The fed has launched the bomb and inflation is rampant and there is nothing that they (the fed) are willing to do to halt the inflation. Things may stablize a bit, but damage is already done. Worse yet, our administrtion does not see this as a big problem. Way too rich for way to long is what has left the president and many other folks in Washington unable to understand or even consider the lower 70% income group. "Build Back Better" is a fine anthem for any with unlimited resources, but not the best plan for those who will simply print more money to pay for it. So we do have a problem that will not just go away, nor be solved by adding more fuel to the fire.
If I had an acceptable solution I would certainly share it with those able to aply it. But unfortunately I don't.
Of course the motivation is to expand where the bulk of the production already is established. And China certainly is a better place as far as both costs and rules go. Even considering transportation and logistics costs, China is far more receptive to IC production that the US, ESPECIALLY California, with all of it's fears and rules and high costs. The cost of operation does need to be considered.
Certainly this article is a valid analysis of the situaion. And avoidingany statement of the solution becuse there is none. The poison is fatal but slow!
Without exception, it seems that the driving force has been greed, the working to increase the wealth of the wealthy at the expense of the rest. Keynes had some valid theories but mostly his plans were to enrich the wealthy.
Margaret Thatcher summed up the intrinsic flaw of socialism very well with:"Eventually you run out of Other People's Money", which must always be true when rewards exceed value constantly. Bubbles always burst.
What was not included in the article is the effect of the climate change panic working to reduce or stop the production of fuels. The concept of totally using renewables neglects the fact that with current technology it will take better than 100% effectiveness to meet current needs. Do we see aproblem with that?
It is appalling to see that our government has no clues. And it becomes offensive as well when they inflict losses that they will not feel or even notice onto the rest of us who will suffer as a result of their actions.
We REALLY need tht one more ballot choice: "None Of The Above", a vote against all of the candidates for an office, rejecting them completely. Most parties would choose to avoid the embarrasment of having it happen more than once.
Quite interesting indeed. I do see cautions about some prices being subject to "manipulation", and I am certain that it does happen. A few months back a major party purchased a huge amount of Bitcoin and suddenly the share price jumped way up, and then, while the price was still climbing and buyers hot to buy, said major party sold all of those shares for a serious profit.And then suddenly the situation was changed. Some called it a "pump and dump", while others just laughed, and the regulators all looked in the other direction.
So we have predictions about profits and profitabilities relative to may companies and segments, all for the near future. And some folks believe these predictions and act upon them as though they re true. My question is about the basis of these predictions, and are they any better than numbers plucked out of open air? Or pulled from some un-named body orfice?
Just what data is examined to make predictions about profitability and share prices? And how reliable are the predictions likely to be? And what is the track record as far as accuracy?
Latest Comments
Market Briefing For Monday, Nov. 15
The fed has launched the bomb and inflation is rampant and there is nothing that they (the fed) are willing to do to halt the inflation. Things may stablize a bit, but damage is already done. Worse yet, our administrtion does not see this as a big problem. Way too rich for way to long is what has left the president and many other folks in Washington unable to understand or even consider the lower 70% income group. "Build Back Better" is a fine anthem for any with unlimited resources, but not the best plan for those who will simply print more money to pay for it. So we do have a problem that will not just go away, nor be solved by adding more fuel to the fire.
If I had an acceptable solution I would certainly share it with those able to aply it. But unfortunately I don't.
White House Rejects Intel Proposal To Add Semi Production Capacity In China
Of course the motivation is to expand where the bulk of the production already is established. And China certainly is a better place as far as both costs and rules go. Even considering transportation and logistics costs, China is far more receptive to IC production that the US, ESPECIALLY California, with all of it's fears and rules and high costs. The cost of operation does need to be considered.
Meshing Cryptocurrency Wealth Generation With Global Fiat Money Demise
Certainly this article is a valid analysis of the situaion. And avoidingany statement of the solution becuse there is none. The poison is fatal but slow!
Without exception, it seems that the driving force has been greed, the working to increase the wealth of the wealthy at the expense of the rest. Keynes had some valid theories but mostly his plans were to enrich the wealthy.
Margaret Thatcher summed up the intrinsic flaw of socialism very well with:"Eventually you run out of Other People's Money", which must always be true when rewards exceed value constantly. Bubbles always burst.
5 Harsh Lessons About Investing In Raw Materials Companies
Thanks for a very educational article!!
8 Monster Stock Market Predictions For The Week Of Nov. 14, 2021
I had guessed that the discussion would be about organizations dealing in monsters. Rather a disapointment.
Oil Forecast 2022 And Beyond
What was not included in the article is the effect of the climate change panic working to reduce or stop the production of fuels. The concept of totally using renewables neglects the fact that with current technology it will take better than 100% effectiveness to meet current needs. Do we see aproblem with that?
Our World This Week: EVs And Lingerie
It is appalling to see that our government has no clues. And it becomes offensive as well when they inflict losses that they will not feel or even notice onto the rest of us who will suffer as a result of their actions.
We REALLY need tht one more ballot choice: "None Of The Above", a vote against all of the candidates for an office, rejecting them completely. Most parties would choose to avoid the embarrasment of having it happen more than once.
This Clean Energy Manufacturing Company Has A Better 1-Month Return Than Dogecoin, Litecoin, & Tesla
The share price is upand the product line is broad. What else can you tell us that might be persuasive?How will it be doing in 6 months or a year?
Look Out Below: Why A Rug-Pull Flash Crash Makes Perfect Sense
Quite interesting indeed. I do see cautions about some prices being subject to "manipulation", and I am certain that it does happen. A few months back a major party purchased a huge amount of Bitcoin and suddenly the share price jumped way up, and then, while the price was still climbing and buyers hot to buy, said major party sold all of those shares for a serious profit.And then suddenly the situation was changed. Some called it a "pump and dump", while others just laughed, and the regulators all looked in the other direction.
What's Going On With Earnings In Q4 And Beyond?
So we have predictions about profits and profitabilities relative to may companies and segments, all for the near future. And some folks believe these predictions and act upon them as though they re true. My question is about the basis of these predictions, and are they any better than numbers plucked out of open air? Or pulled from some un-named body orfice?
Just what data is examined to make predictions about profitability and share prices? And how reliable are the predictions likely to be? And what is the track record as far as accuracy?