Habemus Taurus...

[Leme]

Boa Noite!

Com a devida vénia ao site da Forbes aqui transcrevo este artigo de Ken Fisher. Este sujeito escreve mensalmente no site e tem um certo historial de "acertos" desde o topo da bolha, e subsequente "bear market", até às subidas do mercado de 2003 e 2004. No início do ano, e de acordo com o seu método de previsão, diz que em 2005 poderá ocorrer uma grande subida ou uma grande descida! (Opta pela subida e fundamenta na sua análise). É uma espécie de "contrarian", mas quem estiver interessado é melhor consultar os seus artigos passados onde o Sr. explica a sua metodologia.

O facto de ter "acertado" no passado não garante "acertos" futuros, e o primeiro "estenderete" está sempre à porta...;assim sendo a inserção deste artigo não é uma recomendação de compra nem de venda! Cuidado!

Pode parecer uma provocação, depois das pesadas quedas recentes, mas suponho que têm algum interesse os seus pontos de vista sobre a dívida americana (pelo menos divergem de outras análises aqui colocadas) e aquela "marrada" final (sursum corda ursus) que não podemos deixar de considerar corajosa (Stop worrying...)...

Cumprimentos

Leme


Portfolio Strategy Surprise--America Owes Too Little Kenneth L. Fisher, 04.18.05, 12:00 AM ET More From Kenneth L. Fisher

Network Foreign capital, imported at the rate of $600 million per year, helps the U.S. economy. The money goes to build productive assets here. Here's another reason to be bullish: everyone is worried sick that America is overindebted, but it's not. This country could profitably take on more loans from abroad and invest the money in productive assets. We're underindebted. The debt worriers have been with us for a long time, and they've always been wrong. Their economic prescriptions are born of a moral philosophy that says debt is bad and more debt is worse. They don't like to see the U.S. importing capital from abroad at the rate of $600 billion a year. What the worriers fail to contemplate is the uses to which that capital is put. What is the right debt level for society to carry? The answer is: that level where our marginal borrowing costs approach our marginal return on assets. This is, in fact, the same formula that a corporation would use. If you can borrow at 6% to build a factory that will yield a return of 12%, you should borrow. The U.S. is nowhere near there. As a result, we need more debt to get more income, so people can become wealthier. The Federal Reserve counts $97 trillion of assets in the economy, offset by $44 trillion of debt, leaving (with rounding) $52 trillion of net worth. The asset figure, to be sure, involves some double-counting (General Motors' factory, an asset, is financed by bonds, counted again as an asset in your individual retirement account), but no matter: The key figure is the $52 trillion at the bottom of the U.S. balance sheet. And we're getting a great return on that $52 trillion. Our national income is $12 trillion. Yes, most of the income is labor income, not a return on capital as conventionally calculated. Yet think for a moment: Why are labor rates higher here than in Madagascar? It's precisely because we have so much invested in the form of roads, factories and job skills. I compare the $12 trillion income to the $52 trillion of net capital and conclude that capital is extremely productive in this country. I'm not worried about importing a little more of it and putting it to use. Folks fret about our $2 trillion of consumer debt and $4 trillion of federal government debt. But these are small numbers in relation to our income, to our total debt (mortgage and business debts are far larger) and to our net worth. Stop worrying. Instead, buy stocks.