• Sprott Money
    04/29/2016 - 05:58
    There is unfortunately no basis for renewed optimism that this current litigation will have any meaningful impact on precious metals manipulation – with respect to either silver or gold.

"Passage Of The Healthcare Bill Means The Double-Dip Is Coming" - Market Insight From Permabull Jim Cramer Who Just Turned Bearish

Tyler Durden's picture

Your rating: None

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:16 | 271852 johngaltfla
johngaltfla's picture

That dork thought that Lehman was a solvent company. This is not the trigger for a down turn IMHO. Europe will lead the way. The volume and commitment by the public is too weak for a major bearish turn beyond 8 weeks.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:17 | 271854 CookieMonster
CookieMonster's picture

If Cramer becomes bearish, does that mean the stock market is going to explode to the upside???

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 09:17 | 272115 E pluribus unum
E pluribus unum's picture

Yes. It also means that his hedge fund friends will be buying while everyone else is selling. Cramer is a tool.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 09:57 | 272151 ella
ella's picture

Rumor has it that some call him the CNBC Court Jester.  I don't know if it is true or not. Isn't he or his site the street being investigated?  

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 12:37 | 272327 tmosley
tmosley's picture

I personally think that rule only applies to his long picks.  When permabull Cramer turns bearish, then things are looking pretty bad.

Contrarian indicators only work if you look at the fundamentals, and they agree with the contrarian thesis.  In this case, the fundamentals for the US economy are pointing so far down they look like they are pointing straight up for China.  I wouldn't go long ANYTHING except gold, silver, and physically held commodities at this point.  I might go long dividend producing foreign stocks outside of the west, but the US is cooked.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:19 | 271856 dnarby
dnarby's picture

Ahhh... WTF!?

Based on the CCI indicator (Cramer Contra Indicator), we should now wait a day and go long.

One thing that bothers me is that this is the first thing he's said since he described in detail how to (hypothetically) manipulate stocks that makes sense.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:26 | 271859 Stranger
Stranger's picture

Berkshire bonds now yield less than FedGov bonds.


Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:34 | 271871 andy55
andy55's picture


Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:06 | 271911 Arm
Arm's picture

Two words: Wells Fargo....



Mon, 03/22/2010 - 13:38 | 272387 SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

Wells services my mortgage but the beneficiary of my note is the sham corporation known as "MERS."  We're gonna have some fun.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 02:28 | 272011 Hulk
Hulk's picture

Bye bye AAA

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:27 | 271860 Howard_Beale
Howard_Beale's picture

Who cares what Cramer says....The Double Dip will have nothing to do with health care.

It all goes back to the banks--wherein the truth lies, and the lies that mark to myth have created.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:38 | 271879 Careless Whisper
Careless Whisper's picture

the "double dip" is propaganda. we're in a depression.

i don't need zh to tell me what cramer thinks. if i wanted to know that, i could find it on my own.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:51 | 271949 TheGoodDoctor
TheGoodDoctor's picture

This is a ruse to take the gaze away from the banksters balance sheets, the programs that are being cut soon, and Greece/Europe. The health care bill is a scape goat for Cramer. Basically the excuse for them to knock down the market and create the new crisis because they aren't getting what they want.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 01:05 | 271964 simonyadig
simonyadig's picture

Hunter, I was thinking pretty much the same thing.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 01:13 | 271969 TheGoodDoctor
TheGoodDoctor's picture

Hey simonyadig, I forgot to mention the financial services bill too! I knew I was forgetting something. Probably more too. 

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 01:48 | 271989 Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

It's all just narrative.  Gives a good idea as to what kind of crumbs the political & financial folks think is needed to draw the general publics attention away from the matters at hand and return them to survivor or survival as the case may be.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 10:43 | 272191 AccreditedEYE
AccreditedEYE's picture

I agree. This is old news anyway, he was ranting about this last week.

Now, when the hell does the market come out from manipulation and start to reflect the current economic condition?

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 01:03 | 271952 Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

It all goes back to the banks--wherein the truth lies, and the lies that mark to myth have created.

And the whole stinking mess that has grown right along with it.  I like to call the whole thing faith based governance.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:28 | 271862 Brokenarrow
Brokenarrow's picture

cnbc says,"health care is good for equities..."


Have you ever seen a bigger bunch of lying whores in your life?

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:56 | 271958 Postal
Postal's picture

Have you ever seen a bigger bunch of lying whores in your life?

Yes, at the club in Atlanta......

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 01:18 | 271973 Lux Fiat
Lux Fiat's picture

How could you forget those two clubs up on Capitol Hill?

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:29 | 271864 trillion_dollar...
trillion_dollar_deficit's picture

Most phyrric political victory in the history of western civilization.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:32 | 271869 casino capitalism
casino capitalism's picture

After the virtual annihilation of the middle class, the country needs a dose of socialism to bring it back to equilibrium.  I hate socialism but I think people have to accept that it is needed.  Besides, who can really argue that 35 million people need health insurance.  I agree the health care bill is probably garbage but that's the political system for you.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:49 | 271891 Anonymouse
Anonymouse's picture


Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:22 | 271926 Cursive
Cursive's picture

Well played, mouse, well played.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:46 | 271946 chindit13
chindit13's picture


Cleared runway 18 for (hard) landing, full stop.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 08:41 | 272090 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

...and I feel fine.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 01:34 | 271984 Lux Fiat
Lux Fiat's picture

We need people who are concerned about others, in the good sense.  However, the US political system has an abysmal record when it tries to legislate charity.  The history of public welfare and assistance efforts (read transfer payments) dating back to the 1930s depression prove true the old saying about the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

  - Social security passed to provide a very limited safety net and to quell civil unrest - politicians couldn't resist buying votes by expanding benefits well beyond fiscal prudence.

  - Ditto Medicare/medicaid

  - Look how well Congressional efforts to expand the ranks of US homeowners worked out

I pray that the massive nationalization of healthcare that is healthcare "reform" isn't the straw that breaks the camel's back.  If it isn't, I fear it brings the fiscal breaking point much, much closer.  I've seen nationalized medicine first hand in the form of the military hospital system.  I think that the changes envisioned by the legislation just passed will result in fewer doctors practicing, lower quality care, and government responses to this deterioration that only reinforce the nascent death spiral. True reform is needed without a doubt, but this legislation is a clear violation of a legislator's equivalent of a doctor's hippocratic oath.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 02:36 | 272013 delacroix
delacroix's picture

no problem, we'll just import low paid doctors, from India, and china

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 02:49 | 272015 Lux Fiat
Lux Fiat's picture

Perhaps.  Perhaps they will find better opportunities in their home countries, just when we need them the most.  There were some interesting comments under the open thread from 3/21 to the effect that the US' ability to attract and/or retain other countries' best and brightest, or the not so best and bright, is waning.  It dovetails with some anecdotal info that I have heard.  Given the current dysfunctional state of large swathes of our public educational system, I am concerned.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 03:25 | 272021 three chord sloth
three chord sloth's picture

But hey... we can still attract a big hunk of Mexico and Central America, and an emboldened Obama will try to ram through amnesty before November's election. Since we no longer assimilate newcomers, they will keep their native lifestyles, including the roughly 50% drop-out rate, so we got that goin' for us...

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 09:08 | 272109 repete
repete's picture

Take a look at "Best Care Anywhere" by Phillip Longman.  This book about vereran's health care cites the VA as having the best statistically verifiable care at the most reasonable price.  What is the reason for this and why are the statistics even available? ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS!  When electronic medical records would save more than 100,000 lives a year and billions of dollars, they are rarely used because they would shine a spotlight on the shamefully inefficient and fraudulent medical system that exists today. VA electronic medical record software VistA is available for free to countries like Uganda (thats right Uganda) who have seen the benefit of actually tracking things like outcomes, mistakes and accidents, and healthcare associated infections.  They practice what is called "evidence based medicine",  and have kept their costs extremely low compared to conventional medicine.  So does the new health care bill miss the mark?  Only by a million miles.  

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 11:15 | 272223 loki
loki's picture

Evidence Based Medicine -  good luck with that.   Try that *and* Press-Ganey surveys.    No Go.

"I don't care if you think it's a viral infection -- *I* *want* *my* *antibiotic* *NOW*"


Can you sue the government for malpractice if you are unhappy with the outcome of your veteran's health care?  No.

I see physicians stampeding towards the exits...  

How do I know??   I am one.



Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:33 | 271870 Barmaher
Barmaher's picture

To me, the costs are irrelevent considering the amount of money we've already spent bailing out the crooks on Wall Street.  I don't understand how anybody other than an insurance executive can back the idea that citizens who have pre-existing medical conditions should be denied medical coverage unless they are 1. employed and are eligible for group coverage or 2. poor (and unproductive) making them eligible for the Cadillac of all health care plans: Medicaid. 

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 06:16 | 272046 anony
anony's picture


Like we need a 2000 page bill that nobody who is going to pay for it (us) knows what else is in it that has nothing to do with health insurance, including the North Dakota Bank with a Student loan program, WTF.

There were many solutions to the problem you mention and the uninsured. Instead of focusing on those the democrats have just taken over more of our personal choices while saddling a country growing to 500,000,000 people with a back breaking debt.  I hope they choke on it in November and the republicans overturn the whole damned thing and do what is possible instead of this monstrosity. 

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 07:02 | 272062 Catullus
Catullus's picture

I don't understand how anyone but an insurance executive could think that forcing the entire country to purchase a dervative contract on their own health is a good idea. Burn this concept into your head "HEALTH INSURANCE IS NOT HEALTH CARE".  This bill had nothing to do with health care.  It just forced everyone in the country to consume a minimum amount of health INSURANCE. It's like mandating that everyone purchase put options on JPM.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 11:12 | 272220 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

well said

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:35 | 271872 glenlloyd
glenlloyd's picture

Someone posted somewhere else that this was a new dawn for America. I would tend to agree except I see it as a red dawn.

politicians stand around like nothing's wrong while the empire crumbles in front of them.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:35 | 271874 Master Bates
Master Bates's picture

If Cramer is bearish, I'd start buying calls tomorrow!

Why didn't anybody care about the costs of say, the war... which did nothing productive to help America?

Now, it's "oh my god!  We're going to give health care to people for 100B a year!"

I don't know that the health care bill was the right answer, but I sure know that the old system was a problem.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:46 | 271889 Anonymouse
Anonymouse's picture

How about:

- Health care is a good, not a right

- The federal government has no constitutional authority to "give health care to people"

- Unfunded liabilties of the US are between $50T and $100T (depending on who you ask), and this will make it worse by far

- The accounting gimmickery in the bill would make Charles Ponzi blush

- Federal programs like this typically cost about 3x the amount advertised

Think maybe that is why people are concerned.  Agree with the target or the strategy of WoT, at least national defense is a federal responsibility.  You may not agree it is necessary, you may not agree with the strategy or the tactics, you may even think it is a scam, but at least it is arguably in the federal government's purview (after ObL might actually be a bad guy after all).

But that's beside the point.  Really your argument ("The Health Care bill may be bad, but look at what Bush and Cheney did!") is no different than when I punish one of my boys and he immediately points to his brother and tattles.  It may be true, or it may not, but it does not change the situation at hand.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:51 | 271892 Master Bates
Master Bates's picture

No, what I'm saying is that health care costs 1 T over ten years.  The WoT cost much more than that.

Health care actually has a benefit for people in America. 
Building schools for Iraqi children didn't do a goddamn thing but put me in debt.

I don't know that the health care bill is the right answer to the problem in the health care system, but nobody should be allowed to raise insurance premiums by 20% in one year, year after year.

All I'm saying is that I'd rather have my money going to help Americans than Iraqis.  Helping Iraqis didn't help me one bit.  At least this way, I won't have to pay 1000 bucks every time I have pink eye or some shit.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:54 | 271895 Anonymouse
Anonymouse's picture

"At least this way, I won't have to pay 1000 bucks every time I have pink eye or some shit."

You're right, now you will pay $2000 (plus interest on federal debt) every time some other person goes to the ER to treat their pink eye.

Just stay away from the worcestershire sauce.

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:56 | 271899 Master Bates
Master Bates's picture

Not if they have insurance!

Sun, 03/21/2010 - 23:59 | 271903 Anonymouse
Anonymouse's picture

Old habits die hard.  ERs are open all night.  For many it is a matter of convenience more than cost.  I used to work in an ER.  I've seen it first hand

Besides, who do you think will pay for that insurance?

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:07 | 271912 Master Bates
Master Bates's picture

Rich people!  (LOL.  I'm just being a smart ass for the sake of being a smart ass)
Health insurance companies, actually.

Still, it's better than nobody paying for it, and the government paying for it through subsidies anyway!

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 01:23 | 271975 dnarby
dnarby's picture

Oh come one.  It's common knowledge worcestershire sauce is only dangerous if used in IV's during end of life treatment.

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:17 | 271919 BS Inc.
BS Inc.'s picture

I don't know that the health care bill is the right answer to the problem in the health care system, but nobody should be allowed to raise insurance premiums by 20% in one year, year after year.


You do realize that there is a very stringent process at the state level to figure out what the allowable premium increase is, right? Companies don't just say, "Oh, let's raise prices by 20%". They have to apply for the increase to the state insurance commissioner and the state legislature can also get involved. Typically, whatever increase there is is simply to maintain the prior year's profit margins, all things being equal. So, what does that tell you? It tells you that costs went up 20% on the service side and/or insurers were forced to cover more items in their policies and that drove up the number of claims they'd have to pay, which justified the premium increase.

Nowhere in that process is "excessive" profiteering being done.


Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:36 | 271939 Master Bates
Master Bates's picture

I'll believe that when CEOs aren't making hundreds of millions to billions of dollars to deny my 150 dollar claim!

Mon, 03/22/2010 - 00:49 | 271948 BS Inc.
BS Inc.'s picture

Look at the largest health insurers revenues then calculate the amount of that revenue the CEO's salary represents. It's less than 1%, I assure you.

As for the facts about the process I detailed, it's of no consequence whether your "believe" them or not. They are simply the facts about the process.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!