Seeking Alpha

tiananman

tiananman
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View tiananman's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • A Surprising Truth That Gold Can Tell Us About Stocks [View article]
    John, thanks for your comment.

    Gold's use as a medium of exchange - I concede - has been usurped by paper and digital currency. But it still functions as a medium of exchange - especially and notably in places and during times when paper currency fails. Examples abound.

    Your remark about purchasing power, I think, is a little backwards. Gold's purchasing power stays relatively stable. Currencies fluctuate. And if you want to cherry pick some numbers, you only have to look at a long term chart of the dollar vs. gold to see that there are very few years in the past 120 where it was a losing proposition to by gold with dollars.
    Dec 2, 2012. 11:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short-Term, High-Probability Mean-Reversion Strategy: Adding SLV [View article]
    this guy is just an FPA hound. Ignore
    Apr 12, 2011. 03:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Gold Investors: Forget About Bond Yields [View article]
    Excellent point. Smarty Pants.

    When (not so much if?) yields on government bonds outpace real inflation, that will be a huge nail in the coffin for the gold and silver markets.

    Of course the problem is a complicated one, and it's somewhat backwards looking. What is "real" inflation? It's widely understood that the Fed's inflation numbers and the BLS inflation numbers are at least somewhat fudged.

    I like what the guys over at shadow stats (www.shadowstats.com/) are doing, but even with their best estimates, we can't really know what will happen with inflation/deflation in the future. Or even know with much reliability what will happen to yields.

    Looking at yields vs. inflation is just one very good and yet somewhat unreliable metric to mark the end of the PM bull market.

    I've also talked about valuing gold and silver against the broad stock market. In other words, you would have done very well had you bought the Dow when it was near nominal parity with the price of gold in 1980.
    Dec 19, 2010. 12:31 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Soros vs. Apple: Irrational Pessimism, Part 2 [View article]
    It's different this time? Really, that's your argument?

    Listen, I love my smart phone (droid) and I use it about a hundred times a day to check email, get directions, surf the web, text, take pictures, and of of course, make phone calls - but I hardly think that such a non-essential gadget is the kind of strong foundation to build a bull-case for the entire stock market, or even consumer electronics. I will certainly "stop" using this thing if I lose my job and can't afford the $60+ bill every month. No brainer. Is the argument really that Apple is going to save the entire western world from sovereign debt? $50 billion in cash is nice...but that's like one month of debt service at this point.
    Jun 21, 2010. 12:16 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Short Run Elasticity of Housing Supply [View article]
    It's disingenuous to sign on the dotted line at $300k for an asset and then get pissed off when you're then expected to pay that amount. As far as I'm concerned, if I pay $300k for something it's because I think it's the right price. I couldn't care less if anyone else thinks differently. I'd hate for it to be any other way. If you bid on and buy something at the highest price, you shouldn't be surprised when everyone else doesn't have the same opinion! That's the definition of the highest bidder!
    Mar 11, 2010. 02:10 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Short Run Elasticity of Housing Supply [View article]
    Instead of pointing fingers, we should really look at the real estate debacle as an expensive and well-needed lesson in economics.

    Homes aren't investment vehicles. They don't go up in value. They're not even particularly good vehicles for building equity. People need to learn that you live in a house, and you build equity in your bank account. Houses are more like cars than they're like stocks. You'd be stupid to get new financing on your car every 3 years - but people still don't see the folly of doing the same thing with their house.

    And STILL - there are people who think that houses are investments, and that they're a good vehicle for building equity, that speculating in real estate is wise or even thrifty. That the recent real estate mess was because of predatory lending or some rich evil speculator shorting America. That someone (not them) should pick up the tab for their joy-riding through the real estate market. that the government should and can "fix" whatever is wrong with housing prices.

    I just hope more people will eventually figure out that you don't speculate with something that's priced at a multiple of your net worth. You don't do it with options, and you shouldn't do it with real estate.
    Mar 11, 2010. 02:03 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Build America Bonds: Beautiful if You're Not Rich [View article]
    If you buy these bonds (or any other government bond) you'll eventually get precisely what you deserve.
    Mar 11, 2010. 11:05 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • America's Commodity Crisis, 2010 Edition [View article]
    I don't understand how someone can have such solid reasoning skills, and then come up with conclusions so terrible.

    You're right: the government should not buy up so much oil. They shouldn't have the power and they DON'T have the money. Our adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan should end, and furthermore, we should bring home every American soldier currently stationed overseas. Why? Because, again, for no other reason than: we don't have the money.

    Those two things would have such a downward pressure on oil prices than all of your crazy plans about a 50 cent tax (!) and whatever else would be unnecessary. You're obviously a very intelligent investor, which might lead me to believe that you actually "get" capitalism and markets. The only way to efficiently and cheaply bring something to market is through capitalism. Statism, collectivism, socialism - they've all failed time after time.

    And while you rail against "speculators" in the oil industry, I never heard you thank them when prices dropped to $35/barrel. In a free market, prices fluctuate. Speculators are most active when the government creates market imbalances.

    You even point out that the SPR is a huge waste of money and resources. Don't you think that speculators feast on that kind of imbalance?

    If you want to cut down on speculation, you need to remove politics and government intervention from the marketplace.
    Mar 8, 2010. 11:31 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Winning the Energy Game With Zero-Risk Capital - Marin Katusa [View article]
    Dr Stevious, Marin doesn't write for the Energy Report or the Gold Report, those are different sites that are now interviewing Marin. Casey's energy letters are called Casey's Energy Opportunities, Casey's Energy Report and Casey's Energy Confidential.

    Again, those are different than the publications disclosed in this interview. Be a little more discerning and pay a little more attention before you throw around accusations or jump to conclusions.
    Mar 5, 2010. 03:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Lithium-ion Batteries: 9 Years of Price Stagnation [View article]
    I sincerely hope that EV technology does not become another political football, like corn ethanol. The government's foray into subsidizing that particular technology was a disaster.

    The best we can hope for is that they leave it alone. Will EV and ZEV technology EVER be an affordable, realistic option for the majority of Americans if the Gov't intervenes with subsidies, laws, and restrictions?

    No. Like a scientist fudging his own experiment, the very act of government intervention guarantees the deal will get queered.

    And the only problem li-ion has is a matter of scale. As the lightest metal in existence (and therefore the greatest energy/weight ratio), the usage of lithium in batteries is an inevitability.
    Apr 6, 2009. 10:30 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why I Think Paul Krugman Is Wrong [View article]
    I would hate to play monopoly with Tim Geithner as the banker:

    stuckinstowe.com
    Mar 25, 2009. 09:55 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • If the Fed Is Printing Money, I'm Buying Junior Gold Miners [View article]
    Gold! Big as yer fist! In them hills!

    Don't let them "company men" with their bidness suits come in and take yer profits! Ron Paul 08
    On Mar 19 01:04 PM Just Say Whoa! wrote:

    > Why buy gold miners?
    >
    > They take part of your profits, that's why!
    >
    > To maximize your profits, you should get a pan, stake a claim and
    > Do It Yourself (seekingalpha.com/symbo...).
    >
    > www.goldgold.com/panni...
    >
    > There's gold in them thar hills!!!
    >
    > What are you gold buggers waiting for?
    >
    > Time's a wastin'!!!!
    Mar 20, 2009. 10:05 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Does Gold Beat the DJIA? It Depends [View article]
    Gold is not an investment. It's a store of value. You conflate the two throughout your article.

    You also ignore the fact that ownership of gold was illegal for 41 years. Doesn't that kind of skew the data?

    The article also presupposes an either/or situation. No one would recommend putting all of your money in gold, nor all of it in the stock market.

    I really don't understand all of the logical stumbling blocks people try to put between themselves and the ownership of gold. For instance: no one has a problem with buying gas to put in their car. Gas, like gold, corn, whiskey, etc. has a function, and trading in dollars for any one of them doesn't make you crazy. Gold's function is a portable store of wealth. It has intrinsic value as a store of wealth. Paper does not. Gas has an intrinsic value as fuel that you put in your car. Trading a temporary, extrinsic store of wealth (paper dollars) for something real is not the act of a madman. Everyone does the very same thing every day!
    Mar 17, 2009. 09:27 AM | 12 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Transaction Tax to Reduce Liquidity on U.S. Markets? Terrible Idea [View article]
    But this is not a replacement for the income tax, and you're foolish to think that the Federal Govt will ever repeal the income tax just because they have another tax to replace it. This is an additional tax - and the "measly" 1/4% is the camel's nose.


    On Jan 15 06:21 PM Lew Warden wrote:

    > This is a splendid idea! And it can be collected automatically by
    > the same computer the SEC uses to support its functions. The only
    > marketeers affected by this measly 1/4th of 1% will be day traders
    > and arbitragers. Check the internet for the APTTax (automated payment
    > transaction tax). If this takes hold you can junk the Income Tax
    > and annual returns. Just tax the flow of money, not people. But
    > keep the percentage small.
    Jan 19, 2009. 09:56 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Transaction Tax to Reduce Liquidity on U.S. Markets? Terrible Idea [View article]
    I registered (for free) to read the article in question, and it turns out it's the guy that's running this place:

    www.cepr.net/index.php.../

    The Center for Economic and Policy Research. Not exactly economic though. He makes Keynes look Austrian.

    Jan 15, 2009. 01:54 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
17 Comments
33 Likes