Eric_WSCS)

However, recent news from General Motors (NYSE:GM) and Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) may have Romney biting his tongue. Not only did GM top its 2010 initial public offering price for the first time in two years last week, but as of Wednesday, Tesla is the first recipient of a U.S. Energy Department vehicle loan to pay off its debt fully. Tesla, labeled a “loser” by Romney, now appears to be the winner.

Elon Musk, Tesla’s chief executive officer, tweeted on Monday that the company would “probably” repay the Energy Department loan — worth $465 million and extended in 2009 —  as soon as Wednesday, which just so happens to be a full nine years ahead of schedule. The announcement also comes in the wake of a near-perfect score for the company’s Model S car from Consumer Reports magazine.

The success of the Model S-maker may help silence Obama critics who didn’t agree that certain green-energy companies should receive government loans and grants. When prompted about Tesla’s recent announcement, Ohio Republican Jim Jordan said in an interview to Bloomberg on Tuesday: “When they’re picking all these losers, it’s nice for them to have one where they can point to.” If nothing else, it is clear the Republicans favor the word “loser.”

Nonetheless, despite Tesla’s success, other electric car makers aren’t faring as well. Plug-in carmaker Fisker Automotive, its battery supplier A123 Systems Inc., and solar-panel maker Solyndra LLC have all faced big troubles, as Bloomberg points out. A123 filed for bankruptcy in October, Fisker’s $529 million vehicle loan was blocked, and Solyndra, the recipient of a $535 million loan from a different Energy Department program, also filed for bankruptcy.

A123 and Fisker’s failures were connected, as the former was supplying batteries to the latter that caused some vehicles to shut down during driving. Following its A123 supply disruption and recall for the plug-in Karma, Fisker was prevented from drawing from more of its vehicle loan. Unfortunately, these high-profile failures managed to overshadow a number of companies that met with success.

Because the three companies only borrowed about $1 billion of the more than $8 billion given out under Obama’s alternative-energy vehicle program, the payoff rests more largely on Ford Motor (NYSE:F), which received more than half of that at $5.9 billion. Ford continues to make quarterly payoffs that are scheduled to go through June 2022.

Another major player in the loan debacle, Nissan Motor Co., has yet to reveal a schedule for when it can be expected to repay its $1.4 billion loan being used to develop the all-electric Leaf and accompanying batteries.

Don’t Miss: Existing-Home Sales Hit Highest Level Since November 2009.

Wherever Bernanke goes, he can’t escape federal fiscal policy. The federal deficit and growing debt crisis have defined the post-crisis political environment in America. Ideological budget warfare has given birth to the sequestration spending cuts, which are arguably the largest drags on U.S. economic growth. Combined with the expiration of tax holidays and explicit tax increases, federal fiscal policy has co-dominated economic conversation in the U.S. alongside the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy, so it’s unsurprising that Bernanke would include it in the highest-level overview of the current economic situation.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

The issue that Chairman of the Committee Congressman Kevin Brady (R-TX) pressed Bernanke the most about was the issue of when and how the Fed will exit its quantitative easing program. This question has been at the forefront of Mr. Market’s mind for pretty much the duration of the post-crisis equity bull run, because the Fed’s various QE programs have proven to be a tremendous stimulus for stocks. Without it, the entire economic landscape changes. When purchases begin to end, traders and investors will have to edit their strategies accordingly.

For some context on the scope of the QE program, the FOMC announced in a May 1 policy update that it had “decided to continue purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month and longer-term Treasury securities at a pace of $45 billion per month.”

This program has helped increase the size of the Fed’s balance sheet to over $3.3 trillion. The size of the Fed’s balance sheet is one of the primary concerns of the Fed and one of the most-used pieces of fodder among critics of the program.

Adopting another unconventional monetary tool, the Fed decided to explicitly link its policy decisions to the metrics tracking its dual mandate: employment, and inflation. At the beginning of the year, the Fed set a 2.5 percent inflation threshold and 6.5 percent unemployment target as the minimum criteria for a policy rate move. As St. Louis Fed President James Bullard said in a presentation earlier this week, “The adoption of threshold-based forward guidance was a clear improvement on the previous calendar-based forward guidance, which seemed to be plagued by the pessimistic signal problem.”

Bernanke summed up his feelings on inflation during the testimony by saying that, “if anything, [it] is a little bit too low.” Unfortunately, the same thing can be said of employment.

Besides GDP, the headline unemployment rate is closely monitored as a proxy for economic health. Lowering this rate is not explicitly the job of either monetary or fiscal policy, and policymakers have argued that job growth is primarily the responsibility of the private sector. That said, it is unarguably the responsibility of monetary and fiscal policy to create an environment that encourages the economic growth necessary to sustain job growth. As a result, the health of the labor market is the function of an awkward game of rock-paper-scissors played between the Fed, Congress, and the private sector.

With this in mind — that the Fed has explicitly linked its policy decisions to these economic metrics, and that monetary policy can only affect employment to a certain degree — Chairman Brady asked one of the most interesting questions of the entire hearing.

“My worry is that the Fed doesn’t have the prescription for what ails our economy,” said Brady. “A year ago, the Fed said that it wouldn’t set an employment target rate because it’s generally affected by non-monetary factors. But you’re unwinding the QE based on the employment areas that you have the least control of. What do we make of that?”

After addressing a leading statement about the slowness of the recovery (in which Bernanke cited fiscal policy as a significant headwind to growth, and defended aggressive monetary policy), Bernanke confirmed that monetary policy alone cannot directly influence the level of long-run unemployment.

“What we are trying to address here is the short-run cyclical gap,” he said. “We are seeing the economy operating at a level below what it is capable of operating at, and many people out of work who normally would have work, and monetary policy can help to put people back to work in the short run.”

Bernanke continued to say that in the longer run, increasing the potential growth of the economy is not really the Fed’s job, its the job of Congress. He cited the tax code and government spending on education and infrastructure as factors influencing long-term economic — and therefore employment — growth.

“Fiscal policy, at all levels of government, has been and continues to be an important determinant of the pace of economic growth,” Bernanke said later in his testimony. “Federal fiscal policy, taking into account both discretionary actions and so-called automatic stabilizers, was, on net, quite expansionary during the recession and early in the recovery. However, a substantial part of this impetus was offset by spending cuts and tax increases by state and local governments, most of which are subject to balanced-budget requirements, and by subsequent fiscal tightening at the federal level.”

Being members of Congress, the committee clearly recognized the role of fiscal policy — as separate from monetary policy — in economic growth. Bernanke also clearly identifies the dividing line between the two, and in his assessment of the current economic condition, called attention to the fiscal policy adopted by Congress.

“Fiscal policy at the federal level has become significantly more restrictive,” he said. “In particular, the expiration of the payroll tax cut, the enactment of tax increases, the effects of the budget caps on discretionary spending, the onset of the sequestration, and the declines in defense spending for overseas military operations are expected, collectively, to exert a substantial drag on the economy this year.”

“The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the deficit reduction policies in current law will slow the pace of real GDP growth by about 1-1/2 percentage points during 2013, relative to what it would have been otherwise. In present circumstances, with short-term interest rates already close to zero, monetary policy does not have the capacity to fully offset an economic headwind of this magnitude,” he continued.

At the same time that these headwinds have brewed, Bernanke indicated that not enough has been done to encourage long-run economic growth — the foil to the pro-austerity position being argued all around the world. The short solution to this spending problem is to scale back short-term cuts in order to promote growth that will more substantially reduce deficits and debt in the longer-term.

You can follow Dan on Twitter (@WSCS_Dan)

Don’t Miss: Is Austerity Finally Bringing Growth to Britain?

This May, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has found 15,000 and a new crop of stock buyers. The stock market continues to achieve all-time record highs.

We keep hearing, ‘I have all this cash on the sidelines, do you have any good ideas where to put it now?” The current stock market’s rising tide is not lifting all boats, so in order to win we utilize our CHEAT SHEET investing framework to sift for the gems.

We’ve done a ton of research and found a financial stock with all the characteristics to win in today’s market based on key value metrics.

The best part is our feature stock pick for May is now available in our acclaimed 15-page Stock Investor Cheat Sheet (full of more stock ideas, a Special Report, and much more). Click here now to discover our pick before the next leg higher!

Cheers to your success,

Damien & Derek Hoffman

Founders, Wall St. Cheat Sheet

P.S. – Act now and we’ll send you our new 24-page Ultimate Cheat Sheet to Apple’s Stock free ($68 value)!