ericinNE

Comment Stream

Comment Stream
Filter comments by:
Highest rated Latest comments
Or filter by symbol:
  • Is America on a Downward Slope?
    I scooped this off another website. For what it's worth:

    About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:
    "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
    The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these
    nations always progressed through the following sequence
    1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
    2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
    3. From courage to liberty;
    4. From liberty to abundance;
    5. From abundance to complacency;
    6. From complacency to apathy;
    7. From apathy to dependence;
    8. From dependence back into bondage

    Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota... believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
    Dec 11 00:28 am |Rating: +1 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Fast Money Investment Advice: Turn the Volume Down
    Clearly, you're still stuck in the "investing" mode. This has been a trader's market sicne January. Investors had no business here until recently, and that's still debatable. Wanna be an investor, fine. Expect lots of lower portfolio value for awhile. Fast Money speaks to the trader mentality, and they make no bones about pointing that out, and often. Najarian bros are probably some of the sharpest traders out there. Their frequent comments about needing to nimble and flexible must have fallen on deaf ears, for you. The "taking profits" comment applies to those that have made any, noone else. If that's not you, and the other "investors," you're barking about it don't mean squat.
    Dec 09 06:06 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Is Hyperinflation on the Horizon?
    Yeah. What he said. But then, what we have to do is, what has to happen, is we develop the molecular transmogrification technologies to transport the raw materials. But only after the coming pandemic. See, then we can make the necessary Soylant Green, and monetize it, but only on credit. It has to happen! All left over Soylant Orange will have to be left to rot, in a separate pile. Or be sent to the non-particirating debtor nation-states.
    Nov 15 07:58 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Goldman Turns Cautious on Solar Sector
    GS is rapidly getting to be in the same camp as Cramer, as far as validity of opinion is concerned. Whatever they say, doing the opposite is your best bet.
    Oct 08 02:59 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Tuesday Outlook: Commodities, Emerging Markets
    royial: Not to be facetious, but, Duuhh! ;-)
    Wonder if I'll pick the right reentry point for EEV, EFU, SDS, QID, SRS, SKF. Sold today in anticipation of typical big dip - follow up rally. Looking forward to recouping some losses between now and election day.
    Oct 07 04:57 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • A Satirical Breakdown of the Bailout Plan's Expenditures
    And a burgeoning underground black market in tattered, dogeared copies of The Constitution of the United States Of America.
    Oct 02 23:02 pm |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • The Dummy's Guide to the U.S. Financial Crisis
    Some statements of truth by far greater minds from long ago:
    If you want to control a country, control it's money.
    The most efficient way to get and keep power is to get the citezenry to give it to you.
    The most efficient way to get people to give you power is to make them dependant upon you.
    The most efficient way to make people dependant on you, is to erode the concept of self dependence, personal responsibility, and ultimately, self determination.
    Crises and panic are tools of the state to get more power.

    When this country first started, 0% of the population was dependant on the government for all, or a substantial portion of, their ability to survive. Today, about 40% of the population is dependant on government programs and/or "entitlements&quo... for their ability to survive. At what point will the percentage enable the government to dictate the terms of everyone's life? The natural evolution of democracy inevitably leads back to tyranny, from which the original inception of democracy arose. At some point, some degree of anarchy is required. Anarchy is a perfectly reasonable option, but only when freedom is more impotant than comfort.

    Who among us has ever voted for the "lesser of two evils?" Or voted for a candidate, not knowing what their core beliefs and fundemental philisophical principles were? Of the available choices for president, who here thinks they know, and agree with, their core beliefs and fundemental philisophical principles? Does anyone think that the current mechanisms of government still allow for quality governance at the Federal level? Why is the Federal government involved in anything other than protection from force or fraud?
    Sep 26 02:32 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Not Just Another Bear Cycle
    Opps, make that 92%. Bengal, you need to learn the difference between the terms "precentage return" and "gain" in math, before criticizing others math skills. Gain is the multiplier, and removing the 1 before the decimal would make the multiplier less than 100%, resulting in a net amount of .4805; less than what you started with.
    Jul 14 04:51 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Not Just Another Bear Cycle
    Maybe you were confusing return with gain. An understandable mistake. If Bill had said "96% return" it would have been clearer.
    Jul 14 04:34 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Not Just Another Bear Cycle
    The math is correct. Take a dollar, lose 47.77%. That leaves you with .5223. Times it by 1.915 (192% close enough.) Now you have your dollar back.
    Jul 14 03:40 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • What If We'd Been on the Gold Standard?
    SimpleSimon, your nic befits you perfectly. Please exlpain how a finite, valuable, dwindling, high demand resource is, in any way, correlatable to tulips, or the hypothetical, purely conceptual value of a dot.com. Clearly, the concept of peak oil (now or later) is lost on you. Oil is every bit as valuable as gold, and the disconnect between the two's corelatable value has been, and continues to be, the manipulation of those markets by the cartels that control each. Gold will lose it's value when a mass substitute for oil is found, or when we finally figure out how to convert energy to matter, and not just the other way around.
    May 10 10:52 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • The Treasury, Fed and Bankers Are Setting the Bull Traps
    Bil, I've just recently started reading your posts, and it's clear to me that you suffer from the same affliction I do: The use of logic in the analysis of facts, to arrive at truth, in pursuit of pragmatic solutions. The stock market has become, now more than ever, an insane place w/ insane rules. Supposed "stock fundementals" that ignore underlying economic fundementals are worthless. Keep telling the truth, maybe enough people will someday come appreciate it. Till then, the rest of do. Thanks.
    Apr 21 05:44 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • World Crisis Not Dissimilar to 1929-1932
    Can't follow your reasoning on gold, Prose. I am unaware of any time in history when fiat money devalued, for any reason, that gold did not increase above the rate of devaluation, except for the short time (relatively speaking) after the US went off the gold standard for our currency. Even if the expressed-in-dollars price of gold were to come down, what it could actually buy would be worth disproportionaly more than what the paper dollars would be able to buy. Of course, this assumes one is holding actual gold, not GLD and the like. I have been seriously thinking about moving a chunk of $ into gold and silver coins. Less as a speculative investment, more as an insurance policy for economic upheaval. Readily tradeable assets will be necessary for getting those things you need, don't have, and can't grow/make/take. Gold has been a recognized curreny for over 5000 years, and I can't see that changing, even under the most dire scenerios.
    Apr 18 02:27 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • A Little Financial Knowledge Is a Dangerous Thing
    I can't decide if this elitist crap, or a sincere opinion that just happens to ignore the consequences of a society with a majority of the population having no basic economics/financial literacy.
    My mother-in-law fits the profile. She hemmoraged money out of her IRA's and cash investment accounts from Nov.-early Jan. until I finally got a chance to review what her "financial advisor" at Wells Fargo had put her into, (and then turned his back on, while over $25000 disappeared in that time.) She had no clue what was happening, what the driving forces were, how those forces were directly affecting her, etc.
    Almost all professional financial advisors somehow find a way to rationalize putting their unknowledgable clients into load funds, high fee/long term contract annuities, and other fee paying (to the advisor) investments. Gee, I wonder if there's a self serving agenda/conflict of interest issue, here?
    Can a little knowledge be dangerous in the hands of the arrogant? Sure. But to suggest that individuals are not absolutely the best person to oversee and direct their own investments, is rediculous. And for competent oversight, financial literacy is a must. Along with an understanding of basic economics. My mother-in-law has become very motivated to gain that literacy, now that the consequences of NOT having it have been driven home in the harshest of ways.
    I would be willing to bet that more wealth was lost from retirement accounts this last go around, than in a long time. Most all of it could have been avoided if they had been more financially literate, economicly aware, and in control of their own accounts. Regulation will never be a superior model for success. As an integrated aspect of self reliance, yes. But as a replacement for self reliance? I think not.
    Apr 18 01:20 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article
  • Who's to Blame for the Commodities Boom?
    The Socialist/borderline Marxist nature of some of the replies here illustrate the mentality that will make it possible for someone like Obama to become President. Everything old is new again, eventually. Even when it's been shown to be a miserable failure. But, that's what happens when enough of the population make the same mistakes they were doomed to make, from failing to know history, let alone learn from it.
    Apr 17 04:07 am |Rating: 0 0 |Link to Comment |View article

ericinNE's Comments Stream Stats

  • 33 Comments, 1 , 0
  • Total Comment Stream rating - = 1