Bob Brinker now as negative as CNBC

L

lightwaves

Recycles dryer sheets
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
56
Just heard some of Bob Brinker's Moneytalk show on the radio today. He sounded just like the commentators on CNBC. Bitching and moaning about Obama, Geithner, Bernanke etc. Obama has been President for 6.5 weeks and he is supposed to have solved this disaster by now. This complaining coming from the fellow that publishes the MARKETTIMER newsletter who missed the biggest drop in the market in decades. These bitter "Masters of the Universe", with their gigantic egos, are looking for someone, anyone to blame for their total misreading of the economy.

Unlike all of these Wall Street egomaniacs, I will be patient and see what the Administration can do over the coming months.
 
Oh! Whew! I thought maybe he was telling people to get out now.....

Audrey
 
I thought the "transition team" and the "Office of the President Elect" had been working on the problems/issues since Nov 5th! I do not have the ability to judge the results or impact of what has been done thus far (and a lot has been done) but IMO unless someone steps up and creates some optimism pretty soon we will probably see, at best, a stagnant economy/stock market, for a good while longer. I have several Grand Kids moving into the job market in the near future - my hope is that they will be able to prosper.
 
Hard to imagine what he's complaining about ... he could "retire" at 72 with the annual fees he collects for MarketTimer. No need to sweat the decade lows he missed.
 
Duh - what part of 'The Invisible Hand' did Brinker fail to grasp?

Hey! I'm a Democrat and my Sister a Republican - whom I get to razz now cause 'WE' won plus Brett Farve 'may' be finally retired or not and the Pat's are still a good football team even if they missed the playoffs and it is not football season.

Do you really expect the government to fix the problem? Expect strenuous effort to throw a lot against the wall to get something to stick - But to 'magically untangle' the unentended consequences of the recent financial past is a stretch.

I figure the Saint's may make the Superbowl before we see DOW 14,000 again.

But then I'm an optimist.

heh heh heh - :D

'God Looks After Drunkards, Fools and The United States of America.'

But sometimes it takes awhile. :greetings10:.
 
I'll give the economic stimulus package the same patience that I gave the Iraq War, so in short, I predict we'll be done with the current mess in 3 months.
 
Brinker was bullish through almost all of this.

His record was actually pretty good before the last year and a half, but like so many "gurus", the luck ran out.
 
I've seen his name, but I've never heard him on the radio. Might be because I only listen to the classic rock channels. :)
 
Brinker has not seen a bailout he doesn't love.

Actually Brinker's all in "QQQ" counter rally call in 2002 wiped out selling 65% in 2001 but somehow that is not counted in his return for that period. :whistle:
 
lightwaves said:
Brinker and the other Wall Street "geniuses" want the quick fix. Well...they are not going to get it from this President. He is aiming at shoring up the foundations not giving them an unsustainable sugar high they crave so much.
AFP: Obama sees 'pillars' of recovery in place this year: report
Click to expand...

Well, he better hurry up cause the foundation is cracking and unless the market comes back soon its going to crumble.


$865 billion in state pension fund losses are resulting in reduced benefits for new hires :: Stock Broker Fraud Blog

States in Trouble Due to Economic Downturn | National Council of Nonprofits
 
lightwaves said:
....... Bitching and moaning about Obama, Geithner, Bernanke etc. Obama has been President for 6.5 weeks and he is supposed to have solved this disaster by now. This complaining coming from the fellow that publishes the MARKETTIMER newsletter who missed the biggest drop in the market in decades. .
Click to expand...

I'v been a big fan of Bob. He's probably just grouchy because a lot of subscribers to the Marketimer Newsletter are not renewing (including me).
 
lightwaves said:
Brinker and the other Wall Street "geniuses" want the quick fix. Well...they are not going to get it from this President. He is aiming at shoring up the foundations not giving them an unsustainable sugar high they crave so much.
AFP: Obama sees 'pillars' of recovery in place this year: report
Click to expand...

I think that when Barak has a clue, he'll take more action. For now, he's stuggling to even pick a Treas Sec that knows how to pay his own taxes.....

In the meantime, he'll just keep saying "we're aiming at shoring up the foundations.........".
 
lightwaves said:
Just heard some of Bob Brinker's Moneytalk show on the radio today. ...

Obama has been President for 6.5 weeks and he is supposed to have solved this disaster by now.
Click to expand...

lightwaves, did Brinker *really* say that he thought Obama should have *solved* the problem by now? I listen to Bob quite often, and that does not sound like him. I heard part of the show, and I think he is saying what many others have said (paraphrasing):

The plans presented by the Obama administration do not instill confidence in the market. Very many people believe that these plans are not going to help the economy in the near, mid, or long term. In response, the market has dropped.

As I've mentioned in other threads, this is not opinion, if the plans instilled confidence, you would see it in the market. The market is a leading indicator.


He sounded just like the commentators on CNBC. Bitching and moaning about Obama, Geithner, Bernanke etc.
Click to expand...

Looking back at your recent posts, most of them have to do with complaining that people are picking on ( or should I use your words "bitching and moaning about"?) Obama. He's in the kitchen now, just as you wanted, he has to take the heat. I also looked back at your posts in the Soapbox, you didn't seem to have any problem dishing it in the opposite direction.


Unlike all of these Wall Street egomaniacs, I will be patient and see what the Administration can do over the coming months.
Click to expand...

I see now that you started this thread in the "FIRE and Money" forum. Yet, I don't see anything from you about money, all I see is defense of the Obama admin, and a lot of name calling against those critiquing him. I might suggest that it be moved to "FIRE Related Political Topics", but w/o any real money analysis, I don't see how that fits either. Maybe this would help:

"Every time someone in the Obama admin talks about the economy and their plans, my Net Worth drops, and impacts my FIRE status. When is the Obama team going to present a plan that inspires confidence?"

Now *that* is a "FIRE Related Political Topic".

-ERD50
 
youbet said:
For now, he's stuggling to even pick a Treas Sec that knows how to pay his own taxes.....
Click to expand...

just as he struggled to pick a Secretary of Health and Human Services, a Chief White House Performance Officer, and a Labor Secretary that didn't have problems with taxes.

This does not bode well for getting more taxes out of the top 2%, does it? We have a precedent that "taxes are hard" and I guess you can't really be expected to pay them. Odd that these tax "mistakes" and "complexities" always seem to result in underpayments? I would think there would be a 50-50 chance that we would see a news headline "Cabinet appointee found to have overpaid taxes for the past 3 years". I guess we will see that when we see "Fortune Teller wins the Lottery".

You know, having tax cheats in the admin *is* a FIRE and Money topic. It could well "justify" more tax cheating across the general public. There are two ways this could affect our money, depending how you play the game. Perhaps I'll start a thread....

-ERD50
 
The government appears to be more interested in using the financial mess to implement their social agenda instead of concentrating on the issues.
 
ERD:

I will agree with you that my comments belong in a Political thread so I will stop posting this type of commentary in this forum. Will stick to retire early topics going forward. But I have to comment on one thing you said:

"As I've mentioned in other threads, this is not opinion, if the plans instilled confidence, you would see it in the market. The market is a leading indicator."

Just remember that the Dow was at 14000 a while back. Was that a leading indicator for the real economy? If that was not a false positive, I do not know what is. Don't you think that the market at 6500 could very well be a false negative?
 
lightwaves said:
ERD:

Just remember that the Dow was at 14000 a while back. Was that a leading indicator for the real economy? If that was not a false positive, I do not know what is. Don't you think that the market at 6500 could very well be a false negative?
Click to expand...

It isn't a point in time that is used. It is the slope of the line - up or down.

A false reading would have been the stock market going up as economic activity slowed.

The NBER pegged the date as Dec 2007, but even they did not come out with that date until months later.
Business Cycle Dating Committee, National Bureau of Economic Research
 
lightwaves said:
ERD: .... But I have to comment on one thing you said:

"As I've mentioned in other threads, this is not opinion, if the plans instilled confidence, you would see it in the market. The market is a leading indicator."

Just remember that the Dow was at 14000 a while back. Was that a leading indicator for the real economy? If that was not a false positive, I do not know what is. Don't you think that the market at 6500 could very well be a false negative?
Click to expand...

OK, that sounds like a money Q, thanks.

So yes, the market is a leading indicator, but of course it isn't perfect. So it would be clearer if I said it attempts to be a leading indicator, reflecting the net sentiment of investors based on the information available today.

A bit of a mouth full. But it says that when the DOW was at 14,000, net sentiment was that it was going higher. And when the market drops in response to new information ( like the "stimulus" plan) that tells us that the net sentiment is a lack of confidence that that information bodes well for the future economy. No guarantee that either is right, but it is what it is.

At any rate, I would put more significance on moves in the market in response to news, than I would assign to any particular absolute level of the market. IOW, when a company announces - we expect sales and profits to drop, I expect the stock price to drop on that news. But, it is harder for me to say whether that company is really worth that new price over the long term or not. Make sense?

And excuse my cynicism here, but I can't help but think that if the market rose in response to the Obama admin talks, the same people would be declaring it an absolute, unquestionable sign of success. Tails you win, Heads you win?

And since one of the things most needed to right a bad economy is confidence, I think that this response tells us a lot about what effect the "Stimulus" plans will have. And nominating tax cheats does not instill confidence in the Average Joe either - I think it promotes class warfare, and it makes them feel played for a chump, alienated, resentful, and.... seeking revenge. Esp when we are told that cheating to the tune of thousands of dollars is a "minor issue". And that "revenge" can result in real money issues for tax collections.

-ERD50
 
"A false reading would have been the stock market going up as economic activity slowed."

_dji


Looks like the Dow only dropped after the recession started in Dec 2007....sure does not look like a good leading indicator to me during this period.
 
ERD50 said:
nominating tax cheats does not instill confidence in the Average Joe either - I think it promotes class warfare, and it makes them feel played for a chump, alienated, resentful, and.... seeking revenge. Esp when we are told that cheating to the tune of thousands of dollars is a "minor issue". And that "revenge" can result in real money issues for tax collections.

-ERD50
Click to expand...

Based on my reading, the issue of tax evasion does not seem to follow any partisan lines. Rather, there appears to exist a certain group of relatively wealthy people of both parties who think "taxes are only for the little people" (to paraphrase Leona Helmsley). You see it most publicly in the cabinet picks who are drawn from this pool of people. It is also implied in the news that UBS has Swiss accounts for 47,000 Americans who are probably not paying taxes on those earnings. Why these people can't simply be satisfied with being among the economic winners in our society is a mystery to me. Can the drive to have simply "more", no matter how much one already has, be strong enough to violate the law?
 
bobbee25 said:
The government appears to be more interested in using the financial mess to implement their social agenda instead of concentrating on the issues.
Click to expand...

In one sentence you have managed to describe why the market is down 25% this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom