"Magno Arms" What Does It Indicate? Nothing Good
2 years ago
Friday, May 29, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Elliott Wave Guru Sees Dark Days Ahead
By TIERNAN RAY | MORE ARTICLES BY AUTHOR
One of America's most famous market forecasters thinks that investors should play it safe with their investments.
ROBERT PRECHTER, THE market forecaster who told investors to sell their stocks weeks before the October 1987 crash, is back in the news.
Prechter, head of market-forecasting firm Elliot Wave International and author of several books, including Conquer the Crash (available from Amazon.com), has been quoted recently as saying that the current recession could last for a long time and even force stock markets back down to levels seen at the market bottom reached in March of this year.
Barron's caught up with Prechter by phone this week to understand the technical trading signs he looks at to draw conclusions about investor sentiment.
Barrons.com: You've said that today's recession represents a very deep and prolonged decline, akin to the 1929-1932 depression. What's your reason for viewing things as so dire?
Robert Prechter: My model is that naturally occurring waves of optimism and pessimism, which result from unconscious herding, are the driver of financial and macroeconomic trends. Upon rare occasion, waves of very large degree come to an end. In the financial realm, when people get more pessimistic, they sell stocks and curtail credit. They also take fewer risks in the realm of production, which causes the economy to contract. Taken together, these changes -- at very large degree -- portended a downward revaluation of the stock market, a deflation in credit and a depression.
Q: By what measure are you judging this pessimism?
A: Aside from price patterns per se, we track waves of social mood by way of psychological indicators. At large degree, we use things such as price/dividend, price/book and bond yield/stock yield ratios, mutual fund cash percentages, the number of investors bullish vs. bearish, credit spreads, savings rates, consumer sentiment, duration of optimism, and so on. From 1998 to 2007, these measures set records. P/E is still setting records. Optimism occurs at tops, and the more extreme the optimism, the bigger the degree of the top.
Q: Some observers allege that steps taken by President Roosevelt during the early part of the Great Depression ended up prolonging the depression. Will policy decisions being enacted now ameliorate or exacerbate the current decline?
A: Governments' policy decisions hamper and ruin economies all the time, but their meddling does not affect waves of social mood. On the contrary, waves of social mood generally spur governments to act. The 1929-1932 collapse caused the government to get restrictive and separate commercial and investment banks in 1933; this was after the bust it was designed to prevent was over. The 1990s boom caused government to get frisky and repeal the act in 1999; this was just as the boom it was designed to foster was ending. These policy decisions did not cause any changes in social mood, but the social mood trends predicted the character of the policy changes. Government herds, just like everyone else, but it is at the tail end of the herd, because it takes time for a consensus to develop so extensively that government has the public support to act.
Q: While the Federal Reserve's FOMC Wednesday said the slump will be worse than originally expected in the next three years, others are convinced that the "less bad" data points could lead to a recovery in the second half of this year.
A: Social actions result from social mood change. When we recognized a temporary low in pessimism in late February/early March, we were able to predict changes that would result: stocks would rally, credit spreads would narrow, housing sales would pick up, and authorities would take bows for effective "liquidity" and "stimulus" programs. If it goes high enough, a consensus will probably develop that the bear market and recession are behind us. Then it will be time for the next wave down.
Q: You've been quoted as suggesting people invest in Treasuries, considering them "safe cash proxies," but you've also said skeptical things about Treasuries given massive borrowing and the threat of deflation. Which is it?
A: It's a matter of short rates versus long. The best investment stance for conservative investors has been simple: safety. My primary recommendation is safe-cash equivalents. This means Treasury bills, Swiss money-market claims, some New Zealand bonds, some gold and some cash. There has been no change there. Cash has been good. Today you can buy twice the house, twice the stock shares and twice the gasoline that you could a short while ago.
But long term, Treasuries are different. After 28 years of rising prices for T-bonds, the Fed announced in December that it would buy them. Part of the downturn in prices relates to an anticipated pick-up in the economy, which should in fact occur for part of this year; part is due to hyperinflation fears, which I think are misplaced; and part is due to early fears of eventual government default, which I think are not misplaced. If government rates go up, bond investors will lose money, while we bill investors will make money, at least until it's time to bail out of government debt entirely.
Q: Do you prefer dollars to other currencies?
A: My position is that the dollar is the most inflated currency in the world, so it has the furthest to deflate. In other words, because it is so sick, it is the currency most likely to rise during the deflationary period as dollar-denominated IOUs collapse. Regardless, my currency mix includes what I consider to be very safe foreign debt and some gold. You have to realize that almost everyone loses in a deflation. The key is to lose a lot less than everyone else. Market opinions are one thing; safety is another.
Q: Your remarks as quoted in the press seem to refer essentially to the U.S. economy. What is your view of the rest of the world's economic prospects?
A: It's a developing global depression. Economies and societies are so closely entwined in the modern world that social mood is much more pervasively shared than it was centuries ago. So the world had a boom together, and it's having a bust together. The canary in the coal mine was Japan, which reached impossible-to-maintain extremes of debt and investment values a decade earlier than other countries did.
Q: So in spite of this market run-up, there's more misery ahead?
A: If you stay safe, it's the opposite.
By TIERNAN RAY | MORE ARTICLES BY AUTHOR
One of America's most famous market forecasters thinks that investors should play it safe with their investments.
ROBERT PRECHTER, THE market forecaster who told investors to sell their stocks weeks before the October 1987 crash, is back in the news.
Prechter, head of market-forecasting firm Elliot Wave International and author of several books, including Conquer the Crash (available from Amazon.com), has been quoted recently as saying that the current recession could last for a long time and even force stock markets back down to levels seen at the market bottom reached in March of this year.
Barron's caught up with Prechter by phone this week to understand the technical trading signs he looks at to draw conclusions about investor sentiment.
Barrons.com: You've said that today's recession represents a very deep and prolonged decline, akin to the 1929-1932 depression. What's your reason for viewing things as so dire?
Robert Prechter: My model is that naturally occurring waves of optimism and pessimism, which result from unconscious herding, are the driver of financial and macroeconomic trends. Upon rare occasion, waves of very large degree come to an end. In the financial realm, when people get more pessimistic, they sell stocks and curtail credit. They also take fewer risks in the realm of production, which causes the economy to contract. Taken together, these changes -- at very large degree -- portended a downward revaluation of the stock market, a deflation in credit and a depression.
Q: By what measure are you judging this pessimism?
A: Aside from price patterns per se, we track waves of social mood by way of psychological indicators. At large degree, we use things such as price/dividend, price/book and bond yield/stock yield ratios, mutual fund cash percentages, the number of investors bullish vs. bearish, credit spreads, savings rates, consumer sentiment, duration of optimism, and so on. From 1998 to 2007, these measures set records. P/E is still setting records. Optimism occurs at tops, and the more extreme the optimism, the bigger the degree of the top.
Q: Some observers allege that steps taken by President Roosevelt during the early part of the Great Depression ended up prolonging the depression. Will policy decisions being enacted now ameliorate or exacerbate the current decline?
A: Governments' policy decisions hamper and ruin economies all the time, but their meddling does not affect waves of social mood. On the contrary, waves of social mood generally spur governments to act. The 1929-1932 collapse caused the government to get restrictive and separate commercial and investment banks in 1933; this was after the bust it was designed to prevent was over. The 1990s boom caused government to get frisky and repeal the act in 1999; this was just as the boom it was designed to foster was ending. These policy decisions did not cause any changes in social mood, but the social mood trends predicted the character of the policy changes. Government herds, just like everyone else, but it is at the tail end of the herd, because it takes time for a consensus to develop so extensively that government has the public support to act.
Q: While the Federal Reserve's FOMC Wednesday said the slump will be worse than originally expected in the next three years, others are convinced that the "less bad" data points could lead to a recovery in the second half of this year.
A: Social actions result from social mood change. When we recognized a temporary low in pessimism in late February/early March, we were able to predict changes that would result: stocks would rally, credit spreads would narrow, housing sales would pick up, and authorities would take bows for effective "liquidity" and "stimulus" programs. If it goes high enough, a consensus will probably develop that the bear market and recession are behind us. Then it will be time for the next wave down.
Q: You've been quoted as suggesting people invest in Treasuries, considering them "safe cash proxies," but you've also said skeptical things about Treasuries given massive borrowing and the threat of deflation. Which is it?
A: It's a matter of short rates versus long. The best investment stance for conservative investors has been simple: safety. My primary recommendation is safe-cash equivalents. This means Treasury bills, Swiss money-market claims, some New Zealand bonds, some gold and some cash. There has been no change there. Cash has been good. Today you can buy twice the house, twice the stock shares and twice the gasoline that you could a short while ago.
But long term, Treasuries are different. After 28 years of rising prices for T-bonds, the Fed announced in December that it would buy them. Part of the downturn in prices relates to an anticipated pick-up in the economy, which should in fact occur for part of this year; part is due to hyperinflation fears, which I think are misplaced; and part is due to early fears of eventual government default, which I think are not misplaced. If government rates go up, bond investors will lose money, while we bill investors will make money, at least until it's time to bail out of government debt entirely.
Q: Do you prefer dollars to other currencies?
A: My position is that the dollar is the most inflated currency in the world, so it has the furthest to deflate. In other words, because it is so sick, it is the currency most likely to rise during the deflationary period as dollar-denominated IOUs collapse. Regardless, my currency mix includes what I consider to be very safe foreign debt and some gold. You have to realize that almost everyone loses in a deflation. The key is to lose a lot less than everyone else. Market opinions are one thing; safety is another.
Q: Your remarks as quoted in the press seem to refer essentially to the U.S. economy. What is your view of the rest of the world's economic prospects?
A: It's a developing global depression. Economies and societies are so closely entwined in the modern world that social mood is much more pervasively shared than it was centuries ago. So the world had a boom together, and it's having a bust together. The canary in the coal mine was Japan, which reached impossible-to-maintain extremes of debt and investment values a decade earlier than other countries did.
Q: So in spite of this market run-up, there's more misery ahead?
A: If you stay safe, it's the opposite.
Monday, May 25, 2009
郎咸平：高盛如何绑架美国政府
www.cnfol.com 2009年03月24日 10:34 新世纪周刊 查看评论
在200多年前，亚当·斯密出版了他的《国富论》，其中有一段是这样写的：大英帝国的统治者在过去的100多年里，让他的子民愉快地幻想他们在大西洋的西端，拥有一个伟大的帝国。但是，这个帝国到现在为止只是一个幻影而已，它不是一个帝国，而只是一个项目，一个计划。它不是一座金矿，而只是一座金矿的计划，一项需要持续、永久地支付费用的计划。这是一个非常昂贵的计划，如果情况照这种情势发展下去的话，为了维持殖民地的费用将难以估量。亚当·斯密认为正是那些大资本家绑架了大英帝国，广阔的殖民地不会给英国人民带来任何的实惠跟利益。对于占人口大多数的大英帝国的人民而言，他们只有损失而没有利润。
到了今天，这种大资本家绑架政府的行为再度上演了，只不过这一次，操作这种绑架行动的不再是产业资本，而是金融资本。
无奈的救市
美国7000亿救市资金的分配曾经备受关注，2008年12月，美国财政部终于决定：向银行注资2500亿美元，向保险公司AIG注资400亿美元(最终救助额达到850亿美元)，向美国联邦储备委员会的消费者融资计划提供200亿美元，向花旗集团提供250亿美元，另外还拨款234亿美元来救助美国汽车业。短短几个月的时间里，美国财政部已经将国会划拨的3500亿资金分派一空。于是在2009年2月，奥巴马不得不又一次提列8190亿美元的救市方案来振兴美国经济。
救了金融机构之后结果是什么？太有意思了。2008年他们搞得这么差，但他们2008年总共拿到的奖金是184亿美元，这和牛市的2004年一样。此外，花旗银行拿了这么多钱以后，我们发现，花旗银行的老总们准备拿出5000万美金去买私人飞机。AIG接收了850亿的补助之后，AIG的高管们花了500万美金，去世界的顶级海滩会所度假，气得美国参议院破口大骂。所以奥巴马总统就在2月初讲了一句话，他说华尔街的那些人不负责任到了极点，令人感到耻辱。我们应当做的，是让那些华尔街不断向政府伸手寻求救援的人表现出你们的克制、自控和责任感来。
奥巴马只能骂骂他就算了，他还能做什么呢？因为同样辱骂的语言，同样训斥的语言，也同样存在于19世纪的英国。我记得亚当·斯密就在《国富论》里面，也用同样的口气骂了当时的那一批资本家。亚当·斯密强烈地谴责资本家的贪婪，因为它摧毁了资本家的灵魂。这句话和奥巴马是不是有异曲同工之妙？花旗银行的老总拿出5000万美金给自己配备私人飞机，AIG拿出500万美金去顶级会所度假，2008年他们发给自己的花红高达184亿美金。他们从来就不在乎老百姓，因为他们已经绑架了美国政府。
由于金融海啸会使得大量的金融机构面临倒闭的风险，而这些金融炒家所孕育的金融机构一旦倒闭之后，将会冲击第二张骨牌，那就是打击美国人消费的信心，再冲击第三张骨牌，使得消费下降。再冲击第四张骨牌，企业倒闭破产。再冲击第五张骨牌，失业上升。再冲击第六张骨牌，消费下降。从而形成一个由金融海啸慢慢地冲击到实体经济的这么一个可怕的结果。
这就是为什么美国国会不顾那么多美国老百姓的反对，最终还是通过了7000亿美金的救市方案。然后美国政府就拿这笔钱，去帮助这些金融机构，希望把他们都救活了，救活了之后就不会影响到经济实体面了。
高盛，实在是高
我发现，在这一系列救助行动背后，有一个身影反复出现。
美国财政部要求美国银行收购美林，收购美林之后，马上换掉一把手，这个一把手是谁？名叫约翰·赛恩。他是谁？他就是一个最可怕、最大的国际金融炒家--高盛集团的人。还有，AIG注资850亿美金后也换人了，它的首席执行官也换成高盛的埃德·李迪。一个叫Wachovia的银行，注资之后它的主席也换成了高盛的罗伯特斯·蒂尔。也就是说，当美国政府拿老百姓的钱去救助这些受到重创的银行之后，他们的一把手或者主席全部都换成了国际金融资本的炒家--高盛集团的员工。
高盛甚至掌控了美国的政策。花旗银行的董事长鲁宾，就是美国前财政部长，他也是高盛的人。甚至美国政府注资解救的公司，这些人事的任命权，它不是在美国政府手中，而是在高盛集团的手中，由他们派人去担当要职。就是高盛这个集团，它是国际金融炒家最大最厉害一个，他们的人密布全国，掌控着财政、经济、政府、基金甚至股票交易所、证监会、期货交易所。
高盛在美国政府中一直保持着较好的声望，也在悄悄地操控着美国经济。而在与各大公司的交手中，高盛也多数处于获利的位置。华尔街曾经盛传，是高盛的背后操纵导致竞争对手雷曼兄弟的破产，《石油战争》的作者恩道尔也在书中多次提到高盛如何操纵石油价格。汇丰银行股价的连续下挫，以及很多中国企业损失惨重的交易中都有高盛的身影。那么到底是什么原因让这么多家企业失手于高盛？ 高盛又是用什么手法从全世界席卷大量资本的呢？
无处不在的高盛
我们不要认为高盛跟我们无关。任志刚，就是香港金管局总裁在2009年2月2日暗指汇丰银行遭到操控。被谁操控？下面是我的分析。高盛写了一个研究报告，说汇丰银行的坏账准备应该会高达301亿美元，亏损会高达15亿美元。因此这家银行的价格会从七八十块跌到49块。这个报告一出来，这个公司一周内就跌了四分之一的市值，股价一周内下跌25％。
高盛又写了一份研究报告，高度看空中国石油，虽然包括申银万国、中信证券、海通证券大力推荐中石油，可是以高盛为首的国际金融炒家发布相反的报道。因此香港的中石油H股一周跌了12.82％。那么高盛等银行在2004年，在国有银行要改制的时候，相继发表一些文章跟看法，诋毁中国的国有银行，说不值一点钱，说坏账太高了，不值钱，你们都别要。结果谁要了，高盛自己去买了。所以这就是为什么他们占有的美国银行以一块多钱的价格收购了建行上市的股权。结果在2007年下半年，美国商业银行对外宣布，由于次债危机，他们遭到重大损失，可是建行的上市呢，他们赚到了1300亿。100块乘以13亿人口就等于1300亿，就被这些大行席卷一空，相当于每人出了100元。
各位还记不记得越南危机？发生在2008年4月的越南危机是越南的大悲剧。可是我们注意到了，这个国家在2007年出了问题，可是到了2008年3月之前，以高盛为首的国际投行一再地呼吁大家买入。他们对越南的评价有八个字，叫做：越南概念，亚股新宠。这篇文章是2007年5月14日发表的，文中讲到高盛把越南纳入新钻石11国。在它的力捧之下，越南的股价、楼价拉高，最后到2008年4月呢，不知道什么原因，所有资金全部撤出，股价大跌，楼价大跌，只有一个不跌，就是通货膨胀高达25％。这就是高盛。
所以我完全有理由这么说，以高盛为首的这些国际金融资本，他们就是这一场金融海啸的真正背后操纵人。
www.cnfol.com 2009年03月24日 10:34 新世纪周刊 查看评论
在200多年前，亚当·斯密出版了他的《国富论》，其中有一段是这样写的：大英帝国的统治者在过去的100多年里，让他的子民愉快地幻想他们在大西洋的西端，拥有一个伟大的帝国。但是，这个帝国到现在为止只是一个幻影而已，它不是一个帝国，而只是一个项目，一个计划。它不是一座金矿，而只是一座金矿的计划，一项需要持续、永久地支付费用的计划。这是一个非常昂贵的计划，如果情况照这种情势发展下去的话，为了维持殖民地的费用将难以估量。亚当·斯密认为正是那些大资本家绑架了大英帝国，广阔的殖民地不会给英国人民带来任何的实惠跟利益。对于占人口大多数的大英帝国的人民而言，他们只有损失而没有利润。
到了今天，这种大资本家绑架政府的行为再度上演了，只不过这一次，操作这种绑架行动的不再是产业资本，而是金融资本。
无奈的救市
美国7000亿救市资金的分配曾经备受关注，2008年12月，美国财政部终于决定：向银行注资2500亿美元，向保险公司AIG注资400亿美元(最终救助额达到850亿美元)，向美国联邦储备委员会的消费者融资计划提供200亿美元，向花旗集团提供250亿美元，另外还拨款234亿美元来救助美国汽车业。短短几个月的时间里，美国财政部已经将国会划拨的3500亿资金分派一空。于是在2009年2月，奥巴马不得不又一次提列8190亿美元的救市方案来振兴美国经济。
救了金融机构之后结果是什么？太有意思了。2008年他们搞得这么差，但他们2008年总共拿到的奖金是184亿美元，这和牛市的2004年一样。此外，花旗银行拿了这么多钱以后，我们发现，花旗银行的老总们准备拿出5000万美金去买私人飞机。AIG接收了850亿的补助之后，AIG的高管们花了500万美金，去世界的顶级海滩会所度假，气得美国参议院破口大骂。所以奥巴马总统就在2月初讲了一句话，他说华尔街的那些人不负责任到了极点，令人感到耻辱。我们应当做的，是让那些华尔街不断向政府伸手寻求救援的人表现出你们的克制、自控和责任感来。
奥巴马只能骂骂他就算了，他还能做什么呢？因为同样辱骂的语言，同样训斥的语言，也同样存在于19世纪的英国。我记得亚当·斯密就在《国富论》里面，也用同样的口气骂了当时的那一批资本家。亚当·斯密强烈地谴责资本家的贪婪，因为它摧毁了资本家的灵魂。这句话和奥巴马是不是有异曲同工之妙？花旗银行的老总拿出5000万美金给自己配备私人飞机，AIG拿出500万美金去顶级会所度假，2008年他们发给自己的花红高达184亿美金。他们从来就不在乎老百姓，因为他们已经绑架了美国政府。
由于金融海啸会使得大量的金融机构面临倒闭的风险，而这些金融炒家所孕育的金融机构一旦倒闭之后，将会冲击第二张骨牌，那就是打击美国人消费的信心，再冲击第三张骨牌，使得消费下降。再冲击第四张骨牌，企业倒闭破产。再冲击第五张骨牌，失业上升。再冲击第六张骨牌，消费下降。从而形成一个由金融海啸慢慢地冲击到实体经济的这么一个可怕的结果。
这就是为什么美国国会不顾那么多美国老百姓的反对，最终还是通过了7000亿美金的救市方案。然后美国政府就拿这笔钱，去帮助这些金融机构，希望把他们都救活了，救活了之后就不会影响到经济实体面了。
高盛，实在是高
我发现，在这一系列救助行动背后，有一个身影反复出现。
美国财政部要求美国银行收购美林，收购美林之后，马上换掉一把手，这个一把手是谁？名叫约翰·赛恩。他是谁？他就是一个最可怕、最大的国际金融炒家--高盛集团的人。还有，AIG注资850亿美金后也换人了，它的首席执行官也换成高盛的埃德·李迪。一个叫Wachovia的银行，注资之后它的主席也换成了高盛的罗伯特斯·蒂尔。也就是说，当美国政府拿老百姓的钱去救助这些受到重创的银行之后，他们的一把手或者主席全部都换成了国际金融资本的炒家--高盛集团的员工。
高盛甚至掌控了美国的政策。花旗银行的董事长鲁宾，就是美国前财政部长，他也是高盛的人。甚至美国政府注资解救的公司，这些人事的任命权，它不是在美国政府手中，而是在高盛集团的手中，由他们派人去担当要职。就是高盛这个集团，它是国际金融炒家最大最厉害一个，他们的人密布全国，掌控着财政、经济、政府、基金甚至股票交易所、证监会、期货交易所。
高盛在美国政府中一直保持着较好的声望，也在悄悄地操控着美国经济。而在与各大公司的交手中，高盛也多数处于获利的位置。华尔街曾经盛传，是高盛的背后操纵导致竞争对手雷曼兄弟的破产，《石油战争》的作者恩道尔也在书中多次提到高盛如何操纵石油价格。汇丰银行股价的连续下挫，以及很多中国企业损失惨重的交易中都有高盛的身影。那么到底是什么原因让这么多家企业失手于高盛？ 高盛又是用什么手法从全世界席卷大量资本的呢？
无处不在的高盛
我们不要认为高盛跟我们无关。任志刚，就是香港金管局总裁在2009年2月2日暗指汇丰银行遭到操控。被谁操控？下面是我的分析。高盛写了一个研究报告，说汇丰银行的坏账准备应该会高达301亿美元，亏损会高达15亿美元。因此这家银行的价格会从七八十块跌到49块。这个报告一出来，这个公司一周内就跌了四分之一的市值，股价一周内下跌25％。
高盛又写了一份研究报告，高度看空中国石油，虽然包括申银万国、中信证券、海通证券大力推荐中石油，可是以高盛为首的国际金融炒家发布相反的报道。因此香港的中石油H股一周跌了12.82％。那么高盛等银行在2004年，在国有银行要改制的时候，相继发表一些文章跟看法，诋毁中国的国有银行，说不值一点钱，说坏账太高了，不值钱，你们都别要。结果谁要了，高盛自己去买了。所以这就是为什么他们占有的美国银行以一块多钱的价格收购了建行上市的股权。结果在2007年下半年，美国商业银行对外宣布，由于次债危机，他们遭到重大损失，可是建行的上市呢，他们赚到了1300亿。100块乘以13亿人口就等于1300亿，就被这些大行席卷一空，相当于每人出了100元。
各位还记不记得越南危机？发生在2008年4月的越南危机是越南的大悲剧。可是我们注意到了，这个国家在2007年出了问题，可是到了2008年3月之前，以高盛为首的国际投行一再地呼吁大家买入。他们对越南的评价有八个字，叫做：越南概念，亚股新宠。这篇文章是2007年5月14日发表的，文中讲到高盛把越南纳入新钻石11国。在它的力捧之下，越南的股价、楼价拉高，最后到2008年4月呢，不知道什么原因，所有资金全部撤出，股价大跌，楼价大跌，只有一个不跌，就是通货膨胀高达25％。这就是高盛。
所以我完全有理由这么说，以高盛为首的这些国际金融资本，他们就是这一场金融海啸的真正背后操纵人。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
