MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: Tugg Speedman on June 28, 2015, 01:08:12 PM
-
Looks like Greece is going to default on June 30 (Tuesday). Wall Street has been freaking out all weekend. The German Stock market is being called down 3.5% to 4.0% tomorrow. Every major bank is holding conference calls for clients tonight in preparation for what they call a potentially historic day tomorrow.
We'll see what actually happens. Maybe historic, maybe not. But people that watch this stuff are very concerned.
Added
Sunday early afternoon update ... The German futures exchange trades Dow jones futures. Just opened down about 300. German and UK stocks much worse.
Greek banks and stock market will not open Monday
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/06/sunday%20ig%20market.jpg)
-
It will be down, possibly significantly. I think 'crash' implies a total meltdown, which I seriously doubt.
-
It will almost certainly decline, but crash?...Guess it's dependent on what you define as a crash. The market had a Greece default probability of 25-30% during the latter parts of last week which will certainly be much higher tomorrow morning. The biggest thing here is nobody trusts the Greek government. You come out of left field with a referendum, which 1) will either not pass or 2) it passes but do you trust the Greek government to actually implement it.
-
This should already be priced in.
-
This should already be priced in.
Apparently not or none of this should be happening this weekend.
-
Didn't the markets have months if not years to prepare for this?
-
Didn't the markets have months if not years to prepare for this?
The market did not believe this would happen ... theoretically still might not default as it doesn't occur until Tuesday, so their is time but no one is making any moves to prevent it from happening.
And yes, it is very bad if they do default.
-
Theoretically priced in long ago... the reality is the markets are not based on logic. If they were, investing would be simple
Let's get dis cash!! #shortsella
-
Respect the process, hey?
-
Freak out sale on stocks coming? Cool.
-
You meant the communist they elected in Greece hasn't been able to snap his fingers and make the magic fairy dust smooth things over? Then again, I would be surprised to see capitulation by the EU at the 11th hour. All the threats to cut them off and stop the nonsense, but do they ever do it?
-
Bunch of fools will sell off Monday, causing the market to drop. The same fools will start buying again on Tuesday, causing the market to bounce right back. Seems to happen every time any piece of economic news comes out lately. Janet Yellen opens her mouth - stocks tumble, then bounce back. Oil prices drop - stocks tumble, then bounce back. Oil prices rise - stocks tumble, then bounce back.
Whatever happened to buy-and-hold, dollar cost averaging? Am I the only person who still does that?
-
Bunch of fools will sell off Monday, causing the market to drop. The same fools will start buying again on Tuesday, causing the market to bounce right back. Seems to happen every time any piece of economic news comes out lately. Janet Yellen opens her mouth - stocks tumble, then bounce back. Oil prices drop - stocks tumble, then bounce back. Oil prices rise - stocks tumble, then bounce back.
Whatever happened to buy-and-hold, dollar cost averaging? Am I the only person who still does that?
I normally do it, but I also believe a lot of the current market is smoke and mirrors as a result of QE. I got in very low for Netflix, Facebook, Sirius, Dish Network and a few others. Some I recently pared back, but not all. I don't like to see all, but profit taking is ok when things feel shaky as they do to me right now. If I'm wrong, no big deal as I made some money because I got in at such low prices. If I'm right, then I got out ahead of the downturn.
Thing is, where to put the profits. Not a lot that looks very attractive to me right now. Maybe rainbow flag makers.
-
As we all know, the science of economics is anything but settled, or even predictable.
One outlook from today. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11704051/The-world-is-defenseless-against-the-next-financial-crisis-warns-BIS.html
-
Thing is, where to put the profits. Not a lot that looks very attractive to me right now.
I hear what you're saying overall, but that last part is the key for me. The U.S. Markets may look overpriced, but there really aren't any better looking options. Europe is even more tenuous than we are over Greece; China and Japan have already surged quite a bit this year; and the 1% max that you'd get from a savings account won't even keep up with inflation. I keep small parts of my portfolio in each of those things, but they just don't look strong enough to cause me to make a sudden shift.
And yes, I keep a small Roth IRA that I use solely for a few individual stocks that I attempt to buy low and sell high. It's enough that I can make a few thousand if a pick goes well, or lose likewise if it doesn't. In any event, that account is such a small part of my holdings that good or bad timing won't make a huge impact either way.
-
I hear what you're saying overall, but that last part is the key for me. The U.S. Markets may look overpriced, but there really aren't any better looking options. Europe is even more tenuous than we are over Greece; China and Japan have already surged quite a bit this year; and the 1% max that you'd get from a savings account won't even keep up with inflation. I keep small parts of my portfolio in each of those things, but they just don't look strong enough to cause me to make a sudden shift.
And yes, I keep a small Roth IRA that I use solely for a few individual stocks that I attempt to buy low and sell high. It's enough that I can make a few thousand if a pick goes well, or lose likewise if it doesn't. In any event, that account is such a small part of my holdings that good or bad timing won't make a huge impact either way.
More of a defense mechanism for me....park stuff off to the side. Won't make much, won't lose much. We'll see, but when Icahn bailed last week that was one sign I didn't like.
-
I think 'crash' implies a total meltdown
What the f#ck did I do to you, tower??
-
Greece isn't alone....our own Puerto Rico in wonderful shape.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/06/if_you_like_the_greek_debt_crisis_youll_love_the_puerto_rico_meltdown.html
-
Off the lows as of now. Greece is screwed because they are Greek and don't pay taxes, corruption is comedic in nature and ultimately will stay screwed unless they leave the Euro. One things that strikes me is people's aversion to being in all or mostly cash. Seems there are many issues out there that would suggest that there is much more risk to the downside than there is potential reward given a long equity position, how about a little capital preservation.
-
One things that strikes me is people's aversion to being in all or mostly cash. Seems there are many issues out there that would suggest that there is much more risk to the downside than there is potential reward given a long equity position, how about a little capital preservation.
The one way to be absolutely certain of losing money is by being totally or mostly in cash. Even the best secure cash accounts won't pay enough to keep up with inflation.
-
What the f#ck did I do to you, tower??
Well played. I didn't even think of that. And you have done nothing but entertain me, amuse me, and given me a new perspective.
-
As of right now, the Dow is down about 240. That's the worst since...March 25 of this year, when it fell 292 points. And it took all of a few weeks for the markets to rebound and hit new all-time highs. Maybe today's drop will end at more than 292, maybe not. Maybe this will last a little longer than last time, maybe not. But we'll be seeing new highs before long, because there is nowhere better to put money right now.
So much for a stock market "crash" today. This isn't even anywhere close to a "correction."
-
As of right now, the Dow is down about 240. That's the worst since...March 25 of this year, when it fell 292 points. And it took all of a few weeks for the markets to rebound and hit new all-time highs. Maybe today's drop will end at more than 292, maybe not. Maybe this will last a little longer than last time, maybe not. But we'll be seeing new highs before long, because there is nowhere better to put money right now.
So much for a stock market "crash" today. This isn't even anywhere close to a "correction."
Yup. Not a meltdown or a crash, but still a nice little buying opportunity. I'll take a 1.5% discount.
I'm also in the "buy and hold" dollar cost averaging camp. Not going to sell for decades...so I love days like today.
-
Discount is up to 2%. Hope it stays down for at least a few days so I get a good deal on my next 403(b) contribution.
-
Discount is up to 2%. Hope it stays down for at least a few days so I get a good deal on my next 403(b) contribution.
yeah my 401k contribution comes this Friday.
It always seems like I am a few days behind the big discount days, 401k-wise. Market will rebound tomorrow and Wednesday >:(
But I still throw a C Note into my Roth IRA on days like today.
-
We can all pitch in and help Greece.
http://gizmodo.com/someone-is-trying-to-crowdfund-a-greek-bailout-because-1714684321
-
yeah my 401k contribution comes this Friday.
It always seems like I am a few days behind the big discount days, 401k-wise. Market will rebound tomorrow and Wednesday >:(
But I still throw a C Note into my Roth IRA on days like today.
Roth? A c note? Rough. The plastic surgery biz isn't paying much these days, a1nal??
-
Roth? A c note? Rough. The plastic surgery biz isn't paying much these days, I'm really a badger fanl?
In my 20s. Sorry I haven't reached your income yet.
-
In my 20s. Sorry I haven't reached your income yet.
Best money you will ever make investing is that invested in your 20s.
-
I like market chaos -- people overreact. I rarely sell and I stockpile cash for buying opportunities. A set amount of my paycheck goes into the cash balance of my brokerage account every month.
I am a buy and hold type of person who is mostly into investing in companies that regularly raise their dividend. I will sell at a predetermined amount in order to take my initial investment out and then let the rest ride.
-
I like market chaos -- people overreact. I rarely sell and I stockpile cash for buying opportunities. A set amount of my paycheck goes into the cash balance of my brokerage account every month.
I am a buy and hold type of person who is mostly into investing in companies that regularly raise their dividend. I will sell at a predetermined amount in order to take my initial investment out and then let the rest ride.
Agreed. At this stage of my life, I am only buying investments, never selling. Everything I need or want in my daily life I can purchase out of my bi-weekly cash flow or cash savings. People say you can't time the market, and this is true if you are buying and selling, but if you are just buying, you can time the hell out of it. I make regular dollar-cost averaging contributions to a 401k and Roth every 2 weeks, but if there is a 1% dip or more on any given day, you can bet I am throwing in more. To me, that is timing the market. Sure, selling is a completely different animal, but I'm not worried about that right now.
-
Here we go again, Wall Street is freaking out about tomorrow (July 6). Dow Jones futures are pointing at another down 250 to 300 day (as of now)
Greece resoundingly voted no to the European deal.
-
Yep. Down tomorrow and back up by the end of the week.
Enjoy your status as a Third World country, Greece!
-
Yep. Down tomorrow and back up by the end of the week.
Enjoy your status as a Third World country, Greece!
I say the U.S. should offer to bail them out in exchange for a few of the more desirable Greek Islands. We could make it the 51st state - our Mediterranean Hawaii, as it were.
-
Yep. Down tomorrow and back up by the end of the week.
Enjoy your status as a Third World country, Greece!
Greece....the Puerto Rico of Europe.
-
This person gets it: http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/05/investing/what-to-expect-market-greece-vote/index.html
-
“If more respected investors had warned about the market in ’07, we might have avoided the crisis in ’08. I think the public is walking into a trap again…” – Carl Icahn via Twitter June 24, 2015
Who is Carl Icahn?
http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2013/1312/360_cover_1216.jpg
December 16, 2013
(http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2013/1312/360_cover_1216.jpg)
-
If I was 79 like Carl Icahn, I'd be really worried about a short-term drop. I'm not, so I'm not.
The market bounced back from '08 just fine, and regardless of what happens tomorrow, it'll bounce back again.
-
I say the U.S. should offer to bail them out in exchange for a few of the more desirable Greek Islands. We could make it the 51st state - our Mediterranean Hawaii, as it were.
That's out of the box thinking.
We bought this Purchase from France, some land from Mexico, Alaska from Russia, and island from Denmark.
-
That's out of the box thinking.
We bought this Purchase from France, some land from Mexico, Alaska from Russia, and island from Denmark.
Plus, there's the added benefit of driving the other European nations insane with the notion of the U.S. having a foothold in Europe.
-
I say the U.S. should offer to bail them out in exchange for a few of the more desirable Greek Islands. We could make it the 51st state - our Mediterranean Hawaii, as it were.
I vote Lesbos.
-
I vote Lesbos.
Well, Sultan, you win the prize. I was wondering who was going to say that first.
-
I say the U.S. should offer to bail them out in exchange for a few of the more desirable Greek Islands. We could make it the 51st state - our Mediterranean Hawaii, as it were.
I thought it takes a solvent entity to bail out an insolvent one. Silly me, I forgot about quantitative easing. "Hit it, Fed printing presses!" I thought that original Ponzi guy was Italian. Bravo Fiat (great car) money systems!!
More I think about it, what a great idea! China will never find us in our ClubMed Thassos.
-
Well, Sultan, you win the prize. I was wondering who was going to say that first.
You heard the views were fantastic too?
-
Carl Ichan is an activist investor. He creates his own news to try and push the market in ways in which he'll profit. If you're long term investing you should completely ignore him. If you're short-term trading, then you can try and trade on the "news" that he spins himself.
-
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/calm-markets-are-bad-news-for-greek-negotiators/ (http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/calm-markets-are-bad-news-for-greek-negotiators/)
Ultimately Greece will have to do some work on it's entitlements and some banks are going to have to forgive debt. This will not bring down the financial system.
-
Agreed. At this stage of my life, I am only buying investments, never selling. Everything I need or want in my daily life I can purchase out of my bi-weekly cash flow or cash savings. People say you can't time the market, and this is true if you are buying and selling, but if you are just buying, you can time the hell out of it. I make regular dollar-cost averaging contributions to a 401k and Roth every 2 weeks, but if there is a 1% dip or more on any given day, you can bet I am throwing in more. To me, that is timing the market. Sure, selling is a completely different animal, but I'm not worried about that right now.
A+ for sound personal financial planning.
-
A+ for sound personal financial planning.
What do you buy? Individual stocks? Mutual funds? ETFs? Foreign? Only domestic? Bonds? Alternative investments? Do you buy leverage instruments (or use leverage)?
-
What do you buy? Individual stocks? Mutual funds? ETFs? Foreign? Only domestic? Bonds? Alternative investments? Do you buy leverage instruments (or use leverage)?
low-cost index funds.
-
For the third Sunday night in a row markets are wobbly over Greece.
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2015/07/20150712_panic.jpg)
-
You have to throw it all in and keep doing it, I've done it for 35 years and am way better off even with the hits
I've taken. The market reacts instantly these days to anything that happens in the world,but just as fast it digests it. Institutional high end mutual funds with marginal risk?
-
Crean sucks
-
You have to throw it all in and keep doing it, I've done it for 35 years and am way better off even with the hits
I've taken. The market reacts instantly these days to anything that happens in the world,but just as fast it digests it. Institutional high end mutual funds with marginal risk?
Yep. Invest. Hold. Adjust based only on years to retirement. If you do that, you don't have to worry about sudden drops.
-
Nice day for those not holding shorts today.
The concept of "just hold and then the sudden drops don't matter" has always been odd to me.
If* you do well, you can avoid getting hurt when the market goes down and in fact do very well.
It's giving in.
-
The concept of "just hold and then the sudden drops don't matter" has always been odd to me.
If* you do well, you can avoid getting hurt when the market goes down and in fact do very well.
I avoid getting hurt when the market goes down by not selling, and just waiting for it to go back up. And it always does. So the drops really don't matter in the big picture.
-
I avoid getting hurt when the market goes down by not selling, and just waiting for it to go back up. And it always does. So the drops really don't matter in the big picture.
I find this view to be nonsensical and dumb.
You do get hurt by not selling before your holdings go down. To suggest otherwise is illogical.
-
I find this view to be nonsensical and dumb.
You do get hurt by not selling before your holdings go down. To suggest otherwise is illogical.
Manage your stop losses, people. There is a lot of money to be made in an up and down market.
-
I find this view to be nonsensical and dumb.
You do get hurt by not selling before your holdings go down. To suggest otherwise is illogical.
Please let the rest of us know the day before the market will drop big-time and then let the rest of us know the day before the market will rise big-time.
You must be freakin' rich, being always able to predict the future like that.
Or maybe you're Marty McFly!
-
I find this view to be nonsensical and dumb.
You do get hurt by not selling before your holdings go down. To suggest otherwise is illogical.
To beat the market consistently, you need to know when to buy...then when to sell...then when to buy...then when to sell...then when to buy...etc., etc.
If you do have such consistently perfect timing, your net worth ought to be somewhere north of $1 trillion. If not, you aren't putting your gift to very good use.
-
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/buy-and-hold-wins-again-2013-07-19
http://theconservativeincomeinvestor.com/2014/01/07/peter-lynch-why-buy-and-hold-investing-beats-market-timing/
-
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/buy-and-hold-wins-again-2013-07-19
http://theconservativeincomeinvestor.com/2014/01/07/peter-lynch-why-buy-and-hold-investing-beats-market-timing/
Buying and Holding is a market timing decision ... you are always in.
-
Buying and Holding is a market timing decision ... you are always in.
Actually, no. The timing isn't based on the market. The buy is based on when you have money (or when your company plan makes the contributions), and the sell is based on when you need the money...regardless of what the market may be doing. As an example, my "buys" occur every two weeks on my pay days, totally irrespective of whether the market is up or down.
"Market timing" implies trying to predict fluctuations in the market. "Buy and hold" acknowledges that that isn't beneficial over the long term.
-
Actually, no. The timing isn't based on the market. The buy is based on when you have money (or when your company plan makes the contributions), and the sell is based on when you need the money...regardless of what the market may be doing. As an example, my "buys" occur every two weeks on my pay days, totally irrespective of whether the market is up or down.
lol
-
Nice day for those not holding shorts today.
The concept of "just hold and then the sudden drops don't matter" has always been odd to me.
If* you do well, you can avoid getting hurt when the market goes down and in fact do very well.
It's giving in.
Most people don't have the time or, in my case, the inclination, to study the market. I'm very satisfied with the way the pros have done it for me for the last 30 years.
-
lol
Ouch.
-
Most people don't have the time or, in my case, the inclination, to study the market. I'm very satisfied with the way the pros have done it for me for the last 30 years.
To be clear, I think that's a fine path you've taken. My issue is language that someone else had: "I avoid getting hurt when the market goes down by not selling, and just waiting for it to go back up. And it always does. So the drops really don't matter in the big picture."
Buying AGIO at $100 on the ignorance-driven drop a month ago isn't for everyone. But it was for me - holla. $$$$$$$$$$$$$
-
If you are still awake (and not at the 0ne-direction concert at Soldier’s Field tonight) …
Markets are crashing … again
As of 10:30PM CT
• Shanghai Composite (China) is down 8.3% (and below the July bottom to new lows)
• The DJIA futures are down 450 points, almost equal to Friday's plunge
• S&P futures are down 52 points, equal to Friday's plunge
• 10-year at 1.97%, down 6 bps
• 30-year at 2.68%, down 5 bps
• 2-year at -.56%, down 5 bps
• WTI crude oil at $39.31, down $1.14
• Euro is at 1.1497, up .0099
My sense is Monday is going to be a huge move. The issue is which direction? It could be either a huge up or a massive decline.
I fear it will be a massive decline and in 24 hours everyone is going to a lot poorer and very concerned.
I hope I'm wrong.
-
I'm buying tomorrow.
-
I'm buying tomorrow.
You going to be significantly poorer (as will I and everyone else).
This is worldwide
1) BN 22:30 *JAPAN'S TOPIX INDEX EXTENDS DROP TO 5%, MOST SINCE FEB. 2013
2)*TREASURIES 10-YEAR YIELD FALLS BELOW 2% FIRST TIME SINCE APRIL BFW 21:25
3)*TAIWAN'S TAIEX INDEX FALLS 7.2% IN BIGGEST DROP SINCE 1990 BFW 21:22
4)*SHANGHAI COMPOSITE TUMBLES 7.8% TO ERASE 2015 ADVANCE BFW 21:08
5)*BLOOMBERG COMMODITY INDEX SLIDES TO LOWEST LEVEL SINCE 1999 BFW 21:02
6)*BRENT CRUDE DROPS BELOW $45/BBL FOR FIRST TIME SINCE MARCH 2009 BFW 20:38
7)*SHANGHAI COMPOSITE INDEX FALLS MORE THAN 8.4% BFW 20:36
8)*SAUDI ARABIA'S TADAWUL STOCK INDEX ENTERS BEAR MARKET BN 07:30
9) *SAUDI ARABIA STOCKS DROP 5% AT OPEN BN 03:00
-
Short on ATVI... c'mon, big drop, big drop!
-
You going to be significantly poorer (as will I and everyone else).
This is worldwide
1) BN 22:30 *JAPAN'S TOPIX INDEX EXTENDS DROP TO 5%, MOST SINCE FEB. 2013
2)*TREASURIES 10-YEAR YIELD FALLS BELOW 2% FIRST TIME SINCE APRIL BFW 21:25
3)*TAIWAN'S TAIEX INDEX FALLS 7.2% IN BIGGEST DROP SINCE 1990 BFW 21:22
4)*SHANGHAI COMPOSITE TUMBLES 7.8% TO ERASE 2015 ADVANCE BFW 21:08
5)*BLOOMBERG COMMODITY INDEX SLIDES TO LOWEST LEVEL SINCE 1999 BFW 21:02
6)*BRENT CRUDE DROPS BELOW $45/BBL FOR FIRST TIME SINCE MARCH 2009 BFW 20:38
7)*SHANGHAI COMPOSITE INDEX FALLS MORE THAN 8.4% BFW 20:36
8)*SAUDI ARABIA'S TADAWUL STOCK INDEX ENTERS BEAR MARKET BN 07:30
9) *SAUDI ARABIA STOCKS DROP 5% AT OPEN BN 03:00
Still buying tomorrow. It all depends what you are buying and I'm not buying indexes tomorrow. Put in three orders tonight for market open. Longer play, I won't even look at it for a few months if not a year +.
-
Still buying tomorrow. It all depends what you are buying and I'm not buying indexes tomorrow. Put in three orders tonight for market open. Longer play, I won't even look at it for a few months if not a year +.
Going to share any of them?
-
Short on ATVI... c'mon, big drop, big drop!
I'm addicted to that Hearthstone game. But I don't spend any money on it so I'm just a cost to them, so good call.
-
Any y'alls tidy whiteys still pristine, hey?
-
Just pushed all in when the DOW hit -713, this is summer volatility and we will see markets stabilize in the next couple of weeks. Market is high but it isn't overpriced such that a correction is indicated.
Lemmings panic right now, which will create chaos and within chaos there is profit and opportunity.
-
Be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.
-
I'm buying tomorrow.
Missed it.
-
Missed it.
Not at all, one of the stocks I bought is up...the other flat, the other down. Besides, it's for the long haul.
-
Be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.
Interesting in that I think most are greedy right now ... so what do you do?
-
Interesting in that I think most are greedy right now ... so what do you do?
You seem to be an outlier in thinking "most" are greedy right now:
http://money.cnn.com/data/fear-and-greed/
-
You seem to be an outlier in thinking "most" are greedy right now:
http://money.cnn.com/data/fear-and-greed/
That is a volume measure (not a psychology measure) that has not worked for very for years. For instance it has been screaming buy for a few weeks. How has that worked out?
-
Right now, all three stocks I bought....up, but again....long term is the key. ;)
-
Already back up to almost 100 points to where it started. Nothing to see here folks.
-
Just pushed all in when the DOW hit -713, this is summer volatility and we will see markets stabilize in the next couple of weeks. Market is high but it isn't overpriced such that a correction is indicated.
Lemmings panic right now, which will create chaos and within chaos there is profit and opportunity.
So what did you buy?
Curious because down 1100 (the low of the day) to down 600 only occurred in the first 5 minutes, most stocks were still not open and those that were open hardly traded.
Almost nothing happened at those levels.
-
That is a volume measure (not a psychology measure) that has not worked for very for years. For instance it has been screaming buy for a few weeks. How has that worked out?
It is a psychological interpretation of volume measures.
Just curious - how did you come to your conclusion that most are greedy right now? Gettin' lots of folks on the couch?
-
It is a psychological interpretation of volume measures.
Just curious - how did you come to your conclusion that most are greedy right now? Gettin' lots of folks on the couch?
Measures of newsletters and total flows (out of open-ended mutual funds and into ETFs). In total they are not showing any signs of panic.
Also Treasury yields, they should be plunging if anyone was panicking. They are not.
-
Cannot look at the stock market in isolation:
• World markets have been going down for months
• Credit markets (Corporate bonds) have been weak for over a year
• Commodities are collapsing, some indices are at a 15 years low
• Within commodities, the collapse in crude oil continues.
• China’s economy has been slowing. Chinese officials have been acting in what looks like panic to reverse their slide. It is not working.
• Remember Greece, it is still out there acting as a drag on Europe
• US corporate earnings were growing at -2% from year ago levels
• S&P 500 companies have total sales of $11 trillion (lead by Walmart at $500 billion/year) and total sales is 4% LOWER than a year ago
• The Federal Reserve keeps threatening to raise interest rates
Given all this the real question is why the stock market was performing so well until a few weeks ago.
But this is not new. In 2000 and again 2008 the stock market was the “last to turn.” Interest rates, credit markets, commodities and world stocks markets are turned lower consistent with a downturn in economic activity in 2000 and 2008. In both cases the stock market defied these moves and kept marching higher. Eventually the stock market "got it" and turned lower.
Today we have all the bullet points above and the stock market has defied these moves and kept marching higher. Again, what was it thinking?
What next? I’ve been of the opinion that the stock market finishes the year with a zero return. Right now it is down about 5% YTD. So I it think it ends the year marginally higher. HOWEVER, I do not think this morning was the low of the year. We will most likely retest and might go lower. And the risk is that markets end of the worse than I think, not better,
-
What next? I’ve been of the opinion that the stock market finishes the year with a zero return. Right now it is down about 5% YTD. So I it think it ends the year marginally higher. HOWEVER, I do not think this morning was the low of the year. We will most likely retest and might go lower. And the risk is that markets end of the worse than I think, not better,
I think those are reasonable predictions, and frankly wouldn't consider a flat (or even slightly negative) year a bad thing.
-
Already back up to almost 100 points to where it started. Nothing to see here folks.
I'm giving you a chance to re-think this ... care to revise?
-
i remember when mutation was always beaching about how much money he lost in the market when "sonny" was in. wonder where his blame will be now ::) ??
-
i remember when mutation was always beaching about how much money he lost in the market when "sonny" was in. wonder where his blame will be now ::) ??
Um..... the market is almost twice what Sonny left us. Muta (and I) have made lots of money with BO as Prez.
-
Um..... the market is almost twice what Sonny left us. Muta (and I) have made lots of money with BO as Prez.
18 months before Bush 43 left, the market was all-time highs and looking good. Then came the global financial crisis.
About 18 month remain in Obama's reign. I would not be spending those gains just yet.
and consider this ...
The 22nd amendment was ratified on February 27, 1951. It limits the President to two terms. Since this
1956, Eisenhower elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1958, a bond market driven financial crisis.
1972, Nixon elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1974 was a full blown financial crisis (no doubt accelerated by Nixon resigning.)
1984, Reagan elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1987 the stock market crash (largest plunge in American history).
1996, Clinton elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1998 a financial crisis thanks to the failure of the hedge fund LTCM and 2000 was the popping of the tech bubble.
2004, Bush elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 2007/2008 what is now called the "global financial crisis."
-----
Since the 22ns amendment, every term limited 2nd term president saw a financial crisis. Why? My theory is the 2nd term President becomes a lame duck the moment he gives his acceptance speech. So, he is surrounded by "second stringers" and old guys that should be retired (Kerry). The financial crisis is born out a lack of confidence because the adults of the first term left..
Finally, note I said FINANCIAL crisis, not ECONOMIC crisis.
So, when the market has the week it just had (down 10% in a week, worst day in four years today), and given this history, I would be very leery of jumping in ... unless you want to work into your 70s.
-
Um..... the market is almost twice what Sonny left us. Muta (and I) have made lots of money with BO as Prez.
So is your tax rate. Poof
-
Everyone has their own system. This is what I track to: A lagged composite index from the Chicago Fed. To Heise's point, market speculation has been way ahead of the legs of the economy. Personal Consumption and Housing has lagged in this recovery, unlike previous recoveries. The U.S. economy is driven on consumer buying power, as a reminder. The market assumed consumer confidence and spending will follow. It hasn't.
https://www.chicagofed.org/research/data/cfnai/current-data
Why not? Even though the economy has approached historical full employment, wages have lagged significantly behind (and falling) meaning Full Employment is in the high 4s. Two, while real estate has shown life, it is just burning off excess, very low priced inventory. The Fed sees Full Employment at 5.1 and thinks inflation (aka, raise interest rates), but then sees consumer buying power lagging, and is confused.
The index has been negative since February, meaning the economy is/has been faltering. Historically, the stock market sags every 3-4 years into a negative trend (now), with a year or two of negative (correction). Heise's call is right on, which should be respected as that is his expertise.
The way out? The Keynesian bailout was right on. It saved the economy from a depression. In recovery, instead of extending taxes and not cutting the unmanageable bailout deficit, the reverse was decided by Washington, (status quo), however, as they see one size fits their agenda. Consumers need higher disposable income (higher wages, less under employment, lower gas and food prices, less taxes) to get the U.S. out of this cycle. The reality, though, is that the manufacturing economy of the 70's which transitioned into the service economy of the 90's-00's, is now transitioning into the automation economy. This will be a five-ten year sideways cycle. The mind is willing, but the body is not.
-
Everyone has their own system. This is what I track to: A lagged composite index from the Chicago Fed. To Heise's point, market speculation has been way ahead of the legs of the economy. Personal Consumption and Housing has lagged in this recovery, unlike previous recoveries. The U.S. economy is driven on consumer buying power, as a reminder. The market assumed consumer confidence and spending will follow. It hasn't.
https://www.chicagofed.org/research/data/cfnai/current-data
Why not? Even though the economy has approached historical full employment, wages have lagged significantly behind (and falling) meaning Full Employment is in the high 4s. Two, while real estate has shown life, it is just burning off excess, very low priced inventory. The Fed sees Full Employment at 5.1 and thinks inflation (aka, raise interest rates), but then sees consumer buying power lagging, and is confused.
The index has been negative since February, meaning the economy is/has been faltering. Historically, the stock market sags every 3-4 years into a negative trend (now), with a year or two of negative (correction). Heise's call is right on, which should be respected as that is his expertise.
The way out? The Keynesian bailout was right on. It saved the economy from a depression. In recovery, instead of extending taxes and not cutting the unmanageable bailout deficit, the reverse was decided by Washington, (status quo), however, as they see one size fits their agenda. Consumers need higher disposable income (higher wages, less under employment, lower gas and food prices, less taxes) to get the U.S. out of this cycle. The reality, though, is that the manufacturing economy of the 70's which transitioned into the service economy of the 90's-00's, is now transitioning into the automation economy. This will be a five-ten year sideways cycle. The mind is willing, but the body is not.
100% agree. But it seems the corporate well-to-dos have other ideas for the middle and lower class workers. I get it, "the market decides what a job is worth". Is the market rigged by those in charge though?
-
100% agree. But it seems the corporate well-to-dos have other ideas for the middle and lower class workers. I get it, "the market decides what a job is worth". Is the market rigged by those in charge though?
No. The market wants to reward optimism (speculation). It does not recognize broader shifts very well (generational). In the 2007-08 downturn, China gained with the declining $US. Germany gained in the EU with the PIGS bailout (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain). The recovering (and low interest rate $) killed China (an economy built on copying/stealing US jobs and technology...throw in India). Greece stymied Germany/EU recovery. Oil has killed Russia, Mideast, SA. Baby Boomers (the most educated generation on Earth) transitions to Millenials (more diverse, less educated, more under employed, more connected and more in debt)=Automation. The market needs the transition to adapt. The government and World will follow well behind. The U.S. will lead.
-
Everyone has their own system. This is what I track to: A lagged composite index from the Chicago Fed. To Heise's point, market speculation has been way ahead of the legs of the economy. Personal Consumption and Housing has lagged in this recovery, unlike previous recoveries. The U.S. economy is driven on consumer buying power, as a reminder. The market assumed consumer confidence and spending will follow. It hasn't.
https://www.chicagofed.org/research/data/cfnai/current-data
Why not? Even though the economy has approached historical full employment, wages have lagged significantly behind (and falling) meaning Full Employment is in the high 4s. Two, while real estate has shown life, it is just burning off excess, very low priced inventory. The Fed sees Full Employment at 5.1 and thinks inflation (aka, raise interest rates), but then sees consumer buying power lagging, and is confused.
The index has been negative since February, meaning the economy is/has been faltering. Historically, the stock market sags every 3-4 years into a negative trend (now), with a year or two of negative (correction). Heise's call is right on, which should be respected as that is his expertise.
The way out? The Keynesian bailout was right on. It saved the economy from a depression. In recovery, instead of extending taxes and not cutting the unmanageable bailout deficit, the reverse was decided by Washington, (status quo), however, as they see one size fits their agenda. Consumers need higher disposable income (higher wages, less under employment, lower gas and food prices, less taxes) to get the U.S. out of this cycle. The reality, though, is that the manufacturing economy of the 70's which transitioned into the service economy of the 90's-00's, is now transitioning into the automation economy. This will be a five-ten year sideways cycle. The mind is willing, but the body is not.
Excellent post
-
18 months before Bush 43 left, the market was all-time highs and looking good. Then came the global financial crisis.
About 18 month remain in Obama's reign. I would not be spending those gains just yet.
and consider this ...
The 22nd amendment was ratified on February 27, 1951. It limits the President to two terms. Since this
1956, Eisenhower elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1958, a bond market driven financial crisis.
1972, Nixon elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1974 was a full blown financial crisis (no doubt accelerated by Nixon resigning.)
1984, Reagan elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1987 the stock market crash (largest plunge in American history).
1996, Clinton elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 1998 a financial crisis thanks to the failure of the hedge fund LTCM and 2000 was the popping of the tech bubble.
2004, Bush elected to a 2nd (and last) term. 2007/2008 what is now called the "global financial crisis."
-----
Since the 22ns amendment, every term limited 2nd term president saw a financial crisis. Why? My theory is the 2nd term President becomes a lame duck the moment he gives his acceptance speech. So, he is surrounded by "second stringers" and old guys that should be retired (Kerry). The financial crisis is born out a lack of confidence because the adults of the first term left..
Finally, note I said FINANCIAL crisis, not ECONOMIC crisis.
So, when the market has the week it just had (down 10% in a week, worst day in four years today), and given this history, I would be very leery of jumping in ... unless you want to work into your 70s.
Why am I not surprised that Brandx thinks presidents control the markets or are responsible for them. Another example of someone who never took an econ, business course or has an ounce of common sense.
-
Love oil stocks in the $30's for the long haul. Love, love, love them.
That is because most people don't realize that oil companies actually make a crap ton of money through other energy resources of which they are investing heavily in.
-
No. The market wants to reward optimism (speculation). It does not recognize broader shifts very well (generational). In the 2007-08 downturn, China gained with the declining $US. Germany gained in the EU with the PIGS bailout (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain). The recovering (and low interest rate $) killed China (an economy built on copying/stealing US jobs and technology...throw in India). Greece stymied Germany/EU recovery. Oil has killed Russia, Mideast, SA. Baby Boomers (the most educated generation on Earth) transitions to Millenials (more diverse, less educated, more under employed, more connected and more in debt)=Automation. The market needs the transition to adapt. The government and World will follow well behind. The U.S. will lead.
So you're saying that lower and middle class wages in the US will increase? Really?
*Admittedly, I'm not great with economics/finance as I've repeatedly stated before.
-
I had to watch an hour long video today of Thomas Friedman (NY Times) and Randall Stephenson (CEO of AT&T) for a training event. It was excellent, and Friedman at his best (which is tough for me to say sometimes).
He made some very relevant statements, including the earth is flat. Not literally flat, but flat as in so many people have access to information now. It's no longer about how smart you are your knowledge base, anyone can get that now. It's about motivation, persistence, etc. Knowledge is becoming a dime a dozen commodity.
He spoke much about the middle class and how in the 1950's a guy could drop out of high school and get a gig to buy a house, work 30 years, pay for his family to go to school, retire, etc. As he said, those days are long gone. The social contract has changed and will change much more in the next 20 years. It is going to be up to the individual now more than ever. You will be given the tools, you have access to the information, it's up to you.
-
He spoke much about the middle class and how in the 1950's a guy could drop out of high school and get a gig to buy a house, work 30 years, pay for his family to go to school, retire, etc. As he said, those days are long gone. The social contract has changed and will change much more in the next 20 years. It is going to be up to the individual now more than ever. You will be given the tools, you have access to the information, it's up to you.
And that's exactly the problem.
Up until very recently, a guy who's had hard luck or not all that bright could work hard, buy a house, raise a family and put his kids through school without going into hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.
No longer is that the case
Today, the people who have the money celebrate how underemployed their employees are and blame it on the employees and the public for not being smarter or not catching the breaks they had.
ALL of my best friends graduated from Marquette more than a decade ago. They ALL have pretty good jobs. NONE of them say their kids will ever be going to Marquette. It's not in the financial cards
The downward spiral will go deep. But bootstraps and such...
-
And that's exactly the problem.
Up until very recently, a guy who's had hard luck or not all that bright could work hard, buy a house, raise a family and put his kids through school without going into hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.
No longer is that the case
Today, the people who have the money celebrate how underemployed their employees are and blame it on the employees and the public for not being smarter or not catching the breaks they had.
ALL of my best friends graduated from Marquette more than a decade ago. They ALL have pretty good jobs. NONE of them say their kids will ever be going to Marquette. It's not in the financial cards
The downward spiral will go deep. But bootstraps and such...
They don't celebrate it, that's crazy talk.
Friedman also mentioned that the guy that quit high school, joined a union and that worked great for awhile, but in the long run it led to high of costs in that flat world, where everyone can compete. He also spoke of bootstraps, but not using that term. The tools are there, everyone has a chance to succeed. In fact, he argued greater today than at any other time in history, but it is up to the individual to do it. Gov't isn't going to be there to do it for you.
Sorry, I disagree that people are celebrating it. The reality is, you better be motivated, go to school, work in school, be aggressive and better breaks will come your way.
-
They don't celebrate it, that's crazy talk.
Friedman also mentioned that the guy that quit high school, joined a union and that worked great for awhile, but in the long run it led to high of costs in that flat world, where everyone can compete. He also spoke of bootstraps, but not using that term. The tools are there, everyone has a chance to succeed. In fact, he argued greater today than at any other time in history, but it is up to the individual to do it. Gov't isn't going to be there to do it for you.
Sorry, I disagree that people are celebrating it. The reality is, you better be motivated, go to school, work in school, be aggressive and better breaks will come your way.
There are people who can't or won't succeed in structured, academic environments. And I'm not talking about any certain socioeconomic class or race or whatever. I'm talking good, hard-working people who just aren't meant for college. It seems, in present day and for the future, that you're implying people must keep educating themselves in school to get ahead. Well, again, there are people out there that that path is not meant for them. What are their options?
-
They don't celebrate it, that's crazy talk.
Friedman also mentioned that the guy that quit high school, joined a union and that worked great for awhile, but in the long run it led to high of costs in that flat world, where everyone can compete. He also spoke of bootstraps, but not using that term. The tools are there, everyone has a chance to succeed. In fact, he argued greater today than at any other time in history, but it is up to the individual to do it. Gov't isn't going to be there to do it for you.
Sorry, I disagree that people are celebrating it. The reality is, you better be motivated, go to school, work in school, be aggressive and better breaks will come your way.
Sorry, your "everyone" is reality's much smaller percentage of the population.
In the last 30 years wages have gone up something like 10% and college costs have gone up hundreds of % points.
That's not exactly an even playing field where "everyone" can succeed, even if their bootstraps are up to their nuts
Execs celebrate underemployment of their people all the time. You celebrate union busting, not having to collectively bargain, trimming labor costs, taking away benefits. All for the bottom line, making those at the top and already wealthy stockholders even wealthier
But the worker should be ashamed of himself, even vilified, for not being born in the most awesome way possible, and is instead an evil taker that wants to get paid a fair amount for his labor and maybe raise a family
-
Love oil stocks in the $30's for the long haul. Love, love, love them.
That is because most people don't realize that oil companies actually make a crap ton of money through other energy resources of which they are investing heavily in.
Take a closer look here.
Oil companies are losing fantastic sums of money ... amounts that no one thought was possible. Their losses are so great that it is actually depressing overall GDP.
They cannot survive with oil at these levels. They need it closer to $70, not under $40. This is is going to cause mass bankruptcies. And their is no reason for the price to rise because the world overproduces. The reason it overproduces is the largest source of demand is China (ie., China buys 22 million new cars a year versus 17 million for the US) and there economy is in deep trouble.
The economics of this sector is a horror show.
-
http://slopeofhope.com/2015/08/the-raging-fire-within.html
I’ve been trading the stock market for nearly thirty years, virtually non-stop. Today (that is, Monday, August 24) easily ranks in the top five strangest, craziest days in the thousands upon thousands of trading days I’ve ever witnessed. I felt like I was entering a cage of gorillas that had just ingested a large quantity of PCP. It felt dangerous and really, really unpredictable.
I tend to think in metaphors and analogs, so here is what I have in mind for your consideration: think about a forest. In a large forest, from time to time, there are naturally-occurring fires. These take place due to, say, a lightning strike, and what happens is that all the dry underbrush lights up and damages the forest to a certain degree. Some trees are killed. Some animals are killed. There is loss.
But, once the fire burns out of its own accord, life begins anew. The soil is rich with nutrients. More sunlight gets through to the surviving trees, and they flourish. The forest grows stronger. And, sooner or later, another fire will take place, but through this repeating cycle, in spite of Bambi getting killed from time to time, things improve and are relatively stable.
The same can be said for a financial market which is allowed to rise and fall based on naturally-occurring market forces. Some people get hurt along the way. Some people prosper. But, on the whole, the system works, and it works in such a way that it is fair and, in the grand scheme of things, beneficial.
What we have, instead, is a forest that hasn't been allowed to catch fire. The forest has been drenched with water every day, for years on end, to ensure that no spark can take hold. Lightning still takes place, but it is simply snuffed out on wet tinder. The layers of dead limbs, leaves, and other crinkly detritus accumulate on the ground, and soon you have a forest that is several feet deep in tinder.
So, in this instance, when a spark manages to get through, you don't have a run-of-the-mill fire: you have an apocalypse. The natural give-and-take of the organic system has been suppressed, and a towering inferno rages with a ferocity that seems surreal. You have, at long last, a calamity on your hands.
And that, my friends, is that we've been witnessing the past few trading days. Fire Marshall Yellen (and retired Fire Marshall Bernanke) have utterly perverted the natural order of things, and we are only now beginning to pay the price. The fire, I firmly believe, has only just started. We will indeed have some violent relief rallies along the way, but my only conclusion is that the sensational bearish setups are firmly in place and, once the bounce is complete, you will be witness to a fury of plunging price quotes that will, in the end, prove that Monday, August 24th, was simply a shot across the bow.
-
The fire, I firmly believe, has only just started. We will indeed have some violent relief rallies along the way, but my only conclusion is that the sensational bearish setups are firmly in place and, once the bounce is complete, you will be witness to a fury of plunging price quotes that will, in the end, prove that Monday, August 24th, was simply a shot across the bow.
If you truly believe that, you should probably sell all of your equities and stick the cash in a coffee can.
-
Take a closer look here.
Oil companies are losing fantastic sums of money ... amounts that no one thought was possible. Their losses are so great that it is actually depressing overall GDP.
They cannot survive with oil at these levels. They need it closer to $70, not under $40. This is is going to cause mass bankruptcies. And their is no reason for the price to rise because the world overproduces. The reason it overproduces is the largest source of demand is China (ie., China buys 22 million new cars a year versus 17 million for the US) and there economy is in deep trouble.
The economics of this sector is a horror show.
Long term my friend, long term. You're also focusing on the oil side, like I said these are energy companies not just oil.
-
Sorry, your "everyone" is reality's much smaller percentage of the population.
In the last 30 years wages have gone up something like 10% and college costs have gone up hundreds of % points.
That's not exactly an even playing field where "everyone" can succeed, even if their bootstraps are up to their nuts
Execs celebrate underemployment of their people all the time. You celebrate union busting, not having to collectively bargain, trimming labor costs, taking away benefits. All for the bottom line, making those at the top and already wealthy stockholders even wealthier
But the worker should be ashamed of himself, even vilified, for not being born in the most awesome way possible, and is instead an evil taker that wants to get paid a fair amount for his labor and maybe raise a family
I celebrate union busting because it costs jobs and hurts people in the long run. That is a difference, a huge difference.
As for college costs....yup, they've gone up very high. Why is that? Student loans given out like candy making it "more affordable", labor costs through the roof, etc. Follow the money. You think Hillary's plan to make college more "affordable" by throwing another $500 billion at it is going to lower the costs. LOL. Follow the money.
-
Long term my friend, long term. You're also focusing on the oil side, like I said these are energy companies not just oil.
These are the most cyclical of all companies. Their is openly booms and busts.
Long term you make no money., Have to time these companies.
-
These are the most cyclical of all companies. Their is openly booms and busts.
Long term you make no money., Have to time these companies.
In the old days, when they were oil only, I would agree. My dad worked for years for Exxon, Getty, Unocal as a Petroleum Geologist \ Geophysicist. They are much more diverse now.
I'm playing it long.
-
If you truly believe that, you should probably sell all of your equities and stick the cash in a coffee can.
Thats only if you are a buy and hold passive investor. As an active trader/investor, which Heisenberg would classify himself as I'm sure, I would rather have the market correct 2000 pts on the DJIA instead of just waffling around. I had one of my best days in a LONG time on Friday and did well yesterday. Plenty of money to be made on the downside. And its not just shorting stocks, plenty of inverse ETFs that you can invest in just like a normal long position in a stock.
-
http://slopeofhope.com/2015/08/the-raging-fire-within.html
I’ve been trading the stock market for nearly thirty years, virtually non-stop. Today (that is, Monday, August 24) easily ranks in the top five strangest, craziest days in the thousands upon thousands of trading days I’ve ever witnessed. I felt like I was entering a cage of gorillas that had just ingested a large quantity of PCP. It felt dangerous and really, really unpredictable.
I tend to think in metaphors and analogs, so here is what I have in mind for your consideration: think about a forest. In a large forest, from time to time, there are naturally-occurring fires. These take place due to, say, a lightning strike, and what happens is that all the dry underbrush lights up and damages the forest to a certain degree. Some trees are killed. Some animals are killed. There is loss.
But, once the fire burns out of its own accord, life begins anew. The soil is rich with nutrients. More sunlight gets through to the surviving trees, and they flourish. The forest grows stronger. And, sooner or later, another fire will take place, but through this repeating cycle, in spite of Bambi getting killed from time to time, things improve and are relatively stable.
The same can be said for a financial market which is allowed to rise and fall based on naturally-occurring market forces. Some people get hurt along the way. Some people prosper. But, on the whole, the system works, and it works in such a way that it is fair and, in the grand scheme of things, beneficial.
What we have, instead, is a forest that hasn't been allowed to catch fire. The forest has been drenched with water every day, for years on end, to ensure that no spark can take hold. Lightning still takes place, but it is simply snuffed out on wet tinder. The layers of dead limbs, leaves, and other crinkly detritus accumulate on the ground, and soon you have a forest that is several feet deep in tinder.
So, in this instance, when a spark manages to get through, you don't have a run-of-the-mill fire: you have an apocalypse. The natural give-and-take of the organic system has been suppressed, and a towering inferno rages with a ferocity that seems surreal. You have, at long last, a calamity on your hands.
And that, my friends, is that we've been witnessing the past few trading days. Fire Marshall Yellen (and retired Fire Marshall Bernanke) have utterly perverted the natural order of things, and we are only now beginning to pay the price. The fire, I firmly believe, has only just started. We will indeed have some violent relief rallies along the way, but my only conclusion is that the sensational bearish setups are firmly in place and, once the bounce is complete, you will be witness to a fury of plunging price quotes that will, in the end, prove that Monday, August 24th, was simply a shot across the bow.
This is why I get so annoyed when people celebrate capitalism here in the US. We don't have capitalism. Bailouts, too big to fail, etc, etc. If it were really capitalism, things/businesses/people would crumble from time to time, regardless of who was affected.
-
I celebrate union busting because it costs jobs and hurts people in the long run. That is a difference, a huge difference.
As for college costs....yup, they've gone up very high. Why is that? Student loans given out like candy making it "more affordable", labor costs through the roof, etc. Follow the money. You think Hillary's plan to make college more "affordable" by throwing another $500 billion at it is going to lower the costs. LOL. Follow the money.
Yup. I'll let my good friend, Mark, take it from here:
http://totalfratmove.com/mark-cuban-demolishes-hillary-clintons-student-debt-proposal/
*Yes, I realize that website is ridiculous, but it's the only place I could find the full transcript of what he said
-
In the old days, when they were oil only, I would agree. My dad worked for years for Exxon, Getty, Unocal as a Petroleum Geologist \ Geophysicist. They are much more diverse now.
I'm playing it long.
So you have lost 25% to 50% of your money this year, because that is what they have done. You need a double to break-even.
-
If you truly believe that, you should probably sell all of your equities and stick the cash in a coffee can.
For the record, I did not write that. It was written by the "Slope of Hope" blog that was linked at the top of the post.
I posted it here because of this comment ....
I’ve been trading the stock market for nearly thirty years, virtually non-stop. Today (that is, Monday, August 24) easily ranks in the top five strangest, craziest days in the thousands upon thousands of trading days I’ve ever witnessed. I felt like I was entering a cage of gorillas that had just ingested a large quantity of PCP. It felt dangerous and really, really unpredictable.
What happened yesterday (and may happen the rest of the week) is one of the strangest day anyone has ever seen ... me included.
Those that wave it off as a typical summer day simply do not know what they are talking about. They should put their money in a balance fund run by a manager with a good track record and never think about the market again.
-
What happened yesterday (and may happen the rest of the week) is one of the strangest day anyone has ever seen ... me included.
Those that wave it off as a typical summer day simply do not know what they are talking about. They should put their money in a balance fund run by a manager with a good track record and never think about the market again.
I agree that the causes, nature and speed of the ups and downs are changing, so nobody really knows what makes a day "typical" anymore. And I suspect that yesterday will look strange enough in retrospect to have market analysts talking about it for a number of years, much like the flash crash in 2010.
But long term, the market will continue to do what it has always done - go up and down, but ultimately mostly up. Just like it did both before and after the flash crash.
-
I agree that the causes, nature and speed of the ups and downs are changing, so nobody really knows what makes a day "typical" anymore. And I suspect that yesterday will look strange enough in retrospect to have market analysts talking about it for a number of years, much like the flash crash in 2010.
But long term, the market will continue to do what it has always done - go up and down, but ultimately mostly up. Just like it did both before and after the flash crash.
Anatomy of '1,000 flash crashes': What went wrong
Jeff Cox | @JeffCoxCNBCcom
21 Hours Ago
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/24/anatomy-of-1000-flash-crashes-what-went-wrong.html
Monday's stock market action was bound to be messy, but it was made even worse by a major technical pile-up just as the session got underway.
Dubbed by one trader "1,000 flash crashes," the market opened to tumult in which multiple stocks and in particular exchange-traded funds cascaded lower as orders failed to get filled and prices went ballistic.
In all, 1,278 so-called circuit breakers—trading halts imposed when shares fall to various levels—were tripped across the major exchanges as the Dow Jones industrial average surrendered more than 1,000 points early on, according to New York Stock Exchange officials. The number of tripped breakers was believed to be a record, with ARCA's 999 the most, with the Nasdaq next at 194. A typical day sees fewer than 10.
Traders speculated that the invoking of Rule 48, which is used to head off panic trading but in this case seemed to chase market makers at the opening, was at fault. The rule allows stocks to open without price quotes ahead of time.
Monday's stock market action was bound to be messy, but it was made even worse by a major technical pile-up just as the session got underway.
Dubbed by one trader "1,000 flash crashes," the market opened to tumult in which multiple stocks and in particular exchange-traded funds cascaded lower as orders failed to get filled and prices went ballistic.
In all, 1,278 so-called circuit breakers—trading halts imposed when shares fall to various levels—were tripped across the major exchanges as the Dow Jones industrial average surrendered more than 1,000 points early on, according to New York Stock Exchange officials. The number of tripped breakers was believed to be a record, with ARCA's 999 the most, with the Nasdaq next at 194. A typical day sees fewer than 10.
Traders speculated that the invoking of Rule 48, which is used to head off panic trading but in this case seemed to chase market makers at the opening, was at fault. The rule allows stocks to open without price quotes ahead of time.
Read MoreMarket Circuit Breakers: CNBC Explains
Trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.
Brendan McDermid | Reuters
Trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.
"Bids seemed to vanish," said Dave Lutz, head of exchange-traded funds at Jones Trading.
Lutz said multiple ETFs plunged at the open, were halted, reopened and hit limits, then were halted again.
"Given many of these are U.S. underlying (it's) staggering to me these dislocations," he added. "As stocks broke sharply on the U.S. open, triggering halts, it seems the ETF arbitrage community opted to sit out the first few minutes."
A number of ETFs fell well below their net asset value, or the value of the underlying stocks that make up the respective funds.
Those funds losing more than 40 percent of their value at one point included the First Trust Dow Jones Internet Index, First Trust Consumer Discretionary AlphaDEX, iShares Global Healthcare, PowerShares Global Water Portfolio and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value.
"The flash crashes happened today in the ETF market," said Joe Saluzzi, a principal at Themis Trading. "There was a problem pricing some of these ETFs, and that's something that needs to be looked at."
Traders wrestled with the wisdom of invoking Rule 48.
"Part of the reason they have 48 in place is they don't have the manpower to accurately deal with 2,900 stocks opening and 2,900 stocks where there's going to be this huge imbalance in opening direction, be it buy side or sell side," said Peter Costa, a governor with the NYSE and president of Empire Executions. "Rule 48 gives them time to open accurately."
-
Holy crap what a disaster today was!
Up 441 points (2.7%) and closed down more than 200 points (1.3%). Now back to the down 1100 lows of yesterday. Technicians will tell you this kind a reversal is not good.
Since 1977 (because High, Low, Close is only available since this date) The last time the market was up more than 2.5% intraday and closed down more than 1%
1/23/1987
10/3/2008
10/10/2008
10/29/2008
8/25/2015
@bespokeinvest 11m11 minutes ago
The S&P 500 hasn't had three consecutive closes at least 4 standard deviations below its 50-DMA since 5/15/40. Happened today.
May 1940 would be the middle of the Battle of Britain when it was touch and go whether the British Empire would survive.
Is the equivalent of that happening now (replace China or Britain)
------------------
The takeaway from the above is the market is under some serious stress, the likes we have rarely seen in the last few generations.
-
outstanding analysis of why obammy's economy is a farce. the fed. reserve needs to butt out. it isn't their job to micro/macro manage our economy. the QE is artificially inflating the market and keeping the interest rates low. unfortunately, they really need to be where they belong-higher. i sure don't want them higher, but people are being lured into a false sense of security here. banks have been getting sloppy again. what happens when things are artificial? they don't hold up to the real deal-eventually the cream rises to the top and when it does, it's gonna stink. i think it's starting to get a little ripe already
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-fine-fed-mess-1440197469
-
outstanding analysis of why obammy's economy is a farce. the fed. reserve needs to butt out. it isn't their job to micro/macro manage our economy. the QE is artificially inflating the market and keeping the interest rates low. unfortunately, they really need to be where they belong-higher. i sure don't want them higher, but people are being lured into a false sense of security here. banks have been getting sloppy again. what happens when things are artificial? they don't hold up to the real deal-eventually the cream rises to the top and when it does, it's gonna stink. i think it's starting to get a little ripe already
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-fine-fed-mess-1440197469
The policy of the Fed keeping interest rates artificially low hardly is Obama's doing. That's been going on since the Greenspan years. Increasing interest rates would be harmful in the short run, but in the long run would be good.
-
The policy of the Fed keeping interest rates artificially low hardly is Obama's doing. That's been going on since the Greenspan years. Increasing interest rates would be harmful in the short run, but in the long run would be good.
QE started under Bernanke the month after Obama was elected.
While Bush appointed Bernanke, Obama did reappoint him in 2010
QE was approved of, and continued by, Janet Yellen, who Obama appointed last year.
So Obama's fingerprints are all over QE.
-
Keeping interest rates artificially low pre-dates QE.
-
Keeping interest rates artificially low pre-dates QE.
I can't imagine that private entities would ever do such a thing like artificial manipulation of financial sectors...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forex_scandal
-
The policy of the Fed keeping interest rates artificially low hardly is Obama's doing. That's been going on since the Greenspan years. Increasing interest rates would be harmful in the short run, but in the long run would be good.
personally, i absolutely agree, increasing the interest rates would be harmful almost anytime, except, eventually we are going to have to face the music. whoever is paid the big bucks is going to have to do it...gently. obviously, timing is the biggest factor?
-
Did chicos ever share one of his 3 long plays, or is he worried we'd destroy the stock(s)?
-
So you're saying that lower and middle class wages in the US will increase? Really?
*Admittedly, I'm not great with economics/finance as I've repeatedly stated before.
JFK, Reagan and Bush II extended tax cuts that led to middle and lower class income gap closure. Figure it out as this all led to more than 3-4 years of extended economic growth. Throw in Clinton with the entitlement pull back and we have four for four. Two Dems and tao Republicans. FDR, Bush I and Obama bailed the economy out with Keynesian.
-
JFK, Reagan and Bush II extended tax cuts that led to middle and lower class income gap closure. Figure it out as this all led to more than 3-4 years of extended economic growth. Throw in Clinton with the entitlement pull back and we have four for four. Two Dems and tao Republicans. FDR, Bush I and Obama bailed the economy out with Keynesian.
As I'm trying to learn more about economics and principles, would you mind explaining this a little more? I watched some economic theory on Keynesian over at Khan Academy, but a little harder to put the pieces together here.
-
As I'm trying to learn more about economics and principles, would you mind explaining this a little more? I watched some economic theory on Keynesian over at Khan Academy, but a little harder to put the pieces together here.
When the public sector steps in to save the private sector. The Great Depression, the Federal Savings & Loan Bail Out and the Great Recession. This was needed to create mid to low level jobs in government via public works. In 2008-12, DC was a boom town...I saw today the Millenials held 12% of government jobs then, and 8% now as those jobs have switched to the private sector. One might argue that Reaganomics was also in this group with the splurge is defense spending and automobile subsidies (blue collar jobs) fit this bucket in the midst of hyper inflation.
In 2008, other banks went under, but there was no way the Fed was going to let CitiBank go under due to their massive debt, especially foreign. It would have been the 1920's collapse all over again, but worse. At some point, the Federal government needs to step in and literally own the private sector.
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2012/08/the-untold-story-of-the-bailout-of-citigroup/
-
When the public sector steps in to save the private sector. The Great Depression, the Federal Savings & Loan Bail Out and the Great Recession. This was needed to create mid to low level jobs in government via public works. In 2008-12, DC was a boom town...I saw today the Millenials held 12% of government jobs then, and 8% now as those jobs have switched to the private sector. One might argue that Reaganomics was also in this group with the splurge is defense spending and automobile subsidies (blue collar jobs) fit this bucket in the midst of hyper inflation.
In 2008, other banks went under, but there was no way the Fed was going to let CitiBank go under due to their massive debt, especially foreign. It would have been the 1920's collapse all over again, but worse. At some point, the Federal government needs to step in and literally own the private sector.
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2012/08/the-untold-story-of-the-bailout-of-citigroup/
I see. Makes sense. So do you believe that eventually private sector middle/lower wage increases will occur? My feelings are that since the private sector has realized what people are willing to do for their current wages, they have no incentive to raise them.
-
The policy of the Fed keeping interest rates artificially low hardly is Obama's doing. That's been going on since the Greenspan years. Increasing interest rates would be harmful in the short run, but in the long run would be good.
Come on, it's all Obama's -- sorry, obummer's -- fault!!
Ipso fatso, it stands to reason that the S&P 500's run-up from Jan. 20, 2009, to now -- which turned every $1,000 invested into $2,656, an annual gain of about 16% -- is all to obummer's credit.
All of the 401k accounts that created wealth for the average worker, not to mention all of the rich who became richer ... it was 100% obummer. Who knew he was such a master of the markets?
Because it does stand to reason that if the last week was obummer's fault, all the market gains from the first 2,200 weeks or so of his presidency -- one of the longest bull runs ever -- was entirely to obummer's credit, right?
If only presidents had that much power.
-
personally, i absolutely agree, increasing the interest rates would be harmful almost anytime, except, eventually we are going to have to face the music. whoever is paid the big bucks is going to have to do it...gently. obviously, timing is the biggest factor?
It would be harmful in the short term. In the long run, some interest rate hikes (along with inflation) has some positives. It would increase savings. It would decrease the value of borrowing compared to income.
Really it is ridiculous that 30 year mortgage interest rates are just over 3 percent. In the good old days of the 90s it was around 7-8%. In the mid to late 80s it was usually over 10%. You want to know why lower and middle class wages aren't growing? That's it right there.
-
I see. Makes sense. So do you believe that eventually private sector middle/lower wage increases will occur? My feelings are that since the private sector has realized what people are willing to do for their current wages, they have no incentive to raise them.
When you have little inflation in the economy, and interest rates kept artificially low, wages aren't going to increase. The core inflation rate (minus energy and food) has been less than 2% for awhile now. If people can't sell their goods for more than a modest increase over time, how can they give people more wages? And why would they need higher wages?
-
Because it does stand to reason that if the last week was obummer's fault, all the market gains from the first 2,200 weeks or so of his presidency -- one of the longest bull runs ever -- was entirely to obummer's credit, right?
If only presidents had that much power.
He's been president for longer than I thought...
-
Did chicos ever share one of his 3 long plays, or is he worried we'd destroy the stock(s)?
My long is someone else's short, and vice versa. You are a savvy investor, you know it depends on one's goals, time horizon, risk tolerance, etc.
For me, I try to get into things that I believe people will want or need for decades to come. People need energy. People want to be entertained. People need to eat. So on and so forth. I tend to lean more on the NEED, than the WANT because in desperate times WANT can be cut.
I added more energy to my portfolio on Monday. I feel that is a long term play. Others will disagree, as stated in this thread.
-
Invested some money today. Nothing fancy. Simply added to current positions based upon current dividend yield. I'll collect 6 percent on a solid company while waiting for the market to rebound in whatever year it choses to do that.
-
When you have little inflation in the economy, and interest rates kept artificially low, wages aren't going to increase. The core inflation rate (minus energy and food) has been less than 2% for awhile now. If people can't sell their goods for more than a modest increase over time, how can they give people more wages? And why would they need higher wages?
Fair points. Then why has there been such a disparity between growth of executive pay and worker pay? Maybe we're talking about 2 different timelines?
-
Fair points. Then why has there been such a disparity between growth of executive pay and worker pay? Maybe we're talking about 2 different timelines?
I guess I need to know what you mean by "executive." If you are talking about those at the highest levels, and whose compensation includes stock, well yes. Total compensation has increased mostly due to stock. (But you need to know those are a very small percentage of the workforce.)
But if you are talking basic, salaried professionals making high-5 or low-6 figures, I don't think their compensation has increased much at all as a group.
-
I guess I need to know what you mean by "executive." If you are talking about those at the highest levels, and whose compensation includes stock, well yes. Total compensation has increased mostly due to stock. (But you need to know those are a very small percentage of the workforce.)
But if you are talking basic, salaried professionals making high-5 or low-6 figures, I don't think their compensation has increased much at all as a group.
+1
Most of the astronomical CEO pay is due to them be award tons of stock and the bull market taking it higher. It is not the company shelling out tens of millions in cash to them.
-
I guess I need to know what you mean by "executive." If you are talking about those at the highest levels, and whose compensation includes stock, well yes. Total compensation has increased mostly due to stock. (But you need to know those are a very small percentage of the workforce.)
But if you are talking basic, salaried professionals making high-5 or low-6 figures, I don't think their compensation has increased much at all as a group.
Appreciate the response.
-
+1
Most of the astronomical CEO pay is due to them be award tons of stock and the bull market taking it higher. It is not the company shelling out tens of millions in cash to them.
Tax changes in the 1990s encouraged stock options and other non-traditional sources of pay to CEOs.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/16/bill-clinton-tried-to-limit-executive-pay-heres-why-it-didnt-work/
The legislation also limits taxes collected: From the article "While section 162(m) hasn't cut down on executive pay at all, it has reduced tax revenue by pushing corporations to reduce profits to pay their executives, which in turn reduces the amount of profits subject to the corporate income tax. He estimates that the rule lost at least $7 billion in 2010 alone and that more than half of that figure is due to the exemption of performance-based pay."
Heckuva job Bill.
-
I guess I need to know what you mean by "executive." If you are talking about those at the highest levels, and whose compensation includes stock, well yes. Total compensation has increased mostly due to stock. (But you need to know those are a very small percentage of the workforce.)
But if you are talking basic, salaried professionals making high-5 or low-6 figures, I don't think their compensation has increased much at all as a group.
I think that's a good assessment - the compensation growth I've seen in that professional segment has been real, but quite gradual. Certainly nowhere near the meteoric rise I've seen in charts showing compensation of the one percenters.
-
Reagan and Bush II extended tax cuts that led to middle and lower class income gap closure.
Did they do this before or after they raised taxes?
(Not a snarky comment. Just wonderin'.)
-
Tax changes in the 1990s encouraged stock options and other non-traditional sources of pay to CEOs.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/16/bill-clinton-tried-to-limit-executive-pay-heres-why-it-didnt-work/
The legislation also limits taxes collected: From the article "While section 162(m) hasn't cut down on executive pay at all, it has reduced tax revenue by pushing corporations to reduce profits to pay their executives, which in turn reduces the amount of profits subject to the corporate income tax. He estimates that the rule lost at least $7 billion in 2010 alone and that more than half of that figure is due to the exemption of performance-based pay."
Heckuva job Bill.
And see the reason that was signed is because people were complaining about high salaries back then, and that they weren't tied to company performance. So they created legislation that encouraged more compensation with closer relationship between compensation and performance (stock options), and this happens.
Look, executive compensation isn't going to change much no matter what limits you put on it. Trying to craft a perfect system is going to have all sorts of unintended consequences.
-
+1
Most of the astronomical CEO pay is due to them be award tons of stock and the bull market taking it higher. It is not the company shelling out tens of millions in cash to them.
And therein lies the problem.
The existing compensation structure incentivizes executives to maximize stock value and little else, much to the benefit of themselves and perhaps short-term investors, but often to the detriment of long-term/institutional investors, as well as the company (and economy) as a whole.
See: Enron
See: WorldCom
See: HealthSouth
See: AIG
-
+1
Most of the astronomical CEO pay is due to them be award tons of stock and the bull market taking it higher. It is not the company shelling out tens of millions in cash to them.
Well, I guess there is a silver lining to the stock market meltdown, then. It helped with the income disparity issue.
-
He's been president for longer than I thought...
Crap. Math!
I hate when math ruins perfectly bad snark on my part.
More like 330-something weeks, right? Dang.
-
Crap. Math!
I hate when math ruins perfectly bad snark on my part.
More like 330-something weeks, right? Dang.
Arithmetic... it'll get ya.
-
Well, I guess there is a silver lining to the stock market meltdown, then. It helped with the income disparity issue.
Cancel the meltdown, the maniac depressive market is now up on the week!
This is one of the craziest weeks ever in the market.
-
This is absolutely bonkers. Today's outrageous strength makes no sense. The market still needs to go lower and some window dressing by China shouldn't convince everyone that everything is great again.
-
Cancel the meltdown, the maniac depressive market is now up on the week!
This is one of the craziest weeks ever in the market.
It's a win-win then.
All the working stiffs with 401(k)s benefit.
People who panicked and bailed on Tuesday, not so much.
-
This is absolutely bonkers. Today's outrageous strength makes no sense. The market still needs to go lower and some window dressing by China shouldn't convince everyone that everything is great again.
That's the funny thing. Most of the buy and hold investors - we common people who don't know nuthin' - have virtually nothing to do with these wild, illogical swings. They're primarily caused by institutional investors and day traders who supposedly "know better"...yet regularly overreact to "good" or "bad" news.
Over the long haul, the market will climb...and buy and hold will prove the best long-term strategy.
-
This is absolutely bonkers. Today's outrageous strength makes no sense. The market still needs to go lower and some window dressing by China shouldn't convince everyone that everything is great again.
Today's strong move has very little to do with China. It is about the 3.7% GDP number for Q2. General consensus estimate was for 2.3% GDP. This was a very big surprise to the upside indicating the US economy is still in pretty good shape and actually getting stronger despite the rest of the world's problems. Add to that, the talk that the fed may no longer raise rates in September and you get a nice rally.
-
Today's strong move has very little to do with China. It is about the 3.7% GDP number for Q2. General consensus estimate was for 2.3% GDP. This was a very big surprise to the upside indicating the US economy is still in pretty good shape and actually getting stronger despite the rest of the world's problems. Add to that, the talk that the fed may no longer raise rates in September and you get a nice rally.
I'd agree with this except for one thing:
For most of the last year or so, when the government has released a report that the economy's getting stronger, Mr. Market market has reacted by selling off some.
Why? Because Mr. Market knows that if the economy is strong enough, the Fed will raise the discount rate, and Mr. Market likes the near-zero lending rate we've had.
Yep, good news is often bad, and bad news is often good. Mr. Market's a crazy MF!!
-
(https://media.giphy.com/media/gJmHuHOnReAqA/giphy.gif)
-
I'd agree with this except for one thing:
For most of the last year or so, when the government has released a report that the economy's getting stronger, Mr. Market market has reacted by selling off some.
Why? Because Mr. Market knows that if the economy is strong enough, the Fed will raise the discount rate, and Mr. Market likes the near-zero lending rate we've had.
Yep, good news is often bad, and bad news is often good. Mr. Market's a crazy MF!!
I agree with this and let me add that the consensus for today's GDP was 3.2% (up from 2.3%) So the consensus was expecting a big rebound. It was even bigger than they expected.
And yes, normally this would be bad news as it would move the Fed closer to hiking rates, which the stock market acts like it is cryptonite. This is how the market has traded all year.
Finally the DJIA was up 369 points. Using 24 hour Dow Jones futures as a proxy and you'll find 2/3s of this rally happened last night/early this morning before the GDP release. So that was not it.
What is going on here? Humans do not trade stocks anymore. Computers do and they are dominated by very short-term algorithms and High Frequency Traders (HFT). They are all playing a version of "beat the dealer." Anything can happen in the next few days, several hunrds more points higher or give it all back.
-
I agree with this and let me add that the consensus for today's GDP was 3.2% (up from 2.3%) So the consensus was expecting a big rebound. It was even bigger than they expected.
And yes, normally this would be bad news as it would move the Fed closer to hiking rates, which the stock market acts like it is cryptonite. This is how the market has traded all year.
Finally the DJIA was up 369 points. Using 24 hour Dow Jones futures as a proxy and you'll find 2/3s of this rally happened last night/early this morning before the GDP release. So that was not it.
What is going on here? Humans do not trade stocks anymore. Computers do and they are dominated by very short-term algorithms and High Frequency Traders (HFT). They are all playing a version of "beat the dealer." Anything can happen in the next few days, several hunrds more points higher or give it all back.
Kinda like the banks in '08. The difference being that there is some risk management in place in the Stock market.
-
I agree with this and let me add that the consensus for today's GDP was 3.2% (up from 2.3%) So the consensus was expecting a big rebound. It was even bigger than they expected.
And yes, normally this would be bad news as it would move the Fed closer to hiking rates, which the stock market acts like it is cryptonite. This is how the market has traded all year.
Finally the DJIA was up 369 points. Using 24 hour Dow Jones futures as a proxy and you'll find 2/3s of this rally happened last night/early this morning before the GDP release. So that was not it.
What is going on here? Humans do not trade stocks anymore. Computers do and they are dominated by very short-term algorithms and High Frequency Traders (HFT). They are all playing a version of "beat the dealer." Anything can happen in the next few days, several hunrds more points higher or give it all back.
And that seems screwed up. We should tax the hell out of those trades.
-
I agree with this and let me add that the consensus for today's GDP was 3.2% (up from 2.3%) So the consensus was expecting a big rebound. It was even bigger than they expected.
And yes, normally this would be bad news as it would move the Fed closer to hiking rates, which the stock market acts like it is cryptonite. This is how the market has traded all year.
Finally the DJIA was up 369 points. Using 24 hour Dow Jones futures as a proxy and you'll find 2/3s of this rally happened last night/early this morning before the GDP release. So that was not it.
What is going on here? Humans do not trade stocks anymore. Computers do and they are dominated by very short-term algorithms and High Frequency Traders (HFT). They are all playing a version of "beat the dealer." Anything can happen in the next few days, several hunrds more points higher or give it all back.
Are you saying that the big trading firms are intentionally manipulating the market in order to make money for themselves and their wealthy clients while totally screwing over the regular investor?
-
Are you saying that the big trading firms are intentionally manipulating the market in order to make money for themselves and their wealthy clients while totally screwing over the regular investor?
That would never happen, ATL. ?-(
-
Are you saying that the big trading firms are intentionally manipulating the market in order to make money for themselves and their wealthy clients while totally screwing over the regular investor?
I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you.
-
Are you saying that the big trading firms are intentionally manipulating the market in order to make money for themselves and their wealthy clients while totally screwing over the regular investor?
Funny.
So why am I weeping?
-
Are you saying that the big trading firms are intentionally manipulating the market in order to make money for themselves and their wealthy clients while totally screwing over the regular investor?
Yes! This type of trading is a problem.
And, I can tell you right now, it is NEVER going away. Because whatever reasonable argument that make, they will bury Washington in money and promises of cushy consulting jobs to leave the system as is.
The only way to fix it is to let other sharks compete with the current sharks and hopefully arbitrage away all the profits.
-
Jack Bogle is the founder of Vanguard, now the largest mutual fund company in the world with almost $4 trillion in assets.
The stock market's wild ride over the past week has been "the biggest exercise in sheer unadulterated speculation" Jack Bogle has ever seen in his more than 60 years in the business, the index mutual fund pioneer said Friday.
His advice to investors—don't do anything right now.
"It's just speculators not speculating on what they think is going to happen but what they think other speculators think is going to happen," the founder of the Vanguard Group said in an interview with CNBC's "Power Lunch."
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/28/jack-bogle-how-to-handle-the-markets-wild-ride.html
--------------------------------------------
I point this out as this week was so unlike anything anyone has EVER seen that it is hard to attach a bigger meaning to it.
That said, I will say this ... here is a picture of the top speculators and traders in 2015 freaking out. Can you see the panic in them? ....
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CNLVSI6WIAAocL7.jpg)
-
And therein lies the problem.
The existing compensation structure incentivizes executives to maximize stock value and little else, much to the benefit of themselves and perhaps short-term investors, but often to the detriment of long-term/institutional investors, as well as the company (and economy) as a whole.
See: Enron
See: WorldCom
See: HealthSouth
See: AIG
We could list 100's of counter examples that show the opposite. When stock values are maximized, employees benefit, investors benefit, etc. The examples you gave above failed for a number of reasons including breaking the law, cooking the books, etc. When stock values are driven properly, legally, ethically, etc, the benefits are profound.
-
We could list 100's of counter examples that show the opposite. When stock values are maximized, employees benefit, investors benefit, etc. The examples you gave above failed for a number of reasons including breaking the law, cooking the books, etc. When stock values are driven properly, legally, ethically, etc, the benefits are profound.
+1
Actually you can name hundreds of thousands of examples of executives and key employees that have been incentized by stock options. If you want to summarize it in just two words' "silicon valley" and how that are changing the face of humanity and getting rich by owning stock options of the companies they work for.
So, hundreds of thousands of success stories. 4 negative stories. Sounds like a very good deal for all.
-
What's interesting is that chicos didn't share any of his/her stock picks
Also interesting are those who 'stay long' and don't trade based on market movements here and there.. LOVELY WEEK for those of us who did it correctly.
-
What's interesting is that chicos didn't share any of his/her stock picks
Also interesting are those who 'stay long' and don't trade based on market movements here and there.. LOVELY WEEK for those of us who did it correctly.
To each their own, in my view there is no "correctly" because it depends on what pertains to your tolerance, your time horizon, etc. For one person that buys and another person that shorts on that same stock, the "correct" answer depends on timing, horizon, etc. If I have 20 years to play with, or 2 years...different "correct" way of playing it.
No, I didn't share the three stocks I bought this week, no one's business.
If you would like to know what stocks I've been in from the past, sure. Most of these I got in very low. Some I'm still in, some I sold. For example, with the collapse of the markets in 2006 I was convinced there was no way the gov't would let Citibank fail. So I went into C. Proved beneficial. For T, it's all about the dividends and the yield.
C
T
NFLX
FB (I'm up 376% since I bought)
APPL
DIS
DISH
Sony (I bought during the hack when it was tanking. :) )
Sirius XM (bought below $1)
Visa
Sempra
Costco
etc, etc Health Care stocks have been a beautiful thing for most of the last decade. :D Energy sector down the last two years, which is why I am buying buying buying.
I have a few shat burgers, but typically buy on solid companies that people under value. Netflix is the one that I still kind of laugh at. They make almost no money, relatively speaking to their revenues. It is such an irrational stock, but I bought it so low that is could bomb massively and still do ok.
Plenty of index funds, Bonds as well.
-
Also interesting are those who 'stay long' and don't trade based on market movements here and there.. LOVELY WEEK for those of us who did it correctly.
You've had a lovely week…I've had a lovely seven+ years and counting...and I haven't had to lift a finger. Sure pays well to do it incorrectly. 8-)
-
You carbon based investors are really old school.
Rage against the Machine!
The Financial Times - Gillian Tett: Welcome to a wild world of robot investing
Automated computer programs have changed how markets function
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3c4afe68-4b17-11e5-b558-8a9722977189.html#axzz3kFrFANrE
While it may take weeks before regulators understand why the plunges occurred, one reason for the swing is that automated computer programs have changed how markets function. The use of similar programs — such as high-frequency trading strategies — has expanded so rapidly that these are now estimated by the Securities and Exchange Commission to represent more than half of all US stock trades, and a big chunk of other asset markets. Orders are being executed at lightning speeds in huge volumes. But there is another, often overlooked implication: these machines are being programmed to link numerous market segments together into trading strategies. So when computer programs cannot buy or sell assets in one segment of the market, they will rush into another, hunting for liquidity. Since their algorithms are often similar (or created by computer scientists with the same training) this pattern tends to create a “herding” effect. If a circuit breaks in one market segment, it can ripple across the system faster than the human mind can process. This is a world prone to computer stampedes.
(http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/b40534c2-c067-4787-8da8-1fc1167a9d21.img)
-
You carbon based investors are really old school.
Rage against the Machine!
The Financial Times - Gillian Tett: Welcome to a wild world of robot investing
Automated computer programs have changed how markets function
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3c4afe68-4b17-11e5-b558-8a9722977189.html#axzz3kFrFANrE
While it may take weeks before regulators understand why the plunges occurred, one reason for the swing is that automated computer programs have changed how markets function. The use of similar programs — such as high-frequency trading strategies — has expanded so rapidly that these are now estimated by the Securities and Exchange Commission to represent more than half of all US stock trades, and a big chunk of other asset markets. Orders are being executed at lightning speeds in huge volumes. But there is another, often overlooked implication: these machines are being programmed to link numerous market segments together into trading strategies. So when computer programs cannot buy or sell assets in one segment of the market, they will rush into another, hunting for liquidity. Since their algorithms are often similar (or created by computer scientists with the same training) this pattern tends to create a “herding” effect. If a circuit breaks in one market segment, it can ripple across the system faster than the human mind can process. This is a world prone to computer stampedes.
(http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/b40534c2-c067-4787-8da8-1fc1167a9d21.img)
Tax the hell out of those trades
-
Tax the hell out of those trades
That will never ever ever happen ... they are more powerful than even Washington. They have all the money and own all the politicians.
-
No, I didn't share the three stocks I bought this week, no one's business.
If you would like to know what stocks I've been in from the past, sure. Most of these I got in very low.
lol
-
That will never ever ever happen ... they are more powerful than even Washington. They have all the money and own all the politicians.
And that's the problem. I can't tell with you, but maybe you're the type that wants it to remain that way.
-
lol
Laughing that I got them low, or laughing that I haven't listed them? The low part is provable...just need to look at the cost basis. Not sharing the stocks, well part of that is due to their cost.
-
And that's the problem. I can't tell with you, but maybe you're the type that wants it to remain that way.
No I don't, I just learned to accept it is here and not going away, ever.
-
Laughing that I got them low, or laughing that I haven't listed them? The low part is provable...just need to look at the cost basis. Not sharing the stocks, well part of that is due to their cost.
You listed out a bunch of stocks you claim to have done well on.. while also stating that you bought three great stocks last week but you won't reveal any of them. I'm not understanding why you won't share any of those three, yet are willing to spill out a long list of others.. "well part of that is due to their cost" ... what?!?!?
-
You listed out a bunch of stocks you claim to have done well on.. while also stating that you bought three great stocks last week but you won't reveal any of them. I'm not understanding why you won't share any of those three, yet are willing to spill out a long list of others.. "well part of that is due to their cost" ... what?!?!?
No, actually I said I bought three stocks last week. Whether they are great or not, I have no idea, but I hope they will be great, but certainly didn't say it. Only time will tell on that one.
The cost factor matters because there are already enough goofballs on this site that think people are what they are not. Let me give you an example, say I bought a stock that was $500 each vs a stock that was a penny stock? That feeds into some of the nonsense here. I have a very middle class existence. My wife doesn't work, has a HS education, and has her medical challenges the last decade plus. Two kids, one with her own medical issues. Drive a used pickup truck, have an average California home, but some of the comments here people like to peg folks into the 1%. It's crazy. So yes, I don't disclose that stuff because it isn't anyone's business. Furthermore, I honestly don't like it when others say "buy this stock". People should do their own due diligence and I'm not going to identify specific stocks that someone may purchase without them doing their own research. You are free to tell people each stock you purchase, I'm free to not name them. I'm happy to share some of the ones I purchased long ago....both crapburgers and ones that have done well, but with a historical view due to how long ago I bought them.
-
No, actually I said I bought three stocks last week. Whether they are great or not, I have no idea, but I hope they will be great, but certainly didn't say it. Only time will tell on that one.
The cost factor matters because there are already enough goofballs on this site that think people are what they are not. Let me give you an example, say I bought a stock that was $500 each vs a stock that was a penny stock? That feeds into some of the nonsense here. I have a very middle class existence. My wife doesn't work, has a HS education, and has her medical challenges the last decade plus. Two kids, one with her own medical issues. Drive a used pickup truck, have an average California home, but some of the comments here people like to peg folks into the 1%. It's crazy. So yes, I don't disclose that stuff because it isn't anyone's business. Furthermore, I honestly don't like it when others say "buy this stock". People should do their own due diligence and I'm not going to identify specific stocks that someone may purchase without them doing their own research. You are free to tell people each stock you purchase, I'm free to not name them. I'm happy to share some of the ones I purchased long ago....both crapburgers and ones that have done well, but with a historical view due to how long ago I bought them.
Lol. WHAT?
The price of a single share of one stock would make people think you're rich?
Now, if you said, "I purchased $120,000 of stock X, and $340,000 of stock Y"... now you've got something. But that commentary from you is bizarre.
Furthermore, the fact is that you listed out a bunch of stocks that you have purchased.... why these three should be hidden and "isn't anyone's business" but the others have different rules.. well, that is absolutely bonkers.
-
Lol. WHAT?
The price of a single share of one stock would make people think you're rich?
Now, if you said, "I purchased $120,000 of stock X, and $340,000 of stock Y"... now you've got something. But that commentary from you is bizarre.
Furthermore, the fact is that you listed out a bunch of stocks that you have purchased.... why these three should be hidden and "isn't anyone's business" but the others have different rules.. well, that is absolutely bonkers.
Welcome to the World According to Chicos.
It's a bonkers place!
-
Welcome to the World According to Chicos.
It's a bonkers place!
From the guy who thinks someone likes guns because he defends a person's right to protect himself. Please, you have bonkers cornered.
JayBee....you need to read the rest of what I said. Those that I listed were bought in the past, some of which I have divested myself from. I choose not to share the ones I just bought, for reasons stated. Why is this such a big deal to you? Maybe I bought stocks in a porn company, or a marijuana grower, or maybe an international stock that is HQ'd in a country that is less than desirable. I just don't wish to share. Pretty simple.
-
... Maybe I bought stocks in a porn company, ....
Avenue Q had it right: Only safe investment is porn.
-
Avenue Q had it right: Only safe investment is porn.
Tough to monetize, too much free stuff out there. The department I worked at for years also housed the Adult revenue group. They had a tough gig....flood of cheap or free porn. I'd stay away from those IMO.
-
Lol. WHAT?
The price of a single share of one stock would make people think you're rich?
Now, if you said, "I purchased $120,000 of stock X, and $340,000 of stock Y"... now you've got something. But that commentary from you is bizarre.
Furthermore, the fact is that you listed out a bunch of stocks that you have purchased.... why these three should be hidden and "isn't anyone's business" but the others have different rules.. well, that is absolutely bonkers.
Chico "won't disclose that stuff (his 3 stock purchases) because it's nobody's business". Hilarious. His parents, his upbringing, his schooling, his jobs, famous people he knows, dines with, exchanges emails with, etc., his wife, his wife's parents and his kids are "our business" and can be used as props to support his narrative. Not those stock picks, though. That's personal, private and nobody else's business.
-
That will never ever ever happen ... they are more powerful than even Washington. They have all the money and own all the politicians.
FIFY.
-
Chico "won't disclose that stuff (his 3 stock purchases) because it's nobody's business". Hilarious. His parents, his upbringing, his schooling, his jobs, famous people he knows, dines with, exchanges emails with, etc., his wife, his wife's parents and his kids are "our business" and can be used as props to support his narrative. Not those stock picks, though. That's personal, private and nobody else's business.
Putting pictures of his kids on a forum just to prove a point?
Maybe it's just me, but that is really sick.
-
FIFY.
Correct!
-
Chico "won't disclose that stuff (his 3 stock purchases) because it's nobody's business". Hilarious. His parents, his upbringing, his schooling, his jobs, famous people he knows, dines with, exchanges emails with, etc., his wife, his wife's parents and his kids are "our business" and can be used as props to support his narrative. Not those stock picks, though. That's personal, private and nobody else's business.
Yes. But at least he was kind enough to share that he purchased 3 great stocks when the market dipped.
If they do well, he'll have no problem sharing in the future.
thanks chicos!!!!!!!!!!!
-
And that's the problem. I can't tell with you, but maybe you're the type that wants it to remain that way.
Yes. But at least he was kind enough to share that he purchased 3 great stocks when the market dipped.
If they do well, he'll have no problem sharing in the future.
thanks chicos!!!!!!!!!!!
The Bondsman bought into 90 day bonds...
-
Yes. But at least he was kind enough to share that he purchased 3 great stocks when the market dipped.
If they do well, he'll have no problem sharing in the future.
thanks chicos!!!!!!!!!!!
If he told us, he'd have to kill us ... with one of those guns he says he doesn't like.
-
Yes. But at least he was kind enough to share that he purchased 3 great stocks when the market dipped.
If they do well, he'll have no problem sharing in the future.
thanks chicos!!!!!!!!!!!
Nope, never said they were great. I said I purchased three stocks. Hopefully they turn out great. As stated, it is for the longhaul....years down the road.
I'm just glag I didn't say something to the effect that there is only one "correct" way to buy stocks...the correct and proper way I believe. That made many of us laugh here. Quite frankly, the person it should have made laugh more than anyone on this board is Lenny....but I doubt it dawned on him.
-
If he told us, he'd have to kill us ... with one of those guns he says he doesn't like.
It just isn't any of your business. Sorry. Move along now.
I'm not asking what stocks you bought, what the name of your dog is, where you live, how often you pork someone, etc. Now, if you offer that up, fine. If I offer up specific stocks, or whatever..fine. I choose not to.
This really seems to be a craw for some of you. Why?
-
It just isn't any of your business. Sorry. Move along now.
I'm not asking what stocks you bought, what the name of your dog is, where you live, how often you pork someone, etc. Now, if you offer that up, fine. If I offer up specific stocks, or whatever..fine. I choose not to.
This really seems to be a craw for some of you. Why?
Because you are the one saying/doing it. Disagreements are personal on this board of late.
-
Because you are the one saying/doing it. Disagreements are personal on this board of late.
Of late? That's been the case here for years. It isn't what is said here, it's WHO says the what.
-
I recommend Blue Star airlines....load up.
-
I recommend Blue Star airlines....load up.
"Blue Horse Shoe Loves Anacot Steel,"
-
"Blue Horse Shoe Loves Anacot Steel,"
"Buy Can All Pet."
-
No, I didn't share the three stocks I bought this week, no one's business.
If you would like to know what stocks I've been in from the past, sure. Most of these I got in very low. Some I'm still in, some I sold. For example, with the collapse of the markets in 2006 I was convinced there was no way the gov't would let Citibank fail. So I went into C. Proved beneficial. For T, it's all about the dividends and the yield.
C
T
NFLX
FB (I'm up 376% since I bought)
APPL
DIS
DISH
Sony (I bought during the hack when it was tanking. :) )
Sirius XM (bought below $1)
Visa
Sempra
Costco
So funny that the stocks you bought and have scored nicely on ARE our business.
But after telling us you bought three stocks recently, those AREN'T our business.
I'm guessing that if one of the newbies go "up 376% since I bought," it suddenly will become our business. If you end up down 75% on them, they'll remain none of our business.
As Archie used to say to Edith, "You're a pip."
-
So funny that the stocks you bought and have scored nicely on ARE our business.
But after telling us you bought three stocks recently, those AREN'T our business.
I'm guessing that if one of the newbies go "up 376% since I bought," it suddenly will become our business. If you end up down 75% on them, they'll remain none of our business.
As Archie used to say to Edith, "You're a pip."
I also stated clearly that those were bought a long time ago, and a number of them sold. That's why I said I was ok sharing SOME of them. Many I didn't share, thus the "etc". Just have to read and read the context.
So not hard......
-
So funny that the stocks you bought and have scored nicely on ARE our business.
But after telling us you bought three stocks recently, those AREN'T our business.
I'm guessing that if one of the newbies go "up 376% since I bought," it suddenly will become our business. If you end up down 75% on them, they'll remain none of our business.
As Archie used to say to Edith, "You're a pip."
i don't know if i should laugh or cry here-what the... is all the squat about THE THREE STOCKS he bought recently? i'll tell you why he's not telling you-cuz if he does, all of you will run out and buy and then if they don't do well, chicos will never forgive himself
good luck on those by the way
-
Here was a long term buy i got in on three years ago. Still a lot of upside. Over 130 today before some profit taking pre-holiday.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=STZ+Interactive#{"range":"5y","allowChartStacking":true}
-
Here was a long term buy i got in on three years ago. Still a lot of upside. Over 130 today before some profit taking pre-holiday.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=STZ+Interactive#{"range":"5y","allowChartStacking":true}
NICE!!!
-
i don't know if i should laugh or cry here-what the... is all the squat about THE THREE STOCKS he bought recently? i'll tell you why he's not telling you-cuz if he does, all of you will run out and buy and then if they don't do well, chicos will never forgive himself
good luck on those by the way
I like to tell people I won $250,000+ at the dog track one year. Absolutely true. But, I always add that I wagered about $240,000 that year.
So someone saying they picked 3 good stocks does not mean they made a penny in the stock market. What other stocks did they also buy?
-
same thing when i tell people i never have to pay for a room in las vegas....funny thing is most times the room is paid for at the tables, slots or sports book. true story though-my wife hit a 3 card royal flush about 4-5 years ago with her money on the progressive-$16,000. i don't think we've lost combined 16k yet. we're not big big gamblers, many times come out even or down a few hundred. so based on that, we are probably up yet. i did take a beating by my standards last march madness-lost $2500 which is nothing-guys have lost that falling out of their pockets there
-
It will drop due to a 5.1% unemployment rate, fueling fears that the Fed will raise the interest rate. I have always been fascinated by the logic that low unemployment is bad news for stocks.
-
It will drop due to a 5.1% unemployment rate, fueling fears that the Fed will raise the interest rate. I have always been fascinated by the logic that low unemployment is bad news for stocks.
Agreed. Many investors these days simply don't know what they want.
If today's unemployment numbers had looked bad...the market would drop because people would be worried that the US economy is bad. If today's unemployment numbers looked good (as they did)...the market would drop because people would worry that the good economic news will lead to a Fed rate hike.
Fortunately, regardless of the cause for today's panic sell-off, the markets will bounce back next week. And if the Fed actually does raise rates, that'll cause another drop...but then we'll bounce back again.
-
Agreed. Many investors these days simply don't know what they want.
If today's unemployment numbers had looked bad...the market would drop because people would be worried that the US economy is bad. If today's unemployment numbers looked good (as they did)...the market would drop because people would worry that the good economic news will lead to a Fed rate hike.
Fortunately, regardless of the cause for today's panic sell-off, the markets will bounce back next week. And if the Fed actually does raise rates, that'll cause another drop...but then we'll bounce back again.
Excellent post.
-
It will drop due to a 5.1% unemployment rate, fueling fears that the Fed will raise the interest rate. I have always been fascinated by the logic that low unemployment is bad news for stocks.
It's bad news when it spells the end of the near 0-cost access to financing that the Fed has established by keeping rates so low for so long.
-
More than anything else, Mr. Market dislikes uncertainty.
If the Fed just goes ahead and announces a small rate hike, there would be a knee-jerk sell-off, especially in REITs, utilities and other sectors directly affected, but then things would quickly level out and the market would return to "normal."
These weeks and months of "will the Fed raise?" and "why won't the Fed raise?" and "when will the Fed raise?" have contributed greatly to the volatility.
-
It's bad news when it spells the end of the near 0-cost access to financing that the Fed has established by keeping rates so low for so long.
Bingo. The unemployment number is not what spooks the markets, it is the free money everyone has had access to for crazy number of years. That is also what has fueled stock buybacks by companies. It was cheaper to buy their own stock when money is so damn cheap.
-
Here was a long term buy i got in on three years ago. Still a lot of upside. Over 130 today before some profit taking pre-holiday.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=STZ+Interactive#{"range":"5y","allowChartStacking":true}
Up $3.25 today. Hope some of you jamokes listened to me. Don't ever say I didn't help my Scoop brothers out.
http://www.thestreet.com/quote/STZ.html
-
Dr. Blackheart
You are wise man. Keep educated the young guys on here.
-
Here was a long term buy i got in on three years ago. Still a lot of upside. Over 130 today before some profit taking pre-holiday.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=STZ+Interactive#{"range":"5y","allowChartStacking":true}
Hedge funds jumped in big today, up $2.59 to $142.85. Will be some profit taking at year's end and approaching high end of PEG. However, forward speculation with Ballast Point acquisition, continued strong growth in Corona and Modelo, and an early Sierra snowpack with El Niño to help the grape harvest. If you bet your house in early September at $130, you are now a multi-millionaire two months later.
-
Hedge funds jumped in big today, up $2.59 to $142.85. Will be some profit taking at year's end and approaching high end of PEG. However, forward speculation with Ballast Point acquisition, continued strong growth in Corona and Modelo, and an early Sierra snowpack with El Niño to help the grape harvest. If you bet your house in early September at $130, you are now a multi-millionaire two months later.
If you bet your house on Disney a few months ago, same thing. ;D
-
If you bet your house on Disney a few months ago, same thing. ;D
Yep. If you sold on your stop gap to profit take, and then bought at the bottom on the way up with that profit. But you didn't.
-
Yep. If you sold on your stop gap to profit take, and then bought at the bottom on the way up with that profit. But you didn't.
I just bought on the way down and all the way at the bottom, up $27 since then. All fun.
-
I just bought on the way down and all the way at the bottom, up $27 since then. All fun.
So the Backyard Beer Summits are this:
(https://assets3.thrillist.com/v1/image/1469456/size/tmg-article_tall/11-backyard-sheds-turned-into-kickass-bars)
When they could have been this?:
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/05/11/09/288C724900000578-0-image-a-1_1431332178561.jpg)
-
Nope, instead going to pay for college tuition and the like.
-
Nope, instead going to pay for college tuition and the like.
All kidding aside, you had the foresight on Disney. It has historically been solid. I think there is some evolving risk. However, do this math: If instead of buying on the way down in increments, you sold on increments to some base (say you held 1000 shares, and you wanted to keep a base of 400 for the long term play and sold 100 at a time on the way down to 90). And you kept the profits in cash until the bottom where you got back in. What would be your profit versus what your current strategy was? The difference would be four years of private college paid.
You had the insight. There was money to be made off the bounce of the mouse.
Btw, Yellen is speaking today. Some bad economic news in November on factories. The economy is sideways down driven by that long term negative consumer spending trend--expect volatility here.
-
All kidding aside, you had the foresight on Disney. It has historically been solid. I think there is some evolving risk. However, do this math: If instead of buying on the way down in increments, you sold on increments to some base (say you held 1000 shares, and you wanted to keep a base of 400 for the long term play and sold 100 at a time on the way down to 90). And you kept the profits in cash until the bottom where you got back in. What would be your profit versus what your current strategy was? The difference would be four years of private college paid.
You had the insight. There was money to be made off the bounce of the mouse.
Btw, Yellen is speaking today. Some bad economic news in November on factories. The economy is sideways down driven by that long term negative consumer spending trend--expect volatility here.
Problem I see there is that having the insight on DIS long term prospects being strong is easier to execute than incrementally selling on the way down because eventually you'd need to call the bottom correctly. By buying into the weakness you get the chance to accumulate shares and lower your basis and you only need to be right about the underlying thesis: DIS is strong long term. Selling into the weakness you need to get the thesis right but also time the bottom, right?
-
Problem I see there is that having the insight on DIS long term prospects being strong is easier to execute than incrementally selling on the way down because eventually you'd need to call the bottom correctly. By buying into the weakness you get the chance to accumulate shares and lower your basis and you only need to be right about the underlying thesis: DIS is strong long term. Selling into the weakness you need to get the thesis right but also time the bottom, right?
That's how I approach it, because I'm not smart enough to figure out where bottom is. I just go for what I think is below value, and if the price drops and continues to be even further below value, I grab more.
Yellen's comments will be interesting. So many pushing for rate increases (I'm one of them), but so many politics involved as well. We have to get off the teat of QE and essentially 0% interest at some point. It is going to mean a little pain, but that pain has got to start.
-
Our economy could use a little inflation. It will hurt in the short term but would be very beneficial in the long term.
-
Disney announces higher than anticipated dividend today.
Cheers!!!
-
If you bet your house in early September at $130, you are now a multi-millionaire two months later.
On a 10% gain? Umm...
-
That's how I approach it, because I'm not smart enough to figure out where bottom is. I just go for what I think is below value, and if the price drops and continues to be even further below value, I grab more.
Yellen's comments will be interesting. So many pushing for rate increases (I'm one of them), but so many politics involved as well. We have to get off the teat of QE and essentially 0% interest at some point. It is going to mean a little pain, but that pain has got to start.
i agree and it's going to sting a little, but this administration has been using the QE all along to try to say we are recovering and doing well. no one wants to acknowledge the man behind the curtain.
-
On a 10% gain? Umm...
Plus Cheeks' stock grant gains for total profit (estimated to 120k). Figuring he got those at $60? Trying to reinforce the concept of profit raking. That said, I cannot disagree with Chicios's long term play. Just trying to reinforce the concept that there is a lot more to be made in an "up and down and then up" market. But, in a few weeks, if Chicos sold on the way down versus bought, he would have had about 33% more stock in the short term to convert for the same cash in. Still don't get the strategy to buy on the way down versus profit taking. $$$$
More so, in the thread, vets like Heise predicted the bottom.
-
Here was a long term buy i got in on three years ago. Still a lot of upside. Over 130 today before some profit taking pre-holiday.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=STZ+Interactive#{"range":"5y","allowChartStacking":true}
Now up over $150 in a volatile market.
-
DJIA lost 1,079 points or 6.19%. Its worst start to a new year ever (data back to 1897).
Below is the S&P version. All similar years were bad
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYOiFhNUsAAfxBb.png:large
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYOiFhNUsAAfxBb.png:large)
Note 1991 was an exception because we started the Kuwait war on January 17, 1991. Markets were having a nervous breakdown in the weeks leading into this over the prospects of a shooting war with Iraq. January 10 still remains the single wildest day in crude oil trading history because of this (I lost a crap-load of money this day, and almost my career)....
http://articles.philly.com/1991-01-10/business/25817877_1_pegasus-econometric-group-brian-tagler-peter-beutel
Given this unique story, I don't think it fits with the rest examples above. It is an outlier.
-
Again, this is the Federal Reserve CFNAI, a composite of key economic and related inflationary pressure. Above zero is above average historical growth in the economy. Negative is below average growth. Over +.7 over an extended period of months, means inflation. Under -.7 means recession.
While recent job growth has been strong, other factors have been in decline recently, bringing the overall composite tracking down. The Fed raised the interest rates based on the strong job growth, while anticipating a stronger US$ for its members with concern about keeping inflation in check. As the market has shown in the past six months, the economy is headed south as are the markets.
That said, this economy is fueled still by consumer spending, and the Consumer & Housing Index has not had a positive growth month (vs. historical averages) since December 2006. When you hear about disparity in incomes, no wage growth, under employment, blue vs. white collar wages, you see that in this index.
This is the continued long-term, transition from the Computer Economy to the Automation Economy. From building of technology, infrastructure and networks to automating ordering, production and delivery (Amazon, Google Cars). Workers skilled in the trades (installing cell towers, building houses and cars) of yesterday are being replaced by workers building robots and designing apps to automate and support these processes. Training is critical as well as to the adjustment of wages and incomes due to automation versus historical.
Not to get political, but a generation of pensioners retiring at full wages, with the assumption that the next generation of high earners will support them in their retirement, as they did the generation before them (The American Dream), is flawed. Their jobs are and will be replaced by machines, and the Millenials will moving to jobs that support Automation. The next generation behind the the Millenials will be largely minority, and likely less educated. Wages will be lower. Thus, a government and a tax system based upon progressive incomes and personal consumption taxes needs to adapt as well (i.e., drones fighting our wars, on-line education, transits apps to replace conductors, etc.).
Automation will lead to productivity. Productivity is always a sign of prosperity. An economy in transition will be a sideways economy, however. That is where we are. Thus, there will be money to be made in this market in the ups and downs. NASDAQ was up about 6% in 2015, the DJI was negative.
(https://www.chicagofed.org/~/media/images/research/data/cfnai-monthly-ma3-png.png?h=292&la=en&w=525) (https://www.chicagofed.org/~/media/images/research/data/cfnai-legend-png.png?la=en)
https://www.chicagofed.org/research/data/cfnai/current-data
-
The S&P is down 7.5% in the first 8 trading days this year. Worst start ever.
At this rate the S&P will hit zero (100%) decline on or around May 7th?
-
At this rate the S&P will hit zero (100%) decline on or around May 7th?
LOL
Its a correction. This is normal. Time to buy.
-
*RUSSELL 2000 CAPS 22% DROP FROM JUNE RECORD, ENTERS BEAR MARKET
Almost a quarter of the value of small stocks now gone. This is normal?
Only happened 4 times in the last 25 years.
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2016/01-overflow/20160113_EOD11.jpg)
-
*RUSSELL 2000 CAPS 22% DROP FROM JUNE RECORD, ENTERS BEAR MARKET
Almost a quarter of the value of small stocks now gone. This is normal?
Only happened 4 times in the last 25 years.
Ok maybe not normal. I don't know....what is normal?
Unprecedented...absolutely not. Time to buy.
-
Again, this is the Federal Reserve CFNAI, a composite of key economic and related inflationary pressure. Above zero is above average historical growth in the economy. Negative is below average growth. Over +.7 over an extended period of months, means inflation. Under -.7 means recession.
While recent job growth has been strong, other factors have been in decline recently, bringing the overall composite tracking down. The Fed raised the interest rates based on the strong job growth, while anticipating a stronger US$ for its members with concern about keeping inflation in check. As the market has shown in the past six months, the economy is headed south as are the markets.
That said, this economy is fueled still by consumer spending, and the Consumer & Housing Index has not had a positive growth month (vs. historical averages) since December 2006. When you hear about disparity in incomes, no wage growth, under employment, blue vs. white collar wages, you see that in this index.
This is the continued long-term, transition from the Computer Economy to the Automation Economy. From building of technology, infrastructure and networks to automating ordering, production and delivery (Amazon, Google Cars). Workers skilled in the trades (installing cell towers, building houses and cars) of yesterday are being replaced by workers building robots and designing apps to automate and support these processes. Training is critical as well as to the adjustment of wages and incomes due to automation versus historical.
Not to get political, but a generation of pensioners retiring at full wages, with the assumption that the next generation of high earners will support them in their retirement, as they did the generation before them (The American Dream), is flawed. Their jobs are and will be replaced by machines, and the Millenials will moving to jobs that support Automation. The next generation behind the the Millenials will be largely minority, and likely less educated. Wages will be lower. Thus, a government and a tax system based upon progressive incomes and personal consumption taxes needs to adapt as well (i.e., drones fighting our wars, on-line education, transits apps to replace conductors, etc.).
Automation will lead to productivity. Productivity is always a sign of prosperity. An economy in transition will be a sideways economy, however. That is where we are. Thus, there will be money to be made in this market in the ups and downs. NASDAQ was up about 6% in 2015, the DJI was negative.
(https://www.chicagofed.org/~/media/images/research/data/cfnai-monthly-ma3-png.png?h=292&la=en&w=525) (https://www.chicagofed.org/~/media/images/research/data/cfnai-legend-png.png?la=en)
https://www.chicagofed.org/research/data/cfnai/current-data
A lot of good data, along with your interpretation and thoughts here, Dr. There is going to be a huge conflict in policy and philosophy of our country as we make the transition you speak of. Many of the older populations can't relate and don't understand. Many of the younger want the "new era" to be ushered in quickly so we don't get screwed. Tough times ahead.
-
Ok maybe not normal. I don't know....what is normal?
Unprecedented...absolutely not. Time to buy.
If you want to get sharp, wait till the S&P gets down into the 1800-1810 range. And I agree, this is very nasty, but its an overdue correction that is being fueled quite helpfully by fantastically low oil prices that seem to have no bottom. Oil has been way down and even still, inventories today revealed a growing supply vs last month.
I personally think 2016 is going to be kind of a nasty year but I don't think its some doomsday melt down.
-
We are doomed!
Doomed, I say!
Sell everything. Put all of your cash in a mayonaisse jar and drop it off at my place for "safe keeping." I'll take real good care of it!
-
We are doomed!
Doomed, I say!
Sell everything. Put all of your cash in a mayonnaise jar and drop it off at my place for "safe keeping." I'll take real good care of it!
If one did that two years ago, and you only dipped into that jar "once in a while" most investors would have been better off.
-
DJIA down 475 points as I write this (late Morning, Jan 20, 2016).
Essentially no one has made money in the broad stock market in the last 2 to 3 years.
Small cap stocks, the Russell 2000 Index, is down 25% since its all-time peak on June 23, 2015. One-quarter of its value is gone, making it one of the 5 largest "bear markets" since the 1980s! It's at the same level as May 2013.
Large cap stocks, the S&P 500 index, is down 14% since its all-time peak on May 21, 2015. It's at levels last seen in October 2014.
So what is going to happen next?
* irrational move and time to buy
* Figure your next worth on December 31 and if you don't get out now, it will be the same in 5 to 7 years (meaning you not getting "richer" for several more years.)
-
That's why I don't invest in the broad stock market.
My portfolio is up nicely the last two years. Sorry if yours isn't.
I'm curious what moves you have made or are making now? Instead of dooming and glooming us, tell us what you are doing to recession-proof your portfolio.
-
That's why I don't invest in the broad stock market.
My portfolio is up nicely the last two years. Sorry if yours isn't.
I'm curious what moves you have made or are making now? Instead of dooming and glooming us, tell us what you are doing to recession-proof your portfolio.
I've been short since late 2014. Been very short oil since last spring.
I think we have a down 1000 point day coming and I will start to cover. That might be today.
(and cover means I'll get another chance to put my shorts out at higher levels).
The energy sector is like the financial sector in 2008. Continental, Pioneer are collapsing, they might not make it to the end of the week before filing for bankruptcy. I cannot borrow anymore otherwise I would short more.
I'm long Long-term Treasuries 10-year and 30-year. Thinking about getting long gold again but have not pulled the trigger on that.
-------------
Yes I have a poor view of things and I think it is getting worse.
-
As recently as 2010 and 2013, both strong years for the stock market(13% gains), we had intra-year declines of 16% and 10%, respectively. In 2011 the market had an intra-year decline of 19%, yet finished flat for the year.
Yes market corrections happen and sell-offs can be very painful, but we need to remember that they do happen often and even in the good years. In fact if you look back to 1981 the S&P 500 index has experienced at least a 5% intra-year decline in every year but one(1995). The average intra-year decline has been 14.4%. Sell-offs like we've experienced so far this year happen about every 2 and a half years, granted this one has been very quick and maybe that is why it feels different than in previous years.
As far as what we're doing is concerned, we are and have been overweight US large cap, with a recent tactical shift to large cap value and in particular dividend paying stocks. We like international developed markets and I agree on the 10-yr space. Towards the end of Q3 2015 we positioned our fixed income allocation to the intermediate space. US treasuries, corporates and munis. We do also like preferreds.
Stay invested, rebalance periodically and you should be OK in the long run.
-
As recently as 2010 and 2013, both strong years for the stock market(13% gains), we had intra-year declines of 16% and 10%, respectively. In 2011 the market had an intra-year decline of 19%, yet finished flat for the year.
Yes market corrections happen and sell-offs can be very painful, but we need to remember that they do happen often and even in the good years. In fact if you look back to 1981 the S&P 500 index has experienced at least a 5% intra-year decline in every year but one(1995). The average intra-year decline has been 14.4%. Sell-offs like we've experienced so far this year happen about every 2 and a half years, granted this one has been very quick and maybe that is why it feels different than in previous years.
As far as what we're doing is concerned, we are and have been overweight US large cap, with a recent tactical shift to large cap value and in particular dividend paying stocks. We like international developed markets and I agree on the 10-yr space. Towards the end of Q3 2015 we positioned our fixed income allocation to the intermediate space. US treasuries, corporates and munis. We do also like preferreds.
Stay invested, rebalance periodically and you should be OK in the long run.
2010 saw a peak-to trough correction of 17% (you said 16%, close enough). That ended with the Fed promising QE2
2011 saw a peak-to trough correction of 19% (in the middle was the downgrade of the US by S&P freak out). That ended with the Fed promising more QE (in this case operation twist).
2012 saw a 10% correction, that ended with the Fed promising QE3
2016, 14% correction to date (25% for the Russell 2000), but the Fed is hiking rates now.
The post crisis (post-2008) market was all about easy money and central bank manipulation of stock prices (higher). That is why I shorted it in late 2014. Ending QE and promising hiking was going to open the third level of hell. Took longer than I thought but that is now happening.
If the Fed caves and says they will not hike anymore, or even hints at more easing, I would change my mind. As of now they are not.
Don't fight the Fed
-
Well, I sure hope if there is another recession, that the bounce-back that happens after we bottom out almost all goes to the top 1% again. That's always fun.
-
Just keep dollar cost averaging. If was 60 and still heavily invested in stocks right now I'd be worried. I'm half that age. Time to buy at a discount.
-
Well, I sure hope if there is another recession, that the bounce-back that happens after we bottom out almost all goes to the top 1% again. That's always fun.
Why not aspire to join them? If you can foresee the bounce-back, then you ought to be able to profit from it, eh?
Corrections, recessions, depressions, they're all just opportunities.
-
Why not aspire to join them? If you can foresee the bounce-back, then you ought to be able to profit from it, eh?
Corrections, recessions, depressions, they're all just opportunities.
1. That's not really the point.
2. No, I can't. As a grad student with tons of debt, I have near-zero disposable income to put toward investments
-
I've been short since late 2014. Been very short oil since last spring.
I think we have a down 1000 point day coming and I will start to cover. That might be today.
(and cover means I'll get another chance to put my shorts out at higher levels).
The energy sector is like the financial sector in 2008. Continental, Pioneer are collapsing, they might not make it to the end of the week before filing for bankruptcy. I cannot borrow anymore otherwise I would short more.
I'm long Long-term Treasuries 10-year and 30-year. Thinking about getting long gold again but have not pulled the trigger on that.
-------------
Yes I have a poor view of things and I think it is getting worse.
Thanks for sharing this.
Congrats on shorting oil - it was a great move.
I wish you good fortune.
-
I've been short since late 2014. Been very short oil since last spring.
I think we have a down 1000 point day coming and I will start to cover. That might be today.
(and cover means I'll get another chance to put my shorts out at higher levels).
The energy sector is like the financial sector in 2008. Continental, Pioneer are collapsing, they might not make it to the end of the week before filing for bankruptcy. I cannot borrow anymore otherwise I would short more.
I'm long Long-term Treasuries 10-year and 30-year. Thinking about getting long gold again but have not pulled the trigger on that.
-------------
Yes I have a poor view of things and I think it is getting worse.
hey, don't forget your long-lost uncle rocket over here we're kinda like paisan heyna? good job! i thought $48 was pretty low :(
-
Just keep dollar cost averaging. If was 60 and still heavily invested in stocks right now I'd be worried. I'm half that age. Time to buy at a discount.
Yep. Even at 53, I know that this slide will someday look like the housing bubble or the dot-com bubble. And the stocks I'm buying now are on sale. The worst possible strategy would be to sell right now.
And anyone who is 60+ should already have a decent enough portion of their portfolio in bonds and fixed income products that they can ride out your first few years of retirement from assets that haven't been temporarily devalued.
-
Yep. Even at 53, I know that this slide will someday look like the housing bubble or the dot-com bubble. And the stocks I'm buying now are on sale. The worst possible strategy would be to sell right now.
And anyone who is 60+ should already have a decent enough portion of their portfolio in bonds and fixed income products that they can ride out your first few years of retirement from assets that haven't been temporarily devalued.
Great point.
Look at a 50-year chart. 1987 and 2001-02 and 2008-09 look like little blips. You can't even see the 20% corrections like we had in 2013.
Buy great companies at good valuations. Hold. Reinvest dividends. Keep holding. Live happily ever after.
There are only so many Heisys who can predict every up and down. (And I'm really not mocking him. If he really thought to short Big Oil in 2014, he gets my props.)
-
Dead-cat bounce the last coupla days, or something real?
-
Now What?
-
Now What?
Some volatility for a little while.
Life goes on.
-
Now What?
Wait for the dust to settle; then buy at discount prices.
-
Now What?
Mostly, this just unwound the "we thought they would stay in" rally we had the last few days.
Sound and fury signifying not all that much.
-
Question, is this a good or bad thing for me, as I will be living in London for a year starting in September. For the short term, I think my money is going to go a lot further than it would have a week ago but I don't think I'll be staying out there after to find a job anymore.
-
Question, is this a good or bad thing for me, as I will be living in London for a year starting in September. For the short term, I think my money is going to go a lot further than it would have a week ago but I don't think I'll be staying out there after to find a job anymore.
If you're going there as a student with U.S. dollars in your pocket everything just got considerably cheaper. If you're working and getting paid in dollars that's really good too. Hard to say about the job part - a lot can happen in a year.
-
If you're going there as a student with U.S. dollars in your pocket everything just got considerably cheaper. If you're working and getting paid in dollars that's really good too. Hard to say about the job part - a lot can happen in a year.
We literally don't know whether it is good or bad for at least two years. Practically speaking there should be no changes for the next two years and the changes beyond that have to be negotiated between the UK and the EU.
-
Mostly, this just unwound the "we thought they would stay in" rally we had the last few days.
Sound and fury signifying not all that much.
So the second largest country in the EU wants to leave and you think it means nothing?
Why is that?
-
My portfolio, which is mostly proven, blue-chip, Dividend Growth stocks but also includes bonds and cash, lost 0.9% today.
Compare that to the S&P 500, which lost 3.6%.
That's why I'm not sweating. I'm a conservative, long-term investor, not a trader. I don't listen to market noise or panic every time a "black swan" flies somewhere in the world.
-
My portfolio, which is mostly proven, blue-chip, Dividend Growth stocks but also includes bonds and cash, lost 0.9% today.
Compare that to the S&P 500, which lost 3.6%.
That's why I'm not sweating. I'm a conservative, long-term investor, not a trader. I don't listen to market noise or panic every time a "black swan" flies somewhere in the world.
Yeah but, .9% of $10 mil is still a hellofa lotta cabbage, ai na?
-
My portfolio, which is mostly proven, blue-chip, Dividend Growth stocks but also includes bonds and cash, lost 0.9% today.
Compare that to the S&P 500, which lost 3.6%.
That's why I'm not sweating. I'm a conservative, long-term investor, not a trader. I don't listen to market noise or panic every time a "black swan" flies somewhere in the world.
But you looked.
I didn't even do that. I have people I pay to worry about that stuff for me.
-
Hopefully you're drivin' ta work and dere not taken da bus, ai na?
-
But you looked.
I didn't even do that. I have people I pay to worry about that stuff for me.
So you don't monitor the work of those you engage?
-
But you looked.
I didn't even do that. I have people I pay to worry about that stuff for me.
Exactly my opinion. We meet quarterly - in person twice a year and on the phone twice a year (to JB's point).
I will tell you that our main guy sent out a 'how you should think about Brexit' letter today so i'm guessing he had a number of his other clients calling him today.
-
Went to more of a cash position last week. Time to buy.
-
BLUE-LIGHT SPECIALS!! this has to strengthen the market in the long run-especially as a few other countries are looking to leave the EU as well. nothing wrong with having a say in your own biness. it's bringing things back closer to home and getting rid of the liabilities before they really come home to roost
-
So you don't monitor the work of those you engage?
Not on a daily basis. I want to spend their time managing my stuff, not talking people off the ledge.
-
Exactly my opinion. We meet quarterly - in person twice a year and on the phone twice a year (to JB's point).
I will tell you that our main guy sent out a 'how you should think about Brexit' letter today so i'm guessing he had a number of his other clients calling him today.
Same here. I could care less about daily fluctuations and don't rush to check every time the market jumps or drops.
I pay someone to do that and like you, we get together quarterly.
JB was being his usual self - assuming anyone who doesn't follow his model is an idiot.
-
Not on a daily basis. I want to spend their time managing my stuff, not talking people off the ledge.
Aren't we getting dangerously close to political talk?
Is everything political now?
Globalization on the march, the result of WWII and Boeing.
The dollar is stronger, come visit Italy, fly Boeing.
Buy American, sell British, no need for high priced number crunchers.
-
Now What?
Same as every time stocks take a dip. The ones I'm buying now are on sale. They will come back.
-
But you looked.
I didn't even do that. I have people I pay to worry about that stuff for me.
Some people do their own plumbing. Some do their own painting. Some do their own house repairs. Etc.
I hire professionals to do most of that (or am happy when Mrs. MU82 does it).
I happen to enjoy doing my own investing, and I happen to think I'm pretty decent at it. I also like that I don't spend money paying others to do it. Plus, I write about investing for a large Web site, and the research involved keeps me sharp and helps me as an investor.
We all have stuff we're good at and enjoy doing, and stuff we'd rather pay others to do.
-
Some people do their own plumbing. Some do their own painting. Some do their own house repairs. Etc.
I hire professionals to do most of that (or am happy when Mrs. MU82 does it).
I happen to enjoy doing my own investing, and I happen to think I'm pretty decent at it. I also like that I don't spend money paying others to do it. Plus, I write about investing for a large Web site, and the research involved keeps me sharp and helps me as an investor.
We all have stuff we're good at and enjoy doing, and stuff we'd rather pay others to do.
I've read some of your articles and it's pretty obvious you are quite knowledge able on the subject.. Makes a dope like me feel much better about paying someone else to do it.
-
The Tories (Conservatives under Cameron) and Labor (under Corbyn) were both in favor of remain. It lost and Cameron resigned and Corbyn is on his way out.
Simply Amazing.
To appreciate this ... imagine the US had a referendum yesterday and the democrats and republicans both supported it. It lost and today Obama resigned and Paul Ryan is excepted to resign in the coming days.
That is the political earthquake that hit the UK/EU.
You'll be telling your grandchildren about this event and what is coming next.
-
The Tories (Conservatives under Cameron) and Labor (under Corbyn) were both in favor of remain. It lost and Cameron resigned and Corbyn is on his way out.
Simply Amazing.
To appreciate this ... imagine the US had a referendum yesterday and the democrats and republicans both supported it. It lost and today Obama resigned and Paul Ryan is excepted to resign in the coming days.
That is the political earthquake that hit the UK/EU.
You'll be telling your grandchildren about this event and what is coming next.
A long way to go. The referendum was non-binding, and only Parliment has the legal right to decide. That creates a political mess, and Cameron was savvy to resign immediately to force/delay that hand. Today was an emotional reaction, let's see what happens when the rational sets in.
-
Not on a daily basis. I want to spend their time managing my stuff, not talking people off the ledge.
This was an unusual and significant day. My comment to you was based on you going after someone for "looking at it"...
Not a daily basis issue.
To think it's worthy of critiquing someone for considering the implications of a potentially significant event... strange.
-
A long way to go. The referendum was non-binding, and only Parliment has the legal right to decide. That creates a political mess, and Cameron was savvy to resign immediately to force/delay that hand. Today was an emotional reaction, let's see what happens when the rational sets in.
Non-binding is irrelevant. Cameron reigned so they can get someone that is Pro-BRexit to lead them in leaving (probably Boris Johnson). So it will happen.
What happens next? Next ... which is why the DJIA was down 600 points.
END OF THE EU? Germany warns FIVE more countries could leave Europe after Brexit
FIVE European countries may seek to follow Britain’s lead in leaving the EU in a Brexit domino effect, Germany has warned.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/683224/END-OF-THE-EU-Germany-France-Austria-Hungary-Finland-Netherlands-Europe-Brexit
--------------
The EU is coming apart. It is going back to the 1970s. To do business in the 28 countries of the EU, you'll need to make 28 different version of your product (one for each country's rules) deal in 12 currencies and 7 languages.
So why do you think the markets reacted so badly?
I hope I'm wrong.
-
Non-binding is irrelevant. Cameron reigned so they can get someone that is Pro-BRexit to lead them in leaving (probably Boris Johnson). So it will happen.
What happens next? Next ... which is why the DJIA was down 600 points.
END OF THE EU? Germany warns FIVE more countries could leave Europe after Brexit
FIVE European countries may seek to follow Britain’s lead in leaving the EU in a Brexit domino effect, Germany has warned.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/683224/END-OF-THE-EU-Germany-France-Austria-Hungary-Finland-Netherlands-Europe-Brexit
--------------
The EU is coming apart. It is going back to the 1970s. To do business in the 28 countries of the EU, you'll need to make 28 different version of your product (one for each country's rules) deal in 12 currencies and 7 languages.
So why do you think the markets reacted so badly?
I hope I'm wrong.
To be sure, all of that COULD happen. The UK could be the match that lit the fire.
Or it could just be the anomaly, the country that was always a bit of an oddball for not accepting the euro that was destined to leave at some point because it never fully integrated.
Which is the true answer? If I had to put money on it, I'd say the latter. But there is a reason markets are spooked. There is a risk. I deal with risk in my job and anyone who knows anything about risk knows that the two major factors are likelihood and impact. Markets are spooked not so much because of the high likelihood, but the potential catastrophic impact. I firmly believe a total EU disintegration is low likelihood, but high impact. It would be like a catastrophic asteroid capable of wiping out civilization with a 1000 to 1 chance of hitting earth. "Likely"? No. Worthy of concern and keeping a close eye on? Absolutely.
-
We literally don't know whether it is good or bad for at least two years. Practically speaking there should be no changes for the next two years and the changes beyond that have to be negotiated between the UK and the EU.
No changes? Tell that to someone who was long the pound.
-
This is the perfect example of why the rich get richer... because the stupid get scared.
-
Non-binding is irrelevant. Cameron reigned so they can get someone that is Pro-BRexit to lead them in leaving (probably Boris Johnson). So it will happen.
What happens next? Next ... which is why the DJIA was down 600 points.
END OF THE EU? Germany warns FIVE more countries could leave Europe after Brexit
FIVE European countries may seek to follow Britain’s lead in leaving the EU in a Brexit domino effect, Germany has warned.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/683224/END-OF-THE-EU-Germany-France-Austria-Hungary-Finland-Netherlands-Europe-Brexit
--------------
The EU is coming apart. It is going back to the 1970s. To do business in the 28 countries of the EU, you'll need to make 28 different version of your product (one for each country's rules) deal in 12 currencies and 7 languages.
So why do you think the markets reacted so badly?
I hope I'm wrong.
It is hardly irrelevant when a vote has to make it legal, Scotland and Northern Ireland want to have a vote to leave the UK, Spain lays claim to Gibraltar which houses the British fleet, both majority parties oppose it, Spain/Portugal/Italy send the Brit retirees packing, and a new Prime Minister isn't in place until October. And now, perhaps the elitist EU will wake up and understand the sentiment of many of their member countries. As time passes, the harsh realities of all this will settle in. Will Parliment have the scones to vote for an exit in the midst of a free fall, or will the EU wake up, saving face for everyone?
-
Right, the UKIP (the party leading the charge to leave) only has 4 seats, out of the 1450 in the British parliament. It's not insane to think that the government is gonna pull an "oh sh!t, we really screwed up" moment and not actually enact it. It's not like it was a landslide vote, and people who voted to leave were pretty open by saying that they may have screwed up. They could also take into account the demographics of the vote, where young voters who will have to deal with the consequences were overwhelmingly in the remain camp.
The one thing Britain has going for them is that their liberal and conservative party isn't as divided as democrats and Republicans in the US, they could actually pull this one out.
-
The reason the vote won is their is London and the rest of the U.K., like we have Mahattan and the rest of the US. Americans all visit London, and once they understand London, they really know nothing about the rest of the U.K. Just like foreigners that visit and understand Manhattan really know nothing about the rest of the US.
The hatred for the EU outside of London is palpable. Those people are celebrating in the streets that this vote won. If a bunch of intellectuals and politicians in London try and stop it there will be a revolution. That's why Cameron resigned, and said he was resigning so somebody else can take over and lead the UK's exit from the EU. So stop with the fantasy that they're going to call this back. They are leaving and it's significant.
And polls in Europe show that many others (France, Dutch, Netherlands) have higher percentages that want out. And the UK is at risk of having Scotland and Northern Ireland leave them.
The floodgates are opened all over Europe. France will leave the Netherlands will leave the Basque country of Spain want to become independent Flanders want to become independent of Belgium. This is just a start. A full reshape of Europe will be underway like we haven't seen and hundreds of years.
And as each one of these regions leaves it renegotiates tariffs and rules that will make business harder and more expensive.
We have an 12 page thread here and everybody says that everything that ever happens anywhere to anything is always a buying opportunity. That blind bullishness has worked for 30 years Because of the ever increasing globalization of the planet and business efficiencies that come from that. The BRexit vote could've mark end of the movement towards globalization. If so, one of the most titanic shifts in business we seen in our lifetime has just occurred.
My fear is the stock market's next 30 years will look like Japanese stock market over the last 30 years ... Go nowhere. That's essentially been the case for the last 15 years, it's barely beating the rate of inflation and underperformed the bond market, gold, commodities and just about every non-cash option. It's also been the case since this thread started in June of last year, it's down 3%. So markets might be forward looking and been so poor an investment since 2000 because it sees this coming.
I hope I'm wrong.
-
This is the perfect example of why the rich get richer... because the stupid get scared.
"Can't you understand what's happening here? Don't you see what's happening? Potter isn't selling. Potter's buying! And why? Because we're panicking and he's not." - G. Bailey
-
The Tories (Conservatives under Cameron) and Labor (under Corbyn) were both in favor of remain. It lost and Cameron resigned and Corbyn is on his way out.
Simply Amazing.
To appreciate this ... imagine the US had a referendum yesterday and the democrats and republicans both supported it. It lost and today Obama resigned and Paul Ryan is excepted to resign in the coming days.
That is the political earthquake that hit the UK/EU.
You'll be telling your grandchildren about this event and what is coming next.
O.K. now it's political, it's like the Republicans got kicked in the teeth by the Tea Party they created, and it could happen here. The triangulating Democrats and the true Republicans have created globalization to the determent of the masses. The low wage workers and unemployed may just be revolting and that is a very big problem.
All the analysis, metrics, analytics, and number crunching won't solve the problem because it is systemic to unregulated, cannibalistic capitalism. The so-called free market is running its inevitable course.
Unbridled capitalism has thrown the bit and is running wild, enjoy the ride.
-
"Can't you understand what's happening here? Don't you see what's happening? Potter isn't selling. Potter's buying! And why? Because we're panicking and he's not." - G. Bailey
Yep.
-
This is the perfect example of why the rich get richer... because the stupid get scared.
Because the stupid get screwed and the end-game is war.
That's when the stupid get really screwed.
However, in todays world war should be unthinkable, but it must be in human nature. So we start with trade wars, political wars, and we slide into shooting wars.
Yes, Take America Back, from the brink of war....this is just what ISSIS prays to Allah for, the west fighting with itself.
The hand of the free market at work, or the hand of God if you prefer or ignorant democracy.
BTW we are talking economics and not really politics although politics is the means by which the economic order is changed.
-
blah blah blah
I didn't read beyond your first three lines because I knew it would be crap like all else you write but you need to be correct if you're building a grand argument against people not knowing crap.
Northern Ireland voted to remain. Scotland voted to remain. Simply writing it is "London and the rest of the U.K." regarding the vote is disingenuous. And that's a kind description.
-
I didn't read beyond your first three lines because I knew it would be crap like all else you write but you need to be correct if you're building a grand argument against people not knowing crap.
Northern Ireland voted to remain. Scotland voted to remain. Simply writing it is "London and the rest of the U.K." regarding the vote is disingenuous. And that's a kind description.
Northern Ireland Voted Remain and they wants to Remain, so they will join with Ireland (who is an EU member) and stay. (This is the theory)
Scotland voted to remain so they will become an independent country and join the EU. This time it will happen because they have a positive economic argument, unlike 2014 when they were scared with a negative economic argument. Problem is this could bankrupt the UK (the main argument used to stop the Scottish referendum in 2014).
But at the same time the Netherlands, France, Dutch and Italy have a huge movement energized to leave the EU. Within Spain the secessionist movements are energized, ditto Belgium.
Everything is turning upside down.
40% of the S&P 500 countries get their revenues from overseas. The emerging markets are a mess (led by China), Japan is a mess and now Europe is a mess. Further the dollar is soaring which further hurts these companies. S&P 500 companies have had 5 quarter of negative earnings, this does not help this situation.
It's all bad bad bad and was a total shock, and this is not corrected in 1 day or 1 week. Yes, this sets up a great buying opportunity ... in 2 or3 years but don't lose a third to half your money first.
I hope I'm wrong.
-
"Can't you understand what's happening here? Don't you see what's happening? Potter isn't selling. Potter's buying! And why? Because we're panicking and he's not." - G. Bailey
That film really has so much wisdom buried in it.
-
But at the same time the Netherlands, France, Dutch and Italy have a huge movement energized to leave the EU. Within Spain the secessionist movements are energized, ditto Belgium.
But those movements are being led by parties that aren't in control. The only reason the UK one got to a vote was because Cameron made the stupid logistical move of daring his opposition to vote to leave...and they did.
I kinda doubt that Hollande, for example, is going to serve it up to Marine LePen on a silver platter like Cameron did in the UK.
And when citizens of other countries see how this is affecting the UK, their opinions of the EU is likely to change. Funny thing - Google showed that many Brits were searching for basic information about the EU (what exactly does it do?) in the hours after polling closed. In other words, they had no real idea what they were voting about.
-
This is the perfect example of why the rich get richer... because the stupid get scared.
Bingo!!!!!!
The people who get hurt the worst are the people who voted for it.
-
Bingo!!!!!!
The people who get hurt the worst are the people who voted for it.
Except the stats showed that older Brits largely put this one over the top, while younger people - who will be impacted the most - generally voted against it. The problem is that fewer young people voted...either due to general apathy, or the mistaken assumption that it would never pass.
-
Except the stats showed that older Brits largely put this one over the top, while younger people - who will be impacted the most - generally voted against it. The problem is that fewer young people voted...either due to general apathy, or the mistaken assumption that it would never pass.
Funniest tweet I saw was something along the lines of, "I'm never giving my seat up to a old person again, because they have enough energy to screw our country"
-
And the Chinese in England continue to sightsee and eat French and Italian food, they really don't care, why should they? This is just a big deal for the British finance industry, banking and insurance.
I am really tired of hearing about how Britain is our closest ally, hooey. As they have demonstrated, it is each person out for him/her self.
Would you believe it, but in England today, I have a friend there at the moment, there is no talk of Trump.
-
So why do you think the markets reacted so badly?
"The markets" hate change. They really hate uncertainty. And they almost always overreact -- whether it's panic-selling or wild buying.
For the first several days this week, "the markets" overreacted to reports that Brexit probably would not happen, pushing all indices into or near record territory. Friday's giveback was predictable. Even after Friday's carnage, most of "the markets" are still within a few percentage points of their all-time highs.
Things will continue to be volatile as this all shakes out. Every time there is a rumor that another country wants out, there will be selling, followed by buying, followed by selling.
Every crash or correction is followed by a recovery. Every bull is followed by a bear.
There are two ways to deal with this: 1. Try to time the market as a trader; or 2. Build a portfolio filled with high-quality, time-tested companies (or funds), ride out the bad times and profit handsomely from the good times.
Study after study shows that the "average" investor doesn't even realize half the gains of the overall market over time. Why? Because he/she panics in just these situations, selling during down times and buying during good times.
-
trying not to push this into bipartisan politics, but would the UK voting to get out of the EU be similar to individual states voting(if it is even possible) to become independent of the fed? that would mean the state(s) would have to come up with their own currency, but how would they figure in to the national defense/military involvement and anything else i may not be considering? just wondering 8-)
-
But those movements are being led by parties that aren't in control. The only reason the UK one got to a vote was because Cameron made the stupid logistical move of daring his opposition to vote to leave...and they did.
I kinda doubt that Hollande, for example, is going to serve it up to Marine LePen on a silver platter like Cameron did in the UK.
And when citizens of other countries see how this is affecting the UK, their opinions of the EU is likely to change. Funny thing - Google showed that many Brits were searching for basic information about the EU (what exactly does it do?) in the hours after polling closed. In other words, they had no real idea what they were voting about.
Yes all those parties are not in control. The key word is "yet." These parties are gaining. The Right-wing party in Austria barely lost last month with 49.7% of the vote. Merkel's approval rating is way down, Hollande is unpopular, LePen is gaining, let's see how the Spanish elections goes tomorrow.
European banks were down about 25% yesterday. Something they didn't even do in the worst of 2008. They are scared out of their mind that Europe is going to come apart and they're gonna be left holding trillions of dollars of derivatives and securities in a currency, the euro, it might not exist.
-
"The markets" hate change. They really hate uncertainty. And they almost always overreact -- whether it's panic-selling or wild buying.
For the first several days this week, "the markets" overreacted to reports that Brexit probably would not happen, pushing all indices into or near record territory. Friday's giveback was predictable. Even after Friday's carnage, most of "the markets" are still within a few percentage points of their all-time highs.
Things will continue to be volatile as this all shakes out. Every time there is a rumor that another country wants out, there will be selling, followed by buying, followed by selling.
Every crash or correction is followed by a recovery. Every bull is followed by a bear.
There are two ways to deal with this: 1. Try to time the market as a trader; or 2. Build a portfolio filled with high-quality, time-tested companies (or funds), ride out the bad times and profit handsomely from the good times.
Study after study shows that the "average" investor doesn't even realize half the gains of the overall market over time. Why? Because he/she panics in just these situations, selling during down times and buying during good times.
I hate this phrase that the market hates uncertainty. Can you tell me a period in human history when things weren't uncertain?
What is driven the epic bull market this started in 1982 was/is globalization. We are now legitimately talking about ending it. That is one of the biggest things that ever happened.
The reason the market was so bad and Friday is it was so inconceivable leave Would win. And now that it has we are on the precipice of an epic change which might not be good.
I hope I'm wrong I really do.
-
George Soros: "Brexit Makes EU Disintegration Irreversible
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-25/george-soros-brexit-makes-eu-disintegration-irreversible
Greenspan: "This Is The Worst Period I Recall; There's Nothing Like It"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-24/greenspan-worst-period-i-recall-theres-nothing-it
-
people want other people, if they are in charge, to have their interests at heart, not someone who is disconnected both ideologically but geographically as well. the brits were sick and tired of having some dude in belgium or italy telling them what is best for them across the channel
-
Paul Ingrassia
@IngassiaP
Brexit fails 1st test. Europe Ryder Cup team will keep British golfers and EU flag when it faces the US. in late Sept. Huh?
-
now they are talking about a "do-over"?? hmmmm shoot till ya win 'eyn'a?
-
I hate this phrase that the market hates uncertainty. Can you tell me a period in human history when things weren't uncertain?
What is driven the epic bull market this started in 1982 was/is globalization. We are now legitimately talking about ending it. That is one of the biggest things that ever happened.
The reason the market was so bad and Friday is it was so inconceivable leave Would win. And now that it has we are on the precipice of an epic change which might not be good.
I hope I'm wrong I really do.
I understand the perspective that the world economy will never be the same/never recover from the threat (or reality) of the EU breaking up. I don't agree with it as i believe that markets are over reacting to the Brexit vote and that, if they aren't over reacting, the world economy is evolutionary not static in nature and will adapt to a new reality i.e. there will always be opportunity for the opportunistic.
My question is....have you made changes to your portfolio/holdings as a result of the Brexit vote? If so, what?
We were in a fairly conservative position - partly because of European, and other area, uncertainty and partly because of life situation - and will not be changing our "generally conservative but situationally aggressive" approach.
-
I understand the perspective that the world economy will never be the same/never recover from the threat (or reality) of the EU breaking up. I don't agree with it as i believe that markets are over reacting to the Brexit vote and that, if they aren't over reacting, the world economy is evolutionary not static in nature and will adapt to a new reality i.e. there will always be opportunity for the opportunistic.
My question is....have you made changes to your portfolio/holdings as a result of the Brexit vote? If so, what?
We were in a fairly conservative position - partly because of European, and other area, uncertainty and partly because of life situation - and will not be changing our "generally conservative but situationally aggressive" approach.
i have a couple of funds in an advisory fund with eddy jones. they are constantly evaluated and changed according to percentages and other data i leave up to my money peoples
-
Yes all those parties are not in control. The key word is "yet." These parties are gaining. The Right-wing party in Austria barely lost last month with 49.7% of the vote. Merkel's approval rating is way down, Hollande is unpopular, LePen is gaining, let's see how the Spanish elections goes tomorrow.
By the time they'd ever get anywhere close to exit votes, they'd see how much it will have hurt the UK
-
By the time they'd ever get anywhere close to exit votes, they'd see how much it will have hurt the UK
That the problem.
1. Hammer the UK for BRexit, cause chaos in financial markets. Buy and hold loses money and time. (US financials down 5% Friday, European Banks were destroyed Friday, down 15% to 25%, worse than any single day in 2008).
2. Markets recovery, no pain in UK and financial markets, everyone sees its ok to leave, mass exodus. Then see no. 1
No good scenario, losses and pain ensure. Like I said, I hope I'm wrong, I fear I am not.
-
Don't worry, Heisy.
You're wrong.
Every time something "disastrous" happens, causing alarmists to say that the markets might "never recover," the markets recover.
9/11 is a perfect example. Not only was America shown to be vulnerable but it took place practically at Wall Street.
You know what? Our economy recovered. It took some time, but it recovered.
Brexit -- if it even stands -- will not break the world's economy forever. As much as you follow the market, economic issues, etc, I frankly am quite surprised you would think it might.
-
I understand the perspective that the world economy will never be the same/never recover from the threat (or reality) of the EU breaking up. I don't agree with it as i believe that markets are over reacting to the Brexit vote and that, if they aren't over reacting, the world economy is evolutionary not static in nature and will adapt to a new reality i.e. there will always be opportunity for the opportunistic.
My question is....have you made changes to your portfolio/holdings as a result of the Brexit vote? If so, what?
We were in a fairly conservative position - partly because of European, and other area, uncertainty and partly because of life situation - and will not be changing our "generally conservative but situationally aggressive" approach.
The biggest single driver of growth and higher standards of living has been globalization.
The problem is it also has caused massive stresses in developed society. Since the 2008 bailouts, that took care of bankers and screwed everyone else, the elites and politicians have lost credibility. That's why BRexit passed. No one listens to considered opinion anymore, they think it's conflicted telling them what is best for bankers, not them. See Trump and Sanders, same here too.
Now the the UK has taken the leap into the unknown, it's all changed. New are not going back. We are moving forward on this path and we are going to tear down all the institutions of Globalization.
So yes, the dynamic and evolutionary economy I'll adjust and adapt .... In 10 years. In the meantime we are getting tariffs, rules and a reversal of Globalization. That will leave a big mark on your portfolio. Smoot Hawley 2.0 is my fear (google it).
PS had my worst day since 2008 on Friday. Too many European financials. Kicking myself over this ... Saw this coming and did not get out of the way. Total amateur move that I should know better than to make.
-
Don't worry, Heisy.
You're wrong.
Every time something "disastrous" happens, causing alarmists to say that the markets might "never recover," the markets recover.
9/11 is a perfect example. Not only was America shown to be vulnerable but it took place practically at Wall Street.
You know what? Our economy recovered. It took some time, but it recovered.
Brexit -- if it even stands -- will not break the world's economy forever. As much as you follow the market, economic issues, etc, I frankly am quite surprised you would think it might.
Your correct but you could be one-third poorer in a few years. And if that happens you realize you made no money in 20 years.
Over the last 15 years the stock markets had its worst run in about 100 years. Everything outperforms it except cash. It's just not been a good investment. Especially if you exclude the highflying tech stocks, the stable businesses that are the foundation of America have been horrible investments. Banking, energy, consumer staples, industrials, etc.
So I don't fear for the economy of the long run prospects. I fear that in the year 2022 you're going to see that your net worth is exactly the same as today another lost five or six years.
Regarding all your examples, after 9/11 you didn't make any money in the stock market for two years. you didn't make any money after 2008 for seven years. These things add up. If BRexit means you're gonna lose another five years, all of a sudden an entire generation is lost. We're almost there now.
-
Regarding all your examples, after 9/11 you didn't make any money in the stock market for two years. you didn't make any money after 2008 for seven years. These things add up. If BRexit means you're gonna lose another five years, all of a sudden an entire generation is lost. We're almost there now.
Well, my biggest investment in 2008 was MMM stock. I bought it at $75 in June of that year. Within 9 months, it was trading well below $50. I wasn't thrilled (obviously) but I didn't panic-sell and, in fact, reinvested dividends, so I was buying more at bargain prices every three months.
By November 2009, it was trading higher than the price I paid. Another year later, it was up $10/share from what I paid. Plus, I owned dozens of new shares thanks to the reinvested divvies.
In other words, in just a little over 2 years, I had a solid profit in MMM. It's now at $170. You can do the math.
PG, my second biggest investment in 2008, bought at around $60, also turned out pretty well (though not as well as MMM).
GE, another large investment, went from $30 to $6 before starting its climb back up. That one took many years to get back to break-even but it did. I sold at a profit and allocated the money elsewhere.
My main funds back in 2008, Vanguard Wellington and Vanguard Health, also took far fewer than 7 years to get "whole."
Bottom line: I did "make money" in far fewer than 7 years -- as did many others who didn't panic and sell at the bottom.
As for 9/11, I'm not sure what you remember about the feelings of dread caused by the terrorist attack. I will remind you that the average American was FAR more worried about the economy -- among MANY things -- than he/she is about Brexit.
I do not believe I will be one-third poorer because of Brexit. Given that you were wrong about me making no money for 7 years after 2008, I don't know how you could possibly claim to know how my portfolio (or anybody else's) will do over the next several years.
You throw a lot of generalizations out there even though you know strikingly little about my investing.
You also didn't say what any investor (including me) should do now that Brexit has happened. Should we climb under our desks and cover our heads -- as we were instructed to do during atom bomb drills in the '60s? Curl up in the fetal position? Sell everything and use the proceeds to buy gold?
-
That the problem.
1. Hammer the UK for BRexit, cause chaos in financial markets. Buy and hold loses money and time. (US financials down 5% Friday, European Banks were destroyed Friday, down 15% to 25%, worse than any single day in 2008).
2. Markets recovery, no pain in UK and financial markets, everyone sees its ok to leave, mass exodus. Then see no. 1
No good scenario, losses and pain ensure. Like I said, I hope I'm wrong, I fear I am not.
3. The UK suffers massively for its incredibly dumb move (we don't need to hammer them - they did that themselves), the rest of the EU suffers some as well, and investors see the US as the best place to invest more than ever before. People have money they want to invest and they'll put it here.
I've survived many an economic downturn. This too shall pass.
-
Well, my biggest investment in 2008 was MMM stock. I bought it at $75 in June of that year. Within 9 months, it was trading well below $50. I wasn't thrilled (obviously) but I didn't panic-sell and, in fact, reinvested dividends, so I was buying more at bargain prices every three months.
By November 2009, it was trading higher than the price I paid. Another year later, it was up $10/share from what I paid. Plus, I owned dozens of new shares thanks to the reinvested divvies.
In other words, in just a little over 2 years, I had a solid profit in MMM. It's now at $170. You can do the math.
PG, my second biggest investment in 2008, bought at around $60, also turned out pretty well (though not as well as MMM).
GE, another large investment, went from $30 to $6 before starting its climb back up. That one took many years to get back to break-even but it did. I sold at a profit and allocated the money elsewhere.
My main funds back in 2008, Vanguard Wellington and Vanguard Health, also took far fewer than 7 years to get "whole."
Bottom line: I did "make money" in far fewer than 7 years -- as did many others who didn't panic and sell at the bottom.
As for 9/11, I'm not sure what you remember about the feelings of dread caused by the terrorist attack. I will remind you that the average American was FAR more worried about the economy -- among MANY things -- than he/she is about Brexit.
I do not believe I will be one-third poorer because of Brexit. Given that you were wrong about me making no money for 7 years after 2008, I don't know how you could possibly claim to know how my portfolio (or anybody else's) will do over the next several years.
You throw a lot of generalizations out there even though you know strikingly little about my investing.
You also didn't say what any investor (including me) should do now that Brexit has happened. Should we climb under our desks and cover our heads -- as we were instructed to do during atom bomb drills in the '60s? Curl up in the fetal position? Sell everything and use the proceeds to buy gold?
You compare you investments to zero return to say the are successful. I compare mine to government bonds. If the cannot beat government bonds, their is a problem. What you described above did not beat government bonds, or gold for that matter. That is unacceptable.
If we're talking about the end of globalization, P&G, MMM and especially GE are going to suffer badly. Prior to 2008 the long-term return in the stock market was 9%. Since 2008 it's been more like 5%. Post BRexit it and what's coming with the end of globalization makes me think it's can be closer to zero.
-
3. The UK suffers massively for its incredibly dumb move (we don't need to hammer them - they did that themselves), the rest of the EU suffers some as well, and investors see the US as the best place to invest more than ever before. People have money they want to invest and they'll put it here.
I've survived many an economic downturn. This too shall pass.
What investors are going to see the US as the best return? European investors? Their moneys going to money heaven. This is the biggest mistake people make when talking about a Investment flows. There is not a fixed sum of money that moves around the world to the best investment. It gets lost it gets destroyed it goes the money heaven.
And even if you're right and huge sums of money are coming to the US that means the dollars going to soar. Ask anyone on Wall Street what's the biggest driver earnings is the level of the dollar. A dollar rising dollar is going to kill stock market earnings because 40% of all revenues comes from overseas.
The Bullish scenario is strong growth oversees the bullish scenarios rising stock markets overseas.
The Bullish scenario is not weak growth, collapsing bank stocks stock markets and Europe trying to tear itself apart.
Why do you think our stock market is lower now than it was two years ago? Why have government bonds returned your 25% over the last two years when the stock market is returned to zero? Why has Gold had its best year in 35 years you're to date?
Only Bullish story left is naked manipulation by the Federal Reserve printing money and driving interest rates to zero and maybe negative.
-
The problem is it also has caused massive stresses in developed society. Since the 2008 bailouts, that took care of bankers and screwed everyone else, the elites and politicians have lost credibility. That's why BRexit passed.
Brexit passed for one reason only - Nationalism.
-
Brexit passed for one reason only - Nationalism.
What does that mean to you?
-
Note that the survey below was taken in March and April. Now that BRexit has actually happened, assume the numbers are higher.
If Italy and France leave the rest irrelevant, EU won't survive.
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2016/06/04/Clrs-wNVYAA01iT.jpg)
-
What does that mean to you?
In its best form, nationalism is a simply pride in one's country.
That is not what I am referring to. Now is is more a negative feeling - against internationalism, other countries, and globalism. It is driven as much or more by some sort of racial pride than just patriotism. Like almost all else, it is now simply a political tool.
-
You compare you investments to zero return to say the are successful. I compare mine to government bonds. If the cannot beat government bonds, their is a problem. What you described above did not beat government bonds, or gold for that matter. That is unacceptable.
If we're talking about the end of globalization, P&G, MMM and especially GE are going to suffer badly. Prior to 2008 the long-term return in the stock market was 9%. Since 2008 it's been more like 5%. Post BRexit it and what's coming with the end of globalization makes me think it's can be closer to zero.
No, I compared my results to your claim that I "didn't make any money after 2008 for seven years" -- as if you could possibly know.
So you were wrong. But because you're not very good at admitting when you are wrong, you opted to project your goals onto the performance of my portfolio even though you don't know what is in my portfolio.
That was an example of classic goalpost shifting. It's nice to see that again with the master -- Chicos -- on "leave."
As for GE ... as I said in my previous post, I sold GE some time ago. I guess you were so excited to establish your superiority that you overlooked that little fact.
Not that it should matter to you, but I am well ahead of all of my investing goals, thank you. If you are, too, I congratulate you.
I have been an adult (and an investor) through three recessions, including the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, as well as the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil.
Brexit will be just another challenge that patient, determined investors will overcome.
-
Life is easy when you don't have any major investments.
-
Life is easy when you don't have any major investments.
That's a good attitude. Try to keep it as you get older and start accumulating things, including whatever wealth you are able to attain.
If you keep the attitude, life will continue to be easy.
-
the majority of my assets are in land/my bldg, and the businesses(dental and an indoor self-storage facility) that i own. i'd say 1/3 in retirement plans, invested in the market, 2/3 businesses and bldg. i realize the businesses and bldg are hooked at the hip with the overall economy, but i believe it may be a better set-up than the reversal.
-
Spanish Elections today, and the non-Establishment party, Podemos, is expect to do well.
Podemos was created in 2014 by self-described communist and Hugo Chavez admirer Pablo Igelsis. He is calling for the modification of the Lisbon Treaty (what they perfer), or evoking it. That's code for radical change of the EU or Spain could leave
So we might be a few hours away from Spain ideologically aligning with BRexit, although doing it with a radical left government. So MAJOR change might be coming to a second EU country.
Quick history lesson, as late as the 1970s Spain was governed by a Military dictatorship (Chevy Chase famous line, General Francisimo Franco is still dead)
-
The New York Times lead on Sunday (today) gets it right. The institutions and structure put in place after WW2 are at real risk of collapsing. A realignment of the world like nothing seen since 1945.
Britain Rattles Postwar Order and Its Place as Pillar of Stability
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/world/europe/britain-rattles-postwar-order-and-its-place-as-pillar-of-stability.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=span-ab-top-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Britain’s historic vote to leave the European Union is already threatening to unravel a democratic bloc of nations that has coexisted peacefully together for decades. But it is also generating uncertainty about an even bigger issue: Is the post-1945 order imposed on the world by the United States and its allies unraveling, too?
Now Britain symbolizes the cracks in that postwar foundation. Its leaving the European Union weakens a bloc that is the world’s biggest single market, as well as an anchor of global democracy. It also undermines the postwar consensus that alliances among nations are essential in maintaining stability and in diluting the nationalism that once plunged Europe into bloody conflict — even as nationalism is surging again.
There, the breakdown of the postwar political order has been more fundamental and violent than in Europe. The uprisings of the Arab Spring erupted from widespread frustrations with stagnant, autocratic politics and economic lethargy. But these rebellions failed to yield stable governments, and the borders drawn by Europeans a century ago in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq have been rendered largely irrelevant.
The nationalism surging in Europe is not the problem in the Arab world; rather, populations have retreated into greater reliance on sects, ethnic groups and militias. Jihadist groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State have fought national armies and won, providing a religious alternative to the nation-state that has been embraced by some.
-
Life is easy when you don't have any major investments.
Mo' money, mo' problems, amirite?
Reminds me of when glow and I got married on October 17, 1987. We had just spent the bulk of our modest savings on our modest wedding. Two days later, Black Monday happened.
I was never so glad to be broke.
-
If we're talking about the end of globalization, P&G, MMM and especially GE are going to suffer badly. Prior to 2008 the long-term return in the stock market was 9%. Since 2008 it's been more like 5%. Post BRexit it and what's coming with the end of globalization makes me think it's can be closer to zero.
It's easy to cherry-pick time periods to make them look good or bad. For the returns prior to 2008, how about starting with the dot-com bubble? Or for more recent returns, how about looking at overall returns since 2009 instead of 2008? How about looking at returns from the mid-60s to the early-80s? That would make even a zero return seem spectacular.
Select the dates carefully enough, and you can paint any picture you want.
-
For him, near-term means the next week or so.
If stocks do decline 10% in the next week, is that a crash?
(Note, stocks declined 10% in four days in late August when China devalued. Stocks are at that same level now, buying that panic, and holding to today, produced no gains.)
JPM Head Quant: Expect Up To $300 Billion In Program Selling, "5-10% Near-Term Downside To The S&P500"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-26/jpm-head-quant-expect-300-billion-program-selling-5-10-near-term-downside-sp500
is week, we expected a Brexit outcome to have an asymmetric impact for equities, with downside exacerbated by unwind of long equity investor positioning. In particular, increasing equity volatility would induce systematic strategies (Volatility Targeting, Risk Parity, CTAs) to start deleveraging their high equity exposure, resulting in $100-300 billion of selling.
-
Mo' money, mo' problems, amirite?
Reminds me of when glow and I got married on October 17, 1987. We had just spent the bulk of our modest savings on our modest wedding. Two days later, Black Monday happened.
I was never so glad to be broke.
My employer had just launched a 401k plan for us in April 1987. I eagerly plowed the max allowed into it every two weeks, investing in the S&P 500 fund option. When Black Monday struck 6 months later, I panicked, sold all of the fund and put everything in the money market option. I simultaneously directed future investments go into the money market fund.
So I locked in the losses from the crash and then got zero benefit when the market recovered.
That is why the "average investor" fails. Thankfully, the 30-something, 40-something and especially 50-something me is a little more knowledgeable about these things than the 20-something me was.
It's one of the oldest cliches, but so true ... I wish I knew then what I know now. (Or at least what I think I know now!)
-
Mo' money, mo' problems, amirite?
Reminds me of when glow and I got married on October 17, 1987. We had just spent the bulk of our modest savings on our modest wedding. Two days later, Black Monday happened.
I was never so glad to be broke.
Chick, about that same time my husband was accidentally sent a check from a retirement account that was supposed to be Wired directly the new account instead. Took a few day to get it to the new account. Never was I ever so happy to not have my money "working" for me.
I'm on my way home from a week in Berlin and it didn't strike me that the Germans were too exercised about the Brexit (and I was spending a lot of time with officials in the Ministry of Economics and Energy). These associations change all the time, and markets adapt. That's why you don't get too excited when you have 20% annual returns in your portfolio, or too nervous when you have -10%, both of which I have experienced (more than once) over the past four decades. Slow and steady, and You can win the race, or at least not lose it.
-
The New York Times lead on Sunday (today) gets it right. The institutions and structure put in place after WW2 are at real risk of collapsing. A realignment of the world like nothing seen since 1945.
It took me a while to figure out your game, but I finally got it.
You are a calamity groupie.
-
I'm on my way home from a week in Berlin and it didn't strike me that the Germans were too exercised about the Brexit (and I was spending a lot of time with officials in the Ministry of Economics and Energy). These associations change all the time, and markets adapt. That's why you don't get too excited when you have 20% annual returns in your portfolio, or too nervous when you have -10%, both of which I have experienced (more than once) over the past four decades. Slow and steady, and You can win the race, or at least not lose it.
Did you meet with them Friday because before Friday they were all confident that brexit was never going to happen. This is quite shocking for them. Just read the German papers in about how German politicians are conflicting themselves with statements about what's next.
-
For him, near-term means the next week or so.
If stocks do decline 10% in the next week, is that a crash?
(Note, stocks declined 10% in four days in late August when China devalued. Stocks are at that same level now, buying that panic, and holding to today, produced no gains.)
JPM Head Quant: Expect Up To $300 Billion In Program Selling, "5-10% Near-Term Downside To The S&P500"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-26/jpm-head-quant-expect-300-billion-program-selling-5-10-near-term-downside-sp500
is week, we expected a Brexit outcome to have an asymmetric impact for equities, with downside exacerbated by unwind of long equity investor positioning. In particular, increasing equity volatility would induce systematic strategies (Volatility Targeting, Risk Parity, CTAs) to start deleveraging their high equity exposure, resulting in $100-300 billion of selling.
The Black Swan doesn't seem to mind, ai-na?
-
It took me a while to figure out your game, but I finally got it.
You are a calamity groupie.
Yeah, he must've been lots of fun just before civilization as we knew it ended on Y2K. ;)
-
Did you meet with them Friday because before Friday they were all confident that brexit was never going to happen. This is quite shocking for them. Just read the German papers in about how German politicians are conflicting themselves with statements about what's next.
I spent the entire week with them, both before and after the vote. They did believe Britain would vote to remain, but didn't think the Brexit vote was that significant for anyone but Britain. What politicians say in papers is what politicians want the world to hear What they say in private - like, Britain has always held itself an arm's length from the rest of the EU, is what I trust they think as individuals. These where some very smart individuals high up in the German Ministry.
I'm only reporting my conversations; I certainly don't claim to know what all of Germany or Europe thinks. In all financial matters, we must act as we see fit to protect our wealth. Like chick and others, I pay a very good person to look after that for me, and generally take his advice. So forgive me if I don't cash out in small bills tomorrow and stuff them in my mattress.
-
It took me a while to figure out your game, but I finally got it.
You are a calamity groupie.
It took you this long? Dude's probably got a basement full of canned good and gas masks.
-
I spent the entire week with them, both before and after the vote. They did believe Britain would vote to remain, but didn't think the Brexit vote was that significant for anyone but Britain. What politicians say in papers is what politicians want the world to hear What they say in private - like, Britain has always held itself an arm's length from the rest of the EU, is what I trust they think as individuals. These where some very smart individuals high up in the German Ministry.
I'm only reporting my conversations; I certainly don't claim to know what all of Germany or Europe thinks. In all financial matters, we must act as we see fit to protect our wealth. Like chick and others, I pay a very good person to look after that for me, and generally take his advice. So forgive me if I don't cash out in small bills tomorrow and stuff them in my mattress.
Duz yur dude drive ta work or take da bus, hey?
-
It took you this long? Dude's probably got a basement full of canned good and gas masks.
I can only imagine what Heisy was thinking about the future of the world (not to mention the U.S. economy) after 9/11.
I'm guessing, "We may never, ever recover from this," was probably his main thought.
-
I can only imagine what Heisy was thinking about the future of the world (not to mention the U.S. economy) after 9/11.
I'm guessing, "We may never, ever recover from this," was probably his main thought.
Nope ... got long
Remember, I'm a professional speculator. I used to manage/trade OPM (other people's money) but now I speculate for myself and a handful of other professional investors.
So Am I a calamity Groupie ... yes. My business works best when we are at the beginning of the end of civilization. When things are going great I struggle.
That is why I'm so pissed at myself about my losses on Friday. It was an unforced error.
So yes, I'm in and out all the time and now I'm pressing my shorts (more UK stocks than US stocks but both, and a smaller position in China A-shares. Biggest position is the short in the Pound, looking to cover in the lows 1.20s.). I will until everyone gets that warm wet feeling in their pants. My guess is that is in the next two weeks.
How good am I at doing this? Been doing it since 1986, thirty years, and continually turn down offers to so the same for large investment banks and hedge funds.
-
Heisy Baby, did ya drive ta work or take da bus, hey?
-
Remember, I'm a professional speculator.
Really? I thought you were a professional cutter and paster of articles on a college basketball websight.
-
Remember, I'm a professional speculator.
How good am I at doing this? Been doing it since 1986, thirty years, and continually turn down offers to so the same for large investment banks and hedge funds.
If you're as good as you say you are, you should have plenty of $$$$ put away - so why all the worry about the next financial disaster?
-
I'm beginning to seriously wonder if the Brexit is actually going to happen.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2016/06/anarchy-uk
Cameron had no plan, Boris Johnson (leading Brexit advocate) apparently has no plan, Parliament (including members who voted for Brexit) have no plan...so basically the entire UK is currently staring at each other with blank looks on their faces. Meanwhile, Merkel and Hollande are asking the UK what kind of message they should send to other EU members...and nobody is answering the phone. And the two-year exit process doesn't begin to run until after the UK formally requests withdrawal.
My guess - more and more people sign the petition for a re-vote, so it is granted...and "stay" wins by a landslide because UK citizens now realize their own government has no clue how to proceed without the EU propping it up.
-
Nope ... got long
Remember, I'm a professional speculator. I used to manage/trade OPM (other people's money) but now I speculate for myself and a handful of other professional investors.
So Am I a calamity Groupie ... yes. My business works best when we are at the beginning of the end of civilization. When things are going great I struggle.
That is why I'm so pissed at myself about my losses on Friday. It was an unforced error.
So yes, I'm in and out all the time and now I'm pressing my shorts (more UK stocks than US stocks but both, and a smaller position in China A-shares. Biggest position is the short in the Pound, looking to cover in the lows 1.20s.). I will until everyone gets that warm wet feeling in their pants. My guess is that is in the next two weeks.
How good am I at doing this? Been doing it since 1986, thirty years, and continually turn down offers to so the same for large investment banks and hedge funds.
You are my hero. (You would be even more my hero if you admit you were wrong -- as I called you out for moving the goalposts at 11:46:53 PM last night.)
Hard to believe you made an unforced error Friday. You sell yourself here in Scoop Land as knowing everything about everything. So disappointed to hear you are (almost) mortal.
-
the majority of my assets are in land/my bldg, and the businesses(dental and an indoor self-storage facility) that i own. i'd say 1/3 in retirement plans, invested in the market, 2/3 businesses and bldg. i realize the businesses and bldg are hooked at the hip with the overall economy, but i believe it may be a better set-up than the reversal.
I've been mildly curious about the self-storage industry for a while. 'mild curiosity' defined as every time I see a facility in a super rural area, or two in close proximity in a metro area, the following questions pop into my mind but 20 seconds later leave.
- what does the customer base look like? Is it consumer or small/mid business?
- if consumer, is it mostly temporary usage (just got divorced living in a'ppt until i can find a house) or long term (i don't have room for Mom's estate but can't part with it)?
- other than on site advertising i've seen minimal advertising. am i just not seeing it or is it a 'hey, when you need storage you know it' situation?
- it seems like there was a big spike in supply 15 (ish?) years ago and, unlike the self-serve yogurt shop explosion of 5 years ago, it looks like there is still a good amount of demand for that supply. Was this really a newly found service or were there other versions of this service available before the latest manifestation?
I'm not looking for anything detailed (if so, tell me to pound), just an educated pedestrian' level of info.
*****not super sorry for going off topic in this thread******
-
You are my hero. (You would be even more my hero if you admit you were wrong -- as I called you out for moving the goalposts at 11:46:53 PM last night.)
Hard to believe you made an unforced error Friday. You sell yourself here in Scoop Land as knowing everything about everything. So disappointed to hear you are (almost) mortal.
Often wrong but never in doubt.
-
Nope ... got long
Remember, I'm a professional speculator. I used to manage/trade OPM (other people's money) but now I speculate for myself and a handful of other professional investors.
So Am I a calamity Groupie ... yes. My business works best when we are at the beginning of the end of civilization. When things are going great I struggle.
That is why I'm so pissed at myself about my losses on Friday. It was an unforced error.
So yes, I'm in and out all the time and now I'm pressing my shorts (more UK stocks than US stocks but both, and a smaller position in China A-shares. Biggest position is the short in the Pound, looking to cover in the lows 1.20s.). I will until everyone gets that warm wet feeling in their pants. My guess is that is in the next two weeks.
How good am I at doing this? Been doing it since 1986, thirty years, and continually turn down offers to so the same for large investment banks and hedge funds.
Chicas and Heisy HAVE to be brothers. Unless one of them died in the womb.
-
Right, the UKIP (the party leading the charge to leave) only has 4 seats, out of the 1450 in the British parliament. It's not insane to think that the government is gonna pull an "oh sh!t, we really screwed up" moment and not actually enact it. It's not like it was a landslide vote, and people who voted to leave were pretty open by saying that they may have screwed up. They could also take into account the demographics of the vote, where young voters who will have to deal with the consequences were overwhelmingly in the remain camp.
The one thing Britain has going for them is that their liberal and conservative party isn't as divided as democrats and Republicans in the US, they could actually pull this one out.
Only 51.9% voted to leave hardly overwhelming. There were several news articles on this on Friday that Britons were Googling "what it means to leave the EU" because most of then who voted leave had no idea what they were voting for.
-
I've been mildly curious about the self-storage industry for a while. 'mild curiosity' defined as every time I see a facility in a super rural area, or two in close proximity in a metro area, the following questions pop into my mind but 20 seconds later leave.
- what does the customer base look like? Is it consumer or small/mid business?
- if consumer, is it mostly temporary usage (just got divorced living in a'ppt until i can find a house) or long term (i don't have room for Mom's estate but can't part with it)?
- other than on site advertising i've seen minimal advertising. am i just not seeing it or is it a 'hey, when you need storage you know it' situation?
- it seems like there was a big spike in supply 15 (ish?) years ago and, unlike the self-serve yogurt shop explosion of 5 years ago, it looks like there is still a good amount of demand for that supply. Was this really a newly found service or were there other versions of this service available before the latest manifestation?
I'm not looking for anything detailed (if so, tell me to pound), just an educated pedestrian' level of info.
*****not super sorry for going off topic in this thread******
no problems-this is a new endeavor for us. i built a 12,000 sq. ft bldg. in 2003) we use half for my dental ofc. and my brothers accounting business. so that left about 6,000sq. ft vacant. our intentions were to turn it into more office space. well, over the years, we had quite a few hits, all misses and then the economy chit out in 2008-09...my builder suggested self storage a few years ago and i laughed. well here we are. i was driving around one day and saw this beautiful indoor, climate controled self storage facility-BANGO! if you go to a self storage blog, it's a whole different world. my facility is relatively small(35 units) by industry standards, but i just want to get some cash flow going. btw, i am about a month away from opening. anyway, there are waiting lists for these, especially the indoor climate controled ones. i have another acre plus just outside and that may become phase II and have 60 or so more units. i have a 500 unit apartment complex across the street from me. self-storage has become a must-have for apartment dwellers, college students in transition, movers in transition, art, guns, motorcycles, snowmobiles, we have our township needing climate controll to store/archive hard copy stuff goingback years. if you need storage, you don't need advertizing other than a web site and word of mouth. the facility will be practically self run except for those who want a tour. everything else can be done online. i can monitor the facitlity from my phone of i-pad. everyone, and mean EVERYONE i talk to say they cannot build these fast enough. if you visit inside self storage, you will be amazed of how omnipresent this is
-
no problems-this is a new endeavor for us. i built a 12,000 sq. ft bldg. in 2003) we use half for my dental ofc. and my brothers accounting business. so that left about 6,000sq. ft vacant. our intentions were to turn it into more office space. well, over the years, we had quite a few hits, all misses and then the economy chit out in 2008-09...my builder suggested self storage a few years ago and i laughed. well here we are. i was driving around one day and saw this beautiful indoor, climate controled self storage facility-BANGO! if you go to a self storage blog, it's a whole different world. my facility is relatively small(35 units) by industry standards, but i just want to get some cash flow going. btw, i am about a month away from opening. anyway, there are waiting lists for these, especially the indoor climate controled ones. i have another acre plus just outside and that may become phase II and have 60 or so more units. i have a 500 unit apartment complex across the street from me. self-storage has become a must-have for apartment dwellers, college students in transition, movers in transition, art, guns, motorcycles, snowmobiles, we have our township needing climate controll to store/archive hard copy stuff goingback years. if you need storage, you don't need advertizing other than a web site and word of mouth. the facility will be practically self run except for those who want a tour. everything else can be done online. i can monitor the facitlity from my phone of i-pad. everyone, and mean EVERYONE i talk to say they cannot build these fast enough. if you visit inside self storage, you will be amazed of how omnipresent this is
In the rural area where I now live, the barns on non-working farmsteads have been converted to RV and boat storage. Such places near subdivisions with outdoor storage rules do the best. Nice stream of income without much hassle.
We have a whole segment of the economy dedicated to managing extra stuff.....storage, resale shops, craigslist, ebay, professional organizers.....plenty of opportunity at all levels there for those who want to put in the effort.
-
I think it bears repeating (no pun intended) that the Brexit vote was a NON-BINDING REFERENDUM... much to the parallel of how American Presidential primaries are NON-BINDING REFERENDUMS.
Populist angst only goes so far before the big boys and girls have to put their earmuffs on and get the job done. The only difference is that the Brits have the bangers and bristols to put their political careers on the line in order to do the right thing... on this side of the pond, Congress is bent as a nine-bob and hasn't the trousers to go with their mouth because they're not going to muck about with reality when they need to be willy-waving for their next bung and queering the pitch from the other side of the aisle. So it's sod off to the people because they're no more than scallys and scrubbers who think Congress is a bunch of jacked up tossers who doesn't know it's onions and has made a pig's ear of the country.
In before the bang.
-
Only 51.9% voted to leave hardly overwhelming. There were several news articles on this on Friday that Britons were Googling "what it means to leave the EU" because most of then who voted leave had no idea what they were voting for.
That is what happens at every event. Election night their will be a google spike on "who is <the winner>" Nothing new here. It just more media bias against BRexit.
-
Only 51.9% voted to leave hardly overwhelming. There were several news articles on this on Friday that Britons were Googling "what it means to leave the EU" because most of then who voted leave had no idea what they were voting for.
As a group, people generally aren't as stupid as you make them out to be. Furthermore, you say "because" but can you be so sure Britons' mass ignorance was the cause for the uptick in google searches for "what it means to leave the EU?"
Anyway, when you break down the numbers by nation within the UK, Scots overwhelmingly voted to stay, while the English voted to leave by a six-point margin (and that's including London).
(https://snag.gy/KZ3k1c.jpg)
-
I think it bears repeating (no pun intended) that the Brexit vote was a NON-BINDING REFERENDUM... much to the parallel of how American Presidential primaries are NON-BINDING REFERENDUMS.
Populist angst only goes so far before the big boys and girls have to put their earmuffs on and get the job done. The only difference is that the Brits have the bangers and bristols to put their political careers on the line in order to do the right thing... on this side of the pond, Congress is bent as a nine-bob and hasn't the trousers to go with their mouth because they're not going to muck about with reality when they need to be willy-waving for their next bung and queering the pitch from the other side of the aisle. So it's sod off to the people because they're no more than scallys and scrubbers who think Congress is a bunch of jacked up tossers who doesn't know it's onions and has made a pig's ear of the country.
In before the bang.
The PM resigned, half the shadow cabinet has resigned. This is the first time in the hundreds of years of parliamentary rule in the UK both major political parties been in such turmoil at the same time. Markets around the world are crashing. If only everyone realized that none of this counts it would all go away.
It's over and BRexit won. BRexit is happening and the only thing that is more dangerous than BRexit itself is this kind of talk that the vote does not count, The "let's ignore the will of the people" talk is what will lead to revolution, not BRexit.
-
The PM resigned, half the shadow cabinet has resigned. This is the first time in the hundreds of years of parliamentary rule in the UK both major political parties been in such turmoil at the same time. Markets around the world are crashing. If only everyone realized that none of this counts it would all go away.
It's over and BRexit won. BRexit is happening and the only thing that is more dangerous than BRexit itself is this kind of talk that the vote does not count, The "let's ignore the will of the people" talk is what will lead to revolution, not BRexit.
It's not the will of the people though. It's the will of those who will be dead in the next 10-20 years, which frankly, shouldn't count.
-
As a group, people generally aren't as stupid as you make them out to be. Furthermore, you say "because" but can you be so sure Britons' mass ignorance was the cause for the uptick in google searches for "what it means to leave the EU?"
Anyway, when you break down the numbers by nation within the UK, Scots overwhelmingly voted to stay, while the English voted to leave by a six-point margin (and that's including London).
(https://snag.gy/KZ3k1c.jpg)
Eh, I feel like England is like Illinois. Rauner won despite getting destroyed in Chicago because the rest of Illinois is so different. That being said, it's silly to think that Chicago doesn't have as much pull as the rest of the state, just like London probably has more pull than the rest of England. It's a city of 7 million, that can't be ignored.
-
It's not the will of the people though. It's the will of those who will be dead in the next 10-20 years, which frankly, shouldn't count.
72% of the Uk went to the polls, the largest amount in 24 years. BRexit won. But because a bunch of inaccurate polls (that said remain would win) said old people voted for it, these results should be ignored?
So, in November when Hillary wins, the Republicans are within their right to say it was a bunch of old people that will be dead soon and the polls also say she is unpopular so we will not leave and refuse to accept these results. You ok with this too. (I picked Hillary as my example as that is far more controversial than using Trump).
I'm not trying to make this a political argument, I'm trying to illustrate how unbelievably dangerous it is for a democracy to not accept the vote of the people. This is what they voted for, they have to live with it. non-binding is irrelevant,. They expressed their opinion and now the government has to give it to them (leave the EU).
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. - H. L. Mencken
-
It's not the will of the people though. It's the will of those who will be dead in the next 10-20 years, which frankly, shouldn't count.
Most bigoted post ever on Scoop. Congrats.
-
It's not the will of the people though. It's the will of those who will be dead in the next 10-20 years, which frankly, shouldn't count.
If a person can't trouble themselves to get off their dead butt and pull a lever once in awhile is their opinion really relevant to that election? Isn't half of success in life simply showing up?
How about we only count the votes of only those who have jobs or own property or only have a certain level of education .......
Even when my side has lost, I've never found compelling (and often find it dangerous) the argument of that but for a different electorate than the one that voted the losing side would have won.
-
It's not the will of the people though. It's the will of those who will be dead in the next 10-20 years, which frankly, shouldn't count.
(http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/09/Bitch-please-Blank-stare-Seriously-Are-you-serious-Stare-Staring-The-Rock-Rock-GIF.gif?gs=a)
-
Eh, not worth it
-
It's not the will of the people though. It's the will of those who will be dead in the next 10-20 years, which frankly, shouldn't count.
Bravo for stupidity.
How about a 3/5th vote compromise. Those older than 45 your vote means less. /s
After all, the wisdom of 18 to 24 year olds like yourself is so on target.
Hey, while we are at it those that don't pay taxes their votes shouldn't count either.
-
no problems-this is a new endeavor for us. i built a 12,000 sq. ft bldg. in 2003) we use half for my dental ofc. and my brothers accounting business. so that left about 6,000sq. ft vacant. our intentions were to turn it into more office space. well, over the years, we had quite a few hits, all misses and then the economy chit out in 2008-09...my builder suggested self storage a few years ago and i laughed. well here we are. i was driving around one day and saw this beautiful indoor, climate controled self storage facility-BANGO! if you go to a self storage blog, it's a whole different world. my facility is relatively small(35 units) by industry standards, but i just want to get some cash flow going. btw, i am about a month away from opening. anyway, there are waiting lists for these, especially the indoor climate controled ones. i have another acre plus just outside and that may become phase II and have 60 or so more units. i have a 500 unit apartment complex across the street from me. self-storage has become a must-have for apartment dwellers, college students in transition, movers in transition, art, guns, motorcycles, snowmobiles, we have our township needing climate controll to store/archive hard copy stuff goingback years. if you need storage, you don't need advertizing other than a web site and word of mouth. the facility will be practically self run except for those who want a tour. everything else can be done online. i can monitor the facitlity from my phone of i-pad. everyone, and mean EVERYONE i talk to say they cannot build these fast enough. if you visit inside self storage, you will be amazed of how omnipresent this is
Interesting, thanks.
i figured i should get my thanks in before the lock and apparently, according to ChitownSpace, i need to go train for Logan's Run
(i do think the generation gap determined the outcome but that doesn't mean you ignore it, it means you need to energize the younger folks)
-
Eh, not worth it
Your original quote, that the boomers were screwing you. Maybe the boomers and the middle class think they are being screwed by non taxpayers. Sure you want to dig your heels into this one?
-
The PM resigned, half the shadow cabinet has resigned. This is the first time in the hundreds of years of parliamentary rule in the UK both major political parties been in such turmoil at the same time. Markets around the world are crashing. If only everyone realized that none of this counts it would all go away.
It's over and BRexit won. BRexit is happening and the only thing that is more dangerous than BRexit itself is this kind of talk that the vote does not count, The "let's ignore the will of the people" talk is what will lead to revolution, not BRexit.
A couple million people have already signed an online petition requesting a revote. That number is the largest in UK history, and is growing by the hour as people realize that neither the ruling nor opposition parties have a clue what to do next. (This cluelessness was even admitted by a member of Parliament who voted in favor of the Brexit.) Anyhow, Parliament is required to debate any online petition that gets at least 100,000 signatures, so the will of the people who have signed this petition will be considered by Parliament. And by the time Parliament gets to the debate, the petition might just very well have more signatures than there were votes in favor of Brexit.
Like you said - the will of the people.
-
Bravo for stupidity.
How about a 3/5th vote compromise. Those older than 45 your vote means less. /s
After all, the wisdom of 18 to 24 year olds like yourself is so on target.
Hey, while we are at it those that don't pay taxes their votes shouldn't count either.
I mean, based on the British economy absolutely tanking, those 18-24 year olds may not be as bad as decision makers as you think. I'm not ignorant to think there will never be another recession when my generation is in power, because there will be, however this one was very preventable.
-
It's not the will of the people though. It's the will of those who will be dead in the next 10-20 years, which frankly, shouldn't count.
You do realize that Brexit would very likely have failed if younger people had gotten out and voted, right? Per the Financial Times, approximately 65% of 30-year old eligible people voted, while approximately 80% of eligible 50-year old eligible people voted.
http://blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2016/06/24/brexit-demographic-divide-eu-referendum-results/
Given that more young people voted "Remain," the results would likely have been different if more 18-35 year olds just voted.
-
You do realize that Brexit would very likely have failed if younger people had gotten out and voted, right? Per the Financial Times, approximately 65% of 30-year old eligible people voted, while approximately 80% of eligible 50-year old eligible people voted.
http://blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2016/06/24/brexit-demographic-divide-eu-referendum-results/
Given that more young people voted "Remain," the results would likely have been different if more 18-35 year olds just voted.
Absolutely, and that's why I hate people my age too, talk a big game and don't always deliver (ahem, bernie supporters) Basically I just hate people I guess is what I'm trying to get at here.
-
A couple million people have already signed an online petition requesting a revote. That number is the largest in UK history, and is growing by the hour as people realize that neither the ruling nor opposition parties have a clue what to do next. (This cluelessness was even admitted by a member of Parliament who voted in favor of the Brexit.) Anyhow, Parliament is required to debate any online petition that gets at least 100,000 signatures, so the will of the people who have signed this petition will be considered by Parliament. And by the time Parliament gets to the debate, the petition might just very well have more signatures than there were votes in favor of Brexit.
Like you said - the will of the people.
Cameron spoke today and said they will debate it, and then not do it.
17.4 million voted to leave. 16.8 million vote to remain. If 3 million remain voters sign a petition for a do-over, then what? Another referendum? And it Remain wins. Then millions of leave voters will sign petitions to demand yet another referendum.
When does it end? Answer, last week, it's over and they are out.
----------------
Regarding the idea that the vote was non-binding. All votes are non-binding.
This November we will not be voting for President. We will be participating in a non-binding popularity contest. The actual vote for President is in December by the electoral college. And they are not bound by the general election results. They can vote anyway they want. And some states apportion electoral college votes by congressional district, others by states. History has examples of electoral college votes going against the popular election results of that state or district (it's rare and has not changed an outcome).
So, our election this November, like the BRexit referendum, is non-binding. They are all non-binding, everywhere. And the second they are treated as non-binding, that country ceases to be a democracy.
-
Heisy:
If it is the will of the people to have a new referendum, why is that any less democratic than last week's vote?
And I'm not talking about a few million Brits. I'll be impressed when tens of million voters demand a new referendum. If that happens, they absolutely should have a do-over. If not, I agree with you that last week's decision should stand.
I'm guessing President Gore, Supreme Court Justice Merrick Garland and U.S. gun-control advocates would agree wholeheartedly with you that the will of the people should decide elections and other major issues.
-
Really enjoy the panic portion of the Superbar crowd making this thread laughable with their doom and gloom and continued expanding on ignorance as a basis for opinion making.
There are far too many unknowns to draw any conclusion from Brexit. A) we don't know if the UK actually ends up withdrawing B) if they do withdraw we have no idea what the new engagement/agreements look like so we can't determine if it's a better or worse deal for both/either parties C) we don't know what the world economy looks like 2 years from now if/when it takes effect.
Any initial reaction is 100% about uncertainty, fear, and unwinding of positions held assuming the UK voted to stay.
Let's discuss 6 months from now.
-
You know what would be fascinating, if the English soccer team came out with a European flag. I'm sure the odds of that happening are like .01 percent but man would that spark a discussion.
-
Cameron spoke today....
As of Friday, Cameron's opinion doesn't mean much....
-
A couple million people have already signed an online petition requesting a revote. That number is the largest in UK history, and is growing by the hour as people realize that neither the ruling nor opposition parties have a clue what to do next. (This cluelessness was even admitted by a member of Parliament who voted in favor of the Brexit.) Anyhow, Parliament is required to debate any online petition that gets at least 100,000 signatures, so the will of the people who have signed this petition will be considered by Parliament. And by the time Parliament gets to the debate, the petition might just very well have more signatures than there were votes in favor of Brexit.
Like you said - the will of the people.
Whoops.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407
Its inquiry is focused on the possibility that some names could be fraudulent - 77,000 signatures have already been removed.
More than 3.2 million signatures are on the petition, but PM David Cameron has said there will be no second vote.
From other sources, there were North Koreans who somehow managed to sign that petition, 39k people from the Vatican (pop of ~800), and Napoleon Bonaparte also managed to sign the petition.
Yeah.
-
Whoops.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407
Its inquiry is focused on the possibility that some names could be fraudulent - 77,000 signatures have already been removed.
More than 3.2 million signatures are on the petition, but PM David Cameron has said there will be no second vote.
From other sources, there were North Koreans who somehow managed to sign that petition, 39k people from the Vatican (pop of ~800), and Napoleon Bonaparte also managed to sign the petition.
Yeah.
I didn't expect a revote so much as I expected parliament just to say thanks but no thanks. If they don't leave the EU it's not going to be due to another referendum vote.
-
Whoops.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407
Its inquiry is focused on the possibility that some names could be fraudulent - 77,000 signatures have already been removed.
More than 3.2 million signatures are on the petition, but PM David Cameron has said there will be no second vote.
From other sources, there were North Koreans who somehow managed to sign that petition, 39k people from the Vatican (pop of ~800), and Napoleon Bonaparte also managed to sign the petition.
Yeah.
Doesn't change the fact that plenty of Brits signed too. The numbers may change, but the popular opposition won't.
Oh, and were you aware that the petition to hold the re-vote was started by William Oliver Healy...who voted in favor of the Brexit?
Whoops, indeed.
-
I think it bears repeating (no pun intended) that the Brexit vote was a NON-BINDING REFERENDUM... much to the parallel of how American Presidential primaries are NON-BINDING REFERENDUMS.
Populist angst only goes so far before the big boys and girls have to put their earmuffs on and get the job done. The only difference is that the Brits have the bangers and bristols to put their political careers on the line in order to do the right thing... on this side of the pond, Congress is bent as a nine-bob and hasn't the trousers to go with their mouth because they're not going to muck about with reality when they need to be willy-waving for their next bung and queering the pitch from the other side of the aisle. So it's sod off to the people because they're no more than scallys and scrubbers who think Congress is a bunch of jacked up tossers who doesn't know it's onions and has made a pig's ear of the country.
In before the bang.
Your post was bollocks. But when you mix too much Guinness with too much wanking, I'd expect you to be off your trolley..
-
Your post was bollocks. But when you mix too much Guinness with too much wanking, I'd expect you to be off your trolley..
I just assumed his lift didn't go to the top....
-
Heisy:
If it is the will of the people to have a new referendum, why is that any less democratic than last week's vote?
And I'm not talking about a few million Brits. I'll be impressed when tens of million voters demand a new referendum. If that happens, they absolutely should have a do-over. If not, I agree with you that last week's decision should stand.
I'm guessing President Gore, Supreme Court Justice Merrick Garland and U.S. gun-control advocates would agree wholeheartedly with you that the will of the people should decide elections and other major issues.
We are going to hold and election in November. The sides are very passionate.
One side is going to lose and then demand a recall or special election, Madison writ large. I'll bet the losing side can get 50 million signatures (which ever side it is). We saw the mess this created in Madison. Do we really want to go down this road?
Election matter, no do-overs. If you don't vote you give your choice to others and have to live with it.
Recalls and/or impeachment are for very specials violations of rules, not a tool to over-turn an election with disagree with.
Their is no evidence of fraud or impropriety so should not start signing petitions to vote again and again and again because the losing side refuses to accept they lost.
-
Whoops.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407
Its inquiry is focused on the possibility that some names could be fraudulent - 77,000 signatures have already been removed.
More than 3.2 million signatures are on the petition, but PM David Cameron has said there will be no second vote.
From other sources, there were North Koreans who somehow managed to sign that petition, 39k people from the Vatican (pop of ~800), and Napoleon Bonaparte also managed to sign the petition.
Yeah.
But did Boaty McBoatface sign it?
-
Whoops.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407
Its inquiry is focused on the possibility that some names could be fraudulent - 77,000 signatures have already been removed.
More than 3.2 million signatures are on the petition, but PM David Cameron has said there will be no second vote.
From other sources, there were North Koreans who somehow managed to sign that petition, 39k people from the Vatican (pop of ~800), and Napoleon Bonaparte also managed to sign the petition.
Yeah.
This is hilarious.
As for the real impact of Brexit ... I agree totally with mu03eng. Let's see how the next several months shake out before we all agree to jump out of 100th-story windows together.
-
Well, whatever happens this year makes me feel like I'm living a chapter in a future history book. I'll have a better idea when I leave for England in a month so well see.
-
Well, whatever happens this year makes me feel like I'm living a chapter in a future history book. I'll have a better idea when I leave for England in a month so well see.
You'll see a bunch of noise, but it will be very difficult to see the actual signal. It is an impossibility to determine the impact for at least a year or until parliament actually votes on something of consequence.
-
Your post was bollocks. But when you mix too much Guinness with too much wanking, I'd expect you to be off your trolley..
Sure, I drink Guinness. And I wank it with the rest of them. But your daft ignorance is as welcome as a debagging ringburner.
-
Really enjoy the panic portion of the Superbar crowd making this thread laughable with their doom and gloom and continued expanding on ignorance as a basis for opinion making.
There are far too many unknowns to draw any conclusion from Brexit. A) we don't know if the UK actually ends up withdrawing B) if they do withdraw we have no idea what the new engagement/agreements look like so we can't determine if it's a better or worse deal for both/either parties C) we don't know what the world economy looks like 2 years from now if/when it takes effect.
Any initial reaction is 100% about uncertainty, fear, and unwinding of positions held assuming the UK voted to stay.
Let's discuss 6 months from now.
Of course as of now there is nothing definitive that we can say about the situation. However, I do think that there is fruitful discussion out there about Brexit and its potential ramifications, even if the latter are generalities.
When I first heard of the Brexit months ago I immediately thought of Dani Rodrik (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dani_Rodrik) and his trilemma. (Rodrik is arguably the world's most eminent scholar on the nexus of globalization and political economy). While I don't read his blog regularly, he has indeed been blogging about it recently
http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2016/06/brexit-and-the-globalization-trilemma.html
The FT was also reminded of Rodrik's trilemma and subsequently wrote about it, and Rodrik critiqued the FT's writeup:
http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2016/03/more-on-the-political-trilemma-of-the-global-economy.html
IMO, Brexit will indeed lead to lower economic output for the Brits (how much is too difficult to quantify). There is simply no way that the UK can get the same type of economic integration with the rest of Europe without being a member of the EU. Even if the UK signs new bilateral trade agreements with Belgium, Portugal, France, etc., these deals will most certainly not be as beneficial to British exporters as being a full-fledged member of the EU.
Leaving the EU entails economic costs. Why pay this cost? What does the UK get out of it? The tl;dr version of the Rodrik trilemma (mentioned in the blog posts cited above) is that the benefit of leaving the EU is greater sovereignty, i.e., movement from leg to base of the triangle (shown below). Is this benefit worth the cost? Apparently Scots don't think so and non-London Englishmen do.
(http://rodrik.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c891753ef01b8d1f6d855970c-800wi)
How do we manage the tension between national democracy and global markets? We have three options. We can restrict democracy in the interest of minimizing international transaction costs, disregarding the economic and social whiplash that the global economy occasionally produces. We can limit globalization, in the hope of building democratic legitimacy at home. Or we can globalize democracy, at the cost of national sovereignty. This gives us a menu of options for reconstructing the world economy.
-
Really enjoy the panic portion of the Superbar crowd making this thread laughable with their doom and gloom and continued expanding on ignorance as a basis for opinion making.
There are far too many unknowns to draw any conclusion from Brexit. A) we don't know if the UK actually ends up withdrawing B) if they do withdraw we have no idea what the new engagement/agreements look like so we can't determine if it's a better or worse deal for both/either parties C) we don't know what the world economy looks like 2 years from now if/when it takes effect.
Any initial reaction is 100% about uncertainty, fear, and unwinding of positions held assuming the UK voted to stay.
Let's discuss 6 months from now.
What panic are you seeing in this thread. I'm the only guy expressing concern. The rest here are like you, enjoying the anal tearing of the portfolio convinced that their is nothing that can ever stop them from making money.
-
What panic are you seeing in this thread. I'm the only guy expressing concern. The rest here are like you, enjoying the anal tearing of the portfolio convinced that their is nothing that can ever stop them from making money.
There are several folks in here other than you that are going off the deep end, you just happen to be the most usual of suspects.
There are all sorts of reasons Brexit might be a disaster for the world economy just like there are all sorts of reasons it might be brilliant....it all depends on the decisions of leaders and commoners alike over the next several years. Forgiven me if I don't get my knickers in a twist over things that are literally not knowable at this very moment. Minimize the downside risk and move on.
-
Of course as of now there is nothing definitive that we can say about the situation. However, I do think that there is fruitful discussion out there about Brexit and its potential ramifications, even if the latter are generalities.
When I first heard of the Brexit months ago I immediately thought of Dani Rodrik (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dani_Rodrik) and his trilemma. (Rodrik is arguably the world's most eminent scholar on the nexus of globalization and political economy). While I don't read his blog regularly, he has indeed been blogging about it recently
http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2016/06/brexit-and-the-globalization-trilemma.html
The FT was also reminded of Rodrik's trilemma and subsequently wrote about it, and Rodrik critiqued the FT's writeup:
http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2016/03/more-on-the-political-trilemma-of-the-global-economy.html
IMO, Brexit will indeed lead to lower economic output for the Brits (how much is too difficult to quantify). There is simply no way that the UK can get the same type of economic integration with the rest of Europe without being a member of the EU. Even if the UK signs new bilateral trade agreements with Belgium, Portugal, France, etc., these deals will most certainly not be as beneficial to British exporters as being a full-fledged member of the EU.
Leaving the EU entails economic costs. Why pay this cost? What does the UK get out of it? The tl;dr version of the Rodrik trilemma (mentioned in the blog posts cited above) is that the benefit of leaving the EU is greater sovereignty, i.e., movement from leg to base of the triangle (shown below). Is this benefit worth the cost? Apparently Scots don't think so and non-London Englishmen do.
(http://rodrik.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c891753ef01b8d1f6d855970c-800wi)
How do we manage the tension between national democracy and global markets? We have three options. We can restrict democracy in the interest of minimizing international transaction costs, disregarding the economic and social whiplash that the global economy occasionally produces. We can limit globalization, in the hope of building democratic legitimacy at home. Or we can globalize democracy, at the cost of national sovereignty. This gives us a menu of options for reconstructing the world economy.
I agree there is absolutely a fruitful discussion to be had, there are all sorts of directions this could go, positive or negative. My post was in reaction to those who know the results and know it's going to be bad.
I have limited exposure to Rodrick, but it is a very interesting discussion point. One thing that has struck me is how nearly identical his model is to that of project management restraints (scope, cost, and time). You can control for two of the three, but never all three. There's got to be a universal nature to that relationship somewhere.
-
Just to add insult to injury, England just got knocked out of Euros by Iceland.
-
Just to add insult to injury, England just got knocked out of Euros by Iceland.
probably because the average age of an Icelandic player is so much younger than that of the English team
-
You'll see a bunch of noise, but it will be very difficult to see the actual signal. It is an impossibility to determine the impact for at least a year or until parliament actually votes on something of consequence.
I've heard we shouldn't judge for at least 5 -- and that's for a basketball coach so for a Brexit -- it's probably 10.
-
So, our election this November, like the BRexit referendum, is non-binding. They are all non-binding, everywhere. And the second they are treated as non-binding, that country ceases to be a democracy.
So, you are saying then that we are still the "Warriors"...
The Warexit was a palace coup. Out with the pitchforks! Our democracy is dead.
-
So, you are saying then that we are still the "Warriors"...
The Warexit was a palace coup. Out with the pitchforks! Our democracy is dead.
very well stated!!
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmAX0zHWYAAjX8z.jpg:large)
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmAX0zHWYAAjX8z.jpg:large)
Beer is spelled wrong.
-
So here we are, right back to where we started.
Brexit's two-day panic basically only erased the four-day run-up that was fueled by speculation that the "remains" would prevail over the "leaves."
Mr. Market is easily positive today, and it's almost as if Brexit had never taken place.
Or as Bill Maher said Friday: "A week ago, Trump thought Brexit was the name of one of Sarah Palin's kids."
Look, I'm not saying the effects of Brexit are "over." The only thing I know for sure is that those who claim to know how this is all going to shake out months or years from now are full of Yorkshire pudding!
-
So here we are, right back to where we started.
Brexit's two-day panic basically only erased the four-day run-up that was fueled by speculation that the "remains" would prevail over the "leaves."
Mr. Market is easily positive today, and it's almost as if Brexit had never taken place.
Or as Bill Maher said Friday: "A week ago, Trump thought Brexit was the name of one of Sarah Palin's kids."
Look, I'm not saying the effects of Brexit are "over." The only thing I know for sure is that those who claim to know how this is all going to shake out months or years from now are full of Yorkshire pudding!
Wait, did we rally back the 600 points we lost on Friday? And the destruction of the European financial stocks, the worst two days ever recorded, has that been reversed?
The only thing more full of Yorkshire pudding is those that scream "it does not matter" before they even understand what "it" actually is.
(http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2016/06/23/20160627_banks3.jpg)
-
Turns out the 3 million online "signatures" for a second referendum is a hacked POS. But this does not mattered, like the "What is the EU" google searches (which is the case after every event with google) the media bias is so one0ded against BRexit that all objectivity has been lost.
Second referendum petition: Inquiry removes at least 77,000 fake signatures, as hackers claim responsibility for 'prank'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/concern-as-online-call-for-second-brexit-vote-gains-more-than-39/
In isolationist North Korea, one of the least internet-connected countries in the world, 23,778 people had apparently gone online to express their frustration at the UK’s decision to quit the EU.
Located 800 miles south east of the Falklands, and with a permanent population of zero, the South Atlantic British Overseas Territory of South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands was responsible for more than 3,000 signatures
That was some 300 more than those coming from the British Antarctic Territory, which though home to some 400 researchers also has no settled population of its own.
Signatories are also recorded in places as far flung as the Caribbean island of Aruba (101), Bermuda (564), China (432), Hong Kong (2,089), Japan (742) Venezuela (24) and the South Pacific Islands of Tuvalu (18), Wallis and Fortuna (8) and Vanuatu (31).
They included 18,734 signatures from France, 11,816 from Spain, 7,031 from Germany, 3,139 from the Netherlands and 2,492 Italians and 4,122 residents of Gibraltar – which came out strongly in favour of Remain in Wednesday's momentous poll.
Some 2,326 Swiss-based supporters backed a second referendum on EU membership, as did 279 residents of Turkey, 3,746 in New Zealand and 11,971 in Australia.
Support was less pronounced in Western Sahara (3) Mongolia (3), Somalia (4), Guatemala (4) and French Polynesia (6)
Overall, close to 2.5 million signatures had been added from within the UK by midday on Sunday, making up an overwhelming proportion of the whole.
-
Wait, did we rally back the 600 points we lost on Friday? And the destruction of the European financial stocks, the worst two days ever recorded, has that been reversed?
The only thing more full of Yorkshire pudding is those that scream "it does not matter" before they even understand what "it" actually is.
I'm sorry. I should have said that nobody knows the future ... except Heisy!
(Even if you apparently can't read. I didn't say the market rallied 600 points; I said the Friday-Monday pullback merely had erased last week's four-day run-up ignited by those who had erroneously assumed "remain" would win. And I never screamed "it does not matter." In fact, I literally said the Brexit effect isn't over. What's funny is the one guy who came right out and said he didn't understand what "it actually is" was your boy Trump! But now he's all for it ... and he's taking credit for it! Too effen funny!!!!!!)
-
You're like the old window washer joke ...
What did the window washer that fell from the 50th floor say as he passed by the 5th floor?
So far so good.
-
You're like the old window washer joke ...
What did the window washer that fell from the 50th floor say as he passed by the 5th floor?
So far so good.
And you're like Chicken Little fable.
Do let the rest of the uneducated masses know when the sky really has fallen, OK?
-
Turns out the 3 million online "signatures" for a second referendum is a hacked POS. But this does not mattered, like the "What is the EU" google searches (which is the case after every event with google) the media bias is so one0ded against BRexit that all objectivity has been lost.
Second referendum petition: Inquiry removes at least 77,000 fake signatures, as hackers claim responsibility for 'prank'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/concern-as-online-call-for-second-brexit-vote-gains-more-than-39/
In isolationist North Korea, one of the least internet-connected countries in the world, 23,778 people had apparently gone online to express their frustration at the UK’s decision to quit the EU.
Located 800 miles south east of the Falklands, and with a permanent population of zero, the South Atlantic British Overseas Territory of South Georgia and the Sandwich Islands was responsible for more than 3,000 signatures
That was some 300 more than those coming from the British Antarctic Territory, which though home to some 400 researchers also has no settled population of its own.
Signatories are also recorded in places as far flung as the Caribbean island of Aruba (101), Bermuda (564), China (432), Hong Kong (2,089), Japan (742) Venezuela (24) and the South Pacific Islands of Tuvalu (18), Wallis and Fortuna (8) and Vanuatu (31).
They included 18,734 signatures from France, 11,816 from Spain, 7,031 from Germany, 3,139 from the Netherlands and 2,492 Italians and 4,122 residents of Gibraltar – which came out strongly in favour of Remain in Wednesday's momentous poll.
Some 2,326 Swiss-based supporters backed a second referendum on EU membership, as did 279 residents of Turkey, 3,746 in New Zealand and 11,971 in Australia.
Support was less pronounced in Western Sahara (3) Mongolia (3), Somalia (4), Guatemala (4) and French Polynesia (6)
Overall, close to 2.5 million signatures had been added from within the UK by midday on Sunday, making up an overwhelming proportion of the whole.
So 77,000 hacked signatures of a reported number of over 4 million (last I saw) makes the whole thing a "hacked POS"? Given the lax voter ID laws we have here in the USA, I'd bet that 77,000 number pales in comparison to the ineligible votes in any national election. Are we to ignore all national election results now?
And your comment still ignores the fact that the petition was started by a person who voted for the Brexit, and the great likelihood that many (most?) of the signatories are actually British citizens.
You do realize that Parliament is required to consider the petition even if only 100,000 signatures are legit, right?
-
Labour leader Jeremy Crobyn lost a no confidence vote today176 to 40. 20 of his cabinet ministers have resigned.
He still refuses to step down as the head of the labour party.
It was a non-binding vote ... See the chaos and crisis (within the Labour Party) that comes from ignoring non-binding votes.
-
So 77,000 hacked signatures of a reported number of over 4 million (last I saw) makes the whole thing a "hacked POS"? Given the lax voter ID laws we have here in the USA, I'd bet that 77,000 number pales in comparison to the ineligible votes in any national election. Are we to ignore all national election results now?
And your comment still ignores the fact that the petition was started by a person who voted for the Brexit, and the great likelihood that many (most?) of the signatories are actually British citizens.
You do realize that Parliament is required to consider the petition even if only 100,000 signatures are legit, right?
Cameron said they would consider it and then not have a second referendum. So that is done.
It is a hacked POS, if they dig in harder, the number of fraudulent signatures is goi g to be a lot higher than77,000.
-
Cameron said they would consider it and then not have a second referendum. So that is done.
It is a hacked POS, if they dig in harder, the number of fraudulent signatures is goi g to be a lot higher than77,000.
Yes, there will very likely be more than 77,000 fraudulent signatures. But likewise, the number of legitimate signatures is very likely to be far greater than 100,000...and that is the only number that really matters.
You yourself have been spending months telling us how the conventional wisdom of politics and politicians are changing dramatically...and yet you take Cameron's statement as the gospel truth. So which is it: we don't know what's going to happen next (your mantra for the past several months), or we can be sure that Cameron is correct (perhaps your new mantra?!?)?
-
Yes, there will very likely be more than 77,000 fraudulent signatures. But likewise, the number of legitimate signatures is very likely to be far greater than 100,000...and that is the only number that really matters.
You yourself have been spending months telling us how the conventional wisdom of politics and politicians are changing dramatically...and yet you take Cameron's statement as the gospel truth. So which is it: we don't know what's going to happen next (your mantra for the past several months), or we can be sure that Cameron is correct (perhaps your new mantra?!?)?
Cameron his leaving on September 2. Corbyn just lost a no confidence vote today. So who is going to approve a new referendum? BTW, the BRexit referendum was agreed to in 2013 and took three years to happen.
Effectively the UK has no functioning government as it has a caretaker PM and a Labour leader that will be forced to leave. In the long history of UK politics, this has never happened before.
And in the middle of all this you think a do-over vote will be approved.
Get a grip, it's over, BRexit won and it is going to happen. And all the chaos that it will bring will follow from it.
And why did BRexit happen ... I will quote you quoting me.
You yourself have been spending months telling us how the conventional wisdom of politics and politicians are changing dramatically.
We all like to say the words and then continue as if nothing has changed.
-
Here's an interesting tidbit from none other than Nigel Farage - a key Brexit proponent - shortly before the vote. He was quoted as saying that if "Remain" won 52-48, there would be "unfinished business."
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-eu-referendum_uk_576e6585e4b08d2c56393f12
So even a supporter of Brexit acknowledged that a close result wouldn't necessarily be a #donedeal.
This is totally uncharted territory, so it's naive to think that a revote is beyond the realm of possibility.
-
Here's an interesting tidbit from none other than Nigel Farage - a key Brexit proponent - shortly before the vote. He was quoted as saying that if "Remain" won 52-48, there would be "unfinished business."
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-eu-referendum_uk_576e6585e4b08d2c56393f12
So even a supporter of Brexit acknowledged that a close result wouldn't necessarily be a #donedeal.
This is totally uncharted territory, so it's naive to think that a revote is beyond the realm of possibility.
You're grasping for straws.
If Hillary wins 52% 48%, and the Trump supporters riot and we have days of tear gas and chaos, will you give them a revote too.
Elections matter, BRexit won. Everyone in UK politics is getting kicked out.
What will happen next? Too new parties will form, a pro and anti EU party. Then years later, after the UK is out of the EU, the voters can either vote in the Pro-EU party or continue with the anti-EU party.
So, yes in 5 to 10 years the UK can get an effective revote, not next week. Allowing a revote next week is the single most destructive thing the UK can do. Elections matter and if the "elite" look like they want to invalidate an election because they don't like the outcome, nothing short of a revolution will commence.
-
You're grasping for straws.
If Hillary wins 52% 48%, and the Trump supporters riot and we have days of tear gas and chaos, will you give them a revote too.
Elections matter, BRexit won. Everyone in UK politics is getting kicked out.
Where is what will happen. Too new parties will form, a pro and anti EU party. Then years later, after the UK is out of the EU, the voters can either vote in the Pro-EU party or continue with the anti-EU party.
So, yes in 5 to 10 years the UK can get an effective revote, not next week. Allowing a revote next week is the single most destructive thing the UK can do. Elections matter and if the "elite" look like they want to invalidate an election because they don't like the outcome, nothing short of a revolution will commence.
So Mr. Uncertainty is suddenly certain. Why the sudden and dramatic change?
-
So Mr. Uncertainty is suddenly certain. Why the sudden and dramatic change?
Because elections matter. And while you are holding out for crushing the democratic process, and vote and vote and vote until the elites get what they want, I'm not ready to call for the end of western Civilization.
Do you understand how unbelievably dangerous this is?
-
So when we vote down a school or library referendum, we don't have to keep voting on it year after year, right?
-
Because elections matter. And while you are holding out for crushing the democratic process, and vote and vote and vote until the elites get what they want, I'm not ready to call for the end of western Civilization.
Do you understand how unbelievably dangerous this is?
First of all, it was a referendum...and a non-binding one, at that. Do you understand the difference between a non-binding referendum and an election?
The rules are the rules, and it was recognized all along that the referendum was non-binding. The UK Has a process to make referendums binding, but chose not to do that. So how would it end western civilization if the UK continues to follow the processes for dealing with the results of this type of process...which includes the right to request UK withdrawal from the EU, declining to issue such a call, or asking for another referendum.
I'm saying they should follow the rules, not break them. That means the decision has not yet been made, and there are still options for Parliament.
-
First of all, it was a referendum...and a non-binding one, at that. Do you understand the difference between a non-binding referendum and an election?
The rules are the rules, and it was recognized all along that the referendum was non-binding. The UK Has a process to make referendums binding, but chose not to do that. So how would it end western civilization if the UK continues to follow the processes for dealing with the results of this type of process...which includes the right to request UK withdrawal from the EU, declining to issue such a call, or asking for another referendum.
I'm saying they should follow the rules, not break them. That means the decision has not yet been made, and there are still options for Parliament.
You do realize that elections are also non-binding.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=47927.msg848127#msg848127
So the UK followed the rules and BRexit won. Game over.
You're playing with fire and too naive to realize what your doing.
72% of the voting population cast a vote, the highest turnout on 24 years. Did anyone tell them it was non-binding and did not count?
The PM (Cameron) resigned because of the results. Did he know it was a non-binding referendum that could be ignored.
The head of the Labour party (Corbyn) lost a no-confidence vote today. Did he know it was a non-binding referendum that could be ignored.
The UK is not having it worst political crisis in its history. Don't they know it was a non-binding referendum that could be ignored.
-
Boris Johnson's HQ as the EU referendum result comes in.
http://www.youtube.com/v/a6HNXtdvVQ&
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a6HNXtdvVQ&app=desktop
-
Correction - some elections/votes/referenda are non-binding. In the case of the electoral college, it has been well documented that the electoral process might not yield the same result as the non-binding popular vote...and it has not caused the end of western civilization.
In this case, my opinion is that Parliament should follow the rules of the non-binding referendum just like the electoral college does with the popular vote...which means it's up to Parliament to decide what to do next.
My bottom line point stands - there is a significant difference between a process which was known from the beginning to be non-binding, and one that is binding by law. In the case of a binding process, you are done once the votes have been counted. And in the case of non-binding ones, it's up to the respective decision-making authority to follow the process through the next steps. Game on, Parliament!
-
Correction - some elections/votes/referenda are non-binding. In the case of the electoral college, it has been well documented that the electoral process might not yield the same result as the non-binding popular vote...and it has not caused the end of western civilization.
In this case, my opinion is that Parliament should follow the rules of the non-binding referendum just like the electoral college does with the popular vote...which means it's up to Parliament to decide what to do next.
My bottom line point stands - there is a significant difference between a process which was known from the beginning to be non-binding, and one that is binding by law. In the case of a binding process, you are done once the votes have been counted. And in the case of non-binding ones, it's up to the respective decision-making authority to follow the process through the next steps. Game on, Parliament!
You want a dictatorship run by elites pretending to be a democracy. Keep voting until we get the results Goldman Sachs approves of.
Game On Parliament ... have you noticed that everyone is resigning. Who is going to do this destroying of western democracy that you want?
-
You want a dictatorship run by elites pretending to be a democracy. Keep voting until we get the results Goldman Sachs approves of.
Game On Parliament ... have you noticed that everyone is resigning. Who is going to do this destroying of western democracy that you want?
In your opinion...why did they choose to make the vote non-binding, when UK law also provides a clear mechanism for a binding one? If the intent was for Parliament not to have any say over the final result, the vote would have just been binding from the start.
You want Parliament to ignore the fact that a decision was made to have a non-binding referendum. I want to preserve western democracy by following the rules that were established in advance.
-
Heisenburg you are too good at this, not sure why you are wasting your talents on a free message board.
(https://media3.giphy.com/media/HH4H1XRRWQD16/200_s.gif)
-
Heisy knows all - just ask him! (Of course, he was CERTAIN Hillary wouldn't be the Dem nominee, but even Jesus made a mistake when he turned water into that crappy boxed wine.)
Thanks to Heisy, I just sold all of my stocks and buried the cash in my bomb shelter.
Brexit is here, and it will be 10 times worse than the Great Recession, the Great Depression, the dot-com bust, Black Monday and the aftermath of 9/11 ... combined!!!
DOOMED!
DOOMED, I SAY!!!
RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Heisy knows all - just ask him! (Of course, he was CERTAIN Hillary wouldn't be the Dem nominee, but even Jesus made a mistake when he turned water into that crappy boxed wine.)
Thanks to Heisy, I just sold all of my stocks and buried the cash in my bomb shelter.
Brexit is here, and it will be 10 times worse than the Great Recession, the Great Depression, the dot-com bust, Black Monday and the aftermath of 9/11 ... combined!!!
DOOMED!
DOOMED, I SAY!!!
RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!!!!!!!!
You're too far gone trolling to understand what is happening. Epic things are happening in the political world and it so bothers you that you DEMAND I apologize for not getting everything right.
Ok, I apologize for not getting everything correct.
Here is another prediction. This will end when you believe in God again.
-
You're too far gone trolling to understand what is happening. Epic things are happening in the political world and it so bothers you that you DEMAND I apologize for not getting everything right.
Ok, I apologize for not getting everything correct.
Here is another prediction. This will end when you believe in God again.
What will end?
Heisy ... it doesn't bother me or anybody else that you are not always correct.
What is a tad annoying is that you THINK you are always correct. It's rarely gray with you, almost always black and white.
-
You're too far gone trolling to understand what is happening. Epic things are happening in the political world
Epic things are always happening in the political world. Never, ever been a time when it was different.
-
What will end?
Heisy ... it doesn't bother me or anybody else that you are not always correct.
What is a tad annoying is that you THINK you are always correct. It's rarely gray with you, almost always black and white.
A note I sent to my "group" a few says ago ... edited for this board.
The bull market of the last 30 years has been built on globalization. That is the movement of people and products around the world in search of efficiencies and lower costs. This has been the basis of ever rising stock prices since the mega bull market began on August 12, 1982.
Until 2008 we only saw isolated instances of unhappiness with globalization. The NAFTA debate, the violent protests in Seattle in 1999 at the WTO meeting and so on. Even though globalization hurt the poor and unskilled (because their jobs were shipped to lower costs countries) it's march continued. The reason (my theory) because everyone thought the governments and organizations promoting globalization were perceived to be fair. Even the losers, while unhappy they drew the short straw, tolerated it.
For instance we had a recession in 2000. People lost their jobs and opportunities failed. It created unhappiness. But when surveying the situation we saw Enron executives go to jail, Arthur Anderson (Enron's accountant) liquidated as punishment for Enron and all the 1999/2000 dotcom billionaires lost everything. In other words the 2000 recession, like all them before, were equally unfair to all. No one got special treatment.
Then 2008 happened (and will remain the most important year of our lifetime). What was 2008? When things got really bad, really bad, politicians bailed out the rich and powerful and screwed everyone else (rich and powerful is now short-handed as Goldman Sachs).
The problem was governments and organizations that promoted globalization never explained why the bailouts were necessary. Because they did not, or could not, they lost credibility. This is critical important to understand ... because this explanation was never offered, the conclusion was they are corrupt and took care of their powerful friends and threw everyone else to the wolves. Now no one believes government officials or "experts" telling us what policy is appropriate. The conclusion is they are either lying or conflicted and telling us what is best from their personal situation, not everyone as a whole.
The backlash to 2008 thanks to the inability to explain why the bailouts were necessary was immediate. The tea party (they hate the bailouts and blame the Government) Occupy Wall Street (they hate the bailouts and blame Wall Street). The Arab Spring (an overthrow of the establishment), the rise of the right-wing nationalist parties in throughout Europe, Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and now BRexit are all part of a larger whole.
Since government and organizations are corrupt, they cannot be reformed, they must be replaced. This is why no amount of "reason" can change anyone's mind. No one cares about Trump's inconsistencies, they don't care who "pooh-bahs" endorse (does anyone care that George Will is no longer a republican? Is it actually a good thing that Hank Paulson endorsed Hillary, I say no), and no one listens to "facts" anymore as they are now just political spin. That is why all the arguments about sending 350 million pounds a week to the EU that could be used to pay for national health worked in the BRexit win. Since no one is credible anymore, no one can refute this obviously incorrect claims.
We have also changed our politics as well. We no longer vote on a left (democrat) to right (republican) continuum. It is now and establishment/non-establishment continuum. We want bomb throwers and people to turn the tables over. The system is corrupt and we need it to change. That is why Trump, Sanders, the right-wing parties in Europe and BRexit succeeded. The supporters know they are disruptive. That is what they want!
@EmanuelDerman
To all who argued the financial world would’ve collapsed without the bailouts: The political world is collapsing now because of the bailouts
@EmanuelDerman
@Noahpinion @financequant You would have to try understand how other people think and feel. But, in short, …
@EmanuelDerman
@Noahpinion @financequant … Sometimes people will hurt themselves in order to screw up the people that screwed them …
But things have moved into hyperspace in the last 60 days with Trump getting the nomination and BRexit winning. The push back is serious and will get violent if necessary. That is why I think a revote of BRexit is the single worst thing that can happen, it says the powerful don't care what the masses want. Ditto finding "rules" or "procedures" to Dump Trump. Doing that is literally the beginning of the end.
So we are dead set to reverse the 30+ years of globalism. This is devastatingly bad news for businesses and valuations. This is why I say "I hope I'm wrong." It is also why I thought Hillary would not be the nominee (because she is the ultimate establishment candidate) , it was way closer than anyone thought possible with non-establishment Sanders getting 45% of the delegates (before 2008 Nader got 3%)
So we are at cross-roads in world economics. Are we going to end globalization? If so, that is the single most bearish thing that can happen, even worse than the financial crisis. Actually ending globalization is finishing what the financial crisis started in 2008.
My fear is that is exactly what will happen. How do we stop it and preserve globalization? I see three ways.
1. The public wants change so give it to them. Massive resignation of global leaders and end global organizations. Then start over. This I give a 0.00% chance of happening.
2. On the next recession hammer the sh*t of the large banks and Goldman. Show it is indeed equally unfair during a downturn, like we saw in 2000. This would work but it will also destroy the stock market in the process. I give this a 25% chance.
3. An economic revolution and the ballot box and in the street to kick out the establishment. Sometimes it is peaceful (BRexit) sometimes violent (Arab Spring). But it will result in government, organizations and leaders falling. This is BRexit and I give this a 75% chance of happening. It is also terrible for the valuation of businesses.
This is why last week's vote was so earth shattering. Coming after Trump winning the nomination just 60 days earlier, it shows major epic change now cannot be stopped and will end with the basis of the 30 year bull market ... globalization.
------------------------------
Two thoughts for this board.
1. To prove politics is a circle and not a straight line. I describe myself as a right-leaning libertarian. The opposite of me, on this board, might be Vogue65. He is always talking about "Boeing," his short-hand for globalization. My guess is he would agree with these comments. So polar opposite political views met at the same point on the circle.
2. My smug I'm never wrong attitude. I'm a professional speculator. Think of me like a basketball shooter. To be successful you have to have no conscience, and always believe in yourself to the point of smugness. So when I miss, I forget it and demand the ball again to shoot. I think I'm always hot and think every shot will work, and will say as much.
-
A note I sent to my "group" a few says ago ... edited for this board.
So, just because I'm curious, what would your financial advice be to an early 30s, single and no kids, healthcare professional with 100k student debt and little available cash? I do have a retirement account from a prior employer and some minimal savings (<10k).
-
A note I sent to my "group" a few says ago ... edited for this board.
The bull market of the last 30 years has been built on globalization. That is the movement of people and products around the world in search of efficiencies and lower costs. This has been the basis of ever rising stock prices since the mega bull market began on August 12, 1982.
Until 2008 we only saw isolated instances of unhappiness with globalization. The NAFTA debate, the violent protests in Seattle in 1999 at the WTO meeting and so on. Even though globalization hurt the poor and unskilled (because their jobs were shipped to lower costs countries) it's march continued. The reason (my theory) because everyone thought the governments and organizations promoting globalization were perceived to be fair. Even the losers, while unhappy they drew the short straw, tolerated it.
For instance we had a recession in 2000. People lost their jobs and opportunities failed. It created unhappiness. But when surveying the situation we saw Enron executives go to jail, Arthur Anderson (Enron's accountant) liquidated as punishment for Enron and all the 1999/2000 dotcom billionaires lost everything. In other words the 2000 recession, like all them before, were equally unfair to all. No one got special treatment.
Then 2008 happened (and will remain the most important year of our lifetime). What was 2008? When things got really bad, really bad, politicians bailed out the rich and powerful and screwed everyone else (rich and powerful is now short-handed as Goldman Sachs).
The problem was governments and organizations that promoted globalization never explained why the bailouts were necessary. Because they did not, or could not, they lost credibility. This is critical important to understand ... because this explanation was never offered, the conclusion was they are corrupt and took care of their powerful friends and threw everyone else to the wolves. Now no one believes government officials or "experts" telling us what policy is appropriate. The conclusion is they are either lying or conflicted and telling us what is best from their personal situation, not everyone as a whole.
The backlash to 2008 thanks to the inability to explain why the bailouts were necessary was immediate. The tea party (they hate the bailouts and blame the Government) Occupy Wall Street (they hate the bailouts and blame Wall Street). The Arab Spring (an overthrow of the establishment), the rise of the right-wing nationalist parties in throughout Europe, Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and now BRexit are all part of a larger whole.
Since government and organizations are corrupt, they cannot be reformed, they must be replaced. This is why no amount of "reason" can change anyone's mind. No one cares about Trump's inconsistencies, they don't care who "pooh-bahs" endorse (does anyone care that George Will is no longer a republican? Is it actually a good thing that Hank Paulson endorsed Hillary, I say no), and no one listens to "facts" anymore as they are now just political spin. That is why all the arguments about sending 350 million pounds a week to the EU that could be used to pay for national health worked in the BRexit win. Since no one is credible anymore, no one can refute this obviously incorrect claims.
We have also changed our politics as well. We no longer vote on a left (democrat) to right (republican) continuum. It is now and establishment/non-establishment continuum. We want bomb throwers and people to turn the tables over. The system is corrupt and we need it to change. That is why Trump, Sanders, the right-wing parties in Europe and BRexit succeeded. The supporters know they are disruptive. That is what they want!
@EmanuelDerman
To all who argued the financial world would’ve collapsed without the bailouts: The political world is collapsing now because of the bailouts
@EmanuelDerman
@Noahpinion @financequant You would have to try understand how other people think and feel. But, in short, …
@EmanuelDerman
@Noahpinion @financequant … Sometimes people will hurt themselves in order to screw up the people that screwed them …
But things have moved into hyperspace in the last 60 days with Trump getting the nomination and BRexit winning. The push back is serious and will get violent if necessary. That is why I think a revote of BRexit is the single worst thing that can happen, it says the powerful don't care what the masses want. Ditto finding "rules" or "procedures" to Dump Trump. Doing that is literally the beginning of the end.
So we are dead set to reverse the 30+ years of globalism. This is devastatingly bad news for businesses and valuations. This is why I say "I hope I'm wrong." It is also why I thought Hillary would not be the nominee (because she is the ultimate establishment candidate) , it was way closer than anyone thought possible with non-establishment Sanders getting 45% of the delegates (before 2008 Nader got 3%)
So we are at cross-roads in world economics. Are we going to end globalization? If so, that is the single most bearish thing that can happen, even worse than the financial crisis. Actually ending globalization is finishing what the financial crisis started in 2008.
My fear is that is exactly what will happen. How do we stop it and preserve globalization? I see three ways.
1. The public wants change so give it to them. Massive resignation of global leaders and end global organizations. Then start over. This I give a 0.00% chance of happening.
2. On the next recession hammer the sh*t of the large banks and Goldman. Show it is indeed equally unfair during a downturn, like we saw in 2000. This would work but it will also destroy the stock market in the process. I give this a 25% chance.
3. An economic revolution and the ballot box and in the street to kick out the establishment. Sometimes it is peaceful (BRexit) sometimes violent (Arab Spring). But it will result in government, organizations and leaders falling. This is BRexit and I give this a 75% chance of happening. It is also terrible for the valuation of businesses.
This is why last week's vote was so earth shattering. Coming after Trump winning the nomination just 60 days earlier, it shows major epic change now cannot be stopped and will end with the basis of the 30 year bull market ... globalization.
------------------------------
Two thoughts for this board.
1. To prove politics is a circle and not a straight line. I describe myself as a right-leaning libertarian. The opposite of me, on this board, might be Vogue65. He is always talking about "Boeing," his short-hand for globalization. My guess is he would agree with these comments. So polar opposite political views met at the same point on the circle.
2. My smug I'm never wrong attitude. I'm a professional speculator. Think of me like a basketball shooter. To be successful you have to have no conscience, and always believe in yourself to the point of smugness. So when I miss, I forget it and demand the ball again to shoot. I think I'm always hot and think every shot will work, and will say as much.
OK, Heisy, that last paragraph explains a lot.
-
heisy-that was superb. the point about being smug-it goes the same for golfers. if you want to be good or just to enjoy the game, you have to have a bad memory, selective amnesia with one exception to your "basketball mentality". and that is a dose of humility because just when ya think you've figured it out, hello water ball
now, so much for the diet as i'm gonna go back to being fat happy and stupid-life can be so much simpler that way...Eyn'A?
-
So, just because I'm curious, what would your financial advice be to an early 30s, single and no kids, healthcare professional with 100k student debt and little available cash? I do have a retirement account from a prior employer and some minimal savings (<10k).
Hold whatever you need in cash, and then ...
All of these are ETFs Type in these tickers into your favorite investment site for details
I'm a HUGE fan of the RAFI indices from Research Affiliates in Newport Beach CA. They are the inventors of "Smart Beta." I'm also good friends with Rob Arnott, the founder.
Domestic Stocks - 30%
10% SPY - S&P 500
10% IWM - Russell 2000
10% PRF - RAFI US 1000
International 20%
10% PXH - RAFI Emerging Markets
10% PXF - RAFI Developed Markets (x-US)
Fixed Income - 30%
10% AGG - Core US Agg Bond
10% TIP - Inflation Protected Bonds
10% PCY - Emerging Market Debt
Commodities 10%
5% GLD Gold
5% SLV, Silver
Speculative 10% (pick two)
5% EUO - Short Euro
5% EWJ - Japan
5% NLY - Annaly
5% Your favorite stock(s)
The final question is how much risk to take. I would do 66% to 75% of the total amount because of what I wrote above. If I'm wrong about the end of globalization, I would go to 100% of the total amount. If my worst fears of the end of globalization are beginning to happen, I would go to 66% to 50%, if not lower.
-
Wow, there is a whole lot of craziness in this thread.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath, let a few weeks pass and then re-evaluate the situation.
-
So essentially, Heisy comes to Scoop to... scare us into selling our stocks... so he can... buy... low?
At least it's not a pump and dump.
-
Bernie Sanders Agrees With Me!!
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/opinion/campaign-stops/bernie-sanders-democrats-need-to-wake-up.html?referer=https://t.co/ywq46GeMt4
-
Bad news for Mr. Smuggles: Looks like another big day for the market, as U.S. investors yawn at Brexit again.
Even Nike is up fairly big premarket despite a mediocre (some might even say disappointing) earnings report after close yesterday. Which is too bad because I was planning to top off my position this morning. Instead, I'll just stay patient and wait for Mr. Smuggles' next cataclysmic event.
-
OK, Heisy, that last paragraph explains a lot.
Indeed. But wise people learn from their mistakes - they don't just forget them and move on as though they never happened.
IMHO, of course....
-
Derrick Wilson kept shooting, too.
-
Wait, did we rally back the 600 points we lost on Friday? And the destruction of the European financial stocks, the worst two days ever recorded, has that been reversed?
Well, as I write this just after market close today, my portfolio is valued almost exactly $100 more than it was going into Friday's open. Yep ... one whole C-note! That doesn't count my funds, which take several hours to update, so it probably will register as a couple thousand higher by dinnertime.
In other words, it took me all of two Wall Street sessions to establish a new all-time portfolio high after the so-called most cataclysmic financial event in European history.
I am not saying this to prove I am an investing genius. Unlike you, Smuggles, I don't make such a claim. I own mostly brand-name, proven, blue-chip dividend growers -- no secrets, mostly household names. It's the kind of boring, conservative portfolio that many of our parents (and their parents) built way back when.
I'm saying this because I happen to believe that doom-and-gloom overreaction is not an especially good predictor of anything long-term when it comes to investing.
See ya, Smuggles!
-
Well, as I write this just after market close today, my portfolio is valued almost exactly $100 more than it was going into Friday's open. Yep ... one whole C-note! That doesn't count my funds, which take several hours to update, so it probably will register as a couple thousand higher by dinnertime.
In other words, it took me all of two Wall Street sessions to establish a new all-time portfolio high after the so-called most cataclysmic financial event in European history.
I am not saying this to prove I am an investing genius. Unlike you, Smuggles, I don't make such a claim. I own mostly brand-name, proven, blue-chip dividend growers -- no secrets, mostly household names. It's the kind of boring, conservative portfolio that many of our parents (and their parents) built way back when.
I'm saying this because I happen to believe that doom-and-gloom overreaction is not an especially good predictor of anything long-term when it comes to investing.
See ya, Smuggles!
Congratulations on your shiny new C-note. Spend it well.
And I'm glad to see everything now revolves around the lens of the S&P 500. And two day moves is how you base your decisions. Welcome to the world of short term speculation! Hope your bragging after a two day move does better than Chicos bragging about Disney at $120 meaning my all the gloom and doom about the house of Mickey and ESPN cord cutters was wrong ($96 today) or JayBee bragging that Apple climbed off its four year low to $101 so all my gloom and doom calls that Apple is now a replacement cycle phone utility were equally wrong ($94 today).
Go back a few days and you'll see my betting was:
So yes, I'm in and out all the time and now I'm pressing my shorts (more UK stocks than US stocks but both, and a smaller position in China A-shares. Biggest position is the short in the Pound, looking to cover in the lows 1.20s.). I will until everyone gets that warm wet feeling in their pants. My guess is that is in the next two weeks.
China, Pound Euro stocks ... and two I forgot two others, gold and bonds are all acting like their is a problem.. Collectively they have offset my US stock losses. I've scratched the last two days.
And since you're now in the world of tick watching ... does the name Theresa May mean anything to you? It should because depending on what she does tomorrow, and yes she will do something important tomorrow, all your gains could be running right back down your leg.
Since you have the awesome two day track record and are now a veteran speculator, I'll let you explain why she is so important to your portfolio tomorrow.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CmJFK9ZXIAAw1en.jpg:large)
-
Teresa May could be incredibly important if you own a lot of European stocks or have positions in the pound and/or euro. For those of us who invest mostly in the US, she is of modest importance in the long run.
-
Congratulations on your shiny new C-note. Spend it well.
And I'm glad to see everything now revolves around the lens of the S&P 500. And two day moves is how you base your decisions. Welcome to the world of short term speculation!
I'm not a short-term speculator at all. Very long-term. I also told you exactly what I invest in, and it's not the S&P 500. Patting oneself on the back is your deal, not mine. While you even admitted to being smug, I came right out and acknowledged I'm no investing genius and have no grand schemes; I simply buy great companies and hold them.
You would know all of that if you actually read what I said instead of being in such a hurry to chronicle (again) how great you are.
As usual, Smuggles, you are all bluster and self-aggrandizement.
Two days ago, I expressed a little optimism in the face of the Brexit panic. You immediately shot it down by huffing and puffing that the 600-point loss was not recouped. So all I did here is show you that, in one investor's portfolio anyway, the Friday-Monday loss indeed had been recouped. (Yep, there I go ... bragging again!)
I already have agreed with you and others that Brexit will cause some pain, perhaps even long-term, far-reaching pain.
But I also have said that intelligent, patient investors will overcome that over time -- just as we overcame Black Monday, the dot-com crash, 9/11 and the Great Recession.
Mr. Market is very resilient. Which, of course, you already know. But if you admit it's not all doom and gloom, you wouldn't get to argue for the sake of arguing and smugly showing the rest of us how smart you think you are.
-
Well, as I write this just after market close today, my portfolio is valued almost exactly $100 more than it was going into Friday's open. Yep ... one whole C-note! That doesn't count my funds, which take several hours to update, so it probably will register as a couple thousand higher by dinnertime.
In other words, it took me all of two Wall Street sessions to establish a new all-time portfolio high after the so-called most cataclysmic financial event in European history.
I am not saying this to prove I am an investing genius. Unlike you, Smuggles, I don't make such a claim. I own mostly brand-name, proven, blue-chip dividend growers -- no secrets, mostly household names. It's the kind of boring, conservative portfolio that many of our parents (and their parents) built way back when.
I'm saying this because I happen to believe that doom-and-gloom overreaction is not an especially good predictor of anything long-term when it comes to investing.
See ya, Smuggles!
sell sell sell
-
I just saw this table about how stocks have historically reacted to recent adversity ...
Market Shock Stocks - Next 12 Months Stocks - Next 3 Years Stocks - Next 5 Years
Asian Financial Crisis (September 1998) +24.9% +23.4% +53.0%
World Trade Center Attacks (September 2001) -7.1% +55.4% +120.3%
Lehman Bankruptcy (September 2008) -2.7% +0.4% +63.3%
U.S. Debt Downgrade (August 2011) +9.7% +70.6% +65.8%
Boston Marathon Bombing (April 2013) +23.3% +25.7%
Brexit ???? We'll see.
Mr. Market is resilient. Patient, intelligent investors who own quality stocks (or funds) and don't panic are almost always rewarded handsomely long-term.
-
Mr. Market is resilient. Patient, intelligent investors who own quality stocks (or funds) and don't panic are almost always rewarded handsomely long-term.
Yep. Since this thread was started just about a year ago, we have been through numerous events that day traders have described as "potentially catastrophic" for the markets. The default of Greece, numerous terrorist attacks, the rise of "anti-establishment" politicians, threats of Puerto Rican default, and now Brexit. People who buy and sell frequently have had headaches galore, while those of us who buy and hold through dollar cost averaging have done just fine...without the daily headaches.
-
Yep. Since this thread was started just about a year ago, we have been through numerous events that day traders have described as "potentially catastrophic" for the markets. The default of Greece, numerous terrorist attacks, the rise of "anti-establishment" politicians, threats of Puerto Rican default, and now Brexit. People who buy and sell frequently have had headaches galore, while those of us who buy and hold through dollar cost averaging have done just fine...without the daily headaches.
Congratulations to learning the "secret" to investors who are able to sleep well at night.
Of course, it's not a secret at all. It's common-sense investing -- the way folks from Warren Buffett to my grandma have been investing for generations.
-
Yep. Since this thread was started just about a year ago, we have been through numerous events that day traders have described as "potentially catastrophic" for the markets. The default of Greece, numerous terrorist attacks, the rise of "anti-establishment" politicians, threats of Puerto Rican default, and now Brexit. People who buy and sell frequently have had headaches galore, while those of us who buy and hold through dollar cost averaging have done just fine...without the daily headaches.
Dead Wrong. See page 1, this thread was started on June 28, 2015. Since that date (through noon today)
S&P 500 -1.46%
Russell 2000 = -11.58%
Dow Jones = -1.1042%
Made no money during the life of this thread. Meanwhile if you were scared ...
Gold = +12.65%
30yr Tsy = +24.89%
10yr Tsy = +10.91%
Cash = +0.22%
Agg Bond Market = 6.57%
Small cap stocks have been a disaster and every option, including cash, has beaten stock since this thread starts, and I'm including the 200 DJIA gain today.
Fact is if anytime in the last 3 5, 10, 15 year if you yanked your money out of stocks, and put it in bonds or gold, you won. That is the problem. The stock market is not a good performer. The 1990s was 15 years ago and the stock market stopped being a superior investment.
-
Dead Wrong. See page 1, this thread was started on June 28, 2015. Since that date (through noon today)
S&P 500 -1.46%
Russell 2000 = -11.58%
Dow Jones = -1.1042%
Made no money during the life of this thread. Meanwhile if you were scared ...
Gold = +12.65%
30yr Tsy = +24.89%
10yr Tsy = +10.91%
Cash = +0.22%
Agg Bond Market = 6.57%
Small cap stocks have been a disaster and every option, including cash, has beaten stock since this thread starts, and I'm including the 200 DJIA gain today.
Fact is if anytime in the last 3 5, 10, 15 year if you yanked your money out of stocks, and put it in bonds or gold, you won. That is the problem. The stock market is not a good performer. The 1990s was 15 years ago and the stock market stopped being a superior investment.
No, you are dead wrong...largely because you have no idea what I own. My portfolio involves both stock and bond/treasury funds. The former have been down slightly, while the latter have been up more than enough to make up the difference. All through dollar cost averaging.
Sorry to burst your bubble...again.
-
Congratulations to learning the "secret" to investors who are able to sleep well at night.
Of course, it's not a secret at all. It's common-sense investing -- the way folks from Warren Buffett to my grandma have been investing for generations.
Treasuries have beaten him for the last 15 years.
Things changed in 2000 and Buffett's method stopped working. And he blew himself up in 2008 and the only reason he was not ruined was the bailouts.
How do I know this? He said so in November 2010, he thanked the government for saving him so he continue to be the second richest man on the planet, while millions of others lost their jobs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/opinion/17buffett.html
-
I assume that most people here are using some sort of asset allocation model. They are diversified in their investments.
Not all S&P 500 or DJIA and definitely not all small caps like the Russell 2000. Most people view stocks as a long-term investment so pointing out what they've done versus gold or bonds or cash in a one year time frame doesn't mean anything.
Here are the long-term annualized returns(15 years-2000-2015), so it includes catastrophic events like 9/11 and the dot com crash. BTW the numbers look even better if we go out to 20 years. From worst performer to the best.
Bloomberg Commodity Index - .8%
Cash - 1.8%
MSCI EAFE(International Stocks) - 2.8%
S&P 500(US Large Companies) - 4.1%
Barclays Aggregate(Bonds) - 5.4%
MSCI EME(Emerging Markets Stocks) - 5.9%
Russell 2000(US Small Cap Stocks) - 6.6%
S&P 400(US Mid Cap Stocks) - 7.2%
Barclays Global High Yield Index - 7.9%
NAEIT - 12.0%
A diversified asset allocation approach would have returned about 5.9% annualized.
-
Wow, there is a whole lot of craziness in this thread.
Everyone needs to take a deep breath, let a few weeks pass and then re-evaluate the situation.
Weeks?
You're on the right path, but how about "days"?
-
So now Heisenberg is calling himself the Boy Plunger?
-
Dead Wrong. See page 1, this thread was started on June 28, 2015. Since that date (through noon today)
S&P 500 -1.46%
Russell 2000 = -11.58%
Dow Jones = -1.1042%
Made no money during the life of this thread. Meanwhile if you were scared ...
Gold = +12.65%
30yr Tsy = +24.89%
10yr Tsy = +10.91%
Cash = +0.22%
Agg Bond Market = 6.57%
Small cap stocks have been a disaster and every option, including cash, has beaten stock since this thread starts, and I'm including the 200 DJIA gain today.
Fact is if anytime in the last 3 5, 10, 15 year if you yanked your money out of stocks, and put it in bonds or gold, you won. That is the problem. The stock market is not a good performer. The 1990s was 15 years ago and the stock market stopped being a superior investment.
Well, Smuggles, it's a good thing my wife and I don't own the S&P 500, the Dow Jones or the Russell 2000!
Our portfolio is about 75% proven, blue-chip, dividend-growing stocks; about 15% bond and bond-like investments; and about 10% cash. It is up about 12% through the first 6 months of 2016, about 13% the last 12 months and about 24% since June 30, 2014. Think of all the "events" that have happened these last couple of years ... and our simple, conservative portfolio of mostly brand-name companies is up 24%.
After losing 1.7% the first two trading days post-Brexit -- less than a third of what the "market" lost -- we have gained 2.9% in the three days since. Our portfolio now stands 1.2% above where it was before Brexit, hitting our all-time high.
You're gonna have to look for others to doom-and-gloom to oblivion, Smuggles. Patient, intelligent investors -- a group to which many Scoopers happily belong -- ain't buyin' the crap you're sellin'.
Don't worry, though, we know you'll always claim to be right about everything, no matter the subject.
As for your screen-name change, you'll always be Smuggles to me!
-
Dead Wrong. See page 1, this thread was started on June 28, 2015. Since that date (through noon today)
S&P 500 -1.46%
Russell 2000 = -11.58%
Dow Jones = -1.1042%
Made no money during the life of this thread. Meanwhile if you were scared ...
Gold = +12.65%
30yr Tsy = +24.89%
10yr Tsy = +10.91%
Cash = +0.22%
Agg Bond Market = 6.57%
Small cap stocks have been a disaster and every option, including cash, has beaten stock since this thread starts, and I'm including the 200 DJIA gain today.
Fact is if anytime in the last 3 5, 10, 15 year if you yanked your money out of stocks, and put it in bonds or gold, you won. That is the problem. The stock market is not a good performer. The 1990s was 15 years ago and the stock market stopped being a superior investment.
Well, if you want to measure 'investments,' the smart money is - and always has been - in "none of the above."
I've already realized nearly a 100% return of capital on investments I made just over a year ago and am projecting for a leveraged IRR of 30%+ over a three-year horizon. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt played absolutely no role whatsoever... just the knowledge that it's nearly impossible to make short-term money in an ultra-efficient market.
Incidentally, the US stock market didn't go ultra-efficient until about 15 years ago (thanks Al Gore!). So Heisey's actually right on the stock market no longer being a superior investment... but that doesn't mean that one should start betting the Don't Pass Line.
-
I've already realized nearly a 100% return of capital on investments I made just over a year ago and am projecting for a leveraged IRR of 30%+ over a three-year horizon. Fear, uncertainty, and doubt played absolutely no role whatsoever... just the knowledge that it's nearly impossible to make short-term money in an ultra-efficient market.
Congrats, Benny. What have you invested in that has produced such fantastic returns? (If you don't mind me asking.)
-
Congrats, Benny. What have you invested in that has produced such fantastic returns? (If you don't mind me asking.)
Private equity. You know... those typically crappy, underperforming investments that take a 2% fee and 20% of the profits.
-
Private equity. You know... those typically crappy, underperforming investments that take a 2% fee and 20% of the profits.
Well, sir, I congratulate you.
You have bigger onions than I do ... but of course you probably already figured that!
-
75% proven, blue-chip, dividend-growing stocks;
about 15% bond and bond-like investments; and
about 10% cash.
It is up about 12% through the first 6 months of 2016,
about 13% the last 12 months and
about 24% since June 30, 2014.
Think of all the "events" that have happened these last couple of years ... and our simple, conservative portfolio of mostly brand-name companies is up 24%.
Not doubting you but I know guys that make seven figures a month that don't have this track record.
Here's why ...
75% proven, blue-chip, dividend-growing stocks
And index that replicates this is the S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats
The S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats index is designed to measure the performance of S&P 500 index constituents that have followed a policy of consistently increasing dividends every year for at least 25 consecutive years.
YTD = 11.53%
1-Year = 13.26
2-year = 20.24%
15% bond and bond-like investments
The proxy for this is the Barclays US Agg Total Return Value
YTD = 5.33%
1-Year = 6.01%
2-year = 6.07%
10% cash
The proxy for this is 3-Month Tsy Bill
YTD = 0.14%
1-Year = 0..22%
2-year = 0.32%
===============
YTD
75% of S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats at 11.53% is 8.65%
15% of Barclays US Agg Total Return Value at 5.33% is 0.80%
10% of 3-Month Tsy Bill at 0.14% is .01%
Add it up and your benchmark is 9.46%. You are up 12%
1-Year
75% of S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats at 13.26% is 9.95%
15% of Barclays US Agg Total Return Value at 6.01% is 0.90%
10% of 3-Month Tsy Bill at 0.22% is .02%
Add it up and your benchmark is 11.05%. You are up 13%
2-Year
75% of S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats at 20.24% is 15.18%
15% of Barclays US Agg Total Return Value at 6.07% is 0.91%
10% of 3-Month Tsy Bill at 0.32% is .03%
Add it up and your benchmark is 16.12%. You are up 24%
If your were a professional manager you would be a superstar outperforming over 99% of your peers with this track record.
-
Private equity. You know... those typically crappy, underperforming investments that take a 2% fee and 20% of the profits.
Private equity is not efficient?
The S&P 500 is down over the last year and this investment is up 100%. You must be taking risk similar to putting your life savings on the come line in Vegas. Glad it worked out for you.
Restated, How many buildings at MU will have the Benny on them because if I had these returns their would be buildings with my name on them in Milwaukee.
-
So now Heisenberg is calling himself the Boy Plunger?
Wonder if he realizes the Boy Plunger ultimately lost his huge fortune and killed himself? Probably wished he'd just invested in low-cost index funds.
-
Wonder if he realizes the Boy Plunger ultimately lost his huge fortune and killed himself? Probably wished he'd just invested in low-cost index funds.
I stay at the Sherry Netherland hotel most of the time in NYC.
And he lost his fortune 4 times.
-
I stay at the Sherry Netherland hotel most of the time in NYC.
And he lost his fortune 4 times.
nar·cis·sis·tic
ˌnärsəˈsistik/Submit
adjective
synonyms: vain, self-loving, self-admiring, self-absorbed, self-obsessed, conceited, self-centered, self-regarding, egotistic, egotistical, egoistic; informalfull of oneself
Also.......really not that impressive. You really need to know your audience before you start bragging about your lavish lifestyle.
-
Doom and gloomers. STZ up 6 dollars today. Drink up.
http://www.marketwatch.com/m/quote/stz
-
Private equity is not efficient?
The S&P 500 is down over the last year and this investment is up 100%. You must be taking risk similar to putting your life savings on the come line in Vegas. Glad it worked out for you.
Restated, How many buildings at MU will have the Benny on them because if I had these returns their would be buildings with my name on them in Milwaukee.
Any vehicle is only as efficient as the products it buys.
See... you have such a narrow vision of private equity; you think it's a bunch of entitled fund managers sitting around a table thinking they can outperform the market by writing bigger checks. But I don't think you've ever shopped at the market I play in. Stocks, bonds, commodities, treasuries and forex aren't the only asset classes out there, but they are the only efficient ones.
The Benny B Thunderdome is slated for opening in 2035.
-
What a boring dick measuring contest.
-
Private equity is not efficient?
The S&P 500 is down over the last year and this investment is up 100%. You must be taking risk similar to putting your life savings on the come line in Vegas. Glad it worked out for you.
Restated, How many buildings at MU will have the Benny on them because if I had these returns their would be buildings with my name on them in Milwaukee.
And by the way, the come line in Vegas is about as risk free as you get. To get a 30% return with virtually no risk.... yeah, that's an investment I'm putting my life savings into.
-
nar·cis·sis·tic
ˌnärsəˈsistik/Submit
adjective
synonyms: vain, self-loving, self-admiring, self-absorbed, self-obsessed, conceited, self-centered, self-regarding, egotistic, egotistical, egoistic; informalfull of oneself
Also.......really not that impressive. You really need to know your audience before you start bragging about your lavish lifestyle.
Ok ...
Jesse Livermore is arguably the most famous stock speculator that ever lived. He might have been the first national stock market celebrity, what Warren Buffet is today. Edwin Lafevre wrote a book about him in 1923 called Reminiscences of a Stock Operator. It is one of the must reads in the investment community.
He started in the 1890s in a Boston bucket shop where he got the nickname Boy Plunger.
Livermore made and lost a ton of money in his life, In 1940 after he wiped himself out again. He finished a drink at the bar of the Sherry Netherlands hotel in NYC, walked into the cloak room, put a pistol in his mouth and killed himself. In his suicide note he said he was too old to start over again.
A modern version of Livermore might be found in the energy business. See the story of Aubrey McClendon.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=51125.msg816484#msg816484
Ok, does that explain my new handle and the Sherry Netherlands Hotel reference?
-
What a boring dick measuring contest.
Dickerrod, eno?
-
Not doubting you but I know guys that make seven figures a month that don't have this track record.
Here's why ...
75% proven, blue-chip, dividend-growing stocks
And index that replicates this is the S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats
The S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats index is designed to measure the performance of S&P 500 index constituents that have followed a policy of consistently increasing dividends every year for at least 25 consecutive years.
YTD = 11.53%
1-Year = 13.26
2-year = 20.24%
15% bond and bond-like investments
The proxy for this is the Barclays US Agg Total Return Value
YTD = 5.33%
1-Year = 6.01%
2-year = 6.07%
10% cash
The proxy for this is 3-Month Tsy Bill
YTD = 0.14%
1-Year = 0..22%
2-year = 0.32%
===============
YTD
75% of S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats at 11.53% is 8.65%
15% of Barclays US Agg Total Return Value at 5.33% is 0.80%
10% of 3-Month Tsy Bill at 0.14% is .01%
Add it up and your benchmark is 9.46%. You are up 12%
1-Year
75% of S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats at 13.26% is 9.95%
15% of Barclays US Agg Total Return Value at 6.01% is 0.90%
10% of 3-Month Tsy Bill at 0.22% is .02%
Add it up and your benchmark is 11.05%. You are up 13%
2-Year
75% of S&P 500 Dividends Aristocrats at 20.24% is 15.18%
15% of Barclays US Agg Total Return Value at 6.07% is 0.91%
10% of 3-Month Tsy Bill at 0.32% is .03%
Add it up and your benchmark is 16.12%. You are up 24%
If your were a professional manager you would be a superstar outperforming over 99% of your peers with this track record.
Whatever you say, Smuggles.
-
Anyone notice that Heisy tries to convince us he has "skills" the same way chicas tried to convince us he had "friends"?
I, for one, remain unconvinced.
-
Anyone notice that Heisy tries to convince us he has "skills" the same way chicas tried to convince us he had "friends"?
I, for one, remain unconvinced.
It took me too long, but I've finally realized it's not worth engaging him. He is never wrong. He has all the answers, regardless of the subject. He not only admits to being
"smug" -- his word, not mine -- he also brags about it, as if it's a positive character trait.
Oh, and he knows what our investments are better than we do -- even if we have our brokerage account on the screen right in front of us.
He doesn't want a conversation, he wants a confrontation. Like Chicos, he likes to argue for the sake of arguing. It's just not worth it.
See ya, Smuggles! Maybe one of these days, you'll even learn the difference between "there," "their" and "they're"!!
-
His livelihood requires ramping up uncertainty and unease. He flat out said he doesn't make money during a calm market. So it is nature to look for and try to ramp up crises so he can make mo' money. It carries over.
-
Ok ...
Jesse Livermore is arguably the most famous stock speculator that ever lived. He might have been the first national stock market celebrity, what Warren Buffet is today. Edwin Lafevre wrote a book about him in 1923 called Reminiscences of a Stock Operator. It is one of the must reads in the investment community.
He started in the 1890s in a Boston bucket shop where he got the nickname Boy Plunger.
Livermore made and lost a ton of money in his life, In 1940 after he wiped himself out again. He finished a drink at the bar of the Sherry Netherlands hotel in NYC, walked into the cloak room, put a pistol in his mouth and killed himself. In his suicide note he said he was too old to start over again.
A modern version of Livermore might be found in the energy business. See the story of Aubrey McClendon.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=51125.msg816484#msg816484
Ok, does that explain my new handle and the Sherry Netherlands Hotel reference?
I knew who Livermore was, didn't know the story of his demise, still not wrong about narcissism.
-
Yeah, the story is well known. Make and lose tons of money, stay at the Sherry Netherland, kill self. Good times.
You say Buffet's strategy no longer works...but I'll bet he doesn't end up penniless and dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound in a hotel.
-
Yeah, the story is well known. Make and lose tons of money, stay at the Sherry Netherland, kill self. Good times.
You say Buffet's strategy no longer works...but I'll bet he doesn't end up penniless and dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound in a hotel.
Buffett's strategy does work... guess who was buying earlier in the week while everyone else was panicking.
-
Buffett's strategy does work... guess who was buying earlier in the week while everyone else was panicking.
Agree.
I was referring to a comment by Jesse Livermore fka Heisenberg a couple of pages back that said Buffet's strategy stopped working around 2000.
-
Yeah, the story is well known. Make and lose tons of money, stay at the Sherry Netherland, kill self. Good times.
You say Buffet's strategy no longer works...but I'll bet he doesn't end up penniless and dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound in a hotel.
He was on his way in 2008 until TARP saved his arse.
And again. Treasuries have beaten Buffett over the last 15 years. And you cannot investment like him because he buys preferred stocks issued to him with amazing deals you can never get.
-
He was on his way in 2008 until TARP saved his arse.
And again. Treasuries have beaten Buffett over the last 15 years. And you cannot investment like him because he buys preferred stocks issued to him with amazing deals you can never get.
TARP saved every investor's arse.
And I don't care whether I can invest like him. I was just pointing out that you were wrong in saying that he is no longer successful. Your fallen hero, on the other hand....
-
Free Chicos 2016
-
TARP saved every investor's arse.
And I don't care whether I can invest like him. I was just pointing out that you were wrong in saying that he is no longer successful. Your fallen hero, on the other hand....
... And TARP is tearing our politics apart. "Our" means the developed world, Trump, Sanders, BRexit, Nationalist parties in Europe. Huge price to pay so Warren does not fail.
-
Berkshire never took bail out funds in 2008. Warren Buffett was actually buying stocks in 2008. Made a huge investment in Goldman Sachs - 5 Billion dollars. Doesn't sound like somebody about to go into the poor house.
-
That GS investment was not the only one he made at the time either.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122220798359168765
-
That GS investment was not the only one he made at the time either.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122220798359168765
Careful, Tortuga. Facts often don't play well here.
-
Doesn't foment enough uncertainty.
-
... And TARP is tearing our politics apart. "Our" means the developed world, Trump, Sanders, BRexit, Nationalist parties in Europe. Huge price to pay so Warren does not fail.
So you lose the argument about TARP's impact as some unique Buffett-saving device, and turn it into a political debate? We were talking about Buffett's still successful trading style vs Livermore's...which was successful until it wasn't.
-
I have enjoyed reading this thread.
I made my living for many years on Wall Street participating in all aspects of it. Investment Banking, Private Equity, Sales and Trading, Venture Capital, High Yield Bonds etc . About ten years ago I turned to the company CEO side. Life is a lot more fun where I am at now.
The one lesson I learned from working on the street is you have to pick a style of investing and stay loyal to it through thick and thin. The Battle for Investment Survival is won by those who control their emotions. It is far easy to control your motions when you have a degree of confidence in what you do. The market is so dynamic it can accommodate everyone provided your patient and focused.
My fundamental principal is Bulls Get a little , Bears get a little and Hogs get slaughtered.
-
Berkshire never took bail out funds in 2008. Warren Buffett was actually buying stocks in 2008. Made a huge investment in Goldman Sachs - 5 Billion dollars. Doesn't sound like somebody about to go into the poor house.
All his investments took TARP ... Without it he was toast.
Buffett does not buy stocks anymore. That has not been his primary business for decades. He buys specially designed preferred stocks that offer him huge sweetheart deals that no one else can get. Yes, I would love to invest like Warren but no one can get these preferreds.
Regarding his "buying" in 2008 ...
October 16, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/opinion/17buffett.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
On October 16, 2008 Buffett penned an op-ed in the New York Times titled “Buy American, I am." This advice was offered just as the biggest stock market collapse of the last 80 years was getting underway.
On January 19, 2009 Buffett found a little surprise in his depends ..
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a3lI4cKxPngg&refer=home
Us in Midst of an ‘Economic Pearl Harbor’
The U.S. is facing an “economic Pearl Harbor” that has spread fear throughout the country, billionaire investor Warren Buffett told Tom Brokaw in an interview broadcast yesterday on Dateline NBC. “We have a negative feedback cycle going on right now,” Buffett said, according to a transcript of the interview on CNBC’s Web site. “We have fear which leads to people not wanting to spend, and not wanting to make investments. And that leads to more fear.”
March 9, 2009
The day after the 2009 low, and after his "Buy American" op-Ed above was down almost 40%, that surprise in his depends was now running down his leg and he sold at a massive loss.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/09/news/newsmakers/buffett_economy.reut/index.htm
Warren Buffett said Monday the U.S. economy had “fallen off a cliff” but would eventually recover, although a rebound could kindle inflation worse than that experienced in the late 1970s. Speaking on CNBC television, the 78-year-old billionaire said the country is experiencing a “close to the worst-case” scenario of falling business activity and rising unemployment, causing consumer confidence and spending to tumble.
May 1, 2009
After the market rebounded 30%, and Buffett got a new set of depends, he announced it was all good again. But Warren, everyone took massive losses from your October buy on March 9, the day after the low.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/30516766
Warren Buffett tells CNBC’s Becky Quick that the U.S. economy has made it past the “Pearl Harbor” conditions of last September, but he says “we’re still at war.” … “Well, no. We’re at a war now to some degree, but Pearl Harbor was September. Pearl Harbor was September. At that point, you could have lost the war. And there was a strike at the heart of the American system, the financial system. And we got past that. Some of the right decisions were made then, so I give people great credit for doing that. The war isn’t over, though.”
To recap ...
* Buffett is a huge buyer of financials. Always has been. But he does not buy the common stock. He buys specially designed preferred stocks that offer him sweetheart deals. Something no one but him can get.
* In late 2008 he was so far over his skies with financial (preferred stock) exposure that Berkshire was facing ruin. Berkshire stock was down almost 50% in late 2008.
* Around the same time Buffett was found of saying that Derivatives were "weapons of financial mass destruction." It turned out that Buffett was an active player in these instruments and they were exploding in his face (he sold long term puts on stock indices that gave him billions in unrealized losses).
* October 14, 2008 all the heads of Buffetts collapsing financial investments were called to Wasington to be told to take TARP money to save the system (and Buffets empire). Records show treasury Secretary Hank Paulson was in frequent contact with Buffett in the days leading up to this decision.
* October 16, 2008, two days after the Government saved his empire, he penned "buy American, I Am" (above). Literally that day the stock market began its worst collaspe in 80 years.
* he panicked at the stock market low on March 9, 2009 calling it "close to worse case." Why? Because now those derivatives ("weapons of financial mass destruction") were threatening to bury the Berkshire empire,
* nine days later, March 18, 2009, the Fed starts printing money (QE), this naked manipulation of the stock market saves Buffett from his derivative exposure that was burying Berkshire. Records show that in the days leading up to the Fed's decision, Buffett was in frequent contact with Fed chief Ben Bernanke.
* May 1, 2009, With the stock market rebounding, Buffett announces the economic Pearl harbor had passed.
* November 2010, pens a "thank you letter" to the government for saving his empire.
-------------
When Bernie Sanders gets huge applause about "Wall Street billionaires" rigging the system for themselves and screwing the middle class, he is talking about Warren Buffett.
The actions taken to save Buffett (TARP and QE) are the same actions that are being blamed for millions of unemployed and poor economic performance.
Buffett is worse than Goldman Sachs bankers, that because Buffett is Goldman Sachs' largest investor.
-
The one thing I lesson I learned from working on the street is you have to pick a style of investing and stay loyal to it through thick and thin. The Battle for Investment survival is won by those who control their emotions. It is far easy to control your motions when you have a degree of confidence in what you do. The market is so dynamic it can accommodate everyone provided your patient and focused.
Interesting comment, and I believe it's true.
There are a lot of ways to make money. If there weren't, only one kind of investing would succeed, and we know that's not true. I agree wholeheartedly with finding something that works for one's "investing personality," having confidence in it, and sticking with it.
One of the most important aspects of controlling one's emotions when it comes to investing is the ability to tune out the "noise." Most successful investors are great at doing that.
We've got a coupla noisy ones here on Scoop. Not that I'm naming names.
-
Interesting comment, and I believe it's true.
There are a lot of ways to make money. If there weren't, only one kind of investing would succeed, and we know that's not true. I agree wholeheartedly with finding something that works for one's "investing personality," having confidence in it, and sticking with it.
One of the most important aspects of controlling one's emotions when it comes to investing is the ability to tune out the "noise." Most successful investors are great at doing that.
We've got a coupla noisy ones here on Scoop. Not that I'm naming names.
Completely agree ... there are as many way to make money as there are people that made money.
* Buffett had a style that works (I picked "had" purposely)
* James Simons (Renaissance Technology) while investing purely on computer models is considered one of the greatest hedge fund managers ever. (to be clear, Simons has never made a trade or investment, he programs computers to do it for him.)
* Steve Cohen (Point 72) is a pure discretionary trader (the opposite of Simons) and he too is extraordinarily successful. He also channels his emotions into his trading, not remove them from his decisions.
* Sam Zell has a far different approach and was once described as the greatest capitalist of the 20th century (as well as the grave dancer for picking up cheap assets).
* Paul Tudor Jones has amassed billions as a short term futures trader. Ditto John Henry, the former owner of the Red Soxs.
* John Bogle of Vanguard thinks none of the above works so he pioneered index funds and now runs the largest mutual fund complex in the world.
* Dan Fuss (MU grad!) of Loomis Sayles has a reputation as an aggressive punter in the bond market, going where few would dare and think is prudent and he has been among the more successful bond traders ever.
* Heisenberg/Livermore has never been wrong .. ever. Despite this some here want him to admit to something that has never happened. His quantitative/systematic built around discretionary assumptions approach has done well for him (he's still doing it after 30 years and has not had to resort to getting a real job ... yet).
-
And today we have record highs
Just dialed back my 401k from 95% stocks to 85% stocks. Will up it back to 95% after we take a little dip.
-
And today we have record highs
Just dialed back my 401k from 95% stocks to 85% stocks. Will up it back to 95% after we take a little dip.
You must be seeing things ... because sources say (OK, just one source said) Brexit immediately was going to cause a major market crash.
-
And today we have record highs
Doesn't matter. I'm still reeling from the devastation that was wrought upon us. 8-)
-
Record highs. Time to panic. (Hey, this IS fun)
-
Siemens backs away from Brexit warnings
Siemens (OTCPK:SIEGY) is backing away from its earlier warnings that leaving the European Union could make the U.K. a worse place to conduct business and affect the company’s future U.K. investment plans, Financial Times reports.
While eager to see some sort of framework plan showing how the U.K. would approach its departure from the E.U., CEO Joe Kaeser says the U.K. remains a re-industrialization “showcase,” and regardless of the Brexit vote, Siemens would build a “huge manufacturing place” for local transport systems “in a heartbeat” if there were enough domestic orders.
After the vote to leave the E.U., Siemens warned long-term plans to export wind turbine blades from its £160M manufacturing plant in Hull likely would be put on hold, but Kaeser brought his top managers to the U.K. this week to help send staff and customers the message that “we’re here for the long term.”
-
Boeing also planning to add 2,000 more jobs in the UK.
I still think Brexit was dumb. For a lot of reasons. But it looks like the economic impact was overstated. I am happy about that. Everyone should be.
-
Boeing also planning to add 2,000 more jobs in the UK.
I still think Brexit was dumb. For a lot of reasons. But it looks like the economic impact was overstated. I am happy about that. Everyone should be.
Boeing won a contract to build the Boeing P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft for the UK Military. The 2,000 staff are to build this one airplane so it is not a statement about BRexit.
-
Raise your hand if you're happy you didn't panic-sell over the Brexit hysteria.
[Raises hand]
-
Raise your hand if you're happy you didn't panic-sell over the Brexit hysteria.
[Raises hand]
Raise your hand if you bought that day!
-
Shoulda called it Brezzzzzzzit!
Hell, the new PM was a "remainer" and not a "leaver," which is pretty funny.
-
Boeing also planning to add 2,000 more jobs in the UK.
I still think Brexit was dumb. For a lot of reasons. But it looks like the economic impact was overstated. I am happy about that. Everyone should be.
I think drawing conclusions from a jobs headline two weeks removed from a non-binding vote (versus actual withdrawal) is the equivalent to drawing conclusions from a one/two day stock sell-off.
-
I think drawing conclusions from a jobs headline two weeks removed from a non-binding vote (versus actual withdrawal) is the equivalent to drawing conclusions from a one/two day stock sell-off.
True about the non-binding vote, but the new PM (who opposed the Brexit) stated yesterday that the Brexit will happen...and yet stocks are rising today.
IMHO the markets have now priced the assumption that the Brexit will happen, so the actual effects when it (gradually) occurs will be muted. Kind of like the Greek default - everyone (including notably Heisenberg/Livermore) thought the bottom would drop out. It ended up being a couple-day blip, then a bounce, then business as usual. The Brexit might not be quite that smooth, but I don't think there will be huge longer-term effects in the US market.
-
True about the non-binding vote, but the new PM (who opposed the Brexit) stated yesterday that the Brexit will happen...and yet stocks are rising today.
IMHO the markets have now priced the assumption that the Brexit will happen, so the actual effects when it (gradually) occurs will be muted. Kind of like the Greek default - everyone (including notably Heisenberg/Livermore) thought the bottom would drop out. It ended up being a couple-day blip, then a bounce, then business as usual. The Brexit might not be quite that smooth, but I don't think there will be huge longer-term effects in the US market.
Maybe - what you lay out has happened or maybe what you say is being assumed or maybe it is being ignored.
The US equity market is definitely dependent on what happens in Europe since most US MNCs have about 20%+ of their revenues coming from Europe.
I just meant that until there is clarity about what Brexit means it is all speculation.
-
True about the non-binding vote, but the new PM (who opposed the Brexit) stated yesterday that the Brexit will happen...and yet stocks are rising today.
IMHO the markets have now priced the assumption that the Brexit will happen, so the actual effects when it (gradually) occurs will be muted. Kind of like the Greek default - everyone (including notably Heisenberg/Livermore) thought the bottom would drop out. It ended up being a couple-day blip, then a bounce, then business as usual. The Brexit might not be quite that smooth, but I don't think there will be huge longer-term effects in the US market.
This
-
Maybe - what you lay out has happened or maybe what you say is being assumed or maybe it is being ignored.
The US equity market is definitely dependent on what happens in Europe since most US MNCs have about 20%+ of their revenues coming from Europe.
I just meant that until there is clarity about what Brexit means it is all speculation.
Perhaps, but there is much more clarity now than there was 2 weeks ago.
-
Perhaps, but there is much more clarity now than there was 2 weeks ago.
I would argue there is rightfully a lot less hysteria.
In my opinion there isn't much more clarity on what happens economically in Europe. Of course Europe and the UK are not going away - the pathway and details of Brexit execution though could still cause some undesirable economic events to occur - that may or may not be priced into the market.
Just my opinion, but claiming hysteria or stability from a short term view of the market are conclusions rooted in very similar logic.
-
As I said ... Brezzzzzzzzzzzit.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fed-bullard-says-brexit-close-163932119.html
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard said he thought the U.K.’s vote to leave the European Union wouldn’t have a lasting effect on the U.S. economy, joining Cleveland Fed chief Loretta Mester in playing down the threat Brexit poses to the U.S.
“Now that the markets have had some chance to digest the move, I think the ultimate impact on the U.S. economy will be close to zero,” Bullard told reporters Tuesday following a speech in St. Louis.
-
As I said ... Brezzzzzzzzzzzit.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fed-bullard-says-brexit-close-163932119.html
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard said he thought the U.K.’s vote to leave the European Union wouldn’t have a lasting effect on the U.S. economy, joining Cleveland Fed chief Loretta Mester in playing down the threat Brexit poses to the U.S.
“Now that the markets have had some chance to digest the move, I think the ultimate impact on the U.S. economy will be close to zero,” Bullard told reporters Tuesday following a speech in St. Louis.
They may be out of the EU, but over the next year or two, many agreements will be signed extending trade deals and defining the relationship that the British will have with the EU. The British economy may be the only one that is actually affected adversely - and even that may only last for a couple years.
-
Yeah, but someone said..............
-
Thoughts on the Nintendo stock with Poke'mania going on? Yet to be globalized but all the rage in the US.
-
They may be out of the EU, but over the next year or two, many agreements will be signed extending trade deals and defining the relationship that the British will have with the EU. The British economy may be the only one that is actually affected adversely - and even that may only last for a couple years.
My guess - after a bunch of negotiations, the U.K. and EU sign treaties to allow relatively free flow of goods (including € and £), services and people across borders. And in the end, the U.K. is "officially" out of the EU, but the relationships will be largely unchanged.
Ultimately, May will be able to say she respected the vote by proceeding to get the U.K out of the EU, saved the U.K. economy...and for the unhappy folks who wanted to close the borders, she'll be able to say the compromises in the treaties were the only way she could she could save the economy while leaving the EU.
A divorced couple that still lives and sleeps together....
-
My guess - after a bunch of negotiations, the U.K. and EU sign treaties to allow relatively free flow of goods (including € and £), services and people across borders. And in the end, the U.K. is "officially" out of the EU, but the relationships will be largely unchanged.
Ultimately, May will be able to say she respected the vote by proceeding to get the U.K out of the EU, saved the U.K. economy...and for the unhappy folks who wanted to close the borders, she'll be able to say the compromises in the treaties were the only way she could she could save the economy while leaving the EU.
A divorced couple that still lives and sleeps together....
Yup.
Very little will change. Not ever being tied to the euro makes it even more possible.
-
My guess - after a bunch of negotiations, the U.K. and EU sign treaties to allow relatively free flow of goods (including € and £), services and people across borders. And in the end, the U.K. is "officially" out of the EU, but the relationships will be largely unchanged.
Ultimately, May will be able to say she respected the vote by proceeding to get the U.K out of the EU, saved the U.K. economy...and for the unhappy folks who wanted to close the borders, she'll be able to say the compromises in the treaties were the only way she could she could save the economy while leaving the EU.
A divorced couple that still lives and sleeps together....
Pretty much agree. England will get a little sovereignty back (or at least the appearance of it) but not much will really change.
-
True about the non-binding vote, but the new PM (who opposed the Brexit) stated yesterday that the Brexit will happen...and yet stocks are rising today.
IMHO the markets have now priced the assumption that the Brexit will happen, so the actual effects when it (gradually) occurs will be muted. Kind of like the Greek default - everyone (including notably Heisenberg/Livermore) thought the bottom would drop out. It ended up being a couple-day blip, then a bounce, then business as usual. The Brexit might not be quite that smooth, but I don't think there will be huge longer-term effects in the US market.
Trading BRexit as if it was a bad news in the bond, currency and gold markets has been a winner. BRexit has been devastatingly bad for European banks.
If you looked at these markets alone, you would conclude something major just happened and it not necessarily good.
But if you looked at the US stock market, something else is happening. It caused it to go up. BRexit has panicked central banks, the BoE is expected to cut rates later today for the first time since 2009, the ECB is expected to cut rates or add other forms of stimulus soon, the BoJ is openly talking about "helicopter money" (where the central bank bypass the financial system and injects money directly into the economy) and the Fed rate hikes are on hold for years.
Stocks are junkies for cheap central bank money and BRexit is a classic "bad news is good news" story for stocks. The worse things get the more central banks throw money out the window to take care of stock owners.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-feds-new-froth-problem-1468436349
-------------------
2007 - the housing market peaked (in late 2006), credit market were stressed, Bear Stearns mortgage fund collapsed, BNP money market funds closed (causing a near panic in August 2007), interest rates were collapsing, the Fed was concerned (Cramer's famous rant that were "nuts" for not throwing money out the window to stop the impeding crisis).
Meanwhile the stock market keeps powering ahead making one new high after another through October 2007, long after ever other market turned. Stock investors ridiculed the subprime market and how worry warts that suggested it was a big deal were wrong.
Then 2008 happened and stock investors lost half their money. Turns out the stock market was the "last to get it."
2016 is starting to have this feel. While the stock market is making new highs, I'm worried this is really bad and I'm playing this as it is bad news. I'm long treasuries, gold and silver while holding a short the pound, euro, European banks. Also have a short in US stocks that have hurt. Overall this positioning for bad things is working really well.
So why is it when you keep saying BRexit is nothing, cassandras like me that are positioned for coming problems are up nearly 25% this year (as in the last 6 months). Why am I doing so well if my outlook is all wrong? Why are markets letting me make a lot of money with this view?
-
My guess - after a bunch of negotiations, the U.K. and EU sign treaties to allow relatively free flow of goods (including € and £), services and people across borders. And in the end, the U.K. is "officially" out of the EU, but the relationships will be largely unchanged.
Ultimately, May will be able to say she respected the vote by proceeding to get the U.K out of the EU, saved the U.K. economy...and for the unhappy folks who wanted to close the borders, she'll be able to say the compromises in the treaties were the only way she could she could save the economy while leaving the EU.
A divorced couple that still lives and sleeps together....
If this happens, why won't everyone leave and effectively ending the EU?
May just named Boris Johnson foreign secretary. Still think this is all for show and a meaningless non-binding vote? (posters that keeping point BRexit was a non-binding vote really do not understand what just happened ... I laid t out about 5 pages ago.)
Remember May was a remain but never campiagned for it suggesting she was really a closet leaver. Boris' appointment underscores this believe.
-
If this happens, why won't everyone leave and effectively ending the EU?
May just named Boris Johnson foreign secretary. Still think this is all for show and a meaningless non-binding vote? (posters that keeping point BRexit was a non-binding vote really do not understand what just happened ... I laid t out about 5 pages ago.)
Remember May was a remain but never campiagned for it suggesting she was really a closet leaver. Boris' appointment underscores this believe.
Boris is foreign secretary but he has no power over the Brexit as May has generated a separate cabinet position for Brexit. The Brexit secretary and Chancellor of the Exchequer are the critical positions and are both filled by solidly moderate individuals (David Davis and Philip Hammond respectively).
The only thing that Boris's appointment signifies is that other than the EU, Theresa May doesn't give a shyte about the rest of the world.
-
So why is it when you keep saying BRexit is nothing, cassandras like me that are positioned for coming problems are up nearly 25% this year (as in the last 6 months). Why am I doing so well if my outlook is all wrong? Why are markets letting me make a lot of money with this view?
I could ask you the same question: If Brexit is the Armageddon you act like it is, why am I doing so well? I have done nothing but continue my dollar cost averaging of a well diversified portfolio, and my investment balances continue to climb from one record high to another.
So you act like the sky is falling, constantly panic...and make money. I relax and keep my accounts on autopilot...and make money. Personally, I find relaxation much more enjoyable than panic.
And yes, I did the same thing in 2008. Even though the numbers in my account went down, I didn't panic and sell, and those paper losses turned to huge gains over time. Patience, grasshopper....
-
While Brexit has passed, the debate now will be "hard Brexit" (economic and political isolationism) and "soft Brexit" (maintaining most of the EU ties, market integration, freedom of movement, etc. without formal EU membership). This will play out over the next year or two. The EU was threatening to not allow the UK a soft Brexit, to dissuade them from leaving, but it is really in the rest of the EU's interest to allow Britain to maintain these ties, so I don't see them cutting off their nose to spite their face. Ultimately I believe there will be a soft Brexit, especially with May at the helm. The appearances will satisfy many of the ill-informed voters those who wanted out of the EU while still avoiding the dire consequences of true isolationism. It will also reassure Scotland and Northern Ireland about remaining part of the UK. A hard Brexit will almost surely result in an independent Scotland and united Ireland. May has to strike a very careful balance to keep the UK together and satisfy the referendum voters. I think she knows this.
-
I could ask you the same question: If Brexit is the Armageddon you act like it is, why am I doing so well? I have done nothing but continue my dollar cost averaging of a well diversified portfolio, and my investment balances continue to climb from one record high to another.
So you act like the sky is falling, constantly panic...and make money. I relax and keep my accounts on autopilot...and make money. Personally, I find relaxation much more enjoyable than panic.
And yes, I did the same thing in 2008. Even though the numbers in my account went down, I didn't panic and sell, and those paper losses turned to huge gains over time. Patience, grasshopper....
Oh, stop with the common sense already. That doesn't play well in Smugglesville!
-
Markets up big again today.
I'm now contemplating dialing my 401k back even more from 85% stocks to maybe 75% stocks.
I think stocks are overpriced.
Am I being overcautious?
-
Markets up big again today.
I'm now contemplating dialing my 401k back even more from 85% stocks to maybe 75% stocks.
I think stocks are overpriced.
Am I being overcautious?
From the risk-management perspective there isn't a returns difference between 80% and 85% equities allocation over the course of decades (monte carlo simulations only look backwards, though, so take everything with a grain of salt).
If you're looking at a time frame of 50 years of account draw-downs (a super early retirement), and talking about a % chance of your assets lasting that long while you're paying yourself at a constant spending power you can start calculating ideal asset allocation over that amount of time.
(http://i.imgur.com/zjqVHP8.png)
(X-axis is %confidence of assets lasting through retirement)
(Y-axis is 0% stocks on the left, to 100% stocks on the right)
As you'll notice, allocating much over 75%-80% of your assets to equity doesn't make a big difference on returns. What it does do though (and not shown in that graph) is significantly raise the risk of you being unable to reallocate your fixed-income assets back into equities to take advantage of significant drops in the market.
To answer your other question: Are you being overcautious? Nobody knows. Economics is a joke and anyone that says they can predict how the market is going to behave in the next 1-3 years is full of crap. Like Peter Lynch said, 'Far more money has been lost by investors preparing for corrections, or trying to anticipate corrections, than has been lost in corrections themselves."
-
From the risk-management perspective there isn't a returns difference between 80% and 85% equities allocation over the course of decades (monte carlo simulations only look backwards, though, so take everything with a grain of salt).
If you're looking at a time frame of 50 years of account draw-downs (a super early retirement), and talking about a % chance of your assets lasting that long while you're paying yourself at a constant spending power you can start calculating ideal asset allocation over that amount of time.
(http://i.imgur.com/zjqVHP8.png)
(X-axis is %confidence of assets lasting through retirement)
(Y-axis is 0% stocks on the left, to 100% stocks on the right)
As you'll notice, allocating much over 75%-80% of your assets to equity doesn't make a big difference on returns. What it does do though (and not shown in that graph) is significantly raise the risk of you being unable to reallocate your fixed-income assets back into equities to take advantage of significant drops in the market.
To answer your other question: Are you being overcautious? Nobody knows. Economics is a joke and anyone that says they can predict how the market is going to behave in the next 1-3 years is full of crap. Like Peter Lynch said, 'Far more money has been lost by investors preparing for corrections, or trying to anticipate corrections, than has been lost in corrections themselves."
That Lynch quote is one of my favorite investing-related quotes ever.
I'm not telling anybody what to do, but I will say that ever since 2012 more than a few "experts" have been saying "The Next Big One" is right around the corner. I just happened to see an article from July 2014 talking about how "overvalued" Altria was at 41. It's now at 69 -- a 68% gain in 2 years.
Having said all that, each of us must invest to his/her own comfort level.
-
I could ask you the same question: If Brexit is the Armageddon you act like it is, why am I doing so well? I have done nothing but continue my dollar cost averaging of a well diversified portfolio, and my investment balances continue to climb from one record high to another.
So you act like the sky is falling, constantly panic...and make money. I relax and keep my accounts on autopilot...and make money. Personally, I find relaxation much more enjoyable than panic.
And yes, I did the same thing in 2008. Even though the numbers in my account went down, I didn't panic and sell, and those paper losses turned to huge gains over time. Patience, grasshopper....
I answered this question already. Every market on the planet says BRexit and slow growth are a problem. The US stock market is the outlier.
Every major market bottomed in late 2001. The stock market bottomed in October 2002, marking the first time since the 19th century that it bottom after the recession ended (recession ended in November 2001)
As I noted above, every major market topped in 2006/early 2007. Stocks laughed it off and peaked in October 2007. It was 50% lower one year later.
Between December 2008 and January 2009 every major market bottomed. Stocks sold off in another 25% and bottomed in March 2009
And here we go again. Every world market has peaked in the last year. US Stocks are blasting to new highs.
In the last 15 years the stock market is "the last to get it." It seems to be happening again.
So when US stocks ignore the rest of the world, they are 0 for 3. They are ignoring the rest of the word now. Earnings are poor, growth is poor. Financials are poor (and history shows the market cannot "survive" with lousy financials).
The stock market is a rigged game (via central banks). And since this thread was started 14 months ago, it has only managed to return 2.5%.
Investing in stocks is like betting on Highleigh. It's rigged and you are guessing how the rig will work out.
Good luck but again, the stock market is the outlier in world markets.
-
I answered this question already. Every market on the planet says BRexit and slow growth are a problem. The US stock market is the outlier.
Every major market bottomed in late 2001. The stock market bottomed in October 2002, marking the first time since the 19th century that it bottom after the recession ended (recession ended in November 2001)
As I noted above, every major market topped in 2006/early 2007. Stocks laughed it off and peaked in October 2007. It was 50% lower one year later.
Between December 2008 and January 2009 every major market bottomed. Stocks sold off in another 25% and bottomed in March 2009
And here we go again. Every world market has peaked in the last year. US Stocks are blasting to new highs.
In the last 15 years the stock market is "the last to get it." It seems to be happening again.
So when US stocks ignore the rest of the world, they are 0 for 3. They are ignoring the rest of the word now. Earnings are poor, growth is poor. Financials are poor (and history shows the market cannot "survive" with lousy financials).
The stock market is a rigged game (via central banks). And since this thread was started 14 months ago, it has only managed to return 2.5%.
Investing in stocks is like betting on Highleigh. It's rigged and you are guessing how the rig will work out.
Good luck but again, the stock market is the outlier in world markets.
You cite history, but seem to ignore it. Yes, the US stock market has gone down many times, but then it has ALWAYS come back stronger than ever.
I plan to live another 30 years or more, so downs for a couple of years don't concern me. In fact, it gives me a chance to buy discounted stocks for a while. There was an awesome sale in 2009....
-
You cite history, but seem to ignore it. Yes, the US stock market has gone down many times, but then it has ALWAYS come back stronger than ever.
I plan to live another 30 years or more, so downs for a couple of years don't concern me. In fact, it gives me a chance to buy discounted stocks for a while. There was an awesome sale in 2009....
Again ... common sense.
Investors who try to time the market and, in the process, miss just a handful of the best "up" days ... well, they will impose a significant penalty on their portfolios. Not only will they have missed a chance to experience those gains, and not only will they have missed a chance to recover from the worst days, but they also will have missed a chance to benefit from all the compounding in the years following those handful of great days.
-
You cite history, but seem to ignore it. Yes, the US stock market has gone down many times, but then it has ALWAYS come back stronger than ever.
I plan to live another 30 years or more, so downs for a couple of years don't concern me. In fact, it gives me a chance to buy discounted stocks for a while. There was an awesome sale in 2009....
Not true and you seem to be contradicting yourself.
Since 2000 the US stock market has been a poor performer, lagging inflation, bonds, gold, world stocks and bonds. And that is the point, the ever rising stock market ended 15 years ago. (To be clear, its NOMINAL level still rising but the only thing that does not beat it is central bank manipulated cash at 0. Every other asset class has been a better option since 2000).
Now if are are talking about TIMING the market, then I think this is a good place to sell it, buy it back a few years from now at much lower prices.
-
Again ... common sense.
Investors who try to time the market and, in the process, miss just a handful of the best "up" days ... well, they will impose a significant penalty on their portfolios. Not only will they have missed a chance to experience those gains, and not only will they have missed a chance to recover from the worst days, but they also will have missed a chance to benefit from all the compounding in the years following those handful of great days.
Missing the best down days matters more. And you are assuming that those not in the market are in zero yielding cash. Many timers, like me, rotate between other asset classes like bonds, gold, foreign stocks and so on.
So to turn your point around, I cannot by "stuck" in stocks that are up 3% or 4% year-to-date when silver is up 47%, gold 28%, bonds 19% and so on.
In the past those that were big in precious metals and bonds had a dour outlook on the economy. So, when you stop singing "God Bless America" you will note that any non-cash option is doing better. (Again, cash is zero as it is a central bank manupulation)
Back to my original question, the investment choices of the "bomb shelter and can soup crowd" like gold, bonds and gun stocks is going vertical way outperforming traditional stock indices. You think their is a message in that differing performing that you are lagging way behind them?
I think their is and that is trouble is coming. And as I noted before, since 2000, us stocks are the "last to get it." and I believe this is happening again.
-
Not true and you seem to be contradicting yourself.
Since 2000 the US stock market has been a poor performer, lagging inflation, bonds, gold, world stocks and bonds. And that is the point, the ever rising stock market ended 15 years ago. (To be clear, its NOMINAL level still rising but the only thing that does not beat it is central bank manipulated cash at 0. Every other asset class has been a better option since 2000).
Now if are are talking about TIMING the market, then I think this is a good place to sell it, buy it back a few years from now at much lower prices.
I am not contradicting myself.
The market goes up, the market goes down. But even when it goes down a lot, it always comes back up even more. I have been saying this from the start.
I suspect you panic so much because of what you said before - you've never had a "real" job, so you depend on your investments for your day to day bills. I don't. My investments have nothing to paying my bills now, five years from now, or even ten years from now. They are all about paying bills fifteen, twenty and thirty years down the road. For you, panic might make sense. For me to buy into your panic would be stupid.
-
I am not contradicting myself.
The market goes up, the market goes down. But even when it goes down a lot, it always comes back up even more. I have been saying this from the start.
I suspect you panic so much because of what you said before - you've never had a "real" job, so you depend on your investments for your day to day bills. I don't. My investments have nothing to paying my bills now, five years from now, or even ten years from now. They are all about paying bills fifteen, twenty and thirty years down the road. For you, panic might make sense. For me to buy into your panic would be stupid.
Common sense rarely wins arguments. But I don't work now and don't worry about $$$$ for the exact reason you laid out.
-
Common sense rarely wins arguments. But I don't work now and don't worry about $$$$ for the exact reason you laid out.
What? You didn't get the memo?
We are doomed! DOOMED, I say!!!
-
I am not contradicting myself.
The market goes up, the market goes down. But even when it goes down a lot, it always comes back up even more. I have been saying this from the start.
I suspect you panic so much because of what you said before - you've never had a "real" job, so you depend on your investments for your day to day bills. I don't. My investments have nothing to paying my bills now, five years from now, or even ten years from now. They are all about paying bills fifteen, twenty and thirty years down the road. For you, panic might make sense. For me to buy into your panic would be stupid.
Investing is about competing alternatives. The stock market is just one alternative.
The stock market is the second to last horse in a race (cash is last) and you arguing that as long as you left the starting gate (which it has) you're winning. Every other horse is doing better, further from the gate than the stock market horse.
Again, since 2000, every time the stock market horse falls behind, bad things happen. It happened in 2000 and 2007. It is happening again now.
And yes, I don't have a real job, and I'm very happy that I have been able to do this for 30 years without having to resort to getting a real job (although I came close to crapping out in 1998). I do have employees so I sign the front of paychecks.
-
What? You didn't get the memo?
We are doomed! DOOMED, I say!!!
When bad things happen, the Fed will probably drive interest rates to negative and the returns will be YUUGGE while stocks lose.
I'm very bullish on developed market Sovereign debt yields. Gilts and Bonds lead the pack.
-
Investing is about competing alternatives. The stock market is just one alternative.
The stock market is the second to last horse in a race (cash is last) and you arguing that as long as you left the starting gate (which it has) you're winning. Every other horse is doing better, further from the gate than the stock market horse.
Again, since 2000, every time the stock market horse falls behind, bad things happen. It happened in 2000 and 2007. It is happening again now.
And yes, I don't have a real job, and I'm very happy that I have been able to do this for 30 years without having to resort to getting a real job (although I came close to crapping out in 1998). I do have employees so I sign the front of paychecks.
Thanks - you confirmed the disconnect. I won't argue with the investment strategies of someone who needs their investment money now for day to day cash flow, when I need it later.
I know I'll be fine, you seem just as convinced that you'll be fine. Time to let it go.
-
Anyone care to chime in on the recent surge* in the stock market?
* surge... surge.. I meant surge...
-
Anyone care to chime in on the recent serge in the stock market?
If you have stocks hopefully your participating.
-
Anyone care to chime in on the recent serge in the stock market?
Is this the Serge to whom you are referring? If so, I am on my way over to Wall Street right now.
(http://awesome-body.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/serge-quote.jpg)
In unrelated news, the Dow is up 900 points since election day.
-
Anyone care to chime in on the recent serge in the stock market?
Do you mean this Serge?
(http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/nba/players/full/3439.png&w=350&h=254)
-
I think it's this Serge
(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/20150512/5207405/beverly-hills-cop-axel-foley-o.gif)
-
I think it's this Serge
(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/20150512/5207405/beverly-hills-cop-axel-foley-o.gif)
I tried to find one of these. Nice work!
-
Perhaps he meant to say Sarge with all those donuts he's making in the market these days.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHdKqK5a_9ZaC8YgvDBzZV0BKTxJTcdKSpbVLNQCdymlgCe64Z)
But yes... I have thoughts. Most predominant and simplistic of which involves the concept that you'd have to be a pretty dim bulb not to believe that when the dust settles, the people moving the markets deep down believe that a Trump presidency is going to be good for business.
I am not saying that I believe what other people believe or that what other people believe is right or wrong because none of that is relevant... allz I'm saying is simply what I believe that other people believe, because after all, I don't move the market, other people do.
-
Perhaps he meant to say Sarge with all those donuts he's making in the market these days.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHdKqK5a_9ZaC8YgvDBzZV0BKTxJTcdKSpbVLNQCdymlgCe64Z)
But yes... I have thoughts. Most predominant and simplistic of which involves the concept that you'd have to be a pretty dim bulb not to believe that when the dust settles, the people moving the markets deep down believe that a Trump presidency is going to be good for business.
I am not saying that I believe what other people believe or that what other people believe is right or wrong because none of that is relevant... allz I'm saying is simply what I believe that other people believe, because after all, I don't move the market, other people do.
What about the people who moved into the market over the last 8 years? In case you forgot, it went up somewhere in there range of 8,000+ points (just to use one example.)
Apparently, the people moving the markets deep down believed that an Obama presidency was going to be good for business.
-
What about the people who moved into the market over the last 8 years? In case you forgot, it went up somewhere in there range of 8,000+ points (just to use one example.)
Apparently, the people moving the markets deep down believed that an Obama presidency was going to be good for business.
Yeah, you kind of missed the point there. It wasn't political commentary... it was commentary on human behavior and reactionary investing. In other words, I don't care if you're right or wrong, I already know what you're thinking.
However, it is quite Chicos of you to use an 8-year run to draw a comparison to a 3-week span in 2016.
-
The market is also buying in sectors that can build a buffer to what may -- or may not -- come to reap in late Q1 or Q2 of 2017. No matter who was elected, the market was going to respond kindly but based on differing intents. It's equivalent to the annual May market of years past as you ensure your next three months in one fell swoop rather then a short term (and possibly short-sighted) reactionary outlook and subsequent action.
-
Perhaps he meant to say Sarge with all those donuts he's making in the market these days.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRHdKqK5a_9ZaC8YgvDBzZV0BKTxJTcdKSpbVLNQCdymlgCe64Z)
But yes... I have thoughts. Most predominant and simplistic of which involves the concept that you'd have to be a pretty dim bulb not to believe that when the dust settles, the people moving the markets deep down believe that a Trump presidency is going to be good for business.
I am not saying that I believe what other people believe or that what other people believe is right or wrong because none of that is relevant... allz I'm saying is simply what I believe that other people believe, because after all, I don't move the market, other people do.
Is there some sort of indicator in the stock ticker that would resemble a rhombus of terror or a parabola of mystery?
By the way, we should be best friends.
-
Is there some sort of indicator in the stock ticker that would resemble a rhombus of terror or a parabola of mystery?
By the way, we should be best friends.
Nope. Just a triangle of confusion.
-
(https://d21rhj7n383afu.cloudfront.net/washpost-production/Reuters/20200131/5e3482ec4cedfd00010157a0/5e34877e46e0fb00099e8f4f_1450955028646-chsuqu_t_1580500867803_640_360_400.gif?player=powa)
UK flag removed in Brussels.
And now comes the internal battle between Scotland and England.
https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/31/scotland-has-democratic-mandate-for-new-independence-referendum-sturgeon-to-say-on-brexit
Buckle up, everyone.
-
God bless England
-
God bless England
The country that's responsible for oppressing people all over the word for race, ethnicity, and religion as recently as the 90s? You've got problems
-
The country that's responsible for oppressing people all over the word for race, ethnicity, and religion as recently as the 90s? You've got problems
And also responsible for a lot of good.
They're xenophobic fools for leaving, but there are exceedingly stupid groups in a lot of countries.
Also, the market is going to trend down until this virus is slowed down.
-
God bless England
"I’ll stand up and be the first to admit being an epic hypocrite on this over the years. 100%. OWNING IT! The worst at times. It really should stop." --Jams
-
(https://d21rhj7n383afu.cloudfront.net/washpost-production/Reuters/20200131/5e3482ec4cedfd00010157a0/5e34877e46e0fb00099e8f4f_1450955028646-chsuqu_t_1580500867803_640_360_400.gif?player=powa)
UK flag removed in Brussels.
And now comes the internal battle between Scotland and England.
https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/31/scotland-has-democratic-mandate-for-new-independence-referendum-sturgeon-to-say-on-brexit
Buckle up, everyone.
And Northern Ireland.
They extremely unhappy with this too.
-
God bless England
Absolutely. They’re gonna need it.
Should have gone all in and adopted the Euro.
-
And Northern Ireland.
They extremely unhappy with this too.
Simple solution: 26+6=1.
-
The country that's responsible for oppressing people all over the word for race, ethnicity, and religion as recently as the 90s? You've got problems
The country responsible for educating billions of people, bringing civilization to vast parts of the world, immense advances in medicine, and on and on....God Bless England
-
Absolutely. They’re gonna need it.
Should have gone all in and adopted the Euro.
LOL
-
Simple solution: 26+6=1.
I think it could happen.
-
I doubt we will see any sort of formal unificaiton in our lifetimes. More that Northern Ireland will exist as a quasi-independent state with growing economic ties to Ireland because being a member of the EU makes sense. I just hope that we don't see a repeat of the unnecceary violence of the past.
England is going to have to spend its time worrying about Scotland.
-
The country responsible for educating billions of people, bringing civilization to vast parts of the world, immense advances in medicine, and on and on....God Bless England
They sure have spread racial and ethnic problems. And famine. And disease. And indentured servitude. And slavery. And use of concentration camps. And stealing cultural heritage. And theft. And rape. And murder. If that's what you mean by civilization then yeah, they've done a lot.
Their greatest contribution is that their oppression led the the revolution and the rise of democracy. Their greatest contribution to civilization is oppression.
The history books bleed with the atrocities of the English.
-
They sure have spread racial and ethnic problems. And famine. And disease. And indentured servitude. And slavery. And use of concentration camps. And stealing cultural heritage. And theft. And rape. And murder. If that's what you mean by civilization then yeah, they've done a lot.
Their greatest contribution is that their oppression led the the revolution and the rise of democracy. Their greatest contribution to civilization is oppression.
The history books bleed with the atrocities of the English.
Amen, Buck.
-
Their greatest contribution is that their oppression led the the revolution and the rise of democracy. Their greatest contribution to civilization is oppression.
The American revolution replaced the English democracy of landowning, white males with the American democracy of landowning, white males.
-
They sure have spread racial and ethnic problems. And famine. And disease. And indentured servitude. And slavery. And use of concentration camps. And stealing cultural heritage. And theft. And rape. And murder. If that's what you mean by civilization then yeah, they've done a lot.
And to this point, the English were usually better than their other European counterparts. But that's not saying much.
-
They sure have spread racial and ethnic problems. And famine. And disease. And indentured servitude. And slavery. And use of concentration camps. And stealing cultural heritage. And theft. And rape. And murder. If that's what you mean by civilization then yeah, they've done a lot.
Their greatest contribution is that their oppression led the the revolution and the rise of democracy. Their greatest contribution to civilization is oppression.
The history books bleed with the atrocities of the English.
You're right, the English are to blame for it all.
::)
-
You're right, the English are to blame for it all.
::)
They're not responsible for it all, and I didn't say they were. But they are responsible for all those things, and more, in many places around the world.
They have been oppressive in Wales and Scotland. In Ireland. In Africa. In India. In Pakistan. In China. In Tibet. In Australia. In Oceania. In the Caribbean. In North America.
Even when they are the good guys, fighting the Nazis, they are actively starving out millions of people in India. Ghandi, and international symbol of peace and civil rights, was a villain to the Empire.
There aren't many others that can match their list of atrocities. There aren't many others that could match the expanse of their empire. Empires, though, are not typically built through peaceful and moral means. There have been other tyrants. Other evils. Other empires. Plenty of them. All with blood on their hands, the US not excluded. But few have been at it for so long, with such a record of success. They have been oppressing and conquesting for nearly a thousand years. And now, their atrocities are largely whitewashed in perception. They are the good guys, spreading culture and education. Right.
I didn't make this stuff up out of hand. It is quite simply history. Much of it written with pride by bloody English hands.
-
Earl Grey is very good tea, though.
They also gave us Monty Python and Bond, James Bond.
-
I didn't make this stuff up out of hand. It is quite simply history. Much of it written with pride by bloody English hands.
Im a true Anglophile. Love British TV, obsessive about soccer, fascinated by their history and elements of their culture, would move to London in a heartbeat given the chance...that being said, you’re completely right.
Take the British Museum in London. Incredible museum, but as my buddy who lived near it for awhile once said “it’s a display of the British going ‘here’s the cool stuff we took from places we forcibly invaded!”
I don’t think their influence was all bad, and there is a charm to the hybrid culture of former British colonies, but there is no denying the brutality and oppressive nature of the Empire. Hell, the East India Company had an army more powerful than most countries and pretty much existed solely for the economic domination of the Crown
-
Im a true Anglophile. Love British TV, obsessive about soccer, fascinated by their history and elements of their culture, would move to London in a heartbeat given the chance...that being said, you’re completely right.
Wags, I, too, think their history is fascinating and try to absorb as much of it as possible.
I love British TV as well, but I think it is the drama shows that are far and away the best they have to offer. Their comedies, generally leave me asking, "Huh". Of course their is Fleabag and a couple others but that is about it.
Just wondering your opinion on British comedies vs. British drama shows..
-
Wags, I, too, think their history is fascinating and try to absorb as much of it as possible.
I love British TV as well, but I think it is the drama shows that are far and away the best they have to offer. Their comedies, generally leave me asking, "Huh". Of course their is Fleabag and a couple others but that is about it.
Just wondering your opinion on British comedies vs. British drama shows..
I think there is a “British” humor you have to get. It’s a big drier and off kilter. Like Mr Bean for example (but I think that’s just comedic brilliance). There are some I love, but I’ve found that I can show them to my GF or others and they don’t land. Like I loved Gavin and Stacy which my old English mama her recommended to me, but my friends were like :o. I’ve usually found ones I like by seeing comedians or comic actors I like in interviews or other shows, and working backwards.
I feel like the “newer” British comedies aren’t as hard to grasp. Catastrophe, Bad Education, Fleabag all have that British comedic influence, but it’s more easy to digest. Man Like Mobeen is one of my newest favorites on Netflix. Very regional and British centric references and slang, but the premise and jokes are absolutely fantastic.
But I do agree, their dramas are incredible. I can’t get enough. They do period pieces especially well. Also a big fan of some of the seasons being only 3-5 episodes long, but each episode is 1.5+ hours. Like they did with Sherlock or Luther
-
They're not responsible for it all, and I didn't say they were. But they are responsible for all those things, and more, in many places around the world.
They have been oppressive in Wales and Scotland. In Ireland. In Africa. In India. In Pakistan. In China. In Tibet. In Australia. In Oceania. In the Caribbean. In North America.
Even when they are the good guys, fighting the Nazis, they are actively starving out millions of people in India. Ghandi, and international symbol of peace and civil rights, was a villain to the Empire.
There aren't many others that can match their list of atrocities. There aren't many others that could match the expanse of their empire. Empires, though, are not typically built through peaceful and moral means. There have been other tyrants. Other evils. Other empires. Plenty of them. All with blood on their hands, the US not excluded. But few have been at it for so long, with such a record of success. They have been oppressing and conquesting for nearly a thousand years. And now, their atrocities are largely whitewashed in perception. They are the good guys, spreading culture and education. Right.
I didn't make this stuff up out of hand. It is quite simply history. Much of it written with pride by bloody English hands.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-tPscKRaQY
-
I doubt we will see any sort of formal unificaiton in our lifetimes. More that Northern Ireland will exist as a quasi-independent state with growing economic ties to Ireland because being a member of the EU makes sense. I just hope that we don't see a repeat of the unnecceary violence of the past.
England is going to have to spend its time worrying about Scotland.
The Catholics vs the Protestants has lost some of it's fire with the decline of religious participation in both N. Ireland and the Republic. Plus disarmament by the IRA. And now Brexit. A unified Ireland is closer than many think.
-
Im a true Anglophile. Love British TV, obsessive about soccer, fascinated by their history and elements of their culture, would move to London in a heartbeat given the chance...that being said, you’re completely right.
Take the British Museum in London. Incredible museum, but as my buddy who lived near it for awhile once said “it’s a display of the British going ‘here’s the cool stuff we took from places we forcibly invaded!”
I don’t think their influence was all bad, and there is a charm to the hybrid culture of former British colonies, but there is no denying the brutality and oppressive nature of the Empire. Hell, the East India Company had an army more powerful than most countries and pretty much existed solely for the economic domination of the Crown
Boy, you should see the Louvre. :P
-
The Catholics vs the Protestants has lost some of it's fire with the decline of religious participation in both N. Ireland and the Republic. Plus disarmament by the IRA. And now Brexit. A unified Ireland is closer than many think.
This. 26+6 has been a dream for decades, but deep down, everyone knew it wasn't possible without significant bloodshed. Until now.
It would be ulsterly amazing from an anthropological standpoint to see this happen; 20 years ago, a peaceful reunification of Ireland was about as likely as... well... a peaceful reunification of Ireland. With more and more hardliners dying off (or at least relinquishing power/influence) every day, it could be just a few years away. Perhaps even months... because - and Piper, please correct me if I'm off in my observations here - if there's one thing that the Republic and N Ireland agree upon, it's that they are absolutely not closing the border again.
-
This. 26+6 has been a dream for decades, but deep down, everyone knew it wasn't possible without significant bloodshed. Until now.
It would be ulsterly amazing from an anthropological standpoint to see this happen; 20 years ago, a peaceful reunification of Ireland was about as likely as... well... a peaceful reunification of Ireland. With more and more hardliners dying off (or at least relinquishing power/influence) every day, it could be just a few years away. Perhaps even months... because - and Piper, please correct me if I'm off in my observations here - if there's one thing that the Republic and N Ireland agree upon, it's that they are absolutely not closing the border again.
The only people looking for a hard border are the DUP. A unification is possible as time goes on, but the tories usually need them to maintain a majority so they might not be excited to get rid of them, unless Johnson gets sick of dealing with that economic hole and decides to let them go. Id place a good amount of money we see independent Scotland before United ireland.
-
The Catholics vs the Protestants has lost some of it's fire with the decline of religious participation in both N. Ireland and the Republic. Plus disarmament by the IRA. And now Brexit. A unified Ireland is closer than many think.
This. 26+6 has been a dream for decades, but deep down, everyone knew it wasn't possible without significant bloodshed. Until now.
It would be ulsterly amazing from an anthropological standpoint to see this happen; 20 years ago, a peaceful reunification of Ireland was about as likely as... well... a peaceful reunification of Ireland. With more and more hardliners dying off (or at least relinquishing power/influence) every day, it could be just a few years away. Perhaps even months... because - and Piper, please correct me if I'm off in my observations here - if there's one thing that the Republic and N Ireland agree upon, it's that they are absolutely not closing the border again.
Thank you both for this.
-
Absolutely. They’re gonna need it.
Should have gone all in and adopted the Euro.
No way, the Euro is a disaster. Ticking time bomb. Gives Germany too much power over other countries for one, and being able to issue debt in a currency you print is pretty important.
-
English policy at one point in time was formally "Make the world England", that's about as oppressive a slogan as you can generate without formally saying something like "We coming for your technology, your women, and your wealth and what's more you're gonna like it"
Having said that, it's also of an age where human society was of the sophistication that might makes right.....I believe we've evolved as a society so we can both recognize the mistakes of the past while not dwelling on them to the point of crippling society. It's a delicate balance to be sure.
-
English policy at one point in time was formally "Make the world England", that's about as oppressive a slogan as you can generate without formally saying something like "We coming for your technology, your women, and your wealth and what's more you're gonna like it"
Having said that, it's also of an age where human society was of the sophistication that might makes right.....I believe we've evolved as a society so we can both recognize the mistakes of the past while not dwelling on them to the point of crippling society. It's a delicate balance to be sure.
Reasonable. What is an argument like that doing on Scoop?
-
Boy, you should see the Louvre. :P
I could be mistaken, but I believe they returned a lot of works post-Napoleon. Then again, Ive spent most of my time on both my visits trying not to be trampled or outright shoved out of the way by obnoxious tourists.
That being said, the Louvre, still feels like a premiere art museum, regardless of the origin of pieces. The British Museum, on the other hand, feels like a monument to conquest thinly disguised as a historical museum on anthropology. I still prefer it to the Louvre though ;D
-
England fought two wars in support of the East India Company illegally smuggling opium into China. And got a lease for Hong Kong out of the deal.
-
English policy at one point in time was formally "Make the world England", that's about as oppressive a slogan as you can generate without formally saying something like "We coming for your technology, your women, and your wealth and what's more you're gonna like it"
Having said that, it's also of an age where human society was of the sophistication that might makes right.....I believe we've evolved as a society so we can both recognize the mistakes of the past while not dwelling on them to the point of crippling society. It's a delicate balance to be sure.
I'd agree entirely regarding recognizing the past and not letting it cripple you. I love london, it's one of about 4 cities around the globe I could see myself living in permanently. though with England it's not long ago that they were actively oppressing the catholic vote and taking rights away from them, not to mention the orange order is still able to throw a big parade through the catholic neighborhoods in Derry and Belfast. So it seems odd that anyone (particularly a right leaning catholic) would want to say "god bless England". Then double down proclaiming they've pretty much only done good.
-
I'd agree entirely regarding recognizing the past and not letting it cripple you. I love london, it's one of about 4 cities around the globe I could see myself living in permanently. though with England it's not long ago that they were actively oppressing the catholic vote and taking rights away from them, not to mention the orange order is still able to throw a big parade through the catholic neighborhoods in Derry and Belfast. So it seems odd that anyone (particularly a right leaning catholic) would want to say "god bless England". Then double down proclaiming they've pretty much only done good.
Yeah, there is no doubt one of the issues creating the "crippling" is those who would stick their fingers in their ears and shout "lalalalalalalalalalalallalala" when someone points out past transgressions, especially those that are relatively contemporary. One of the key vestiges of the tribal era that I hope dies first/quick as we emerge into the post-tribal era is the "my side has done nothing wrong" mentality.
-
I'd agree entirely regarding recognizing the past and not letting it cripple you. I love london, it's one of about 4 cities around the globe I could see myself living in permanently. though with England it's not long ago that they were actively oppressing the catholic vote and taking rights away from them, not to mention the orange order is still able to throw a big parade through the catholic neighborhoods in Derry and Belfast. So it seems odd that anyone (particularly a right leaning catholic) would want to say "god bless England". Then double down proclaiming they've pretty much only done good.
I think we're long past hijacking the thread, so I'll say it:
What are the other three cities?
-
I think we're long past hijacking the thread, so I'll say it:
What are the other three cities?
The correct question is "what are the other two besides London and Milwaukee?"
-
I think we're long past hijacking the thread, so I'll say it:
What are the other three cities?
Chicago, Toronto, Dublin.
-
Chicago, Toronto, Dublin.
I'm going to preface this by saying I love Ireland and I'm trying to get my wife to consider when we retire in 20 years that we move to Doolin and live the good life.
Having said that, I think Dublin is generally overrated as a city. Yes you have access to general Irish culture/experience outside of Dublin but it is a relatively generic European multi-cultural city. I'd put Munich, Salzburg, and Amsterdam well ahead of Dublin on the list of cities
-
I'm going to preface this by saying I love Ireland and I'm trying to get my wife to consider when we retire in 20 years that we move to Doolin and live the good life.
Having said that, I think Dublin is generally overrated as a city. Yes you have access to general Irish culture/experience outside of Dublin but it is a relatively generic European multi-cultural city. I'd put Munich, Salzburg, and Amsterdam well ahead of Dublin on the list of cities
I do agree about it being overrated, if I was retiring I'd go cork or back to Galway but my company has an office there so it'd be an easy transition plus I get anxious if I'm not in a big city.
-
I do agree about it being overrated, if I was retiring I'd go cork or back to Galway but my company has an office there so it'd be an easy transition plus I get anxious if I'm not in a big city.
Not taking a shot, cause I get your point, but Dublin is smaller than Milwaukee, which I'd never consider a big city, and worlds away from the other truly BIG cities you listed. Just made me smirk
-
Not taking a shot, cause I get your point, but Dublin is smaller than Milwaukee, which I'd never consider a big city, and worlds away from the other truly BIG cities you listed. Just made me smirk
Not saying it's massive, but I'd call it a big city. Also the general culture/feel of it is much more urban than Milwaukee with people on the street and a large international population.
-
They sure have spread racial and ethnic problems. And famine. And disease. And indentured servitude. And slavery. And use of concentration camps. And stealing cultural heritage. And theft. And rape. And murder. If that's what you mean by civilization then yeah, they've done a lot.
Their greatest contribution is that their oppression led the the revolution and the rise of democracy. Their greatest contribution to civilization is oppression.
The history books bleed with the atrocities of the English.
Yup and the Catholic Church has done horrible things...and good things. Corporations. Men. Rich people. And the USA and every country in the world. Some people that’s all they focus on. Wojo wins 8 games but loses 1, that’s all they care about. English essentially civilize many of the people in the world, but who gives a damn.
Just how some people are, can only find the negatives and they live for it....never happy.
-
Not saying it's massive, but I'd call it a big city. Also the general culture/feel of it is much more urban than Milwaukee with people on the street and a large international population.
It's about square footage.....Dublin is much more dense then Milwaukee even though the population is smaller so it feels bigger.
-
English essentially civilize many of the people in the world, but who gives a damn.
I'm curious as to how you define this.
-
I'd agree entirely regarding recognizing the past and not letting it cripple you. I love london, it's one of about 4 cities around the globe I could see myself living in permanently. though with England it's not long ago that they were actively oppressing the catholic vote and taking rights away from them, not to mention the orange order is still able to throw a big parade through the catholic neighborhoods in Derry and Belfast. So it seems odd that anyone (particularly a right leaning catholic) would want to say "god bless England". Then double down proclaiming they've pretty much only done good.
I'm not sure a single person has attempted to make that argument. You're vilifying England, but seemingly giving a pass to other countries past transgressions.
Best not look into the Belgian Congo rubber trade, American slavery, or the Rape of Nanjing... Just to name a few, and of course we're leaving out Nazi Germany.
My point is that there probably isn't a civilization on Earth that hasn't committed atrocities. So, singling out England as 'the worst', when the Mongol Empire basically killed 5% of the entire world's population... I mean...
-
I'm not sure a single person has attempted to make that argument. You're vilifying England, but seemingly giving a pass to other countries past transgressions.
Best not look into the Belgian Congo rubber trade, American slavery, or the Rape of Nanjing... Just to name a few, and of course we're leaving out Nazi Germany.
My point is that there probably isn't a civilization on Earth that hasn't committed atrocities. So, singling out England as 'the worst', when the Mongol Empire basically killed 5% of the entire world's population... I mean...
Who has done that? No one else was brought up. No one said "God Bless the (insert other evil empire here!)"
But really, if anyone had been championing how the Belgians, Mongols, Japanese etc. were so great, their atrocities may have been brought up. But none of those cultures were relevant to this conversation in any way.
-
Chicago, Toronto, Dublin.
Well, I nailed two of the three. I missed on Toronto, but that is a solid choice, eh?
Toronto is Benny’s and the Mrs.’s go-to for a weekend getaway. Easily a top 5 8.05 city in just about every category.
-
I'm not sure a single person has attempted to make that argument. You're vilifying England, but seemingly giving a pass to other countries past transgressions.
Best not look into the Belgian Congo rubber trade, American slavery, or the Rape of Nanjing... Just to name a few, and of course we're leaving out Nazi Germany.
My point is that there probably isn't a civilization on Earth that hasn't committed atrocities. So, singling out England as 'the worst', when the Mongol Empire basically killed 5% of the entire world's population... I mean...
See Buckchucklers response for what I would have said.
It's also worth noting a lot of those other empires mentioned have had their governments overthrown, England is still the same government, until just a few months ago they were still covering for the murder of unarmed civilians peacefully marching for their rights, people like Arlene Foster and Ian Paisley are still regularly voted into power by the DUP despite directly sponsoring N Ireland versions of redlining to keep money out of traditionally catholic neighbourhoods not to mention the connections to the UVF and Orange Order. It's not my job to fight every injustice, just the ones that I have a vested interest in
Well, I nailed two of the three. I missed on Toronto, but that is a solid choice, eh?
Toronto is Benny’s and the Mrs.’s go-to for a weekend getaway. Easily a top 5 8.05 city in just about every category.
Great spot for a weekend getaway, funny how many people forget it's not that far away when thinking of little excursions.
-
See Buckchucklers response for what I would have said.
It's also worth noting a lot of those other empires mentioned have had their governments overthrown, England is still the same government, until just a few months ago they were still covering for the murder of unarmed civilians peacefully marching for their rights, people like Arlene Foster and Ian Paisley are still regularly voted into power by the DUP despite directly sponsoring N Ireland versions of redlining to keep money out of traditionally catholic neighbourhoods not to mention the connections to the UVF and Orange Order. It's not my job to fight every injustice, just the ones that I have a vested interest in
Great spot for a weekend getaway, funny how many people forget it's not that far away when thinking of little excursions.
I actually started saying that as well Galway, but decided against it. Thanks for adding it.
-
Who has done that? No one else was brought up. No one said "God Bless the (insert other evil empire here!)"
But really, if anyone had been championing how the Belgians, Mongols, Japanese etc. were so great, their atrocities may have been brought up. But none of those cultures were relevant to this conversation in any way.
So then, just to be clear. Any sort of pride in any civilization will be met with the same disgust that was thrown at the English?
Let me guess, you're a proud descendant of Ireland? I probably don't need to ask Galway Eagle if he is. :P
-
So then, just to be clear. Any sort of pride in any civilization will be met with the same disgust that was thrown at the English?
Let me guess, you're a proud descendant of Ireland? I probably don't need to ask Galway Eagle if he is. :P
See my comment about recency, and how its still the same government. I can't speak for him but I have an Irish passport, grew up spending about a quarter of the year there, and did my post grad there so it's a vested interest in the politics of the country.
-
See my comment about recency, and how its still the same government. I can't speak for him but I have an Irish passport, grew up spending about a quarter of the year there, and did my post grad there so it's a vested interest in the politics of the country.
So I’m other words you have an admitted personal bias.
-
So I’m other words you have an admitted personal bias.
Ok you tell me if something like bloody sunday and the consequential cover up warrants a "God bless england"
-
So then, just to be clear. Any sort of pride in any civilization will be met with the same disgust that was thrown at the English?
Let me guess, you're a proud descendant of Ireland? I probably don't need to ask Galway Eagle if he is. :P
No probably not. But if someone had said "God Bless Germany", how long would it have taken before someone said, yeah, but...
My guess is not very long.
And part of my heritage is Irish yes, but not all of it. I'm a good old American Mutt. But I am connected with my Irish side. I have cousins there still who have had some less than pleasant dealings with the British that I won't get into here. Does that help to shape my opinion? Sure. But other things do as well.
I am a student of history. And along with Wags, I have always been fascinated with English history. It probably started when I was a kid and loved knights and pirates. Henry II (and his legacy) is one on the historical figures I find most fascinating. Another is Churchill. Both men heros and villains in the same body. Both accomplished great things, and terrible things. Both analogs for the English. They have done wonderful things, I mean, I love Dickens and Led Zeppelin. But they have had painted the world with blood of the oppressed. For hundreds and hundreds of years. A record that few other tyrannical regimes can match. They weren't the Nazis, but the Nazis were in power for 20 years, not 1000. If you were to look at the British time in India, it would match just about any other level of atrocities in history.
Oh, and let me guess, you have the Union Jack flying outside your house and a picture of Queen Elizabeth on your mantle? Hmmm, maybe not, but proud descendant of England?
-
So I’m other words you have an admitted personal bias.
Everyone has a personal bias. To say otherwise is ridiculous. That doesn't mean you can't look at the history and see what has happened. Even if you completely take Ireland out of the picture, the Brits still have a long list of atrocities. You mentioned the opium wars. I have several times mentioned India. There are countless other examples, many of which I referred to earlier. My having Irish ancestry doesn't change any of that.
Hey, I probably wouldn't exist if the Brits didn't do everything possible to exacerbate the famine. History can't be changed. But it shouldn't be whitewashed.
-
Ok you tell me if something like bloody sunday and the consequential cover up warrants a "God bless england"
No I never said anything If the sort. But you have created a metric, with irrelevant criteria such as “it’s the same government,” to paint them a certain way.
-
Everyone has a personal bias. To say otherwise is ridiculous. That doesn't mean you can't look at the history and see what has happened. Even if you completely take Ireland out of the picture, the Brits still have a long list of atrocities. You mentioned the opium wars. I have several times mentioned India. There are countless other examples, many of which I referred to earlier. My having Irish ancestry doesn't change any of that.
Hey, I probably wouldn't exist if the Brits didn't do everything possible to exacerbate the famine. History can't be changed. But it shouldn't be whitewashed.
Oy. Clearly I didn’t explain myself clearly because that’s not what I was implying.
-
No I never said anything If the sort. But you have created a metric, with irrelevant criteria such as “it’s the same government,” to paint them a certain way.
I didn't imply you said anything... you said I have a bias, the implication was that I can't possibly be correct that England doesn't deserve such praise from Chico's so I asked you to be the judge of one event. I did not put words into your mouth or anything of the sort.
It's very relevant metric if someone is creating a false equivalency between a fallen empire like Mongolia from thousands of years ago that happens to share the same name with a new country in the region vs a current "kingdom" that has doubled down on defending their atrocities as recently as this past year, which still has many of the same political parties and individuals who helped those atrocities to happen. I'm not sitting here arguing about Oliver Cromwell I'm talking recent things.
-
No probably not. But if someone had said "God Bless Germany", how long would it have taken before someone said, yeah, but...
My guess is not very long.
And part of my heritage is Irish yes, but not all of it. I'm a good old American Mutt. But I am connected with my Irish side. I have cousins there still who have had some less than pleasant dealings with the British that I won't get into here. Does that help to shape my opinion? Sure. But other things do as well.
I am a student of history. And along with Wags, I have always been fascinated with English history. It probably started when I was a kid and loved knights and pirates. Henry II (and his legacy) is one on the historical figures I find most fascinating. Another is Churchill. Both men heros and villains in the same body. Both accomplished great things, and terrible things. Both analogs for the English. They have done wonderful things, I mean, I love Dickens and Led Zeppelin. But they have had painted the world with blood of the oppressed. For hundreds and hundreds of years. A record that few other tyrannical regimes can match. They weren't the Nazis, but the Nazis were in power for 20 years, not 1000. If you were to look at the British time in India, it would match just about any other level of atrocities in history.
Oh, and let me guess, you have the Union Jack flying outside your house and a picture of Queen Elizabeth on your mantle? Hmmm, maybe not, but proud descendant of England?
100% of my DNA is Northern European. I do not fly the Union Jack. In fact, parts of my family got the hell out of England in the 17th Century.... Other parts left Germany, Ireland, Sweden, Norway... As far as I can trace it back.
I didn't imply you said anything... you said I have a bias, the implication was that I can't possibly be correct that England doesn't deserve such praise from Chico's so I asked you to be the judge of one event. I did not put words into your mouth or anything of the sort.
It's very relevant metric if someone is creating a false equivalency between a fallen empire like Mongolia from thousands of years ago that happens to share the same name with a new country in the region vs a current "kingdom" that has doubled down on defending their atrocities as recently as this past year, which still has many of the same political parties and individuals who helped those atrocities to happen. I'm not sitting here arguing about Oliver Cromwell I'm talking recent things.
Its only a false equivalency because it isn't convenient to you. Got it. And stop being so outraged about 26 people when the government you call HOME drops bombs and hurls missiles from unmanned drones daily. Where is the outrage for that? What a crock. You're not booing every time the National Anthem is being played, so maybe drop the Irish pride routine... because it really seems disingenuous.
Every country has bad history, and a lot of them won't and don't apologize for their past transgressions... sooooooooo get over it.
-
Its only a false equivalency because it isn't convenient to you. Got it. And stop being so outraged about 26 people when the government you call HOME drops bombs and hurls missiles from unmanned drones daily. Where is the outrage for that? What a crock. You're not booing every time the National Anthem is being played, so maybe drop the Irish pride routine... because it really seems disingenuous.
Every country has bad history, and a lot of them won't and don't apologize for their past transgressions... sooooooooo get over it.
No it's still a false equivalency. Youre just refusing to acknowledge it's a different situation when a government has been taken out of power and acknowledged it's wrong doing and changed (Germany) vs a government of victors that is still the same.
I have loads more examples than that one instance to be outraged by, just seems like the one everyone would know the most. As far as booing, you don't know me so you probably shouldn't make that assumption. I don't boo, it's disrespectful to those around me, not going to kneel either, but I sure as hell am not cheering along, taking my hat off, getting a woody hearing the national anthem either. And certainly not proclaiming god bless America, same as god bless England. Sorry to disappoint you. I hope you don't have any American pride or else it's a little hypocritical of you to tell a citizen of another country "drop your pride" and ignore transgressions that have never been addressed internationally. I expect you don't have any hate toward any country that has ever wronged the USA then.
-
No it's still a false equivalency. Youre just refusing to acknowledge it's a different situation when a government has been taken out of power and acknowledged it's wrong doing and changed (Germany) vs a government of victors that is still the same.
I have loads more examples than that one instance to be outraged by, just seems like the one everyone would know the most. As far as booing, you don't know me so you probably shouldn't make that assumption. I don't boo, it's disrespectful to those around me, not going to kneel either, but I sure as hell am not cheering along, taking my hat off, getting a woody hearing the national anthem either. And certainly not proclaiming god bless America, same as god bless England. Sorry to disappoint you. I hope you don't have any American pride or else it's a little hypocritical of you to tell a citizen of another country "drop your pride" and ignore transgressions that have never been addressed internationally. I expect you don't have any hate toward any country that has ever wronged the USA then.
I'm not sure I can roll my eyes hard enough at this.
-
I'm not sure I can roll my eyes hard enough at this.
That's how I've felt about your false equivalency, assumptions about me and unanswered potential hypocrisy. So we're good :)
-
That's how I've felt about your false equivalency, assumptions about me and unanswered potential hypocrisy. So we're good :)
Well, my assumptions were true.
Pretty interesting that you're drawing a continuous line for England as though nothing has changed in a thousand years. Your argument is that change in style of government equates to limitless blame. Got it. Its a really stupid argument, but hey, I guess you're the one trying your best to make it.
-
Well, my assumptions were true.
Pretty interesting that you're drawing a continuous line for England as though nothing has changed in a thousand years. Your argument is that change in style of government equates to limitless blame. Got it. Its a really stupid argument, but hey, I guess you're the one trying your best to make it.
Good god aren't you're real mature now that you've turned to childish insults. Are you a student or something?
I don't care about thousands of years ago. Remember you are the one who brought that up Initially, and have continued arguing as if I'm bringing up stuff from "a thousand years" reread and point to me where I've mentioned any reason for disliking England that is more than the past 50-70 years. If you do I'll donate $50 to a non partisan charity of your choice.
Let me put this argument real simple:
"God Bless England" is in favor of support for a country who's CURRENT powers endorse essentially redlining practices, and discrimination based on religion and have continued to support the cover up of various atrocities that have happened in recent memory. I do not draw a continuous line, never have. The era I am arguing is linear, because it literally is still the same government since the Anglo Irish treaty in the 20s. In that time span England has done plenty to warrant not being "blessed".
Everything else you've brought up whether it be stuff from other countries, atrocities from thousands of years ago, to my ancestry, to whether I "boo" at the national anthem, to now claiming that I've been saying England still has the same government. Is all A) not relevant. B) In many cases misrepresenting what I have said.
If you'd like to return to a legitimate debate and stop childishly insulting then happy to if not just assume it's not worth me time.
-
They have done wonderful things, I mean, I love Dickens and Led Zeppelin. But they have had painted the world with blood of the oppressed.
That is a great way to describe Led Zeppelin. Bonzo would be smiling.
-
Good god aren't you're real mature now that you've turned to childish insults. Are you a student or something?
I don't care about thousands of years ago. Remember you are the one who brought that up Initially, and have continued arguing as if I'm bringing up stuff from "a thousand years" reread and point to me where I've mentioned any reason for disliking England that is more than the past 50-70 years. If you do I'll donate $50 to a non partisan charity of your choice.
Let me put this argument real simple:
"God Bless England" is in favor of support for a country who's CURRENT powers endorse essentially redlining practices, and discrimination based on religion and have continued to support the cover up of various atrocities that have happened in recent memory. I do not draw a continuous line, never have. The era I am arguing is linear, because it literally is still the same government since the Anglo Irish treaty in the 20s. In that time span England has done plenty to warrant not being "blessed".
Everything else you've brought up whether it be stuff from other countries, atrocities from thousands of years ago, to my ancestry, to whether I "boo" at the national anthem, to now claiming that I've been saying England still has the same government. Is all A) not relevant. B) In many cases misrepresenting what I have said.
If you'd like to return to a legitimate debate and stop childishly insulting then happy to if not just assume it's not worth me time.
God Bless America.
Go.
-
That is a great way to describe Led Zeppelin. Bonzo would be smiling.
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/xPFyyVbqVCD4c/giphy.gif)
-
I don't care about thousands of years ago. Remember you are the one who brought that up Initially, and have continued arguing as if I'm bringing up stuff from "a thousand years" reread and point to me where I've mentioned any reason for disliking England that is more than the past 50-70 years. If you do I'll donate $50 to a non partisan charity of your choice.
Curious... why a "non-partisan" charity? Aren't all charities non-partisan by definition (at least for tax status)?
-
Curious... why a "non-partisan" charity? Aren't all charities non-partisan by definition (at least for tax status)?
Ehhh I just wanted that established in case I forgot some response I wrote. It didn't matter anyways as I was not the one bringing that up.