Mmarrkk

Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
comments259
  • Positive ratings +3
  • Negative ratings -3
  • Net rating 0 or 50 %
Filter comments by:
Highest rated Latest comments
Or filter by symbol:

Latest Comments
259 Comments

    • Wed Nov 19th 11:00 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Buffett Increases Stake in COP - Smart Move!
      Or maybe Ireland, where taxes are also low but workforce is educated??? Guess you forgot to add them to your list!

      Bottom line: US business taxes are some of the highest in the world. And they are continually changing and tied up in a garbled mess we call a tax code. Maybe that's the problem...its a code. Why not decode it and make it simple...flat tax or fair tax?


      On Nov 18 03:34 PM Chris B wrote:

      > "He [Buffet] realizes that he can make more money being taxed higher
      > in a functioning economy/currency than he can make being taxed lower
      > in an unstable, inflation-riddled economy/currency."...
      >
      > If anyone disagrees with this statement, I recommend you try starting
      > your business empire in some low-tax, low-regulation capitalist utopia
      > like Hati, Afghanistan, or Somalia, where the taxes are zero and
      > you'll get virtually no government interference. Of course, none
      > of your employees will be literate or healthy, transportation and
      > communication will be near impossible, and you'll have to pay bribes
      > to the local gang, but just imagine - no taxes! You'll quickly find
      > that capitalism can't work without a competent, honest government
      > providing the framework: laws, courts, regulation, enforcement, education,
      > infrastructure, health and sanitation, etc.
      View article »
    • Wed Nov 19th 10:56 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Buffett Increases Stake in COP - Smart Move!
      Fitz: Spending - didn't I say in my previous post that Bush has spent way too much? I liked the tax cuts and still do but tax cuts with increased spending is a disaster. That was one of my points. We seem to agree on the spending portion of that...it has been out of control during Bush. My fear is it will still be out of control during O. Also totally agree that GW is not what I would call a conservative, particularly when it comes to spending and immigration. So we agree there. Facists? uhhh maybe not. But I'll let you call him a fascist if I get to call Obama a socialist...maybe a marxist but we'll see. His words say socialist so I'll stay there for now.

      How much damage can Bush do before leaving office? Looks like its Congress that wants to keep handing out the lollipops. I hope we shut down the candy jar now. Take the remaining $350 B that isn't being used in TARP and the $25 B that the UAW wants via GM, and all of the rest and put it in a lock box tighter than you know what. If we are going to do a stimulus, lets do it with infrastructure projects that will yield, as you say, something to show for it. First up: improved natural gas distribution system. Second: natural gas retail outlets and car conversions. Third: highways/bridges. Fourth: improved rail systems to take trucks off the road and put them on trains. Last/Never: free welfare checks called "stimulus checks". These do nothing.

      With my differences on spending, immigration, etc., I still like GW but I'm not connected to the point where I get anything from him or his actions. Still like the man and still not against the war on terror. No attacks since 9-11...I'll go with that. And I hope that after 4 years of O, I can still say that! In fact, I'd like to be saying that 50 years from now no matter who's in charge.
      View article »
    • Tue Nov 18th 10:47 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Buffett Increases Stake in COP - Smart Move!
      Fitz: man, you're going to pull me into a political argument!! Guess Wiz did that earlier! Bottom line: I believe Bush's tax cuts worked...check out the rise in gov't revenues. What didn't work was Bush's spending ! Tax cuts without spending cuts is a disaster and I'll be the first to admit we failed miserably. But everyone wants to blame it on the tax cuts. Why not blame it on the spending. OUR GOVERNMENT SPENDS TOO MUCH MONEY! Hi, I'm Uncle Sam and I'm a spendaholic! And Obama is going to make that problem much much worse. So far, I've run out of fingers, toes, arms, legs and other appendages to count on for all of the promises of money/give aways he's promised to individual groups. Some of which I belong to, others I don't.

      I really think Joe the Plumber fully understand the O plan. While his taxes might go down in the short term, Old Joe the Plumber was looking further out to a point where he would be successful and make more than the $250k a year. That's when O would start to , you know, spread it around! I love it when he says that 95% of the folks making less than 250k/year would get a tax cut. Hell, a huge portion of that 95% don't pay taxes. So I guess that means welfare checks! Oyyy.

      The good news?? With the economic condititions as they are, he's going to have a tough time to pull off any of these plans. Raise taxes during times like these?? 1929 will seem like a cake walk. I just hope my rich relatives can time their deaths to the year where we have a 0% death tax. Cuz after that, its back to , you know, spreading it around.

      Cut spending, cut more and then cut even more. Start with congressional salaries...a pittance I know but sure would make a lot of people happy! Cut the waste. Cut the gov't bailouts!! Particularly to the UAW, I mean the Big 3 automakers. That pig shouldn't fly!
      View article »
    • Tue Nov 18th 10:32 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Chesapeake Energy Continues to Shore Up Its Balance Sheet
      We've come a long way when an oil/natural gas company is called "green"!! Thanks buyforeclosures. You've added a new level to those I'll pay no attention to!
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 17:21 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?
      great debate. Here's where I see the problem:

      GM and others are making more cars than they can sell. Many more. So how do you fix that? Stop making so dang blasted many cars!!!! Or make cars that you can sell. Or some combination of the above.

      Step one: shut down all plants for at least 1 month. Sorry, you lose the paycheck but its better than the alternative.

      Step two: pre-packaged bankruptcy allowing for protection of consumer warranties and re-opening of labor contracts.

      Step three: simulataneous reductions on proportionate scale in executive management salaries

      Step four: massive reductions in capacity. Shutter about 1/3 of the factories. Sorry, we just can't support that many dang blasted cars/trucks being built right now.

      Step five: research fuel efficient/zero emission cars. re-open some factories when these are ready.

      Step six: Figure out why Toyota, Honda, Hyundai (for gosh sakes!!) and others are kicking our butts!
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 16:54 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Pickens Plan Changes Its Strategy
      Thanks for the education on smale scale LNG. Looked at a few of the links. I'm guessing the LNG idea would be feasible for larger transport needs but on an individual car basis, might be a bit costly. But I don't know. My experience is working with 500 MMCF/day plants that cost $6 billion, not things on this scale.

      I think some of the issues expressed really are an issue of short vs long term goals and how we transition from one to the other. Getting rid of coal fired plants isn't going to happen in the next 5-10 years. Sorry, it just can't. The U.S. economy won't be able to handle it and that was true before this little depression/big recession hit us. Long term, yes we can move from coal if we are willing to accept the additional costs. Maybe we can ship our coal to other countries?? Or convert it to some other fuel that is more acceptable to our climate change/global warming/global freezing friends. Trying to be all inclusive as over the last 30 years I've seen concerns over too cold and too hot. Stop trying to keep up. Its going to be too something and we are to blame I guess.

      Jack: from a security standpoint I don't have the same concern. One can do the same amount of damage with some of the rogue nuke material floating around the world. Just put the regas terminals in remote areas. LNG terminals are built all over the world. We in the U.S. are starting to lag the rest of the world when it comes to this source/supply. The Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Australians, Qatari's, Spanish, Italians, Dutch, Germans, etc. all seem to have incoroporated LNG into their energy supply chains. Why not us?
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 16:41 PM
      |
      Rating: +1 -1
      Commented on:
      Buffett Increases Stake in COP - Smart Move!
      Old Wiz: Your third point is very significant to me. If, in fact, Warren is paying the 15% rate and running around telling everyone that "we" should be paying more taxes, than I also have issues with his less than honest approach. As a billionaire, he's more than welcome to "donate" more of his money to the US Treasury to help our nation. But telling others that we should be happy to accept a marginal rate increase to beyond 35% while he's paying much less, is simply dishonest. I lost a lot of respect for him when he came out backing Obama while there were other viable candidates that I felt were better for the economy and the nation. One could argue the O vs McC choice as I don't think either were very good choices, but well earlier when there were better economic minds still in the race, he went with O. I still like some of his picks when it comes to stocks and I wish I could get a deal like the one he negotiated out of GE!! Just wish he'd stick to investing and not tax policy and politics. Also wish his big buys in COP would yield big up's in the stock. Time will tell.
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 15:52 PM
      |
      Rating: +1 0
      Commented on:
      The Biggest Problem Detroit's Big Three Face
      Turi: we are traitors? Could you glance at your computer and tell me what brand it is? And could you tell me where it was made? Not assembled, but where all the parts/components were made?? My guess is that it probably has a large portion of foreign content.

      Toyota, Hyundai, etc. all have factories here in the US hiring red-blooded American workers. Many of them, however, are priveledged to not be union members and hence their advantage over the Big (little) 3 automakers. Pensions, healthcare, restrictions on how to work, who can work, etc., all come at a cost, either financial or quality. But if my Hyundai was built in Alabama, why am I a traitor for buying it? Sure weren't a bunch of Koreans building it there in Alabama, that I can tell you!

      Heard the other day one Congressman from Alabama who said "We in the US don't have an automobile makers crisis, we have a GM, Ford and Chrysler and UAW crisis. We have factories in Alabama that are doing real well!". Telling.
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 12:13 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Biggest Problem Detroit's Big Three Face
      1. Use pre-arranged Bankruptcy with protections for warranties of existing and new cars. Quite simple actually.

      2. Said pre-arranged BK will also allow union contracts to be torn up and start negotiating from scratch. Start with the Toyota US plants' contracts as a start point.

      3. 1 month furlough for all plants for any company with a 3-month inventory overhang.

      Problem: too many cars/trucks being built for too much cost and no one wants to buy them. Solution: it sure isn't give them $25 billion to build more of them so they have a 12-month inventory!!
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 12:02 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Consider 'Pull' Rather Than 'Push' for the Auto Industry
      I like the idea of a tax credit for US built cars, but do you realize that many cars built here are built by Toyota, Hyundai, Nissan, etc.?? And these aren't the companies holding out their hands for freebies! They are profitable and make a product in demand. So, do buyers of these cars get the tax credits? Or will our "friends" on the Left demand that the credits only go to cars built by UNION-TAXED makers like GM, Ford and Chrysler? To be honest, the biggest difference between the Big 3 and their foreign competitors are the Unions. But we don't want to mess with that do we? Why is it someone pays $72/hour and cannot seem to turn a profit while someone else pays $48/hour and sells twice as many vehicles??? Hmmmmmmmmm.

      Condition the bail out on a pre-packaged bankruptcy that protects warranties for consumers and tears up the old and new union contracts and starts over again. If the unions don't want to bargain, let them join the other millions of folks going on unemployment! Believe me, a couple of weeks eating spam and they will be aching for those $48/hour jobs! Or they can work like average Americans for a lot less!
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 11:38 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 -1
      Commented on:
      Buffett Increases Stake in COP - Smart Move!
      Fitz: again we agree on something!! as usual, our agreements center around oil/gas winners! Maybe we should stick to that versus our normal political debate! I love COP!

      Lukoil was a great investment and will continue to make money for years to come IMHO. Risk? yes but no more than investing in some states within the U.S. where taxes seem to change on a monthly basis. Or where a windfall profits tax seems to roll off the tongues of many! Oh oh, getting close to politics! I'll close.

      Go COP, Go CNG for cars/trucks, Go Nukes! And go Red Raiders! Guns Up!
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 11:32 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Pickens Plan Changes Its Strategy
      Please be careful with the use of LNG when discussing transportation fuels. The more generally accepted use of the term "LNG" is liquified natural gas which is what is used to transport natural gas around the world. It involves extreme temperatures/pressures and would not be a viable alternative for any transportation need.

      Are you trying to say "LPG"? Liquified Propane Gas? Like we use for our B-B-Q pits??
      View article »
    • Mon Nov 17th 11:25 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Chesapeake Energy Continues to Shore Up Its Balance Sheet
      Great summary. Now its time for the obligatory "CHK has too much debt" and "CHK is going out of business" that generally follow any article concerning CHK. Of course, none of those posters can ever really tell you what level the debt is, when its due, what the loan covenants involve and what triggers them, etc. Not to mention that most of CHK's gas is still selling for north of $9 vs current market prices of $6.50.

      Be patient, bide your time. This stock will go back up faster than the market ever will. Or, would you prefer to buy some GM or AIG??
      View article »
    • Fri Nov 14th 09:44 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Chesapeake Energy Unlikely To Remain this Cheap
      They don't show something below $5 because that scenario is just a 1% probability. Gas prices below $5 will not support all the drilling that is going on. So when prices drop that low, everyone shuts in their drilling rigs and stop spending money. With 2 months, the impact on production will be felt. Within 6 months, gas production will not meet even tepid demand brought on by our mini-depression/recess... When we don't produce enough gas to meet demand, what happens to the price of gas?? Yup...it goes up...quickly. Within 6 months of gas hitting below $5, it will rocket back up to at least $7 and probably more.


      On Nov 12 04:46 PM BrotherMaynard wrote:

      > come to think of it....here's the most recent presentation from their
      > site (10/14, analyst day...its a big file, like 12mb just to warn
      > you): media.corporate-ir.net...
      >
      >
      > Go to page 3.
      >
      > Look at NAV with a $5 nat gas scenario...$29 pershare (a lot higher
      > than today, obviously). However, notice the difference between NAV
      > at $6 and NAV at $5 (or the second derivative of change)...its a
      > 37% drop. The drop is the same from $7 to $6. Yet from $8 to $7 it
      > was only a 25% change...so the lower the prices go, the faster the
      > NAV falls. If nat gas hits $4 will NAV be worth maybe, 50% less?
      > Who knows...they, for whatever reason, won't show us.
      View article »
    • Thu Nov 13th 11:45 AM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Shell Boosts Renewable Energy Spending: Will Big Oil Really Go Green?
      Imagine...and OIL and GAS company spending 95-98% of its money on OIL and GAS projects/production?? The horror. They are OIL and GAS companies and should focus on OIL and GAS. Others can focus on green energy and the like. Just that they might not be very profitable for a while!
      View article »