Seeking Alpha

justaluckyfool

justaluckyfool
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View justaluckyfool's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Is Greenspan Sealing The Market's Fate? [View article]
    When will we learn:
    "Anyone that attempts to predict a future price is a FOOL.
    If by chance, correctly then they are just a lucky fool; however, still a FOOL."
    What does it matter if first, second or third ?
    Mar 17 02:26 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Investing In European Banks: Low Valuations Vs. Capital Requirements [View article]
    " Deutsche Bank is levered 60:1 on a TCE/assets basis, and that its Basel “risk-weighted” assets are only $450 billion, but actual balance sheet assets are $3 Trillion?"

    * In other words, due to the Basel standards, which count sovereign and other AAA assets as risk free, Deutsche Bank has $2.5 trillion of assets with zero capital backing."
    That is ONE private for profit bank (PFPB). Are 1,000 PFPB this size in the world ? Perhaps the total would be $2.5 QUADRILLION. This brings to mind,
    "There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of the voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved." -- Ludwig von Mises .
    But one fool says, perhaps a solution; "What if ...The Central Bank
    of each sovereignty were to mandate 100% capitalization (full liquidity) at the same time to prevent massive default ('systemic failure') make available by loans at 2% for 36 years in whatever amounts needed ?
    As Frederick Soddy said, "End 'Fictitious Lending' "(The Role Of Money" 1926,1933).
    read more: http://bit.ly/MlQWNs
    Jan 26 10:13 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Leverages Up [View article]
    If only the Fed were to act "for the people" instead of for PFPB.
    OMG - A people owned hedge fund. The Fed could purchase
    $100 trillion of assets, residential and commercial real estate notes.
    Modify them as assumable with a 2% rate for 36 years.
    This would produce a "tax income " (revenue stream of $5.5 trillion per year for 36 years.
    "To lower taxes, you need to raise revenues from somewhere else"
    Why not use the "silver bullet" designed by Ben Bernanke to :
    lower income taxes to zero, raise revenues to $5.5 trillion a year?
    Why do you not want prosperity for yourselves and your children?
    (GOOGLE-"Justaluckyfool' -"QE 4 the people",- "QE 4 JOBS")
    Read more: http://bit.ly/MlQWNs
    Dec 18 11:15 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Leverages Up [View article]
    " The purpose is to make the market healthier,"
    The purpose of the purchase of MBSs is purely only to help the Private For Profit Banks get out of a negative position while at the same time stabilizing the market value of their "toxic" issue.
    IF Ben Bernanke (The Feds) wanted to stabilize the housing sector, create jobs, bettering of the economy, "Ben Bernanke should receive the Noble Prize in Economics.
    Ben Bernanke has proven MMT.
    A Monetary Sovereignty can not run out of money for purchases of assets.
    Solid proof; QE 4-for as long as need and in what amount desired!!
    BUT justaluckyfool asks,
    " WHY NOT do it for the people ? Stop doing it solely to benefit the "Private For Profit Banks" (PFPB).
    Justa example: Purchase all residential real estate loans and modify them at 2% for 36 years. This would allow for stabilization of the housing and construction sectors, increase jobs and the bettering of all citizens. And at the same time raise revenue, lower taxes, and fund "for the general welfare. A simple solution; if $100 trillion is needed ,what happens ?All that it does is take away from the PFPB a revenue(profit) of $5.5 trillion a year and turns into an income for the US Treasury.
    But , who is man enough to "free the servitude of the people" as it is the right of the people as stated in the 13th amendment.
    My God continue to bless America.
    May Ben Bernanke see this moment in history, and surely President Obama could place himself next to Lincoln in history. As Lincoln freed the slaves, Obama can free all the people from servitude.
    13th amendment.
    "Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, ... shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
    "Justaluckyfool".
    Dec 18 11:00 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Should Stimulate Lending [View article]
    "To puchase a $1 million in stock (100,000 shares at $10 each) they would only take $1 million out of your account. Then when you sell the 100,000 shares at $10 each they would deposit $1 million in your account."

    Awesome! 2 trades through Ameritrade cost me less than $20."
    ****Justaluckyfool wishes to thank you for proving,"It is mot a zero sum game, yes,there is a COST.
    You mention, "what the underlying is worth"
    And what is the worth of the "$13.083 trillion bank assets?
    Would you believe it to be so "marked to market" " I guess you do, but then I would ask, "Where is your head ?"
    Jason C believes "MBS" is 100%.
    Damn, he should make a trilliondefending against foreclosures
    because their loans are still at 100% value and banks should not be allowed to sell their property to get back 50% of the value of the 100% notes.
    Aug 28 01:20 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Should Stimulate Lending [View article]
    "-Yes, that is correct but in order to do that they would have to declare the banks "insolvent" and place them in "receivership" so they would be allowed to "print" the "taxpayers money and give it to them as a "bailout" (gift) thru the FDIC"

    Gift? They could loan it to them instead.

    ****Justalucky*****How do you loan an insolvent-in receivership trillions of dollars and expect them to pay it back, or perhaps lose trillions more because they know (moral hazard) that some idiot will lend them their losses forever.

    "Maybe you should Google "Bank of America scheme to place $78 trillion of derivatives on books to gain FDIC protection"

    What does the $78 trillion in that sentence mean? Explain it to me.
    ****Justaluckyfool***It means that they have insurance policies (derivatives) outstanding (bets) that are now listed on their balance sheet which means that their depositors money would be used to pay any loses.

    Since most were bets on the housing market, how much do you think they would have to pay

    to the other end if they had to close out their position? If lucky and only 10% loss,$7.8 trillion !


    "As for it being a zero sum game-that is a false statement"

    If I bet my brother $10 on a Bears game, is that a zero sum bet?
    ****Answer ,yes

    Honest transaction No bookie, no market maker, $10 in then $10 out.

    How is a derivative different?

    *****Read above answer.

    "Its like saying if you purchase stock for $1 billion and sell it for $1billion you have NO LOSS"

    LOL! My purchase and sale price includes commission, so yes, I have no loss.

    "Who paid "the market makers " the millions of dollars cost (charge ) to buy and sell?"

    You pay a market maker when you buy or sell?

    *****EXCUUUSE ME ! Isn't that the answer to the question above?

    ***Who the hell is "your " broker??

    To puchase a $1 million in stock (100,000 shares at $10 each) they would only take $1 million out of your account. Then when you sell the 100,000 shares at $10 each they would deposit $1 million in your account. Oh, get it -You own a brokerage.



    "Also try : "Web of Debt" by Ellen Brown" "
    This helps explain your confusion, Ellen is an idiot.

    ***Justaluckyfool, *** With that comment the only proper recourse is termination of the conversation.
    Aug 27 02:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Should Stimulate Lending [View article]
    Jim Myrtle "the Fed would provide physical currency for those demand deposits"-Yes, that is correct but in order to do that they would have to declare the banks "insolvent" and place them in "receivership" so they would be allowed to "print" the "taxpayers money and give it to them as a "bailout" (gift) thru the FDIC.
    Maybe you should Google "Bank of America scheme to place $78 trillion of derivatives on books to gain FDIC protection.
    As for it being a zero sum game-that is a false statement. Its like saying if you purchase stock for $1 billion and sell it for $1billion you have NO LOSS. Who paid "the market makers " the millions of dollars cost (charge ) to buy and sell?
    In the case of derivatives, the trillions already spent as profit and bonuses.
    As to the why and how; banks would call in loans is the reason they are insolvent...they can't; therefore ,they can not honor the demand for the money they are supposed to have in storage.

    Correction:
    Assets $13.083 of which $7.123 are loans outstanding means that
    real assets on hand capable of demand are $5.8. since the money amount that the banks have in storage (not theirs) is $8.8 trillion,
    then you would agree that if there is a run-they are insolvent.
    There is a great book to read. "The Best Way To Rob A Bank, Is To Own One" by William Black
    Also try : "Web of Debt" by Ellen Brown"
    Aug 26 03:29 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Should Stimulate Lending [View article]
    Jason C , Your words,not mine,
    Bank deposits.......$8.8 trilion......Amount needed in cash if reun on banks.

    Assets................... trillion

    but-but-of which...$7.123 trillion is LOANS OUTSTANDING

    Is my math correct ?
    Money in the bank is $5.8 trillion ??? How does that
    Pay out $8.8 trillion with out panic?
    How do you call in $7.1 trillion in loans without "SYSTEMIC FAILURE"?
    Aug 25 06:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Should Stimulate Lending [View article]
    ****"Next derivatives. They are not debts and they are not money. Their net value is zero, as an accounting identity. No, the FDIC is not on the hook for any imaginary amount multiplied into any other imaginary amount. It guarantees bank deposits at federally chartered US banks (and charges a premium for doing so)."
    Well I guess the banks really got me fooled ?
    and of course the Office of the Comptrollor of the Currency as well (http://www.OCC.org)
    and of course....Geithner's 'Dirty Little Secret'rense.com/gener...
    You +1'd this publicly. Undo
    By refusing to do so, he is trying to save de facto bankrupt US banks that threaten to ... Chase which holds a staggering $88 trillion in derivatives (¤66 trillion!). Morgan Chase is followed by Bank of America with $38 trillion in derivatives, and ...
    OCC's Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives ActivitiesFirstwww.rit...
    You +1'd this publicly. Undo
    Aug 7, 2012 – Example: Bank of America had $88 trillion outstanding in derivatives (bets) of that incomprehensible amount only maybe 2% may possible be ...
    Bank Of America Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On U.S. ...seekingalpha.com/..... ...Cached
    You +1'd this publicly. Undo
    Oct 21, 2011 – Bloomberg reports that Bank of America (BAC) has shifted about $22 trillion worth of derivative obligations from Merrill Lynch and the BAC ...
    Sleight of hand: BofA moves dodgy Merrill derivatives to bankwww.nypost.com/p/....
    You +1'd this publicly. Undo
    Oct 21, 2011 – A plan by beleaguered Bank of America to foist trillions of dollars of funky Merrill Lynch derivatives onto its depositors is raising eyebrows on ...
    BUT PLEASE TELL ME OCC IS WRONG !
    Aug 23 04:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Should Stimulate Lending [View article]
    JASON C , "The agency MBS position has a remaining unrealized capital gain north of $40 trillion - some gains were realized as bond matured etc..."
    HOW much money is out there ?
    I believe that notable economists have state "the cause of the financial crisis is due to a credit expansion so large that it may be considered unprecedented historically".
    And how about the over $200 trillion in derivatives (as verified by the OCC at http://www.occ.gov) that US Banks hold, which in most cases has 0% reserve. Is there a liquidity problem ?
    And how about the $88 trillion Bank of America is sticking to the people by "putting it on the books" so as it would be FDIC insured. Which begs the question,"JUSTALUCKYFOOL" asks,
    Who would pay the $8.8 trillion if 10% of their bets were to be lost?
    $17.6 trillion if 20% lost?
    So much for bank liquidity, as a matter of fact-"If there was to be a bank run on all the banks, they may come up short,ah, what comes after trillion/ Quadrillion? Maybe not but surely at 10% reserve and as much as 30 times leveraged it has to be at least 1/2 of a Quadrillion?
    Read more:http://bit.ly/MlQWNs Perhaps there is a solution.
    "Justaluckyfool" But let me leave you with one quote, "
    "There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of the voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved." -- Ludwig von Mises
    Aug 21 07:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fed Should Stimulate Lending [View article]
    Justaluckyfool asks and answers, "What has put us inside of a dog"?
    The answer is :Mis information, Lies, and Schemes.
    The consequence of "Moral Hazard".
    Resuling from the lack of full disclosure by our government and our elected officals.
    They claim, "We would be unable to comprehend, or cope with the truth."
    So being led by others, they use their positions for the betterment
    of a few instead of all.

    Examples of "mis information"
    Read; Rodger Malcolm Mitchell : http://bit.ly/MFL9X7

    Try to have a little fun before the economic shunami, castastrophe, collaspe . We the people, who are supposed to be the "governing"
    are failling to properly do are job and thereby putting ourselves into servitude.(Google "Justaluckyfool")


    Aug 19 02:51 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 10-Year Treasuries Telling A Much Scarier Story Than Stocks [View article]
    Not "if", they can not be predicted, rather because they can not be predicted is the reason to ? invest? gamble. The greater the risk should have a greater reward.
    Why is it that any "investment" advice must contain a disclosure:
    "Past performence does not guarantee future results."
    Isn't that saying that the advice is a gamble ?
    However,the investor does have two out of three possibilities going for them.The future price must be either higher or the same which makes them a winner if dividends are paid. The third possiblity is the one that kills you-lower.
    Jul 24 11:02 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 10-Year Treasuries Telling A Much Scarier Story Than Stocks [View article]
    Let me correct the Question:
    What if the gov were to spend exactly..on appropriations.... what it raises in revenue for the next tens years,would the debt go up, and if so why?"
    If there is no interest expence on the $15 trillion wouldn't it still be $15 trillion ten years from now? If so why pay it? Leave it out there for 1,000 years or until we have an extra $15 trillion.
    :
    Jul 23 11:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 10-Year Treasuries Telling A Much Scarier Story Than Stocks [View article]
    What if the gov were to spend exactly what it raises in revenue for the next tens years,would the debt go up, and if so why?
    Ans. Interest,compounded would actually double the $15 trillion to $30 trillion based upon the percentage and amount of time as in the RULE OF 72.(E.G., @2% in 36 years)
    Excerpt from "Don't End The Fed, Amend The Fed" by justaluckyfool: "
    Jul 22 03:29 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 10-Year Treasuries Telling A Much Scarier Story Than Stocks [View article]
    The American people have a unique form of government in that the people are the GOVERNING and not the GOVERNED.
    They are bound by certain rules and regulations as stated in the US Costitution which they can amend, change, or delete. That is what electing those who would do our bidding is all about.
    The flaw to this type of government is in that it is made up of humans and thereby subject to "moral hazard"
    For if 51% believe slavery is right, it will be so untill 51% believe otherwise.
    Please note that in our present time we are at a crossroad where the 51% may become "unduly influenced by special interest groups" which could change what we vote for thereby creating an unintended consequence that could change our "pursuit of happiness" Read "Don't End The Fed, Amend The Fed'
    by justaluckyfool
    (Google it or on seeking alpha)
    Jul 22 03:13 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
56 Comments
12 Likes