Monday, May 31, 2010

Democrat Governors 2010 Strategy: GOP, Tea Party is Scaring Us!

First published at DBKP: 2010 Democrat Governors Strategy: The GOP is Scaring Us, Make Them Stop



Nathan Daschle is sending out emails, sounding the alarm for DemocratGovernors.org. . What's got Nathan so spooked? A 82-second video called "Remember November." Let's take a look at Nate's trembling missive.

"Hey Nathan! Booo! Got ya...."


AS ALWAYS, FEAR IS AN OPTION



FEAR STALKS THE DEMOCRAT GOVERNORS OF AMERICA

If readers smell something funny, it might just be the scent of pure terror.

That's according to Nathan Daschle, from the Democratic Governors.org. According to Nate's email, he's quaking with fear-or is it rage? Hard to remember which week this is.

So let's go to the email.



from: Nathan Daschle, DemocraticGovernors.org
date: Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:23 PM
subject: [VIDEO] Coming This Fall

Dear Xxxxxx,

You heard from me recently about the new fear-centric marketing campaign by the Republican Governors Association. It's called 'Remember November,' and is based on the story of Guy Fawkes, the 17th-century English terrorist who tried to blow up Parliament.

Well, the DGA is responding to these sick tactics. But instead of using images of violence to incite fear, we went in a slightly different direction.

Click here to find out how we turned the RGA's ridiculous tactic on its head!

Watch the DGA's "Coming This Fall" video!

The future of our country should be driven by the vigor of America's great debate, not seditious flame-throwing rhetoric. Utter nonsense like 'Remember November' might be good for firing up the angry fringe, but it does absolutely nothing to move our country forward.

So please, check out our new video today -- and then forward it to 5 friends!

We need your help to show people that these dangerous antics by the GOP won't work. Show them we will hold them accountable and respond in a way that brings them right back to reality.

Thanks for all you've done, and all you continue to do, for the Democratic Governors Association.

-Nathan


Nathan Daschle
Executive Director
Democratic Governors Association

P.S. Social networks are a great way to spread around videos like this one, so after you view it, be sure to share it with your friends on Facebook and Twitter!


What's the "sick tactics" video that has Nathan all riled up?

Let's take a quick look.



Readers may decide: was Nathan right to label this video "fear-centric marketing?"

I mean, if you're a Democrat Congressman or Senator and you're watching this, you probably do feel a little fear; after all, most of those in Congress have done little else their entire lives but belong to the political class.

Okay, Nathan, you might have a point there.

Is the video "great debate" or "seditious flame-throwing rhetoric?"

("Seditious," by the way, is the new buzzword; sorta like "racist" was last year and "Nazi" was during the Bush administration.

It's supposed that the GOP can be thankful that Nathan didn't call Remember September "a racist piece of seditious Nazi propaganda."

Suggestion for Daschle: if you really want to scare people, try this next time.




by Mondo Frazier
image: DBKP file

Back to DBKP Front Page.



Your Ad Here





Your Ad Here

Monday, May 17, 2010

Investing: The Power of the Stock Return Predictor

Originally posted at DBKP: Investing--The New Rules: Harness the Power of The Stock Return Predictor

The Stock Return Predictor is one of the most powerful online tools for investing today. Find out why.




The Stock-Return Predictor tells you the price of stocks at a given time.

You wouldn’t give a thought to buying a car or a movie ticket or a chocolate bar without first knowing the price you were being asked to pay. The same should go with your purchases of stocks. My view (I am biased, to be sure) is that this calculator is the most powerful investor’s tool available on the internet today.

All buying decisions are made through a two-step process. Say that you were planning to buy a car. Your first step would be to determine which model was the right one for you. You might spend a good bit of time researching different possibilities before deciding that Car X is the one for you. But at that point the job is still only half done.







Say that you look up Car X in Consumer Reports and learn that the fair price for the car is $20,000. Then you go to a dealer who offers to sell you one for $18,000. You are probably going to sign the papers quick before he changes his mind. You can confidently make that deal because you know this is the car for you and you know that you are getting a more-than-fair deal.

Now say that the dealer demands $25,000 for the car. You are probably going to walk away. It’s not that the car is not right for you. It’s that the price is too high. When you determined that this car offered a strong value proposition for you, that determination assumed that you would be buying it at a reasonable price. There is no car that does not become a poor choice when priced too high.

So it is with stocks. We explored last week why index funds represent the best choice for the typical middle-class investor. When you buy an index fund, you are buying a share of the productivity of an economy that for 140 years now has generated enough profits to finance a long-term average return of 6.5 percent real. That’s plenty good enough for those of us looking for a no-muss/no-fuss investing approach.

But you cannot realistically expect to see that 6.5 percent return if you pay a price well in excess of fair value.

Say that you pay two times fair value for your index funds (that you buy them at a time when valuation levels are double what they should be). In that event, half of your money is going to buy an asset that will indeed generate a long-term return of something in the neighborhood of 6.5 percent real. But the other half of your money is going to purchase cotton-candy nothingness, stuff that is going to be blown away in the wind as prices work their way back to fair value. Spending half of your money on cotton-candy nothingness is not the way to finance an early retirement or even a reasonably comfortable age-65 retirement. Investors who care about getting value for their money need to do better.

Please plug the number “8” into The Stock-Return Predictor and push the “Calculate” button. That is the P/E10 value (“PE10” is our valuation metric; I’ll explain why it is the best valuation metric in a later column) that applied in 1982, when stocks were priced insanely low. The calculator tells you that the most likely 10-year annualized return starting from that valuation level is nearly 15 percent real. That’s an amazing return. Check with any friends who bought stocks in 1982 and they will confirm for you that the calculator got it right; investors who bought stocks in 1982 really did obtain big rewards for doing so over the next 10 years.

Now enter the number “44” into the Predictor. That’s the P/E10 value that applied in January 2000, when stocks were priced higher than they have ever before in history been priced. The calculator reveals the most likely 10-year annualized return as a negative 1 percent real. Again, checking with friends who bought stocks at those prices will show that the calculator is doing something important. The 2000s have come to be known among U.S. stock investors as “the lost decade.” Stocks were not the best choice for the long run for that 10-year stretch. They were the worst choice (money market accounts did better).

Why? Because stocks were so overpriced that two-thirds of the money that people put into stocks in January 2000 was going not to buy an asset class paying a 6.5 percent real return but to buy cotton-candy nothingness. Putting that much of your money into cotton-candy futures is going to go a long way toward setting back your financial freedom dreams every time.

It’s simple, isn’t it? You pay attention to price when buying everything else you buy. You need to begin paying attention to price when buying stocks too. Regardless of what The Stock-Selling Industry tells you is best. The “experts” in The Stock-Selling Industry are telling you what is best for them. You need to start tuning out their marketing slogans with the aim of doing what is best for you.

Next week’s column will explain where the numbers that pop up in The Stock-Return Predictor come from and how you can be sure that the calculator really works.


Every Monday at DBKP:
* Investing–The New Rules: Get the Odds on Your Side
* Stock Investing: Much of Today’s Understanding is Primitive



by Rob Bennett

images: Passionate Savings

Rob Bennett recently authored a Google Knol arguing that “The Bull Market Caused the Economic Crisis.” His bio is here.


Back to DBKP Front Page.



Your Ad Here






Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Updated WWI and WWII Posters Updated for The Age of Obama

Originally posted at DBKP: Updated World War I and II Poster Art: Obama’s War on Capitalism

The federal government's gobbling up banks, car companies, insurance companies, housing: it's a war out there. Here's some World War I and II posters--as well as some classic editorial cartoons--updated for 2010.



WW I & II POSTERS UPDATED AS A PUBLIC SERVICE FOR 2010




From RidesAPaleHorse:

Been doing a lot of thinking lately about our national situation. As you know, I'm a big fan of wartime poster art and have a pretty extensive collection.

We're in nothing short of a war on our way of life as I see it. So I did a few posters, some from as far back as WWI--and before. Also did a few WWII issues as well.


Click images to enlarge.

NOTE: Some vintage editorial cartoon updates are also included. Mouse over image for poster names.








































NOTE: Posters may be used with credit to RidesAPaleHorse and link back to this post. The headline may read 'Obama's War on Capitalism', but RAPH's correct: it's more like a 'War on Our Way of Life.'

ALSO: Some more DBKP Pixelaneous Photo Essays. The collection does need updating! It only contains links to the first 58 or so...


by RidesAPaleHorse
images: RAPH
notes: Mondo

Back to DBKP Front Page.



Your Ad Here






Monday, May 10, 2010

Funniest Beer Commercial of the Year

Originally posted at DBKP: Funniest Beer Commercial We’ve Seen All Year

We thought Dos Equis had the funniest beer commercials on TV. But this one beats them out. Our pick for Funniest Beer Commercial We've Seen All Year.



OUR PICK






posted by Mondo
h/t: Scott & Vicki
image: nostalgia Rush

Back to DBKP Front Page.



Your Ad Here






Saturday, May 8, 2010

Investing--The New Rules: Beat the Odds

Originally posted at DBKP: The New Rules: Get the Odds on Your Side





You want the odds on your side.

If you follow a Buy-and-Hold strategy, you are the gambler. Do gamblers sometimes win? They do indeed. And Buy-and-Hold generated great returns in the late 1990s.

But you don’t want to be the gambler, you want to be the house. Is there a way for the stock investor to get the odds on his side? Is there a way to be sure that you won’t occasionally win some but then give most of the winnings back later on, to insure that over the long run you will almost certainly end up a winner?

There is.

Actually, there are two ways to do this.







The first way is the Warren Buffett way. Buffett studies the companies he invests in for a long time before putting money on the table. He passes up all possibilities until he finds one that puts the odds strongly in his favor. Then he patiently waits for the probabilities to assert themselves.

He doesn’t win every bet any more than the house in a casino wins every bet. But he never sweats it. Like the house, Buffett knows in advance that the odds are on his side. His long-term edge gives him the feeling of confidence that makes investing fun.

There’s only one problem with the Buffett approach. It’s hard. It takes a lot of work. Most of us don’t have the time or skill or energy to pull it off. We are better off not trying.

Fortunately for us lazybones types, there is a second way that works almost as well. The reason why the Buffett approach is so much work is that there are a hundred factors that can determine whether a company is successful for not. If you miss one factor and it turns out to be important, there goes your hope of being the house and not the gambler. We lazybones types need an approach to getting the odds on our side that only requires us to check out a single factor and then permits us to roll over and go back to sleep.

We’ve got it!

It’s called indexing. When you buy an index fund, you are buying a share of the productivity of the entire U.S. economy. You don’t need to bother figuring out whether a company has good management or a competitive edge or is sufficiently capitalized or any of that other boring junk. It’s always going to be the case that some of the companies in the U.S. economy are going to have good management and that some are not, that some are going to have a competitive edge and that some are not, that some are going to be well capitalized and that some are not. Buy indexes and you get a mix of all of them. You won’t do as well as if you put in the effort to separate the sheep from the goats. But you’ll do pretty darn well all the same.

How well? The U.S. economy has been sufficiently productive to generate an average long-term return for stock investors of 6.5 percent real for 140 years now. That’s what you can expect if you become a follower of the lazy Buffett approach to investing.

Now -- I need to make a very, very, very important point. Indexing is the answer for the typical middle-class investor. But John Bogle and the other Buy-and-Holders have given indexing a bad name with the tireless promotion of their misleading marketing slogans.

I advocate a reformed Bogle approach called “Valuation-Informed Indexing.” This approach incorporates the critically important lessons we have learned from the academic research of the past 30 years. It is not an indexing approach that will eventually leave you busted, as Bogle’s will. It is an indexing approach that works in the real world.

To understand why valuations are so important, you need to take a moment and consider why it is that Buffett’s approach works so well. Buffett finds a strong value proposition to invest in and then sticks to the decision long enough for it to pay off. Bogle almost does the same. Bogle advocates sticking with your decisions, he recommends long-term investing just as Buffett does. But Bogle leaves out a critically important step in the process of getting the odds on your side. His strategy includes no feature insuring that you are investing in a strong value proposition.

That can never work. Not in the long term.

So --

What makes for a strong value proposition with indexes?

If you can manage to tune out all the junk that the investing “experts” have been putting in your head for 30 years now, you probably can guess. Buying a share of U.S. productivity is much like buying anything else. You have lots of experience buying stuff. What is the one thing that you are certain always to look at to insure that you do not get ripped off when buying carrots or comic books or sweaters or printers?



Price!

Indexes can be wonderful, just like all the other things you can buy with money in this Consumer Wonderland of ours. But they are obviously not wonderful at any possible price! Buy indexes at a good price and you are the house. Buy indexes at a bad price and you are arguably something even worse than a gambler -- you are a sap.

Buy indexes at a poor enough price and it’s not just that the long-term odds are not with you, it’s that the long-term odds are against you. Buy indexes at a poor enough price and it’s pretty much a lock that you are going to get a worse return from stocks than you could get from money markets. Yuck! Not good.

Investing could be so simple. The only thing that complicates it is that The Stock-Selling Industry spends hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing expenses trying to persuade you not to take price into consideration. Why would people who make a living from selling stocks want us all to think that we should put our money into stocks regardless of the price at which they are selling? This is a hard one! I might have to think this one over for a few years and get back to you!

I want to free you from the power of the expert stock salesman. I want to teach you how to invest in indexes effectively. I want to teach you to become the house and not the gambler by learning how to distinguish index fund purchases that represent strong long-term value propositions from index fund purchases that represent poor long-term value propositions. I’ll present you next week with a tool that will tell you in five minutes all that you need to know to know whether stocks are going to pay off for you or not.

by Rob Bennett
images:
* Casino Review Bank
* DBKP file

Rob Bennett recently authored a Google Knol arguing that “The Bull Market Caused the Economic Crisis.” His bio is here.


Back to DBKP Front Page.



Your Ad Here






Friday, May 7, 2010

Useful Idiots: Selective Outrage!

The Lamestream Media, Dinosaur Media, Legacy Media, MSM, Moron Media, MFM: whatever you call it, they're mostly Useful Idiots.



Originally posted at DBKP: Useful Idiots: Selective Outrage




[Click images to enlarge; click a 2nd time for larger]

Useful Idiots by James Hudnall and Val Mayerik.

A bit about the creators (taken from their bios at Big Journalism):


James Hudnall is a professional writer and internet developer.

He describes his political philosophy as "para-realism."

James has been blogging since 2002 and has written professionally since 1986. His graphic novels have been translated into seven languages. In addition to Useful Idiots, James produces the strip Obama Nation with cartoonist Batton Lash every Sunday at Big Hollywood.

Hudnall is also a U.S. Air Force Veteran. He currently lives in San Diego, California.

Be sure to check out his blog at thehud.com.




Val was born in Youngstown, Ohio in the 1950s. He started drawing for Marvel Comics in 1972. Some of his more well known works were Howard the Duck and The Savage Sword of Conan. He broke into the comics business with the help of artist Dan Adkins. He also worked at Neal Adam's Continuity Studios.

In the 1990s he moved from comics to computer gaming design and commercial art where he works for an impressive list of clients. Val is also a painter of western art. You can view his work at valmayerik.com.


Check out thehud.com, valmayerk.com and Big Journalism for more. As always, if readers like what they see, don't be hesitant to let them know.

by Mondo
image: Selective Outrage

Back to DBKP Front Page.



Your Ad Here






Monday, May 3, 2010

Stock Investing: Much of Today's Understanding is Primitive

Originally posted at DBKP: Stock Investing: Much of Today’s Understanding is Primitive




I Know More About Investing Than John Bogle


-- And You Can Too!

It’s not that I’m picking on Vanguard Founder John Bogle. Bogle is a hero of mine. The point that I want to make is that none of the investing experts know as much as they are portrayed to know about stock investing. Today’s understanding of how stock investing works is primitive. This reality gives you an opportunity to shoot ahead of the experts if you are willing to question a few of the most popular beliefs that we have discovered in recent years are built on sand.

It’s not just me who says that our knowledge today is primitive. Rob Arnott is the former editor of the Financial Analysts Journal, the most prestigious journal in the field. He says that today’s conventional investing wisdom is rooted in “myth and urban legend.” Anatole Kaletsky wrote in The Times that the economic theories on which today’s conventional investing wisdom is based are “on the brink of a paradigm shift." We are where astronomy was when Copernicus realized that the earth revolves around the sun. The academic economics of the past 20 years is comparable to pre-Copernican astronomy, with its mysterious heavenly cogs, epicycles and wheels within wheels or maybe even astrology, with its faith in star signs.”

So you don’t need to take “experts” like John Bogle too seriously. Bogle is a smart fellow. I have learned many important things from reading his work. But when he says something that does not add up, I remind myself that the conventional investing wisdom that he espouses is rooted in myth and urban legend and I think the issue through for myself until I come to an understanding in which I am able to feel greater confidence.

The thing that I don’t get about Bogle’s advice is why he says that there is no need for investors to lower their stock allocations when stock prices go to insanely dangerous levels. Bogle acknowledges that stock prices always revert to the mean; he calls this an “Iron Law” of stock investing. The market was priced at three times fair value in January 2000. That translates into $12 trillion of overvaluation, $12 trillion of money that investors were thinking could be used to finance their retirements that was fated to go “poof!” sometime over the following 10 or 15 years. Shouldn’t we have all been expecting a stock crash as the Iron Law forced prices back to fair value? It sure seems so to me.

I’ve studied the history of the Buy-and-Hold concept to try to figure out what is going on with the strange advice that we have been hearing from most of the experts for the past 30 years. It turns out that there was a time when the academic research really did support the Buy-and-Hold idea. There was a time when the research seemed to indicate that stocks are always priced properly, that insane levels of overvaluation are an impossibility. If that were so, staying at the same stock allocation at all times really would make sense.

But Yale Professor Robert Shiller (author of Irrational Exuberance) did research in 1981 poking holes in the idea that stocks are always priced right. If Shiller’s findings hold up (and there is now 30 years of follow-up research backing him up), staying at the same stock allocation at all times is a terrible idea. If Shiller is right, Bogle is wrong. If valuations affect long-term returns, the risk of investing in stocks is greater at times of high prices. If Shiller is right, the investor seeking to “Stay the Course” (a favorite Bogle admonition) needs to change his allocation in response to big price swings, not always keep it the same.




Why haven’t the experts been telling us this? Buy-and-Hold became extremely popular during the huge bull market. Advocating Buy-and-Hold made a lot of people millionaires. I have a funny feeling that the primary expertise of many of the “experts” in the The Stock-Selling Industry is in marketing. Buy-and-Hold teaches that we should all always be putting most of our money into stocks. Wouldn’t every industry like to be able to persuade the public that its product is a good deal at any possible price? The Stock-Selling Industry actually got away with this far-fetched (and self-serving!) claim during the Buy-and-Hold Era.

Are you depressed? Please don’t be. What I am saying is encouraging news if you look at it from the right angle.

I am saying that the conventional investing wisdom is dubious stuff. That’s bad. But you know what? There is no law that says that we need to follow the conventional wisdom. What if we stopped?

If the conventional wisdom is as bad as I am arguing it is, there are wonderful opportunities available to all of us to invest far more effectively just by taking a little time to learn what the academic research really does say rather than going by what the expert salesmen say that it says. If valuations affect long-term returns, as the research has been showing for 30 years now, we can all easily obtain far higher returns at far less risk. How? All we need to do is to lower our stock allocations when stocks are priced to provide poor long-term returns and increase our stock allocations when stocks are priced to provide super long-term returns.

If Shiller is right, stock returns are predictable. To the extent that stock returns are predictable, stocks are not risky. You can get the great returns available to those who invest in stocks without having to expose your retirement money to much risk of loss. All you have to do is to be willing to adopt a more skeptical attitude to the claims of John Bogle and the other expert salesmen.

More to come!


by Rob Bennett
images:
* Primitive Thinkers
* Canuck Jihad

Rob Bennett recently posted a Google Knol arguing that “The Bull Market Caused the Economic Crisis.” His bio is here.

Back to DBKP Front Page.



Your Ad Here

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Charlie Crist: Crist Leads his own Party of One



Charlie Crist: Party of One™





Ed Morrissey has a few thoughts on the sad state of affairs that opportunistic fame-chaser, Gov. Charlie Crist, finds himself in. The situation is totally of Crist's doing and demonstrates why principles are important things--even more so than technocratic understanding or extreme wonkishness to someone who aspires to leadership.

From Crist: I could vote for a Democrat as Senate Majority Leader:

Many have questioned Crist’s sense in abandoning his party for a one-shot run at the US Senate, and this will only deepen the conviction that Crist has completely taken leave of his senses. Does he really believe that in 2010 the electorate wants to endorse current Democratic leadership in Congress? How many independents does he think he’ll win by assuring them that he’ll vote to maintain the status quo if he goes to Washington?

Crist has become a Party of One, trying to join a Caucus of One. That’s likely to be a great description of the rest of his political career.






"Float like a butterfly, waffle like I.H.O.P."



"I could vote for a Democrat as Senate Majority Leader."

That all the soundbite you need if you're Marco Rubio and looking for way to portray Charlie as the anti-Crist. Crist will be one of those politicians who was successful, not because he did a good job, but because he was in the right place at the right time.

He's now demonstrated his competence by forcing himself into the wrong place at the wrong time and saying the wrong things to give the right impression.

The U.S. Army's advertising handle for a time--it still might be--was "An Army of One." Flip-flopping Charlie Crist already has a great slogan ready to roll:

Charlie Crist: Party of One™


Be all you can be, Charlie!


by Mondo Frazier

image: http://img.metblogs.com/orlando/files/2008/07/72dpicristwin001.jpg




Your Ad Here
 
coompax-digital magazine