bthomas

Wednesday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

Breadth and volume are key to true rallies. This is not a sustainable rally by any metric except the ruby slipper metric. No this isn't Kansas Dorothy, and we're not going home.


On May 06 07:59 AM dirty_dirty wrote:

> anyone look into how volume in this "rally" compares to past bear
> rallies? is this low volume trying to say something?

Tuesday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

Volume is truly key here because this action is so easily manipulated by "Da Boys." The grating thing is they're doing it with our (taxpayer) money. Does Timmy really want to release the Stress test results? Please. We shall see. It' still too early but, this may be the beginning of the new Epic Inflation Machine. The dollar index is sliding, prices are rising across the board. Commodities anyone?

Friday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

Demark indicators are used to anticipate trend reversals.


On Apr 24 07:33 PM cma cma wrote:

> David, you sometimes post the Demark chart, which is great, since
> no one else does, but we need the interpretation, please!

Friday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

Nonsense,
Turn off the PlayStation and read a book. Learn a little more about charts before commenting. I am certain it is nonsense to the ignorant. David Fry is one of the best informed, most straight talking authors on the SA sight. Get a clue!


On Apr 24 05:47 AM Nonsense wrote:

> Use your keyboard more. Communicate better what it is you are trying
> to tell us.
>
> Any stiff can copy/paste a collage of charts in a blog.

Friday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

Congress wastes the taxpayers' time going after government employees (technically 80% gov. stake). If senate goes along, the courts will likely declare it unconstitutional. The lawmakers need to focus on the deregulation issue that allowed this abuse. So GS was hedged against an AIG bankruptcy. Who insured it? AIG? Are we certain bankruptcy would have been worse? Glass Steagall or something better, (unlikely, I know) must be (re) instated. This keeps the giddy bankers aware they are playing with other people's money. They smeared the line like a one year old with his birthday cake. Lax regulation, when everyone was flush with cash, home values only rising, money was free, -that's what got us here as greed ruled the day. We must go From '08, '09 back to depression era regulatory policy.The deja vu all over again thing (thanks Yogi). We must blame ourselves, not the least of which: Phil, Alan, Billy, Bobby and "under the big" top Sandy. I am certain none feel personally responsible, as the "Maestro" has already stated he is not. Hold on kids inflation is coming.

Tuesday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

A major problem is that expediency seldom is profitable when liquidation is concerned. The easiest sold segment is rarely the most profitable. It will likely be pennies on the dollar for the taxpayer in this method. Since we're 'in to win', the long haul is going to prove better at serving the public good. The complex derivative nonsense can be unwound etc. Time will tell. BTW. Where is Paulson these days. AIG gives GS the payout and Buffet gets a guaranteed 10%. Can you say subpoena? That's right. Paulson has immunity?


On Mar 17 07:27 AM unfaire wrote:

> I opposed the TARP. I smelt something fishy from the very beginning.
> It turned out that I was right. Most of those who got the TARP money
> are double dipping, or even triple dipping. It goes this way:
> 1. I lost billions buying some crappy financial instrument like CDS
> from, say, AIG and other cohorts.
> 2. Give me billions, tax payers, so that I can stay in business.
> I am too big to fail.
> 3. So, I got billions of tax payers’ money.
> 4. AIG as well as all the cohorts also got billions of tax payers’
> money.
> 5. Since and AIG and all the cohorts are flush with tax payers’ money,
> take back from me those crappy financial instrument and pay me in
> full.
> 6. Now, AIG and all the cohorts including me got back those crappy
> financial instruments, I am in poor house again. Tax payers please
> make me full again by giving me billions.
> 7. And, the cycle goes on again.
> Under the guise of too big to fail, we tax payers are continue to
> be taken for suckers. It is still not too late to:
> 1. Stop bailing them out.
> 2. Sell off various parts of the failing financial institutions in
> piece meal under the government supervision.
> 3. Give back the tax payers first whatever that can be recovered
> from the sale.
> 4. If there is any left, let the other stakeholders have them.<br/>In
> a capitalist society, when the price is right, i.e., cheap enough
> so that some pieces of these failing institutions can be made profitable,
> there will be someone who would buy them and make money from them.
> In doing so, most of these pieces will be healthy again and making
> money by themselves without any more of tax payers’ money.
> Bernanke said very well. I believe this is what he meant: When the
> politicians do not have the will to go against the self interests
> of the financial biggies, neglecting the well being of the all the
> rest including us the tax payers and who put them in office, we will
> never solve the problem.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

The bankers must be reined in. We should start with rational regulation where responsible adults can trust the veracity of what comprises AAA rated securities. Those irresponsible parties must be held accountable. Conflict of interest is pervasive on all sides, from government to regulator to business . This seems to escape everyone's attention. It's all public money now folks, the public trust must be upheld. We are ten years hence from repealing Glass Steagall. Everything is in shambles now because greed overrode every other aspect of life. The Fed has too much power. congress should work to rein this in. Glass Steagall, or whatever replaces it, must be enacted to require people to do what greedy people cannot do for themselves: -the right thing. Split them up. Preserve the public trust.

Friday Outlook: Commodities, Global Markets

The bankers must be reined in. We should start with rational regulation where responsible adults can trust the veracity of what comprises AAA rated securities. Those irresponsible parties must be held accountable. Conflict of interest is pervasive on all sides, from government to regulator to business . This seems to escape everyone's attention. It's all public money now folks, the public trust must be upheld. We are ten years hence from repealing Glass Steagall. Everything is in shambles now because greed overrode every other aspect of life. The Fed has too much power. congress should work to rein this in. Glass Steagall, or whatever replaces it, must be enacted to require people to do what greedy people cannot do for themselves: -the right thing. Split them up. Preserve the public trust.

Thursday Outlook: Commodities, Emerging Markets

Dave,
Thanks for the diligence despite the ssdd syndrome. You're always my first read. Perhaps less government. Perhaps agencies which do their jobs? A Department of work ethic enforcement? We can dream. Can't we? Ah! Idealism.

Gold: Not an Effective Hedge Against Inflation

Excellent, insightful comment. (rebuttal)


On Dec 24 08:18 AM ABG wrote:

> The author arbitrarily uses 1980, at the top of the 1980s market
> cycle, to support the idea that gold is a bad hedge against inflation.
> But, we are near the bottom of the gold cycle right now, not the
> top. The last 8 years of gold's appreciation happened in a time
> of deep calm and steady economic growth. It was not the result of
> fear and panic, as in the 1970s. The first year of panic was the
> second half of 2007 to 2008. So, the gold cycle is now just beginning,
> not ending.
>
> Arbitrary choice of 1970, at the bottom of the 1970s gold cycle,
> as a date upon which to base an analysis will give a completely different
> picture, compared to the choice of 1980. The price for gold on the
> Swiss market was $42 per ounce. If you had bought gold in 1970,
> keeping it stored in Switzerland (because Americans were not allowed
> to own bullion until 1974), you would have had incredible gains to
> date, exceeding the official measures of inflation.
>
> Of course, there would have been yearly storage charges, but, if
> you owned the S&amp;P 500 index, you would have needed to pay taxes
> on the dividends, and on all the sales that you are constantly forced
> to make when various stocks are removed from the indexes. If you
> owned a passive mutual fund, you would have been more seriously impacted
> by taxes.
>
> If the index creators just left all stocks on the index that started
> on the index, and never got rid of the dogs, your gains in stock
> investing would be non-existent. So, companies are always added,
> and removed, and funds that follow the indexes, or you, need to buy/sell
> in sympathy with these moves to keep your portfolio consistent with
> the index. This creates taxable events, and taxes reduce return.
> In comparison, gold is not taxable until it is sold. Most people
> never sell it, so the capital gain is never taxed.
>
> At any rate, after taxes, you would have had a much bigger gain from
> a static gold investment, dated from 1970, than from investing the
> same amount of money in the S&amp;P 500 in 1970.
>
> That is not to say investing in the stock market is a bad idea.
> It is simply a bad idea at this moment in time. There will come
> a time for stock investing, but not is not that time. Right now,
> smart people will opt for gold. Even though the stock market will
> go up a lot in the next few years, from current depressed prices,
> all of these gains will be for show only. They will likely be merely
> nominal gains, even though I do think we will be seeing DOW 30,000
> by 2011.
>
> Because of the circumstances that surround us, over the next 5-10
> years, stocks will arise primarily out of inflationary pressure created
> by the Fed in its quantitative easing program. In other words, after
> adjustment for the reduced buying power of the dollar, stock gains
> will be non-existent, at least for many years. Gold, in contrast,
> will probably go up in real terms, because of the increased levels
> of world instability, a continuing decrease in mine production in
> spite of higher prices, and simply that almost everyone wants at
> least a little bit of it (whether in bullion or jewelry) and the
> world population is growing much faster than the world's stockpile
> of gold.

Gold: Not an Effective Hedge Against Inflation

In an inflationary environment gold is and has been and will continue to be a stable marker as the respective currency is in value decline. We are not currently in such an environment, but will soon be. Bernanke at the Fed an Paulsen at Treasury have been trying their damndest to ensure it is so. Look at the dollar index since mid Nov. Look at GLD same period. Long term gold wins. Short term gold wins. End of story.

Gold: Not an Effective Hedge Against Inflation

bollocks.

Why Gold Hasn't Been a Hedge Against Inflation

It is still early for long oil. As the global conditions worsen, the economies most dependent on oil export are 'over a barrel'. Despite promises and pledges to reduce production their nationalized oil economies cannot afford it. As an inflationary hedge stick with aurum. As conditions improve (months away) oil will slowly rise as the shorts are squeezed. Fed policy helps gold as well. Ben's helicopter is really an inflation machine.

The Dollar Gets Slammed

Fitzman,

We cannot dig our way out of this hole, -ever done it? Blues artist Robert Cray Said it best: "The forecast calls for pain." BTW, love the Cat 5 moron reference.


On Dec 11 02:40 PM The Fitzman wrote:

> bush economic policies have almost guaranteed the following long-term
> trends:
> 1) lower US dollar
> 2) higher oil
> 3) higher gold
> 4) higher inflation (in the US)
> 5) a lower standard of living for US citizens
> 6) an S&amp;P500 which will (continue) to go no-where
>
> the only hope to break this trend is:
> a) responsible fiscal policy (no-hope for that until we dig ourselves
> out of the current deep hole we are in, meaning massive gov spending)

>
> b) more importantly a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy:

>
> thefitzman.blogspot.co...

>
>
> i am just surprised the US dollar has been as strong as it has been
> for as long as it has been. no doubt it is worldwide investor panic,
> for there is no fundamental reason the US currency should be so strong
> other than the US has the world's dominant military force. unfortunately,
> unwise use of this force has only increased our haste to bankruptcy,
> increased terrorism aimed at us, and reduced our reputation in the
> world. in short, how can the US dollar not go down as such wrongheaded
> US policy and US dollar printing presses work overtime? obama, must
> as i like him, is simply inheriting a colasal mess as the result
> of a cat 5 moron.

The Dollar Gets Slammed

Inflation was/is one of the monetary goals in attempt to stave off deflation/recession, hence the "bailout" investments treasury has made in the banks. Money supply can be reined in once a turnaround is established. The changes Schiff espouses are going to require more prudence than most of consumer America is accustomed to, basically to consume less. That means a slower economy. Probably a slower turnaround. Expect greater regulation despite the current stricture in lending. Further slowing the economy. The value of the dollar goes down relative to yen, euro, and all commodities. With Epic amount of cash flying out of the Fed and Treasury it must. Save more buy less.