Reply With Quote
sorry, didn't hit the link, but it reminded me of darrin.
when darrin said he was so happy to have a wealthy boss.
one of the most pathetic things i've ever heard.
Paul Ryan, who is in love with the rich, gets called out by TNR.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cha...xposes-himself
sorry, didn't hit the link, but it reminded me of darrin.
when darrin said he was so happy to have a wealthy boss.
one of the most pathetic things i've ever heard.
Yeah, it's much better to work for a ty performing company and a poor boss.
It's also good when Wall Street takes it in the teeth, especially if you have a 401k.
Sometimes it can be. Isn't that how a lot of startups that eventually flourished started? It's probably a higher-risk, higher-reward.
Maybe you should take some responsibility for who you invest your retirement money with.
I'm sure there are some cases like this, but I can only speak from personal experience. I work for a start-up. We survived 9/11 and the cluster of 2008. When our company wasn't doing well, we went on some internal "austerity measures". When the company is doing well, there is money for better equipment, more personnel, raises, bonuses, etc.
I risked. I lost.
If someone only invests in non-stocks in their mutual fund, they are a complete dumbass.
I've been on both sides. Worked for the multinational company on a salary, with the internal politics and all that crap. And helped build the startup as an employee with a non-rich boss, and nowadays own a 30% stake in the company. It's a risk, and I lived paycheck to paycheck at times during the last 10 years we've been in business. But the eventual possible reward is also bigger. We just had a call from a VC fund not two days ago. There might be an opportunity to grow right there. If not, we'll keep chugging along.
It might sound odd, but I don't have a 401K, IRA or any kind of mutual fund. Like you said, non-stocks are very low yield, which at times can't even outpace inflation, and stocks are way too volatile for my taste. Plus up to not long ago, I just didn't have enough money to throw in that roulette.
It's part of the reason why I don't think privatizing SS is a good idea at all.
Ryan's protecting/enriching the wealthy?
Is anybody surprised?
Do the Repugs, or the tea baggers, EVER do or want anything else?
Nevertheless, should go over well with the donor class.
Hows that?
Ever get a job from a poor boss?
Social Security benefits helped put Ryan through college. He got his, Jack, so too ing bad if you don't get yours.
Interesting. 30% is a damn good share. I wish I owned that much. One good thing about 401k is that it does keep you from being completely anal raped by the IRS (no ).
It does as long as you don't dip into it and the market is offsetting the tax savings. Otherwise you're getting anally raped by both. A Roth IRA makes lot more sense from a IRS standpoint when it comes to retirement, IMO.
I don't have a problem with the market taking a , tbh. When the money isn't there, it's on people's pockets, which isn't such a bad of a thing for an economy that needs spending.
So what are you doing with your money? I never figured you for a gold bug.
Right now paying the bills and paying off the little debt I have
But should I have enough investment money, I would most likely put it on precious metals like gold. Not commodity gold, but actual gold coins and the like. Eventually with enough capital I'd like to move into rental property as a good Italian that I am. If I actually were to invest on the market short-term right now, it would have to strictly be on energy stocks.
oh look, ppl still crying about rich people lmao
"ppl still crying about rich people"
YOU LIE, GFY
I feel sorry for the rich.... they have it rough
Republicans are evil, pay no attention to Obama in bed with GE and GE paying zero corporate income taxes last year.
Or Geithner, Obama, and co. doing everything they can to protect the auto unions and their Wall Street banking buddies.
Or Obama and co. hooking up all their health care buddies with Obamacare.
[/ignorant spurstalk.com liberal]
Keep people poor, uninformed, and most importantly, dependent on a nanny state, and you'll have one uva loyal voting block -- and they do.
silver ETF's.Right now paying the bills and paying off the little debt I have
But should I have enough investment money, I would most likely put it on precious metals like gold. Not commodity gold, but actual gold coins and the like. Eventually with enough capital I'd like to move into rental property as a good Italian that I am. If I actually were to invest on the market short-term right now, it would have to strictly be on energy stocks.
ZSL and AGQ. You can make a killing trading between them over and over. My friend actually created an equation that tells him when to buy/sell these 2 by using the MAC-D, historical price shifts, and a few other variables. Gives him a number between 0 and 1, which gives him an idea of when to buy/sell.
He said he ran it back 5 years and it would have been a good bet over 90% of the time.
Anyone taking a political side, as you so clearly are, has the most ignorance.
Good job.
Energy stocks would be a mediocre play right now. I got killed in TSO and AXAS recently (could have pulled out with a hefty gain, but Libya came out of nowhere and added too much uncertainty). I basically had to wait an entire quarter to get my gains back and that killed me because I'm not an investor at all. They've made an impressive run for about a month but have kinda cooled off.
I don't keep up with the sector as a whole because I tend to micro manage, but from the energy stocks I've seen they've all already made their run. They can still go a bit higher, but the lion's share of the pop just happened.
By the articles le, I thought we had Tony Weiner part deux going on.
I don't know what you call 'short-term'. I call short-term two to three years. If I needed to be as hands-on as I would need to be on a casino, I probably won't invest in it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
