Seeking Alpha

Carlos X. Alexandre

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Carlos X. Alexandre's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Is Obsolete Home Price Data Relevant? [View article]
    It's not about time, but method. Keep digging!
    Aug 28 09:17 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Obsolete Home Price Data Relevant? [View article]
    One must understand the difference between the Shiller index and the median price from Existing and New Homes, and is not about which one is more recent. One should become familiar with the topic to have a discussion.
    Aug 27 07:16 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Understanding The Rise In Mergers And Acquisitions Activity [View article]
    Traditionally M&A activity is usually a sign of tough economic times with companies trying to find economies of scale and cost savings, although it is seldom explained that way. Certainly, investment bankers stand to make fat fees from the process, and push for the marriages regardless of compatibility, while banking on the fact that CEOs, in general, have no clue, and that is why they hire advisors.
    Aug 8 11:22 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Coming Market Crash And The "Trigger" [View article]
    Has absolutely nothing to do with Ukraine, and that is only a distraction!!!
    Aug 8 01:22 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Coming Market Crash And The "Trigger" [View article]
    No mention of war, which is far more visible, and that is the unspoken trigger!
    Aug 8 11:43 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Dynamic And Durable Growth Part 3: The Mobile Data Tsunami [View article]
    Infomercials are now taking over! Hmm!
    Aug 7 06:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Biggest Myth About The Economy That You Probably Believe [View article]
    "We're also starting to see better signs of employment, which means potentially more spending and consumption of more goods and services. I like to track employment with "nonfarm" employees. This is a common way of tracking employment. You can see from the chart below that this number dipped during the recession... but recently reached an all-time high."

    First, the jobs report rom the BLS starts by reading "Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 209,000 in July..." Thus, the fact that you like to track "nonfarm" employment is shared by the BLS, and everyone else.

    Second, to point to an all-time high in employment numbers without putting it in context with population growth is misleading. After all, those "extra" people do need food, clothing, and housing and without a job they become a burden on somebody, be it family, friends or government.
    Aug 7 12:54 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    @ David de los Angeles: a good crash course on the subject.

    I shall add that in a deflationary environment the buyer doesn't have an incentive to consume today because prices will be lower tomorrow, pointing back to human behavior, something that is poorly understood by the majority of market participants and policy makers.
    Jul 17 07:11 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    "The richer, the bigger the effect." Whom? Wow! Impressive!
    Jul 17 01:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    Let me simplify it: While the rich do get richer as a result, the main goal was to inflate the 401Ks and IRAs of the middle class, because that middle class consumption is what gets the economy going, not consumption from the rich. You stated that "Making the rich richer was central to the policy the Fed decided to follow," and the word "central" is what makes it "exclusive," with the middle class's wealth being the side effect.

    Like I said, you win, only because you don't get it.
    Jul 17 12:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    What is very annoying is when someone is all over the place, and all one has to do is read the thread as the claims are inconsistent. Your central argument is that the Fed's plan is to make the rich richer to the exclusion of everyone else, much like a conspiracy, not that the Fed's stated goal was to inflate assets, and if you can't tell the difference... oh well!

    When Bernanke stated that "higher stock prices will boost consumer wealth and help increase confidence," he didn't say "rich consumer," and I've stated over 2 years ago that the "wealth effect" was the Fed's target.

    Here's the definition of "wealth effect:" http://bit.ly/1pebGKj

    "The wealth effect helps to power economies during bull markets. Big gains in people's portfolios can make them feel more secure about their wealth and their spending." PEOPLE'S, not RICH PEOPLE!!!

    Politeness is hard to embrace when the other party makes no sense, and political correctness has never been my forte. Ask anyone that attended Liceu D. Diniz em Chelas in 1974-77 with me.
    Jul 17 10:50 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    God help me! "Rich is to hold a lot of claims on others." ??? That's a creditor (may be rich or on the verge of bankruptcy depending on "claims" and "others"), not necessarily "rich." If I own a house free and clear, what claims do I have on others? Now we're going off the reservation without a permit, and the word massaging will continue, which takes me back to my years in legal and the always enjoyable deconstruction of arguments. For whatever it's worth, you win and the trophy is forthcoming.
    Jul 17 10:25 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    The statement "the policy is increasing the wealth of those holding the most wealth" is correct, although un intended because the Fed's goal is to prove to all of us that they know what they're doing. But the statement is very different from your initial implication that the Fed's goal was to make the rich richer, and "anyway" does not fit the initial narrative!!! We're dancing a nonproductive tango and deviating from the bullet points, and no, not everything else is secondary, because "everything else" is not defined. Over and out.
    Jul 17 09:45 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    I never said that the "wealth effect" doesn't exist, only that the Fed is clueless as to why it didn't work as intended, and to state that "the rich is a relative concept" flies in the face of the original claim that the rich get richer, a well understood claim especially as it applies to inequality. Using that logic, one with $2,000 is richer than one with $1,000, but they're both poor. We're going from an initial clear assertion to dancing and semantics, and that is not my preferred approach. To each his/her own.
    Jul 17 09:24 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Making The Rich Richer [View article]
    Making the rich richer is not the "wealth effect" because they're already wealthy, and there's no increased demand from the wealthy because they buy whatever they want regardless of economic conditions. However you may continue to stick to your theory. All the best.
    Jul 17 09:04 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
578 Comments
699 Likes