Rand Paul/Peter Schiff for President in 2012/2016?

[JMapleton]

1. Schiff predicted the utter collapse of the dollar, but waffled on when. Obviously the dollar hasn't collapsed, his prediction was wrong and stupid.

You cannot predict a day for someone very long term like that. It will happen and most likely within the next 10 years. Major economic events like this cannot be predicted by anyone with date-time accuracy.

2. Schiff predicted gold at thousands of dollars, yet again with no timeline, and he's still wrong.

Completely idiotic statement. It's not going to thousands of dollars overnight and has been consistently increasing over the past 2 years, isn't that an obvious clue Schiff is right? Gold will be 1400 by years end most likely.

3. International stocks have recovered barely above US stocks. Over a 10-year horizon, US stocks *STILL* beat international stocks, despite the wild ride. Schiff fails again.

Absolutely incorrect.
http://www.moneypeek.com/2009/10/cnbc-peter-schiff-about-us-market-vs.html

Foreign markets have recovered far better than US markets. Look up the charts from the past year, almost all Asian markets have recovered faster than US markets and GDP growth is Asian is far outpacing that in the US.

The US market is fueled by the printing of money, while foreign markets are fueled by actual economic growth.

4. Schiff and Rogers predicted something even more asinine than the first 3, a decoupling of the US economy from the world. Not only was this assumption flat-out wrong, but ludicrous at the same time.

Incorrect again. Asian markets are faring far better with lowering unemployment in China because of the Chinese government's wise spending projects, which they have saved up for, and Asian GDP is improving far faster:
http://247wallst.com/2010/02/01/china-growth-trumps-arms-dispute/

Decoupling is not something that is going to be noticeable at the moment, the US is still running relatively strong. When our economic finally collapses, which will happen when China slow begins to float their currency, decoupling will be a major issue.

Again, you either highly uneducated towards economic issues or you are purposely playing dumb to make your arguments appear viable.

5. Schiff (and Rogers) failed to protect his own clients from his own stupid viewpoints. The very fact that points 1-4 show he was wrong, only highlight how foolish he is in his objectivity of outlooks. He is an absolutist without timeline, and thus, like you and your ilk, fail to consider all possibilities and the probability of those possibilities. Schiff's main hiding point was that he is not a money manager, merely a broker. However, he gives out investment advice and does it quite poorly. He has clients, those people pay him money to "broker" investments and give investment advice. He has given quite poor advice.

Over the past 10 years, his clients have far extremely well for themselves and over the next 10 years I expect even better things.

Furthermore, Jim Rogers has no clients, but manages his own billion dollar portfolio, which alone gives more credibility than you or anyone else on an internet message board.

Hey OP, do you want to send me your investment performance using GIPS compliant presentations? I'd love to see how great (shitty) you've done.

Because I discuss financial issues online as personal opinions, I do not discuss my qualifications or the status of my professional licenses. I do not, nor have I ever worked for a firm other than myself as I consider most people who do so to be lacking in any real knowledge of the market. Last thing I need is a cubicle dweller giving me armchair advise when I know personally of my own successes. Everything is my personal opinion and has no reflection of my professional status.

Until you can show your personal net worth of over a billion dollars like Jim Rogers, you have no right to tout your own credentials as an obvious 8 to 5 cubicle dweller. In fact, tell me the last time you've even spoken to a billionaire (let alone have the credentials of one). For me it's been about 4 days.

 

[totalnoob]

I did well following Schiff's advice to buy gold & silver 5 years ago.

 

[bamacre]

JMapleton,

You're not going to change any minds here. Especially LegendKiller's, him being a VP of a financial institution.

 

[Moonbeam]

JMapleton,

You're not going to change any minds here. Especially LegendKiller's, him being a VP of a financial institution.

Yup, it gets especially difficult when somebody knows something.

 

[dmcowen674]

The above statement is from a person who claims to have additional portfolios invested with Schiff over the past 2 years. In total (not just this portfolio), my contact says he invested $70,000 and is now down to $27,000. That is a loss of 61%.

I have talked with another person who claims to be down 72%, and many others who claim 40% or more. http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html

<Burns>

Excellent

<Burns off>

 

[halik]

How's US gov't printing money again?

Also I don't quite understand the mechanics of "decoupling" when china starts to float the Yuan. They'll do that by stopping the purchases of US debt (not by dumping what they own) and let it float above the managed bands.

US is not even in the top 10 in terms of debt/gdp and are in the middle in terms of G8 countries... this sort of fearmongering is just nonsense; if there was any truth to it, you'd see it in treasury CDSs.

Finally I'm not quite sure what "talking to a billionaire" has to do with anything; but for what it's worth I work on a team that manages a 11fig institutional portfolio.

 

[LegendKiller]

You cannot predict a day for someone very long term like that. It will happen and most likely within the next 10 years. Major economic events like this cannot be predicted by anyone with date-time accuracy.

This wasn't a "day" or a week, it was years worth of advice that were shit.

Completely idiotic statement. It's not going to thousands of dollars overnight and has been consistently increasing over the past 2 years, isn't that an obvious clue Schiff is right? Gold will be 1400 by years end most likely.

I'll bookmark this. I firmly believe you're wrong on several levels. Just because it's increased over the last 2 years isn't indicative of anything, but of course, only a rear-view mirror tool like you would think that the past is a even a mediocre predictor of the future.

Absolutely incorrect.
http://www.moneypeek.com/2009/10/cnbc-peter-schiff-about-us-market-vs.html

Not "absolutely" he hedged many times.

Foreign markets have recovered far better than US markets. Look up the charts from the past year, almost all Asian markets have recovered faster than US markets and GDP growth is Asian is far outpacing that in the US.

The US market is fueled by the printing of money, while foreign markets are fueled by actual economic growth.

Incorrect again. Asian markets are faring far better with lowering unemployment in China because of the Chinese government's wise spending projects, which they have saved up for, and Asian GDP is improving far faster:
http://247wallst.com/2010/02/01/china-growth-trumps-arms-dispute/

China has pumped far more into their economy, as a % of GDP, than any other country in the world. The loan volume is ridiculous, as is the "projects" they "invested" in. China's a black hole, investors shouldn't invest in black holes. Why? Because it's risk and should be discounted appropriately. Of course, trend followers, such as yourself, only invest because others are, not because the fundamentals advise it.

All of the Asian economies are still, and will remain, highly dependent on western businesses and consumers. China's nothing more than the west's sweatshop. Without it, it'd be an 19th century shithole.

Decoupling is not something that is going to be noticeable at the moment, the US is still running relatively strong. When our economic finally collapses, which will happen when China slow begins to float their currency, decoupling will be a major issue.

The mirage of decoupling is akin to the "new paradigm" bullshit that's been spewed for years by "investors" who are lazy and refuse to see the truth. When China's economy finally collapses, you'll be where? Ohh yeah, on your high-speed trading platform out way before the collapse, right?

Again, you either highly uneducated towards economic issues or you are purposely playing dumb to make your arguments appear viable.

Yeah, I'm "uneducated". Bitch, please, my dickhair has forgotten more "education" than you'll ever know. I've been right about every single economic factor thus far. That isn't an indication of anything at all, but it's far better than Schiff's record (dollar collapse,ARGH!)

Over the past 10 years, his clients have far extremely well for themselves and over the next 10 years I expect even better things.

Furthermore, Jim Rogers has no clients, but manages his own billion dollar portfolio, which alone gives more credibility than you or anyone else on an internet message board.

Just how well? Nobody knows. We saw one statement where they did far worse than benchmarks. Thus, it's easy to say they are "doing well" but is it really that well? If you were as smart as you say you are, you'd know that's a logic trap.

Because I discuss financial issues online as personal opinions, I do not discuss my qualifications or the status of my professional licenses. I do not, nor have I ever worked for a firm other than myself as I consider most people who do so to be lacking in any real knowledge of the market. Last thing I need is a cubicle dweller giving me armchair advise when I know personally of my own successes. Everything is my personal opinion and has no reflection of my professional status.

Until you can show your personal net worth of over a billion dollars like Jim Rogers, you have no right to tout your own credentials as an obvious 8 to 5 cubicle dweller. In fact, tell me the last time you've even spoken to a billionaire (let alone have the credentials of one). For me it's been about 4 days.

Blah blah blah. You escape the question by deflecting. Overall, you've got nothing at all. There was another toolbag like you on OT, I bitchslapped him in the Marketocracy "game" and he stopped playing. In fact, I bitchslapped everybody, it wasn't hard, and it mirrored my own portfolio.

Yeah yeah yeah, keep your anti-establishment jealousy. Overall, you wouldn't make it on the 'Street.

Wow, you deal with clients worth billions? So do I! In fact, my address book has dozens of Fortune 100 clients that I've financed, with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of financing, over the last decade.

Wow, go eat a dick, nobody cares about your "billion dollar men".

 

[LegendKiller]

JMapleton,

You're not going to change any minds here. Especially LegendKiller's, him being a VP of a financial institution.

Yeah, as opposed to your YouTube University Education, who would ever listen to somebody who has legitimate degrees, certifications, and work experience.

What do you do again, janitor?

 

[First]

Schiff has been discussed ad-nausuem and has been debunked ad-nauseum. Something I wrote a little while ago updated as of today, 2/4/2010:

Peter Schiff&#8217;s Monstrously Inaccurate Predictions; 2002-2010

Schiff says by 2011 the dollar will fall 50&#37;, 60%, or 70%. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0YNCSFzKBY&feature=related

Reality: It has in fact gained slightly in strength since that date

Article: Unlike the "legitimate bull markets" of many foreign markets, Peter Schiff believes the U.S. is merely experiencing a "rally in a bear market," and is lagging the rest of the world "for a reason." The worst is not over, according to Euro Pacific Capital's Schiff, who predicts the Dow will fall another 90% from current levels when measured against gold. A longtime dollar bear and gold bull, he foresees gold hitting $5000 per ounce "in the next couple of years," and predicts the Dow and gold will trade on a one-to-one ratio vs. the current level of around 9.7-to-1. Schiff believes gold is currently "climbing a wall of worry" but will eventually become as hot as tech stocks in 1999 and start moving up $100 per day. - http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/342802/Peter-Schiff-U.S.-Rally-Is-Doomed-Gold-Will-Hit-5000?tickers=^DJI,GLD,EPHCX,FXI,EEM,GDX,^GSPC

Reality: None of what he has said here has come true or is coming true currently with the dollar at $1.38 against the Euro and $1.57 against the pound.

Schiff claims that the FHA will need a bailout because it only has $30B in reserves and $1T in assets on its sheet - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZi7uquwZKQ&feature=channel

Reality: As of yet undetermined. But what's funny is that Schiff completely fails to explain why his theory that the world will decouple from the U.S. hasn&#8217;t happened at all despite his predictions it would happen the prior 2 years; i.e. cannot explain how the global economy collapsed worse than the U.S. in 08 and 09. Even admits that his &#8220;accounts went down along with the rest of the market in 2008", yet doesn&#8217;t see the contradiction in that statement since he consistently claims he predicted the economic collapse. How can you predict something as an investor yet not make money from it?!?!

&#8220;We can see double digit inflation over the next 2-3 years&#8221;. &#8211; Peter Schiff 08/2009

Reality: undetermined 6 months in, but on pace to be hilariously wrong.

&#8220;We&#8217;ve been in a bear market since 2000&#8221;. &#8211; Peter Schiff 08/2009 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWu6TJ84k7U&feature=related

Reality: factually incorrect based on the definition of a bear market.

&#8220;Gold will end the year [2009] at $2000/ounce&#8221;. &#8211; Peter Schiff 01/2008

Reality: off by 80%.

&#8220;The dollar&#8217;s not going to make a comeback, I don&#8217;t care how much they talk it up. It&#8217;s impossible for the dollar to make a comback. You might as well ask me if pigs sprout wings can they fly. The dollar&#8217;s not going to go up&#8221;. &#8211; Peter Schiff in 01/2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-Id1_BlkME

Reality: dollar was ~ $1.48 against the Euro at the time he said this, and as of today (2/4/10) it's at $1.38 against the Euro, or ~7% stronger.

Talked about how &#8220;market extremely over-valued&#8221; as long ago as 05/02. -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCv32qaINIQ

&#8220;You know, what he&#8217;s [Obama] talking about, that the recession is going to linger for years, he&#8217;s right, it&#8217;s going to linger for maybe a decade, and it&#8217;s going to be a depression&#8221;. &#8211; Peter Schiff 01/09

&#8220;The only thing that&#8217;s going to save this economy is less government&#8221;. &#8211; Peter Schiff 01/09 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4v5x932cNE&feature=related

 

[First]

Overall, dude is a riot and hasn't made any more money than any other average brokerage that shorts stocks or has been long on commodities for a good few years now. Which means little since he completely missed out on the strength of the dollar over the past 3 years, as in he got it monstrously wrong. Not even close actually, since the dollar went the entire opposite direction.

 

[JMapleton]

Blah blah blah. You escape the question by deflecting. Overall, you've got nothing at all. There was another toolbag like you on OT, I bitchslapped him in the Marketocracy "game" and he stopped playing. In fact, I bitchslapped everybody, it wasn't hard, and it mirrored my own portfolio.

Well you've got me there, I really don't know how to respond. Your comments are so ridiculous and childish I can only picture you as nothing more than a wannabe "internet toughguy". Your post is almost funny. "I beat a guy at fake online trading." Wow, I'm speechless. You just try way to hard dude.

 

[First]

Well you've got me there, I really don't know how to respond. Your comments are so ridiculous and childish I can only picture you as nothing more than a wannabe "internet toughguy". Your post is almost funny. "I beat a guy at fake online trading." Wow, I'm speechless. You just try way to hard dude.

Yeah except he's also right.

 

[juiio]

“The dollar’s not going to make a comeback, I don’t care how much they talk it up. It’s impossible for the dollar to make a comback. You might as well ask me if pigs sprout wings can they fly. The dollar’s not going to go up”. – Peter Schiff in 01/2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-Id1_BlkME

Reality: dollar was ~ $1.48 against the Euro at the time he said this, and as of today (2/4/10) it's at $1.38 against the Euro, or ~7% stronger.

Cherry-picking one currency isn't a sign of a comeback. Of course the dollar has gained against the Euro; the Euro is in even worse shape than the dollar. The pound is in as bad of shape as the dollar. If you cherry-pick another currency, such as the Chinese Yuan, the dollar is down in that timeframe. Given his beliefs, Schiff is obviously referring to the dollar relative to the price of gold, not to a specific currency.

 

[First]

Cherry-picking one currency isn't a sign of a comeback. Of course the dollar has gained against the Euro; the Euro is in even worse shape than the dollar. The pound is in as bad of shape as the dollar. If you cherry-pick another currency, such as the Chinese Yuan, the dollar is down in that timeframe. Given his beliefs, Schiff is obviously referring to the dollar relative to the price of gold, not to a specific currency.

How the dollar does relative to gold is directly tied to how well it does against other currencies so your point is both moot and nonsensical since we know that generally gold is used as a hedge against inflation and that it's not likely to precipitously rise if the dollar gains in strength. Not to mention Schiff has never in fact said the dollar would collapse relative to gold but has specifically mentioned time and again that the dollar would collapse relative to other currencies. He has been dead wrong about it against two of the biggest currencies in the world (Euro and pound). And I can only guess that you were joking with that yuan comment as pretty much anyone who follows the yuan knows exactly why its exchange rate paces the way it does with the dollar.

 

[LegendKiller]

Well you've got me there, I really don't know how to respond. Your comments are so ridiculous and childish I can only picture you as nothing more than a wannabe "internet toughguy". Your post is almost funny. "I beat a guy at fake online trading." Wow, I'm speechless. You just try way to hard dude.

Except people can actually see my performance. If I were merely talking the talk, and poorly, that'd be different. Yet, somehow, like the rest of the Ron Paul Bots (RPBs), you can't counter me either, despite your "internet toughguy" approach (without backup).

I countered you on your stupid charting, you came back about hedge funds, I countered that, and you reverted back to "I'm way cooler than a cube guy" , I countered that and you came back with "Lookey here, son, I'm a baddass day trader, I eat banks for lunch and shit them out for dinner, I have way more money than you". You did the same thing here with your "Lookey here, son, I know billionaires".

Now who's acting like the "internet toughguy"? Seems to me you're the one trying way too hard to act joe-cool. That's OK though, you live in Ohio or some other flyover state, you've seen "the shit".

 

[JMapleton]

That's OK though, you live in Ohio or some other flyover state, you've seen "the shit".

Save your energy for some one who cares, lol.

Btw, I live in the wealthiest city in the United States based on per capita billionaires and millionaires.

 

[LegendKiller]

Save your energy for some one who cares, lol.

Btw, I live in the wealthiest city in the United States based on per capita billionaires and millionaires.

Dude, you get it yet? I'm not impressed by your supposed BSD status. You just aren't showing anything impressive and all you have is your supposed street cred, which you refuse to show.

Wow, more billionaires, ROFL.

 

[Dissipate]

Yeah, as opposed to your YouTube University Education, who would ever listen to somebody who has legitimate degrees, certifications, and work experience.

What do you do again, janitor?

How many advisors and investors with education equal to or better than your own got caught with their pants down, and lost billions? Also, if education isn't the sole factor determining success, what qualities do you possess differentiating yourself from your colleagues who failed?

 

[LegendKiller]

How many advisors and investors with education equal to or better than your own got caught with their pants down, and lost billions? Also, if education isn't the sole factor determining success, what qualities do you possess differentiating yourself from your colleagues who failed?

It is a generally well-known fact that higher, and more, education is highly correlated with intelligence. Thus, those who are more educated will be more intelligent. YouTube educations notwithstanding, considering the vast amount of patently false information out there.

Furthermore, theoretical application of knowledge, such as economics, rarely applies to the "real world". Thus, Austrian economics, which has even less validity than most schools (considering it is more qualitative than quantitative, and the qualitative side utterly dismisses human behavior), is even less applicable than most.

As far as those who failed, they are culled just like any other market whereby poor performance eliminates one from the pool. Bad ideas eventually come crashing down, which is why I lend very little credence to people such as Milken or Blodgett these days. I've survived thus far in a very challenging environment and my ideas are reasonably good, good enough I've been kept around. As far as my personal investing, I've done very well, but I can't attribute it to more than luck with some smidgen of skill. I don't go out of my way to pretend I'm the next Seth Klarmann, with some magical viewpoint. I just do my own thing.

What differentiates me from my peers? Personally, I see it as a well-rounded education and experience level, something many of my peers lack. I manage money for my institution and do it reasonably well.

It's one reason why I'm not impressed with the OP. Wow, he knows people who have "billions". Big fucking deal.

His whole chartist mentality is a fucking joke. He touts his rearview mirror bullshit, both here and in the OT stock forum, yet refuses to reveal performance. He rearviews the RMBS downturn, "knowing" the market was over-valued. Yet, he didn't say why, or how, the recent downturn was triggered. Did he know the jobs number was going to be worse than almost all of the major economists? Did he know that the PIIGS would finally cause a ton of worry last week, to the day? Does he know when the RMBS cases will be settled?

No, he picks and chooses bullshit points in time where he is right. Big fucking deal, any money manager can back-date performance for when they are right, it's a basic tenant of financial management that's taught in any masters-level classes, or even statistical studies. By and large, he fails, as does most money managers.

Then, his only recourse is to point out how hedge funds and banks make tons of money trading technicals. Yet he forgets to rationalize those results, failing to admit the high-speed systems that they have access to can front-run millions of trades, especially those put through their own brokerage systems. He forgets to mention sub-pennying, short-sale repo bullets, or other gimmickry used by banks and hedge funds to fuck investors, all strategies a day-trader does not have access to.

Yet I'm supposed to believe he's some BSD money manager, when all he can do is present stupid arguments and "billionaire" dropping? ROFL, get a fucking clue.

 

[Dissipate]

It is a generally well-known fact that higher, and more, education is highly correlated with intelligence. Thus, those who are more educated will be more intelligent. YouTube educations notwithstanding, considering the vast amount of patently false information out there.

Furthermore, theoretical application of knowledge, such as economics, rarely applies to the "real world". Thus, Austrian economics, which has even less validity than most schools (considering it is more qualitative than quantitative, and the qualitative side utterly dismisses human behavior), is even less applicable than most.

As far as those who failed, they are culled just like any other market whereby poor performance eliminates one from the pool. Bad ideas eventually come crashing down, which is why I lend very little credence to people such as Milken or Blodgett these days. I've survived thus far in a very challenging environment and my ideas are reasonably good, good enough I've been kept around. As far as my personal investing, I've done very well, but I can't attribute it to more than luck with some smidgen of skill. I don't go out of my way to pretend I'm the next Seth Klarmann, with some magical viewpoint. I just do my own thing.

I disagree about poor performance eliminating one from the pool. That certainly could be the case for small time individual investors, but it appears that once one becomes a certain size, one can leverage political mechanisms to stay in business after performing very badly.

In the grand scheme of things bad ideas do come crashing down, eventually. Personally, I think that mass franchise democracy is a very very bad idea. The macro data seems to suggest that on the current course, it will come crashing down. Could that course change for the upside? Possibly, but very unlikely. Every single election for a couple hundred years has produced very similar results: war and welfare leading to large quantities of debt, with absolutely no change in this course visible on the horizon. Short of a technological marvel I don't see a way out of even worse times all around.

If I were an institutional investor with access to experts and large software systems to aide my investment strategy I might see short term opportunities in passive investments such as the stock market, but I am not. As a relatively minuscule investor, it appears my best shot would be to invest in broad indexes that track the overall market. However, because of the problems mentioned above, and systemic risk, I do not see long term investing in broad indexes as a viable strategy for my financial future.

What differentiates me from my peers? Personally, I see it as a well-rounded education and experience level, something many of my peers lack. I manage money for my institution and do it reasonably well.

What do you define as 'reasonably well?' What would you estimate your risk adjusted performance to be so far?

It's one reason why I'm not impressed with the OP. Wow, he knows people who have "billions". Big fucking deal.

His whole chartist mentality is a fucking joke. He touts his rearview mirror bullshit, both here and in the OT stock forum, yet refuses to reveal performance. He rearviews the RMBS downturn, "knowing" the market was over-valued. Yet, he didn't say why, or how, the recent downturn was triggered. Did he know the jobs number was going to be worse than almost all of the major economists? Did he know that the PIIGS would finally cause a ton of worry last week, to the day? Does he know when the RMBS cases will be settled?

No, he picks and chooses bullshit points in time where he is right. Big fucking deal, any money manager can back-date performance for when they are right, it's a basic tenant of financial management that's taught in any masters-level classes, or even statistical studies. By and large, he fails, as does most money managers.

Then, his only recourse is to point out how hedge funds and banks make tons of money trading technicals. Yet he forgets to rationalize those results, failing to admit the high-speed systems that they have access to can front-run millions of trades, especially those put through their own brokerage systems. He forgets to mention sub-pennying, short-sale repo bullets, or other gimmickry used by banks and hedge funds to fuck investors, all strategies a day-trader does not have access to.

Yet I'm supposed to believe he's some BSD money manager, when all he can do is present stupid arguments and "billionaire" dropping? ROFL, get a fucking clue.

I think political activist 'libertarians' are a joke as well. As far as billionaires go, there is one billionaire who is planning on building floating countries outside the purview of national governments: PayPal cofounder Peter Thiel: http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/the-education-of-a-libertarian/. What is your opinion of this billionaire's plan?