Too expensive, indeed. I read that the homebuyer tax-credit program wound up costing $43k per additional house bought (that would not have been otherwise).
"We've achieved some very temporary economic growth amounting to perhaps $420 billion at the expense of $2,800 billion spent and another $8,000 billion committed."
How does the temporary nature of these actions escape so many people? Mind boggling.
CME reqs seem like an excuse for a pullback in metals, which is perfecctly fine. A correction had been eerily absent in this latest move. Parabolic moves like that probably cause more heart attacks than bacon.
Things should pick up for PMs again when *gasp* people realize that QE2 may not be the end of Bernanke's monetary adventures, and European banks are still F'd. Maybe U.S. ones, too. Hard to tell.
Good points. But Chinese equities still seem vastly preferable to US ones, for the foreseeable future. Everyone is book-cooking these days. The US is relaxing accounting standards, bailing out on an unprecedented scale, and focusing on "operating earnings" to make P/E ratios palatable.
China's cooking GDP #s, sure. But GDP is increasingly irrelevant as government spending makes up a larger and larger percentage of it, worldwide. GDP won't increase productivity when it's made up of military spending, social programs, etc. In the US or China.
China's government may be spending beyond their means now, but at least they have the reserves to do so. We're just writing IOUs. Both markets will be manipulated and cooked, but I'm leaning eastwards for longs.
Goldman Admits to Frontrunning Clients. Not. [View article]
What about this part?
"You should not consider Trading Ideas as objective or independent research or as investment advice. When we discuss Trading Ideas with you, we will not be acting as your advisor (including, without limitation, in relation to investment, accounting, tax or legal matters) and the provision of Trading Ideas to you will not give rise to any fiduciary or equitable duties on our part."
Why aren't they acting as advisor to their clients here? Is it just a legal thing? Or are they making it clear that they're not always acting in the client's best interest? A financial advisor has a duty to act in their clients best interest, don't they?
FB5000 sez: "ALL THE NUMBERS - ALL THE NUMBERS ARE TRENDING BETTER. It is a simple fact. The recession moderated drastically in Q2 and is now over.... The market is up. Recovery is here"
Kudlow, is that you? Or Dennis? Either way, I will attempt brief re-education; Any numbers that are "trending better" are only doing so because of massive, unsustainable government intervention, along with accounting changes and earnings manipulation.
The fundamental picture has gotten worse, if anything. The slight decrease in personal debts is far outweighed by the increase in public ones.
We are headed for a major collapse. Might take a while, as more and more desperate and ineffective measures are tried to remedy the situation. But it'll end in either a deflationary depression or Argentina-style hyperinflation. I'm betting on Argentina, but Mr. Derringer, among others, thinks otherwise, so you'd be wise to consider that scenario as well. Apologies for any preachiness, I've had a beer or six.
Didn't Caterpillar Say Things Were Improving? [View article]
Are you saying m/m is better for a business like CAT? Why? Seems like their business is quite seasonal, so y/y makes sense.
It's funny how bulls use 10-year operating S&P p/es when it suits their case, arguing that it provides a better picture. Then they jump up and down over tiny month/month housing improvements.
On Aug 20 11:43 AM romorris wrote:
> I'm trust caterpiller's management before I'd trust someone that > deliberately quotes y/y figures when he knows better. > > They are straight shooters.
Book Reviews: '13 Bankers' and 'Econned' Add New Layers to Financial Crisis Story [View article]
Think we'll ever see honest people like Simon Johnson (or Bill Black, Elizabeth Warren, etc) in roles like Treasury Secretary or SEC commissioner? I guess not, but it's fun to think about.
Ed, you said "The position that government can just arbitrarily reach into some private enterprise’s internal affairs and make individual decisions on its behalf is indefensible."
I think these bonuses and bailouts are what's really indefensible. They have benefited in countless ways - loose money, direct bailouts, debt guarantees, FHA loans and other mortgage initiatives which pad profits and transfer risk to the taxpayer, being able to sell crap securities to the Fed.
How you can call that a "private enterprise's internal affairs" is beyond me.
The Bull Case for Simon Property Group [View article]
$24b in debt and $774 million in cash = strong balance sheet? I disagree, and think any cash they raise/earn will go towards paying that off, not buying up properties.
Costs of borrowing rising (they paid 10%+ on most recent bond issue), property values falling, retailers going bankrupt, consumer spending still falling (YOY, MOM fluctuations are worthless). I'm short SPG still.
They have some great properties, but you have to factor in that debt. No bulls like to mention that.
Thinking the Impossible: Could Bank of America Go to Zero? [View article]
On Jan 29 09:22 PM Matt Miller wrote:
> When 90% of the bloggers here are so sure the world is ending, I > just buy more and stop watching the tape. As Warren said, it is never > been a good thing to bet against America. This too shall pass. Buy > BAC and put it away for seven years for a 10X.
If you use SeekingAlpha as a sample, of course the sentiment will be bearish. But are SA users a good sample to base your unscientific survey on? Hell no. They're far more skeptical and contrarian than your average person.
Good luck investing with Warren. Hopefully you get 10% eternal dividends and warrants with your shares too. Buffet hasn't owned stocks personally in years, he's just dipping his toe in now. Also consider that his perspective may be a little different than yours.
The Recovery Was Too Expensive [View article]
"We've achieved some very temporary economic growth amounting to perhaps $420 billion at the expense of $2,800 billion spent and another $8,000 billion committed."
How does the temporary nature of these actions escape so many people? Mind boggling.
Why Silver Just Went Hyperbull [View article]
Things should pick up for PMs again when *gasp* people realize that QE2 may not be the end of Bernanke's monetary adventures, and European banks are still F'd. Maybe U.S. ones, too. Hard to tell.
Why GDP Stats Are Still Ugly [View article]
Debunking the China Growth Myth [View article]
China's cooking GDP #s, sure. But GDP is increasingly irrelevant as government spending makes up a larger and larger percentage of it, worldwide. GDP won't increase productivity when it's made up of military spending, social programs, etc. In the US or China.
China's government may be spending beyond their means now, but at least they have the reserves to do so. We're just writing IOUs. Both markets will be manipulated and cooked, but I'm leaning eastwards for longs.
Goldman Admits to Frontrunning Clients. Not. [View article]
"You should not consider Trading Ideas as objective or independent research or as investment advice. When we discuss Trading Ideas with you, we will not be acting as your advisor (including, without limitation, in relation to investment, accounting, tax or legal matters) and the provision of Trading Ideas to you will not give rise to any fiduciary or equitable duties on our part."
Why aren't they acting as advisor to their clients here? Is it just a legal thing? Or are they making it clear that they're not always acting in the client's best interest? A financial advisor has a duty to act in their clients best interest, don't they?
Why GDP Stats Are Still Ugly [View article]
Kudlow, is that you? Or Dennis? Either way, I will attempt brief re-education; Any numbers that are "trending better" are only doing so because of massive, unsustainable government intervention, along with accounting changes and earnings manipulation.
The fundamental picture has gotten worse, if anything. The slight decrease in personal debts is far outweighed by the increase in public ones.
We are headed for a major collapse. Might take a while, as more and more desperate and ineffective measures are tried to remedy the situation. But it'll end in either a deflationary depression or Argentina-style hyperinflation. I'm betting on Argentina, but Mr. Derringer, among others, thinks otherwise, so you'd be wise to consider that scenario as well. Apologies for any preachiness, I've had a beer or six.
Will BP Go Bust? [View article]
Yeah, a "moral hazard" index etf would have performed quite well over the past 18 months. Banks, homebuilders, CRE, insurers.
FOMC Announcement: Watch That Thesis [View article]
www.bearishnews.com/po...
Didn't Caterpillar Say Things Were Improving? [View article]
It's funny how bulls use 10-year operating S&P p/es when it suits their case, arguing that it provides a better picture. Then they jump up and down over tiny month/month housing improvements.
On Aug 20 11:43 AM romorris wrote:
> I'm trust caterpiller's management before I'd trust someone that
> deliberately quotes y/y figures when he knows better.
>
> They are straight shooters.
Book Reviews: '13 Bankers' and 'Econned' Add New Layers to Financial Crisis Story [View article]
Hands Off Goldman Bonuses [View article]
I think these bonuses and bailouts are what's really indefensible. They have benefited in countless ways - loose money, direct bailouts, debt guarantees, FHA loans and other mortgage initiatives which pad profits and transfer risk to the taxpayer, being able to sell crap securities to the Fed.
How you can call that a "private enterprise's internal affairs" is beyond me.
Earnings: More 'Black Shoots' [View article]
The Bull Case for Simon Property Group [View article]
Costs of borrowing rising (they paid 10%+ on most recent bond issue), property values falling, retailers going bankrupt, consumer spending still falling (YOY, MOM fluctuations are worthless). I'm short SPG still.
They have some great properties, but you have to factor in that debt. No bulls like to mention that.
Thinking the Impossible: Could Bank of America Go to Zero? [View article]
> When 90% of the bloggers here are so sure the world is ending, I
> just buy more and stop watching the tape. As Warren said, it is never
> been a good thing to bet against America. This too shall pass. Buy
> BAC and put it away for seven years for a 10X.
If you use SeekingAlpha as a sample, of course the sentiment will be bearish. But are SA users a good sample to base your unscientific survey on? Hell no. They're far more skeptical and contrarian than your average person.
Good luck investing with Warren. Hopefully you get 10% eternal dividends and warrants with your shares too. Buffet hasn't owned stocks personally in years, he's just dipping his toe in now. Also consider that his perspective may be a little different than yours.
Tempted to Sell Silver, But for What? [View article]
Coulda said the same thing when silver was at $20, $25, $30, $35 $40, $45...
What's the threshold? 100%? 200%? 300%? See what I mean?
Silver has outperformed, and these things tend to go on longer than most would expect.
Fundamentals still strong, gold/silver ratio still higher than historical avgs, and out of whack with current gold/silver production.