kertch

Charlie Gasparino: Another Crash 'Has to Happen Again'

Your comment reflects an ignorant and dangerous way of thinking:

"Not to absolve government, but..." - but of course you would like to absolve government.
"... these dopes would have immolated even without the incentives." - Dopes? These guys gamed the entire U.S. economy and banking system to thier advantatage and walked away with Billions, leaving us with the tab. We got immolated: the shareholders, the bondholders, and the taxpayers, not the bankers. The dopes are us, the ones paying for the mess, believing our "trusted public servants" will keep the "stupid evil bankers" from robbing us. If that's what you think then "moral hazard" is the only card you've got left to play. BTW, you're just the half-wit tinpot calling the kettle black.

On Nov 05 04:33 PM wobatus wrote:

> Not to absolve government, but these dopes would have immolated even
> without the incentives. Moral hazard is such an over-played card.
> Did all the shareholders and bond-holders of LEH really expect to
> get bailed? Well that was wrong, wasn't it? Same with ma and pa Citi
> shareholder. And then we get half-wit tinpot commentary from financial
> illiterates.

Why I'm Cutting RF Micro Devices and Skyworks Further

I bought this stock early this year at $1.24, rode it down to 88 cents, and back up to $5.08 where I sold out. I bougth it because I know the company and the industry and thought the stock severely undervalued at $1.24. However, given the fundamentals, I just don't trust it above $5.00 and feel lucky that it went as high as it did. Granted that it's outlook has improved significantly, it can't really justify a price in excess of even $4.00 when it's traded between $6.00 and $8.00 during the boom times with far better top line and bottom line numbers. Eventually, this stock will settle into a more realistic price range when the anticipation of the "imminent recovery" is over. My opinion is that right now with RFMD you're just playing the market swings not the fundamentals.

How Much Natural Gas Remains in the USA?

Wisdom, you've missed your own point. If energy is fungable then it makes sense to increase the entire energy supply. The supply and demand imbalances will be mitigated if alternative sources are easily available and easily substituted.


On Oct 04 04:04 PM Wisdom vs. Information wrote:

> captain ccs hits the nail on the head that so many of you do not
> even realize exists: energy is energy. you can argue about this stuff
> and make stats lie but you are wasting your time in the long run.
> energy prices will rise and fall as supply and demand for the various
> sources change; if oil and gas become too expensive to use for transportation,
> we will start using something else, yawn.
>
> if we start using NG for transportation, it's price will increase
> dramatically and become more volatile-- how will that effect utuility
> electricity prices? stupid!

Brazil Upsets Economists with Decision on In-House Drilling Rigs

This is just a continuation of the current trend of economic nationalism. This is a very powerful move by Brazil, and there is really nothing that the rest of the world can do about it. I would venture to say that Mercantilism is the new economic paradigm and eventually almost all nations will be forced into it by thier trading partners and their workers at home by the current and continuing economic circumstances. "Jobs at home!" will be the cry. Nations will try to produce domestically everything that they can, importing only those products or raw materials they can't produce at home. Anyone who doesn't do this, like the U.S. for example, will find itself with a large current account deficit and a shortage of jobs. Global free trade occurs in cycles, this just happens to be a time when we are moving into down cycle of global trade.

Why Is Congress Agnostic About Natural Gas?

Silly Germans! Soon they'll be completely addicted to Russian natgas. Say goodbye to Germany as a reliable NATO partner once the Russians have a chokehold on thier economy.


On Sep 10 04:32 AM mbr wrote:

> Just read this: "by Aurelia End Aurelia End – Wed Sep 9, 11:06 am
> ET BERLIN (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) – An ambitious project
> was unveiled in Germany on Wednesday to install mini gas-fired power
> plants in people's basements and produce as much electricity as two
> nuclear reactors within a year.
>
> The Hamburg-based renewable energy group Lichtblick and its automaker
> partner Volkswagen say the plants would produce not only heating
> and hot water but also electricity, with any excess power fed into
> the local grid.
>
> The two firms said the concept of "SchwarmStrom" (literally, "swarm
> power") would allow Germany to abandon nuclear and coal power stations
> sooner and help compensate for the volatility of renewables like
> wind and solar power...."
>
> Not only do the US have huge nat. gas reserves they are also ahead
> of the competition for most efficiently converting it to power. Just
> check Capstone Turbine Corp. In other words the US could easily beat
> in efficiency the "SchwarmStrom" system, not writing about the most
> efficient hybrid vehicles (see GreenCar.com
> August 31, 2009 Title: Ford S-Max Hybrid Uses Advanced Capstone MicroTurbine
> Power).
>
> Unfortunately "Dereliction of duty" also abounds.
>
>
> Long CPST of course

3 Energy MLPs for the Price of One

It's true that UBTI (unrelated business taxable income) can trigger a tax event even in an IRA, but most MLP's operate at a UBTI loss. This is due to thier unique structure and business. Your payment is paid out of cash flow before expenses and is therefore not a dividend (which are paid out of profits). MLP's write down thier profits through depreciation of thier assets, which is usually covers all thier profits. So in a normal operating environment you, as a partner in the MLP, will not have a positive UBTI. However, there may be times when a large windfall occurs which cannot be entirely covered by asset depreciation in which case you might owe taxes.

The Market Bubble Is About to Pop

The inverse relationship between long-term secular bull markets in the U.S. and commodity prices is there for everyone to see. Just check your charts back to 1970. The relationship seems counterintuitive. Why would commodity prices soar when the U.S economy performs poorly? The answer is the underlying cause of the underperforming economy: asset inflation due to an overly loose monetary policy. Once this begins a vicious cycle can ensue. Corporate profits drop because of higher commodity input prices, making them less attactive and commodities more attractive. When profits are constrained by input costs most people don't want to be invested on the downsteam side of the supply chain.

Chesapeake Cuts a Deal With Plains Exploration & Production: 'Lump Sum Please'

Just to comment, high grade Pennsylvania athracite is used almost exclusively for iron ore blast furance operation. It is no longer burned as a power source since it is not nearly as common as lower grade forms of coal and is more valuuble for use in steel making.

Cash for Clunkers May Cost Up to $45,354 Per Vehicle

This is a poorly thought-out, slanted response conflating economics
with socialist ideology. Money doesn't just magically appear at the treasury department (though it semms to at the Fed!). Each dollar you spend on "stimulus" must come from somewhere, and currently it comes from Asia, and it comes at a cost. If this program makes so much economic sense why not expand it? Let's give all new car purchasers $20,000 in rebates, and why not give all home purchasers $100,000 to buy a home? Soon the entire economy will be growing like gangbusters! Right. We'll just end up in the same mess we're in now as soon as China takes away the treasury's credit card. If the average citizen is in debt, how will the government going deeper into debt make the problem better? Those that support this type of economic program are under the impression that a dollar in stimulus yeilds a dollar+ in output. This is only true for a short time. As in our example, the economic boost provided by the cash for clunkers program will stop as soon as the program is over. If there is no underlying economy, boomtowns become ghostowns as soon as the gold runs out. Now listen closely - it's a mathematical fact that OVER TIME a dollar in stimulus ALWAYS yeilds less than a dollar in output. Only a dollar in investment can yeild a dollar+ in real output and a positive return is not a certainty.

The myopic focus on short-term stimulus without accounting for any offsetting future financial penalty, only government cheerleading, displays a lack of any serious critical thinking.

On Aug 01 11:21 AM Marvin Clark wrote:

> This is a poorly thought-out, slanted argument conflating economics
> with political ideology. The suggested $20,000 - $45,000 suggested
> cost per transaction wildly inflated and is disingenuous.
>
> Furthermore, cars do magically materialize into showrooms. They are
> transported from manufactures to dealers, creating jobs. They are
> detailed before being delivered, creating jobs. Salespeople are paid
> commissions; finance workers and offices workers process paperwork,
> creating jobs. Taxes are paid on new transactions. New cars aren't
> purchased and parked in garages. New owners take them out on the
> road and drive them. New owners drive to dinner, visit friends and
> family; take quick trips. They test drive their new purchase. The
> velocity of money increases. By the way, this is the point of the
> program.
>
> We can debate the politics of spending money this way, but to state
> each car purchase can cost up to $45,354, without honestly accounting
> for any offsetting financial benefits, only government bashing, displays
> a lack of any serious critical thinking.

Cash for Clunkers May Cost Up to $45,354 Per Vehicle

What an ignorant answer. Schools, roads, bridges, and other such services are govenment functions that we pay for. Bailouts are not government services. They are just a way to pay off losers with political connections. Stop using that worthless old argument to justify wasting other peoples money.


On Jul 31 04:30 PM KingGeithner wrote:

> Well, then I don't want to help pay for your kid's education, or
> the roads you drive on, or any other service you use from the government
> that I may not be using either.

How Does Intel Continue to Perform Well?

It's a mature value company and should consider paying a dividend. Too many people still buy Intel today hoping for a repeat of the 90's.

Cree's South Korean LED Deal Highlights Potential

I have following CREE for probably 15 years now. I am intimately aquainted with thier management and technology. If you want a good idea about what CREE will do in the future look at it's chart from 2001 to today. It's a great stock to trade but a poor one to invest in. Rumors about aquisition have been around for the last decade, as have those about the comming boom in LED lighting. It's also one of the most "playable" stocks by traders, who often hold large short positions when the stock goes above $32, causing the occasional short squeeze (this is what happened in Dec. 2005 when the stock broke $40). It's great one to make money on - as long as you know when to buy and when to sell.

Six Myths About Smart Grid

Myth #1 is itself a myth. Consumers may not want complete control, but they don't want want to abdicate it either. What the consumer wants is to turn on an appliance when they want and expect it to work. If I need a shower in the afternoon I don't want the power company shutting down my hot water heater, nor do I want them unilaterally lowering the temperature on my thermostat. Once consumers have this happen to them, you kcan pretty much trash the whole idea.

6 Ways to Short the Obama Health Plan

Bob55,
Perhaps you have good intentions but you are quite naive. All of the things that you mentioned happening to the middle class are true. But the solutions you espouse make absolutely no sense. American workers are underpaid because they now must compete globally with better educated workers in other counties who will work for much less money. Entire industries are moveing to nations where operating costs are much lower. More and more money is being invested abroad where capital is treated better. The policies of Obama will only drive more jobs out of the U.S. A tax on carbon will not make the U.S. more competetive, only more expensive for industry. If green energy, which is at least 3 times as expensive as "dirty" coal-based energy, will create jobs, it will at best only offset the ones lost in the coal, oil, and natural gas industries. Many scientists world wide are questioning the premise of man-made global warming. Perhaps China will support this new opinion, turn it's back on global warming, burn cheap coal and dominate world manufacturing while we bankrupt ourselves subsidizing clean energy. In fact who will benefit most from "clean energy"? China produces the cheapest solar cells and India the cheapest wind turbines. Unless utilities are forced to buy american, they will purchase the most cost effective green solutions meaning Chinese and Indian products. If taxes are raised on capital gains, investors will simply invest more in other countries. We are already seeing resistance from buyers of our gigantic debt. As to health care, today the use of healthcare resources is limited by the ability to pay, however no one is capping your salary or earings potential. With government health care resources will be limited by politics. Those with political connections will get the best health care, the rest will suffer. I have relatives in Germany and firsthand experience with thier nationalized health care systems. Once you retire and leave the workforce, services are routinely denied. My Uncle was even denied a perscription to an H-blocker like Prilosec to treat his acid reflux because he was over 65. The verdict was final and no second opinion was allowed, as seeking other medical opinions is considered a "waste" of resources. Ten years later he was diagnosed with stomach cancer. At that time he was denied surgery because it was decided that he was now too old. Three months later he died. That is the reality of socialized health care in Germany and other countries. It would be foolish to think that it would be any different here.

National Health Insurance, 'Cap and Trade': Two Steps in the Wrong Direction

If health care for profit is unethical, why don't you spend 8 years and $200k getting a medical degree and then practice medicine for free. Or better yet, get a Ph.D. and spend 20 years of your life developing a life-saving drug and then give it away. Or maybe it's just OTHER people who should work for free while you derive the benefits?

On Jun 28 09:47 PM sether wrote:

> 72% of americans want public health care.
> 90% of corporate money doesn't.
> If public health care drives private providers out of business, GOOD.
> The sooner the better. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people.
> Health care for profit is unethical, and violates the hippocratic
> oath. Look into it.
> Peter Schiff here reduced to FOX News-level propaganda. Nice work,
> you sellout. How do you sleep?