GaltMachine's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/user/3179241/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/1449251/comments?source=feed#comment-19094021 19094021
I did not make the statement he did!

You are clearly not interested in any data that contradicts your viewpoint.

In the history of the stock market there is going to be at least one period where Jeremy's statement is invalid. Here is just one example:

http://bit.ly/YXQbmw

Any year during the 1915-1928 period would fit the bill. There are others. During secular bear markets you get wiped out!

If he had said any period with a PE of less than 10 then I would probably give him the benefit of the doubt.

When you invest is more important than any other factor. Just ask a firsttime Nasdaq investor in 2000.

Have a nice day!]]> Tue, 21 May 2013 19:07:36 -0400
I did not make the statement he did!

You are clearly not interested in any data that contradicts your viewpoint.

In the history of the stock market there is going to be at least one period where Jeremy's statement is invalid. Here is just one example:

http://bit.ly/YXQbmw

Any year during the 1915-1928 period would fit the bill. There are others. During secular bear markets you get wiped out!

If he had said any period with a PE of less than 10 then I would probably give him the benefit of the doubt.

When you invest is more important than any other factor. Just ask a firsttime Nasdaq investor in 2000.

Have a nice day!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1449251/comments?source=feed#comment-19091781 19091781
I wasn't referring to whether it was correct last year but rather whether it was correct as a rule and please note the quote does not say last year. The statement says "We've never had when..." which is a generalization.

I guarantee you that it is not true in all periods in history:)

In fact I am sure I could find a period in the last 10-15 years in which that statement is incorrect.

Sorry I just happen to read things literally and hold people accountable to the statements they make regardless of whether your are bullish or bearish accuracy should be your goal.]]> Tue, 21 May 2013 17:53:35 -0400
I wasn't referring to whether it was correct last year but rather whether it was correct as a rule and please note the quote does not say last year. The statement says "We've never had when..." which is a generalization.

I guarantee you that it is not true in all periods in history:)

In fact I am sure I could find a period in the last 10-15 years in which that statement is incorrect.

Sorry I just happen to read things literally and hold people accountable to the statements they make regardless of whether your are bullish or bearish accuracy should be your goal.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1449251/comments?source=feed#comment-19072691 19072691
"Ignore him since refused to say what the "long run" is even when water boarded."

HILARIOUS!

The thing about Siegel is he is usually most vocal and most visible just before something bad happens - he really is a contrarian indicator :)]]> Tue, 21 May 2013 11:13:17 -0400
"Ignore him since refused to say what the "long run" is even when water boarded."

HILARIOUS!

The thing about Siegel is he is usually most vocal and most visible just before something bad happens - he really is a contrarian indicator :)]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1449251/comments?source=feed#comment-19071431 19071431
"When you start at a 13 price-earnings ratio, get back in history, the future is much, much brighter. We've never had bad stock returns over the next three, five, 10 years when you start with a 13 P/E ratio, and that's the world of difference."

Well the current PE's are way above that level now:

http://on.wsj.com/sXXWWp

http://bit.ly/JNT7Io]]> Tue, 21 May 2013 10:44:20 -0400
"When you start at a 13 price-earnings ratio, get back in history, the future is much, much brighter. We've never had bad stock returns over the next three, five, 10 years when you start with a 13 P/E ratio, and that's the world of difference."

Well the current PE's are way above that level now:

http://on.wsj.com/sXXWWp

http://bit.ly/JNT7Io]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1437121/comments?source=feed#comment-19044271 19044271
We closed at 1666.

How does that fit into your narrative?]]> Mon, 20 May 2013 16:50:08 -0400
We closed at 1666.

How does that fit into your narrative?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1034641?source=feed#comment-19026001 19026001
http://bit.ly/15KidEK]]> Mon, 20 May 2013 10:16:31 -0400
http://bit.ly/15KidEK]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1029591?source=feed#comment-18895511 18895511 Thu, 16 May 2013 10:11:21 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1437121/comments?source=feed#comment-18894361 18894361
"If you had read an article in 2006 that stated the stock market would crash and lose 60% in value"

That is an awesome premise for an article. Just a brilliant framing of the actual historical record.

Putting myself back in time I would have indeed agreed with your contention that I would have "said the author was an alarmist, a perma bear, a doomsdayer, he had a vivid imagination, he was a conspiracy nut, he was paranoid, he was delusional."

The reason I know I would have is that I said similar things to my brother who was predicting just such a catastrophe based upon what he was reading at the time. ]]> Thu, 16 May 2013 09:53:03 -0400
"If you had read an article in 2006 that stated the stock market would crash and lose 60% in value"

That is an awesome premise for an article. Just a brilliant framing of the actual historical record.

Putting myself back in time I would have indeed agreed with your contention that I would have "said the author was an alarmist, a perma bear, a doomsdayer, he had a vivid imagination, he was a conspiracy nut, he was paranoid, he was delusional."

The reason I know I would have is that I said similar things to my brother who was predicting just such a catastrophe based upon what he was reading at the time. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1029211?source=feed#comment-18894071 18894071
The next four to five of seasonal factors would suggest continuing weakness at these levels. So if NSA claims stay the same the numbers will remain at this level for the next month and a half.

04/27/2013 92.1 98.6
05/04/2013 92.3 95.6
05/11/2013 88.4 95.0
05/18/2013 88.5 93.5
05/25/2013 89.7 92.3
06/01/2013 84.8 92.9
06/08/2013 99.0 93.7 ]]> Thu, 16 May 2013 09:49:20 -0400
The next four to five of seasonal factors would suggest continuing weakness at these levels. So if NSA claims stay the same the numbers will remain at this level for the next month and a half.

04/27/2013 92.1 98.6
05/04/2013 92.3 95.6
05/11/2013 88.4 95.0
05/18/2013 88.5 93.5
05/25/2013 89.7 92.3
06/01/2013 84.8 92.9
06/08/2013 99.0 93.7 ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1029221?source=feed#comment-18890051 18890051
Holy cow.]]> Thu, 16 May 2013 08:34:50 -0400
Holy cow.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1026391?source=feed#comment-18845541 18845541
Combine it with the PPI this morning and this is really looking like a recipe for deflation.]]> Wed, 15 May 2013 09:42:50 -0400
Combine it with the PPI this morning and this is really looking like a recipe for deflation.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1026161?source=feed#comment-18842471 18842471
"On an unadjusted basis, prices for finished goods advanced 0.6 percent for the 12 months ended April 2013, the smallest 12-month rise since a 0.5-percent increase in July 2012. "

I can't imagine that that would be a positive for earnings growth in the next few quarters.]]> Wed, 15 May 2013 08:51:55 -0400
"On an unadjusted basis, prices for finished goods advanced 0.6 percent for the 12 months ended April 2013, the smallest 12-month rise since a 0.5-percent increase in July 2012. "

I can't imagine that that would be a positive for earnings growth in the next few quarters.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/1022781?source=feed#comment-18802171 18802171 Tue, 14 May 2013 08:22:31 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1417321/comments?source=feed#comment-18615061 18615061
I like Price to Sales as well but mainly for individual stocks particularly growth stocks.

However, the Buffett measure is similar to what you are calculating but uses the total stock market to GDP as the measure.

Here is a link to GuruAnalyst which updates this number daily:

http://bit.ly/yXvIhT

2013-05-09:
The Stock Market is Modestly Overvalued. Based on historical ratio of total market cap over GDP (currently at 109.2%), it is likely to return 2.5% a year from this level of valuation. This page is updated daily with the market. This includes the returns from the dividends, currently yielding at 2%.
As pointed by Warren Buffett, the percentage of total market cap (TMC) relative to the US GNP is “probably the best single measure of where valuations stand at any given moment.”

This is not a timing tool but it does suggest that the best part of the buying cycle has passed unless you get really, really strong GDP growth or a major correction to bring down valuations. It seems to be a logical way to assess the current value of the market.]]> Thu, 09 May 2013 07:45:35 -0400
I like Price to Sales as well but mainly for individual stocks particularly growth stocks.

However, the Buffett measure is similar to what you are calculating but uses the total stock market to GDP as the measure.

Here is a link to GuruAnalyst which updates this number daily:

http://bit.ly/yXvIhT

2013-05-09:
The Stock Market is Modestly Overvalued. Based on historical ratio of total market cap over GDP (currently at 109.2%), it is likely to return 2.5% a year from this level of valuation. This page is updated daily with the market. This includes the returns from the dividends, currently yielding at 2%.
As pointed by Warren Buffett, the percentage of total market cap (TMC) relative to the US GNP is “probably the best single measure of where valuations stand at any given moment.”

This is not a timing tool but it does suggest that the best part of the buying cycle has passed unless you get really, really strong GDP growth or a major correction to bring down valuations. It seems to be a logical way to assess the current value of the market.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/991511?source=feed#comment-18349051 18349051 Thu, 02 May 2013 08:51:43 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1369961/comments?source=feed#comment-18135481 18135481
Great, great post!

All this before the train wreck of Obamacare has been fully implemented. Next year is going to be very scary.

I love these two paragraphs:

"Business Cycle Theory contends that down cycles are essential to a healthy economy; that down cycles should be accepted for their healing properties rather than avoided for their economic discomfort. Keynesian theory, on the other hand, contends that economic down cycles are economically unnecessary, can and should be avoided by appropriate government stimulation. John Maynard Keynes famously promised that “we will not have any more crashes in our time.”

The benefits of down cycles are; excess debt is paid down, and risky business models modified or abandoned. Without down cycles, debt accumulates and excessively leveraged business models prevail. Since the Depression, stimulative Keynesian economic policy to avoid the economic discomfort of down cycles has caused borrowers to become addicted to cheap credit and dependent upon highly leveraged business models. Borrowers, at every level, individuals, corporations and governments have come to regard debt as wealth, a classic and tragic error of economic understanding and an unsustainable economic model. "]]> Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:07:02 -0400
Great, great post!

All this before the train wreck of Obamacare has been fully implemented. Next year is going to be very scary.

I love these two paragraphs:

"Business Cycle Theory contends that down cycles are essential to a healthy economy; that down cycles should be accepted for their healing properties rather than avoided for their economic discomfort. Keynesian theory, on the other hand, contends that economic down cycles are economically unnecessary, can and should be avoided by appropriate government stimulation. John Maynard Keynes famously promised that “we will not have any more crashes in our time.”

The benefits of down cycles are; excess debt is paid down, and risky business models modified or abandoned. Without down cycles, debt accumulates and excessively leveraged business models prevail. Since the Depression, stimulative Keynesian economic policy to avoid the economic discomfort of down cycles has caused borrowers to become addicted to cheap credit and dependent upon highly leveraged business models. Borrowers, at every level, individuals, corporations and governments have come to regard debt as wealth, a classic and tragic error of economic understanding and an unsustainable economic model. "]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/974011?source=feed#comment-18124011 18124011 Fri, 26 Apr 2013 08:44:59 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/969241?source=feed#comment-18077971 18077971 Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:38:07 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/955941?source=feed#comment-17928891 17928891 Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:42:43 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/955521?source=feed#comment-17869851 17869851
Beware of Klingons on Uranus.

:)]]> Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:46:35 -0400
Beware of Klingons on Uranus.

:)]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/955521?source=feed#comment-17868281 17868281
At least they are saving the planet for the rest of us ;)

We should be giving them medals for their good intentions.]]> Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:01:25 -0400
At least they are saving the planet for the rest of us ;)

We should be giving them medals for their good intentions.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/955111?source=feed#comment-17846391 17846391
In the immortal words of Nelson: "Hah hah!"

Another Malthusian myth put to rest.]]> Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:33:36 -0400
In the immortal words of Nelson: "Hah hah!"

Another Malthusian myth put to rest.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1344071/comments?source=feed#comment-17690591 17690591
I think you have to factor in yen depreciation from a non-Japanese investors point of view to get an accurate return.

So the absolute return is phenomenal if it was fully currency hedged but I don't think all investors understand this.

DXJ shows a hedged return and the performance is awesome.]]> Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:19:13 -0400
I think you have to factor in yen depreciation from a non-Japanese investors point of view to get an accurate return.

So the absolute return is phenomenal if it was fully currency hedged but I don't think all investors understand this.

DXJ shows a hedged return and the performance is awesome.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/945241?source=feed#comment-17687391 17687391 Tue, 16 Apr 2013 10:01:23 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/944841?source=feed#comment-17686331 17686331
What has more net economic "value" (as in total GDP): multi family or single family?

Slight drop in the pace of single family was offset by the surge in multi-family but I am not at all clear what that mix means from a GDP point of view.

thank you.]]> Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:33:04 -0400
What has more net economic "value" (as in total GDP): multi family or single family?

Slight drop in the pace of single family was offset by the surge in multi-family but I am not at all clear what that mix means from a GDP point of view.

thank you.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/945051?source=feed#comment-17686121 17686121
The prior number on the link was 78.3 as far as I can tell.

Can't find it on the link anywhere. Doesn't seem to make sense based upon the IP number above going up.]]> Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:29:47 -0400
The prior number on the link was 78.3 as far as I can tell.

Can't find it on the link anywhere. Doesn't seem to make sense based upon the IP number above going up.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/939811?source=feed#comment-17555881 17555881
You blame the GOP for legislating Obama's economic policy?

You do realize the tax increases effective Jan 1st, including the payroll taxes, were at the behest of the President, don't you?

This was his plan. The GOP didn't want to raise taxes on anyone.

FYI the Senate is controlled by the Democrats.

Are you really this misinformed?]]> Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:25:45 -0400
You blame the GOP for legislating Obama's economic policy?

You do realize the tax increases effective Jan 1st, including the payroll taxes, were at the behest of the President, don't you?

This was his plan. The GOP didn't want to raise taxes on anyone.

FYI the Senate is controlled by the Democrats.

Are you really this misinformed?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/940171?source=feed#comment-17538861 17538861
Seems like the Fed's wealth effect theorem hasn't reached MainStreet yet.

Who could have imagined that the Obama Admin's economic policy would be based upon trickle down economics?

Rule of Life number 36: Watch what they do not what they say. ]]> Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:08:18 -0400
Seems like the Fed's wealth effect theorem hasn't reached MainStreet yet.

Who could have imagined that the Obama Admin's economic policy would be based upon trickle down economics?

Rule of Life number 36: Watch what they do not what they say. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/939881?source=feed#comment-17537431 17537431
Come on. ]]> Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:49:40 -0400
Come on. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/currents/post/939811?source=feed#comment-17537031 17537031
Who could have predicted that?

;)]]> Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:46:30 -0400
Who could have predicted that?

;)]]>