Here Are Four Charts That Explain What The Protesters Are Angry About...:
'via Blog this'
Monday, October 17, 2011
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Friday, September 30, 2011
Monday, September 12, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
Friday, August 12, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
The Second Great Contraction - The Globe and Mail
Politicians would be wise to listen to the Rogoffs--however their myopic egos will likely not allow them to.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Fiduciary versus suitability standard | Advisor.ca
Fiduciary versus suitability standard | Advisor.ca
My Comment
Although the industry–both domestically and globally–is moving towards a fiduciary standard, care should be taken not to abandon the ‘transactional’ client or a client that willingly trades growth stocks with an advisor who has expertise in this sector–whether it be resource, biotech or hi-tech in nature.
This is slowly becoming an neglected part of the retail industry due to matters of cost and compliance risk. However, it should not be forgotten that venture capital is the essence of the capitalist paradigm–the foundation from which everything else in the industry stems from. The allocation of capital between risk takers and exploration and innovation entrepreneurs is paramount to the success of capital markets.
Obviously, the issue of suitability is an investment principle that has to be clearly established in the opening and operation of a transactional account, but the universalization of a fiduciary standard would not be appropriate or effectual in such instances.
It is important that the industry recognize the importance of the junior resource-technology sectors of the markets and endeavor to accommodate traders and investors who are willing to assume the risks involved–even though it may lead to higher costs and compliance issues–That is the essence of capitalism.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Friday, November 12, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
The Country Club.
Once upon a time there was a country club that catered to the crème de la crème of society. Members were apparently blessed with wealth, class, dignity and all the other attributes expected of the elite. Certain protocols were expected to be maintained when the ‘pretty people’ mingled and socialized in the confines of the exclusive club.
One day a garish patron entered the club full of bravado and unmitigated audacity. (Think: Rodney Dangerfield in Caddy Shack) The patron—Mr. Tinman and his mistress Mz. Suchs demanded the best service, repeatedly sending their carefully prepared cuisine back to the kitchen complaining that it was not up to the standards that one would expect for guests of their eminence and import.
Finally after making life difficult for the staff and ruining the meals of the other patrons—to whom they felt infinitely superior—the maitre de presented the bill for the meal. The cheque was in the amount of $13.4 Billion— a reasonable sum considering that the amount really did not matter since it would ultimately be paid by Mr. Tinman’s benefactor,Mr. Federalas, to whom they relied upon to maintain their position in the social strata.
Mr. Tinman complained loudly about the service and the conditions in which he and his guest had to dine. After disrupting the entire evening of the other patrons and belittling the staff, Mr. Tinman grudgingly paid the bill and added a paltry gratuity of $550 million—a mere 4.1% of the bill.
After the obnoxious guests had departed for their summer home in the Hamptons, the staff and management met to discuss what should be done about the frequent visits from Mr. Tinman and his entourage. It was decided that putting up with his crass and discourteous behaviour was unacceptable and that his membership should be revoked at the club.
Upon hearing of this decision, the kindly benefactor—Mr. Federalas--pleaded with the management of the Club to allow Mr. Tinman to keep his membership since if it was revoked the Tinman family would have a hissy fit and make life terrible for everyone that they came in contact with—especially other members of the club.
After some deliberation management acquiesced since they knew that in order to survive they had to accommodate even the spoiled brats that belonged to the club. The members of the club soon became accustomed to the obnoxious behavior of Mr. Tinman and actually some members began to emulate his behavior since it was so entertaining to pretend that membership in the country club meant that you could behave in any manner you wished without regard for others.
Over time the status of the club declined and became a refuge for disingenuous hypocritical ‘low lifes’ who loved to put on airs that they had class and dignity. The staff and management eventually changed and became as obnoxious as the patrons. Everyone lived happily ever after.
One day a garish patron entered the club full of bravado and unmitigated audacity. (Think: Rodney Dangerfield in Caddy Shack) The patron—Mr. Tinman and his mistress Mz. Suchs demanded the best service, repeatedly sending their carefully prepared cuisine back to the kitchen complaining that it was not up to the standards that one would expect for guests of their eminence and import.
Finally after making life difficult for the staff and ruining the meals of the other patrons—to whom they felt infinitely superior—the maitre de presented the bill for the meal. The cheque was in the amount of $13.4 Billion— a reasonable sum considering that the amount really did not matter since it would ultimately be paid by Mr. Tinman’s benefactor,Mr. Federalas, to whom they relied upon to maintain their position in the social strata.
Mr. Tinman complained loudly about the service and the conditions in which he and his guest had to dine. After disrupting the entire evening of the other patrons and belittling the staff, Mr. Tinman grudgingly paid the bill and added a paltry gratuity of $550 million—a mere 4.1% of the bill.
After the obnoxious guests had departed for their summer home in the Hamptons, the staff and management met to discuss what should be done about the frequent visits from Mr. Tinman and his entourage. It was decided that putting up with his crass and discourteous behaviour was unacceptable and that his membership should be revoked at the club.
Upon hearing of this decision, the kindly benefactor—Mr. Federalas--pleaded with the management of the Club to allow Mr. Tinman to keep his membership since if it was revoked the Tinman family would have a hissy fit and make life terrible for everyone that they came in contact with—especially other members of the club.
After some deliberation management acquiesced since they knew that in order to survive they had to accommodate even the spoiled brats that belonged to the club. The members of the club soon became accustomed to the obnoxious behavior of Mr. Tinman and actually some members began to emulate his behavior since it was so entertaining to pretend that membership in the country club meant that you could behave in any manner you wished without regard for others.
Over time the status of the club declined and became a refuge for disingenuous hypocritical ‘low lifes’ who loved to put on airs that they had class and dignity. The staff and management eventually changed and became as obnoxious as the patrons. Everyone lived happily ever after.
Spare Me The Sudden Outrage The Reformed Broker
Mr. Brown posted this to his blog in April of 2010. Cant get a prognostication much more accurate than this.
Spare Me The Sudden Outrage The Reformed Broker
Spare Me The Sudden Outrage The Reformed Broker
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Robert Rubin: Architect of Doom (excpet for his buddies)
At some point in time the realization that the world has been conned by a group of plutocrats will become painfully obvious--as if it hasn't already.
Institutional Risk Analytics
Institutional Risk Analytics
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Saturday, June 5, 2010
How's Supply Side Economics Working Out For You ?
The four stated goals of Supply Side Economic Policy
1. Reduce government spending,
2. Reduce income and capital gains marginal tax rates,
3. Reduce government regulation of the economy,
4. Control the money supply to reduce inflation
Government Spending
Effective Individual Income Tax Rates
Adjusted Monetary Base
Wealth Distribution
Total Government Debt as a % of GDP
It seems to be working out rather well for the banks.
Six Giant Banks Made $51 Billion Last Year
1. Reduce government spending,
2. Reduce income and capital gains marginal tax rates,
3. Reduce government regulation of the economy,
4. Control the money supply to reduce inflation
Government Spending
Effective Individual Income Tax Rates
Adjusted Monetary Base
Wealth Distribution
Total Government Debt as a % of GDP
It seems to be working out rather well for the banks.
Six Giant Banks Made $51 Billion Last Year
Friday, June 4, 2010
OTC Derivatives: Failed Banks or Failed Nations? - Hera - The Mises Community
This is a comprehensive discussion about the risk that UNREGULATED derivatives play in the world economy. An opinion like this--coming from a strong proponent of the Austrian School says volumes about how badly out of whack Wall Street, K Street and The Beltway have become.
Well worth the read !
OTC Derivatives: Failed Banks or Failed Nations? - Hera - The Mises Community
Well worth the read !
OTC Derivatives: Failed Banks or Failed Nations? - Hera - The Mises Community
Friday, May 28, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
Sure, Go Ahead: Blame the Socialists.
The thing that I find fascinating is that the problem of bureaucracy is a systemic problem worldwide. I tend to agree that socialism—as defined and demonstrated by Marxists –is an inefficient theory of both political economy, and implicitly, social justice. Where I begin to have a problem with criticism of socialism is that the antagonists are as much to blame for the world’s woes as the failed Marxists. It is interesting to note that since the collapse of the Berlin Wall—and essentially Marxist political economy, the deterioration of individual economies—and as a consequence—the global economy government deficits, financial malfeasance, and other macroeconomic problems have proliferated. This is not to categorically assign blame to ‘capitalists’ but only to point out that much of our troubles have been self-inflicted by the free-market liberal democratic paradigm. Hypocritical politicians have campaigned on the principles of smaller government while the empirical evidence clearly reveals that law makers who claim to seat on the right side of the political teeter tooter are as complicit as those who are deemed to be socialists.(Obama did not create the problems and has merely taken over what the Bush Administration attempted to do to stop the economy from collapsing) The consequences of supply side economics are testament to how ideology can be easily corrupted by the lust for power and influence. Example: For Americans to blame their financial woes on ‘socialism’ is like blaming the boogieman. Reagan, Bush I and Bush II talked a good game on fiscal restraint and trickle down economics—but unfortunately the reality of the current situation seriously tarnishes their credibility. Ironically, it was the left wing Clinton that turned in the best economic performance since Eisenhower—although the surpluses and boom years were more an economic aberration due to the policies of an unbridled Fed than a consequence of his economic policies.
Another irony that I see in the current debate about the scourge of socialism is that the social democratic countries—namely Norway, Sweden and Finland have economic metrics with regard to fiscal management that reveal a lower financial risk than that of America and the U.K. The Scandinavian countries have managed their economies well during these tumultuous times—although they too have experienced problems in the past—and have been able to deliver a standard of living to its citizens that consistently top the rankings made by the World Bank and other institutions. While I agree that Marxism and other forms of extreme socialism will not make the world a better place in which to live—and that I think it is quite valid to make pronouncements to that effect—solely blaming socialism for the current mess is insufficient—modern capitalism and hypocritical proponents of liberal individualism warrant much of the blame.
While the deficiencies of socialism are acknowledged and the burden placed upon us by a burgeoning public sector are obvious—it seems to me that no one has the political will to address the realities of a massive downsizing of government that will be required to remedy the problem. While resources must be moved from the unproductive sector of the economy to a venue that encourages innovation and economic efficiency, the problem of ridding the public sector of literally millions of jobs seems to be constantly swept under the rug. Politicians are excellent at doing the Ostrich trick. How would a government deal with massive unemployment and the necessity of converting a static and lethargic workforce to a mobile and enthused segment of the economy? The Leviathan has to be disassembled and this certainly won’t happen without massive opposition and possible social unrest. When a politician can explain to me how and when that inevitable task would be undertaken I will be encouraged. The dilemma is daunting and will require much misery to be endured by the middle class. The social ramifications are immense.
However, in the end, the mechanism of the free market will handle this—it always has and always will—whether under the guise of capitalism—socialism—theocracy—fascism—monarchy or whatever man can throw in its way. Free markets prevail under any political context—it is just a matter of how long it can remain somewhat in balance under the misguided rule of politicians and financiers who spout their ideology but inevitably succumb to the vices of excessiveness. People have no idea what is on the horizon—I find it very disconcerting. The foundations of our society has fissures running throughout—the structure that holds our societies together and ensure that justice prevails is about to collapse on itself. The memory of the 2007-2008 economic fiasco is quickly fading—the renewed bubble in the stock market attests to the fact that no one is willing to take responsibility and that the status quo is still guiding our path into a financial abyss that has not been witnessed by the world for several hundred years. The culprit—when the history books are written--might be socialism, but the reality of the situation is that endemic greed and elitist arrogance and contempt have exploited the people who form the heart of a society that embraces liberty and the repercussions will be dramatic and filled with personal suffering and misery. When the individuals that are responsible for innovation and production—the middle class—are alienated and disenfranchised anarchy prevails. History has shown that at times like this liberty is often usurped by tyrants and man reverts to cruel and harsh measures to protect what he deems to be rightfully his.
There is only one solution to what ails us: the innate response that our planet and all its living beings employ to endeavor to survive. This will be the work of God—it won’t be pleasant but it will serve to readjust the imbalances that our deviation from virtuous behavior has caused. Later this year, when the markets truly meltdown, people will begin to appreciate the gravity of the predicament that mercenary capitalists and megalomanic politicians have placed our world in. Civilization will soon be ripe for tyrants to emerge and take advantage of the chaos.
It is fine to blame socialists for all our woes—but the evidence clearly reveals that the conservative right and big business are as complicit as the progressives in creating a situation that will change our world drastically over the next decade.
Another irony that I see in the current debate about the scourge of socialism is that the social democratic countries—namely Norway, Sweden and Finland have economic metrics with regard to fiscal management that reveal a lower financial risk than that of America and the U.K. The Scandinavian countries have managed their economies well during these tumultuous times—although they too have experienced problems in the past—and have been able to deliver a standard of living to its citizens that consistently top the rankings made by the World Bank and other institutions. While I agree that Marxism and other forms of extreme socialism will not make the world a better place in which to live—and that I think it is quite valid to make pronouncements to that effect—solely blaming socialism for the current mess is insufficient—modern capitalism and hypocritical proponents of liberal individualism warrant much of the blame.
While the deficiencies of socialism are acknowledged and the burden placed upon us by a burgeoning public sector are obvious—it seems to me that no one has the political will to address the realities of a massive downsizing of government that will be required to remedy the problem. While resources must be moved from the unproductive sector of the economy to a venue that encourages innovation and economic efficiency, the problem of ridding the public sector of literally millions of jobs seems to be constantly swept under the rug. Politicians are excellent at doing the Ostrich trick. How would a government deal with massive unemployment and the necessity of converting a static and lethargic workforce to a mobile and enthused segment of the economy? The Leviathan has to be disassembled and this certainly won’t happen without massive opposition and possible social unrest. When a politician can explain to me how and when that inevitable task would be undertaken I will be encouraged. The dilemma is daunting and will require much misery to be endured by the middle class. The social ramifications are immense.
However, in the end, the mechanism of the free market will handle this—it always has and always will—whether under the guise of capitalism—socialism—theocracy—fascism—monarchy or whatever man can throw in its way. Free markets prevail under any political context—it is just a matter of how long it can remain somewhat in balance under the misguided rule of politicians and financiers who spout their ideology but inevitably succumb to the vices of excessiveness. People have no idea what is on the horizon—I find it very disconcerting. The foundations of our society has fissures running throughout—the structure that holds our societies together and ensure that justice prevails is about to collapse on itself. The memory of the 2007-2008 economic fiasco is quickly fading—the renewed bubble in the stock market attests to the fact that no one is willing to take responsibility and that the status quo is still guiding our path into a financial abyss that has not been witnessed by the world for several hundred years. The culprit—when the history books are written--might be socialism, but the reality of the situation is that endemic greed and elitist arrogance and contempt have exploited the people who form the heart of a society that embraces liberty and the repercussions will be dramatic and filled with personal suffering and misery. When the individuals that are responsible for innovation and production—the middle class—are alienated and disenfranchised anarchy prevails. History has shown that at times like this liberty is often usurped by tyrants and man reverts to cruel and harsh measures to protect what he deems to be rightfully his.
There is only one solution to what ails us: the innate response that our planet and all its living beings employ to endeavor to survive. This will be the work of God—it won’t be pleasant but it will serve to readjust the imbalances that our deviation from virtuous behavior has caused. Later this year, when the markets truly meltdown, people will begin to appreciate the gravity of the predicament that mercenary capitalists and megalomanic politicians have placed our world in. Civilization will soon be ripe for tyrants to emerge and take advantage of the chaos.
It is fine to blame socialists for all our woes—but the evidence clearly reveals that the conservative right and big business are as complicit as the progressives in creating a situation that will change our world drastically over the next decade.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
