logicalsinger

Jim Rogers Believes World Is Heading for Depression

I don't think Rogers gets the fundamentals of wealth creation. At the root is the intellectual property machine which has been until now US-based innovation and technology. Emerging markets wealth is derived from that root wealth creation when American and European companies move to outsource manufacturing and services. Until you see major proprietary innovation and intellectual property (tech, pharma, media etc.) coming out of emerging markets, I wouldn't get too excited again about those markets.

Financials: Cleaning House Is Always Better

<< A financial system which measures success by how much it enables the creation of production of goods and services of utility is efficient. >>

So if I borrow money from the bank and invest it in the creation of "goods and services of utility" but I don't generate any profits in that effort, we can call the system 'efficient'? Er...not exactly. I destroyed wealth in the process even if the goods and services had utility

On Mar 20 01:04 PM John Lounsbury wrote:

> Simon - - -
>
> I read your NY Times article. Among the reasons discussed for why
> keeping the same management and operatives in place is a bad idea,
> the strongest for me is the motivation of the perpetrators to:<br/>
>
> 1. Cover their tracks;
>
> 2. Try to protect and advance their own financial interests over
> those of the company; and
>
> 3. Continue to obtain obscene compensation for "working out the problem"
> after receiving obscene compensation for creating the problem.<br/>
>
> Add this to the perception that taking risks that blow up has no
> penalty if you can construct a big enough bomb to convince your hostages
> (the U.S. taxpayers) that you are the only one competent enough to
> deconstruct the bomb, you can get rich building the bomb and then
> add to your riches by deconstructing the bomb. It is a big problem
> for this to happen from the enrichment of the bomber perspective.
> It is an even bigger problem that the rest of the world will never
> learn all the details of the bomb if both the building and deconstructing
> process are done behind closed doors.
>
> It is becoming ever more apparent that allowing the "smart people"
> to "work out" this crisis is doing nothing more than enabling an
> innefficient financial system. A financial system which measures
> success by how much money its minions can make is inefficient for
> the 99.9% of the population not among the minions.
>
> A financial system which measures success by how much it enables
> the creation of production of goods and services of utility is efficient.
>
>
> We have lost the latter measure of success in the past couple of
> decades.

Financials: Cleaning House Is Always Better

I think most people in the financial industry, including most people at AIG, are honest upstanding people. There were some rogues (Madoff etc.) and there were some risks which were poorly understood, but I don't buy the idea that we are waking up now and finding out that everyone was a thief all along.

Financials: Cleaning House Is Always Better

Cleaning House, in particular the House of Representatives, is a great idea. Pelosi and co. are demonstrating their incompetence on a daily basis.

More Outrageous than Bailout Bonuses? Nonstop Printing of Money

It's the lawyers against the MBAs. The lawyers (Obama, Congress, etc.) are having a field day while the MBAs (Wall Street, corporate America) are on the defensive. It's a battle of the elites. The populist sentiment is just a tool, in this case in the hands of the lawyers. The media is full of people consumed with envy and they are also mad at MBAs for making so much money.

Many MBAs don't create any wealth but many do! No lawyer creates any wealth but most redistribute it.

Chinese Are Likely to Halt Purchases of U.S. Treasury Debt

User 360916
No, this doesn't require "rock-solid logic". It only requires a sense of ethics that demands that other parties honor their commitments. What is "breathtaking" is the willingness of so many people to look the other way while someone is "drinking their milk shake".

On Mar 13 10:28 AM User 360916 wrote:

> Logical snigger: your rock-solid logic in the field of global trade
> is breathtaking. Why not run for political office and then you could
> call the shots! We'd be so much the better if your political beliefs
> became the foundation of global well-being! Hooray!

WSJ and Barron's Watch: Overall Consensus, Bottom Has Not Been Reached

That is actually good news. The consensus is generally wrong at the extremes, whether it is March 2000 when everyone was bullish (new economy yada yada) or March 2003 when everyone was bearish (Iraq invasion etc). In both cases, the consensus was hugely wrong.

World War III: U.S. vs. China?

<< The bottom line is the Chinese, who are the largest foreign holders of United States Treasury Bills, have been underwriting U.S. economic growth for decades.>>

They have been underwriting mainly their exports of Chinese-made products in the US. At the root, economic growth came from America's tech boom and other innovations. Superpowers don't go to war against one another. Little upside since neither will conquer the other, and huge downside. They wage war through proxies just like the Soviet and US did in the Cold War.

Money from the Sidelines Will Determine Next Rally

I think there is plenty of "stock on the sidelines" that may go into cash. I don't believe 'Cash on the sidelines' has ever been a good indicator of future market performance.

Citadel's New Hedge Funds

<< Ken Griffin's Citadel has plans to roll out a few more funds, even after Citadel's flagship funds had a rough year in 2008.>>

I would rephrase this as "to roll out a few funds BECAUSE Citadel's flagship funds had a rough year". Older funds have a high water mark and won't earn any incentive fees for a while. New funds have no such hurdle.

Another Reason to Be Bullish on Altria

Tough to argue with an 8% yield for a defensive stock. Looks good to me too. Treasury notes pay you 1 or 2%. I think the extra 6% more than compensates for the extra risk of litigation etc. Good call!

Is China a Good ETF Bet?

NO !

Seven Promising Investment Opportunities in France

EADS: The A380 is a disaster. It wouldn't shock me if it bankrupted them in the end.

Goldman Sachs Is Toast

$122 billion in cash??? Really? Are you confusing their own cash and cash held for other parties? And what are the liabilities on the other side of these cash assets?


On Mar 10 05:53 AM [e-mail] wrote:

> I'll take the opposite side of that bet anyday.
>
> Goldman has $122 billion in cash, which I believe is still considered
> a tangible asset. Are you sure that they are 23x overleveraged?<br/&...
>
> It appears to me they have significantly more room for error than
> either Bank of America (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) or Citigroup
> (seekingalpha.com/symbo...). I'd imagine some financial companies
> are going to remain standing when this is all said and done, and
> I see few mega-institutions left standing as cash rich as Goldman.
>
>
> I'm more of a micro-cap hunter than a institutional bank analyzer,
> so correct me where I'm wrong. Perhaps my arguments are too simple.
>
>
> Dave

Gold Continues to Gain Ground

As your chart shows, from a technical perspective, you would buy around $87 which is the bottom of the channel. Technicals can help determine good entry points when the longer-term fundamentals also point in the same direction, which I believe is the case for a bullish stance on gold.