tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post3998514053557955163..comments2023-10-31T08:06:28.554-05:00Comments on Kaspar's Market Insights: David Tepper - High on Hopium or Embracing a Ponzi?Market Seerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11426404712713948515noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-555259742260775302010-10-28T08:01:07.776-05:002010-10-28T08:01:07.776-05:00Sorry for my bad english. Thank you so much for yo...Sorry for my bad english. Thank you so much for your good post. Your post helped me in my college assignment, If you can provide me more details please email me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-3297224563622719102010-10-06T16:17:12.540-05:002010-10-06T16:17:12.540-05:00lol - well I am fully aware I get to and too wrong...lol - well I am fully aware I get to and too wrong ALL the time. Believe me your not the first one to tell me. In the end I don't really care. I try to get my letters correct but the blog is casual and more for my own purpose to get my thoughts out. If people like reading them great but don't really care if anyone reads them. I have tried to concentrate and get to and too correct but I will probably always interchange them. Just not of high enough importance though it probably should be.Market Seerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11426404712713948515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-36160419014707688562010-10-06T16:06:09.399-05:002010-10-06T16:06:09.399-05:00I’m just picky, but you might want to check your u...I’m just picky, but you might want to check your usage of “to”!<br /><br />Adverb<br /><br />too (not comparable)<br /><br />1.(focus) Likewise<br />2.(conjunctive) also; in addition.<br />3.(degree) To an excessive degree; over; more than enough.<br />4.(affirmation) used to contradict a negative assertion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-88461487917085960952010-10-04T13:30:24.083-05:002010-10-04T13:30:24.083-05:00The 78% of countries I cited account for 73% of gl...The 78% of countries I cited account for 73% of global GDP. In aggregate they're less than 1% below peak globally in real terms. <br /><br />And: <br /><br />http://atmospherical.blogspot.com/2007/08/purple-sun.htmlTravisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-70159785949944435372010-10-01T14:38:22.224-05:002010-10-01T14:38:22.224-05:00I can't believe we having the bone headed argu...I can't believe we having the bone headed argument that has been a V shaped recovery. I know of no one delusional enough, including the biggest bulls in the world, to make this argument.<br /><br />Your 78% number is in nominal terms not real. Furthermore 67% of world GDP is in developed economies. Almost 100% of developed economies or almost 67% of world GDP is not at peak levels.<br /><br />As far as your quarterly comparisons you just compared the two smallest recessions since WWII to the largest depression/recession since WWII. The bounce should be massively larger. More importantly is that your comparing apples to oranges. Between 50 and 70% of that GDP in those quarters was government spending and not private rebound which you and I our children will be paying for for decades to come. It isn't true wealth developed which GDP should track but additional borrowing from our future. <br /><br />There are plenty of legitmate things to argue about but arguing this is a V shaped recovery has to be one of the dumbest things. Probably arguing the sun is purple would be more intelligent.Market Seerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11426404712713948515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-40159512494297481012010-10-01T14:14:22.145-05:002010-10-01T14:14:22.145-05:00Here is the first four quarters of the last three ...Here is the first four quarters of the last three economic expansions.<br /><br />•Q2 1991-Q1 1992: 2.7%, 1.7%, 1.6%, 4.5%.<br />•Q4 2001-Q3 2002: 1.4%, 3.5%, 2.1%, 2.0%.<br />•Q3 2009-Q2 2010: 1.6%, 5.0%, 3.7%, 1.6%<br /><br />The previous two were both weaker.Travisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-20937053571732370722010-10-01T14:01:33.694-05:002010-10-01T14:01:33.694-05:00Think globally. 78% of countries at new highs in G...Think globally. 78% of countries at new highs in GDP. Housing starts in the US don't drive the global economy, sorry!Travisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-54927336694697941022010-09-30T08:12:19.292-05:002010-09-30T08:12:19.292-05:00Good grief what have you been smoking. The audici...Good grief what have you been smoking. The audicity to make such a claim.<br /><br />This has been the weakest recovery post WWII.<br /><br />Real GDP growth of 3% is far less than half of what one would orginally expect to see coming out of this sort of downturn.<br /><br />-From the lows in employment in DEc/09, 9% of the recession losses have been recouped.<br />-From the lows in household net worth in 2009Q1, 9% of the recession losses have been recouped.<br />-From the lowes in wages & salaries in Morch 2009, 36% of the recession losses have been recouped.<br />-From the lows in housing starts in April 2009, 7% of the recession losses have been recouped.<br />-From the lows in home prices in April 2009, 13% of the recession losses have been recouped<br />- New and existing home sales are at all time lows - they have never recovered.<br /><br />You have no context of history if you have the slightest belief that this is a V shaped recovery. This is the Great Disapointment not a V.<br /><br />Why in the world would we be talking about QE2 if we had a surging recovery.<br /><br />There is a huka bar down the street if you want to join TepperMarket Seerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11426404712713948515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5031801052696130392.post-82548721840530163612010-09-29T23:35:32.426-05:002010-09-29T23:35:32.426-05:00We've just gone through a V-shaped recovery. E...We've just gone through a V-shaped recovery. Economic numbers and output all at nominal all time highs. We're way past the point of recovery. We've been expanding, at just about the same pace as when we've come out of the last four recessions including the S&L crisis. Any growth now will be considered "expansion" and not "recovery." Wake up and smell the corporate profits! :-)Travisnoreply@blogger.com