Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
Euro rebounded a little today, I wonder why...because no change in interest rates? I see nothing compared to a few days ago to make it look more valuable.
Firstly, let me clarify to you that I wouldn't be in the market at this moment if I didn't believe it was likely to advance.
But... I have clearly shown more than almost anyone that I am not a guy to put my money in a market that is obviously in a declining mode. That's why I was mostly out for the majority of the recent decline.
Now, as far as focusing on the daily volatility, as you call it... the only value I see in doing that is if you are inclined to actually trade on those daily swings. Daily movement in share prices can equal profits, while no movement only equals no profits. Day traders with computers take advantage of this movement every day. That's often how they make their money... by playing the swings.
I definitely don't consider myself a true "day-trader". There is no way I can do what those guys do. Nor do I want to. I have better things to do. But I do consider myself a market momentum trader. If the market as a whole is going into a tailspin or correction, I attempt to avoid most of the downside. It's that simple. When bargains are created, I consider buying them. And I am not afraid to dump a stock shortly after I buy it, if I think it is going to head south.
It is mathematically, as well as financially, appropriate and smart to avoid losses whenever possible. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to ride a large downward wave when you can preserve capital instead.
Consider, AS AN EXAMPLE, that the Dow is at 10,000. And you own $100,00 worth of stocks. Then, let's say it goes down to 8,000... and that you had stayed in the market You would have suffered a loss of 20 percent. Your stocks would be worth $80,000. OK,... Now be very aware of this... It's return from 8,000 to 10,000 would require a gain of 25% (not the 20% it lost) just to reclaim that 20% loss!
Let's continue... Now let's say, AS AN EXAMPLE, that I also had invested $100,000 in the market, but I decided to get out of the market when it was at 10,000 and I ultimately avoided that 20% loss. Then I got back in at 8,000. So, when the market goes up 25%, you would only break even, but I would have $125,000. Taking it a little further, if the market went up 50% from the low of 8,000, you would then have $120,000, but I would have $150,000!
That's why it is sooooooo important to not let your porfolio or any stock investments significantly drop in value if you can avoid it. It takes a whole lot more percentage gains to simply make up for those losses.
The math has a voice of its own, and never lies... listen to it carefully, grasshopper.
Agree 100%. Furthermore, there would be many smaller bounces within your example, so if you played them right... all the way to the bank.
Absolutely!! All those bounces are terrific opportunities for those that want to take advantage. I personally don't take it to that extreme, but nonetheless, it's there for the taking.
I kind of look at the market like a yo-yo hiking up a mountain... all those little ups and downs, but overall generally climbing... until recent history however, whereby it falls off the mountain periodically, only to have to climb it all over again.
This problem with the market in recent history is that it pulls back so far that it wipes out much, if not all, of the "long-term" gains. This drastic change in the market's behavior is now a proven historical fact, and makes it necessary to change what was at one time a tried-and-true long-term approach, to a somewhat shorter-term approach.
There are those that do not like this change, and are stuck in the older mentality. Ultimately, if they do not change with the times, it will cost them.
There are experts that have written about this change to the market... describing how and why traditional long-term investing in equities is no longer as effective or viable as it once was, and that it requires closer attention than is often desireable... but nonetheless it does require closer attention, and shorter-term adjustments to be profitable.
I think your post is `right on` Math doesn`t lie...
Just a guess, but if you have enough money, I think the example you used, if multiplied thirty or forty times, makes a good case for the bonds.....just think of a solid ten percent return year in and year out, particularly if it were in a retirement account without taxes.You would double those millions in less time than we have been posting on these boards.....I am happy you have your major funds in bonds....Tony
Ha ha, if this is valid to determine the position of an electron in a lapse of time equivalent of a one quintillionth of a second, it should be good enough to determine ups and downs in the nanosecond markets.
Regards, Jose
PS: X-Ray showed my griddle joints are OK. I can do anything except run and bounce by now. Yet I must improve my physical strength. Anyway, I'm in the movie again. :shades:
Good news for you We both need to be more careful, so I hope when my `accident` time comes, I can minimize it by heeding my own warning....I know you are getting tuned up for the soccer games...Tony
First things first... I am glad (along with our great friend Tony) that your X-Ray revealed positive news and that you are healing up well. You'll be up to your "old self" before you know it... LOL. I have no doubt your wife (and you) must be relieved to know that she can return to being your beautiful bride instead of your nurse... which she did for you so willingly. You are blessed to have such a partner in life. I truly mean that.
Second... with regards to the article about attoseconds... thank you for sharing it with me, as you know I am interested in that sort of thing, ever since our first conversations about the Large Hadron Collider. After having read the article you linked, I can only say that there is little doubt that those among us that wear the most accurate of wristwatches will clearly end up needing new ones one day, as their accuracy now seems quite pitful.
Always appreciate your strategies and really good moves....like the 1'er and the 911 made with you!
At the end of the day, you only loose if you sell. Otherwise, the market could drive you nuts. Better to relax and enjoy the ride!
This, too, shall pass. Debt is going to hold back the gain for awhile. After that, the sun will shine again. Better oil rigs will persevere...and the price will return to $100/bbl.
The market should be around 14K by then...next year, I would be so bold as to predict. But folks need to get back to work first. That's the rub!
Now I'm off to attend to my very sick Mom out on L.I.. Say a prayer and thanks!
A man ill in bed but with the brain still functioning can be as unpredictable in his wish as a particle in the quantum mechanics can be. My poor wife had not the attosecond pum-probe. She says now she is released again, more than me.
I admire your capability with the markets and in business, I really do.
Thanks for posting that article. I found it to be a little too basic and over simplified. Too bad they didn't explain in more detail, but I guess it was meant for the masses !!
Have you read all the new taxes associated with the healthcare bill. I didn't come across this story until yesterday but there will now be a 3.8% sales tax on the sale of your home thanks to the healthcare bill. I thought real estate was punished enough,
Excerpt:
Tax on Home Sales. Imposes a 3.8 percent tax on home sales and other real estate transactions. Middle-income people must pay the full tax even if they are “rich” for only one day – the day they sell their house and buy a new one.
That is on the sale price. Plus about 25% if you live in CA capital gains tax. Hopefully a more common sense Congress will scrap that horrible Obamacare bill.
Well I read the article, and assume that is after the half million that is exempt.....I do believe the long term cap. gains is going up, and personally I have found it impossible to really accumulate much money due to the taxes that have been in existence my entire life....Man once you have children ---forget about it---
Another thing that is stacked against us is no deduction for losses , but full tax for gains......As Tagman recently noted, math doesn`t lie.....Thanks for the heads up though Tony
Jose, even though this is a little beyond my complete comprehension, it is very interesting/fascinating. Wow, my brain is now much more clear after reading this article .
I am very happy to hear that you are making steady progress toward a complete recovery after your serious accident.
Some analysts say the frequent shifts are a sign that the market is closer to getting back in balance after the S&P 500 index fell 13.7 percent from its 2010 peak on April 23 until its low of the year on June 7. It's important to remember that it can take time for the market to find its bottom. That means there could be more selling.
"It could go down another 10 percent or so," said John Apruzzese, partner and equity portfolio manager at Evercore Wealth Management in New York. "We had one of the most dramatic drops in investor sentiment that we've ever experienced."
Apruzzese and other analysts note that the big drops in confidence drive away investors and can also make the market prone to a surprise climb. When investors give up, savvy traders often see that as a sign to step in.
It's a given among many professional money managers that everyday investors usually pull out of the market at exactly the wrong time. That signals for the smart money that it's time to move in.
Individual investors funneled $6.3 billion into U.S. stock funds in April when the market hit its highest level of the year. Then May brought the steepest slide for the S&P 500 index since February 2009. Investors responded by yanking $15 billion from U.S. stock mutual funds, according to investment research firm Morningstar Inc. May's withdrawal was the biggest since March 2009, when the S&P 500 index hit a 12-year low and started rocketing higher.
I would submit you have a good sense of timing based on your knack of repelling losses.
I know one thing: I've gained on the books since investing from 1996 - 2008. Since I really do not need the invested portion of my total portfolio, I can whether the roller coaster. One thing I absolutely know: I know NOTHING regarding timing. How should one invest...or trade...or time buying and selling?
I submit no one really knows...though they say they do.
Investors are growing concerned about how the economy will respond when it has to do without supports from the government like stimulus spending and low interest rates. This week brings reports on housing starts for May and the National Association of Home Builders' housing market index, which measures industry confidence. The reports will give a read on how demand has been holding up since the expiration of a homebuyer tax credit in April.
"I think the bottom line is visibility about the near-term outlook has dimmed," said Adrian Cronje, chief investment officer at the investment firm Balentine in Atlanta. "It's almost like an aircraft. We've gone through some clouds and you're likely to have a few more air pockets."
Now we have the leg up and the brokers again make a commission.....I`m telling everyone, the economy is chugging along, but the BP disaster hasn`t been solved yet, therefore it will unfortunately have a big place in our lives ....Devastating to everyone , and Wall Street will use it to their advantage Tony
Tony, I am positive that this BP disaster is much larger and much worse than the media is even capable of reporting. Over time, we will learn more and more about the true magnitude and complexity of the devastation.
Regarding the market... this recent upside shows that there is indeed a bottom, at least for now... and that is a very good sign. I don't know about the rest of the gang, but I personally have been a buyer this week.
I sensed you had (been a buyer), and also as it was declining.....You really do have a good sense of the market with these new parameters..
When I am at the farm and look at the miles of river, and marsh, and think of the people who are so impacted by this tragedy, it stops me in my tracks.......I have always had a sense of the natural wonders we all live with, and take it upon myself not to do any harm.....The greed of BP is astounding, and I hope this sets the stage for the rest of the business managers-ceo- not to take any shortcuts......Arthur Anderson was a large company and the government just shut it down, and a hundred fifty thousand people had to find new employment......I hope that BP is treated the same way---although I don`t wish their employees any harm.....Maybe a reorganization with BP broke up and absorbed by other large companies....Tony
Tony, I think you are getting a little carried away with placing so much blame on BP. Sure the blowout was their fault, but it was an accident and accidents happen. Now Obama has taken over full responsibility for the cleanup activities...and that has been bungled beyond all belief. Two months and virtually nothing has been done.
He won't allow other oil companies or other countries to help although they have offered. He won't even allow the local people to do much. Finally, Governor Jindal has defied him and started building the off shore levies. Obama just cannot make a decision.
Maybe this is another example of not letting a crisis go to waste.
Accident? I don't think anyone would say it was intentional.
However, accidents happen for a variety of reasons... but in this case there is enough evidence to suggest serious negligence on BP's part, which would leave BP in a position of extreme liability and responsibility for what occurred. Also, BP's behavior after the "accident" is highly questionable, to say the least.
In addition, accidents usually result in various consequences... consequences as a direct result of the accident itself, specifically the yet-unmeasureable massive environmental damage... and legal consequences to the responsible party, if there is one... and in this case it would most definitely appear to be BP.
I might add that I also truly believe that the President of the United States is guilty, although to a much lesser degree, but nonetheless guilty of negligence, in that he failed to act in a responsible and timely fashion, and I believe that some level of appropriate legal action should be taken against him for his failure.
As far as I know, no one knows the actual cause of the accident. There is a lot of speculation but no one has actually come up with an answer. It very well could have been something out of BP's control. It is quite likely that we will never know the cause...but Obama has put a hold on drilling until we know the cause.
It appears that BP has stepped up to the plate and taken responsibility for the accident. They are putting $20 Billion dollars in a fund to pay claims and that fund will be administered by the U.S. government. Plus they have said that this will not cap their liability.
Do you remember how unmerciful the press and the Democrats were on the Bush response to Katrina? That criticism was well deserved. The people of Louisiana are saying that Obama's response to the oil spill is much slower and worse than Bush's response to Katrina.
As usual---well said--and another thing I appreciate is that you can have your criticism and not feel in the least way as a `bigot`...Thank goodness the race question is out of the picture..
I too am disappointed in the response by the government, and the apparent disorganization , and lack of `take charge` leadership.....I think our citizens are ready to do something, and not for pay, they just need a dedicated leader....
When we had hurricane Hugo, everyone was very quick to help their neighbor, even though in some cases you didn`t even know them....America has a great spirit when challenged, and this is a monster challenge ....Tony
Yes BP owns the well, but isn't there an operations contract with TRANS OCEAN? And wasn't the incident under Trans Ocean's watch? Perhaps BP is targeted because they are much larger with more Liability insurance & deeper pockets.
Do you remember how unmerciful the press and the Democrats were on the Bush response to Katrina? That criticism was well deserved. The people of Louisiana are saying that Obama's response to the oil spill is much slower and worse than Bush's response to Katrina.
I do think there's a bit of a difference. FEMA is a Federal Agency with the sole purpose of helping the U.S. in domestic disaster situations. Katrina was not a surprise, everybody knew it was coming. Katrina is just the type of disaster that FEMA exists to support. Bush appointed the head of FEMA. And FEMA was inept. The head of FEMA was inept. But that doesn't excuse the IMHO much greater responsibility on the government of New Orleans and the state of Louisiana.
OTOH, the scope of this problem was not immediately apparent. It happened over 100 miles offshore. If the well had been capped fairly quickly there might not have been much of a problem on US shores. BP said they were going to fix it. They are the oil company who should have expertise. Over days leading into weeks, they tried A, then B, then C, etc. It took a number of weeks for it to become apparent how screwed up BP was and how they basically had no ability to solve the problem. Whereas with Katrina you knew it was a major disaster on day 1.
I also agree that Obama could have moved quicker. But as usual the partisan sides are doing the big "my guy was good, your guy is bad" name calling. The reality is not at either extreme.
It amazes me. If I'm a moralistic neocon I say Limbaugh is correct and all gays are bad. Then Limbaugh has Elton John perform at his party and suddenly Elton is good, because my guy said he was, right? :confuse:
Only matters which side is saying it, not what is being said. What ever happened to independent thinking? The party system has pretty much destroyed it, to the detriment of this country.
So anyway, to keep on topic, I see BP is suspending the dividend. I heard a radio commentator yesterday speculating that BP may not survive this crisis. Based upon their safety record on this and previous disasters, I would tend to think that is a good thing.
About the overall responsibility of BP, and the attitude that accidents happen, so let`s blame the government for everything associated with the response.....I easily associate a twenty to twenty four inch pipe gushing way more than was alluded to, as there are several of them on the farm, and the misleading reporting by BP is just a small example of their guilt.....I don`t accept the words from BP , just the consequences of their actions...Tony ps on further thought I would retract my statement on closing them down....We need them to stop this gusher, and be around for a long time to deal with the aftermath of their gross negligence.
What do you think about the reported sale by Tony Haywood of 1/3 of his BP stock one month before the Deepwater Horizon blew up? Was he just lucky or could he have had insider knowledge that a catastrophe was likely?
BP has a history of spills, fires and explosions at its facilities. Before the Deepwater Horizon rig killed 11 and filled the Gulf of Mexico with oil, BP had a 2005 explosion in Texas City, Texas, that killed 15 people, and a 2006 oil leak in its Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, operations pipeline. BP stock has plummeted 50% since the Gulf of Mexico spill – losing $90 billion in shareholder value. However, BP CEO Tony Hayward cashed in about a third of his BP stock one month before the Deepwater Horizon rig burst, according to The Daily Telegraph.
I personally wouldn`t like to think that way..although there is a pattern of accidents...I do know that BP has been thinking of selling their Alaskan pipeline or holdings, and I think because of a lack of maintenance...That would all be aboveboard as they have had to shut the pipeline down on occasion, so `buyer beware`.....
Alot of posters on this board certainly can express themselves in fine order and I mean that sincerely Tony
They are putting $20 Billion dollars in a fund to pay claims and that fund will be administered by the U.S. government. Plus they have said that this will not cap their liability.
I think every claim will be taken to court for settlement. 1000s of people will claim huge losses they have no way of proving. It will drag on till at least 2030 and beyond.
For example we know that excess fertilizer run-off producing high yields of corn for ethanol has killed about 7000 square miles of the Gulf. The same area being impacted by the oil spill. The oil spill cannot kill shrimp, crab and fish the US government has already killed with ethanol mandates.
An over 7,000-square-mile wildlife "dead zone" located in the center of the Gulf of Mexico has grown from being a curiosity to a colossus over the past two decades, according to the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), and scientists are now concerned the recent oil spill and other emerging chemical threats could widen the zone even further.
The NWF describes the dead zone as being "the largest on record in the hemisphere in coastal waters and one of the biggest in the world."
During the summer months, it is nearly devoid of wildlife, save for the dead bodies of crabs, shrimp and other marine species that succumb to oxygen depletion in the polluted water.
Animal toxicology experts believe the Gulf dead zone is a man-made monstrosity.
"Outside of widespread impacts from oil release, the drainage of the Mississippi River into the Central Gulf has deposited massive amounts of agricultural chemicals and fertilizers from agricultural activities in the Central United States," Ron Kendall, director of The Institute of Environmental and Human Health, told Discovery News.
BP does not own the Pipeline. It is a consortium called Alyeska Pipeline company. BP has operated in a diminishing field for some years. They are way past what was considered useful life. Conoco Phillips along with others are moving westward into the old Naval Petroleum reserve. No worries about oil spills there. The Navy discovered the oil because of the natural pools of the stuff on the tundra. That was nearly 100 years ago. The Feds just sat on it until Bush pushed to open it up for production when ANWR was put off limits. All the same tundra. Different Eco Nuts trying to block different areas. They have been producing Billions of barrels of oil from there for the last 33 years with only a couple very small spills that were quickly cleaned up. No real environmental damage. That is pretty good for an average of over one million barrels a day for that many years. And there is still a lot more oil across the Arctic that can be safely produced. Much more so than drilling in 5000 feet of water.
I saw a photo of the area up there, and to my eye utter desolation , I`m not against the search for oil, just the companies that do it, do it in a responsible way...I think most firms are responsible, but when they are not, the BP disaster is possibly the result....I`m the type of person who believes in severe punishment for severe crimes, and BP actions were a crime....I don`t think BP purposefully did this, but they did purposefully take the shortcuts creating this disaster...
Many people will not get a penny from this situation, but their way of life has been effected in ways that money can`t compensate for....My heart goes out to them..Just as it does when the natural disasters such as wild fires in the West, and Hurricanes for me .Tony
I don`t think BP purposefully did this, but they did purposefully take the shortcuts creating this disaster...
This disaster shares a lot of similarities to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. You had a Congress paid off by oil interests to allow single hull tankers carry crude in less than great places. You had oil companies trying to squeeze every cent out of a barrel of oil by cutting costs manning their tankers. You had a sloppy run Coast Guard that was supposed to be monitoring the tankers as they went through treacherous waters. That was 21 years ago. Today you have BP trying to cut corners on a very tricky drilling project. A very sloppy government agency asleep at the wheel. An Interior secretary that was supposedly cleaning up the corruption in his department. Studies never read only approved. And legislation that removed much of the responsibility from the oil companies. All comes together in a big bang and the tax payers and poor folks along the Gulf are the big losers.
You had a sloppy run Coast Guard that was supposed to be monitoring the tankers as they went through treacherous waters.
You aren't a conservative wishing for more responsibility on the government, when it is a private vessel passing those waters, are you? Oh the humanity! :P
Sorry I've been away guys but been busy as hell again, but not with business, simply with changes in my motrhers life and they are too long in detail to go into.
Anyway couple of things:
Re the hadron - that thing has to find the Higgs particle, time keeping betterment is an accident of that.
Re the market and employment. I personally see this, and have seen it all along as a jobless recovery. I d'ont see unemployment going down to prior year levels until the baby boomers retire. I just d'ont see a lot of job creation. I see some jobs added, just not a lot. Now if we can get past the fears of higher taxes then maybe they'll be more risk taking and jobs created by smaller business but it ain't happening until Obama softens his tone. We had a long board meeting in my business last week about this. People rather lessen expenses and sell their business while taxes are still low then go into risk taking with the reward being higher taxes and the risk remains too great in the current economic climate anyway. So I d'ont expect any major favorable changes in unemployment data until the pool lessens from attrition of baby boomers, rather than from job creation. But I think the folks that are secure in employment will loosen the purse strings and with more credit flowing and great efficiencies in business right now the bottom line improves greatly and with it valuations. Note that GM and Toyota are cautiously turning bullish and that's a great sign.
We almost avoided this whole thing. A fail safe system missed cutting the pipe and capping off the flow immediately after the explosion by inches. This is both fascinating and extremely frustrating to read:
Tag - will explain the A4 soon but bottom line is I love the cars styling and in this class I prefer performance over luxury but I think Audi gives you both better than anyone. I've driven the C a few times now as a loaner and it's not impressive nor is the Lexus IS. But how it will likely come to fruition later this year goes beyond that and I'll cover it later. Also here's an interesting thing about Lexus and the LS halt on sales and how it affected me. It's a blessing from a financial situation. Because I enterred the market and orderred the car just before the point of recall and sales closedown, in conjunction with the LS 6 months lease foregiveness, heres what Lexus did for me. They deferred my June and July lease payments and extended the current lease until January (Dec 10th lease payment for me). It would have ended with my October payment before. I was actually having 5 months of lease payments waived, not 6, because of timing of the deal I made. When the car comes in, and I told my dealer I want it in the first week of Aug. they will then waive the 5 remaining lease payments (Aug-thru December). As long as I take a new vehicle I get use of the car from June10-August 10 for free. They keep me honest by adding those payments to the end of the current lease should I renege on the new car. Smart business. They give away something but also protect themselves.
Comments
Regards,
OW
Why focus on the daily volatility?
Firstly, let me clarify to you that I wouldn't be in the market at this moment if I didn't believe it was likely to advance.
But... I have clearly shown more than almost anyone that I am not a guy to put my money in a market that is obviously in a declining mode. That's why I was mostly out for the majority of the recent decline.
Now, as far as focusing on the daily volatility, as you call it... the only value I see in doing that is if you are inclined to actually trade on those daily swings. Daily movement in share prices can equal profits, while no movement only equals no profits. Day traders with computers take advantage of this movement every day. That's often how they make their money... by playing the swings.
I definitely don't consider myself a true "day-trader". There is no way I can do what those guys do. Nor do I want to. I have better things to do. But I do consider myself a market momentum trader. If the market as a whole is going into a tailspin or correction, I attempt to avoid most of the downside. It's that simple. When bargains are created, I consider buying them. And I am not afraid to dump a stock shortly after I buy it, if I think it is going to head south.
It is mathematically, as well as financially, appropriate and smart to avoid losses whenever possible. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to ride a large downward wave when you can preserve capital instead.
Consider, AS AN EXAMPLE, that the Dow is at 10,000. And you own $100,00 worth of stocks. Then, let's say it goes down to 8,000... and that you had stayed in the market You would have suffered a loss of 20 percent. Your stocks would be worth $80,000. OK,... Now be very aware of this... It's return from 8,000 to 10,000 would require a gain of 25% (not the 20% it lost) just to reclaim that 20% loss!
Let's continue... Now let's say, AS AN EXAMPLE, that I also had invested $100,000 in the market, but I decided to get out of the market when it was at 10,000 and I ultimately avoided that 20% loss. Then I got back in at 8,000. So, when the market goes up 25%, you would only break even, but I would have $125,000. Taking it a little further, if the market went up 50% from the low of 8,000, you would then have $120,000, but I would have $150,000!
That's why it is sooooooo important to not let your porfolio or any stock investments significantly drop in value if you can avoid it. It takes a whole lot more percentage gains to simply make up for those losses.
The math has a voice of its own, and never lies... listen to it carefully, grasshopper.
TM
Absolutely!! All those bounces are terrific opportunities for those that want to take advantage. I personally don't take it to that extreme, but nonetheless, it's there for the taking.
I kind of look at the market like a yo-yo hiking up a mountain... all those little ups and downs, but overall generally climbing... until recent history however, whereby it falls off the mountain periodically, only to have to climb it all over again.
This problem with the market in recent history is that it pulls back so far that it wipes out much, if not all, of the "long-term" gains. This drastic change in the market's behavior is now a proven historical fact, and makes it necessary to change what was at one time a tried-and-true long-term approach, to a somewhat shorter-term approach.
There are those that do not like this change, and are stuck in the older mentality. Ultimately, if they do not change with the times, it will cost them.
There are experts that have written about this change to the market... describing how and why traditional long-term investing in equities is no longer as effective or viable as it once was, and that it requires closer attention than is often desireable... but nonetheless it does require closer attention, and shorter-term adjustments to be profitable.
Otherwise... the gains go bye-bye.
TM
I think your post is `right on` Math doesn`t lie...
Just a guess, but if you have enough money, I think the example you used, if multiplied thirty or forty times, makes a good case for the bonds.....just think of a solid ten percent return year in and year out, particularly if it were in a retirement account without taxes.You would double those millions in less time than we have been posting on these boards.....I am happy you have your major funds in bonds....Tony
In short time may be we should act in attoseconds
Electron localization following attosecond molecular photoionization
Impressive.
Ha ha, if this is valid to determine the position of an electron in a lapse of time equivalent of a one quintillionth of a second, it should be good enough to determine ups and downs in the nanosecond markets.
Regards,
Jose
PS: X-Ray showed my griddle joints are OK. I can do anything except run and bounce by now. Yet I must improve my physical strength. Anyway, I'm in the movie again. :shades:
BP Oil Spill
Very funny
TM
Good news for you
First things first... I am glad (along with our great friend Tony) that your X-Ray revealed positive news and that you are healing up well. You'll be up to your "old self" before you know it... LOL. I have no doubt your wife (and you) must be relieved to know that she can return to being your beautiful bride instead of your nurse... which she did for you so willingly. You are blessed to have such a partner in life. I truly mean that.
Second... with regards to the article about attoseconds... thank you for sharing it with me, as you know I am interested in that sort of thing, ever since our first conversations about the Large Hadron Collider. After having read the article you linked, I can only say that there is little doubt that those among us that wear the most accurate of wristwatches will clearly end up needing new ones one day, as their accuracy now seems quite pitful.
TM
Huge IF. Maybe...
Always appreciate your strategies and really good moves....like the 1'er and the 911 made with you!
At the end of the day, you only loose if you sell. Otherwise, the market could drive you nuts. Better to relax and enjoy the ride!
This, too, shall pass. Debt is going to hold back the gain for awhile. After that, the sun will shine again. Better oil rigs will persevere...and the price will return to $100/bbl.
The market should be around 14K by then...next year, I would be so bold as to predict. But folks need to get back to work first. That's the rub!
Now I'm off to attend to my very sick Mom out on L.I.. Say a prayer and thanks!
Regards,
OW
Take care,
Jose
How true is this.
A man ill in bed but with the brain still functioning can be as unpredictable in his wish as a particle in the quantum mechanics can be. My poor wife had not the attosecond pum-probe. She says now she is released again, more than me.
I admire your capability with the markets and in business, I really do.
Regards,
Jose
Regards,
Jose
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Have you read all the new taxes associated with the healthcare bill. I didn't come across this story until yesterday but there will now be a 3.8% sales tax on the sale of your home thanks to the healthcare bill. I thought real estate was punished enough,
Excerpt:
Tax on Home Sales. Imposes a 3.8 percent tax on home sales and other real estate transactions. Middle-income people must pay the full tax even if they are “rich” for only one day – the day they sell their house and buy a new one.
Link:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/mar/28/health-laws-heavy-impact/
Another thing that is stacked against us is no deduction for losses , but full tax for gains......As Tagman recently noted, math doesn`t lie.....Thanks for the heads up though Tony
I am very happy to hear that you are making steady progress toward a complete recovery after your serious accident.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/12/phone-fight.html#
Some analysts say the frequent shifts are a sign that the market is closer to getting back in balance after the S&P 500 index fell 13.7 percent from its 2010 peak on April 23 until its low of the year on June 7. It's important to remember that it can take time for the market to find its bottom. That means there could be more selling.
"It could go down another 10 percent or so," said John Apruzzese, partner and equity portfolio manager at Evercore Wealth Management in New York. "We had one of the most dramatic drops in investor sentiment that we've ever experienced."
Apruzzese and other analysts note that the big drops in confidence drive away investors and can also make the market prone to a surprise climb. When investors give up, savvy traders often see that as a sign to step in.
It's a given among many professional money managers that everyday investors usually pull out of the market at exactly the wrong time. That signals for the smart money that it's time to move in.
Individual investors funneled $6.3 billion into U.S. stock funds in April when the market hit its highest level of the year. Then May brought the steepest slide for the S&P 500 index since February 2009. Investors responded by yanking $15 billion from U.S. stock mutual funds, according to investment research firm Morningstar Inc. May's withdrawal was the biggest since March 2009, when the S&P 500 index hit a 12-year low and started rocketing higher.
I would submit you have a good sense of timing based on your knack of repelling losses.
I know one thing: I've gained on the books since investing from 1996 - 2008. Since I really do not need the invested portion of my total portfolio, I can whether the roller coaster. One thing I absolutely know: I know NOTHING regarding timing. How should one invest...or trade...or time buying and selling?
I submit no one really knows...though they say they do.
Investors are growing concerned about how the economy will respond when it has to do without supports from the government like stimulus spending and low interest rates. This week brings reports on housing starts for May and the National Association of Home Builders' housing market index, which measures industry confidence. The reports will give a read on how demand has been holding up since the expiration of a homebuyer tax credit in April.
"I think the bottom line is visibility about the near-term outlook has dimmed," said Adrian Cronje, chief investment officer at the investment firm Balentine in Atlanta. "It's almost like an aircraft. We've gone through some clouds and you're likely to have a few more air pockets."
What goes up, down then winds up the same? Stocks
Regards,
OW
Regarding the market... this recent upside shows that there is indeed a bottom, at least for now... and that is a very good sign. I don't know about the rest of the gang, but I personally have been a buyer this week.
TM
When I am at the farm and look at the miles of river, and marsh, and think of the people who are so impacted by this tragedy, it stops me in my tracks.......I have always had a sense of the natural wonders we all live with, and take it upon myself not to do any harm.....The greed of BP is astounding, and I hope this sets the stage for the rest of the business managers-ceo- not to take any shortcuts......Arthur Anderson was a large company and the government just shut it down, and a hundred fifty thousand people had to find new employment......I hope that BP is treated the same way---although I don`t wish their employees any harm.....Maybe a reorganization with BP broke up and absorbed by other large companies....Tony
He won't allow other oil companies or other countries to help although they have offered. He won't even allow the local people to do much. Finally, Governor Jindal has defied him and started building the off shore levies. Obama just cannot make a decision.
Maybe this is another example of not letting a crisis go to waste.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
As of what date?
Accident? I don't think anyone would say it was intentional.
However, accidents happen for a variety of reasons... but in this case there is enough evidence to suggest serious negligence on BP's part, which would leave BP in a position of extreme liability and responsibility for what occurred. Also, BP's behavior after the "accident" is highly questionable, to say the least.
In addition, accidents usually result in various consequences... consequences as a direct result of the accident itself, specifically the yet-unmeasureable massive environmental damage... and legal consequences to the responsible party, if there is one... and in this case it would most definitely appear to be BP.
I might add that I also truly believe that the President of the United States is guilty, although to a much lesser degree, but nonetheless guilty of negligence, in that he failed to act in a responsible and timely fashion, and I believe that some level of appropriate legal action should be taken against him for his failure.
TM
It appears that BP has stepped up to the plate and taken responsibility for the accident. They are putting $20 Billion dollars in a fund to pay claims and that fund will be administered by the U.S. government. Plus they have said that this will not cap their liability.
Do you remember how unmerciful the press and the Democrats were on the Bush response to Katrina? That criticism was well deserved. The people of Louisiana are saying that Obama's response to the oil spill is much slower and worse than Bush's response to Katrina.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I too am disappointed in the response by the government, and the apparent disorganization , and lack of `take charge` leadership.....I think our citizens are ready to do something, and not for pay, they just need a dedicated leader....
When we had hurricane Hugo, everyone was very quick to help their neighbor, even though in some cases you didn`t even know them....America has a great spirit when challenged, and this is a monster challenge ....Tony
I believe I have heard "day one" mentioned several times.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
About what? Do you think Obama's response and clean up efforts have been stellar?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I do think there's a bit of a difference. FEMA is a Federal Agency with the sole purpose of helping the U.S. in domestic disaster situations. Katrina was not a surprise, everybody knew it was coming. Katrina is just the type of disaster that FEMA exists to support. Bush appointed the head of FEMA. And FEMA was inept. The head of FEMA was inept. But that doesn't excuse the IMHO much greater responsibility on the government of New Orleans and the state of Louisiana.
OTOH, the scope of this problem was not immediately apparent. It happened over 100 miles offshore. If the well had been capped fairly quickly there might not have been much of a problem on US shores. BP said they were going to fix it. They are the oil company who should have expertise. Over days leading into weeks, they tried A, then B, then C, etc. It took a number of weeks for it to become apparent how screwed up BP was and how they basically had no ability to solve the problem. Whereas with Katrina you knew it was a major disaster on day 1.
I also agree that Obama could have moved quicker. But as usual the partisan sides are doing the big "my guy was good, your guy is bad" name calling. The reality is not at either extreme.
It amazes me. If I'm a moralistic neocon I say Limbaugh is correct and all gays are bad. Then Limbaugh has Elton John perform at his party and suddenly Elton is good, because my guy said he was, right? :confuse:
Only matters which side is saying it, not what is being said. What ever happened to independent thinking? The party system has pretty much destroyed it, to the detriment of this country.
So anyway, to keep on topic, I see BP is suspending the dividend. I heard a radio commentator yesterday speculating that BP may not survive this crisis. Based upon their safety record on this and previous disasters, I would tend to think that is a good thing.
BP has a history of spills, fires and explosions at its facilities. Before the Deepwater Horizon rig killed 11 and filled the Gulf of Mexico with oil, BP had a 2005 explosion in Texas City, Texas, that killed 15 people, and a 2006 oil leak in its Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, operations pipeline. BP stock has plummeted 50% since the Gulf of Mexico spill – losing $90 billion in shareholder value. However, BP CEO Tony Hayward cashed in about a third of his BP stock one month before the Deepwater Horizon rig burst, according to The Daily Telegraph.
Alot of posters on this board certainly can express themselves in fine order and I mean that sincerely Tony
I think every claim will be taken to court for settlement. 1000s of people will claim huge losses they have no way of proving. It will drag on till at least 2030 and beyond.
For example we know that excess fertilizer run-off producing high yields of corn for ethanol has killed about 7000 square miles of the Gulf. The same area being impacted by the oil spill. The oil spill cannot kill shrimp, crab and fish the US government has already killed with ethanol mandates.
An over 7,000-square-mile wildlife "dead zone" located in the center of the Gulf of Mexico has grown from being a curiosity to a colossus over the past two decades, according to the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), and scientists are now concerned the recent oil spill and other emerging chemical threats could widen the zone even further.
The NWF describes the dead zone as being "the largest on record in the hemisphere in coastal waters and one of the biggest in the world."
During the summer months, it is nearly devoid of wildlife, save for the dead bodies of crabs, shrimp and other marine species that succumb to oxygen depletion in the polluted water.
Animal toxicology experts believe the Gulf dead zone is a man-made monstrosity.
"Outside of widespread impacts from oil release, the drainage of the Mississippi River into the Central Gulf has deposited massive amounts of agricultural chemicals and fertilizers from agricultural activities in the Central United States," Ron Kendall, director of The Institute of Environmental and Human Health, told Discovery News.
http://news.discovery.com/animals/gulf-dead-zone-oil-spill.html
AFter several days Obama said they had been "on it from day one."
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Many people will not get a penny from this situation, but their way of life has been effected in ways that money can`t compensate for....My heart goes out to them..Just as it does when the natural disasters such as wild fires in the West, and Hurricanes for me .Tony
This disaster shares a lot of similarities to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. You had a Congress paid off by oil interests to allow single hull tankers carry crude in less than great places. You had oil companies trying to squeeze every cent out of a barrel of oil by cutting costs manning their tankers. You had a sloppy run Coast Guard that was supposed to be monitoring the tankers as they went through treacherous waters. That was 21 years ago. Today you have BP trying to cut corners on a very tricky drilling project. A very sloppy government agency asleep at the wheel. An Interior secretary that was supposedly cleaning up the corruption in his department. Studies never read only approved. And legislation that removed much of the responsibility from the oil companies. All comes together in a big bang and the tax payers and poor folks along the Gulf are the big losers.
You aren't a conservative wishing for more responsibility on the government, when it is a private vessel passing those waters, are you? Oh the humanity! :P
Regards,
OW
Anyway couple of things:
Re the hadron - that thing has to find the Higgs particle, time keeping betterment is an accident of that.
Re the market and employment. I personally see this, and have seen it all along as a jobless recovery. I d'ont see unemployment going down to prior year levels until the baby boomers retire. I just d'ont see a lot of job creation. I see some jobs added, just not a lot. Now if we can get past the fears of higher taxes then maybe they'll be more risk taking and jobs created by smaller business but it ain't happening until Obama softens his tone. We had a long board meeting in my business last week about this. People rather lessen expenses and sell their business while taxes are still low then go into risk taking with the reward being higher taxes and the risk remains too great in the current economic climate anyway. So I d'ont expect any major favorable changes in unemployment data until the pool lessens from attrition of baby boomers, rather than from job creation. But I think the folks that are secure in employment will loosen the purse strings and with more credit flowing and great efficiencies in business right now the bottom line improves greatly and with it valuations. Note that GM and Toyota are cautiously turning bullish and that's a great sign.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/18/business/businessspecial4/18toyota.html?scp=1&- - - - - - - sq=Bullish%20Signals%20From%20G.M.%20and%20Toyota%20...&st=cse
Re the oil spill:
We almost avoided this whole thing. A fail safe system missed cutting the pipe and capping off the flow immediately after the explosion by inches. This is both fascinating and extremely frustrating to read:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/us/21blowout.html?ref=us
Re cars,
Tag - will explain the A4 soon but bottom line is I love the cars styling and in this class I prefer performance over luxury but I think Audi gives you both better than anyone. I've driven the C a few times now as a loaner and it's not impressive nor is the Lexus IS. But how it will likely come to fruition later this year goes beyond that and I'll cover it later. Also here's an interesting thing about Lexus and the LS halt on sales and how it affected me. It's a blessing from a financial situation. Because I enterred the market and orderred the car just before the point of recall and sales closedown, in conjunction with the LS 6 months lease foregiveness, heres what Lexus did for me. They deferred my June and July lease payments and extended the current lease until January (Dec 10th lease payment for me). It would have ended with my October payment before. I was actually having 5 months of lease payments waived, not 6, because of timing of the deal I made. When the car comes in, and I told my dealer I want it in the first week of Aug. they will then waive the 5 remaining lease payments (Aug-thru December). As long as I take a new vehicle I get use of the car from June10-August 10 for free. They keep me honest by adding those payments to the end of the current lease should I renege on the new car. Smart business. They give away something but also protect themselves.