S&P closes at an all-time high (again!) Over 250k jobs created last month. Stock ticker RICK declares a dividend. Holy fuck are we absolutely doomed! Obviously just a bubble!
Markets are rigged. Might show rising jobs until November, then get revised down. Of course if a hacker changes election voting, no one will ever be able to prove anything. That is if hackers make Trump win. If he wins California, then we'll know it was flawed and who knows for how long? We're all doomed. Hillary will cause slower growth and Trump will send millions of low wage workers back to Mexico. Garbage will be piling up in the streets. Cats attacking dogs. Chinese eating dogs with their dog eating festivals. We're all doomed, especially if you are a dog living in China. I'm surprised there is no outcry over the dog eating festival.
There's a bunch depending how aggressive you want to be. The more aggressive the more they are just for trading. TBF is the least aggressive: daily -1X short.
If you are a dog in China, run, run for your life before they eat you, unless you have a good foreign owner. There was a big outcry over a lion that got shot in Africa but no outcry over all the pet dogs killed and eaten in China. I see everything is just media driven like people are mindless zombies.
Hot dang, this indeed must be the same Dougster, "Buy high, sell higher!"
No, this is not just a bubble, it is The Bubble.
Usually the uncertainly of a Presidential election trashes the bubbles. But in this case there does not seem to be any uncertainly.
So we are on for the boom of 2023, expecting the Dow to top 120,000.
Each bubble brings grief and misery, and each bubble brings a bust, which also brings grief and misery. And then Dougster and his pals profit, as our country becomes more and more like the third world.
But what Dougster is really waiting for is The Singularity, Ray Kurzweil's Singularity, when humanity formally splits in two, and when the New World Order officially begins.
"Another 8 years of the same policies and poverty in America will be completely eliminated", Herbert Hoover 1928 campaign.
SJG, what makes you think the market is overvalued? If it's too high, then according to you it was too high at Dow 14k, 15k, 16k, and even now at $18k.
So my question to you is since you've historically stated there has been a bubble percolating for years, can you with any certainty tell us where the true value should be? 10k at the Dow or maybe even 8,000? This constant bubble talk is like a broken clock which is right only twice daily, when in fact the markets go up way more often than they go down. If you're going to be successful in investing you must accept the swings as being normal, and not just hope for the bubbles to pop!
None of us knows what these markets will do tomorrow.
But we can look at some past lows and analyze them, because these lows give you some idea what the minimum consumption levels are. Back when it crashed in 1986, the end of the Reagan Bubble, people said the Dow would never exceed 4000 again.
And then in the run up to Bush 43's Iraq war, it was down to around 7,500.
Now can we say these are under valuations, like we might say some highs are overvaluations?
I think that would be the wrong way to look at it, because again, we don't know that these markets will do. It is after all just an arena for gambling. Anything you or I might know about these firms has zero predictive power, it is all explanation after the fact, information which has already contributed to the prices being at their current level.
What I feel most certain in saying is that the current market index levels are the result of over consumption, consumption which is being stimulated by the amount of money flowing into these markets. This money causes an unsustainable level of employment, and this plus the market inflations causes an unsustainable level of consumer consumption. And then all of this reflects back onto the markets.
So I do feel confident in saying that the current market pricing makes such speculative investment very risky. And I am using the term 'investment' extremely loosely.
But this gets into another area, I am not really just saying that there is a bubble. I am also saying that there is spiritual sickness. The money which has made these bubbles and busts is just money which should be collected as upper bracket personal income tax. Once our tax system was gutted, these bubbles started. And there have been so many now that it is hard for me to keep track.
The bubbles themselves add absolutely nothing to our national well being. You can look at how sick our nation is, simply by how high these markets go. And the only reason for these market indices is simply so that the news can have something to report on, so that people will for some reason think that these markets are something they should pay attention to.
You speak of being "successful in investing", well I certainly have no interest in anything like that, just like I have no interest in betting on horse races or athletic events. And these things are actually very similar, as they are all controlled by odds makers. If you bet on a horse race or an athletic contest, you will get odds. And if you put money into one of the issues on these markets, then the 'odds' are already included in the current pricing. Highly unlikely you or I could ever know anything beyond what the professional money managers know who control the insurance and pension funds already know, and these are mostly what determine the current pricings. These fund managers are the odds makers.
So you say that these swings are normal. I do not agree. They are very destructive. What the bubbles and busts are, is typical, if you practice the Laissez-faire capitalism like in the 1920's. And that these swings then become typical is exactly the problem.
When these markets crashed and we had a deep economic collapse at the end of the 1920's, we shifted over to a different type of economic system, Keynesian. Under this system it is the responsibility of government and central banks to use their powers to stabilize business cycles. The main variables are the size of the public sector, and whether we run surplus or deficit budgets.
And in fact, this worked well for 4 decades. Booms and busts were minimized, as were any sustained deficits. It was a very good system. Anyone who takes a macro economics class learns about this.
But at the end of the 1970's something did strain it. Capitalism is still an insane system, as it is dependent on endless growth. So it will always be running into external limits. One of these is always going to be natural resource consumption, such as oil consumption. And then as those in some oil drilling nations wanted fair returns, the OPEC Cartel formed, and so we faced 'stagflation', seeing both great inflation at the same time as high unemployment.
So this plus some other overseas incidents, plus the religious right coming into politics, destabilized Jimmy Carter and brought in Ronald Reagan, and that was the end of Keynesianism. And then encouraging Iraq to attack Iran was the end of OPEC.
So because of this political change, we do have countless booms and busts. Very hard to stop a bust once it starts. But if people decline to support the booms, then the busts will be minimized.
And then all of this gambling attitude towards life, it depends upon convincing people that their own talents and abilities are worthless. So the way they are supposed to live is by speculation. This amounts to a completely fatalistic approach to living.
One writer who talks about this, shows the evidence for it in the rise of these state lotteries, they represent a kind of spiritual sickness. And the sees this as indication that the American Dream has been stolen, but then there are new examples which we should look to:
And then you speak of these markets going up more than going down. What seems to happen is that they go up gradually, reaching frightening levels and still going up and up. The balance sheets of the corporations, if they are improving, it is only due to stimulated over consumption due to market inflation, and also just currency inflation. What is really going up is the 'pop', the multiplier factor, the price to earnings ratio.
And then something happens that really scares people, and so they have to face the fact that the king has no clothes, and so there is a crash.
But then, as people want to keep stimulating bubbles, people will start boosting for the next boom, and so it will start going up again. So it looks like a saw tooth wave. Steady slope on the up cycle, then a steep drop on the down cycle, and all cause simply by human psychology, by fatalism.
And I call this fatalism because it depends upon convincing people that their own efforts have little merits, so all they should do is gamble.
Where as the alternative, putting our time, energy, and talents together, in things we will have material involvement in, is pooh poohed.
There is nothing more satisfying than working with a circle of associates you know well, and trying to build some businesses. And the success rate for owner financed businesses, at least one's with a minimum outside capital, is very high.
These sorts of speculator VC's have endless money to put in, and this Jim Hansell shows exactly why this causes such a high ( 90% ) failure rate. See they don't want modest success. What they want is 100 to 1 or greater. And as for the 90% that fail, they don't care, they just say, "The downside is limited." For them all it is is money. The actual talents and efforts of the people are meaningless.
And having worked closely with individuals named in this book, and having seen all the situations this author describes, variations on collective insanity, I understand why these sorts of speculators cause the high failure rates. They don't want people to work hard and make things go. They want spectacular price appreciation. And so this effects the sorts of things they decide to fund, and it also undermines the efforts of others who approach things differently.
So this speculative economy is good for no one, except for the speculators.
I am involved right now in things which are very different, working with people I know, and with long term commitment. And we do value our own talents and abilities, as well as those of our colleagues.
And a prime example of this is to be found in one Elon Musk. Starting with only $2k to his name, but working hard and making his first two companies go. And then in a few years cashing out with $22Meg. That certainly beats any stock market index gains. And what were the risks? Well doing it himself and with close associates, and with a willingness to try again and again as needed, the long term risks were very small.
I have not read his biography, but I will. Musk may be one who can make the boast, "Never had a job in my life."
I admire such people because they don't submit to social pressure. Most people down to $2k, about 1 months rent here, would submit and do what everyone tells them, "get a job."
See, the middle-class family turns most people into Homer Simpson. It is designed to do this.
Must not have worked on Musk. I cannot make the claim myself, never had a job. But I think the idea is right. Really what I mean is, you should do things you believe in and which use your talents and abilities. You should never do other than this, and you should never allow people to convince you that the best use of your talents is mere gambling, horse races, Las Vegas, or the stock markets. The best your of talents and your funds is in things you and associates will apply you talents and abilities to.
These people peddling stock market speculation, though they may make it sound sexy, it is actually noxious.
SJG, it appears you're taking the view that everyone and anyone can become an Elon Musk. Entrepreneurship is only for a small % of people, just like not everyone can become a professional athlete or actor. If it was so easy to do then everybody would do what you stated in creating their own product/business. It's just not feasible.
At least anybody who makes a paycheck and lives below their means can easily invest in the markets, and regardless of booms or busts, they will make an excellent return on their investments over a lifetime. This is not speculation, it is a historical fact that anyone who consistently invests periodically over their career of 30 years will have substantial gains. Nobody can disprove that if they simply participated in the overall market like the S&P 500, and I'm not talking about speculating on an individual stock/company. The OP's topic was about the "markets" and not speculation on an individual company or business. How do you refute that proven theory of steady investing over 30 years, SJG. It never has failed as long as you rebalance to a more conservative portfolio as you get closer to the end of your career, right? So these people who have no abilities to lead a business or compete in producing services or products can lead a successful standard of living simply by investing part of their paycheck throughout their life as a working middle class hero!
"taking the view that everyone and anyone can become an Elon Musk."
Negative. Just citing him as a most impressive example, and a better man than I, because it looks like he never caved into pressure and got a job.
I think what you are saying is that anyone with discretionary income can invest. Well, many really don't have discretionary income. There are all sorts of cultural factors which make it likely that some will end up with very high incomes.
And then, if these Indexed Funds like you speak of perform that well, then tomorrow's stock prices would be today's stock prices. If there were zero risk, then there would be no possibility of gain.
Buckminster Fuller had suggested that the Social Security Trust fund be invested in the most conservative portion of the stock market, and that if it had been from the start, then by the 1950's it would have had so much money that it would not need to collect any more. And we need something like this to get to Citizenship Pay.
He was not talking about any privatization schemes, he was talking about the collective.
But what I was talking about probably sums up in two points:
1. People do better if they can assemble their own team, people they know, and then run some businesses. Neither you nor I need be the head of any such team. All that matter is that we be working with people we know. Why would you assume that an indexed fund would out perform what you and close associates could do by yourselves.
2. And then, if there is so much to be said for these indexed funds, a kind of totally hands off or passive investment, then we should make it so that everyone gains, and especially those at the bottom who need it most.
The idea that everyone should strive for a self-financed retirement is simply the Reagan people campaigning to dismantle Social Security. The system should be fixed so that if we apply the skills we have, then we do well. Setting up a system of Winners and Losers accomplishes nothing good. So I don't care if we are in a boom or a bust right now, I just know that we have a system which is set up wrong.
We will either have political consciousness and a working democracy, which will mean that everyone does well, and will probably come to resemble the Social Democracies of Western Europe. A politically conscious electorate would never support something which creates winners and losers, because the costs of that are far too high to bare.
Or we will have people listening to Social Darwinism and Racism from Right Wing media sources and we will have a form of State Capitalism, where most people are seriously underemployed, and where many people believe that the poor deserve to be poor and the rich deserve to be rich.
I just read today the US stock market indexes valued in real money, aka, valued in gold, was a lot lower now than over a decade ago. It may all be relative. If your dollars valued in gold buy less than they did in 2001 and the stock price valued in gold is worth less now than several years ago, only the number price of the stock changed, the value of the stock priced in gold went down in this example.
There are many market experts who agree with the notion that the stock market is in a bubble. Corporate fundamentals aren't coming close to justifying the ramp up in equity prices, nor does the state of the economy. It is commonly believed in the investment management community that the equity market is so heated because there is simply no place else to put money right now. Domestic debt has paid very little for many years, foreign debt is paying even less with some countries running negative interest rates, and foreign equities are scary for many right now given the economic conditions overseas and the devaluation of foreign currencies vs. the dollar.
I guess time will tell. If this market can survive a return to normal interest rates, then I guess the pundits are wrong.
Any system in which "everyone does well" is fundamentally flawed.
Those that put forth the effort to do well should surely be rewarded commensurate with their efforts and gifts.
Those that do not put forth any effort deserve no reward.
Those that are exceptional deserve exceptional reward.
With no consequence to underachieving and no reward for overachieving, we become a nation of mediocrity. Not a place in which I would wish to live. In fact, over enough time, we become a system of losers -- as there is no consequence to sucking since "everyone does well".
It seems the only healthy system is a meritocracy.
We must all, no matter our circumstance, aspire to improve ourselves. A system of rewards promotes aspiration -- which is how America has led the world in improving the human condition for 200 years.
pensionking --> "Those that put forth the effort to do well should surely be rewarded commensurate with their efforts and gifts." --> end quote
It seems to me a lot of working people that no matter how much I bust my ass, I still get the same salary or maybe a small bonus, if there's any left, after the executives take theirs. OK, they're running the show. Fine. So, to me, it seems like the reward button is broken, or I'm misunderstanding what y'all mean by efforts and gifts. I'm thinking I just am not understanding something.
if you bust your ass produce more you should receive more reward. Simple. The reward button IS broken in this country -- that is why participation trophies in youth sports are the symptom to a much bigger disease. The disease is the idea that everyone should "feel good" all the time.
My kid was part of a tug of war competition last spring at elementary school. Parents came to watch. After the last match ended, everyone was declared the winner and everyone got a medal. WTF??
@Pension: I've never met an actuary who wasn't pretty smart. So respectfully, instead of looking to the "feel-good" attitude that's failing to reward hard-working people, look to the real problem -- huge and growing income inequality. Wealth begets wealth. It's so obvious to me that children of rich parents have all the advantages and opportunities to become rich themselves. If it doesn't stop, we'll end up with less social mobility and a feudalistic society like the one we descended from.
@Random: I agree with some of your points. Income inequality is an issue that needs to be addressed. Today, too many people are working poor and way too many "middle class" income earners cannot live a comfortable middle class existence. While I consider myself middle class, as were my parents, my parents died with little more than the home they lived in and I am struggling to pay my bills month to month.
College costs are outrageously high. The Expected Family Contribution (EFC) formula is bullshit. State supported public universities should be compelled to cover a meaningful share of the uncovered EFC. What does it say about us that elite universities will cover 100% of unmet EFC but state schools won't touch it??
Local, state and federal taxes are too high. Government is bloated. There should be fewer barriers to business creation so that smart entrepreneurial poor folks can lift themselves through hard work and ingenuity through the middle class to wealth.
Succinctly, I'm more objecting to SJGs idea that we should aspire to live in a society with no "winners and losers". As Alec Baldwin said in Glengarry Glen Ross, "Follow my advice and fire your fucking ass because a loser is a loser."
" there is simply no place else to put money right now"
I believe that this is probably true. When the dotcom boom started this was painfully obvious from the very start. The local semiconductor manufacturing industry had come into tough times, and the VC's became frightened of funding anymore. Much of their reluctance was because of the $billion fabs going up in Asia. Facilities of that scale have since been built in the US, but not with VC money. But at that time, there were no domestic facilities like that.
So the money stopped. It was still there, as it was railroad money. But there was nothing to do with it. Billboards carried advertisement about water conservation.
Then all of a sudden, working to commercialize a government developed communications technology, the money flowed and flowed and flowed and people cheered the boom. Everyone was working for a company with dotcom in it's name, and the upscale car dealerships had never seen it better.
But I wasn't cheering. I could see that the fact that so much money was going into things which didn't even have a plan for getting into black ink, and really were just catchy names, was sign of economic ill health, of there not being more worthwhile things to put money into, and there not being more worthwhile things for putting technical talent into.
pensionking, everyone wants to do well. Their motives might not be entirely monetary. Most of the time the people who do the most innovative things and the people who fight the hardest for something, are not at all monetarily motivated.
But everyone wants to do well, so that they can win the admiration of friend and family.
But it is just that our economic system is based on limiting the number of people who have that chance. And it is also that our capitalist system depends upon the middle-class family to break children, turn them into Homer Simpson, and now also to create an untouchable caste of scapegoats.
That there would be people doing slave labor and cheap labor, used to be sufficient in order to maintain discipline. But now, in the information age, there is far less need for labor. So our system uses the middle-class family to create an untouchable caste, often living on drugs, alcohol, and psychiatric medications. These folks are subjected to ritual humiliations, and this keeps everyone else in line.
And then another of the things which keeps the poor down are the Born Again Churches. They prevent the poor from organizing, by making them believe that they are responsible for their own plight.
And the volunteers in these ministries, just like the guy I helped put into San Quentin, all have scapegoat children of their own.
Here, I found a perfect list of the sorts of faults they find in their scapegoat children:
•Drug and alcohol abuse
•Failed personal and romantic relationships
•Loss of religious faith, in cases of clergy abuse
•Disinterest in family relationships
•Disintegration of a family
•Poor self-esteem
•Feelings of deep depression
•Difficulties with casual social relationships
•Feelings of isolation and despair
•Loss of trust in authority figures and institutions who don't report child molestation
•Despair in reaction to persecuting attitudes of police
•Anger
•Inappropriate sexual behavior
•Poor work habits
•Unemployment or underemployment
They all have children who they accuse of the things on this list.
Only problem is, the list is not intended to be a list of the failings of scapegoat children. It is a list prepared by a law firm, and they use it to show indications of childhood sexual abuse, and they use it to recover damage money from the abusers.
Once I knew that the jury had convicted this Pentecostal Daughter Molester, I shifted my focus into trying to make sure he got a lengthy sentence, by showing the court how pervasive of a social menace he and his church are. They all have children which they accuse of the things on that list. And of course if the scapegoat is female, then just as it had been with his eldest daughter, the allegations also include sex.
And pensionking, getting people excited about meaningless sporting competitions is one of the ways Capitalism, and the welfare of the most wealthy, is promoted.
I think the way Buckminster Fuller explains it is best. Industrial technology has advanced so far, though mostly in the effort to kill people with greater efficiency, that accidentally we now have the ability to use that technology to let everyone live better than even royalty had been able to. But what stands in the way of this is that we are still placing people in completion with each other and demanding that everyone prove that they can earn a living. And we do this even though a large majority of the forms of paid employment produce zero social good, and they certainly offer nothing which compares with the harm they do by using up scarce resources.
Did anyone see today that all US stock market indexes closed at all time highs?
We know in time the markets will drop in valuations, but given time they will restore themselves to their previous highs and go higher. So during their track downward it will be another opportunity to buy cheaper prices for the eventual return to future all time highs.
SJG, do you participate in the market gains like over 50% of the American people have? This is a proven statistic that the majority of US citizens own shares in US stock markets. Why would anyone cheer the demise of the majority of working class people? Only someone whom is so inclined to a meta narrative!
My fellow TUSCLers seem to be willing to part with the past and look forward to optimism with the US economy. There is more discretionary income than ever. All of my shows this last week from Green Bay to Ohio have been sold out. People are ready to have a good time again! I bet the strip clubs are packed all over the country! I went to my favorite watering hole in Dayton and it was hopping! See you soon.
"Did anyone see today that all US stock market indexes closed at all time highs?"
If more people can be induced into gambling and approaching life in a fatalistic way, then the stock markets will likely go even higher. Or at least if they can keep bringing more people in, they can try to sustain the current pricing, for a while. We will have to watch and see.
If on the other hand people come to believe in their own abilities and to see that there own efforts are more worthy of their money, then the stock market bubbles will be minimized. And if we can minimize the bubbles, we are also minimizing the busts. The bubbles cause the busts.
And yes, when the markets drop, people can buy in and make lots of money if they go back up. That is how these markets tend to work. Most of the time it is the rich getting richer, while the poor have been duped and are placing money which they really cannot afford to lose, at great risk. Most of the time, those who lose were poor to start with and those who win where rich to start with. Nothing good whatsoever is coming from this inducing people to get into the stock markets.
Lots of people are boosting for the bubbles, and I guess this does induce more people to get in, but it benefits working people absolutely nothing, just more cost of living inflation and a greater concentration of wealth. If we continue to go this way, America will be a land of just the rich and the poor.
And why on earth would I want to put money into stock markets when I have assembled my own team and am far more interested in what we can do, applying our own abilities. We have the example of Elon Musk, going from $2k to clearing $22Meg, in about 5 years. That is an 11,000x multiplication. And even if what we do is nothing like that, even if we can just barely make it, we are still doing things which we believe in and we are applying our talents. Why would we ever believe that that is somehow worth less, than just gambling. And even if we were to gain nothing, we would still have the satisfaction of having built and sustained our team, and of having done things which we believe in and which use our abilities. And undoubtedly we will be creating more opportunities for ourselves.
People who work for a living used to be valued and respected in America. JimG, you really do not seem to understand this. Probably it is because you are so young, and never knew what it was like before, particularly when unions were stronger and before America was deindustrialized, and especially before Ronald Reagan was elected.
Mainly because of all the strides in AI. One consequence is that the product cycle is getting faster. Another consequence is that fewer, expensive human workers will be needed in the future.
Check the companies which are doing the best: also happen to be the leaders in AI. (e.g. GOGL, AMZN, MSFT, FB.) Meanwhile banks and other financials are just starting to catch onto this.
mikeya02, Rong again as usual. Smart people invest in themselves, and in the things they can do with close associates. Only people who have been beaten down and broken would ever consider that gambling on the stock market is better than what they can do, teaming with well known associates.
JimG, the way it does this is exactly how you've explained. People who have surplus income, and especially people who can afford to lose money, can take risks that much of the population cannot afford. So sometimes the are able to make lots of money. But as they are buying low and selling high, it is because other people are doing the opposite.
Luring people of modest means into the stock market is not that much different from selling them California Lottery tickets. It is just a way of taking money off of them. These people who are making money off of the stock market, are making it off of other people.
The stock market also undermines labor movement solidarity, and without that working people would have nearly nothing.
General currency and cost of living inflation does not help us. Getting people to devalue their own efforts and abilities does not help us. There is nothing good about this fixation on the stock market. It just comes down to yet another move towards a two tier society. ( What Dougster and his friends are staying up night and day in order to actualize. )
401k's and IRA's are not bank savings accounts, they are investments in something which resembles a mutual fund. And mutual funds, compared to long term T-bills with essentially zero risk, do not do very well.
But the reason people like them is because of the tax deduction, and then for 401k's there is usually also an employer matching contribution.
These advantages do make them attractive for sure.
But there are still a few other facets worth considering. First of all, the reason these things were set up, was because Social Security is one of the most progressive programs this country has ever had, and it remains one of the most popular pieces of legislation ever passed.
It is a direct threat to those who want laissez-faire, that is the appearance of no rules.
If they wanted to do benefit to our society, they could have set up something like IRA and 401k, but where the money goes into long term T-bills. That would have made a lot more sense.
But no, they wanted to get people into the speculative economy, and they wanted to strengthen the financial and political power of Wall Street, while trying to break up political support for social security.
Second, 401k and IRA are still upwards wealth transfer mechanisms. Though there is a cap on the amount of income which can go into it and be tax deducted each year, there is still in effect a limit to how far down it goes. That is, as highlighted by Mitt Romney in his ill fated statement, many Americans do not make enough money to pay any income tax. There are all sorts of other regressive taxes which eat at their useable income, but at least with income tax they are spared. Its the Standard Deduction, Exemptions, and then for those with children the Earned Income Tax Credit.
And then on top of this, a large number of Americans are really just scraping by from month to month, pay check to pay check, If they are not behind in rent or car insurance payments, and if they can get say some needed dental work, they are doing better then they have been. So IRA and 401k are at best just abstractions for them
And so then, is getting people to put money into IRA and 401k a good thing? I would say no. Certainly money going into the stock market accomplishes nothing for our society.
Money going instead into T-Bills would help lower their needed interest rates, and that would be good. Money going into the Social Security Payroll Tax, though unfortunately a regressive tax, would be good because that directly funds the government and that money recirculates, understanding that the Social Security Trust Fund amounts to just general revenue. The tax should be changed to make it progressive instead of regressive.
But are 401k and IRA teaching people some moral discipline? Well the accepted prudence was bank accounts, and these are not bank accounts, these are gambling.
Politically it is a very strong move towards the establishment of a two tier society, like what Dougster and his friends want.
And then third, just from the POV of one's personal finances and lifestyle, I would say that if the best use one has for their money is some kinds of stock market investment, then they must have given up. They don't value their own abilities. There are all sorts of things one could do, usually with close associates, which have a greater chance of return and which actually use one's abilities and use them for a purpose one is committed to.
I for one have goals and ambitions which go way beyond the mere accumulation of personal wealth.
The kinds of businesses funded by people like the Kleiner Perkins VC's, have an extremely high rate of failure. And they waste the talents of everyone involved. But this is because of the sorts of things they fund, the sorts of business plans they want people to have, and because they put too much money in. They do this because they are shooting for the sometimes huge win, and quickly. Overall this gets more money for their clients. But the cost of this is a huge waste of talent, and then what is being done does not provide that much societal value.
Some books about business done differently than KP:
Good luck with your 401k. I plan to be doing lots of other things, and not alone, but with close associates. We will be using our money, and our talents and ambitions together. We will not be handing money over to institutions we have no control over. And multiplying our money is only but one of our lesser objectives.
For the majority of Americans....Banks 1% interest.....401K's 7% this year...do the math. Also what is your problem with repeating yourself? Oops, I did it again. Asking a troll to explain himself.
I'm not an insider like @Dougster, but what I see around me looks encouraging. Housing market looks strong, seems like more jobs going unfilled, modest pressure on rising salaries.
Also, from what I read, the banks are not leveraged to ridiculous levels like they were during the crash. Things like the Volker rule and Dodd-Frank have done their job. Then there's Tarullo (a Fed governer) who's a hero for making sure that Dodd-Frank was implemented.
Like @Dugan said above, we've had near-zero fed-funds rate for about eight years and it remains to be seen if the stock market will hold up as rates rise. I sure hope so.
Like Tarullo, Bernanke is another unsung hero. He's a Republican who used massive government intervention and novel thinking to get us through the crisis.
mikeya02, I don't know if you read what I posted. Banks used to offer higher interest, 5.75%, and then 6% for S and L's.
Mutual funds don't compare well to the longest types of T-bills, essentially zero risk. IRA and 401k are attractive because of the tax deduction, and then the later also has the employer matching contribution to make it even more attractive.
But still, these were invented to undermine political support for Social Security, and for our society, having all this money going into the stock market does nothing good, not compared to having it go to T-bills or the Soc. Sec fund.
And then, why would you want to put your money into something you have no control over and when you could be using your money for your own ventures, investing in yourself.
And then though there is a limit on the tax deduction, a cap, this 401k and IRA system still contributes to the wealth gap, pushing us towards a two tier society.
I for one have bigger goals and ambitions than just the accumulation of personal wealth. I want to leave a much larger mark than just having stuff money buys.
IRA and 401k were created to influence our nations politics. And I do not support that.
RandomMember,
None of us know that these markets will do tomorrow. But I for one know that things will be better when these markets and these economic indicators cool down. Ideally would be to settle at some mid level. But this is unlikely because people ( like Dougster ) try to boost them because that is how they make money. And then human psychology seems to go along with it. So there we have it, booms and busts. So many of these since 1980, and nothing good has ever come from this.
I am applying my talents and finances together, investing in myself and in my close circle of well known associates. For us, what the 'economy' does has very little effect. And we plan to keep it this way.
DOW will go to 20k, 25k, and then eventually 30k by the time 2026 comes around. Of course there will be a few shocks on its way up and as long as you stay the course you won't lose any money, but of course SJGuy thinks this is a suckers game. The only sucker out there is the person who doesn't invest their time and energy for future endeavors, whether it be the markets or education or other types of investments. It's why there is the terminology "diversification".
mikeya02, lots of people have always lived differently from the herd. I don't know if they have a huge effect, but they do inspire others, and then there are from time to time large scale changes in how people think.
I for one want the satisfaction of knowing that I was able to continue to educate myself, to make common cause with others and to involve them in things constructive, and then to be able to apply my abilities.
Going thru a divorce has forced me to rethink some of the basic questions of life. We have another member who had gone thru a divorce too, but he spends his time chemically intoxicated. So he can't do to much thinking.
Obtaining lots of money is obviously desirable, but not if it subtracts one iota from the above. So I apply my money, notice I said apply instead of invest, to my own ventures.
Just one simple question to SJGuy, give us one example of you applying your money or yourself in any successful venture, if you cant, stop posting your contrarian theories they have been discredited over and again ad nauseum.
twentyfive, You seem to want to drive people off of this board by cross examining them and probing them about their personal affairs. I've seen you do this before. That is not how the Internet works. And trying to inhibit rational discourse is bad for any online forum.
If you want in general to know about successful ventures, I would refer you to and man who is public about his present and past business ventures.
I'm not trying to drive anyone off of anything you know better than that. I am trying to get you to refrain from giving people advice where you have no knowledge of the subject matter. If you were able to speak knowledgeably about business in general that would be fine but just calling things you don't understand a scam or worse is irresponsible.
Sage advice from 25, right San Jose Guy? It appears in my short period of time on this board that you have neglected to make many friends, at least to what I know of the recent action on this website towards the OP's topic.
I want to become friends with you. What can I do to become a friend of you on TUSCL, SJG? Shall I repent all my capitalistic ventures and forfeit the financial success that comes with it? Give it all to charity? Live in squalor just so I can feel what it is like to live amongst the poor and homeless, and shove them in a cab over to the soup kitchen so they can live hunger free for another day?
Your right SJG, the changes I just mentioned beforehand are the ones I'm going to start making, and then I will throw away all the talents that got me to this successful point in my life and hope for the best. Are we now friends SJG?
I'm actually being serious about the friends thing, though.
25, people have abilities, and hopefully if they haven't been too beaten down, then hopefully they will want to apply them. Hopefully they will see their own abilities as more valuable and more worthy of 'investment' than any of these financial markets. And hopefully they will quickly disregard anyone trying to put out the kinds of stuff you are.
And JimG, 25 is not only not giving any sage advice, he isn't giving any advice at all, just non-sense.
You seem to like to denigrate the poor. You are not alone in that on this board. But I still do not go along with you in any way shape or form.
You SJGuy are just nuts, I didn't attack you unless pointing out what you don't know constitutes an attack. You and some of the others need to realize that while every one is entitled to their own opinion you are not entitled to your own facts and getting personal doesn't change facts. Drop mike!
If you guys want to be friends with SJG, then join him and his loser friends at a San Jose coffee shop at midnight while they fantasize about building a commie counter-culture movement
Mikeya02, you've talked about counter culture. Well there have long been people who do not go along with this idea of working to get money ( selling yourself like a prostitute ) so that you can play or retire.
Here is a very conservative financial writer. As I know he denounces all speculative "investing", and also "house flipping", and instead promotes the old fashioned idea of putting your money and time into only those things which you know well and understand.
https://www.amazon.com/Wealthy-Barber-Up…
I basically do agree with the above.
Here are some people who have a different idea, and it is based upon getting enough money to be what they call, Financially Independent. While this may look like just working to retire, there are some different aspects to it.
Now I don't go along with the above, but many people do and it is still well worth understanding what they are saying. And nothing that they suggest in anyway involves the stock market or speculative investing.
Probably one of the most influential Americans with counter culture ideas was Henry David Thoreau.
Now no, just being one person, he would not be enough to influence election outcomes. But his influence on how people think, both then and in the years since, has been huge.
MIkeya02, you seem to think that all which is wrong in this world is simply because people don't think and live the way you do. I could not possible be in greater disagreement with you.
SJG I do not denigrate the poor. Does this mean we can be friends again? Or what will it take to be counted amongst your inner circle of this organization you speak(write)? I am highly interested in helping an organization of self sustainment like the one you imagine, which contains women who suck us dry daily. I've yet to find any women willing to keep me saturated in pussy juices, because half of our time together she has been pregnant, and the other half she has been nursing. It's made fur some exciting romantic showers, I'll tell ya! Oh the stories I could share with your group SJG!
Now that we've closed above 19,000 on the Dow, is SJG still saying the market is doomed to crash since he began TUSCL over 2 years ago? Is he still calling for people to jump out of buildings, lose their jobs, and all investments within the markets.
Man, I remember how chastised I was a couple of years ago for telling people: that it wasn't just a bubble; think rates hikes would actually help; that there was plenty of upside left. I remember JamesSTD in particular saying it was "mostly likely a bubble due to low rates". That a low unemployment rate was a lagging indicator and more evidence that we were near that top. Now the market is soaring because they will finally raise rates.
Yet, people like that will never be wrong. To them there will always be a great bursting of "the bubble" just ahead. But they won't put a date on it. So they'll never be wrong... after it could happen in the next six months. Some people whose world view is spoon fed to them (like RickyBoy) have been calling it for 8 years. Yet they aren't wrong. It's come right around the next corner.
Meanwhile in reality the economy is booming like never before and finding qualified people to hire is the biggest challenge because employment is so strong.
People forget the time value of money. When the market goes sideways for a period of time, the correction has already taken place.
The naysayers are like a broken clock. They get it right once in a very long time, and then scream "See! I told you so!" When in fact if they would have been invested the whole time they would have capitalized on the market gains enough to cushion against any losses. Investing if it was for the faint of heart would mean everyone could do it, but only the ones with a strong stomach that lead without emotion can handle it. That basically takes out all of the liberal Hillary supporters.
I also recall taking alot of flak for saying we were early in the greatest economic boom in world history, likely to last 20 to 30years. Anybody doubt that now?
meat has been about the only one on the board I can remember who has been consistently bullish over the years pointing out that there will of course be pullbacks but the strong trend up remains in tact. Everyone else has been screaming "bubble".
I have been fairly bullish I hate to remind you and @meat I voted for Hillary, so maybe I'm not exactly liberal, I don't believe that I am faint of heart. I've been fully invested for over 20 years.
Our brains are designed to believe we are smart to look for the bad scenarios/negativity. Kind of like the cave men looking outside and being weary of bears and the big bad wolf, so it is hard to think positive is the means to being smart.
You guys (Doug and Meat) will never get the credit you deserve for being optimistic since it goes against our primal thinking. Yet those who predict the sky was falling sure look silly over time. They negative Nellys are usually the type of people who like to play victim in most circumstances, exampleslike social humanitarians, cultural appropriation, income inequality, etc. etc......
If you understood the basics that the cost of living goes up over time, then the markets naturally will need to keep up with that increase, hence surely inflation is about to set in, and that will cause a slowing trend in the markets for the next 10 years. The trends never go in lockstep with each other, rather the ebb and flow is difficult to predict. This is why the prognosticators fail and the strong of heart succeed if you just stick it out and don't listen to SJG!
25, I surmise that you weren't a Hillary supporter, rather just an anti-Trump supporter. Much the same way that i wasn't a Trump supporter, yet in the camp where anyone but Hillary needs to be president. The Hillary supporters were blindly believing with identity politics that if you're a woman, minority, poor, or an immigrant that you needed to vote for her. It sounds good to feel that way to support her, just like it feels good to be skeptical of a falling market and protect your $$.
More money is lost in investing trying to protect yourself from a falling market or trying to predict it will fall than any other means. This is the hardest lesson anyone can comprehend when it comes to investing.
Keep in mind the major reason why Hillary lost the election is because she didn't relate to the working middle class. She had no message for those of us who work hard, invest our paycheck a into the markets in hopes that someday we can relax and not work our asses off our entire lives until we die. She failed to do want her husband did successfully, appeal to the middle class.
I probably shouldn't wade even more into politics.
Meat72, I can respect the logic behind being an anti-Hillary supporter. The Democratic Party has arguably embraced identity politics too much. But don't forget that Trump de facto embraced identity politics. He just focused on a few, largely white groups. He never articulated an actual plan other than "trust me, good stuff is going to happen".
And to be fair to Hillary I don't think she really cared about identity politics. I think she viewed it as a way to build up a winning coalition. Turned out she was wrong, but I don't think she was a goofy liberal saying "let's not do cultural appropriation" on college campuses. She just thought she saw a path to victory and tried it. Maybe that's dishonest, but I'm not convinced that Trump was any more sincere. But who knows? I don't know what's in Trump's mind.
I think that as a country we're rolling the dice on an unknown quantity when we could have played it safe and had somebody who who likely would have lost in four years. I think Trump will lose in four years too, but for different reasons. I know a lot of people are unhappy but my own life is actually pretty good, so it's a bit academic to me. That said, I have zero confidence he'll improve things for the folks that are hurting. But I add another "who knows?"
That said, I actually had my guy shift investments to a more aggressive stance. I don't need liquid assets right now. I'm young (mid-30's). Things probably won't be that bad under Trump. And if they are I'm young enough to weather the storm until cooler heads are in the White House.
If I were the age of some other posters I'd be quaking in my boots. :(
To clarify further, I think your correct about her not relating to the middle class. But I think it was largely the white middle class. To be fair to Trump he actually saw an increase in the African American vote from something like 6% (Obama vs Romney) to 8% of so (Clinton vs Trump).
The sad thing is that Trump could actually heal divisions in the country. But he's wasting time tweeting about Hamilton. He has every right to, but he's being unwise. Even if you think that the Hamilton cast were jerks, he's expending political capital before he's even in office. Why not just let it drop? Or better yet, actually tweet something about starting a dialog to heal divisions in the country? That would subvert expectations.
I predict that racial resentments will grow far worse under Trump unless he changes course and does what he claimed he wanted to do in his victory speech. Pointlessly bitching at the cast of a Broadway show won't do that.
If somebody would either out a bullet into George Soros or else freeze all of his assets, we'd see much improved race relations. The media is something to point fingers at, because we all know most people can't think for themselves, therefore they look to TV and media outlets to tell them how to think.
Well yes of course it does. Now none of us know what it will do tomorrow, but when there is no prior precident for it being this high, the risks are greater.
People should be investing their talents and money together, in their own ventures, and in ventures they set up with close associates. Collapse the owner - worker divide. End the continuing trend towards financialization.
Everyone, even you Dougster, has other talents besides speculating. They can be developed.
Amazing thing about this, is the fact is that markets are great equalizers, and proof that what you are doing has value. If you are not winning then it's time to change your strategy, if you are winning it proves that what you are doing is correct.
Markets go up and down. If you found a good way to make millions, if you were smart you'd probably keep quiet about it and just do it. You can think the market is going up to 2300 or even 2500 or down to 1400 but the market doesn't care what you think. Unless you're Warren Buffet because then you can be the market for a while. There's not enough liquidity in a stock if any of us are actually changing the market price of a stock very much. This can happen with extended hours trading in some stocks that aren't very liquid.
All i read is people saying it will rise or fall. I don't see anybody give simple reasons. unemployment is rising/falling , interest is rising/falling, inflation is low/high these are just factual observations (or 6th sense if it's just a feeling)
What's the core reasons ? I just think that US economy is saturated, the growth is only dependent on new innovative (or disruptive) start-ups and finding new markets for selling products and services (or to peddle more products there).
Internal consumption is not rising. More people are not investing in auto or home (this is a fact not feeling), which indicates they are not optimistic about long term growth. No new natural resource reserve is expected to be discovered (fracking was the last).
If someone is saying there is a bubble they should first define.. what commodity/product/service/financial asset is overvalued and why they think it is overvalued ?
I am trying to get this discussion to the basics. If anybody is too awesome to think I am oversimplifying and wants to discuss only CMBS, RMBS, CDS, CLO and other financial instruments twisted around mortgage backed securities , credit default swaps PM me.
Sometimes people forget why they were fighting but must continue to do so.
The Hillary supporters I know fall into 2 camps (the really affluent or wealthy ones, who support Hillary, I have not come across them IRC)
(1) Camp One is on welfare, disability, or work and earn on OK income (~50K) but don't manage finances well enough to to save. Financial literacy and/or an ascetic lifestyle from Biblical scripture would help these people. If they'd stop spending all of their month each month, maybe we could see if they have or don't have fear over investment in the stock market. I meet lots of these people (welfare, young yet disabled, or elderly) when volunteering with the food truck or other charities. It's a challenge to get them to place where they'd be able to invest. Great Society it is not. If anything they are less self reliant due to the welfare incentives.
(2) Camp Two work and earn a decent income (50K and up) and know enough to divert some funds each pay period to a 401K or a Fidelity Vanguard fund. These funds typically ask "when" you expect to retire and apply risk accordingly. These are what I used to use when I still contributed to my savings (I don't but I should). Maybe these are the scared people you are talking about? The ones only using their 401K and nothing else? I don't think this group has the financial literacy (typical) to invest in the open stock market. So perhaps we agree.
For group #1, Some of it is their own fault. They need to learn from brother Juicebox69! Some don't adequately lower expenses enough and are instead buying frivolous things (or getting pegged on fees and interest .. financial literacy, the remedial class, not even 101 level). Some get nailed on housing costs, bidding on home prices in the right, safe neighborhood that's in the best school district, or on rents the same way as buying. Even then, it is still a conscious choice. Sometimes I wonder if parents are making good choices or not? I know education is essential in this economy, but damn. There are less costly ways to go about it.
You should here all of the whining I here from them when helping them or donating my time. What a bunch of complainers! I'm starting to see your guys' view on this.
Group #2 are probably the ideological descendants of those who voted Sixteenth Amendment, who wanted to see the Vanderbuilts and the Carnegies "pay their fair share." (back then it was over the delta of 4% on the tariffs of imported goods, which amounted to a builtin 4% gift of profit to the capitalist class). Misguided but I understand where they are coming from. Though I am also starting to see where you are guys are coming from on this too (thanks to dallas). We all got railroaded on the 16th; income was never defined by an act of congress; the voters at the time probably had different intents than the newly expanded federal government.
Both conservatism and liberalism/progressivism in the US has become less critical of government as a means of "correcting" society. This is probably not good for the future of the republic.
Our federal legislatures see tax money in the federal treasury as campaign money to spend in their districts to win re-election rather than seeing it as our hard-earned money which should be responsibly spent or returned back to us. This corruption is not good for the future Romney's 53% that pay taxes. And it's not good for the republic.
Thanks if you managed to read this far to the end. You are probably not part of the overall illiteracy that is the problem facing our nation today.
Dominic77, no disrespect, but how many people in your category 1 do you actually know? I'll be honest, I don't think I know anybody with income less than $50K (except retirees that are now living off their savings).
I don't think you can make broad conclusions from this election. It wasn't so much a liberal vs conservative as it was between a charismatic outsider whose ideology and policy proposals were poorly defined and an insider who gave a number of people, even a good slice of her supporters, the creeps. Add to that the fact that the outsider was also viewed as crazy and/or creepy by a good number of people.
That said, there is clearly just about half of the country that want a more liberal direction and about half that want a conservative direction. The former are concentrated in cities whereas the latter are more spread out. So I suspect we'll have a conservative house, a split senate, and a presidency that goes back and forth based on the small number of folks that both vote and can be swayed one way or the other.
Hillary is not the most warm and fuzzy, but she is honest. The negatives about her, the reason lots of modest income people declined to vote for her, is simply the effects of right wing media and its total lies.
Hey Meat72, I have SJG on ignore so don't know what he wrote, but he would say their is never a good time to participate in the market, even after it has crashed at an all time low. He is proof of the stupidity found in the liberal base against capitalism.
I think he believes in a bartering system. That is what his "organization" that he is building is about. Except he only has he, himself, and not me. He also is anti white man, anti sports, anti family, and pro-counter culture so basically he's a nut job.
95 comments
Latest
Just like hitting a dead possum before Rick the Vulture can clean it up
All of them.
Housing market is also very strong where I live.
(this is a stripper forum).
Those of us who don't manage a hedge fund wouldn't know how to short treasuries. Some sort of ETF for that purpose?
Pop!
No, this is not just a bubble, it is The Bubble.
Usually the uncertainly of a Presidential election trashes the bubbles. But in this case there does not seem to be any uncertainly.
So we are on for the boom of 2023, expecting the Dow to top 120,000.
Each bubble brings grief and misery, and each bubble brings a bust, which also brings grief and misery. And then Dougster and his pals profit, as our country becomes more and more like the third world.
But what Dougster is really waiting for is The Singularity, Ray Kurzweil's Singularity, when humanity formally splits in two, and when the New World Order officially begins.
"Another 8 years of the same policies and poverty in America will be completely eliminated", Herbert Hoover 1928 campaign.
SJG
https://www.amazon.com/Screwed-Undeclare…
Somebody help me with the TUSCL login. I have to stop. Too fucking unreal.
So my question to you is since you've historically stated there has been a bubble percolating for years, can you with any certainty tell us where the true value should be? 10k at the Dow or maybe even 8,000? This constant bubble talk is like a broken clock which is right only twice daily, when in fact the markets go up way more often than they go down. If you're going to be successful in investing you must accept the swings as being normal, and not just hope for the bubbles to pop!
But we can look at some past lows and analyze them, because these lows give you some idea what the minimum consumption levels are. Back when it crashed in 1986, the end of the Reagan Bubble, people said the Dow would never exceed 4000 again.
And then in the run up to Bush 43's Iraq war, it was down to around 7,500.
Now can we say these are under valuations, like we might say some highs are overvaluations?
I think that would be the wrong way to look at it, because again, we don't know that these markets will do. It is after all just an arena for gambling. Anything you or I might know about these firms has zero predictive power, it is all explanation after the fact, information which has already contributed to the prices being at their current level.
What I feel most certain in saying is that the current market index levels are the result of over consumption, consumption which is being stimulated by the amount of money flowing into these markets. This money causes an unsustainable level of employment, and this plus the market inflations causes an unsustainable level of consumer consumption. And then all of this reflects back onto the markets.
So I do feel confident in saying that the current market pricing makes such speculative investment very risky. And I am using the term 'investment' extremely loosely.
But this gets into another area, I am not really just saying that there is a bubble. I am also saying that there is spiritual sickness. The money which has made these bubbles and busts is just money which should be collected as upper bracket personal income tax. Once our tax system was gutted, these bubbles started. And there have been so many now that it is hard for me to keep track.
https://www.amazon.com/America-Wrong-Don…
The bubbles themselves add absolutely nothing to our national well being. You can look at how sick our nation is, simply by how high these markets go. And the only reason for these market indices is simply so that the news can have something to report on, so that people will for some reason think that these markets are something they should pay attention to.
You speak of being "successful in investing", well I certainly have no interest in anything like that, just like I have no interest in betting on horse races or athletic events. And these things are actually very similar, as they are all controlled by odds makers. If you bet on a horse race or an athletic contest, you will get odds. And if you put money into one of the issues on these markets, then the 'odds' are already included in the current pricing. Highly unlikely you or I could ever know anything beyond what the professional money managers know who control the insurance and pension funds already know, and these are mostly what determine the current pricings. These fund managers are the odds makers.
So you say that these swings are normal. I do not agree. They are very destructive. What the bubbles and busts are, is typical, if you practice the Laissez-faire capitalism like in the 1920's. And that these swings then become typical is exactly the problem.
When these markets crashed and we had a deep economic collapse at the end of the 1920's, we shifted over to a different type of economic system, Keynesian. Under this system it is the responsibility of government and central banks to use their powers to stabilize business cycles. The main variables are the size of the public sector, and whether we run surplus or deficit budgets.
And in fact, this worked well for 4 decades. Booms and busts were minimized, as were any sustained deficits. It was a very good system. Anyone who takes a macro economics class learns about this.
But at the end of the 1970's something did strain it. Capitalism is still an insane system, as it is dependent on endless growth. So it will always be running into external limits. One of these is always going to be natural resource consumption, such as oil consumption. And then as those in some oil drilling nations wanted fair returns, the OPEC Cartel formed, and so we faced 'stagflation', seeing both great inflation at the same time as high unemployment.
So this plus some other overseas incidents, plus the religious right coming into politics, destabilized Jimmy Carter and brought in Ronald Reagan, and that was the end of Keynesianism. And then encouraging Iraq to attack Iran was the end of OPEC.
So because of this political change, we do have countless booms and busts. Very hard to stop a bust once it starts. But if people decline to support the booms, then the busts will be minimized.
https://www.amazon.com/America-Wrong-Don…
And then all of this gambling attitude towards life, it depends upon convincing people that their own talents and abilities are worthless. So the way they are supposed to live is by speculation. This amounts to a completely fatalistic approach to living.
One writer who talks about this, shows the evidence for it in the rise of these state lotteries, they represent a kind of spiritual sickness. And the sees this as indication that the American Dream has been stolen, but then there are new examples which we should look to:
https://www.amazon.com/European-Dream-Eu…
And then you speak of these markets going up more than going down. What seems to happen is that they go up gradually, reaching frightening levels and still going up and up. The balance sheets of the corporations, if they are improving, it is only due to stimulated over consumption due to market inflation, and also just currency inflation. What is really going up is the 'pop', the multiplier factor, the price to earnings ratio.
And then something happens that really scares people, and so they have to face the fact that the king has no clothes, and so there is a crash.
But then, as people want to keep stimulating bubbles, people will start boosting for the next boom, and so it will start going up again. So it looks like a saw tooth wave. Steady slope on the up cycle, then a steep drop on the down cycle, and all cause simply by human psychology, by fatalism.
And I call this fatalism because it depends upon convincing people that their own efforts have little merits, so all they should do is gamble.
Where as the alternative, putting our time, energy, and talents together, in things we will have material involvement in, is pooh poohed.
There is nothing more satisfying than working with a circle of associates you know well, and trying to build some businesses. And the success rate for owner financed businesses, at least one's with a minimum outside capital, is very high.
Some books about this:
https://www.amazon.com/Honest-Business-S…
https://www.amazon.com/Growing-Business-…
And then by contrast, and having worked with Kleiner-Perkins:
https://www.amazon.com/Money-No-Object-V…
These sorts of speculator VC's have endless money to put in, and this Jim Hansell shows exactly why this causes such a high ( 90% ) failure rate. See they don't want modest success. What they want is 100 to 1 or greater. And as for the 90% that fail, they don't care, they just say, "The downside is limited." For them all it is is money. The actual talents and efforts of the people are meaningless.
And having worked closely with individuals named in this book, and having seen all the situations this author describes, variations on collective insanity, I understand why these sorts of speculators cause the high failure rates. They don't want people to work hard and make things go. They want spectacular price appreciation. And so this effects the sorts of things they decide to fund, and it also undermines the efforts of others who approach things differently.
So this speculative economy is good for no one, except for the speculators.
I am involved right now in things which are very different, working with people I know, and with long term commitment. And we do value our own talents and abilities, as well as those of our colleagues.
And a prime example of this is to be found in one Elon Musk. Starting with only $2k to his name, but working hard and making his first two companies go. And then in a few years cashing out with $22Meg. That certainly beats any stock market index gains. And what were the risks? Well doing it himself and with close associates, and with a willingness to try again and again as needed, the long term risks were very small.
I have not read his biography, but I will. Musk may be one who can make the boast, "Never had a job in my life."
I admire such people because they don't submit to social pressure. Most people down to $2k, about 1 months rent here, would submit and do what everyone tells them, "get a job."
See, the middle-class family turns most people into Homer Simpson. It is designed to do this.
Must not have worked on Musk. I cannot make the claim myself, never had a job. But I think the idea is right. Really what I mean is, you should do things you believe in and which use your talents and abilities. You should never do other than this, and you should never allow people to convince you that the best use of your talents is mere gambling, horse races, Las Vegas, or the stock markets. The best your of talents and your funds is in things you and associates will apply you talents and abilities to.
These people peddling stock market speculation, though they may make it sound sexy, it is actually noxious.
SJG
King Crimson - Larks Tongues In Aspic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlDInWEc…
At least anybody who makes a paycheck and lives below their means can easily invest in the markets, and regardless of booms or busts, they will make an excellent return on their investments over a lifetime. This is not speculation, it is a historical fact that anyone who consistently invests periodically over their career of 30 years will have substantial gains. Nobody can disprove that if they simply participated in the overall market like the S&P 500, and I'm not talking about speculating on an individual stock/company. The OP's topic was about the "markets" and not speculation on an individual company or business. How do you refute that proven theory of steady investing over 30 years, SJG. It never has failed as long as you rebalance to a more conservative portfolio as you get closer to the end of your career, right? So these people who have no abilities to lead a business or compete in producing services or products can lead a successful standard of living simply by investing part of their paycheck throughout their life as a working middle class hero!
Negative. Just citing him as a most impressive example, and a better man than I, because it looks like he never caved into pressure and got a job.
I think what you are saying is that anyone with discretionary income can invest. Well, many really don't have discretionary income. There are all sorts of cultural factors which make it likely that some will end up with very high incomes.
And then, if these Indexed Funds like you speak of perform that well, then tomorrow's stock prices would be today's stock prices. If there were zero risk, then there would be no possibility of gain.
Buckminster Fuller had suggested that the Social Security Trust fund be invested in the most conservative portion of the stock market, and that if it had been from the start, then by the 1950's it would have had so much money that it would not need to collect any more. And we need something like this to get to Citizenship Pay.
https://www.amazon.com/Grunch-Giants-Buc…
He was not talking about any privatization schemes, he was talking about the collective.
But what I was talking about probably sums up in two points:
1. People do better if they can assemble their own team, people they know, and then run some businesses. Neither you nor I need be the head of any such team. All that matter is that we be working with people we know. Why would you assume that an indexed fund would out perform what you and close associates could do by yourselves.
2. And then, if there is so much to be said for these indexed funds, a kind of totally hands off or passive investment, then we should make it so that everyone gains, and especially those at the bottom who need it most.
The idea that everyone should strive for a self-financed retirement is simply the Reagan people campaigning to dismantle Social Security. The system should be fixed so that if we apply the skills we have, then we do well. Setting up a system of Winners and Losers accomplishes nothing good. So I don't care if we are in a boom or a bust right now, I just know that we have a system which is set up wrong.
We will either have political consciousness and a working democracy, which will mean that everyone does well, and will probably come to resemble the Social Democracies of Western Europe. A politically conscious electorate would never support something which creates winners and losers, because the costs of that are far too high to bare.
Or we will have people listening to Social Darwinism and Racism from Right Wing media sources and we will have a form of State Capitalism, where most people are seriously underemployed, and where many people believe that the poor deserve to be poor and the rich deserve to be rich.
SJG
I guess time will tell. If this market can survive a return to normal interest rates, then I guess the pundits are wrong.
Those that put forth the effort to do well should surely be rewarded commensurate with their efforts and gifts.
Those that do not put forth any effort deserve no reward.
Those that are exceptional deserve exceptional reward.
With no consequence to underachieving and no reward for overachieving, we become a nation of mediocrity. Not a place in which I would wish to live. In fact, over enough time, we become a system of losers -- as there is no consequence to sucking since "everyone does well".
It seems the only healthy system is a meritocracy.
We must all, no matter our circumstance, aspire to improve ourselves. A system of rewards promotes aspiration -- which is how America has led the world in improving the human condition for 200 years.
It seems to me a lot of working people that no matter how much I bust my ass, I still get the same salary or maybe a small bonus, if there's any left, after the executives take theirs. OK, they're running the show. Fine. So, to me, it seems like the reward button is broken, or I'm misunderstanding what y'all mean by efforts and gifts. I'm thinking I just am not understanding something.
if you bust your ass produce more you should receive more reward. Simple. The reward button IS broken in this country -- that is why participation trophies in youth sports are the symptom to a much bigger disease. The disease is the idea that everyone should "feel good" all the time.
My kid was part of a tug of war competition last spring at elementary school. Parents came to watch. After the last match ended, everyone was declared the winner and everyone got a medal. WTF??
College costs are outrageously high. The Expected Family Contribution (EFC) formula is bullshit. State supported public universities should be compelled to cover a meaningful share of the uncovered EFC. What does it say about us that elite universities will cover 100% of unmet EFC but state schools won't touch it??
Local, state and federal taxes are too high. Government is bloated. There should be fewer barriers to business creation so that smart entrepreneurial poor folks can lift themselves through hard work and ingenuity through the middle class to wealth.
Succinctly, I'm more objecting to SJGs idea that we should aspire to live in a society with no "winners and losers". As Alec Baldwin said in Glengarry Glen Ross, "Follow my advice and fire your fucking ass because a loser is a loser."
I believe that this is probably true. When the dotcom boom started this was painfully obvious from the very start. The local semiconductor manufacturing industry had come into tough times, and the VC's became frightened of funding anymore. Much of their reluctance was because of the $billion fabs going up in Asia. Facilities of that scale have since been built in the US, but not with VC money. But at that time, there were no domestic facilities like that.
So the money stopped. It was still there, as it was railroad money. But there was nothing to do with it. Billboards carried advertisement about water conservation.
Then all of a sudden, working to commercialize a government developed communications technology, the money flowed and flowed and flowed and people cheered the boom. Everyone was working for a company with dotcom in it's name, and the upscale car dealerships had never seen it better.
But I wasn't cheering. I could see that the fact that so much money was going into things which didn't even have a plan for getting into black ink, and really were just catchy names, was sign of economic ill health, of there not being more worthwhile things to put money into, and there not being more worthwhile things for putting technical talent into.
rickdugan +10
*********************************************************
pensionking, everyone wants to do well. Their motives might not be entirely monetary. Most of the time the people who do the most innovative things and the people who fight the hardest for something, are not at all monetarily motivated.
But everyone wants to do well, so that they can win the admiration of friend and family.
But it is just that our economic system is based on limiting the number of people who have that chance. And it is also that our capitalist system depends upon the middle-class family to break children, turn them into Homer Simpson, and now also to create an untouchable caste of scapegoats.
That there would be people doing slave labor and cheap labor, used to be sufficient in order to maintain discipline. But now, in the information age, there is far less need for labor. So our system uses the middle-class family to create an untouchable caste, often living on drugs, alcohol, and psychiatric medications. These folks are subjected to ritual humiliations, and this keeps everyone else in line.
Frances Fox-Piven , creating an underclass, Social Darwinism is not a new idea.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuJp5tGm…
And then another of the things which keeps the poor down are the Born Again Churches. They prevent the poor from organizing, by making them believe that they are responsible for their own plight.
And the volunteers in these ministries, just like the guy I helped put into San Quentin, all have scapegoat children of their own.
Here, I found a perfect list of the sorts of faults they find in their scapegoat children:
•Drug and alcohol abuse
•Failed personal and romantic relationships
•Loss of religious faith, in cases of clergy abuse
•Disinterest in family relationships
•Disintegration of a family
•Poor self-esteem
•Feelings of deep depression
•Difficulties with casual social relationships
•Feelings of isolation and despair
•Loss of trust in authority figures and institutions who don't report child molestation
•Despair in reaction to persecuting attitudes of police
•Anger
•Inappropriate sexual behavior
•Poor work habits
•Unemployment or underemployment
They all have children who they accuse of the things on this list.
Only problem is, the list is not intended to be a list of the failings of scapegoat children. It is a list prepared by a law firm, and they use it to show indications of childhood sexual abuse, and they use it to recover damage money from the abusers.
http://www.aswllp.com/Sexual-Molestation…
Once I knew that the jury had convicted this Pentecostal Daughter Molester, I shifted my focus into trying to make sure he got a lengthy sentence, by showing the court how pervasive of a social menace he and his church are. They all have children which they accuse of the things on that list. And of course if the scapegoat is female, then just as it had been with his eldest daughter, the allegations also include sex.
And pensionking, getting people excited about meaningless sporting competitions is one of the ways Capitalism, and the welfare of the most wealthy, is promoted.
I think the way Buckminster Fuller explains it is best. Industrial technology has advanced so far, though mostly in the effort to kill people with greater efficiency, that accidentally we now have the ability to use that technology to let everyone live better than even royalty had been able to. But what stands in the way of this is that we are still placing people in completion with each other and demanding that everyone prove that they can earn a living. And we do this even though a large majority of the forms of paid employment produce zero social good, and they certainly offer nothing which compares with the harm they do by using up scarce resources.
https://www.amazon.com/Critical-Path-Kiy…
SJG
We know in time the markets will drop in valuations, but given time they will restore themselves to their previous highs and go higher. So during their track downward it will be another opportunity to buy cheaper prices for the eventual return to future all time highs.
SJG, do you participate in the market gains like over 50% of the American people have? This is a proven statistic that the majority of US citizens own shares in US stock markets. Why would anyone cheer the demise of the majority of working class people? Only someone whom is so inclined to a meta narrative!
My fellow TUSCLers seem to be willing to part with the past and look forward to optimism with the US economy. There is more discretionary income than ever. All of my shows this last week from Green Bay to Ohio have been sold out. People are ready to have a good time again! I bet the strip clubs are packed all over the country! I went to my favorite watering hole in Dayton and it was hopping! See you soon.
If more people can be induced into gambling and approaching life in a fatalistic way, then the stock markets will likely go even higher. Or at least if they can keep bringing more people in, they can try to sustain the current pricing, for a while. We will have to watch and see.
If on the other hand people come to believe in their own abilities and to see that there own efforts are more worthy of their money, then the stock market bubbles will be minimized. And if we can minimize the bubbles, we are also minimizing the busts. The bubbles cause the busts.
And yes, when the markets drop, people can buy in and make lots of money if they go back up. That is how these markets tend to work. Most of the time it is the rich getting richer, while the poor have been duped and are placing money which they really cannot afford to lose, at great risk. Most of the time, those who lose were poor to start with and those who win where rich to start with. Nothing good whatsoever is coming from this inducing people to get into the stock markets.
Lots of people are boosting for the bubbles, and I guess this does induce more people to get in, but it benefits working people absolutely nothing, just more cost of living inflation and a greater concentration of wealth. If we continue to go this way, America will be a land of just the rich and the poor.
And why on earth would I want to put money into stock markets when I have assembled my own team and am far more interested in what we can do, applying our own abilities. We have the example of Elon Musk, going from $2k to clearing $22Meg, in about 5 years. That is an 11,000x multiplication. And even if what we do is nothing like that, even if we can just barely make it, we are still doing things which we believe in and we are applying our talents. Why would we ever believe that that is somehow worth less, than just gambling. And even if we were to gain nothing, we would still have the satisfaction of having built and sustained our team, and of having done things which we believe in and which use our abilities. And undoubtedly we will be creating more opportunities for ourselves.
People who work for a living used to be valued and respected in America. JimG, you really do not seem to understand this. Probably it is because you are so young, and never knew what it was like before, particularly when unions were stronger and before America was deindustrialized, and especially before Ronald Reagan was elected.
SJG
How Reaganomics Killed America’s Middle Class
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdCNGkZo…
https://www.amazon.com/America-Stole-Don…
How Wall Street Works: Financial Market Theory and Fiscal Policy (1997)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUuC6Vy3…
WALL STREET
How It Works
and for Whom
http://www.wallstreetthebook.com/WallStr…
So is that another Rolls-Royce there Dougster, after two previous ones were repossessed. And is that another diamond ring, real this time?
And so if people buy into this all time high market, then what signs should they look for as indicators to get out?
Mostly all the stock market does is help rich people take money off of poor people.
SJG
JimG, the way it does this is exactly how you've explained. People who have surplus income, and especially people who can afford to lose money, can take risks that much of the population cannot afford. So sometimes the are able to make lots of money. But as they are buying low and selling high, it is because other people are doing the opposite.
Luring people of modest means into the stock market is not that much different from selling them California Lottery tickets. It is just a way of taking money off of them. These people who are making money off of the stock market, are making it off of other people.
The stock market also undermines labor movement solidarity, and without that working people would have nearly nothing.
General currency and cost of living inflation does not help us. Getting people to devalue their own efforts and abilities does not help us. There is nothing good about this fixation on the stock market. It just comes down to yet another move towards a two tier society. ( What Dougster and his friends are staying up night and day in order to actualize. )
SJG
401k's and IRA's are not bank savings accounts, they are investments in something which resembles a mutual fund. And mutual funds, compared to long term T-bills with essentially zero risk, do not do very well.
But the reason people like them is because of the tax deduction, and then for 401k's there is usually also an employer matching contribution.
These advantages do make them attractive for sure.
But there are still a few other facets worth considering. First of all, the reason these things were set up, was because Social Security is one of the most progressive programs this country has ever had, and it remains one of the most popular pieces of legislation ever passed.
It is a direct threat to those who want laissez-faire, that is the appearance of no rules.
If they wanted to do benefit to our society, they could have set up something like IRA and 401k, but where the money goes into long term T-bills. That would have made a lot more sense.
But no, they wanted to get people into the speculative economy, and they wanted to strengthen the financial and political power of Wall Street, while trying to break up political support for social security.
Second, 401k and IRA are still upwards wealth transfer mechanisms. Though there is a cap on the amount of income which can go into it and be tax deducted each year, there is still in effect a limit to how far down it goes. That is, as highlighted by Mitt Romney in his ill fated statement, many Americans do not make enough money to pay any income tax. There are all sorts of other regressive taxes which eat at their useable income, but at least with income tax they are spared. Its the Standard Deduction, Exemptions, and then for those with children the Earned Income Tax Credit.
And then on top of this, a large number of Americans are really just scraping by from month to month, pay check to pay check, If they are not behind in rent or car insurance payments, and if they can get say some needed dental work, they are doing better then they have been. So IRA and 401k are at best just abstractions for them
And so then, is getting people to put money into IRA and 401k a good thing? I would say no. Certainly money going into the stock market accomplishes nothing for our society.
Money going instead into T-Bills would help lower their needed interest rates, and that would be good. Money going into the Social Security Payroll Tax, though unfortunately a regressive tax, would be good because that directly funds the government and that money recirculates, understanding that the Social Security Trust Fund amounts to just general revenue. The tax should be changed to make it progressive instead of regressive.
But are 401k and IRA teaching people some moral discipline? Well the accepted prudence was bank accounts, and these are not bank accounts, these are gambling.
Politically it is a very strong move towards the establishment of a two tier society, like what Dougster and his friends want.
And then third, just from the POV of one's personal finances and lifestyle, I would say that if the best use one has for their money is some kinds of stock market investment, then they must have given up. They don't value their own abilities. There are all sorts of things one could do, usually with close associates, which have a greater chance of return and which actually use one's abilities and use them for a purpose one is committed to.
I for one have goals and ambitions which go way beyond the mere accumulation of personal wealth.
The kinds of businesses funded by people like the Kleiner Perkins VC's, have an extremely high rate of failure. And they waste the talents of everyone involved. But this is because of the sorts of things they fund, the sorts of business plans they want people to have, and because they put too much money in. They do this because they are shooting for the sometimes huge win, and quickly. Overall this gets more money for their clients. But the cost of this is a huge waste of talent, and then what is being done does not provide that much societal value.
Some books about business done differently than KP:
https://www.amazon.com/Honest-Business-S…
https://www.amazon.com/Growing-Business-…
And then just about how to look at money:
http://www.wholeearth.com/issue/2024/art…
Good luck with your 401k. I plan to be doing lots of other things, and not alone, but with close associates. We will be using our money, and our talents and ambitions together. We will not be handing money over to institutions we have no control over. And multiplying our money is only but one of our lesser objectives.
SJG
Also, from what I read, the banks are not leveraged to ridiculous levels like they were during the crash. Things like the Volker rule and Dodd-Frank have done their job. Then there's Tarullo (a Fed governer) who's a hero for making sure that Dodd-Frank was implemented.
Like @Dugan said above, we've had near-zero fed-funds rate for about eight years and it remains to be seen if the stock market will hold up as rates rise. I sure hope so.
Like Tarullo, Bernanke is another unsung hero. He's a Republican who used massive government intervention and novel thinking to get us through the crisis.
Mutual funds don't compare well to the longest types of T-bills, essentially zero risk. IRA and 401k are attractive because of the tax deduction, and then the later also has the employer matching contribution to make it even more attractive.
But still, these were invented to undermine political support for Social Security, and for our society, having all this money going into the stock market does nothing good, not compared to having it go to T-bills or the Soc. Sec fund.
And then, why would you want to put your money into something you have no control over and when you could be using your money for your own ventures, investing in yourself.
And then though there is a limit on the tax deduction, a cap, this 401k and IRA system still contributes to the wealth gap, pushing us towards a two tier society.
I for one have bigger goals and ambitions than just the accumulation of personal wealth. I want to leave a much larger mark than just having stuff money buys.
IRA and 401k were created to influence our nations politics. And I do not support that.
RandomMember,
None of us know that these markets will do tomorrow. But I for one know that things will be better when these markets and these economic indicators cool down. Ideally would be to settle at some mid level. But this is unlikely because people ( like Dougster ) try to boost them because that is how they make money. And then human psychology seems to go along with it. So there we have it, booms and busts. So many of these since 1980, and nothing good has ever come from this.
I am applying my talents and finances together, investing in myself and in my close circle of well known associates. For us, what the 'economy' does has very little effect. And we plan to keep it this way.
Thom Hartmann and Richard Wolfe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdCNGkZo…
SJG
The Best of Acid Jazz: Jazz Funk Soul Acid Groove
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaRhetAo…
I for one want the satisfaction of knowing that I was able to continue to educate myself, to make common cause with others and to involve them in things constructive, and then to be able to apply my abilities.
Going thru a divorce has forced me to rethink some of the basic questions of life. We have another member who had gone thru a divorce too, but he spends his time chemically intoxicated. So he can't do to much thinking.
Obtaining lots of money is obviously desirable, but not if it subtracts one iota from the above. So I apply my money, notice I said apply instead of invest, to my own ventures.
SJG
If you want in general to know about successful ventures, I would refer you to and man who is public about his present and past business ventures.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=yout…
SJG
I want to become friends with you. What can I do to become a friend of you on TUSCL, SJG? Shall I repent all my capitalistic ventures and forfeit the financial success that comes with it? Give it all to charity? Live in squalor just so I can feel what it is like to live amongst the poor and homeless, and shove them in a cab over to the soup kitchen so they can live hunger free for another day?
Your right SJG, the changes I just mentioned beforehand are the ones I'm going to start making, and then I will throw away all the talents that got me to this successful point in my life and hope for the best. Are we now friends SJG?
I'm actually being serious about the friends thing, though.
And JimG, 25 is not only not giving any sage advice, he isn't giving any advice at all, just non-sense.
You seem to like to denigrate the poor. You are not alone in that on this board. But I still do not go along with you in any way shape or form.
SJG
Mikeya02, you've talked about counter culture. Well there have long been people who do not go along with this idea of working to get money ( selling yourself like a prostitute ) so that you can play or retire.
Here is a very conservative financial writer. As I know he denounces all speculative "investing", and also "house flipping", and instead promotes the old fashioned idea of putting your money and time into only those things which you know well and understand.
https://www.amazon.com/Wealthy-Barber-Up…
I basically do agree with the above.
Here are some people who have a different idea, and it is based upon getting enough money to be what they call, Financially Independent. While this may look like just working to retire, there are some different aspects to it.
https://www.amazon.com/Your-Money-Life-T…
http://www.financialintegrity.org/index.…
Now I don't go along with the above, but many people do and it is still well worth understanding what they are saying. And nothing that they suggest in anyway involves the stock market or speculative investing.
Another that I do go along with, promotes the integration of work, play, and learning:
https://www.amazon.com/Three-Boxes-Life-…
I highly recommend the above.
And then I also agree with:
http://www.wholeearth.com/issue/2024/art….
Probably one of the most influential Americans with counter culture ideas was Henry David Thoreau.
Now no, just being one person, he would not be enough to influence election outcomes. But his influence on how people think, both then and in the years since, has been huge.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGdreCP6…
MIkeya02, you seem to think that all which is wrong in this world is simply because people don't think and live the way you do. I could not possible be in greater disagreement with you.
SJG
My point is that these booms are just as harmful as the busts, and then the booms cause the busts. None of this is good for our society.
And then individually, we should have better options for what we can do with our money.
I think they've got it right at SF Guild Memorial, "Poverty is caused by social marginaliztion."
http://www.glide.org/
SJG
What a Nostradumbass!
Yet, people like that will never be wrong. To them there will always be a great bursting of "the bubble" just ahead. But they won't put a date on it. So they'll never be wrong... after it could happen in the next six months. Some people whose world view is spoon fed to them (like RickyBoy) have been calling it for 8 years. Yet they aren't wrong. It's come right around the next corner.
Meanwhile in reality the economy is booming like never before and finding qualified people to hire is the biggest challenge because employment is so strong.
The naysayers are like a broken clock. They get it right once in a very long time, and then scream "See! I told you so!" When in fact if they would have been invested the whole time they would have capitalized on the market gains enough to cushion against any losses. Investing if it was for the faint of heart would mean everyone could do it, but only the ones with a strong stomach that lead without emotion can handle it. That basically takes out all of the liberal Hillary supporters.
You guys (Doug and Meat) will never get the credit you deserve for being optimistic since it goes against our primal thinking. Yet those who predict the sky was falling sure look silly over time. They negative Nellys are usually the type of people who like to play victim in most circumstances, exampleslike social humanitarians, cultural appropriation, income inequality, etc. etc......
If you understood the basics that the cost of living goes up over time, then the markets naturally will need to keep up with that increase, hence surely inflation is about to set in, and that will cause a slowing trend in the markets for the next 10 years. The trends never go in lockstep with each other, rather the ebb and flow is difficult to predict. This is why the prognosticators fail and the strong of heart succeed if you just stick it out and don't listen to SJG!
More money is lost in investing trying to protect yourself from a falling market or trying to predict it will fall than any other means. This is the hardest lesson anyone can comprehend when it comes to investing.
Meat72, I can respect the logic behind being an anti-Hillary supporter. The Democratic Party has arguably embraced identity politics too much. But don't forget that Trump de facto embraced identity politics. He just focused on a few, largely white groups. He never articulated an actual plan other than "trust me, good stuff is going to happen".
And to be fair to Hillary I don't think she really cared about identity politics. I think she viewed it as a way to build up a winning coalition. Turned out she was wrong, but I don't think she was a goofy liberal saying "let's not do cultural appropriation" on college campuses. She just thought she saw a path to victory and tried it. Maybe that's dishonest, but I'm not convinced that Trump was any more sincere. But who knows? I don't know what's in Trump's mind.
I think that as a country we're rolling the dice on an unknown quantity when we could have played it safe and had somebody who who likely would have lost in four years. I think Trump will lose in four years too, but for different reasons. I know a lot of people are unhappy but my own life is actually pretty good, so it's a bit academic to me. That said, I have zero confidence he'll improve things for the folks that are hurting. But I add another "who knows?"
That said, I actually had my guy shift investments to a more aggressive stance. I don't need liquid assets right now. I'm young (mid-30's). Things probably won't be that bad under Trump. And if they are I'm young enough to weather the storm until cooler heads are in the White House.
If I were the age of some other posters I'd be quaking in my boots. :(
The sad thing is that Trump could actually heal divisions in the country. But he's wasting time tweeting about Hamilton. He has every right to, but he's being unwise. Even if you think that the Hamilton cast were jerks, he's expending political capital before he's even in office. Why not just let it drop? Or better yet, actually tweet something about starting a dialog to heal divisions in the country? That would subvert expectations.
I predict that racial resentments will grow far worse under Trump unless he changes course and does what he claimed he wanted to do in his victory speech. Pointlessly bitching at the cast of a Broadway show won't do that.
Write, or rong?
SJG
People should be investing their talents and money together, in their own ventures, and in ventures they set up with close associates. Collapse the owner - worker divide. End the continuing trend towards financialization.
Everyone, even you Dougster, has other talents besides speculating. They can be developed.
SJG
Agreed!
Consider that when you hear people talking about the stock market.
SJG
What's the core reasons ? I just think that US economy is saturated, the growth is only dependent on new innovative (or disruptive) start-ups and finding new markets for selling products and services (or to peddle more products there).
Internal consumption is not rising. More people are not investing in auto or home (this is a fact not feeling), which indicates they are not optimistic about long term growth. No new natural resource reserve is expected to be discovered (fracking was the last).
If someone is saying there is a bubble they should first define.. what commodity/product/service/financial asset is overvalued and why they think it is overvalued ?
I am trying to get this discussion to the basics. If anybody is too awesome to think I am oversimplifying and wants to discuss only CMBS, RMBS, CDS, CLO and other financial instruments twisted around mortgage backed securities , credit default swaps PM me.
Sometimes people forget why they were fighting but must continue to do so.
SJG
https://www.flickr.com/photos/navymailma…
Simple, huh?
(1) Camp One is on welfare, disability, or work and earn on OK income (~50K) but don't manage finances well enough to to save. Financial literacy and/or an ascetic lifestyle from Biblical scripture would help these people. If they'd stop spending all of their month each month, maybe we could see if they have or don't have fear over investment in the stock market. I meet lots of these people (welfare, young yet disabled, or elderly) when volunteering with the food truck or other charities. It's a challenge to get them to place where they'd be able to invest. Great Society it is not. If anything they are less self reliant due to the welfare incentives.
(2) Camp Two work and earn a decent income (50K and up) and know enough to divert some funds each pay period to a 401K or a Fidelity Vanguard fund. These funds typically ask "when" you expect to retire and apply risk accordingly. These are what I used to use when I still contributed to my savings (I don't but I should). Maybe these are the scared people you are talking about? The ones only using their 401K and nothing else? I don't think this group has the financial literacy (typical) to invest in the open stock market. So perhaps we agree.
For group #1, Some of it is their own fault. They need to learn from brother Juicebox69! Some don't adequately lower expenses enough and are instead buying frivolous things (or getting pegged on fees and interest .. financial literacy, the remedial class, not even 101 level). Some get nailed on housing costs, bidding on home prices in the right, safe neighborhood that's in the best school district, or on rents the same way as buying. Even then, it is still a conscious choice. Sometimes I wonder if parents are making good choices or not? I know education is essential in this economy, but damn. There are less costly ways to go about it.
You should here all of the whining I here from them when helping them or donating my time. What a bunch of complainers! I'm starting to see your guys' view on this.
Group #2 are probably the ideological descendants of those who voted Sixteenth Amendment, who wanted to see the Vanderbuilts and the Carnegies "pay their fair share." (back then it was over the delta of 4% on the tariffs of imported goods, which amounted to a builtin 4% gift of profit to the capitalist class). Misguided but I understand where they are coming from. Though I am also starting to see where you are guys are coming from on this too (thanks to dallas). We all got railroaded on the 16th; income was never defined by an act of congress; the voters at the time probably had different intents than the newly expanded federal government.
Both conservatism and liberalism/progressivism in the US has become less critical of government as a means of "correcting" society. This is probably not good for the future of the republic.
Our federal legislatures see tax money in the federal treasury as campaign money to spend in their districts to win re-election rather than seeing it as our hard-earned money which should be responsibly spent or returned back to us. This corruption is not good for the future Romney's 53% that pay taxes. And it's not good for the republic.
Thanks if you managed to read this far to the end. You are probably not part of the overall illiteracy that is the problem facing our nation today.
I don't think you can make broad conclusions from this election. It wasn't so much a liberal vs conservative as it was between a charismatic outsider whose ideology and policy proposals were poorly defined and an insider who gave a number of people, even a good slice of her supporters, the creeps. Add to that the fact that the outsider was also viewed as crazy and/or creepy by a good number of people.
That said, there is clearly just about half of the country that want a more liberal direction and about half that want a conservative direction. The former are concentrated in cities whereas the latter are more spread out. So I suspect we'll have a conservative house, a split senate, and a presidency that goes back and forth based on the small number of folks that both vote and can be swayed one way or the other.
SJG
Ancient Egypt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhOQBWN4…
Some things never change. What a punching bag!
I think he believes in a bartering system. That is what his "organization" that he is building is about. Except he only has he, himself, and not me. He also is anti white man, anti sports, anti family, and pro-counter culture so basically he's a nut job.
SJG