OK, maybe I am crazy, but the last time I checked we were at war. The last time I checked men and women who bravely serve this country were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think the idea is maybe that they were doing this so WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO.
Look, I was not in support of our invasion of Iraq. I think it was a strategic error that cost many lives and depleted time, manpower and money from our real mission of defeating Islamic Extremism around the globe. That said, our President, Congress, and intelligence agencies decided otherwise. I am to this day blown away by the arrogance of Liberals who say they know how to better fight Islamic extremism. Or worse, they say it doesn't exist. It is not a threat. George W. and his cronies were just trying to scare us. According to some of these wackos, the Bush administration actually perpetrated 9/11.
Yet, stupid me, I have the audacity to turn on CNN, which I have now labeled the "Crap News Network", and torture myself with PROPAGANDA about how the evil Jews are oppressing the Palestinians. I am not Jewish, so far as I know, but I feel Jewish tonight. WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP CNN is spewing.
Hamas, a militant political terrorist organization which has denied Israel's right to exist and vowed to destroy it through military violence is getting treated with kid gloves by American media. I am crying - I am literally crying.
Hamas, who has launched more than 110 rockets onto Israel's soil since Saturday, is the good guy? What is Israel supposed to do?
I have one question to ask you: If tomorrow, Hamas recognized Israel's right to exist and quit launching rockets at Israel, would the conflict end, or would Israel invade Gaza? Sleep on that.
If you think Hamas and Israel are equals, consider this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7801881.stm
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Thursday, December 25, 2008
What does Christmas mean to you?
I have been asking myself this question for the last few days. This year, in light of the economic turmoil, Christmas has been interesting. I really started to feel sort of well, sick, as I would look at all the materialism surrounding myself and the ones I love this year. I also felt more and more hope as I asked myself what Christmas really means to me.
I won't go into my entire spiritual journey here. I started as an agnostic, became a raving atheist, and now find myself a reverent, sort of new age Christian. I know people like labels, but I can't really find a convenient one to describe what I believe to be true.
I began a spiritual journey when I realized there was more to life than a personality. I have always felt a strong connection with my soul, and feel like it is the guiding force in my life, but there was a time I didn't believe in souls. The kind of Religion I was exposed to as a child represented a kind of non-thinking obedience I simply could not stomach. The idea of "God" as a male power that wielded punishment over man and especially WOMAN just did not sit well with me. Never mind the adults (mostly catholic catechism teachers) who would act like I was the devil incarnate if I asked them how they could be sure God, as they explained him, existed.
How arrogant, how faithless I was. "OK", I would say,"Please define faith for me." At that point they would give me a frustrated look that was halfway between outright contempt and hatred. I decided I was on my own in deciding these matters.
Eventually, I realized the limits of my own personality and ego through, well, good old fashioned messing up my life enough that I knew there had to be a better way......and there was. I feel I have, through years of inner searching in a sort of eastern style, finally found my Self. I can't always stay connected to my soul (often I am not), but I found it through a process of deep personal emotional work and surrendering to what I like to call the, "Life Force". I believe this "Life Force" is God, but not the pedantic God so many of our religions describe.
So where does Christmas fit in? Well......along my journey I began reading many spiritual texts, including to much of my friends surprise, the ........Bible. I became fascinated with the Gnostic's. They believed that to find God you had to search within. I was surprised to find how interested in Jesus I was. Not just from a spiritual perspective, but also from an archaeological one. What was true about Jesus and what was made up by the men who lived after him?
I could quote a bunch of sources here, but that would be more appropriate for a book, not a blog. What I basically found was that Jesus was an amazingly loving, intelligent, fascinating man. He was not meek, but audacious. He was not closed, but open. He was not lacking, but abundant. He was not a savior, but a teacher. This is my own interpretation.
So if Christmas represents the birth of a man who many believe to have been the Son of God, which to me means he embodied the "Life Force" in the purest form, then I have to celebrate that. How wonderful! What an example to all of us.
I would like to leave you with two things Jesus talked about to consider:
"The meek shall inherit the Earth"
What is the Earth, when compared to the Kingdom of Heaven? Do you really want to be meek?
Is the Earth, as Jesus saw it, really all that valuable?
I know this quote is inaccurate but it is something like; " For He who has little, even that which he has shall be taken from Him. For Him who has plenty, even more shall be given."
Could that actually mean that people who live in a state of gratitude will feel abundant, and those who see themselves as lacking will lose everything?
"Judge Not, Lest Ye be Judged" - So true. When we fail to forgive (correct our perception of others) we are ultimately condemning ourselves.
So tonight I celebrate the ideas of Jesus as I see them. Arrogant....maybe. But who really knows. I choose to see him as a man who brought peace, forgiveness, and Godliness to Earth. These qualities still exist in each of us....and I am thankful for it.
I won't go into my entire spiritual journey here. I started as an agnostic, became a raving atheist, and now find myself a reverent, sort of new age Christian. I know people like labels, but I can't really find a convenient one to describe what I believe to be true.
I began a spiritual journey when I realized there was more to life than a personality. I have always felt a strong connection with my soul, and feel like it is the guiding force in my life, but there was a time I didn't believe in souls. The kind of Religion I was exposed to as a child represented a kind of non-thinking obedience I simply could not stomach. The idea of "God" as a male power that wielded punishment over man and especially WOMAN just did not sit well with me. Never mind the adults (mostly catholic catechism teachers) who would act like I was the devil incarnate if I asked them how they could be sure God, as they explained him, existed.
How arrogant, how faithless I was. "OK", I would say,"Please define faith for me." At that point they would give me a frustrated look that was halfway between outright contempt and hatred. I decided I was on my own in deciding these matters.
Eventually, I realized the limits of my own personality and ego through, well, good old fashioned messing up my life enough that I knew there had to be a better way......and there was. I feel I have, through years of inner searching in a sort of eastern style, finally found my Self. I can't always stay connected to my soul (often I am not), but I found it through a process of deep personal emotional work and surrendering to what I like to call the, "Life Force". I believe this "Life Force" is God, but not the pedantic God so many of our religions describe.
So where does Christmas fit in? Well......along my journey I began reading many spiritual texts, including to much of my friends surprise, the ........Bible. I became fascinated with the Gnostic's. They believed that to find God you had to search within. I was surprised to find how interested in Jesus I was. Not just from a spiritual perspective, but also from an archaeological one. What was true about Jesus and what was made up by the men who lived after him?
I could quote a bunch of sources here, but that would be more appropriate for a book, not a blog. What I basically found was that Jesus was an amazingly loving, intelligent, fascinating man. He was not meek, but audacious. He was not closed, but open. He was not lacking, but abundant. He was not a savior, but a teacher. This is my own interpretation.
So if Christmas represents the birth of a man who many believe to have been the Son of God, which to me means he embodied the "Life Force" in the purest form, then I have to celebrate that. How wonderful! What an example to all of us.
I would like to leave you with two things Jesus talked about to consider:
"The meek shall inherit the Earth"
What is the Earth, when compared to the Kingdom of Heaven? Do you really want to be meek?
Is the Earth, as Jesus saw it, really all that valuable?
I know this quote is inaccurate but it is something like; " For He who has little, even that which he has shall be taken from Him. For Him who has plenty, even more shall be given."
Could that actually mean that people who live in a state of gratitude will feel abundant, and those who see themselves as lacking will lose everything?
"Judge Not, Lest Ye be Judged" - So true. When we fail to forgive (correct our perception of others) we are ultimately condemning ourselves.
So tonight I celebrate the ideas of Jesus as I see them. Arrogant....maybe. But who really knows. I choose to see him as a man who brought peace, forgiveness, and Godliness to Earth. These qualities still exist in each of us....and I am thankful for it.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Obama Has Some Good Qualities
I know I have been very critical of Obama and his policies, and this probably will not change. However, everybody has some redeeming qualities.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/12/23/am.obama.shirtless.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/12/23/am.obama.shirtless.cnn
Monday, December 22, 2008
Parenting
You know, I am always fascinated by children. They are so present. I mean they live in the NOW. One of my favorite books is Eckart Tolle's "The Power of Now". If there is one thing you can do for you children that will transform your life and theirs, it is to be present.
Being a "stay at home mom", which I pretty much have been for the last 7 years, taught me the value of presence. When I was working full time as a bank manager and working on my MBA I thought I was the busiest person in the world. I was wrong. It didn't take long for the Universe to serve me up a nice piece of humble pie. Having a baby blew my mind. Literally. The fact is, my mind needed to be blown. I never realized how lost I was in my thoughts before the demands of motherhood forced me to be present.
What exactly do I mean by presence? How often are you doing one thing, like loading the dishwasher, while you are thinking about something else? Perhaps you are even "listening" to your spouse, while you are thinking of that kitchen floor that needs to be mopped. When is the last time you were not thinking, but simply being? When you were utterly present in the task before you.
I realized, at some point, that all my children needed was love, attention , and presence. (Food helps) But seriously, that is all they wanted. When they were stressed, it was usually because I was stressed, and not present. When they threw tantrums or misbehaved it was usually because they had perhaps been around me all day, but never had my present attention. I was lost in my thoughts about the world. Maybe it was about money, or my lost career, or a recent fight me and my husband had had, or what I to needed to buy at the grocery store. Whatever it was, (the thought of the moment) it was competing with them for my present attention.
I can hear you all already. "But kids can't have attention all the time." "Kids need to be independent." etc, etc. You are correct. The truth is - the need very little attention - if, when they are getting the attention, you are present with every cell of your being. If your mind is quiet and you are totally focused on them, they need very little actual time.
If you play a game with them and are thinking about something else while you do it, you might as well have not done it at all. They will still be needy. This is what I would like to say to parents who say they spend so much time and attention on their children, but their kids always want more. I would like to ask them: Were you really and truly present with your child? Was your mind clear when you were speaking o them or listening to them?
The next topic I would love to talk about is why adults avoid presence like it is the plague.
I plan on writing more about this topic in future posts. I would love your input.
Hope you are all having a wonderful Christmas season!
Being a "stay at home mom", which I pretty much have been for the last 7 years, taught me the value of presence. When I was working full time as a bank manager and working on my MBA I thought I was the busiest person in the world. I was wrong. It didn't take long for the Universe to serve me up a nice piece of humble pie. Having a baby blew my mind. Literally. The fact is, my mind needed to be blown. I never realized how lost I was in my thoughts before the demands of motherhood forced me to be present.
What exactly do I mean by presence? How often are you doing one thing, like loading the dishwasher, while you are thinking about something else? Perhaps you are even "listening" to your spouse, while you are thinking of that kitchen floor that needs to be mopped. When is the last time you were not thinking, but simply being? When you were utterly present in the task before you.
I realized, at some point, that all my children needed was love, attention , and presence. (Food helps) But seriously, that is all they wanted. When they were stressed, it was usually because I was stressed, and not present. When they threw tantrums or misbehaved it was usually because they had perhaps been around me all day, but never had my present attention. I was lost in my thoughts about the world. Maybe it was about money, or my lost career, or a recent fight me and my husband had had, or what I to needed to buy at the grocery store. Whatever it was, (the thought of the moment) it was competing with them for my present attention.
I can hear you all already. "But kids can't have attention all the time." "Kids need to be independent." etc, etc. You are correct. The truth is - the need very little attention - if, when they are getting the attention, you are present with every cell of your being. If your mind is quiet and you are totally focused on them, they need very little actual time.
If you play a game with them and are thinking about something else while you do it, you might as well have not done it at all. They will still be needy. This is what I would like to say to parents who say they spend so much time and attention on their children, but their kids always want more. I would like to ask them: Were you really and truly present with your child? Was your mind clear when you were speaking o them or listening to them?
The next topic I would love to talk about is why adults avoid presence like it is the plague.
I plan on writing more about this topic in future posts. I would love your input.
Hope you are all having a wonderful Christmas season!
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Nice Hat Kim
Kim Jong-Il has a new hat. Even dictators can look cool. (or not) I bet that guy in front of him is a tad nervous. He just had to minimize his blog and pretend to look busy.Al-Qaeda Doesn't Like Obama Either
I just want to get a point across to those on the left that thought electing Obama was going to solve our problems with Islamic extremists. As with the gay marriage issue, there is no change.
Please do not forget 9/11 happened before we went to war in Iraq and Afganistan. Facts matter.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/20/gbeck_1119/
Please do not forget 9/11 happened before we went to war in Iraq and Afganistan. Facts matter.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/20/gbeck_1119/
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
I Told You So
You know, I hate to say it but.....I told you so. True Liberals (People who believe in freedom) are going to regret voting for this man. He is all about control.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/17/obama.warren/index.html?iref=nextin
I never believed Obama was for gay rights. This was from a previous post ( This is what Obama thinks about Gay Marriage):
Q: [to Keyes]: You've criticized homosexuality throughout your career. What would you say to your child if he or she were a homosexual?
KEYES: Marriage is based upon heterosexual relations because they are connected to procreation. Where procreation is impossible, marriage is irrelevant. And that is the civic explanation against homosexual marriage. It is irrelevant. And the idea that one should have legislation that is regulating private friendships for no reason is a degrading of those friendships.
OBAMA: Well, to answer the original question, I would love that child and seek to support them. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but I detest the bashing and vilifying of gays and lesbians. Most gays and lesbians are seeking basic recognition of their rights so they're not discriminated against in employment or renting a house, so they can see their partner in a hospital. These are rights for everybody, not just some people. Source: Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes Oct 21, 2004
So you see, Obama is a hypocrite. This man is a pragmatist. I have yet to figure out what his moral compass is. I think he is out to please everyone and tell his truth to no one.
Hey, I have watched him on TV this week. He is smooth. I can't help but have moments when I am like, "This guy is cool, he gets it." But, every fiber of my soul tells me he is full of it. (I left out the "sh")
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/17/obama.warren/index.html?iref=nextin
I never believed Obama was for gay rights. This was from a previous post ( This is what Obama thinks about Gay Marriage):
Gays should not face discrimination but should not marry
Q: [to Keyes]: You've criticized homosexuality throughout your career. What would you say to your child if he or she were a homosexual?
KEYES: Marriage is based upon heterosexual relations because they are connected to procreation. Where procreation is impossible, marriage is irrelevant. And that is the civic explanation against homosexual marriage. It is irrelevant. And the idea that one should have legislation that is regulating private friendships for no reason is a degrading of those friendships.
OBAMA: Well, to answer the original question, I would love that child and seek to support them. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but I detest the bashing and vilifying of gays and lesbians. Most gays and lesbians are seeking basic recognition of their rights so they're not discriminated against in employment or renting a house, so they can see their partner in a hospital. These are rights for everybody, not just some people. Source: Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes Oct 21, 2004
So you see, Obama is a hypocrite. This man is a pragmatist. I have yet to figure out what his moral compass is. I think he is out to please everyone and tell his truth to no one.
Hey, I have watched him on TV this week. He is smooth. I can't help but have moments when I am like, "This guy is cool, he gets it." But, every fiber of my soul tells me he is full of it. (I left out the "sh")
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Bulls vs. Bears
I remain steadfast in my belief that only experienced traders and 10-20 year investors should be in this market. It is crazy. There is a war going on between two different mindsets.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28244855 (I really like this technical analyst.)
The Bull Case: The worst is over. Housing is near a bottom. The Fed's drastic easing and throwing of money from helicopters will rescue the credit markets and consumers will start spending again. Goldman Sachs loss of $2.1 billion dollars in the fourth quarter was a good thing because it was better than expected. Obama can create millions of jobs. Stimulus checks will be used for consumption instead of debt reduction and the auto makers will survive and take us into a new green paradise where we will all get free health care from Sanjay Gupta while Anderson Cooper reads us a bedtime story about how Obama is going to save our PLANET IN PERIL. Charts show the market has bottomed. Keynesian economics has worked in the past and that means it will work again.
The Meanie Bear Case: The worst is yet to come. Housing has a long way to go - on the downside. Consumers are cash strapped, debt ridden, and losing their jobs. The Fed would only drop interest rates to near zero and throw money from helicopters if they knew something was seriously wrong with our economy. There is no demand for new credit, borrowers are over extended and need time to repair their balance sheets before they will borrow again. Because of this, no matter how low rates are, no matter how much government tells banks to lend TARP money, there simply are not enough credit worthy borrowers to lend to. You can not fix a market by propping up supply when there is no demand. Corporate profits will have a temporary bounce around Christmas and then fall back off a cliff. Charts show the market is very unhealthy and has much further to fall. Keynesian economics is dead.
It's like the shrink who shows two people the same black ink picture of blobs and they both come up with a different interpretation. One says its Jesus, the other Satan.
Who is right? Does our perception of the situation affect its outcome? Or does reality exist independent from observation? Or is it a little bit of both? (The Forrest Gump Theory)
Please, I am not saying there is a right or wrong answer. I would like your input and opinions.
By the way - I am still short.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/28244855 (I really like this technical analyst.)
The Bull Case: The worst is over. Housing is near a bottom. The Fed's drastic easing and throwing of money from helicopters will rescue the credit markets and consumers will start spending again. Goldman Sachs loss of $2.1 billion dollars in the fourth quarter was a good thing because it was better than expected. Obama can create millions of jobs. Stimulus checks will be used for consumption instead of debt reduction and the auto makers will survive and take us into a new green paradise where we will all get free health care from Sanjay Gupta while Anderson Cooper reads us a bedtime story about how Obama is going to save our PLANET IN PERIL. Charts show the market has bottomed. Keynesian economics has worked in the past and that means it will work again.
The Meanie Bear Case: The worst is yet to come. Housing has a long way to go - on the downside. Consumers are cash strapped, debt ridden, and losing their jobs. The Fed would only drop interest rates to near zero and throw money from helicopters if they knew something was seriously wrong with our economy. There is no demand for new credit, borrowers are over extended and need time to repair their balance sheets before they will borrow again. Because of this, no matter how low rates are, no matter how much government tells banks to lend TARP money, there simply are not enough credit worthy borrowers to lend to. You can not fix a market by propping up supply when there is no demand. Corporate profits will have a temporary bounce around Christmas and then fall back off a cliff. Charts show the market is very unhealthy and has much further to fall. Keynesian economics is dead.
It's like the shrink who shows two people the same black ink picture of blobs and they both come up with a different interpretation. One says its Jesus, the other Satan.
Who is right? Does our perception of the situation affect its outcome? Or does reality exist independent from observation? Or is it a little bit of both? (The Forrest Gump Theory)
Please, I am not saying there is a right or wrong answer. I would like your input and opinions.
By the way - I am still short.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
What would Saddam have done?
I know this video is all over the place. If you watch the news at all you have already seen it. I just want you to watch it one more time and ask yourself: What would Saddam have done to the shoe thrower?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/14/bush.iraq/index.html?iref=mpstoryview#cnnSTCVideo
Hey; no matter what you think about Bush you must admit he has cat like reflexes and a great sense of humor.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/14/bush.iraq/index.html?iref=mpstoryview#cnnSTCVideo
Hey; no matter what you think about Bush you must admit he has cat like reflexes and a great sense of humor.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Islamic Extremism in Minneapolis
Extremism is alive and well in Minneapolis. This is just more proof that the isolationists are wrong.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/12/12/minneapolis.somalis/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/12/12/minneapolis.somalis/index.html
Gettelfinger is an Idiot
There, I said it. This guy is a complete moron. God bless the Republicans in the Senate.
One of the things the Senate Republicans are asking the UAW to do is make wage concessions so that their wages are more in line with those of workers at Toyota and Honda plants in the US. Gettelfinger, (Mr. President of the UAW) wants to make no wage concessions. The top people at these plants make upwards of $70 an hour. That is $140,000 a year! At Toyota and Honda they make more like $44 an hour. You don't have to be a genius to notice who makes a higher quality product. They should be making LESS than the guys at Toyota and Honda. Mr. Gettelfinger just wants things to stay the same and the taxpayers to subsidize the failing companies which employ his members.
In the same interview he says the Auto Makers won't survive January without government help. This guy wants our tax dollars to hold the wages of UAW workers artificially high until the companies that employ the people he is defending go under. I would like to see how popular he is with the UAW members when they are waiting in bread lines. This guy knows the automakers are doomed, yet he himself is a key component in that destruction.
Shame on you Mr. Gettelfinger. You are helping NO ONE! You are a whiny child. I don't know how you sleep at night.
One of the things the Senate Republicans are asking the UAW to do is make wage concessions so that their wages are more in line with those of workers at Toyota and Honda plants in the US. Gettelfinger, (Mr. President of the UAW) wants to make no wage concessions. The top people at these plants make upwards of $70 an hour. That is $140,000 a year! At Toyota and Honda they make more like $44 an hour. You don't have to be a genius to notice who makes a higher quality product. They should be making LESS than the guys at Toyota and Honda. Mr. Gettelfinger just wants things to stay the same and the taxpayers to subsidize the failing companies which employ his members.
In the same interview he says the Auto Makers won't survive January without government help. This guy wants our tax dollars to hold the wages of UAW workers artificially high until the companies that employ the people he is defending go under. I would like to see how popular he is with the UAW members when they are waiting in bread lines. This guy knows the automakers are doomed, yet he himself is a key component in that destruction.
Shame on you Mr. Gettelfinger. You are helping NO ONE! You are a whiny child. I don't know how you sleep at night.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Tis' The Season
Why can't I get in the Christmas mood? I am feeling, well...... overwhelmed. My children are used to me being home almost all the time. Even if I am not engaged with them, I am almost always around. I started a new job last week and I must say; things are a changing.
I have been saying, "Get your own socks." "It's up to you." "I am not asking you what you want for breakfast again.", and other things like that a lot this week.
Everyone I run into or talk to seems, well, sort of scared. I know I am. This economy is nothing, if not scary. Many in my generation remember the recession of the 1970's and early 80's. I remember my friends parents losing their jobs. We were lucky, my parents didn't lose their jobs. I have this feeling, though, that this time is going to be much worse. Actually, it is not just based on feeling, but also facts. I really want to tell all of you that this will be easy, but it will not. This period is going to test us. We are going to have to work harder, and better, than ever before. I have friends that are also stretched physically, mentally, financially, and emotionally. I really just feel like we have had it really good up until now. I know I have been extremely fortunate in this life and I thank God for that every morning when my feet hit the floor.
Ironically, I feel a sense of relief when I think about the end of Consumerism as we know it. Is it possible I can not have granite counter tops and still be cool in this new era we are entering? Perhaps this is a good thing. Perhaps it is necessary. Why fight it.
I love that part in Forrest Gump when Jenny(his true love) dies and Forrest asks dead Jenny if we are all just floating around random like in the Universe, or if God has a plan for each of us (a Destiny). I love it that he tells her that he thinks it is a little bit of both. Perhaps both are true. It is a little bit of both.
So, control what you can. Let go of what you can't. Know the difference. That is the best we can do.
And remember, Christmas is not about shopping, it is about hope. It is about reaching for the part of our Selves that can save ourselves.
I have been saying, "Get your own socks." "It's up to you." "I am not asking you what you want for breakfast again.", and other things like that a lot this week.
Everyone I run into or talk to seems, well, sort of scared. I know I am. This economy is nothing, if not scary. Many in my generation remember the recession of the 1970's and early 80's. I remember my friends parents losing their jobs. We were lucky, my parents didn't lose their jobs. I have this feeling, though, that this time is going to be much worse. Actually, it is not just based on feeling, but also facts. I really want to tell all of you that this will be easy, but it will not. This period is going to test us. We are going to have to work harder, and better, than ever before. I have friends that are also stretched physically, mentally, financially, and emotionally. I really just feel like we have had it really good up until now. I know I have been extremely fortunate in this life and I thank God for that every morning when my feet hit the floor.
Ironically, I feel a sense of relief when I think about the end of Consumerism as we know it. Is it possible I can not have granite counter tops and still be cool in this new era we are entering? Perhaps this is a good thing. Perhaps it is necessary. Why fight it.
I love that part in Forrest Gump when Jenny(his true love) dies and Forrest asks dead Jenny if we are all just floating around random like in the Universe, or if God has a plan for each of us (a Destiny). I love it that he tells her that he thinks it is a little bit of both. Perhaps both are true. It is a little bit of both.
So, control what you can. Let go of what you can't. Know the difference. That is the best we can do.
And remember, Christmas is not about shopping, it is about hope. It is about reaching for the part of our Selves that can save ourselves.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
This is NOT Capitalism
I become very angry when uninformed people blame the current economic crisis we are in on Capitalism. The reason; they don't know what real Capitalism is. The system we have been living under since the creation of the Federal Reserve (1914) has been slowly morphing into a bastardized version of capitalism. I found and article that explains this much better than I can. Here is an excerpt:
"Where in capitalism is the idea that you can spend more than you earn? Where in the vision of Adam Smith is the idea that foreigners will subsidize your standard of living – indefinitely? Where in laissez-faire is the notion that central bankers will prevent corrections by controlling the price of money? What had happened to the old sturm and drang? Where was Schumpeter’s ‘creative destructive?’ The new capitalists offered creation without destruction... resurrection without crucifixion! They offered not only to hold harmless investors in the face of their own bad judgment...but to revive booms before they ever expired and to cut short corrections before anything has been corrected.
This was not the old capitalism of our grandfathers. The old-timers had been wary of it...they knew that the free market was dangerous and unpredictable. The old capitalism was a jungle...red in tooth and claw. You had to watch your back. This new capitalism was a zoo; all the dangerous beasts were supposed to be behind bars. It was almost too wonderful.
The culture of zoo-capitalism spread to all levels of society. At the top, such was faith in this new doctrine that tax rates were reduced...in the belief that more capitalism would enlarge the tax base (unfortunately, spending increased faster). But don’t worry, “Deficits don’t matter,” said Dick Cheney. In other words, our dynamic capitalistic economy will grow itself out of any problems. And at the bottom, too, people fell victim to the same delusion. Consumer debt multiplied as householders borrowed and spent money they hadn’t made yet. Why not? Their houses, their stocks and their incomes would always go up, wouldn’t they? And savings? Who needs savings when you live in the strongest, most flexible, most globalized, most technology-enhanced, most tax-enlightened economy in history?"
Bravo! I definitely could not have said it better myself. The writing is by Bill Bonner. He writes for The Daily Reckoning Australia.
Here is a link to the entire article:
http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/consumer-debt/2007/12/10/
"Where in capitalism is the idea that you can spend more than you earn? Where in the vision of Adam Smith is the idea that foreigners will subsidize your standard of living – indefinitely? Where in laissez-faire is the notion that central bankers will prevent corrections by controlling the price of money? What had happened to the old sturm and drang? Where was Schumpeter’s ‘creative destructive?’ The new capitalists offered creation without destruction... resurrection without crucifixion! They offered not only to hold harmless investors in the face of their own bad judgment...but to revive booms before they ever expired and to cut short corrections before anything has been corrected.
This was not the old capitalism of our grandfathers. The old-timers had been wary of it...they knew that the free market was dangerous and unpredictable. The old capitalism was a jungle...red in tooth and claw. You had to watch your back. This new capitalism was a zoo; all the dangerous beasts were supposed to be behind bars. It was almost too wonderful.
The culture of zoo-capitalism spread to all levels of society. At the top, such was faith in this new doctrine that tax rates were reduced...in the belief that more capitalism would enlarge the tax base (unfortunately, spending increased faster). But don’t worry, “Deficits don’t matter,” said Dick Cheney. In other words, our dynamic capitalistic economy will grow itself out of any problems. And at the bottom, too, people fell victim to the same delusion. Consumer debt multiplied as householders borrowed and spent money they hadn’t made yet. Why not? Their houses, their stocks and their incomes would always go up, wouldn’t they? And savings? Who needs savings when you live in the strongest, most flexible, most globalized, most technology-enhanced, most tax-enlightened economy in history?"
Bravo! I definitely could not have said it better myself. The writing is by Bill Bonner. He writes for The Daily Reckoning Australia.
Here is a link to the entire article:
http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/consumer-debt/2007/12/10/
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Consumerism On Life Support
What a week in the market. I have all but given up on predicting direction. I remain short, but it really hurt me this past week. Still, I think this is a bear market rally & the S&P will break through its lows by the end of March.
Why? Because the primary driver of GDP growth over the last 15 years or so has been consumption. Conspicuous consumption is dead. (for now) See GDP (otherwise known as Gross Domestic Product) = C + G + I, where C =consumption G=government spending and I= investment. This is a very basic explanation. If you want more detail read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product
When an economy is growing, GDP is increasing. When an economy is contracting, it is decreasing. "Keynesian" economics is a school of economic thought says that the government can and should intervene in economies to "smooth" the business cycle. This can be temporarily effective. It can slow economies when they grow too quickly. It can "stimulate" economies when they are contracting.
GDP is contracting right now, and has been since December 2007 because consumers are dramatically reducing their spending. Keynesian policies that have worked to stimulate demand are not working anymore. In other words, the "C" in GDP is falling off a cliff... no matter what the Government does. In the Fortune Encyclopedia of Economics, 1993 edition, I found the following in the section on GDP:
"GDP measures production, not exchange. If economists, policymakers, and news commentators kept this simple truth in mind, much confusion over the interpretation of economic statistics might be avoided. Many proposals to cut taxes, for example, are aimed at 'stimulating consumer spending', which is expected to cause an increase in GDP. But consumer spending is a use of GDP, not production. A rise in consumer demand could simply crowd out investment, not raise GDP." The writing goes on to explain that in the short run, Keynesian emphasis on demand is, "relevant and alluring". But, government reliance in "demand management" can "distort market prices, generate major inefficiencies, and destroy production incentives." Sound familiar? Is it possible that we are currently experiencing the effects of years of government binging on Keynesian policies to artificially prop up demand (consumer spending)? I not only think it is possible, I think it is true.
Now that propping up consumption is no longer working, the government is going to drastically increase the "G" in the formula above. We already see this beginning with all the bailouts and no doubt we will see it in Obama's New, New Deal.
These policies will lead us into a socialist state. I am sad to say this is where we are headed. I can only hope there are enough people out there who will grasp what is happening and try to save our country.
Luckily, the market, like the"force" in Star Wars has a way of letting us know when things are out of whack. They are very out of whack right now. If we try to fight gravity by "propping up demand" we only continue dependence on the same policies that created this mess in the first place.
Check out how much America has been consuming:
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch5en/conc5en/leadingtraders.html
Look where government spending is headed:
http://www.gao.gov/cghome/hccrisis/img6.html
Try to get a good night's sleep, anyway.
Why? Because the primary driver of GDP growth over the last 15 years or so has been consumption. Conspicuous consumption is dead. (for now) See GDP (otherwise known as Gross Domestic Product) = C + G + I, where C =consumption G=government spending and I= investment. This is a very basic explanation. If you want more detail read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product
When an economy is growing, GDP is increasing. When an economy is contracting, it is decreasing. "Keynesian" economics is a school of economic thought says that the government can and should intervene in economies to "smooth" the business cycle. This can be temporarily effective. It can slow economies when they grow too quickly. It can "stimulate" economies when they are contracting.
GDP is contracting right now, and has been since December 2007 because consumers are dramatically reducing their spending. Keynesian policies that have worked to stimulate demand are not working anymore. In other words, the "C" in GDP is falling off a cliff... no matter what the Government does. In the Fortune Encyclopedia of Economics, 1993 edition, I found the following in the section on GDP:
"GDP measures production, not exchange. If economists, policymakers, and news commentators kept this simple truth in mind, much confusion over the interpretation of economic statistics might be avoided. Many proposals to cut taxes, for example, are aimed at 'stimulating consumer spending', which is expected to cause an increase in GDP. But consumer spending is a use of GDP, not production. A rise in consumer demand could simply crowd out investment, not raise GDP." The writing goes on to explain that in the short run, Keynesian emphasis on demand is, "relevant and alluring". But, government reliance in "demand management" can "distort market prices, generate major inefficiencies, and destroy production incentives." Sound familiar? Is it possible that we are currently experiencing the effects of years of government binging on Keynesian policies to artificially prop up demand (consumer spending)? I not only think it is possible, I think it is true.
Now that propping up consumption is no longer working, the government is going to drastically increase the "G" in the formula above. We already see this beginning with all the bailouts and no doubt we will see it in Obama's New, New Deal.
These policies will lead us into a socialist state. I am sad to say this is where we are headed. I can only hope there are enough people out there who will grasp what is happening and try to save our country.
Luckily, the market, like the"force" in Star Wars has a way of letting us know when things are out of whack. They are very out of whack right now. If we try to fight gravity by "propping up demand" we only continue dependence on the same policies that created this mess in the first place.
Check out how much America has been consuming:
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch5en/conc5en/leadingtraders.html
Look where government spending is headed:
http://www.gao.gov/cghome/hccrisis/img6.html
Try to get a good night's sleep, anyway.
Guest Blogger
My beautiful daughter is my guest blogger tonight. I had to work late and she is still awake. So I asked her if she wanted to help with my blog. Here is what she has to say:
"I am proud of my mom for making her own blog site. I like that she came up with the title econ mom. My day was good. Today we rehearsed songs on the stages in the cafeteria. We sang "Happy Talk", "Under The Sea", and another song that I can't remember the name of. I cannot sleep because yesterday I went to sleep late and tonight I think I am going to fall asleep at the same time I did yesterday. I already read a book called "Fantastic Mr. Fox" by Roald Dahl. I think it is really cool. I understand I am talking about random topics, but I don't care.
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH ADULTS?: They are old and grumpy. I know that I should listen to my parents or other adults but sometimes they get annoying. No offense.
MY BROTHER: He likes guns, swords, a game called Command & Conquer, & he likes to flick me. I do not like when he flicks me. I have to say that I am not always nice to my brother. I still love my brother even though sometimes he can be a pain in the neck.
SCHOOL: I think fourth grade is a little more challenging than third grade and under. But I am very glad that I have a boy teacher because he is very nice and I've always had girl teachers.
HOW TO ACHIEVE WORLD PEACE: People being nice. Recycling. And I don't know much more about that.
WHAT I LIKE: I only like to read good books. I like science. I like Webkinz. I like lemon tea.
WHAT I HATE: I hate it when my hair gets all full of static in winter. I also hate onions. I hate a boy in my class. I hate hate homework.
GROWN UPS SHOULD: Listen to kids more. Sometimes let their kids, if they have any, be wild. Let them stay up a little later on weekends, but, I have to say sorry to my mom because she is letting me stay up late right now That is all I have to say. Bye "
"I am proud of my mom for making her own blog site. I like that she came up with the title econ mom. My day was good. Today we rehearsed songs on the stages in the cafeteria. We sang "Happy Talk", "Under The Sea", and another song that I can't remember the name of. I cannot sleep because yesterday I went to sleep late and tonight I think I am going to fall asleep at the same time I did yesterday. I already read a book called "Fantastic Mr. Fox" by Roald Dahl. I think it is really cool. I understand I am talking about random topics, but I don't care.
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH ADULTS?: They are old and grumpy. I know that I should listen to my parents or other adults but sometimes they get annoying. No offense.
MY BROTHER: He likes guns, swords, a game called Command & Conquer, & he likes to flick me. I do not like when he flicks me. I have to say that I am not always nice to my brother. I still love my brother even though sometimes he can be a pain in the neck.
SCHOOL: I think fourth grade is a little more challenging than third grade and under. But I am very glad that I have a boy teacher because he is very nice and I've always had girl teachers.
HOW TO ACHIEVE WORLD PEACE: People being nice. Recycling. And I don't know much more about that.
WHAT I LIKE: I only like to read good books. I like science. I like Webkinz. I like lemon tea.
WHAT I HATE: I hate it when my hair gets all full of static in winter. I also hate onions. I hate a boy in my class. I hate hate homework.
GROWN UPS SHOULD: Listen to kids more. Sometimes let their kids, if they have any, be wild. Let them stay up a little later on weekends, but, I have to say sorry to my mom because she is letting me stay up late right now That is all I have to say. Bye "
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
What Children Need
Children need time, attention (conscious attention), love, & food and water. Therefore, I will not be blogging tonight. My kids need me.
Have a good night!
Have a good night!
Monday, December 1, 2008
Bernanke Amazes Me
I was watching the "fally" fall apart today on CNBC. They panned to a speech Bernanke was giving at an economic conference. I tuned in just in time for the question and answer period. I could not believe my ears but I thought I heard Bernanke, a self-proclaimed "expert" on the Great Depression say that, "there is no comparison" between the situation we are now facing and the Great Depression he has so avidly studied. Now, I want to know, what exactly has he been studying? No, seriously, I am not being sarcastic. I know I am nowhere near as smart as Bernanke. But, I have been fascinated with the Great Depression for years, and I have read at least three academic books, two of them were very dry and technical, but full of good information nonetheless. The third, I am still reading. It is by far the best of the three. ('The Forgotten Man' by Amity Shlaes) I would recommend it for everyone.
Now, I know I am no Bernanke. I am, however, smart enough to realize that THIS PERIOD IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE GREAT DEPRESSION ERA in more ways than one. We are facing:
1) The unwinding of a very large asset bubble. (Housing was the trigger in this case.)
2) A period of steep deflation in the value of many hard assets.
3) A global recession.
4) A dramatic decline in stock prices.
(part of the asset deflation)
5) Government intervention on a massive scale. (New Deal type policies on the horizon)
6) Massive failures in the financial services sector. (Leman, AIG, Citi, Etc.)
So, what exactly does Bernanke mean when he says the era's are not comparable? I might just be cynical enough to think he is trying to prevent being replaced by OBAMA.
Bernanke says we will be better off this time because the FRB is going to hold interest rates very low and the government won't be protectionist. He also says the economy is so much bigger now that the consequences of a global slowdown won't be as severe as they were back then.
What am I missing here? Am I to read in to his comments that he intends to inflate the money supply to such a degree that a depression is impossible? Is he just so brilliant that he an his board of governors can stop a very large interconnected global economy from faltering? Can he single-handedly create a new asset bubble to replace the old one? Are federal reserve governors just inherently SMARTER now because of evolution than they were in the 1930's? Oh, that's probably true. What an arrogant.......OK, I'll stop now. I think you get the picture.
Needless to say I would love it if someone out there, economist or not, could give me some hard evidence as to why the downturn we are facing is different than the Great Depression. I mean it, I really want to be wrong on this one.
Please read:
http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/10/15/afx5559042.html
and
http://www.forbes.com/reuters/feeds/reuters/2008/12/01/2008-12-01T194048Z_01_WBT010190_RTRIDST_0_USA-FED-BERNANKE-DEPRESSION-URGENT.html
Now, I know I am no Bernanke. I am, however, smart enough to realize that THIS PERIOD IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE GREAT DEPRESSION ERA in more ways than one. We are facing:
1) The unwinding of a very large asset bubble. (Housing was the trigger in this case.)
2) A period of steep deflation in the value of many hard assets.
3) A global recession.
4) A dramatic decline in stock prices.
(part of the asset deflation)
5) Government intervention on a massive scale. (New Deal type policies on the horizon)
6) Massive failures in the financial services sector. (Leman, AIG, Citi, Etc.)
So, what exactly does Bernanke mean when he says the era's are not comparable? I might just be cynical enough to think he is trying to prevent being replaced by OBAMA.
Bernanke says we will be better off this time because the FRB is going to hold interest rates very low and the government won't be protectionist. He also says the economy is so much bigger now that the consequences of a global slowdown won't be as severe as they were back then.
What am I missing here? Am I to read in to his comments that he intends to inflate the money supply to such a degree that a depression is impossible? Is he just so brilliant that he an his board of governors can stop a very large interconnected global economy from faltering? Can he single-handedly create a new asset bubble to replace the old one? Are federal reserve governors just inherently SMARTER now because of evolution than they were in the 1930's? Oh, that's probably true. What an arrogant.......OK, I'll stop now. I think you get the picture.
Needless to say I would love it if someone out there, economist or not, could give me some hard evidence as to why the downturn we are facing is different than the Great Depression. I mean it, I really want to be wrong on this one.
Please read:
http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/10/15/afx5559042.html
and
http://www.forbes.com/reuters/feeds/reuters/2008/12/01/2008-12-01T194048Z_01_WBT010190_RTRIDST_0_USA-FED-BERNANKE-DEPRESSION-URGENT.html
Sunday, November 30, 2008
What Is Real Value?
A question has been floating around in my mind today. I was thinking about prices. I was having a discussion with my husband about what the price of something should be. His point was that everything has different value to different people.
True. I have friends that enjoy scrapbooking. I however, do not. These women seem to really enjoy their hobby. I have to admit, I wish I liked it. I somehow feel I am lacking in femininity because I can't stand to scrapbook. I like looking at the wonderful books these people put together. Perhaps my children will wish they had one someday. Alas, they will only have CD Rom's and boxes full of pictures of themselves. I guess I am OK with that. But the real point is this: to me, scrapbooking supplies have little or no value, therefore, I wouldn't spend much if anything on them. But to many women (let's face it, it is almost only women who do this activity), they are extremely valuable. They literally are willing to spend hundreds, if not thousands of dollars on pretty paper. The person who receives the higher utility from a certain product, is willing to pay more for it. Without this there would be no markets, no arbitrage, no speculation. This is all fine and good. But it ultimately means that value is subjective.
I am having trouble with this idea. I really want value to be objective. But it isn't. It just isn't. The marketplace is what it is; and isn't it cool? If value were objective, I couldn't make money trading stocks. If value were objective, everyone would be willing to pay the same amount for scrapbooking supplies. Pehaps the best markets can do is get the prices of goods as close to their true value as possible through trading.
My old economics professors would probably laugh at me, "DUH". But it still fascinates me.
If you can think of a good or a commodity that has objective value please comment & explain your thoughts. I would love to hear them.
True. I have friends that enjoy scrapbooking. I however, do not. These women seem to really enjoy their hobby. I have to admit, I wish I liked it. I somehow feel I am lacking in femininity because I can't stand to scrapbook. I like looking at the wonderful books these people put together. Perhaps my children will wish they had one someday. Alas, they will only have CD Rom's and boxes full of pictures of themselves. I guess I am OK with that. But the real point is this: to me, scrapbooking supplies have little or no value, therefore, I wouldn't spend much if anything on them. But to many women (let's face it, it is almost only women who do this activity), they are extremely valuable. They literally are willing to spend hundreds, if not thousands of dollars on pretty paper. The person who receives the higher utility from a certain product, is willing to pay more for it. Without this there would be no markets, no arbitrage, no speculation. This is all fine and good. But it ultimately means that value is subjective.
I am having trouble with this idea. I really want value to be objective. But it isn't. It just isn't. The marketplace is what it is; and isn't it cool? If value were objective, I couldn't make money trading stocks. If value were objective, everyone would be willing to pay the same amount for scrapbooking supplies. Pehaps the best markets can do is get the prices of goods as close to their true value as possible through trading.
My old economics professors would probably laugh at me, "DUH". But it still fascinates me.
If you can think of a good or a commodity that has objective value please comment & explain your thoughts. I would love to hear them.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Commercial Opportunity?
Just when I thought the world was starting to make some sense, I read this article:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27930515
The link to the article above will tell you why there are some really good investments in commercial real estate bonds right now.
THIS IS MADNESS!!! Whatever you do, DO NOT go out and buy commercial real estate bonds. This article would have millions of people buying the garbage because the yield is high.
Remember that a bond is just a loan. A commercial real estate bond is just a loan from private investors to commercial real estate thieves. These things are junk. The reason they are paying such a high rate of return is because if you invest in them you WILL NEVER SEE YOUR PRINCIPAL again. Don't do it - high yields often mean high risk. Have you driven around town lately to see what is happening to commercial real estate?
These guys are so desperate for new "investors" (i. e. "suckers") they will do anything to get your hard earned cash. The banks have already realized they are crooks - don't become the lender of last resort.
Also, please do not rush into stocks because the headlines are saying we are in for the biggest bear market rally since 1933. Stop and think about that for a moment. 1933! Where exactly were we bouncing from back then?
Please pull out your historical charts.
http://stockcharts.com/charts/historical/djia1900.html
If you are a trader, or an investment advisor with years of experience, you may be able to play this rally. If you are not, please don't buy all the bull shit you hear. These people have a vested interest in selling stocks.
I remember my days as an intern at a certain "financial planning" company. I worked as an assistant to financial planners. I decided NOT to be a financial planner because of what was going on there. (Granted, there are some very good financial planners out there, but they are not the flashy kind of guys and gals that most people gravitate toward.)
I also remember my days as an Investment Sales Representative (and later Supervisor) at your local community bank. I remember the feeling I got when I would put people in the appropriate product for their risk tolerance & time horizon. I knew I had done the right thing for the customer, but I knew I would soon be called in to my manager's office, after selling a boring CD or Annuity to an 70 year old lady. It was approximately 1997.
"Why didn't you sell them on mutual funds? You know you get a higher commission?" To which I would answer, "It didn't seem appropriate, given her risk profile." The boss would then say, but didn't you show her the CHART?" The "CHART" was a graph showing the S&P 500 and it's gains since 1955 or so. I would counter that it wasn't an accurate chart to show, because it did not accurately portray the risk associated with stock investments. It excluded the time period from 1929 to 1954. This woman was retired. She needed her last $200,000 in the world to live off of. I wasn't being a good steward if I put her in risky assets. My boss would act very irritated and make suggestions under his breath that I would be better in operations. And so it was, eventually I moved into operations, which I loved. Sales was not for me.
Now, this is not to say that if this woman would have been 30, 40, or maybe even 50 with a lot of assets, that I wouldn't have recommended mutual funds as part of her portfolio. I would have; IF her risk tolerance and time horizon were appropriate. But, you see, this wasn't very good for sales. I was too smart for sales, or to honest. I would do much better in operations. And I did.
I am currently reading a book by Aaron Clarey called, "Behind The Housing Crash". It reminds me of what I was experiencing back in the day. He was going through a very similar thing as a credit analyst not long after I was listening to my bosses tell me why mutual funds would always go up over time. Buy his book - it is worth every penny. I laughed out loud in several parts, probably because I could relate, although in a different time and place. I was worried about the dot-com bubble at the time, and how it had inflated stocks. A little while later, he was worried about the housing bubble, and he was right to be worried. Anyway, it is a great read, especially if you want to understand the nature of the housing bubble.
OK - that was a tangent. Goodnight.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27930515
The link to the article above will tell you why there are some really good investments in commercial real estate bonds right now.
THIS IS MADNESS!!! Whatever you do, DO NOT go out and buy commercial real estate bonds. This article would have millions of people buying the garbage because the yield is high.
Remember that a bond is just a loan. A commercial real estate bond is just a loan from private investors to commercial real estate thieves. These things are junk. The reason they are paying such a high rate of return is because if you invest in them you WILL NEVER SEE YOUR PRINCIPAL again. Don't do it - high yields often mean high risk. Have you driven around town lately to see what is happening to commercial real estate?
These guys are so desperate for new "investors" (i. e. "suckers") they will do anything to get your hard earned cash. The banks have already realized they are crooks - don't become the lender of last resort.
Also, please do not rush into stocks because the headlines are saying we are in for the biggest bear market rally since 1933. Stop and think about that for a moment. 1933! Where exactly were we bouncing from back then?
Please pull out your historical charts.
http://stockcharts.com/charts/historical/djia1900.html
If you are a trader, or an investment advisor with years of experience, you may be able to play this rally. If you are not, please don't buy all the bull shit you hear. These people have a vested interest in selling stocks.
I remember my days as an intern at a certain "financial planning" company. I worked as an assistant to financial planners. I decided NOT to be a financial planner because of what was going on there. (Granted, there are some very good financial planners out there, but they are not the flashy kind of guys and gals that most people gravitate toward.)
I also remember my days as an Investment Sales Representative (and later Supervisor) at your local community bank. I remember the feeling I got when I would put people in the appropriate product for their risk tolerance & time horizon. I knew I had done the right thing for the customer, but I knew I would soon be called in to my manager's office, after selling a boring CD or Annuity to an 70 year old lady. It was approximately 1997.
"Why didn't you sell them on mutual funds? You know you get a higher commission?" To which I would answer, "It didn't seem appropriate, given her risk profile." The boss would then say, but didn't you show her the CHART?" The "CHART" was a graph showing the S&P 500 and it's gains since 1955 or so. I would counter that it wasn't an accurate chart to show, because it did not accurately portray the risk associated with stock investments. It excluded the time period from 1929 to 1954. This woman was retired. She needed her last $200,000 in the world to live off of. I wasn't being a good steward if I put her in risky assets. My boss would act very irritated and make suggestions under his breath that I would be better in operations. And so it was, eventually I moved into operations, which I loved. Sales was not for me.
Now, this is not to say that if this woman would have been 30, 40, or maybe even 50 with a lot of assets, that I wouldn't have recommended mutual funds as part of her portfolio. I would have; IF her risk tolerance and time horizon were appropriate. But, you see, this wasn't very good for sales. I was too smart for sales, or to honest. I would do much better in operations. And I did.
I am currently reading a book by Aaron Clarey called, "Behind The Housing Crash". It reminds me of what I was experiencing back in the day. He was going through a very similar thing as a credit analyst not long after I was listening to my bosses tell me why mutual funds would always go up over time. Buy his book - it is worth every penny. I laughed out loud in several parts, probably because I could relate, although in a different time and place. I was worried about the dot-com bubble at the time, and how it had inflated stocks. A little while later, he was worried about the housing bubble, and he was right to be worried. Anyway, it is a great read, especially if you want to understand the nature of the housing bubble.
OK - that was a tangent. Goodnight.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Mumbai
Just more horrific evidence of what we are up against.
I am actually impressed with the statement from the Obama team. Surprised, but impressed. We'll see what more he has to say. I guess Biden was right, he is going to be tested. I hope it isn't as bad as I think it will be. I am sure he is starting to think a bit about how Bush felt when he was informed of the 9/11 attacks. Nothing like on the job training. It just reminds me we have to stand together as Americans to face this threat, no matter what our economic & political views.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/16020.html
I am actually impressed with the statement from the Obama team. Surprised, but impressed. We'll see what more he has to say. I guess Biden was right, he is going to be tested. I hope it isn't as bad as I think it will be. I am sure he is starting to think a bit about how Bush felt when he was informed of the 9/11 attacks. Nothing like on the job training. It just reminds me we have to stand together as Americans to face this threat, no matter what our economic & political views.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/16020.html
The Power of Denial
Denial is hard to fight. The government and many in the media would have you believe that we can spend our way out of this mess. We can't.
The government would have you believe that inflation is better than depression. It isn't.
Stock brokers would like you to believe the market has bottomed. It hasn't.
If I hear the phrase "stimulate consumer spending" again I am going to puke. How the hell do people think this mess was created in the first place?
Unemployment, credit card defaults, more banks failures - eventually the government will run out of $. Well, then they will have to print it, lots of it. That means each of your hard earned dollars will buy less.
Right now the government is in the process of trying to stop a deflationary spiral. They are essentially saying they prefer inflation to deflation, when what we really need is to let the market reallocate resources from spenders to savers. The government simply won't let this happen. So instead we will have inflation. Here is a a brief explanation of deflation & inflation from Wikipedia:
"Deflation is generally regarded negatively, as it is a tax on borrowers and on holders of illiquid assets, which accrues to the benefit of savers and of holders of liquid assets and currency. In this sense it is the opposite of inflation (or in the extreme, hyperinflation), which is a tax on currency holders and lenders (savers) in favor of borrowers and short term consumption. In modern economies, deflation is caused by a collapse in demand (usually brought on by high interest rates), and is associated with recession and (more rarely) long term economic depressions."
What immediately jumps out at me is deflation is usually brought about by high interest rates. But real interest rates are close to zero, and have been held artificially low my the Fed since after 9/11. Something smells fishy. Hence, our government just wants to create more bubbles. I hope the American consumer will wake up and start saving more, paying down debt, and consuming less.
Isn't it ironic that the same leftists that so vilify rampant consumerism are fostering it with their economic policies? Isn't it even more ironic that the "conservatives" that have been in power for the last eight years have done the same thing. Think about it.
The government would have you believe that inflation is better than depression. It isn't.
Stock brokers would like you to believe the market has bottomed. It hasn't.
If I hear the phrase "stimulate consumer spending" again I am going to puke. How the hell do people think this mess was created in the first place?
Unemployment, credit card defaults, more banks failures - eventually the government will run out of $. Well, then they will have to print it, lots of it. That means each of your hard earned dollars will buy less.
Right now the government is in the process of trying to stop a deflationary spiral. They are essentially saying they prefer inflation to deflation, when what we really need is to let the market reallocate resources from spenders to savers. The government simply won't let this happen. So instead we will have inflation. Here is a a brief explanation of deflation & inflation from Wikipedia:
"Deflation is generally regarded negatively, as it is a tax on borrowers and on holders of illiquid assets, which accrues to the benefit of savers and of holders of liquid assets and currency. In this sense it is the opposite of inflation (or in the extreme, hyperinflation), which is a tax on currency holders and lenders (savers) in favor of borrowers and short term consumption. In modern economies, deflation is caused by a collapse in demand (usually brought on by high interest rates), and is associated with recession and (more rarely) long term economic depressions."
What immediately jumps out at me is deflation is usually brought about by high interest rates. But real interest rates are close to zero, and have been held artificially low my the Fed since after 9/11. Something smells fishy. Hence, our government just wants to create more bubbles. I hope the American consumer will wake up and start saving more, paying down debt, and consuming less.
Isn't it ironic that the same leftists that so vilify rampant consumerism are fostering it with their economic policies? Isn't it even more ironic that the "conservatives" that have been in power for the last eight years have done the same thing. Think about it.
The market is having a very big bear market rally. If you were long you got lucky, sell the rip. If you were short & can afford to, stick it out, this market is coming back down. Do I know for sure? Of course I don't. But I believe this is what they call a "fally". (A fake rally caused primarily by short covering.)
Here is a funny article to read:
http://www.minyanville.com/articles/bailout-recession-deregulation/index/a/20072/p/1
Now, hang on, because I am going to totally shift gears. How does all of this doom & gloom fit into Thanksgiving? Well, "A Course in Miracles" says: Giving And Receiving Are One in Truth. So even if you are losing your home, have lost all your money in the stock market, and are truly depressed about the coming depression, here are some things you can give:
Love
Attention
Time
Presence
Understanding
Forgiveness
These things are free last time I checked. However, you cannot find them until you have gotten rid of the Denial that is so powerful in this world. Though physical things are important to our daily survival, you can't even really enjoy them until you realize how unimportant they are. If you can give on the physical level, do that too. If not, remember the "things" listed above are much more valuable than what you have lost.
I hope you all have a wonderful Thanksgiving.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Where Your Tax Dollars Are Going
I really wanted to focus on the more touchy feely things in my life today. I wanted to write a bit about parenting, why going to the dentist sucks, etc. etc.
However, I was watching CNBC and caught this. More pressing issues prevailed. This is the single largest shareholder in CITIGROUP. GOD HELP US.
I really want you to know where your extra $300 billion is being spent.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27894331
I was hoping I could post the video, but you can't view it unless you have a subscription to CNBC Plus. If you do, please watch the video. If you don't, please read the text and then read the following about the Prince. Keep in mind he was playing with "worry beads" during the entire interview with the beautiful Maria Bartiromo. Perhaps he was afraid of her. If not, what was he so worried about?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Waleed_bin_Talal
Am I crazy to be a little worried? I would love your input, so don't be afraid to post a comment. Be "anonymous" if you don't want to share your name or do not have a Google account.
However, I was watching CNBC and caught this. More pressing issues prevailed. This is the single largest shareholder in CITIGROUP. GOD HELP US.
I really want you to know where your extra $300 billion is being spent.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27894331
I was hoping I could post the video, but you can't view it unless you have a subscription to CNBC Plus. If you do, please watch the video. If you don't, please read the text and then read the following about the Prince. Keep in mind he was playing with "worry beads" during the entire interview with the beautiful Maria Bartiromo. Perhaps he was afraid of her. If not, what was he so worried about?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Waleed_bin_Talal
Am I crazy to be a little worried? I would love your input, so don't be afraid to post a comment. Be "anonymous" if you don't want to share your name or do not have a Google account.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Why Obama Can't Save Us
I was thinking about a little formula I and millions of others know and wanted to share it with the rest of you. I hope I can do it.
The formula is used to determine what a company's stock is worth. Here it is:
P (Stock Price) = E1Q + E2Q2 + ... + ENQN + ENQN x Q/(1 - Q)
where E2 is the earnings in period 2 (usually a quarter of a year) and Q is the so-called "discount factor" 1/(1 + R). The R represents the prevailing rate of return in the market place, or in layman's terms, the going interest rate during the time period in question. The "ENQN + ENQN x Q/(1 - Q)" part just takes the formula into the future.
OK, don't stop reading yet, it is OK if you don't get the math. The basic point is that a stock is only worth the sum of the company's EXPECTED future earnings. Where stock prices get really out of whack, is when people do a terrible job of predicting what the company is likely to earn in the future.
The tech bubble is the best example I can think of. Analysts, traders, and the guy next store all bought into the lie that dot com companies' earnings would continue to grow at a phenomenal rate, forever in to the future. So, the stock prices went up way too much. The truth was, the majority of these companies would not be able to generate earnings at all in the future. Once that reality was realized, the stocks came down accordingly. In other words - the E in the formula above fell, or in some cases never materialized at all. You have probably figured out by now that the word EXPECTED is key here. When earnings expectations fall - so do stock prices.
Currently, the stock market has realized that because or financial system is on the verge of collapse and we are entering the next Great Depression (or at least a terrible recession) companies are worth much less than Wall Street thought they were.
If stocks are overvalued, eventually they will come down. If they are undervalued, eventually they will come up. It is sort of like gravity, E=MC2, or centripetal force. You can't fight it. Or you can, but you will lose money.
Know, knowing this, do you still think Obama can create wealth? I read a ticker on CNN yesterday that said he is going to create 250,000 jobs. I would like to know how exactly he plans to do this. Is it possible that the expectations for your saviour are a little too high? You know what, I am going to create a job for you too. You can come and clean my house. I will pay you with fairy dust, because that is what our currency will be worth soon. Obama will have you building roads and bridges. To pay you he will take it out of your paycheck. Better yet he will take it out of the profits of the company who still employs your wife until they go under and she can help you build the roads and bridges. GOD - it is insanity!
Now, here is another formula I have learned over the past 8 years or so. It is even more difficult to grasp than the first, but it is essentially the same.
WORLD PEACE = IP 1 + IP 2 + ......... IPN;
where IP 1 equals inner peace for person 1. IP 2 = inner peace for person 2. N is the number of people in the world.
I am sure Obama can fix this too. Once he convinces the rest of the world that we, too, are cool.
Look, no one else can bring you peace - you have to find it within yourself.
Look, no one else can bring you wealth - you have to work to create something of value.
Obama can't bring about world peace and prosperity any more than extracting equity from a house or racking up credit card debt to buy consumables can create wealth.
Sickness does not create health. Dependency does not create wealth.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Learn more at:
http://www.moneychimp.com/articles/finworks/fmvaluation.htm
The formula is used to determine what a company's stock is worth. Here it is:
P (Stock Price) = E1Q + E2Q2 + ... + ENQN + ENQN x Q/(1 - Q)
where E2 is the earnings in period 2 (usually a quarter of a year) and Q is the so-called "discount factor" 1/(1 + R). The R represents the prevailing rate of return in the market place, or in layman's terms, the going interest rate during the time period in question. The "ENQN + ENQN x Q/(1 - Q)" part just takes the formula into the future.
OK, don't stop reading yet, it is OK if you don't get the math. The basic point is that a stock is only worth the sum of the company's EXPECTED future earnings. Where stock prices get really out of whack, is when people do a terrible job of predicting what the company is likely to earn in the future.
The tech bubble is the best example I can think of. Analysts, traders, and the guy next store all bought into the lie that dot com companies' earnings would continue to grow at a phenomenal rate, forever in to the future. So, the stock prices went up way too much. The truth was, the majority of these companies would not be able to generate earnings at all in the future. Once that reality was realized, the stocks came down accordingly. In other words - the E in the formula above fell, or in some cases never materialized at all. You have probably figured out by now that the word EXPECTED is key here. When earnings expectations fall - so do stock prices.
Currently, the stock market has realized that because or financial system is on the verge of collapse and we are entering the next Great Depression (or at least a terrible recession) companies are worth much less than Wall Street thought they were.
If stocks are overvalued, eventually they will come down. If they are undervalued, eventually they will come up. It is sort of like gravity, E=MC2, or centripetal force. You can't fight it. Or you can, but you will lose money.
Know, knowing this, do you still think Obama can create wealth? I read a ticker on CNN yesterday that said he is going to create 250,000 jobs. I would like to know how exactly he plans to do this. Is it possible that the expectations for your saviour are a little too high? You know what, I am going to create a job for you too. You can come and clean my house. I will pay you with fairy dust, because that is what our currency will be worth soon. Obama will have you building roads and bridges. To pay you he will take it out of your paycheck. Better yet he will take it out of the profits of the company who still employs your wife until they go under and she can help you build the roads and bridges. GOD - it is insanity!
Now, here is another formula I have learned over the past 8 years or so. It is even more difficult to grasp than the first, but it is essentially the same.
WORLD PEACE = IP 1 + IP 2 + ......... IPN;
where IP 1 equals inner peace for person 1. IP 2 = inner peace for person 2. N is the number of people in the world.
I am sure Obama can fix this too. Once he convinces the rest of the world that we, too, are cool.
Look, no one else can bring you peace - you have to find it within yourself.
Look, no one else can bring you wealth - you have to work to create something of value.
Obama can't bring about world peace and prosperity any more than extracting equity from a house or racking up credit card debt to buy consumables can create wealth.
Sickness does not create health. Dependency does not create wealth.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Learn more at:
http://www.moneychimp.com/articles/finworks/fmvaluation.htm
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Yoga Lovers
I love Yoga. I do not practice it often enough. I just want my friends who doubt we are facing a rising tide of Islamic extremism in the world to read this:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/11/22/malaysia.yoga.banned.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/11/22/malaysia.yoga.banned.ap/index.html
Poor Denny
I was wondering how Denny Hecker was doing. During the boom just about every bus in the Twin Cities had his smiling face on it. Mortgages, auto loans, and selling cars is his game. Denny Hecker is his name.
This is just to remind you that auto prices will not be going up anytime soon, even if The Pathetic Three go under.
No, really, we need more cars.
This is just to remind you that auto prices will not be going up anytime soon, even if The Pathetic Three go under.
No, really, we need more cars.
Friday, November 21, 2008
What A Day; Thank God
Wow, I certainly got my hat handed to me today in the market. Humbling to say the least. I was short, very short. The appointment of Geithner threw everything off. The market soared on the news. He will change everything. He will be able to do what Paulson has not. The sky's the limit from here.
Sure. Ok. Riiiiiiiiiigggghhhhhtt,
But, I don't care. Even though we are probably entering the next Great Depression, tonight I am in a mood to be thankful. A mood of gratitude.
How wonderful I have a husband who truly loves me. How lucky I am. How wonderful I have two children that make me smile at least once a day. How wonderful I have a house to live in, food to eat (good food too), a fire in the fire place. I got to play a game of UNO Attack with my daughter in front of that fireplace tonight. A Mom, Dad & sister who love me and my family. A fabulous extended family. Friends that are like family, and would give me the shirt off their backs. Tonight I am filled with love & gratitude. I don't care about anything else. I am going to enjoy what is here in front of me right NOW.
I hope you will take some time to do the same.
Sure. Ok. Riiiiiiiiiigggghhhhhtt,
But, I don't care. Even though we are probably entering the next Great Depression, tonight I am in a mood to be thankful. A mood of gratitude.
How wonderful I have a husband who truly loves me. How lucky I am. How wonderful I have two children that make me smile at least once a day. How wonderful I have a house to live in, food to eat (good food too), a fire in the fire place. I got to play a game of UNO Attack with my daughter in front of that fireplace tonight. A Mom, Dad & sister who love me and my family. A fabulous extended family. Friends that are like family, and would give me the shirt off their backs. Tonight I am filled with love & gratitude. I don't care about anything else. I am going to enjoy what is here in front of me right NOW.
I hope you will take some time to do the same.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Politics & Pies
I realize it may seem to readers that I am a Republican. I am not. I don't have a convenient label for my political views. I believe in freedom. I want the government out of economics and out of religion. I think markets should be as government-free as possible. I am pro-choice. I am pro-choice not because I am not the decider. God, or the Universe, or the Life Force, or whatever you want to call it is the decider. I have no business telling someone else what to do with their own body. I also have no business deciding whether life begins at conception. The Republican platform is strictly pro-life. That is fine, I can see how reasonable people could disagree about when life begins. If you truly believe in your heart of hearts that life begins at conception, then abortion is murder, and you must use the power of the government to stop it. Or must you? Remember that movie with Tom Cruise where the government puts people in jail before they commit murder? (Forgive me for not remembering the name.) Anyway, I am pro-choice.
I am also in support of gay marriage. Being a very spiritual person (I believe true salvation lies within), but not particularly religious (institutionalized spirituality), I do not understand what the hell people are threatened by when they say, "Marriage is between a man and a woman". What does that mean? Perhaps they could explain it to me. As if being married to someone of the opposite sex guarantees happiness. What if you happen to fall in love with someone of the same sex? Why would anyone want to stop two people who truly love each other from getting married and enjoying the same legal benefits as heterosexual couples? What could there motivation possibly be? I bet most of you didn't know Obama is against gay marriage too. This is how Obama felt about gay marriage in 1994:
Gays should not face discrimination but should not marry
Q: [to Keyes]: You've criticized homosexuality throughout your career. What would you say to your child if he or she were a homosexual?
KEYES: Marriage is based upon heterosexual relations because they are connected to procreation. Where procreation is impossible, marriage is irrelevant. And that is the civic explanation against homosexual marriage. It is irrelevant. And the idea that one should have legislation that is regulating private friendships for no reason is a degrading of those friendships.
OBAMA: Well, to answer the original question, I would love that child and seek to support them. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but I detest the bashing and vilifying of gays and lesbians. Most gays and lesbians are seeking basic recognition of their rights so they're not discriminated against in employment or renting a house, so they can see their partner in a hospital. These are rights for everybody, not just some people.
Source: Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes Oct 21, 2004
From ontheissues.org
Anyway, for these reasons I can't call myself a Republican. However, I voted for McCain because I believe their are two problems facing this country that are much more pressing than abortion or the gay marriage issue. Our economy is in the midst of a full scale collapse. The US Government must not go bankrupt. Yes, yes, I can hear it already. "George Bush and his policies are responsible for all of our economic problems." No, they are not. It simply isn't true - even if you want it to be because you hate Bush. Our economy is on the verge of collapse because American consumers don't like the word "no". Truth does matter.
The second factor is Islamic extremism. I have simply read to much on this subject to think it is not a problem. It is. We cannot let our guard down. The extremists do not care how "enlightened" you far left liberals think Obama is. They will not decide to back off because he is our president. 9/11 happened BEFORE we invaded Iraq.
If we lose all our money and all our freedom we will only have to worry about where our next meal is coming from. Economics is just too important to every human being in this country to ignore. Obama is just plain wrong when it comes to economics. He believes in splitting up the pie fairly, so everyone will have a piece. Sounds good on the face of it. Sounds great.
But as you lay your head on the pillow tonight before you close your eyes, ask yourself a few questions:
Who made the pie?
Why did they make the pie in the first place?
When the pie is gone, who will make more pies?
Will they want to make any more pie at all?
Goodnight.
I am also in support of gay marriage. Being a very spiritual person (I believe true salvation lies within), but not particularly religious (institutionalized spirituality), I do not understand what the hell people are threatened by when they say, "Marriage is between a man and a woman". What does that mean? Perhaps they could explain it to me. As if being married to someone of the opposite sex guarantees happiness. What if you happen to fall in love with someone of the same sex? Why would anyone want to stop two people who truly love each other from getting married and enjoying the same legal benefits as heterosexual couples? What could there motivation possibly be? I bet most of you didn't know Obama is against gay marriage too. This is how Obama felt about gay marriage in 1994:
Gays should not face discrimination but should not marry
Q: [to Keyes]: You've criticized homosexuality throughout your career. What would you say to your child if he or she were a homosexual?
KEYES: Marriage is based upon heterosexual relations because they are connected to procreation. Where procreation is impossible, marriage is irrelevant. And that is the civic explanation against homosexual marriage. It is irrelevant. And the idea that one should have legislation that is regulating private friendships for no reason is a degrading of those friendships.
OBAMA: Well, to answer the original question, I would love that child and seek to support them. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but I detest the bashing and vilifying of gays and lesbians. Most gays and lesbians are seeking basic recognition of their rights so they're not discriminated against in employment or renting a house, so they can see their partner in a hospital. These are rights for everybody, not just some people.
Source: Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes Oct 21, 2004
From ontheissues.org
Anyway, for these reasons I can't call myself a Republican. However, I voted for McCain because I believe their are two problems facing this country that are much more pressing than abortion or the gay marriage issue. Our economy is in the midst of a full scale collapse. The US Government must not go bankrupt. Yes, yes, I can hear it already. "George Bush and his policies are responsible for all of our economic problems." No, they are not. It simply isn't true - even if you want it to be because you hate Bush. Our economy is on the verge of collapse because American consumers don't like the word "no". Truth does matter.
The second factor is Islamic extremism. I have simply read to much on this subject to think it is not a problem. It is. We cannot let our guard down. The extremists do not care how "enlightened" you far left liberals think Obama is. They will not decide to back off because he is our president. 9/11 happened BEFORE we invaded Iraq.
If we lose all our money and all our freedom we will only have to worry about where our next meal is coming from. Economics is just too important to every human being in this country to ignore. Obama is just plain wrong when it comes to economics. He believes in splitting up the pie fairly, so everyone will have a piece. Sounds good on the face of it. Sounds great.
But as you lay your head on the pillow tonight before you close your eyes, ask yourself a few questions:
Who made the pie?
Why did they make the pie in the first place?
When the pie is gone, who will make more pies?
Will they want to make any more pie at all?
Goodnight.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
KNOW YOUR HISTORY
Please take a look a this. This is why I say if we break 7400 on the DOW we are in trouble.
http://stockcharts.com/charts/historical/djia1900.html
Thank You & Goodnight.
http://stockcharts.com/charts/historical/djia1900.html
Thank You & Goodnight.
The Pathetic Three
I know - I know. It is mean to say anything bad about the big three. It is Anti-American. Look, these guys don't deserve to be saved. Neither did the bankers. I actually heard some guy testifying before congress today say that if we let the pathetic three go under, the American consumer will suffer because auto prices will go up. WHAAAAAAT??????? Has this fool ever studied basic economics - and I mean BASIC. I am assuming he means that the supply will drop so severely, that this will cause prices to rise. WRONG! Why the hell does he think the pathetic three aren't selling any cars? Because demand has fallen off of a CLIFF! How do we get back to equilibrium?? By having a dramatic reduction in supply! But with all those unsold vehicles sitting on the lots prices have to come down. By asking to be bailed out the pathetic three are essentially asking the government to keep the prices of their cars artificially high. It is because of this fact, their involvement in shady financing (GMAC finance), and sky high labor costs that the pathetic three are failing. People are broke - they can't buy any more cars! This does not even begin to touch on the fact that they made horrible decisions. They didn't invest enough in fuel efficient cars. They didn't have the balls to take on the unions. Etc., Etc. They didn't follow Toyota's example.
It is easy to be for Capitalism when things are going well. It is not as easy when you are the guy losing your job or going out of business. I love how all the "Capitalistic" bankers on Wall Street ran to the government with their hands out when their models failed. How dare they call themselves Capitalists. How dare they call this system Capitalism.
Real Capitalism has nothing to do with the hybrid government/business model we have seen for the last 25 years.
Let them fail.
It is easy to be for Capitalism when things are going well. It is not as easy when you are the guy losing your job or going out of business. I love how all the "Capitalistic" bankers on Wall Street ran to the government with their hands out when their models failed. How dare they call themselves Capitalists. How dare they call this system Capitalism.
Real Capitalism has nothing to do with the hybrid government/business model we have seen for the last 25 years.
Let them fail.
Thoughts of The Day
Parenthood: My daughter did not want to go to school today because she has short hair and "everyone else" has long hair. She ended up having a good day. My son is learning to read and it is so fun that it reminds me that sometimes the things that seem most difficult in life (parenting) are the most rewarding. Easy does not always translate into good.
The Market: Day trading is the only strategy that is working for me. I don't like to day trade, but it is simply the only thing working right now. Don't try it at home kids. I truly believe we are stuck in a range. I think 7400 is about the bottom. If it is not we might as well all pack it up and move to New Zealand because the next stop is around 4000 on the DOW. If you have $ in stocks and are not an investment professional it is time to realize "buy &and hold" was a lie. If you were lucky enough to get out before the crash you might want to SLOWLY increase your exposure to the market to about 30% or so.(If your time horizon and financial situation are appropriate.) However, please don't be one of those people who gets worried about missing the upswing (unless you are a trader). In my opinion, we are entering one of the longest, most protracted bear markets in history. Save your $, pay off all you debt, & find a way to produce income. BY THE WAY, if we bailout the carmakers we will end up with a country full of YUGO's - remember te YUGO? Ahhhhhhhh, THE YUGO. GOD HELP US.
The Market: Day trading is the only strategy that is working for me. I don't like to day trade, but it is simply the only thing working right now. Don't try it at home kids. I truly believe we are stuck in a range. I think 7400 is about the bottom. If it is not we might as well all pack it up and move to New Zealand because the next stop is around 4000 on the DOW. If you have $ in stocks and are not an investment professional it is time to realize "buy &and hold" was a lie. If you were lucky enough to get out before the crash you might want to SLOWLY increase your exposure to the market to about 30% or so.(If your time horizon and financial situation are appropriate.) However, please don't be one of those people who gets worried about missing the upswing (unless you are a trader). In my opinion, we are entering one of the longest, most protracted bear markets in history. Save your $, pay off all you debt, & find a way to produce income. BY THE WAY, if we bailout the carmakers we will end up with a country full of YUGO's - remember te YUGO? Ahhhhhhhh, THE YUGO. GOD HELP US.
Hello!
I am a mother of two who loves economics, stocks, and politics. I decided a blog would be a good idea when I realized I was spending way too much time talking to my poor friends and family about economics. I graduated from the University of Minnesota with a B.A. in Quantitative Economics in 1994. I worked in retail banking for about five years before having my first child and then went on to complete an MBA with a concentration in accounting and finance. For the last five years I have been home with my children full-time. So, when people ask me, "What do you do?" I always hesitate before answering. Do they really want to hear; "I care for two children, run a household, study economics, stocks, predict things like the dot com crash, the recent oil price run up and subsequent decline & the housing crash and subsequent stock market decline, take care of a dog, cat, rabbit, crayfish, fish, and try to remain sane peaceful and centered while I explore the inner depths of my psyche? The answer is NO.
However, if you would like some free information about the economy delivered in language that anyone can understand, you have found the right site.
However, if you would like some free information about the economy delivered in language that anyone can understand, you have found the right site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
