Bad Dog's Comments

'We're on the Path for Fireworks in 2010'

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:49:09 -0500

Remarkable use of Capital letters there, Chum! You sound like Jerry Lewis.

On Dec 30 12:27 AM Jasper M wrote:

> On Dec 29 12:53 PM D. McHattie wrote:

2010 Investing: A Tale of Two Economies

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:39:21 -0500

Great article. Thanks. Really enjoyed also the outraged comments from the booboisie.

2010 Investing: A Tale of Two Economies

Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:37:10 -0500

Yeah, you can prove anything with facts! - Homer Simpson

On Dec 29 10:11 AM Jack1234 wrote:

> You can make numbers say anything you wish to depict. The fact of
> the matter is that Americans have the highest standard of living
> of any country in the world - including the lower 40% income bracket.
> Wake up and get your head out of the sand - we have it pretty good
> in the USA. If others can make a greater income than I, more power
> to them. This is what makes America great.

Gold and Silver Dead Cat Bounce into Resistance Levels

Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:32:42 -0500

A dead cat bounce describes a slight rebound after a precipitous decline, definitely not the behavior of gold and silver. The author needs an education on terms.

Volcker's Wake Up Call: Spread the Word

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:06:16 -0500

In 1970, the financial sector was responsible for 12% of GDP; now it's over 30%.

On Dec 16 01:10 PM Cambrian Capitalist wrote:

> The premise that financial innovation has not improved global productivity
> or economic growth is wrong.
>
> The simplest example of financial innovation facilitating economic
> growth involves the following: If I was a large corporation that
> wanted to construct a new office building in Manhattan with an initial
> budget of $2 billion, who is going to give me a construction loan?
> When can I transform that loan into a commercial mortgage? What will
> the costs of this financing be? The point is there are only a few
> financial institutions that can comfortably assume the risk of such
> an enterprise on a standalone basis. Because of the specific risk
> of such activity and the lack of potential competition at this level,
> it is highly likely that the financing costs associated with this
> venture will be very high. Without securitization, which allows banks
> to spread the specific risk of these activities around to a broad
> pool of investors, these activities would never get off the ground.
>
>
> Further illustration of this point is when the CEO's of money center
> banks were called in front of Congress. Congressmen would ask them
> why they were pulling back their lending activity to which the CEO's
> would respond that their individual companies had expanded their
> lending activity. They were not lying. The answer to why aggregate
> lending activity had declined was because the securitization markets
> (i.e. mortgage pass-throughs, CDO's, RMBS, CMBS) was frozen and were
> liquidating. At their peak in 2007 the securitization markets were
> almost as large as the aggregate level of conventional credit assets.
> The point is that credit can no longer flow into the economy in the
> absence of functioning securitization markets. These markets are
> essential to the optimal allocation of financial resources in the
> United States and the world. Glass-Steagall is and was irrelevant
> to the hazards involved in the freezing of securitization markets.
> The central issues that drove the credit meltdown were derived from
> agency conflicts, and the improper incentives created by government
> involvement in subsidizing the overproduction of housing stock.

>
> Recreating Glass-Steagall is tilting at windmills thinking.

Volcker's Wake Up Call: Spread the Word

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:04:39 -0500

Right. And it will crash about every 15 years as it did before the 1930's.

On Dec 16 10:46 AM One Eyed Guide wrote:

> The reason Volcker will win in the end is simple:
>
> The current system is unstable and will crash again if there is no
> financial reform.
>
> From the repeal of Glass-Steagall to the crash was less than 10 years.
> The next major crash will be much quicker given how weak the economy
> is. 3 year? 2 years? Next year? The only question is when.

Volcker's Wake Up Call: Spread the Word

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:03:34 -0500

How do you know that Volcker has been sidelined? Remember that all that has been accomplished so far is to stop the massive bleeding. Still bleeding, of course, but not a mortal wound. So now that the triage is in place, we need to develop a long-term fix. I note, however, that the very, very mild financial reform bill was completely opposed by every Republican. That tells you something. The Republican Party represents the interests of the super-rich and no others, no matter what kind of window dressing they put up to con ordinary people into voting for them. A full 19% of Americans believe that they are in the top 1% of income earners. Telling.

On Dec 15 09:20 PM woodsey wrote:

> Paul Volcker has been tested as perhaps no other has. He gets my
> vote. But he has been sidelined by Obama. This is one of many questionable
> moves that will cause me to withhold my vote for O.

5 Reasons Gold Is Going to Rise: A Response to Nouriel Roubini

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:54:47 -0500

Once people start typing in CAPS it's time to stop reading.

On Dec 15 12:24 PM KAIMU BIZ wrote:

> ALOHA !!
>
> Quite simply you don't need some mythical GAAP, or even more bizarre
> NON-GAAP, computation to figure out TOTAL DEBT of the US government
> as it is published every day at the US TREASURY DAILY STATEMENT.
> Just go to the FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE website, which is run
> by the US Treasury, and the US DEBT data is printed there daily.
> Like reading a quarterly corporate financial only it's daily!
>
> The first thing you notice is that unlike a small business or a typical
> American household the US Treasury considers DEBT as an "asset" or
> "revenue". Look where they place it on their ledger. How many of
> us are allowed to make that statement? When has credit card debt
> ever been income. Ask the IRS that question.
>
> So based on the December 11, 2009 statement I see that the TOTAL
> US DEBT, which includes both US Treasuries "marketable" and Government
> Account Series "non-marketable" is now approaching $11TRIL USD for
> FY 2010. FY 2010 is now only two and half months since it began
> October 1st. In other words the US Treasury is printing up US DEBT
> at a $45TRIL per month rate.
>
> By the way, the US DEBT limit, the "gross" limit was crossed last
> week and in fact computed on a monthly basis is already sitting at
> $12.113TRIL USD, which is higher than $12.104TRIL.
>
> There is one line item on the US TREASURY DAILY STATEMENT that I
> have even written my one of my Senators here in Hawaii about listed
> on the statement as UNCLASSIFIED. That line item will go over the
> $100BIL mark this week. After waiting three months he sent me a
> letter claiming it was "clearinghouse" mechanism. If so, it is the
> only "clearinghouse" in history that does not "clear", as this line
> item grows larger and larger daily and in fact at the end of FY 2009
> it was over $500BIL USD. In fact, my own Senator does not know what
> that line item is or where those funds are going.
>
> There is nothing "magical" or rocket science about any of this as
> it is stated in black and white for all to see right under our noses
> at the US TREASURY! This week marks my 30th week that I have been
> reporting on the US Treasury Daily Statement in my weekly article
> TAX REVENUE BREAKDOWN. It is published at a number of gold and trading
> websites, one of which is GATA, the Gold Anti Trust Assoc. Anti-trust
> is the perfect description of a MONEY MONOPOLY, which is exactly
> what the US FED is. We also have a TWO PARTY POLITICAL MONOPOLY
> that works hand-in-hand with the US FED in order to grow and retain
> government power.
>
> What gold is and what few mention, even Roubini, is not a hedge against
> inflation or the US Dollar, but a hedge against the LIABILITY BUBBLE,
> which is in full swing at every global government and bank. Gold
> has no liabilities and last I looked I did not see one single CDS-Credit
> Default Swap contract written against it. In 5000 years gold has
> never filed for bankruptcy or defaulted. In the USA alone the US
> Dollar has defaulted to gold twice. Once in 1933 and the other time
> in 1971 by Nixon.
>
> Part of the Roubini warning is that the "carry trade" will unwind
> and all those "risky assets" will implode. What is a "risky asset"
> Mr. Roubini? As I see it the only asset that CANNOT file BK or default
> is GOLD. What is less risky than that Mr. Roubini?
>
> It is what it is ...

5 Reasons Gold Is Going to Rise: A Response to Nouriel Roubini

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:53:58 -0500

Can I have some of your worthless fiat currency? The grocer refuses to accept my gold dust.

On Dec 15 09:10 AM eggfaced wrote:

> If we can agree that fiat money is worthless and needs the discipline
> implemented by a backing of a real asset, then I assert this asset
> can only be Gold. Gold is money. It is inert, easily maliable into
> coins and bars, and is nearly impossible to counterfeit due to its
> unique density. There are numerous other properties that make gold
> the perfect medium of exchange. Other commodities like oil do not
> share these properties as it can be refined into byproducts and is
> not practical to carry, store, etc. I have thousands of years of
> history to back me up on this. This 30 year experiment of fiat money
> is going to end badly as it has throughout history.

5 Reasons Gold Is Going to Rise: A Response to Nouriel Roubini

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:52:46 -0500

The assertion that the Romans suffered ruinous inflation seems a little far-fetched. Who measured this mythical inflation rate and how did they do this? Where were the records kept? It sounds like creative reading to me. I do not doubt that there was inflation in the Roman economy but there was also deflation too if you think of the Roman economy in modern terms. The problem with that idea is that a vast amount of economic activity in those times was non-monetary. Barter as part of near-subsistence living was the norm. So I am doubtful as to whether any useful points about the relative value of gold can be made by harking to some pseudo-historical record. Ironically, Roman coinage was made of gold. So you are arguing that the Romans debased gold? The noble constant of your financial universe?

Is a Gold Correction Imminent?

Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:25:08 -0500

The republic has no integrity and never did. Ask the Indians about all those treaties, you pretentious boob. America is a pustule on the planet. Time it was popped.

On Dec 04 01:25 PM fireball wrote:

> liam
> i would suggest on sa look for articles from elliot gue, peter schiff,
> jeff neilson... there are a few others. tyler durden who i have not
> seen in quite some time. sometimes the worst warn you what not to
> think.
> i took my stake in gold and silver when no one seemed to want it.
> very glad i did. a correction seems possible. looks like morgan needs
> it. i made the mistake of waiting for a drop. i waited because i
> hold a decent percentage of bullion.
> in the 90s i read an article that extimated u.s. public and private
> debt combined at 66 trillion. i started buying bullion. i would love
> to see bullion plummet. i will up my stake dramatically. i think
> 10% is reasonable. 20% would be a gift.
>
> jr007
> do you believe in the integrity of politicians? bankers? multi nationals?
> still i will not abandon the republic and leave it to the scum in
> washington. instead i will stay busy in the (perhaps vain) attempt
> to restore the constitution and the free society and market of the
> rare in history, representative republic. sometimes it is better
> to keep struggling even when the prospect of success is dim to none.
> i recognize the damage is cumulative for well over a century but
> if good men do nothing evil wins for sure. besides the contest will
> not be boring.

10 Reasons to Believe That We're in a Depression

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:26:15 -0500

"...if man had never mutated from the apes"?? We ARE apes!

On Nov 20 11:11 AM bobbobwhite wrote:

> The problem is so much larger than what you say. At the core of it
> all is the arrogant refusal(and perhaps innate inability) of modern
> humanity to honor, respect and follow the basic laws of nature that
> is the fundamental, underlying reason for everything that is wrong
> with its relationship with the earth. Overpopulation in lower animal
> forms is always controlled and balanced by natural forces, but humans
> no longer respect nor adhere to any natural controls that humans
> can dominate, even termporarily, knowing all the while that this
> negligent behavior will end badly for the earth and for all future
> humans, as we are now seeing occur in its initial stages. As we have
> allowed ourselves to progressively devalue all respect for anything
> other than all things human and care only for the satisfaction of
> the immediate and personal now(no true concern even for our own grandchildren!),
> that abject disregard will end our days much earlier than simple
> evolution would have done naturally, as we are now too far down the
> road of arrogance and disrespect of nature to change our ways in
> time to reverse the immense damage already done.
>
> The earth will be the final winner, and regain its former health
> in time, as it " knows" in its eternal Rock of Ages that it would
> have been much better for all living things if man had never mutated
> from the apes. But we did, and more's the pity, as we are all now
> paying dearly for our temporary moment in the sun that we all mindlessly
> thought would last forever as we uncaringly hurried it along toward
> its end.

10 Reasons to Believe That We're in a Depression

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:24:56 -0500

What makes you think democracy is particularly essential? Democracy is an outgrowth of a strong middle class. If you don't have one, you cannot have a viable democracy. The US middle class is going to disappear. Democracy?

On Nov 19 12:02 PM Tony Petroski wrote:

> Mr. Clark: Entertaining article.
>
> "However, in the 21st century, cheap land, cheap labor and a younger
> demographic profile, suggests that in 20 years, the reins of power
> will be in the adolescent hands of a rapidly growing Asia."
>
> Maybe. But they don't have cheap land, and their labor is getting
> more expensive, and they don't have a democratic means of transferring
> power.
>
> The 21st Century is just getting started. The U.S. hasn't gone the
> way of Rome yet and we're in the Age of Obama.
>
> We have more to contribute than military security (see how things
> go when the Pax Americana is spoiled) and entertainment. We have
> football, and the world will give up soccer once they see the alternative.

Why the Stock Market Should Crash

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:34:53 -0500

Greed? Isn't it logic rather? I would think that the stock market represents assets that, from a foreign perspective look cheap and from a domestic perspective are cheap if you borrowed money at zero percent.

On Nov 17 08:38 AM jimmy Turano wrote:

> CHARLES YOUR ARTICLE MAKES SENSE AND SOME OF THE COMMENTS AS WELL
> ARE VERY GOOD IN DEED.
> The Dow currently is reflecting only greed and not accurate at all.
>
> Things are getting worse in all aspects and the Dow has to collapse
>
> to a 7,000 level before things begin to get better in my opinion.
>
> In the New york areas, many stores are empty, the remaining store
> owners are suffering financially. People are asking for credit in
> stores, and in Manhattan,Brooklyn, and Queens areas, you can witness
> first hand how citizens are now taking food out of the garbage, after
> people discard what they have just finished eating for Breakfast,
> or lunch, or Diner. I have experienced an onslaught of individuals
> stopping in my place of business looking for work.
> People come in crying that they may loose their homes, or be put
> out of their apartments lately. They say the Recession is over, but
> I have stated for the past 6 months that we are in a DEPRESSION.
>
> To be ahead of the curve, the only way of complete recovery, for
> all Americans, and our Country, is a very obvious result.
> One that will take years, however the outcome won't be pretty at
> all. And Charles the answer is on the Wall. It is 'WAR'.
> LIKE YOU SAID IN THE BEGINNING, OF YOUR ARTICLE,
> MAYBE NOT TODAY, OR EVEN NEXT YEAR, BUT WITHIN 4 YEARS, THIS IS THE
> ONLY SOLUTION TO THE BIGGEST
> PROBLEM OUR COUNTRY FACES SINCE 1929!
> GOD HELP US!

What Bernanke's Comments All Mean

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:19:54 -0500

A huge currency crisis is emerging. I think that's why Obama is in Beijing. The Chinese currency is terribly under-valued and other SE asian countries are having to hold down their currencies too for competitive reasons. The Chinese are increasingly unhappy about having to buy US debt to keep their currency low enough to finance exports. They are trying very hard to increase internal trade but that's not enough probably. As Earl Butts said, "Things that cannot go on, don't."

The Unsustainable Lie of Inflation

Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:19:43 -0500

I have not noticed prices going up 20%. I think your grocer is ripping you off.

On Nov 09 02:16 PM dick streich wrote:

> You are absolutely right. The sad thing is that most americans believe
> what they here or read. Unfortunately, with the exception of the
> Wall
> Street Journal, it's impossible to get the facts regarding issues.
> On top of this, the government keeps telling us that there is no
> inflation.
> If that is so, how come prices on almost everything have increased
>
> 20-50%
> Hope you will continue to make people aware of what's going on.

>
> Dick Streich
>
>
> 5

Gold and the Worldwide Flight from Paper Currency

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:26:34 -0400

I guess that would be why gold is down today and the dollar is up? If you look at the rise in gold since it was around $300, it doesn't look like it has been responding to paper money supply. It really looks like a whole bunch of other factors are playing as significant a role. Gold bugs have an idee fixe. Everything that supports their belief is lauded; anything else is ignored. Ultimately, there can be no "major flight" from paper because it is an essential medium of exchange. Gold just isn't. So Gold may go up but that doesn't automatically mean that it's due to a flight from paper.

Era of Unprecedented Inflation Just Around the Corner

Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:20:06 -0400

Damn, but that's crap! The FDR era massively increased people's ability to save. People of the post-depression era were incredible savers. It was the 1970's, Imperial America that started the rot as workers's wages began to stagnate, women were forced out of the home into work in order to keep the household income up, then both husband and wife had to work longer hours, and then they went into debt. This is so well known, but you don't know it. Interesting.

On Oct 19 09:30 AM Mark Hagerman wrote:

> "The illusory decade of excess and living beyond our means with a
> complete lack of savings..."
>
> It isn't just one decade; this situation is a direct consequence
> of FDR's mismanagement. We've had three quarters of a century of
> government intereference, and the endgame is now in sight.

What's Next for Gold and the Dollar?

Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:23:15 -0400

It has nothing to do with the "regime in the US". This is a historical trend that would be happening no matter what. The US has, for 40 years, established policies that turned it inexorably into a debtor nation. Chief among it's failures has been the dominance of a culture that is self-indulgent, ignorant, selfish and brutal. The US is now paying the price as China now makes this the Chinese Century and there basically are no political fixes to the debasement of an entire culture, never mind the currency.

On Oct 13 09:03 AM User 353732 wrote:

> The falling dollar and rising gold and oil are of course, manifestations
> of the same phenomenon: the vote of the discerning world on the behavior,
> policies and tropes of the Regime in the US.
> The world knows and is increasingly insistent in telegraphing via
> changes in the exchange rate of the dollar and real assets(esp, proto
> or substitute currencies such as oil and gold) that the only way
> the Parasitic economy of the US can grow is at the direct and terrible
> expense of the Productive economy. The world knows what many Americans
> still refuse to accept or fathom that the only way the Ruling Troika
> of WashDc, Wall St and MSM can increase is for the ordinary American
> to decrease.
>
> The current Bosses of US politics, money and mass communications
> have already shorted the US because it is in their interest to do
> so. The world sees this plainly; the majority of Americans do not.
>
>
> It is not that much of world wants to demote the dollar or degrade
> the global stature of the US or compress the wealth and job creating
> capacity of America as ends unto themselves...They do not; the sane
> part of the world knows that a strong dollar, a vibrant American
> economy and a powerful global presence by America are a gift...An
> asset to be monetized. It is the US Regime that wants to and is debasing
> the currency, the economy and the Nation.
>
> The sane world, with no great enthusiam, is merely responding to
> the tragic fading of American exceptionalism and the willed termination
> of the American experiment.

U.S. Dollar: The Investment that Might Be About to Bottom

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:27:11 -0400

Take a look at Zoellick's comments in today's paper. The USD is weakening simply because there are choices of other currencies that offer a path to somewhat lower risk. The USD has to be perceived as a slightly higher holding risk today in view of the significant debt overhang in the US both public and private. To the extent that Americans have to tighten their belts to pay off their debts, the USD will reflect that. Of course, having a slightly weaker USD is useful to that end up to a point. The weaker USD makes US equities that much more attractive to foreigners.

U.S. Quantitative Easing Has Just Begun

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:50:34 -0400

Oh and you are full of crap. Forgot to add that one. "Full of marxists" indeed! If only they were!! At least they'd be on the right side of the barricades!! Nitwit!!

On Sep 23 01:36 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> If Bernanke and Obama were truly concerned about preserving jobs,
> they would have allowed bad banks to fail, and supported businesses
> and consumers with real, substantial tax cuts...along with accompanying
> large cuts to government. China's economy didn't rocket out of recession...they
> were NOT IN one. They went from double digit growth down to mid-to-upper
> single digits for a while. That's not recession...merely slower
> growth.
>
> But the Obama administration has gone the opposite way -- endorsing
> continued fiscal insanity, continuing the errant Bush policy of propping
> up the failed banks...and that can only cause more job losses and
> further strain on the taxpayer.
>
> It's not that the White House completely ignores job losses. It's
> just that the White House is full of Marxists who see the opportunity
> to "never let a crisis go to waste." At present, that means expansion
> of government and an opportunity to impose conditions and control
> over businesses that further restrain capitalism. I can imagine
> the Europeans, as they are very familiar with 10% unemployment on
> an ongoing basis, wondering what the heck America is doing. America's
> focus on personal responsibility is waning, and we are becoming like
> the socialist European nations whose national defense and general
> economies our prosperity has subsidized for decades. Extending our
> already generous unemployment compensation *entitlement* will only
> further strain the nation's finances and lead to reduced personal
> incentive. Will Europe subsidize our national defense and general
> economy, as we have done for them, now that we've fallen out of the
> role? They can't afford to. The stimulus plan will either expire
> and the propped-up U.S. will fall sharply...or it will be expanded
> until hyperinflation forces a complete reset -- what should have
> been allowed to happen to begin with.

U.S. Quantitative Easing Has Just Begun

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:48:38 -0400

At the very least, have government representation on the BOD of banks receiving bailout money! When you buy a big chink of a Company you get a set on the board, but taxpayers got nothing. So the banks can continue to lie, cheat and steal, and we are paying for it. And they sent Bernie Madoff to jail! He's an amateur compared to B of A.

On Sep 23 01:36 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:

> If Bernanke and Obama were truly concerned about preserving jobs,
> they would have allowed bad banks to fail, and supported businesses
> and consumers with real, substantial tax cuts...along with accompanying
> large cuts to government. China's economy didn't rocket out of recession...they
> were NOT IN one. They went from double digit growth down to mid-to-upper
> single digits for a while. That's not recession...merely slower
> growth.
>
> But the Obama administration has gone the opposite way -- endorsing
> continued fiscal insanity, continuing the errant Bush policy of propping
> up the failed banks...and that can only cause more job losses and
> further strain on the taxpayer.
>
> It's not that the White House completely ignores job losses. It's
> just that the White House is full of Marxists who see the opportunity
> to "never let a crisis go to waste." At present, that means expansion
> of government and an opportunity to impose conditions and control
> over businesses that further restrain capitalism. I can imagine
> the Europeans, as they are very familiar with 10% unemployment on
> an ongoing basis, wondering what the heck America is doing. America's
> focus on personal responsibility is waning, and we are becoming like
> the socialist European nations whose national defense and general
> economies our prosperity has subsidized for decades. Extending our
> already generous unemployment compensation *entitlement* will only
> further strain the nation's finances and lead to reduced personal
> incentive. Will Europe subsidize our national defense and general
> economy, as we have done for them, now that we've fallen out of the
> role? They can't afford to. The stimulus plan will either expire
> and the propped-up U.S. will fall sharply...or it will be expanded
> until hyperinflation forces a complete reset -- what should have
> been allowed to happen to begin with.

Outlandish CEO Pay: How to Fix the Problem

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:21:59 -0400

Having sex with young teen girls is not as immoral as the government determining wages, huh? Because nothing - NOTHING - is more immoral than that. Murder, arson, grand larceny - none of those are as bad as the government determining wages. Not that I am advocating this, but you are a loon.

On Sep 23 07:07 AM CLH wrote:

> I cant think of anything more immoral than govt. determining wages
> and salary. Both minimum and maximum pay should be determined only
> by the owners of the corporations and not the govt. who know nothing
> about anything.

More Trouble Brewing for Banking Sector?

Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:38:36 -0400

But they are tolerating huge unemployment and will continue to do so.

On Sep 21 10:14 PM highlarche wrote:

> This government will not tolerate huge unemployment. They will spend
> spend and spend to fight it. I say buy gold and silver.

Capacity's Comeback Strongly Indicates Recession's End

Thu, 17 Sep 2009 12:53:37 -0400

You can't forget about healthcare reform because healthcare is eating our economy. In a few years, it will eat 25% of GDP. Compare that to about 9% in Europe and any other part of the world where they have more sense than God gave lettuce. The US economy is being screwed by an insane system that doesn't deliver good healthcare, where the incentives are upside down, and innovation is lacking. Forget about it? Hah!

On Sep 17 10:17 AM Ferdinand E. Banks wrote:

> I'm an optimist. I not only think that things will get better, I
> know that they will - assuming that Mr Obama forgets about health
> care for a couple of years. After all, nothing succeeds like success,
> and for the time being he can forget about a health-care success..
>
>
> Some of the above comments make a lot of sense - especially the one
> by Mike (from The City). The people who are planning the recovery
> - Larry and Ben, and perhaps their foot soldiers - should forget
> about their interational economics textbooks, and take a close look
> at what 'internationalism' has done to the US economy. The 'outsourcing'
> of industrial production is insane, and that is barely the half of
> it.. .

The Great Unwind

Mon, 14 Sep 2009 12:02:18 -0400

You cannot, by definition, prevent the inevitable. The US is in decline for the same reason that the British, the Spanish and Portuguese empires collapsed - massive indebtedness to foreigners.

The curse of the victor is hubris. You come out of a huge war extremely rich and powerful. You build a massive army. You get involved in war after war because your army needs something to do. Your institutions, your very system of government become profoundly corrupt because of the vast amount of money sloshing around. You permit the massive expansion of debt because you know that you will be the first empire in history on which the sun shall never set. Right. Ask the Romans about that one.

Why Economists Messed Up

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 19:47:47 -0400

Damn but that's crap! Flunking history = bad. The greatest period of economic expansion in the 20th Century occurred during a period of very high taxation. But out of that taxation, we got an Interstate highway system, a fantastic education system with a correspondingly educated workforce and powerful economy, and very low deficits, along with many other advantages. What did our huge tax reductions get us? I think we know the answer to that. Taxes are a form of forced saving. Lack of saving = bad. Time to relearn your lessons, Junior.

On Sep 07 03:11 PM ebworthen wrote:

> Economists are like lawyers; they fool themselves into believing
> they are doing something constructive for society.
>
> Once they convince themselves they are doing good (whether they are
> or not) they proceed to make money prognosticating and equivocating
> about the morality of onerous taxation, lavish spending, corporate
> greed, and the need to fire people with 20 years service to a company
> or government.
>
> Most third graders have the common sense needed to be an economist.
>
>
> Here it is:
>
> 1. Debt = bad
> 2. Allowance for chores = good
> 3. Lending to the kid you don't know very well = bad
> 4. Principal busting the bully for shaking down other kids for lunch
> money = good
> 5. Principal ignoring bully because it is his Nephew = bad
> 6. Stealing money from Mom or Dad = bad
> 7. Government stealing money from Mom and Dad = good (or so the
> politicians say).
>
> We have robbed the average citizen who invested in the nation (markets).
> We have turned around and robbed them and the next two generations
> to excuse the malfeasence of Wall Street. Our lawyer politicians
> are doing what lawyers do; equivocating and taking both sides to
> forestall reality until they can get elected again.

Sure It’s Legal … But Is It Right?

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:06:47 -0400

Yeah. You should add in the 30 years of corruption of the basic idea of government; that it needs to exist; that it has to insist on fair play; that its job is to do socially necessary things that cannot be easily done by individuals. For the last 8 years especially, we have had a government hell bent on making sure government did not work in any reasonable way. Heckuva job, Brownie! Remember that? We spent $2 trillion on a war of choice!! We took a balanced budget and trashed it. C'mon, fess up! You thought the Bush tax cuts were a great idea, didn't you? If you did, the STFU, because you voted for the mess we are in now.

On Sep 02 01:43 PM bottoms-up wrote:

> Ethics? Right and wrong? Remember, we are a "nation of laws" and
> the laws are made by sorry sorts like Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, etc.
> - need I say anything more?
>
> The U.S Government needs to run full tilt to line the pockets of
> GS and others who will shill the markets up in the face of horrible
> economic data (remember this is the time of year when things were
> supposed to really turn around for our economy).
>
> Ethics in business? Do they even cover it in today's MBA programs?

The Non-Stimulating Stimulus Bill

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 14:04:34 -0400

It's NOT a good article. It's crap; that's what it is. Just one example: the reference to "crowding out investors". What investors? There aren't any. Banks are not lending very much. VC funds are pretty quiet and cautious. Interest rates are incredibly low. WTF is this "crowding" the "pundit" is going on about. The fact is - and actual qualified economists say this - without the stimulus package - without the activism of the FED - your ass would be hanging out of your pants and we would be in the midst of the second Great Depression. May I remind you that there are still millions of Americans - your fellow citizens - who are living on the edge. The stimulus package is keeping a lot of people in work who would otherwise be out of a job. That may not mean much to you if you are of the ilk that believes that the economy is a matter of shifting money around from one place to another. But in the real American economy where people make things, this stimulus package is a very real thing that is doing a lot of good.

On Sep 01 08:05 AM Schweizer wrote:

> One of your best articles yet. Stimulus bill is a "Stumble-us" bill.
>
>
> All this false hope only to result in things being far worse than
> they would have been.

Is It a Stock Market Rally or a Dollar Devaluation?

Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:51:43 -0400

Where do you think money is created if not from "thin air"?

On Aug 23 02:04 AM Lumuc wrote:

> What happens to the US stock market then? Does it keep going up
> as the dollar decreases in value? At what point do the US markets
> collapse given the fiat money the FED created out of thin air?
I
> appreciate the informative opinion.