jdl51's Comments

Is the Dollar Too Big to Fail?

Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:42:44 -0500

They just raised the debt ceiling to $12 trillion, so apparently you think we're going to have an $8 trillion deficit next year. I'm wondering why all these deficit hawks stayed in the closet for the past 30 years when their guys were in power. When Reagan was elected, the national debt was a little over a trillion. Three republican presidents later it's now around $12 trillion. Obama's first budget started two months ago, so aside from whatever stimulus was spent the past eight months, his contribution so far is minimal, even though the right claims he's spent more than Bush did during his entire eight years in office. Some folks will believe just about anything. Just think how much better off we'd be if the Republicans were truly fiscally responsible and didn't continually hand off trillions of debt for democratic administrations and future generations of Americans to deal with.

On Dec 19 08:52 AM Dave Lewenz wrote:

> By 2011 the dollar will be revalued by the Treasury unable to service
> the debt as interest rates hit ten percent. How much of a hair cut,
> My guess is 50 cents. The treasury is printing 200 billion a month,
> with tax revenues projected to be down by 35% this year that means
> the feds got print up 4 trillion dollars! Just in 2010! Total debt
> by 2011 20 trillion, who you going to call?? Debt busters

Why I Would Not Bet on iPhone over Android

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:44:30 -0500

"BTW I just went to the Google store to check it out and when I clicked on "apps" it took me to T-shirts and buttons. Not an impressive start."

Might want to check Android apps, seeing as that's the OS.

Consumer-Driven Deflation? Not Even Close

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:17:44 -0500

"You may be unaware of the fact that the authorities controlling the status quo – namely Ben Bernanke, Barack Obama, and all their little elves – actually want you to use the words inflation and deflation incorrectly."

Okay. So Obama and company are the culprits, eh? Apparently you can't keep your politics out of your opinion. When's the last time the markets were hanging on the M1, M2 etc numbers instead of the PPI and CPI? Never. This has been going on since I've been following markets which is around 40 years now. If the CPI isn't the standard for gauging inflation worldwide then everyone's been doing it wrong for decades, not just the present administration. I guess you're saying that if prices go down while the money supply is increasing, we're experiencing inflation. I think most, if not all, economists would disagree with that premise. If you were to say an increasing money supply would be a precursor to higher inflation or might lead to higher inflation, you might have better luck.

Another Crisis Looms Right Around the Corner

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:51:20 -0500

Reminds me of Reagan's first term, gold at all time highs, unemployment over 10.5%, soaring deficits, the worst recession in years, raising taxes on social security, getting our butts kicked in Lebanon...........

Show Me Economic Expansion, Chairman Bernanke

Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:55:25 -0500

"With a spread of over 475 basis points between the Fed rate and the interest rate of a 30yr fixed rate mortgage, the only entity whose financial condition is improving is Wall St. investment brokerages and the big banks, which have ties to those brokerages."

30 year fixed rate is based off 10 year treasury bills, currently around 3.4%, not the Fed funds rate.

Show Me Economic Expansion, Chairman Bernanke

Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:51:21 -0500

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and
corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." Thomas Jefferson

Another totally bogus quote from TJ. The old Fox method of getting your point across, repeat some lie enough times and the ignorant will take it as the truth.
www.snopes.com/quotes/...

On Nov 22 08:27 AM Rosco1776 wrote:

> The light at the end of the tunnel is only flashlights trying to
> find their way through the darkness. End the fed and get back to
> sound economic policy like our founders suggested and set up for
> us. We are a long way off the path and it's going to be a rough road
> back but if we don't get back on track soon there will be no return
> without drastic measures. Let's not let it get so bad that we need
> another revolution!
>
> "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
> of currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and
> corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people
> of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent
> their fathers conquered." Thomas Jefferson

Whitney Gets Bearish: Will She Be Right Again?

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:03:43 -0500

"You're missing the forest for the trees. Wall Street loves people who are only capable of seeing the surface of the circumstances..."

Some 94 percent of S&P 500 companies have reported to date, and 80 percent of those have beaten earnings expectations, which would be the highest percentage of companies beating estimates for a quarter since Thomson Reuters began tracking the data in 1994.

If I wait until hyperinflation, economic financial collapse, or whatever the doomsday scenario is these days, I'd have lost a terrific opportunity to make a lot of money. It appears that most of the doom and gloomers base their financial opinions on their political beliefs, that it's impossible for the economy to improve under the current administration. That thinking clouds their judgment, in other words, a big tree is blocking their view.

Whitney Gets Bearish: Will She Be Right Again?

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:35:33 -0500

No fundamental reason for the recent rally? How about most companies earnings met or exceeded analysts' estimates. Most companies are seeing slow improvement in the economy. 3rd quarter GDP growth was over 3% compared to a negative 6.5% in the 4th quarter last year. The rest of the world's economies are back on the road to expansion. I mean, come on. There may be bumps in the road ahead, but we are in much, much better shape than we were a year ago when everyone thought the world was coming to an end. Last September the DJI was at 11,500. I don't see these levels as outlandish by any means in a growing economy compared to what lay ahead of us this time last year and then compared to what's to come.

Meredith Whitney: 'I Haven't Been This Bearish in a Year'

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:50:45 -0500

It seems that the people crying about the market rising without fundamental support ignore the fact that 65% of the companies reporting last quarter exceeded earnings estimates. Markets look forward and with positive GDP growth for the first time in over a year, trillions in stimulus worldwide, decent or great earnings numbers, low interest rates, there is a floor under this market even from these levels. We'll have our little corrections here and there, but unless there is some game changing event, it looks like a slow, steady rise to the upside from here.

Meredith Whitney: 'I Haven't Been This Bearish in a Year'

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:24:54 -0500

"In this interview on CNBC, she says she is expecting a monster number from Goldman (GS) tomorrow morning, in 2010 and in 2011. She is well above the street on Goldman. She even uses the word ‘cheap’ when referring to the stock. Is Meredith Whitney a bull now? Have a listen – she also talks about other names and sees Bank of America (BAC) as the one to watch."

That was the middle of July when she thought GS was cheap. Only $25 a share later she's ready to throw it under the bus. Same goes for BAC. She missed the big runup after March where she continually said financials would take years to recover, then tried to get on board in July after she got burned and now is trying to get in front of any possible correction so she can say I told you so. What exactly has changed in the past seven months to have her jumping from one extreme to the other and then back again? She's just trying to cover her as..... I expect if nothing dramatic happens in the next few weeks and bank earnings jump again in the 4th qtr, she'll be out with another bullish pronouncement. Make up your mind, woman.

Do We Goldbugs Finally Have Your Attention?

Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:34:50 -0500

I remember in 1980 I was living in the British Virgin Islands. There was a guy there huffing and puffing about how great gold was and he could play down there because of all of the money he was making on his gold investment. Then one day he got a call from his broker. He had borrowed against his account, he got a margin call and he was down to zero overnight. His girlfriend dumped him and took what little money he had left. Had to get a real job after that. Gold was over $800 an ounce then. So what is that, $300 in almost 30 years? When things go up, people think they'll always go up. When things go down, people think they'll always go down. The reality lies in between. Just ask the oil traders who swore oil was going to $200 last year.

And Bernanke Didn't Think Unemployment Would Reach 10%

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:23:31 -0500

What we're seeing is the result of eight years of republicanism. Seems like most posters here think that before January 22, things were just peachy. We came within a hair of a total financial meltdown. If we had let the banking system fail, there would have been total anarchy in the streets. Businesses everywhere would have shut their doors laying off tens of millions, that would have escalated until our economy would have suffered a crash that would make the great depression look like a tea party. That is the scope of the disaster that was unfolding last fall before any action was taken. Yet there are many here who seem to think that would have been the better path, to do nothing and let the whole system collapse. I do not like the fact that we have spent hundreds of billions to prop up the banking system but the alternative was far, far worse. Anyone who doesn't think so really doesn't have a grasp of what happened a year ago and its consequences or are so blinded by ideological hate that they don't care what happens to our country.

Earnings Season: The Car Is Shiny, But Look Under the Hood

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:03:45 -0500

Well, I've always been told that the markets are forward looking. We've gone up over 50% in six months. The markets anticipated improved earnings, they're here and now we're waiting for what's next. If the economy continues to improve, job cuts are trending down and are expected to show growth shortly after the first of the year, then we'll start the next leg up.

Property Values Set to Fall 43% from Current Depressed Levels

Tue, 03 Nov 2009 11:02:16 -0500

Fortunately I bought property in the '80s and '90s and have done fairly well, even if we get to the Armegeddon levels the author is predicting. Just looking at my area, S.Florida, another 40% plus drop seems highly unlikely. That would put waterfront homes in the 150s which haven't seen that level since the early '90s, late '80s. At those prices and at present interest rates, which are at historic lows, people would be snapping up property down here so fast it would make your head spin. Imagine you're a European and you could get a really nice condo on Miami Beach for less than 60,000 euros. There is a support level under this market and it is not 40% down from here unless the entire world economy goes completely down the tubes. At present the opposite is happening, with China growing near 9%, the U.S. showing positive growth, EU economy starting to expand, interest rates close to zero in some countries and global stimulus still with the pedal to the metal. If there is any improvement in employment, which at current productivity rates seems just around the corner, the stabilization will be firmly in place.

Oil: Supply and Demand? Hardly!

Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:20:07 -0400

If you limited trading oil contracts to people who actually have a connection to the product and get speculators out of the arena, the price would probably drop by half, regardless of what the dollar is doing. The oil market is a manipulated market and has been for a long time, whether you're talking about the producers or the futures market. The WTO should have come down on OPEC a long time ago, but are too afraid to do so. And why the U.S. doesn't have a comprehensive energy policy that takes advantage of our huge NG reserves, promotes alternative energy and lessens our dependence and monetary support of ME regimes that are the source of terrorism shows the power of the oil lobby in this country. It should be about what benefits everyone and not just a bunch of Texas oilmen.

A Cautious Look at Where Markets Are Headed

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:40:32 -0400

It's hard to believe that with interest rates at 0, the 30 year mortgage at 5%, oil fairly stable, and earnings reports more up than down, that a protracted retreat in stock prices will happen. Correction, yes, but never before have we had interest rates this low with no hike on the horizon. Add to that the stimulus efforts worldwide I have to believe that next year will be a more gradual rise in stock prices than we've had the past few months with a few pullbacks along the way. Consumers should gradually work their way back into the picture, too. Automobile sales have been depressed lately and with a 12 million per year scrappage rate, it's only a matter of time before people will have to buy cars. We shall see.

Where's the Outrage at the Banks?

Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:38:44 -0400

"Whoa there for a moment, lets be fair and think back in the early 1990's when our government who regulates our banks told them and other financial institutions to ease credit for those who normally cannot qualify for a home loan."

Let' be fair and tell the truth here. The CRA was implemented to stop banks from redlining neighborhoods that they were taking deposits from but refused to lend to. The banks were never "forced" to lend to anyone but were required to lend to qualified borrowers in neighborhoods that they serviced. The banking fiasco had its roots in irresponsible lending to just about everyone, not poor unemployed ghetto folks. If that were the case, we would not be having foreclosures in every neighborhood in the country, but would be limited to a few homes in the poorest neighborhoods that the right constantly tries to blame for the collapse of the whole financial system. You'd have to be an idiot or completely ignorant of how the system works to believe that. Banks went on a lending binge to anyone that walked in the door regardless of qualifications because they were more interested in making fees, securitizing the loans, passing them on to investment bankers who with the collusion of the rating agencies, sold them to an unsuspecting world and then the cycle repeated itself until it collapsed. And to multiply the problem, investment banks sold insurance policies, but they couldn't call them insurance policies because those are regulated so they called them credit default swaps. They sold them to anyone who wanted one, again to collect the fees on something they never thought they would have to pay off. Unfortunately the whole house of cards collapsed. The previous administration didn't believe in regulation and looked the other way while all this was going on instead of jumping in and putting a halt to it or at least try to regulate the derivatives industry which would have lessened the losses considerably. If you want to blame someone, blame the mortgage brokers that sold these subprime loans to people they knew wouldn't be able to pay, the appraisers that juiced their numbers, the regulators who were asleep at the switch and the ratings agencies that didn't bother to do their due diligence and check the underlying mortgages. Any link in that mortgage chain would have put a stop to the whole mess, yet all of them were too greedy to do their job responsibly.

Looking Back at Fiscal 2009

Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:17:19 -0400

"Wow! talk about not being able to remember history!! It was a year ago when the Dem majority split the 2009 budget in half with "the Bush budget" covering the 6 months to end of March when the second half Democrat/Obama budget could run the deficit up faster than Bush ever had. If you are going to write here, at least TRY to get your facts straight. BTW, I think that Bush and the GOP congress were complete fiscal failures as are Obama and the Dems. WE ARE TOAST!"

Bush's 2009-2010 budget that he proposed, before Congress even looked at it, had a $1.2 trillion deficit, not including Iraq and Afghanistan, which he never included in his budgets since the wars started. So before Democrats touched it, he projected a $1.2 trillion/$1.4 trillion for this coming fiscal year which started a couple of weeks ago. Bush ran up close to $7 trillion in debt. Started at around $5 trillion and ended up close to $12 trillion, much of that when republicans had complete control of Congress. Of course, republicans have been saying for the past 30 years that deficits don't matter, except when a democrat is in charge. No one gave the dems credit when they fixed the budget mess left behind by Reagan and Bush I. They'll have to fix it again because the republicans are incapable of ever balancing a budget.

Looking Back at Fiscal 2009

Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:52:23 -0400

This is the final Bush budget. All of the deficit, aside from the $200 billion stimulus spending, are what's left of the Bush administration "fiscal responsibility". In other words, Obama is not responsible for this deficit and it's increased government spending. And Bush's proposed budget for 2009/2010 had a projected deficit of $1.4 trillion. So before Obama even set foot in the WH, these deficits were already baked in the cake. Not bad considering Bush started with a budget in surplus and projected surpluses as far as the eye could see. He averaged around $750 billion a year in deficits with nothing to show for it except two wars and a financial meltdown that almost destroyed our economy. Now let's see if the public will remember how well the republicans did last time they were in power and vote for them again next year.

Bank Earnings: Reality Check Ahead

Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:18:57 -0400

So no concrete information, just passing on a rumor is the best you can do? How about some facts instead of printing a comment from another article. Some experts? Are these the same experts who haven't reliably predicted any of the catastrophes the financial system went through the past couple of years?

Marc Faber: Equities Safer than Dollars

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:57:02 -0400

"Estimated Currency and Financial Derivatives $642.184 Trillion"

I think you misplaced the decimal here. A year ago during the meltdown, financial derivatives were around $60 trillion and some of that has been wound down. Next month, the
last Bush budget will expire. So aside from the stimulus spending this year, somewhere around $100 billion, all of the deficits accumulated since 1980, around $11 trillion, are from the last three republican presidents. The borrow and spend policies of the last three decades has nearly destroyed our economy, and may yet destroy our economy. So much for deficits don't matter.

On Sep 29 07:08 PM twitee wrote:

> For those less inclined to Scripture, we can readily turn to mathematics
> and to our instructive friend, the parabola, for clues about what
> lies ahead. Simply stated, parabolic growth rates herald major changes
> just ahead in virtually any arena of life, and the parabolic increases
> in the Federal Reserve’s creation of dollars will prove to be no
> exception.
>
> The accumulated official US Public Debt of $11.3 Trillion at May
> 2009 has grown by over $2.1 Trillion in the past twelve months alone,
> with multi-trillions more ahead and no end in sight. The immediate
> future suggests massive additional bailouts for commercial real estate,
> credit card debt portfolios and insurance companies - plus the bubbling
> up of a Witches’ Brew from hundreds of trillions of toxic OTC derivatives
> now in jeopardy - as the next major dominoes likely to fall. The
> usdebtclock.org website provides the following:
>
> US Public Debt $11.317 Trillion
> US Government Bailouts $11.650 Trillion
> Estimated Currency and Financial Derivatives $642.184 Trillion

>
>
> Note: In March 2006 the Federal Reserve discontinued its separate
> publishing of the critical M3 money supply data, and so we are left
> to the estimate the parabolic increases in the printing of money
> within the larger ‘Estimated Currency and Financial Derivatives’
> data.
>
> At some point in the near future, the market may finally acknowledge
> that the boasted about US Dollar, the Emperor, is no longer wearing
> any clothes. And for both Wall Street and the average American alike,
> the Buck may stop here...be prepared for the inevitable rise of Gold,
> Equities and any Hard asset in a long run....in a short term we are
> in the war with deflation....

Should You Invest in Banking Stocks?

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:47:05 -0400

Betting on financials, or the market in general, to go down this time of the year is more often right than not. We are still feeling the effects of the meltdown in real estate but things are less bad than they were a year ago. I sincerely doubt that BAC and C have hit their highs and anyone holding these two, especially BAC, should make out very well in the long term. 0% from the Fed, 5% mortgage rates and 14% +/- on CC added to BAC's Merrill acquisition, it would be almost impossible not to make a ton of money.

Some Scary Implications of U.S. Debt

Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:52:57 -0400

Thirty years ago when RR was elected, our national debt was a little over $1 trillion. After 30 years and three "deficits don't matter" republican administrations later, it's closer to $12 trillion. Eight years ago people were wondering what would happen if we didn't have a treasury market anymore because we were starting to retire some of that debt. Thanks to "fiscally responsible" republicans we don't have to worry about THAT anymore.

Defending the 'Most Dangerous ETFs': A Response to Don Dion

Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:43:54 -0400

If you had put your money in FAS last spring and held it, you'd have something like an 800% return by now, even with the decay. Not bad.

Some Scary Implications of U.S. Debt

Sat, 26 Sep 2009 16:52:49 -0400

In 2001 as GWB took office, the question economists had on their minds was what would we do if the debt was totally paid off. We were running $200 billion a year surpluses and surpluses were projected out as far as the eye could see. They took the 30 year bond off the market and we were down to around $5 trillion in debt. After eight years, GWB and the republican congress managed to take care of that problem. They added another $6 plus trillion and as of today, we're still operating under Bush's last budget. So much for being "fiscally conservative".

Why the U.S. Dollar Drop Might Be Significant

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 08:53:11 -0400

The dollar hit new lows against the Euro? Wasn't it trading around 1.65 to the Euro last year? It's now at 1.44. And when the Euro was first issued in the late '90s it was at 1.18, which isn't much of a decrease seeing as how we've added almost $6 trillion in debt the past eight years. It may go lower, which will make our goods and services much cheaper, imports more expensive and bring our trade deficit into balance which would then improve the position of the dollar. And the cycle goes on.

Is a Crash Impending?

Sat, 05 Sep 2009 12:02:08 -0400

"How old are you? Do you remember 1982-3? 1990-1? Do you recall 1973-4?"

And then you can add 1987 and 2008. Anyone see a pattern here? They all happened under republican administrations. Since 1981 three republican administrations have added over $11 trillion to our national debt, with an average of $750 billion a year with the last administration. We're still operating under Bush's final budget until next month with over a trillion deficit and his proposed budget that he submitted in January of this year for FY 2009/2010 had a $1.2 trillion deficit. These are the facts and they are not in dispute so don't give me a thumbs down because you don't like hearing the truth. This economy was driven into the ground with the world's financial system teetering on the brink of total collapse, yet it seems the majority of posters on Seeking Alpha had the delusional expectation that the new administration would have fixed everything by now and have positive growth rates and growing employment in their first few months in office. It took Clinton six years to bring our budget into balance from a much less precarious situation. It will take much longer to dig ourselves out of the huge hole that we now find ourselves in, especially given the non cooperation and obstructionism from the party that put us there.

The Non-Stimulating Stimulus Bill

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:49:24 -0400

"WASHINGTON -- Government efforts to funnel hundreds of billions of dollars into the U.S. economy appear to be helping the U.S. climb out of the worst recession in decades.

The U.S. economy is beginning to show signs of improvement, with many economists asserting the worst is past and data pointing to stronger-than-expected growth. On Tuesday, data showed manufacturing grew in August for the first time in more than a year. "There's a method to the madness. We're getting out of this," said Brian Bethune, chief U.S. financial economist at IHS Global Insight.

Much of the stimulus spending is just beginning to trickle through the economy, with spending expected to peak sometime later this year or in early 2010. The government has funneled about $60 billion of the $288 billion in promised tax cuts to U.S. households, while about $84 billion of the $499 billion in spending has been paid. About $200 billion has been promised to certain projects, such as infrastructure and energy projects.

Bloomberg News

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner speaks last month at the construction site of a new elementary school in Berea, Ohio.
Economists say the money out the door -- combined with the expectation of additional funds flowing soon -- is fueling growth above where it would have been without any government action.

Many forecasters say stimulus spending is adding two to three percentage points to economic growth in the second and third quarters, when measured at an annual rate. The impact in the second quarter, calculated by analyzing how the extra funds flowing into the economy boost consumption, investment and spending, helped slow the rate of decline and will lay the groundwork for positive growth in the third quarter -- something that seemed almost implausible just a few months ago. Some economists say the 1% contraction in the second quarter would have been far worse, possibly as much as 3.2%, if not for the stimulus.

For the third quarter, economists at Goldman Sachs & Co. predict the U.S. economy will grow by 3.3%. "Without that extra stimulus, we would be somewhere around zero," said Jan Hatzius, chief U.S. economist for Goldman.

The Non-Stimulating Stimulus Bill

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:10:00 -0400

Since 1980 the past three republican administrations have run up over $11 trillion in debt with nothing to show for it but a bloated military and the biggest gap between rich and poor in our history. The numbers you're seeing on deficit projections just didn't appear on January 20,2009. These numbers have been baked into the cake for years. We were well on the path of fiscal responsiblity when GWB took office with surpluses as far as the eye could see. It took just a few short years of applying Friedmanomics, tax cuts for the rich and no regulation/deregulation of the banking industry to turn our economy into a shambles and creating deficits as far as the eye can see. Bush's last proposed budget for FY 2009-2010 had a $1.2 trillion deficit not even counting Iraq and Afghanistan. This was before Obama even took office. We're still working under a Bush budget right now, not counting the stimulus which is paid out over a more than two year time frame. GWB's budget doesn't even run out until next month. So all this BS about Obama having a larger deficit than Bush had during his entire two terms shows either the level of ignorance on the right or the outright dishonesty. The term "fiscally responsible republican" was long ago relegated to the ash heap of history. It will take a democratic administration, once again, to straighten out our countries finances.

What's Plausible for the Fiscal Outlook?

Mon, 31 Aug 2009 11:09:41 -0400

We spend almost two thirds of that every year on defense spending. The trillion for health care is over a 10 year period and some of that could be made up in efficiencies. We're talking about, at most, tens of billions a year for health care coverage for all. Cut out half of the farm subsidies and other corporate welfare and you've got something that really benefits the country.

On Aug 31 10:11 AM crazyv wrote:

> "therefore Obama Administration tax policy is not that different
> from where we’d end up if we extended all of the Bush tax cuts (as
> Senator McCain had wanted to do had he become president) ($11.3 trillion)."
>
>
> The difference is equal to the cost of providing universal health
> insurance! When a trillion dollars is "not that different" in eyes
> of the author - I stopped reading.