huntlakeswim

The Non-Stimulating Stimulus Bill

C L,
Not sure if you're referring to me or Calafia Beach with your comment. If it's me, I didn't state my political affiliation or opinions in my comments and didn't say I've got anything figured out other than, this is a bad argument. (And I didn't even take credit for figuring that out) It's hard to tell how much of it is good criticism and how much is just posturing. I can't read everything here, so I rely on the editors' picks. They goofed this one up.


On Sep 02 02:42 AM C L Freeman wrote:

> After all this, there are still people who view the world in terms
> of Republican vs Democrat and think they've got it figured out?<br/>
>
> Seriously!?
>
> On Sep 01 10:07 PM huntlakeswim wrote:

The Non-Stimulating Stimulus Bill

I don't mind a differing view and I don't blame Calafia Beach for his opinion. Clobbersaurus is right on with his criticism of it. Regardless of your argument, it should be a good one. This article is a political argument thinly veiled with economics and it's not a very good one, so I'm not sure what qualifies it to be an "editor's pick".

I think if the editors of Seeking Alpha have a political point they would like to make, they ought to make it themselves.

Friday Wrap: This Market's Running on Empty

bull etf's -> cash -> bear etf's

The view is great from up here. Now, hands up and enjoy the ride down! Weee!

Geithner's Stress Test, Revealed

It's a model and models aren't perfect. But it may provide a rational way to evaluate strength and prepare for the next step in an understandable way.

Paulson made it up as he went along. Money went to the banks and banks did with it what they wanted. It was necessary, but short term and short sighted. We might disagree with some aspects of the stress test, but can't we agree that it's better than waiting for market panic and soaking up preferred shares? At that point, we might as well nationalize now with all its bitter (poison) pills.

Last thing, the author mentions how previous models have failed to predict characteristics of the next recession. Right now, I'd like to get out of this one. We know what some of the causes are and the model seeks to capture those with the aim of recovery. The preventive medicine is going to look different.

Three Reasons Solar Sell-off May Be in Early Innings

Kelvin, I think you drank the Minneapolis koolaid. Solars retraced last week just before and during the convention (hmmm...), but I'm writing this just after announcement that FRE and FNM need Uncle Sam's bailing bucket. Longer, stranger days ahead, where the general economic condition will be ballast in the boats of most stocks. Investors still willing to assume a little risk may end up looking for companies with an emerging technology and growth potential. You might see a change in investor sentiment after November and another strong quarter of growth in this industry.

What's Up with the China Solar Stocks

I think there's been a reluctance to commit to solar stocks given the volatility they've shown, concerns about liquidity, the quickness with which this technology develops, and, well, they've just been neglected. Look at a 6-month chart and you'll get perspective on this drop. All summer they've seen low volume and been unable to hold gains. That may be changing, but not without shudders like today.

Obama Is Bad for the Economy - Barron's

>These folks tend to plow a lot of their money into businesses

How can we be sure? One-percenters may be less inclined to take on investment/market risk given the greater financial security of more cash savings. Someone with the need to have their savings grow or provide income might be a more motivated investor.