As far as blaming the baby boomers is concerned I'm afraid your own generation will disappoint you as much as the previous generations have once the money and power flows down to them
It's in the genes
You can blame the Catholics or the Jews or the Baby Boomers or whatever but it's the human race
If you have a society with not too much wealth then things can be pretty amazing but once a society gets too rich then everything goes to shit and there are no exceptions
Too much money is just like too much booze or too much food, it fucks up the human race
It's in the genes
You can blame the Catholics or the Jews or the Baby Boomers or whatever but it's the human race
If you have a society with not too much wealth then things can be pretty amazing but once a society gets too rich then everything goes to shit and there are no exceptions
Too much money is just like too much booze or too much food, it fucks up the human race
Just a product of one generation holding power for too long.. that and people living longer .. old people get stuck in “the good old days” mentality.. like coal/fossil fuel use etc.. we need higher turnover to do better at evolution of our species.. the millemials know we are completely fucked fiscally and environmentally if we don’t change our ways but have no power to do anything about it yet.. the baby boomers are like fuck it I’m dead soon who gives a fuck.. now we got a 70 yo blowhard self centered celebrity as POTUS
I wouldn’t pay attention to day to day noise.. long term (10+ year charts) it still looks just fine.. near term technicals traders were looking at pull back to 1300 level.. at some point soon I think it will start its next bull leg upwards.. after 6-7 years of consolidation from the 2011 high.. I could be wrong we shall see..
this is the DECADE monthly chart of btg
THIS IS NOT an uptrending or bullish set-up. NONSENSE.
that said , its forming a triangle, likely to break (inflation fears, USD in fee fall..?.) Buy through a break of the triangle, certainly over 4.50 ......if the break is to the upside.
once it breaks through a ceiling the 'sky is the limit'....lol....its not Amazon .............short term-- BUY, oversold, broke through 8 EMA, awesome candlestick today
Gold/silver making a nice move today.. btg up 6%
the reality of stagflation beginning to smack everybody in the face.. as CPI was above expectations.. and retail sales were below expectations.. bad combo for economy... mr market May still head up to 50 dma around 2720 on s&p but expect it to fade..
the reality of stagflation beginning to smack everybody in the face.. as CPI was above expectations.. and retail sales were below expectations.. bad combo for economy... mr market May still head up to 50 dma around 2720 on s&p but expect it to fade..
Nice bounce in crypto land eekster especially for ltc .. looks like they getting ready to release litepay.. I’m still sceptical if it all near term.. and believe the recent highs for crypto will be the highs for many many years.. as they still need years of development to live up to the hype/valuations.. just sense it recently hit the equivalent of nasdaq 5k in 2000 and now in crashing stage.. will be a very bumpy ride.. looking out say 10 years there will be some very big winners.. for payments/money ltc seems to be the front runner.. for the Internet 2.0 decentralizing and disrupting many industries .. Eth looks like the front runner.. but it’s constantly evolving and things can change..
Looks like gold up against the 1350 wall again.. may need more time to break through.. who knows on near term stuff.. it should eventually as the fundamentals (global fiscal insaity) are still clearly there.. unlike the stock market which is very overvalued on a historical basis.. not even factoring in ten over debted/leveraged nature of our economy..
Mr. Market back for more.. resilient that’s for damn sure..
regardless of what happens this article sorta highlights how the US is becoming Mexico north as ive been saying for years.. unless there is some sort of revolution amongst the left/right brainwashed masses to join forces and destroy the one party system of fiscal liberalism .. we heading for a nation with hoards of poor people and a few that own everything..
——————
Why Warren Buffett is a ‘prime example’ of the failure of American capitalism
By Shawn Langlois
Key Words
Published: Feb 15, 2018 1:21 pm ET
‘The path to solving America’s inequality crisis goes through Omaha’
Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett talks to reporters prior to the Berkshire annual meeting.
That hot take comes from David Dayen, ripped from a deep dive published on Thursday in the Nation headlined “The dirty secret behind Warren Buffett’s billions.” Not quite the fawning media coverage of the Berkshire Hathaway BRKboss you’ve probably come to expect.
After all, he’s the Oracle. The folksy host of the “Woodstock for capitalists.” Bill Gates’s bridge-playing buddy. And, as Dayen points out, Obama and Clinton hailed his endorsements, while Bernie Sanders backed his take on taxes. Even Katy Perry hangs with him and talks about bitcoin BTCUSD+9.36% .
“The press treats him like a Kardashian, publishing quirky features about his bad eating habits, frugal spending, and hobnobbing with celebrities,” Dayen writes.
But there’s a dark side to all this, according to Dayen.
The ‘unfair advantages’
“[M]onopoly power and the unfair advantages it provides” is the driving force behind Buffett’s massive fortune, in Dayen’s view.
“Companies in Buffett’s portfolio have extorted windfall profits, ripped off taxpayers, and abused customers,” he says, adding that Buffett “makes no secret of his fondness for monopoly. He repeatedly highlights the key to his personal fortune: finding businesses surrounded by a monopoly moat, keeping competitors at bay.”
Moat-wise, Buffett has said as much.
“If you’ve got the power to raise prices without losing business to a competitor, you’ve got a very good business,” Buffett once said. “If you’ve got a good enough business, if you have a monopoly newspaper or if you have a network television station, your idiot nephew could run it.”
And at a Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting back in 2000, he said that “we think in terms of that moat and the ability to keep its width and its impossibility of being crossed. We tell our managers we want the moat widened every year.”
But that doesn’t sit well with Dayen.
The ‘road to oligarchy’
“America isn’t supposed to allow moats, much less reward them,” he writes in the piece. “Our economic system, we claim, is founded on free and fair competition. We have laws over a century old designed to break up concentrated industries, encouraging innovation and risk-taking. In other words, Buffett’s investment strategy should not legally be available, to him or anyone else.”
Dayen says, however, that the government has hasn’t done nearly enough, beyond just Buffett, to curb the proliferation of the problem.
“The United States has not only failed to build bridges across monopoly moats; it has stocked those moats with alligators,” he writes. “This consolidation has vastly inflated corporate profits, damaged workers and consumers, stunted economic growth, and supercharged economic inequality.”
Buffett has played a key role in the trend, Dayen claims. “Buffett isn’t following America on the road to oligarchy; he’s leading it,” he charges, before launching into three specific examples of Buffett’s “hunger for monopoly” — VeriSignVRSN+1.72% , TransDigm TDG+2.12%and his aggressive move into the airline sector.
Dayen also writes about the hypocrisy of Buffett’s pleas for tax fairness while he maintains a $22-billion stake in AppleAAPL+3.26% , “perhaps America’s most notorious corporate-tax evader.” The iPhone maker is his third-biggest position, behind Wells FargoWFC+0.24% and Kraft Heinz KHC-0.01% .
“Getting serious about taming monopolies also means ceasing the endless praise of Warren Buffett,” Dayen concludes. “The path to solving America’s inequality crisis goes through Omaha and the cuddly billionaire whose love of monopoly is contributing to national desperation.”
See original version of this
regardless of what happens this article sorta highlights how the US is becoming Mexico north as ive been saying for years.. unless there is some sort of revolution amongst the left/right brainwashed masses to join forces and destroy the one party system of fiscal liberalism .. we heading for a nation with hoards of poor people and a few that own everything..
——————
Why Warren Buffett is a ‘prime example’ of the failure of American capitalism
By Shawn Langlois
Key Words
Published: Feb 15, 2018 1:21 pm ET
‘The path to solving America’s inequality crisis goes through Omaha’
‘Warren Buffett should not be celebrated as an avatar of American capitalism; he should be decried as a prime example of its failure, a false prophet leading the nation toward more monopoly and inequality.’
That hot take comes from David Dayen, ripped from a deep dive published on Thursday in the Nation headlined “The dirty secret behind Warren Buffett’s billions.” Not quite the fawning media coverage of the Berkshire Hathaway BRKboss you’ve probably come to expect.
After all, he’s the Oracle. The folksy host of the “Woodstock for capitalists.” Bill Gates’s bridge-playing buddy. And, as Dayen points out, Obama and Clinton hailed his endorsements, while Bernie Sanders backed his take on taxes. Even Katy Perry hangs with him and talks about bitcoin BTCUSD+9.36% .
“The press treats him like a Kardashian, publishing quirky features about his bad eating habits, frugal spending, and hobnobbing with celebrities,” Dayen writes.
But there’s a dark side to all this, according to Dayen.
The ‘unfair advantages’
“[M]onopoly power and the unfair advantages it provides” is the driving force behind Buffett’s massive fortune, in Dayen’s view.
“Companies in Buffett’s portfolio have extorted windfall profits, ripped off taxpayers, and abused customers,” he says, adding that Buffett “makes no secret of his fondness for monopoly. He repeatedly highlights the key to his personal fortune: finding businesses surrounded by a monopoly moat, keeping competitors at bay.”
Moat-wise, Buffett has said as much.
“If you’ve got the power to raise prices without losing business to a competitor, you’ve got a very good business,” Buffett once said. “If you’ve got a good enough business, if you have a monopoly newspaper or if you have a network television station, your idiot nephew could run it.”
And at a Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting back in 2000, he said that “we think in terms of that moat and the ability to keep its width and its impossibility of being crossed. We tell our managers we want the moat widened every year.”
But that doesn’t sit well with Dayen.
The ‘road to oligarchy’
“America isn’t supposed to allow moats, much less reward them,” he writes in the piece. “Our economic system, we claim, is founded on free and fair competition. We have laws over a century old designed to break up concentrated industries, encouraging innovation and risk-taking. In other words, Buffett’s investment strategy should not legally be available, to him or anyone else.”
Dayen says, however, that the government has hasn’t done nearly enough, beyond just Buffett, to curb the proliferation of the problem.
“The United States has not only failed to build bridges across monopoly moats; it has stocked those moats with alligators,” he writes. “This consolidation has vastly inflated corporate profits, damaged workers and consumers, stunted economic growth, and supercharged economic inequality.”
Buffett has played a key role in the trend, Dayen claims. “Buffett isn’t following America on the road to oligarchy; he’s leading it,” he charges, before launching into three specific examples of Buffett’s “hunger for monopoly” — VeriSignVRSN+1.72% , TransDigm TDG+2.12%and his aggressive move into the airline sector.
‘Getting serious about taming monopolies also means ceasing the endless praise of Warren Buffett.’
Dayen also writes about the hypocrisy of Buffett’s pleas for tax fairness while he maintains a $22-billion stake in AppleAAPL+3.26% , “perhaps America’s most notorious corporate-tax evader.” The iPhone maker is his third-biggest position, behind Wells FargoWFC+0.24% and Kraft Heinz KHC-0.01% .
“Getting serious about taming monopolies also means ceasing the endless praise of Warren Buffett,” Dayen concludes. “The path to solving America’s inequality crisis goes through Omaha and the cuddly billionaire whose love of monopoly is contributing to national desperation.”
See original version of this
Not good.
Instead of being a caretaker of the the system, he becomes the system.
We have ourselves a new supreme leader folks
China proposes to let Xi Jinping extend presidency beyond 2023
China's governing Communist Party has proposed removing a clause in the constitution which limits presidencies to two five-year terms.
The move would allow the current President Xi Jinping to remain as leader after he is due to step down.
It had already been widely thought that Mr Xi would seek to extend his presidency beyond 2023.
Party congress last year saw him cement his status as the most powerful leader since the late Mao Zedong.
His ideology was also enshrined in the party's constitution, and in a break with convention, no obvious successor was unveiled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-43188739
Instead of being a caretaker of the the system, he becomes the system.
We have ourselves a new supreme leader folks
China proposes to let Xi Jinping extend presidency beyond 2023
China's governing Communist Party has proposed removing a clause in the constitution which limits presidencies to two five-year terms.
The move would allow the current President Xi Jinping to remain as leader after he is due to step down.
It had already been widely thought that Mr Xi would seek to extend his presidency beyond 2023.
Party congress last year saw him cement his status as the most powerful leader since the late Mao Zedong.
His ideology was also enshrined in the party's constitution, and in a break with convention, no obvious successor was unveiled.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-43188739
they haven’t built up enough domestic demand yet to say FU to US.. but the day is coming no doubt.. for now they are perfectly happy feeding us more debt which will be our ultimate demise..
pigs get fat.. hogs get slaughtered..
US still likely has more leverage overall for now.. will be interesting to see how the growing trump/China potential trade war plays out.. especially if we are about to enter a bubble burst period..
but clearly on the path we going with debt party and fiscal insanity from our one party system the common man (elites will keep getting richer/inequality will get worse) in US is screwed...
Watcha gonna do trump you promised!!!
nother weak close for the market looks like the technical bounce over resume the beginning of everything bubble once and for all?
———
February 27, 2018 - 09:56 AM EST[h=1]Steel manufacturers air TV ad pushing Trump to restrict steel imports[/h]
BY JULIA MANCHESTERTWEET SHARE EMAILSteel manufacturers called on President Trump in a new ad on Tuesday to keep his promise to restrict steel imports.
"We heard the promises. Now it's time for action. President Trump, America's workers are counting on you to protect our jobs and to defend our national security. It's time to keep the promise and to protect American Steel," the ad from the Alliance for American Manufacturing says.
Trump campaigned on the promise of bolstering manufacturing, as well as steel manufacturing, saying low-cost foreign imports hurt the U.S. steel industry.
"President Donald Trump tunes into Fox News, MSNBC or CNN this morning, he can expect to see an ad urging him to keep his promise to restrict steel imports," a leader of the group, which includes United Steelworkers, ArcelorMittal and U.S. Steel, told Politico.
The Commerce Department declared steel and aluminum imports from China and elsewhere a national security threat in a report issued last month.
Bloomberg reported last week that Trump was looking to impose a 24 percent tariff on all steel imports.
"As with every decision he makes, the security of the American people and the American economy will be the president's primary concerns while he considers his potential options," deputy White House press secretary Raj Shah said last week. "President Trump is committed to achieving fair and reciprocal trade relationships that protect the American worker and grow our economy."
———————
nother weak close for the market looks like the technical bounce over resume the beginning of everything bubble once and for all?
———
February 27, 2018 - 09:56 AM EST[h=1]Steel manufacturers air TV ad pushing Trump to restrict steel imports[/h]
"We heard the promises. Now it's time for action. President Trump, America's workers are counting on you to protect our jobs and to defend our national security. It's time to keep the promise and to protect American Steel," the ad from the Alliance for American Manufacturing says.
Trump campaigned on the promise of bolstering manufacturing, as well as steel manufacturing, saying low-cost foreign imports hurt the U.S. steel industry.
"President Donald Trump tunes into Fox News, MSNBC or CNN this morning, he can expect to see an ad urging him to keep his promise to restrict steel imports," a leader of the group, which includes United Steelworkers, ArcelorMittal and U.S. Steel, told Politico.
The Commerce Department declared steel and aluminum imports from China and elsewhere a national security threat in a report issued last month.
Bloomberg reported last week that Trump was looking to impose a 24 percent tariff on all steel imports.
"As with every decision he makes, the security of the American people and the American economy will be the president's primary concerns while he considers his potential options," deputy White House press secretary Raj Shah said last week. "President Trump is committed to achieving fair and reciprocal trade relationships that protect the American worker and grow our economy."
———————
EDITORIAL BOARD
[h=1]Trump's Worst Economic Idea[/h]No good can come of steel and aluminum tariffs.
By The Editors
February 27, 2018, 6:00 PM EST
Not helping.
Photographer: Jeff Swensen/Getty ImagesDoes anyone, anywhere, support President Donald Trump's plan to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports?
As Bloomberg News recently reported, Trump is considering broad duties of as much as 24 percent on imported steel and 10 percent on aluminum, with the aim of protecting national security and pressuring China to reform its trade practices.
This is a terrible way to achieve either ambition. The likely outcome would be to raise prices, hinder growth, jeopardize jobs, burden taxpayers, encourage retaliation, and heedlessly destabilize the system of global trade. Not to be alarmist, but it could even raise the cost of beer.
The idea is so comprehensively misguided that it has induced a rare consensus in Washington. Most of Trump's cabinetopposes the idea, as does nearly every mainstream economist. Farm groups call it a "short-sighted mistake." Manufacturers call it "disastrous." Trump's own Economic Report of the President, which he has no doubt read carefully, warns that such barriers could "distort the free allocation of capital."
Surely steelmakers, at the very least, would be grateful for this added protection? Not so fast: Many producers are worried about the inflation, input shortages and supplier disruptions that could result, just as the industry's prospects are otherwise improving and a big infrastructure push is on the way. (Tariffs would only raise the cost of that worthy endeavor.)
Nor does the Pentagon think much of the national-security rationale. Total military demand for steel and aluminum amounts to only about 3 percent of domestic production, meaning that reliance on imports isn't a notable danger. Imposing broad tariffs, however, could have a "negative impact on our key allies," as Trump's defense secretary delicately put it.
China, meanwhile, won't be much affected by these measures. It's already subject to more than two dozen antidumping and countervailing duties on basic steel products, and hence provides less than 3 percent of total U.S. imports. About the only practical effect of broad new tariffs would be to invite retaliation on American exporters.
None of this is unfamiliar; none of it should be controversial. For decades, the U.S. government has tried now and then to protect the steel industry -- and those efforts have consistently harmed consumers, undermined manufacturers, inhibited growth and impeded innovation, all without obvious benefits. The most recent such initiative -- the so-called safeguards imposed by the George W. Bush administration in 2002 -- raised costs and destroyed roughly 200,000 jobs.
There's a better way. A different trade dispute has caught Trump's attention -- concerning intellectual property, and China's approach to transfers of corporate technology. On this issue, the administration is reportedly working with allies to jointly pressure China at the World Trade Organization. This is exactly the right approach: orderly, above board, and intended to minimize conflict. Given time, it may well work.
The same cannot be said for the president's tariffs. If he proceeds with this idea, he'll be harming the economy, not helping it.
[h=1]Trump's Worst Economic Idea[/h]No good can come of steel and aluminum tariffs.
By The Editors
February 27, 2018, 6:00 PM EST
Not helping.
Photographer: Jeff Swensen/Getty ImagesDoes anyone, anywhere, support President Donald Trump's plan to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports?
As Bloomberg News recently reported, Trump is considering broad duties of as much as 24 percent on imported steel and 10 percent on aluminum, with the aim of protecting national security and pressuring China to reform its trade practices.
This is a terrible way to achieve either ambition. The likely outcome would be to raise prices, hinder growth, jeopardize jobs, burden taxpayers, encourage retaliation, and heedlessly destabilize the system of global trade. Not to be alarmist, but it could even raise the cost of beer.
Surely steelmakers, at the very least, would be grateful for this added protection? Not so fast: Many producers are worried about the inflation, input shortages and supplier disruptions that could result, just as the industry's prospects are otherwise improving and a big infrastructure push is on the way. (Tariffs would only raise the cost of that worthy endeavor.)
Nor does the Pentagon think much of the national-security rationale. Total military demand for steel and aluminum amounts to only about 3 percent of domestic production, meaning that reliance on imports isn't a notable danger. Imposing broad tariffs, however, could have a "negative impact on our key allies," as Trump's defense secretary delicately put it.
China, meanwhile, won't be much affected by these measures. It's already subject to more than two dozen antidumping and countervailing duties on basic steel products, and hence provides less than 3 percent of total U.S. imports. About the only practical effect of broad new tariffs would be to invite retaliation on American exporters.
None of this is unfamiliar; none of it should be controversial. For decades, the U.S. government has tried now and then to protect the steel industry -- and those efforts have consistently harmed consumers, undermined manufacturers, inhibited growth and impeded innovation, all without obvious benefits. The most recent such initiative -- the so-called safeguards imposed by the George W. Bush administration in 2002 -- raised costs and destroyed roughly 200,000 jobs.
The same cannot be said for the president's tariffs. If he proceeds with this idea, he'll be harming the economy, not helping it.
