BR: Eloquent, insightful, lucid — why on earth would the filter catch this? Its the perfect comment !
markpmc Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
the title reminds me of the question greg maddux asked a rookie pitcher.
“You trying to throw strikes or get people out?”
Liquidity Trader Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
ahab,
The comment was from a traders perspective — it went right over your head.
Not only do you impose your politics on a non-political post, you completely misunderstand it. And to magnify your foolishness, you are rude to our host in a way that reveals you to be a much bigger asshole than I previously imagined.
This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types. Try one of the Austrians sites,or ZH — they don’t care about making money.
mbelardes Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
After reading through the comments (I rarely see BR this active on the comments, by the way) I’ve come to the conlcusion that some of the commenters are here to learn about macro perspectives and data analysis as a part of money management and some are here to root against the money management sector altogether.
This is why some of the posts where BR criticizes the market and market participants, such as firms and regulators, are so wildly popular and some of the sweet charts and data analysis get MAYBE a few dozen comments.
JasRas Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I’m in the makin’ money business, and frankly this isn’t that hard!! Right or wrong, the Fed and other CB’s are doing some version of QE, monetary expansion, etc… My basic view is dollars are worth less and other things are worth more…other things mean stocks, commodities–including precious metals, etc. Things that promise to return your dollars at a latter date in exchange for a predictable cash flow (ie. fixed income) mean you are getting dollars back later at an unknown deflated value. The cash flow paid in no way is compensating you for that lost buying power. Now, you say, there is no inflation! Look at the CPI. Well….if you believe stats compiled by the government, good luck to you because assets that perform well in inflationary environments are doing well. What amount is inflation and what amount is debasement is not for me to figure out or care….
Are we short term over bought? In all probability, yes. Is this market obliging people and “letting them in”? NO! My experience with rallies that “won’t let you in” is that they’ve got a ways to go. With so many institutional types underperforming, you are witnessing a rally most likely driven by career risk. But, again, the why is somewhat irrelevant. Are you going to watch, or are you going to participate? Are you long? Are you long enough?
The interesting thing I see is the TNX is still hitting record low yields on the 10yr… Someone is going to be wrong, and in a big way because these rubberbands only stretch sooooo far. Is it stocks or is it fixed? One could argue that both are overbought right now. Gold too for that matter. Something somewhere is going to take a breather. Which do you want to be wrong on. You want to top-tick fixed income? Gold? Or a stock market that still isn’t up to the April highs? I can tell you which one is easiest to get forgiveness for…equities.
Good luck to all.
davver Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Barry,
The essential problem is how one is supposed to own assets they know are overpriced. If you believe equities are overpriced then you are playing a greater fools game. How are you to know when you aren’t the greatest fool?
“BTW, just because you are making money in other sectors, does not mean you CANNOT make money in equities.
Making money in Gold or Bonds (ala my pal David Rosenberg) does not excuse missing a HUGE Equity rally.”
Can’t you say the same thing about every bubble? Shouldn’t I have been flipping houses from 2003-2005. Shouldn’t you have been buying and then selling tech 1998-2000. The truth is you have no clue when a bubble is going to end. You could just as easily have seen the housing bubble or tech bubble end earlier or later then it did. There is no rationality to a bubble. Prices simply get more and more insane until they don’t anymore. They seem just as insane the whole way through. You can’t say you have some magic insight as to pinpoint when the insanity will stop.
Look, I use technical investing and other indicators to try and pick my buy and sell points. But I buy things I think have good fundamentals and I sell them when I think they don’t anymore. The technical stuff just helps me pick specific entry/exit points on things I already feel good about. I don’t run out and buy assets I think are crap because some chart or sentiment indicator or gut feel makes me.
When I was younger I put myself through college playing poker, which I feel is very similar to investing. I was a pretty conservative player. I read up on Sklansky, analyzed my hands logically, and played very mathematically. I was aggressive but didn’t naked bluff often just enough to keep people off balance and steal some pots. I was careful never to get too deep into a hand that was trouble. It was reliable profit.
Some people are successful a very different way. They are extremely hyper aggressive and bluff constantly. They rely almost entirely on reading their opponent with little regard for their own cards. I’m sure that there are many people with a similar talent for trading financial instruments. They have a read on the tape. They can make money that way. However, like poker there are many people who think they can do that and can’t for every one that can. In fact I’d say its less likely in investing, as the sample size on investments is too small and the complexity too great.
If you truly think you have the talent to pick the bottom and top of every single investment trend then congratulations. Me, I’ve got to be more humble. I’ve got to focus on things I understand and have a track record of success with. I’d rather stay away from things I consider dangerous that I don’t understand. So I don’t think its wrong to chase every single bubble. Like Rosenburg I’ve made decent profits in gold and bonds. And I didn’t lose any on the way down for equities, in fact I captured about half of the down leg as a short before covering. Maybe I didn’t quintuple my money, but I’ve done rather well, and with a very low amount of risk in my mind.
DiggidyDan Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
I’m just glad after liquidating a lot of my positions from the stock market due to not believing the economic recovery was sustainable, I kept my basic core holdings in stocks i still believed in that pay good dividends and have constant demand such as ADM, BDX, BHP, CVX, GSK, JNJ, MMM, SCCO(formerly PCU YEAH COPPER!) and UL. and halved the rest of the stuff between long term TIPS Bond funds (LTPZ and PRRRX) and an emergency fund in 3% yield MM account. Only problem is I had a couple unforseen blowups in BP and BAX due to non market catastrophes that stopped me out and cost me some big coin. I haven’t made much money over the last 3 years, but I haven’t lost any and I have beat the S&P 500.
Only problem is, I lost 60 Large in the housing market and can’t refi at these low rates and took a pay cut.
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
“This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types”
laughable (and so full of self importance)- also you may want to consider a career in blog enforcement(as if BR can’t take care of himself)-
also- where are my politics? Where were they mentioned in this thread?
I guess you must have mind melded me from across your keyboard (and my guess is you still got it wrong)
Mark E Hoffer Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
“Regardless of how the rally concludes, the folks who missed an 85% generational run up in equities will pound their chests and say “See, we told you so!” And they will have made absolutely no money in the process.”–BR, above
BR,
‘Equities’ are the ‘only investment’?
why not run some DOW/Gold, or DOW/Silver, Charts to go with that?
as Boockvar, rightly, was pointing out, recently, the SPX/CRBRIND, after the “strongest one-month Equity Rally since ’39″, is nearly 1 ..
Hey, you’re better than that…
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I ask:
“what happens if the Fed doesn’t or is unable to oblige?”
BR replies:
“Then you sell.”
I was looking for something more thorough (in a macro sense)- but I like this answer just on brevity alone
gman Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Venn,
I may use that rant in the near future…maybe at my firm…to the only person who is a “tea-party fellow traveler”…who also just happens to be the only trader of the 9 we have who is struggling!
Well put!
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Boo-Yah Barry!
GYSC Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Barry,
I appreciate you taking the time to post this and answer all the comments. I think I see better know how you look at things.
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
It’s actually a good post BR. It does come across a little bit like “chest-thumping,” but sometimes the black and white pixels come across in a different way than the voice/tone in the head. We’ve all come across the wrong way in the written word.
With that said, I think the S&P will trade below 900 before 12/31/2011. I’d take some friendly side-action on that proposition bet.
rootless Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Barry,
We made money from March 09 til April 2010. Since then, we have mostly avoided losing money. Its been a good strategy.
Well, good. I haven’t been doing so well for recent months. But it wasn’t my fault. My trading program did it.
However, as of today, S&P500 is down only 4.7% from the peak in April. So my criticism stands. You say your approach is right, because you have made money since March 09, based on the performance mostly during the price run up. You say yourself the secular bear market has still to find its bottom. Right? And you think the market is overvalued based on metrics like CAPE? Then, I have to agree with some other commenter here, that you are playing the greater fool game. And, in addition to that, you ridicule the ones who are grumpy about it and don’t want to play along and have therefore “missed a 85% generational run up”. You basically say that everyone who participates in this game could have made huge profits. But this logic is flawed. A greater fool game can’t work and won’t have worked for everyone who has participated, after everything is said and done. It only works for some, the ones who are the first ones at the exits, you may belong to those, but it doesn’t work for many. It works for some because it doesn’t work for many. The gains for the ones are the losses for the other ones. The outcome this time won’t be different to the final outcome of the stock market and real estate bubble earlier this decade with misery for many. And the judgment over any investment approach will be spoken when the market cycle has come to its full closure, not based on the performance from the market lows in March 2009 to today.
Your at least implicit advice that one should do it like you have done it, if one wants to make big gains in the stock market, is actually very bad advice, even if it has worked for you.
The aptly named Dick Armey is a real piece of work. As Think Progress noted, the former Speaker of the House turned Freedom Works astroturf teabagger leader came on Eliot Spitzer and Kathleen Parker's new show on CNN and lied about the state of Texas benefiting from federal funding for higher education.
Dick Armey Wants To Completely Eliminate Any Federal Funding For Higher Education:
At one point, Spitzer asked Armey a series of questions about what he thinks the government should and should not be involved in funding to try to “add texture” to what the FreedomWorks chairman believes. During this question period, the CNN host asked Armey if he would “have the federal government pay for higher education?” Armey bluntly responded, “No, I would not.” He then went on to say that the university system of his home state of Texas has “not been made any better by federal money involvement.
Armey’s claim that the “federal government’s involvement in education” hasn’t “benefited the students of America” is wildly false.
Texas students are major benificiaries of this spending. Students in the state actually utilize federal student loans at a level above that of the average U.S. student. During the 2006-2007 school year, 83 percent of Texans utilized federal student loans, compared to 71 percent of Americans.
Spitzer did a good job of getting Dick Armey to lay out just what programs he and his corporate funded "Tea Party" would like to eliminate or drastically cut from federal government funding. Naturally military spending wasn't on the list, but Social Security privatization among a lot of other cuts to social programs were. These people like Dick Armey and his ilk aren't going to be happy until they turn us into a third world country with nothing but rich and poor. It was nice to see him get forced to lay out some specifics instead of just platitudes for once as he was in this interview, not that he was short on his usual platitudes as well as he answered. Big 'gubmit is evil, unless of course you privatize everything so it's used to just funnel money to your corporate funders and we need the "freedom" to pick ourselves up by our own bootstraps.
That works our pretty well for folks like Dick Armey who aren't living on a shoestring and have a lot of large corporate interests making sure he's never going to be hurting or worrying about how he's going to feed his family or pay his bills. For the rest of us, not so much. I wonder if Dick Armey knows what the minimum wage is? My bet is he either doesn't know, or doesn't care just like the rest of these Republicans who are trying to con the working class into thinking care about anything but the interests of big business. The only "freedoms" a Dick Armey cares about are the "freedoms" for corporations to force Americans to compete with slave wages overseas while funneling our tax dollars to the wealthiest among us who pay his bills to help spread their propaganda.
Transcript below the fold via CNN.
SPITZER: No, no, no, not the big words like that, but the specific policies you talk about. I want to see if we can get a better understanding of it and sort of see if we agree or disagree on some basic stuff.
You're talking about a radical redefinition of what government does and doesn't do. Fair to say?
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: ... about what government...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: ... to be...
ARMEY: Perhaps there was a radical redefinition of what government does and doesn't do a couple hundred years ago. They called it the Constitution of the United States
SPITZER: Right. OK.
ARMEY: And it was a Constitution that limited government out of deference to the rights of the individual to his liberty
What we're trying to do is restore government back to the vision of our nation that made us the greatest blessing in history of the world
SPITZER: I understand you see it that way. I'm not disagreeing with that. I just want to see if we can add texture to what this means
ARMEY: OK.
SPITZER: Because when I read -- and I have read a lot of the documents. Let me give you some specific programs and say, would you fund them, all right, things that people can relate to? Would you have had the federal government build the interstate highway system?
ARMEY: Absolutely. And you can find that in Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations."
SPITZER: OK. All right. OK. Would you have had -- would you have the federal government pay for higher education? You're a university professor.
ARMEY: No, I would not
SPITZER: You would not have any funding, no government funding?
ARMEY: No. I don't think the federal government's involvement in higher education has benefited the students of America
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Would you...
PARKER: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let him finish that thought, if you don't mind...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Well, the federal government has the military academies, and it's an important thing. They should continue to do that
But the education of our young people should be under the jurisdiction and under the auspices of the state governments. The state of Texas has a great university system that has not been made any better by federal government involvement
SPITZER: So, you would rip out all money that goes to the universities and say let the states increase their taxes to pay for it?
ARMEY: Let the states manage the education of their young people
SPITZER: Let's continue.
Centers for Disease Control to help make sure we...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Centers for Disease Control left in the hands of the scientists is probably a very important thing
SPITZER: So you would eliminate it, the Centers for Disease Control?
ARMEY: No, I did not. I would leave it in the hands of the scientists and I would tell the politicians to butt out. Let real who have real expertise make scientific decisions, medical decisions. Let's not have a bunch of political mandates issued by people who don't even understand..
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: I don't think that is what CDC does.
OK, how about NIH, National Institutes for Health, does all the research?
ARMEY: I think again that is probably acceptable opportunity to do some good with the federal government's taxpayer dollars, if they have the discipline to leave the agency to do its job on a professional basis, rather than corrupting it.
SPITZER: How about NASA? You going to fund NASA?
ARMEY: Oh, absolutely I would fund NASA. And I sure as heck would keep it focused on its initial mission
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: Now, in your book, and in all the Tea Party stuff, they say we're not cutting defense
ARMEY: I think, again, you can rationalize every agency. There are efficiencies to be made in defense, as there...
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: But you're saying we're not -- so, I'm just trying to figure out where you're cutting.
ARMEY: Defense is stipulated in the Constitution as a legitimate, necessary duty of the federal government
SPITZER: So, where are you cutting?
ARMEY: How about we cut out a lot of nonsense like National Endowment for the Humanities and Arts? And how about getting rid of AmeriCorps, which is just obnoxious?
SPITZER: AmeriCorps, OK.
ARMEY: Even intellectually, it's an insult to the American people
SPITZER: OK.
ARMEY: How about you get rid of the Corporation for National Broadcasting in that very nominal party of the budget which is called discretionary spending, which I would probably call indiscretionary spending?
Lyndon Johnson's Great Society transformed the budget of the United States government from 85 percent discretionary, 15 percent mandatory, to just the reverse. Now your ability to cut spending and to make the trims that are necessary to restore the government to service in the lives of the people is made very difficult because of the dominance of...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: One thing we should point out is that the congressman is also an economist. This is not just a political stump speech here.
ARMEY: This government cannot grow the private sector of the economy by itself, growing larger. It's like you have got a 200-pound jockey that thinks, if I just eat more and gain myself to 210, the horse will be able to win the race...
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: I like that metaphor...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: It seems pretty simple. I mean, we clearly can't afford everything we have got. We can't -- we have got to stop spending somewhere...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: I will tell you what. I will give today's retirees and today's working youth a more hard, fast commitment for Social Security.
I will say to every child in America, every working man and woman in this country, I will guarantee you, you will have Social Security just as you know it today, with the only change being a cost of living adjustment that is commensurate with the consumer price index for the rest of your life, if you choose to stay in it.
SPITZER: OK.
ARMEY: But I will also give you the right to choose to leave it.
SPITZER: But you're saying something very important that I don't think most people are picking up on. What you're doing is changing the escalator in Social Security in a way that many people agree with.
ARMEY: That's right. And I'll tell you what.
SPITZER: I happen to agree with that.
ARMEY: I'm going to just say to the American people, if you choose to...
SPITZER: You already said you're going to do one of them.
ARMEY: If you, as a free-born individual person, choose to say, I want to leave this mandatory government program, you're free to leave. You're free to say no to the government.
benchcraft company scam
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
benchcraft company portland or
BR: Eloquent, insightful, lucid — why on earth would the filter catch this? Its the perfect comment !
markpmc Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
the title reminds me of the question greg maddux asked a rookie pitcher.
“You trying to throw strikes or get people out?”
Liquidity Trader Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
ahab,
The comment was from a traders perspective — it went right over your head.
Not only do you impose your politics on a non-political post, you completely misunderstand it. And to magnify your foolishness, you are rude to our host in a way that reveals you to be a much bigger asshole than I previously imagined.
This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types. Try one of the Austrians sites,or ZH — they don’t care about making money.
mbelardes Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
After reading through the comments (I rarely see BR this active on the comments, by the way) I’ve come to the conlcusion that some of the commenters are here to learn about macro perspectives and data analysis as a part of money management and some are here to root against the money management sector altogether.
This is why some of the posts where BR criticizes the market and market participants, such as firms and regulators, are so wildly popular and some of the sweet charts and data analysis get MAYBE a few dozen comments.
JasRas Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I’m in the makin’ money business, and frankly this isn’t that hard!! Right or wrong, the Fed and other CB’s are doing some version of QE, monetary expansion, etc… My basic view is dollars are worth less and other things are worth more…other things mean stocks, commodities–including precious metals, etc. Things that promise to return your dollars at a latter date in exchange for a predictable cash flow (ie. fixed income) mean you are getting dollars back later at an unknown deflated value. The cash flow paid in no way is compensating you for that lost buying power. Now, you say, there is no inflation! Look at the CPI. Well….if you believe stats compiled by the government, good luck to you because assets that perform well in inflationary environments are doing well. What amount is inflation and what amount is debasement is not for me to figure out or care….
Are we short term over bought? In all probability, yes. Is this market obliging people and “letting them in”? NO! My experience with rallies that “won’t let you in” is that they’ve got a ways to go. With so many institutional types underperforming, you are witnessing a rally most likely driven by career risk. But, again, the why is somewhat irrelevant. Are you going to watch, or are you going to participate? Are you long? Are you long enough?
The interesting thing I see is the TNX is still hitting record low yields on the 10yr… Someone is going to be wrong, and in a big way because these rubberbands only stretch sooooo far. Is it stocks or is it fixed? One could argue that both are overbought right now. Gold too for that matter. Something somewhere is going to take a breather. Which do you want to be wrong on. You want to top-tick fixed income? Gold? Or a stock market that still isn’t up to the April highs? I can tell you which one is easiest to get forgiveness for…equities.
Good luck to all.
davver Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Barry,
The essential problem is how one is supposed to own assets they know are overpriced. If you believe equities are overpriced then you are playing a greater fools game. How are you to know when you aren’t the greatest fool?
“BTW, just because you are making money in other sectors, does not mean you CANNOT make money in equities.
Making money in Gold or Bonds (ala my pal David Rosenberg) does not excuse missing a HUGE Equity rally.”
Can’t you say the same thing about every bubble? Shouldn’t I have been flipping houses from 2003-2005. Shouldn’t you have been buying and then selling tech 1998-2000. The truth is you have no clue when a bubble is going to end. You could just as easily have seen the housing bubble or tech bubble end earlier or later then it did. There is no rationality to a bubble. Prices simply get more and more insane until they don’t anymore. They seem just as insane the whole way through. You can’t say you have some magic insight as to pinpoint when the insanity will stop.
Look, I use technical investing and other indicators to try and pick my buy and sell points. But I buy things I think have good fundamentals and I sell them when I think they don’t anymore. The technical stuff just helps me pick specific entry/exit points on things I already feel good about. I don’t run out and buy assets I think are crap because some chart or sentiment indicator or gut feel makes me.
When I was younger I put myself through college playing poker, which I feel is very similar to investing. I was a pretty conservative player. I read up on Sklansky, analyzed my hands logically, and played very mathematically. I was aggressive but didn’t naked bluff often just enough to keep people off balance and steal some pots. I was careful never to get too deep into a hand that was trouble. It was reliable profit.
Some people are successful a very different way. They are extremely hyper aggressive and bluff constantly. They rely almost entirely on reading their opponent with little regard for their own cards. I’m sure that there are many people with a similar talent for trading financial instruments. They have a read on the tape. They can make money that way. However, like poker there are many people who think they can do that and can’t for every one that can. In fact I’d say its less likely in investing, as the sample size on investments is too small and the complexity too great.
If you truly think you have the talent to pick the bottom and top of every single investment trend then congratulations. Me, I’ve got to be more humble. I’ve got to focus on things I understand and have a track record of success with. I’d rather stay away from things I consider dangerous that I don’t understand. So I don’t think its wrong to chase every single bubble. Like Rosenburg I’ve made decent profits in gold and bonds. And I didn’t lose any on the way down for equities, in fact I captured about half of the down leg as a short before covering. Maybe I didn’t quintuple my money, but I’ve done rather well, and with a very low amount of risk in my mind.
DiggidyDan Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
I’m just glad after liquidating a lot of my positions from the stock market due to not believing the economic recovery was sustainable, I kept my basic core holdings in stocks i still believed in that pay good dividends and have constant demand such as ADM, BDX, BHP, CVX, GSK, JNJ, MMM, SCCO(formerly PCU YEAH COPPER!) and UL. and halved the rest of the stuff between long term TIPS Bond funds (LTPZ and PRRRX) and an emergency fund in 3% yield MM account. Only problem is I had a couple unforseen blowups in BP and BAX due to non market catastrophes that stopped me out and cost me some big coin. I haven’t made much money over the last 3 years, but I haven’t lost any and I have beat the S&P 500.
Only problem is, I lost 60 Large in the housing market and can’t refi at these low rates and took a pay cut.
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
“This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types”
laughable (and so full of self importance)- also you may want to consider a career in blog enforcement(as if BR can’t take care of himself)-
also- where are my politics? Where were they mentioned in this thread?
I guess you must have mind melded me from across your keyboard (and my guess is you still got it wrong)
Mark E Hoffer Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
“Regardless of how the rally concludes, the folks who missed an 85% generational run up in equities will pound their chests and say “See, we told you so!” And they will have made absolutely no money in the process.”–BR, above
BR,
‘Equities’ are the ‘only investment’?
why not run some DOW/Gold, or DOW/Silver, Charts to go with that?
as Boockvar, rightly, was pointing out, recently, the SPX/CRBRIND, after the “strongest one-month Equity Rally since ’39″, is nearly 1 ..
Hey, you’re better than that…
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I ask:
“what happens if the Fed doesn’t or is unable to oblige?”
BR replies:
“Then you sell.”
I was looking for something more thorough (in a macro sense)- but I like this answer just on brevity alone
gman Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Venn,
I may use that rant in the near future…maybe at my firm…to the only person who is a “tea-party fellow traveler”…who also just happens to be the only trader of the 9 we have who is struggling!
Well put!
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Boo-Yah Barry!
GYSC Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Barry,
I appreciate you taking the time to post this and answer all the comments. I think I see better know how you look at things.
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
It’s actually a good post BR. It does come across a little bit like “chest-thumping,” but sometimes the black and white pixels come across in a different way than the voice/tone in the head. We’ve all come across the wrong way in the written word.
With that said, I think the S&P will trade below 900 before 12/31/2011. I’d take some friendly side-action on that proposition bet.
rootless Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Barry,
We made money from March 09 til April 2010. Since then, we have mostly avoided losing money. Its been a good strategy.
Well, good. I haven’t been doing so well for recent months. But it wasn’t my fault. My trading program did it.
However, as of today, S&P500 is down only 4.7% from the peak in April. So my criticism stands. You say your approach is right, because you have made money since March 09, based on the performance mostly during the price run up. You say yourself the secular bear market has still to find its bottom. Right? And you think the market is overvalued based on metrics like CAPE? Then, I have to agree with some other commenter here, that you are playing the greater fool game. And, in addition to that, you ridicule the ones who are grumpy about it and don’t want to play along and have therefore “missed a 85% generational run up”. You basically say that everyone who participates in this game could have made huge profits. But this logic is flawed. A greater fool game can’t work and won’t have worked for everyone who has participated, after everything is said and done. It only works for some, the ones who are the first ones at the exits, you may belong to those, but it doesn’t work for many. It works for some because it doesn’t work for many. The gains for the ones are the losses for the other ones. The outcome this time won’t be different to the final outcome of the stock market and real estate bubble earlier this decade with misery for many. And the judgment over any investment approach will be spoken when the market cycle has come to its full closure, not based on the performance from the market lows in March 2009 to today.
Your at least implicit advice that one should do it like you have done it, if one wants to make big gains in the stock market, is actually very bad advice, even if it has worked for you.
The aptly named Dick Armey is a real piece of work. As Think Progress noted, the former Speaker of the House turned Freedom Works astroturf teabagger leader came on Eliot Spitzer and Kathleen Parker's new show on CNN and lied about the state of Texas benefiting from federal funding for higher education.
Dick Armey Wants To Completely Eliminate Any Federal Funding For Higher Education:
At one point, Spitzer asked Armey a series of questions about what he thinks the government should and should not be involved in funding to try to “add texture” to what the FreedomWorks chairman believes. During this question period, the CNN host asked Armey if he would “have the federal government pay for higher education?” Armey bluntly responded, “No, I would not.” He then went on to say that the university system of his home state of Texas has “not been made any better by federal money involvement.
Armey’s claim that the “federal government’s involvement in education” hasn’t “benefited the students of America” is wildly false.
Texas students are major benificiaries of this spending. Students in the state actually utilize federal student loans at a level above that of the average U.S. student. During the 2006-2007 school year, 83 percent of Texans utilized federal student loans, compared to 71 percent of Americans.
Spitzer did a good job of getting Dick Armey to lay out just what programs he and his corporate funded "Tea Party" would like to eliminate or drastically cut from federal government funding. Naturally military spending wasn't on the list, but Social Security privatization among a lot of other cuts to social programs were. These people like Dick Armey and his ilk aren't going to be happy until they turn us into a third world country with nothing but rich and poor. It was nice to see him get forced to lay out some specifics instead of just platitudes for once as he was in this interview, not that he was short on his usual platitudes as well as he answered. Big 'gubmit is evil, unless of course you privatize everything so it's used to just funnel money to your corporate funders and we need the "freedom" to pick ourselves up by our own bootstraps.
That works our pretty well for folks like Dick Armey who aren't living on a shoestring and have a lot of large corporate interests making sure he's never going to be hurting or worrying about how he's going to feed his family or pay his bills. For the rest of us, not so much. I wonder if Dick Armey knows what the minimum wage is? My bet is he either doesn't know, or doesn't care just like the rest of these Republicans who are trying to con the working class into thinking care about anything but the interests of big business. The only "freedoms" a Dick Armey cares about are the "freedoms" for corporations to force Americans to compete with slave wages overseas while funneling our tax dollars to the wealthiest among us who pay his bills to help spread their propaganda.
Transcript below the fold via CNN.
SPITZER: No, no, no, not the big words like that, but the specific policies you talk about. I want to see if we can get a better understanding of it and sort of see if we agree or disagree on some basic stuff.
You're talking about a radical redefinition of what government does and doesn't do. Fair to say?
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: ... about what government...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: ... to be...
ARMEY: Perhaps there was a radical redefinition of what government does and doesn't do a couple hundred years ago. They called it the Constitution of the United States
SPITZER: Right. OK.
ARMEY: And it was a Constitution that limited government out of deference to the rights of the individual to his liberty
What we're trying to do is restore government back to the vision of our nation that made us the greatest blessing in history of the world
SPITZER: I understand you see it that way. I'm not disagreeing with that. I just want to see if we can add texture to what this means
ARMEY: OK.
SPITZER: Because when I read -- and I have read a lot of the documents. Let me give you some specific programs and say, would you fund them, all right, things that people can relate to? Would you have had the federal government build the interstate highway system?
ARMEY: Absolutely. And you can find that in Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations."
SPITZER: OK. All right. OK. Would you have had -- would you have the federal government pay for higher education? You're a university professor.
ARMEY: No, I would not
SPITZER: You would not have any funding, no government funding?
ARMEY: No. I don't think the federal government's involvement in higher education has benefited the students of America
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Would you...
PARKER: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let him finish that thought, if you don't mind...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Well, the federal government has the military academies, and it's an important thing. They should continue to do that
But the education of our young people should be under the jurisdiction and under the auspices of the state governments. The state of Texas has a great university system that has not been made any better by federal government involvement
SPITZER: So, you would rip out all money that goes to the universities and say let the states increase their taxes to pay for it?
ARMEY: Let the states manage the education of their young people
SPITZER: Let's continue.
Centers for Disease Control to help make sure we...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Centers for Disease Control left in the hands of the scientists is probably a very important thing
SPITZER: So you would eliminate it, the Centers for Disease Control?
ARMEY: No, I did not. I would leave it in the hands of the scientists and I would tell the politicians to butt out. Let real who have real expertise make scientific decisions, medical decisions. Let's not have a bunch of political mandates issued by people who don't even understand..
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: I don't think that is what CDC does.
OK, how about NIH, National Institutes for Health, does all the research?
ARMEY: I think again that is probably acceptable opportunity to do some good with the federal government's taxpayer dollars, if they have the discipline to leave the agency to do its job on a professional basis, rather than corrupting it.
SPITZER: How about NASA? You going to fund NASA?
ARMEY: Oh, absolutely I would fund NASA. And I sure as heck would keep it focused on its initial mission
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: Now, in your book, and in all the Tea Party stuff, they say we're not cutting defense
ARMEY: I think, again, you can rationalize every agency. There are efficiencies to be made in defense, as there...
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: But you're saying we're not -- so, I'm just trying to figure out where you're cutting.
ARMEY: Defense is stipulated in the Constitution as a legitimate, necessary duty of the federal government
SPITZER: So, where are you cutting?
ARMEY: How about we cut out a lot of nonsense like National Endowment for the Humanities and Arts? And how about getting rid of AmeriCorps, which is just obnoxious?
SPITZER: AmeriCorps, OK.
ARMEY: Even intellectually, it's an insult to the American people
SPITZER: OK.
ARMEY: How about you get rid of the Corporation for National Broadcasting in that very nominal party of the budget which is called discretionary spending, which I would probably call indiscretionary spending?
Lyndon Johnson's Great Society transformed the budget of the United States government from 85 percent discretionary, 15 percent mandatory, to just the reverse. Now your ability to cut spending and to make the trims that are necessary to restore the government to service in the lives of the people is made very difficult because of the dominance of...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: One thing we should point out is that the congressman is also an economist. This is not just a political stump speech here.
ARMEY: This government cannot grow the private sector of the economy by itself, growing larger. It's like you have got a 200-pound jockey that thinks, if I just eat more and gain myself to 210, the horse will be able to win the race...
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: I like that metaphor...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: It seems pretty simple. I mean, we clearly can't afford everything we have got. We can't -- we have got to stop spending somewhere...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: I will tell you what. I will give today's retirees and today's working youth a more hard, fast commitment for Social Security.
I will say to every child in America, every working man and woman in this country, I will guarantee you, you will have Social Security just as you know it today, with the only change being a cost of living adjustment that is commensurate with the consumer price index for the rest of your life, if you choose to stay in it.
SPITZER: OK.
ARMEY: But I will also give you the right to choose to leave it.
SPITZER: But you're saying something very important that I don't think most people are picking up on. What you're doing is changing the escalator in Social Security in a way that many people agree with.
ARMEY: That's right. And I'll tell you what.
SPITZER: I happen to agree with that.
ARMEY: I'm going to just say to the American people, if you choose to...
SPITZER: You already said you're going to do one of them.
ARMEY: If you, as a free-born individual person, choose to say, I want to leave this mandatory government program, you're free to leave. You're free to say no to the government.
benchcraft company portland or
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
bench craft company reviews
benchcraft company portland or
benchcraft company portland or
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
benchcraft company scam
BR: Eloquent, insightful, lucid — why on earth would the filter catch this? Its the perfect comment !
markpmc Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
the title reminds me of the question greg maddux asked a rookie pitcher.
“You trying to throw strikes or get people out?”
Liquidity Trader Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
ahab,
The comment was from a traders perspective — it went right over your head.
Not only do you impose your politics on a non-political post, you completely misunderstand it. And to magnify your foolishness, you are rude to our host in a way that reveals you to be a much bigger asshole than I previously imagined.
This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types. Try one of the Austrians sites,or ZH — they don’t care about making money.
mbelardes Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
After reading through the comments (I rarely see BR this active on the comments, by the way) I’ve come to the conlcusion that some of the commenters are here to learn about macro perspectives and data analysis as a part of money management and some are here to root against the money management sector altogether.
This is why some of the posts where BR criticizes the market and market participants, such as firms and regulators, are so wildly popular and some of the sweet charts and data analysis get MAYBE a few dozen comments.
JasRas Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I’m in the makin’ money business, and frankly this isn’t that hard!! Right or wrong, the Fed and other CB’s are doing some version of QE, monetary expansion, etc… My basic view is dollars are worth less and other things are worth more…other things mean stocks, commodities–including precious metals, etc. Things that promise to return your dollars at a latter date in exchange for a predictable cash flow (ie. fixed income) mean you are getting dollars back later at an unknown deflated value. The cash flow paid in no way is compensating you for that lost buying power. Now, you say, there is no inflation! Look at the CPI. Well….if you believe stats compiled by the government, good luck to you because assets that perform well in inflationary environments are doing well. What amount is inflation and what amount is debasement is not for me to figure out or care….
Are we short term over bought? In all probability, yes. Is this market obliging people and “letting them in”? NO! My experience with rallies that “won’t let you in” is that they’ve got a ways to go. With so many institutional types underperforming, you are witnessing a rally most likely driven by career risk. But, again, the why is somewhat irrelevant. Are you going to watch, or are you going to participate? Are you long? Are you long enough?
The interesting thing I see is the TNX is still hitting record low yields on the 10yr… Someone is going to be wrong, and in a big way because these rubberbands only stretch sooooo far. Is it stocks or is it fixed? One could argue that both are overbought right now. Gold too for that matter. Something somewhere is going to take a breather. Which do you want to be wrong on. You want to top-tick fixed income? Gold? Or a stock market that still isn’t up to the April highs? I can tell you which one is easiest to get forgiveness for…equities.
Good luck to all.
davver Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Barry,
The essential problem is how one is supposed to own assets they know are overpriced. If you believe equities are overpriced then you are playing a greater fools game. How are you to know when you aren’t the greatest fool?
“BTW, just because you are making money in other sectors, does not mean you CANNOT make money in equities.
Making money in Gold or Bonds (ala my pal David Rosenberg) does not excuse missing a HUGE Equity rally.”
Can’t you say the same thing about every bubble? Shouldn’t I have been flipping houses from 2003-2005. Shouldn’t you have been buying and then selling tech 1998-2000. The truth is you have no clue when a bubble is going to end. You could just as easily have seen the housing bubble or tech bubble end earlier or later then it did. There is no rationality to a bubble. Prices simply get more and more insane until they don’t anymore. They seem just as insane the whole way through. You can’t say you have some magic insight as to pinpoint when the insanity will stop.
Look, I use technical investing and other indicators to try and pick my buy and sell points. But I buy things I think have good fundamentals and I sell them when I think they don’t anymore. The technical stuff just helps me pick specific entry/exit points on things I already feel good about. I don’t run out and buy assets I think are crap because some chart or sentiment indicator or gut feel makes me.
When I was younger I put myself through college playing poker, which I feel is very similar to investing. I was a pretty conservative player. I read up on Sklansky, analyzed my hands logically, and played very mathematically. I was aggressive but didn’t naked bluff often just enough to keep people off balance and steal some pots. I was careful never to get too deep into a hand that was trouble. It was reliable profit.
Some people are successful a very different way. They are extremely hyper aggressive and bluff constantly. They rely almost entirely on reading their opponent with little regard for their own cards. I’m sure that there are many people with a similar talent for trading financial instruments. They have a read on the tape. They can make money that way. However, like poker there are many people who think they can do that and can’t for every one that can. In fact I’d say its less likely in investing, as the sample size on investments is too small and the complexity too great.
If you truly think you have the talent to pick the bottom and top of every single investment trend then congratulations. Me, I’ve got to be more humble. I’ve got to focus on things I understand and have a track record of success with. I’d rather stay away from things I consider dangerous that I don’t understand. So I don’t think its wrong to chase every single bubble. Like Rosenburg I’ve made decent profits in gold and bonds. And I didn’t lose any on the way down for equities, in fact I captured about half of the down leg as a short before covering. Maybe I didn’t quintuple my money, but I’ve done rather well, and with a very low amount of risk in my mind.
DiggidyDan Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
I’m just glad after liquidating a lot of my positions from the stock market due to not believing the economic recovery was sustainable, I kept my basic core holdings in stocks i still believed in that pay good dividends and have constant demand such as ADM, BDX, BHP, CVX, GSK, JNJ, MMM, SCCO(formerly PCU YEAH COPPER!) and UL. and halved the rest of the stuff between long term TIPS Bond funds (LTPZ and PRRRX) and an emergency fund in 3% yield MM account. Only problem is I had a couple unforseen blowups in BP and BAX due to non market catastrophes that stopped me out and cost me some big coin. I haven’t made much money over the last 3 years, but I haven’t lost any and I have beat the S&P 500.
Only problem is, I lost 60 Large in the housing market and can’t refi at these low rates and took a pay cut.
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
“This site is not for people like you — its for serious asset types”
laughable (and so full of self importance)- also you may want to consider a career in blog enforcement(as if BR can’t take care of himself)-
also- where are my politics? Where were they mentioned in this thread?
I guess you must have mind melded me from across your keyboard (and my guess is you still got it wrong)
Mark E Hoffer Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:26 pm
“Regardless of how the rally concludes, the folks who missed an 85% generational run up in equities will pound their chests and say “See, we told you so!” And they will have made absolutely no money in the process.”–BR, above
BR,
‘Equities’ are the ‘only investment’?
why not run some DOW/Gold, or DOW/Silver, Charts to go with that?
as Boockvar, rightly, was pointing out, recently, the SPX/CRBRIND, after the “strongest one-month Equity Rally since ’39″, is nearly 1 ..
Hey, you’re better than that…
call me ahab Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I ask:
“what happens if the Fed doesn’t or is unable to oblige?”
BR replies:
“Then you sell.”
I was looking for something more thorough (in a macro sense)- but I like this answer just on brevity alone
gman Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Venn,
I may use that rant in the near future…maybe at my firm…to the only person who is a “tea-party fellow traveler”…who also just happens to be the only trader of the 9 we have who is struggling!
Well put!
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Boo-Yah Barry!
GYSC Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Barry,
I appreciate you taking the time to post this and answer all the comments. I think I see better know how you look at things.
Andy T Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
It’s actually a good post BR. It does come across a little bit like “chest-thumping,” but sometimes the black and white pixels come across in a different way than the voice/tone in the head. We’ve all come across the wrong way in the written word.
With that said, I think the S&P will trade below 900 before 12/31/2011. I’d take some friendly side-action on that proposition bet.
rootless Says:
October 6th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Barry,
We made money from March 09 til April 2010. Since then, we have mostly avoided losing money. Its been a good strategy.
Well, good. I haven’t been doing so well for recent months. But it wasn’t my fault. My trading program did it.
However, as of today, S&P500 is down only 4.7% from the peak in April. So my criticism stands. You say your approach is right, because you have made money since March 09, based on the performance mostly during the price run up. You say yourself the secular bear market has still to find its bottom. Right? And you think the market is overvalued based on metrics like CAPE? Then, I have to agree with some other commenter here, that you are playing the greater fool game. And, in addition to that, you ridicule the ones who are grumpy about it and don’t want to play along and have therefore “missed a 85% generational run up”. You basically say that everyone who participates in this game could have made huge profits. But this logic is flawed. A greater fool game can’t work and won’t have worked for everyone who has participated, after everything is said and done. It only works for some, the ones who are the first ones at the exits, you may belong to those, but it doesn’t work for many. It works for some because it doesn’t work for many. The gains for the ones are the losses for the other ones. The outcome this time won’t be different to the final outcome of the stock market and real estate bubble earlier this decade with misery for many. And the judgment over any investment approach will be spoken when the market cycle has come to its full closure, not based on the performance from the market lows in March 2009 to today.
Your at least implicit advice that one should do it like you have done it, if one wants to make big gains in the stock market, is actually very bad advice, even if it has worked for you.
The aptly named Dick Armey is a real piece of work. As Think Progress noted, the former Speaker of the House turned Freedom Works astroturf teabagger leader came on Eliot Spitzer and Kathleen Parker's new show on CNN and lied about the state of Texas benefiting from federal funding for higher education.
Dick Armey Wants To Completely Eliminate Any Federal Funding For Higher Education:
At one point, Spitzer asked Armey a series of questions about what he thinks the government should and should not be involved in funding to try to “add texture” to what the FreedomWorks chairman believes. During this question period, the CNN host asked Armey if he would “have the federal government pay for higher education?” Armey bluntly responded, “No, I would not.” He then went on to say that the university system of his home state of Texas has “not been made any better by federal money involvement.
Armey’s claim that the “federal government’s involvement in education” hasn’t “benefited the students of America” is wildly false.
Texas students are major benificiaries of this spending. Students in the state actually utilize federal student loans at a level above that of the average U.S. student. During the 2006-2007 school year, 83 percent of Texans utilized federal student loans, compared to 71 percent of Americans.
Spitzer did a good job of getting Dick Armey to lay out just what programs he and his corporate funded "Tea Party" would like to eliminate or drastically cut from federal government funding. Naturally military spending wasn't on the list, but Social Security privatization among a lot of other cuts to social programs were. These people like Dick Armey and his ilk aren't going to be happy until they turn us into a third world country with nothing but rich and poor. It was nice to see him get forced to lay out some specifics instead of just platitudes for once as he was in this interview, not that he was short on his usual platitudes as well as he answered. Big 'gubmit is evil, unless of course you privatize everything so it's used to just funnel money to your corporate funders and we need the "freedom" to pick ourselves up by our own bootstraps.
That works our pretty well for folks like Dick Armey who aren't living on a shoestring and have a lot of large corporate interests making sure he's never going to be hurting or worrying about how he's going to feed his family or pay his bills. For the rest of us, not so much. I wonder if Dick Armey knows what the minimum wage is? My bet is he either doesn't know, or doesn't care just like the rest of these Republicans who are trying to con the working class into thinking care about anything but the interests of big business. The only "freedoms" a Dick Armey cares about are the "freedoms" for corporations to force Americans to compete with slave wages overseas while funneling our tax dollars to the wealthiest among us who pay his bills to help spread their propaganda.
Transcript below the fold via CNN.
SPITZER: No, no, no, not the big words like that, but the specific policies you talk about. I want to see if we can get a better understanding of it and sort of see if we agree or disagree on some basic stuff.
You're talking about a radical redefinition of what government does and doesn't do. Fair to say?
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: ... about what government...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: ... to be...
ARMEY: Perhaps there was a radical redefinition of what government does and doesn't do a couple hundred years ago. They called it the Constitution of the United States
SPITZER: Right. OK.
ARMEY: And it was a Constitution that limited government out of deference to the rights of the individual to his liberty
What we're trying to do is restore government back to the vision of our nation that made us the greatest blessing in history of the world
SPITZER: I understand you see it that way. I'm not disagreeing with that. I just want to see if we can add texture to what this means
ARMEY: OK.
SPITZER: Because when I read -- and I have read a lot of the documents. Let me give you some specific programs and say, would you fund them, all right, things that people can relate to? Would you have had the federal government build the interstate highway system?
ARMEY: Absolutely. And you can find that in Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations."
SPITZER: OK. All right. OK. Would you have had -- would you have the federal government pay for higher education? You're a university professor.
ARMEY: No, I would not
SPITZER: You would not have any funding, no government funding?
ARMEY: No. I don't think the federal government's involvement in higher education has benefited the students of America
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Would you...
PARKER: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let him finish that thought, if you don't mind...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Well, the federal government has the military academies, and it's an important thing. They should continue to do that
But the education of our young people should be under the jurisdiction and under the auspices of the state governments. The state of Texas has a great university system that has not been made any better by federal government involvement
SPITZER: So, you would rip out all money that goes to the universities and say let the states increase their taxes to pay for it?
ARMEY: Let the states manage the education of their young people
SPITZER: Let's continue.
Centers for Disease Control to help make sure we...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: Centers for Disease Control left in the hands of the scientists is probably a very important thing
SPITZER: So you would eliminate it, the Centers for Disease Control?
ARMEY: No, I did not. I would leave it in the hands of the scientists and I would tell the politicians to butt out. Let real who have real expertise make scientific decisions, medical decisions. Let's not have a bunch of political mandates issued by people who don't even understand..
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: I don't think that is what CDC does.
OK, how about NIH, National Institutes for Health, does all the research?
ARMEY: I think again that is probably acceptable opportunity to do some good with the federal government's taxpayer dollars, if they have the discipline to leave the agency to do its job on a professional basis, rather than corrupting it.
SPITZER: How about NASA? You going to fund NASA?
ARMEY: Oh, absolutely I would fund NASA. And I sure as heck would keep it focused on its initial mission
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: Now, in your book, and in all the Tea Party stuff, they say we're not cutting defense
ARMEY: I think, again, you can rationalize every agency. There are efficiencies to be made in defense, as there...
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: But you're saying we're not -- so, I'm just trying to figure out where you're cutting.
ARMEY: Defense is stipulated in the Constitution as a legitimate, necessary duty of the federal government
SPITZER: So, where are you cutting?
ARMEY: How about we cut out a lot of nonsense like National Endowment for the Humanities and Arts? And how about getting rid of AmeriCorps, which is just obnoxious?
SPITZER: AmeriCorps, OK.
ARMEY: Even intellectually, it's an insult to the American people
SPITZER: OK.
ARMEY: How about you get rid of the Corporation for National Broadcasting in that very nominal party of the budget which is called discretionary spending, which I would probably call indiscretionary spending?
Lyndon Johnson's Great Society transformed the budget of the United States government from 85 percent discretionary, 15 percent mandatory, to just the reverse. Now your ability to cut spending and to make the trims that are necessary to restore the government to service in the lives of the people is made very difficult because of the dominance of...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: One thing we should point out is that the congressman is also an economist. This is not just a political stump speech here.
ARMEY: This government cannot grow the private sector of the economy by itself, growing larger. It's like you have got a 200-pound jockey that thinks, if I just eat more and gain myself to 210, the horse will be able to win the race...
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: I like that metaphor...
(CROSSTALK)
PARKER: It seems pretty simple. I mean, we clearly can't afford everything we have got. We can't -- we have got to stop spending somewhere...
(CROSSTALK)
ARMEY: I will tell you what. I will give today's retirees and today's working youth a more hard, fast commitment for Social Security.
I will say to every child in America, every working man and woman in this country, I will guarantee you, you will have Social Security just as you know it today, with the only change being a cost of living adjustment that is commensurate with the consumer price index for the rest of your life, if you choose to stay in it.
SPITZER: OK.
ARMEY: But I will also give you the right to choose to leave it.
SPITZER: But you're saying something very important that I don't think most people are picking up on. What you're doing is changing the escalator in Social Security in a way that many people agree with.
ARMEY: That's right. And I'll tell you what.
SPITZER: I happen to agree with that.
ARMEY: I'm going to just say to the American people, if you choose to...
SPITZER: You already said you're going to do one of them.
ARMEY: If you, as a free-born individual person, choose to say, I want to leave this mandatory government program, you're free to leave. You're free to say no to the government.
benchcraft company scam
benchcraft company scam
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
benchcraft company scam
bench craft company reviews
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
bench craft company reviews
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
benchcraft company portland or
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
how to lose weight fast benchcraft company scam
bench craft company reviews
benchcraft company portland or
benchcraft company scam
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
benchcraft company portland or
Life comes in steps and what a misconception it is to tell yourself to follow the rules. You get your high school equivalency diploma or graduate from high school. What's next? You go to college or trade school. What comes after that? You enter the job market that relates to your diploma. Would you say that you're happy with your job, though? Some may say 'yes' while others may say 'no'. For the latter, it's essential to look into your passion and how to make a career out of your interests!
1) What are your hobbies? Do you enjoy writing? Critiquing? Traveling? Singing? Dancing? Modeling? Writing/Performing Music? You see where I'm getting at. First, find your passion.
2) How can you make a career out of this hobby? The internet contains tons of information if you search through your interests in job sites such as monster.com or even going to an agency which will perfect your talent. It will polish up your skills so you can be a number one candidate when applying for your dream career.
3) Don't flake! Nothing is too good to be true...unless you're being told how lucky you are from a Publisher's Clearinghouse representative. So you're at an agency and your agent has told you that the perfect client wants to hire you. Great! You finally found a client who wants you to work in something you've never dreamed of making money in! Take the offer because life comes at you fast and you don't want to miss out on an opportunity.
4) You've landed a dream job doing something you love. Mission accomplished.
Those four simple steps may have seemed short for you but it really is just that. Countless times I've come across people who expect someone to stumble upon their work or knock on their door proclaiming their fame to glory. Any hard-working person knows it doesn't come that easily. The truth is there are many talented people out there who have the same hobbies and interests as you do and they are making money at it. You know you're good at what you do. You know your strengths and you know your weaknesses. Money doesn't grow on trees but money grows for people who exercise their ambitions.
With that in mind, don't go to college for a general topic you know absolutely nothing about just because society tells you to do so. College is very expensive and with all that money you put into books and room & board, wouldn't making that money be just as good? Invest in your talent not in liberal studies.
big seminar 14
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
big seminar 14
White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons? | iLounge <b>News</b>
iLounge news discussing the White iPhone 4 delay due to mismatched Home buttons?. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.
<b>News</b> - Angelina Jolie to Critics: "Hold Judgment" Until You Have <b>...</b>
She fires back at reports that her directorial debut centers on a rape victim who falls for her captor.
<b>News</b> Corp. Could Buy Yahoo
It's possible Rupert Murdoch could buy Yahoo if AOL doesn't. His tech isn't cutting edge, but he does hate Google.
big seminar 14
