Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View cross' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    So, wise, if we have a populace that is in charge of obtaining and paying for their own healthcare and if the healthcare market is truly a free market, what happens to the health of the populace, what happens to the ability of people to work, to produce, to do things like serve in the military. What happens to the United States if the health of the populace declines? Does that matter?
    Going back to an example I've already cited, when that ambulance pulls up to a car accident, why should they be forced to bring anyone, anywhere without payment. If no one wants to buy insurance, what does it really matter, If insurance companies don't want to insure you, like, before Obamacare, so what.
    RE: your endorsement of vouchers in education. That involves me taking money out of my pocket and possibly giving it to you. Why would I want to do that? Isn't that kid an individual? Isn't me paying for his education "socialism"? We can't have that. How could government mandating anything with regard to education possibly be a good, including extracting money from me to pay for that kid's education, private or public. This is the level of argument you are promoting.
    "You jump the gun and start thinking the government should remedy it. Thats socialism." So . . . you are against a program like Medicare?
    Aug 20 06:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • BofA reportedly settles mortgage claims for $17B [View news story]
    It's a buy, particularly looking out longer term, two, three years. They will build earnings, build the div. It will move in sync with the economy, which is clearly picking up steam.
    I also recommend Ford here. The next couple of years should see fifty to one hundred percent gains in both.
    Aug 20 05:24 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    'Wise' it's debatable what falls into the realm of 'social' vs. 'private'. Should roads be a social (government) responsibility or 'private'? How about education for children (I didn't force you to have them, why should I pay for 'em.) How about the military? We have troops all over the world, how does that benefit me? Is there a social good to be had from supporting farmers or should production of food be a 'survival of the fittest farmer'.
    Should we get rid of Medicare?
    How about the Medicare, part D pushed by w and his republican friends?
    How about the NIH. Ebola? Let the private market figure it out.
    Where does the line get drawn?
    Aug 20 02:32 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    In order to "establish my bonafides" it would involve putting a lot of personal info out there.
    I don't think that's too bright.
    I read your bio. It really tells me nothing about your competence to represent a viewpoint. Why don't you address specifically what I have said, if you disagree with it? Can you?
    Aug 20 02:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    Great, so the example you use, injury/illness, loss of assets, bankruptcy.
    After all that, what happens then?
    Does the government through Medicaid step in?
    If so, how is this fair to taxpayers?
    If not, how does this fit in with your suggestions of a "compassionate" society?

    The ACA seeks to eliminate this scenario by compelling individuals to carry insurance. We've tried "compassion". Why not try "responsibility"?
    Aug 20 01:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    At least you're not 'LOL' anymore. That's a start
    Aug 19 02:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    I can list a few positives about traffic laws: they reduce deaths/injuries; they reduce property damage, they make for a more efficient society.
    I guess the downside for citizens who focus on the negatives is speed limits, compelling drivers to obey signage, requirements that drivers be licensed. And yet, would you find any comparison to be had between 'The Third Reich' and traffic laws? Under your logic, I guess the answer is yes.
    Aug 19 11:53 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    So . . . You are suggesting, 'think' that a law that mandates all Americans have access to health care is in any sense comparable to Nazism?
    Is 'think'ing an aspiration for you?
    Aug 19 11:24 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Obama Spins Subsidies Both Ways [View article]
    This article illustrates the danger of taking one's own political views too seriously. peter schiff is a shill for the republican party, plain and simple. He's been a 'the end is near' for equities ever since Obama was elected and been completely wrong about same.
    The ACA, 'Obamacare', for those attempting to pump their politics, is change; change inherently has both negative and positive effects. schiff has done a great job of highlighting the potential negative effects and completely ignores the positive.
    Isn't it a positive that people who have the capacity to retire now can? Those in that 55-65 age group with, what the insurance industry used to call a 'preexisting condition'? When that 60 y.o. retires, doesn't that open up a job for someone else?
    Isn't a positive that insurance is now portable? That someone who is locked into a job that doesn't suit their talents can now more easily move?
    Isn't having health insurance providing for a more healthy populace? Getting skin cancer checks, getting that $3k colonoscopy procedure, blood work done. Doesn't having access to all these diagnostic procedures benefit and actually save money?
    Isn't it a positive that insurance companies must now live under the 80-20 rule that insures that 80% of the premium actually goes to health care?
    Finally, isn't it a positive to compel individuals to support their own health care costs? Those penalties imposed upon individuals who simply refuse to pay for their own medical care will go to support the system.
    What sort of a world do you want to live in, peter? Should health care simply be a commodity/service like any other? When that ambulance pulls up to a car accident and discovers that someone badly injured can't pay upfront, should the policy be 'no pay, no ride'?

    Aug 19 10:50 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividends In Investing: How To Sleep Well At Night [View article]
    Well, as I stated above, my annualized return over the last 36 months has been 23.19%. Another portfolio I manage achieved a return of 20.87% annualized.
    I'm a bit surprised at this good showing as I am essentially running a hedge fund that should underperform in markets making a strong move upward, but I'll take it.
    Aug 14 12:20 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividends In Investing: How To Sleep Well At Night [View article]
    Bob, I got slaughtered in '08. Absolutely decimated. If you want to see a microcosm of what happened to me take a look at a ten year chart of AFL, my largest holding. It is what it is, baby! Fortunately I have that all too common trait in investors, I call it the 'deer-in-the-headlight' strategy and it all worked out. I just hung on.
    In 2011, markets were absolutely flat and I had a negative alpha of 2.11%. A portfolio I manage for another did better in '11 with a positive alpha of 6.80%
    Aug 14 11:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividends In Investing: How To Sleep Well At Night [View article]
    Dave, you managed to string together a bunch of words that mean just about nothing. What are you saying here:
    "it (investing) involves hitting targets that are not relative to an index but actually involve making money, plus beating inflation."
    Isn't the rate of inflation represented by an "index"? So are you trying to beat inflation or not?
    "Others invest to achieve their personal goals. In some ways, that is actually harder, because it involves hitting targets that are not relative to an index"
    I'm not sure what you even mean here. Why is achieving a personal goal harder than achieving alpha?
    Here you say the following:
    "The latter may create alpha yet still lose in absolute terms over long periods of time."
    So . . here's your logic: you have the S&P 500, an index that over the last 40 years (the time span I've been investing in equities) has bested average inflation by 250% on rough average. You're suggesting that an investor who has achieved positive alpha over this index would be in worse shape than someone like you, who has achieved their personal goal and, in your words "beat inflation"?
    Aug 14 10:35 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 3 Stocks That Have Experienced Big Dividend Cuts And Should Be Avoided [View article]
    I've wondered who this guy is:

    It's 'tueffelhund85'!!!

    Does the '85' mean that there are 84 more out there just like you?
    Let's hope not.
    Aug 13 11:55 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividends In Investing: How To Sleep Well At Night [View article]
    I don't think I can easily calculate a risk-adjusted rate of return in my portfolio. I have engaged in a couple of hundred call/put sales-to-open over the last several years, mostly in S&P, A- or better rated div stocks. My cast of characters is constantly changing.
    I do know that my annualized rate of return on my own portfolio over that 36 month period is 23.19%.
    The rate of return on a separate portfolio I manage is at 20.87% over the same time frame.
    I can give an example of two recent trades I made with Walgreens. When WAG dipped into the high 50's a few days ago I sold five Jan. '16 55 strike puts and five Jan. '16 50 strike puts, paying me $4,400 to commit to purchase 1,000 WAG @ 52.50. Given the choice of purchasing 1,000 WAG outright @ 59 or selling these puts, which of these two trades is the better risk-adjusted action?
    I would question your opinion that a shortfall in performance of 2.9% (19.5%-16.6%) is "slight". It's actually quite large and if continued over a lifetime of investing could add up to that six figure amount I mentioned earlier. Thanks for the info, it's interesting.
    Aug 13 11:44 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividends In Investing: How To Sleep Well At Night [View article]
    Eric, I do a monthly Alpha comparison. It's just a simple spread sheet that lists:
    starting value of the portfolio,
    minus contributions (remember, principal contributions are not part of your total return),
    add back any distributions you have received in the period (zero for you as you are clearly building your positions)
    ending value of the portfolio and comparison with your target index. For me the S&P does it.
    What happened last month in my investments? My total value lost .63%. However the S&P declined at a faster rate in July, at a rate of 1.51% so I actually gained a bit of Alpha. My alpha for YTD is 5.85%. That's a pretty decent number and if one can do near that over the long term you will have more money, earlier. If you, in your investing activities, achieve negative alpha over the long term by even a point or two, you will have left a lot of money on the table, probably in the six figure range. Why have you essentially lost this potential gain? Because you can easily purchase a proxy for the S&P.
    Month to month doing this doesn't have a whole lot of value but over a few years you start to get a clear picture of how well your decisions have worked out. (Once you have it set up it takes about 30 seconds to calculate each month so for me it is just an interest) For instance, you cite the increase in value of your portfolio and the increase in div stream but do not say how much of those increases were a result of organic growth vs. new money contributions.
    Anyway, good luck with your investments!
    Aug 13 11:55 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment