Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

alstry (34.92)

Alstrynomics Straight Talk

Recs

16

April 16, 2009 – Comments (26)

Philly Fed: Manufacturing "contracted less severely" this Month

Alstrynomics:  Manufacturing continuing to slow.  Although not slowing as much as last month, we are at such a low level that if we slow anymore......there will be practically no manufacturing left in America.

Mainstream Headline:  The Number of Jobless Claims Slow

Alstrynomics:  OVER 600,000 NEW people filed for unemployment claims this week.  That is 600,000 MORE unemployed people than we had last week.  Now we have over 6 million people collecting unemployment benefits and millions more that have been unemployed for so long that they no longer qualify for benefits.  If we keeping termininating 600,000 people from their jobs every week for the rest of the year......30,000,000 Americans will lose their jobs.

Mainstream Headline:  Wells Fargo reports $3 Billion in Profits

Alstrynomics:  According to a respected analyst, Wells Fargo likely has over $100 Billion stress related assets to write down....but because the government allows Wells Fargo and a number of other financial institution to lie about the quality loan assets, Wells reported a profit instead of Billons in losses.

26 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On April 16, 2009 at 9:23 PM, awallejr (85.54) wrote:

(sigh) You can't be this obtuse about the unemployment numbers.  One last time, NEW claims is NOT the same as NET claims.  While NET claims did increase, not by 610,000, but by 172,000, the RATE of initial claims made has also been decreasing. Your extrapolation is just inaccurate. But Londamania is probably right about you, you will just continue to misuse the numbers anyway.

Report this comment
#2) On April 16, 2009 at 9:31 PM, alstry (34.92) wrote:

You can't be as Foolish as you come off....at least hopefully for your sake.  But I will continue to educate you because that is the sort of generous person I am....

The Net claims increase was only 172K becuase hundreds of thousands of UNEMPLOYED people dropped off the roles due to the expiring time limitations for collecting benefits.

Why do you think I use U6 figures vs. U3?.....it is much more reflective of the Actual Unemployment rate.

Report this comment
#3) On April 16, 2009 at 9:54 PM, abitare (31.77) wrote:

Government numbers are tragically miss used. WFC should be at $0

Report this comment
#4) On April 16, 2009 at 9:54 PM, MasterMind1234 (24.74) wrote:

Damn.. So when are we going to run out of money to give the unemployed..?  Sounds like it will be coming out of our pockets as Obama "Spreads the wealth"

Report this comment
#5) On April 16, 2009 at 9:55 PM, MasterMind1234 (24.74) wrote:

Damn.. So when are we going to run out of money to give the unemployed..?  Sounds like it will be coming out of our pockets as Obama "Spreads the wealth"

Report this comment
#6) On April 16, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:

How's the "kick TDRH's butt" thing going?  Do I hear the sound of gurgling?

Report this comment
#7) On April 16, 2009 at 10:30 PM, awallejr (85.54) wrote:

No Alstry that is simply your ASSUMPTION. You are  assuming that everyone removed is perma unemployed which is flat out wrong.  While there is no way to account with precision where those people went  surely even you would have to acknowledge the possibility that at least some of them actually found jobs.  I already quoted you a FACT in another one of your endless blogs about a local New York survey that found that about 40% of the people unemployed obtained NEW JOBS within 3 months of unemployment. It is also a given that a percentage of people collect unemployment while they continue to work "off the books".  People also go back to school for re-training (a big reason why you read about why "education" related stocks are current high momentum stocks). And there is your "underground economy" (the all cash world) that is never even factored in. To simply multiply a set number every week over a certain future time period is ridiculous.  You don't even factor in the rate of claims decreasing which impacts extrapolation.

I am in the camp that expects unemployment to peak around 12%ish sometime 2010.  And I acknowledge that it is still just surmise on my or anyone else's part.  But your projection is flat out Voodoo mathematics.

 

Report this comment
#8) On April 16, 2009 at 10:31 PM, alstry (34.92) wrote:

No gurgling.......simply preparing for my final 49 picks before going all in to take it all the way....should not be long now.

You have to admit for a person almost exclusively short, and leveraged like alstry's portfolio, he still has a remarkable score after the BIGGEST run in the market since the thirties....

How is the ARNA thing going???????????????

Report this comment
#9) On April 16, 2009 at 10:43 PM, alstry (34.92) wrote:

awallejr,

It is about fricken time someone raised that issue...it might as well have been you.  First, U6 accounts for those people... that is why unemployment is 16.2%...ALREADY currently over 4 points higher than your prediction.  Second, you consider people working for half wage or working at a coffee shop is making a subsistance wage and NOT counted as a "continuing" claim employed?  Third, what about the millions of Americans, like RE agents, who are INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS no longer earning much of any income and not counted in the claims figures or unemployment statistics including U6...are they employed?

Right now unemployment is at 16.2%...actually probably higher if you include independent contractors, my projection is that it will double in the next year or so.....that is not too far off of a time frame....if it does, unemployment will be OVER 30%....it ain't too far of a stretch to make such projection in my opinion since U6 has just about doubled in the past year....and things are getting worse!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this comment
#10) On April 16, 2009 at 10:55 PM, awallejr (85.54) wrote:

Reprinting your own blog:

"Alstrynomics:  OVER 600,000 NEW people filed for unemployment claims this week.  That is 600,000 MORE unemployed people than we had last week.  Now we have over 6 million people collecting unemployment benefits and millions more that have been unemployed for so long that they no longer qualify for benefits.  If we keeping termininating 600,000 people from their jobs every week for the rest of the year......30,000,000 Americans will lose their jobs."

All you did there was multiply 600,000 by remaining weeks there and concluding we will have 30 million unemployed.  It was this simplistic argument I called BS on.  You want to back peddle now, that is fine, because your initial math was asinine.

Report this comment
#11) On April 16, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Option1307 (29.65) wrote:

 If we keeping termininating 600,000 people

He did say "if"...

I can't speak for Alstry, nor do I agree with everything he claims, but I think he was just making a point.

Report this comment
#12) On April 16, 2009 at 11:07 PM, alstry (34.92) wrote:

Awa,

Enough now...it is correct that 30,000,000 people would lose their jobs...but if not a single one of them found a new job....unemployment would be MUCH higher than my 30% projection.

I accounted for that into my analysis....please, give me a bit more credit than that....

Report this comment
#13) On April 16, 2009 at 11:27 PM, awallejr (85.54) wrote:

Option his point was to argue why we will have 50% unemployment which he has been predicting in many other blogs.  He then went 30-50%. Now he is down to 30% since I suppose he finally realized how silly his other predictions were.

And Alstry, if a million people lost jobs every week that would mean 38,000,000 more unemployed by end of the year!!!!  That statement is as much a nonsequitur as your initial quote.

Report this comment
#14) On April 16, 2009 at 11:30 PM, alstry (34.92) wrote:

Awa,

Enough.....why don't you become a better CAPs player...you have a long way to go to get to ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this comment
#15) On April 16, 2009 at 11:33 PM, TMFMmbop (33.52) wrote:

30% unemployment means 90 million folks are unemployed. i think that's overly bearish. time, of course, will tell, but time will tell that you're wrong.  90mm people will not be unemployed.

Report this comment
#16) On April 16, 2009 at 11:34 PM, TMFMmbop (33.52) wrote:

wait, i'm sorry, i should have added 27 exclamation points -- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - that would have made me seem more credible.

Report this comment
#17) On April 16, 2009 at 11:49 PM, DemonDoug (81.27) wrote:

I wonder if it will be bullish if manufacturing hits 0, the economists will say "we have hit bottom" lol.

Report this comment
#18) On April 17, 2009 at 12:02 AM, awallejr (85.54) wrote:

"Awa,

Enough.....why don't you become a better CAPs player...you have a long way to go to get to ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Ah I was waiting for that one.  You actually equate your GAME score with hence being right! 

Report this comment
#19) On April 17, 2009 at 12:11 AM, awallejr (85.54) wrote:

Actually I am going to do some "Alstry math" predicting.  Your total points were around 7500ish March 1 of this year.  6 weeks later you lost around 2400 points. So at 400 points lost per week multiplied by the remaining weeks in the year you will be at negative 10,200!!!!!!!!!

Report this comment
#20) On April 17, 2009 at 12:29 AM, SolarisKing (57.99) wrote:

This just in, courtesy of RonChapmanJr

Largest real estate bankruptcy in history.

 

Hey alsty, hope your not mad. I wonder if you saw my little blog today.

My contribution to Alstrynomics

Report this comment
#21) On April 17, 2009 at 3:44 AM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:

Alstry:

You pathetic attention-seeker.  What a miserable life you must have, to see this forum as your justification for living.  Seeking recognition for your pathetic doom-and-gloom prognostications is a pretty shallow way to live.

You said you'd kick TDRH's butt. I called you on it and offered you a bet to back up your flapping mouth.  School-girl squeal in response.  You lost the first bet.  You did not best TDRH at the end of the first quarter.  Disagree?

And you won't surpass him at the end of the second quarter.  Want to bet?  School-girl squeal coming.

Then, when somebody calls you on your incredibly stupid prognostications, your response is "improve your CAPS score"?  That is so feeble and pathetic, I could almost shed a tear.  But I have to laugh.

Now in your argot, show by your CAPS score why you are the professor of all knowledge.  You are slipping, and all can see it.  Your silly predictions are tiresome.  Post three or four times each day, and those of us who think you are looking upward at the light coming down through your colon from your flapping mouth will be watching.

You might actually consider getting a real job and contributing something to the economy and society.  Or maybe you could get a job running a failing Florida restaurant.

Report this comment
#22) On April 17, 2009 at 5:26 AM, jester112358 (28.69) wrote:

Very good point regarding the questionable "assets" (i.e. bad loans) for which the banks aren't taking proper loss reserves.  If they actually took this into account not only would there be no fake enron like "profits" but they would very well have major bank runs since they are are insolvent.

Report this comment
#23) On April 17, 2009 at 7:14 AM, alstry (34.92) wrote:

Solaris,

Sorry I missed your blog yesterday, I was travelling.  Pretty good.....we can go out for a beer anytime.

Donnerrv,

It shouldn't be much longer now....

TMFMmbop,

The employment base in America is something around 170 million.  Self employed people are not considered employed, there are tens of millions of self employed people.  Neither are the elderly or children.

So 30% U6 unemployment would be about 50 million people.

Before using exclamation points, maybe you should KNOW what you are talking about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Report this comment
#24) On April 17, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Bupp (28.39) wrote:

30% unemployment does not mean that 90 million are unemployed.  Unemplyment rate is not a percentage of the total population it is a percentage of the labour force.

Report this comment
#25) On April 18, 2009 at 3:02 AM, edgebander (99.06) wrote:

WOW there is a lot of massive idiots commenting here.

1) AWALLEJR, can I make a suggestion, clearly you don't like alstry because he is actually using rationale, and facts to back up his reasons for either picking or passing on equities, maybe you should waste less time commmenting on his blogs and do a little bit of research.  Also you comment on the assumptions that the author makes, yet you use MORE assumptions to attempt to disprove him.  I mean if the black market could actually being honestly counted don't you think that the black market wouldn't be black.  Maybe the gov. would have put an end to it.  In any case, you cannot say that someone can't assume stuff while at the same time you take more things for granted than he does.  Did you read your post before you posted it.

2) TMFMMBOP, seriously are you that stupid.  No really, your responding to a blog, being sarcastic about it and being an ass*ole to the author of the statement and you did not one stitch of research to disprove his point.  You have ensured that you will always be an idiot who also harbours ill feelings toward the guy because he actually does what you and awalljer can't or maybe don't know how to do, research.

3) DONNERNY, seriously just stop typing, I will say nothing else because your post was not even close to be relevant.  Your a monkey, who's post was covered in envy.  Remember that research as the other two in my rant is available for all to do.  Your job is to disprove the guy not talk about the guy on a personal level because your incapable of having meaningful debate with him.

 ALSTRY honestly I don't believe that the unemployment is going to get that bad this year because the GOV. has pumped way to much money into this system to allow that.  In any case I do believe that your right the real crash is coming I just think that the GOV. has delayed it by a little bit.  The accounting rules have essentially allowed insolvent banks make a profit.  GS would have had to declare bankruptcy if the taxpayers of the USA didn't bailout AIG, so the more the GOV intervenes the longer this will drag out.  I see your point and I agree with you but I believe that your timing is off.

 GOOD LUCK ALL I HOPE THIS RALLY GETS US ALL SOME OF OUR REAL MONEY BACK.  TO THE ONES WHO ARE JEALOUS AND FULL OF HATE.  SUCK IT UP AND DO SOME RESEARCH AND YOUR GOING TO BE THE SMARTER PERSON FOR IT, MORE IMPORTANTLY YOU WON'T HAVE TO LIVE WITH SO MUCH ENVY INSIDE YOUR HEARTS

Report this comment
#26) On April 18, 2009 at 2:16 PM, awallejr (85.54) wrote:

Edge did you even read yours? And you ought to look in the mirror before you open your blog calling people idiots.

Certainly don't confuse assumptions with possibilities, which  you obviously did.  Alstry was clearly simplistic in his math.  He ASSUMES that all people removed from the unemployment list simply gave up looking for work and  he ASSUMES the rate of loss will remain static throughout the year.  He IGNORES the POSSIBILITY of other factors which I attempted to illustrate.  Possibilities NOT assumptions.  As for your "black market" comment that just made no sense.

I suggest you improve your reading comprehension before name calling people. 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement