Joe in Chicago

Banking on Energy (Rather than Currency or Gold)

Great info!

Why Do People Make Market Forecasts?

Predicting the market is a fool's errand. Ever notice what happens when these prognosticators get it wrong? They blame those items out of their control: politics, Chinese stimulus, technicals, earnings surprise, currency rates, global economy ... When they're right, it's due to their brilliant insights and analysis. :rolleyes:

The fact that a career academic and policymaker like Roubini doesn't know how worthless his opinions are speaks volumes. Who cares if the market is going to 5,000 ... 6,000? What's it going to tomorrow and when will it change course? That's what I need to know. Unless you can predict movements with 100% accuracy, I don't see the value.

If you were to take Roubini literally, you would have been short and missed an incredible run these past six trading days. In fact, shorting the Dow would have lost you 13% PLUS the 13% gain you would have made if you were long (opportunity cost). That's a 26% swing. If you were trading 2X ETF's, the difference would've been 52%!

Ignore the predictions and don't fight the tape.

Elizabeth Warren: The Wrong Person to Oversee TARP

Here's tape from her MSNBC interview (not CNBC) with Rachel Maddow last night:

www.youtube.com/watch?...

Elizabeth Warren: The Wrong Person to Oversee TARP

Agree! ^

In a CNBC interview, yesterday, she made a few points clear: There is NO overarching strategy regarding TARP activity and that the primary challenge, troubled mortgages, has yet to be addressed. According to Prof Warren, 1 in 6 mortgages will be in foreclosure, shortly.

And today, Jamie Dimon went on CNBC and explained how JP Morgan/Chase did not need $25B of TARP funds but would not be writing down mortgage principal. Of course, he sees future losses with WaMu's portfolio (which they recently acquired) but they won't be the first to blink.

It's pretty clear that TARP has major shortcomings and having Prof Warren watchig over the banks is clearly the best news coming out of Washington in recent weeks.

The Case for Making Bigger Cars

And by the way, I think comparing Porsche to a purchase of Aston Martin is completely off the mark. One is a focused, ground up, low-volume producer of exceptional sports cars while the other is an acquisition of an unrelated business model. Is it any surprise that the latter failed?

The Case for Making Bigger Cars

That's not quite the same as: "best pick up on the market."

All he's saying is that the income generated by the F series trucks is the key to Ford's financial health. Chevy and GMC trucks may be better built and outsell Fords but, unlike the F series, they do not generate enough income to offset many of GM's shortcomings.

The Case for Making Bigger Cars

On Dec 08 11:53 AM miken wrote:
> but I'm going to take on your assertion that the F-150 is the best pick
> up on the market.

Where in the article did the author state this?

Are We Seeing Housing Market Manipulation?

Who exactly is going to run out and buy a house with all these cheap mortgages? People who can afford a house already own one. And most would not be interested in relocating, today, unless they lived in a recession-proof market and could avoid a loss.

The majority of people in a position to buy are first-time home owners. And how many of them have down payment money or outstanding credit scores? How much of a dent would they really make?

No the real answer is market forces: foreclosures, a MAJOR correction in real estate values and a long, slow recovery period. Given the recessionary economy and increasing unemployment, the chance we'll see a recovery in real estate before 2010 seems slim to none.