jpiretti

History Continues to Repeat Itself

I guess no one picked up on the "over time (?)". I am not talking about 2-3 years, but 20-30 years. And no one seemed to pick up on the comments on the emerging markets. China has a trade surplus with us, but not with countries like Brazil. What can China offer Brazil except cheap garments? How long did it take us to go from a GDP driven by 30% consumer spending to 70% consumer spending?...certainly more than 30 years...think longer term economic dynamics. And please spare us the "Obama is a socialist" mantra. Teddy R would be considered a fascist if he lived today. Reagan was convinced Medicare would lead not only to total govt. control of health care, but the slippery slope to the loss of all liberties...nonsense. For all you folks out there who believe free market dynamics will drive efficiencies and access to private health insurance, then ask yourself what is the most efficient way private health insurers maximize their profits?...denying services. Can you say that for any other industry?


On Aug 20 10:11 PM untrusting investor wrote:

> How is the US going to become an export driven economy?? US per capita
> income is about $45K vs China at about $5K. Thus, the US has 9x the
> labor cost of China. Is everything in the US to be built by robots
> to keep cost down? The US has the highest healthcare cost in the
> world at 16-17% of GDP. Next highest is Sweden at about 8% of GDP.
> Others are about 4-6% including Canada, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Germany,
> etc. So with US healthcare cost at least 2-4x anyone else's how will
> the US make anything and export it. And that doesn't even factor
> in poor US health outcomes or % uninsured. If those are also taken
> into account, then US healthcare may well be as much as 10x more
> expensive than any other country. Again, with those type of cost
> disadvantges, not going to be able to make and export much of anything.
> And that's just a couple of major issues. Consider hugh unfunded
> social security and medicare, underfunded private pensions, massive
> government annual debt/interest payments (what happens when govt
> interest goes from 2% to say 6%), and the fact that the US spends
> more on US military than all other countries in the world put together.
> Nope .... sorry, the costs in the US are simply not competitive with
> the rest of the world .... so how will the US ever become an export
> country again? Just can't see how that is even remotely possible.
> Yes the US could become competitive again ... but you sure would
> not like the outcome .... how would you like a decrease in your standard
> of living by say a factor of 5-10, then maybe the US might be competitive
> again. That may well be the outcome/plan with virtual hyperinflation
> in the US over the coming years.... let's hope not ... but what are
> the alternatives??

History Continues to Repeat Itself

Clearly if 70% of US GDP comes from consumer spending, we need to find another domestic engine for growth. Some would say that over time (?) we will convert to a consumption driven economy to an export driven economy as China/Asian Basin and emerging markets become more consumer driven. In my opinion, this will rely on a weaker US dollar over time. Maybe the Chinese are propping up the greenback until they can get their domestic consumption (not cheap garments) accelerated.


On Aug 20 07:35 AM perceptions_now wrote:

> Whilst current outcomes may show some similarities to past events,
> the input factors are distinctly different.
>
> Housing stats (www.data360.org/graph_...)
> clearly show a long term falling trend, which is demographically
> based and not about to stop, any time soon.
>
> Oil has Peaked and the resulting economic ups & downs, will also
> not go away soon.
>
> The massive Baby Boomer generation hace already recently started
> their transition from their Peak earning/spending period, to being
> thirty retirees, before leaving us altogether, in droves.
>
> So, I ask the obvious question, where is the economic growth going
> to come from?

Long-Term Market Trends: A DJIA Buy Signal Indicator

Is this a similar calculation to the Coppock Curve?

The U.S. Financial Structure - Why Nothing Is Really Changing

I am not sure if this is waxing philosophical or a self bloated rant. To answer your question on why Empires succeed and fail?...the former answer is they provide basic services for all citizens (Ron Paul might disagree with that) The later is they pursue their empire beyond their borders. In that respect Ron Paul would certainly agree that is a danger. In the mean time...lighten up and go out on a date once in a while. Is this Ted Kowsinski?


On Jun 10 01:42 PM PainfullyAware wrote:

> Jpietti and speeddaimon
>
> The World Is Not Black And White.
>
> You have shown by your comments that you have no concept of moderation.
> You are slaves to your concept of "Libertarian" and therefore have
> no ability to discuss nuance.
>
> Those who are slaves to Labels are easily led by the bridle of emotion.
>
>
> So both of you would gladly herald the destruction of your country
> for pretend "Safety" and "Services"? Yes the Rebuglocrats and Demlocins
> have done a swell job of looting the Treasury and "Running" the country.
>
>
> I would ask you - How Do Empires Decay? Is There Historical President?
> Why are the Empires Of Old Not Around Today?
>
> Also I would ask you - What do you know of the Founding Documents
> Of America and The Environment They Were Forged In. How does Tyranny
> And Atrocity Come To Manifest?
>
> Call the Founders What You Desire - They Would Agree More With Ron
> Paul, And Those Of His Ilk, More Than They Would Disagree.
>
> It seems to me that The Founders put together a set of Guidelines
> that ran more than just a "Municipality" into one of the greatest
> "Opportunities" for human advancement.
>
> The Mentally Minuscule Doom Us All. Ignorance Is Curable.

The U.S. Financial Structure - Why Nothing Is Really Changing

Well I did not want to go there. I always like to give past statements the benefit of the "out of context" doubt.


On Jun 10 10:54 AM speeddaimon wrote:

> I would like to remind you that even libertarians thought ron paul
> was nuts, which is why he ran as a republican this time around. His
> racists newsletters back in the day didn't help.

The U.S. Financial Structure - Why Nothing Is Really Changing

Libertarians always sound the most logical until they actually have to run a municipality....then you realize they expect you to depose of your own waste.


On Jun 09 06:22 PM PainfullyAware wrote:

> I have to agree - Ron Paul calls it as he sees it whether you like
> it or not. The man is adept at Root Cause And Corrective Action Analysis
> - You don't get very far as a Doctor without this skill.
>
> Debate Is The Distillation Of Reality - Marginalization Is Mentally
> Minuscule.

The U.S. Financial Structure - Why Nothing Is Really Changing

I believe the health care reform debate will expose true leadership. In 2007 62% of all bankruptcies came from health indebtedness. 75% of those poor souls had health insurance. What does that tell you about an industry that maximizes profits by denying services. The true leaders will be those who fight against, as opposed to those that fight for the status quo. We can see how this is killing our competitiveness when Japanese car manufactures are opting to build new facilities to Canada in spite of the huge upfront capital provided by US states. Health care cost are the main reason cited


On Jun 09 01:53 PM Dave Wrixon wrote:

> Nothing can change until the American people understand the depth
> of the problem and have the resolve to elect a leader that will make
> tough choices. I mean real tough choices, not Obama throw away line
> tough choices.
>
> This cannot even begin to happen until America's leaders start telling
> the American people the truth. And try to keep it simple guys, these
> people have been brought up on a diet of bullshit.

Why Government Is to Blame for Market Bubbles

Clive, I think you sum it up perfectly. Short term spectacular compensation does not exist if resources are allocated efficiently and resources can't be allocated efficiently if managers are forced to show spectacular results from quarter to quarter, which is how they justify their compensation. I would add shareholders and their short term sensibilities on my short list of culprits.


On Jun 08 06:16 AM Clive Corcoran wrote:

> "The market in a bubble deviates from equilibrium"
>
> This sentence appears to echo the neo-classical notion from economic
> theory that under "normal" circumstances markets seek out equilibrium
> which I believe is fundamentally flawed.
>
> The EMH is the icing on the cake of an even more profoundly erroneous
> view that contemporary markets exist to allocate resources efficiently
> etc.
>
> I would suggest that, now more than ever since the events of late
> 2008, they exist to transfer value from the witless public sector
> (i.e. managed by bureaucrats) to the oligarchical private sector.
> This is achieved via, in Hyman Minsky's terms, Ponzi finance.

The Leading Cause of Personal Bankruptcy

I have never understood the argument that a for-profit health insurance network would be considered the most efficient. Let's use Apple Computer as an example. They make wonderful profits the old fashion way...they produce products that people want and are willing to pay a premium for. What is the most effective way an insurance company maximizes profits?....deny services!...how can we have a world class health care system under this business model?

A Rally of Historic Proportions

So who are these individuals who have the required capital to determine index swing prices while completely staying out of the light of transparentcy? Is it Bill Gross, who runs more money than anybody else...who 5 years ago said the Dow 30 should be at 5k while it was on it's way to 13k?...or is it the PPT which can't seem to plug a plunge to save their lives. Is it the brain trust at Goldman? While being slightly less stupid than most, I don't see any co-ordinated brilliance on their part....can someone give me a name?


On Jun 03 01:44 PM Davewmart wrote:

> The aim was not to regulate or run the derivatives market reasonably.
>
> It was to game the system, to extract insiders profits throughout,
> not for the company but into individuals pockets. In this they have
> been brilliantly competent throughout.
>
> Jpiretti wrote:
> So now the "hell of a job Brownie" powers that be, who couldn't self
> regulate the 60-70 trillion dollar CDS market which created the huge
> dislocations in this economy, destroying massive swaths of their
> own wealth are now the shrewd,competent organized entity you describe....tough
> argument to make...maybe I am just a little naive.

A Rally of Historic Proportions

So now the "hell of a job Brownie" powers that be, who couldn't self regulate the 60-70 trillion dollar CDS market which created the huge dislocations in this economy, destroying massive swaths of their own wealth are now the shrewd,competent organized entity you describe....tough argument to make...maybe I am just a little naive.


On Jun 03 07:12 AM dcb wrote:

> Dr. Leeb,
> you have clearly not done enough reading regarding this rally.<br/>To
> be honest I have written too many posts to go over it again here.
>
>
> From the middle of april to the end of may money flow was out of
> the s&amp;P yet the market didn't drop?
>
> tyler durden and others point out strange effects of prop desks.
> many last minute saves of billions and billions of dollars when key
> resistence levels were close or at the end of the day. the way the
> 880 was like a solid wall for no reason, how about last fridays action
> at the close when the descending triangle was about to be confirmed.
> Note how banks has equity offerings on tap for tuseday
> after you knw monday was going to be huge because to the billions
> bought at the close friday (painting the tape).
>
> Much of the action of this market is based on easily seen illegal
> activity for anyone who wants to do the research to see it. Therefore,
> I conclude the market has actually attempted to correct back to some
> reality but hasn't been allowed to.
>
> Reality will come back into the market when allowed to. I will also
> point out that the head of the NYSE actively encouraged retail investors
> not to participate in this rally, leaving his former coworkers at
> goldman to enjoy the majority of easy gains.

Is This Rally the Real Thing?

Brazil might have taken #1 as far as inport suppliers (they were #9 to USA #4 in 08'), but not trading partners. Brazil was not even in the top 10 in 08' (Singapore was #10 with 15% of USA's level @ #1)


On Jun 02 10:51 AM User 207783 wrote:

> Actually, there is another scary fact re: China. As of last month,
> Brazil replaced the US as their #1 trading partner (per NPR). The
> question is: how far can we slide, before the Chinese consider our
> trade expendable, and sell our debt anyway?

Is This Rally the Real Thing?

I am always amused when individuals wax philosophic with flowery prose on how the world outside of their head is delusional when the simple fact is...their on the wrong side of the trade. I feel I can say this because for the majority of this advance I have been hedged. One of the 4-5 long term indicators I use is a 20 month moving average (in on 7/03 @ 974, out on 1/08 @ 1380)..although the monthly RSI has breached above 30 ( first time since 4th QT. 02'). I am a CMT, so I tend to be more mechanical, but all this political/societal talk to claim the markets are "wrong" is a side show and quite useless. The markets are never wrong by definition. If you as an investor are on the wrong side of the market, is it so comfortable to be "right" and insolvent?

Is This Rally the Real Thing?

Price is reality. There is no other reality in the market but price...although both are fleeting. As far as your dealership/vengeance theory...according to the FEC, 88% of US dealerships contributed to the Republicans the last cycle, so even if 100% of the dealerships that were dumped (by the corporate parent, not the admin.) were registered Republican, it would not be statistically significant...but good luck on your "Big Bad Wolf" theory.


On Jun 02 06:53 AM socrateazz wrote:

> Who lives in reality? I wonder! what is truth? What is actuallity?
> Is propaganda really that strong? Are the masses that blind? All
> will be revealed in the end. Get high on the stock market! Might
> as well! Being drugged by propaganda still feels good. Has worked
> throughout history. Unfortunantly, the more brainwashed a society
> becomes, the deeper into an abyss it goes. Fortunately, the future
> is tomorrow and not today! I see people looking after themselves.
> The media has two pressures causing them to print certain ways. First
> they know if what is printed is too negative toward the Democrat
> leadership, they will be punished by IRS. Why do you think the tax
> laws are so vague? And why is does everybody with leadership on the
> Democrat side tend to end up with seemingly invulernabillity when
> they seem to be so full of manipulative tax cheats? I think they
> own the IRS and a few other organizations. On the other side. I think
> the Democrats have even more dirty pool. I would not be surprised
> if somebody was to investigate and find the dealerships chosen to
> be dumped were dumped because that dealership advertised on the wrong
> radio or TV shows. I would bet on it. If I were a betting man. The
> goal is to sink all the inappropriate groups and support those who
> are politically appropriate. Talk show groups are inappropriate because
> they do not tow the line properly supporting the power group who
> is actually those who complain of others misuse of power. The goal
> seems to be: Cut out supports and the truth will collapse into the
> proper leaders own reality. God have mercy on all, for fools are
> treading on melting ice.

Obama's New Wall Street

Let me also add that Ms. de Rugy's articles on Home Land Security spending are worth a read.