On the technical front, more and more indicators are flashing warning signs. The markets look extended and investor sentiment points to extreme bullishness. Those are usually signals that we are due for a sell off.

That does not mean that the markets won't go higher but the higher the averages climb without a pullback, the sharper the decline will be when it does occur. Remember too that pullbacks are good for the markets. Two steps forward and one step back is the rhythm of just about everything and the markets are simply a reflection of that fact of life. We have had a good run over the last few weeks and the averages are close to historic highs for good reasons.

The traditional Christmas rally was postponed last year because of concerns over the Fiscal Cliff. Prior to that, in November, some investors vented their disappointment over the re-election of President Obama by selling the market. They were convinced that without Mitt Romney, the world would come to an end.

As a result, since the beginning of the year, many investors have been playing catchup. As predicted, once the Cassandras had been proven wrong on tax hikes, spending cuts, the growth of the economy, the debt limit and whatever else they were fretting about, the bears have been making up for lost time and have been throwing money at stocks hand over fist.

As I explained last week, we may also be seeing the beginnings of a shift out of U.S. Treasury bonds and into stocks over the last few weeks.

All of this good news has kept the markets propped up. I expect that enthusiasm will continue over the very short term, but somewhere up ahead lies the possibility of a correction of up to 10%. That might sound like a lot (and it is), but those kinds of corrections normally occur once or twice every 12 months or so. We are overdue for this one.

“Should I sell now?” asks a client.

My answer depends on your circumstances. If you know that at some point over the next few months you will need to raise cash for college tuition, a new roof, an auto or other big ticket purchase, then it probably makes sense to take some profits now and make sure you have the money available for when you will need it.

On the other hand, if it is simply fear and greed spurring your desire to sell, I would advise against it. I have never met anyone who can consistently sell at the highs and buy back at the lows. The majority of times, those who try lose more money than they make.

“So I'm supposed to just sit here and take a 10 percent hit?" the client asks.

My answer is yes. The next thing longtime readers will point out is that over the past few years I have taken action on many similar declines. Why not now?

If I thought that something serious was lurking out there in the bushes, something that could drive the market down a lot further than 10 percent, then I might advise you to step to the sidelines. But I don't see anything like that.

Europe is recovering, not failing. The Fed is easing and the government appears to be getting its act together. Globally, I see more growth ahead. No matter how much I beat the bushes, I just don’t see the kind of dangers that we have had to navigate over the last few years.

There is no way of telling when a correction will occur. We could easily gain another 4-5 percent before it occurs and there is no guarantee that if it does occur it will turn out to be 10 percent. It could be less, a lot less. In which case, selling now will be an exercise in futility. My advice for most investors is simply weather the decline if it occurs. I have a strong feeling that the markets will ultimately make back any losses they may incur and then some.

It is one of the few businesses that continues to grow year after year. Whether one looks at the ads, the attendance or the number of television viewers, the Super Bowl has survived where others of its species have died off. It is truly one of the last mass-audience live television events of our society.

Super Bowl XLVII will be played on Sunday, Feb. 3, in the Mercedes-Benz Superdome in New Orleans. It will mark the 10th time the "Big Easy" hosted the event. The last one was in 2002. It could mean as much as $450 million in business for the city.

Now, that would only be half as much as New Orleans has spent preparing for the game. The city spent more than $1 billion on infrastructure improvements, including renovations at the airport, a new streetcar line, and enhancements to the Superdome itself. After the devastation of Katrina, New Orleans needed to rebuild and have used a number of major sporting events, including the NCAA men's basketball Final Four in 2012, a couple of BCS National Championship Games and the NBA All-Star Game in 2008 to do just that. But the Super Bowl is the big jambalaya in the menu of possible events.

Experts say that for every $100 spent in the city, about 50-70 percent remains there, while the rest leaks out into other surrounding locales. New Orleans, like other cities who have hosted the event, is hoping that by putting their best foot forward, they will convince some of the attendees to remain and even establish businesses in the areas.

Given that the attendance at the Super Bowl is largely a corporate event, businesses get first choice of rooms, flights, special events and just about everything else involved in the Super Bowl and the days surrounding it. The chance to shine cannot be underestimated and the city fathers know it.

For those of us unable to attend the live event, all is not lost. We can look forward to countless parties (either at home or your favorite bar or cafe), root for your favorite team, dance to the half-time show (Beyonce will man the stage this year) and, of course, watch the commercials.

Americans continue to watch the Super Bowl in record numbers. More than 46 percent of TV households watched last year's game, according to Nielsen, which makes it just about the most watched broadcast in U.S. history. And the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to tune in. For advertisers, who strive to reach the age demographic of 18-49 years old, the Super Bowl is the best game in town.

It is probably why Super Bowl ads keep climbing in cost. Ad slots for this year's game sold out at the asking price of $3.5 million per 30-second spot by December. That is up from $3 million/spot last year. But corporations will pay it because there is a gold mine for those who can come up with the right ad.

This year, viewers will see some big names populating the ads. Singer Beyonce, hip-hopper Jay-Z, supermodels Catrinel Menghia, Bar Refaeli and Kate Upton. And that is only a taste of the lineup. Personally, I will be looking forward to the return of the French bull dog, Mr. Quiggly, (which replaced Kim Kardashian in a Skechers' ad). Last year he captured the hearts, minds and pocketbooks of many of us.   

There will also be a number of new ad sponsors this year including Oreos. For me, the day after the event will be as much about my favorite commercial than it is the game. That's why the Super Bowl has become such a business generator for corporations.

Given that the ads are 58 percent more memorable than your average TV commercial, I can see why. If you doubt that, just recall the ad with the little boy dressed as Darth Vader. I bet you can even remember what auto manufacturer sponsored it. That company reaped a cool $100 million in free publicity from the spot, which is not bad for $3.5 million investment. When it comes to the Super Bowl, what is good for business, is also good for America, so let the games begin and the cashier register ring!

That old saying, "a rising tide lifts all boats" certainly applies to the stock market this month. It appears that more and more investors are abandoning the bond market and finally embracing equities. That spells further upside.

Last week, U.S. investors moved a net $3.8 billion into equity mutual funds. The week before that $7.5 billion in new inflows were recorded along with over $10 billion invested in exchange traded funds. That's the best two-week inflow into equity in 13 years.

Over the last few years, I have kept tabs of the money flows in and out of the stock market. We have endured 22 consecutive months of outflows from the equity market. That money went into the bond market, CDs and checking accounts. Many of those investors did well by investing in U.S. Treasury and other bonds, since interest rates continued to fall while fixed income prices rose. They were convinced that equities were going to plummet at any moment. It didn't happen and now, thanks to the record low rates of return offered by these safe havens, investors may be embracing risk once again.

I have often said that as long as money was flowing out of the stock market, volatility would continue to increase while the probability of making new historical highs in the averages would be slim at best. The S&P 500 Index is up about 120 percent from the day I urged investors to re-enter the market back in March of 2009, and we are now within 5 percent of regaining the historical highs of 2007 in most of the averages

We need an expansion in volume and a wave of new buying in order to push us over the top. As I have said, a great many retail investors have sat on the sidelines through this four-year rally. It appears that they may now be moving out of their bond holdings and back into the stock market providing the fuel we need for further gains.

The contrarian in me worries, however, that if we do see the retail investor return to stocks, it may signal an approaching top to this four-year bull run. There have been times in the past, most notably the rush into technology stocks back in 2000, where the retail crowd has jumped in at the absolute worse time. I don't believe that the retail investor is always wrong. There have been plenty of times that the common sense approach of the individual has trumped the hedge fund mentality of most professionals.

The market's grind higher this week was that much more impressive given the earnings disaster of one tech company that, until recently, was the apple of most investors' eyes. I recall warning readers last summer of the high, in fact, impossible valuation that the market was awarding this company. Unfortunately, few readers took my advice to sell.

Stocks are overextended and could have a minor pullback at any moment, but overall I expect the markets will continue their winning streak through the end of the month and beyond. Underlying the averages, I have been seeing a lot of sector rotation where traders are selling the high flyers and buying the laggards. That is also happening overseas where emerging markets, for example, have been subject to profit-taking this month. I would use these pullbacks to add to positions.

Pay special attention to the new disclosure box when you open your year-end, 401(k) statements. That's where you will discover for the first time just how much you are paying for the privilege of investing in those company-sponsored menus of mutual funds. You may be in for a surprise.

More than 70 percent of all 401(k) participants fail to realize that they are paying fees for investing in these tax-deferred retirement plans, according to an AARP study. I have to agree. Over the years, I have met with many prospective clients who had not rolled their 401(k) over to an IRA once they retired. They were under the impression that keeping their savings plan with their company offered a fee-free benefit for life. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Department of Labor, after many delays and postponements, has finally forced employers, advisers and fund companies to own up to just how much they have been charging you, the employee, for this fringe benefit. Longtime readers may recall my past columns concerning the battle to prevent these fees from becoming public knowledge. Wall Street has lost that battle but probably not the war.

The problem, you see, is that consumers may simply fail to comprehend the long-term impact of these fees on their retirement savings. Let's say you open your statement and discover that you are paying a $100 in expense ratios (fees), per mutual fund each year. That may not mean much when the overall worth of the account is $10,000. What you fail to understand is that over the life of contributing part of your paycheck towards retirement — 20 or 30 years — those fees will add up.

Demos, a policy research firm, recently released a study which revealed that a two-income family, earning average wages, will lose $155,000 or about 30 percent over the life of their savings plan, to these Wall Street fees. That is in line with most independent studies on the subject which indicate you will pay one-third of your retirement savings in fees.

Wall Street defends its fees and has released its own studies that show the average investor pays less than $248 a year in 401(k) fees and no more than $20,000 during the life of the plan. Even if they are right, given that the average 401(k) in this country is around $75,000, that still results in over 26 percent of the plan consumed by fees.

So what can you, the employee, do about it? Your first reaction may be to stop investing in your 401(k). That would be a big mistake. These deferred savings plans have at least two major benefits over an IRA. The employers' "match" whereby your company contributes dollar for dollar up to a certain percentage of your own contribution is free money and worth any contribution you make.

Second, the government allows you, the employee, to contribute much more to a 401(k) than to an IRA. This year employees can contribute $17,500 to their 401(k) plans and, for those over 50 years of age, an additional $5,500 can be contributed. That compares to just $5,500 (or $6,500 for those over 50) in contributions to a traditional IRA.

However, you can cut down on the fees by urging your company representative to select mutual fund families with the lowest fees possible. That's what I do every day for my clients. Better yet, tell the company to abandon mutual funds altogether and invest in exchange traded funds (ETFs) instead. Some 401(k) plans already offer ETFs. These index funds are much cheaper than their high-priced cousins and outperform comparable mutual funds over 80 percent of the time.

Remember, too, that you are managing your own 401(k). That puts the onus on you to decide what investments to make and when to move to the sidelines. That's tough to do when few of us have the professional knowledge to cope with today's markets. Part of my job is to advise my non-retirement clients on how to invest those savings and when. It is also one of the reasons I write these columns. Hopefully, it gives you, the reader, some advice on how to manage your retirement savings.

Finally, if you are retiring soon, my advice is to plan to roll over your 401(k) savings into a traditional IRA. You likely will enjoy a cost savings of as much as 1-2 percent annually. You will also be able to expand your investment choices from the limited menu your company plans offers. If you need advice on how to accomplish that give me a call. It is much easier to do than you might think.

Bottom line: the new fee disclosures is a giant step forward for you the consumer but now that you know how much you are paying, it is up to you to do something about it.

Since the Financial Crisis, those who have kept their jobs consider themselves as lucky. That may be so, but at the same time many complain that their benefits have been cut as the price for further employment. There are signs that may be changing.

During 2008, I, like millions of other American workers, attended a mandatory meeting at a former employer. The room was rife with fear and trepidation, since just days before the owner had laid off almost half the company. Instead of more firing, he announced that the company would no longer be providing a match to our employee 401(k) retirement plans. He also reduced the number of paid time off for all of us. His announcement was met with relief that no one else would lose their job.

I'm not sure whether that employer ever reinstated his employees' benefits because I left shortly thereafter. I do know however, that many companies have started to become a bit more generous in what fringe benefits they provide their employees. The employer "match," for example, is making a comeback in some companies, but with a new twist. At that time was a company would match a certain percentage of your own contribution to a deferred benefit plan. Normally the match would range from 3 percent to as much as 6 percent of your yearly contribution.

However, IBM, the business services company with a great reputation for fringe benefits among its corporate peers, introduced a new wrinkle in their employee 401(k) matching compensation this year. Big Blue will still match contributions (and never cut them during the recession), but will now delay its contributions until the end of the year on Dec. 31. They will then pay them in a lump sum. If you leave before Dec. 15, you lose the match. The only exceptions are those that retire that year.

This week, Morgan Stanley, the global brokerage house, announced a variation on that theme. It will defer for up to three years a part of the bonuses for all those who make more than $350,000 and whose bonuses are at least $50,000.  They will also pay those sums in both cash and stock. Although it does not affect the company's financial advisers (brokers) this year, it may be a warning shot about how compensation will be paid in that group in the future. Of course, if you quit prior to the end of those three years, you forfeit any bonus that remains.

In another area, more companies are switching to a "paid time off" (PTO) option rather than the traditional allotment of a certain number of days for holidays, vacation, sickness, pregnancy leave, etc. This gives the employee the option of choosing how many days they can take off from a finite number, whether it is 15-20-30 days or whatever their company decides.

Although this change appears to be in the employee's favor, many companies are nicking away at this benefit in marginal ways. Some companies are limiting the number of days one can carry over from the preceding year while others are reducing the total number of days off that employees enjoyed under the old method.

Of course, the most formidable challenge to employee benefits is yet to come. Obamacare. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, becomes effective in 2014. This year, corporations will have to devise ways to overhaul their employee health care coverage in answer to this new legislation. A couple of firms have already changed their provisions in the health care field. They are opting for what has been termed "Employee Choice" plans.

This plan will give each employee a fixed sum of money (indexed to the rate of yearly inflation) and allow them to choose their own medical coverage and health insurer in an online marketplace.

The employees, according to at least one of the companies, will be paying roughly the same out-of-pocket contributions under the new plan as they did in the old one. They claim the new approach will allow the employee to spend as little or as much on their health care as they think wise. The fear among opponents of this approach is that with the rising costs of health care, the lump sum won't be nearly enough to cover future health care needs.

All in all, the return of employee benefits has been marginal at best, but it is in the early days right now. As the nation's economy continues to grow and unemployment drops, there may yet come a time when fringe benefits will actually expand as a tool to woo hard to find workers. Right now that may seem like a pipe dream but unless this country is doomed to an eternity of lackluster growth, that day will come.