Jeff Miller

Top 5 Quotes from Berkshire's Annual Meeting

WB did not say that we are headed into stagflation. The CNBC transcript cites him as follows: "Inflation has the "potential" to be worse than the 1970s." www.cnbc.com/id/29592831

The author of the piece in your link mentioned that the 70's was a time of stagflation. The term "stagflation" is not mentioned in the transcript.

WB remains positive on economic prospects, as this helpful summary indicates.


On May 03 07:01 AM chleoku wrote:

> Any further words on Buffett's view on the Stagflation that we are
> heading to?
>
> www.wealthalchemist.co.../
>
>
> Does he think that is still going to happen?
>

Interpreters of Data Should Exercise Care to Get Facts Right

Fitz - Part of the skepticism about government reports comes from the facts you cite. I have many articles about this if you would do a search.

We know -- eventually -- from state unemployment records what it is the actual story. No one pays unemployment tax if the jobs do not exist.

These records show that there are about 2.5 million jobs lost each month and 2 million (or so) jobs created. The monthly report shows a net figure. The initial claims show only one side of this.

You are correct, of course, in saying that the people who lost jobs do not get new ones immediately. The new jobs go to a distribution of people who lost jobs over the prior months.

The labor market dynamics are grossly oversimplified by most observers, especially those who do not understand that there is always substantial creation of new jobs, even in recessions.

Thanks for highlighting a key point.

Jeff


On Mar 29 04:30 PM Fitz919 wrote:

> Government Reports are virtually worthless and always have been.
>
>
> A prime example is Weekly Initial Jobless Claims VS the Monthly Employment
> Report.
>
> If you were to simply add up the 4 weekly numbers you should have
> roughly the Monthly number.
>
> Weekly numbers are showing we have about 650K starting to receive
> unemployment benefits week after week. But Non-Farm payrolls show
> they are down about 650K for the whole month. For this to be true
> 75% of the people in the weekly numbers must have gotten hired again.
> You and I both know that all those people didn't find new jobs that
> quickly.
>
> Under Clinton the Labor Secretary Robert Reisch admitted on camera
> that their model adds in "biased" jobs. Meaning that if you have
> 10,000 new jobs in a certain sector, their will be 30,000 other jobs
> which support the 10,000. Lots of service sector hamburger flipper
> jobs etc. It was total bull.
>
> Another example is Crude Oil Inventories. They tell us how much
> oil is sitting in a tank an a certain date. When we need to know
> how much entered the tank, and how much left the tank, and how much
> is still in the tank, then we have useful information.

ETF Update: Absolutely Nothing to Love

Paultaut -- DYY and DAG do not fit the criteria for our trading universe. The system was developed using equity sectors in a number of different time frames and market conditions.

DYY and DAG, are leveraged and commodity-based. We are careful about applying the system in completely uncharted territory. Perhaps when we can do some research on ETN's and commodities, making modifications if necessary. We also believe that there is plenty of volatility and trading opportunity without adding leverage.

Thanks for asking this question and helping me to clarify how we make choices. I wish I could provide more information. Meanwhile, I am open to suggestions to extend our list or replace existing choices. We also provide a custom rating service for some investors who have their own lists.

Thanks again,
Jeff