Europe's pain is coming America's way

he doesnt seem to reply to the fact that he was just a tad (lol) simplistic in relaying what
Mr. Moheban said about gold. The sure sign of a "low level thinker".


I dont "like" this guy. I just thought it was an intelligent counterpoint to Mr. Schiff. Clearly
so far mr. Schiff has been wrong on inflation (and many other things) and mr. Moheban has been
right. As far as whether it was smarter to invest in gold from the price of $1,350 or something else
(siri etc. Lol) only time will tell us. Its going to very interesting.


Always like to bring it back to Mr SeriouslyWrongs favorite economic theorist and theories.


Have you have been able to research these facts?
Please explain. Thanks.



"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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong

Lloyd, you can lose a lot of money on ANYONE'S predictions. Good Lord are you a mess.

For him being so wildly wrong for so many years, I must be amazing in that I've made money. Would you agree that I am amazing?

I love that last line. Allow me to reverse it.

I believe your anti-praise of him IS ideologically based and lacking in FACT BASED THOUGHT (remember - these FACTS didn't happen http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw)

Lloyd beleives it didn't happen. What a hoot. What a morning....

---

We've been down this road, remember? Remember when I forced you to understand the basis of Schiff's comments? Or have you conveniently "forgotten"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong

Stopped back for one last edit I see.

Regarding Schiff, be reminded that this thread is entitled, "Europe's pain is coming America's way". For some reason, you interjected Schiff into the discussion as you have in several other threads. Candidly, you really haven't demonstrated or provided clear "evidence" on anything. Schiff is EXTREMELY TRANSPARENT.

As far as Schiff admitting he is wrong, clearly the man is convinced that America is on an usustainable path just like you. I am not going to call him A LIAR because of his beliefs. He was clearly convinced in 2006 and 2007 that 1.) there was a housing bubble, and 2.) it would burst sending us into long hard recession. You know those results. Take away what you want, but for me, it's worth a more in depth look what he's saying REGARDLESS OF POLITICS.

---

Another reminder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong

You're like a little baby. Here, I'll play along. HYPERINFLATION has not occured, nor has gold reach $12,000 nor has the Dow gone to 1400. And I hope the don't (I have to double back a little on the gold - I'm invested in it).

Now it is time to discuss real ignorance. Instead of understanding the basis of these predictions, you simply hold them up as some sort of flag (I honestly don't know what you are going for). You agree that the ever growing national debt is unsustainable, but will not disuss what that might lead to.

Well Lloyd, the things Schiff discusses may very well be ramafications of ever growing national debt. I don't know. I am not an economist. You dismiss them as "wrong predictions", but fail to put forth any inevitibility of ever increasing national debt. Keep in mind, you "agree" that it is unsustainable.

It's actually a fairly easy topic to understand, but you don't want to because then you would have to agree with Schiff that "bad things" could happen if our ever increasing national debt is not addressed.

Speaks volumes to me Lloyd.

---

I'm sure he closed his eyes when he read this one. Get it?

I understand you cant find a way to defend it. Its embarassing. Sorry,
but this is one area where i will give you no mercy. You will have to live
this down forever. LOL.


http://www.hyperinflation-us.com/


Peter Schiff is Wrong __ James Turk is Wrong


Peter Schiff's Euro Pacific Capital newsletter from April of 2009 stands out as especially revealing. That newsletter clearly demonstrates just how far off the proponents of the Austrian school are on understanding inflation and hyperinflation. The newsletter featured a guest article written a month earlier by James Turk entitled "On the Cusp of Hyperinflation". [James Turk is the author of The Collapse of the Dollar and the founder of goldmoney.com.] In this March 2009 article, James Turk enumerated 6 reasons for his predicting that "hyperinflation of the US dollar is imminent" and also said "[the US dollar] is on the cusp of hyperinflation. I expect this to become increasingly clear within twelve months." Of course this hyperinflation prediction has proven to be wildly off the mark. Average consumer price inflation by any measure has registered in the low to mid single digits in the 2½ years since. Nevertheless, in September of 2010, eighteen months after his 'hyperinflation within a year' prediction, Turk unapologetically published another such prediction, in which he hyperlinked to his original prediction. Though no doubt he is sincere, James Turk is dead wrong. It will be interesting to see for how many more years James Turk and Peter Schiff, et al, will continue to reiterate these runaway inflation predictions that will completely fail to materialize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

I understand you cant find a way to defend it. Its embarassing. Sorry,
but this is one area where i will give you no mercy. You will have to live
this down forever. LOL.


http://www.hyperinflation-us.com/


Peter Schiff is Wrong __ James Turk is Wrong


Peter Schiff's Euro Pacific Capital newsletter from April of 2009 stands out as especially revealing. That newsletter clearly demonstrates just how far off the proponents of the Austrian school are on understanding inflation and hyperinflation. The newsletter featured a guest article written a month earlier by James Turk entitled "On the Cusp of Hyperinflation". [James Turk is the author of The Collapse of the Dollar and the founder of goldmoney.com.] In this March 2009 article, James Turk enumerated 6 reasons for his predicting that "hyperinflation of the US dollar is imminent" and also said "[the US dollar] is on the cusp of hyperinflation. I expect this to become increasingly clear within twelve months." Of course this hyperinflation prediction has proven to be wildly off the mark. Average consumer price inflation by any measure has registered in the low to mid single digits in the 2½ years since. Nevertheless, in September of 2010, eighteen months after his 'hyperinflation within a year' prediction, Turk unapologetically published another such prediction, in which he hyperlinked to his original prediction. Though no doubt he is sincere, James Turk is dead wrong. It will be interesting to see for how many more years James Turk and Peter Schiff, et al, will continue to reiterate these runaway inflation predictions that will completely fail to materialize.

---

It's HAPPENING LMFAO....................

This, folks, is your fair warning: Peter Schiff, James Turk, John Williams, Marc Faber, Charles Goyette and others will surely continue ad nauseum with their predictions of runaway inflation in the dollar but consumer prices simply aren't going to cooperate with them. Sooner or later these pundits will have to face the reality of radically lower consumer price inflation than they predict. Eventually their predictions will lose all credibility. These guys really don't understand economics holistically—especially the factors affecting why people raise prices. Yes, I say factors (plural), as Milton Friedman's famous quote, "Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" is simply wrong. And I say people, as the Austrian school simply views consumer prices as inextricably linked to the money supply, as if little else matters, such as people's perceptions, and people's propensities for taking pricing action (or no action). You just can't have a viable price inflation model that completely removes human behavior from the equation. Sorry Milton.


Keep reading... Click on link

http://www.hyperinflation-us.com/

Yesterday, 11:42 PM #2

Although Peter Schiff and certain Austrian economists talk a very convincing talk, they are dead wrong on several fronts. Their key tenets stem from faulty premises which they stubbornly refuse to reconsider. Their conclusions follow from simplistic and unrealistic half-truths. For example, consider the catchphrase, "You can't spend your way to prosperity." It is half-true, because for an individual, spending will indeed reduce rather than increase his/her own wealth. But for a whole economy it's a very different story. One consumer's spending is a zero-sum wealth transfer in terms of the whole (since the spending of one party is always revenue to another party). It’s a wash. Total spending equals total revenue (ignoring taxes & entitlements), and so as total spending goes up, total revenues go up in lockstep. Spending and revenues are really like two sides of the same coin.

Consider that if all spending were to cease, then all revenues would also cease. No spending by anyone would mean no income for anyone, and then there would be no economy. Prosperity would of course be impossible. For the whole, then, consumer spending acts as essential to prosperity by enabling its flip side—income. And spending is also what entices further production. For example, a retailer may initially stock a certain amount of a product, but will not order any more of it until the product has been selling. Consumer buying is thus essential to support jobs in goods manufacturing. There is no question that consumer spending's flip side is revenue (income) and that consumer spending also boosts both production and employment. So why does a guy like Peter Schiff keep saying that consumer spending is bad for the economy and that investing/saving is good?

Saving rather than spending is good for the individual, yes, but people parking money in savings is detrimental stagnation for the economy as a whole. (These pundits fail to see such distinctions.) It's no coincidence that since the 2008 crises, just as we've had the weakest economy in generations, record amounts of cash have been idly 'sitting on the sidelines' on corporate balance sheets, in bank reserves, and in Americans' portfolios.

Austrian economics is enjoying so much resurgence these days that Mises and Hayek are actually now on the lips of several candidates in the 2012 election cycle. But don't be fooled. Austrian economics misleads because it is based upon plausible-sounding half-truths. Bottom line: the overwhelmingly likely future inflation scenario is that average consumer prices will continue to rise only in the single digits for many years to come. This is despite trillions of 'money printing' by the Fed being quite likely. I personally think it's even highly probable that consumer prices will average low single digit inflation, i.e. below 5.5%, over the next 5 years and beyond. That would mean, on average, goods and services will cost at the most about one third more than they do today by November of 2016. Copy the URL for my website into your google calendar a year or two out as a reminder to check back for new articles and updates—I'll see you then!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

This, folks, is your fair warning: Peter Schiff, James Turk, John Williams, Marc Faber, Charles Goyette and others will surely continue ad nauseum with their predictions of runaway inflation in the dollar but consumer prices simply aren't going to cooperate with them. Sooner or later these pundits will have to face the reality of radically lower consumer price inflation than they predict. Eventually their predictions will lose all credibility. These guys really don't understand economics holistically—especially the factors affecting why people raise prices. Yes, I say factors (plural), as Milton Friedman's famous quote, "Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" is simply wrong. And I say people, as the Austrian school simply views consumer prices as inextricably linked to the money supply, as if little else matters, such as people's perceptions, and people's propensities for taking pricing action (or no action). You just can't have a viable price inflation model that completely removes human behavior from the equation. Sorry Milton.


Keep reading... Click on link

---

No Link................ LMFAO. Going, going.....

Gone. http://www.hyperinflation-us.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

According to Hava-gafa-kasha, this is a work of fiction. No, no that's not right, he would have to acknowledge its existance LMFAO.

Hey Lloyd, Hyperinflation did not occur in 2011, gold is not at $12,000 and the down is not at 1500.

So what do you think of the video?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

Gone. http://www.hyperinflation-us.com/

---

That's the only thing of the web related to Moheban. He really made a name for himself LOL

Is Roubini a Liar and a Charlitan?

Have you noticed that he doesnt like to talk about Buffett and or Soros investing approach much, especially when compared to Mr. schiff. LMFAO.
Low level thinking.


I dont know know much about Moheban but i will see what i can find. Remember you were the guy who didnt know who Milton Friedman was. Ouch. A Coservative guy who claims to know a tremendous amount about economics who doesnt know who he is. Just stop for a minute and think about that. Its boggles the mind.



He just doesnt get it. He keeps playing the ONE video of Schiff where he got something right.
He pretends that he doesnt know that he was predicting the SAME EXACT thing for the 10 years before. HE is a joke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havakasha

Have you noticed that he doesnt like to talk about Buffett and or Soros investing approach much, especially when compared to Mr. schiff. LMFAO.

Low level thinking. Oh boy.


I dont know know much about Moheban but i will see what i can find. Remember you were the guy who didnt
know who Milton Friedman was. Ouch.

---

Schiff's investment advice isn't too far from Soros or Buffett. I read the article you posted, and already replied the same thing before. So now where is the low level thinking.

Yes, thanks for the intro to Milton Friedman. You are correct. If we covered him in econ 101 and 102, I forgot it.

George Soros is no stranger to Blaze readers. The billionaire currency speculator and philanthropist has long been in the news, especially since the fateful day in 1992 when he helped crash England's economy. In fact, since that day, he has been commonly referred to as “the man who broke the bank of England.”

Soros is shrewd, he has a keen eye for investments, and he knows how to play the markets. Therefore, when he makes a prediction, it might be safe to say it's worth a listen. After all, his predictions (among other things) have made him the multi-billionaire he is today.

So you might want to pay attention to a recent story from The Daily Beast that claims George Soros is nervous about the future of the global economy and that he warns of dark things to come.

“At times like these, survival is the most important thing,” Soros said.

As he sees it, the world faces one of the most dangerous periods of modern history—a period of “evil,” writes the Beasts' John Arlidge. “Europe is confronting a descent into chaos and conflict. In America [Soros] predicts riots in the streets that will lead to a brutal clampdown that will dramatically curtail civil liberties [emphases added]. The global economic system could even collapse altogether.”

http://news.yahoo.com/soros-warns-ri...133218140.html

So what about Soros? Seems quite extreme to me. Do you believe this? Is Soros a liar and a charlitan?

Billionaire financier George Soros warns that we are creating another environment which will inevitably lead to a crash, but this time, it won’t be just stock markets and it will be an even bigger boom and bust than the recent credit crisis.

Via Reuters:

“Unless we learn the lessons, that markets are inherently unstable and that stability needs to the objective of public policy, we are facing a yet larger bubble.

“We have added to the leverage by replacing private credit with sovereign credit and increasing national debt by a significant amount.”

Though many contrarian analysts and investors have suggested that a massive economic catastrophe will occur sometime in the next 0 to 3 years, Soros is a bit more optimistic on time frame, according to Reuter’s Funds Hub:

One crumb of comfort could be the 10-year period between the 1998 Asian crisis and the 2008 credit crisis. If the pattern is repeated, it should at least mean we have another 8 years to go before the next crash…

So much for trying to time when the next crash will hit.

This is from April 2010: http://www.shtfplan.com/forecasting/...years_04142010

Wow,this guy is extreme, and for some reason Hava-gafa-kasha "follows" him at an alarming level.

Wow, look at #9. This guy is a doomsday kind of guy lol

http://munsonwealthadvisors.com/?p=143

Actually, his predictions are not very specific. I think he took the fortune teller approach lol.

Any Conservative who didnt know who Milton Friedman was and yet argued economic theory
as if he was an expert on the subject has to be just about the dumbest person on the planet. Where the hell did this guy get a frick'n education? What does he read? Only Peter Schiff? My god is that TELLING.


As usual he left a few things out about what Schiff gets wrong. LMFAO.

Yes, gold will not get to $12,000, Hyperinflation did not occur the past 3 years and will next occur in the next 3, the stock market didnt "catastrophically" crash in early 2011 and there wasnt a bear market for 10 years starting in 2000, the dollar hasnt collapsed in all of the years he has been predicting, and interest rates didnt rise to 6% for the ten year. And on and on and on.


I always like to bring it back to the facts of Mr.SeriouslyWrong's favoritie economic theorist and theories.

Have you have been able to research these facts?
Please explain. Thanks.



"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.



P.S. He actually wants to compare investing with Mr. Schiff to investing with Warren Buffett and
George Soros. Very funny. Lol.

Hyperinflation USA?

http://www.hyperinflation-us.com/


Peter Schiff is Wrong __ James Turk is Wrong


Peter Schiff's Euro Pacific Capital newsletter from April of 2009 stands out as especially revealing. That newsletter clearly demonstrates just how far off the proponents of the Austrian school are on understanding inflation and hyperinflation. The newsletter featured a guest article written a month earlier by James Turk entitled "On the Cusp of Hyperinflation". [James Turk is the author of The Collapse of the Dollar and the founder of goldmoney.com.] In this March 2009 article, James Turk enumerated 6 reasons for his predicting that "hyperinflation of the US dollar is imminent" and also said "[the US dollar] is on the cusp of hyperinflation. I expect this to become increasingly clear within twelve months." Of course this hyperinflation prediction has proven to be wildly off the mark. Average consumer price inflation by any measure has registered in the low to mid single digits in the 2½ years since. Nevertheless, in September of 2010, eighteen months after his 'hyperinflation within a year' prediction, Turk unapologetically published another such prediction, in which he hyperlinked to his original prediction. Though no doubt he is sincere, James Turk is dead wrong. It will be interesting to see for how many more years James Turk and Peter Schiff, et al, will continue to reiterate these runaway inflation predictions that will completely fail to materialize.



Austrian Economics is Wrong


This, folks, is your fair warning: Peter Schiff, James Turk, John Williams, Marc Faber, Charles Goyette and others will surely continue ad nauseum with their predictions of runaway inflation in the dollar but consumer prices simply aren't going to cooperate with them. Sooner or later these pundits will have to face the reality of radically lower consumer price inflation than they predict. Eventually their predictions will lose all credibility. These guys really don't understand economics holistically—especially the factors affecting why people raise prices. Yes, I say factors (plural), as Milton Friedman's famous quote, "Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" is simply wrong. And I say people, as the Austrian school simply views consumer prices as inextricably linked to the money supply, as if little else matters, such as people's perceptions, and people's propensities for taking pricing action (or no action). You just can't have a viable price inflation model that completely removes human behavior from the equation. Sorry Milton.

Although Peter Schiff and certain Austrian economists talk a very convincing talk, they are dead wrong on several fronts. Their key tenets stem from faulty premises which they stubbornly refuse to reconsider. Their conclusions follow from simplistic and unrealistic half-truths. For example, consider the catchphrase, "You can't spend your way to prosperity." It is half-true, because for an individual, spending will indeed reduce rather than increase his/her own wealth. But for a whole economy it's a very different story. One consumer's spending is a zero-sum wealth transfer in terms of the whole (since the spending of one party is always revenue to another party). It’s a wash. Total spending equals total revenue (ignoring taxes & entitlements), and so as total spending goes up, total revenues go up in lockstep. Spending and revenues are really like two sides of the same coin.

Consider that if all spending were to cease, then all revenues would also cease. No spending by anyone would mean no income for anyone, and then there would be no economy. Prosperity would of course be impossible. For the whole, then, consumer spending acts as essential to prosperity by enabling its flip side—income. And spending is also what entices further production. For example, a retailer may initially stock a certain amount of a product, but will not order any more of it until the product has been selling. Consumer buying is thus essential to support jobs in goods manufacturing. There is no question that consumer spending's flip side is revenue (income) and that consumer spending also boosts both production and employment. So why does a guy like Peter Schiff keep saying that consumer spending is bad for the economy and that investing/saving is good?

Saving rather than spending is good for the individual, yes, but people parking money in savings is detrimental stagnation for the economy as a whole. (These pundits fail to see such distinctions.) It's no coincidence that since the 2008 crises, just as we've had the weakest economy in generations, record amounts of cash have been idly 'sitting on the sidelines' on corporate balance sheets, in bank reserves, and in Americans' portfolios.

Austrian economics is enjoying so much resurgence these days that Mises and Hayek are actually now on the lips of several candidates in the 2012 election cycle. But don't be fooled. Austrian economics misleads because it is based upon plausible-sounding half-truths. Bottom line: the overwhelmingly likely future inflation scenario is that average consumer prices will continue to rise only in the single digits for many years to come. This is despite trillions of 'money printing' by the Fed being quite likely. I personally think it's even highly probable that consumer prices will average low single digit inflation, i.e. below 5.5%, over the next 5 years and beyond. That would mean, on average, goods and services will cost at the most about one third more than they do today by November of 2016. Copy the URL for my website into your google calendar a year or two out as a reminder to check back for new articles and updates—I'll see you then!