Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

[FRED]

We're trying to post this interview with Jim Rogers... We were told it's very good... but can't seem to get the audio working.

http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.htm...USJ.lwS8e0.asf

Anyone know about another source?

[Rajiv]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Don't get the audio either!. Can you give some more reference as to the date, content etc. to enable the location of alternate sources?

[Sapiens]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Be careful about misinformation!

The Fed is relevant, indeed very relevant to all that use the “d0llar” monetary unit. Jim’s beneficial interests are not yours or my beneficial interests. One must learn to critically analyze the facts as to how they apply to your particular interests and well-being.

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Be careful about misinformation!

The Fed is relevant, indeed very relevant to all that use the “d0llar” monetary unit. Jim’s beneficial interests are not yours or my beneficial interests. One must learn to critically analyze the facts as to how they apply to your particular interests and well-being.

Sapiens, I truly hate to pick on you, which I have done and for which to a degree I feel badly, but I persist with the dilemma of whether you are someone who really knows something that is exceptional or whether you are just speculating about some of the things you have posted.

How is anyone to consider you more credible than Rogers, when at least Rogers is a known entity? Your advice regarding what may be his "beneficial interests" is not bad advice, but then I believe one must ask what are your interests and from what possible position of knowledge do you give advice?

Why is the information put out by Rogers perhaps more a form of disinformation that anything you may have posted on these fora?

Rogers is not the only person who may qualify as being an authority who questions the relevancy of the FOMC. John Hussman http://hussmanfunds.com/weeklyMarketComment.html probably in each of his last 3 commentaries has suggested that the importance of the Fed is way overstated by Wall Street and the main stream media. Frankly, so far, I have not gained the economic intelligence to know who is correct in the argument of Fed being relevant in actually providing liquidity or is it not. Hussman's arguments strike me as relevant, and I am sure he is a whole lot smarter about these things than I but certainly that does not make him correct.

It is not uncommon for any number of people on these fora to put forth their own arguments regarding statements they support or with which they disagree. They give their reasons or put forth links to articles that support their positions. I think it is through such discourse that some posters here have gained higher levels of credibility.

[jk]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

try:

http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.htm...USJ.lwS8e0.asf

i wonder why he did the interview; he seems irritable.

[Rajiv]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Still no sound!

[zoog]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Still no sound!

The sound works for me on these links... I don't know why some people can't hear it.:confused:

[jk]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Still no sound!

i got both sound and picture at the link i posted.

[Spartacus]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Are you on a non-MS system?

the audio is an MS codec, wmv9dmo or some such.

Still does not work on 64 bit Linux and I assume 64 bit BSD systems (CPU and OS are all 64 bit)

vlc and mplayer do support it on 32 bit systems.

Still no sound!

EDIT: GStreamer might be able to do it on 64 bit CPUs running in 64 bit mode, haven't checked yet.

[Spartacus]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Hussman sounds plausible but I'm not 100% convinced.

Price is generally set at the margin. If the last 10 house sales in a market were down 30%, it doesn't matter if there were thousands of sales at the pre-drop levels.

And if one knows which marginal prices to set to get maximum leverage, how much money does one need?

EDIT: ignore below, I confused Hussman with Sapiens
Anyway, what's interesting is we have 2 people here arguing 2 opposite sides of an issue - Tet's posts read as if he thinks "the elites" (the FED or the FED's true puppetmasters) are using the FED to acquire real assets while devaluing all other peoples' assets

Sapiens' posts read as if he thinks some elites use the system to transfer wealth to themselves, but since he claims the FED is powerless, the only conclusion I can draw is that "they" aren't using the FED, or if they are, "they" will not get what they want this time around

Sapiens, I truly hate to pick on you, which I have done and for which to a degree I feel badly, but I

[zoog]

a more recent Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

try:

http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.htm...USJ.lwS8e0.asf

i wonder why he did the interview; he seems irritable.

Maybe he's always like that in interviews? Maybe it's because the satellite delay drives him nuts and the interviewers start talking over him mid-sentence?

Here is another Bloomberg interview with him on 9/24

http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.htm...htpFRKzlUo.asf

The best part:

Would you buy someone's subprime loan, here in September of 2007? I wouldn't, not with your money.

[FRED]

Re: a more recent Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

Maybe he's always like that in interviews? Maybe it's because the satellite delay drives him nuts and the interviewers start talking over him mid-sentence?

Here is another Bloomberg interview with him on 9/24

http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.htm...htpFRKzlUo.asf

The best part:

EJ's interviewed him three times. He gets cranky if you are not well prepared and don't ask pointed questions. Haven't been able to listen to this one on my 64 bit machine. (Thx, Spartacus, for figuring out the problem.)

So... what's he say?

[Spartacus]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

I listened and since there was nothing really new or use-able for me I've promptly forgotten it. ; )

from memory,
he's Still bullish on commodities, but
peak prices on a couple of commodities (wheat?) , so he doesn't want to buy those

FED should have raised, not lowered,

China still a good bet but not as much as before

he owns Silver and Gold but other bets probably better


PS - I would have thought an MS operating system on a 64 bit machine would be able to play the audio - or are you saying you machine is a non-MS 64 bit system?

[FRED]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

I listened and since there was nothing really new or use-able for me I've promptly forgotten it. ; )

from memory,
he's Still bullish on commodities, but
peak prices on a couple of commodities (wheat?) , so he doesn't want to buy those

FED should have raised, not lowered,

China still a good bet but not as much as before

he owns Silver and Gold but other bets probably better


PS - I would have thought an MS operating system on a 64 bit machine would be able to play the audio - or are you saying you machine is a non-MS 64 bit system?

Thanks for the summary.

New Macs are dual processor 64 bit machines.

[Rajiv]

Re: Jim Rogers Bloomberg interview

The problem was only with that particular video. Not with other bloomberg videos. So I don't believe that it is a codec issue. It could be a bit flip issue in that particular video -- which caused unix based system not to produce the audio.