Doughboys:
LOL, that was funny. I am talking about real news not sports/entertainment news that is all we get these days. Sad part is kids today and most people today know more about Sheets than actual news. They are called diversionary items.
Have a nice weekend.
Stock Market
Stock Market
GoBabyGo
Stock Market
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
KJ Duke:
This video is just one, money masters is another one. You can believe what you like. I been there, I understand its hard to believe. We all have a belief system and when something like this shakes us to our core its hard to accept. Why because the Mainstream Boob Tube NEVER EVER speaks in a negative light about the FED. The FED is the almighty.
You believe what you will but before you make a decision about something do your own research. That is all I ask, I have done mine. But never believe what the MEDIA tells you nor obiously what I say without ever researching a topic. The internet is the great equalizer and a threat to the crooks running this country that is why I use it. I understand the history of the Fed, I understand how it works. I manage money, I am in the market everyday for the last 20+ years. I do research on companies and the economy everyday. Videos such as the one you posted are misinformed propaganda designed for emotional appeal. This is "media" as well, believe it at your own risk. It is silly BS, to be honest. Same for that money masters video, which someone else posted before, it was laughable and full of crap.
I don't believe anything the media or anyone tells me. I do research, everyday, I know how many of these things actually work in the market. I know how investment bankers think and function, CEOs, CFOs, sell-side analysts, buy-side analysts, hedge funds, indivudal investors. I have done all of these except CEO, and I talk to many of them.
KJ Duke:
This video is just one, money masters is another one. You can believe what you like. I been there, I understand its hard to believe. We all have a belief system and when something like this shakes us to our core its hard to accept. Why because the Mainstream Boob Tube NEVER EVER speaks in a negative light about the FED. The FED is the almighty.
You believe what you will but before you make a decision about something do your own research. That is all I ask, I have done mine. But never believe what the MEDIA tells you nor obiously what I say without ever researching a topic. The internet is the great equalizer and a threat to the crooks running this country that is why I use it. I understand the history of the Fed, I understand how it works. I manage money, I am in the market everyday for the last 20+ years. I do research on companies and the economy everyday. Videos such as the one you posted are misinformed propaganda designed for emotional appeal. This is "media" as well, believe it at your own risk. It is silly BS, to be honest. Same for that money masters video, which someone else posted before, it was laughable and full of crap.
I don't believe anything the media or anyone tells me. I do research, everyday, I know how many of these things actually work in the market. I know how investment bankers think and function, CEOs, CFOs, sell-side analysts, buy-side analysts, hedge funds, indivudal investors. I have done all of these except CEO, and I talk to many of them.
Stock Market
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S As we speak just saw the Market (Casino) was already up 115 pts. Now common sense would tell you that after WORSE jobs report in what 35+ years and an unemployment rate of 7.6% (Based on GUMBERMINT numbers) the market would be down. Smells like the PPT team is at play again boys becareful imho.
Great Financial Discussion site probably best on the net is:
Common sense should tell you not to judge the market's reaction to news as meaning anything. Thousands of managers, like myself, are making decisions everyday that drive the markets. How much do you think this employment number being posted today influences my decisions today?
I'll give you a hint, it's very close to 0.00000%.
P.S As we speak just saw the Market (Casino) was already up 115 pts. Now common sense would tell you that after WORSE jobs report in what 35+ years and an unemployment rate of 7.6% (Based on GUMBERMINT numbers) the market would be down. Smells like the PPT team is at play again boys becareful imho.
Great Financial Discussion site probably best on the net is:
Common sense should tell you not to judge the market's reaction to news as meaning anything. Thousands of managers, like myself, are making decisions everyday that drive the markets. How much do you think this employment number being posted today influences my decisions today?
I'll give you a hint, it's very close to 0.00000%.
Stock Market
Originally posted by rucrew2:
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. "Institutional" would include all professionally managed money, not just retirement funds. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations.
Originally posted by rucrew2:
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? It can, but it isn't easy to game because as soon as trends become apparent, others are trying to game them even sooner, until eventually the calendar play has entirely occurred beforehand and the opposite happens because it has been completely pre-positioned for in the market.
This occurs not just in gamin the calendar, but just about everything else, particularly with the rise in hedge fund volume because most can go long or short, and use derivatives to make moves even more exaggerated.
[ February 06, 2009, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. "Institutional" would include all professionally managed money, not just retirement funds. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations.
Originally posted by rucrew2:
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? It can, but it isn't easy to game because as soon as trends become apparent, others are trying to game them even sooner, until eventually the calendar play has entirely occurred beforehand and the opposite happens because it has been completely pre-positioned for in the market.
This occurs not just in gamin the calendar, but just about everything else, particularly with the rise in hedge fund volume because most can go long or short, and use derivatives to make moves even more exaggerated.
[ February 06, 2009, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
Stock Market
A growing trend that people think they're finding "answers" on the internet.
Sad.
More opinions, yes, and most of them short sighted and designed to arouse emotion.
Answers? No.
Sad.
More opinions, yes, and most of them short sighted and designed to arouse emotion.
Answers? No.
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Stock Market
You have a great resume from what it sounds like.
However are you telling me that the PPT does NOT exist? That they do not intervene?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Gr ... al_Markets
Are you telling me that these bailouts are good for the USD?
Are you telling me that these companies that were leveled up anywhere from 10 to 100 times is good?
People getting mortgages at 95 to 100 % LTV was good? (You do know the FED is the so-called bank of oversight and they allowed the bubble to be created in the real estate market. That last 8 years was all an economy based on CREDIT/DEBT after the TECH bubble bust. Meanwhile NAFTA and the like shipped GOOD PAYING JOBS overseas now we are a country of hoping to get hired by Walmart and Mickey D's) WE DONT MAKE SQUAT !! We made worthless CDO'S and Ponzi Scheme's (Why is Madoff sitting home?)
In closing you are telling me the FED is a FEDERAL INSTITUTION? You do know the US CONSTITUTION does not allow for a CENTRAL BANK right? And how did the FED get the power to print money out of thin air?
P.S. All those finance class in COllege I took are worthless based on what is happening.
However are you telling me that the PPT does NOT exist? That they do not intervene?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Gr ... al_Markets
Are you telling me that these bailouts are good for the USD?
Are you telling me that these companies that were leveled up anywhere from 10 to 100 times is good?
People getting mortgages at 95 to 100 % LTV was good? (You do know the FED is the so-called bank of oversight and they allowed the bubble to be created in the real estate market. That last 8 years was all an economy based on CREDIT/DEBT after the TECH bubble bust. Meanwhile NAFTA and the like shipped GOOD PAYING JOBS overseas now we are a country of hoping to get hired by Walmart and Mickey D's) WE DONT MAKE SQUAT !! We made worthless CDO'S and Ponzi Scheme's (Why is Madoff sitting home?)
In closing you are telling me the FED is a FEDERAL INSTITUTION? You do know the US CONSTITUTION does not allow for a CENTRAL BANK right? And how did the FED get the power to print money out of thin air?
P.S. All those finance class in COllege I took are worthless based on what is happening.
GoBabyGo
-
Navel Lint
- Posts: 1723
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Stock Market
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations. [/QUOTE]I think I misspoke my question. I didn’t mean the institutions per say, I meant the amount of money they have to invest that comes from people like me thru 401k’s etc. Or are you saying that investing from “regular people” only accounts for 10% of the market and the other 90% is from business’ rolling over profit?
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations. [/QUOTE]I think I misspoke my question. I didn’t mean the institutions per say, I meant the amount of money they have to invest that comes from people like me thru 401k’s etc. Or are you saying that investing from “regular people” only accounts for 10% of the market and the other 90% is from business’ rolling over profit?
Russel -Navel Lint
"Fans don't boo nobodies"
-Reggie Jackson
"Fans don't boo nobodies"
-Reggie Jackson
Stock Market
Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
A growing trend that people think they're finding "answers" on the internet.
Sad.
More opinions, yes, and most of them short sighted and designed to arouse emotion.
Answers? No. You are right we should all listen to RUSH (imho he gets paid all that money for being truthful) and the like and watch FOX, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS and ABC to get all the news stories. Man what was I thinking. Party on
A growing trend that people think they're finding "answers" on the internet.
Sad.
More opinions, yes, and most of them short sighted and designed to arouse emotion.
Answers? No. You are right we should all listen to RUSH (imho he gets paid all that money for being truthful) and the like and watch FOX, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS and ABC to get all the news stories. Man what was I thinking. Party on
GoBabyGo
Stock Market
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
You have a great resume from what it sounds like.
However are you telling me that the PPT does NOT exist? That they do not intervene?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Gr ... al_Markets
Are you telling me that these bailouts are good for the USD? To an extent necessary, but in my best judgement which is limited since I am not on the inside, poorly executed in many ways.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
Are you telling me that these companies that were leveled up anywhere from 10 to 100 times is good?
No, oversight was lax - a mistake by the former two administrations (Clinton and Bush) and regulators (Congress, SEC, Fed, others). Very difficult for regulation to stay ahead of financial innovators - regulators often times don't fully understand new financial products, and even they do have don't understand the effect they will have until the benefit of hindsight. The best and brightest are the innovators, not the regulators in most cases.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
People getting mortgages at 95 to 100 % LTV was good? (You do know the FED is the so-called bank of oversight and they allowed the bubble to be created in the real estate market.
We operate primarily in a free entrprise market. As such, they allow for substantial economic growth and along with it market cycles which sometimes can turn ugly. All regulators, Congress in particular, had the power to limit leverage more so and did not for various reasons - usually related to either ideology, lack of insight or predictive power, or corruptive political influence. The Fed is the least corrupt of all regulatory bodies IMO.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
That last 8 years was all an economy based on CREDIT/DEBT after the TECH bubble bust. Meanwhile NAFTA and the like shipped GOOD PAYING JOBS overseas now we are a country of hoping to get hired by Walmart and Mickey D's) WE DONT MAKE SQUAT !! We made worthless CDO'S and Ponzi Scheme's (Why is Madoff sitting home?)
Shipping jobs overseas is a tired, old argument. Protectionism leads to lower standards of living for all. You do what you're good at, everyone else does the same, and all benefit.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
In closing you are telling me the FED is a FEDERAL INSTITUTION? You do know the US CONSTITUTION does not allow for a CENTRAL BANK right? And how did the FED get the power to print money out of thin air?
It is a quasi-government institution that is in essense a federal institution. Crazy video makers like to play up the fact that it is technically private, but they leave out critical facts which in essence make it a govt institution which is strcutured in such a way to be less political than the far worse institutions that are congress, treasury, etc.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S. All those finance class in COllege I took are worthless based on what is happening. Apparently.
[ February 06, 2009, 10:10 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
You have a great resume from what it sounds like.
However are you telling me that the PPT does NOT exist? That they do not intervene?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Gr ... al_Markets
Are you telling me that these bailouts are good for the USD? To an extent necessary, but in my best judgement which is limited since I am not on the inside, poorly executed in many ways.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
Are you telling me that these companies that were leveled up anywhere from 10 to 100 times is good?
No, oversight was lax - a mistake by the former two administrations (Clinton and Bush) and regulators (Congress, SEC, Fed, others). Very difficult for regulation to stay ahead of financial innovators - regulators often times don't fully understand new financial products, and even they do have don't understand the effect they will have until the benefit of hindsight. The best and brightest are the innovators, not the regulators in most cases.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
People getting mortgages at 95 to 100 % LTV was good? (You do know the FED is the so-called bank of oversight and they allowed the bubble to be created in the real estate market.
We operate primarily in a free entrprise market. As such, they allow for substantial economic growth and along with it market cycles which sometimes can turn ugly. All regulators, Congress in particular, had the power to limit leverage more so and did not for various reasons - usually related to either ideology, lack of insight or predictive power, or corruptive political influence. The Fed is the least corrupt of all regulatory bodies IMO.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
That last 8 years was all an economy based on CREDIT/DEBT after the TECH bubble bust. Meanwhile NAFTA and the like shipped GOOD PAYING JOBS overseas now we are a country of hoping to get hired by Walmart and Mickey D's) WE DONT MAKE SQUAT !! We made worthless CDO'S and Ponzi Scheme's (Why is Madoff sitting home?)
Shipping jobs overseas is a tired, old argument. Protectionism leads to lower standards of living for all. You do what you're good at, everyone else does the same, and all benefit.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
In closing you are telling me the FED is a FEDERAL INSTITUTION? You do know the US CONSTITUTION does not allow for a CENTRAL BANK right? And how did the FED get the power to print money out of thin air?
It is a quasi-government institution that is in essense a federal institution. Crazy video makers like to play up the fact that it is technically private, but they leave out critical facts which in essence make it a govt institution which is strcutured in such a way to be less political than the far worse institutions that are congress, treasury, etc.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S. All those finance class in COllege I took are worthless based on what is happening. Apparently.
[ February 06, 2009, 10:10 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
Stock Market
You are a "last word" guy, aren't you, gobabygo
[ February 06, 2009, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: DOUGHBOYS ]
[ February 06, 2009, 10:11 AM: Message edited by: DOUGHBOYS ]
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Stock Market
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S As we speak just saw the Market (Casino) was already up 115 pts. Now common sense would tell you that after WORSE jobs report in what 35+ years and an unemployment rate of 7.6% (Based on GUMBERMINT numbers) the market would be down. Smells like the PPT team is at play again boys becareful imho.
Great Financial Discussion site probably best on the net is:
Common sense should tell you not to judge the market's reaction to news as meaning anything. Thousands of managers, like myself, are making decisions everyday that drive the markets. How much do you think this employment number being posted today influences my decisions today?
I'll give you a hint, it's very close to 0.00000%. [/QUOTE]Everyone I know has lost trust in the market. They feel its a huge ponzi scheme. Redemptions are lining up because of the following reasons:
1) People lost trust in market
2) People lost their jobs need money to live
3) Even MONEY MARKET FUNDS blowing up
IMHO a guy like MADOFF is just one of many bigger ones out there and as the redemptions start to unwind further more ponzi schemes will be exposed. Come March I think the s will hit the fan on that end but what do I know.
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S As we speak just saw the Market (Casino) was already up 115 pts. Now common sense would tell you that after WORSE jobs report in what 35+ years and an unemployment rate of 7.6% (Based on GUMBERMINT numbers) the market would be down. Smells like the PPT team is at play again boys becareful imho.
Great Financial Discussion site probably best on the net is:
Common sense should tell you not to judge the market's reaction to news as meaning anything. Thousands of managers, like myself, are making decisions everyday that drive the markets. How much do you think this employment number being posted today influences my decisions today?
I'll give you a hint, it's very close to 0.00000%. [/QUOTE]Everyone I know has lost trust in the market. They feel its a huge ponzi scheme. Redemptions are lining up because of the following reasons:
1) People lost trust in market
2) People lost their jobs need money to live
3) Even MONEY MARKET FUNDS blowing up
IMHO a guy like MADOFF is just one of many bigger ones out there and as the redemptions start to unwind further more ponzi schemes will be exposed. Come March I think the s will hit the fan on that end but what do I know.
GoBabyGo
Stock Market
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
You have a great resume from what it sounds like.
However are you telling me that the PPT does NOT exist? That they do not intervene?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Gr ... al_Markets
Are you telling me that these bailouts are good for the USD? To an extent necessary, but in my best judgement which is limited since I am not on the inside, poorly executed in many ways.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
Are you telling me that these companies that were leveled up anywhere from 10 to 100 times is good?
No, oversight was lax - a mistake by the former two administrations (Clinton and Bush) and regulators (Congress, SEC, Fed, others). Very difficult for regulation to stay ahead of financial innovators - regulators often times don't fully understand new financial products, and even they do have don't understand the effect they will have until the benefit of hindsight. The best and brightest are the innovators, not the regulators in most cases.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
People getting mortgages at 95 to 100 % LTV was good? (You do know the FED is the so-called bank of oversight and they allowed the bubble to be created in the real estate market.
We operate primarily in a free entrprise market. As such, they allow for substantial economic growth and along with it market cycles which sometimes can turn ugly. All regulators, Congress in particular, had the power to limit leverage more so and did not for various reasons - usually related to either ideology, lack of insight or predictive power, or corruptive political influence. The Fed is the least corrupt of all regulatory bodies IMO.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
That last 8 years was all an economy based on CREDIT/DEBT after the TECH bubble bust. Meanwhile NAFTA and the like shipped GOOD PAYING JOBS overseas now we are a country of hoping to get hired by Walmart and Mickey D's) WE DONT MAKE SQUAT !! We made worthless CDO'S and Ponzi Scheme's (Why is Madoff sitting home?)
Shipping jobs overseas is a tired, old argument. Protectionism leads to lower standards of living for all. You do what you're good at, everyone else does the same, and all benefit.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
In closing you are telling me the FED is a FEDERAL INSTITUTION? You do know the US CONSTITUTION does not allow for a CENTRAL BANK right? And how did the FED get the power to print money out of thin air?
It is a quasi-government institution that is in essense a federal institution. Crazy video makers like to play up the fact that it is technically private, but they leave out critical facts which in essence make it a govt institution which is strcutured in such a way to be less political than the far worse institutions that are congress, treasury, etc.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S. All those finance class in COllege I took are worthless based on what is happening. Apparently. [/QUOTE]I get it Privatize the GAINS and Socialize the losses so that is what a Capitalist Society is about.
[ February 06, 2009, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: GoBabyGo ]
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
You have a great resume from what it sounds like.
However are you telling me that the PPT does NOT exist? That they do not intervene?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Gr ... al_Markets
Are you telling me that these bailouts are good for the USD? To an extent necessary, but in my best judgement which is limited since I am not on the inside, poorly executed in many ways.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
Are you telling me that these companies that were leveled up anywhere from 10 to 100 times is good?
No, oversight was lax - a mistake by the former two administrations (Clinton and Bush) and regulators (Congress, SEC, Fed, others). Very difficult for regulation to stay ahead of financial innovators - regulators often times don't fully understand new financial products, and even they do have don't understand the effect they will have until the benefit of hindsight. The best and brightest are the innovators, not the regulators in most cases.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
People getting mortgages at 95 to 100 % LTV was good? (You do know the FED is the so-called bank of oversight and they allowed the bubble to be created in the real estate market.
We operate primarily in a free entrprise market. As such, they allow for substantial economic growth and along with it market cycles which sometimes can turn ugly. All regulators, Congress in particular, had the power to limit leverage more so and did not for various reasons - usually related to either ideology, lack of insight or predictive power, or corruptive political influence. The Fed is the least corrupt of all regulatory bodies IMO.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
That last 8 years was all an economy based on CREDIT/DEBT after the TECH bubble bust. Meanwhile NAFTA and the like shipped GOOD PAYING JOBS overseas now we are a country of hoping to get hired by Walmart and Mickey D's) WE DONT MAKE SQUAT !! We made worthless CDO'S and Ponzi Scheme's (Why is Madoff sitting home?)
Shipping jobs overseas is a tired, old argument. Protectionism leads to lower standards of living for all. You do what you're good at, everyone else does the same, and all benefit.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
In closing you are telling me the FED is a FEDERAL INSTITUTION? You do know the US CONSTITUTION does not allow for a CENTRAL BANK right? And how did the FED get the power to print money out of thin air?
It is a quasi-government institution that is in essense a federal institution. Crazy video makers like to play up the fact that it is technically private, but they leave out critical facts which in essence make it a govt institution which is strcutured in such a way to be less political than the far worse institutions that are congress, treasury, etc.
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S. All those finance class in COllege I took are worthless based on what is happening. Apparently.
[/QUOTE]I get it Privatize the GAINS and Socialize the losses so that is what a Capitalist Society is about.[ February 06, 2009, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: GoBabyGo ]
GoBabyGo
Stock Market
Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
You are a "last word" guy, aren't you, gobabygo No just like the movie the Godfather "I want out but they keep sucking me back in"
Right or wrong I love these chats.
You are a "last word" guy, aren't you, gobabygo No just like the movie the Godfather "I want out but they keep sucking me back in"
Right or wrong I love these chats.
GoBabyGo
Stock Market
Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations. [/QUOTE]I think I misspoke my question. I didn’t mean the institutions per say, I meant the amount of money they have to invest that comes from people like me thru 401k’s etc. Or are you saying that investing from “regular people” only accounts for 10% of the market and the other 90% is from business’ rolling over profit? [/QUOTE]I'm not sure what the pct of retirement funds in equities is relative to the whole market, that is probably a readily available stat though.
I do know that self-directed IRAs (where individuals can invest their own retirement money) since inception had a return of less than the money market rate, and that was before last year's market meltdown. The main reason is, individuals get bearish after the damage has been done to prices, and come back well after the market has moved higher, thus consistently doing damage to their long-term returns.
Case in point - the market is much safer to invest in now than when you had 90% in equities. Just avoid the "yesterday's news" large caps and much of the financial sector; they are in for long-term problems.
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations. [/QUOTE]I think I misspoke my question. I didn’t mean the institutions per say, I meant the amount of money they have to invest that comes from people like me thru 401k’s etc. Or are you saying that investing from “regular people” only accounts for 10% of the market and the other 90% is from business’ rolling over profit? [/QUOTE]I'm not sure what the pct of retirement funds in equities is relative to the whole market, that is probably a readily available stat though.
I do know that self-directed IRAs (where individuals can invest their own retirement money) since inception had a return of less than the money market rate, and that was before last year's market meltdown. The main reason is, individuals get bearish after the damage has been done to prices, and come back well after the market has moved higher, thus consistently doing damage to their long-term returns.
Case in point - the market is much safer to invest in now than when you had 90% in equities. Just avoid the "yesterday's news" large caps and much of the financial sector; they are in for long-term problems.
Stock Market
KJ Duke:
You said you are for the Bailouts and We operate primarily in a free entrprise market.
Explain to me if the Government is involved daily and taxpayers are paying the BANKSTERS bails (which can NEVER be repaid back) how is this a CAPITIALIST SOCIETY if No one fails?
You said you are for the Bailouts and We operate primarily in a free entrprise market.
Explain to me if the Government is involved daily and taxpayers are paying the BANKSTERS bails (which can NEVER be repaid back) how is this a CAPITIALIST SOCIETY if No one fails?
GoBabyGo
Stock Market
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S As we speak just saw the Market (Casino) was already up 115 pts. Now common sense would tell you that after WORSE jobs report in what 35+ years and an unemployment rate of 7.6% (Based on GUMBERMINT numbers) the market would be down. Smells like the PPT team is at play again boys becareful imho.
Great Financial Discussion site probably best on the net is:
Common sense should tell you not to judge the market's reaction to news as meaning anything. Thousands of managers, like myself, are making decisions everyday that drive the markets. How much do you think this employment number being posted today influences my decisions today?
I'll give you a hint, it's very close to 0.00000%. [/QUOTE]Everyone I know has lost trust in the market. They feel its a huge ponzi scheme. Redemptions are lining up because of the following reasons:
1) People lost trust in market
2) People lost their jobs need money to live
3) Even MONEY MARKET FUNDS blowing up
IMHO a guy like MADOFF is just one of many bigger ones out there and as the redemptions start to unwind further more ponzi schemes will be exposed. Come March I think the s will hit the fan on that end but what do I know. [/QUOTE]There are criminals in every part of society, and the more $ involved, the more of them. No one that did proper due diligence would have invested with Madoff - in our Q4 report we wrote a piece about check and balances regarding independent custodians, audits and performance appraisals. If your advisor doesnt have these in place, you have a right to be concerned.
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
P.S As we speak just saw the Market (Casino) was already up 115 pts. Now common sense would tell you that after WORSE jobs report in what 35+ years and an unemployment rate of 7.6% (Based on GUMBERMINT numbers) the market would be down. Smells like the PPT team is at play again boys becareful imho.
Great Financial Discussion site probably best on the net is:
Common sense should tell you not to judge the market's reaction to news as meaning anything. Thousands of managers, like myself, are making decisions everyday that drive the markets. How much do you think this employment number being posted today influences my decisions today?
I'll give you a hint, it's very close to 0.00000%. [/QUOTE]Everyone I know has lost trust in the market. They feel its a huge ponzi scheme. Redemptions are lining up because of the following reasons:
1) People lost trust in market
2) People lost their jobs need money to live
3) Even MONEY MARKET FUNDS blowing up
IMHO a guy like MADOFF is just one of many bigger ones out there and as the redemptions start to unwind further more ponzi schemes will be exposed. Come March I think the s will hit the fan on that end but what do I know. [/QUOTE]There are criminals in every part of society, and the more $ involved, the more of them. No one that did proper due diligence would have invested with Madoff - in our Q4 report we wrote a piece about check and balances regarding independent custodians, audits and performance appraisals. If your advisor doesnt have these in place, you have a right to be concerned.
Stock Market
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations. [/QUOTE]I think I misspoke my question. I didn’t mean the institutions per say, I meant the amount of money they have to invest that comes from people like me thru 401k’s etc. Or are you saying that investing from “regular people” only accounts for 10% of the market and the other 90% is from business’ rolling over profit? [/QUOTE]I'm not sure what the pct of retirement funds in equities is relative to the whole market, that is probably a readily available stat though.
I do know that self-directed IRAs (where individuals can invest their own retirement money) since inception had a return of less than the money market rate, and that was before last year's market meltdown. The main reason is, individuals get bearish after the damage has been done to prices, and come back well after the market has moved higher, thus consistently doing damage to their long-term returns.
Case in point - the market is much safer to invest in now than when you had 90% in equities. Just avoid the "yesterday's news" large caps and much of the financial sector; they are in for long-term problems. [/QUOTE]Wow, so you are saying Buy Long? Really?
IMHO we are in the 3rd inning of this. Redemptions, State Govt Bailouts, and Commercial Real Estate have yet to hit. You see CALPERS is in trouble. IMHO Gold/Silver
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
KJ Duke;
Do you have any guess as to how much, if any, the impact of institutional investing (401k,IRA etc) has had on the market? My guess is that the volume is way down. I know I went from 90/10 stock/cash to 50/50.
Also, just wondering. In “normal” times, does the market move unnaturally on certain days of the month just because of institutional investing? Off the top of my head, institutions probably drive 90%-95% of the trading volume. Of greater importance is which types of institutions are buying/selling, what they are buy/sell, why and what are their expectations. [/QUOTE]I think I misspoke my question. I didn’t mean the institutions per say, I meant the amount of money they have to invest that comes from people like me thru 401k’s etc. Or are you saying that investing from “regular people” only accounts for 10% of the market and the other 90% is from business’ rolling over profit? [/QUOTE]I'm not sure what the pct of retirement funds in equities is relative to the whole market, that is probably a readily available stat though.
I do know that self-directed IRAs (where individuals can invest their own retirement money) since inception had a return of less than the money market rate, and that was before last year's market meltdown. The main reason is, individuals get bearish after the damage has been done to prices, and come back well after the market has moved higher, thus consistently doing damage to their long-term returns.
Case in point - the market is much safer to invest in now than when you had 90% in equities. Just avoid the "yesterday's news" large caps and much of the financial sector; they are in for long-term problems. [/QUOTE]Wow, so you are saying Buy Long? Really?
IMHO we are in the 3rd inning of this. Redemptions, State Govt Bailouts, and Commercial Real Estate have yet to hit. You see CALPERS is in trouble. IMHO Gold/Silver
GoBabyGo
-
Navel Lint
- Posts: 1723
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Stock Market
Originally posted by Vander:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by GYOZTES:
You can thank Ronald Reagan and trickle down economics for the mess we are in today. The solution to our financial problems-TAX the SUPERRICH- I would prefer a flat tax rate. Everyone should pay the same rate. No more (or severely limit) deductions. No more mortgage deduction, which is one of the incentives behind interest only loans that helped create this problem.
I would also consider a national sales tax paired with the flat tax. At least on some items. [/QUOTE]Ronnie was the only president of my lifetime that really understood economics and was largely responcible for the prosparity of the 80's and 90's. yes he made mistakes. I make them too. I'd take him back in a heartbeat. Bet we wouldn't have all the bailouts if he were president now. Just my 2 cents again when not asked for. [/QUOTE]At the time I was a Reagan, Jake Kemp, supply-side fan. But after reading Dave Stockman’s book and his magic asterisk, I realized that that brand of economics may work in theory, but politics and real world problems will prevent complete success.
It is one of the reasons that I currently don’t agree with new tax cuts. Even if you forget about TARP and stimulus packages, the gov’t can’t?/won’t?/shouldn’t? control spending.
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by GYOZTES:
You can thank Ronald Reagan and trickle down economics for the mess we are in today. The solution to our financial problems-TAX the SUPERRICH- I would prefer a flat tax rate. Everyone should pay the same rate. No more (or severely limit) deductions. No more mortgage deduction, which is one of the incentives behind interest only loans that helped create this problem.
I would also consider a national sales tax paired with the flat tax. At least on some items. [/QUOTE]Ronnie was the only president of my lifetime that really understood economics and was largely responcible for the prosparity of the 80's and 90's. yes he made mistakes. I make them too. I'd take him back in a heartbeat. Bet we wouldn't have all the bailouts if he were president now. Just my 2 cents again when not asked for. [/QUOTE]At the time I was a Reagan, Jake Kemp, supply-side fan. But after reading Dave Stockman’s book and his magic asterisk, I realized that that brand of economics may work in theory, but politics and real world problems will prevent complete success.
It is one of the reasons that I currently don’t agree with new tax cuts. Even if you forget about TARP and stimulus packages, the gov’t can’t?/won’t?/shouldn’t? control spending.
Russel -Navel Lint
"Fans don't boo nobodies"
-Reggie Jackson
"Fans don't boo nobodies"
-Reggie Jackson
Stock Market
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
KJ Duke:
You said you are for the Bailouts and We operate primarily in a free entrprise market.
Explain to me if the Government is involved daily and taxpayers are paying the BANKSTERS bails (which can NEVER be repaid back) how is this a CAPITIALIST SOCIETY if No one fails? Government fiscal and monetary policy has been used in the context of capitalist societies over many business cycles around the world.
Secondly, I didnt say I like how these bailouts are functioning or being executed. Companies need to fail, we should not be trying to save everyone, or even most.
You take action to avoid a complete collapse if that action would cause even greater damage. And if they hadn't done anything, this would have been the case. I have my own ideas on approach which I think would be a lot more effective, but I don't have time for politics. I'm busy enough managing client money and doing slow drafts.
KJ Duke:
You said you are for the Bailouts and We operate primarily in a free entrprise market.
Explain to me if the Government is involved daily and taxpayers are paying the BANKSTERS bails (which can NEVER be repaid back) how is this a CAPITIALIST SOCIETY if No one fails? Government fiscal and monetary policy has been used in the context of capitalist societies over many business cycles around the world.
Secondly, I didnt say I like how these bailouts are functioning or being executed. Companies need to fail, we should not be trying to save everyone, or even most.
You take action to avoid a complete collapse if that action would cause even greater damage. And if they hadn't done anything, this would have been the case. I have my own ideas on approach which I think would be a lot more effective, but I don't have time for politics. I'm busy enough managing client money and doing slow drafts.
Stock Market
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
Wow, so you are saying Buy Long? Really?
IMHO we are in the 3rd inning of this. Redemptions, State Govt Bailouts, and Commercial Real Estate have yet to hit. You see CALPERS is in trouble. IMHO Gold/Silver I'm not just saying it, I've been doing it since mid-December. We were buying everyday this week, until today.
Wow, so you are saying Buy Long? Really?
IMHO we are in the 3rd inning of this. Redemptions, State Govt Bailouts, and Commercial Real Estate have yet to hit. You see CALPERS is in trouble. IMHO Gold/Silver I'm not just saying it, I've been doing it since mid-December. We were buying everyday this week, until today.
Stock Market
Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by Vander:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by GYOZTES:
You can thank Ronald Reagan and trickle down economics for the mess we are in today. The solution to our financial problems-TAX the SUPERRICH- I would prefer a flat tax rate. Everyone should pay the same rate. No more (or severely limit) deductions. No more mortgage deduction, which is one of the incentives behind interest only loans that helped create this problem.
I would also consider a national sales tax paired with the flat tax. At least on some items. [/QUOTE]Ronnie was the only president of my lifetime that really understood economics and was largely responcible for the prosparity of the 80's and 90's. yes he made mistakes. I make them too. I'd take him back in a heartbeat. Bet we wouldn't have all the bailouts if he were president now. Just my 2 cents again when not asked for. [/QUOTE]At the time I was a Reagan, Jake Kemp, supply-side fan. But after reading Dave Stockman’s book and his magic asterisk, I realized that that brand of economics may work in theory, but politics and real world problems will prevent complete success.
It is one of the reasons that I currently don’t agree with new tax cuts. Even if you forget about TARP and stimulus packages, the gov’t can’t?/won’t?/shouldn’t? control spending. [/QUOTE]My mom worked with David' mom. I spoke with her a few times - she thought I reminded her of him and advised me to stay out of politics.
There is something to be learned from all of those guys, the supply-siders and Stockman. Ideology alone doesn't work, but doesn't mean completely toss it aside either.
quote:Originally posted by Vander:
quote:Originally posted by rucrew2:
quote:Originally posted by GYOZTES:
You can thank Ronald Reagan and trickle down economics for the mess we are in today. The solution to our financial problems-TAX the SUPERRICH- I would prefer a flat tax rate. Everyone should pay the same rate. No more (or severely limit) deductions. No more mortgage deduction, which is one of the incentives behind interest only loans that helped create this problem.
I would also consider a national sales tax paired with the flat tax. At least on some items. [/QUOTE]Ronnie was the only president of my lifetime that really understood economics and was largely responcible for the prosparity of the 80's and 90's. yes he made mistakes. I make them too. I'd take him back in a heartbeat. Bet we wouldn't have all the bailouts if he were president now. Just my 2 cents again when not asked for. [/QUOTE]At the time I was a Reagan, Jake Kemp, supply-side fan. But after reading Dave Stockman’s book and his magic asterisk, I realized that that brand of economics may work in theory, but politics and real world problems will prevent complete success.
It is one of the reasons that I currently don’t agree with new tax cuts. Even if you forget about TARP and stimulus packages, the gov’t can’t?/won’t?/shouldn’t? control spending. [/QUOTE]My mom worked with David' mom. I spoke with her a few times - she thought I reminded her of him and advised me to stay out of politics.
There is something to be learned from all of those guys, the supply-siders and Stockman. Ideology alone doesn't work, but doesn't mean completely toss it aside either.
Stock Market
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
Wow, so you are saying Buy Long? Really?
IMHO we are in the 3rd inning of this. Redemptions, State Govt Bailouts, and Commercial Real Estate have yet to hit. You see CALPERS is in trouble. IMHO Gold/Silver I'm not just saying it, I've been doing it since mid-December. We were buying everyday this week, until today. [/QUOTE]I gather you are not a fan of Peter Schiff, gerald Celente, Bob Chapman but a fan of Kudlow and Cramer yes?
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
Wow, so you are saying Buy Long? Really?
IMHO we are in the 3rd inning of this. Redemptions, State Govt Bailouts, and Commercial Real Estate have yet to hit. You see CALPERS is in trouble. IMHO Gold/Silver I'm not just saying it, I've been doing it since mid-December. We were buying everyday this week, until today. [/QUOTE]I gather you are not a fan of Peter Schiff, gerald Celente, Bob Chapman but a fan of Kudlow and Cramer yes?
GoBabyGo
Stock Market
Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
I gather you are not a fan of Peter Schiff, gerald Celente, Bob Chapman but a fan of Kudlow and Cramer yes? Schiff is an ideological speculator. Ridiculous to invest with someone like that. He's good at spinning his ideolody because it never changes, eventually guys like that hit it right. But its about as prescient as me saying the stock market will have a good year at some point in the next decade. He flat out stinks as a money manager as his clients can attest.
I don't know the other two guys after him. Kudlow is another ideologue - sometimes interesting, sometimes annoying, but I don't take him seriously.
Kramer is a freakin joke. He doesnt know how to manage money - the fact that people actually take his advice is just sad ... see my earlier comment about self-directed IRAs, he is not helping the cause.
I gather you are not a fan of Peter Schiff, gerald Celente, Bob Chapman but a fan of Kudlow and Cramer yes? Schiff is an ideological speculator. Ridiculous to invest with someone like that. He's good at spinning his ideolody because it never changes, eventually guys like that hit it right. But its about as prescient as me saying the stock market will have a good year at some point in the next decade. He flat out stinks as a money manager as his clients can attest.
I don't know the other two guys after him. Kudlow is another ideologue - sometimes interesting, sometimes annoying, but I don't take him seriously.
Kramer is a freakin joke. He doesnt know how to manage money - the fact that people actually take his advice is just sad ... see my earlier comment about self-directed IRAs, he is not helping the cause.
Stock Market
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
I gather you are not a fan of Peter Schiff, gerald Celente, Bob Chapman but a fan of Kudlow and Cramer yes? Schiff is an ideological speculator. Ridiculous to invest with someone like that. He's good at spinning his ideolody because it never changes, eventually guys like that hit it right. But its about as prescient as me saying the stock market will have a good year at some point in the next decade. He flat out stinks as a money manager as his clients can attest.
I don't know the other two guys after him. Kudlow is another ideologue - sometimes interesting, sometimes annoying, but I don't take him seriously.
Kramer is a freakin joke. He doesnt know how to manage money - the fact that people actually take his advice is just sad ... see my earlier comment about self-directed IRAs, he is not helping the cause. [/QUOTE]I think we agree on something however Schiff is right on about the USD. With us being about 100 Trillion (Its like Monopoly money) in debt I do not see how this will resolve itself without
1) Scraping the USD or
2) Telling the FED f you the Govt is not paying you back come take it we still have the military to enforce it and the govt can always seize the FED to wipe out it debt. imho
quote:Originally posted by GoBabyGo:
I gather you are not a fan of Peter Schiff, gerald Celente, Bob Chapman but a fan of Kudlow and Cramer yes? Schiff is an ideological speculator. Ridiculous to invest with someone like that. He's good at spinning his ideolody because it never changes, eventually guys like that hit it right. But its about as prescient as me saying the stock market will have a good year at some point in the next decade. He flat out stinks as a money manager as his clients can attest.
I don't know the other two guys after him. Kudlow is another ideologue - sometimes interesting, sometimes annoying, but I don't take him seriously.
Kramer is a freakin joke. He doesnt know how to manage money - the fact that people actually take his advice is just sad ... see my earlier comment about self-directed IRAs, he is not helping the cause. [/QUOTE]I think we agree on something however Schiff is right on about the USD. With us being about 100 Trillion (Its like Monopoly money) in debt I do not see how this will resolve itself without
1) Scraping the USD or
2) Telling the FED f you the Govt is not paying you back come take it we still have the military to enforce it and the govt can always seize the FED to wipe out it debt. imho
GoBabyGo