Globel E

Fractured Wall Street Fairy Tales #1: Buy and Hold is the Best Strategy

Good thing you are not cynical.
Your perspective and opinions are consistently worthy of thought.

--And, entertaining to boot!

Positioning for When Water Runs Out: Part I

Remarkable! Mr. Shaefer, not a water "expert", actually offers many of the painful details relating to the global potable water supply. It always impresses me that so few in the financial world are aware of, much less concerned about, how little water (forget "freshwater", or even "potable" water) per capita our globe allows us. I wish there were a way to underwrite the significance of his observations to most who read these articles. After 30 years as a univ. prof., preaching to that next generation about the need to examine near future, very troublesome, problems relating to water, supply, quality, and distribution, I watch with sadness how little is noted, much less understood, by those who might present a wiser course for us all.

If you have time read anything by Sandra Postel. She is an acknowledged expert on water problems, and she produces a remarkably easy (academic) read on the subject.

SBS and DGW are legitimate (at least in their public descriptions of themselves) stock picks in this arena. I bought both for myself and my grandchildren.)

verweile.com/514_html/.../ offers a set of slides from a lecture relating to global water problems. Perhaps the data there will serve to underwrite the value of Mr.Shaefer's comments.

Brazil: Non-Commodity Stocks Offer an Excellent Entry Point

SBS has one other characteristic of interest - not only are they involved with water supply, they are involved with wastewater disposal. Nice combination in rapidly growing urban circumstances.

Agricultural Commodities: The Next Bull Market

My word !! You clearly have legitimate understandings of both the population/food-prefer... AND the stock market. That's down right unnerving. These two realms of understanding seem to be so disparate that experts in the one have little concept of the basics in the other. Thank you. (Really!)
(Prof. Emeritus-Land grant ag. univ.- and comfortable survivor of recent stock market mayhem.)

Monsanto Update

A reassuring review of prior notions. Keep in mind that while Monsanto can be associated with the "other fertilizer stocks", it is far more. They have been working for 20+ years on the development of super seeds- not simply pest resistant, but actually resistant to the pesticides that sometimes damage crops. Add a talent for producing fixed N internal to the plant and it is difficult to see how they cannot succeed in dominating the seed market. To my knowledge only DuPont and Bayer are currently following in their custom seed development universe. Surely, there must be others, but none are anywhere near the commercial promise of Monsanto!

Capital One Defies Even Constanza Logic

Folks, Much can be said of the need to curb those who spend beyond their means. Perhaps they are foolish, perhaps they have been mislead. But not everyone who uses a credit card is a crook, or an idiot.

That sad debt situation has never confronted me (and I suspect has never confronted most of you who declare the customer guilty, or the bank "struggling" to get those deadbeats to pay their honest bills.)

I've phoned more than once to get the issuer of my credit card to NOT increase my limit. Why tempt fate - should my card be lost or stolen, or my identity usurped. I never approach the limit, and I never carry a balance (note-the card is simply paid to zero each month.) The card is a true convenience-I often shop on line.

Last month I received a silly note saying my interest rate would be changed to 30% if I paid late?? My interest rate is calculated monthly, and has been ZERO for several years?? They could multiply my present rate by1000 and it would be zero??

Originally, I shrugged it off. But, reading through the arguments, above, I have changed my mind. The note was offensive, vaguely suggesting that I was less than honest and just might not pay. Indicating that ALL PEOPLE MUST be dishonest?

It was not based on anything identified with me or my acct. (or FICO score, or any of the 3 credit reports). It was just offensive and a bit obnoxious.

Any bank sending such nonsense, is DISHONEST. They must be thieves and they must be quite intentionally threatening people who they, as thieves, mislead into debt. I thought usury laws existed. Perhaps not. But, swindling must still be illegal.

Cramer's Mad Money- How to Invest in a Bear Market (12/29/08)

No doubt getting as far as possible from equities owned in major part by hedge funds is a necessary defense against forced selling and its damage. BUT-----how does one tell that there are hedge funds holding a major portion of some given equity? I select only long term safe, short term profitable (not parabolically so) equities and found, to my discomfort, that many of them were obvious victims to the forced selling late in 2008. They were sale-able, less conservative selections were not. So my carefully selected equities very suddenly dropped in face value. The pattern was so obviously that of forced selling (by date) that anyone not comatose could see the pattern --AFTER THE FACT. Most will recuperate (some already have). But, my great preference would be to identify BEFORE some disaster, that hedge funds (almost all of which are dishonestly, at minimum unethically, presented and run) are my fellow travelers. HOW ?????????? I find it difficult to determine even the names of "hedge funds". Were there not over 10,000 early in 2008 - all employing questionable tactics to obtain unusually high returns?

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Just in case you're keeping a tally. The repeated title reminds me to read your comments.

A Guide to Water Investing: Desalination

The author's credentials would be meaningful here.

Six South America Profit Plays

Any thoughts on GFA ?

Agrochemical Sector a Bright Spot in Slowing Global Economy

Ah so--- nicely stated - timely, short, and accurate. Unfortunately, that S&P is the same S&P that is being exposed (on-going Congressional hearings) as about as trustworthy as the average snake.

Like many others, I had taken some comfort in such facts as this article offers UNTIL it became clear that this is what S&P suggests. Now, it must be suspect. Were they, politely and quietly, to go out of business, that might improve the capacity of anyone interested in the market to trust the wisdom of "experts". If anyone can take comfort in the opinion of an old, retired, (state university, ag. school) professor. this article offers very reasonable bases for long term, legitimate, strength in fertilizer stocks. In cost/benefit terms adding fertilizer adds considerable relative value. The demand increase resulting from inevitable population growth and from the newly acquired taste for, especially, animal proteins, guarantees increased use of N, P and K fertilizers.

In addition potash-related stocks (think - guano) gain strength from the difficulty of developing new commercial sources and nitrogen-related stocks gain from the absolute requirement for high nitrogen Inputs (think - amino acids all include N) in any food chain leading to animal protein.

Thanks to the contributor, we could all use some positive information today!

An End to Efficient Market Theory

Last evening (Sep.18) ABC's Nightline played some moderately long newsclips of McCain (ALL DATED within 2008) clearly declaring that less interference, and less regulation were what he would impose on the financial markets if he were president. That's not a clip out of context folks. Not a manipulated bit of imagery from some clever software. Surely he voted against his party on 5-10% of the time, but NOT ON FINANCIAL MATTERS. Then again, he was not in charge anyway!

It sounds as if several contributors are, today, trying to blame Obama for ?? something ?? involved in the histrionics we are all watching at the moment. Pay attention, he, also, was not in charge???

Could we try realism? This is supposed to be communications between and among rational folks who are trying to understand the bases for a most undesirable situation.

Underdog Smallcaps: Potential Short Squeezes

Is it correct that
1) short selling is legal,
2) naked short selling is not,
3) the damage is best done by massive naked short selling,
4) the SEC put out some temporary rules last month to protect vulnerable financials from "excessive naked short selling damage"
5) those temporary rules only protected a relatively small group of companies
6) those temporary rules ended about a week ago
7) they are now planning new rules to control short selling after the miseries of Monday, 9/15
----------------------...
8) the new rules will be a new way to enforce the laws that have existed all through this insanity?

Please which piece am I missing? Why is it not possible to enforce existing laws against a practice, but it is possible to enforce temporary "rules" against that same ILLEGAL practice?

While the Solar Sector Bottoms in the Near Term, LDK Solar Stands Out

The McCain/Palin perspective on science is unnerving. Palin has stated that global warming is not related to human activity and the general acceptance of creationism indicates a rejection of the advances in understanding of plate techtonics/continental drift that has allowed geologists to determine the limits of vast, "unknown" oil reserves. Solar would not be favored by these folks.

Canadian Oil Sands: Gates and Buffett Visit

Hey! What are all you "environmentally aware" folks doing here (esp. S.W.)? Permit me to add another piece or two. Like it, or not, we will continue to use fossil fuels for some time (God help us if the associated warming stops the Gulf Stream/Artic currents interactions). Any source that moves us from accommodating the ugly habits of several oil rich regimes is preferable. Anyone old enough to remember South Africa's bad habits?

Work on perspective - if the entire global system is taken into account, making a mess of a piece of n. Canada pales compared to scrambling the atmosphere/ocean circulation patterns. That would eliminate anything resembling a natural system in all of Canada. Of course, there would be lots of additional water available.

Alternatives to fossil fuels are inevitable, sooner or later we will run out. Sooner seems preferable. If there is a profit, then maybe someone will work on the problem for a profit. T.B. Pickens probably has a few motives that involve increasing his billions. (Maybe not, at his age he may be looking forward.) Who cares! He and A.Gore probably have different motives for their efforts re energy. Again, who cares. I hope both gain riches, or power, proportional to their success in triggering development of alternative energy sources.

I just met my grand kids. They're cute. Maybe we could avoid extinction so they can be around for a while.

BTW-mkreisel, I sincerely hope you are wrong.