BloggingStocks http://www.bloggingstocks.com BloggingStocks http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/media/feedlogo.gif BloggingStocks http://www.bloggingstocks.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/<![CDATA[Market absolutism, like orthodox communism, is dead]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/market-absolutism-like-orthodox-communism-is-dead/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/market-absolutism-like-orthodox-communism-is-dead/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/13/market-absolutism-like-orthodox-communism-is-dead/#commentsFiled under: , ,

Here's something I try to convey to students I teach at the undergraduate level: it can take years, even decades to confirm economic trends -- 'instant-analysis' is frequently wrong and often serves little purpose -- but there are trends one can discern fairly quickly.

One economic trend that's clear and one investors need to recognize: Like orthodox communism, market absolutism is dead as an economic philosophy.

Continue reading Market absolutism, like orthodox communism, is dead

Market absolutism, like orthodox communism, is dead originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>communismeconomic conservativismfree marketThu, 13 Aug 2009 16:40:00 EST<![CDATA[Is the market always right?]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/11/is-the-market-always-right/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/11/is-the-market-always-right/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/11/is-the-market-always-right/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

Readers of this space know that economist David H. Wang, a colleague and friend of yours truly, approaches the economic scene from a unique perspective.

Wang was born and raised in Communist China for 22 years, before moving permanently to the United States in 1989 for graduate school, completing his Ph.D. in economics in 1995.

Of course Wang still talks with family and friends in China, and right now there's this joke making the rounds in the great centers in Beijing and Shanghai.

Question: What's the difference between U.S. President George W. Bush and Chairman Mao?

Answer: Chairman Mao actually put some bankers in jail.

**

As officials and citizens in China, India, Russia, Brazil, and many other developing nations look on, the United States is attempting to end a financial crisis that threatens to severely damage economies worldwide.

In the process, Wang and other economists agree, a number of myths and misnomers -- some promoted by the current U.S. administration, are being dispelled, and we'll review each in the months ahead.

Continue reading Is the market always right?

Is the market always right? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Sat, 11 Oct 2008 18:10:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>banking sectorbanksChairman MaoChinaDavid H. WangfeaturedFedfree marketfree marketsgdpGeorge W. BushMaomortgage backed securitiesPresident BushU.S. economyU.S. Federal ReserveU.S. TreasurySat, 11 Oct 2008 18:10:00 EST<![CDATA[Should Congress fund a homeowners' refinance program after the bailout?]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/24/should-congress-fund-a-homeowners-refinance-program-after-the-b/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/24/should-congress-fund-a-homeowners-refinance-program-after-the-b/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/24/should-congress-fund-a-homeowners-refinance-program-after-the-b/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

If a vote were held Thursday or Friday, the U.S. Treasury's $700 billion bailout bill would probably pass both chambers of the U.S. Congress, but by narrow margins and with a) an equity stake for U.S. taxpayers for every company that receives assistance, b) a cap on executive compensation, and c) oversight provisions.

Once the bailout work is done, should the U.S. Congress also pass a homeowners assistance bill to help more homeowners with at-risk / burdensome mortgages refinance to secure a lower interest rate?

As BloggingStocks' Jon Berr pointed out Monday, while lawmakers (and no doubt taxpayers) do not want to reward housing speculators, there's a large pool of borrowers who will be able to pay their mortgages if they can get out of high interest rate notes, and other burdensome adjustable rate mortgages, and refinance at a low, 30-year fixed rate.

While it's true the U.S. Government and taxpayers would end up subsidizing refinanced mortgages if the government receives interest that's less than it could by investing the money elsewhere, the costs of foreclosure - leading to bond defaults - leading to banking institution stress / systemic stress will undoubtedly be far greater, so says economist David H. Wang.

Continue reading Should Congress fund a homeowners' refinance program after the bailout?

Should Congress fund a homeowners' refinance program after the bailout? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>aigbailout billbarney frankBarneyFrankDarwinEconomic DarwinismfeaturedFederal Housing AdministrationFederalHousingAdministrationfinancial crisisfnmforeclosuresfrefree marketgdphome ownershipHouse Financial Services CommitteeHouseFinancialServicesCommitteehousing sectorinterest ratesmortgagesSocial DarwinismU.S. economyU.S. TreasuryWed, 24 Sep 2008 18:30:00 EST<![CDATA[Who or what caused this financial crisis? ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/18/who-or-what-caused-this-financial-crisis/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/18/who-or-what-caused-this-financial-crisis/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/18/who-or-what-caused-this-financial-crisis/#commentsFiled under: ,

Investors and readers are no doubt aware of the benefits of the free enterprise system as practiced in the United States: entrepreneurship, innovation, ingenuity, dynamism, risk taking, wealth building, and commerce are chief among these benefits.

But readers also know that corporate capitalism has its drawbacks, including (but not exclusively) financial crises that have resulted in devastating economic and social upheavals.

1893, 1929, 1987, 20??

Moreover, despite technological change, productivity increases, and massive increases in wealth, it's remarkable how similar both the crises and the public policy responses have been over the hundred-plus year period: excesses occur, bad debts mount, some regulatory changes are implemented by the U.S. Government (and sometimes by state governments), and then corporate capitalism resumes.

Further, whether it's due to America's culture, its vast natural resources, something innate in Americans, human nature in general, or some other factor, or a combination, every time a crisis occurs, the American people, by and large, reach the same conclusion regarding what caused the crisis or problem: bad decisions or incorrect decisions. Basically, that people, mainly executives and other business leaders (sometimes federal/state regulators), made mistakes or bad decisions.

Continue reading Who or what caused this financial crisis?

Who or what caused this financial crisis? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 14:49:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>banking sectorbond marketcorporate capitalismcorporationscredit crunchcredit marketsfeaturedfinancial crisisfree marketstock marketU.S. economyU.S. GovernmentThu, 18 Sep 2008 14:49:00 EST