joi, 5 mai 2011

Seth's Blog : Seeing the truth when it might be invisible

Seeing the truth when it might be invisible

I'll believe it when I see it.

This is a problem.

It didn't used to be. It used to be a totally fine strategy to work your way through life only believing what you could see and touch, only caring about what impacted your life right now.

Two things changed:

First, over time, the base of knowledge we have about the world has increased exponentially, and that knowledge compounds. Electrons and ozone and game theory and databases might all be invisible, they might be beyond your understanding, but they're still important, still looming right at the edges of the life you live right now.

And second, of course, is the notion of a worldwide web of information, a system that brings every bit of news and data and discovery right to your door. While you may want to disbelieve what's happening around you, that won't make it go away, and what's "around you" is now a much larger sphere than it ever was before.

If you are too trusting of the invisible, then you buy that $89 ebook that comes with the promise of instant riches, or you sign up for ear candling, or invest time and money with a charlatan. If you haven't figured out how to discern the invisible stuff that's true from the invisible stuff that's a trick, you're helpless in a world where just about every decision we make has to do with things that are invisible.

Thus, two kinds of serious errors: believing in invisible things that aren't true, or insisting that the truth might not be. They're caused by fear, by deliberate misinformation and by being uninformed.

We have to accept that once we start down the slippery slope of always (or never) believing, we end up in Alice-in-Wonderland territory. Do you have firsthand knowledge that the Earth is round (a sphere)? Really? Have you ever seen the tuberculosis bacteria? Perhaps it doesn't exist, they might say it's just a fraud invented by the pharmaceutical industry to get us to buy expensive drugs... Or consider the flip side, the Bernie Madoff too-good-to-be-true flipside of invisible riches that never appear. After all, if someone can't prove it's a fraud yet, it might be true!

Eight things you've probably never seen with your own eyes: Buzz Aldrin, the US debt, multi-generational evolution of mammals, an atom of hydrogen, Google's search algorithm, the inside of a nuclear power plant, a whale and the way your body digests a cookie. That doesn't mean they don't exist, nor does it mean you can't find a way to make them useful.

Do governments and marketers lie to us? All the time. Does that mean that the powerful (reproducible, testable and yes, true) invisible forces of economics, history and science are a fraud? No way.

Once you go down that road, you're on your own, no longer a productive member of a society built on rational thought. Be skeptical. Test and measure and see if the truth is a useful hypothesis to help move the discussion forward. Please do. But at some point, in order to move forward, we have to accept that truth can't be a relative concept, something to use when it suits our agenda but be discarded when we're frightened or want to score a point.

Richard Feynman said, "I don't know what's the matter with people: they don't learn by understanding, they learn by some other way — by rote or something. Their knowledge is so fragile!"

Merely because it's invisible doesn't mean it's true--or false.

Is it a skill to figure out what's true, even if it's invisible? I think it is, and a rare and valuable one.

 

More Recent Articles

[You're getting this note because you subscribed to Seth Godin's blog.]

Don't want to get this email anymore? Click the link below to unsubscribe.




Your requested content delivery powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 9 Thoreau Way, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA. +1.978.776.9498

 

miercuri, 4 mai 2011

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis


Recession Sessions - 16 Songs About the "Great Recession"

Posted: 04 May 2011 07:43 PM PDT

Ryan Stotland of the Bull and the Bear band pinged me with an email about an album of songs regarding the "Great Recession".
Hello Mish

We just released Recession Sessions, which is an album of economics-themed songs dedicated to the Great Recession. It's pioneering the genre of "financial folk", and we're hoping to use the album as a springboard to raise money and awareness for the Somerville Homeless Coalition.

Ryan
In an Email exchange with Ryan, he confirmed that 33% of money raised will go to the Somerville Homeless Coalition.

The song that started it all three years ago is called Central Bankers' Dilemma. Since then, the group has added 15 more songs. For more information about the artists and the songs please see Recession Sessions.



Three years and several continents later, the album is finished, but Ryan asks "is the crisis really over yet?"

I have a one word answer to that question: No.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Rasmussen Employment Survey: 19% of Workers Report Their Firm is Hiring, 25% Laying Off

Posted: 04 May 2011 01:11 PM PDT

In contrast to a Gallup poll that shows more companies are hiring than firing, a Rasmussen Reports poll shows the opposite.

Please consider Rasmussen Employment Index
19% of Workers Report Their Firm is Hiring, 25% Laying Off

The Rasmussen Employment Index, which measures workers' perceptions of the labor market each month, regained five points in April after falling to a recent low in March. At 74.9, the Employment Index is up two points from a year ago and 11 points from two years ago. Yet despite April's gain, confidence in the Labor Market is still down from the beginning of 2011.



Just 19% of working Americans now report that their firms are hiring while 25% say their firms are laying workers off. Those numbers are little changed from the month before. It has been nearly three years since the number reporting that their firms are hiring has topped the number reporting lay-offs.



Twenty-eight percent (28%) of workers are now worried about losing their jobs in the near future. That's down a point from a month ago when concern reached the highest level since September 2010.

The survey of 8,522 working Americans was conducted in April 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 1 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
28% Worried About Losing Their Job

One of the key finding in the survey is the number of people worried about losing their job. Those with such worries are not likely to go on spending sprees.

However, I cannot explain the huge divergence between the Rasmussen survey and the recent Gallup survey.

Gallup Survey Question

Based on what you know or have seen, would you say that in general, your company or employer is --
1) hiring new people and expanding the size of the workforce
2) not changing the size of its workforce
3) letting people go and reducing the size of its workforce



Gallup hiring minus firing = +13.
Rasmussen hiring minus firing is-6.

That is a huge difference for which I have no explanation.

For details and commentary on the Gallup survey, please see Gallup: U.S. Job Creation At Post-Recession High; What's Next? How Congress Can Spur Job Creation

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Non-Manufacturing ISM Plunges Below Prediction of All 73 Economists, New Orders Collapse, Prices Firm; Did Rosenberg Capitulate at the Top?

Posted: 04 May 2011 10:35 AM PDT

The April 2011 Non-Manufacturing ISM plunged 4.5 points to 52.8 from 57.3 The drop was below expected range of all 73 economists in a Bloomberg ISM Survey.

The range of economists' forecasts in the Bloomberg survey was 54.5 to 59 with the median forecast up a tick to 57.4.

Tellingly, new orders collapsed by 11.4 points from 64.1 to 52.7. Employment, one of the weaker measures and up only 8 consecutive months fell to 51.9. One more reasonably bad month and services employment will contract.

Please consider the April 2011 Non-Manufacturing ISM Report On Business®
Economic activity in the non-manufacturing sector grew in April for the 17th consecutive month, say the nation's purchasing and supply executives in the latest Non-Manufacturing ISM Report On Business®.



click on chart for sharper image

New Orders

The 12 industries reporting growth of new orders in April — listed in order — are: Management of Companies & Support Services; Arts, Entertainment & Recreation; Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting; Mining; Real Estate, Rental & Leasing; Wholesale Trade; Information; Health Care & Social Assistance; Public Administration; Construction; Other Services; and Educational Services. The four industries reporting contraction of new orders in April are: Finance & Insurance; Retail Trade; Professional, Scientific & Technical Services; and Utilities.



Employment

Twelve industries reported increased employment, five industries reported decreased employment, and one industry reported unchanged employment compared to March.

The industries reporting an increase in employment in April — listed in order — are: Arts, Entertainment & Recreation; Mining; Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting; Management of Companies & Support Services; Other Services; Information; Construction; Accommodation & Food Services; Finance & Insurance; Public Administration; Wholesale Trade; and Transportation & Warehousing. The industries reporting a reduction in employment in April are: Real Estate, Rental & Leasing; Educational Services; Health Care & Social Assistance; Professional, Scientific & Technical Services; and Utilities.

Prices

For the second consecutive month, all 18 non-manufacturing industries reported an increase in prices paid, in the following order: Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting; Mining; Utilities; Arts, Entertainment & Recreation; Construction; Wholesale Trade; Accommodation & Food Services; Finance & Insurance; Transportation & Warehousing; Real Estate, Rental & Leasing; Management of Companies & Support Services; Educational Services; Professional, Scientific & Technical Services; Retail Trade; Public Administration; Information; Health Care & Social Assistance; and Other Services.
ISM Prices Firm, What About Profits?

This was a pretty grim ISM report, especially compared to expectations with the median prediction from economists was up not down.

Unless this report is an outlier, if prices paid remain firm, profits can't. Employment is also suspect and close to contraction.

One month does not a trend make. However, if this is the start of a directional change, the report does not bode well for GDP, profits, or the unemployment rate.

Expect Keynesian clowns to howl for more stimulus.

Did Rosenberg Capitulate at the Top?

CNBC reports Rosenberg Goes Bullish: Is the End Nigh?
Published: Wednesday, 27 Apr 2011 | 12:52 PM ET

If the bull market will end when the last grizzled bear comes out of his den and comes to the table, then hold onto your portfolio, because it may well be dinnertime.

David Rosenberg, the curmudgeonly senior strategist and economist at Gluskin Sheff in Toronto, told clients Wednesday in his daily newsletter that he's finally given up his long-held position that the market is heading for a thud, if not an all-out crash.

Even as the major averages have risen 90 percent off their March 2009 lows, Rosenberg hasn't been convinced, arguing that the economy is still too weak and investor sentiment way too giddy to justify such a relentless rally.

No more.

"This is not about throwing in the towel," he writes, "it is an acknowledgement of what the market internals are flashing at the current time from a purely tactical and technical standpoint."

For more than two years now Rosenberg has been advising clients not to trust the rally, defending bonds against "inflationistas" and warning that deflation remains the far greater danger.

But he now marvels—somewhat incredulously, to be sure—at how investors are dispelling concerns over downward GDP revisions, soaring commodity prices, supply disruptions after the Japan disaster and looming European debt default risks.

"The (US dollar) is on a one-way ticket south and so far has been orderly—will that be sustained is anyone's guess," he writes. "For now it is being viewed as fodder for the global liquidity and risk-on trades."

Rosenberg says he is still "nervous" about the US consumer, whose weakness in the wake of the credit collapse hasn't bothered Wall Street investors much. He also makes an argument about Chinese inflation and equity weakness there.

But mostly, he sees the market trending toward an "important technical signpost" which he says is a "Holy Grail" that entails "new highs led by higher volume."

Anyway, Rosenberg cites the "wall of worry" argument that the market will keep moving higher despite its many obstacles.
Wall of Worry? What Wall of Worry?

There has not been any worries for at least a year. What little worry there was a year ago vanished in a sea of liquidity, followed by a Fed-induced Quantitative Easing euphoria.

Yesterday, for the first time ever, I got a cold-call from a commodities broker telling me I should buy silver futures.

It is hard to find anyone who does not think buying this dip right now with both hands is a poor idea.

They could be right. Anything is possible. However, history suggests that buying the first dip following a parabolic spike is not a wise action.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Is Inflation High and Rising or Low and Falling? A Four-Quadrant Model of Investing Analyzed

Posted: 04 May 2011 02:52 AM PDT

I received an interesting email out of the blue yesterday from Archie Kangethe, a Vice President at Morgan Stanley Smith Barney.
Good Morning Mish,

If you have time please check out the chart below from Dr. Kelly at JPMorgan. The data from the US government would lead me to believe we are in the lower left quadrant, but my daily life leads me to believe we are in the upper left. If we are indeed in the upper left and the markets were to perform as it did in the past; commodities and cash could do well.

I would love to read your thoughts.

Archie P. Kangethe
Vice President-Wealth Management
Financial Planning Specialist
Financial Advisor
MorganStanley SmithBarney
2Q 2011 Guide to the Markets

Kangethe forwarded a chart showing "four quadrants of inflation": high and rising, low and rising, high and falling, and low and falling.

I asked to see the context and received a link to 63 page PDF called the 2Q 2011 Guide to the Markets by Dr. David P. Kelly, CFA and four others on the JPMorgan Market Strategy Team.

I did a double-take on this and in case you missed it, Kangethe works for Morgan Stanley, the chart and PDF in question is from JPMorgan.

I found a number of interesting charts in the PDF to comment on and will get to "four quadrants" last. Here are some charts that caught my eye.

In all cases, anecdotes in red or blue on the charts are mine.

Total Private Payroll



In the "Great Recession" 8.8 million jobs were lost. Only 1.8 million have been added. It's worse than it looks because in general, it takes 125,000 jobs a month (1.5 million annually) to keep up with birth rate and immigration. The recession ended June 2009.

In theory (all things equal which they seldom are), unemployment should be rising. The only reason it has fallen from 10.1% to 8.8% is several million people dropped out of the labor force. Millions want a job but stopped looking for work and are therefore not counted as unemployed.

Forward Earnings Estimates



One thing supporting rising earnings is lack of hiring. If you outsource to Asia, and/or get by with fewer workers profits rise. Still, those operating earnings are highly suspect.

A far better valuation case can be made by looking at 10-year normalized "real" earnings as opposed to fluff forward estimates that are frequently wildly off as they were in 2007-2008.

Moreover, most stock market gains and losses do not come from earnings but rather the price investors are willing to pay for those earnings.

GDP - The Great Depression vs. The Great Recession



One of the things that smoothed out GDP is that government spending by definition adds to GDP. Whether anything useful is produced is irrelevant.

When you throw $trillions at a problem one might expect more than the paltry rise in GDP and employment we have seen in this alleged recovery.

However, the question as always is "where to from here?"

US Headwinds

  • Expiring unemployment benefits
  • Cutbacks in state budgets
  • Rising taxes in many states
  • Congressional focus on cutting the deficit
  • Pent-up demand for autos is exhausted
  • Renewed housing slump
  • Massive housing inventory
  • End of QEII
  • Gas prices over $4

Global Headwinds

  • Rising interest rates in Europe
  • Renewed sovereign debt crisis in Europe
  • Rising interest rates in China
  • Regime change in China in 2012
  • Unsustainable growth in China
  • Property bubbles in Australia, Canada, China

That is veritable cornucopia of headwinds. I struggle to see many tailwinds other than exceptionally low interest rates. Worse yet, exceptionally low rates fueled what I believe is another stock market bubble, another commodity bubble, and another round of speculative mania in junk bonds.

CPI 1960-2011



The above chart shows the CPI as computed by the BLS. Many would dispute that chart. I dispute it for completely different reasons.

I think actual housing prices belong in the CPI, not Owners' equivalent rent that is the single largest component in the CPI with a 25.2% weighting.

I have talked about this many times before but the most recent chart I have is a year old. Please consider Case-Shiller CPI Now Tracking CPI-U; Real Interest Rates Are Once Again Negative
CS-CPI vs. CPI-U



click on chart for sharper image
Note that at the height of the property bubble CS-CPI was at 8% vs. 4% as reported by CPI-U. The opposite happened in the housing crash. Given the renewed downturn in housing, CPI inflation is overstated now.

Four Quadrants of Inflation



click on chart for sharper image

Archie Kangethe wrote "The data from the US government would lead me to believe we are in the lower left quadrant, but my daily life leads me to believe we are in the upper left."

Is one's daily life a measure of inflation? Can one ignore housing? Is there a representative basket? More importantly, where to from here?

Inflation may be high as measured by commodities, education, and energy but not housing, electronics, or food bought on sale and stored. I do all of our grocery shopping and I think food is a bargain. Sale prices on meat are no higher than they were 10 years ago.

As noted above, I do not think one should ignore housing. Housing prices used to be the CPI at one point until someone got the not-so bright idea to use rent prices instead.

The CPI would certainly be lower today if housing prices were factored in. It would have been way higher in 2006. Greenspan missed huge inflation by failing to incorporate housing prices. Bernanke repeated Greenspan's mistake.

Prices a Poor Measure of Inflation

Regardless of how one feels about the above price commentary, prices are a poor measure of inflation for numerous reasons that I have spelled out at length. One such example is Inflation: What the heck is it written way back in 2006.

I have since changed my definition slightly to include a "mark-to-mark" valuation of credit.

Certainly by my own definition we have been in a period of inflation since March 2009 even though various measures of credit have declined.

Another way of looking at things is by conditions one might expect to see in periods of inflation, deflation, and hyperinflation as described in Humpty Dumpty On Inflation in December of 2008.

At that time, a table of 16 factors signaled deflation. Most are synonymous with inflation now. However, and I keep point this out to many deaf ears, my model has been the US would go in and out of deflation over a long period of time similar to Japan.

We were in deflation then, we are not now, and I expect another credit crunch and another round of deflation to which Bernanke will likely respond again, probably pushing gold up again.

Four Quadrant Inflation as a Method of Investing

Can it Be that it was all so simple then?
Or has time rewritten every line?


No, it's not that simple. In 13 times since 1971 inflation was "low and falling" yielding a return of 12%. In 2008 inflation was low and falling yielding a return of -50% or so depending on what index one wants to measure. Foreign equities did worse because of the rising dollar.

By the way, I need to be fair to JPMorgan. They posted that quadrant chart without comment. They did not say it was a way to invest.

Nonetheless, assume for a moment that Kangethe is correct, and that inflation is high and rising. Look at the upper left quadrant. Does one expect cash to return 7%? With interest rates near zero, I should hope not.

Are commodities even the place to be now? Personally I doubt it as explained in Manufacturing ISM Prices Paid Hits Another High, Up 22nd Consecutive Month; Inflation Hysteria?

Four Quadrants a Poor Investing Model

The four quadrant model of investing has two more serious flaws.

  1. It fails to consider in valuation
  2. It fails to factor in cycles of PE-expansion and PE-Contraction

Valuations Matter

Valuations are a critical factor in investment decisions.

In case you missed it, please consider Negative Annualized Stock Market Returns for the Next 10 Years or Longer? It's Far More Likely Than You Think
Annualized Rates of Return for Select Years



Click on any table to see a sharper image

Note how much the starting PE valuation matters. Someone who started investing in 1929 received an annualized rate-of-return of 0% for two full decades, even if they religiously reinvested dividends every year.

However, someone investing in 1982 received an excellent annualized rate-of-return for two full decades (12% for the first decade and 9% annualized for 20 years).

Note year 2000. Starting valuations were the highest in history. It should not have been a surprise to discover that 10 years later, the annualized rate-of-return was -2%.

Bear in mind, the Case-Shiller normalized PE for the year ending 2010 is 23. Does that bode well for the next decade?

Cycles of PE Compression and Expansion



Over long periods of time PE ratios tend to compress and expand. Unless "it's different this time", history says that we are in a secular downtrend in PEs. From 1983 until 2000, investors had the tailwinds PE expansion at their back. Since 2000, PEs fluctuated but the stock market never returned to valuations that typically mark a bear market bottom.

Moreover, demographically speaking, the current decade not only starts with very rich valuations, but also comes at a time when peak earnings of boomers have passed. Those boomers are now heading into retirement and will need to draw down savings, not accumulate large houses and more toys.

Of course, the market can of course do anything this year (or the next few years), but history strongly suggests that stock market returns for the next 10 years will be lean years, perhaps negative years.
Commodities Analysis

In regards to Quadrant I investing (high and rising), once again assuming that is where we are (which I doubt), does one really want to plow into silver at $50 up from 5, oil at $110 up from $35, etc?

Someone may, but I don't, especially given the headwinds I noted at the beginning of this post. The time to buy sectors is when they are undervalued and unloved, not when nearly every hedge fund in the world is plowing into commodity futures and leveraged mo-mo bets on equities.

Are there any bears left? On anything other than the dollar and treasuries?

Ironically, cash can do well at zero% if commodities and equities both tank. Given extreme bullish sentiment including a number of prominent bears throwing in the towel, that is a rather likely possibility.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List


Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics


Parkour Dog

Posted: 04 May 2011 01:26 PM PDT

Parkour, also known as free-walking, is damn impressive to watch when done right. Videos on YouTube get tens of millions of views as free-walkers bravely leap between rooftops, over fences, along walls or up trees—anywhere two feet and a firm grip can get you. The goal is to get from one point to another in the most elegant way possible, even if that second point is 20 feet up a building facade, or blocked by errant construction materials.

Well, free-walking is not just for humans anymore. Meet Tret, the parkour dog. He is better at Parkour than most people. Watch him climb trees, do trick jumps, and leap from building to building like it's an average day at the park. Two extra feet are a big asset it seems. That is one well trained animal.








Modern Celebrities in the Renaissance Era

Posted: 04 May 2011 12:37 PM PDT

The Renaissance, is a cultural movement that spanned roughly the 14th to the 17th century, beginning in Florence in the Late Middle Ages and later spreading to the rest of Europe. The term is also used more loosely to refer to the historic era, but since the changes of the Renaissance were not uniform across Europe, this is a general use of the term. As a cultural movement, it encompassed a resurgence of learning based on classical sources, the development of linear perspective in painting, and gradual but widespread educational reform. Traditionally, this intellectual transformation has resulted in the Renaissance being viewed as a bridge between the Middle Ages and the Modern era. Although the Renaissance saw revolutions in many intellectual pursuits, as well as social and political upheaval, it is perhaps best known for its artistic developments and the contributions of such polymaths as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo, who inspired the term "Renaissance man.

Here we have celebrities painted as renaissance man and women from 14th- 17th century enjoy as u imagine who they are

Jennifer Aniston


Dustin Hoffman


Johnny Depp


Sharon Stone


Mel Gibson


Julia Roberts


Robin Williams


Scarlett Johansson


Harrison Ford


Angelo Bono


Madonna


Eva Longoria


Michelle Pfeiffer


Angelina Jolie


Brad Pitt


Cate Blanchett


Daniel Craig


Natalie Portman


Drew Barrymore


Natalie Portman


Dakota Fanning


Hugh Laurie


Angelina Jolie


Jennifer Aniston


Anne Hathaway


Cher


Amy Winehouse


Michael Jackson


Kate Winslet


Arnold Schwarzenegger


Johnny Depp


Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie


Uma Thurman


Michael Jackson


Gwyneth Paltrow


Hydro Jet Pack

Posted: 04 May 2011 11:55 AM PDT

Feast your eyes on the Jetlev R200, a water powered jet pack.

It soars 30 ft. high, can dip into the water, and although it's attached to a cable, there is a "three dimensional degree of freedom" in the steering.

As of May, the first round of these jet packs will be released for the sticker price of $99,500 a small price to pay to turn yourself part Aquaman, part The Rocketeer.
































Superhero Movies By The Numbers (Infographic)

Posted: 04 May 2011 11:46 AM PDT

Hollywood's been churning out superhero movies for more than half a century now, but it's only in the past decade that they've really become an all-encompassing cultural phenomenon. With Green Hornet in theaters this weekend to kick off yet another year of superhero obsession, we put on our lab coats and started crunching numbers to try and figure out how it's going. The answers may surprise you.

Here's the result, superhero movies by the numbers:

Click to Enlarge.


Source: cinemablend


The Modern Super Samurai Isao Machii

Posted: 03 May 2011 11:15 PM PDT

Superhuman Isao Machii can slice through the tiniest of objects at incredible speeds.


Surprising Same Age Celebrities

Posted: 03 May 2011 09:55 PM PDT

These days we expect our celebs to look nothing less than perfect. Some of them only got better with age and knew how to age gracefully, others just seem hooked up on botox injections, cosmetic surgery and who knows what else...

What all these celebrities have in common? They're the same age. Even if sometimes it's hard to believe. Take a look.

Courteney Cox & Sandra Bullock
Age: 46



Prince William & Cory Monteith
Age: 28



Elizabeth Hurley & Bjork
Age: 45



Gordon Ramsay & Rainn Wilson
Age: 45



Lindsay Lohan & Heidi Montag
Age: 24



Iggy Pop & Elton John
Age: 64



Madonna & Ellen
Age: 53



Keith Richards & Ben Kingsley
Age: 67



Amy Winehouse & Mila Kunis
Age: 27



Paris Hilton & Chelsea Clinton
Age: 30



Brad Pitt & Jet Li
Age: 48



Lady Gaga & Amanda Bynes
Age: 25



Megan Fox & Olsen Twins
Age: 25



Jack Nicholson & George Takei
Age: 74



Anne Hathaway & LeAnn Rhimes
Age: 28



Jennifer Aniston & Catherine Zeta-Jones
Age: 42



Macauley Culkin & Jake Gyllenhaal
Age: 30



Celine Dion & Naomi Watts
Age: 43



Eminem & Gwyneth Paltrow
Age: 38



Goldie Hawn & Helen Mirren
Age: 65



Helena Bonham Carter & Salma Hayek
Age: 44



Jamie Lee Curtis & Jennifer Tilly
Age: 52



Kylie Jenner & Chloe Moretz
Age: 14



John Krasinski & Pete Doherty
Age: 32



Diane Lane & J.K. Rowling
Age: 46



Maggie Gyllenhaal & Sarah Michelle Gellar
Age: 33



Taylor Momsen & Miranda Cosgrove
Age: 17



Paz de la Huerta & Scarlett Johansson
Age: 26



Katy Perry & Avril Lavigne
Age: 26



Seth Rogen & Kieran Culkin
Age: 29



Shania Twain & Brooke Shields
Age: 45



Rachel Weisz & Heather Graham
Age: 41


Source: xfinity.comcast