Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Rakesh Saxena  

View Rakesh Saxena's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • General Electric: 'Buy America' Clause Severely Limits Downside Potential [View article]
    Dear B smith: I agree with you that we should look at other "managed" economies and learn lessions where applicable rather than simply debating the merits and demerits of protectionism. Many thanks- Rakesh

    On Feb 16 08:21 PM B smith wrote:

    > How about some discussion of positive ideas to improve our economy.
    > We have allowed litigation, regulations, work rules, unions, taxes
    > and a host of similar things to become greater and greater burden
    > on the cost to produce things in the United States. At the same time
    > we opened trade agreements, which lowered or ended import duties
    > on the same items, with countries that had little or no regulation,
    > cost of litigation, few or no work rules or unions, taxes, environmental
    > considerations and on and on.
    > The result is you make it difficult to do business in the United
    > States , while opening the door to business in other countries that
    > make it easy to do business. The result, closed businesses, lost
    > jobs, declining economy. For a short time we enjoyed the lower prices
    > for goods and services from overseas. The trend however accelerated,
    > and people felt that it would keep going, and that eventually we
    > would not have enough economic energy to continue to grow and create
    > enough wealth to have a robust economy. Add doubling energy, and
    > gasoline prices for two years in a row and the camels back breaks.
    > We can try to re-invigorate housing or re-inflate other industries..
    > and subsidize energy alternatives, which is helpful, but in my opinion
    > only takes care of 20% of the reasons we reached the tipping point
    > and headed downhill.
    > The basic faith in the economic system of the United States will
    > not be re-established until we 1). Discuss the reasons for the imbalance
    > of non-free trade, and determine what we are going to do about it.
    > 2). Discuss the cost of energy, and the market factors around supply
    > and pricing and what we can do to create a pricing and supply situation
    > that will provide moderate and stable energy costs, until we can
    > get alternatives working in sufficient amounts to move away from
    > fossil fuels.
    > My suggestion is that we:
    > a). Create a US sovereign fund to invest at low interest rates in
    > expanding existing manufacturing or stimulating lost industries to
    > come back to the US.
    > b). Examine managed economies around the world for good ideas, and
    > unbalanced conditions and balance the playing field as a condition
    > for free trade imports.
    > c). We should eliminate litigation against manufacturers or cap awards.
    > Create a federal panel of judges to hear complaints and a set package
    > of awards for legitimate claims. Create a 10 year package of environmental
    > rules that will not change, and create a federal environmental board
    > that makes citing decisions that are not subject to legal appeal
    > or lawsuits. Put excellent knowledgeable people on these non partisan
    > boards like we do with the federal reserve. They should be appointed
    > and remain and not be political like current cabinet related posts.
    > Rotate members in and out over time.
    > d). In order for companies to qualify for being part of this plan,
    > they would have to agree to conditions such as executive compensation
    > limits, green environmental standards, workers bill or rights and
    > agree to provide stock to employees as part of their pay.
    > We need to do some radical changes to set America back on its feet
    > and be self dependent.
    > Comments?
    Feb 17, 2009. 12:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • General Electric: 'Buy America' Clause Severely Limits Downside Potential [View article]
    You may well be correct Tedamerica. But short trading requires extreme discipline, and if the assumption upon the shorts were predicated have changed, one needs to exit. If one leaves profits on the table, so be it. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 16 01:05 AM Tedamerica wrote:

    > GE will drop to between $5.00 and $7.50 next week. This will be a
    > good time for new buyers to make a good, long term investment.
    Feb 16, 2009. 01:24 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • General Electric: 'Buy America' Clause Severely Limits Downside Potential [View article]
    Yes ED K. Fears of a trade war are overblown. In the face the global downturn, virtually every country has already implemented subsidies and tarrifs to protect their domestic producers and exports. Many thanks- Rakesh

    On Feb 15 06:41 PM ED K wrote:

    > Good informative article.
    > Telling the American public to buy American is not enough.Without
    > government action in the form of some kind of higher import tariffs
    > to level the playing field even when products from abroad are of
    > leeser quality the lower price will win out.This might even generate
    > some additional jobs.
    > I don't think an action of this kind would trigger a trade war as
    > many countries already have high import fees.Should'nt our manufacturers
    > have a shot at America's buyers??????
    Feb 16, 2009. 01:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • General Electric: 'Buy America' Clause Severely Limits Downside Potential [View article]
    Dear Nitram: You sound like a disgruntled and angry Obama voter, on the verge of turning into a Rush LImbaugh follower. I can only suggest that you start dealing in facts if you want to save your capital. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 15 04:31 PM NITRAM wrote:

    > Dear Saxena.Were you alive during the Epression. No. you talk is
    > what you read in books or heard from other people.You talk through
    > your butt. You are correct in not listrening to any Congressman.
    > However, if you dont believe that Tzar Obama and assistant Tzar Emanuell
    > want Socialism and a trade war, you should clean your ears. I am
    > from New York and I am sorry to say I voted for Chuck Schumer. Did
    > you listen to his news conference. He said, " Americans dont care
    > about PORK". I care how my money is spent. I have never been political,
    > but know I will work against everything Obama and his socialistic
    > team say and do. You ust realise that every day he changes things
    > that he said durinng the campaign. He appoints and congress approves
    > a Treasury Secretary who has commited crimes against the agency he
    > heads.
    Feb 16, 2009. 01:19 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • General Electric: 'Buy America' Clause Severely Limits Downside Potential [View article]
    Dear HiSpeed: You are one of those people who continue talking about the economics of the Great Depression without any facts in hand. FYI, the "globalization" we speak of today is unique, and the facts as they present themselves today are entirely different from the "global" facts in the 1930s-1940s. Moroever, you are perhaps not aware that numerous countries have restructured their economies with the aid of protectionist measures. I am not advocating a trade war; protectionism is a reality, let's deal with it constructively. So don't be misled by your local Congressman. And facts, please! Many thanks-Rakesh

    On Feb 15 11:36 AM HiSpeed wrote:

    > This author actually believes a trade war would be good for America?!?
    > WRONG! Protectionism killed global trade by OVER 60% -- this was
    > a significant contributor to the depth of the 1930s Depression!<br/>
    > Protectionism was and will be a complete disaster to the US economy!
    > History has proven that protectionism has failed America miserably
    > in the past. I'm afraid this is going to be one of history's reruns.
    > The author is a fool for promoting such poorly thought-out tripe.
    > BTW, GE is going to cut their dividend soon.....
    Feb 15, 2009. 01:44 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • General Electric: 'Buy America' Clause Severely Limits Downside Potential [View article]
    Dear Herbert Hoover: The disclosure statement must be read in the context of earlier articles aggressively advocating short positions in GE. The disclosure was made out of an abundance of caution for those visiting this site regularly, not to advance any long-position agenda. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 15 09:36 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:

    > Disclosure: No Outstanding Short Positions on GE.
    > Doesn't that mean that the guy is long? This entire article is nothing
    > but an attempt to get others to buy this stock so his investment
    > can appreciate. Hardly an unbiased look by an unbiased "analyst".
    > A waste of everyone's time.
    Feb 15, 2009. 11:21 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Emerging Markets: Millions Returning to the Natural Economy [View article]
    Nothing wrong with returning to our rural roots, omooc. At least we would not have to worry about stimulus packages and TARP funds. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 13 10:24 PM omooc wrote:

    > What's wrong with returing to your rural roots? In China, a few years
    > in the city allowed one to save some money, thereby allowing one
    > to build a house in the rural area, and to return there from time
    > to time. In the Chinese-language paper I read, I saw a photo, a couple
    > of days ago, on the front page, showing the backside of a bicyclist,
    > returning home, with a big washing machine (by Haier) at the back.
    > The general attitude seems to be positive -- a few years in the city
    > is nice, but returning to the rural home with your spouse and family
    > is nicer. With simple tastes and no debt, plowing the field is gainful
    > employment.
    Feb 14, 2009. 12:45 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Emerging Markets: Millions Returning to the Natural Economy [View article]
    Dear Proximo: FYI, my main business in a bull market has been merger-arbitrage type transactions, which provide the window to go long one one stock and short another. I am not a value investor (long term) because, since the early 1908s I have not trusted the accounting and disclosure in the marketplace. So I have focused on trading "misalignments", a bit akin to spread (pair) trading. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 13 10:10 PM PROXIMO wrote:

    > Rakesh---You have indicated that your preferred investment style
    > is short sales. Just curious, if conditions improved, say, several
    > years out and a bull market in stocks likely, would you still be
    > most comfortable focusing on opportunities in the short sector? Or
    > would you look to go long? Just curious---if you happen to read this
    > comment. Thanks, PROX.
    Feb 14, 2009. 12:43 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Emerging Markets: Millions Returning to the Natural Economy [View article]
    Dear Kay: You are correct insofar as certain rural areas in these markets are dominated by foreign remittances, criminal gangs and aid packages. In that sense, the term "natural economy" needs to be contextualized in today's reality. Many thanks for your comment. - Rakesh

    On Feb 12 02:02 PM Kay Moseley wrote:

    > "Regeneration of the natural economy"? Would that it were true!
    > Unfortunately, more and more of the countryside in the "emerging
    > markets" now resemble rural slums -- dependent on purchased food
    > and other inputs and thus on either some sort of rural wage work
    > (including massive narcotics markets, here and there), remittances
    > from relatives with urban or overseas jobs, or on "humanitarian assistance"
    > (surplus food + foreign NGOs). This is why food prices, poverty and
    > protests figure (as in the last paragraph of this interesting article).
    Feb 12, 2009. 03:54 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Geithner Dossier: Is There Really Money to Be Made Now? [View article]
    Dear ETFDesk: Yes, some of the smaller banks are perhaps "long" candidates at some point over the next few months. Re other ETFs (PGF & PFF), they just don't fit into the focused short window which is currently dominated by the five names cited. Short trading in this environment of daily news (and an abudance of spin) needs to be extremely targeted in order to maximize profits and curtail risks. Good website! Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 11 11:06 AM ETFDesk dot com wrote:

    > Great thought and analysis. I tend to think KRE might also be a good
    > play- althought risky, I like the smaller banks, can't wait to see
    > where they come out in a year from now.
    > Any thoughts on PGF and PFF?
    Feb 11, 2009. 01:43 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Real Crisis: Collapsing Capital Accumulation Process [View article]
    Very good brief David. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 10 06:18 PM David Braunstein wrote:

    > firstproman, I disagree that we are sowing the seeds of the next
    > bubble excess. Those days are over for many years because everyone
    > is overleveraged now: homeowners, businesses, hedgefunds, nations,
    > municipalities. The era of low interest rates produced over pricing
    > and stock and asset bubbles. The next ten years will be marked by
    > delevering and no amount of government intervenion is likely to change
    > that. The government has two choices: (1) do nothing and let our
    > capital system restructure the system through bankruptcies and foreclosures,
    > or (2) pump more money into the system by printing it. Of course
    > there is a third choice which is a mixture of (1) and (2). Since
    > printing money hurts older americans and those who are unemployed
    > and underemployed, that option hurts the most people as inflation
    > cuts them to the bone. Therefore, a mixture is most likely. There
    > will be no inflation or deflation if the governemt gets it right.
    > Some asset prices will deflate; some will inflate. There will be
    > winners and losers. Stock prices are likely to remain stable after
    > reaching an equalibrium which is somewhere between 600 and 700 on
    > the S&amp;P 500 Index. From there it will rise, but most likely by
    > only 5% to 6% annually for many years to come. Long-term interest
    > rates will peak at 3% for the same number of years. Capitalism will
    > coexist with socialism.
    Feb 11, 2009. 12:21 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Real Crisis: Collapsing Capital Accumulation Process [View article]
    Dear firstproman: I am not predicting any catastrophe, just to be clear. I am merely emphasizing that "state capitalism" will shape the next few decades. That is the first issue we need to debate and resolve first. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 09 03:11 PM firstproman wrote:

    > Rakesh, with respect I'm afraid this article is off base. This is
    > akin to Malthusian Catastrophe doctrine. We've heard it all before.
    > History to date indicates otherwise. Our experience so far is that
    > we (the human race) can, through technology, produce a lot more than
    > we can consume. Some will argue that we are reaching a tipping point
    > where the world can't produce any more. Even that argument is wrong.
    > Man's damage to the environment is due to excessive OVER consumption
    > by a small percentage of the world population i.e. SUVs, unnecessary
    > toys etc. As Henry George pointed out "Both the Jayhawk and the man
    > eat chickens; but the more Jayhawks, the fewer chickens, while the
    > more men, the more chickens." We have OVER produced chicken so much
    > so that in North America we eat the white meat and wings almost exclusively
    > and get rid of the rest and any price.
    > The challenges of the third world are an opportunity. Think of all
    > the business and profits that will eventually be made as entrepreneurs
    > build the water and power plants, hospitals and schools etc that
    > are desperately need AND THAT EVENTUALLY WILL BE BUILT when sanity
    > reaches those shores. Yes, I don’t know when the warlords will see
    > sense BUT note that China has already announced that they are turning
    > inwards and launching a two year >$1 Trillion development plan. India
    > will likely follow, then parts of Eastern Europe etc
    > Rakesh, I concede that you may be right in the very short term. My
    > response takes the longer term view.
    Feb 9, 2009. 03:57 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Real Crisis: Collapsing Capital Accumulation Process [View article]
    Dear Gordon: You are correct. When speaking about GDP growth, few analysists dare to address defense expenditures. Perhaps I should ask a question you my be reluctant to ask: Is this war on terror not acting like a stimulus anyway? Over to you. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 09 01:24 PM gordon wrote:

    > HERE'S AN EXCELLENT POINT!> <And, if defense-related expenditures
    > are removed from the national budgets of the developing economies,
    > real GDP growth rates are less than zero, with few exceptions. >
    > Why aren't more authors talking about this? In the recent GDP reports,
    > 60% of exports was DEFENSE! (read: OFFENSE!) The US is the largest
    > weapons manufacturer/seller in the world, take this out, GDP was
    > negative for MANY quarters.
    > Obama said the withdrawl of Iraq troops would pay for domestic stimulus'.
    > A LIE! Just like the 7,000 troop increase he spoke of becoming a
    > 30,000 troop ESCALATION.
    > And no outrage YET in this country?
    Feb 9, 2009. 03:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Real Crisis: Collapsing Capital Accumulation Process [View article]
    Dear Aalan: To be more precise, I prefer to short, and I seek short opportunities only. With all this lack of transparency, dodgy accounting practices, leverage, bailouts, and misleading GDP and job numbers, I simply am not interested in buying anything---unless there is a pure short-term trade based on market volatility, or a merger arbitrage window. The analysis speaks for itself, and any views which challenge the premises are always welcome. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 09 02:44 PM Aalan wrote:

    > Rakesh, AFAICT, has never met an asset that he didn't want to short.
    > That somewhat limits the usefulness of his analysis for the same
    > reason that sell-side analysts who rate everything a "buy" are useless.
    Feb 9, 2009. 03:07 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Financial Bailout Remains a Work-in-Progress, Chaos-in-Motion [View article]
    Dear SeekingTruth: FYI, the reason for the term "state capitalism" is that it means big government and strong alliances with big capital (i.e. via the infamous lobbysts). The "socialism" component is irrelevant, since the system does nothing sustainable for workers; we should not confuse the government's alliance with trade unions with real rights and welfare for the poor and underpriviliged. This term, state capitalism, has its roots in pre-War Italy and Germany, and in the Soviet Union under Stalin. I have sent in an article today putting state capitalism in perspective. Many thanks - Rakesh

    On Feb 07 10:19 AM SeekingTruth wrote:

    > Rakesh, Your term "State Capitalism" strikes me as most apropos in
    > describing our current direction. A term I have used for years is
    > "Quasi Capitalism-Socialism" but I think your term is more succinct
    > and "telling".
    > Thanks again for a job well done and for a new highly descriptive
    > and appropriate term.
    Feb 8, 2009. 04:13 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment