sheila

The Economic Recovery That Isn't

studiophototrope, I have serious questions to your comment.
If businesses finally reach equilibrium with much smaller workforces, and the job losses slow to a stop, how does the very slow growth support the nation's needs? How does our nation manage the millions of unemployed and potentially needy families? What do we do with these people that can't consume and possibly can't afford the basics of life?
Just wanting to know....


On Oct 04 09:47 AM studiophototrope wrote:

> >> Those who do cling to the absurd belief that, absent exponential
> productivity gains, the economy can expand while workers are being
> laid off will undergo a massive test of their convictions now that
> it's clear the employment picture is bleak. <<
>
> And those who gravitate to view points on the edges, rather than
> understanding that what takes place usually is somewhere near the
> middle, subject themselves to not being taken seriously.
>
> You write as if the economy can't expand once the lay offs stop but
> hiring doesn't resume.
> Can the economy expand without workers being laid off but minus a
> renewal of large scale hiring? The answer is yes, slowly.
>
> At some point workers will stop getting laid off and concurrently
> companies will find their equilibrium point. From there, they don't
> go on a hiring rampage and create the unnecessary/duplicate jobs
> that needed to be cut during the contraction, but rather, they manage
> their workforce relative to the economic cycle. The economy grows
> slower, but it grows, as "capitalism and free markets" work out the
> excesses. That should be cheering you up, no?
>
> The current economic statistics are difficult to interpret correctly
> because they are contradictory on so many levels. Growth in some
> areas, contraction in others demonstrates a changing, evolving worldwide
> business environment and economy. Cherry picking stats to support
> a position should be reserved for those who follow sports.
>
> I would think being the "free market" guy you are, you would have
> at least considered that US businesses are capable of managing their
> employment rolls not only when the economy contracts or expands,
> but also when it grows slowly. No one is happy with the large number
> of people still losing their jobs, but isn't the free market, cutting
> the fat, tightening the belt stage what free market capitalists have
> been recommending since this began? Now that the markets are doing
> their thing, it's suddenly become proof of fundamental flaws??<br/>
>
> I'm not sure if you aware, but there are colors that exist between
> black and white.
>
> Best regards
> Louis

The U.S's Permanent Depression

Sorry, I meant to give you a thumbs up! Pressed wrong icon.
Excellent comment and I agree.


On Oct 05 09:19 AM Leftfield wrote:

> To me, your overview of how cooperation between China and the US
> could be beneficial and necessary looks plausible. The part where
> you mention transfer of technology gives me some pause, though.
> I believe we have given away the store too much in trade already
> with the outsourcing of good jobs, investment and unequal trade terms,
> to say the least.
> You mention that there is local oversight and a federal system here
> that corrects excesses. The way out of that has been mandates from
> on high that have largely obliterated the competition amongst localities
> that should be our strength. That, coupled with subsidies, has caused
> countless costly local/state projects and increases in government
> pay/size, to go ahead whose cost has been diffused, which wouldn't
> be approved otherwise. The consequences of this is now coming home
> to roost along with many other abuses in our system.
> I still think your ideas show a constructive way ahead, but I am
> far more pessimistic about decisionmaking in this country whose excellent
> design has been circumvented and which has become very corrupt to
> benefit some at the expense of all.

Inflation May Be the Solution

Dear inthemoney,
People don't accept it. It just has ever thus been so.
It is much easier for dependent authorities to jail little people for crimes. They don't have $$$lawyers, lobbyists, and organizations (media,bloggers, and host of non-profits) and powerful business/political allies, to lead their defense and claims of innocence. Occasionally, a biggie will fall, when one of the allies has been burnt by their behavior, or if there is absolutely no other political way out. The penalty will be light. The well connected Madoff expected only 12 years! He must have harmed quite a number of the elite to get the sentence he so justly deserves, even thought it isn't over yet (appeals).
I gave you thumbs up...surely goodness and justice have some place in this world, or so I too would like to believe.


On Sep 11 10:01 AM inthemoney wrote:

> Inflation is the same as abandoining a contract, only the contract
> is not between the private parties but between the government and
> the people.
> Regardless of whether it is or it is not the right thing to do short
> term, what is the cost long-term of willful betrayl of its part of
> the contract by the government? Inflation is stealing from the common
> man to pay for the government's excesses.
> Why do people quietly accept stealing as a viable solution in the
> financial markets while put people in jail for stealing of goods
> and services?

America: A Bona Fide Plutonomy

Living amongst the serfs, this "old" news from Citi just makes your blood boil, eh? I would have liked a slice of the pie.

Macro Trends Spell Doom for Banks and Their Profits

Dear Savy,
Thank you for your comment. It made me mindful that there truly are "good" things amongst the doom/gloom news and analysis. It gives a refreshing perspective. As a novice, the negative news still has me anxiously holding my breath, second guessing myself, and fearful of taking decisive action to dig my accounts out of their hole. My IRA is in a variety of bond funds and cash and unfortunately, I've missed most of this rally. I hope to buy in little bits to get back into the equities market and was already considering some of those companies you mentioned. Thanks again.

On 2008 Aug 26 09:17 AM savvy investor wrote:

> I apologize for being so critical, but this is typical of all the
> negativity that is driving investor sentiment that is NOT commensurate
> with the overall financial facts.
> You are too negative on the world and US economies. You do not mention
> record exports from the US, the worldwide record GDP growth especially
> in emerging economies, the endurance of the US consumer, the relatively
> benign US inflation (yes food will be up around 5% this year and
> energy is up but only related to about 7% of GDP and a smaller percentage
> of income than anywhere else in the world), historically low or moderate
> unemployment, low home interest rates. All the talk about our national
> debt is wrong too--the US government needs to be looked at like a
> business. If it can borrow at a lesser interest rate than it return
> on assets, then debt is good (and 10 year bomnds are below 4%!).
>
> Corporate profits are BEATING the estimates -- outside of financials,
> airlines and autos, and housing, the US economy is simply GREAT.
> Winners are Info Technology companies like IBM and others, McDonalds
> had record revenues and profits as did Walmart, industrials like
> MDR/ABB/Corning/Cummin... mineral and commodity producers like Freeport
> McMoran/Rio Tinto/BHP/Vale/Exxon/e... energy services companies like
> Schlumberger/Pride/Tra... ag equipment like Deere and ag chemicals
> like Mosaic/Monsanto/Potash... generic chemicals like Dow/Monsanto/etc,
> commercial construction (offsetting the residential construction
> woes) with strong business done by CAT and Terex, Boeing is doing
> noicely and a huge US employer.
> Get a balanced perspective and don't dwell on the negatives like
> the "ain't it awful" US press.
> You must be short the market to only report negatives. Unfortunately
> that is typical of the vast majority of the US press and media that
> can't wait to deliver negative news, or make it up if it isn't there
> to report. Most of the press/media folks are 'newbies' as part of
> cost reductions, their industries are in a cost reduction and "change
> period" where print advertising and media advertising are migrating
> to on-line services. Their perspective is coloured by their own situation.
> Energy in the US is still cheaper than almost any other stable economy
> in the world, the US is the most prolific and productive economy
> in the world (our GDP is GROWING), our food is cheaper as a percentage
> of income than most developed economies, the 'savings rate' does
> NOT count 401K/IRA/home equity/etc so is only a distorted picture
> of REAL net worth (and that is GROWING per capita in the US). <br/>We
> generally live in a free, safe, productive, healthy, comparatively
> wealthy, enjoyable society that is the envy of the world. We're are
> all very lucky to be living in the US in 2008!

WealthTrack Interviews PIMCO's Bill Gross

jka, thank you for the link. good read- thought provoking


On Jul 09 02:58 AM jkallday wrote:

> Transcript is here:
> www.wealthtrack.com/tr...

Market Leadership and the New Normal

You have touched on something here with mobility to work.. provided that some can find jobs. Not home ownership, but renters.


On May 04 01:52 PM conceptwizard wrote:

> I agree on one point but not the other. Cars I believe the numbers
> are correct. Baby boomers are retiring by the thousands and one car
> only will be needed. Economics will drive others to a one car scenario.
> Cars will also be driven longer because they should last longer.
>
> On the housing issue one of the biggest factors on the home ownership
> time frame dropping was due to people having to go where the work
> was. I do not see this changing at all, if anything more job transistion
> will be required. When you look at the average jobs per worker lifetime
> has elevated substanstially over the years. The days of going to
> work for one employer for life are few and far between. This will
> require workers to be more transient, thus should be moving more.

Taking On the Analysts: Ignorance Is No Excuse

Well, we both get the same feeling re: Chris Davis. Just look at the dismal performance of the Clipper fund. Years worth of dismal!!
The crash of 2008 only made the hole deeper. That and the fact that his GRANDFATHER 's philosophy reigns. This will blind his and his fund to current needs if all you see is through the OLD spectacles and philosophy. AIG is/was nearly 20% of Clipper. It was painful to listen to Davis' management report.
I am stuck in that fund and through constraining agreements. It will become an inheritance of my grandchildren before it might even be worth anything again. Unless of course the fund is closed. sigh :(

Roche Covets Genentech for Good Reason

This genetic testing is very nice. But if there is punitive damage to the individual patient or the requesting doctor by health insurance companies once the markers are identified, or specialized drugs requested and used that point to "nasty markers" I don't see it making much headway. I think that the leagle business might have a better gain. Then again, what do I know?

Where We Should Be Investing: The Paradox of Thrift

I read a lot, learn a lot, but rarely comment. You have stated the real truth to this chaotic mess, and it becomes more clear for me.

I am suddenly responsible for family finances without the benefit of any previous experience, other than a personal checking account. What a time to pick up the baton!
Thank you for your insight.