Rosenberg On The 40% Dead Cat Bounce

Comments

[Anonymous]

makes a strong argument for little or not inflation for a number of years.

[Anonymous]

an oasis of sanity in a world of madness this guy

[crazyjerrygarcialover (not verified)]

That's probably why David Rosenberg "left" BAC/ML.

[Steak]

It is truly fascinating to see the nominal returns of equities versus the "real" returns.  Not only does the 2000 peak tower above the 2007 one, but there are distinct periods where *gasp* stocks flatline for decades.  If anything, stocks flatlining is more the normal nature of things than the "financial nymphomania" I've known all my life.

See Robert Arnott's (PIMCO's only outside advisor) piece "Bonds, Why Bother?" for a great exposition on returns for the two asset classes measured over 200+ years.  http://www.indexuniverse.com/publications/journalofindexes/articles/149-may-june-2009/5710-bonds-why-bother.html 

[Anonymous]

Have to love the point that gov't is best-suited toward promotion of social stability and prudence rather than saving the entire show.

[StilesBC]

Ouch, 

'Best thing Bill Clinton did was listen to Bob Rubin.'

We talking about the same Bob Rubin?  

[wallst1980]

Yeah I disagreed with that statement big time, considering what Bob Rubin did to de-regulation in the name of Goldman Sachs!

[Anonymous]

I love how the CNBC bubbleheads are looking like they're helplessly exposed and clueless next to Rosenberg's logic.

[Anonymous]

And next to most everything else. I'm fairly sure they aren't posting here because of the Math Question requirement. Every morning that the futures have a different + or - sign than fair value, they screw it up and add instead of subtract or vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Joe Kernan is the only one who should be speaking on that show.

[usetheinternet (not verified)]

Currencies are not moving as strongly as equities. Gives one pause. Also NYSE TRIN is almost at parity. Not a big selling day. Very strange action today. Very few traders made money as it just trended down all day. Hard to make money that way unless you were already properly positioned.

finally we get another good selloff. more to come. hat tip to:  http://investmintideas.blogspot.com

[Anonymous]

The problem with Rosenberg is that he has his history wrong. In fact, FDR did very little "prime the pump" spending and had critics who even then said it was wrongly focussed.

This is why I keep coming back to regime change: it is because we have no rights under the West Coast Hotel scrutiny regime, that the political system can keep misdirecting stimulus. Where does it go? To those who can buy the Hill. It's completely ridiculous.

But we don't have an individually enforceable right to housing, or maintenance, or medical care, or liberty, or education (or, for that matter, property), to FORCE changes in government policy through the courts.

Remember one more thing about individually enforceable rights: the legal process of litigating them is also the process of DISCOVERING the FACTS. Why do you think Paulson put in that phrase in his stimulus proposal about nothing being litigable. Why are people having such a fit when the Bankruptcy Courts allow these bailouts to occur, even though people point to FACTS which should dictate a different outcome.

The reason is very simple: those who want to present FACTS have no RIGHTS, so they are on the OUTSIDE looking IN.

So Rosenberg, whatever he may know about cycles, knows absolutely NOTHING--NADA--about the legal context in which this depression is unfolding.

Also, I really wonder how much he knows about the economy on the ground. I don't know who else follows it, but I follow the supply chain and its collapse. People don't understand it very well, but the only thing which prompted new efforts--both regulatory and stimulative--on FDR's part was evidence that the supply chain was collapsing.

When the supply chain collapses, the regime collapses. Just ask the Tsar. I don't give a DAMN what happens to investors. The supply is starting to collapse because on the ground credit is disappearing: fast.

The political system doesn't mind this, because it's big business backers are eager to take market share from collapsing companies. But that's eating the devil's candy once the supply chain itself becomes problematic.

The supply chain is problematic. Regime change!

Again, just check out my book The Eminent Domain Revolt. Our thug rulers aren't entirely stupid. They're not going to move their asses as long as unemployment among those with Bachelor's degrees or higher is so low (underemployment rate about 7% I'd say, right now). They're going to wait,because employed middle class people right now are not in favor of granting new rights.

But they are VERY afraid for the facts. So as usual with a regime change, it is anomalous. But the trend is clear.

However, do you have any idea what is involved in getting rid of the notion of health and welfare legislation and replacing it with an ironclad, INDIVIDUALLY ENFORCEABLE right to the maintenance of important facts?

People who know, know this is coming. As one lawyer said at the time of the Kelo v. New London decision, if that 5-4 decision had gone the other way, it would have been a revolution. He knew what he was talking about. Why? Because it would have been the end of the West Coast Hotel scrutiny regime.

Just hope unemployment goes through the roof very, very soon, so we can change this damned regime before it totally destroys the country.

[Steak]

It is one of those paradoxes, huh?  Any reform that is built on the foundation of our structurally imbalanced (a cheritable term) system of rewards is bound to fail and make things worse for the next generation.  So in order to save the system I find myself rooting for its collapse, what more I want this collapse to come sooner rather than later so we can get on with the whole rebuilding institutions thing.

I don't want people to lose their jobs, I don't want the country to suffer.  But nothing will change until everyone takes a hit and some are pushed to the breaking point. 

Either way, I'm very unhappy with the direction this country is going.

[Anonymous]

totally agree that regime change is needed in
precisely the same manner in which jefferson
called for it...the obamanauts and other
affiliated morons thought they were getting
change but they were fed a lie to feed their ego
by the powers pimping obama as a savior who in
reality is whore. the powers behind the throne
rule unmolested.

property rights are the fundamental bedrock of
any civilized society and they have been under
relentless attack since 1913. the 1930s supreme
court reigned in the excesses of the roosevelt
administration but his socialistic advisors won
the heart and soul of the universities. since
that time generation after generation of
totalitarian socialist demagogues have come and
gone all supported by their educated minions....

kelo was in a ways a watershed but in others
nothing more than a codification of the wretched
advance of totalitarian socialism's
unstinted lurch for power.

i do disagree with your notion that roosevelt was
not a pump primer - even the despicable
morganthau wrote in his diary in so many words
that we tried spending our way to kingdom come
with no palpable effect - can we try something
different now?

i am not sure that i follow your interest in the
courts although that is certainly where the
dammage has occurred....as an opponent of
judicial activism i prefer to settle policy
matters at the polls. the courts are a source
of more mischief than can be imagined and should
be restrained - a power which congress has but
refuses to use.

what the roosevelt's and all socialists following
him have done very successfully is logically
gerrymander the electorate in such a way that
half pay no taxes. as such there will be no
impetus for regime change because that one half
non-paying electorate can always be counted on
to vote against those advocating property rights.

now if you want to discuss rights then consider
the issue of standing. it is thrown around with
arrogant contempt by judges who refuse to grant
standing to anyone wanting to petition the
courts for redress. philip berg was denied
standing to demand a legal copy of obama's birth
certificate. the judge's ruling was an outrage.
who the fuck says that a citizen of this country
does not have a right to demand that candidates
for public constitutional office submit certified
qualifications?

your individual enforceable rights are too broad -
they leave the domain of individual rights to
become social rights - demands upon other people
for heath care, jobs, education and as such
cannot for the life of me understand your
objection to kelo in that it was the natural
outworking of these expansive unfettered social
rights emanating through penumbras in the
consitution.

[Miles Kendig]

And the Walton family has more income than those 100 million people.

[Anonymous]

I noticed that 17-18 year cycle on the Dow myself. So, you get at least one "buy and hold" cycle in your life (two if you're lucky), and at least one "market timer" cycle. I loved that comment "you don't buy the rallies, you rent them". Think I'll get that put on a T-shirt!

[Shaza (not verified)]

I really like Rule # 9! He slices right through the BS! 

[joann]

Refreshing to see the anchors listening to Rosie without interruption, and pom poms in the freezer with the shoots

[Anonymous]

Apocalypse now? Refuse to repay all consumer debt. Default is an act of patriotic revolution. Project Mayhem with no explosives.