Seeking Alpha

Michael Clark

Michael Clark
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Michael Clark's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Ben Bernanke Pleads for His Job; My Response to Bernanke [View article]
    Yes, well time will tell. You think he save us from a terrible fate. I think he has merely postponed our dread.

    We are insolvent as a society -- we have too much debt. Ben is curing our insolvency with MORE INSOLVENCY. This isn't free money he's giving to the banks to invest in stocks and real estate. This is money our grandchildren will be paying in taxes for Ben's cool decisions.


    On Dec 05 02:25 AM John Aislabie wrote:

    > Bernanke proved a very steady pair of hands when many others were
    > calling for steps that would have created an entirely unmanageable
    > financial mayhem. As a result we still have the levers in place to
    > manage the US and there is still a substantial world economy that
    > is only badly bruised not broken into pieces.
    > The lofty sentiments of preserving pure capitalism by having a complete
    > economic meltdown are ridiculous. Bernanke had studied the great
    > depression closely and, correctly, knew to the depth of his soul
    > that it is worth avoiding. I thank him for a cool head at a time
    > when few others could be trusted.
    Dec 5, 2009. 03:03 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ben Bernanke Pleads for His Job; My Response to Bernanke [View article]
    Whatever it takes to survive. And 'surviving' today, in the corporate world, means 'covering your ass' and kissing the right ass. Creativity; ingenuity; guts and glory? No; more steal, cheat and lie so you can live again to steal, cheat and lie some more.

    Ethics and modern capitalism are not friends. In fact, modern capitalism and organized crime are the same thing in a different class. Organized crime is trying to 'move up' and become bankers.


    On Dec 04 11:00 AM bobbobwhite wrote:

    > At age 24, in my first good career job out of college, I first noted
    > that some people at work would habitually lie to deflect resonsibility
    > for their mistakes or even accuse others they knew were innocent
    > of blame for these mistakes.
    >
    > I thought at the time that this had to be an abberation, and coming
    > from a very religious family, I innocently and ignorantly "knew"
    > that people were not typically that way. However, after 5 years of
    > corporate experience, I fully understood that many people are really
    > that way, and live their entire lives under that dishonorable, dispicable
    > code of misbehavior. And, not all of them are in prison. These types
    > are increasing in number in our degrading society as they are allowed
    > or even encouraged to gain materially from their lies, which they
    > see as perfectly OK in order to escape blame and to achieve the most
    > personal success.
    >
    > Did all these shameless people all join together and get positions
    > in Washington and on Wall Street? Sometimes I truly wonder, especially
    > after reading Bernanke's blatent pack of lies, and Geithner's and
    > Paulson's and Greenspan's, plus all those "do anything for a buck"
    > bankers on Wall Street.
    Dec 5, 2009. 03:01 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Bunning vs. Bernanke [View article]
    Please, Frog. Could Greenspan not have put an end to the DotCom Bubble and the Housing Bubble simply by raising rates? Of course he could have. He chose not too.

    Who 'makes' our economy? Do you think Greenie-Bernanke's 0% interest rates for a decade and the mad accumulation of debt won't impact the American economy for the next 30 years? If not, what are you drinking?


    On Dec 04 11:00 PM PompanoFrog wrote:

    > I need to add my two cents. The Central Bank does not have the ability
    > to control market system bubbles. They can only be effective in controlling
    > the damage after the system has cracked.
    >
    > A domestic bubble takes place in a specific industry sector. The
    > Central Bank when it attempts to restrict credit to that sector is
    > effecting many other sectors of the economy that are not directly
    > related to the problem. These sectors have constituencies. As we
    > can see from the current situation the Central Bank has very little
    > political clout to hide behind. It can never prove that this is the
    > absolute right time to crack the egg.
    > In case you don't know the monetary transmission mechanism is global.
    > How can our Bank stop a bubble in Dubai or Beijing? If China falls
    > we will see massive selling in international markets as Chinese investors
    > attempt to become more liquid.
    > Once the egg has cracked they have the tools through interest rates
    > and, through a Bernanke inovation, direct market intervention to
    > create liquidity to allow the market to clear. Both political parties
    > in Congress are responsible for the lack of regulatory oversight.
    > The leadership of both political parties are trying to destroy the
    > FRB's freedom to conduct monetary policy for different reasons.<br/>The
    > Central Bank does not determine the economic policies that create
    > our long term economic growth rate. Those are political decisions
    > made by the Congress and the President. We have extremists in control
    > of the leadership of both political parties.
    > As investors we need to focus on central bank policy, the business
    > cycle and its effect on our investments
    Dec 5, 2009. 12:15 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Delta Air Lines (DAL +3.3%) says November traffic sank 7.1%, to 13.57B revenue passenger miles; capacity dropped 8.4% and load factor (percentage of available seats filled) rose to 79.6% from a year-ago 78.5%. Earlier this week Continental (CAL) reported monthly traffic was up 3% on a 1.2% drop in capacity, moving its load factor to 80.2%. (more traffic data)  [View news story]
    Wow! Now that is a recovery!
    Dec 4, 2009. 11:22 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Emerging Markets Aren't a Bubble [View article]
    It's an illusion that all 'bubbles' are credit bubbles. There are 'price bubbles' as well. Do you think the legendary Denmark Tulip Bubble (it was Denmark, wasn't it?) was based on too much borrowing or simply on a price bubble that destroyed everyone who bought at the top.

    The credit/debt bubble is much more destructive, lasting for a generation. But price bubbles are also bubbles.
    Dec 4, 2009. 11:19 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Schwarzenegger predicts sea-level will go up like a hockey stick [View instapost]
    Poor old Arnold has bought a bill-of-goods. Follow the money trail. Who is making money off this Global Change basket of grasshoppers?
    Dec 4, 2009. 11:06 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bunning vs. Bernanke [View article]
    Actually, Harry, Clinton was not about to buck the Reagan Spirit, since he was a political whore out for himself -- Clinton was the mirror-image of Richard Nixon, the President who tried to be a democrat during an era of democratic ideas. All Clinton/Nixon cared about was a second term.

    Obama? Well, he made a huge mistake (in my mind) choosing sham unity and 'preservation' of the illusion instead of staking out the true 'populist' position (ala Teddy Roosevelt) and making war on Big Wall Street. I think he's regretting it now -- he made his bed with Wall Street and turned his back on America. I'm sure in his mind he's trying to stitch together the American Empire by pretending that nothing's changed. But this will not be able (this pretending) to go on much longer.


    On Dec 04 09:29 AM Harry Tuttle wrote:

    > Sure. I suppose the Clinton Administration which repealed Glass-Steagall
    > and fought HARD for the "self" regulated OTC derivatives market was
    > part of the Reagan revolution.
    >
    > How about the FACT that the SAME people (Summers, Geithner, Bernanke)
    > are in charge?
    >
    > I guess Obama is part of the Reagan conspiracy as well. Or maybe
    > we should blame Nixon. Wait! Hoover is still unpopular.
    Dec 4, 2009. 10:54 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Bunning vs. Bernanke [View article]
    You are right about the spelling of 'too'. But, please, this banking tragedy was not caused by too much government in business, but NO regulation of business by government. Everyone was in the same bed, exchanging toxic fluids, all big-shot members of organized crime.... 'Regulations'? 'Laws'? Those are for old fuddy-duddies. The old Republican line vs big government 'interference' doesn't work, since the Republican ideology helped to destroy our system.

    Back to the drawing board.


    On Dec 04 09:38 AM Free Markets Rule wrote:

    > From your post: "But capitalists are, as a group, way to stupid to
    > figure that out." Sorry to be petty, but "to" in that sense is spelled
    > "too", but I guess we capitalists are too stupid to know that either.
    > Ha!
    >
    > And less petty... most of our current issues were caused by our government
    > intervening in free markets. You can only distort the laws of supply
    > and demand for so long before they come back to bite you for it.
    >
    Dec 4, 2009. 10:46 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Bunning vs. Bernanke [View article]
    Yes.


    On Dec 04 07:29 AM RJK1 wrote:

    > The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience,
    > Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without
    > humanity, Worship without sacrifice, Politics without principles”
    >
    >
    > Mahatma Gandhi
    >
    > Any of this sound a chord with folks?
    Dec 4, 2009. 10:41 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bunning vs. Bernanke [View article]
    There is truth in what you say. But how were the middle-class able to try to live like the upper middle class, without the means? The banks made it possible. Look at a graph of the decline in savings, the rise in consumer debt...and you will see a meteroric growth in earnings of financial companies. These facts are NOT conincidences. The banks used the low interest rates to seduce borrowers into making bad decisions.

    The borrowers aren't off the hook, in my mind. They are now suffering the consequences. The difference is that those evil high earners (the bankers) got the government to bail them out -- and they are still making their billions -- while the middle-class borrowers are eating turd-sandwiches with no government standing by to bail them out.

    The game is fixed. If the banks win, they win. If they lose, they get taxpayer money to bail them out.

    Yes, them evil high-earners own the government. That's the problem.


    On Dec 03 10:21 PM DougM wrote:

    > Many of those dying middle class folks chose to live the lifestyle
    > of the upper-middle-class, without the income to support it. New
    > gas guzzlers every few years, bigger and bigger houses, bigger and
    > bigger TVs, I could go on and on. Look at the stats on, say, average
    > house size circa 1970 versus now, and tell me there hasn't been a
    > consumption binge by lots of ordinary folks. And why exactly? Keeping
    > up with the Joneses, as depicted for them on those big-screens.
    > Never mind that they did not have the income to support that - after
    > all, they deserved it, didn't they? So savings rates go to zero,
    > and people go into debt to fuel the lifestyle. And this is the fault
    > of a bunch of evil high-earners?
    Dec 4, 2009. 06:41 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bunning vs. Bernanke [View article]
    Bunning 'as a outsider'. An outsider to what? Congress is SUPPOSED to approved a Fed Chairperson. In fact the Fed Chairperson is the OUTSIDER seeking approval of the Congress to decide who should get rich and who should not in America.

    Integrity of Bernanke? I doubt if Bunning thinks he has much integrity. He sold out to the Big Banks. That's his integrity, I guess. He was loyal to his masters on Wall Street.


    On Dec 04 04:32 AM The shark wrote:

    > I think we have all faced our own "damned if I do / damned if I don't"
    > moments - unfortunately Mr. B has faced his moment of truth within
    > the global gold fish bowl - from which there is no escape from the
    > decisions you make.
    >
    > As for Mr Bunning as an outsider I found his naked aggression distasteful
    > as it added no alternative - it is easy to be critical but if you
    > are going to attack someone, attack his decisions not his character
    > - his comments in terms of Jekel Island and morality were completely
    > irrelevant and non productive. Even more damning for me was his inability
    > to even read his prepared script without falling over the pronounced
    > of certain obviously highlighted " for max effect" phrases. Did he
    > write it ?
    >
    > Despite whether you agree or not with Mr B's policy decisions his
    > integrity and his desire are unquestionable - to me all of those
    > Senators demonstrated a lack of real understanding of the "real"
    > issues and their questions indicative of Governments inability to
    > charter a coherent, relevant and timely passage through this storm.
    > Our global leadership to a very high degree appears ill equipped
    > to meet today's economic challenges.
    >
    > It will get better but it could get better a whole lot quicker if
    > there were more competent people at the wheel.
    Dec 4, 2009. 06:32 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ben Bernanke Pleads for His Job; My Response to Bernanke [View article]
    Greenspan was praised too. Look what he gave us. We'll be digging out of this mess for 30 years.

    If Alan hadn't have become monomanically obsessed with his own divinity and a robotic ideologue, then I probably would not be criticizing him.


    On Dec 04 05:11 AM voice wrote:

    > Critics don't need credentials and need accomplish nothing but ...criticise.
    > It is the easy thing to do and any moron can criticise and any primitive
    > man can attack violently without cause or effect for that matter.
    > I see a lot of "eloquence" and certainty in these blogs but I know
    > of one professor of economics, published writer and lecturer/speaker,
    > accomplished authority in areas of economics and one praised even
    > by his enemies for his brilliance and action to stave off the impending
    > disaster of last Fall. Bernanke. All you critics, how do you compare?
    > And if you don't match up could you be at least civil when you disagree?
    > ...we are afterall a civilised society; well you excepted of course.
    Dec 4, 2009. 06:19 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ben Bernanke Pleads for His Job; My Response to Bernanke [View article]
    Actually if you read financial commentaries from 2004-2008, a LOT of people saw this coming. Of course the men who were creating the apocalypse (the Fed especially) didn't see it coming. Greenspan and Bernanke didn't see it coming. I guess that's why we want them to keep their jobs -- because being blind is not as big a sin apparently as being skeptical. I good dose of skepticism about their own knowledge may have kept them from blowing the global gasket.

    A lot of Friday Morning Quarterbacks are now being called Monday Morning Quarterbacks because...we have this tradition in America of forgiving everything and believing that everyone is really trying to do what's best for everyone. That's an illusion, of course. Apparently it's an illusion we're still clinging to.


    On Dec 04 04:11 AM Kevin Mulhern wrote:

    > Love the Monday Morning Quarterback everyone is playing here, would
    > love to see how many of you all were long financials between Fall
    > '07 and Fall '08. Nobody knew the depth of what was going on, the
    > man has been better suited to handle this crisis than anyone else.
    > There were failures, sure, but anyone think his replacement would
    > be substantively different? Assuming most of you believe there is
    > too much liquidity in the system, Janet Yellen of SF Fed is far dovish
    > than him. Good luck! I'll look forward to your articles in 2013 about
    > how Yellen completely blew the inflation battle!
    Dec 4, 2009. 06:08 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Federal House Divided [View article]
    Moon:

    This proves why Ben needs to be gone. His whole philosophy is that the answer to an international solvency crisis is taking on more debt and more risk. This is a philosophical flaw that is lethal. Ben is just another cheerleader for more debt, more inflation, more bubbles and less responsibility (governmental and personal). Let our grandchildren worry about our solvency. We want the fun to continue.

    Ben has a one-sided intelligence that tells him that expansion (inflation, especially of prices of assets) is good, contraction is bad, and it is his job to do ANYTHING he can to perpetualize the expansion cycle. Sad for him when he wakes up and discovers the horrible insistence of his own shadow -- a completion of his philosophy. (Ben should be hitting the water just about.....NOW!)

    Ben's fear of the Dark Side is only helping to divide America into opposing realities, those with too much, seeking to keep what they have, arming themselves against the dark hordes (those the rich have robbed and indebted and discarded) who are threatening to take away from the best and the brightest all the assets they've been storing up for their entire life -- and those who, more and more, have nothing. (What was it Jesus said about storing up wealth? Don't let it be your God. It doesn't last.)

    We know who Bernanke is working for.


    On Dec 03 07:18 AM Moon Kil Woong wrote:

    > In many ways we are lucky banks don't lend all they have.
    >
    > For one thing there are not enough viable lenders which to lent to.
    > That's why FHA and others are around to help lend to people who can't
    > really afford homes and why everyone is trying to keep rates at teaser
    > levels. That's why there are still ARM loans, no down loans, and
    > all the veritable garbage that caused the first housing bubble. In
    > actuality everyone can say we know what caused this crisis yet we
    > haven't solved or restricted the practices we know caused them.<br/>
    >
    > Second, banks (esp. too big to fail ones) are so unstable if they
    > loaned this money out any moderate wind could bankrupt them yet again.
    > Thus they keep plenty of cash on hand making money loaning it to
    > the Federal Reserve that often gives it to them for free and buys
    > their bonds to give them yet more money in which to deposit for interest.
    > It is a bizzare cycle indeed.
    >
    > And third if all this money found its way to the market undoubtedly
    > it would inflate money supply to such a level the dollar would become
    > worthless a lot faster than -14% a year. To me the buck dropping
    > 14% when US Treasuries are paying 1.5-4.5% interest is a tragedy.
    > No wonder no one saves any money in America. What's the use with
    > a government and a central bank that wantonly destroys its value.
    >
    >
    > Indeed the Federal Reserve is a house divided. It proves that at
    > least someone is not insane yet. Zirp rates and QE are a path to
    > economic hell. For it encourages all forms of irrational behavior
    > leaving capitalism under the control of the patently insane.
    Dec 4, 2009. 01:43 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bunning vs. Bernanke [View article]
    The Fed is safe at the moment -- but not for ever. Watch the next wave politically -- Goldman Sachs is buying guns, not for this wave, but for the next wave.
    Dec 4, 2009. 01:09 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
9,556 Comments
18,391 Likes