...Geez how many times did that happen during the Obama presidency. Of course, if it was Obama who was still president the right (and left!) would be believe one of the greatest extraordinary popular delusion of all time: that it was just due to the Fed's monetary policies. Now that Trump is in office, I guess the all time highs are all about him?
Classic market bubble brought on by hysteria over missing out on making money and the fact that the population bulge known as the baby boomers has caused too much cash chasing too few good investments. First shots fired overseas or news that Trump had help from the Russians and we'll see October 1987 again.
So many reasons... They are successfully automating large parts of their business, the economy is booming as are the markets, deregulation looks about certain, rising rates, and, plenty of "their people" in positions high up in the Trump administration.
The truth is we need someplace to part our long term savings / nest egg. Since savings accounts don't really pay much (at least for deposits under $10K or $50K) I'm glad the stock market exists and that it does seem to go up year-to-year. :)
This is dadillacs reply to you it fits I agree and am going to apply his logic.
"In the beginning your opinions were funny and I enjoyed your casual comments. Later I felt sorry for you that you had to voice your opinion about everything, your existence must be so miserable. Finally, it got to where it pissed me off to see your comments. You never give a straight answer on anything and only try to piss people off with your opinions. Honestly I don't think even you believe most of the shit that comes out of your mouth, you just want to be heard."
As he said you will no longer be heard by me as well.
There are lots of hurdles to starting your own business, or becoming your own VC. But in the organization I am building, those hurdles will be removed.
About the organization I am building, everyone will have an investment portfolio, coming from the work we do. But, it will always be in our stuff.
People won't need the money, as the organization will take care of them.
But if people want to leave, that portfolio, subject to some vesting time intervals and all, will be there for them. So the risks they are taking of say being out and pennyless, by staying with us, will be minimal. Far more security than all but a very few in this entire world enjoy.
Basically, cash in while the paper money flows. Get out and turn it into tangible assets....gold, silver, etc. GOTTA RIDE THE WAVE AND GET OFF ASO CLOSE TO THE PEAK AS POSSIBLE!!!!
Goldman Sacks was reinvigorated by Obama. The idea the left somehow gives a shit about the working person is asinine. The difference between the Republican rich in Congress and the Democratic rich, is the Republicans made it in the private sector screwing some of us and the Democrats made it in the public sector screwing all of us.
Presidents have limited influence on the stock market. They like to take credit for upturns, but don't want to be blamed for downturns. It would not be good for the economy if the president tried to intervene in stock prices.
How do you know when someone is a moron? They make cross burning references, as if t hey ever suffered the way others did. Whiny little bitch. Progressives have 10 stock lines, that mean zero any more.
The stock market, I mean it is a zero sum game. People make money because people lose money. Beyond that its just currency inflation, and oh yeah, one more thing, because people have been sold a bill of goods by right wing news media, federal policy is intended to pump up the stock market. The money which keeps it high is just money which is now being supported by deficit spending.
Presidents know that they need to keep the market high. And that is really idiotic. But people like patting themselves on the back. Putting money into the markets, rigged by our government at the expense of other social and environmental needs.
2/3 of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. All it is is a Reverse Robinhood, and moving us closer and closer to unlivable wages for most people.
$5.2 Trillion money mountain, doing nothing except inflating the stock market and home prices.
People afraid to put their money into things which will solve social and environmental problems, because that would always mean promoting democracy.
So just like King Laius, so afraid that his son Oedipus would kill him, that he set up the conditions which made that inevitable.
--> "Let’s say you have 3 people and 1 corporation. And the 3 people all have $10 for a $30 total. And then the corporation decides to raise capital so it issues 4 shares of stock at $4 or $1 per share. Let’s assume two of our people buy the entire issue and become owners of 2 shares each for a total of $2 each ($1 per share). So our corporation has $4 and our two investors own 2 shares each valued at $1 per share ($4 market cap).
Then, a year later, for whatever reason, investor 1 decides the stock is worth 100% more and tries to sell it on the stock exchange where person 3 purchases the 2 shares for $2 each ($1 higher than the IPO price). Now person 3 owns 2 shares each valued at $2 for a total of $4 and person 1 has $12 TOTAL of which $2 is their capital gains on the stock sale. Person 2 still own his 2 shares that are now worth $4 total ($2 unrealized cap gains).
Is there more money in the system? No. Person 1 has $12 (he had $10, invested $2 and generated a return of $2 for a total of $12 in net worth). Person 2 has $8 and shares of stock that he believes are now worth $4 (ie, he think he’s worth $12). Our corporation has the $4 they raised from investors 1 & 2. Person 3 has $6 plus shares that he thinks are worth $4. But look what’s happened here. Our little economy is actually worth more! Person 1 has $12 where he once had $10. Person 2 has $8, but thinks he’s worth $12. Our corporation still has the cash of $4. And person 3 has $6 plus the shares worth $4. So our corporation can invest the $4 in its operations, person 1 has benefited from his investment by increasing his net worth by 20%, person 2 is worth 20% more (at least on paper) and person 3 is where he started but hopes the corporation will make wise investments so he can benefit like investor 1 did.
I think I got all those numbers right there. So, zero sum isn’t the right description in that a stock market can actually increase the overall wealth of its participants (at least on paper)…Also, I basically just described QE where people bid up stock prices without the underlying corporations actually changing anything. The economy is technically worth more, but that could be a mirage for all we know. This society’s obsession with unrealized stock market wealth is, quite frankly, absurd and misguided. It’s a real-time example of counting your chickens before they hatch.”" --> END QUOTE
--> "Trading," meanwhile, means switching stocks during the period with the aim of exceeding the mere "investment" return. (There is no other reason to trade.)
Stocks have to be owned by someone, though–even bad stocks–and the trader who bought the bad stocks from the better trader will lag the investment return. In a case in which there are only two traders, the winning trader will exceed the market return by exactly the amount that the losing trader lags it (before costs).
To apply this to the reader’s example above, let’s assume that the "investment return" of the stock in question is $5 (the move from $5 to $10). Assuming the reader held the stock for the entire period, he or she would have made $5. If instead of holding the stock for the entire period, however, the reader tried to exceed the "investment return" by trading the stock back and forth with another trader, the gross return of both traders would still equal $5. Depending on the relative skill (or luck) of the traders, however, the return of each particular trader might be very different: One trader might make $3 while the other made $2. Or one might make $5 while the other made $0. Or one might make $10 while the other lost $5.
What the Slate reader is missing, in other words, is the distinction between "investing" and "trading." In the U.S. stock market over the past century or so, the "investing return" has been about 10% a year. The aggregate "trading" return, meanwhile, has been 10% less the costs of trading. Because it is impossible for the aggregate "trading" return to exceed the "investing" return, every dollar that has been won by one U.S. stock trader has been lost by another." --> END QUOTE
skibum --> "The idea the left somehow gives a shit about the working person is asinine." -->
True. Any many more previously on the left like me (who used to be on the right before that) have been warming up to Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders (the two protest candidates). We need more candidates like those two. Very refreshing for those of us who work. :)
SJG: " The stock market, I mean it is a zero sum game. People make money because people lose money"
This is absolutely non-sense and show that you don't know anything about math wit. It's positive because civilization marches forward, companies become more efficient and technology advances.
If Trump had more sense or acted more reasonable,he might wait until th end of his term to mention the booming stock market, if it hasn't crashed by then.
People who promote finacialization will say that the stock market increases in value because of "civilization marching forward". But we saw in the fall of 1929, that this was not so. Most of the needs being served by industry now are very soft needs, social status based needs. And so this is why the specter of collapse is always very close.
But collapse should not be seen as a specter. Good things, often the best things, happen in recessions.
And the bigger the bubbles, the bigger the busts. So if you are putting money into the stock markets, you are not helping anything, only bringing about the next bust.
If you start your own business, not alone, but with a circle of associates, your own prospects are better, because of the money, but also because of the degree of control you can have. And you have the chance of doing things which will march civilization forward, whereas things which depend on their stock prices have very little chance to do this.
Dougster is deliberately promoting the demise of our Democracy. He wants this. Most of those who seem to go along with him, simply do not understand what is at stake.
The US could have gone the same way as Germany, in the 1930's. Now it is the same kind of a choice we are facing.
I'm the biggest democratic on the board. I want to see people voting online and involved in all decision making. Like it was in ancient Athens. I don't think it's coincidence that that city was governed like that and had the most extraordinary intellectual output per capita in human history. (Was only a city of 60,000)
You can never argue against what people really believe, because they you won't get to imagine yourself being the hero. So you take what everyone says and either distort or call them liars and argue what you wished they believed. And your wish always to be arguing against someone with a completely evil position with the big goal of make your PSCYHO loser self seem like the hero.
That's all people are to you, SJG. Not individuals in their own right with their own reasonable ideas, but just entities you want to turn into windmills so you can get some redemption for your PSYCHO existence by charging them down.
What Dougster is promoting leaves out far more people than it includes. The reason it is able to do this is because it depends on getting people to believe in the bogus sciences of Social Darwinism and Eugenics.
Capitalism has always depended on having scapegoats, in order to justify its effects. And this is why welfare systems, since the 1600's, have been designed to regulate the poor, instead of providing for their needs.
It is interesting because the first of these global industrial over production recessions occurred in the 1870's. More steel was produced than could be consumed. So you had large scale plant closures, unemployment, and an overall consumer market collapse.
So to rationalize this, the bogus science of Social Darwinism developed. And in the US, the Republican Party, no longer the party of civil rights and racial justice, but the party of big business, pressured the lame duck Grant administration to end Reconstruction in the South. So the West would be a base for raw materials, and a place to direct all the discontents, while the South would be a consumer base, our own internal third world.
And we are still suffering from the consequences of this kind of politics.
And with the new political doctrine, the 1880's worked out as a reactionary decade.
Now coming into the post WWI era, the bogus science of eugenics was developed, and it came into its own in the 1930's. Though originating in the US, it really took off in Nazi Germany.
And then in our current information age, the situation has still further intensified. We used to get our scapegoats from the immigrants and racial minorities, those who did low wage labor and slave labor.
But as much less labor is needed anymore, this does not work. So what we have instead is a massive expansion of the mental health system, and the idea of leaning disabilities, and of the recovery movement. We are now getting our scape goats directly from the middle-class family. We don't need cheap labor, we need basket cases.
And this is what maintains discipline in a post industrial economy, where more and more people are living closer and closer to the edge. Just the sight of those made into basket cases by our mental health system, roaming about on the sidewalks and living under bridges, gets people to keep their mouths shut and their noses to the grindstones. People do not demand livable wages or affordable housing, out of fear that they too could end up like the basket cases they see all around them.
What instead they feel is fatalism. Our California State Lottery, run out of Georgia, feeds this. And our federal lottery, otherwise known as the stock market, feeds it.
So what a perfect system Dougster and his ilk have, the ideal upwards wealth transfer siphon, and with the bogus sciences to give it political support.
I am no hero, all I am is a still small voice barely heard above the wind. But when hell brakes lose, even if I am in my 90's, I'll be the one passing out the Kalashnikovs. And in the mean time, I am setting up something which will help huge numbers of people to start and run their own businesses, by letting them scale it down to a reasonable entry point, and then supplying them with cookie cutter structure and equity arrangements, and everything else they might need, including customers. We will work together and not let each other fail. Invitation only, and people are held to very high standards before they even get in the door. This is not a Recovery or Salvation Program. It is for those who want life long learning, and also stripper grade hotties to drain them dry 365 days per year.
And then all the while promoting progressive politics, trying to take us to Social Democracy, because that is the only way democracy can survive, if it includes everyone. Just having a vote does not mean that you are included. It means much more than that.
You Dougster, what you are promoting is fatalism, and you do it by peddling Greed, Fear, and Ignorance. You are actively working to build a two-tier society. Probing your mind via these many months of exchanges, is vision of hell.
37 comments
Latest
Chaching $$$$$$$$
My thinking is it's inspite of not because of.
If you can't beat 'em... Join 'em. Right, SJG?
SJG
"In the beginning your opinions were funny and I enjoyed your casual comments. Later I felt sorry for you that you had to voice your opinion about everything, your existence must be so miserable. Finally, it got to where it pissed me off to see your comments. You never give a straight answer on anything and only try to piss people off with your opinions. Honestly I don't think even you believe most of the shit that comes out of your mouth, you just want to be heard."
As he said you will no longer be heard by me as well.
SJG
SJG
People won't need the money, as the organization will take care of them.
But if people want to leave, that portfolio, subject to some vesting time intervals and all, will be there for them. So the risks they are taking of say being out and pennyless, by staying with us, will be minimal. Far more security than all but a very few in this entire world enjoy.
SJG
SJG
A) they call people names like porch monkey and think calling someone progressive is an insult.
ROFMMAO
Presidents know that they need to keep the market high. And that is really idiotic. But people like patting themselves on the back. Putting money into the markets, rigged by our government at the expense of other social and environmental needs.
2/3 of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. All it is is a Reverse Robinhood, and moving us closer and closer to unlivable wages for most people.
$5.2 Trillion money mountain, doing nothing except inflating the stock market and home prices.
People afraid to put their money into things which will solve social and environmental problems, because that would always mean promoting democracy.
So just like King Laius, so afraid that his son Oedipus would kill him, that he set up the conditions which made that inevitable.
Yanis Varoufakis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB4s5b9N…
SJG
"Is the Stock Market a Zero Sum Game?" --> NO
. . by Cullen Roche (2013) of Pragmatic Capitalism
http://www.pragcap.com/is-the-stock-mark…
--> "Let’s say you have 3 people and 1 corporation. And the 3 people all have $10 for a $30 total. And then the corporation decides to raise capital so it issues 4 shares of stock at $4 or $1 per share. Let’s assume two of our people buy the entire issue and become owners of 2 shares each for a total of $2 each ($1 per share). So our corporation has $4 and our two investors own 2 shares each valued at $1 per share ($4 market cap).
Then, a year later, for whatever reason, investor 1 decides the stock is worth 100% more and tries to sell it on the stock exchange where person 3 purchases the 2 shares for $2 each ($1 higher than the IPO price). Now person 3 owns 2 shares each valued at $2 for a total of $4 and person 1 has $12 TOTAL of which $2 is their capital gains on the stock sale. Person 2 still own his 2 shares that are now worth $4 total ($2 unrealized cap gains).
Is there more money in the system? No. Person 1 has $12 (he had $10, invested $2 and generated a return of $2 for a total of $12 in net worth). Person 2 has $8 and shares of stock that he believes are now worth $4 (ie, he think he’s worth $12). Our corporation has the $4 they raised from investors 1 & 2. Person 3 has $6 plus shares that he thinks are worth $4. But look what’s happened here. Our little economy is actually worth more! Person 1 has $12 where he once had $10. Person 2 has $8, but thinks he’s worth $12. Our corporation still has the cash of $4. And person 3 has $6 plus the shares worth $4. So our corporation can invest the $4 in its operations, person 1 has benefited from his investment by increasing his net worth by 20%, person 2 is worth 20% more (at least on paper) and person 3 is where he started but hopes the corporation will make wise investments so he can benefit like investor 1 did.
I think I got all those numbers right there. So, zero sum isn’t the right description in that a stock market can actually increase the overall wealth of its participants (at least on paper)…Also, I basically just described QE where people bid up stock prices without the underlying corporations actually changing anything. The economy is technically worth more, but that could be a mirage for all we know. This society’s obsession with unrealized stock market wealth is, quite frankly, absurd and misguided. It’s a real-time example of counting your chickens before they hatch.”" --> END QUOTE
"Why Trading is a Zero-Sum Game" --> YES
. . by Henry Blodget (2007) of 24/7 Wall St
http://247wallst.com/investing/2007/03/0…
--> "Trading," meanwhile, means switching stocks during the period with the aim of exceeding the mere "investment" return. (There is no other reason to trade.)
Stocks have to be owned by someone, though–even bad stocks–and the trader who bought the bad stocks from the better trader will lag the investment return. In a case in which there are only two traders, the winning trader will exceed the market return by exactly the amount that the losing trader lags it (before costs).
To apply this to the reader’s example above, let’s assume that the "investment return" of the stock in question is $5 (the move from $5 to $10). Assuming the reader held the stock for the entire period, he or she would have made $5. If instead of holding the stock for the entire period, however, the reader tried to exceed the "investment return" by trading the stock back and forth with another trader, the gross return of both traders would still equal $5. Depending on the relative skill (or luck) of the traders, however, the return of each particular trader might be very different: One trader might make $3 while the other made $2. Or one might make $5 while the other made $0. Or one might make $10 while the other lost $5.
What the Slate reader is missing, in other words, is the distinction between "investing" and "trading." In the U.S. stock market over the past century or so, the "investing return" has been about 10% a year. The aggregate "trading" return, meanwhile, has been 10% less the costs of trading. Because it is impossible for the aggregate "trading" return to exceed the "investing" return, every dollar that has been won by one U.S. stock trader has been lost by another." --> END QUOTE
True. Any many more previously on the left like me (who used to be on the right before that) have been warming up to Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders (the two protest candidates). We need more candidates like those two. Very refreshing for those of us who work. :)
This is absolutely non-sense and show that you don't know anything about math wit. It's positive because civilization marches forward, companies become more efficient and technology advances.
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVr6Zj…
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVr6Zj…
it's right there in black & white nothing to discuss
But collapse should not be seen as a specter. Good things, often the best things, happen in recessions.
And the bigger the bubbles, the bigger the busts. So if you are putting money into the stock markets, you are not helping anything, only bringing about the next bust.
If you start your own business, not alone, but with a circle of associates, your own prospects are better, because of the money, but also because of the degree of control you can have. And you have the chance of doing things which will march civilization forward, whereas things which depend on their stock prices have very little chance to do this.
Dougster is deliberately promoting the demise of our Democracy. He wants this. Most of those who seem to go along with him, simply do not understand what is at stake.
The US could have gone the same way as Germany, in the 1930's. Now it is the same kind of a choice we are facing.
SJG
You can never argue against what people really believe, because they you won't get to imagine yourself being the hero. So you take what everyone says and either distort or call them liars and argue what you wished they believed. And your wish always to be arguing against someone with a completely evil position with the big goal of make your PSCYHO loser self seem like the hero.
Capitalism has always depended on having scapegoats, in order to justify its effects. And this is why welfare systems, since the 1600's, have been designed to regulate the poor, instead of providing for their needs.
https://www.amazon.com/Regulating-Poor-F…
It is interesting because the first of these global industrial over production recessions occurred in the 1870's. More steel was produced than could be consumed. So you had large scale plant closures, unemployment, and an overall consumer market collapse.
So to rationalize this, the bogus science of Social Darwinism developed. And in the US, the Republican Party, no longer the party of civil rights and racial justice, but the party of big business, pressured the lame duck Grant administration to end Reconstruction in the South. So the West would be a base for raw materials, and a place to direct all the discontents, while the South would be a consumer base, our own internal third world.
And we are still suffering from the consequences of this kind of politics.
And with the new political doctrine, the 1880's worked out as a reactionary decade.
Now coming into the post WWI era, the bogus science of eugenics was developed, and it came into its own in the 1930's. Though originating in the US, it really took off in Nazi Germany.
And then in our current information age, the situation has still further intensified. We used to get our scapegoats from the immigrants and racial minorities, those who did low wage labor and slave labor.
But as much less labor is needed anymore, this does not work. So what we have instead is a massive expansion of the mental health system, and the idea of leaning disabilities, and of the recovery movement. We are now getting our scape goats directly from the middle-class family. We don't need cheap labor, we need basket cases.
And this is what maintains discipline in a post industrial economy, where more and more people are living closer and closer to the edge. Just the sight of those made into basket cases by our mental health system, roaming about on the sidewalks and living under bridges, gets people to keep their mouths shut and their noses to the grindstones. People do not demand livable wages or affordable housing, out of fear that they too could end up like the basket cases they see all around them.
What instead they feel is fatalism. Our California State Lottery, run out of Georgia, feeds this. And our federal lottery, otherwise known as the stock market, feeds it.
So what a perfect system Dougster and his ilk have, the ideal upwards wealth transfer siphon, and with the bogus sciences to give it political support.
I am no hero, all I am is a still small voice barely heard above the wind. But when hell brakes lose, even if I am in my 90's, I'll be the one passing out the Kalashnikovs. And in the mean time, I am setting up something which will help huge numbers of people to start and run their own businesses, by letting them scale it down to a reasonable entry point, and then supplying them with cookie cutter structure and equity arrangements, and everything else they might need, including customers. We will work together and not let each other fail. Invitation only, and people are held to very high standards before they even get in the door. This is not a Recovery or Salvation Program. It is for those who want life long learning, and also stripper grade hotties to drain them dry 365 days per year.
And then all the while promoting progressive politics, trying to take us to Social Democracy, because that is the only way democracy can survive, if it includes everyone. Just having a vote does not mean that you are included. It means much more than that.
You Dougster, what you are promoting is fatalism, and you do it by peddling Greed, Fear, and Ignorance. You are actively working to build a two-tier society. Probing your mind via these many months of exchanges, is vision of hell.
SJG
A Star Trek like utopia, or The Matrix dystopia? $5.2 Trillion of waste, inflating the stock market and home prices:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB4s5b9N…
Insight into Dougster
www.tuscl.net/postread.php?PID=48214#com…
KZSU, Stanford, on air
http://kzsu.stanford.edu/
KPFA, Foothill College, archives, listening to last one, "Droll":
http://www.kfjc.org/broadcast_archives/
Montrose, KSAN 1973, better than their first album, in my opinion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzC835bh…
Could a small non-profit local radio station offering such programming make it?