Bad Dog

Whistling Past the Graveyard?

I agree. We need to be giving people jobs. Just handing out tax cuts is pointless. We have lots of infrastructure needs. Rather than have workers sitting around in poverty, let's give them jobs to rebuild this decaying country. Time for a little patriotism!


On Feb 16 12:53 PM doubleguns wrote:

> If we are going to suffer our demise I would prefer to get it over
> with ASAP so we can get started on the rebuilding of our country
> and instituting some type of controls over congress like term limitations
> and budget controls. If this gets dragged out to long there wont
> be enough capital left in the country to rebuild with since it will
> have left for Canada or some other "more favorable" investing location.
>
>
> I dont like this spend, spend, spend bill since it reminds me of
> the story about --Give a man a fish he eats for a day but teach him
> to fish he eats forever.
>
> We need to get people jobs, handing them money is not fixing the
> problem and eventually some portion of the people get lazy and would
> rather take a handout then work if it goes on for too long. Once
> a mans dignity is gone its hard to restore it.
>
> Bottom line is we have to end this quicky either at the bottom where
> it seems we are heading or some how fix the problem. Unfortunatly
> I havent heard any compelling solutions yet.

The End of Gold, Part Three

How will it accomplish this 50% devaluation?


On Feb 11 12:46 PM lance sjogren wrote:

> I don't subscribe to the hyperinflation scenario.
>
> I believe the US will devalue the dollar about 50% over the next
> 4 years, and then work extremely hard to strengthen the dollar so
> that it doesn't fall further.
>
> A 50% devaluation of the dollar will wring out a lot of excesses
> in the system. The mountain of debt of different forms (govt, consumer)
> that the US currently has is far too big to pay off. There are two
> alternatives, one is for the US simply to default, the other is to
> devalue the dollar to the point where our debt burden becomes manageable.
> The latter is the obvious course. That is the cours the treasury
> and Fed are embarked on even if they probably would never say so
> and may not even be aware that is what they are doing.
>
> Gold should do well over the next 3-5 years. Once the dollar stabilizes
> at its lower level then gold will probably flatten out or decline
> slightly.

The Final Market Bubble

To those who think that the US is drowning in debt, I have to say that WW2 left the US with debts exceeding 120% of GDP. We had just paid millions of people to stop what they were doing and start building machines that would mostly be destroyed or scrapped at some point. We built ships, loaded them with goods, and sent them out into the Atlantic or Pacific to be sunk by an enemy submarine. Then we made things worse by paying for much of the reconstruction of western Europe, and on top of that built the interstate highway system. Surely, after all this "wasteful spending" the US was in an even bigger whole than it was in 1932? I rest my case.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Uh, dude, he's been President for only 10 days or so. I think you're asking the wrong guy. Bush appointed people like Chris Cox (Mr. What? Me worry?) and Paulson (Mr. Goldaman Sachs), and they did about as good a job as Ol' Brownie after Katrina. Those are the folks you should be mad at, or doesn't your memory go back beyond 2 weeks?


On Jan 30 09:18 AM markg wrote:

> Sure Obama and company can whine belatedly about TARP money going
> for bonuses, but where was the oversight before this happened? What
> can they do now? Same thing they did before, nothing!
>
> The money is gone and it is going to stay gone.

A Simple Post on Gold

I didn't say I didn't own gold. But like any sensible person, I own a variety of assets. I just don't happen to think that any part of the Titanic is any safer than where I am. And I am old; so it doesn't really matter in my case. Kind of too bad for you if you are young. You are the one who will have to suffer, not me. I have already had a long and happy life.


On Jan 29 06:18 PM yellowhoard wrote:

> Thank god for liberal dems such as yourself BadDog. My investment
> in silver and gold is guaranteed to continue moving up as long as
> you and your homies are steering the ship.
>
> Good luck with those bonds!

Stimulus Package: There Is No Free Lunch

Infrastructure is the responsibility of government - all government. In fact it's the only reason to have government.


On Jan 29 07:29 PM PrudentMan, CFA wrote:

> First of all, most of the infrastructure is the responsibility of
> the States. They have spent themselves in the hole while we had
> a great economy (too great to be real, which it wasn't) for 7 1/2
> years until the worldwide bust in credit derivatives came about.
> When you have unregistered credit derivatives that are 20 times the
> amount on notional credit is it any wonder that ithe market burst?
> I disagree with those who blame regulators. I blame the individuals,
> institutions, financial institutions and other speculators who didn't
> do their due diligence and took exorbitant risks for little marginal
> return.
>
> The Highway Trust Fund, which is funded by federal gasoline taxes
> for federal highways and state gasoline taxes for state highways,
> is supposed to be funded to repair and build roads. Isn't it doing
> what it is supposed to be doing.? Everywhere I go roads are being
> repaired. So, where is this money going - pork!
>
> Either all of this money should go to tax cuts or not done at all.
> After all, in 1982 we had 10.9% unemployment and we had tax cuts
> that worked. In 2000-2001 we had not only a recession but 9/11 and
> we had tax cuts that worked. Anyone who says that tax cuts haven't
> worked is either disingenuous, stupid or so partisan that he or she
> is blinded from the facts.
>
> This race to Socialism must stop or we will follow the road Britain
> followed after WWII, the Soviet Union, Cuba and soon Venezuela.

Stimulus Package: There Is No Free Lunch

Tax cuts are like pushing on a string. You actually have to create economic activity by doing things. Tax cuts will not do that. That's the reactionary response to everything and it's why this country is descending into 3rd world status.


On Jan 29 07:29 PM PrudentMan, CFA wrote:

> First of all, most of the infrastructure is the responsibility of
> the States. They have spent themselves in the hole while we had
> a great economy (too great to be real, which it wasn't) for 7 1/2
> years until the worldwide bust in credit derivatives came about.
> When you have unregistered credit derivatives that are 20 times the
> amount on notional credit is it any wonder that ithe market burst?
> I disagree with those who blame regulators. I blame the individuals,
> institutions, financial institutions and other speculators who didn't
> do their due diligence and took exorbitant risks for little marginal
> return.
>
> The Highway Trust Fund, which is funded by federal gasoline taxes
> for federal highways and state gasoline taxes for state highways,
> is supposed to be funded to repair and build roads. Isn't it doing
> what it is supposed to be doing.? Everywhere I go roads are being
> repaired. So, where is this money going - pork!
>
> Either all of this money should go to tax cuts or not done at all.
> After all, in 1982 we had 10.9% unemployment and we had tax cuts
> that worked. In 2000-2001 we had not only a recession but 9/11 and
> we had tax cuts that worked. Anyone who says that tax cuts haven't
> worked is either disingenuous, stupid or so partisan that he or she
> is blinded from the facts.
>
> This race to Socialism must stop or we will follow the road Britain
> followed after WWII, the Soviet Union, Cuba and soon Venezuela.

Stimulus Package: There Is No Free Lunch

Easy for you to say. I guess you mustn't be one of the 4.8 million out of a job. All this package is for is to try to stem the financial disaster somewhat. Since we are going down, we might as well spend our time doing some useful things. That's the point of this package. The only thing wrong with it is that it's too small.


On Jan 29 11:45 PM sittingoutthisrecessio... wrote:

> The bill that the House passed is irresponsible. Nothing will be
> "stimulated" and the infrastructure projects are not "shovel ready".
> But there are billions for childcare, Head Start, and other agenda-driven
> programs. We are in a serious situation, yet we get this nonsense
> from our elected representatives. Sadly, we continue to re-elect
> the shysters who keep doing this to us. We may be getting the government
> we deserve.

Stimulus Package: There Is No Free Lunch

Gee. How clever. Do you write on toilet walls too? Might as well because that's going to be the closest thing you will have to a job soon, sucker.


On Jan 29 07:54 PM yellowhoard wrote:

> BadDog is a moron.

Stimulus Package: There Is No Free Lunch

You haven't a clue. 13,000 bridges are in urgent need of repair. Ever heard of Minneapolis? Check out the major bridge collapse. Just one of 13000. If you had been anywhere in America, you would see that this country is literally falling apart. Roads in Michigan look like something from Costa Rica. Surely? HA!


On Jan 29 07:08 PM Yamu wrote:

> I haven't been to America yet but surely the infrastructure is at
> least adequate? Hasn't the NYT even pointed out that infrastructure
> spending relative to GDP has risen somewhat? Infrastructure spending
> is great for a country like India, fine for China, but adds only
> marginal value to the US. Railway systems haven't been developed
> as until recently flying made much more sense, the environmental
> campaign only really gained mainstream support in the last two years,
> and the America's geographic situation.
> Putting scientists into finance may not have been the best move but
> then, a few entrepreneurial scientists can have an immense effect.

>
> Health-care spending is sky-high but for some reason ineffective.

>
>
> What's really weird is that so little people pay attention to the
> content of the stimulus bill. Huge parts will be little tax-cuts
> and help for the states to make ends meet. There's little 'real'
> stimulus. Even though I was against it they could have made sure
> to implement more 'real' stimulus, if they're doing it, they might
> as well do it properly...

Stimulus Package: There Is No Free Lunch

You know what stifles growth? Bridges that fall down. An electricity grid that barely works. The fact that no new rail line has been built for 50 years in this country. The fact that we send huge amounts of money to the mid-east for oil that we could easily innovate our way out of. The fact that we have a poorly educated workforce. The fact that we have a totally inadequate healthcare system. Those are the real thieves of growth. America has, for the last 30 years, put process ahead of product. We think that putting our best and brightest into doing ever fancier financial deals is a better idea than building the actual infrastructure that IS America. The weasels that are now telling us that we shouldn't be spending public funds to make this a stronger, more efficient, better educated, healthier country are the real stiflers of growth. They are the people we must oppose, because they represent a greater threat to prosperity than any amount of government spending.

Gold and Silver - Perhaps the Bugs Have the Wrong Beast?

Good example of how arguing with mixed metaphors is a losing proposition.


On Jan 29 03:37 PM yellowhoard wrote:

> As bad as things appear to be now, these are the "good" times. Congress
> is spending like drunken sailors. No offense to you drunk sailors
> out there. Soon, the economy will boom. With a multi trillion dollar
> shot of adrenelin, the patient wil come out of its coma, sit up,
> wink at the nurse, and then promptly die as his heart explodes. The
> hospital bill will kill anyone left standing. Confiscatory tax rates
> are just down the road. So are business killing interest rates.

>
>
> At some point, I'm thinking the next several months, individuals
> will figure this out and start hiding assets in big ole bars of gold.

>
>
> I could be wrong. But most of you know I'm right.

A Simple Post on Gold

Gold doesn't really go up; everything else goes down. So, for gold to get above 1000, a bunch of things have to go bad. The USD has to go down, equities have to tank, etc, etc. People go on and on about inflation, and maybe we will see some, but I am still planning for a deflationary recession, the spending plan in Congress not withstanding.

Gold is Overbought: Time to Short Barrick?

What is "normal" about today's market? How can gold be trading outside its "normal" trading range when everything is abnormal?

Will Gold Break Its Downtrend?

Right, Larry. Sometimes the price of gold goes up and sometimes it goes down, and that seems to be because people start buying or selling gold respectively. So my prediction is that gold will continue to do just that. Hahahahahaha!

But seriously, one of the flaws in all this technical analysis, from my POV is the idea that the price of a commodity 3 weeks back has anything to do with its price today. Technical analysis tries to see patterns in these trading ups and downs, all too human a habit, but it's about as useful as reading tea-leaves in my opinion.


On Jan 26 04:55 PM Larry House wrote:

> Maybe--maybe not, to answer your question. Now how do you invest
> based on that?