So what now for the stock market, after the trashing it took today??
Are we near a point, after which it will free fall?
I would expect some serious governmental intervention and ppt action if it appears to be dropping too fast or too much. And governmental interventions are exactly what we really don't need more of.
When large numbers of people see their costs of going to work doubling, their home equities down, and their stock portfolios being creamed by 3% in a day, it won't be too long before they decide to get real defensive with their asset positions - if they even know how.
As usual, OPEC is being less than helpful. There is truly no where to run, and it's about time that the U.S.A. starts getting serious about it's own situation in the scheme of things.
If industry can be allowed to function and society can start protecting itself from degenerates of all types, we might still stand a chance. If you see a smart and tough young innovator or leader - help them out.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
One thing is certain and that is government in this country will continue to grow larger and larger. Most rational thinking people call it socialism. Call it whatever you like but the government getting bigger is indisputable. This is not politics or an opinion its factual information and quite relevant for determining A) if you think you will even have a retirement someday, if it will be possible to do here from a financial point of view, C) if you will actually have something substantive left to pass down to your loved ones and then D) how you think you can pull this off.
Once someone can elevate their brain into realizing how immoral and unfree of a situation that constant increase in government size creates , then one can start looking at areas that are best for investing whatever monies are not stolen from them in places that will help create a better life for them and their Families as well as leaving some kind of legacy behind that will also not be plundered so as the heirs can also have a little something extra. As it stands right now, there's a whole lot of ignorance and debt gonna be passed down by a very large percentage of humans.
<< <i>So what now for the stock market, after the trashing it took today??
Are we near a point, after which it will free fall? >>
No.
The stock market remains the only game in town to make money in commerce and industry for most people. Inflation will affect profits and stock prices too. It may not keep up with inflation but it will have a hard time making steep and prolonged drops in this enviroment. >>
I would add that it's the most common but that says nothing about the mentality of said people.
Personally I'd much prefer having a few items tucked away like a Choice AU-Mint State 1795 Eagle or similar. A dozen or so of coins like that will insure a million bucks for retirement which can be sold one by one with funds even being wired to wherever one likes. ( Till that window is closed as well and some of us know that there are plans to close it so be aware or be square )
Being a collector of many things, many years ago there was a man that would come out of Mexico with some very high-end Mayan art pieces for sale. At that time there were a hand full of wealth collectors in Texas, and one of these was a friend of mine.
My friend would invite me to his house to look at the pieces for sale when this gentleman came to central Texas. At that time these items were priced beyond my means so I did not purchase any, but he only dealt in the very best museum quality items.
Generally this gentleman would have a couple of large cases full of artifacts, perhaps 20 or 30 items. One night while having coffee I ask him where he went after Texas if he did not sell all of his pieces. He told me he went straight to Europe mostly Belgium and Holland.
He said in those countries the taxes are so high, and the estate taxes so ridiculous, due to their socialism, that many wealth people followed the following process.
The family would work hard and save money and as soon as possible buy a home in a nice secure area. They would then all work to pay the home mortgage off. Once paid off they would secretly construct a hidden vault in the house that only family members knew of. Through the years they would get hold of all the cash they could and buy Gold, Rare coins, PM bars, Art, etc. and put it in the vault. At the time of death of the head of the family there were two wills. One for public record, and a secret one just for the family members.
He said that he had been privileged though many years of trading with some of these families to go inside a couple of these vaults, and some contained millions of dollars in hard assets passed from generation to generation.
How many wealthy people in the U.S. are already preparing in this manner do you think?
I'm not in favor of government regulation, meddling or however you want to put it, but does anyone think that encouraging the rich to spend their money would provide economic benefit? Is now a good time to do that or should we wait till things get worse? Just a thought that instead of the guvmint sending out stimulus checks maybe they should encourage the wealthy to spend their money.
<< <i>I'm not in favor of government regulation, meddling or however you want to put it, but does anyone think that encouraging the rich to spend their money would provide economic benefit? Is now a good time to do that or should we wait till things get worse? Just a thought that instead of the guvmint sending out stimulus checks maybe they should encourage the wealthy to spend their money. >>
Whether a person, be they wealthy, middle class, or working poor, spends or saves their money in the bank makes little difference. The only bad thing that can happen is for gov't to confiscate it from the productive and redistribute to those that are not.
Whether a person, be they wealthy, middle class, or working poor, spends or saves their money in the bank makes little difference. The only bad thing that can happen is for gov't to confiscate it from the productive and redistribute to those that are not.
That's not the only bad thing, but it's an excellent point nonetheless. There's a big difference between being a truly unfortunate case who is in need of a helping hand vs. being a systemic malignancy that *only* sucks the lifeblood out from the hardworking and industrious. A big difference.
If you spend it at least the guvmint can't take it from you. Whats the point of dying uber rich?
Living a decent and healthy lifestyle is much better than living in constant squalor, is it not? It's getting harder to even do that when the guvmint keeps raising the ante'.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Being a collector of many things, many years ago there was a man that would come out of Mexico with some very high-end Mayan art pieces for sale. At that time there were a hand full of wealth collectors in Texas, and one of these was a friend of mine.
My friend would invite me to his house to look at the pieces for sale when this gentleman came to central Texas. At that time these items were priced beyond my means so I did not purchase any, but he only dealt in the very best museum quality items.
Generally this gentleman would have a couple of large cases full of artifacts, perhaps 20 or 30 items. One night while having coffee I ask him where he went after Texas if he did not sell all of his pieces. He told me he went straight to Europe mostly Belgium and Holland.
He said in those countries the taxes are so high, and the estate taxes so ridiculous, due to their socialism, that many wealth people followed the following process.
The family would work hard and save money and as soon as possible buy a home in a nice secure area. They would then all work to pay the home mortgage off. Once paid off they would secretly construct a hidden vault in the house that only family members knew of. Through the years they would get hold of all the cash they could and buy Gold, Rare coins, PM bars, Art, etc. and put it in the vault. At the time of death of the head of the family there were two wills. One for public record, and a secret one just for the family members.
He said that he had been privileged though many years of trading with some of these families to go inside a couple of these vaults, and some contained millions of dollars in hard assets passed from generation to generation.
How many wealthy people in the U.S. are already preparing in this manner do you think? >>
that's a good story many Asian immigrants do that already here and also many Hispanic's "hard work and save money" is the key, not what one does or how much one makes but how one does it and does with it.
One thing is certain and that is government in this country will continue to grow larger and larger. Most rational thinking people call it socialism. Call it whatever you like but the government getting bigger is indisputable. This is not politics or an opinion its factual information
Very true. Extravagant spending, zero savings and increasing debt have become the norm, from the highest levels of our government down to individuals. And you're right, it's not political because it doesn't seem to matter which party controls the Congress or White House.
<< <i>One thing is certain and that is government in this country will continue to grow larger and larger. Most rational thinking people call it socialism. Call it whatever you like but the government getting bigger is indisputable. This is not politics or an opinion its factual information
Very true. Extravagant spending, zero savings and increasing debt have become the norm, from the highest levels of our government down to individuals. And you're right, it's not political because it doesn't seem to matter which party controls the Congress or White House. >>
Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better.
Actually, it IS getting tough out there. I was just listening to the Glen Beck radio program.... as he read off a list of some of the companies, and how many stores, are closing up. Very sobering; and these are not being very much publicized by the media. Ones like Home Depot...... and quite a few other well known names.
Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
Sounds true to me and I'm mostly rational. FDR started the big socialistic movement and I'd say we're further along today than ever before. So far along in fact that you can no longer tell one party from the other. The military machine is paid for with funny money which is about as socialistic as it gets.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
We haven't had a balanced budget since Andy Jackson. I trust you are counting Bill Clinton's tactics of using Soc Sec money to show a surplus? That's smoke and mirrors. No administration has paid down the debt in this century to my knowledge and certainly not a rapid paydown. And when you toss in future entitlements which is part of GAAP, you don't come close. Reagan really inflated the nation's debt, Bush 1 added to it as did Clinton, and Bush 2 doused it with gasoline. I wonder if you meant the middle 1890's when we had a major recession in progress? We may have paid down some debt back then....but not likely.
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better.
Frankly, it's mathematically impossible to pay it off with today's dollar value. Just for starters the SS and Healthcare entitlements have to be shrunk to next to nothing....and from there we have to count our pennies again. A big dollar devaluation is almost a must to make any ground on the budget deficit.
Even though the US list of millionaires barely changed (and if you inflation adjust....the number actually fell) the world wide number increased by a lot. We may be losing them, but the rest of the world is making them.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
Ahh, the 90's. There was a retro-active tax increase on people who work. Not sure which party was in charge, but I do know they were slaughtered in the next election.
<< <i>One thing is certain and that is government in this country will continue to grow larger and larger. Most rational thinking people call it socialism. Call it whatever you like but the government getting bigger is indisputable. This is not politics or an opinion its factual information
Very true. Extravagant spending, zero savings and increasing debt have become the norm, from the highest levels of our government down to individuals. And you're right, it's not political because it doesn't seem to matter which party controls the Congress or White House. >>
Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better. >>
You are precisely the type of ignoramus that is the reason WHY this country has turned socialist.
Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better. >>
You do realize that when our problems grow sufficiently complex everyone will work for the government.
And that an inordinate number of our problems are caused by government.
So, if I recall correctly, just a few years ago...
People were buying these internet services companies and making a fortune and when Mr. Buffett was asked what he thought about it he said he didn't have a clue...they produce no goods, they have no assets, how could they be worth anything, much less these hundreds of dollars a share...for what; air and a couple of guys? Yet, folk bought them and a guy I know got out of it in a good spot and retired early with a house on the coast because of the dot com successes. Still, Mr. Buffett just goes huh? And the term irrational exhuberance was born. Then these companies started folding and it was over as quick as it had begun. Jumping out of windows was an understatement. But, some survived...ala google.
All the while corporations were starting to get examined for inflating their net worth, cooking the books but it wasn't too much of a big deal, it was just kind of a wink. Buy it anyway, it will grow was the mantra. Then, we had Enron, year 2000 bankruptcies. Soon, folk started looking aroung...first the dot com, then the charge that corporations were over valuing themselves on the books but there was already a crack in the foundation; folk were starting to talk but no one did anything. Everyone was suprised by the quick collapse of some rock solid enterprises. Meanwhile, smart folk were just working the carry trade, smilin' and tellin' stories over some nice drinks but there was a leak in the basement and water was coming in; slowly at first.
So, while the dot com and the flush of Enrons was becoming history, people had been working on a new thing; derivatives or packaging A rated paper for international investment purposes. It was very good and soon there was money everywhere. Money poured into realestate development, expansion, acquisition, there was money everywhere; piles of it. dictionary Many of the modern countries were printing money to increase their money supply, gezus, there is money everywhere!!! But drats, foiled again; most of the money wasn't coming back. It was lost in worthless loans on housing and large scale developments and other creative money schemes. The bad money had wormed it's way around the world, it was greedily consumed by top tier corporations until finally, the whole world was tainted with these derivatives. It had been consumed like a mother rat eats poision and returns to the nest to suckle her young. Soon, folk started asking for their money and found that the once solid investments were well oversold and the term leveredged derivatives was starting to be heard in public media...people were going huh?. TV journalists were trying to explain it to the guy sittin' on the couch watching the 6:00 news as he's been noticing that his portfolio had been taking some significant nicks lately. But he didn't understand what they was saying "contigation"...huh?.
Soon, currencies started behaving funny. The dollar was no longer slipping, it was diving against the euro but even the euro was beginning to draw looks. People are buying commodity futures, the consumers are changing. The USD used for oil, gold, commodities, was becoming very weak and since everything is traded in USD and the USD was weak, folk in other currencies could buy lots more for lots less. Now the world economy has become a true world economy, every thing is connected to everything else, parts of a whole; a living breathing whole. But the US consumer had already become the consumee, things are starting to get awkward. Sucking on an endless nipple of energy consumption, working less and enjoying it more, dreaming and wishing instead of saving and planning, it was good and then it was done. Awkward is an understatement.
Next, will come the real players, they are probably suiting up right now methinks. Waiting to get their game on, goin' out hunt something big and bring it home. Soon they will come out it seems, certainly they have been watching and waiting looking for weakness, looking for global scale assets in distress. I wonder how long before they come on to the field. Surely there are at least a few of them. Some of the lesser minions are beginning to peck away at global assets...China in African commodities, Mideast in the US realestate, it's happening but just small stuff. Kings of the Oligarchs, Sheik of the Sheiks, Wall Street Wizards, old money fortunes that have their money out of the game already, cash bullets in the gun, hard assets looking for the right target Greed IS good, looking for the key. This is not going to be a fighting war, it is going to be an acquisition war, a war of ownership and control of world assets at the international level. Yep, the big boys are coming out and we might see them soon or we may not see them for a little while but this whole little story only took about 10 years to evolve, it shouldn't be too long.
<< <i>As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt? >>
I don't see evidence that the debt was decreasing anytime during that period. If I might ask, where are you getting the numbers indicating that the debt was being paid down during the 90s?
I would guess that "rapidly paying down the debt" was loosely based on the so-called miracle surplus claim in the 1990's. But that was "accomplished" using all sources of revenues (including borrowing/taking from Social Security). Such a method of "paying down the debt" would not have passed muster using generally accepted accounting principles.
The declining Roman empire had its extended Legions, bread and circus. And close to the end the money was inflated and the food scarce. The parallels to today's armies, junk foods, and casino's-state lotteries-games shows-stock market-Televised reality shows and sports (ie "the circus") has many similarities.
This guy doesn't publish all that much on the PM sites, but when he does say something it is usually proven to be dead on. He predicts $1700+ gold by this time next year. EO has been very quiet up until the last week or so. And he's not a fan of gold stocks going forward prefering to hold his gold in hand. I'm not sure I agree because the trillions of US dollars floating around in foreign central banks will make their way back by slowly buying into US and foreign companies that own assets worth owning (energy, metals, agri, land, water, etc). That's one way to ween themselves off the accumulated US dollars while still supporting economies.
I've been slowly pondering these different methods of analysis as articles pop up. Each guy seems to have his own favorite methods of determining market moves. David Nichol's fractal curves caught my attention when I first saw it following the March crash. Their curve seemed to clearly show the rise occurring and the big correction that was coming. In looking at his fractal curve today it's very bullish with high daily/weekly momentum placing us right back at about the levels of August 2007. The monthly fractal chart does not yet show a multi-month run in the cards. That chart clearly defined the May 2006 run up and correction as well. Something to keep an eye on imo. Delta turning points, Ski and EWT are also slowly aligning with the fractal charts. Longer term Ski indices are not there yet but feel next week they will be. It seems we are set up to make a strong move now but maybe not to $1000+...yet. Those still waiting for $750-$800 had their chance twice at $850. While there could be a 3rd chance left, more than likely $880-$900 is our new bottom.
<< <i>Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
Sounds true to me and I'm mostly rational. FDR started the big socialistic movement and I'd say we're further along today than ever before. So far along in fact that you can no longer tell one party from the other. The military machine is paid for with funny money which is about as socialistic as it gets.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
We haven't had a balanced budget since Andy Jackson. I trust you are counting Bill Clinton's tactics of using Soc Sec money to show a surplus? That's smoke and mirrors. No administration has paid down the debt in this century to my knowledge and certainly not a rapid paydown. And when you toss in future entitlements which is part of GAAP, you don't come close. Reagan really inflated the nation's debt, Bush 1 added to it as did Clinton, and Bush 2 doused it with gasoline. I wonder if you meant the middle 1890's when we had a major recession in progress? We may have paid down some debt back then....but not likely.
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better.
Frankly, it's mathematically impossible to pay it off with today's dollar value. Just for starters the SS and Healthcare entitlements have to be shrunk to next to nothing....and from there we have to count our pennies again. A big dollar devaluation is almost a must to make any ground on the budget deficit.
Even though the US list of millionaires barely changed (and if you inflation adjust....the number actually fell) the world wide number increased by a lot. We may be losing them, but the rest of the world is making them.
It looked like the PPT took a 2nd day off today.
roadrunner >>
Clinton's so called budget balancing came at the expense of gutting military spending and in part I believe from windfall tax receipts from the Roth IRA conversion. What would have happened had those run out since they had at best 4 years' worth?
Bill; Don’t you just love the endorsement Barclays has given the Federal Reserve?
"Barclays Capital said in its closely-watched Global Outlook that US headline inflation would hit 5.5pc by August and the Fed will have to raise interest rates six times by the end of next year to prevent a wage-spiral. If it hesitates, the bond markets will take matters into their own hands. "This is the first test for central banks in 30 years and they have fluffed it. They have zero credibility, and the Fed is negative if that's possible. It has lost all credibility," said Mr Bond."
Isn’t it a shame that Mr. Bond [James, perhaps?] didn’t mention that the Fed and the old lady of Threadneedle St. have the same ownership. Oh well, I guess there’s room for both of them "under the bus":
The private ownership of the Fed is a closely guarded secret. However, it is generally believed that the following banks/families have at least some stake:
1. Rothschild Bank of London 2. Warburg Bank of Hamburg 3. Rothschild Bank of Berlin 4. Lehman Brothers of New York 5. Lazard Brothers of Paris 6. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York 7. Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy 8. Goldman, Sachs of New York 9. Warburg Bank of Amsterdam 10. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York.
According to the information presented there (assuming not much has changed since 1976) it would appear that the Bank of England actually owns the Federal Reserve and the IRS.
The Bank of England is, in turn, almost certainly owned by the Rothschild family, though if they saw fit to sell shares, they would not be required to report this, since these are privately traded companies we're talking about.
Please note that to determine who controls these institutions, it's not enough to simply list the shareholders, one must also take into consideration who, in turn, owns the shareholders themselves. Furthermore, the influence and connections of the chairmen cannot be ignored, as these men are the ones making the decisions.
Almost makes you want to ask who really owns good ole Barclays, ehhhhh?.....Rob Kirby
Yeah, same Barclays that runs one of our favorite PM ETF's and is owned by BONY. Wonder how JPMorgan is included in that list? Can you say Rothschild's? Yes, it's a very small world and everyone appears to be linked together in some way. Seems odd that each major bank/brokerage is ratting out the other guy's balance sheet and downgrading them. At this rate, none of the big banks/brokerages will have ratings with Aa's or Bb's in them.
Decided to check out some early posts on page 8 and 9 here and ran into Kaytsok's recommendations of analyst Don Hays, former NASA engineer. At $1000 per subscription Hays' advice doesn't come cheap. Hays was predicting in July 2004, a doubling in the Dow or S&P by 2008. Back then gold was $450 and silver $8. Besides very bullish on the Dow, Hays was suggesting that the materials boom in China and India was waning and that commodities would trade in a narrow range for years to come (ie go nowhere).
Obviously $1000/yr with Mr. Hays wasn't money well spent since 2005. I decided to check on his general track record since that time and ran across this link. I was hoping to find that maybe he pulled back a bit on his bullish ways.
Not surprisingly, he has been calling for big gains about every quarter and that a market rebirth was due any day. This gets old after 3 years though. If I was calling for PM's to rise for 3 years and they did squat, I'd expect to be egged. Currently Hays expects big things this year and into spring 2009. We will continue to wait and see. But to me, it seems like he has misjudged about every macro-economic move of the past few years. The stock model that had been so faithful to him over decades doesn't appear to be geared to the credit/debt binging/$1 Quad derivatives society. Of course if he is persistant for years to come, eventually he will be right. Eventually you have to toss the old models out and start over again. What we're dealing with today has no previous model.
Even as an equity guy, I called out Hayes's predictions as dubious.
But as an equity guy I want to extend thanks to the investment banks for creating double inverse etfs.
I kind of hope these guys get what they want as they will find themselves out of business in a few years. OPEC sees $170 oil. I see Donald Trump is building a condo tower in Dubai, if that aint the kiss of death I dont know what is.
Heres a little homework I did on global equity bubbles. The Japanese market rallied about 500% over 6 years before it collapsed. The Nasdaq almost 600% in about 5 years before it collapsed. Now we have the Brazilian market up over 800% in 6 years. I wonder what will happen next? And since their stock market is heavily weighted in basic materials and energy, I really wonder what will happen next. Actually I do have fairly good idea.
This from a country that hasnt seen a recession in nearly 20 years.
U.K. house prices fall; consumer gloom deepens Separate surveys reflect economic fears By William L. Watts, MarkeWatch
Last update: 7:01 p.m. EDT June 29, 2008Comments: 1LONDON (MarkeWatch) - The British housing market continued to stagnate in June, while consumer confidence slipped neared an all-time low amid a darkening economic outlook, according to two separate surveys released Monday.
Hometrack's monthly house price survey found average prices dropped by 1% in June for the ninth consecutive monthly decline. Compared to June 2007, prices were down 3.2% and are off 2.5% since the beginning of the year. Separately, the GfK NOP Index, a measure of consumer confidence, fell five points to -34, from -29 in May, and near the lowest level ever recorded. Confidence in the economic outlook over the next 12 months fell to a record low of -45 from -39 in May. GfK NOP, a consulting firm, conducts the survey on behalf of the European Commission. The Hometrack survey echoed other studies that have found the number of housing transactions have shrunk as potential buyers stay away due to the credit crunch. "New buyer registrations were down 5.7% in June and have now fallen by 52% since the start of the credit crunch," said Richard Donnell, Hometrack's director of research, in a news release. "This drop in volumes was always possible as around half of all transactions in recent years have been driven by aspirational or non-needs-based movers who are now sitting on their hands," he said. The drop in transaction volumes threatens to reach levels not seen since the 1970s, Donnell said. The survey found sellers are now receiving 91.6% of their asking prices, down from 92.3% in May and the lowest level since the series began in 2001. A year ago, sellers were receiving 95.6% of their asking prices. Meanwhile, it's no surprise consumers are growing increasingly gloomy about their economic prospects, said Rachael Joy, a member of the consumer confidence team at GfK NOP. "With rising inflation, gloomy forecasts for interest rates and soaring fuel, utility and food prices dominating the front page headlines, it's no surprise that confidence in the general economy is almost in freefall," she said. "It seems unlikely that this trend will reverse in the near future."
What do you expect from a nation that sold 50% of it's gold at the lowest levels seen in 25 years at the absolute bottom of the market($260/oz)....and then elected the dufus responsible for it as Prime Minister?
I dont think the UK's selling of gold has anything to do with their economic situation, but I do miss Tony Blair.
I make these posts because I want to show that as the USA does have its problems, it is not alone. I have cautioned about the global economy for about a year now, mostly as I am astounded at the strength of the Euro--a fledgling currency-- as opposed to the weakness of the dollar. There are several other currencies that way beyond their value, and they will succomb when the commodity bubble breaks, whether their weakness translates into strength for the dollar remains to be seen. All of this plays into the perceived value of gold and silver which have held their uptrends quite nicely thus far.
The conservatives on this board will love this but the national debt has risen 3.2 and 9.7 respectively since 1946 during the Democratic and Republican regimes. Also the debt FELL during 4 years of the Truman administration.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
...are you ready for the next phase of the perfect storm.
I think this current melt down in the equities will continue through the summer until the election and if the big "O" gets in power it should continue until next spring. There will be little bear traps along the way up to resistance lines (which use to be support lines until late 2007.) But overall I don't see any solutions that us "US Americans" are willing to take until it's too late.
It seems we "US Americans" always need to be kicked in the nads before we wake up and smell the kung pao chicken.
I have balked for a long time, but may give in for a year or so until things mellow down. I was going to bump up my 457 from 550/mo to $1000/mo, but I may just put part that excess into yellow metal for awhile and the other part into maxing out my roth. I have all of my roth money in PRNEX which is doing great this year and will continue to do so for awhile. PRNEX is a fund that deals with natual resources so it will be fine. It's went agaist the market trend up from $60 to $69 since Jan. and up from $64 in October when the stock market briefly peaked.
<< <i>I think this current melt down in the equities will continue through the summer until the election and if the big "O" gets in power it should continue until next spring. There will be little bear traps along the way up to resistance lines (which use to be support lines until late 2007.) But overall I don't see any solutions that us "US Americans" are willing to take until it's too late. >>
I think I have my defensive portion of the portfolio pretty much as I want it now.
I only have about 40% invested in conventional stocks -- about 50% domestic and 50% divided between developed and emerging foreign markets.
I have about 35% in inflation hedges, hard assets and weak-dollar plays like real estate, oil, gold, silver, agriculture, Swiss francs and TIPS.
The remaining 25% is in conventional high-grade bonds, half U.S. Treasuries and half high-quality international.
It'll be hard to hit a home run with a portfolio like this because there will almost always be something under pressure depending on economic conditions, but it will be more resistant to being completely wiped out if I went "all in" to one direction and turned out to be wrong. I think I can sleep with this.
That should be a given, looks like a fair thing to be doing. A little ROTH, a little cash, a little metal...stir lightly, and relax. This is the first year I will max out the ROTH and my wife is doing it too, in fact, she did it last year. Wish I had started on this earlier. Taxwise, it is too good.
That should be a given, looks like a fair thing to be doing. A little ROTH, a little cash, a little metal...stir lightly, and relax. This is the first year I will max out the ROTH and my wife is doing it too, in fact, she did it last year. Wish I had started on this earlier. Taxwise, it is too good. >>
very true. I should have been considering doing it even more than piling up the 457 anyway. I wish I had known of roths a decade ago. I've become educated in investing only in the last four years.
Guru input request: Can someone give us non-economics degreed layman the basic definition of short interest shares and what they portend for future stock movement? I've read the definition a few times but keep coming away with a huh.
<< <i>I have balked for a long time, but may give in for a year or so until things mellow down. I was going to bump up my 457 from 550/mo to $1000/mo, but I may just put part that excess into yellow metal for awhile and the other part into maxing out my roth. I have all of my roth money in PRNEX which is doing great this year and will continue to do so for awhile. PRNEX is a fund that deals with natual resources so it will be fine. It's went agaist the market trend up from $60 to $69 since Jan. and up from $64 in October when the stock market briefly peaked. >>
I've had PRNEX for a while too, and it's been a great fund.
On the Roth, I know I'm in the minority, but I've always preferred a traditional IRA. I know withdrawals from the Roth are tax free, but it's after-tax money to begin with. In round numbers, if your tax rate is 25% you can save $100 into an IRA for $75 out of your paycheck, whereas the Roth would take 100 after-tax dollars to accomplish the same thing. So the IRA gives you more money to compound, which is the big advantage of saving over time. Also the fact that you can make withdrawals from a Roth before 59 1/2 I believe defeats the purpose of saving for retirement, since people will be tempted to raid their Roth. I know I'm simplifying the differences, and as I said most people favor the Roth. Of course, there's no reason why you can't have both.
<< <i>Guru input request: Can someone give us non-economics degreed layman the basic definition of short interest shares and what they portend for future stock movement? I've read the definition a few times but keep coming away with a huh. >>
Short interest measures the amount of market activity is "short" as opposed to long. A high short interest means that more market participants are bearish on the market and more money is on the short side.
Some consider this a bullish contrarian indicator because a high short interest means that there is more that will need to be "covered" with a buy. When the market rises and people who sold short rush out to close their short positions, it's a "short squeeze" that causes a quick upward spike in the market.
<< <i>Guru input request: Can someone give us non-economics degreed layman the basic definition of short interest shares and what they portend for future stock movement? I've read the definition a few times but keep coming away with a huh. >>
Short interest measures the amount of market activity is "short" as opposed to long. A high short interest means that more market participants are bearish on the market and more money is on the short side.
Some consider this a bullish contrarian indicator because a high short interest means that there is more that will need to be "covered" with a buy. When the market rises and people who sold short rush out to close their short positions, it's a "short squeeze" that causes a quick upward spike in the market. >>
with regards to a Roth IRA vs traditional IRS, I prefer the traditional
Who knows how the tax rules will change in the future when it is time to cash out the Roth? There may be no income tax and all sales taxes. Your Social security benefits may be means tested and if you have a huge Roth, then you won't get your SS.
I would rather take the sure tax break now rather than risk getting no tax break at all.
Comments
53 year low, like going back in time.
Gold or GM?
WTH!
Are we near a point, after which it will free fall?
I would expect some serious governmental intervention and ppt action if it appears to be dropping too fast or too much. And governmental interventions are exactly what we really don't need more of.
When large numbers of people see their costs of going to work doubling, their home equities down, and their stock portfolios being creamed by 3% in a day, it won't be too long before they decide to get real defensive with their asset positions - if they even know how.
As usual, OPEC is being less than helpful. There is truly no where to run, and it's about time that the U.S.A. starts getting serious about it's own situation in the scheme of things.
If industry can be allowed to function and society can start protecting itself from degenerates of all types, we might still stand a chance. If you see a smart and tough young innovator or leader - help them out.
I knew it would happen.
Once someone can elevate their brain into realizing how immoral and unfree of a situation that constant increase in government size creates , then one can start looking at areas that are best for investing whatever monies are not stolen from them in places that will help create a better life for them and their Families as well as leaving some kind of legacy behind that will also not be plundered so as the heirs can also have a little something extra. As it stands right now, there's a whole lot of ignorance and debt gonna be passed down by a very large percentage of humans.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>
<< <i>So what now for the stock market, after the trashing it took today??
Are we near a point, after which it will free fall? >>
No.
The stock market remains the only game in town to make
money in commerce and industry for most people. Inflation
will affect profits and stock prices too. It may not keep up
with inflation but it will have a hard time making steep and
prolonged drops in this enviroment. >>
I would add that it's the most common but that says nothing about the mentality of said people.
Personally I'd much prefer having a few items tucked away like a Choice AU-Mint State 1795 Eagle or similar. A dozen or so of coins like that will insure a million bucks for retirement which can be sold one by one with funds even being wired to wherever one likes. ( Till that window is closed as well and some of us know that there are plans to close it so be aware or be square )
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
Some of you might like this story:
Being a collector of many things, many years ago there was a man that would come out of Mexico with some very high-end Mayan art pieces for sale. At that time there were a hand full of wealth collectors in Texas, and one of these was a friend of mine.
My friend would invite me to his house to look at the pieces for sale when this gentleman came to central Texas. At that time these items were priced beyond my means so I did not purchase any, but he only dealt in the very best museum quality items.
Generally this gentleman would have a couple of large cases full of artifacts, perhaps 20 or 30 items. One night while having coffee I ask him where he went after Texas if he did not sell all of his pieces. He told me he went straight to Europe mostly Belgium and Holland.
He said in those countries the taxes are so high, and the estate taxes so ridiculous, due to their socialism, that many wealth people followed the following process.
The family would work hard and save money and as soon as possible buy a home in a nice secure area. They would then all work to pay the home mortgage off. Once paid off they would secretly construct a hidden vault in the house that only family members knew of. Through the years they would get hold of all the cash they could and buy Gold, Rare coins, PM bars, Art, etc. and put it in the vault. At the time of death of the head of the family there were two wills. One for public record, and a secret one just for the family members.
He said that he had been privileged though many years of trading with some of these families to go inside a couple of these vaults, and some contained millions of dollars in hard assets passed from generation to generation.
How many wealthy people in the U.S. are already preparing in this manner do you think?
MF
A better question might be will the FED spend another 500 billion to continue to bail out the financial institutions?
If there comes a point where the banks are just allowed to fail, yes we will see the dow below 10,000.
Yeah, good luck with that.
<< <i>I'm not in favor of government regulation, meddling or however you want to put it, but does anyone think that encouraging the rich to spend their money would provide economic benefit? Is now a good time to do that or should we wait till things get worse? Just a thought that instead of the guvmint sending out stimulus checks maybe they should encourage the wealthy to spend their money. >>
Whether a person, be they wealthy, middle class, or working poor, spends or saves their money in the bank makes little difference. The only bad thing that can happen is for gov't to confiscate it from the productive and redistribute to those that are not.
That's not the only bad thing, but it's an excellent point nonetheless. There's a big difference between being a truly unfortunate case who is in need of a helping hand vs. being a systemic malignancy that *only* sucks the lifeblood out from the hardworking and industrious. A big difference.
If you spend it at least the guvmint can't take it from you. Whats the point of dying uber rich?
Living a decent and healthy lifestyle is much better than living in constant squalor, is it not? It's getting harder to even do that when the guvmint keeps raising the ante'.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>Some of you might like this story:
Being a collector of many things, many years ago there was a man that would come out of Mexico with some very high-end Mayan art pieces for sale. At that time there were a hand full of wealth collectors in Texas, and one of these was a friend of mine.
My friend would invite me to his house to look at the pieces for sale when this gentleman came to central Texas. At that time these items were priced beyond my means so I did not purchase any, but he only dealt in the very best museum quality items.
Generally this gentleman would have a couple of large cases full of artifacts, perhaps 20 or 30 items. One night while having coffee I ask him where he went after Texas if he did not sell all of his pieces. He told me he went straight to Europe mostly Belgium and Holland.
He said in those countries the taxes are so high, and the estate taxes so ridiculous, due to their socialism, that many wealth people followed the following process.
The family would work hard and save money and as soon as possible buy a home in a nice secure area. They would then all work to pay the home mortgage off. Once paid off they would secretly construct a hidden vault in the house that only family members knew of. Through the years they would get hold of all the cash they could and buy Gold, Rare coins, PM bars, Art, etc. and put it in the vault. At the time of death of the head of the family there were two wills. One for public record, and a secret one just for the family members.
He said that he had been privileged though many years of trading with some of these families to go inside a couple of these vaults, and some contained millions of dollars in hard assets passed from generation to generation.
How many wealthy people in the U.S. are already preparing in this manner do you think? >>
that's a good story
many Asian immigrants do that already here and also many Hispanic's
"hard work and save money" is the key, not what one does or how much one makes but how one does it and does with it.
Very true. Extravagant spending, zero savings and increasing debt have become the norm, from the highest levels of our government down to individuals. And you're right, it's not political because it doesn't seem to matter which party controls the Congress or White House.
Yep, last year, the list of US millionaires only grew by 2%, down from 8% in '06. It's tough out there, I'm tellin' ya.
<< <i>One thing is certain and that is government in this country will continue to grow larger and larger. Most rational thinking people call it socialism. Call it whatever you like but the government getting bigger is indisputable. This is not politics or an opinion its factual information
Very true. Extravagant spending, zero savings and increasing debt have become the norm, from the highest levels of our government down to individuals. And you're right, it's not political because it doesn't seem to matter which party controls the Congress or White House. >>
Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better.
Sounds true to me and I'm mostly rational. FDR started the big socialistic movement and I'd say we're further along today than ever before. So far along in fact that you can no longer tell one party from the other. The military machine is paid for with funny money which is about as socialistic as it gets.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
We haven't had a balanced budget since Andy Jackson. I trust you are counting Bill Clinton's tactics of using Soc Sec money to show a surplus? That's smoke and mirrors. No administration has paid down the debt in this century to my knowledge and certainly not a rapid paydown. And when you toss in future entitlements which is part of GAAP, you don't come close. Reagan really inflated the nation's debt, Bush 1 added to it as did Clinton, and Bush 2 doused it with gasoline. I wonder if you meant the middle 1890's when we had a major recession in progress? We may have paid down some debt back then....but not likely.
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better.
Frankly, it's mathematically impossible to pay it off with today's dollar value. Just for starters the SS and Healthcare entitlements have to be shrunk to next to nothing....and from there we have to count our pennies again. A big dollar devaluation is almost a must to make any ground on the budget deficit.
Even though the US list of millionaires barely changed (and if you inflation adjust....the number actually fell) the world wide number increased by a lot. We may be losing them, but the rest of the world is making them.
It looked like the PPT took a 2nd day off today.
roadrunner
Ahh, the 90's. There was a retro-active tax increase on people who work. Not sure which party was in charge, but I do know they were slaughtered in the next election.
<< <i>
<< <i>One thing is certain and that is government in this country will continue to grow larger and larger. Most rational thinking people call it socialism. Call it whatever you like but the government getting bigger is indisputable. This is not politics or an opinion its factual information
Very true. Extravagant spending, zero savings and increasing debt have become the norm, from the highest levels of our government down to individuals. And you're right, it's not political because it doesn't seem to matter which party controls the Congress or White House. >>
Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better. >>
You are precisely the type of ignoramus that is the reason WHY this country has turned socialist.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
We started as a republic of hard working, God
fearing farmer/soldiers. These citizens carved a nation, out of the
forests, conquered the mountains, tamed the plains ,until
we reached the Pacific ocean. Then by war and guile and
purchase, we filled in a Nation, vast, wide and great. In time, our Republic
grew in influence until we became an empire in reach of our destiny. As with
ancient Rome, the rights, obligations and visions of the common folk became less
then the ideals that gave rise to the Republic. Indolence, indulgence and corruption,
have dulled the noble purpose. Leaders, inadequate to the higher needs of mankind,
have strode the halls of power. Incestuous quests for gold and power have entwined
the tree of state ,with a bloated, self serving machinery , that which was to be a representative
government , all too soon, failed to represent ,or to govern. As with Rome, the state
continues in appearance of power and great might. However, behind the facade, lies a
creeping decay, that unimpeded , leads inevitably to decline . To this end, we all play a role.
Our acts of commission and omission, our collective failure to defend what is good and right, will
eventually allow this Nations fall from grace.
Camelot
<< <i>
Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better. >>
You do realize that when our problems grow sufficiently complex everyone will work for the government.
And that an inordinate number of our problems are caused by government.
People were buying these internet services companies and making a fortune and when Mr. Buffett was asked what he thought about it he said he didn't have a clue...they produce no goods, they have no assets, how could they be worth anything, much less these hundreds of dollars a share...for what; air and a couple of guys? Yet, folk bought them and a guy I know got out of it in a good spot and retired early with a house on the coast because of the dot com successes. Still, Mr. Buffett just goes huh? And the term irrational exhuberance was born. Then these companies started folding and it was over as quick as it had begun. Jumping out of windows was an understatement. But, some survived...ala google.
All the while corporations were starting to get examined for inflating their net worth, cooking the books but it wasn't too much of a big deal, it was just kind of a wink. Buy it anyway, it will grow was the mantra. Then, we had Enron, year 2000 bankruptcies. Soon, folk started looking aroung...first the dot com, then the charge that corporations were over valuing themselves on the books but there was already a crack in the foundation; folk were starting to talk but no one did anything. Everyone was suprised by the quick collapse of some rock solid enterprises. Meanwhile, smart folk were just working the carry trade, smilin' and tellin' stories over some nice drinks but there was a leak in the basement and water was coming in; slowly at first.
So, while the dot com and the flush of Enrons was becoming history, people had been working on a new thing; derivatives or packaging A rated paper for international investment purposes. It was very good and soon there was money everywhere. Money poured into realestate development, expansion, acquisition, there was money everywhere; piles of it. dictionary Many of the modern countries were printing money to increase their money supply, gezus, there is money everywhere!!! But drats, foiled again; most of the money wasn't coming back. It was lost in worthless loans on housing and large scale developments and other creative money schemes. The bad money had wormed it's way around the world, it was greedily consumed by top tier corporations until finally, the whole world was tainted with these derivatives. It had been consumed like a mother rat eats poision and returns to the nest to suckle her young. Soon, folk started asking for their money and found that the once solid investments were well oversold and the term leveredged derivatives was starting to be heard in public media...people were going huh?. TV journalists were trying to explain it to the guy sittin' on the couch watching the 6:00 news as he's been noticing that his portfolio had been taking some significant nicks lately. But he didn't understand what they was saying "contigation"...huh?.
Soon, currencies started behaving funny. The dollar was no longer slipping, it was diving against the euro but even the euro was beginning to draw looks. People are buying commodity futures, the consumers are changing. The USD used for oil, gold, commodities, was becoming very weak and since everything is traded in USD and the USD was weak, folk in other currencies could buy lots more for lots less. Now the world economy has become a true world economy, every thing is connected to everything else, parts of a whole; a living breathing whole. But the US consumer had already become the consumee, things are starting to get awkward. Sucking on an endless nipple of energy consumption, working less and enjoying it more, dreaming and wishing instead of saving and planning, it was good and then it was done. Awkward is an understatement.
Next, will come the real players, they are probably suiting up right now methinks. Waiting to get their game on, goin' out hunt something big and bring it home. Soon they will come out it seems, certainly they have been watching and waiting looking for weakness, looking for global scale assets in distress. I wonder how long before they come on to the field. Surely there are at least a few of them. Some of the lesser minions are beginning to peck away at global assets...China in African commodities, Mideast in the US realestate, it's happening but just small stuff. Kings of the Oligarchs, Sheik of the Sheiks, Wall Street Wizards, old money fortunes that have their money out of the game already, cash bullets in the gun, hard assets looking for the right target Greed IS good, looking for the key. This is not going to be a fighting war, it is going to be an acquisition war, a war of ownership and control of world assets at the international level. Yep, the big boys are coming out and we might see them soon or we may not see them for a little while but this whole little story only took about 10 years to evolve, it shouldn't be too long.
This is going to get a lot more interesting.
Experimental post, please do not consume.
<< <i>As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt? >>
Here are the figures I found for the national debt in the 90s (from The Bureau of the Public Debt):
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25
I don't see evidence that the debt was decreasing anytime during that period. If I might ask, where are you getting the numbers indicating that the debt was being paid down during the 90s?
The declining Roman empire had its extended Legions, bread and circus. And close to the end the money was inflated and the food scarce. The parallels to today's armies, junk foods, and casino's-state lotteries-games shows-stock market-Televised reality shows and sports (ie "the circus") has many similarities.
Enrico Orlandini on gold's past - present - future
This guy doesn't publish all that much on the PM sites, but when he does say something it is usually proven to be dead on. He predicts $1700+ gold by this time next year. EO has been very quiet up until the last week or so. And he's not a fan of gold stocks going forward prefering to hold his gold in hand. I'm not sure I agree because the trillions of US dollars floating around in foreign central banks will make their way back by slowly buying into US and foreign companies that own assets worth owning (energy, metals, agri, land, water, etc). That's one way to ween themselves off the accumulated US dollars while still supporting economies.
Concerning ski indices...delta turning points..elliot waves...Daniel codes...and fractal analysis.
I've been slowly pondering these different methods of analysis as articles pop up. Each guy seems to have his own favorite methods of determining market moves. David Nichol's fractal curves caught my attention when I first saw it following the March crash. Their curve seemed to clearly show the rise occurring and the big correction that was coming. In looking at his fractal curve today it's very bullish with high daily/weekly momentum placing us right back at about the levels of August 2007. The monthly fractal chart does not yet show a multi-month run in the cards. That chart clearly defined the May 2006 run up and correction as well. Something to keep an eye on imo. Delta turning points, Ski and EWT are also slowly aligning with the fractal charts. Longer term Ski indices are not there yet but feel next week they will be. It seems we are set up to make a strong move now but maybe not to $1000+...yet. Those still waiting for $750-$800 had their chance twice at $850. While there could be a 3rd chance left, more than likely $880-$900 is our new bottom.
David Nichols gold fractal dimensions
roadrunner
<< <i>Neither of you believe the above statements, do you? First, a truly rational person would not call a larger government "socialsim". That person would look at WHY the government is growing larger, and their are many reasons. We have a huge military machine to support, for one thing. There is a lot of pork in every budget, for another. More important, I think, is that society's problems are also growing much more complex and with a much larger population. Overall, however, I'd say our government is less socialistic today than at any time I've been alive.
Sounds true to me and I'm mostly rational. FDR started the big socialistic movement and I'd say we're further along today than ever before. So far along in fact that you can no longer tell one party from the other. The military machine is paid for with funny money which is about as socialistic as it gets.
As far as the second statement, it DOES make a difference which party is in power. Remember the 90s when we were rapidly paying down our nation's debt?
We haven't had a balanced budget since Andy Jackson. I trust you are counting Bill Clinton's tactics of using Soc Sec money to show a surplus? That's smoke and mirrors. No administration has paid down the debt in this century to my knowledge and certainly not a rapid paydown. And when you toss in future entitlements which is part of GAAP, you don't come close. Reagan really inflated the nation's debt, Bush 1 added to it as did Clinton, and Bush 2 doused it with gasoline. I wonder if you meant the middle 1890's when we had a major recession in progress? We may have paid down some debt back then....but not likely.
What I DO agree about is that spending and debt issues are not going to be solved any time soon. We are in too deep of a hole for that. But the sooner we start climbing, the better.
Frankly, it's mathematically impossible to pay it off with today's dollar value. Just for starters the SS and Healthcare entitlements have to be shrunk to next to nothing....and from there we have to count our pennies again. A big dollar devaluation is almost a must to make any ground on the budget deficit.
Even though the US list of millionaires barely changed (and if you inflation adjust....the number actually fell) the world wide number increased by a lot. We may be losing them, but the rest of the world is making them.
It looked like the PPT took a 2nd day off today.
roadrunner >>
Clinton's so called budget balancing came at the expense of gutting military spending and in part I believe from windfall tax receipts from the Roth IRA conversion. What would have happened had those run out since they had at best 4 years' worth?
From Le Metropole 27th June 2008
Rob Kirby…
Bill;
Don’t you just love the endorsement Barclays has given the Federal Reserve?
"Barclays Capital said in its closely-watched Global Outlook that US headline inflation would hit 5.5pc by August and the Fed will have to raise interest rates six times by the end of next year to prevent a wage-spiral. If it hesitates, the bond markets will take matters into their own hands. "This is the first test for central banks in 30 years and they have fluffed it. They have zero credibility, and the Fed is negative if that's possible. It has lost all credibility," said Mr Bond."
Isn’t it a shame that Mr. Bond [James, perhaps?] didn’t mention that the Fed and the old lady of Threadneedle St. have the same ownership. Oh well, I guess there’s room for both of them "under the bus":
The private ownership of the Fed is a closely guarded secret. However, it is generally believed that the following banks/families have at least some stake:
1. Rothschild Bank of London
2. Warburg Bank of Hamburg
3. Rothschild Bank of Berlin
4. Lehman Brothers of New York
5. Lazard Brothers of Paris
6. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
7. Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy
8. Goldman, Sachs of New York
9. Warburg Bank of Amsterdam
10. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York.
Now, the long answer is more complex. Have a look at these charts:
http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/whofed.html
According to the information presented there (assuming not much has changed since 1976) it would appear that the Bank of England actually owns the Federal Reserve and the IRS.
The Bank of England is, in turn, almost certainly owned by the Rothschild family, though if they saw fit to sell shares, they would not be required to report this, since these are privately traded companies we're talking about.
Please note that to determine who controls these institutions, it's not enough to simply list the shareholders, one must also take into consideration who, in turn, owns the shareholders themselves. Furthermore, the influence and connections of the chairmen cannot be ignored, as these men are the ones making the decisions.
Almost makes you want to ask who really owns good ole Barclays, ehhhhh?.....Rob Kirby
Yeah, same Barclays that runs one of our favorite PM ETF's and is owned by BONY. Wonder how JPMorgan is included in that list? Can you say Rothschild's? Yes, it's a very small world and everyone appears to be linked together in some way. Seems odd that each major bank/brokerage is ratting out the other guy's balance sheet and downgrading them. At this rate, none of the big banks/brokerages will have ratings with Aa's or Bb's in them.
roadrunner
Obviously $1000/yr with Mr. Hays wasn't money well spent since
2005. I decided to check on his general track record since that time
and ran across this link. I was hoping to find that maybe he pulled back a bit on his bullish ways.
Don Hays track record
Not surprisingly, he has been calling for big gains about every quarter and that a market rebirth was due any day. This gets old after 3 years though. If I was calling for PM's to rise for 3 years and they did squat, I'd expect to be egged. Currently Hays expects big things this year and into spring 2009. We will continue to wait and see. But to me, it seems like he has misjudged about every macro-economic move of the past few years. The stock model that had been so faithful to him over decades doesn't appear to be geared to the credit/debt binging/$1 Quad derivatives society. Of course if he is persistant for years to come, eventually he will be right. Eventually you have to toss the old models out and start over again. What we're dealing with today has no previous model.
roadrunner
But as an equity guy I want to extend thanks to the investment banks for creating double inverse etfs.
I kind of hope these guys get what they want as they will find themselves out of business in a few years. OPEC sees $170 oil. I see Donald Trump is building a condo tower in Dubai, if that aint the kiss of death I dont know what is.
Heres a little homework I did on global equity bubbles. The Japanese market rallied about 500% over 6 years before it collapsed. The Nasdaq almost 600% in about 5 years before it collapsed. Now we have the Brazilian market up over 800% in 6 years. I wonder what will happen next? And since their stock market is heavily weighted in basic materials and energy, I really wonder what will happen next. Actually I do have fairly good idea.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
U.K. house prices fall; consumer gloom deepens
Separate surveys reflect economic fears
By William L. Watts, MarkeWatch
Last update: 7:01 p.m. EDT June 29, 2008Comments: 1LONDON (MarkeWatch) - The British housing market continued to stagnate in June, while consumer confidence slipped neared an all-time low amid a darkening economic outlook, according to two separate surveys released Monday.
Hometrack's monthly house price survey found average prices dropped by 1% in June for the ninth consecutive monthly decline. Compared to June 2007, prices were down 3.2% and are off 2.5% since the beginning of the year.
Separately, the GfK NOP Index, a measure of consumer confidence, fell five points to -34, from -29 in May, and near the lowest level ever recorded. Confidence in the economic outlook over the next 12 months fell to a record low of -45 from -39 in May. GfK NOP, a consulting firm, conducts the survey on behalf of the European Commission.
The Hometrack survey echoed other studies that have found the number of housing transactions have shrunk as potential buyers stay away due to the credit crunch.
"New buyer registrations were down 5.7% in June and have now fallen by 52% since the start of the credit crunch," said Richard Donnell, Hometrack's director of research, in a news release.
"This drop in volumes was always possible as around half of all transactions in recent years have been driven by aspirational or non-needs-based movers who are now sitting on their hands," he said.
The drop in transaction volumes threatens to reach levels not seen since the 1970s, Donnell said.
The survey found sellers are now receiving 91.6% of their asking prices, down from 92.3% in May and the lowest level since the series began in 2001. A year ago, sellers were receiving 95.6% of their asking prices.
Meanwhile, it's no surprise consumers are growing increasingly gloomy about their economic prospects, said Rachael Joy, a member of the consumer confidence team at GfK NOP.
"With rising inflation, gloomy forecasts for interest rates and soaring fuel, utility and food prices dominating the front page headlines, it's no surprise that confidence in the general economy is almost in freefall," she said. "It seems unlikely that this trend will reverse in the near future."
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
roadrunner
I make these posts because I want to show that as the USA does have its problems, it is not alone. I have cautioned about the global economy for about a year now, mostly as I am astounded at the strength of the Euro--a fledgling currency-- as opposed to the weakness of the dollar. There are several other currencies that way beyond their value, and they will succomb when the commodity bubble breaks, whether their weakness translates into strength for the dollar remains to be seen. All of this plays into the perceived value of gold and silver which have held their uptrends quite nicely thus far.
Always remember.....perception is reality.
Central bankers not too optimistic
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Well, just Love coins, period.
...are you ready for the next phase of the perfect storm.
I think this current melt down in the equities will continue through the summer until the election and if the big "O" gets in power it should continue until next spring. There will be little bear traps along the way up to resistance lines (which use to be support lines until late 2007.) But overall I don't see any solutions that us "US Americans" are willing to take until it's too late.
It seems we "US Americans" always need to be kicked in the nads before we wake up and smell the kung pao chicken.
Ren
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
<< <i>I think this current melt down in the equities will continue through the summer until the election and if the big "O" gets in power it should continue until next spring. There will be little bear traps along the way up to resistance lines (which use to be support lines until late 2007.) But overall I don't see any solutions that us "US Americans" are willing to take until it's too late. >>
I think I have my defensive portion of the portfolio pretty much as I want it now.
I only have about 40% invested in conventional stocks -- about 50% domestic and 50% divided between developed and emerging foreign markets.
I have about 35% in inflation hedges, hard assets and weak-dollar plays like real estate, oil, gold, silver, agriculture, Swiss francs and TIPS.
The remaining 25% is in conventional high-grade bonds, half U.S. Treasuries and half high-quality international.
It'll be hard to hit a home run with a portfolio like this because there will almost always be something under pressure depending on economic conditions, but it will be more resistant to being completely wiped out if I went "all in" to one direction and turned out to be wrong. I think I can sleep with this.
This is getting old as this has been happening to me for the past 30 years.
Sure, I did fantastically well in the stock market in the mid to late 1990's. But was an exception in all these years.
That should be a given, looks like a fair thing to be doing. A little ROTH, a little cash, a little metal...stir lightly, and relax. This is the first year I will max out the ROTH and my wife is doing it too, in fact, she did it last year. Wish I had started on this earlier. Taxwise, it is too good.
<< <i>"...part into maxing out my roth"
That should be a given, looks like a fair thing to be doing. A little ROTH, a little cash, a little metal...stir lightly, and relax. This is the first year I will max out the ROTH and my wife is doing it too, in fact, she did it last year. Wish I had started on this earlier. Taxwise, it is too good. >>
very true. I should have been considering doing it even more than piling up the 457 anyway. I wish I had known of roths a decade ago. I've become educated in investing only in the last four years.
Positive BST Transactions (buyers and sellers): wondercoin, blu62vette, BAJJERFAN, privatecoin, blu62vette, AlanLastufka, privatecoin
#1 1951 Bowman Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#2 1980 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
#8 (and climbing) 1972 Topps Los Angeles Rams Team Set
<< <i>I have balked for a long time, but may give in for a year or so until things mellow down. I was going to bump up my 457 from 550/mo to $1000/mo, but I may just put part that excess into yellow metal for awhile and the other part into maxing out my roth. I have all of my roth money in PRNEX which is doing great this year and will continue to do so for awhile. PRNEX is a fund that deals with natual resources so it will be fine. It's went agaist the market trend up from $60 to $69 since Jan. and up from $64 in October when the stock market briefly peaked. >>
I've had PRNEX for a while too, and it's been a great fund.
On the Roth, I know I'm in the minority, but I've always preferred a traditional IRA. I know withdrawals from the Roth are tax free, but it's after-tax money to begin with. In round numbers, if your tax rate is 25% you can save $100 into an IRA for $75 out of your paycheck, whereas the Roth would take 100 after-tax dollars to accomplish the same thing. So the IRA gives you more money to compound, which is the big advantage of saving over time. Also the fact that you can make withdrawals from a Roth before 59 1/2 I believe defeats the purpose of saving for retirement, since people will be tempted to raid their Roth. I know I'm simplifying the differences, and as I said most people favor the Roth. Of course, there's no reason why you can't have both.
<< <i>Guru input request: Can someone give us non-economics degreed layman the basic definition of short interest shares and what they portend for future stock movement? I've read the definition a few times but keep coming away with a huh. >>
Short interest measures the amount of market activity is "short" as opposed to long. A high short interest means that more market participants are bearish on the market and more money is on the short side.
Some consider this a bullish contrarian indicator because a high short interest means that there is more that will need to be "covered" with a buy. When the market rises and people who sold short rush out to close their short positions, it's a "short squeeze" that causes a quick upward spike in the market.
<< <i>
<< <i>Guru input request: Can someone give us non-economics degreed layman the basic definition of short interest shares and what they portend for future stock movement? I've read the definition a few times but keep coming away with a huh. >>
Short interest measures the amount of market activity is "short" as opposed to long. A high short interest means that more market participants are bearish on the market and more money is on the short side.
Some consider this a bullish contrarian indicator because a high short interest means that there is more that will need to be "covered" with a buy. When the market rises and people who sold short rush out to close their short positions, it's a "short squeeze" that causes a quick upward spike in the market. >>
good educatin'
thanks agin guys
Who knows how the tax rules will change in the future when it is time to cash out the Roth? There may be no income tax and all sales taxes. Your Social security benefits may be means tested and if you have a huge Roth, then you won't get your SS.
I would rather take the sure tax break now rather than risk getting no tax break at all.