Financial topics

Investments, gold, currencies, surviving after a financial meltdown
aedens
Posts: 5211
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 4:13 pm

Re: Financial topics

Post by aedens »

freddyv wrote:I love this guy...

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/ar ... -Attention

Howard Davidowitz, telling it like it is.

--Fred
He is getting shredded in the forums so step one is over. Step two is ignore him and pile on empirical study's that we already read over 2000 years as like reality, and step three is coming and we know it going to hurt. Meanwhile, Uncle ben is trying to get the Kids to set up a bonafide SWF. It really starting to get painfull given the scope of the issue we face gentlemen. I wrote my Senator and it was such a waste of time but we
taxpayers must bring them so much joy in there cool aid party's up high. Hey, since revenues are down 30 percent they all can take a 30 percent pay cut
and a 50 percent benefit cut so they can feel as happy as A. Taxpayer so we can comiserate there wonderfull bubble world.
freddyv
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:23 am
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by freddyv »

http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/pdf/mwo051509.pdf
John Mauldin wrote: An Unsustainable Trend in Debt

This week, the federal government published two important reports on long-term budgetary trends. They both show that we are on an unsustainable path that will almost certainly result in massively higher taxes. By 2016 we will have to fund Social Security out of general revenues, as the surplus we now have will be gone. And there are no trust funds. They are a myth. It as if I wrote myself a check for $2 trillion and then declared I was worth $2 trillion. The money is just not there. Social Security makes Bernie Madoff look like a small-time crook.

And Medicare is in far worse shape. For those with the stomach, you can read Bruce Bartlett's analysis at http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes- ... icare.html. He estimates that taxes will have to go up by 81% if we are to pay the obligations as they now stand.

...

We found the limit on personal and corporate debt this past year. We pushed the limits until the system crashed. And now the US government wants to basically do the same thing. They are planning to see where the limits on government debt-to-GDP will be. Unless cooler and more rational heads in the Democratic Party prevail, this is not going to be pretty. Sometime in the middle of the next decade we will hit the wall, and it will make the current crisis pale in comparison.
For those of you who don't subscribe to John Mauldin's newsletter, I highly recommend it. It's right up there with Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis, IMO.

--Fred
abs
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: Financial topics

Post by abs »

John -

Thanks for posting this transcript of the discussion with Nightingale. I saw this interview on Bloomberg and actually replayed it on my DVR because I was so surprised to see someone speaking so clearly and bluntly about his belief that we are already in deflation and will last for a decade to come. Bloomberg is much more balanced than CNBC and I end up watching 90% Bloomberg and very little CNBC for financial interviews for that fact. Having said that, both channels are guilty of not pressing people hard during interviews. I have seen people blatantly telling lies on both channels. I completely agree with Nightingale's comments.

Andrew

John wrote:Dear Higgie,
Higgenbotham wrote: > I'm still expecting deflation and about the same probability of
> deflation as I expected last Fall, though I expect the specifics
> to be a little different.

> Where I've modified my views from last Fall is that I'm expecting
> the coming deflationary jolt to be more concentrated and severe to
> the point where, combined with something like a pandemic (in other
> words, too many things happening at once), we could see anarchy
> and breakdown along the lines of what Freddy posted from Gene
> Inger today.
I can't even imagine a scenario leading to US dollar inflation. The
most I can imagine is regional inflation, where a lot of paper money
is injected into some region for some reason, possibly
counterfeiting.

I agree with your concept of a "deflationary jolt," and anarchy and
breakdown of law and order. During these crisis periods, it's almost
always the case that there are roving bands of criminals who will
kill anyone for a few bucks. In this atmosphere, a dollar is going
to be extremely valuable, which means deflation.

Here's an interview on Bloomberg that I transcribed today:
Roger Nightingale, Pointer York wrote: > Economics numbers were not as good as the optimists were hoping
> for. But that was to be expected.

> This is not going to be a fast economics recovery. It's going to
> be very slow indeed. It's going to be characterized by low
> inflation, probably negative inflation, and interest rates at
> negligible levels for years, possibly for a whole decade.

> But within that I believe that you're going to get profits
> generally that are very satisfactory. ...

> The level of optimism that had developed about economics recovery
> was unsustainable. And we've gone down in economics terms. We
> have a couple of good numbers, and the consensus moved from
> extreme pessimism to - I think - unjustified optimism overnight.

> The reality is that the economy has slowed down sharply and it
> probably is going to recover, but exceedingly slowly. And the
> recovery is going to last many years, possibly much longer than a
> decade.

> We should see that sharp rises are unrepresentative, and will
> probably be followed by quite sharp falls. ...

> [Q: A lot of people are saying that the economy will improve next
> year, but you don't seem to buy that.]

> Absolutely not. By the way, look at what those guys were saying
> a year, 18 months ago. They didn't pick the recession /
> depression. That's my story, and I think it's persistent. If we
> ae anything like depression - and in fact, that's my story -- then
> it's going to be a long, dull period.

> [Q: Countries around the world are using stimulus.]

> We tried it in the 30s, it didn't work then. We tried it in Japan
> in the last 18 years, it hasn't worked then. I don't think it's
> capable of being resolved. I think once you're in depression, you
> are stuck.
Sincerely,

John
John
Posts: 11501
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by John »

Dear Andrew,
abs wrote: > Thanks for posting this transcript of the discussion with
> Nightingale. I saw this interview on Bloomberg and actually
> replayed it on my DVR because I was so surprised to see someone
> speaking so clearly and bluntly about his belief that we are
> already in deflation and will last for a decade to come. Bloomberg
> is much more balanced than CNBC and I end up watching 90%
> Bloomberg and very little CNBC for financial interviews for that
> fact. Having said that, both channels are guilty of not pressing
> people hard during interviews. I have seen people blatantly
> telling lies on both channels. I completely agree with
> Nightingale's comments.
I'm inclined to agree about CNBC vs Bloomberg. CNBC probably has the
same "rigorous" reporting standards as MSNBC, and has gotten
noticeably worse in the last couple of months, probably because of
political pressure after Rick Santelli's famous rant.

** The mob turns ugly as AIG bonuses come under fire
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... 19#e090319


The following report from from Fox News' Bill O'Reilly has a heavy
political slant, but it contains serious charges directed at CNBC:
Bill O'Reilly wrote: > General Electric, NBC News and President Obama - that is the
> subject of tonight's talking points memo.

> As you may know, NBC News has emerged as the most pro-Obama TV
> News operation in the country. Its cable operation openly shills
> for the President, and did so during the election.

> And when some CNBC financial commentators began criticizing Mr.
> Obama, General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt and NBC President Jeff
> Zucker went over to CNBC in New Jersey in person, to deal with the
> situation. GE owns NBC.

> Well, since that time, very little criticism has been heard on
> CNBC, perhaps, ladies and gentlemen, it is just a coincidence.

> On April 23 I reported that GE is heavily invested in "green
> technology." And if the carbon tax is passed by Congress, GE
> will try to get billions of dollars in contracts in the cap and
> trade program. Because GE is already in big financial trouble,
> already receiving $139 billion in federal insurance, to shore up
> its financial arm, and is now going full tilt to get even more
> federal dollars.

> According to reporting by [conservative] Andrew Wilkow, a serious
> radio host, GE is banking on government-mandated computerized
> health records. If that passes, GE's technology could be used,
> earning the company billions.

> To make that happen, GE has appointed former Senator Tom Daschle,
> to its GE Health Advisory Board. Daschle, you may remember, was
> President Obama's choice as secretary of Health and Human
> Services until a tax scandal derailed him. But there's no
> question that Daschle has big time connections to the Obama White
> House. We asked the Senator for an interview. So far he is
> ducking us.

> So obviously there is a huge, huge conflict of interest here.
> NBC News is in the tank for Obama, even as its parent company is
> trying to secure billions from the feds. And if you don't believe
> me, listen to Obama advisor Kareem Dale.

> Video (Kareem Dale, special assistant to Obama): At the White
> House we always like to say, we love MSNBC.

> O'Reilly: And why not?

> A fascinating footnote. Neither NBC News or GE is hiding any of
> this. In a public relations video, the cards are laid right on
> the table:

> Video (GE Promotional Video): Jeff Immelt himself is very
> committed to a broader set of issues affecting energy policy,
> greenhouse gas emissions, climate change, etc. Imagination is a
> business imperative for GE.

> O'Reilly: They have to get these contracts. So, it is no
> accident that NBC News is promoting government run health care, as
> well as President Obama's policies in general.

> If this were any other industry, anything else, there'd be a
> federal investigation. But the press is largely above the law.
> There's no oversight on the press at all. We can do pretty much
> what we want to do.

> Summing up, a major American news operation, NBC, giving
> favorable coverage to a President, while its parent company stands
> to profit dramatically, if Mr. Obama's agenda succeeds. Corrupt?
> You make the call.
These are serious charges, but with the mainstream media turning into
a pile of shit on a daily basis, nobody really cares. But it
explains why you always hear so much crap on CNBC. If Bloomberg is
any better, it's only incrementally better.

Sincerely,

John
malleni
Posts: 150
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:34 pm

Re: Financial topics

Post by malleni »

It is a bomb!

http://business24-7.ae/articles/2009/5/ ... 5bd9d.aspx

Much of the region's gold that has so far been held in London may soon return.

London (AND "Anglo-Saxon" based "ekonomy") is soon going to see a huge outflow of gold.
Obvious consequences:
1) DMCC's new vault became operational on April 26 this year.
2) ETF gold from DGS will be moved to these new vaults
3) Gold reserves of regional central banks' also likely to shift from London
4) This move by Dubai is evidence of a loss of confidence in London’s gold market.

It will be interesting to see how much REAL gold exists now in the London vaults?... (after all frauds and creation of "paper" gold :D )
I suppose that this could be "a trigger".



On the other side Roubini has something to say too:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/fina ... rency.html

China's yuan 'set to usurp US dollar' as world's reserve currency
The Chinese yuan is preparing to overtake the US dollar as the world's reserve currency...


Even this:
-In April 2009, China became Brazil’s leading trade partner, an event which has always announced major changes in global leadership. This is only the second time that this has happened since the UK put an end to three centuries of Portuguese hegemony two hundred years ago. The US then supplanted UK as Brazil’s leading trade partner at the beginning of the 1930s...

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009- ... 316255.htm
China surpasses U.S. to become Brazil's biggest trading partner ...



... confidence... confidence...??? :roll:
sadhic
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:58 am

Re: Financial topics

Post by sadhic »

INDIAN MARKET FLARED UP DUE TO POLITICAL STABILITY
John
Posts: 11501
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by John »

sadhic wrote:INDIAN MARKET FLARED UP DUE TO POLITICAL STABILITY

It looks like a bad case of panic buying to me. Let's see what happens
later in the week.

John
Gordo
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 11:18 am

Re: Financial topics

Post by Gordo »

Most of the funds I purchased earlier this year (mentioned in this forum) are now up 100% from their lows. I've already largely taken profits, but there are good reasons to remain bullish over the next few months. Here are some recent comments from my favorite contrarian newsletter writter, Kaplan:

Why did so many investors buy Russian and Brazilian shares in the spring of
2008, only to dump them in the autumn? There are many reasons: the media
telling them daily to take such action; their friends making money in these
sectors and thereby creating jealousy; people wanting to be trendy and
jumping aboard any bandwagon, both in the latest clothing designs as well as
in the markets; and a thousand other equally irrational reasons.

It is hardly a surprise that corporate insiders in the same companies did
the exact opposite: they sold at their heaviest pace ever in the spring and
summer of 2008, and then bought shares of their own companies at a
multi-decade peak during the past autumn and winter.

Thus, the mightiest hunters continue to catch the weakest prey. That's how
it is in the jungle and in the financial markets, and how it always will be
in the future.

The reason that being a true contrarian is so successful is that you
maximize your chance of hunting with the lions at the very time that their
prey are most numerous and confused.

Today's second main topic is a critical mood shift in the media.

Since October 2008, the media have been full of stories about why we're
supposedly headed into a "deflationary depression". As the media repeatedly
saturated the public with this nonsense, amateurs cut back on their spending
and took money out of the stock market-thus ensuring that the real economy
would deteriorate even as the financial markets had already fully forecast
this inevitable event.

Throughout the autumn and spring, there was one story after another about
how some women were literally inviting their friends over to buy clothes out
of their closets; how even many of the wealthy were firing staff which they
had employed for years; how fashion design had changed radically and spawned
the new term "recessionista"; and so on. It was the age of the "new
frugality".

The more that the media hyped the new frugality, the more aggressively I
continued to accumulate my favorite equity funds whenever they became most
undervalued. If you look back over past centuries, whenever the public
behave with a sudden increase in frugality encouraged by the media, it has
always been an ideal time to buy stocks.

Below is a sample story of the new frugality from the past week. When
almost no one wants to look like a banker, that is when you get the best
deals on business suits--and what is far more important, you know that the
global equity rebound still has a long way to go:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/fashi ... ef=fashion

Global equity markets have rebounded strongly if unevenly since early March
2009. Therefore, it must be the case that the media will switch their
script from frugality to excess-not in a single day or week, but gradually,
so that you hardly notice at first and then eventually you are overwhelmed
by a new "urge to splurge".

For the first time since the summer of 2008, we are finally getting the
opposite side of the story: how the new frugality is giving way to an
anticipation of increased prosperity:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandte ... overy.html

The above kind of story still tends to be heavily outnumbered by the tale of
woe in the previous link. However, the ratio of "urge to splurge" to "new
frugality" is likely to progressively increase over the next several months,
until being frugal is eventually dismissed as being "so yesterday"-as
hopelessly out of touch with the times as being a lavish spender had been in
recent months.

This is all a natural part of how the financial markets have always behaved
during extended periods of economic stagnation. The Great Depression began
with a cultural reaction to the carefree, overly lavish 1920s. The "new
frugality" was all the rage by 1932. Everyone tried to show how they were
spending even less money than their penny-pinching neighbors.

However, just one year later, the au courant behavior was to dress "to the
nines"-in the most formal dinner jackets, while attending the most elegant
parties. While in 1932 the trendy thing was to show how you were even worse
off than your unfortunate neighbor, the next wave of Great Depression
fashion around the world was all about being as debonair, refined, and
aristocratic you could appear in the public eye-even though unemployment was
still near 25% in the U.S. and at even higher levels in many other
countries.

Those who insist that the 2009 stock market rebound is a bear-market rally
which is about to end within a few weeks-mostly the same analysts who missed
the biggest two-month rebound since the Great Depression--have badly
misunderstood the connection between the financial markets, the media, and
society. This year's stock-market recovery cannot possibly be over until
the media is telling you on a daily basis how people are spending more, how
they are acting more lavishly, how they are saying goodbye to roughing it,
and how "everyone knows" that you just don't sell clothes out of your closet
any more.

It will almost surely take at least a few more months for the media to scrap
the new frugality in favor of the even newer urge to splurge. If you keep
your eyes and ears open, you will notice that the more that the stock market
rallies, the more pronounced will become this mood shift. Cultural behavior
has always followed the financial markets, and always will. It's not
different this time.

Frequent chatter about increased prosperity, analysts' overuse of the word
"Goldilocks", absurd extremes in luxury spending, new records for subsectors
of real estate and collectibles, and similar events have always marked
important stock-market peaks. When stories of conspicuous consumption
saturate the media, they will send a useful equity sell signal in the second
half of 2009 just as they did in the second half of 2007.

We had a rapid mood shift from reckless overspending to Scrooge-like
frugality in just a few months in 2008. We are currently undergoing a
transformation which is somewhat less drastic, but equally important in its
implications for the global financial markets. Until people worldwide are
embracing the "urge to splurge", don't sell your stocks or corporate bonds
since they have an enormous part of their rally still ahead.
freddyv
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:23 am
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by freddyv »

These were the opening words to John Mauldin's, "Outside the Box" newsletter today:
John Mauldin wrote: Nearly everyone I talk with has the sense that we are at some critical point in our economic and national paths, not just in the US but in the world. One path will lead us back to relative growth and another set of choices leads us down a path which will put a very real drag on economic growth and recovery. For most of us, there is very little we can do (besides vote and lobby) about the actual choices. What we can do is adjust our personal portfolios to be synchronized with the direction of the economy. The question is "What will that direction be?"

John, I would be interested in your opinion of what Generational Dynamics has to say about how this direction will be decided.

I recall reading something by you just the other day that suggested that even the movers and shakers are basically just pawns in what is an almost predestination because of factors such as Generational Dynamics, that there is not much that can change the direction of where we are headed.

It is amazing to me, as we watch California quickly sliding into bankruptcy, that the vast majority of people and investors don't seem to notice the domino efftect that has begun; that will likely be the next, or one of the next shoes-to-drop as first the states go under and then our federal government must default on its obligations after bailing them out.

Months ago you where talking about how we were throwing more and more money at this and while we had a bit of a respite, we now begin in earnest, once again, as states and cities find they are insolvent.

--Fred
freddyv
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:23 am
Location: Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Financial topics

Post by freddyv »

Gordo wrote:Most of the funds I purchased earlier this year (mentioned in this forum) are now up 100% from their lows.
I'm sure they are, Gordo, and like the typcial gambler you never mention your losses. I distinctly recall you calling for a big rally back in December, but I am sure you got out and completely missed that 2,500 point decline and then bought every fund and stock right at the lows.

Gordo wrote: by Gordo » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:26 pm

The 2009 bull market will be among the most powerful short-term bull markets in the past century. So those who do “miss out”, especially those who sold in a panic in the fourth quarter of 2008, will rue their emotional behavior.

The DJIA was at 8149 on Jan 28, 2009 and now stands at 8500 but dropped to 6550 between those points. Yep, the math says that it takes a 100% gain to cancel out a 50% drop.

Gordo wrote: by Gordo » Tue Dec 16, 2008 5:11 pm

Regarding the market right now. How high can it go? I think higher, maybe not tomorrow, but over the next month.

Dow closed at 8924 on Dec 16, 2008 and was at 8281 one month later on Jan 16, 2009 and would drop to 6550 by early March. Gordo was magically out of the market and only participated in the gains.

Hindsight...it's 20/20.

--Fred
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 1 guest