Carlos X. Alexandre

Long/short equity, short-term horizon
Carlos X. Alexandre
Long/short equity, short-term horizon
Contributor since: 2010
Company: cxalgo ltd.
Here's my point because some are too mentally dull to get it!
October 27, 2005
"Ben S. Bernanke does not think the national housing boom is a bubble that is about to burst, he indicated to Congress last week, just a few days before President Bush nominated him to become the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. U.S. house prices have risen by nearly 25 percent over the past two years, noted Bernanke, currently chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, in testimony to Congress's Joint Economic Committee. But these increases, he said, "largely reflect strong economic fundamentals," such as strong growth in jobs, incomes and the number of new households."
http://wapo.st/yaTOX1
The above opinion coming from an individual paid to have a superb sense of our economic condition, while some of us, less illustrious, no doubt, were unloading houses on the unsuspecting public, says a lot about the person. Furthermore, for anyone to state that "house prices have risen by nearly 25 percent over the past two years" and see that statistic as "normal" in a historical context, is extremely sad.
When Bernanke boards the SA train is when I get off. Best of luck!
Not sure where the "we paid debt off" comes from, because according to the US Treasury, the USA had $2 billion in debt in 1900 and $252 billion in 1949, without a single year showing zero. Then we reached $5 trillion in 1996 (no, there was no debt reduction under Bill Clinton, only shuffling), reached $10 trillion under George Bush, and are now celebrating $18 trillion.
http://1.usa.gov/pyqsn2
It's not my definition of "restructure," it's the industry's definition as it applies to debt, and that is one topic of the article. Within that context, restructuring means that the debtor cannot meet the obligations as defined by the contract--loan, bond, etc.
Certainly one can restructure anything (change the basic structure), but in political lingo you don't' restructure the tax code, you "reform it." Research it! You're an English major!!!
But I can tell that you are desperate for a date, want to dance and then kiss, and I'm not your type. So sorry!
@fripp1: Einstein once said that one should keep it simple, but no simpler, and in this case it appears that you don't understand the word "restructuring." I do not defend the oil wars, as you put it, or the spending that republicans are responsible for, and, as free instruction, jobs programs are not the responsibility of government because they never work only because they're clueless as to what industry needs. It's all smoke and mirrors!
And whenever anyone jumps from the weeds and starts pointing fingers at the opposite political side without looking in the mirror, we know that we have an idiot in your midst. Einstein enough for you?
Ah, the ever elusive "prescription for a debt fix." There's a simple answer for that, especially when levels are excessive, and I've sprinkled it across several articles over time: It's called restructuring, in a polite manner, or bankruptcy when being practical.
Another option which never works and will never be adopted is to significantly increase taxes across the board coupled with reducing government spending which may lead to social unrest. In short, there's no good answer want that's why Greece wants to write-off part of the debt because the adoption of austerity is insufficient and counter-productive.
Now, there are those that live in Disneyland and think that the castles and characters are real, and all will be well only if all of us dress up like princesses and pretend to have tea from empty cups, and will swear that those thick textbooks from yesteryear show that it works by building bridges and roads, and feeding toads when they don't' want to. Yes, it does, sweet pea, now go take a nap and resume your dreaming!
Hope this helps. All the best!
If you haven't noticed, I'm a short-term trader, thus the "I couldn't care less where markets go." My only long-term position is gold (UGL) which I have held through thick and thin for almost one year and I'm back to almost even ($1,350 entry point). The bet there is war, pure and simple, not inflation.
"by receiving the principal when the bonds come due..." You mean the $18 trillion in principal, USA alone, that has been spent and must repaid with another $18 trillion that must be raised in the bond market, regardless of whether democrats or republicans did it or are in power in the future? Oh, how the stars and bright and tantalizing... and blinding!
I cease to publish at SA due to the site's political bias. The response of my latest article was as follows:
"Thanks for the submission, but we will pass as this focuses primarily on the politics vs the investing ideas that we focus on delivering to our readers."
article link: http://bit.ly/1C58Jod
Have a United Airlines electronic travel certificate that expires on 1/18/15, and worth $87.90. If anyone can use it, please feel free to take it (first come, first serve). Here's the code: 7G36CX2EM8
http://on.ft.com/1ruQgPa
“There are large numbers of companies across China that should go bankrupt but haven’t done so,” says Han Chuanhua, a bankruptcy lawyer at Zhongzi Law Office, a Beijing legal practice. “The government doesn’t want to see bankruptcy because as soon as companies go bust, unemployment spikes and tax revenues disappear. By stopping companies from going bankrupt, officials are able to maintain the illusion of local prosperity, economic growth and stable taxes.”
"UBS Raises Flag on China’s $1 Trillion Overseas Debt Pile."
http://bloom.bg/1CBcaUO
Exactly! I guess I got under your skin, and it's not "Another food for thought," it's "here's food for thought." All the best!
Just to clarify: Portugal was a colonial power and always sought to help itself through exploitation, not the poor countries. Do we suffer from ostrich syndrome?
Breaking News: First Hong Kong, now Macau. "China tightens grip on Macau as dissent rises in gambling hub."
http://reut.rs/1raGW2L
"China is helping other poor countries." No, not really. China is exploiting other countries, because I know that first hand, especially Africa. Trust me.
And...? Trying to rain on parade? Don't worry, I have a special umbrella with anti-idiot repellent. Although I respect Gordon Chang and he is correct about China, he's not the only one. Here's one Chang 2010 prediction that hasn't happened: "By 2013 Japan will overtake China and become, once again, the world’s second-largest economy."
http://onforb.es/13nUSvf
Here's the one thing that I predict: End of communist party control in 2021. All the best!
Ben: Let me bring some perspective to the word "pride." 500 years ago Portugal, my birthplace, gave more to the world than China ever will, and, as a matter of trivia, Macau, the gambling hub with 16 km2, was given to the Portuguese by China as a gift for helping fight pirates. Now it took for a handful of nuts to travel half way around the globe to kill pirates because apparently the Chinese, like the French, were lovers, not fighters. As a matter of fact Napoleon sent his generals to Portugal three times and got his ass kicked ever single time. Now do you see how easy it is to be proud of my country.
In 1974 Portugal had a revolution where not a single shot was fired, and soldiers had carnations in the barrels of their guns, and after 48 years of fascism and enduring the political police which was the last vestige of the Gestapo, there was hope that the new generation (my generation) would bring Portugal back to its former glory.
As it stands, Portugal is a basket case of debt, inefficiency, corruption, and sheer stupidity. I came to the conclusion, and in a general sense, that we were very good at sailing little ships into unknown oceans, fighting and stealing, and those skills are no longer needed. That's how pride is thrown out the window, and I cannot overlook reality just because I was born there.
We can pick and choose stats and blindly hope that the truth is actually a lie, but, as I have pointed out before, China has been around for 5,000 years and being overpopulated is hardly an excuse. Thus, did China economically wake up after 4980 years had passed by?
You're a smart man, and I'm going to give you one major problem that to explain would require disclosure of genetic research: The one child policy has created a brain drain for at least one generation!!! All the best.
A paper dragon is beautiful to look at, but it's still paper!
Ben, long time no hear: I understand pride, but you talk about China as if it was self built after waking up from a slumber with a proverbial light bulb. Are you serious? What you refer to -- "major accomplishment" -- has been in the last two decades, thanks to all the trade deficits, nothing else, and the party is coming to an end, while the "economic sophistication" lacks.
I see the spoiled rich Chinese kids (they're leaving China) around the neighborhood driving exotic cars, and in the end they do not add anything to our local system because all they know, and their parents as well, is how to pillage through a political system. All the best.
One more thing: You forgot the pollution which is another touristic attraction.
Still holding gold position, and the loss! All the best.
Great copy for a brochure, but that's about it! All the best.
Didn't get it yet? Unless it reverses it's only getting warmed up!
"While stocks may open lower today and mark new lows in this speed bump of the month of December thus far, signs point toward bargain hunting and a year-end rally." Maybe, but you're only missing the one and most important factor, and it's incumbent upon you to figure that out. All the best!
Frankly, nothing, absolutely nothing, will surprise me thanks to constant central bank interference which has made a mockery of the markets. One thing that is not being considered is that the dollar may sink overnight driven by war because the US always carries the financial burden of fighting the bad guys on a global scale and at this juncture the humongous debt pile will get much bigger in short order. I keep stating that "It's complicated" because it is, and there are too many facets to this global unraveling story, while one-track-minders still discuss stock fundamentals as if they matter. Baby out with the bath water!
Great point among many. (Wrote article on Sunday before trade data but it took SA until now to publish.)
mjtroll1: We must be on different radio frequencies because I don't follow...
Let's bring some context to this story. Thirteen days ago the opinion was that the market had topped out at 2,000 as the S&P was hitting 1900 (http://seekingalpha.co...) and it "could be the start of a long awaited correction of 10% to 15% that has been overdue for some time."
Now one was "stupid" for panicking after reading the article mentioned above, when the "fundamentals" described only two weeks ago haven't changed a bit. Which one is it?
Good job on fundamentals, but the fact remains that the dollar (index) has played a bigger role, and it has risen from about 79 in April to almost 86 today, or 8.8%.
Although Ebola is not an insignificant risk for a variety of reasons and cannot be compared to the risk of being in a car accident because there's still plenty of information missing 38 years later, the disease's relationship to the market's "correction" is non-existent, and is being used as a smoke screen by some.
How can one be "bullish for years" and have "No positions." Apparently "isn't the time to sell" only because there's nothing to sell! "Stay the course" must mean buy and sell nothing!
I am not a ratings guru, but if I'm reading this right (http://bit.ly/1rkGbAG) on Sep 22 CNBC's Squawk Box (6-9 am) had 13,000 viewers in the 25-54 demo, and there's no rating for Fox Business. However, FBN shows 12,000 viewers under Primetime. Interestingly enough, Shark Tank on CNBC had 90,000 viewers at 9 pm and those are reruns. I think that Bloomberg may be too thick for the average person and couldn't find ratings.