<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>cstauffer's Comments</title>
    <description>cstauffer's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com</description>
    <link>http://seekingalpha.com/user/214653/comments</link>
    <item>
      <title>Tesla: Mr. Musk's Wild Ride At Your Expense</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1454881/comments?source=feed#comment-19522611</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">19522611</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Elon Musk on Friday during his CNBC interview stated that Tesla would have been successful without government support and incentives, however it would have taken much longer.  He reminded his interviewers that speeding up the development and adoption of new technologies is exactly what government support of these technologies is designed to do.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sun, 02 Jun 2013 10:23:52 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Elon Musk on Friday during his CNBC interview stated that Tesla would have been successful without government support and incentives, however it would have taken much longer.  He reminded his interviewers that speeding up the development and adoption of new technologies is exactly what government support of these technologies is designed to do.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tesla: Mr. Musk's Wild Ride At Your Expense</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1454881/comments?source=feed#comment-19239241</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">19239241</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[bwmaki,<br/><br/>You are correct that when you strip out the various government subsidies the company would not yet be profitable in Q113.  However, the profit quarter is not the sole reason that the stock has risen so dramatically.  These subsidies have been in place for years and they have not been able to post a profitable quarter.  The enthusiasm over the company's profitability was driven by the volume of Model S's sold and the forward guidance for annual volumes and profit margins.  The Model S is an undeniable market success and that success and the success of the future Model X is very promising with the expansion of the Super Charger network.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 10:18:01 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[bwmaki,<br/><br/>You are correct that when you strip out the various government subsidies the company would not yet be profitable in Q113.  However, the profit quarter is not the sole reason that the stock has risen so dramatically.  These subsidies have been in place for years and they have not been able to post a profitable quarter.  The enthusiasm over the company's profitability was driven by the volume of Model S's sold and the forward guidance for annual volumes and profit margins.  The Model S is an undeniable market success and that success and the success of the future Model X is very promising with the expansion of the Super Charger network.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tesla: Mr. Musk's Wild Ride At Your Expense</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1454881/comments?source=feed#comment-19174041</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">19174041</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Mr. Pirrong,<br/><br/>There are example after example throughout the history of our great country of private/public partnerships which enabled new technologies to shape the course of our economy and tranform our country in an irreversable manner. No example is more significant than the creation of the trancontinental railroad made possible by the issuance of government bonds and government land-grants to railroad companies. This partnership opened up the entirety of the United States to vast numbers of people and expanded commerce opportunities. There is absolutely nothing wrong with government assistance to entreprenaurs who take on significant risk when they attempt to leverage an emerging technology which will be inherently unprofitable for years until economies of scale are created through expanded adoption. Let me give you another pertinent example which has improved the lives of people all over the globe and that is government scientific R&amp;D, for example the mapping of the human genome. Who knows maybe someday your life will be saved by a medication or therapy made possible by this government investment.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 14:43:51 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Mr. Pirrong,<br/><br/>There are example after example throughout the history of our great country of private/public partnerships which enabled new technologies to shape the course of our economy and tranform our country in an irreversable manner. No example is more significant than the creation of the trancontinental railroad made possible by the issuance of government bonds and government land-grants to railroad companies. This partnership opened up the entirety of the United States to vast numbers of people and expanded commerce opportunities. There is absolutely nothing wrong with government assistance to entreprenaurs who take on significant risk when they attempt to leverage an emerging technology which will be inherently unprofitable for years until economies of scale are created through expanded adoption. Let me give you another pertinent example which has improved the lives of people all over the globe and that is government scientific R&amp;D, for example the mapping of the human genome. Who knows maybe someday your life will be saved by a medication or therapy made possible by this government investment.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Bill Gross channels Paul Krugman? "You've got to spend money," says the Bond King, arguing Europe and the U.K. have erred by pursuing fiscal austerity. "Bond investors want growth much like equity investors," he says. If austerity leads to recession, credit spreads will widen whether or not a country is able to print its own money. As of the end of March, Gross' BOND ETF had one-third of its assets in Treasurys, the highest level since July.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/956971?source=feed#comment-17981171</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17981171</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Bret, I am not sure how you calculate that spending is up $1T annually since 2007, when our deficit is projected to be less than $800B this year.  You are correct that the original 2009 stimulus did not necessarily stimulate sustained growth, however it was intentionally not designed to do that.  It was designed to get funds into the economy as quickly as possible in order to stem the economic plunge that the country was in the midst of at the time.  The sustainable growth stimulus has been proposed many times over the last couple of years and each time those efforts were blocked by the House of Representatives.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 11:41:45 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Bret, I am not sure how you calculate that spending is up $1T annually since 2007, when our deficit is projected to be less than $800B this year.  You are correct that the original 2009 stimulus did not necessarily stimulate sustained growth, however it was intentionally not designed to do that.  It was designed to get funds into the economy as quickly as possible in order to stem the economic plunge that the country was in the midst of at the time.  The sustainable growth stimulus has been proposed many times over the last couple of years and each time those efforts were blocked by the House of Representatives.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>U.S. Taxes: Who Makes And Who Pays - More Than The Rich Will Have To Pay More</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1053291/comments?source=feed#comment-17935361</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17935361</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[outcastsearcher, what possible incentive would I have to have &quot;rich&quot; people pay 100% of their income in taxes?  If that were the case, my business would not have any clients.<br/><br/>Correcting your calculation above, where you responded to Rich stating the the average middle income family paid 25% in taxes to the Federal Government, I think that you are confusing margin tax rate and the actual tax paid.  Most &quot;middle income&quot; families, whether during the Clinton years or now actually pay a federal income tax that, as a percentage, is under 20% and in many cases under 15%.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:12:24 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[outcastsearcher, what possible incentive would I have to have &quot;rich&quot; people pay 100% of their income in taxes?  If that were the case, my business would not have any clients.<br/><br/>Correcting your calculation above, where you responded to Rich stating the the average middle income family paid 25% in taxes to the Federal Government, I think that you are confusing margin tax rate and the actual tax paid.  Most &quot;middle income&quot; families, whether during the Clinton years or now actually pay a federal income tax that, as a percentage, is under 20% and in many cases under 15%.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Bill Gross channels Paul Krugman? "You've got to spend money," says the Bond King, arguing Europe and the U.K. have erred by pursuing fiscal austerity. "Bond investors want growth much like equity investors," he says. If austerity leads to recession, credit spreads will widen whether or not a country is able to print its own money. As of the end of March, Gross' BOND ETF had one-third of its assets in Treasurys, the highest level since July.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/956971?source=feed#comment-17934401</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17934401</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Gross is right in my opinion, as is Krugman on this particular subject.  Deflation and stagnate growth (think Japan over the last 20 years) is the biggest risk to most developed nations in the near and intermediate term.  ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 11:48:03 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Gross is right in my opinion, as is Krugman on this particular subject.  Deflation and stagnate growth (think Japan over the last 20 years) is the biggest risk to most developed nations in the near and intermediate term.  ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The 3 Tesla Secrets</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1333951/comments?source=feed#comment-17508451</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17508451</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Randy,<br/><br/>Thank you so much for sharing your very impressive observations and analysis.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:46:41 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Randy,<br/><br/>Thank you so much for sharing your very impressive observations and analysis.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is This Bull Market Fundamentally Driven? A Look At P/E Expansion</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1287411/comments?source=feed#comment-16609081</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16609081</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Doug, exactly!  Recessions lead to greater productivity due to necessity.  That productivity then leads to higher profit margins.  This has been the cycle that has created the &quot;jobless recoveries&quot; that we have seen over the last 15 - 20 years following recessions. In large part, this has been made possible by the significant advances in computer technology that we have seen since the advent of the internet.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:55:36 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Doug, exactly!  Recessions lead to greater productivity due to necessity.  That productivity then leads to higher profit margins.  This has been the cycle that has created the &quot;jobless recoveries&quot; that we have seen over the last 15 - 20 years following recessions. In large part, this has been made possible by the significant advances in computer technology that we have seen since the advent of the internet.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is This Bull Market Fundamentally Driven? A Look At P/E Expansion</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1287411/comments?source=feed#comment-16600931</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16600931</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Jim, you are correct.  When I read the article, I thought that it was interesting, but then concluded that it was not something that was definitive enough due to the inability to make the necessary adjustments from one time period to another between input variables.  Mathmatically Doug attempted to illustrate that the stock market advance since 2009 has not, comparatively, been significantly driven by fundamentals.  Intuitively, I would question that conclusion when we look at corporate balance sheets.  EPS in not the end all when evaluating value creating fundamentals, however free cash flow is.  Based upon the very real cash flows that have led to historically high cash balances, I would conclude that the stock market performance over the last four years can easily be supported by fundamentals.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2013 10:36:51 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Jim, you are correct.  When I read the article, I thought that it was interesting, but then concluded that it was not something that was definitive enough due to the inability to make the necessary adjustments from one time period to another between input variables.  Mathmatically Doug attempted to illustrate that the stock market advance since 2009 has not, comparatively, been significantly driven by fundamentals.  Intuitively, I would question that conclusion when we look at corporate balance sheets.  EPS in not the end all when evaluating value creating fundamentals, however free cash flow is.  Based upon the very real cash flows that have led to historically high cash balances, I would conclude that the stock market performance over the last four years can easily be supported by fundamentals.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is This Bull Market Fundamentally Driven? A Look At P/E Expansion</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1287411/comments?source=feed#comment-16540041</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16540041</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[wallstreet, you point out a valid comparison from an interest rate standpoint.  I do agree with jan below that because of the capital markets basically grinding to a halt in late 2008 and early 2009, earnings did collapse, thus driving up P/E up sharply for a period of time.  I tend to find this type of analysis interesting, but inherently useless because there are too many variables which can skew inputs that are not necessarily comparable from period to period.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:34:42 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[wallstreet, you point out a valid comparison from an interest rate standpoint.  I do agree with jan below that because of the capital markets basically grinding to a halt in late 2008 and early 2009, earnings did collapse, thus driving up P/E up sharply for a period of time.  I tend to find this type of analysis interesting, but inherently useless because there are too many variables which can skew inputs that are not necessarily comparable from period to period.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is This Bull Market Fundamentally Driven? A Look At P/E Expansion</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1287411/comments?source=feed#comment-16518921</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16518921</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Doug, yes I understand the thesis, it is just that the analysis arrives at the thesis conclusion by backing out the effect of multiple expansion to arrive at how much of the bull run has been driven by fundamentals.  Therefore, if PE multiples are not adjusted for interest rate environment variances, the presumption that multiple expansions are a purely a &quot; investors' willingness to pay ever increasing multiples on those earnings&quot;, otherwise known as a higher level of speculation, is not quite the whole story.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:31:31 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Doug, yes I understand the thesis, it is just that the analysis arrives at the thesis conclusion by backing out the effect of multiple expansion to arrive at how much of the bull run has been driven by fundamentals.  Therefore, if PE multiples are not adjusted for interest rate environment variances, the presumption that multiple expansions are a purely a &quot; investors' willingness to pay ever increasing multiples on those earnings&quot;, otherwise known as a higher level of speculation, is not quite the whole story.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is This Bull Market Fundamentally Driven? A Look At P/E Expansion</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1287411/comments?source=feed#comment-16514851</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16514851</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Interesting article, however the analysis is missing one critical factor when comparing P/E ratios across different points in time and that is the interest rate environment.  Obviously, one cannot compare a market P/E ratio during a period of time when the Fed Funds rate is 10% unadjusted with a P/E ratio when the Fed Funds rate is 3% or even .50%.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 17:13:10 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Interesting article, however the analysis is missing one critical factor when comparing P/E ratios across different points in time and that is the interest rate environment.  Obviously, one cannot compare a market P/E ratio during a period of time when the Fed Funds rate is 10% unadjusted with a P/E ratio when the Fed Funds rate is 3% or even .50%.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Meaning Of Cyprus</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1280601/comments?source=feed#comment-16418411</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16418411</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[ghoapoki,<br/><br/>The equity markets may go down initially Monday in the U.S. and around the world as traders attempt to seize on a negative headline and the emotion that goes along with it.  However, once this story becomes better understood, fears will likely rapidly evaporate and investors will turn back to fundamentals such as corporate earnings and low interest rates, which are still pointing to higher equity prices.  The one asset class that could benefit from Cyprus is gold, which is devoid of fundamentals and almost entirely driven by emotions.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sun, 17 Mar 2013 21:38:34 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[ghoapoki,<br/><br/>The equity markets may go down initially Monday in the U.S. and around the world as traders attempt to seize on a negative headline and the emotion that goes along with it.  However, once this story becomes better understood, fears will likely rapidly evaporate and investors will turn back to fundamentals such as corporate earnings and low interest rates, which are still pointing to higher equity prices.  The one asset class that could benefit from Cyprus is gold, which is devoid of fundamentals and almost entirely driven by emotions.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Speculation On The Cause Of The OMONTYS Recall</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1234751/comments?source=feed#comment-16323131</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16323131</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Thanks for you explanation.  I am not a chemist or biologist, it just seemed to me that a test of some kind could be developed to screen for individuals who would exhibit an allergic reaction to Omntys.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:53:43 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Thanks for you explanation.  I am not a chemist or biologist, it just seemed to me that a test of some kind could be developed to screen for individuals who would exhibit an allergic reaction to Omntys.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Speculation On The Cause Of The OMONTYS Recall</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1234751/comments?source=feed#comment-16259491</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16259491</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Couldn't they draw blood and simply test the blood?  I would assume that blood from a patient who would exhibit a severe allergic reaction when tested with Omontys?]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 23:57:55 -0400</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Couldn't they draw blood and simply test the blood?  I would assume that blood from a patient who would exhibit a severe allergic reaction when tested with Omontys?]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Speculation On The Cause Of The OMONTYS Recall</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1234751/comments?source=feed#comment-15796991</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">15796991</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I am not a doctor, nor a scientist of any type, but it would seem that a patient could be tested for hypersensitivity or blood could be drawn and tested for adverse reaction to Omontys.<br/><br/>I really do not understand why a test of some type is not the most logical and expedient solution?]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2013 09:54:59 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I am not a doctor, nor a scientist of any type, but it would seem that a patient could be tested for hypersensitivity or blood could be drawn and tested for adverse reaction to Omontys.<br/><br/>I really do not understand why a test of some type is not the most logical and expedient solution?]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Speculation On The Cause Of The OMONTYS Recall</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1234751/comments?source=feed#comment-15665411</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">15665411</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Chemist, I really don't have any idea what you are talking about, but that is because I am not a scientist.  However, you seem to be picking up on what I am, and that is that the known facts of the case involving this drug does not necessary lead to completely pulling the drug off the market the way that this occurred.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 20:54:35 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Chemist, I really don't have any idea what you are talking about, but that is because I am not a scientist.  However, you seem to be picking up on what I am, and that is that the known facts of the case involving this drug does not necessary lead to completely pulling the drug off the market the way that this occurred.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Speculation On The Cause Of The OMONTYS Recall</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1234751/comments?source=feed#comment-15664421</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">15664421</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[I don't know? Something just does not add up with the way this was handled.  There did not seem to be any justification for taking existing patients off of the Omontys who were tolerent of the drug.  If the medical community can inject live viruses in people and inject allergens to induce allergic reactions for testing reasons safely, it completely escapes me why they did not leave those who are tolerent of the drug on it and quickly develop a way to screen new patients to determine if they will be tolerent of the drug.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 20:24:36 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[I don't know? Something just does not add up with the way this was handled.  There did not seem to be any justification for taking existing patients off of the Omontys who were tolerent of the drug.  If the medical community can inject live viruses in people and inject allergens to induce allergic reactions for testing reasons safely, it completely escapes me why they did not leave those who are tolerent of the drug on it and quickly develop a way to screen new patients to determine if they will be tolerent of the drug.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Speculation On The Cause Of The OMONTYS Recall</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1234751/comments?source=feed#comment-15662921</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">15662921</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Can anyone explain why the decision was made to pull the drug off the market for patients who were already safely using the drug given that all adverse affects occurred with first time usage.  Also, why can't they administer as very low dose of the drug in new patients, similar to what is done by an allergist when a person is being tested to determine what they are allergic to, and screen new patients in that manner before putting them on Omontys?]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 19:47:06 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Can anyone explain why the decision was made to pull the drug off the market for patients who were already safely using the drug given that all adverse affects occurred with first time usage.  Also, why can't they administer as very low dose of the drug in new patients, similar to what is done by an allergist when a person is being tested to determine what they are allergic to, and screen new patients in that manner before putting them on Omontys?]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The money management business inspires a lively exchange at the Barron's Roundtable, with Brian Rogers' liking of Legg Mason (LM) as either a value or takeover play getting the thumbs up from Mario Gabelli, but a razzing from Bill Gross who says the stock-picking industry is in secular decline thanks to ETFs. Gabelli to Gross: "If you want to preach in favor of mindless investing, we don't have to stand by."</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/784661?source=feed#comment-14232451</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">14232451</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Tomas, I have been in this industry for a long time and I left the industry as an employee back in 2008 to start my own firm because I had witnessed the asset management business becoming ever increasingly commoditized and homogenized.  Advisers fully embraced becoming manager of managers, but they still continued to charge the same fee as they did in the past when they actually did research, built portfolios and engaged in independent thought.  I was disgusted and did not want to have anything to with this malpractice, in my opinion.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2013 18:55:46 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Tomas, I have been in this industry for a long time and I left the industry as an employee back in 2008 to start my own firm because I had witnessed the asset management business becoming ever increasingly commoditized and homogenized.  Advisers fully embraced becoming manager of managers, but they still continued to charge the same fee as they did in the past when they actually did research, built portfolios and engaged in independent thought.  I was disgusted and did not want to have anything to with this malpractice, in my opinion.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The money management business inspires a lively exchange at the Barron's Roundtable, with Brian Rogers' liking of Legg Mason (LM) as either a value or takeover play getting the thumbs up from Mario Gabelli, but a razzing from Bill Gross who says the stock-picking industry is in secular decline thanks to ETFs. Gabelli to Gross: "If you want to preach in favor of mindless investing, we don't have to stand by."</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/784661?source=feed#comment-14226161</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">14226161</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[shourey, I tend to agree with you even though I do believe that active management can add risk adjusted value when it is done right.  The market as defined by the market cap weighted S&amp;P 500 index is not smart at all, in fact if, like the market, an asset manager would have been 30% in technology stocks in 1999 and 21% in financials in 2008, he should have been fired.  The problem with active management today is not &quot;active management' it is &quot;closet indexing&quot;.  Most large actively managed funds are statistically equivalent to the index that they track and therefore fees and timing mistakes doom them to under-perform.  These types of funds are certainly not worth the fees that they charge.  However there are very good active managers who do not closet index and who add value over time.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2013 15:09:08 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[shourey, I tend to agree with you even though I do believe that active management can add risk adjusted value when it is done right.  The market as defined by the market cap weighted S&amp;P 500 index is not smart at all, in fact if, like the market, an asset manager would have been 30% in technology stocks in 1999 and 21% in financials in 2008, he should have been fired.  The problem with active management today is not &quot;active management' it is &quot;closet indexing&quot;.  Most large actively managed funds are statistically equivalent to the index that they track and therefore fees and timing mistakes doom them to under-perform.  These types of funds are certainly not worth the fees that they charge.  However there are very good active managers who do not closet index and who add value over time.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Why You Should Sell Vertex</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1123061/comments?source=feed#comment-13980691</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13980691</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[Seeking, you are correct.  The Kalydeco platform is designed to treat most forms of Cystic Fibrosis and this science is the first of its kind to actually go after the cause of Cystic Fibrosis instead of former treatments which only targeted symtoms.  Before Kalydeco suffers of Cystic Fibrosis usually did not survive past 30 years of age.  ]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:44:33 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Seeking, you are correct.  The Kalydeco platform is designed to treat most forms of Cystic Fibrosis and this science is the first of its kind to actually go after the cause of Cystic Fibrosis instead of former treatments which only targeted symtoms.  Before Kalydeco suffers of Cystic Fibrosis usually did not survive past 30 years of age.  ]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans - including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor - are reportedly overwhelmingly opposed to the fiscal cliff deal approved by the Senate. The House appears poised to amend the deal and send it back to the Senate, setting up a legislative high-wire act.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/740481?source=feed#comment-13378591</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13378591</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[mike, I have re-read your posts and I really don't see the brillance.  First of all, anyone who tries to argue that Roosevelt did not pull the country out of the Great Depression loses any benefit of the doubt that I might give someone on a message board like this.  Almost any credible analysis of the most impactful and best U.S. Presidents puts FDR in the top five overall, and number one since Lincoln.  If you have actually ever had the opportunity to talk with someone who lived through the Great Depression as an adult, you would not be saying what you did about FDR.  You have not backed up your criticism of Obamacare.  You and agree that we should have done a large infrastructure stimulus, but that was not politically possible at the time and certainly not possible after the mid-term elections in 2010.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sun, 06 Jan 2013 23:06:20 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[mike, I have re-read your posts and I really don't see the brillance.  First of all, anyone who tries to argue that Roosevelt did not pull the country out of the Great Depression loses any benefit of the doubt that I might give someone on a message board like this.  Almost any credible analysis of the most impactful and best U.S. Presidents puts FDR in the top five overall, and number one since Lincoln.  If you have actually ever had the opportunity to talk with someone who lived through the Great Depression as an adult, you would not be saying what you did about FDR.  You have not backed up your criticism of Obamacare.  You and agree that we should have done a large infrastructure stimulus, but that was not politically possible at the time and certainly not possible after the mid-term elections in 2010.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans - including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor - are reportedly overwhelmingly opposed to the fiscal cliff deal approved by the Senate. The House appears poised to amend the deal and send it back to the Senate, setting up a legislative high-wire act.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/740481?source=feed#comment-13335831</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13335831</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[mike, any one who actually looks at what Obamacare does, the nuts and bolts of the legislation, cannot possibly be impressed at the scope that it entails to deliver better and more affordable healthcare to everyone.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2013 10:13:25 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[mike, any one who actually looks at what Obamacare does, the nuts and bolts of the legislation, cannot possibly be impressed at the scope that it entails to deliver better and more affordable healthcare to everyone.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans - including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor - are reportedly overwhelmingly opposed to the fiscal cliff deal approved by the Senate. The House appears poised to amend the deal and send it back to the Senate, setting up a legislative high-wire act.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/740481?source=feed#comment-13335751</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13335751</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[mike, put yourself in President Obama's shoes for a moment.  Virtually every Democrat President since Truman has tried to get enough support to pass a universal care healthcare bill and President Obama had one chance ahead of the mid-term elections to actually get this legislation passed.  Had he not pushed ahead, it might be another 65 years before that time came around again.  Also, with healthcare costs being our biggest fiscal threat and the number of uninsured at a record high equating to almost 20% of the country, I think that it was a pretty high priority.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Sat, 05 Jan 2013 10:10:07 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[mike, put yourself in President Obama's shoes for a moment.  Virtually every Democrat President since Truman has tried to get enough support to pass a universal care healthcare bill and President Obama had one chance ahead of the mid-term elections to actually get this legislation passed.  Had he not pushed ahead, it might be another 65 years before that time came around again.  Also, with healthcare costs being our biggest fiscal threat and the number of uninsured at a record high equating to almost 20% of the country, I think that it was a pretty high priority.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>U.S. Taxes: Who Makes And Who Pays - More Than The Rich Will Have To Pay More</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/article/1053291/comments?source=feed#comment-13301201</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13301201</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[205427,  <br/><br/>Diluting current shareholders does not cost the company, it costs the shareholders.  These options are not options purchased in the market, they are private contractual options that are truly phantom until exercised.<br/><br/>My point is only to say that just because you are granted options in such a way that you do not even have to pay taxes on the &quot;value&quot; of that perk, a person is taking no risk.  This is not the same as saying that they don't have anything at risk.  They do have something at risk, but that something is a phantom contractual arrangement that cost them nothing in the first place.  It is not like most of these executives are given a choice between a cash bonus or an option.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 10:29:50 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[205427,  <br/><br/>Diluting current shareholders does not cost the company, it costs the shareholders.  These options are not options purchased in the market, they are private contractual options that are truly phantom until exercised.<br/><br/>My point is only to say that just because you are granted options in such a way that you do not even have to pay taxes on the &quot;value&quot; of that perk, a person is taking no risk.  This is not the same as saying that they don't have anything at risk.  They do have something at risk, but that something is a phantom contractual arrangement that cost them nothing in the first place.  It is not like most of these executives are given a choice between a cash bonus or an option.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans - including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor - are reportedly overwhelmingly opposed to the fiscal cliff deal approved by the Senate. The House appears poised to amend the deal and send it back to the Senate, setting up a legislative high-wire act.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/740481?source=feed#comment-13254471</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13254471</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[mike, interesting statement given the the fastest growing large economy in the world over the last 20 years has been China, which is a command and control economy dominated by the government.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2013 09:22:52 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[mike, interesting statement given the the fastest growing large economy in the world over the last 20 years has been China, which is a command and control economy dominated by the government.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans - including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor - are reportedly overwhelmingly opposed to the fiscal cliff deal approved by the Senate. The House appears poised to amend the deal and send it back to the Senate, setting up a legislative high-wire act.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/740481?source=feed#comment-13254401</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13254401</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[mike, the last recession began in January 2008 and the financial crisis truly began with the failure of Bear Stearns in April, 2008 and then spun out of control after the failure of Lehman Bros. in September, 2008.  People like to blame easy money policies of the Fed from 2001 to 2007 as the main cause of the housing bubble.  However, the Fed cut rates from 2001 through the end of 2002 and began to raise interest rates in 2003 and did so consistently through 2007.  Absent QE, the Fed can only effect short-term rates, not long-term rates that the 10, 20, or 30 year mortgage rates are priced on.  If you remember Greenspan testified to Congress regarding the &quot;Conundrum&quot; of long-term rates not responding to the Fed's interest rate tightening.  That conundrum in retrospect was do to the fact that the world was awash in liquidity due to unchecked leverage.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2013 09:21:33 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[mike, the last recession began in January 2008 and the financial crisis truly began with the failure of Bear Stearns in April, 2008 and then spun out of control after the failure of Lehman Bros. in September, 2008.  People like to blame easy money policies of the Fed from 2001 to 2007 as the main cause of the housing bubble.  However, the Fed cut rates from 2001 through the end of 2002 and began to raise interest rates in 2003 and did so consistently through 2007.  Absent QE, the Fed can only effect short-term rates, not long-term rates that the 10, 20, or 30 year mortgage rates are priced on.  If you remember Greenspan testified to Congress regarding the &quot;Conundrum&quot; of long-term rates not responding to the Fed's interest rate tightening.  That conundrum in retrospect was do to the fact that the world was awash in liquidity due to unchecked leverage.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans - including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor - are reportedly overwhelmingly opposed to the fiscal cliff deal approved by the Senate. The House appears poised to amend the deal and send it back to the Senate, setting up a legislative high-wire act.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/740481?source=feed#comment-13254061</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13254061</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[mike, look outside the borders of the U.S.  Since the financial crisis, that was indeed significantly enabled by the deregulation of financial markets that allowed commercial banks to get involved with capital markets.  What that meant was that banks, who originate mortgages were also allowed to syndicate, package and sell those mortgage to off balance sheet entities (shadow banking system) and hedge funds.  Lack of regulation allowed those shadow banking entities and hedge funds to leverage themselves 50X to 100X.  Where do think all that liquidity came from to fund these mortgages?]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2013 09:12:16 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[mike, look outside the borders of the U.S.  Since the financial crisis, that was indeed significantly enabled by the deregulation of financial markets that allowed commercial banks to get involved with capital markets.  What that meant was that banks, who originate mortgages were also allowed to syndicate, package and sell those mortgage to off balance sheet entities (shadow banking system) and hedge funds.  Lack of regulation allowed those shadow banking entities and hedge funds to leverage themselves 50X to 100X.  Where do think all that liquidity came from to fund these mortgages?]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>House Republicans - including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor - are reportedly overwhelmingly opposed to the fiscal cliff deal approved by the Senate. The House appears poised to amend the deal and send it back to the Senate, setting up a legislative high-wire act.</title>
      <link>http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/740481?source=feed#comment-13253881</link>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">13253881</guid>
      <content>
        <![CDATA[mike, here I agree with you.  There needs to be an across the board review of all regulations to make sure that they are meaningful and not duplicated.]]>
      </content>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2013 09:07:28 -0500</pubDate>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[mike, here I agree with you.  There needs to be an across the board review of all regulations to make sure that they are meaningful and not duplicated.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
