Friday, April 3, 2009

Distribution of Wealth Shift

Jack Anderson, author, once said "the incestuous relationship between government and big business thrives in the dark". As we watch the "distribution of wealth shift," the common babble ground for the GOP and conservatives as they see institutions losing power, remember that this is a circle, and we are now simply in the circle that requires regulation, because we did not regulate very well.

This distribution of power and money went over well with G20 and I was proud to see a President and First Lady actually applauded and respected by the other countries. We've had 8 years of the cowboy, and it will takes years to restore our civility. Obama and the First Lady are out selling the agenda well, and only the smart know the agenda will shift as we uncover even more fraud.

Traders saw market moves to 8115, right at our Dow tops, on happiness over G20. Many traders watched futures and did buy our April400C up in price with the dramatic futures move, reporting buys at 7.60 to 8.40 and trades to tops of 11.60.

You'll ask why some traders do this.

These are traders that study our resistance and support lines seriously, and saw that the market struggled at the upside R1 of 389.33, struggled again at R2. 394.53 where it held several times, and then tried for R3,where it hit 398.91, just below our R3 399.72 top, before falling to hold for hours just above the magic 8000.

There is more upside potential, but a count now of 9 shows overbought conditions. G20 may now have a reaction.

Of interest, Gold held steady, almost waiting for something, at 920.00 an ounce

Floydian Soap Box Rant:

Okay, censors get happy, as it's my last day of swearing at you. For those of you that do not allow swearing in your life, you've missed a lifetime of the greatest comic and commentator in my lifetime, George Carlin, who used words like FUCK to emphasize and for meaning, and NO, another more "appropriate word" would not have had the effect. You've missed out on what you've made yourself believe to be true.

Words are just words.

So let's talk about how our nation needs to return to family values, this is one of my favorites. And it will allow me to swear again.

As a life coach therapist I deal with lots of families, and I'll tell you, I sure don't want most of the values these families have. Incest, drug use, illegal abortions, affairs outside of marriages, lies in their work, stealing from family members....whew, what are the family values we are supposed to emulate? Are they written down someplace, like the Ten Commandments?

If I am to "honor my husband" does this mean I put up with his shit when he is beating me? Or abusing me?

If I am to focus on the good of the family, and how we practice God's love, how about my shithead brother-in-law who won't even visit his Mom and makes my wife and I pay to help her?

My point: family values is more rhetoric. They are words that sound good. We don't all even agree on what family values are. If they are traditional "perfect Christian values from a book," great, but the families I see do not eat meals together, watch videos in the backseat of the car, and the kids don't read, they watch TV. Most everybody is overweight. Help me know what this big word barrage "family values" means..?

And history is a whitewash. Little do we discuss little old Ben Franklin having a great sex life when in Paris, and contracting VD a number of times. We choose to believe what we see as valuable, and choose to ignore what is not important at that time.

Lastly, to my subscribers that "must be right" and believe in "facts and logic." First, allow me to laugh at your shortsighted thinking. For hundreds of years it was a FACT that the only swans in the world were WHITE.

Then, in Australia they discovered BLACK swans. All the facts we had, that were so eloquently argued, were suddenly false.

So when those of you tell me I "deal in facts and logic," perhaps see a therapist for your delusional thinking. We ONLY KNOW what we KNOW.


And for those of you that wrote on my "being arrested" first a comment from a kind subscriber in Israel:"
"Hello Floyd,
Were you really beaten by police?
This is awful, especially since they should be protecting
people from the violence of others, instead of doing it
themselves.
This kind of brutality must surely leave painful mental scars
that won't heal.
I always try to stay away from trouble (not always successfully -
sometimes trouble stalks me). It isn't necessarily because I agree
to everything those in authority tell us to do, rather I don't think I
can change the system by standing in harms way. I am also not
as brave as you are.
Thanks,
Noam"


And here's my "third arrest" for your review. I was dressed in a business suit, driving a very nice car, with proper license plates, and registration. I was fully legal. I had not been drinking, had no drugs in me, and was the perfect citizen.
I was parked by the side of a road, two lane, in Florida, not a well used road, and with no traffic. I had the windows open and was playing opera at high volume, car turned off, just sitting there.
It was Midnight. I was headed home and just stopped to "think" on something and was listening to music.
The sirens came and the cop wanted to know what I was doing there. I told him, gave him my drivers license, and generally felt like a fucking criminal for being there. He came back to the car, having run my plates and found me legal.
So he handed me back my license, and said "what do you do for a living, sir?" That was the mistake. It is none of his fucking business what I do for a living, and I told him so. He said "why does it matter?" (as you might ask) and my response was exactly right "Yes, why does this invasion of my privacy matter? What difference does it make? You are through identifying me. I've been charged with nothing, and have been told to go.
The officer responded by asking me to get out of the car, spreadeagled me, handcuffed, and searched me for "probable cause."
I got his badge number and name and wrote the ACLU, and the police dept.

What can we learn from this experience about the stock market? And what are your thoughts....did I yet again push the envelope, proudly your man of disrespect? I do not like people that gain positions that put them in power unless they have been trained to do so. This man invaded my rights, and treated me like a criminal. Imagine if I had been black or hispanic?

___________________
And one we go with the soapbox, from trader JK:

This note comes from a fellow who is in banking...

"I'm part of team that was considering going after the Legacy Loans program (residential mortgages). After hearing from one of my partner's senior FDIC contact, I'm about 99.9% sure we won't play.

Here's what the FDIC is thinking now:

1) Commercial and construction loans will be first in the auction process. The recent Goldman analysis that was floating around here indicated that many large banks haven't even begun to mark these assets down. Literally. Lots of them are reporting their assets in these categories as worth par or very close to it.

2) Virtually all of the selling will be from the big banks... more than their respective market share would indicate.

3) Hope you're sitting down for this one: TARP funds will be used to replace any writedowns that will arise from the difference between current marks and the auction price.

So it is official (or soon shall be): the taxpayer will be the bagholder for all toxic assets on the major banks' balance sheets. The notion that destroyed capital (via credit writedowns) can be replaced by borrowed money (TARP funds) also means that the largest banks will be much more levered than before this whole sorry process began.

Imagine the following auction scenario. A pool was marked at $.98, it sells for $.50 at auction. TARP funds $.48 of the unpaid principal balance to make up the capital hit. The private buyer puts up 1/12th of the auction price (FDIC 6:1 leverage, Treasury 50% of capital). So in other words, the private buyer has put up about 2% of the UPB and the bank took a previously disclosed 2% writeoff. Ultimately in this scenario, the taxpayer is taking on something like 96% of the risk.

This is a direct transfer of wealth from the taxpayer to the folks holding on to the lower parts of the capital structure in major banks. It will make the AIG stealth bailout/scam look like a freakin' parking violation."


Now, take that information and begin to find the facts from it. Is this information correct, or is "fact and logic" again being deluded.

There are black swans.

No comments: