Al's Insights – Thu 28 Jun, 2012

Trader Rog and Big Al opine on the Supreme Court Decision

Click download link to listen on this device: Download Show


Featuring:
Al KorelinRoger Wiegand

Comments:
  1. On June 28, 2012 at 9:21 am,
    Marc says:

    Big Al and all,
    I got a swell idea…let’s have another good ol’ (very ol’) fashion tea party. But, this time, lets throw all of the politicians into the “collective harbor” with a nice, big ol’ metal anchor fastened firmly to their collective ankles. And then, we cannot only reboot the financial system/currency over again – but, also the political ‘leadership” too – and why we are at it – let’s follow that up with adding the “wall street” charlatans to the “harbor swim and dunk’ for GOOD MEASURE!
    Marc

    • On June 28, 2012 at 10:02 am,
      Big Al says:

      I like the idea of “voting them out of office” better.

      Big Disappointed Al

      • On June 28, 2012 at 12:26 pm,
        irishtony says:

        AL ….the problem is the stupid sheeple, wont vote them out…..Man, most of them dont even know who they are voting for, too many are too stupid to think for themselves.

    • On June 28, 2012 at 10:05 am,
      castanheiro says:

      Hi Marc,
      Personally, I like your idea, but how about this slight modification to your scenario. Round up all the elected ‘rouges’ and put them all on Alcatraz. No food, no nothing. They will start eating each other and when only one of them is left he can swim for the mainland. Chum the water around the island everyday and keep those sharks in a frenzy. That ought to do it. :)

      • On June 28, 2012 at 10:22 am,
        Marc says:

        Hey, Mr. C.,
        Hope college is going good. Mine was more a frustrated slant…your idea is much more fun…heck, Big Al’s is just plain vanilla – BUT, very practical. :).
        Marc

      • On June 28, 2012 at 12:30 pm,
        irishtony says:

        HI MR castanheiro………..Would you really like to feed that type of GARBAGE to those beautiful fish !.

  2. On June 28, 2012 at 9:27 am,
    Bobby says:

    “we the people” elect our representatives “the buck stops here” We can have no less than Ron Paul, any other vote is wasted.

    • On June 28, 2012 at 10:01 am,
      Big Al says:

      Hi Bobby,

      Look for a comment on Ron later today.

      Big Al

  3. On June 28, 2012 at 9:49 am,
    Dennis M. O'Neil says:

    We are no longer citizens we are slaves.
    The Supreme Court decided your very act of being alive is taxable.

    A tip I learned in Law School was read the dissent first.
    The first case cited by the dissenting Justices Opinion was Wickard v. Filburn.
    Do you remember Roscoe Filburn being penalized for growing wheat for his own use….well today’s opinion suggest he could have been penalized for not growing the wheat just the same.

    Apparently we are a burden to the government because the government created to many entitlements for us. The solution is we need less of us or tax us for sticking around.

    The ‘celebration’ of July 4th will be done in the midst of a thick irony.

    • On June 28, 2012 at 10:01 am,
      Big Al says:

      Hi Dennis M,

      I particularly like your final statement!

      Big Al

      • On June 28, 2012 at 10:10 am,
        Dennis M. O'Neil says:

        Al and Roger,
        Not a good day for liberty.
        But in the long run a good day for the metals.
        Question: Who is John Gault?
        Answer: I am John Gault!

        BTW Curious if either of you have comments on the Barclay LIBOR revelations….I would like to know what Bill Murphy thinks of LIBOR being manipulated in a way similar to his well reasoned allegations about the metals

    • On June 28, 2012 at 12:34 pm,
      irishtony says:

      HI DENNIS……Perhaps the 4th of july would be a good time to get the “IRON” out !!!

  4. On June 28, 2012 at 10:23 am,
    Ben says:

    Look up the history of our Lady of Fatima. That offers an insight as to where we are headed. God bless.

  5. On June 28, 2012 at 10:30 am,
    EDWARD MURPHY says:

    rog/al
    Right after Obama’s inaug. the democrats formed a committee for the purpose of 9should it become necessary) to convert IRAs into treasururies , then paying 3% (long bond). Rog’s concerns are extremely real, should our incumbent president get re-elected!!! Perhaps its time to consider he that has the best chance to unseat him vs.any write ins. Know what I mean??? peace

  6. On June 28, 2012 at 10:33 am,
    James says:

    gold doesn’t seem to like the decision. deflation is here. try as they might they cant stem the tide. im sure in euroland the summit will be another yawner, they will agree to meet again…italy and spain are toast. u.s. will get another credit downgrade. jp morgan loss is more like $8 billion…which will all come out when they are cornered, until then they will swear everything is fine. this is clearly the end game. everything goes down from here, no one will be spared the pain.

  7. On June 28, 2012 at 10:34 am,
    Sandy says:

    The SCOTUS ruled the state expansion of medicaid unconstitutional.

  8. On June 28, 2012 at 10:44 am,
    cfs2000 says:

    Maybe I’m stupid, but I thought the lack of a severability clause meant the whole law is constitutional or NOT constitutional. The Supreme court, it is my understanding, DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE PART of a law, without the severability clause.
    But, hell, I thought most all of the law did not meet constitutionality tests, not just the medicaid part.
    We have a president who thinks he is an emperor and a supreme court who think they are god. I believe, the Obama-care law failed constitutional muster, and the US is now set for oblivion…….slowly. Or maybe a REVOLUTION.

    • On June 28, 2012 at 11:38 am,
      Dennis M. O'Neil says:

      “In the course of human events…..”

  9. On June 28, 2012 at 12:28 pm,
    John W. Robertson says:

    Can I have my Treasuries printed on Charmin instead of Northern?

    Well, look on the bright side folks. Nancy Pelosi has said several times that Obamacare won’t cost any additional money! (Not sure who her accountant is.)

    • On June 28, 2012 at 12:38 pm,
      irishtony says:

      JOHN W……..Could it be BERNANKE ?

    • On June 28, 2012 at 1:30 pm,
      EDWARD MURPHY says:

      Damn, Dame Pelosi is one scary lookin’ humanoid formerly of the female persuasion

    • On June 28, 2012 at 3:58 pm,
      Dennis M. O'Neil says:

      John W.

      You made me chuckle on a day I thought I could not.
      Thank You!

  10. On June 28, 2012 at 3:23 pm,
    Dai Uy says:

    Al et al:

    Obama’s victory today is only a Phyrric one; Chief Justice Robert’s did the Romney side a big favor and I think he intentionlly did it. A very shrewd guy……………

    Had he voted against Obamacare, it would have been a big rally point for the Dems come November but since he upheld it, it will unify Romney backers and independents and Catholics and the evangelicals like nothing else could as 70% of the populace doesn’t want the damn thing and he was shrewd by calling it a tax which it is of course.

    So for the Rs here, let not your hearts be troubled. Many Dems will stay away from voting figuring that they don’t need to do it because they have their beloved Obamacare. This may be a blessing in disguise and provide the necessary impetus to take both the WH and the Senate and to keep the House of Reps.Also pray for a cold rainy day in November as that often keeps the Dems away from the polls.

    I look for some accomodation between Paul and Romney.

  11. On June 28, 2012 at 3:27 pm,
    Lynn Brown says:

    Hey folks — read the decision and study the law in its entirety. I have done both (yes, the whole thing) and studied and worked in our health system for a long career in health law and policy. You gentlemen are misrepresenting what both the decision and the law say, just as partisan commentators on both sides of the political spectrum are doing with impunity. But you should be more honest than them. Hysterical rhetoric won’t help solve the terribly difficult problems our society faces in this arena. Study and think about how the health care and health insurance marketplaces work (or in the view of many ordinary consumers, don’t work) in the United States, and note that they are different from each other…a crucial distinction that most of the popular opinion about this law completely misses. I won’t defend the law, because it remains flawed, and my belief is that many of its consequences remain impossible to predict. Its costs are high, but so are the economic costs of doing nothing to address the growing financial inaccessibility of health care, as well as its alarming and costly lapses in quality (ever looked at rates of preventable medical errors, rates of healthcare-acquired infections, and the costs of adverse drug reactions and interactions?) But the law really does not constitute a government takeover of either marketplace, nor has SCOTUS opened the door to permitting the government to compel any individual to do anything. Good grief. I repeat – read the decision. I appreciate your views on hard assets and the financial markets, which are based on far more knowledge and experience than I have in those areas, but I sure hope they are more fully informed by fact than what I see on this thread. How about some alternative solutions and a rational debate about options to improve the health system for all of us in a civil society, rather than nonstop sarcastic criticism?

    • On June 29, 2012 at 9:03 am,
      Dai Uy says:

      Lynn Brown:

      Your position is well articulated. I would like to know how all the parade of horribles that you mention under the existing health care system will be eliminated under Obamcare. My view is that they will only be exacerberated.

      • On June 29, 2012 at 10:28 am,
        Lynn Brown says:

        I do not believe I suggested that that “Obamacare” will solve all the problems in the US health care system. That would be disingenuous. I did say that many of its consequences remain impossible to predict. One example of an approach that I believe will be successful: the law incentivizes new approaches to how primary, secondary and tertiary health services are organized via entities called Accountable Care Organizations, where reduced costs and improved health outcomes are rewarded. The industry could probably do this without such incentives, and a few of the most sophisticated systems already are on that road. I might add that I believe many current quality problems anad some cost problems stem from poor communication and disorganization, because the health care industry is far behind the curve in its use of information technology that is taken for granted in other industries. Do we need federal legislation to fix all that? I do know that the industry hasn’t fixed itself and I can’t identify market incentives for them to do so. Health care (as distinct from health insurance) does not operate as a classic free market and I do not believe it ever will, because consumers do not have the expertise to decide whether or not they really need that MRI or that lab test, or whether the nurse is handing them pills that might do more harm than good. Making purchase decisions that affect whether you live or die, whether you suffer or get well, are, in my view, qualitatively different from those that relate to any other goods or services because there really are no reasonable alternatives to choosing to live or not to feel pain. (I exclude end of life decisions from this analysis, where choosing not to live is a viable option for individual choice — all that nonsense about Obamacare “death panels” was about provisions intended to make sure people have information they need to make their own choices).

        Why do you think that “Obamacare” will increase quality problems? I have noted that “parades of horribles” suggested by the law’s opponents are based on myth, as are some of the advantages touted by its proponents. Much of it is one big experiment, and if implementation moves forward, lessons will be learned and changes will be needed. That is how large systemic change, which takes decades, works. Nobody on the planet – regardless of political belief – is smart enough to get it all right the first time. In industry, the approach is called “continuous quality improvement.” I believe that that is equally applicable to social and political policy. Let me repeat: my call is for reasoned discussion based on accurate information, rather than knee-jerk politics. That may be too much to hope.

        I read this site to learn about hard asset investing, because I am persuaded that there is a compelling macroeconomic case for that approach to managing one’s personal finances. I am contributing only because the discussion turned to an area where I have expertise. What has me puzzled is why interest in hard asset investing and its rationale is so tied to the rigid, angry political beliefs (which I respect, and share in part but not in whole) that I see predominant here. My approach is to look carefully at known information and test my own assumptions continually. I sure hope there is space for that in the hard asset investing world.

        • On June 29, 2012 at 11:05 am,
          Dai Uy says:

          LYNN:

          Once again, your position is well articulated. I happen to believe that basic health care is a basic human right and the present costly Emergency room alternative for those who are uninsured is costly, inneffective and unsustainable.

          Obamacare is now the law of the land and it cannot be fixed and must be repealed and that is why I believe that a new Congress and President is the only rational way to fix the problem hoping that all people of good faith will come up with a solution that provides necessary services without bancrupting our country.

          The abortion provisions are unconsciable.

          And if Romney cannot come up with some viable alternative, then he doesn’t deserve to be elected. Tort reform is absolutely necessary, a position that the Democrats at the behest of the trial attorneys have not nor will they consider.

          I commend you for reading the 27,000 pages of Obamacare; I have not read it but then again Speaker Pelosi said that we would have to read the bill to find out what was in it completely excluding any meaningful contribution from the minority party at the time

          • On June 29, 2012 at 2:04 pm,
            Lynn Brown says:

            Thanks, Dai Uy. I agree with most of what you have said. If we repealed and started from scratch, however, I think that a lot of what is in Obamacare would reemerge in a different guise, because it is less unreasonable and more mainstream than people generally believe. I think the uncertainty that repeal would cause would be more harmful both to the states and to the private sector than the alternative of identifying fixes along the way. A case in point is the CLASS Act (relating to long-term care insurance) part of the bill, which even the Obama HHS is not implementing because everyone recognizes it won’t work as written.

            One thing often forgotten is that it was the Senate bill that was ultimately passed. I can tell you from close observation of that long process (I worked for a nonpartisan special interest at the time and represent none but my own views now) that the Senate GOP had a great deal of meaningful input and compromises were made until the bipartisan approach of the Senate Finance Ctte fell apart, and those compromises were retained in the version the Senate passed. When Sen. Scott Brown (no relation) won in Massachusetts, the Dems had to choose whether to pass a flawed bill (and they knew it was flawed) or none at all. Neither party in the House had any meaningful input to the bill that went to the House floor, the bill that the Senate had already passed, because the House GOP was largely ignored throughout the process and the majority had to swallow hard to accept the Senate bill on which it had had no input.

            Suggesting that no bill at all would have been better is a reasonable view. I think it’s a close call, but upon reflection I don’t share it, because I think that a new law, despite its flaws and potential for unintended consequences, was needed to get the ball rolling to change an unsustainable system. Is this a crazy, irresponsible way to make important policy? Yup. But, practically speaking, I don’t believe we can do any better in the foreseeable future. I don’t believe that a wholly new Congress will be able to compromise or function with any greater effectiveness, no matter who is President, in view of the divisiveness in the electorate. I hope I’m wrong. If there were a solution that didn’t require federal action at all, I’d be all for it, but I can’t think of one.

            Three final points and then I’m done. First, the term “Obamacare”, created to be used derisively, always amuses me, because the Senate had a lot more to do with what’s in it than the President. Members of his own party have criticized the President for being too “hands-off” during the bill drafting process. A more accurate term, in my opinion, would be BaucusKennedyHarkincare. And Grassley, GOP of Iowa, significantly influenced parts of it, notwithstanding his ultimate disavowal when bipartisanship broke down. Second, I don’t think we can know whether Obamacare, or any future Romneycare, for that matter, will break the bank, until many years in the future. We already know that the aging of the population will increase the percentage of GDP we spend on heatlh care unless we succeed in delivering care more efficiently and gaining some savings from disease prevention; testing and implementing ways to do that effectively is a multi-year project. We gotta ramp up that work now, regardless of where political power resides. Finally, don’t give me too much credit — my desk version of the Act is about 2400 pages, not 27,000, with wide margins!

  12. On June 28, 2012 at 4:39 pm,
    Clay says:

    This is how and why Empires fall.

    • On June 28, 2012 at 5:35 pm,
      Ryan says:

      Sadly, Clay, I think you are correct.
      Here is my latest rant on the topic:
      http://ryanpjordan.com/?p=629

      • On June 28, 2012 at 6:13 pm,
        Clay says:

        Ryan: The US is rapidly becoming an abomination to the World, while the world is slowing waking up to this fact. This court decision and the imperial-senate approval before it, is a big step among many towards the complete tyranny of government over the people. This will end badly for everyone living in North America, especially those in the US.

        As soon as the European circus is cancelled and over, with Germany and its northern allies leaving the Latin countries to fight with themselves, the economic world will turn their attention to Japan and the US. This will mark the end of the dollar as world currency, initiating a MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) collapse of the center. The Federal Government will by 2014 confiscate through mandated federal control of all individual retirements, starting first with all tax deferred accounts. They will require a large percentage of these accounts to hold US government debt.

        After that things really get bad.

        • On June 29, 2012 at 11:42 am,
          John W. Robertson says:

          Clay,

          Your commentary was both funny, and also sad. Though as any insane person will tell you, laughing and crying are similar releases.

        • On August 26, 2012 at 11:13 pm,
          Ahmet says:

          Nice read, I just passed this onto a clogealue who was doing some research on that. And he actually bought me lunch as I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that: Thanks for lunch! We have two ears and only one tongue in order that we may hear more and speak less. by Laertius Diogenes.

          • On August 27, 2012 at 1:53 pm,
            Big Al says:

            Hello Ahmet,

            Great comment of yours, “we have two ears and only one tongue”. Words of wisdom, thank you.

            Big Al

  13. On June 29, 2012 at 7:41 am,
    roger wiegand says:

    the markets have been smoothed over until 9-23/9-25 on our forecasts. A -38% to -50% crash appears in the cards on that date or after Obama wins the election. If the smash is after the election it will be in the middle of several lawsuits and the attempted impeachment of the president – Traderrog

    • On June 29, 2012 at 8:31 am,
      Dai Uy says:

      TR:

      I don’t share your view that Obama will be re-elected. See the article I posted above after you opined. The fight has just begun.
      Best wishes.

  14. On June 29, 2012 at 8:41 am,
    Dai Uy says:

    TR:

    Having served with 4 Attorneys General of the United States, I can unequivocally(sp) state that Eric Holder is the most corrupt Attorney General in the history of our country with the possible exception of John Mitchell and this issue is not going away any more than Obamacare

    • On June 29, 2012 at 9:26 am,
      Clay says:

      When the Sheriff becomes a criminal, crime become the law.

      Where are the Magnificent 7 when you need them.

    • On June 29, 2012 at 11:48 am,
      John W. Robertson says:

      Holder claimed (as Mitchell once did) he didn’t know about the guns being sold. I once did a quick costing on the “contract value” of several thousand assault rifles — don’t remember the exact number, but it was in the millions, well out of the control of any regional office’s signing authority. I also seriously have to doubt an AG not being made aware of a plan to give a few thousand semi-autos to what is effectively, your enemy. There are still people FUMING over this in TX and AZ, particularly some folks over at Customs & Border Protection, and I don’t blame them.

      • On June 29, 2012 at 11:49 am,
        John W. Robertson says:

        Well, of course, Mitchell claimed he didn’t know about the plumbers, not about guns….just in case anyone younger than 30 is reading this.

        • On June 29, 2012 at 1:45 pm,
          Dai Uy says:

          John: No one got killed in Mitchell’s cover up or Watergate. Only 3 people can sign off on WireTap applications. The AG and the Assciate AG except the head of the Criminal Division(only when the first 2 are not available).

  15. On June 29, 2012 at 9:51 am,
    Dai Uy says:

    Clay:

    BTW: Joe Biden (as well as Nancy Pelosi) are the gifts that keep on giving. During Obama’s gloating press conference yesterday, Joe forgot that the mike was on as he whispered audibly into the President’s ear: ” This is a Big F_____ Deal ” and he didn’t use the descriptive adjective, “friggin”.

    And now the Dims are actully selling made in America T-Shirts at $30.00 a pop that read ” Obamacare is a B.F.D”.

    • On June 29, 2012 at 12:09 pm,
      John W. Robertson says:

      Boy, we’ve had more open-mike “gaffs” with the Obama admin than the previous 5 admins combined. If one didn’t know it, it almost sounds planned. I’m on record saying they are planned…recall the open-mike whipsers at a couple of EU summits where Obama “didn’t know” a mike was on. Whatever. The T-shirts were probably already printed before Biden said a word.

      • On June 29, 2012 at 12:15 pm,
        John W. Robertson says:

        Oh, just in case it slipped anyone’s mind, election day is 132 days away. Perfect timing for a nice t-shirt “grass roots” campaign, using a succinct, memorable buzz-word (acronym), complete with vulgar expressionism to incite a bit of energy. Seriously folks, the problem with political advisors is they’re all read the same book. The techniques are all so obvious after a while.

        This was planned.

    • On June 29, 2012 at 2:08 pm,
      Lynn Brown says:

      I do believe the B.F.D. incident occurred when Congress passed the bill, not yesterday.

      • On June 29, 2012 at 3:12 pm,
        Dai Uy says:

        Lynn:

        You are correct; I stand corrected.

        The BFD Tshirts are currently being printed and distributed.

        The