Cicero

Total Rating:
0 / 0

31 Comments

    • Fri Jun 6th 06:25 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Miller and Heebner: A Study in Contrasting Investment Styles
      Over the last 10 years Miller had three great years (~48%, 44%, 27%), one good year (~12%), two blah years at ~6%, one awful year (losing ~19%), and three bad years (losing ~10%, and 7% twice). His five year average return is under 7%, and that doesn't cover his three worst years of the last 10. I assume that if you pull back further, say 20 years, that his record looks less dismal, but either way, his reputation seems to exceed his results.
      View article »
    • Wed Jun 4th 07:44 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Rising Risk of Emerging Markets
      Thanks Cromag, that's a big help. Checking out two similar funds or stocks is hard when they appear to have the same return looking at a chart, but in reality one has a 10% distribution a few months back and the other hasn't. Too bad you can only go back one year, but I'm buying you a beer tonight anyway!

      I wonder how many investors never realize this idiosyncrasy?
      View article »
    • Tue Jun 3rd 13:24 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      A Bull Market Correction or End of a Bear Market Rally?
      You may be a socialist. But don't blame capitalism for the corporatocracy we have, where powerful forces (from teachers' unions and trial lawyers on the demopublican side to big pharma and big oil, who lean towards republicrats) act in collusion with the fedgov to rape the taxpayer. Sure, greed is there in humans and will rear its ugly head even in a free market, but the damage would be exponentially less if the Constitution was followed. As it is, private bankers collude with the fedgov to create money from nothing and charge America 8% of our national budget in interest. The dotcom and housing bubbles were created in large part by the fed (with plenty of help from ignorant and greedy homeowners and mortgage brokers along the way), just as the inflation and recession of the 70's was. If the fedgov wasn't there to offset their losses with tax dollars when their gambles fail (think the Peso collapse and the recent help given to the subprime lenders), these rich investors would learn from their painful losses. So before you opt for socialism, let's try re-legalizing freedom and reapplying the Constitution. Haluburton and the big arms dealers would see profits plummet as we refrained from empire building, but our economy would take off and prosperity would flourish.
      View article »
    • Mon Jun 2nd 17:16 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Rising Risk of Emerging Markets
      Latin America is runnning on all cylinders and some regional funds have held up (EMF, Tremex, GAF and GUR of my holdings). But many emerging markets are well off their highs. Here are my single country holdings and how far they are below their 1 year high:

      IIF (44%) India
      CAF (41%) China Smaller companies
      FXI (30%) China larger
      TKF (28%) Turkey
      ISL (24%) Isreal
      EWY (22%) S Korea
      TRF (18%) Russia
      EWT (10%) Tawain

      Does anyone know of a free stock charting website that factors dividends and distributions into the charts (so you can see actual returns visually without having to do the math to adjust for them)?


      View article »
    • Fri May 30th 07:40 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Banking Sector: 'Buy When There's Blood in the Streets'?
      Correction: It is to our peril NOT to see the man behind the curtain. Also, the article "The Nixon Recovery" in the NY Times also admits that the fed is independent of our gov't.
      View article »
    • Fri May 30th 07:33 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Banking Sector: 'Buy When There's Blood in the Streets'?
      Understanding macro-economics is vital to investing wisely. Most Americans think inflation is a complex array of economic forces that are in constant flux, with the Federal Reserve officials fighting gallantly to grasp and defend against them. In fact, this is a distraction to avert our attention from the simple reality that a group of private bankers, the Federal Reserve (they are not "federal" and there are no "reserves") is working in collusion with Congress to print money from nothing at essentially no cost and loan it to our government, charging us about 8% of our national budget in perpetual interest (we never repay the principle) for the privilege. It is to our financial ruin to ignore the man behind the curtain and see the great and mighty wizard in honest light. The ideas are simple enough for my high school economics class to grasp. Printing money inflates the supply and causes the value of the dollar to drop, just as adding more water to a pot of soup dilutes the (nutritional) value of each cup. This can all be verified on the Federal Reserve website in various speeches and in the NY Times. Ron Paul is virtually the only statesman in DC who understands this and is fighting against it.

      Sources

      Bernanke admits creating money from nothing in a speech on 11/21/02 on the Fed’s website: www.federalreserve.gov.../

      The NY Times article “The Nixon Recovery” of 2/4/04 admits the fed prints or doesn't print money to sway elections: (query.nytimes.com/gst/...

      The NY Time, article, "The Education of Ben Bernanke" admits the Fed created the housing bubble by pumping easy money in an effort to stem the damage of the dot.com bubble (that they fueled with easy money in the 90’s): www.nytimes.com/2008/0...
      The article notes the Fed has “…control over the supply of money” and that this “…power to expand the money supply is unique... only the…Fed can create new money.”
      The same article notes the Fed flooded the economy with easy money specifically to manipulate the 72 election for Nixon, creating the “brutal recession” and massive double digit inflation that marked the economic havoc of that decade. We learn that idle builders (my father was a carpenter) “were so enraged that some sent him two-by-fours in the mail.”

      Bernanke admits Fed caused depression in the conclusion of this 2002 Speech here on Fed Website: www.federalreserve.gov...


      View article »
    • Fri May 23rd 07:17 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Solving the Energy Problem Without Nuclear
      I had to rub the sleep out of my eyes and check my calendar to be sure it's still 2008. This author must be biased and working to ignore the truth. Nuclear plants are being stopped by wacko environmental groups, not costs or facts. Here's a snippet from a politically incorrect magazine, The New American. The link below it has the complete article with all the details, but it's worth buying a hard copy just for the pictures of the results of the safety tests.

      Used-fuel containers must pass rigorous tests by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission including:

      A 30-foot free fall onto an unyielding surface, which would be equivalent to a head-on crash at 120 miles per hour into a concrete bridge abutment;
      A puncture test allowing the container to fall 40 inches onto a steel rod six inches in diameter;
      A 30-minute exposure to fire at 1,475 degrees Fahrenheit that engulfs the entire container; and
      Submergence of the same container under three feet of water for eight hours.
      If that’s not sufficiently comforting, there are also transportation tests to verify container integrity, consisting of:

      Running a flatbed tractor-trailer carrying a container into a concrete wall at 84 miles per hour;
      Placing a container on a rail car that was driven into a concrete wall at 81 miles per hour; and
      Placing a container on a tractor-trailer that was broadsided by a train locomotive traveling at 80 miles per hour.
      In all cases, post-crash assessments showed that the containers — although slightly dented and charred — would not have released their contents. One wonders how the thousands of tanker trucks transporting deadly chlorine and bromine gases would stand up to such conditions.

      source: www.thenewamerican.com...
      View article »
    • Fri May 16th 07:35 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      China: No, But This Time Really Is Different
      Note how insulated our nation was from sovereign debt default when the Constitution was respected as the job description of and contract with the people of our fedgov. Damage was limited by our distrust of too much fedgov power, and of our distrust of allowing a central bank to get their grubby hands on our currency. It's difficult enough fighting corruption and greed in the free market and on a state level; consolidating the power in D.C. and allowing the cleptocracy in Congress to collude with private bankers at the "Federal Reserve" (it's not federal, and there are no reserves) may prove to be our nation's undoing.

      Our money is created from nothing. It's like adding water to soup. When you double the water in a pot of soup, you need two cups of it to get the same nutrition. When you double the money supply, you need two dollars to replace one original dollar. It was their inflating of the money supply that caused the liquidity that inflated the dotcom bubble. It was their inflating of the money supply that inflated the subprime bubble (though greedy mortgage brokers and greedy home buyers were part of the equation.)

      Bernanke admits right in the NY Times that Congress allows them to create money from nothing. He has never explained why Americans are forced to pay 8% of our national budget in interest on such funny money to the private bankers. (The NY Times also admits that the Federal Reserve bankers are private and independent, by the way.) The NY Times confirms that the Fed flooded the money supply in the 70's to re-elect Nixon, and that the raging inflation that resulted was only "cured" by the Federal Reserve tightening the money supply so much that it caused the massive recession of the 70's. Bernanke himself admits that the Fed caused the Depression, which would have been known as the recession of 29-30 had they not mucked up the markets.

      We can hopefully still invest and make money if we are aware of the macro influences of our steady path away from the Constitution (if we can avoid economic collapse), but electing statesmen like Ron Paul is necessary to really turn us around economically as well as morally.

      Sources:
      The Nixon Recovery (NY Times 2/4/04): query.nytimes.com/gst/...

      The Education of Ben Bernanke (NY Times 1/20/08): www.nytimes.com/2008/0...

      Bernanke admits Fed caused depression (see conclusion of this 2002 speech here on Fed Website): www.federalreserve.gov...

      Bernanke admits creating money from nothing in a speech on 11/21/02 (4th paragraph under heading “Curing Deflation”) on the Fed’s website: www.federalreserve.gov.../
      View article »
    • Mon May 12th 13:17 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Industries to Avoid, Industries to Buy
      The war profiteering and lobby money are both examples of how a bloated, unconstitutional fedgov attracts corruption. Both are reasons to return to the Constitution and minimize the size, scope, and power of the fedgov, which would minimize the damage the fedgov could do. The corruption won't go away - it's embeded in human nature. Keep gov't as local as possible. It's hard enough to watch our towns and city councils, much less the theives in D.C..
      View article »
    • Mon May 12th 13:12 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Industries to Avoid, Industries to Buy
      Glad to see from the responses that intelligence is alive and well outside of D.C.. Socialism is much more the problem than solution. Enron was the antithesis of the free market run amuck. They had cronies on the inside writing laws and lawyers whose full time jobs were to take advantage of the maze of regulations. Enron was one of the first big corporations promoting the Global Warming, "problem" and hyping the fedgov "solution" because they planned once again to take advantage of the ensuing gov't regulations.
      View article »
    • Fri May 9th 06:30 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      iPhone (Apple) vs. BlackBerry (RIM): Which Do Consumers Love Most?
      Presupposing a closed, limited set of answers (either A or B) does not serve an honest function. The author asked. The answer found was that it's a two horse race and both are good bets to make money. Disagree if you will, criticize the data or its interpretation, explain why you disagree, or just go out and place your bet, but don't criticize because the race is too close to call in the author's mind.
      View article »
    • Sun May 4th 14:34 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      U.S. Dollar Signaling a Changing Tide?
      Congress allows the Fed cartel of independent private bankers to create money from nothing and then charges you and me 8% of our national budget in perpetual interest for the privilege (we never repay the principle).
      The NY Times article “The Nixon Recovery” of 2/4/04 admits they print or don't print money to sway elections, causing runaway inflation (as in the 70's): (query.nytimes.com/gst/...
      The NY Time, article, The Education of Ben Bernanke admits the Fed created the housing bubble by pumping easy money in an effort to stem the damage of the dot.com bubble (that they fueled with easy money in the 90’s): www.nytimes.com/2008/0...
      It notes the Fed “…has vast powers over the economy” with its “…control over the supply of money” and that this “…power to expand the money supply is unique... only the…Fed can create new money.” It notes Bernanke helped create the housing bubble and that the Fed ignored the warnings (of people like Ron Paul) and “the speculative lending continued.”
      The same article notes the Fed flooded the economy with easy money specifically to manipulate the 72 election for Nixon, creating the “brutal recession” and massive double digit inflation that marked the economic havoc of that decade. We learn that idle builders (my father was a carpenter) “were so enraged that some sent him two-by-fours in the mail.”
      Bernanke admits Fed caused depression in the conclusion of this 2002 Speech here on Fed Website: www.federalreserve.gov...
      Bernanke admits creating money from nothing in a speech on 11/21/02 on the Fed’s website: www.federalreserve.gov.../ (4th paragraph under heading “Curing Deflation.” He duplicitous states the US gov’t creates it – is so, why pay independent private bankers interest? In fact, Congress allows the “Federal Reserve” (they aren’t federal and there are no reserves) to print monopoly “money” and loan it to the fedgov. We, the sheeple, pay 8% of our national budget in perpetual interest on that “money”. Talk about an investment! Imagine spending $3,000 to print a million back in 1960, lending it to the fedgov, and collecting 3% “interest only” for life. That’s $30,000 a year for perpetuity – a 1000% return on investment each and every year for perpetuity without investing another dime.
      Ron Paul anyone?
      View article »
    • Sun May 4th 13:19 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Yahoo's Tough Week Ahead
      Sounds to me as if TraderX lost big time betting on Yang. The sour grapes in his mouth have put tears in his eyes, which explain his view of that satisifed, confident grin on Michael's face. Don't be bitter TraderX, double up your bets on Yahoo instead if you're that sure of yourself.

      NOTE FROM SA EDITORS: TraderX's comments were deleted due to abusive language and lack of content.
      View article »
    • Sun May 4th 12:42 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Cleantech "Power 10" Ranking (Vol. I)
      Solar Watcher, no need for name calling - stick to constructive criticism.

      I never rank my personal tastes in products as a top filter, though I throw it in as a variable depending on the stock in question.
      View article »
    • Wed Mar 26th 11:50 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Emerging Markets Definitely Due for a Pullback
      Make up your mind?

      A ten year old could suggest this kind of logic?

      Moronic?

      Looking at the simple big picture (EM's tend to crash big time periodically) is nothing if not part of smart investing. The first three posters are probably still trying to recoup their losses from the dot.com and real estate bubbles because they didn't have a moronic ten year old to help them rebalance their portfolio when the bubbles got too big. We all know that the market can stay irrational far longer than we can stay solvent, but the idea of this forum is to keep scanning the horizon for as many factors as possible to consider in making decisions. Good job Jim, don't let the negative comments get to ya'!
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»