Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View 153972's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Zacks' Bear Of The Day: Ford [View article]
    SA Readers,

    Please do not solely rely upon analysts to determine your investment decisions. They do not know anymore than you if you read the 10Ks, listen to the earnings investment, and analyst day conference calls, read SA and other investment websites as well as the NYT and FT.

    This is not to say that you shouldn't lend credence to their opinions but please don't make your decisions on just their opinion.

    Long F
    Nov 7, 2014. 02:35 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Microsoft: Further Upside May Be Limited [View article]

    Thank you for the article. I found it enlightening.
    Oct 28, 2014. 12:51 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why ED Is In My Portfolio [View article]

    I echo CapeCapMgmt's comment about your article.
    Oct 28, 2014. 11:50 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kinder Morgan Inc. Investment Thesis [View article]
    Very good article. Thank you.
    Oct 15, 2014. 08:58 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are We Starting To See Why It's Really The Exorbitant 'Burden' [View article]
    Again, obfuscation is your brand.

    What are you afraid of?
    Oct 15, 2014. 05:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are We Starting To See Why It's Really The Exorbitant 'Burden' [View article]
    Since you don't want to answer the question about what you think the appropriate level of government spending to GDP ought to be., i.e., a hard number this reflects your obfuscation, particularly since your predicate to your argument is what we take in as revenue. In other words, if you can't state a percentage of GDP for government spending how can you determine what is the appropriate amount of revenue that ought to be cut? You are in effect whistling in the dark. I am not surprised by this outcome since you have mostly spouted platitudes since your first comment.

    As for my riposte about an independent judiciary, I stand by that remark. You cannot have a modern, legitimate republican form of government without an independent judiciary. If you think so, please inform me what multi-party country that has a functioning republican government that does not have an independent judiciary?

    You can call an independent judiciary big government but that only shows where your mindset is.

    FYI: the power of purse is only with the legislative branch per Article I of the US Constitution and not elected branches as you state.
    Oct 15, 2014. 01:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are We Starting To See Why It's Really The Exorbitant 'Burden' [View article]
    As you correctly state the Supreme Court is fallible. So, should we throw the baby out with the bath water? Since an independent judiciary is one of the hallmarks of a functioning democracy, I will accept their fallibility as the price of a republican, Constitutional government.

    You appear to want to go back to the good ol' days of Grover Cleveland or the the late 19th century by your admiration of limited government. With this in mind what is the appropriate amount of government spending as a percentage of GDP should we have?
    Oct 14, 2014. 07:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are We Starting To See Why It's Really The Exorbitant 'Burden' [View article]
    I am glad we agree.

    In answer to your question, "Which clause authorizes the federal government control over agriculture in the first place?" it is the commerce as interpreted by the Supreme Court in several decisions as I'm sure you were already aware of.

    The Ag Dept IMO has become a department captured by Big Ag corporations. The transfer payment is only a symptom of the disease.
    Oct 14, 2014. 12:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are We Starting To See Why It's Really The Exorbitant 'Burden' [View article]
    So we agree that there are more than enumerated powers in the Constitution?
    Oct 13, 2014. 05:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Are We Starting To See Why It's Really The Exorbitant 'Burden' [View article]

    You are stubbornly stating that enumerated is still the correct answer but you now add the necessary and proper clause which only augments my original argument regarding implied, inherent and resulting powers. Thank you for coming around somewhat.

    My contention was and remains that to rely on enumerated powers is not recognized by de jure, by our history, events, circumstances and facts.

    First, implied powers are those that may be inferred from power expressly granted - for example, the power to draft men from the express power to raise armies and navies. Concomitant with that is moral obligation to provide medical care for veterans.

    Second, resulting powers are those that result when several enumerated powers are added together - for example the authority to make paper money legal tender for the payment of debts results from adding together the enumerated powers to coin money, to regulate interstate commerce and to borrow money.

    Three, inherent powers are those powers in the field of external affairs that the Supreme Court has declared do not depend upon constitutional grants but grow out of the very existence of the national government.
    Oct 12, 2014. 12:13 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Are We Starting To See Why It's Really The Exorbitant 'Burden' [View article]

    The Constitution has enumerated powers, but within the document there is also implied, resulting and inherent powers. You cannot only list enumerated when discussing the causes of the fiscal deficit and our national debt.
    Oct 11, 2014. 01:00 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Warning sounded over rising sports rights costs [View news story]
    ESPN and TNT are IMO making a sound investment. On most nights "free" commercial TV is average and paid subscriber such as Showtime, HBO, Starz, can be DVR'd to watch at your convenience. Most men want to watch some sports Monday -Friday and the NFL and college football do not fill the void for sports enthusiasts.

    Long DIS
    Oct 7, 2014. 04:21 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Holder’s departure could signal end of big mortgage cases [View news story]
    Read the Papers: You didn't report. You opined.

    It is too bad that the facts get in the way with your opinions. You have ignored the New York Times article because it doesn't fit your paradigm. You now discuss Warren Buffet and tax inversions, which I am supposing that your read or heard about regarding the Burger King and Tim Horton merger.
    Mr. Buffet comments about that merger and the tax avoidance are discussed in the below link.

    You really must get your facts together.

    BTW, name calling AG Holder with Gestapo tactics then calling him a Marxist is ad hominem and adds nothing to your comment except showing other readers of your naiveté when opining about Holder.
    Sep 30, 2014. 05:55 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Holder’s departure could signal end of big mortgage cases [View news story]
    AG Holder has suggested for some time that he would retire after 6 years; therefore his leaving the DOJ should be no surprise or conspiracy theory or termination by the president as your comment states.

    As for West, he has a new job at Pepsi and can cash in as so many of our bureaucrats and elected officials do. We do have the best government that money can buy after all.
    Sep 27, 2014. 01:50 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Alibaba's Corporate Governance Is Not A Concern [View article]
    Copy catting E-Bay, Amazon,etc., is not innovation IMO. Ma has created a niche in China but at this time he does not have competitors based upon the 80% market share the author quotes and based upon the IPO roadshow. What happens when princelings or Chinese entrepreneurs also want to enter the BABA market?

    I agree with the author that BABA has significant room to grow due to the relative low amount of internet traffic in China.

    I am concerned if BABA encounters competition in China or if he runs a foul with the some powerful bureaucrat in China.

    A second concern is that he has been remarkably successful in China but can he and his team duplicate that in India, Japan, the rest of Asia, North America and Europe?

    I concur with thotdoc: give Ma and BABA some time before branding him the next Jobs, Bezos, Whitman, etc., innovator.

    I have to differ with the author re: China law enforcement of the VIE and his analogy with Google and Facebook. The Chinese judiciary and regulatory environment is not the same as the US and the SEC. US decisions are generally based upon facts and the law. The SEC and judiciary are also independent. Does anyone think that the Chinese judiciary and their regulators are independent or that their decisions are not based upon politics?
    Sep 26, 2014. 08:28 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment