Reply With Quote
You are better than this . . . (I think)
But, but, but if it goes down it is Obama's fault and if it goes up it is the power of the free market at work...
You are better than this . . . (I think)
RG = The Man
Market bounces due to good news from Citi (never mind the writedown in Q4 apparently and the fact it's a penny stock) as well as some signs of leadership from DC, albeit from Bernanke.
Whoever's to blame at this point, let's figure that out later. The bailout (nationalization, whatever) of AIG continues to look like a black hole and provides a neat trick to provide cover to the fact that the US taxpayer is, at this point, bailing out foreign counterparties, as well as Goldman (surprise, surprise) and BofA, among others. As far as the funny money printing in DC goes, AIG seems to be the final determinant in how much longer that will continue.
Are we missing out on a tremendous buy & hold opportunity? The markets have sustained a brisk rally & are approaching 7000... Citi Bank is posting profits, GE has rebounded, Ford has re worked their contracts…Is now the time to invest in equities?
Only if you are prepared to live with the volatility and see you investment go down in value 20 - 30% in the short term.Are we missing out on a tremendous buy & hold opportunity? The markets have sustained a brisk rally & are approaching 7000... Citi Bank is posting profits, GE has rebounded, Ford has re worked their contracts…Is now the time to invest in equities?
In the long term, this is a buying opportunity.
That is the problem with trying to time the market.Are we missing out on a tremendous buy & hold opportunity? The markets have sustained a brisk rally & are approaching 7000... Citi Bank is posting profits, GE has rebounded, Ford has re worked their contracts…Is now the time to invest in equities?
You never fully know when the down market will end, and stocks will rebound.
Better to simply go for the long term, invest in sound, well-managed companies, and not sweat swings like this. Buy in at regular intervals, and accept that you will lose some money in down markets, but the fact that you bought in down markets will give you more shares when the market finally turns around.
Dollar cost averaging seems to me to be an excellent idea/strategy/concept.
Brief primer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_cost_averaging
More links:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...ng&btnG=Search
A quickie about the pros and cons:
http://cashmoneylife.com/2008/10/08/...pros-and-cons/
I agree.
This is nothing but a short term bounce. With UBS announcing a record $18B loss and consumer confidence hitting a new low (just two of the most recent negative headlines), the market will continue to fall until there are clear indications the economy will be turning around in the future.
CFO optimism index
Dead-cat bounce?
Mar 11th 2009
From Economist.com
Chief financial officers around the world are a bit less gloomy
GLIMMER of recovery or a dead-cat bounce? Confidence in economic prospects has picked up slightly among chief financial officers around the world—although pessimists still far outnumber optimists. This is according to the latest quarterly poll of over 1,000 CFOs, conducted in late February by Duke University in America, Tilburg University in the Netherlands and CFO, a sister publication to The Economist. But whereas finance chiefs may be marginally less dour than in previous quarters, they are continuing to slash earnings forecasts and are speeding up plans for layoffs and spending cuts. Most CFOs in America, Europe and Asia expect to freeze hiring and wages over the next 12 months.
------------------
Personally, I would not even begin to want to speculate about where it is going in a week.
The "dead cat" just bounced past 7000...
I'm no expert on any of this, but it IS kinda funny how CC only shows up in this thread when the market is going south.
I'm here. I'm glad to see the market bounce. It's better than it continuing to go straight down.
The fact that the bounce has lasted for three days does not mean that it's still not just a dead cat bounce.
If you really think that the markets are that great I suggest you put your money where your mouth is and then check back in a month.
man was hoping for the market to tank so i can use me dividends on DRP....fkn market has been good for last couple of days...still holding on...
No way man. The market is giving us its judgment on Obama's policies, remember?
Investors must really like what he is doing, and think it will be enourmously effective.
If Republicans want to hand their hat on the "the market is ONLY tanking because of Obama's policies", then when the market goes up they give the Democrats the "the market ONLY went up because of Obama's policies."
The actual truth that what the president does has not a whole lot of impact on the state of the economy, and any real impact takes years to be felt, is irrelevant.
Thats what I always thought, anyway. The President only controls the surplus/balance/deficit of the Federal government directly.
He can indirectly influence the economy by policy, proposed legislation and cabinet appointments, but I never thought less than 90 days was enough to judge accordingly or, the most absurd, lay blame.
You guys just keep 69ing each other and pretend that politics don't affect the markets.
Actually, I heard the best financial news today that I have heard in weeks. The premier of China came out today and very subtly but obviously warned Obama to not devalue the dollar through reckless spending (with the implied "or else we will quit buying your bonds")
He might be able to ignore the Republicans in Congress but he would be ill advised to ignore China.
now he's pandering to china while throwing in some phobic innuendo.
As I have told you previously I am not a phobe. I fully support your right to (paraphrasing B2b) take a nice stiff supple meaty lubed up up your ass.
Strawman, spin, repeat. Conservatives seem to take their debate strategies from shampoo instructions, i.e. lather, rinse, repeat.
I would never say that politics don't really effect markets. That is silly.
I will say day-to-day swings are not really good indicators of effective policy. THAT is reaaally silly.
You distorted my ultimate position in an attempt to dismiss it, i.e. strawman fallacy, then commit a further logical fallacy, the post hoc fallacy.
http://skepdic.com/posthoc.htmlThe post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this therefore because of this) fallacy is based upon the mistaken notion that simply because one thing happens after another, the first event was a cause of the second event. Post hoc reasoning is the basis for many supers ions and erroneous beliefs.
The only thing you can logically prove in this case is order of time, you have absolutely zero proof of causality, any more than I had when I sarcastically claimed that Obama is doing something great because of what the markets are doing.
Don't Believe Everything You Think: The 6 Basic Mistakes We Make in Thinking (Paperback)
Product Description
Do you believe that you can consistently beat the stock market if you put in the effort? —that some people have extrasensory perception? —that crime and drug abuse in America are on the rise? Many people hold one or more of these beliefs although research shows that they are not true. And it’s no wonder since advertising and some among the media promote these and many more questionable notions. Although our creative problem-solving capacity is what has made humans the successful species we are, our brains are prone to certain kinds of errors that only careful critical thinking can correct. This enlightening book discusses how to recognize faulty thinking and develop the necessary skills to become a more effective problem solver. Author Thomas Kida identifies "the six-pack of problems" that leads many of us unconsciously to accept false ideas:
· We prefer stories to statistics.
· We seek to confirm, not to question, our ideas.
· We rarely appreciate the role of chance and coincidence in shaping events.
· We sometimes misperceive the world around us.
· We tend to oversimplify our thinking.
· Our memories are often inaccurate.
Kida vividly illustrates these tendencies with numerous examples that demonstrate how easily we can be fooled into believing something that isn’t true. In a complex society where success—in all facets of life—often requires the ability to evaluate the validity of many conflicting claims, the critical-thinking skills examined in this informative and engaging book will prove invaluable.
I do bookkeeping for an older couple who have managed to ac ulate a fair amount of wealth.
They were invited to a rather exclusive seminar given by Ken Fischer of Fischer investments. Valuing my insight and expertise, they asked me to come along as their guest.
Since the seminar was in the middle of the election season, one of the questions that came up was "What do I do with my money if X gets elected?"
Fischer has spent some time as a political analsyst (if my memory is correct), and brought up an interesting graphic showing market performances during each year of each president for the last 100 years or so, excluding the outlier of the Great Depression, which tended to skew the average performance rather unfavorably away from Republicans.
He showed a VERY consistant trend in market performance. In the first year of Democratic presidencies, the market tended to be down a bit more than in Republican presidencies. In the second year of Democratic presidencies, that downturn was more than made up for in the second year, and there was no statisctically signficant difference between Republican presidents overall and Democratic presidents overall.
His analysis was that a lot of investors seemed to believe that Democrats were bad for investors, and pulled their money out, then realized that there wasn't really a difference in overall business environments and put their money back into the market in the second year.
You might be confident in your confirmation bias, but what I know of the actual data contradicts your theory, and suggests that there is not really that much difference between the two parties as some, apparently including yourself, Cosmic, would want to believe.
Unfortunately you are correct that there is little difference between the two parties these days when it comes to spending. They both suck. Fiscal conservatism is dead and buried. At the same time, if you really think that Obama's socialist nanny state vision is going to be good for the economy long term I want some of what you are smoking.You might be confident in your confirmation bias, but what I know of the actual data contradicts your theory, and suggests that there is not really that much difference between the two parties as some, apparently including yourself, Cosmic, would want to believe.
we get it, roy. you're just looking for a safe place to land.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. consumers' mood improved unexpectedly in March as confidence in government economic policy improved, but sentiment remained anemic overall and close to a record low, a survey showed on Friday.
It's all about confidence, with that I agree. The thing's just as likely to drop 500 points next week as it is to go up.
The financial people are turned on by the possibility of
- changing the accounting rules so they don't have to massively write down investments to reflect real actual value, and
- the stock market change that will make short selling (in bulk) harder.
If those two things don't happen you can expect the market to lose all this week's gains and then some.
The funny thing is everyone is talking about this "three day gain" when the Dow eeked out a stastically insignificant 5 point gain on Wednesday. I guess when the market hadn't gone up 2 days in row for over a month, you take what you can get ...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
