July 2 2009 - Thursday
Hour one: Senator Bernie Sanders www.sanders.senate.gov is here - Do we have a Super Majority or not? Bernie says Yes! Harry Reid says No! Who's right.
Also - Should we have a gasoline tax or a road tax?...complete w/GPS?
Hour Two: "New global warming doomsday report...Dr. Strangelove-style fear mongering?!" Thom confronts Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise www.cei.org
Hour Three: "How to invest and win in a bad economy" Thom talks with investment adviser Joe Ponzio www.fwallstreet.com
Also - Geeky Science rocks!
Comments
Re: How to invest & win...
Market Predictions from the Foundation for the Study of Cycles
The Foundation for the Study of Cycles was formed during the Great Depression to try to figure out why it happened. It was staffed and funded by leading intellectuals and business men of the day.
Right (they claim to have a very impressive predictive track record) or wrong (the Foundation was convened by Herbert Hoover before his bid for re-election, so he obviously didn't want the Foundation to look at problems his administration caused), the Foundation claims that market cycles could have predicted the Depression, as well as subsequent bull and bear markets.
Richard Mogey - current Research Director at the Foundation - has just publicly announced the following predictions:
Because of a convergence of numerous cycles all at once, the stock market may go up for a little while, but will crash in 2010 and reach all-time lows late 2012. Mogey says that the 2008 crash was nothing compared to the coming crash
Gold may correct in 2009, but will go up in 2010 and peak in 2011
Silver may experience a short-term correction like gold, but will go up and top in 2012
Oil may experience a short-term correction, but will form a major top in 2011
The dollar will decline until at least 2012, although there might be short-term bear market rallies
Interest rates on high-grade paper will decline later this year and continue declining until 2012
Interest rates on low-grade paper could move higher for a while
Mogey argues that using the Foundation's cycles, investors can also make profitable intermediate-term trades based on shorter-term trends, and recommends using a 2% back stop (with the stop only pegged to the close of daily trading).
The Foundation claims that it has charted the cycles of individual companies' performance for 44 years, and says that it recommends shorter-term trades only on those companies that have the most consistent cycles.
Weiss Research, Inc. just announced that it has purchased the exclusive rights to the Foundation's data on individual companies, ETF performance and other metrics and has formed a joint venture called the "Foundation Alliance" to provide information and investment recommendations.
This could be the ultimate goldmine of investment insight, or a huge scam.
Note: I am not an investment advisor and this should not be taken as investment advice
I've been enjoying a new (started this week) talk show on MSNBC --- "Morning Meeting" with Dylan Ratigan. I like the guests and discussions he's had. Here's one from this morning, where he spent some quality time talking about the lack of a jobs policy with this administration:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/31709041#31709041
I'm going to email the show to suggest they have Thom on to talk about the economy.
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH -
White House economic advisor Christine Romer on today's worse-than-expected jobs report:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/31709041#31707853
I feel like Fox Mulder: I want to believe.
Quark
Me too! I want to believe, but the facts appear to speak otherwise :(
Helen Thomas hits White House for lack of transparency
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/01/helen-thomas-hits-white-house-for...
So much for change... I am beginning to think that we all got bamboozled.
DRichards,
Sign me up for a ticket to "Bamboozleville." That's how I'm beginning to feel, too. (I guess I'm a pessimist after the last 8 years, especially. That leaves room for me to be pleasantly surprised!
VIDEO ...HOW THE DOW RALLY IS TOTALLY FAKE AND SPECULATORS RAISE THE VOLUME OF STOCKS BEING TRADED ARTIFICIALLY
this guy talks about how speculating houses are falsely raising volume and how the DOW rally is totally fake.
he goes into some idiot libertarian rant after that.....but, like every libertarian, their recognition of the problem is bang on, but their solution is completely crazy.
libertarians are habitually 50% wrong....repuglicans 100%
http://maxkeiser.com/2009/07/01/principal-program-trading-is-a-way-to-ge...
Re: Libertarians
Though I disagree with the libertarian party and their totally "free market" stance, there is some things that I agree with, such as ending the Federal Reserve.
At present, the Libertarians appear to be the only viable party that isn't paid for by the corporations.
Wow... Joe the Plumber talks to God and God talks back. What a way to make a big decision.
The way to make a major decision is to throw the I Ching. The I Ching talks back too. Isn't that what you do Thom?
Well... I have to go out and before I do, I want to talk to one of my plants. I have a Spanish olive tree.
Hola amigos. Cómo estás. Pareces hermoso hoy. Aprecio todos lo que lo haces. Gracias.
¿Escuchas Thom Hartmann?
I am telling you Thom - we were lucky to get Markey Waxman though the house. This is what I was trying to tell you yesterday. They are scary and we will be lucky to get anything through and need all the votes we can get. THX for having him on.
I just called Waxman Energy & Commerce Committee on recess. The energy environment team. Aide would not give me the name of anyone on the committee and was as dumb as a box of rocks about my asking her whether it was true that the bill would make it so that the EPA would not be able to regulate greenhouse gases.
Al Markey's aide answered the phone to say that he would let me leave a message for Jeff Duncan and so I did.
Interesting interview on NPR's Fresh Air Radio yesterday with author Jeff Sharlet about his recent book The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power. Sharlet examines the power wielded by a secretive Christian group known as the Family, or the Fellowship.
The group's approach to religion, Sharlet says, is based on "a sort of trickle-down fundamentalism," which holds that the wealthy and powerful, if they "can get their hearts right with God ... will dispense blessings to those underneath them."
Members of the group ardently support free markets, in which, they believe, God's will operates directly through Adam Smith's "invisible hand."
The Family was founded in 1935 by a minister named Abraham Vereide after, he claimed, he had a vision in which God came to him in the person of the head of the United States Steel Corporation.
Here's a link to the interview:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324
Thom
Where can I find more information on the 20 Year stock cycles?
Me too, and more about commodities too. My portfolio is in the tank. I'm going to buy that guy's book (great interview BTW!) but I'd like to find some additional resources as well.
RE: My Previous Post on "The Family"
So. Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (along with other politicians) has links to this group.
Oh I see --
DeFazio, Stark and Kucinich did not vote for Waxman Markey because the bill essentially would marginalize the EPA and so have introduced these ammendments:
(174) Would strike the EPA's authority to list a greenhouse gas as an air pollutant under section 108 of the Clean Air Act
(126) Would restrict what entities can buy, sell, trade, and retire allowances and offsets to the industries that emit greenhouse gases. It also would state that nothing in the subsection would prevent these industries from obtaining consultation from financial advisers to carry out the purposes of the section.
http://www.rules.house.gov/amendment_details.aspx?NewsID=434
Yes, could be a reason for not voting for the bill. I will continue to try to learn why the EPA was being taken out of the loop as surely, they would still need to measure GHG output - very disconcerning this whole bill -- and Repower America [Al Gore's group very hard to get ahold of]:
Note: would re inserts the EPAs authority- ....legalese..... confusing!
Just got off the phone with a Markey aide asking about whether indeed the EPA would not be able to regulate greenhouse gases under the Waxman Markey bill. We were able to discern that the purpose of Waxman Markey was built with the intent of an international compatibility concerning carbon trading credits in that what was needed and wanted, was for the select purposes of global warming and did not dilute in any fashion the United States Clean Air Act, nor especially the newly won provision that the EPA regulate greenhouse gases 2007 ruling nor yesterday's grant of waiver to the State of California.
Aide assured me that the EPA in the United States will be able to measure and monitor and report green house emmissions to standards as is now. In asking the aide to make an analogy to sofware versions of pollution standards, he had felt that the Waxman Markey Bill would be another platform altogether than the Federal Clean Air Act.
Key to Waxman Markey are addressing the forests for example, world wide. We cannot think of them nor our air as only belonging to the USA when in fact when a forest is cut somewhere in another country, with respect to global warming. The idea is to cap emissions from the 2005 levels by 2020 so by 2050 we meet a reduction of 83%. The Federal EPA will administer the bill. Under this bill, the act of emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which is now free will have to be paid for. Thus, simply adding onto the Clean Air Bill would not be in order and an entirely new and specified legislation into a carbon cap, would be.
The Clean Air was built around questions such as does SOx or NOx travel from Ohio to New York for example; whereas needed an entirely new piece of legislation was needed for the mechanism to read concentrations of carbon with respect to other countries including research and development for low carbon generation and energy efficiencies.
My concern was that De Fazzio states that the EPA will not be regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Bill and to this, the Markey aide says is not true.
The real issue evidently is that the credits are being given away....?
Here is master link to Markey site: http://globalwarming.house.gov/multimedia/welcome_video see the tabs on top and look more closely into them.
Here is link to the actual bill H.R. 2454 The American Clean Energy and Security Act http://globalwarming.house.gov/legislation?id=0007#main_content
Off the master page is Skeptic Watch beneath the Hearing & Publications Tab: Science Over Spin with references to both the Lomborg Washington Post article and the Stern Review : http://globalwarming.house.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases?id=0092
Off the master page is Science Basics beneath the Issues Tab http://globalwarming.house.gov/issues/globalwarming?id=0002
Quark,
re: Jeff Sharlet's "The Family"
The book isn't so recent. It came out in May of 2008. (I thought it was earlier than that, but I checked Amazon. It may have been that I heard him talking about an article he wrote earlier on a similar topic.).
I recall hearing Sharlet talking about a conservative prayer group that Hillary Clinton had been a part of. More info at
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&add...
Thom,
You read a historical passage about our Founding Fathers and their signing of the Declaration of Independence on Thursday. Could you send me the source of that read. It would be great to share with my family and friends on the 4th.
Thank you,
Rich Corr
Thom,
Yes, that was beautiful.
B Roll,
Now that you say that (about "The Family"), I kind of remember hearing about it when it came out --- I especially remember the Hillary Clinton part. What I thought was interesting this time was that Gov. Sanford contacted a group associated with the "family" for advice on his marriage problems after he made his trip to Argentina and the truth came out.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Images of Thom
At Mondragon - both the mountain and the cooperative city - in Spain (written about in "Threshold" book)
This Myron Ebell is one of those people who wants global warming to go away because his mind is distracted by the complicated science of global warming, and tries to make it simple for simpletons. Is global warming “bad”? Well, maybe for people living on the coast, but it is “good” for people living in the frigid interior, which will experience warmer temperatures, but then again “bad” because they will have to leave their air conditioners on longer. The over-all thrust of the anti-global warming crowd is that it is too expensive to combat global warming even if it is bad; we can’t afford not to continue using fossil fuels at the same rate—even if it means running out eventually without a back-up plan. Of course, the eventual result of global warming is an ice age, caused by the stoppage of ocean currents like the Gulf Stream. For people like Ebell, The Answer is technology—that is if you can afford it, or it’s not too late.
Anyways, after decades of trying, the city of Seattle and federal prosecutors finally “nailed” Frank Colacurcio, a 92-year-old strip club operator—indicting him on several charges related to alleged prostitution business. But this should be viewed as part of the “nannytown” effort to “cleanse” the city of nightlife activities that are “offensive” to the “family-friendly” agenda of Mayor Greg Nickels and his constituency. Seattle, you see, has no place to expand, and there are people who still have this odd-ball idea that the city is “progressive” and “fun.” When I moved to Seattle in 1991, even the Space Needle seemed so pedestrian that I couldn’t be bothered with taking a ride up it until my visiting brother made me do it ten years later.
But with no place to expand, and property values high in white North Seattle, where are housing developers to go to make money? The Central District? Too “dangerous.” But what about South Seattle, with its mix of various minority and low-income folk? Once, whites fled from South Seattle before the onslaught of the “those people”; now, they see low (relatively) property prices just waiting to be snatched-up by bargain hunters. Just wave a few dollar bills in their faces, and the locals will sell-out. Thus begins the gentrification process; although developers are required to build—along with expensive single family homes and condos—“affordable” rental units, this latter requirement is only honored in the breech. Affordable to whom? Certainly not for the people displaced, making $8 an hour.
In “progressive” Seattle, “family-friendly” also means moving the “others” out so that the white folks don’t have to be inconvenienced by living amongst them. Progressive? More like narcissistic.