How was your Monday?

Well things have been busy here. Just got back from New York City, where I met Cynthia Basinet. You may recall that I interviewed her a little while back.

Cynthia Basinet is a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, who works on improving the lives of the people of the Sahara, women worldwide, was a model and is a singer of renown. I was very happy to have had the chance to meet her in person. She is even more interesting in person than in the interview.

Cynthia is currently working on several projects, which I can't reveal right now. I believe I can say that fans of her music, and acting, should have more to enjoy soon. And of course her humanitarian work is an on-going cause that will end one day because there will no longer be a need, I hope.

I can also mention that I expect to be at the Tribeca Film Festival and will likely be meeting a few of the directors of films presented there. This will be a first for me, so I'm very excited about this.

Plus, for those that follow my writing on the financial front, I spoke with a former colleague of mine while in NYC. I believe that in the next quarter or so there will be some huge news hitting the markets. This is not a stock related matter, and I really can't say any details yet. But if all goes as planned I will have a major story to present to my readers on the subject.

All in all this was a busy and positive weekend. Now I have to catch up with some work for clients, and the news since last week.

Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer: really missing the point

So Jon Stewart took on Jim Cramer tonight. It was a beat down. It was vicious. It was obvious that Stewart had an ax to grind. And it was wrong on many points, yet true to the feelings of many.

As a former stockbroker I have had many discussions with people about the markets. I’ve written many things about the economy. And from time to time I have noted points in agreement and disagreement with Jim Cramer. But to attack him, and/or CNBC, as if they were the cause of the current economic crisis is both a fallacy and an attempt to find a scapegoat.

To be fair CNBC and Cramer failed in their mission to inform the public. Then again, neither ever truly were supposed to do that. Anyone thinking that either was more than an educated high-brow entertainment probably was sniffing glue (or some other like substance) and likely thought they would be made a millionaire by buying internet stocks they never heard of, or knew what they did, during the late 1990’s.

Is the market a fixed game? No. Is there an unfair advantage for large corporations and wealthy individuals? Absolutely. And are the major brokerage firms the biggest crooks in the industry? I’ve always believed so. Yet not one part of this, or what Stewart was railing about, is any different than it was 50 years ago for the most part.

What has changed is the greed and work done by small investors. If there is anyone to be upset with, it has to be that.

Jon Stewart will without doubt gain huge ratings. Jim Cramer may be looked at with harsh eyes in the near future. And CNBC will get the branding of slipshod reporting that they deserve. But it really doesn’t matter.

I don’t care how many regulations are created to prevent another Bernie Maddoff, or Enron, or Tyco, or AIG, and on an on. Given time there will be another scandal. And another ridiculous bubble in some sector of investing, with a crash that has to happen as well. Because the greed of everyone, at each level of the game, necessitates it.

I listened tonight as Stewart and Cramer went back and forth saying ‘You seemed to know’, ‘Did you know’, ‘Why weren’t we told’, ‘I was lied to’, and so on. Its wonderful posturing, but you don’t need to be an economist to have seen what was happening. Without following more than the politics of the day, occasional glances at the Dow Jones Index, and reading bits of news over the internet I foresaw the problems of the mortgage crisis. It was blatant, and there was plenty of time to act before the hammers started falling. And while I’m smart, I’m not so smart as to have been the only one to recognize what was going to happen.

Don’t believe me? Check out what I wrote back in October 2006

“The economy is better, things have improved. Barring events like 9/11, or Enron, the markets will continue to grow. But hype will never help mom & pop investors. It does help some institutions though, like LEH which was 15.68 around Feb 14, 2000 and continued HIGHER to 78.70 on Oct 16, 2006.

Just keep this stuff in mind as you watch the talking heads spout how great things are in the market. Or you see that ad saying that you should invest on your own.”

or on December 2007

“The fact that the mortgage crisis is far closer to its beginning than end. I expect that there are far more homes in danger than has been seen to date. Even with the highly selective mortgage bailout stated by President Bush, many are going to be at risk. Credit card debt can only float for so long. With the added pressure of oil at or above $100 per barrel, which I expect mid-January as I stated above, more will fail even if rates are lowered (less than 2 points).”

or even January 2008

“Those that are in trouble, or will be, with their mortgages will not be helped by lower rates as that will not cap increased heating and gasoline prices. Small businesses are not going to be able to get new loans as easily even with lower rates as financials scramble to find cash to absorb the losses they are experiencing. Effectively some degree of pain must happen and is not preventable.

I say all this for one reason. So that you my readers can be prepared. If I am correct even in part, then this nation will encounter times we have not seen for quite a while. I doubt that we will see the inflation and unemployment that existed in the 1970’s (when I was a child) but I am sure that we will see levels that those under 30 have never experienced.”

My point is that the current crisis was very visible, if anyone was not bothering to be distracted by hype from the likes of Representative Barney Frank and other Government “watchdogs”, or being entertained by CNBC. All you had to do was read and do the math. Investments are no different than your home, if you don’t keep up with it then don’t be surprised if it falls apart one day.

But there has to be a bad guy. In America we are conditioned to look out for someone in a black hat if something goes wrong. And today that guy gets to be Jim Cramer with Jon Stewart as our hero. Bull.

The bad guy is in equal parts the Government, for creating an environment over a decade ago that was little better than a Ponzi scheme. Then there are the corporations, that jumped in on the game looking to ride the wave for as much short-term profit as possible. Add to this mix speculators who looked for ever faster gains with commensurate risk. Throw in cable networks whose goal is ratings above reporting, and then put in a public that didn’t care as long as the paper investments looked better than the Jones’ 15 minutes ago.

And this complete recipe is virtually exactly what happened with the internet bubble, except this one was bigger and not quite as exhuberant. No one learned then, because no one cared. All that mattered was the immediate gratification being reported on our instantaneous communication devices. But the risk of instant gain is the environment we find ourselves in today.

It will happen again. No matter the regulations – because most of the factors that caused this meltdown were all legal if not bad business decisions which can’t be regulated. No matter the protests of Government – because their lack of understanding (or overall disdain) feeds these kinds of bubbles and crashes. Without regard to who reports what facts in whatever manner – because most don’t care or bother to pay attention to the details anyway. No matter the pain for the public – because everyone wants to be a millionaire tomorrow without doing the work required, and many believe they deserve such rewards just because they breathe air in America.

So the indignation of Jon Stewart amuses me. Yes, Cramer and CNBC could have done a better job of reporting. Yes, Congress could have done a far better job of enacting realistic regulations and understanding how those regulations are affecting the market. And a big YES, the public could have paid attention to the facts at hand and did some math. But none of them did these things. Nor do I believe they ever will, to any large or useful degree.

So I won’t score the big points with the blogosphere with this post. My past comments about the economy and markets went without much fanfare as well. Such is the fate of being right consistently. But let me ask you this…

Do you really want to feel smug and righteous because some comedian beat up on a quasi-entertainer/commentator, while politicians throw your future earnings down a drain and your retirement funds evaporate?

Do you know what the Government is doing with trillions of dollars, and how that will affect investments today and in 5 years – with even a slight bit of educated estimates?

Do you get to save your house, or retire, or pay for whatever any easier because a liberal leaning comdey show host got serious for a minute while you still don’t know how to read a corporate 10Q, understand why a second stimulus plan is already being worked out and how badly that will affect your savings and jobs, and re-elect Congressional leaders that can’t figure out their responsibilities even after 20+ years on the job?

I’m sure that many of my long-time readers do get all these things. Perhaps even more than a few of my first-time readers will. But for those that don’t, ignore the hype this one program will raise and start paying attention. Your money will depend on it.

I will now go back to the entertainment news Black Entertainment USA is normally dedicated to.

Bill O'Reilly interview with Senator Obama - part 2 analysis

Well the questions between Bill O’Reilly and Senator Obama on the economy was interesting. And aggressive.



First are the facts. The economy grew during President Bush. The average wage increased for Americans $400 to $500 dollars, that’s on top of the $2000 it grew under President Clinton. And the Federal Government increased revenues by 20% under President Bush. Spending by President Bush has been outrageous though, and wasteful.

Now if you want to see what I think of the increases on the corporate tax structure just check out my previous post [Democratic tax plans: a look from reality]

A more realistic view is location 11%, Energy 4%, Advertising 1.2%, Raw Goods 3.2%, Communication 4.2%, Operation 2.35%, Outsourcing 2.2%, Employees 32%, Tax 34% - which nets 94.15% of Revenue. Increase cost of higher taxes means that the 6% profit becomes 11.5% in debt.

Senator Obama clearly states that he will be increasing taxes on investments to at least 25%, which is massive. It means that to make a decent return on an investment – say the historical 11% that most mutual funds have made per year – you in fact have to make a 36% profit to get the return, which most stocks never make unless you are in the middle of the internet bubble. That is a fact I can attest to from my experience as a successful stock broker.

So to make attactive profits for inestors, companies will be forced to make changes. As I have stated in the abovementioned post, that means that since virtually all costs are fixed except employees they will absorb the hit as will consumers.

Also note that Senator Obama restates a previously stated comment. He states that 95% of Americans will benefit from his tax plan. That is a lie. He has clearly and repeatedly stated that 95% of American that RECEIVE A PAYCHECK will benefit from his tax plan. Business owners are not included in his savings, no matter the size of their business.

Bill O’Reilly also failed to mention that Senator Obama, along with his Vice President, already voted to effectively increase the taxes of all Americans making $31,850 or more this year. That’s a 3% tax increase on roughly 95% of Americans.

Now in a quick statement Senator Obama mentioned China

“…[the debt has] gone up $4 trillion dollars, that a credit card we’re taking out on our kids from the bank of China, that they’re goning to have to pay back…”

While I too have no love of foreign investment levels that currently exist I have a problem with what is being implied. Does Senator Obama plan to limit who can invest in American companies and banks? Because in a free economy you can’t stop anyone from investing.

In addition, I am unaware of English, French, or German companies, individuals, or nations stepping up and offering to make the investments in America that the Chinese and Saudi Arabians has offered. So if we are to have these investments and no friendly countries are offering anything, what are we to do?

The counter position – which is never being mentioned – means that we refuse the investments of these nations, or limit them. That also means that several of our banks, this year, would have been short on average $5 billion each at least. That means that at least 2 major money center banks would have failed this year. Without that foreign money the economy would have crashed as the dollar got crushed and inflation flew thru the roof because banks would have caused a domino effect that would easily have plunged the nation into a depression.

I have yet to hear an answer that addresses the problems the counter position creates. Perhaps it’s because there is no answer, or they realize that most Americans are unfamiliar with stock market intricacies to ask this question. But I do.

So does this mean that Senator Obama would rather have CitiGroup, and Lehman, and other banks/brokerages fail than accept the billions of dollars foreign investors offer – even is only certain countries are willing to give us the money and none of them are close friends? Is Senator Obama saying that he is willing to plunge America into a Depression that will obviously not help retirees, workers, the economy, and ultimately the world?

Tonight is part 3. Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright, and other questions on character that are sure to be the high point of the interview.

Dark circles? Guy-safe cures

Have you ever had a meeting that was very important, maybe critical, and you couldn’t get any sleep a couple of days prior? Maybe it was your first job, or a big promotion, or opening your own business. Maybe you lost sleep for a more personal reason, like buying a house, or getting married. Or just stress was kicking at you because of the stock market.

Whatever the reason you just aren’t getting any sleep, and you look miserable. The dark circles under your eyes are a dead giveaway to your lack of sleep, and can easily ruin that first impression, wedding photos, and so on. What can you do? More importantly what can you do if you hate, or don’t trust or don’t hate time for, chemical cures? What do you do if you are a guy and have no clue?

Well I’ve found some information that may help you out. Even if you are a guy as clueless about skincare and health as I am.

According to Best Syndication one of the best things you can do is cut up some thin cucumber slices. We’ve all seen movies and television shows where women are doing this as part of a spa treatment, but it really is good for you. Just keep your eyes shut and wait 10 minutes. So simple even a guy can do it. Before you know it you will be looking far better for that meeting or event.

Now if you are a real meat and potatoes kind of guy, cucumbers are not an option. Vegetables are not your friend – you wouldn’t know where to buy them and the smell makes you sick – so you need another option. In the same style and manner as the cucumber you can substitute a thin slice of potatoe. Now it will take 2x as long, but if the thought of a cucumber makes you feel to feminine, it’s your next option.

But let’s make this a bit harder. What if you are too macho for cucumbers, and stuck in England? (For the ladies perhaps you are just trying to relax in a bath in your hotel room.) Well there is still hope to get that better paying job. Have a couple of glasses of tea to calm you down, and once you are done the tea bags should be cool. Now use them by putting them on your eyes for 10 minutes. As a bonus keep in mind only caffeinated teas will do the job, so guys we have nothing to fear – like ordering some kind of herbal tea.

But if all the above is just too much effort, there is still one more simple, guy-safe solution that you can use. 2 cool teaspoons (no tea required). You’ll need to wash your face with warm water prior, and the teaspoons shouldn’t be left in a freezer so long as to risk freezing to you eyelids. Again it’s going to take 10 minutes. And again, guys, the spoons should not be cold enough to have icicles attached.

Now best Syndication goes on to mention one more solution before discussing wrinkles. I’m not going to mention it because I’m a dumb guy that wouldn’t eat a banana or know how to puree anything if you paid me. Other guys might, but I don’t. But if I mention it I’m sure some women will know what it is and what to do. Banana puree.

So, now that you have my understanding of the natural cures you have no excuse to start that business, get married, ask that cute girl at the bar/coffee shop out, or whatever your reason for needing to know this.

Hope it helps, and maybe gave you a smirk.