lannarebirth

I don't know. This seems like one of the better years I can recall. Probably the forest burning hasn't started in earnest yet though.

how did i manage being a successful investor for more than 30 years without haramis, dojis, oscillators, candles, fibonacci, elliott and.............. voodoo?

Well, it WAS the uptrend line after all.

Indendence for Lanna!

Interesting idea!

Visit Laos to see what that might look like.

I think Herr Naam is a pragmatist and I think the various governments would like to give the apearance of remedial action. I also think they'd like the action to appear as incremental as possible to give the appearnce that subsequent actions are "stronger measures" and more likely to effect a solution. What I think both Marx and Herr Naam know is that it is time and relief from new economic pressures that are the only thing that will bring about improved conditions. I think tha's why he evaluates his investments based on ability to pay the coupon rather than how bad it might smell.

Absolutely and I suspect he understands things far better than we do. My desire to play Lehman's again I agree would be difficult to implement and possibly disastrous. But essentially you are making a decision under duress simply to avoid disaster. Marx's point is that time is the big killer that the Euro will collapse underweight of its fundamental flaws that your is simply creating a bigger problem in the end. You have not solved and actually increased the probability of its long term destruction if not ensured it. A short term solution to stabilize has exacerbated the long term destabilization of the currency. You have not solved the crisis you are simply moving the date and making it bigger. Think of Maastricht, think of the concept and think the lowest cost result is bailing out Greece that has acted in such bad faith and so irresponsibly.

That is why I hate laissez faire economics (apart of being a concept with no rationale), there is no creative destruction solution here, just increasing moral hazard. (I realize this would not be a laissez faire solution but the way markets work is that they are just as likely to move away from equilibrium as towards it - the costs of a laissez faire solution may only be acceptable to Sokal.)

How a banker can argue that government controls over banks will make them less efficient while the Government has given them a blank cheque to act as irresponsibly as possible because they will bail them out is beyond me. We certainly need more Government regulation, unfortunately we also need better Governments.

And I do believe Naam is being a little economical with the truth when he says EU backed multilateral bonds wont cost you a penny. But (1) someone is going to have to pay Greek debt and now it is guaranteed I doubt they are going to contribute a penny simply borrow some more (2) this just another bailout of the banks which I admit would have happened on default (3) it doesnt seem logical that underwriting the least responsible is a no cost solution

You cant have government and central bank (FED FANNY FREDDIE FDIC) run markets disguised as capitalism and free markets on the way up and then blame laissez faire economics when it all blows up.

People still don't see the moral hazard that the FDIC is, it is just as bad or worse then FANNY and FREDDIE yet nobody sees it coming. If it wasn't for the FDIC, interest rates would already be up. If their was no government guarantee on bank deposits then people would care allot more about which bank they had their money in. There would be consumer reports on banks and people would find out which bank was the best and the safest. If their was no FDIC then there would have already been some bank runs (like Northern Rock in the UK) and some money would have been pulled out of US treasuries and bonds which would have brought interest rates up. But thanks to the moral hazard and government run market, this is not happening yet when it does, who's fault is it of course ? The free market, capitalism, this makes my <deleted> blood boil.

http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/capitalista.htm

Well, it depends doesn't it? Take Canada for instance. It has hitched its NAFTA star to the US consumer. About 70% of its people live near the border and are dependant on cross border trade. You're going to let your currency go wherever it needs to to keep that trade alive. Yes Canada is a resource rich country, but that provides little employment and it looks like you're selling those industriesl to China anyway. I'm a PR of Canada and IMO the housing bubble is still pretty alive there. A further appreciation in the currency would probably trigger a slide there. Well, anyway good luck with that.

This argument definitely swings both ways.

The number one reason for the financial crisis was that THERE WERE NO SUITABLE GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF THE BANKING SYSTEM.

The reason that China has escaped the worst ravages of the last two financial crises is BECAUSE THEY HAVE CAPITAL CONTROLS, CONTROL THEIR EXCHANGE RATE AND THEIR BANKING SYSTEM.

The reason Canada escaped without a serious banking crisis is that they have SENSIBLE COLLATERAL CONTROLS OVER LENDING BY BANKS.

Markets are essentially irrational and dumb driven by sentiment fear and greed. Even when you say that the problem is that interest rates are controlled by the Government and were too low for too long why would rational agents use this to borrow stupidly and lend stupidly apart from the fact they are stupid. Individual desires wants and needs do not aggregate to anything approaching a sensible equilibrium because to justify that the basic minimum assumption is that we act as totally independent agents which is ridiculous. I do sympathsize with the view that the crappy results you achieve with laissez faire are probably not much worse than we get with crappy Government intervention.

None of these exotic products could have ever existed without ultra low interest rates. There would have never been enough velocity in the housing market to support these products without government/Fed/Treasury controlled interest rates.

The Canadian housing market is as bloated and bubbled as any other place in the world thanks to low interest rates, the only difference is that this bubble is contained in a more traditional banking system. The fallout will eventually be the same when interest rates go up. Canada skipped round one of the financial crisis but it will not skip round 2 when interest rates go up.

Prolonged periods of low interest rates can certainly create bubbles, but bubbles can correct and generally speaking the risk takers lick their wounds, regroup and move on to the next economic cycle. The systemic risk is not from low interest rates, it is from excessive leverage and the use of portfolio/security "insurance" products, such as CDS's. CDS's create significant imbalances as they are not marked to market daily, nor are counterparties required to show ability to pay out on claims. That's the recipe for a calamity.

Excessive leverage is low interest rates, you cant have excessive leverage without low interest rates. Leverage gives more value to each unit of capital that you started with, so the less units of capital you need to pay the interest, the more units you have left over to speculate with.

OK, I'll grant you that point, but it's still the ability to "hedge" that allows one to lay on the leverage. That is to say, to give the appearance of having hedged. There's no such thing as securities insurance that doesn't get marked to market in real time in the real world. That was the cause of the '87 crash and will be the cause of any subsequent crash where "insurance" products exist.

There's always the Food Forum.

latest (like last week) evidence out of USA suggests that contrary to popular beliefs, talking on mobiles does not significantly increase incidence of traffic accidents. Previous studies had shown correlations as high as with drunk driving... but apparently this latest study refutes these claims.

Before i retired, it was my job to review and filter such reports and then make recommendations to local government... but have not kept up on all the latest studies.... just read the headlines....

still, interesting food for thought

Then surely you know that funders of such reports tend to get the result they pay for.

being so well established you would think TV had nothing to fear by allowing people to mention the names of other forums.

Everyone keeps ignoring the fact that one (want-to-be) competitor has slandered George and many of the moderators - accusing Thai Visa of being a criminal conspiracy and all kinds of other wild charges over many years. Why would Thai Visa allow anyone to promote these kinds of libelous forums on their website?

Is mere mention of the unspeakable a promotion?

Hardly, dear boy, but I can well appreciate the defensiveness that may be engendered by what others understand to be nothing more than the exercise of free speech.

Gent, is that you? You've been missed.

"The Prem," as the overall development is called, is an unusual concept. The real estate aspect of it, Premburi, is not close to being finished. The school is now very well-established. The following is interesting:

http://premburi.premcenter.org/concept.html

It's a very scenic and peaceful area out near The Prem school but I have to say it; those homes they built as part of "Premburi" are hideous.

Prolonged periods of low interest rates can certainly create bubbles, but bubbles can correct and generally speaking the risk takers lick their wounds, regroup and move on to the next economic cycle. The systemic risk is not from low interest rates, it is from excessive leverage and the use of portfolio/security "insurance" products, such as CDS's. CDS's create significant imbalances as they are not marked to market daily, nor are counterparties required to show ability to pay out on claims. That's the recipe for a calamity.

Bubbles correcting. I seriously believe that without very concerted Government intervention the financial system would have totally collapsed 2 years ago. Do you think that Naam thinks that multilateral guarantees are the 'correct' solution for the Euro. He just wishes to avoid the potential of a financial implosion.

Marx is very interesting on his analysis of risk. He essentially believes that all financial products from loans to derivatives (obviously there werent deriviatives then) do not reduce risk but simply build it up over time into a bigger crisis. The Euro is a classic case where the stabilization of the currency has resulted in increased destabilizing of countries fundamentals. Rakesh Saxena very much traded on this philosophy.

But Bernanke and Greenspan have the belief that bubbles cannot be spotted or effectively intervened in but that the Fed needs to intervene to cushion the fall out. The average 12 year old can see there is no logic to that argument (and they have written papers on it.)

I think Herr Naam is a pragmatist and I think the various governments would like to give the apearance of remedial action. I also think they'd like the action to appear as incremental as possible to give the appearnce that subsequent actions are "stronger measures" and more likely to effect a solution. What I think both Marx and Herr Naam know is that it is time and relief from new economic pressures that are the only thing that will bring about improved conditions. I think tha's why he evaluates his investments based on ability to pay the coupon rather than how bad it might smell.

The number one cause of the financial crisis was GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF INTEREST RATES.

The number two cause of the financial crisis was GOVERNMENT SPONSORED MORTGAGE INSURANCE (FANNY MAE AND FREDDIE MAC.)

And the future currency crisis in the making will be caused GOVERNMENT INSURED BANK DEPOSITS (FDIC)

Does this look like free market, laissez faire ideology to you ? because it sure as hel_l doesn't look like it to me.

This argument definitely swings both ways.

The number one reason for the financial crisis was that THERE WERE NO SUITABLE GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF THE BANKING SYSTEM.

The reason that China has escaped the worst ravages of the last two financial crises is BECAUSE THEY HAVE CAPITAL CONTROLS, CONTROL THEIR EXCHANGE RATE AND THEIR BANKING SYSTEM.

The reason Canada escaped without a serious banking crisis is that they have SENSIBLE COLLATERAL CONTROLS OVER LENDING BY BANKS.

Markets are essentially irrational and dumb driven by sentiment fear and greed. Even when you say that the problem is that interest rates are controlled by the Government and were too low for too long why would rational agents use this to borrow stupidly and lend stupidly apart from the fact they are stupid. Individual desires wants and needs do not aggregate to anything approaching a sensible equilibrium because to justify that the basic minimum assumption is that we act as totally independent agents which is ridiculous. I do sympathsize with the view that the crappy results you achieve with laissez faire are probably not much worse than we get with crappy Government intervention.

None of these exotic products could have ever existed without ultra low interest rates. There would have never been enough velocity in the housing market to support these products without government/Fed/Treasury controlled interest rates.

The Canadian housing market is as bloated and bubbled as any other place in the world thanks to low interest rates, the only difference is that this bubble is contained in a more traditional banking system. The fallout will eventually be the same when interest rates go up. Canada skipped round one of the financial crisis but it will not skip round 2 when interest rates go up.

Prolonged periods of low interest rates can certainly create bubbles, but bubbles can correct and generally speaking the risk takers lick their wounds, regroup and move on to the next economic cycle. The systemic risk is not from low interest rates, it is from excessive leverage and the use of portfolio/security "insurance" products, such as CDS's. CDS's create significant imbalances as they are not marked to market daily, nor are counterparties required to show ability to pay out on claims. That's the recipe for a calamity.

i submit to your superior knowledge (is it based on Fàckipedia?). i was "with" Soros in South-East Asia and made a bundle early 1998 and lost much more than a bundle in autumn 1998 because i was "with" Soros in Russia.

thanks for not listening

Although Soros is a bit pompous he explains the concept of 'reflexivity' (circular, non-linnear relationship between predictions, decisions, actions and reactions within markets). And he made a good deal of his money by manipulating market psychology. Certainly Sokal should read it so he doesnt have any more romantic dreams about laissez faire producing something bearing some resemblance to a sensible result. The market is always right is only something that nobody who has ever traded a market would say. I would have liked to have spent some time working for Soros.

Lying and frontrunning being another way of putting it. Even Buffet is reduced to that these days.

I like to say the market is never right, but it always wins.

Yet the reality of the situation felt at least here in the US of A has changed zilch...nada...zip.

Record high unemployment...check

Record high foreclosures...check

Record high bankruptcies...check

Food prices going ballistic...check

Banks closed weekly...check

Not trying to be too confrontational but this section of the forum has become the DOOM & GLOOM BOYS CLUB. Hard for a non club member to play with you guys.

The non doom and gloomers have called the markets around the world correctly the last year and will continue to have a good track record over the next 5 years. If I had listened to all the doom perpetuated on this forum I would have substantially less money than I had a year ago. Looking back if I would had taken the opposite stance of the doom and gloomers, I would have made millions. If I only had the balls to buy a USA financial ETF a year ago.

Oh, I almost forgot. Record unemployment, bankruptcies, and sky rocketing food prices; other than not being accurate, what type of individuals would benefit from this scenario? My guess are those that hold commodities - hmm, who would that be?

My opinions mirror my belief that the world economy will weather this crisis with no lasting financial impact. Maybe the doomers are correct but your track record is really not that good.

Peace:)

Said the pool boy turned NINJA loan salesman who was down 3% on a 5% off the top market correction that was 60% + off the lows.

HaHa - funny and I thought all you could do was endlessly talk about charts. Being down 3% was just a simple fact and by no means was I bosting. Actually, I was stating it at a negative and you took it completely out of context. You also rambled(earlier post) about placing a stop loss on a max 3% gain which I never stated. Reality sucks for the insecure but look on the bright side, you may have found a place on Thai visa that might finally listen to you.

Also, I was many other things than a pool boy and a loans salesman(6 months-lol). That was a part of my life where I found the strength to persevere and haven't lost the taste for winning the game of life since sweeping those pools. In reality, cleaning pools after breaking 10 bones two months prior and losing 30 lbs was an accomplishment. I guess sulking about the collapse of the dot com bubble and the lack of employment in my field was an option.

Really, you need to get a life and spend some real time enjoying life outside of TV. I'm sure you aren't all that bad a person and I bet you might make a friend or two. I recommend diversifying your communications beyond charts and graphs because most of the real world realizes you can't chart success.

I'm sick as _hell but getting better everyday so my days corresponding on TV are coming to an end. The best of luck finding that happy place.

Hugs to you,

Happy Ninja:)

Of course you can chart success. You say you were involved in the Dot Com and Mortgage industries huh? Well, let's take a look:

Hmmm

Anyhow, talking about the economy and making money are two different things. While we may be investors or traders, or whatever, we are still citizens of various governments with opinions and insights into our governments behavior with respect to economics. We're human beings after all, accept for maybe zorro who says he doesn't care what happens to whomever if he can make a buck.

As for making money you'll find my approach centers around taking money out of markets as opposed to putting money into them.

Congratulations on your winning the judgement. Let's hope your luck continues and it is executed to your satisfaction. Judgement and execution of judgement being two different things...

Yet the reality of the situation felt at least here in the US of A has changed zilch...nada...zip.

Record high unemployment...check

Record high foreclosures...check

Record high bankruptcies...check

Food prices going ballistic...check

Banks closed weekly...check

Not trying to be too confrontational but this section of the forum has become the DOOM & GLOOM BOYS CLUB. Hard for a non club member to play with you guys.

The non doom and gloomers have called the markets around the world correctly the last year and will continue to have a good track record over the next 5 years. If I had listened to all the doom perpetuated on this forum I would have substantially less money than I had a year ago. Looking back if I would had taken the opposite stance of the doom and gloomers, I would have made millions. If I only had the balls to buy a USA financial ETF a year ago.

Oh, I almost forgot. Record unemployment, bankruptcies, and sky rocketing food prices; other than not being accurate, what type of individuals would benefit from this scenario? My guess are those that hold commodities - hmm, who would that be?

My opinions mirror my belief that the world economy will weather this crisis with no lasting financial impact. Maybe the doomers are correct but your track record is really not that good.

Peace:)

Said the pool boy turned NINJA loan salesman who was down 3% on a 5% off the top market correction that was 60% + off the lows.

"The number one cause of the financial crisis was GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF INTEREST RATES."

governments do not control interest rates, the market does.

In the US the FED sets the interest rate...albeit in reaction to the market

At least that is my understanding

Fed = Tail. Meet the Dog:

http://www.barchart.com/futures/Financials

$USD:GBP filled a gap from last May today. Should be good for a wee bounce. It's trend seems to be guided by it's 150 ma, which it is well under. Negative till that condition changes IMO.

Most 7-11's have a poster on the wall for applying stickers to. This is for tamboon to some wat or another. Just leave the stickers on the counter and say tamboon and they'll apply it to the poster for you.

Yes, I know that. they are profligate spenders and mismanagers, no question. Seemingly, they had no plans for a Dept. of Homeland Security and a TARP bailout either, but in this age of "crisis" governing, big changes happen suddenly and "seem" to be imposed rather than reached through consensus or public will.

i agree changes happen under duress.

But that duress will not appear while people feel that the US is financing the third world that just because it can balance its budget it might do. It has clearly stated its intention to abuse its reserve currency status for the foreseeable future. The US has no intention of actually paying its interest on its debt, it is simply going to borrow more. I just dont really understand how a country like Thailand can generate surpluses and use them to finance US debt. It just seems so irresponsible to me.

That is only because the rest of the world is still using misguided keynesian policies like devaluing their own currency, when the rest of the world wakes up and stops using keynesian policies then the US dollar is done.

You didn't see the US trying to devalue its currency when it was the biggest creditor export nation in the world, they where doing just the opposite, they where settling trade in gold. That is where the 8000 tons came from

Treasure your intellectual gifts now sokal. They say genius often fades after the age of 25.

What 20k baht/mo will get you in Thailand. Maybe money better spent:

http://www.thaistudentcharity.org/index.ph...2&Itemid=60

Charts are self explanatory. There is something odd about a call based on a "chart technical picture" that doesn't include a chart but does have several paragraphs devoted to non technical rationalizations. Anyhow, they could be right that it moves up from here. If it does, and to new highs it will be a blowoff top to the LT cycle IMO.

What's your credit union have to say on the matter?

To be honest there is something distinctly odd about the concept of a gold analyst. It would appear to be an oxymoron.

I mean it really is hard to think of something intelligent to say so you will tend to end up with a more buyers than sellers, chart breakout buy story.

$GOLD bounced off its 34 week ema which could be anticipated as it needs "desloping" if it is to fall further. If it comes back to it's 34week ema in the next few weeks it's going lower.

Yes, I know that. they are profligate spenders and mismanagers, no question. Seemingly, they had no plans for a Dept. of Homeland Security and a TARP bailout either, but in this age of "crisis" governing, big changes happen suddenly and "seem" to be imposed rather than reached through consensus or public will.

i agree changes happen under duress.

But that duress will not appear while people feel that the US is financing the third world that just because it can balance its budget it might do. It has clearly stated its intention to abuse its reserve currency status for the foreseeable future. The US has no intention of actually paying its interest on its debt, it is simply going to borrow more. I just dont really understand how a country like Thailand can generate surpluses and use them to finance US debt. It just seems so irresponsible to me.

It's not charity work. They do it to keep their currency/exports/workforce/manufacturing sector competitive with China. All these countries are symbiotic parasites of each other.

That, and to forestall more of this:

One thing people always miss about the problems in the USA. In order for US to improve it's fiscal situation, it need only STOP doing many of the extravagant things it does that are wasteful. Other governments need to give MORE than they are presently to heal their problems. That hurts. US also has more taxing authority available (by present first world global standards) than do other major governments. We'll see.

The US has no plans to balance his budget for the foreseeable future although there is a vague commitment to a balanced primary budget in 2015. So it is totally irrelevant what the US 'can' achieve when they are not even trying to achieve it.

Yes, I know that. they are profligate spenders and mismanagers, no question. Seemingly, they had no plans for a Dept. of Homeland Security and a TARP bailout either, but in this age of "crisis" governing, big changes happen suddenly and are "imposed" rather than reached through consensus or public will or accepted constitutional means.

I agree with that school of thought that says pride is a sin, no matter what your color is.