Universal Huckleberry

Economic Growth Differences: Democratic vs. Non-Democratic Countries

Debate? Please, why bother?

My 11-year old could tell you about the result of USA vs. USSR... My 15-year old, however, would argue that it's not the form of government or even the government itself that determines a nation's prosperity, but rather the economic system, and that capitalism has produced more wealth for more people in a shorter amount of time than any other economic system in history. On the other hand, my 18-year old would argue that it's neither government nor capitalism which creates wealth, but rather it is the power of individuals existing in a culture where they are granted rights, exercise freedoms and maintain responsibilities to each other.

Anyway, didn't some really smart people already figure this out some 230 years ago?

Will Pickens' Scrapped Project Slow Wind Energy Momentum?

Joseph, did you know that the oil industry is responsible for generating approximately $1.5 trillion in tax revenue for governments at the Federal, State and Local levels? That's a darn good return on investment for the paltry $56 billion they receive in subsidies.

I hold several "green" investments, but I am not so delusional as to think that renewable energy companies, most of which are years if not decades away from profitibility, are even close to being capable of replacing that tax revenue. Having the technology is one thing, but's a completely different matter to be able to implement that technology from the standpoint of economics. I think that was the whole point of this article, and was certainly at the root of Pickens' decision.


On Jul 09 05:54 PM JosephN wrote:

> Lucius, Did you know Oil is one of the most heavily subsidized energy
> industries in the united states.
>
> In fact, nearly all energy industries are subsidized by the government.
> Except many of the renewable forms, like geothermal which just got
> some help this year for the first time. Or Wind, which they take
> away the subsidies and give them back every couple of years.
>
> Personally I would love to see Oil and Coal companies lose all their
> subsidies and that money go to future energy tech.

Republicans Offer Alternative Energy Bill Heavy on Nuclear, Oil Drilling

"Biofuels can do anything that petroleum can."
-Fred Linn

Really? I think you need to turn off your MSNBC and Air America, and try to explain to the rest of us how biofuels can replace crude in manufacturing the broad field of plastics, including polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene, PVC, polyesters, nylons, and others. These synthetic polymer "commodities" are as much a part of our lives as wood, metal and glass. They are processed into films, fibers, paints, adhesives, composites (e.g., glass fiber reinforced polyesters) and the extraordinary range of plastic goods found in modern society, including the computer (or mobile device) that you are all reading this on. Without "evil oil", this forum and this debate about America's energy future wouldn't even be possible.

Chase Yield with MLPs and Short Commodities ETFs

A more comprehensive list of available MLP funds:

As far as I know, the Bear Stearns Alerian MLP Select ETN (BSR) is the only fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index (AMZS), however, BSR is a debt instrument and not an equity instrument and therefore subject to both market risk and issuer risk. In these troubled times, that makes many investors nervous about Exchange Traded Notes.

Kayne Anderson sports a small family of funds: KYN, KYE and KED. These are all Closed-End Funds. The Kayne Anderson MLP Investment Co. (KYN) is, as its name suggests, focused primarily on energy MLPs. It invests roughly 80% of its resources into midstream energy MLPs. The Kayne Anderson Energy Total Return Fund (KYE) is more broadly diversified in the energy sector. The last time I checked KYE was about 60% MLPs, and the rest in a mixed bag of production, development, transportation and storage. Kayne Anderson's third CEF is The Kayne Anderson Energy Development Co. (KED), which is about 60% invested in private energy companies and the rest in micro-cap MLPs.

The Tortoise CEFs closely parallel the Kayne Anderson funds: (TYG) Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. consists of mostly midstream energy MLPs, (TYY) Tortoise Energy Capital Corp. includes MLPs and other select upstream and downstream energy companies involved in development, production, transportation and storage, and (TTO) Tortoise Capital Resources Corp. which invests in mostly private and micro-cap energy infrastructure not readily available to the retail investor. Both Kayne Anderson and Tortoise boast a number of experts and insiders from the energy MLP sector, and the impression I get is that both companies know their business and utilize industry contacts to make effective investment decisions.

There are also a few other CEFs you might want to consider: (FEN) First Trust Advisors Energy Income and Growth Fund, 5.36% expenses, all top-ten holdings are midstream gas & oil MLPs. (FMO) Fiduciary/Claymore MLP Opportunity Fund, about 80% MLPs mostly from midstream energy. And (MTP) MLP & Strategic Equity Fund, 1.3% expenses.

Looking at any of these nine funds is an easy way to invest while automatically diversifying and simultaneously avoiding the K-1 and UBTI tax issues.

Uranium Mining: 5 Investment Opportunities

Nice article, Kristjan. Please continue to tag your pieces with NLR, PKN & NUCL to catch those of us who invest in the sector more broadly.

Master Limited Partnerships: An Island of Stability for Dividend Investors

Living:

As far as I know, the Bear Stearns Alerian MLP Select ETN (BSR) is the only fund tracking the Alerian MLP Index (AMZS), however, you are correct in stating that an ETN is a debt instrument and not an equity instrument and therefore subject to both market risk and issuer risk. In these troubled times, that makes many investors nervous about ETNs.

"LS" mentioned the Kayne Anderson funds (KYN) and KYE). These are both Closed-End Funds. The Kayne Anderson MLP Investment Co. (KYN) invests roughly 80% of its resources into midstream energy MLPs. The Kayne Anderson Energy Total Return Fund (KYE) was 57% MLPs last time I checked, and the rest in a mixed bag of production, development, transportation and storage. Kayne Anderson also has another CEF, The Kayne Anderson Energy Development Co. (KED), which was 56% invested in private energy companies and the rest in micro-cap MLPs.

You might also look at the Tortoise CEFs which parallel the Kayne Anderson funds: (TYG) Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. (mostly midstream MLPs), (TYY) Tortoise Energy Capital Corp. (MLPs and other select upstream and downstream companies), and (TTO) Tortoise Capital Resources Corp. (mostly private and micro-cap energy infrastructure). Both Kayne Anderson and Tortoise boast a number of experts and insiders from the energy MLP sector, and the impression I get is that these guys know their, uh, stuff.

There are also a few other CEFs you might want to consider: (FEN) First Trust Advisors Energy Income and Growth Fund, 5.36% expenses, all top-ten holdings are midstream gas & oil MLPs. (FMO) Fiduciary/Claymore MLP Opportunity Fund, about 80% MLPs mostly from midstream energy. And (MTP) MLP & Strategic Equity Fund, 1.3% expenses.

Looking at any of these nine funds is an easy way to invest while automatically diversifying and simultaneously avoiding the K-1 and UBTI tax issues.

The High Dividend Stock Investor's Collapsing Dollar Survival Guide, Part 4

A minor point: (TYG) is not an MLP itself, but a closed-end fund that invests in energy infrastructure MLPs. The correct name is "Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp."

The High Dividend Stock Investor's Collapsing Dollar Survival Guide, Part 2

Great article, Cliff- organized, thorough and well written. Exactly what I'd expect from a CPA! Judging by your inclusion in 120 "watchlists" since January, it looks like there is substantial interest in your content and style. I know it takes hours and hours to do the research, collect your thoughts and then translate them into a coherent stream of words that make up an "article", so on behalf of the SA community I'd like to say that we certainly appreciate your efforts!

I'm looking forward to the rest of this series, particularly with regards to MLPs. I noticed that among your list of MLPs you hold only one CEF, Tortoise Energy Infrastructure. I've spent some time examining MLP CEFs including (FEN), (FMO), the Tortoise funds (TYG), (TYY) and (TTO), the Kayne Anderson funds (KYN), (KYE) and (KED), and (MTP) which Delojozafado commented on earlier. I also looked at the ETN (BSR) based on the Alerian MLP Index (AMZS), but I'm very hesitant to invest in a debt instrument. I would like to invest in the MLP sector, but I have a modest portfolio via dollar cost averaging and would prefer to be diversified within the sector. (Also, quite frankly, I'm a little intimidated by the UBTI and K-1 requirements.) Obviously, an analysis of the MLP CEFs might be somewhat outside the scope of your Series, but I'm sure there are many other SA'ers with more limited time and financial resources who would greatly appreciate your input.

Dividend Aristocrats Strike Back

God help us...


On Feb 23 10:33 AM market ace wrote:

> If you call these aristocrat dividend stocks you are a joke. There
> are many many much better dividend stocks out there compared to your
> pathetic list.

The Differences Between Chinese and U.S. Economic Recoveries

I'm just a simple man, I can't offer any fancy charts or graphs.

But from a common sense viewpoint I'd have to say that the biggest difference, with regards to stimulus spending, between the US and Chinese "economic recoveries" is that we are financing our $787 billion expenditure with DEBT while the Chinese are paying for their $600 billion with CASH- a good chunk of which is from our interest payments to them.

When you just step back and think about that for a moment, squinting at the correlation between some squiggly lines on a chart seems rather insignificant, doesn't it?

A Busy Week for Dividend Increases

Dividend Growth Investor, can you tell us exactly what the criteria are for companies to qualify as Dividend Achievers, Aristocrats or Champions? Or, can you direct us to an article or site which covers the subject?

Thanks!

Pfizer's Acquisition of Wyeth Could Be Short Boon to Shareholders

Dividend Growth Investor- "capitalise"?: typo, spelling, or British?

Which Way Are Shipping Stocks Headed?

Tim, a shipping blog would be fantastic, particularly since you'd be the one doing it. I appreciate the "nuts-n-bolts" and "call 'em like you see 'em" approach you take toward analysis.

Penn West Still Shaky After Cutting Distribution

Nice analysis, Mr. Bui. You have a great "tone" as a writer.

The bottom line is that oil is a finite resource, and will eventually go up. I agree with paultaut that 2010 (and beyond) will be better years.

Tk77Mann, your prediction that we will be dependent on oil "for another decade at least" is probably way short. I would guess more like 25 -50 years, maybe longer. We are years away from feasible energy alternatives, and of course there's also the tiny little problem that we currently have no other alternative but crude for manufacturing the broad field of plastics, including polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene, PVC, polyesters, nylons, etc. These synthetic polymer "commodities" are processed into films, fibers, paints, adhesives, composites (e.g., glass fiber reinforced polyesters) and the extraordinary range of plastic goods found in modern society, including the computer that you are all reading this on. Polymers are also a crucial component of other advanced technologies, and of course are an integral part of the chip and printed circuit production process.

Beabaggage also touched on another issue that will keep oil and gas as viable industries for decades to come: money, or at least taxes. The oil industry alone generates billions upon billions upon billions of tax dollars for federal, state and local governments in the form of payroll taxes, corporate taxes and direct tariffs, such as the 54 cents-per-gallon (national average) that we pay on every gallon of gasoline. It will be quite some time before the "alternative" or "renewable" energy industry is mature enough and competitive enough and profitable enough to bare a significant share of this massive tax burden. (But rest assured, our clever politicians will eventually find a way to tax the sun and the wind and the waves.)

Precious Metals: Some Recent Developments

Mark, Implats' projected palladium deficit is 295,000 toz on supply of 8,215,000 toz, or about 3.6%. If all of your optimistic scenarios come true, then palladium does indeed look "bullish" for 2009. Otherwise I'd have to say that 2009 just looks "better".

Keep up the great work!