mlyn

Misconceptions About Health Insurance

Thank you for personalizing it.

Shift in Boomer Habits Bodes Poorly for Traditional TV Service Providers

A friend of mind bought an HDTV 40" to which he plugged his laptop. He has a wireless mouse and laptop so he is able to sit in a comfortable armchair and computes from a distance. He streams in his Netflix movies or watches Comedy Central or PBS or CNBC at his whim. If he wants to watch television, he can; but rarely does he switch to it unless it is an "old" habit of turning on the 11 pm news.

Broadcasters in a Social Media Bind

I'm considering buying a 40" HDTV, only to hook my laptop to it to see all the shows I watch now: Charlie Rose, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, etc. I also subscribe to Netflix and can catch up on TV serials like the Wire because I don't subscribe to cable. Who needs TiVo? Really, I don't want television programming to go away, but if one wants to determine one's own viewing schedule, from spontaneous watching to pre-scheduled, who needs the TV Guide?

The topic we should really be concerned about is China's mandate that all computers sold in China must have a blocking device installed. The ruse is to keep children away from pornographic website. But actually, this would be another way to contain public protest via the internet because version 1 may block porn, but version 5 may actually be spying on dissidents. I am quite sure China and the Chinese are observing what is occurring in Iran.

The tech company that kowtows to the Chinese gov is the company that gets the Chinese market. If all the tech companies acquiesce, there by the side of the road will be the "free" market and internet democracy.

Why You Should Own Gold and Silver Mining Stocks and Warrants

It seems to me many Canandian junior mining companes may be pink sheets in the US market. Does that make a difference in any way? I tend to agree with the author when the stock is not listed in the U.S. However it is a higher commission for the discount broker to purchase on the TSX.

Dangers of a Dollar Collapse

Forgive my naivete about economics, but why, why won't the dollar collapse? if not today, why not 10, 20 years from now if the current economic state of affairs continue, including black swan events. Is it just pure American hubris that the US dollar cannot, will not collapse. I would think many foreigners in positions of power around the world are asking themselves that question. Isn't the chink in the armor beginning to show?

Uranium Mining: 5 Investment Opportunities

Does anyone know anything about Thorium as a nuclear play over uranium?

The Reflation Trade Portfolio

One has to be prudent in defining "emerging market" curriencies. Brazil and China have an agreement to trade with one another in their own "emerging market" currencies--in other words, avoiding the use of US dollar. Resource countries like Brazil, Canada, Australia can support their currencies.

Treasuries, Mother of All Bubbles, Is Primed to Pop

If China and others do not buy our treasuries and the Fed steps in and buys them, then doesn't it continue the bubble?

New WisdomTree ETF Bundles Emerging Market Currencies

Everbank.com offers single country currencies and multi country currencies in CDs.

Year to Date Performance of Leveraged ETFs

Tim Geithner said on the Charlie Rose Show that the financial system can no longer do business as it did in the last ten years; that regulatory controls are inevitable. Neel Kashkari said there should be a systemic risk regulator, probably the Fed.

So How did the 2X and 3X ETFs come to be with convoluted and disingenuous disclosures? How do financial products get put into the market when they are proving highly leveraged and risky. If we are automatically losing money in these leveraged ETFs, who is making the money?

Let's Keep Big Banks from Ruining America Forever

Thank you, Mr. Kim, for your analysis to which I wholeheartedly agree. There is another person, a member of GATA, who has written about the banking industry in her article "Where would Jesus Bank?" which is located on her website solari.com. Her name is Catherine Austin Fitts. From her article the big banks are conduits for U.S. foreign policy, money laundering, and so forth. I think the earnest salvation of the GS, Citi, and BofA is to preserve a tool for the use of the CIA and State Dept. She also encouraged us to cancel our relationships with big banks. This is the primary way we could hurt them. However to disengage from the big banks has proven difficult. My credit cards are still BofA or Chase. I had a WaMu mortgage which was taken over by JPMorgan . . .

Wall Street's Response to Obama's Economic Policy

The criticisms are that his "plan" is just too general; nothing substantive to hang a hat on; no specifics, etc., etc., etc.

Has anyone ever thought that the intent of his "plan," regardless of the stock market, is some kind of message to other players like bondholders or sovereign wealth funds? Can one possibly imagine that the economic team is trying to engineer some kind of reaction outside of the expected Wall St. media reaction he is getting now?

The Fed and the Treasury would like nothing more than the U.S. dollar to devalue or, put the other way, have other currencies revalue up in relation to the U.S. dollar.

Instead of Treasury nationalizing the banking system, perhaps it wants Wall St to decide to go into Chapter 11 or something else. Wall St. had the expectation that it was going to be "bailed out" by taxpayers' money, and surprise, surprise.

I'm only speculating because I, for now, cannot agree that the economic team is "clueless." Obviously it is risky that the econ team will achieve "spring cleaning" it wants considering all the despairing "fall out" in the market and media.

I agree with the author, but only time will tell what the outcome will be.


On Feb 11 09:26 AM kelm wrote:

> Your first hint that there is no substance to the "plan" is when
> Geithner's first concrete step in his speech was setting up a website.
> I have lost count of the number of instances i corporate America
> where I have seen that tactic used. It ALWAYS means they have nothing
> concrete.
>
> Yes, better transparency is necessary. But the crux of the problem
> is - fix the banks. Fix means - exactly what are we doing to get
> all the bad banks closed down or restructured in some defined period
> of time. Tell me how you'll communicate your success after you've
> told me what EXACTLY you are doing and how EXACTLY it will solve
> the problem. Don't kid yourselves. If those details don't exist then
> there is no plan in any meaningful sense.
>
> Geithner was supposed to present a plan to fix the banking system.
> A plan means details not vague generalities. At best you could call
> it a strategy but it is the same strategy that Japan followed to
> their continuing detriment.
>
> The Treasury's "plan" put's America in an even worse posture than
> we were in before and will greatly prolong the crisis.

Wall Street's Response to Obama's Economic Policy

The criticisms are that his "plan" is just too general; nothing substantive to hang a hat on; no specifics, etc., etc., etc.

Has anyone ever thought that the intent of his "plan," regardless of the stock market, is some kind of message to other players like bondholders or sovereign wealth funds? Can one possibly imagine that the economic team is trying to engineer some kind of reaction outside of the expected Wall St. media reaction he is getting now?

The Fed and the Treasury would like nothing more than the U.S. dollar to devalue or, put the other way, have other currencies revalue up in relation to the U.S. dollar.

Instead of Treasury nationalizing the banking system, perhaps it wants Wall St to decide to go into Chapter 11 or something else. Wall St. had the expectation that it was going to be "bailed out" by taxpayers' money, and surprise, surprise.

I'm only speculating because I, for now, cannot agree that the economic team is "clueless." Obviously it is risky that the econ team will achieve "spring cleaning" it wants considering all the despairing "fall out" in the market and media.

I agree with the author, but only time will tell what the outcome will be.


On Feb 11 09:26 AM kelm wrote:

> Your first hint that there is no substance to the "plan" is when
> Geithner's first concrete step in his speech was setting up a website.
> I have lost count of the number of instances i corporate America
> where I have seen that tactic used. It ALWAYS means they have nothing
> concrete.
>
> Yes, better transparency is necessary. But the crux of the problem
> is - fix the banks. Fix means - exactly what are we doing to get
> all the bad banks closed down or restructured in some defined period
> of time. Tell me how you'll communicate your success after you've
> told me what EXACTLY you are doing and how EXACTLY it will solve
> the problem. Don't kid yourselves. If those details don't exist then
> there is no plan in any meaningful sense.
>
> Geithner was supposed to present a plan to fix the banking system.
> A plan means details not vague generalities. At best you could call
> it a strategy but it is the same strategy that Japan followed to
> their continuing detriment.
>
> The Treasury's "plan" put's America in an even worse posture than
> we were in before and will greatly prolong the crisis.

Geithner Could Use Some Communications Help

The criticisms are that his "plan" is just too general; nothing substantive to hang a hat on; no specifics, etc., etc., etc.

Has anyone ever thought that the intent of his "plan," regardless of the stock market, is some kind of message to other players like bondholders or sovereign wealth funds? Can one possibly imagine that the economic team is trying to engineer some kind of reaction outside of the expected Wall St. media reaction he is getting now?

The Fed would like nothing more than the U.S. dollar to devalue or, put the other way, have other currencies revalue up in relation to the U.S. dollar.

Instead of nationalize the banking system, if banks "voluntarily" went into Chapter 11 or something else without government "intervention."

I'm only speculating because I, for now, cannot agree that the economic team is "clueless." Obviously it is risky that the team will achieve the outcome it wants or an outcome it didn't want. It obviously it wants some kind of "spring cleaning." Only time will tell.

Geithner Could Use Some Communications Help

The criticisms are that his "plan" is just too general; nothing substantive to hang a hat on; no specifics, etc., etc., etc.

Has anyone ever thought that the intent of his "plan," regardless of the stock market, is some kind of message to other players like bondholders or sovereign wealth funds? Can one possibly imagine that the economic team is trying to engineer some kind of reaction outside of the expected Wall St. media reaction he is getting now?

The Fed would like nothing more than the U.S. dollar to devalue or, put the other way, have other currencies revalue up in relation to the U.S. dollar.

Instead of nationalize the banking system, if banks "voluntarily" went into Chapter 11 or something else without government "intervention."

I'm only speculating because I, for now, cannot agree that the economic team is "clueless." Obviously it is risky that the team will achieve the outcome it wants or an outcome it didn't want. Only time will tell.