Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

alstry (< 20)




April 05, 2010 – Comments (14)

Wall Street and Washington are robbing Fools dry as they take trillions from their retirement accounts living high on the hog while laughing at the Fools as they stare at the ticker.  In the mean time America's private economy is in a DEPRESSION and more and more is contracting and shutting down.

Fulton State Hospital - Possibly 300

Think of America's private economy as the foundation and Wall Street/Washington as termites....eventually when they eat enough, the whole house falls down.....

If the Mexicans are not making any know the workers of society are struggling.

The amount of money sent home by Mexicans working abroad dropped 14.9 percent in the first two months of the year as compared to 2009, but the pace of decline slowed somewhat. Remittances are Mexico's No. 2 source of foreign income after oil exports. Almost 12 million Mexicians live in the United States, and Mexico receives the world's third largest amount of remittances, after India and China.

You can only Fool the Fools for so long before they run out of money...........

14 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On April 05, 2010 at 6:10 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

You can only raise rates and cut incomes so much before you have to go after assets......

The Bloomer City Council approved a 31 percent water rate increase at the Jan. 27 regular meeting. Customers will see a larger bill with the March 1 billing cycle; the increase will apply to readings back to Jan.15.

Report this comment
#2) On April 05, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:

"...Wall Street and Washington are robbing Fools dry as they take trillions from their retirement accounts..."

Simple question.  You quote this repeatedly on recent blogs.

What is the mechanism by which this occurs?  Most IRAs and 401Ks, and most individually managed retirement accounts (like mine) are invested in Treasury bonds, muni bonds, mutual funds and individual stocks.

What special mechanism do Wall Street and Washington have to access these funds?  I haven't noticed any "raiding".

Report this comment
#3) On April 05, 2010 at 8:54 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

I gotta feeling you may even like me one day....for your sake, I hope it is not the case....but I am rarely wrong in these kinds of issues.

Back to your point.

Let's look at Standard Pacific as an example.  As you well know, based on my analysis, I estimated it was worth at best, NEGATIVE $1 Billion dollars.  FWIW, I would be a qualified expert to testify at trial as to the value of a business.  Anyway, subsequent to my analysis, a private equity fund, probably investing pension money, invested over $600 million dollars on the equity side of the ledger in a company that they could have gotten for free?...and then some.

Clearly...Wall Street firms made a boatload in commissions on the guess is the private equity managers made 10% of the front end....and who knows how much was made on the derivitives?....while in the long run.....the pension funds are likely going to lose most, if not all of the investment.

A similar deal was done by Calpers with LandSource, a situation that basically gave Lennar over $1 Billion dollars while LandSource went bankrupt about a year later hosing Calpers.  This was a case, before I started blogging on MF, that was easy to foresee that Calpers was getting screwed to the benefit of Lennar and those that cut the deal.

We could go on and on......but I know you want to know how does this relate to you......

you are holding munis, mutual funds probably well diversified into a variety of toxic investments......but don't fret, you are not are most pension funds, endowments, and family trusts. 

How do I know.... I discussed this issue with a close friend who is the point man overseeing one of the largest family trusts in the nation.  The irony, because of the express language of the trust his hands are tied into following modern portfolio theory....thus forcing him to put the vast majority of the money into what I feel are toxic likely investments focused on the leveraged industrial age.

If he deviates...he is fired, and likes his cushy job too much to deviate.

At this point, it is not a question whether all will a degree much greater than you contemplated in your well written paper.....what is unknown is the mechanism, manner, an timing of the collapse.

I have run this issue by a number of mathematicians including actuaries and physicists.  We have narrowed to a few likely choices...but exactly what and when is elusive.

But you know one thing for sure....when we bailed out the bankers and not the citizens last year in March....we were heading down a very dangerous path.......

I could go on and on...but that is enough for now.  Pay attention and look in direction you have never looked before...because what is coming is something you have never seen before.....regardless how smart you think you are...and we both think you are pretty smart.


Report this comment
#4) On April 05, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:

"...a private equity fund, probably investing pension money..."

Clearly an unsupported supposition.  How do you know?

"...the pension funds are likely going to lose most, if not all of the investment..."

How do you know?  An unsupported supposition.

"...easy to foresee that Calpers was getting screwed to the benefit of Lennar and those that cut the deal..."

What does that have to do with my investments?

" are holding munis, mutual funds probably well diversified into a variety of toxic investments..."

An unsupported supposition.

"How do I know.... I discussed this issue with a close friend who is the point man overseeing one of the largest family trusts in the nation..."

What does this have to do with my investments, or his, or his?

This is sophistry of the worst sort.  You make suppositions, extend from the particular to the general and draw conclusions from this sophistry.  Look at DonnerDiv.  Tell me how MY retirement investments are being raided.

Alstry, you have to do a lot better than this to support your absurd thesis.


Report this comment
#5) On April 05, 2010 at 9:15 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote: are probably right.....;)

Report this comment
#6) On April 05, 2010 at 9:19 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

As an much are you making on your savings????

Report this comment
#7) On April 05, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:


17.5% last year, 5.2% so far this year.  And this year I'm 70% in cash so far.

That's a big amount supporting five families.

Report this comment
#8) On April 05, 2010 at 9:46 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

My question was how much were you making on your savings....not high risk investments.

By the way, what would your borrowing costs be if your company wanted to borrow money vs. what you are making on your savings????

If you want to discuss like a professional.....I will be more than happy to maintain civility...otherwise......being Alstry is very easy....and quite frankly, a lot more entertaining.

And in closing...based on #8, you are clearly not looking in the right of luck.

Report this comment
#9) On April 05, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:


You seem to have a blog compulsion.  Why not?  To each his own.  But you are blogging the same thing, blog after blog, day after day.  Let's class them up.

Start the day reading John Mauldin (he only publishes on Fridays, Jim Jubak (a couple of blogs each week), Bill Gross (Pimco, about one blog per month), Seeking Alpha (new stuff every day), Agora (new stuff every day), Kitco (new stuff every day), Kunstler (every Monday, but he's lost his way), anybody else from Pimco, your "jobs lost everyday" site.

Then integrate all this in your head and prepare a thought-out, reasoned blog (please, max. one per day) that has intellect (which you have) and reasoning to foresee the future.

I'd look forward to reading it.

Report this comment
#10) On April 05, 2010 at 10:15 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

I avidly read most of the contrast, my blogs are primarily links to articles which I feel are important or relevant pieces of evidence to a greater theme.

Sorta in the style of an attorney making his case to a jury....slowly by admitting evidence piece by piece as the tapistry is weaved.

I appreciate your frustration...but do it must be done this way to properly preserve appeal and avoid summary judgment.

Trust me, it should not be too much longer before you understand why....and at that point, my guess is you will thank me for my stubbornness......but spelling will never by my strong suit.



Report this comment
#11) On April 05, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:

On the cash, I make nothing.  The equities I hold are very low (relative) risk.  As you can see from DonnerDiv, the holdings are divided 70% cash, 30% invested.

Of the 30%, 75% is in the USA is going to Hell scenario (best foreign currencies and total economy ETFs) and 25% in high quality dividend payers (with an emphasis on non-USA revenue sources).

Re borrowing vs. cash.  I have no need to borrow.  I have more cash than could ever be required by my businesses.  There is no debt in the equation.

But, of course, I am very conservative.  I/we have no need to earn more.  I simply must ensure total capital preservation.  Income is a plus.  Cap gains (if any) are the frosting on the cake.

It's not the usual situation.

Report this comment
#12) On April 05, 2010 at 10:46 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

I figured as much...however, based on a number of the likely may not be the correct allocation as what we are dealing with is not the usual situation.

The problem we are dealing with is as much political as it is much international is it is domestic....more revolutionary and less evolutionary....and a lot of my analysis is beyond the scope of CAPS.

It is much easier to simply keep it in an Alstry format...if my blogging bothers you...just go back and read the above names you guess is they will be of little assistance if what I am contemplating comes to fruition...and please, it is not doom and gloom or the end of the world.........simply the end of a world as we know it.

Report this comment
#13) On April 05, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Donnernv (< 20) wrote:

And off we stumble into the unfathomable supernatural.

Report this comment
#14) On April 05, 2010 at 11:05 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:


Dylan Ratigan is joined by Julian Assange, co-founder of Wikileaks, Lt. Colonel Anthony Shaffer, from the Center for Advance Defense Studies, Glen Greenwald, from and Brett McGurk from the CFR, in discussing today's must watch video. Assange states that the purpose of releasing these videos is to show how "modern aerial warfare is being done" and "to show the debasement and moral corruption of soldiers as a result of war." As pertains to the video, Julian states the obvious: if indeed the military believed him to be an insurgent, the wounded man should be interrogated and asked about what he was doing. The army's desire is merely "to kill as many people as possible, to get as high a score as possible, and then brag about it to the rest of the troops." McGurk is laconic "this is a tragic, tragic video." Shaffer does a detailed analysis on the Rules of Engagement (Minimum Force and Capture and Interrogate being primary), especially when the engaging party on the US behalf is something that appears straight out of Call of Duty, and can be controlled by the same 19 year old joystick-happy day traders that gun the market day in and day out. Lastly Greenwald discusses the responsibility of the media to cover these kinds of events. As Glen notes, "Wikileaks is absolutely heroic, because this kind of footage is seen all the time in the Muslim world, about what we are doing over there, and what the effect of our missions are, but it is seen very rarely over here... This is far from uncommon...What do you think the people who this video and the family members who are surviving, are going to think about the U.S. over the next 2 or 3 decades."

My are too self absorbed with your success to see clearly....for what its worth....I was once like you....and that is not intended to be a cut.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners