Replies to post #146468 on Zeev's Turnips Patch-No Politics (ZEEV)

[mainehiker]

sounds good! will do

[TREND1]

Zeev
How about your comments?
Trading when 90 to 95% of stock is owned by Institutions:
Below all stocks are in the Education Group:

 
 COCO 2004 est EPS 2.26 +20% above last year. 
 CECO 1.43 26% 
 EDMC 2.26 20% 
 ESI  1.45 20% 
 STRA 2.57 22% 
 

[Koikaze]

Turn the horses out in the back pasture, we're done for the day. For those interested, I've added a few items to the Zeev's Ideas Board (#board-1351).

Fred

[jdaasoc]

I was about to reply to your post about liquidity when "FED poll" blew into town.

You said

the predictive value is non important, presence of such liquidity is on important drive in rising prices

I hope just about everyone will agree on this fact and when you combine it with the large deficits coming to roost, there is no other end game possible but higher rates. Weather we end up with that 70's thing where interest rates go double digit which only came about because of oil embargo, governmental confidence crisis on top of aging WWII generation, I doubt we will see anything like it due to increased productivity and health standards but I think someone going to get squeezed out at the trow if everyone in the global economy seeks more credit to grow world economy.

Federal reserves is worried about everything from gasoline consumption to debt levels. If the Chinese are getting let say ten billion a month in US dollars in excess of their ability to import foreign goods, some of those dollars are going into cars that will need gas. The competition for goods such as energy is already heating up and we in US are coming out on short end of stick. As long as I see HNP growing electricity production at 80% per annum the pressure on energy prices is not going to abate.

[market_watcher]

I have not heard much of the talking heads discussing the implications of such a drain and competition for funds.

With commercial loans down so far, what competition is there really? The Fed creates the rudiments of money, but it can't force people to borrow it, which is when it actually becomes money. The government, on the other hand, having no need to borrow only when the NPV is positive, can borrow to create all sorts of boondoggles. So, you could have massive deficits but, if the only borrowing was from the public sector, rates could remain stable.

I'm not sure I think this is true, but it was the subject of an article I was reading recently and, of course, if companies aren't borrowing it's tough for economic growth to occur that isn't government-related. That's probably why the same person who wrote this article wrote another about how a US pullback from responsibility in Iraq would be bad for the economy.

Just thought I'd throw this out there and see if you had any comments. If you disagree, remember, don't shoot the messenger.