RedScare Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I think this is a good example of people having their own perceptions clouded by the bias they hold against anything against their own views. I didn't even say a word about race or racism. C wean get back to the topic of discussion? If a poster writes "radical", and another poster goes off on a racial screed, is that an indication of latent racism on the part of the 2nd poster? Back to the topic, I bought a little bit of XOM today, and a little bit of Ford. In spite of the 500 point dropoff, I am only down 1% on my purchases. We'll see how they hold up in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted August 11, 2011 Author Share Posted August 11, 2011 Ive been eyeing some of the smaller priced ones that I think took an unjustified his like oracle, but ive been thinking about a bit of apple, my concern as to how effective it would be without jobs. Or how much of a hit it would take if/when he dies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I think Jobs death will hurt Apple, as he seems to drive most of the innovation there. I'm starting to suspect he is the head borg, and when he dies, the colony dies. Apple was certainly drifting when he was away. Apple is also pretty high priced right now, a doubling of stock price would mean a market cap of over 600 million dollars, and the company isn't worth that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I think this is a good example of people having their own perceptions clouded by the bias they hold against anything against their own views.I didn't even say a word about race or racism.C wean get back to the topic of discussion?I hold no bias. I have become just as disenchanted with the republican party as the democrat party....and the racial component is the only perceived radical element of the tea party. If you were not referring to the tea party as racists, then what was the reference to?Back on topic though - I am going to revise my predictions downward. Although I too bought XOM yesterday....I previously put the DOW floor at 10,000 because I believe it to be a mental roadblock It is the point where many investors got in, and so they are unwilling to sell below that point...Im going to revise it now to 9000. If France is downgraded, and it should be, it will rock the market again. If the market falls again today, and oil dips further down we are going to see a big hit on all oil producers and service companies....Look to Halliburton, Schlumberger, and Baker taking big hitsI am following Baker closely. They possess the most technology related to fracing of land based wells, and possess the most equipment to complete the process. Fracing utilizes a tremendous amount of assets, so as long as the EPA does not shut the process down, look for Baker to make substantial future gains as the other companies are all already playing catch up. P/E is above my max and dividend is too low, but if the price falls enough it may be a good play....its already at 58 from 80.I also like Johnson & Johnson...large assets, heavily purchased products that are used in day/day life...P/E is a little bit high, but they have a decent dividend that has increased year over year. When the market is like it is I am looking for discount stocks that pay relatively high dividends for my long term positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The racial element is only there because that is what the news media WANTS to report on. It makes good news....half the racists in the movement are plants by half wit liberals. That statement and the utterly ridiculous belief that there is a predominate racial prejudice in the tea party infuriates me because it is the last ditch effort of a losing party full of half wits to negatively label something that opposes them in an effort to marginalize the movement. Its totally ridiculous to say that a movement that wants to cut spending and prevent taxes from being raised is racist. I oppose almost everything Obama has done, and it is not because he is half black...I oppose the half that is white too. He is just a terrible president. The tea party is right in this instance. We have to cut spending. It is not something that can just be pushed further down the road. The Obama admin had 2 years of both chambers and NEVER passed a budget. The amount of government spending has expanded so rapidly that the only logical thing that can be done is to stop spending money, and not small cuts...huge enormous cuts. Taxes will need to be raised eventually but it is foolish to even contemplate raising taxes without corresponding huge cuts in spending and a balanced budget amendment at the same time....Democrats were not willing to even make an effort at real cuts, so the Tea Party made no effort to bend on taxes. The thought of a balanced budget is repulsive to the democrats....They consider the most basic requirement of any entity (a balanced budget) to be completely untouchable to their constituents. The Tea Party did not win the debt ceiling debate, they lost. They compromised....the democrats got more money to squander and the amount of cuts (less than 1%) was pathetic at best.The downgrade was not because of instability caused by the tea party - the downgrade was because of instability caused by an unserviceable debt. We CUT our way to another 1.6 Trillion dollar deficit this year. That is pathetic.Let's put the 2011 federal budget into perspective: U.S. income: $2,170,000,000,000 Federal budget: $3,820,000,000,000 New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000 National debt: $14,271,000,000,000 Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000 (about 1 percent of the budget)WOW - 1 whole percent. Big cut....we still added 1.6 TRILLION dollars to the debt.I understand and agree with the need to cut spending... but you DO know that our population is growing right? I don't agree with federal programs/grants that cost $15,000,000 to study the mating behaviour of beavers or similar programs... Perhaps we should start with this kind of wasteful spending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The racial element is only there because that is what the news media WANTS to report on. It makes good news....half the racists in the movement are plants by half wit liberals. That statement and the utterly ridiculous belief that there is a predominate racial prejudice in the tea party infuriates me because it is the last ditch effort of a losing party full of half wits to negatively label something that opposes them in an effort to marginalize the movement. Its totally ridiculous to say that a movement that wants to cut spending and prevent taxes from being raised is racist. I oppose almost everything Obama has done, and it is not because he is half black...I oppose the half that is white too. He is just a terrible president. The tea party is right in this instance. We have to cut spending. It is not something that can just be pushed further down the road. The Obama admin had 2 years of both chambers and NEVER passed a budget. The amount of government spending has expanded so rapidly that the only logical thing that can be done is to stop spending money, and not small cuts...huge enormous cuts. Taxes will need to be raised eventually but it is foolish to even contemplate raising taxes without corresponding huge cuts in spending and a balanced budget amendment at the same time....Democrats were not willing to even make an effort at real cuts, so the Tea Party made no effort to bend on taxes. The thought of a balanced budget is repulsive to the democrats....They consider the most basic requirement of any entity (a balanced budget) to be completely untouchable to their constituents. The Tea Party did not win the debt ceiling debate, they lost. They compromised....the democrats got more money to squander and the amount of cuts (less than 1%) was pathetic at best.The downgrade was not because of instability caused by the tea party - the downgrade was because of instability caused by an unserviceable debt. We CUT our way to another 1.6 Trillion dollar deficit this year. That is pathetic.Let's put the 2011 federal budget into perspective: U.S. income: $2,170,000,000,000 Federal budget: $3,820,000,000,000 New debt: $ 1,650,000,000,000 National debt: $14,271,000,000,000 Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000 (about 1 percent of the budget)WOW - 1 whole percent. Big cut....we still added 1.6 TRILLION dollars to the debt.Uh... You DO know that S&P themselves stated that their downgrade was mostly due to the debt/spending/ceiling gridlock in congress, right? The other factor was their belief in the inadequacy of the deal to stabilize spending/debt by the "middle of the decade". I dont know about y'all but the "middle of the decade" sounds a bit arbitrary to me... so I think it is safe to say this bit can be discounted slightly if not mostly and that the real reasons where political.Unwillingness to pay a debt is far different than being able to.Forgot to include link:http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/08/sps-credit-rating-cut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I understand and agree with the need to cut spending... but you DO know that our population is growing right? I don't agree with federal programs/grants that cost $15,000,000 to study the mating behaviour of beavers or similar programs... Perhaps we should start with this kind of wasteful spending.There is only one answer to the current problem we have. It is to cut spending. We can not spend our way out of the problem, and the growth in population is not keeping pace with the growth of the deficit. The servicing of the interest on the debt alone is going to become unmanageable if we continue on course. I agree that you start with the silly stuff, but there is no political will to even do that. We simply need to cut across the boards possibly to pre-2007 levels. If you do that, nobody is getting special treatment or the appearance of favoritism. If the Dems dont want massive cuts in SS and medicaid then they need to pass a balanced budget amendment and then find the cuts to other areas to get there. The military is over funded, the right needs to recognize that and reduce it.We have a spending problem. There is zero political will on the left to stop spending. The left wants the government to spend more because the politicians on the left want to get re-elected.The downgrade was political, but it was done for a good reason. The left has nothing to gain by getting their financial affairs in order. They only lose voters as they cut services and spending. The right has everything to gain by getting the financial affairs in order....they gain voters by cutting spending. The divide between the two is growing as it becomes not the haves vs the have nots, but rather it is the people who are willing to work vs those who are not. The expectations that a high school diploma will get you a $25 an hour job somewhere is unreasonable now. Our labor market is now competing globally....Our workers need to realize that the days of just going to work in a factory for a good middle class life are gone. China is willing to do that work for far less than our workers. We need a new model going forward, and continuing to take from those who are still prospering to give to those who are not is not going to create the model of success we will need for the future. The entitlements and handouts are going to stifle the innovation needed for us to revive our society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The following people would like to thank the tea party and the republicans for not raising their taxes. The middle class desperately needs to keep up the fight on behalf of the wealthy as there is no nobler cause. Every yacht helps but more corporate jets are still badly needed.Bill Gates $54 B 55 Medina, WA MicrosoftWarren Buffett $45 B 80 Omaha, NE Berkshire HathawayLarry Ellison $27 B 66 Woodside, CA OracleChristy Walton & family$24 B 56 Jackson, WY WalmartCharles Koch$21.5 B 75 Wichita, KS DiversifiedDavid Koch$21.5 B 70 New York, NY DiversifiedJim Walton$20.1 B 63 Bentonville, AR WalmartAlice Walton$20 B 61 Fort Worth, TX WalmartS. Robson Walton$19.7 B 67 Bentonville, AR WalmartMichael Bloomberg$18 B 69 New York, NY BloombergLarry Page$15 B 38 Palo Alto, CA GoogleSergey Brin$15 B 37 San Francisco, CA GoogleSheldon Adelson$14.7 B 77 Las Vegas, NV casinosGeorge Soros$14.2 B 80 Westchester, NY hedge fundsMichael Dell$14 B 46 Austin, TX DellSteve Ballmer$13.1 B 55 Seattle, WA MicrosoftPaul Allen$12.7 B 58 Mercer Island, WA Microsoft, investmentsJeff Bezos$12.6 B 47 Seattle, WA AmazonAnne Cox Chambers$12.5 B 91 Atlanta, GA Cox EnterprisesJohn Paulson$12.4 B 55 New York, NY hedge fundsDonald Bren$12 B 78 Newport Beach, CA real estateAbigail Johnson$11.3 B 49 Boston, MA FidelityPhil Knight$11.1 B 73 Beaverton, OR NikeCarl Icahn$11 B 75 New York, NY leveraged buyoutsRonald Perelman$11 B 68 New York, NY leveraged buyoutsForrest Mars$10 B 79 Big Horn, WY candy, pet foodJohn Mars$10 B 74 Jackson, WY candy, pet foodJacqueline Mars$10 B 71 The Plains, VA candy, pet foodGeorge Kaiser$9.4 B 68 Tulsa, OK oil & gas, bankingJames Simons$8.7 B 72 East Setauket, NY hedge fundsLen Blavatnik$7.5 B 53 London Access IndustriesSteve Cohen$7.3 B 55 Greenwich, CT hedge fundsEdward Johnson$7.1 B 80 Boston, MA FidelityPhilip Anschutz$7 B 71 Denver, CO InvestmentsMark Zuckerberg$6.9 B 26 Palo Alto, CA FacebookJames Goodnight$6.9 B 68 Cary, NC SAS InstituteJack Taylor & family$6.5 B 88 St. Louis, MO Enterprise Rent-A-CarRupert Murdoch$6.2 B 80 New York, NY News CorpJim Kennedy$6.2 B 63 Atlanta, GA Cox EnterprisesBlair Parry-Okeden$6.2 B 60 Scone Cox EnterprisesSamuel Newhouse$6.2 B 83 New York, NY publishingSteve Jobs$6.1 B 56 Palo Alto, CA Apple, PixarAndrew Beal$6 B 58 Dallas, TX bank, real estateEli Broad$5.8 B 77 Los Angeles, CA InvestmentsHarold Hamm$5.8 B 65 Oklahoma City, OK Continental ResourcesPatrick Soon-Shiong$5.6 B 59 Los Angeles, CA generic drugsPierre Omidyar$5.5 B 43 Honolulu, HI EbayEric Schmidt$5.45 B 55 Atherton, CA GoogleDonald Newhouse$5.4 B 81 Somerset County, NJ publishingCharles Butt & family$5.3 B 73 San Antonio, TX supermarketsJohn Menard$5.2 B 71 Eau Claire, WI RetailRichard Kinder$5.2 B 66 Houston, TX pipelinesCharles Ergen$5.2 B 58 Denver, CO EchoStarDavid Geffen$5.1 B 68 Malibu, CA movies, musicHarold Simmons$5 B 79 Dallas, TX InvestmentsRay Dalio$5 B 61 Greenwich, CT hedge fundsFrederik G.H. Meijer$4.9 B 91 Grand Rapids, MI supermarketsIra Rennert$4.5 B 76 New York, NY InvestmentsDennis Washington$4.5 B 76 Missoula, MT construction, miningRalph Lauren$4.4 B 71 New York, NY fashion and retailSam Zell$4.4 B 69 Chicago, IL real estate, private equityRichard DeVos$4.3 B 85 Ada, MI AlticorRichard LeFrak & family$4.3 B 65 New York, NY real estateDavid Tepper$4.3 B 53 Milburn, NJ hedge fundsRay Lee Hunt$4.3 B 68 Dallas, TX Oil, real estateLeonard Lauder$4.2 B 78 New York, NY Estee LauderLester Crown & family$4.2 B 85 Wilmette, IL InvestmentsJohn Paul DeJoria$4.2 B 67 Austin, TX hair products, tequilaRobert Rowling$4.1 B 57 Dallas, TX InvestmentsBruce Kovner$4.1 B 66 New York, NY hedge fundsStephen Schwarzman$4.1 B 64 New York, NY InvestmentsMicky Arison$4.1 B 61 Bal Harbour, FL Carnival CruisesRoger Wang$4.1 B 62 Nanjing, Jiangsu RetailRobert Bass$4 B 63 Fort Worth, TX oil, investmentsDirk Ziff$4 B 46 New York, NY hedge fundsRobert Ziff$4 B 44 New York, NY hedge fundsDaniel Ziff$4 B 39 New York, NY hedge fundsCharles Johnson$4 B 78 San Mateo, CA Franklin ResourcesMarion MacMillan Pictet$3.8 B 78 Hamilton Cargill Inc.Whitney MacMillan$3.8 B 82 Minneapolis, MN Cargill Inc.Cargill MacMillan$3.8 B 83 Indian Springs, CA Cargill Inc.Pauline MacMillan Keinath$3.8 B 77 St. Louis, MO Cargill Inc.Charles Schwab$3.7 B 73 Atherton, CA discount stock brokerageRupert Johnson$3.7 B 69 San Mateo, CA Franklin ResourcesRay Dolby$3.6 B 78 San Francisco, CA Dolby LaboratoriesThomas Frist & family$3.6 B 72 Nashville, TN HCA HealthcareVictor Fung & family$3.55 B 65 Hong Kong RetailLeonard Stern$3.5 B 73 New York, NY real estateGordon Moore$3.5 B 82 Woodside, CA IntelHenry Kravis$3.4 B 67 New York, NY leveraged buyoutsWilliam Koch$3.4 B 70 Palm Beach, FL oil, investmentsHenry Ross Perot Sr$3.4 B 80 Dallas, TX computer services, real estateHaim Saban$3.4 B 66 Beverly Hills, CA televisionJohn Sall$3.4 B 62 Cary, NC SAS InstituteJohn Sobrato & family$3.3 B 71 Atherton, CA real estateJohn Arnold$3.3 B 37 Houston, TX hedge fundsGeorge Lucas$3.25 B 66 Marin County, CA Star WarsAnn Walton Kroenke$3.2 B 62 Columbia, MO WalmartDaniel Och$3.2 B 50 New York, NY hedge funds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barracuda Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The following people would like to thank the tea party and the republicans for not raising their taxes. The middle class desperately needs to keep up the fight on behalf of the wealthy as there is no nobler cause. Every yacht helps but more corporate jets are still badly needed. Some of those, particularly Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, have come out publicly in favor of increasing taxes on the wealthy. I suspect it's more the nouveau riche who are most against raising the nominal rate on the top income brackets. Conservatives in the middle class seem to take an idealogical position against eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the rich, even if those taxes would help balance the budget and not directly affect those in the middle class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted August 11, 2011 Author Share Posted August 11, 2011 Some of those, particularly Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, have come out publicly in favor of increasing taxes on the wealthy. I suspect it's more the nouveau riche who are most against raising the nominal rate on the top income brackets. Conservatives in the middle class seem to take an idealogical position against eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the rich, even if those taxes would help balance the budget and not directly affect those in the middle class.I'll continue the derailment of this thread this once:I don't think the taxation rate should be changed MUCH, however, some of the loopholes that are used should be limited or closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Some of those, particularly Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, have come out publicly in favor of increasing taxes on the wealthy. I suspect it's more the nouveau riche who are most against raising the nominal rate on the top income brackets. Conservatives in the middle class seem to take an idealogical position against eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the rich, even if those taxes would help balance the budget and not directly affect those in the middle class.There is a place on your tax return that you can give extra money to the government. It can be voluntary. If they want to give more Buffett and Gates are more than welcome to do so. Nothing is holding them back except the fact that they dont really want to give more. I don't think the billionaires are the ones that this harms the most. Its the families making $100-250K that are fundamentally against the increase....They fall squarely into the increase and they see the money being literally wasted....most of the families are still heavily in debt from school and home buying and are not financially sound on their retirement yet either. They are wise enough to know that the government is not going to provide for them in the future so they are making smart decisions now to prepare for the future. Also, you cant balance the budget by increasing taxes on the wealthy alone anyways, you would still need exceptionally deep cuts....cuts that democrats are not willing to make. It is not just the republicans and the tea party who are unwilling to give. The democrats are equally as stubborn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 There is only one answer to the current problem we have. It is to cut spending. We can not spend our way out of the problem, and the growth in population is not keeping pace with the growth of the deficit. The servicing of the interest on the debt alone is going to become unmanageable if we continue on course. I agree that you start with the silly stuff, but there is no political will to even do that. We simply need to cut across the boards possibly to pre-2007 levels. If you do that, nobody is getting special treatment or the appearance of favoritism. If the Dems dont want massive cuts in SS and medicaid then they need to pass a balanced budget amendment and then find the cuts to other areas to get there. The military is over funded, the right needs to recognize that and reduce it.We have a spending problem. There is zero political will on the left to stop spending. The left wants the government to spend more because the politicians on the left want to get re-elected.The downgrade was political, but it was done for a good reason. The left has nothing to gain by getting their financial affairs in order. They only lose voters as they cut services and spending. The right has everything to gain by getting the financial affairs in order....they gain voters by cutting spending. The divide between the two is growing as it becomes not the haves vs the have nots, but rather it is the people who are willing to work vs those who are not. The expectations that a high school diploma will get you a $25 an hour job somewhere is unreasonable now. Our labor market is now competing globally....Our workers need to realize that the days of just going to work in a factory for a good middle class life are gone. China is willing to do that work for far less than our workers. We need a new model going forward, and continuing to take from those who are still prospering to give to those who are not is not going to create the model of success we will need for the future. The entitlements and handouts are going to stifle the innovation needed for us to revive our society.Budget amendment... As in the Constitution? Interesting... Some time ago I read an article saying that most economists agree that deficit spending up to a certain percentage was optimal. I'll see if I can find it now.However, if we're going to amend the Constitution to include a balanced federal budget amendment, perhaps it would be a good time to repeal the 14th amendment (or the relevant clauses therein) and replace it with an amendment clarifying birthright citizenship and/or requirements for citizenship? What do y'all think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barracuda Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 There is a place on your tax return that you can give extra money to the government. It can be voluntary. If they want to give more Buffett and Gates are more than welcome to do so. Nothing is holding them back except the fact that they dont really want to give more. I don't think the billionaires are the ones that this harms the most. Its the families making $100-250K that are fundamentally against the increase....They fall squarely into the increase and they see the money being literally wasted....most of the families are still heavily in debt from school and home buying and are not financially sound on their retirement yet either. They are wise enough to know that the government is not going to provide for them in the future so they are making smart decisions now to prepare for the future. Obama proposed restoring only the top two income tax brackets for families making more than $250K. So I still suspect most of their opposition to the tax increase is on idealogical grounds, or they just don't understand the proposal. Also, you cant balance the budget by increasing taxes on the wealthy alone anyways, you would still need exceptionally deep cuts....cuts that democrats are not willing to make. It is not just the republicans and the tea party who are unwilling to give. The democrats are equally as stubborn.True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 There are a lot of worthy causes in the world. Defending billionaires is NOT one of them. Shame on republican sheep - they are the devil's monkey wrench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 There are a lot of worthy causes in the world. Defending billionaires is NOT one of them. Shame on republican sheep - they are the devil's monkey wrench.Spoken like a true class warfare proponent. Jealous much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Spoken like a true class warfare proponent. Jealous much?Spoken like a true Fox News monkey wrench. At last I have been exposed. I'm not a billionaire. And yes, I am very jealous of billionaires, I admit it. I'm not a billionaire and I wish I was one. Then maybe I wouldn't mind republicans and teabaggers fighting in my behalf in place of lesser causes such as feeding the hungry, making education affordable or creating jobs for the middle class.I can understand a billionaire voting teabagger, but anyone who is not a billionaire who spends so much time and energy fighting so hard to help billionaires make more billions and has no problems cutting medical aid to elderly sick people is a sucker, a sadist or a sheep. Say Baah!I now understand your point. If one doesn't make it their life's calling to defend billionaires - they must be jealous. Teabaggers should run with that message. I think it sums up their mission very nicely.Teabaggers are Americas' own junior Al Qaida in waiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The following people would like to thank the tea party and the republicans for not raising their taxes. The middle class desperately needs to keep up the fight on behalf of the wealthy as there is no nobler cause. Every yacht helps but more corporate jets are still badly needed.Bill Gates $54 B 55 Medina, WA MicrosoftWarren Buffett $45 B 80 Omaha, NE Berkshire Hathaway major snippage of irrelevant twaddleWhat's your point? Most of the folks you listed own lots of stock or own valuable businesses. They aren't taxed on their billions, because the US doesn't tax wealth, but taxes income. Warren Buffet takes a salary of $100,000 per year from Berkshire Hathaway because he has other means on which to live. Bill Gates was paid $300,000 as CEO of MSFT. Since their income was low, they paid low taxes. Presumably, they paid capital gains taxes on the stock they sold to generate cash. The way the tax laws work in the US, if you have a giant pile of cash, say a billion dollars in 100's, you pay no income tax. That makes your list irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porchman Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 If it's not clear to anybody at this point, the S&P rating had little to do with the market volatility this week.. The S&P rating's effect on the stock market was given a lot of hype by the media, which continually proves itself poorly analytical in such matters. S&P threatened in April that it was looking at a downgrade. In early July, they named their number for government cuts: $4 Trillion. The Government missed that mark. S&P downgraded. Ummm...no surprise. The largest holders of US debt are holding and buying. What's the emergency over the S&P rating?Here's why we must experience a market week like this....-We were whores to the real estate market. We had a bubble. Bubbles, in economic cycles, take several years to unfold. We're still unfolding...-The mess in Europe continues to unfold. It will continue to unfold. The stock market is going to absorb that unfolding. It will for some time. The EU will prevail. They have the ability to deal with their problems - riots and all.Do not confuse this week's volatility with sovereign debt problems. The volatility is due to real economic conditions. Those conditions still exist. Take advantage of it. Get over it. Commit sepuku. Commit to dollar cost averaging. Do whatever you want to. Regarding all the other arguments above, we should be diligent for long-tern responsibility. That responsibiility is to the fiscal plite of our Government. That responsibility is to the struggling middle class and the poor in our Nation. For some of us, these considerations should be a spiritual. For some of us, these considerations should be a matter of supporting the base of our economy. May we be smart enough to hold these premises in balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 If it's not clear to anybody at this point, the S&P rating had little to do with the market volatility this week.. The S&P rating's effect on the stock market was given a lot of hype by the media, which continually proves itself poorly analytical in such matters. S&P threatened in April that it was looking at a downgrade. In early July, they named their number for government cuts: $4 Trillion. The Government missed that mark. S&P downgraded. Ummm...no surprise. The largest holders of US debt are holding and buying. What's the emergency over the S&P rating?Here's why we must experience a market week like this....-We were whores to the real estate market. We had a bubble. Bubbles, in economic cycles, take several years to unfold. We're still unfolding...-The mess in Europe continues to unfold. It will continue to unfold. The stock market is going to absorb that unfolding. It will for some time. The EU will prevail. They have the ability to deal with their problems - riots and all.Do not confuse this week's volatility with sovereign debt problems. The volatility is due to real economic conditions. Those conditions still exist. Take advantage of it. Get over it. Commit sepuku. Commit to dollar cost averaging. Do whatever you want to. I kind of figured that the longer-term effect of the S&P downgrade had already been priced-in, at least for the most part. But I do think that it probably triggered a lot of trades based in behavioral finance models. 'If I think that other traders are going to be spooked (rightly or wrongly), then I will try to act spooked a few moments before they are to stay ahead of the curve, and then jump back in when the moment seems right.' If I think that other traders are adopting my same strategy, then that effect is subject to a multiplier and a great deal of volatility.But essentially, you're right. The story is political in nature, not economic.Regarding all the other arguments above, we should be diligent for long-tern responsibility. That responsibiility is to the fiscal plite of our Government. That responsibility is to the struggling middle class and the poor in our Nation. For some of us, these considerations should be a spiritual. For some of us, these considerations should be a matter of supporting the base of our economy. May we be smart enough to hold these premises in balance.IMHO, there should not be any further extension of unemployment benefits without attaching those benefits to a jobs program. If you want unemployment, you have to go and help rebuild a city park or a freeway or something.And as for redistribution of wealth in the form of transfer payments, I think that such things should be a matter of tax-deductible charity. And individuals should decide their priorities, whether the poor or the elderly or disabled veterans, etc., are most deserving. Or perhaps it's artists...or billionaires. Whatever. It's not my money to take, and the fact is that money finds a way to flow within the modern global economy, regardless of what anybody does with it.You bring up the spiritual component of "responsibility". I don't think that a Christian god that sets an example of allowing individuals their free will and the opportunity to sin would much favor coercive mechanisms that deprive an individual of the opportunity to freely demonstrate righteous behavior. It seems inconsistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 If it's not clear to anybody at this point, the S&P rating had little to do with the market volatility this week.. The S&P rating's effect on the stock market was given a lot of hype by the media, which continually proves itself poorly analytical in such matters. S&P threatened in April that it was looking at a downgrade. In early July, they named their number for government cuts: $4 Trillion. The Government missed that mark. S&P downgraded. Ummm...no surprise. The largest holders of US debt are holding and buying. What's the emergency over the S&P rating?Here's why we must experience a market week like this....-We were whores to the real estate market. We had a bubble. Bubbles, in economic cycles, take several years to unfold. We're still unfolding...-The mess in Europe continues to unfold. It will continue to unfold. The stock market is going to absorb that unfolding. It will for some time. The EU will prevail. They have the ability to deal with their problems - riots and all.Do not confuse this week's volatility with sovereign debt problems. The volatility is due to real economic conditions. Those conditions still exist. Take advantage of it. Get over it. Commit sepuku. Commit to dollar cost averaging. Do whatever you want to. Regarding all the other arguments above, we should be diligent for long-tern responsibility. That responsibiility is to the fiscal plite of our Government. That responsibility is to the struggling middle class and the poor in our Nation. For some of us, these considerations should be a spiritual. For some of us, these considerations should be a matter of supporting the base of our economy. May we be smart enough to hold these premises in balance.You lost me at spiritual... Spirituality has nothing to do with any of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 You lost me at spiritual... Spirituality has nothing to do with any of this. Depending on how much you lose, you might change your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I've always had the "Buy and hold" mentality when it came to stocks, and I'm just seeing a BUNCH of opportunity. I already sank some "beer money" in stocks over the past few days.Needless to say, there are stocks that have taken a substantial hit, but I see it as a buying opportunity. Which ones do you think have taken an undeserved hit that are bound to make a substantial rebound when we (eventually) recover. But there are too many for one person to research. Any opinions of what you might buy?BTW: I buy to hold for 5 yrs or more, I'm not out for a quick buck, so I'm curious to hear your opinions.I'm thinking about just buying an S&P index fund. As it happens I just finished reading 'The Myth of the Rational Market' which points out how difficult it is to consistently pick stocks that out-perform the market over time. That said, although they would have tanked last week I think that energy stocks are good bets in general. Demand for oil isn't going to go away. It seems somewhat surprising given the increased concern over a recession, but a lot of banks are still predicting a strong stock market for the remainder of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted August 14, 2011 Author Share Posted August 14, 2011 I'm thinking about just buying an S&P index fund. As it happens I just finished reading 'The Myth of the Rational Market' which points out how difficult it is to consistently pick stocks that out-perform the market over time. That said, although they would have tanked last week I think that energy stocks are good bets in general. Demand for oil isn't going to go away. It seems somewhat surprising given the increased concern over a recession, but a lot of banks are still predicting a strong stock market for the remainder of the year.I've always had a tendency buy stocks while people are in a panic and have done quite well with it. Problem is that people have a tendency to run as a herd and when the market does its gyrations, I just ride out the storm and look at opportunities to buy. I NEVER try to sell during these times, but when I think the news on a particular holding seems to justify it, and that is rare. That said, my daughter is going to be in for a juicy inheritance, I'm too tight fisted to cash out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barracuda Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 The following people would like to thank the tea party and the republicans for not raising their taxes. The middle class desperately needs to keep up the fight on behalf of the wealthy as there is no nobler cause. Every yacht helps but more corporate jets are still badly needed.Warren Buffett $45 B 80 Omaha, NE Berkshire HathawayFrom Warren Buffett...I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=3http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/buffett-blasts-low-taxes-billionaires-says-congress-must-142239366.html;_ylt=AmKi_0eL5SgJinP3zOqHOl.7YWsA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1Ym92NjQ5BHBvcwM3BHNlYwN0b3BTdG9yaWVzBHNsawNidWZmZXR0c3VwZXI-?sec=topStories&pos=4&asset=&ccode= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 See. Mr. Buffett "mostly" gets it. But don't worry, I'm sure he'll have enough money left over for himself.I wonder if he saw my post at HAIF and I gave him a guilt trip so he decided to do the right thing. You are welcomed, America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Sure glad I don't own any Apple stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted August 25, 2011 Author Share Posted August 25, 2011 Sure glad I don't own any Apple stock.Kinda makes you wonder how big of a hit it will take. Predictions on the opening/closing bell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20thStDad Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Kinda makes you wonder how big of a hit it will take. Predictions on the opening/closing bell?$300 at tomorrow's close (down $85) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted August 25, 2011 Author Share Posted August 25, 2011 $300 at tomorrow's close (down $85)In after hours it fell 5%. I feel its going to drop another $100-150 before some sharks scoop it up, bringing it up slightly, but it will close down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoustonMidtown Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Sure glad I don't own any Apple stock.Buy now..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.