Nassim Nicholas Taleb Angry
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=ABXPICWjFIo&feature=related
Modern portfolio theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_portfolio_theory
Harry Markowitz
is an American economist and a recipient of the John von Neumann Theory Prize and the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Markowitz
Benoit Mandelbrot On Efficient Markets- FT.Com 9.30.09
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=vxbxXBrOPS8&feature=related
Benoit Mandelbrot thinks we're all screwed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLFkQdiXPbo
John Cassidy: Efficient-Market Theory
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=TP8PVBop7mg&feature=related
Mandelbrot Set Video
zn+1 = zn2 + c
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=aIj30SOoIDM&feature=related
The Major Works of R.N. Elliot
http://www.amazon.com/Major-Works-R-N-Elliott/dp/093275001X
söndag 4 april 2010
fredag 2 april 2010
China and the U.S.: The Indispensable Axis
I denna TIMES artikel framställs det som om vi nu kan se framför oss en ekonomisk och politisk kamp mellan USA och Kina - två likar. Där visserligen Kina är på frammarch men där USA fortfarande kommer att vara en grundbult för hur Kina kommer att utvecklas.
Rather than being cold war adversaries, however, the U.S. and China will form an indispensable axis for global governance. That doesn't mean the two will be best friends — don't expect a new special relationship similar to the U.S.-British alliance of the 20th century.
Frågan är väl om det är sant. Vissa ser framför sig ett Kina som nu kommer att ta över i allt högre utsträckning
Nobel laureate economist Robert Fogel predicts that China's economy will be an eye-popping 40% of global GDP by 2040, while others project somewhat more modest growth — but few question that it's happening dazzlingly fast. Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1971133_1971110_1971106,00.html#ixzz0juqR4IVj
Det är även sant att Kina mer och mer tydligt börjar att markera mot USA och där man ex inte längre anser sig vara lika beroende av Amerikansk teknologi.
Does China Still Need U.S. Tech? Google Tiff Highlights Evolution
Decades of technology transfers have transformed China into a world-class player in carmaking, pharmaceuticals and consumer electronics. Foreign firms can ill-afford to forgo China's booming markets, and Chinese officials know this. China's National Bureau of Statistics says R&D spending in China surged 24.4% in 2008 to $67.6 billion — 73.3% from corporations, the rest from government labs and universities.
China's government oversees one of the fastest growing R&D budgets in the world, according to the World Economic Forum.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=520525
Kinesiske proffessorn Xiang Songzuo har sedan tidigare angett sex punkter som han anser USA from med nu måste åtgärda. En besk medecin för Amerika dikterad av dess långivare. Frågan är kommer Kuina snart att börja agera mot USA på motsvarande sätt som ett IMF har gjort helt nyligen i Lettland?
"To relieve the crisis, the US must repay its debts, and to do that it needs to live a more frugal life instead of asking others to continue lending it the money to maintain its over-consumption.
The first thing the government needs to do is reduce spending and the deficit.Correspondingly, the US needs to cut military disbursement, stop its global expansion and the robbing of oil resources from other countries.
Companies should also become thrifty and avoid highly leveraged operation.
Families and individuals should stop anticipating their income to buy houses and travel globally.
Instead, they should warmly welcome foreigners to travel to and spend money in the US.
China Should Raise Conditions
But if the US must ask China to buy some portion of its national debt, what kind of conditions and principles should China we raise?
The principle should be the same as the basic principle upheld by the US and IMF when “saving” other countries in crisis: cut fiscal disbursement and both the government and the people should save money.
Besides that, there are six points:
first, the US should cancel the limits on high-tech exports to China, and allow China to acquire advanced technology and high-tech companies from the US;
secondly, the US needs to open its financial system to Chinese financial institutions, allowing all Chinese financial firms to open branches and develop business in the US;
third, the US should not prevent Europe from canceling the ban against selling weapons to China;
fourth, the US should stop selling military weapons to Taiwan;
fifth, the US should loosen its limits on numbers of Chinese tourists and allow them to travel freely to the US;
and sixth, the US should never restrain China’s exports to the US and force RMB appreciation in the name of domestic protectionism and employment ressure."
http://www.chinastakes.com/story.aspx?id=813
Så frågan är hur mycket idag Kina behöver USA och om det inte eg är USA som nu behöver Kina?
Without China and global growth, the outlook for these American companies, like all domestic American companies, is bleak to non-existent.
The bottom five financial companies (quasi-financial in GE's case) subtracted 18 points from the index's advance. Even more interesting, without China buying our government debt and keeping US interest rates absurdly low, all five companies already would have been forced to file bankruptcy which, in the short-term, would create even bigger problems for the US economy.
It is also worth mentioning Walmart in any discussion regarding our dependence on China. If not for China, Walmart's profits would be lower because its costs would be higher.
Furthermore, lower prices at Walmart increase Americans' purchasing power and in turn raise our standard of living. The Chinese, on the other hand, barely benefit by receiving more Dollars each day in exchange for their hard work for wages that are below what Americans would be paid in the US.
Thanks to China, our standard of living is much higher than it would be otherwise.
http://www.safehaven.com/article-12769.htm
En annan konflikt som legat och pyrt är att USA drivit argumentet att Kina skffar sig fördelar egenom att manimpulera sin valuta.
Hu's US Visit May Signal Easing by China on Currency
http://www.cnbc.com/id/36143940
Förhoppningen från USAs sida är att med en lägre dollar i förhållande till Reminin så minskar dels "trycket" på USAS inhemska ekonomi och dels så ökar USAs möjligheter att exportera till Kina.
För Kinas del handlar detta om"lose- lose " snarare än "win - win". Med en högre värderd valuta blir i ett nafs Kinas innehav i amerikanska stattspapper midre värda, landet minskar sina export intäkter och USA skulle teoretiskt sett i alla fall kunna öka sitt ekonopmiska inflytande i Kina. Är då trade offen för detta upplägg tillräcklig för Kina? Frågan i realiteten är hur mycket eg behöver Kina exporten till USa för att säkra sin ekonomiska utveckling?
Kina har idag en otvetydigt lägre militär kapacitet än USA. Men vem behöver armeer när man i realiteten äger sin "partner". Kina finansierar idag USAs underskott och om de skulle upphöra med detta är frågan hur det eg skulle gå med USAs militära kapacitet, inte minst att skydda sina oljeintressen givet att landen importerar ca 70% av all den olja de konsumerar.
Beslutar sig Kina för att sluta hålla den amerikanska ekonomin under armarna genom att helt sluta köpa amerikanska statspapper skulle man istället i ensamt majestät, utan konkurrens kunna koncentrera sig på att bygga upp sin inhemska ekonomi med stöd av de resurser, råvaror och den energi landet så förtvivlat behöver för att lyckas med detta från mellanöstern och Afrika.
Frågan nu kanske är inte om detta kommer att ske utan istället när. När kommer Kina att anse att USA i realiteten är en större börda än en tillgång för landet? Istället ett USA så finansiellt ansträngt som man skulle bli om Kina slutar att köpa amerikanska statspapper att man helt sonika måste dra tillbaka all sin militär runt om i världen skulle för Kina istället öppna upp en värld av möjligheter och tillväxt. ¨
Är det nu Hu som åker till USA för att tala om för Amerikanerna vad de skall göra eller är det USA som kallar på Hu för att sätta spelreglerna?
I alla fall i min värld och precis som vår förre Finansminister sade när han träffade "smilande småglin på Waal -Street" - "den som står i skuld är aldrig fri".
Rather than being cold war adversaries, however, the U.S. and China will form an indispensable axis for global governance. That doesn't mean the two will be best friends — don't expect a new special relationship similar to the U.S.-British alliance of the 20th century.
Frågan är väl om det är sant. Vissa ser framför sig ett Kina som nu kommer att ta över i allt högre utsträckning
Nobel laureate economist Robert Fogel predicts that China's economy will be an eye-popping 40% of global GDP by 2040, while others project somewhat more modest growth — but few question that it's happening dazzlingly fast. Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1971133_1971110_1971106,00.html#ixzz0juqR4IVj
Det är även sant att Kina mer och mer tydligt börjar att markera mot USA och där man ex inte längre anser sig vara lika beroende av Amerikansk teknologi.
Does China Still Need U.S. Tech? Google Tiff Highlights Evolution
Decades of technology transfers have transformed China into a world-class player in carmaking, pharmaceuticals and consumer electronics. Foreign firms can ill-afford to forgo China's booming markets, and Chinese officials know this. China's National Bureau of Statistics says R&D spending in China surged 24.4% in 2008 to $67.6 billion — 73.3% from corporations, the rest from government labs and universities.
China's government oversees one of the fastest growing R&D budgets in the world, according to the World Economic Forum.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=520525
Kinesiske proffessorn Xiang Songzuo har sedan tidigare angett sex punkter som han anser USA from med nu måste åtgärda. En besk medecin för Amerika dikterad av dess långivare. Frågan är kommer Kuina snart att börja agera mot USA på motsvarande sätt som ett IMF har gjort helt nyligen i Lettland?
"To relieve the crisis, the US must repay its debts, and to do that it needs to live a more frugal life instead of asking others to continue lending it the money to maintain its over-consumption.
The first thing the government needs to do is reduce spending and the deficit.Correspondingly, the US needs to cut military disbursement, stop its global expansion and the robbing of oil resources from other countries.
Companies should also become thrifty and avoid highly leveraged operation.
Families and individuals should stop anticipating their income to buy houses and travel globally.
Instead, they should warmly welcome foreigners to travel to and spend money in the US.
China Should Raise Conditions
But if the US must ask China to buy some portion of its national debt, what kind of conditions and principles should China we raise?
The principle should be the same as the basic principle upheld by the US and IMF when “saving” other countries in crisis: cut fiscal disbursement and both the government and the people should save money.
Besides that, there are six points:
first, the US should cancel the limits on high-tech exports to China, and allow China to acquire advanced technology and high-tech companies from the US;
secondly, the US needs to open its financial system to Chinese financial institutions, allowing all Chinese financial firms to open branches and develop business in the US;
third, the US should not prevent Europe from canceling the ban against selling weapons to China;
fourth, the US should stop selling military weapons to Taiwan;
fifth, the US should loosen its limits on numbers of Chinese tourists and allow them to travel freely to the US;
and sixth, the US should never restrain China’s exports to the US and force RMB appreciation in the name of domestic protectionism and employment ressure."
http://www.chinastakes.com/story.aspx?id=813
Så frågan är hur mycket idag Kina behöver USA och om det inte eg är USA som nu behöver Kina?
Without China and global growth, the outlook for these American companies, like all domestic American companies, is bleak to non-existent.
The bottom five financial companies (quasi-financial in GE's case) subtracted 18 points from the index's advance. Even more interesting, without China buying our government debt and keeping US interest rates absurdly low, all five companies already would have been forced to file bankruptcy which, in the short-term, would create even bigger problems for the US economy.
It is also worth mentioning Walmart in any discussion regarding our dependence on China. If not for China, Walmart's profits would be lower because its costs would be higher.
Furthermore, lower prices at Walmart increase Americans' purchasing power and in turn raise our standard of living. The Chinese, on the other hand, barely benefit by receiving more Dollars each day in exchange for their hard work for wages that are below what Americans would be paid in the US.
Thanks to China, our standard of living is much higher than it would be otherwise.
http://www.safehaven.com/article-12769.htm
En annan konflikt som legat och pyrt är att USA drivit argumentet att Kina skffar sig fördelar egenom att manimpulera sin valuta.
Hu's US Visit May Signal Easing by China on Currency
http://www.cnbc.com/id/36143940
Förhoppningen från USAs sida är att med en lägre dollar i förhållande till Reminin så minskar dels "trycket" på USAS inhemska ekonomi och dels så ökar USAs möjligheter att exportera till Kina.
För Kinas del handlar detta om"lose- lose " snarare än "win - win". Med en högre värderd valuta blir i ett nafs Kinas innehav i amerikanska stattspapper midre värda, landet minskar sina export intäkter och USA skulle teoretiskt sett i alla fall kunna öka sitt ekonopmiska inflytande i Kina. Är då trade offen för detta upplägg tillräcklig för Kina? Frågan i realiteten är hur mycket eg behöver Kina exporten till USa för att säkra sin ekonomiska utveckling?
Kina har idag en otvetydigt lägre militär kapacitet än USA. Men vem behöver armeer när man i realiteten äger sin "partner". Kina finansierar idag USAs underskott och om de skulle upphöra med detta är frågan hur det eg skulle gå med USAs militära kapacitet, inte minst att skydda sina oljeintressen givet att landen importerar ca 70% av all den olja de konsumerar.
Beslutar sig Kina för att sluta hålla den amerikanska ekonomin under armarna genom att helt sluta köpa amerikanska statspapper skulle man istället i ensamt majestät, utan konkurrens kunna koncentrera sig på att bygga upp sin inhemska ekonomi med stöd av de resurser, råvaror och den energi landet så förtvivlat behöver för att lyckas med detta från mellanöstern och Afrika.
Frågan nu kanske är inte om detta kommer att ske utan istället när. När kommer Kina att anse att USA i realiteten är en större börda än en tillgång för landet? Istället ett USA så finansiellt ansträngt som man skulle bli om Kina slutar att köpa amerikanska statspapper att man helt sonika måste dra tillbaka all sin militär runt om i världen skulle för Kina istället öppna upp en värld av möjligheter och tillväxt. ¨
Är det nu Hu som åker till USA för att tala om för Amerikanerna vad de skall göra eller är det USA som kallar på Hu för att sätta spelreglerna?
I alla fall i min värld och precis som vår förre Finansminister sade när han träffade "smilande småglin på Waal -Street" - "den som står i skuld är aldrig fri".
Eurozone on the brink
The Street : March 26, 2010 : Eurozone on the Brink - Part 1
http://www.bnn.ca/news/16634.html
The Street : March 26, 2010 : Eurozone on the Brink - Part 2
http://watch.bnn.ca/the-street/march-2010/the-street-march-26-2010/#clip281271
Men mest intressant att bevaka nu kanske - kommer Kina fortsätta Amerikanska statspapper?
Euro Feels the Pressure
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1457159064&play=1
http://www.bnn.ca/news/16634.html
The Street : March 26, 2010 : Eurozone on the Brink - Part 2
http://watch.bnn.ca/the-street/march-2010/the-street-march-26-2010/#clip281271
Men mest intressant att bevaka nu kanske - kommer Kina fortsätta Amerikanska statspapper?
Euro Feels the Pressure
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1457159064&play=1
STP
Closed at C$1.3 well above the resistance of C$1.2 with some 3.5 mill shares traded. From a pure TA perspective not much resistance up to the C$2 level. Given the interest right now from e.g. analysts and media and also considering the additional positive fundamentals, more news in the pipe relevant to this company it now seems it will not take long until we reach that level.
Once there it's time to again look at what's the next target.
March 26, 2010: Southern Pacific hed a conference call to discuss the increase in its reserves and recent corporate developments on Friday, March 26, 2010. A presentation by Byron Lutes, President & CEO of Southern Pacific was followed by a question and answer period. If you were unable to participate, a taped broadcast will be available until April 2, 2010. To access the replay, dial 416-695-5800 or 1-800-408-3053. The pass code is 6106870.
Southern Pacific Cites 149% Increase in McKay Reserves
http://www.rigzone.com/NEWS/article.asp?a_id=90095
Once there it's time to again look at what's the next target.
March 26, 2010: Southern Pacific hed a conference call to discuss the increase in its reserves and recent corporate developments on Friday, March 26, 2010. A presentation by Byron Lutes, President & CEO of Southern Pacific was followed by a question and answer period. If you were unable to participate, a taped broadcast will be available until April 2, 2010. To access the replay, dial 416-695-5800 or 1-800-408-3053. The pass code is 6106870.
Southern Pacific Cites 149% Increase in McKay Reserves
http://www.rigzone.com/NEWS/article.asp?a_id=90095
torsdag 1 april 2010
John Taylor Gatto - State Controlled Consciousness
John Taylor Gatto is an American retired school teacher of 29 years 8 months and author of several books on education. He is an activist critical of compulsory schooling and the hegemonic nature of discourse on education and the education professions.Excerpt from an interview by the Swedish teacher Lennart Mogren ( http://www.youtube.com/redirect?username=mearbhrach&q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slutaskolan.nu&video_id=8ogCc8ObiwQ&event=url_redirect&url_redirect=True&usg=TgjiolfTOxswYF5Rxoj5o9mEcBE= ).
Intressant i sin helhet. I synnerhet delen som börjar ca 4.50 är tänkvärd om man nu tror att vi står inför en annan verklighet som inte kan längre kan sätta materiellt överflöd, inte mingst pga en allt mer akut och global resursproblematik, i första rummet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=8ogCc8ObiwQ&feature=related
Watch the whole interview here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8404777388320594019#
Intressant i sin helhet. I synnerhet delen som börjar ca 4.50 är tänkvärd om man nu tror att vi står inför en annan verklighet som inte kan längre kan sätta materiellt överflöd, inte mingst pga en allt mer akut och global resursproblematik, i första rummet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=8ogCc8ObiwQ&feature=related
Watch the whole interview here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8404777388320594019#
The Nature Of Dis-Ease
Sometimes, the body’s natural harmony breaks down, and we experience dis-ease, which is a reflection of the body’s inability to maintain normal control of its function-providing systems.
Because behavior is created through the interaction of proteins with their complementary signals, there are really only two sources of dis-ease: either the proteins are defective or the signals are distorted.
About 5 percent of the world’s population is born with birth defects, which means they have mutated genes that code for dysfunctional proteins. Structurally deformed or defective proteins can “jam the machine,” disturb normal pathway functions, and impair the character and quality of lives. However, 95 percent of the human population arrives on this planet with a perfectly functional set of gene blueprints.
Because the majority of us have a perfectly healthy genome and produce functional proteins, illness in this group can likely be attributed to the nature of the signal. There are three primary situations in which signals contribute to dysfunction and dis-ease.
The first is trauma. If you twist or misalign your spine and physically impede the transmission of the nervous system’s signals, it may result in a distortion of the information being exchanged between the brain and the body’s cells, tissues, and organs.
The second is toxicity. Toxins and poisons in our system represent inappropriate chemistry that can distort the signal’s information on its path between the nervous system and the targeted cells and tissues. Altered signals, derived from either of these causes, can inhibit or modify normal behaviors and lead to the expression of dis-ease.
The third and most important influence of signals on the dis-ease process is thought, the action of the mind. Mind-related illnesses do not require that there be anything physically wrong with the body at the outset of the dis-ease. Health is predicated upon the nervous system’s ability to accurately perceive environmental information and selectively engage appropriate, life-sustaining behaviors. If a mind misinterprets environmental signals and generates an inappropriate response, survival is threatened because the body’s behaviors become out of synch with the environment. We may not think that a thought could be enough to undermine an entire system, but, in fact, misperceptions can be lethal.
Läs mer om detta faschinerande ämne nedan:
http://www.brucelipton.com/book-excerpts/the-nature-of-dis-ease/
Because behavior is created through the interaction of proteins with their complementary signals, there are really only two sources of dis-ease: either the proteins are defective or the signals are distorted.
About 5 percent of the world’s population is born with birth defects, which means they have mutated genes that code for dysfunctional proteins. Structurally deformed or defective proteins can “jam the machine,” disturb normal pathway functions, and impair the character and quality of lives. However, 95 percent of the human population arrives on this planet with a perfectly functional set of gene blueprints.
Because the majority of us have a perfectly healthy genome and produce functional proteins, illness in this group can likely be attributed to the nature of the signal. There are three primary situations in which signals contribute to dysfunction and dis-ease.
The first is trauma. If you twist or misalign your spine and physically impede the transmission of the nervous system’s signals, it may result in a distortion of the information being exchanged between the brain and the body’s cells, tissues, and organs.
The second is toxicity. Toxins and poisons in our system represent inappropriate chemistry that can distort the signal’s information on its path between the nervous system and the targeted cells and tissues. Altered signals, derived from either of these causes, can inhibit or modify normal behaviors and lead to the expression of dis-ease.
The third and most important influence of signals on the dis-ease process is thought, the action of the mind. Mind-related illnesses do not require that there be anything physically wrong with the body at the outset of the dis-ease. Health is predicated upon the nervous system’s ability to accurately perceive environmental information and selectively engage appropriate, life-sustaining behaviors. If a mind misinterprets environmental signals and generates an inappropriate response, survival is threatened because the body’s behaviors become out of synch with the environment. We may not think that a thought could be enough to undermine an entire system, but, in fact, misperceptions can be lethal.
Läs mer om detta faschinerande ämne nedan:
http://www.brucelipton.com/book-excerpts/the-nature-of-dis-ease/
STP.V
Again with yesterdays close at well over 5 mill shares traded volumes certainly has increased last couple of days and in fact weeks.
Nice that we cosed at the important 1.2 level. It's not entierly impossible we'll get somewhat of an uptick once we crushed that wall.
With numers like these below STP will soon have made a complete pay back of the Senlac aquisition. Then you have to agree with Mr Rubins - howe come nobody today get's alarmed over $80 oil in the midst of a recession when just a couple of years $70 oil was said to be the end of the world in the midst of a prosperous economy?
By the fourth quarter of this year, oil prices will be back in triple-digit range, and by next year oil prices will rise to record highs, taking out the high-water mark of $147 per barrel set back before the recession began in 2008.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/jeff-rubins-smaller-world/expect-a-new-peak-for-oil-next-year/article1517154/
Nice that we cosed at the important 1.2 level. It's not entierly impossible we'll get somewhat of an uptick once we crushed that wall.
With numers like these below STP will soon have made a complete pay back of the Senlac aquisition. Then you have to agree with Mr Rubins - howe come nobody today get's alarmed over $80 oil in the midst of a recession when just a couple of years $70 oil was said to be the end of the world in the midst of a prosperous economy?
By the fourth quarter of this year, oil prices will be back in triple-digit range, and by next year oil prices will rise to record highs, taking out the high-water mark of $147 per barrel set back before the recession began in 2008.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/jeff-rubins-smaller-world/expect-a-new-peak-for-oil-next-year/article1517154/
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)