As I watch the pre-market activity and commentary from the airheads on CNBC it just boggles the mind. Last week these same people said the world is coming to an end, which meant buy to me, but today the “market is soaring.” Investors must get confused when they watch this porno for the mind as they flip-flop every day. Cramer says do not buy until Dow 9,000, but tonight he will say I told you to buy on Friday! He did not, he was a bear, which is why I thought I should buy. This market is bipolar and, to me, and the commentary you hear is insane. I am bearish on the market, but like individual companies.
We went from market crashing last week to the market is the place to be, today at least. I think this is a strong bounce rally before it declines more, I would not commit new money today or yet unless you are renting this market. The only reason we are getting a bounce today is because of a $1T bailout of Europe, ouch! I do not believe this is a real bounce and volume will be pitifully light, as all up days are, and this market is really just responding to short-term oversold conditions. This will be a good time to de-risk ones portfolio, IMHO.
The problem in Europe is not resolved, anyone who thinks it is needs to check their meds, as the funding package is merely treating the symptoms of the crisis not the source of the problem. Essentially, the bad behavior of the PIIGS is being rewarded, but they should be punished, and all the ECB is doing is taking the risk off of the speculators, rewarding their behavior as well, and giving that risk to the central bank. On top of that, the number should be shocking to the markets, $1T is a very large number and above where most people saw it. Not to mention, a good chunk of that is coming from the IMF, a.k.a. the U.S. which is the top funder of the IMF.
The U.S. is broke and borrows all of our capital, like most countries nowadays, so we are simply bailing out debt by issuing more debt. Who does that make sense? It does not. This bailout will not fix the problem long-term and merely kicks the can down the road for a little while. It will blow up at some point and now the bond vigilantes will look at other countries, i.e. the UK, U.S. or Japan, IMHO. They should have left the situation alone and let the PIIGS default to introduce a mechanism to kick them out of the EMU, but no, we are going down the bailout route, again! Not only that, but they are spreading the risk around to other countries now, unreal.
But the fundamentals of the U.S. economy are strong, say the bulls, which is why the market will scream today. Well, I will say things are much better, but not enough to justify the markets run-up and not strong enough to send the market up whatever percent today, this is a technical rally based on some, IMHO, troubling news. I look at the NFP figures from Friday, which I called a fraud and I stand by that comment since 188K were “made up estimates” from the BLS. When one subtracts out the 188K birth/death model figures, which NO commenter on the TV is talking about, except Rick Santelli, we have a figure of +102K. That is a great number right? Not really. Consider this, if we back out the 188K make believe BLS numbers, remember the birth/death model is responsible for the BLS revising unemployment up by 800K in February. We have a baseline number of 102K. If we subtract out government jobs, which are most temporary as well, think Census, we are down to about +48K. You could subtract out temporary hiring as well, but they are jobs, just not permanent, IMHO. No matter how one looks at it, except for CNBC, the ADP figure was accurate and the employment report was less robust than most think, but hey, let’s not let the facts get in the way of buy, buy, buy.
Overall, I fail to see how many classify this as a strong recovery after we spent trillions and 2 years later we are still at 10% unemployment and we have an anemic recovery at best. I am not saying things are not getting better, rather I am saying we have stabilized for really bad to just less bad. I believe a double dip is coming and this market is so not priced for a double dip. If we add in the Europe craziness the market is much less attractive, IMHO. The $1T, which should scare you in the U.S. as you are on the hook for a large portion of that because we are the top funders of the IMF, is a huge number and underscores how bad of shape the EU is really in. We have merely are fighting a debt crisis with more debt, sure there are austerity measures, but they are not going to fix the problem and the Greeks are apparently great at hiding assets.
Yet again, we are socializing the profits of speculators which were lambasted in the European media via the governments over the weekend, unreal. Instead of bailing out the PIIGS they should have instituted an ejection mechanism instead, that would save the Euro, but now they kicked the can down the road and are making other countries issue debt to fix the debt crisis, no sovereign country has cash on hand so they borrow it, see the problem? Austerity measures or not, it is a problem that will be with us for a long time. This is a reflexive rally built on a news event which was actually bad news. How does one support its currency by issuing a slush fund for bailouts? You can only defend a currency through higher rates or taxation, that really is not the case here as Greece will still have debt-to-GDP ratio of 150% by 2014, or there about.
This rally is somewhat justified, but I would be extremely careful with buying into this. Tonight Cramer will revise his call from Friday and Kudlow will continue with his “V” shaped recovery nonsense, but the problems are still there lurking in the background waiting to reappear. Buy gold because this is not over and what the EU did was inflationary, when that inflation will hit, I do not know, but it will in the EU and in the U.S. The other issue is, where will the vigilantes go next? The UK, U.S., Japan or will they stay in the EU? At the end of the day it was probably best to let the PIIGS default so the market can clear the bad debt, but let’s not have the market solve the problem, let’s tinker with it so another bomb can blow up somewhere else.
Oh, let’s not forget one of our GSE’s, which are “sound,” requested another $10B from the government. Yup, a sure sign of how strong things are.
We all know the answer to that question, but he really has taken the cake today. As Goldman defends itself against this lawsuit Cramer had a piece on CNBC titled “Cramer: Goldman Invested Own Money in CDO.” In this article he cites an unnamed source, which is the first red flag, that stated Goldman did not short this CDO. Well, who cares as that is not the allegation. The allegation is that Goldman allowed Paulson to pick out lousy mortgages to short, in order to create the synthetic CDO, and did not disclose to investors that this CDO was created by a guy who wanted to short the market. The charges claim that the marketing of this CDO was said to have been picked by an “independent” third party which is patently false, unless Paulson & Co. wanted to lose money. As an aside, this is right about the time Goldman started to short the sub-prime market according to my sources, you know, publically available information.
The question is about whether Goldman did this, I think they did, and what other banks might have done the same thing, they all copy each other and the synthetic CDO market was a very esoteric vehicle to invest in. The CDO market was also controlled by a few main banks, Goldman, Morgan, BoA, Deutsche Bank, Citi and a few others. These banks kept the prices of the CDS swaps low, meaning the buyers, i.e. Paulson, was not making any money, as the market was collapsing which shows that the banks were deluding themselves about the reality of the market. Most CDO’s only needed a 5% default rate to blow up, banks did not move the prices of the CDS’s in the buyers favor until well after that 5% default rate, read The Big Short to verify. In other words, these guys controlled the market, created a product they knew was crap (the short sellers picked what they wanted to short!) and then sold these synthetic products to unwitting clients, they had to invest in some of them because by 2007 all the suckers were less likely to buy synthetic products.
My point is simple, no one claimed Goldman shorted this specific CDO, but misled investors to buy it by distorting the facts about it. Are they guilty? More than likely, but I am sure the case will be settled with admission of guilt. Does this mean AIG and other investors might have a claim? Yup, so go buy some GS Cramer, I am sure he will tell you that later tonight. Did other banks do the same thing? More than likely. It is hard to believe GS was the only bank that did this when they were a relatively small player in that business, compared to Citi, Merrill Lynch and others. Does Cramer grasp those facts or thoughts? I don’t think so.
After all, this is the guy who thinks the market going up every day for a month and a half is a good thing. Then again, Cramer, whose selective memory will omit this in a week or tonight, did this on his show last night:
I guess Cramer never made money shorting stocks… yeah right. I respect Cramer the hedge fund manager, but this other guy, what he turned into, is disingenuous.
I was a bit desperate tonight for entertainment before the ball drops and happened to tune into Mad Money, I am sure Cramer is please as I single handedly increased his ratings from 1 to 2. Regardless, tonight I realized why I stopped watching this guy. He has no sense of decency, memory or humility whatsoever. In fact, all he does is revise his picks, his history and track record all the time. I will post videos to prove it in a little bit.
Tonight he was talking about retirement, which is a joke since he ignored what I rightfully pointed out is the most important thing in retirement planning, the sequence of returns, oh well, why let the facts, oh forget it. Anyhow, here is what you need to remember about good old Jim, he invested in the greatest bull market ever, yes he was a hell of a fund manager, but regardless it was also the greatest bull market ever, and he rarely held positions for very long. If you doubt this then go read Trading with the Enemy which was written by a guy who worked for Jim, apparently Jim is not a nice guy, go figure.
My point is Jim knows nothing about retirement planning because it is a totally different ballgame than trading stocks. It involves a complex range of skills sets and knowledge that not just any person has, sorry, but it’s true. This does not mean I am not a guru and I am not claiming this, but I do consult in this area and speak with experts all the time so I have a good grasp on the topic. Anyhow, tonight Jim claims that he “loves” index funds, but does he really?
It is true he used to tell people to invest in these funds until they built up $10K to trade stocks. However, earlier this year he got rather upset at a guest on CNBC, I am searching for the video, where he went off on the guy saying that anyone who invested and held, i.e. buy and hold investing in index type funds, were losers, literally, because they got killed over the last 12 years. At that time the markets were at historic lows so we were at levels not seen in over a decade. At that time he advocated being active in your account and moving money, which has always been my belief as I believe that passive and active management performance is cyclical. I guess he changed his mind since the market recovered though because now you should own index funds and then add stocks after awhile.
This man must confuse the hell out of his viewers. I mean, one day he is telling you to buy dividend stocks, then buy internet stocks, wait, now buy Best Buy before the earnings and the next day he is saying never buy a stock before the quarterly earnings and now he is saying that your core holdings should be index funds? If you are confused, so am I, but that is what the man said, so don’t blame me. The kicker is his disclaimer is that he is merely trying to entertain you, but here is what I just cannot figure out. If he is entertaining us and we really should not take him seriously, you should never take an entertainer seriously in my book, then why is he dispensing buy and sell recommendations on stocks?
Worse yet, why is the advice he’s giving one night in direct conflict with the advice he has given the night before? Honestly, I am not trying to give him a hard time, but I have a real problem with people revising their history, especially when it is on TV and it is easily searchable. If a broker or a financial advisor acted like that or dispensed advise like that FINRA would slap them so hard it would not be funny, but not commentators, even though the history of what they said is recorded. It is just unreal that this type of behavior can continue and no one says anything about it. I don’t care if the advice is bad, hell Suze Orman says lose your house before you even think about tapping your IRA for an emergency, yeah, that makes sense, everyone gives bad advice, but don’t cover it up.
Be the First to Comment 
Subscribe to Annuity IQ's Feed
