Is Dubai's Default a Black Swan Event? [View article]
None of the Arab Countries were worried about Sadam so why would they help rebuild the US's mistaken adventure into Iraq for oil?
On Nov 27 08:21 AM apppro wrote:
> And as 2nd issue: > > To heck with them! Did any of those Arab countries help pay for the > reconstuction of Iraq or Brunai when we got rid of Sadam for them!
Bright Future for Petrobras and Brazil [View article]
The rule of law doesn't mean much in the US. Brazil is not Venzuela. All leftist regimes are not communist.
On Nov 19 03:14 PM Alan von Altendorf wrote:
> Michael, my first sell call was in June 08 at $72. You could have > bought anything in Mar 09 and made money. Holding PBR is dangerous. > I'm not asking you to agree with me. Keep in mind that Chavez snatched > $22 billion belonging to COP and XOM, plus the service companies > assets -- and Petrobras is in the thick of it. The rule of law means > nothing in South America.
I agree Andrew but public opinion is against nuclear and probably wont change until they can't afford their utility bills.
On Nov 13 12:21 PM Andrew Butter wrote:
> Sounds like Nuclear which is a well proven technology and doesn't > cause any environmental hazard if managed properly is the way forwards > (the waste is solid). > > The key issue there is the capex; perhaps instead to throwing money > at banks, throw it at building nuclear, if there were economies of > scale and the environmentalists could agree that the unlikely risk > of a nuclear disaster was less of a risk than CO2, capex could come > down.
> Mr. Lounsbury: Your last comment is most pertinent. The "science" > of climatology seems to me to be quite speculative. I can't help > but be suspicious of the motives of many of Al Gore's friends and > admirers. In 1977, a gentleman published a book entitled: "The Coming > Ice Age". But the ice age never came. It is my understanding that > this author is now an advisor to President Obama. I have always been > a "conservationist" and have advocated soil and water conservation > and intensive reforestation. Man has historically caused regional > environmental disasters in the Middle East, China, the United States > and Central America. But I see the Climate Change folks as using > this supposed issue to seize control of society to promote yet another > Utopian Paradise. The Utopians have caused more death, agony, and > suffering than any other movement in human history. In conclusion, > the climate guys cannot accurately predict the weather next year, > let alone in the next decades.
Healthcare Reform: Two Extremes, Neither Focusing on Health [View article]
Good comment Alan.
On Nov 09 03:07 PM Alan Young wrote:
> Good article! You've made some excellent bulls-eyes on aspects of > the problem. If the term "blood sucking vampire squid" weren't already > taken, I'd suggest using it for the "healthcare" industry. > > Still, it's missing an important point. > > In the US we pay about twice as much for healthcare as other developed > countries do, with poorer results. We don't live as long or as healthily > as Europeans and Japanese with their government-paid care, BUT WE > PAY TWICE AS MUCH. That's collectively, not individually; that includes > people who can't even get insurance Most of the difference can be > accounted for by the 30+% sucked out of the system by insurance companies; > most the rest is probably increased administrative costs to doctors > and hospitals who have to deal with complicated and recalcitrant > insurers. > > IOW, eliminating private, for-profit insurance (or making it a much > smaller part of the picture) is probably the best thing we could > do for the good of the country. When the 15% of GDP that currently > goes to disease-management is brought down to 8-9% and applied to > actual health, we will have less burden on the payrolls (employers > and/or employees and/or taxpayers will save $$, and from the macro > point of view it doesn't really matter who gets it—it will help the > rest of the economy recover). Plus, a (potentially) healthier population. > Win-win.
Corporations Win Again - This Time It's Healthcare [View article]
Steve in Greensboro, did you read kucinich's article or are you such a kneejerk-conservative that you went ballistic at the mention of his name? Kucinich is unpopular with the liberals as well as the conservative becasue he offers simple and practical solutions that help the people not our owners the corporations. Did you use the same rhetoric " Never let practical or legal considerations deter you" when George Bush invaded Iraq and pissed off $millions a day? I missed that part in the Constition that forbids the Goverment from taking over health care, please point it out to me.
On Nov 09 04:22 PM Steve in Greensboro wrote:
> I think Dennis "Cuckoo" Kucinich really needs to rally the Left wing > of the Democrat party (redundant, I guess) to oppose Obama-Pelosi's > health care bill. > > If Democrats can't get pure single-payer done now with the huge majorities > they have in both houses, they certainly won't be able to get in > done after the 2010 midterms. > > And don't worry about the impact on the economy of the huge tax increase > required by socialized medicine. And don't worry either about the > fact the Constitution does not allow the Federal government to take > over health care. > > You Lefties need to go for the gusto. Never let practical or legal > considerations deter you.
Corporations Win Again - This Time It's Healthcare [View article]
Robespierre is close. It is a disgrace that the US has 50 million people uninsured and god knows how many under-insured even if they have some kind of group health insurance. Cut out the insurance companies including HMOs and the $billions they bleed away from health care, give Medicare the ability to bargain for drugs, goods and services and there would plenty of money for comprehensive medical and dental coverage for all. And please, get off the Socialism rhetoric, this is a fascist government not a socialist government and it was never a Democracy.
On Nov 09 04:17 PM Robespierre wrote:
> The "health care reform" is a farce. If either party really want > it to offer real health care then all they need to do is to extend > medicare to all Americans. Insurance companies server no purpose. > They have not contained cost as they say they do. They add billions > of dollars in cost. I know some think that if we go medicare for > all there is all this fraud going on. Well the solution to the fraud > is simple: Offer to private companies (capitalism anyone?) %50 of > the recovered fraud money and the other %50 if there are CRIMINAL > convictions. But neither the limousines liberals democrats nor the > idea-less republicans will ever do any real reform
Squid flu? Growing frustration over reports that Goldman Sachs (GS) (along with big employers including Citigroup (C) and Morgan Stanley (MS)) is receiving hundreds of H1N1 vaccines before many hospitals do. David Weidner has a reader's limerick: "As jobless rates keep getting worse/The bankers cut lines to the nurse/Bad debts they accrue/But when there's swine flu/They finally turn risk-averse." NYC's health commissioner defends the distribution. [View news story]
I'm sure that somewhere in the negotiations with the Government there is a clause that makes bonuses given to GS traders is tax exempt and free swine flu shots.
On Nov 06 07:39 PM davidbdc wrote:
> This is actually a deficit reduction move......after all if any of > these traders miss time from work they might only get $1 million > bonus this year instead of $1.5 million......think of all the income > tax the federal government will lose. If a couple of unemployed > main street folks get sick it doesn't really matter since they are > already unemployed.
Nassim Taleb, on a panel with IMF Deputy Managing Director Takatoshi Kato, loses his cool: "Before the discussion he gave us a PowerPoint lecture showing the IMF projections for 2010, 2011, ..., 2014. I could not control myself and got into a state of rage. I told the audience that the next time someone from the IMF shows you projections for some dates in the future, to show us what they PROJECTED for 2008 and 2009 in 2004, 2005, ..., and 2007." [View news story]
Has the Market Already Hit Its High for the Year? [View article]
I quit using stop-losses after it became clear to me that the stock would come down, trigger the stop-loss and go back up to lock in a nice loss.
On Nov 04 07:15 AM AndrewBaker wrote:
> Yes, it's not sensible to ignore the political influence, biased > and unhelpful though it is, and concentrating on specific stocks > is a good idea, though even the best fall in a downturn. So, follow > the trend appears to me the best way right now, even if it goes against > what one believes is the "right" direction. And having tight stops > is so important in doing this. (Even your good stocks can be bought > back cheaper after they've triggered a stop-loss.)
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedIs Dubai's Default a Black Swan Event? [View article]
On Nov 27 08:21 AM apppro wrote:
> And as 2nd issue:
>
> To heck with them! Did any of those Arab countries help pay for the
> reconstuction of Iraq or Brunai when we got rid of Sadam for them!
Bright Future for Petrobras and Brazil [View article]
On Nov 19 03:14 PM Alan von Altendorf wrote:
> Michael, my first sell call was in June 08 at $72. You could have
> bought anything in Mar 09 and made money. Holding PBR is dangerous.
> I'm not asking you to agree with me. Keep in mind that Chavez snatched
> $22 billion belonging to COP and XOM, plus the service companies
> assets -- and Petrobras is in the thick of it. The rule of law means
> nothing in South America.
Zuckerman on Paulson: The All-Time Greatest Trade? [View article]
The Trouble with Clean Coal [View article]
On Nov 13 12:21 PM Andrew Butter wrote:
> Sounds like Nuclear which is a well proven technology and doesn't
> cause any environmental hazard if managed properly is the way forwards
> (the waste is solid).
>
> The key issue there is the capex; perhaps instead to throwing money
> at banks, throw it at building nuclear, if there were economies of
> scale and the environmentalists could agree that the unlikely risk
> of a nuclear disaster was less of a risk than CO2, capex could come
> down.
The Trouble with Clean Coal [View article]
On Nov 03 01:13 PM Jimbo wrote:
> Mr. Lounsbury: Your last comment is most pertinent. The "science"
> of climatology seems to me to be quite speculative. I can't help
> but be suspicious of the motives of many of Al Gore's friends and
> admirers. In 1977, a gentleman published a book entitled: "The Coming
> Ice Age". But the ice age never came. It is my understanding that
> this author is now an advisor to President Obama. I have always been
> a "conservationist" and have advocated soil and water conservation
> and intensive reforestation. Man has historically caused regional
> environmental disasters in the Middle East, China, the United States
> and Central America. But I see the Climate Change folks as using
> this supposed issue to seize control of society to promote yet another
> Utopian Paradise. The Utopians have caused more death, agony, and
> suffering than any other movement in human history. In conclusion,
> the climate guys cannot accurately predict the weather next year,
> let alone in the next decades.
Zero Interest Rates Can't Last Forever. Then Where Are We Headed? [View article]
Leveraged ETFs: A Seeking Alpha Expert Panel [View article]
Healthcare Reform: Two Extremes, Neither Focusing on Health [View article]
On Nov 09 03:07 PM Alan Young wrote:
> Good article! You've made some excellent bulls-eyes on aspects of
> the problem. If the term "blood sucking vampire squid" weren't already
> taken, I'd suggest using it for the "healthcare" industry.
>
> Still, it's missing an important point.
>
> In the US we pay about twice as much for healthcare as other developed
> countries do, with poorer results. We don't live as long or as healthily
> as Europeans and Japanese with their government-paid care, BUT WE
> PAY TWICE AS MUCH. That's collectively, not individually; that includes
> people who can't even get insurance Most of the difference can be
> accounted for by the 30+% sucked out of the system by insurance companies;
> most the rest is probably increased administrative costs to doctors
> and hospitals who have to deal with complicated and recalcitrant
> insurers.
>
> IOW, eliminating private, for-profit insurance (or making it a much
> smaller part of the picture) is probably the best thing we could
> do for the good of the country. When the 15% of GDP that currently
> goes to disease-management is brought down to 8-9% and applied to
> actual health, we will have less burden on the payrolls (employers
> and/or employees and/or taxpayers will save $$, and from the macro
> point of view it doesn't really matter who gets it—it will help the
> rest of the economy recover). Plus, a (potentially) healthier population.
> Win-win.
Corporations Win Again - This Time It's Healthcare [View article]
On Nov 09 04:22 PM Steve in Greensboro wrote:
> I think Dennis "Cuckoo" Kucinich really needs to rally the Left wing
> of the Democrat party (redundant, I guess) to oppose Obama-Pelosi's
> health care bill.
>
> If Democrats can't get pure single-payer done now with the huge majorities
> they have in both houses, they certainly won't be able to get in
> done after the 2010 midterms.
>
> And don't worry about the impact on the economy of the huge tax increase
> required by socialized medicine. And don't worry either about the
> fact the Constitution does not allow the Federal government to take
> over health care.
>
> You Lefties need to go for the gusto. Never let practical or legal
> considerations deter you.
Corporations Win Again - This Time It's Healthcare [View article]
And please, get off the Socialism rhetoric, this is a fascist government not a socialist government and it was never a Democracy.
On Nov 09 04:17 PM Robespierre wrote:
> The "health care reform" is a farce. If either party really want
> it to offer real health care then all they need to do is to extend
> medicare to all Americans. Insurance companies server no purpose.
> They have not contained cost as they say they do. They add billions
> of dollars in cost. I know some think that if we go medicare for
> all there is all this fraud going on. Well the solution to the fraud
> is simple: Offer to private companies (capitalism anyone?) %50 of
> the recovered fraud money and the other %50 if there are CRIMINAL
> convictions. But neither the limousines liberals democrats nor the
> idea-less republicans will ever do any real reform
Squid flu? Growing frustration over reports that Goldman Sachs (GS) (along with big employers including Citigroup (C) and Morgan Stanley (MS)) is receiving hundreds of H1N1 vaccines before many hospitals do. David Weidner has a reader's limerick: "As jobless rates keep getting worse/The bankers cut lines to the nurse/Bad debts they accrue/But when there's swine flu/They finally turn risk-averse." NYC's health commissioner defends the distribution. [View news story]
On Nov 06 07:39 PM davidbdc wrote:
> This is actually a deficit reduction move......after all if any of
> these traders miss time from work they might only get $1 million
> bonus this year instead of $1.5 million......think of all the income
> tax the federal government will lose. If a couple of unemployed
> main street folks get sick it doesn't really matter since they are
> already unemployed.
Gold Bullion Is Rising in All Currencies [View article]
On Nov 06 09:19 AM HATEFEEBAY wrote:
> Damn the Obama administration and ALL the idiots in congress...
> They cannot run anything, yet they want to do our healthcare? HA
Nassim Taleb, on a panel with IMF Deputy Managing Director Takatoshi Kato, loses his cool: "Before the discussion he gave us a PowerPoint lecture showing the IMF projections for 2010, 2011, ..., 2014. I could not control myself and got into a state of rage. I told the audience that the next time someone from the IMF shows you projections for some dates in the future, to show us what they PROJECTED for 2008 and 2009 in 2004, 2005, ..., and 2007." [View news story]
Has the Market Already Hit Its High for the Year? [View article]
On Nov 04 07:15 AM AndrewBaker wrote:
> Yes, it's not sensible to ignore the political influence, biased
> and unhelpful though it is, and concentrating on specific stocks
> is a good idea, though even the best fall in a downturn. So, follow
> the trend appears to me the best way right now, even if it goes against
> what one believes is the "right" direction. And having tight stops
> is so important in doing this. (Even your good stocks can be bought
> back cheaper after they've triggered a stop-loss.)
It's Going to Get Ugly [View instapost]
On Oct 31 02:32 PM Fred W wrote:
> You actually have friends?