DGL and GOLD

[SiriuslyLong]

And to post #45. We already had this discussioin months ago.

You may recall that I noted part of Schiff's investment advice for American companies is that they pay a good dividend and sell in several geographic markets to diversify their sales to many markets and currencies. You may recall that companies like Coke, Catapillar and Yum Yum Brands were cited. I'm sure Buffet would agree with this as there is nothing controversial about it. I would pick one's with a low current multiple myself.

You need to learn more about Schiff before you pass judgement that he is simply a doomsday predictor who has been doing the same thing for years.

You may also recall that we discussed investing in gold and that it has been a very good investment long term. It has grown 6X since 2002. That's pretty damn good.

Have you anything to say in response? Or are you just going to keep posting the article asking why I never addressed it (like some kind of lunatic)?

To post #49 lol

[SiriuslyLong]

Peter Schiff has been wrong on hyperinflation, a 1400 Dow and $12,000 gold. I don't post them as I've dismissed them. Get it? Wheat / Chaff? Ring a bell? Hyperbole? Ring a bell? Underlying basis? Ring a bell? Doubtful, doubtful and doubtful.

There, I've done it... yet again.

And by the way, the facts are irrefutable. Peter Schiff was right (on the housing bubble -- long in advance of the bubble bursting).

Just in case he forgets as he is prone to do. I swear the guy has "issues" and needs meds.

[Havakasha]

Dont take "meds". Dont have "issues". You seem to have great knowledge about these things though. Sorry, I just have your number on Mr. Schiff and you obviously cant handle it. Insults dont cut it when FACTS are the issue. REFUTE just ONE FACT that i have posted about him. You clearly cant.

Dont want to answer the article i posted i quess. Part of the 20 years of research on this guy.


"I am not talking just about his prediction of hyperinflation for 2011, a catastrophic stock market collapse for jan. of 2011, a prediction that 10 year treasury's would go to 6% in 2011, or his
gold price predictions of $12,000. I AM talking about the FACT that he has made MANY similar
WRONG predictions over the course of MANY years. That should have raised a red flag with you,
enough so that you should have distanced yourself from him. There are many legitimate Conservative economists that you could follow and quote. The fact that you follow and praise him is just very telling. Sorry if you dont understand that."

"Get it?. Ring a bell? Doubtful, Doubtful, Doubtful. Lol"
Thanks for those words. they fit quite well.

[Havakasha]

We are ALL waiting for a reasonable response to these facts.
Why is it impossible for you to answer to this article?
There is LOTS MORE where this comes from.

"In other words, Peter Schiff may be a classic case of a stopped clock: he's been predicting a market decline FOREVER and when the market has declined he's hailed as a genius by his cult fans."

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1068...hiff-right-now

Now, had you listened to Peter in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 or even 3/4 of 2007, you lost your shirt. Had you placed bets based on Schiff's market calls, you lost everything you wagered.

The S&P (.INX) went from 1054 in May of 2002 (the date of the interview) to 1561 in Oct. 2007, a 48% gain and the Dow (.DJI) rose 40%.

Banking stocks, the primary victim of the housing bust, went up (JP Morgan (JPM) 36%, Bank of America (BAC) 41%, Wells Fargo (WFC) 39% , Wachovia (WB) 31% and American Express (AXP) 51%) during that time frame (dividends excluded which would dramatically add to results).

Bottom line? Had you listened to Mr. Schiff at anytime before Oct. 2007, you lost...big. To those who did, there is little consolation in the praise being heaped on him today.

Milton Freidman said, "markets can stay dislocated longer than you can stay solvent." For those who bet with Schiff between 2002-2007, they know the statement well.

Why is it a big deal? After all, Berkshire's (BRK.A) Warren Buffett claims he cannot time the market and often watches share prices decline in investments (like recent investments in Goldman Sachs (GS) and GE) before a rebound. How is this any different?

For one, Warren's loss is limited to his investment. He buys 1 share of stock "a" at $25. $25 is the most he can lose.

Now, if we listen to Peter and "short" stock "a" at 25, our loss has no limit. If it goes to $100, we lose $75. In shorting, we are only limited in our upside. If "a" goes to zero, "Schiffers" profit $25.

Buffett's strategy is an investing one and Schiff's is a trading and timing one.

Buffett followers can hold their shares, collect their dividend and wait for the rebound. Schiff followers collect no dividend and watched for over 5 years as their bet went wrong. How many stuck around? How many shorted into every market drop or "presumed" top over 5 years, only repeatedly losing money as the market kept rising and Schiff kept pounding his message home?

Schiff should not be getting the praise he is getting today for being "so right" after saying the same thing and being "so wrong" for the previous 5 years.

[SiriuslyLong]

Dont take "meds". Dont have "issues". You seem to have great knowledge about these things though. Sorry, I just have your number on Mr. Schiff and you obviously cant handle it. Insults dont cut it when FACTS are the issue. REFUTE just ONE FACT that i have posted about him. You clearly cant.

Dont want to answer the article i posted i quess.


"I am not talking just about his prediction of hyperinflation for 2011, a catastrophic stock market collapse for jan. of 2011, a prediction that 10 year treasury's would go to 6% in 2011, or his
gold price predictions of $12,000. I AM talking about the FACT that he has made MANY similar
WRONG predictions over the course of MANY years. That should have raised a red flag with you,
enough so that you should have distanced yourself from him. There are many legitimate Conservative economists that you could follow and quote. The fact that you follow and praise him is just very telling. Sorry if you dont understand that."

"Get it?. Ring a bell? Doubtful, Doubtful, Doubtful. Lol"
Thanks for those words. they fit quite well.

You have nothing, but you wouldn't know. You simply won't engage in an honest discussion.

I have already said his predictions have not been correct. I agree with you. I told you I dismissed them. I don't have to refute it. That wouldn't make sense now would it? What would you know about that though.

You're clueless. I read more of Krugman's BS than I do of Schiff. And you say that I "follow" him and "praise" him when just above I said I dismissed his predictions on hyperinflation. You apply my praise for his housing call to all of him? How generous of you. You are absolutely incredible! And you are most definitely lying about meds.

Do you remember my point on separating the wheat from the chaff?

Do you remember my point about hyperbole?

Do you remember my point about the basis of this "predictions"? I believe you do as I showed you that you agree with him in that ever growing national debt is unsustainable. YOU AGREE WITH PETER SCHIFF.

Yet for some reason you continue to want to disparage him because he's a republican. LAUGHABLE, just like you.

[SiriuslyLong]

We are ALL waiting for a reasonable response to these facts.
Why is it impossible for you to answer to this article?
There is LOTS MORE where this comes from.

"In other words, Peter Schiff may be a classic case of a stopped clock: he's been predicting a market decline FOREVER and when the market has declined he's hailed as a genius by his cult fans."

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1068...hiff-right-now

Now, had you listened to Peter in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 or even 3/4 of 2007, you lost your shirt. Had you placed bets based on Schiff's market calls, you lost everything you wagered.

The S&P (.INX) went from 1054 in May of 2002 (the date of the interview) to 1561 in Oct. 2007, a 48% gain and the Dow (.DJI) rose 40%.

Banking stocks, the primary victim of the housing bust, went up (JP Morgan (JPM) 36%, Bank of America (BAC) 41%, Wells Fargo (WFC) 39% , Wachovia (WB) 31% and American Express (AXP) 51%) during that time frame (dividends excluded which would dramatically add to results).

Bottom line? Had you listened to Mr. Schiff at anytime before Oct. 2007, you lost...big. To those who did, there is little consolation in the praise being heaped on him today.

Milton Freidman said, "markets can stay dislocated longer than you can stay solvent." For those who bet with Schiff between 2002-2007, they know the statement well.

Why is it a big deal? After all, Berkshire's (BRK.A) Warren Buffett claims he cannot time the market and often watches share prices decline in investments (like recent investments in Goldman Sachs (GS) and GE) before a rebound. How is this any different?

For one, Warren's loss is limited to his investment. He buys 1 share of stock "a" at $25. $25 is the most he can lose.

Now, if we listen to Peter and "short" stock "a" at 25, our loss has no limit. If it goes to $100, we lose $75. In shorting, we are only limited in our upside. If "a" goes to zero, "Schiffers" profit $25.

Buffett's strategy is an investing one and Schiff's is a trading and timing one.

Buffett followers can hold their shares, collect their dividend and wait for the rebound. Schiff followers collect no dividend and watched for over 5 years as their bet went wrong. How many stuck around? How many shorted into every market drop or "presumed" top over 5 years, only repeatedly losing money as the market kept rising and Schiff kept pounding his message home?

Schiff should not be getting the praise he is getting today for being "so right" after saying the same thing and being "so wrong" for the previous 5 years.

Because you aren't getting it, I will make it really simple. This is my official reply. Third time is a charm they say LMFAO. Sorry, since we discussed this months ago, it is only the third time today!!!

You may recall that I noted part of Schiff's investment advice for American companies is that they pay a good dividend and sell in several geographic markets to diversify their sales to many markets and currencies. You may recall that companies like Coke, Catapillar and Yum Yum Brands were cited. I'm sure Buffet would agree with this as there is nothing controversial about it. I would pick one's with a low current multiple myself.

You need to learn more about Schiff before you pass judgement that he is simply a doomsday predictor who has been doing the same thing for years.

You may also recall that we discussed investing in gold and that it has been a very good investment long term. It has grown 6X since 2002. That's pretty damn good.

Have you anything to say in response? Or are you just going to keep posting the article asking why I never addressed it (like some kind of lunatic)?

LOL you've opted for the latter. Take the meds LOLOLOLOLOLOOLOLOLOL

[SiriuslyLong]

And uless you get Charles to erase it, it will forever be here, memorialized to a liberal lunatic medicated fool.

Soros is making money on gold. Your hero, the socialist George Soros......... IS LOSING MONEY ON GOLD. HE BOUGHT HIGH!!! Of course, it may go up, but........

[Havakasha]

You called Mr. Soros a "socialist". He is one of the worlds best CAPITALISTS. YOU know NOTHING ABOUT what your talking about. The fact is He made money on his last trade on gold. Did you forget? Jealous? We shall see if he makes or loses money on his new first quarter buy.
Do you happen to know the average price of his purchases? Dont get too excited. My quess is his bet on gold is less than 1% of his investment portfolio and he seems to have a knack of turning most investments into gains. Hence the reason he is a billionaire.
I love the fact that you disparage him yet have nowhere near the intelligence or knowledge of
the financial world. We call that CHUTZPAH.

Even i own gold. You act as if you and Peter Schiff are the only ones who own or have recommended gold. Silly.

An honest discussion? From a guy who wont even acknowledge that Mr. Schiff has been thoroughtly researched and shown to be a liar (has refused to admit he ever made a mistake
in his entire history of predictions. That is pathological)? For some strange reason the facts
upset you enought that you descend to the level of juvenile insults. You really need to grow up. There is overwhelming evidence that Mr. Schiff gets most of his predictions wrong. And that is why you arent able to address this ONE article.

Its not enought to say he has made mistakes. That is what you dont get.
The PATTERN of his mistakes is unmistakeable and if you had any integrity you would
move on to another CULT GURU.

[Havakasha]

SiriuslyWrong:
"You may recall that I noted part of Schiff's investment advice for American companies is that they pay a good dividend and sell in several geographic markets to diversify their sales to many markets and currencies. You may recall that companies like Coke, Catapillar and Yum Yum Brands were cited. I'm sure Buffet would agree with this as there is nothing controversial about it.I would pick one's with a low current multiple myself.You need to learn more about Schiff before you pass judgement that he is simply a doomsday predictor who has been doing the same thing for years. You may also recall that we discussed investing in gold and that it has been a very good investment long term. It has grown 6X since 2002. That's pretty damn good.
Have you anything to say in response? Or are you just going to keep posting the article asking why I never addressed it (like some kind of lunatic)?"


Havakasha:

I will continue to post the article that provides evidence of Mr. Schiff's bad investing history.
There is nothing lunatic about posting it. There is something devious about you refusing to acknowledge and discuss it. Any rational person i think would agree.
There is no need to do further research on Mr. Schiff/. I and others have done lots. I have posted much of it on this site. The conclusion is inescapable. He is a consistent doom and gloomer who gets almost everything wrong. And thats why you cant answer this one snapshot look of his investing over a 5 to 10 year period.

We are ALL waiting for a reasonable response to these facts.
Why is it impossible for you to answer to this article?


"In other words, Peter Schiff may be a classic case of a stopped clock: he's been predicting a market decline FOREVER and when the market has declined he's hailed as a genius by his cult fans."

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1068...hiff-right-now

Now, had you listened to Peter in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 or even 3/4 of 2007, you lost your shirt. Had you placed bets based on Schiff's market calls, you lost everything you wagered.

The S&P (.INX) went from 1054 in May of 2002 (the date of the interview) to 1561 in Oct. 2007, a 48% gain and the Dow (.DJI) rose 40%.

Banking stocks, the primary victim of the housing bust, went up (JP Morgan (JPM) 36%, Bank of America (BAC) 41%, Wells Fargo (WFC) 39% , Wachovia (WB) 31% and American Express (AXP) 51%) during that time frame (dividends excluded which would dramatically add to results).

Bottom line? Had you listened to Mr. Schiff at anytime before Oct. 2007, you lost...big. To those who did, there is little consolation in the praise being heaped on him today.

Milton Freidman said, "markets can stay dislocated longer than you can stay solvent." For those who bet with Schiff between 2002-2007, they know the statement well.

Why is it a big deal? After all, Berkshire's (BRK.A) Warren Buffett claims he cannot time the market and often watches share prices decline in investments (like recent investments in Goldman Sachs (GS) and GE) before a rebound. How is this any different?

For one, Warren's loss is limited to his investment. He buys 1 share of stock "a" at $25. $25 is the most he can lose.

Now, if we listen to Peter and "short" stock "a" at 25, our loss has no limit. If it goes to $100, we lose $75. In shorting, we are only limited in our upside. If "a" goes to zero, "Schiffers" profit $25.

Buffett's strategy is an investing one and Schiff's is a trading and timing one.

Buffett followers can hold their shares, collect their dividend and wait for the rebound. Schiff followers collect no dividend and watched for over 5 years as their bet went wrong. How many stuck around? How many shorted into every market drop or "presumed" top over 5 years, only repeatedly losing money as the market kept rising and Schiff kept pounding his message home?

Schiff should not be getting the praise he is getting today for being "so right" after saying the same thing and being "so wrong" for the previous 5 years.

[Havakasha]

SIRIUSLYWRONG QUOTE:
"I have already said his predictions have not been correct. I agree with you. I told you I dismissed them. I don't have to refute it. That wouldn't make sense now would it? What would you know about that though. You're clueless. I read more of Krugman's BS than I do of Schiff. And you say that I "follow" him and "praise" him when just above I said I dismissed his predictions on hyperinflation. You apply my praise for his housing call to all of him? How generous of you. You are absolutely incredible! And you are most definitely lying about meds."



There you go again with your silly insults about "meds." Never taken them in my life.
You do seem to have a particular fascination and obsession WITH them which makes me suspicious. The way you react to being shown to be wrong about something makes me belieVE if you dont take them niow maybe you should give them a try. LOL

WHAT YOU HAVENT SAID: and what is true is that he has gotten the overwhelming predictions
about economics and investing wrong over the course of many years. When you are honest enough to acknowledge ALL the irrefutable evidence i have displayed here then we can talk.

Paul Krugman is enormously respected, even by people ideologically opposed to him. He does
have a nobel prize in Economics and has predicted many of the economic facts of the past 10 years. Sorry you hold him such low esteem and peter schiff in such high esteem. I think that
speaks volumes.