# The Official Dow 7000 thread



## DavidS

Down 85 points right now to 7279.73. Another 279.73 and we're at 7000. I think we're getting close to 7000. If you look at trends - if we close below 7250 today, we're guaranteed to get to 7000 within the next few weeks.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^DJI


----------



## Truthmatters

I fear its going to go to Dow 5000


----------



## Care4all

i heard cramer saying, it is bs that buying the market at this time is a good bargain....that the reason the stock market is down 50% is because PROFITS are down 50% for many of these companies...

so if profits are down 50% for most all the companies on the stock market...will our unemployment rise to such?  seems impossible but is it really?  

I realize that 80% of our businesses are small businesses not on the stock market so maybe, this does translate to 50% of the 20% are off 50% on their profits and the small businesses are doing much better so the unemployment would not go up as much???


----------



## Truthmatters

Many businesses are opperating at a loss right now. If it doesnt start moving (the eoncomy) in a year or so those businesses will go under.

This is why we need a stimulus so bad right now, to stem the damage from spreading further.

Anyone who is against the stimulus efforts are against their own jobs staying in exsistance.


----------



## DavidS

Care4all said:


> i heard cramer saying, it is bs that buying the market at this time is a good bargain....that the reason the stock market is down 50% is because PROFITS are down 50% for many of these companies...
> 
> so if profits are down 50% for most all the companies on the stock market...will our unemployment rise to such?  seems impossible but is it really?
> 
> I realize that 80% of our businesses are small businesses not on the stock market so maybe, this does translate to 50% of the 20% are off 50% on their profits and the small businesses are doing much better so the unemployment would not go up as much???



The problem with 80% of the small businesses is that they employ less than half of the country. Our economy is far too dependent upon large corporations - thus if a few small businesses were doing badly in one sector, you could take your skills and move to another sector. With large corporations who are dependent upon their stock price and a littany of the same factors, one falls all the rest fall.

I would support some kind of bill limiting the size that a business can grow to in terms of overall revenue and number of employees. Once a business grows too big, spin it off and create another one. And thus you'll have more corporations that are small businesses in the economy and the economy will be much resistent to fads such as housing, railroad or dot-com bubbles. Of course this will never happen because large corporations donate heavily to politicians so congress can pass bills that will favor large corporations. 

This country was founded upon the principles that only rich, white men had influence in our government. Not much has changed, unfortunately.


----------



## Care4all

no David, they employ 80% of the country.

BIG Corporations employ only 20%


----------



## editec

Care4all said:


> no David, they employ 80% of the country.
> 
> BIG Corporations employ only 20%


 
Yup.

Basically that'll be the 20% who simply cannot understand what the rest of us are bitching about, too.

I don't think that, according to what the SBA calls a big business, I've ever worked for a big business.

Done some outside contracting for some of them, but never got a ride on their gravy train.

I'm betting that if you looked at where the profits go, you'd find the same lopsided outcomes, too.

The large coporations making 80% of the profits, while the 20% eek out a living on the remaining 20%.

Sort of mirrors the asset distribution, too doesn't it?

The one that informs us that the lowest 80% of the income scales also only own about 15% of the nation's assets.

*My!..* how coincidental!


----------



## wimpy77

cramer says he thinks 6000 is certain in his opinion. he says geithner needs to either start doing his job or resign. i checked the market and from the looks of it the financials aren't the cause today. they aren't doing all that badly atm. its everyone else including the tech stocks.


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> cramer says he thinks 6000 is certain in his opinion. he says geithner needs to either start doing his job or resign. i checked the market and from the looks of it the financials aren't the cause today. they aren't doing all that badly atm. its everyone else including the tech stocks.



A large part of the problem is a perceived failure of leadership from the Obama administration on financial recovery.  Because Obama-Geithner failed to tell investors exactly what they planned to do, Dodd's loose talk on Friday sent the stock markets into a tail spin, and now a Wall Street Journal article saying the administration will put more capital into Citi and will not allow any of the major banks fail along with repeated reassurances from the administration has turned Friday's losers into today's winners.  

But while the administration's perceived confusion about how to handle this crisis has been taking the markets on a roller coaster ride, a load of economic data comes out today and with it revised estimates about how long the recession will be and how deep.  Within the last week I was reading that the recession was expected to begin easing late this year, but now I'm reading estimates that ti won't begin to recover until some time in 2010.  Since the trend has been that analysts keep telling us it is worse than they had previously thought, I'm guessing we'll soon hear the recovery won't begin until late 2010 pretty soon.


----------



## DavidS

The problem is that the markets hate uncertainty and right now the Obama administration isn't really providing details on their fiscal plans. They're saying "Oh, let's do this!" but not saying how - so the markets sell on speculative uncertainty. Of course, Obama hasn't been in office 45 days, yet and the markets are looking for results NOW NOW NOW.


----------



## wimpy77

toomuchtime_ said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> cramer says he thinks 6000 is certain in his opinion. he says geithner needs to either start doing his job or resign. i checked the market and from the looks of it the financials aren't the cause today. they aren't doing all that badly atm. its everyone else including the tech stocks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A large part of the problem is a perceived failure of leadership from the Obama administration on financial recovery.  Because Obama-Geithner failed to tell investors exactly what they planned to do, Dodd's loose talk on Friday sent the stock markets into a tail spin, and now a Wall Street Journal article saying the administration will put more capital into Citi and will not allow any of the major banks fail along with repeated reassurances from the administration has turned Friday's losers into today's winners.
> 
> But while the administration's perceived confusion about how to handle this crisis has been taking the markets on a roller coaster ride, a load of economic data comes out today and with it revised estimates about how long the recession will be and how deep.  Within the last week I was reading that the recession was expected to begin easing late this year, but now I'm reading estimates that ti won't begin to recover until some time in 2010.  Since the trend has been that analysts keep telling us it is worse than they had previously thought, I'm guessing we'll soon hear the recovery won't begin until late 2010 pretty soon.
Click to expand...



i was watching zandi from moody and other economist last night and he was talking about he still think the economy will recover last this year or early next year. i what like to know the sources you are reading. at this point i do agree you though that the market wants the administration to tell us what the heck they are doing to fix the problem.


----------



## Paulie

Shorts are what are holding the market down at the moment.  

I suspect some big players are shaking out the longs for their own greedy purposes.

While P/E ratios don't seem rational, don't make the mistake of thinking this drop isn't calculated.  I'm not falling for it, myself.  I'm sticking with the few long positions I have and averaging down on dips because I smell a rat.


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> cramer says he thinks 6000 is certain in his opinion. he says geithner needs to either start doing his job or resign. i checked the market and from the looks of it the financials aren't the cause today. they aren't doing all that badly atm. its everyone else including the tech stocks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A large part of the problem is a perceived failure of leadership from the Obama administration on financial recovery.  Because Obama-Geithner failed to tell investors exactly what they planned to do, Dodd's loose talk on Friday sent the stock markets into a tail spin, and now a Wall Street Journal article saying the administration will put more capital into Citi and will not allow any of the major banks fail along with repeated reassurances from the administration has turned Friday's losers into today's winners.
> 
> But while the administration's perceived confusion about how to handle this crisis has been taking the markets on a roller coaster ride, a load of economic data comes out today and with it revised estimates about how long the recession will be and how deep.  Within the last week I was reading that the recession was expected to begin easing late this year, but now I'm reading estimates that ti won't begin to recover until some time in 2010.  Since the trend has been that analysts keep telling us it is worse than they had previously thought, I'm guessing we'll soon hear the recovery won't begin until late 2010 pretty soon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> i was watching zandi from moody and other economist last night and he was talking about he still think the economy will recover last this year or early next year. i what like to know the sources you are reading. at this point i do agree you though that the market wants the administration to tell us what the heck they are doing to fix the problem.
Click to expand...


I saw a few articles earlier, but this is the only one I have at hand right now.

Excite News - Forecasters: Economy worse in '09, better in '10


----------



## wimpy77

toomuchtime_ said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> A large part of the problem is a perceived failure of leadership from the Obama administration on financial recovery.  Because Obama-Geithner failed to tell investors exactly what they planned to do, Dodd's loose talk on Friday sent the stock markets into a tail spin, and now a Wall Street Journal article saying the administration will put more capital into Citi and will not allow any of the major banks fail along with repeated reassurances from the administration has turned Friday's losers into today's winners.
> 
> But while the administration's perceived confusion about how to handle this crisis has been taking the markets on a roller coaster ride, a load of economic data comes out today and with it revised estimates about how long the recession will be and how deep.  Within the last week I was reading that the recession was expected to begin easing late this year, but now I'm reading estimates that ti won't begin to recover until some time in 2010.  Since the trend has been that analysts keep telling us it is worse than they had previously thought, I'm guessing we'll soon hear the recovery won't begin until late 2010 pretty soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i was watching zandi from moody and other economist last night and he was talking about he still think the economy will recover last this year or early next year. i what like to know the sources you are reading. at this point i do agree you though that the market wants the administration to tell us what the heck they are doing to fix the problem.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I saw a few articles earlier, but this is the only one I have at hand right now.
> 
> Excite News - Forecasters: Economy worse in '09, better in '10
Click to expand...


tyvm for the link. i agree with the article


----------



## wimpy77

man its down right now over 200. i think we will be at 6800 before the end of the week unless geithner grows a brain by wednesday and actually says something useful.

bank stocks right now are up, but tech sector which had rally on the last couple of weeks have fallen as has the health care stocks which lead this downturn today mostly.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> man its down right now over 200. i think we will be at 6800 before the end of the week unless geithner grows a brain by wednesday and actually says something useful.
> 
> bank stocks right now are up, but tech sector which had rally on the last couple of weeks have fallen as has the health care stocks which lead this downturn today mostly.



Can you imagine how bad the market would be if the financials were down?


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> man its down right now over 200. i think we will be at 6800 before the end of the week unless geithner grows a brain by wednesday and actually says something useful.
> 
> bank stocks right now are up, but tech sector which had rally on the last couple of weeks have fallen as has the health care stocks which lead this downturn today mostly.



Geithner, Bernanke and Summers are all very smart guys and they all know that unless we recapitalize the financial system we are not going to recover from this recession, but to do that they have to go to Congress and ask for at least $1 trillion, more likely $2 trillion, to put into the banks, those very banks Congress has been demonizing for all these months.  My guess is that these three are preparing for a battle in Congress to get that money.  

On Wednesday, the "stress tests" begin, and the Treasury will make its own evaluation of the assets and liabilities on the banks' books to decide which banks are insolvent and have to be closed or nationalized, which are solvent but too short on funds to aid the economy and which banks are doing ok on their own.  My guess is that armed with this data, Geithner, Summers and Bernanke will go before Congress to ask for the money while Axelrod sends the President on another road trip to explain to the Henriettas and Julios of the country why giving trillions of dollars to the banks instead of to them is really better for them in the long run.  

If all goes well, after everyone in Congress gets some face time on tv to damn the banks and bankers for being so stupid, greedy and just plain evil in every way imaginable, Congress will grant the money but with conditions that sound tough but really aren't.  The problem is that some of the Democrats in Congress really do believe the class warfare rhetoric they've been running on and won't vote for the appropriation, and so Obama may need help from Republicans to get the money, and it's hard to say how that will play out.


----------



## xsited1

DavidS said:


> Down 85 points right now to 7279.73. Another 279.73 and we're at 7000. I think we're getting close to 7000. If you look at trends - if we close below 7250 today, we're guaranteed to get to 7000 within the next few weeks.
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^DJI



As soon as the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007, I took my money out of stocks.  I'm glad I did.


----------



## wimpy77

when geithner was before the finance committee after his first speech he basically told the whole panel that the fed would just print the money and not come to congress.


----------



## driveby

The Stimulus Bill blah blah blah .........


----------



## Terry

obama on tv speaking, maybe so people like Neil Cuvato (sp?) cannot talk about how bad the markets are.  LOL


----------



## wimpy77

jim cramer is irrate with geithner at this point. he says that geithner talks to reporters instead of making a public statement and he changes his mind every five mins.


----------



## wimpy77

Terry said:


> obama on tv speaking, maybe so people like Neil Cuvato (sp?) cannot talk about how bad the markets are.  LOL



what's he saying?


----------



## wimpy77

does anyone have dibs on 6900 tomorrow?


----------



## elvis

xsited1 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Down 85 points right now to 7279.73. Another 279.73 and we're at 7000. I think we're getting close to 7000. If you look at trends - if we close below 7250 today, we're guaranteed to get to 7000 within the next few weeks.
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^DJI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As soon as the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007, I took my money out of stocks.  I'm glad I did.
Click to expand...


I bet you are.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> does anyone have dibs on 6900 tomorrow?



I think if we hit 6999, we'll bounce up to 7300. I remember the first time we hit 7999 - the market fucking rocket shipped to the moon in one day. Went up 400-500 points. 

Looking at after hours trading, though, it looks like the financials will be down tomorrow. All we need is a 115 point loss on the big board tomorrow and BOOM... levels not seen since 1997. I think we need to take a look at April 11, 1997 as the bottom here: 6391.69. I don't think we will will go to early 1996 levels where we played in the low 5000s. I think the bottom is in the mid 6000s, which is where we should've been January 20, 2001. Instead we had reached the 12000s and then dropped to the 11000s.


----------



## Toro

Care4all said:


> i heard cramer saying, it is bs that buying the market at this time is a good bargain....that the reason the stock market is down 50% is because PROFITS are down 50% for many of these companies...
> 
> so if profits are down 50% for most all the companies on the stock market...will our unemployment rise to such?  seems impossible but is it really?
> 
> I realize that 80% of our businesses are small businesses not on the stock market so maybe, this does translate to 50% of the 20% are off 50% on their profits and the small businesses are doing much better so the unemployment would not go up as much???



Cramer blows with the wind.  A year ago, he was telling you to buy stocks.  It is a great time to buy stocks if you have a 10-20 year time horizon.  A 10-20 day, week or month horizon?  Maybe not so much.

Maybe we should start an Official Dow 0 thread.


----------



## Toro

The SP500 is sitting right on support.







I think we are getting close to a near-term bounce.  But I said that 15% higher from here.


----------



## wimpy77

i was reading today that the s&p could bottom at 600.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> does anyone have dibs on 6900 tomorrow?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think if we hit 6999, we'll bounce up to 7300. I remember the first time we hit 7999 - the market fucking rocket shipped to the moon in one day. Went up 400-500 points.
> 
> Looking at after hours trading, though, it looks like the financials will be down tomorrow. All we need is a 115 point loss on the big board tomorrow and BOOM... levels not seen since 1997. I think we need to take a look at April 11, 1997 as the bottom here: 6391.69. I don't think we will will go to early 1996 levels where we played in the low 5000s. I think the bottom is in the mid 6000s, which is where we should've been January 20, 2001. Instead we had reached the 12000s and then dropped to the 11000s.
Click to expand...


i just looked at citi and bac and both were up. but at this point im not believing the futures after what happened today. heck the utilities which are considered safe dividends are getting pummeled.


----------



## Toro

wimpy77 said:


> i was reading today that the s&p could bottom at 600.



It could bottom at 300.

Who knows?


----------



## wimpy77

i saw a guy on cnn who believes 600's could be a bottom, but he also believes the market right now is oversold and believes the short sellers are manipulating the market.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> i saw a guy on cnn who believes 600's could be a bottom, but he also believes the market right now is oversold and believes the short sellers are manipulating the market.



The DOW will hit the 6000s today, guaranteed. Why? 

We're going to get a consumer confidence report and Bernake is going to make some comments. Whenever good ol' Benjamin opens his mouth, the market tanks. His face will be plastered on CNBC at 10 am while the market is down 200 points. Just watch.


----------



## wimpy77

i think you are making a a good call there david. i just want this government to stop all the mythological junk and get to getting this economy on the rail again. the longer they wait the worst it will be.


----------



## wimpy77

where are the futures up?


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> where are the futures up?



Dow futures are up 43, S&P is up 5 and the Nasdaq is down 36. That's a big number to be down for in the Nasdaq - I don't really follow technology, so I wonder what's up.

Futures mean nothing. The DOW was up today when it opened because of positive futures. Asia's not looking too pretty and neither is Europe. It's gonna be a rough day.


----------



## wimpy77

analyst think that people looked for a premature rally in techs and thus far their earnings have been down and not doing well.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> analyst think that people looked for a premature rally in techs and thus far their earnings have been down and not doing well.



Cramer called for Google to fall below 300. It ain't too far off..


----------



## Toro

wimpy77 said:


> i saw a guy on cnn who believes 600's could be a bottom, but he also believes the market right now is oversold and believes the short sellers are manipulating the market.



The market is oversold
The shorts are manipulating the market
We could go to 600, which is only another 20% away.  We have fallen 15% over the past 10 trading days so what's another 20%?  We could get there by mid-March.


----------



## editec

Somebody on this thread said

"The markets hate uncertainty"​That is, I think, the problem.

Now I don't doubt that short sellers are manipulating stocks, either, but really the market thrives on confidence and there is a LACK OF  CONFIDENCE, right now, in where this economy is headed.

IF the number of newly unemployed starts to drop and nothing else changed, the market would begin to rally.

I fully expect that NOT to happen, soon though.

PERHAPS this stimulus package will stem the flow of newly unemployed.

If that happens, the market will begin a recovery.
​​​


----------



## Care4all

Toro said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> i saw a guy on cnn who believes 600's could be a bottom, but he also believes the market right now is oversold and believes the short sellers are manipulating the market.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The market is oversold
> The shorts are manipulating the market
> We could go to 600, which is only another 20% away.  We have fallen 15% over the past 10 trading days so what's another 20%?  We could get there by mid-March.
Click to expand...


QUESTION:

If i have an old 401k account, that now has less in it than what i put in it originally 10 years ago when i opened it....and i close out this account and move what is left in it over to an IRA....

can I take a Capital Loss on what i actually lost, of what i originally put in?  i don't think i can, but i am not certain???


----------



## editec

Care4all said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> i saw a guy on cnn who believes 600's could be a bottom, but he also believes the market right now is oversold and believes the short sellers are manipulating the market.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The market is oversold
> The shorts are manipulating the market
> We could go to 600, which is only another 20% away. We have fallen 15% over the past 10 trading days so what's another 20%? We could get there by mid-March.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> QUESTION:
> 
> If i have an old 401k account, that now has less in it than what i put in it originally 10 years ago when i opened it....and i close out this account and move what is left in it over to an IRA....
> 
> can I take a Capital Loss on what i actually lost, of what i originally put in? i don't think i can, but i am not certain???
Click to expand...

 
I'm no accountant but I cannot imainge that you cannot write off your loses.

If you cannot then there's something that truly DOES need to be fixed.


----------



## Paulie

Care I believe there's a certain amount of loss you can write off, and beyond that you lose.  But I'm not positive what the amount is, or if I'm even correct about that.  Toro will certainly have the answer.

As for the DOW, I'm still holding my Double short (DXD) position that I took at DOW 8600, and I'm stopping out at 6500.  I believe 6500 will be the bottom if we reach that low.  That will be a nice profit for me and it'll make up for some of the longs I've been day trading that I lost on, plus some extra.

After that, I'm out of the trading gig until the market gains some real momentum.  Looks like that probably won't be until late this year or early next year.  

At least we're not getting killed by inflation right now


----------



## editec

Paulie said:


> Care I believe there's a certain amount of loss you can write off, and beyond that you lose. But I'm not positive what the amount is, or if I'm even correct about that. Toro will certainly have the answer.
> 
> As for the DOW, I'm still holding my Double short (DXD) position that I took at DOW 8600, and I'm stopping out at 6500. I believe 6500 will be the bottom if we reach that low. That will be a nice profit for me and it'll make up for some of the longs I've been day trading that I lost on, plus some extra.
> 
> After that, I'm out of the trading gig until the market gains some real momentum. Looks like that probably won't be until late this year or early next year.
> 
> At least we're not getting killed by inflation right now


 
Just curious, Paulie.

I have no dog in this fight but what makes you arrive at the number 6500 as the bottom?

SWAG? Crystal ball?


----------



## wimpy77

well right now bernake is talking at thus far the markets haven't taken to perverable crap they usually take when someone from the fed opens their mouths


----------



## Paulie

editec said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care I believe there's a certain amount of loss you can write off, and beyond that you lose. But I'm not positive what the amount is, or if I'm even correct about that. Toro will certainly have the answer.
> 
> As for the DOW, I'm still holding my Double short (DXD) position that I took at DOW 8600, and I'm stopping out at 6500. I believe 6500 will be the bottom if we reach that low. That will be a nice profit for me and it'll make up for some of the longs I've been day trading that I lost on, plus some extra.
> 
> After that, I'm out of the trading gig until the market gains some real momentum. Looks like that probably won't be until late this year or early next year.
> 
> At least we're not getting killed by inflation right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious, Paulie.
> 
> I have no dog in this fight but what makes you arrive at the number 6500 as the bottom?
> 
> SWAG? Crystal ball?
Click to expand...


Just a hunch.  7000 will be a resistance level for sure, but if it breaks, I think the next resistance will be 6500.  I'm betting that by then, we'll know more about what's going on with the economy and if something positive comes out about the financial system, capital will start coming back into the markets.  

If it breaks 6500, I'm clueless.  The bottom could literally be anywhere.


----------



## wimpy77

Paulie said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care I believe there's a certain amount of loss you can write off, and beyond that you lose. But I'm not positive what the amount is, or if I'm even correct about that. Toro will certainly have the answer.
> 
> As for the DOW, I'm still holding my Double short (DXD) position that I took at DOW 8600, and I'm stopping out at 6500. I believe 6500 will be the bottom if we reach that low. That will be a nice profit for me and it'll make up for some of the longs I've been day trading that I lost on, plus some extra.
> 
> After that, I'm out of the trading gig until the market gains some real momentum. Looks like that probably won't be until late this year or early next year.
> 
> At least we're not getting killed by inflation right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious, Paulie.
> 
> I have no dog in this fight but what makes you arrive at the number 6500 as the bottom?
> 
> SWAG? Crystal ball?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just a hunch.  7000 will be a resistance level for sure, but if it breaks, I think the next resistance will be 6500.  I'm betting that by then, we'll know more about what's going on with the economy and if something positive comes out about the financial system, capital will start coming back into the markets.
> 
> If it breaks 6500, I'm clueless.  The bottom could literally be anywhere.
Click to expand...


well bernake said if they took all the necessary measures the economy could recover in the second half. i think they will pass another stimulus bill before the end of the year and they are gonna keep pumping capital into the banks.


----------



## DavidS

Well, that's it... whenever I say the market is going down, it goes up. Whenever I say it's going up, it goes down. Trying to understad the market is almost as difficult as trying to understand women...


----------



## Care4all

DavidS said:


> Well, that's it... whenever I say the market is going down, it goes up. Whenever I say it's going up, it goes down. Trying to understad the market is almost as difficult as trying to understand women...



whatever works, please keep saying it's going down....

THANK YOU in advance,

Care


----------



## wimpy77

bernake basically helped things today. he said the fed and the treasury will keep pumping money into the system to get this turned around. of course republicans didn't like that because well, they are republicans.


----------



## wimpy77

well the futures are down but as we know that doesn't mean anything. i didn't hear obama say anything that would spark a down opening. its up to geithner tomorrow and let's hope does a better job.


----------



## Toro

It's not surprising the market is down.  Obama's speech was not particularly Wall Street-friendly.

I will be buying stock on the down open.


----------



## wimpy77

he basically called them out huh? but he told the truth. but he basically said the same thing bernanke did. they would keep pumping capital into the banks until they are fixed.


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> he basically called them out huh? but he told the truth. but he basically said the same thing bernanke did. they would keep pumping capital into the banks until they are fixed.



Actually, Obama went further than Bernanke.  Bernanke only said they would stabilize the banks and he said there would be no economic recovery until the banks were stabilized, but he gave no indication they would ask for any more money than they had left from TARP.  Obama made it clear that Congress was going to have to come up with a lot more money for the banks, but if you watched Pelosi during this part of the speech, it is not at all clear his party will back him on this.  In fact, imo, the whole point of the speech was to try to preempt the anger that is sure to come from the public and the Congress when he finally does ask for hundreds of billions more to try to fix the banks.


----------



## wimpy77

at this point i think what needs to be done needs to be done. bernanke is right until the banks are fixed no amount of stimulus will work. how much more do you think they will end up asking for? another $700 billion.


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> at this point i think what needs to be done needs to be done. bernanke is right until the banks are fixed no amount of stimulus will work. how much more do you think they will end up asking for? another $700 billion.



That's a tough question.  The estimates I've seen are that the banks need about $2 trillion more to function properly, but I doubt they will ask for that much at one time.  I think they'll ask for a few to several hundred billion and explain they are trying to restore investor confidence in the banks so that the banks will be able to raise more money from private investors.  When not enough private investors step forward, they'll go back to Congress to ask for a few hundred billion more and this will go on until they get to $2 trillion or so or Congress just says, no.  

On the other hand, if some one could figure out a way to revive the market for the debt backed securities, the banks could raise their own capital without government help.  When TARP was first being debated, some of the Republicans wanted to set up an insurance program that would have insured the value of these securities.  The banks would pay an appropriate premium and the government would guarantee the value of the the bond.  The idea was that by lowering the risk in this way, the market for these securities could be revived and the government wouldn't have to put up all that much money.  In the worst case, since most of the underlying debts were good, the government's liability wouldn't have been too great.  I thought this should have been tried regardless of what else we did, but Paulson dismissed it on the grounds it would take too long.


----------



## DavidS

Care4all said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's it... whenever I say the market is going down, it goes up. Whenever I say it's going up, it goes down. Trying to understad the market is almost as difficult as trying to understand women...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whatever works, please keep saying it's going down....
> 
> THANK YOU in advance,
> 
> Care
Click to expand...


The market is going to tank today. Down at least 300. Maybe 400. Definitely won't go up at all.


----------



## Toro

DavidS said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's it... whenever I say the market is going down, it goes up. Whenever I say it's going up, it goes down. Trying to understad the market is almost as difficult as trying to understand women...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whatever works, please keep saying it's going down....
> 
> THANK YOU in advance,
> 
> Care
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The market is going to tank today. Down at least 300. Maybe 400. Definitely won't go up at all.
Click to expand...


David

Some advice.  You will do a lot better investing if you remove words like "definitely won't" from your vocabulary.

As someone who has done this for two decades and has read hundreds of investment books, markets can and will do anything they want, no matter what you or I think about what should or should not happen.  Trust me, that is a lesson I have learned the expensive way.


----------



## DavidS

So far I'm on my way of being right.... down 153 after we got existing home sales data... i.e. the housing market, the nexxus of this problem, is still having problems. We fix the housing market, we fix the economy.

We are only another 200 points away from 6999.


----------



## editec

Well, DavidS.

Looking at it another way, you had a 33.3...% chance of being right.

The Market could have gone up, or down, or stayed the same, yes?


----------



## DavidS

editec said:


> Well, DavidS.
> 
> Looking at it another way, you had a 33.3...% chance of being right.
> 
> The Market could have gone up, or down, or stayed the same, yes?



The market never does what I want it to.

I really want the market to tank, to finally bottom out so it can start going up again.


----------



## DavidS

Stocks are up! You're welcome, Care!


----------



## wimpy77

stocks ended the day down 80 points on existing home sells data. at least when the treasury department spoke the market didn't tank.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> stocks ended the day down 80 points on existing home sells data. at least when the treasury department spoke the market didn't tank.



You mean the federal reserve? Gietnher wasn't anywhere today...


----------



## wimpy77

yeah


----------



## wimpy77

bernanke in the last couple of days did a pretty good job.


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> bernanke in the last couple of days did a pretty good job.



He has been a calming presence, but we still don't know exactly what the administration will be willing or able to do.  The Fed can help, must help, but it's the Treasury that will have to the heavy lifting and it will be Obama who will have to persuade the people and the Congress to come up with huge sums of money to put into the banks.  How much he will ask for we won't know until the Treasury finishes its stress tests.  Until then, the markets will go up or down according to the latest rumor.


----------



## wimpy77

according to sen. conrad he expect them to ask for another $500 billion.


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> according to sen. conrad he expect them to ask for another $500 billion.



The official story is that they won't know how much to ask for until they finish stress testing the 20 largest banks, but perhaps a political decision has been made not to ask for more than $500 billion at this time regardless of what the stress tests show.  On the other hand, Conrad might just be repeating a rumor he heard.


----------



## wimpy77

could be we shall see. stress test end in what april?


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> could be we shall see. stress test end in what april?



I don't know, but they're only going through the books of the top 20 banks, so I don't think it will take any longer than that.


----------



## wimpy77

i look for the dow to go below 7000 tomorrow when the revised gdp numbers come out tomorrow for the 4th quarter of last year. it is expect to be revised to a decline of 5.4%


----------



## DavidS

Here we go.... 30 points above 6999 in DOW futures because of the GDP and because of Citigroup.


----------



## toomuchtime_

DavidS said:


> Here we go.... 30 points above 6999 in DOW futures because of the GDP and because of Citigroup.



And, I suspect, because private economists are questioning the underlying assumptions Obama's budget is based on.  


The Associated Press: Economists question budget&#39;s economic assumptions


----------



## editec

Paulie said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care I believe there's a certain amount of loss you can write off, and beyond that you lose. But I'm not positive what the amount is, or if I'm even correct about that. Toro will certainly have the answer.
> 
> As for the DOW, I'm still holding my Double short (DXD) position that I took at DOW 8600, and I'm stopping out at 6500. I believe 6500 will be the bottom if we reach that low. That will be a nice profit for me and it'll make up for some of the longs I've been day trading that I lost on, plus some extra.
> 
> After that, I'm out of the trading gig until the market gains some real momentum. Looks like that probably won't be until late this year or early next year.
> 
> At least we're not getting killed by inflation right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just curious, Paulie.
> 
> I have no dog in this fight but what makes you arrive at the number 6500 as the bottom?
> 
> SWAG? Crystal ball?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just a hunch. 7000 will be a resistance level for sure, but if it breaks, I think the next resistance will be 6500. I'm betting that by then, we'll know more about what's going on with the economy and if something positive comes out about the financial system, capital will start coming back into the markets.
> 
> If it breaks 6500, I'm clueless. The bottom could literally be anywhere.
Click to expand...

 
So basically the proformance of the market is more dependent on mass psychology than how the companies themselves are actually doing?

That is believable.


----------



## Paulie

Right now Ed, yes.  The market is moving almost exclusively on data and other news from Washington, and traders/scalpers/pirates/whatever you wanna call em are playing it for all it's worth.

Since most of the DOW companies, and most banks for that matter, are hurting, the market isn't being played on company strength as much as it's being played on technicals like support/resistance levels and GUESSES.


----------



## editec

Paulie said:


> Right now Ed, yes. The market is moving almost exclusively on data and other news from Washington, and traders/scalpers/pirates/whatever you wanna call em are playing it for all it's worth.
> 
> Since most of the DOW companies, and most banks for that matter, are hurting, the market isn't being played on company strength as much as it's being played on *technicals like support/resistance levels and GUESSES*.


 
Like I suggested...SWAG  -- *Sc*ientific *W*ild-*A*ssed *G*uesses

Note how many times I've suggested that the Wall street is clueless?

It was clueless when it thought that its fate was not tied to the fate of the huddle masses on Main Street.

And now that the government is playing lord only knows what kind of games, it is clueless because NOBODY knows what they're doing, where the money's going, how insolvent the insolvent bank really are, or what the net effect of what they're doing will be on the economies over time either.

The masters screwed UP.

They screwed up so badly even THEY don't know whether to shit or go blind.

But by damned they're STILL in charge and they want to continue the same damned system that got us into this fix again, too.


----------



## Toro

I'm feeling oddly calm about this all of a sudden.

I don't even care if we fall another 20%.  I am feeling pretty confident that this mess is solvable, that the end of the world is not here and that the economy, despite perhaps even being in a depression, we are not going to collapse.  I think the banking system is beginning to repair itself.


----------



## editec

wimpy77 said:


> at this point i think what needs to be done needs to be done. bernanke is right until the banks are fixed no amount of stimulus will work. how much more do you think they will end up asking for? another $700 billion.


 
I don't think you quite understand the plan.

The 700 billion is what the people of the USA get to rebuild the infrastructure and what not

*The bankers are promised an amount more like $9 Trillion in cash and guantees for their toxic debts.*


----------



## editec

DavidS said:


> Here we go.... 30 points above 6999 in DOW futures because of the GDP and because of Citigroup.


 
Would that be the SAME CITIBANK which we were recently told was solvent?

NONE of them are solvent, folks.


----------



## wimpy77

editec said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> at this point i think what needs to be done needs to be done. bernanke is right until the banks are fixed no amount of stimulus will work. how much more do you think they will end up asking for? another $700 billion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you quite understand the plan.
> 
> The 700 billion is what the people of the USA get to rebuild the infrastructure and what not
> 
> *The bankers are promised an amount more like $9 Trillion in cash and guantees for their toxic debts.*
Click to expand...


i wasn't talking about the stimulus. senators in the congress are already preparing for another bank bailout for atleast another 700 billion.


----------



## wimpy77

editec said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go.... 30 points above 6999 in DOW futures because of the GDP and because of Citigroup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would that be the SAME CITIBANK which we were recently told was solvent?
> 
> NONE of them are solvent, folks.
Click to expand...


some are and some aren't. cit in most economist eyes are probably the most insolvent of all the banks and most believe that the stress tests will prove that the ceo of bofa is an outright liar.


----------



## Ravi

Toro said:


> I'm feeling oddly calm about this all of a sudden.
> 
> I don't even care if we fall another 20%.  I am feeling pretty confident that this mess is solvable, that the end of the world is not here and that the economy, despite perhaps even being in a depression, we are not going to collapse.  I think the banking system is beginning to repair itself.


What is making you feel confident?


----------



## Toro

Ravi said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm feeling oddly calm about this all of a sudden.
> 
> I don't even care if we fall another 20%.  I am feeling pretty confident that this mess is solvable, that the end of the world is not here and that the economy, despite perhaps even being in a depression, we are not going to collapse.  I think the banking system is beginning to repair itself.
> 
> 
> 
> What is making you feel confident?
Click to expand...


Corporate bond issuance is strong.
Home prices are no longer over-valued, at least not materially so.
The government has developed a mechanism for stress testing and injecting capital into the banks.
There will be no material price deflation.
The banks are stuffed to the gills with reserves
The inter-bank market, i.e. LIBOR, has stabilized.

And most importantly, this.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70488-why-the-banking-system-will-not-collapse.html

Understand that the single most important thing is not the economy.  It is the financial system.  We know (more or less) how to fix the economy.  The black hole is the financial system.  If it is on the road to repair, which I believe it is, then we will effectively deal with the economy.


----------



## Ravi

I hope you are right, Toro. We've not felt a pinch at all, truth be told (well, except for those nasty sep-ira statements). In fact we finally replaced the boat we lost in Wilma...at a steal even for a used boat...and it has a bathroom.


----------



## wimpy77

Toro said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm feeling oddly calm about this all of a sudden.
> 
> I don't even care if we fall another 20%.  I am feeling pretty confident that this mess is solvable, that the end of the world is not here and that the economy, despite perhaps even being in a depression, we are not going to collapse.  I think the banking system is beginning to repair itself.
> 
> 
> 
> What is making you feel confident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Corporate bond issuance is strong.
> Home prices are no longer over-valued, at least not materially so.
> The government has developed a mechanism for stress testing and injecting capital into the banks.
> There will be no material price deflation.
> The banks are stuffed to the gills with reserves
> The inter-bank market, i.e. LIBOR, has stabilized.
> 
> And most importantly, this.
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70488-why-the-banking-system-will-not-collapse.html
> 
> Understand that the single most important thing is not the economy.  It is the financial system.  We know (more or less) how to fix the economy.  The black hole is the financial system.  If it is on the road to repair, which I believe it is, then we will effectively deal with the economy.
Click to expand...


tell this to jim cramer. he was having a mini tantrum. he blames obama daily for the market dropping. i think geithner ultimately has a plan and when the stress tests are completed he will but it into action.

charles gasparino on cnbc actually disagreed with kudlow that he thought it was a could idea to increase their stake in citi because when the government takes the bad assests of of their books they will have capital leftover


----------



## wimpy77

any prediction for this week? dow below 7k and the s&p at 720?


----------



## Toro

Don't listen to Cramer.

That's another piece of advice I'd give anyone.

Not that he's always wrong but rather that is usually just reading the tape.


----------



## DavidS

Toro said:


> Don't listen to Cramer.
> 
> That's another piece of advice I'd give anyone.
> 
> Not that he's always wrong but rather that is usually just reading the tape.



Come on! I'd always listen to Cramer! He can make or break stocks like there's no tomorrow. 

He can say "buy" on a 15 cent stock and tomorrow it'll be over $2. Then the next day he can say sell and he can make a huge profit. He could run his own ponzi scheme!


----------



## editec

DavidS said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't listen to Cramer.
> 
> That's another piece of advice I'd give anyone.
> 
> Not that he's always wrong but rather that is usually just reading the tape.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on! I'd always listen to Cramer! He can make or break stocks like there's no tomorrow.
> 
> He can say "buy" on a 15 cent stock and tomorrow it'll be over $2. Then the next day he can say sell and he can make a huge profit. He could run his own ponzi scheme!
Click to expand...

 
He's very entertaining.


----------



## Toro

DavidS said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't listen to Cramer.
> 
> That's another piece of advice I'd give anyone.
> 
> Not that he's always wrong but rather that is usually just reading the tape.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on! I'd always listen to Cramer! He can make or break stocks like there's no tomorrow.
> 
> He can say "buy" on a 15 cent stock and tomorrow it'll be over $2. Then the next day he can say sell and he can make a huge profit. He could run his own ponzi scheme!
Click to expand...


He can spike a stock, I know that.  For a while, the big houses like Smith Barney on their morning calls were highlighting what Cramer said on his show the previous evening. However, I have a subscription to his site, and he basically reads the tape.  Plus, as has been demonstrated countless times, his recommendations on his show underperform.


----------



## wimpy77

craner for me is about 50/50. but i can't understand for the life of me why he blames obama for the markets wows. like when he announced his budget and when biotechs and health stocks dove it was obamas fault. cramer said that obama is the most anti market president since carter.


----------



## DavidS

Dow futures are down 68. If the market opens like this tomorrow, we'll have an intraday low BELOW 7000. Who would have ever thought??


----------



## wimpy77

the government just announced a $30 billion deal with AIG no doubt probably has the market spooked.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> Dow futures are down 68. If the market opens like this tomorrow, we'll have an intraday low BELOW 7000. Who would have ever thought??



i think we might see a 20% more drop in the dow below 7500 so that's what 1300 points.


----------



## Toro

Maybe we'll go to 300.  

Just remember in 2000 when the Nasdaq crossed 5000, and everyone was telling us that the frenzy was real and you should buy stocks, and the world looked rosy forever.  That was a great time to sell.

Today, the opposite is happening.  It is a great time to buy.  America is on sale.


----------



## wimpy77

so you're saying 6700 tomorrow?


----------



## DavidS

I think it's time to REALLY get into the market when the dow hits 6500 and the S&P hit 690.


----------



## wimpy77

that might happen this week.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> that might happen this week.



This week? It might happen today. Futures are down 141. We won't even see 6900 at the open!


----------



## editec

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> that might happen this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This week? It might happen today. Futures are down 141. We won't even see 6900 at the open!
Click to expand...

 
We'll know in a few minutes, DavidS.

I suspect that the market cannot really thrive as long as the banking situation is still up in the air.

And I suspect the fiscal health of the banks are uncertain until the price of real estate finds a bottom.

Now if I were predicting a bottom on RE, it would be when the price of the median home price rounghly equaled one year's median salary for the American family.

So I expect that the RE prices still have a long way to go down before they  get back in line with the reality of incomes.

Locally, for exmple, if the average family income is 60,000, then the median price of you homes should be roughly that.

In this part of Maine, that would mean that the median price of our homes needs to drop about 50% from what it about a year ago.

If it does that, of course, almost everyone who purchased a home recently, (say with in the last five or ten years) using a conventional mortgage, even if they put down 20% of the purchase price is basically underwater.

There's a happy thought for this snowy Monday morning, isn't it?


----------



## DavidS

Well... it's official. Dow 6900.


----------



## editec

DavidS said:


> Well... it's official. Dow 6900.


 
I cannot see how the stock market NOW, can recover until the PEOPLE's ECONOMIES start to recover.

The disconnect that we seemed to have, where the stock market was trhiving while Main Street was not, was a bubble..in stocks and bonds and real estate, too.

The cashing sound you're all hearing on the market is reality correcting the misguided notion that a national economy can screw the working man and still thrive.

It's taken nearly 40 years, but the big corrrection is happening right now.

_OUCH!_


----------



## Care4all

Why would homes be worth less than before this Boom actually began?

What was 2000's value on these homes?

the other thing, Editec....  i think the banks in the very old days used the figure of the mortgage payment being no more than 25% of ones  gross income...total debt payments of no more than 33% of ones monthly income....

They changed that to no more than 27% and 37% total monthly debt payments about 10 years ago when we bought our house in massachusetts...

AND the Lord only knows what the standards have been changed to after this...

I tend to think that ones house payment being no more than 25% of ones gross monthy income is about right...

Taking your 60k yearly household income, devided by 12 months, comes to a monthly gross income of $5000....

25% of 5k a month is a mortgage or rent payment payment of $1250 a month....

That is a home worth about $210,000....if mortgage interest rates are between 5%-6%.

Maine has a median household income of around $45k only, that would mean these households can afford a home at around $156,000....

Of course there are many households here in maine that make much less than the $45k combined income, at least up in my neck of the woods, so they should have homes for much less values.  My area has 11% of the people living below poverty levels...and this is $15k total household income for a 2 person household.

Care


----------



## Missourian

Care,

In 1998 the price of a house was divorced from inflation.







So people were making the same amount but houses were more expensive, so it took a larger percentage of income to buy the same house.


----------



## FactFinder

Looks like you are going to have to start a 6000 thread. Hurry or you may not get it in before the 5000


----------



## DavidS

I'm worried what happens if the S&P dives below 700. There's such a thing as an over-correction.


----------



## wimpy77

yep i saw an economist today say they market wont stabilize until we see house prices stabilize.


----------



## auditor0007

wimpy77 said:


> yep i saw an economist today say they market wont stabilize until we see house prices stabilize.



There are so many houses on the market right now that they couldn't give them all away.


----------



## DavidS

The S&P is only 4 points above 700. It's taking a really bad hit today.


----------



## DavidS

FactFinder said:


> Looks like you are going to have to start a 6000 thread. Hurry or you may not get it in before the 5000



I don't think we'll reach 6000. At least I certainly hope not. I think the bottom is around 6500. I've been saying this months and I'm finally going to be right about something to do with the stock market. I got rid of Apple when I shouldn't have, held onto Starbucks too long, took money out of gold when it was $700 to put into Morgan Stanley when it was $13/share...  there is absolutely no way to make money in this market right now.


----------



## wimpy77

a guy on cnbc said in his opinion this is a pros market right now and the fix income traders need to stay out for a while.


----------



## mash107

wimpy77 said:


> yep i saw an economist today say they market wont stabilize until we see house prices stabilize.



but with 19million unoccupied homes, prices are only going to stabilize downward.

good for new buyers, for sure; sucks for those that think their home is any more than a place to live.


----------



## wimpy77

the former head of the fdic said he thinks the s&p could drop another 20 to 30%


----------



## Valerie

DavidS said:


> FactFinder said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like you are going to have to start a 6000 thread. Hurry or you may not get it in before the 5000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think we'll reach 6000. At least I certainly hope not. I think the bottom is around 6500. I've been saying this months and *I'm finally going to be right about something to do with the stock market.* I got rid of Apple when I shouldn't have, held onto Starbucks too long, took money out of gold when it was $700 to put into Morgan Stanley when it was $13/share...  there is absolutely no way to make money in this market right now.
Click to expand...


You were right about CAT.  

I bought some DIA today in my IRA.  

DIA: Summary for DIAMONDS TRUST SER 1 - Yahoo! Finance


----------



## Valerie

DIA - Diamonds Trust



> FUND SUMMARY
> The investment seeks to provide investment results that, before expenses, generally *correspond to the price and yield performance of the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA). *The Trust holds the Portfolio and cash, and is not actively "managed" by traditional methods. To maintain the correspondence between the composition and weightings of stocks held by the Trust and component stocks of the DJIA, the Trustee adjusts the portfolio from time to time to conform to periodic changes in the identity and/or relative weightings of index securities, typically within three business days before or after the day on which such changes are scheduled to take effect.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> the former head of the fdic said he thinks the s&p could drop another 20 to 30%



link?

i call bullshit. we're oversold. we either hit the bottom today or we've got another 4% to go. This is it. We're going to linger here for a while, but this is it.


----------



## DavidS

I saw a look today in art cashin that I've never seen before in my life and probably that he's never had in his life. The good news is, we're going up tomorrow. Way up. The trends of this bear market show us two things:

Whenever we close below x250 with the x being 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8 and now sadly 7, we always hit the next thousand below AND whenever we close below the next thousand below for the first time, we go up the next day and close above it. So tomorrow, if the pattern holds, we should close above 7000. One caveat is that we've never hit so far below this before. The first time we reached 7998 intraday, we bounced like 500 points and settled 200-300 points above it and then went all the way up to 8900 or so. We've never, ever, in the entire history of the DJIA hit this low this fast. We usually close at x900 or x950.

I think people are exhausted from selling, personally and I think tomorrow is going to be one of the best days on the markets we've seen all year.


----------



## wimpy77

well i saw the boldest prediction ever on larry kudlow's show doug kass said the yearly in the s&p 500 bottom will be hit in the next three days. also david the had another guy that basically agreed with you he said it was oversold it wasn't funny.


----------



## Toro

It very much feels like a bottom is near in terms of _time_.  However, at this rate, we will be at 600 on the SP by Friday.

I say, if its going to get there, bring it on.  The sooner we get to the bottom, the better.


----------



## wimpy77

agreed toro


----------



## DavidS

Toro said:


> It very much feels like a bottom is near in terms of _time_.  However, at this rate, we will be at 600 on the SP by Friday.
> 
> I say, if its going to get there, bring it on.  The sooner we get to the bottom, the better.



Impossible. There is no way in hell we're going to 600 on the S&P. I think 700 is the bottom at the S&P and I think it will hold.


----------



## manu1959

where was the dow in 93/94......


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> It very much feels like a bottom is near in terms of _time_.  However, at this rate, we will be at 600 on the SP by Friday.
> 
> I say, if its going to get there, bring it on.  The sooner we get to the bottom, the better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Impossible. There is no way in hell we're going to 600 on the S&P. I think 700 is the bottom at the S&P and I think it will hold.
Click to expand...


we will see tomorrow both the nasdaq and s&p futures are down, but the dow futures is up.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> It very much feels like a bottom is near in terms of _time_.  However, at this rate, we will be at 600 on the SP by Friday.
> 
> I say, if its going to get there, bring it on.  The sooner we get to the bottom, the better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Impossible. There is no way in hell we're going to 600 on the S&P. I think 700 is the bottom at the S&P and I think it will hold.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> we will see tomorrow both the nasdaq and s&p futures are down, but the dow futures is up.
Click to expand...


Not sure what you're talking about. S&P futures are up 7.2. DOW is up 64. Nice start to a meteoric rise tomorrow.


----------



## DavidS

manu1959 said:


> where was the dow in 93/94......



3000s.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Impossible. There is no way in hell we're going to 600 on the S&P. I think 700 is the bottom at the S&P and I think it will hold.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we will see tomorrow both the nasdaq and s&p futures are down, but the dow futures is up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not sure what you're talking about. S&P futures are up 7.2. DOW is up 64. Nice start to a meteoric rise tomorrow.
Click to expand...


i had it on cnbc and they had the dow futures up 58, the s&p down 24 and the nasdaq down 28. but that was at 9:00 cst


----------



## Toro

They have the futures on the Bloomberg web site.

Bloomberg.com


----------



## manu1959

DavidS said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> where was the dow in 93/94......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3000s.
Click to expand...


then that is my call.....


----------



## wimpy77

manu1959 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> where was the dow in 93/94......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3000s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> then that is my call.....
Click to expand...


you better hope your wrong.


----------



## manu1959

wimpy77 said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3000s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then that is my call.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you better hope your wrong.
Click to expand...


why.....it will be what it is......but it feels like that time ........


----------



## DavidS

manu1959 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> where was the dow in 93/94......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3000s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> then that is my call.....
Click to expand...


3000s? Wipe out everything that was gained under Bill Clinton? That would be horrific.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3000s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then that is my call.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you better hope your wrong.
Click to expand...


agreed. that would be... well, just bad.

Cramer said it best today: The market is either going to bottom when Obama finally gets a clue or when the market is so ridiculously cheap that you can't afford to stay out of it right now. He said 4000 would be that level.

Would there be any millionaires in this country left if we hit 4000????


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> then that is my call.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you better hope your wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> agreed. that would be... well, just bad.
> 
> Cramer said it best today: The market is either going to bottom when Obama finally gets a clue or when the market is so ridiculously cheap that you can't afford to stay out of it right now. He said 4000 would be that level.
> 
> Would there be any millionaires in this country left if we hit 4000????
Click to expand...


yes. most smart ones took their money out quite a while ago. i don't think obama understands the markets. he sees everyone on wall street as the same level crooked. if the markets get to 4000 omg how many business, utilities and etc will be left. people here are talking about a revolution that would start one right there. if the market goes to 4000 what would the unemployment rate be then?


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> you better hope your wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> agreed. that would be... well, just bad.
> 
> Cramer said it best today: The market is either going to bottom when Obama finally gets a clue or when the market is so ridiculously cheap that you can't afford to stay out of it right now. He said 4000 would be that level.
> 
> Would there be any millionaires in this country left if we hit 4000????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes. most smart ones took their money out quite a while ago. i don't think obama understands the markets. he sees everyone on wall street as the same level crooked. if the markets get to 4000 omg how many business, utilities and etc will be left. people here are talking about a revolution that would start one right there. if the market goes to 4000 what would the unemployment rate be then?
Click to expand...


unemployment will ceiling at around 10%. I think one million people lost their jobs in February.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> agreed. that would be... well, just bad.
> 
> Cramer said it best today: The market is either going to bottom when Obama finally gets a clue or when the market is so ridiculously cheap that you can't afford to stay out of it right now. He said 4000 would be that level.
> 
> Would there be any millionaires in this country left if we hit 4000????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes. most smart ones took their money out quite a while ago. i don't think obama understands the markets. he sees everyone on wall street as the same level crooked. if the markets get to 4000 omg how many business, utilities and etc will be left. people here are talking about a revolution that would start one right there. if the market goes to 4000 what would the unemployment rate be then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> unemployment will ceiling at around 10%. I think one million people lost their jobs in February.
Click to expand...


i hope your right. btw bernanke are both testifying tomorrow so the markets will react i hope they like what they here.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes. most smart ones took their money out quite a while ago. i don't think obama understands the markets. he sees everyone on wall street as the same level crooked. if the markets get to 4000 omg how many business, utilities and etc will be left. people here are talking about a revolution that would start one right there. if the market goes to 4000 what would the unemployment rate be then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unemployment will ceiling at around 10%. I think one million people lost their jobs in February.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i hope your right. btw bernanke are both testifying tomorrow so the markets will react i hope they like what they here.
Click to expand...


Why does Congress ask Bernake and Geitner to testify every other week? Let them do their damned jobs.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> unemployment will ceiling at around 10%. I think one million people lost their jobs in February.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i hope your right. btw bernanke are both testifying tomorrow so the markets will react i hope they like what they here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does Congress ask Bernake and Geitner to testify every other week? Let them do their damned jobs.
Click to expand...


well when greenspan was head of the fed he testified pretty often. i remember him being on television on cspan at least once or twice a month. geithner i dont know so much about. he is testifying before the housing committee. the rules of their housing foreclosure plan will be rolled on wednesday.


----------



## Toro

DavidS said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> It very much feels like a bottom is near in terms of _time_.  However, at this rate, we will be at 600 on the SP by Friday.
> 
> I say, if its going to get there, bring it on.  The sooner we get to the bottom, the better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Impossible. There is no way in hell we're going to 600 on the S&P. I think 700 is the bottom at the S&P and I think it will hold.
Click to expand...


I am hope you're right, but I learned a long time ago never to say "no way in hell" regarding markets.


----------



## Toro

manu1959 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> where was the dow in 93/94......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3000s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> then that is my call.....
Click to expand...


Buy of a lifetime, if that's the case.

But I don't think it's wise to bet on extreme events.


----------



## editec

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> then that is my call.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you better hope your wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> agreed. that would be... well, just bad.
> 
> Cramer said it best today: The market is either going to bottom when Obama finally gets a clue or when the market is so ridiculously cheap that you can't afford to stay out of it right now. He said 4000 would be that level.
> 
> *Would there be any millionaires in this country left if we hit 4000*????
Click to expand...

 
I confess if the market hits 4000, I won't be a millionaire

I'm trying to be stoic about it.

That's fairly easy for me, though, since if the market hit 40,000 I still won't be a millionaire.

*ABject poverty is the ultimate hedge position.*


----------



## DavidS

The fact that the market is not bouncing and can't seem to find any direction today is VERY concerning.


----------



## Terral

Hi DavidS:



DavidS said:


> The fact that the market is not bouncing and can't seem to find any direction today is VERY concerning.



The only reason the Dow Jones is above 3000 is because of *all the liars* talking the markets up over the course of the last year and the banks refusing to implement the bogus FED/Bernanke/Paulson Tarp Plan.  The markets will eventually figure out the truth that Bush and now Obama are working every day to destroy this once-great nation in order to make *their vision of CanAmeriMexico a reality* and the bottom will fall out to destroy the equity in all the markets. Obama is allowing *record Outsourcing of JOBS* to continue like he is allowing *millions and millions and millions of Illegal Alien Foreign Nationals to run around loose EVERYWHERE* displacing U.S. workers from identities and *JOBS*, just like Senor Bush and his out-of-control Bushie Administration. 

Senor Obama represents *Four More Years of failed Bushenomics* where record *displacement of U.S. workers* is par for the course.  The destruction of wealth through decreasing home values will continue with *10,000 new foreclosures every day*, as unemployment continues to skyrocket and the local tax base continues to erode to create record budget deficits that are already completely out of control. Deflation will continue to see home values plummet, as a higher and higher percentage of legal U.S. homeowners find themselves under water with mortgage values far greater than the local consumers are willing to pay for the growing number of distressed properties flooding the housing markets. Government intervention will make things far worse, as the distressed properties displace buyers and nobody is willing to pay a fair market price for your property; and even more homeowners find themselves under water and unable to refinance or sell their properties.  

*The fundamentals of the U.S. Economy ARE BROKEN* and aside from starting WW3 for a recovery (like WW2), we are looking down the throat of* the Second Great Depression* that will make the first one look like childs play. Unemployment in the USA is already over 10 percent and heading towards 20 percent, but the U.S. Government is playing with the numbers and lying every step of the way down the toilet. Try to imagine the reason WHY any bank should be lending out billions of dollars in *a deflationary housing market* where the value of the mortgage-backed securities portfolio *will be worth LESS at the end of every quarter* and housing values will continue to go SOUTH? :0) Anyone demanding that these banks lend out taxpayer money in *this deflationary market* is asking the same bankers to put guns to their own heads and to pull the trigger. No bottom in the housing market means no bottom in the stock markets, which means *BOTH are on their way to IMPLODING right before our very eyes*. 

I believe you need to start* The Official Dow 6000 Thread* in favor of starting *The Official Dow 5000 Thread,* so on and so forth. :0)

GL,

Terral


----------



## editec

I suspect the longer term outcome of this economy is that the HAVES will end up owning a greater percentage of world assets which will appear to have a lesser valuation.

Of course since pricing is always relative to all other things, what will really matter is the percentage of owwnership, rather than its market valuations.

Some of you with cash to invest will be able to benefit from this event assuming you can time your investing correctly.

The big losers will be those of us whose retirements were mostly depending on the value of our homes.

The probable winners will be those of the younger generation who will be able to buy homes that are cheaper and more in line with what they actually make.

The price of Real estate HAD to correct, folks.


----------



## Terral

Hi Editec:



editec said:


> I suspect the longer term outcome of this economy is that the HAVES will end up owning a greater percentage of world assets which will appear to have a lesser valuation.



We disagree. I believe you are pointing to the short term outcome of this imploding U.S. Economy and not the long term. In the long term I see the have nots becoming very desperate, until they take their guns and appropriate whatever they wish from the HAVES in a scenario that looks more like Mad Max than anything else. If you think things through carefully, then Lawlessness will lead to even more Lawlessness until the civilization is reduced back into adopting tribal behavior patterns around a new brand of tribal leader. In other words, we should expect the current Gangland mindset gripping the inner cities to enlarge, until the New World Order cronies running our out-of-control Government implement Martial Law. 

Remember that the current Financial Crisis is being orchestrated part of a larger New World Order Plan, as none of the coming chaos is random or becoming our new reality by accident. Welcome to Senor Bushies vision of CanAmeriMexico where Senor Obama is the new Fascist Dictator in charge . . . 

Your HAVES will continue to sit all fat and happy, thinking they stand above the coming chaos, right up until the have nots break down the door . . . 

GL,

Terral


----------



## DavidS

Well here's that surge I was talking about. Stocks are up 1.5% - 2%. A day late I guess. We should close above 7000 today.


----------



## wimpy77

Terral said:


> Hi Editec:
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> I suspect the longer term outcome of this economy is that the HAVES will end up owning a greater percentage of world assets which will appear to have a lesser valuation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We disagree. I believe you are pointing to the short term outcome of this imploding U.S. Economy and not the long term. In the long term I see the have nots becoming very desperate, until they take their guns and appropriate whatever they wish from the HAVES in a scenario that looks more like Mad Max than anything else. If you think things through carefully, then Lawlessness will lead to even more Lawlessness until the civilization is reduced back into adopting tribal behavior patterns around a new brand of tribal leader. In other words, we should expect the current Gangland mindset gripping the inner cities to enlarge, until the New World Order cronies running our out-of-control Government implement Martial Law.
> 
> Remember that the current Financial Crisis is being orchestrated part of a larger New World Order Plan, as none of the coming chaos is random or becoming our new reality by accident. Welcome to Senor Bushies vision of CanAmeriMexico where Senor Obama is the new Fascist Dictator in charge . . .
> 
> Your HAVES will continue to sit all fat and happy, thinking they stand above the coming chaos, right up until the have nots break down the door . . .
> 
> GL,
> 
> Terral
Click to expand...


 your posts are just rants and highly stupid.


----------



## Terral

Hi wimpy:



wimpy77 said:


> your posts are just rants and highly stupid.



Thank you very much, but your post is kind of wimpy. :0) 

GL,

Terral


----------



## DavidS

Terral said:


> Hi Editec:
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> I suspect the longer term outcome of this economy is that the HAVES will end up owning a greater percentage of world assets which will appear to have a lesser valuation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We disagree. I believe you are pointing to the short term outcome of this imploding U.S. Economy and not the long term. In the long term I see the have nots becoming very desperate, until they take their guns and appropriate whatever they wish from the HAVES in a scenario that looks more like Mad Max than anything else. If you think things through carefully, then Lawlessness will lead to even more Lawlessness until the civilization is reduced back into adopting tribal behavior patterns around a new brand of tribal leader. In other words, we should expect the current Gangland mindset gripping the inner cities to enlarge, until the New World Order cronies running our out-of-control Government implement Martial Law.
> 
> Remember that the current Financial Crisis is being orchestrated part of a larger New World Order Plan, as none of the coming chaos is random or becoming our new reality by accident. Welcome to Senor Bushies vision of CanAmeriMexico where Senor Obama is the new Fascist Dictator in charge . . .
> 
> Your HAVES will continue to sit all fat and happy, thinking they stand above the coming chaos, right up until the have nots break down the door . . .
> 
> GL,
> 
> Terral
Click to expand...


Terral, please take your conspiracy theories to a different sub-forum as this is not the thread for it.


----------



## wimpy77

today was the first time i have read that alot of economist think we are infact in a depression. the market went up but from what i have read the fundamentals are still saying its going to get worse. i believe in all my mind that geithner has to come up with a banking solution before may.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> today was the first time i have read that alot of economist think we are infact in a depression. the market went up but from what i have read the fundamentals are still saying its going to get worse. i believe in all my mind that geithner has to come up with a banking solution before may.



Our economy is more diverse today than it was in the 1920s and 1930s. While some sectors of our economy are in a recession, like housing and real estate, there are others that are in a boom. Thus, our economy overall isn't one thing. It's several.

It was interesting to see the surge that I predicted - at one time we were 30 points below 7000. I felt for sure that we were going to hit it. Then in the last half hour, we lost 100 points. Something is amiss.


----------



## wimpy77

cramer said he thinks it lost a 100 off its high because of the fed report but he thinks the rally could last if things line of right.


----------



## wimpy77

dow futures down right now.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> dow futures down right now.



I don't trust futures this early. Talk to me around 8:35.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> dow futures down right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't trust futures this early. Talk to me around 8:35.
Click to expand...


i don't get up that early lol. but at this point do futures really matter?


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> dow futures down right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't trust futures this early. Talk to me around 8:35.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i don't get up that early lol. but at this point do futures really matter?
Click to expand...


Not when it's anything this insignificant as down 36 points. Then again, in a few months being down 36 points may be 1%!!


----------



## DavidS

Futures are down 93 points.... perhaps anticipation of tomorrow's unemployment report?


----------



## wimpy77

stock market is down over 200 right now. unemployment filings were down compared to last week, but china is basically saying they dont know if they will pass another stimulus and more companies announced layoffs.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> stock market is down over 200 right now. unemployment filings were down compared to last week, but china is basically saying they dont know if they will pass another stimulus and more companies announced layoffs.



We're about 100 points away from the David bottom and 1400 points away from the Hogan bottom.

We are so oversold right now. There is no way we're breaching 6500. Then again, I thought we wouldn't breach 700 on the S&P.


----------



## Toro

At this rate, we'll be hitting Dow 6000 by mid-next week.


----------



## DavidS

Toro said:


> At this rate, we'll be hitting Dow 6000 by mid-next week.



Don't you mean this week??


----------



## wimpy77

something needs to be done and quick.


----------



## DavidS

wimpy77 said:


> something needs to be done and quick.



What do you suggest? The market doesn't play wait and see anymore. The market says "If you don't give us a detailed line-by-line analysis of what you're going to do and 50,000 testimonies of how it's going help we're going to sell." 

Last year's speculators in oil have moved onto stocks and are speculating an Obama fail. Good for us youngsters who want to pick up some GE below $10 - but we just don't want to, I just don't want to get caught with the next Bear Sterns where Jim Cramer tells me to buy 4,000 shares at $65 and then it's sold to JPMorgan at $2 the next week.


----------



## editec

DavidS said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> something needs to be done and quick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you suggest? The market doesn't play wait and see anymore. The market says "If you don't give us a detailed line-by-line analysis of what you're going to do and 50,000 testimonies of how it's going help we're going to sell."
> 
> Last year's speculators in oil have moved onto stocks and are speculating an Obama fail. Good for us youngsters who want to pick up some GE below $10 - but we just don't want to, I just don't want to get caught with the next Bear Sterns where Jim Cramer tells me to buy 4,000 shares at $65 and then it's sold to JPMorgan at $2 the next week.
Click to expand...

 
_OUCH!_

My sincere sympthies, DavidS.


----------



## DavidS

6594.44. Down 281.40. Damn. And if unemployment is bad tomorrow... just wait.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> 6594.44. Down 281.40. Damn. And if unemployment is bad tomorrow... just wait.



oh it will be bad they are already expecting the unemployment rate to go to 7.9% tomorrow. if that's the case i dont see what will keep it from going to 10% or above, especially if gm files for bankruptcy. at this point i think the government will give them money just to keep that from happening.


----------



## Toro

Obama today said, when asked about the unemployment figures tomorrow, that "they're going to be bad."

No wonder the market sold off!

Barack, my man, you gotta be a wee bit more savvy than that!


----------



## Valerie

DavidS said:


> 6594.44. Down 281.40. Damn. And if unemployment is bad tomorrow... just wait.



All I have to say is:




Dow Jones Industrial Average
(DJI: ^DJI)
Index Value:	6,594.44
Trade Time:	4:02pm ET
Change:	Down 281.40 (4.09%)
Prev Close:	6,875.84
Open:	6,874.01
Day's Range:	6,544.10 - 6,874.01
52wk Range:	6,661.74 - 13,191.50


----------



## American Horse

Valerie said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 6594.44. Down 281.40. Damn. And if unemployment is bad tomorrow... just wait.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All I have to say is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dow Jones Industrial Average
> (DJI: ^DJI)
> Index Value:	6,594.44
> Trade Time:	4:02pm ET
> Change:	Down 281.40 (4.09%)
> Prev Close:	6,875.84
> Open:	6,874.01
> Day's Range:	6,544.10 - 6,874.01
> 52wk Range:	6,661.74 - 13,191.50
Click to expand...


GE is becoming a good deal at current prices. I have my price alert set for $5.00/share and thought I'd never see it, but yesterday it was down to $5 and change.  We last sold 600 shares 10 October 15 2007 at $40/share leaving us with 400; the purpose of the sale was to pay federal taxes.  We may soon buy back those 600 shares back for $5/share. 

Those 1000 shares grew out of $15 a week payroll deduction totalling only about $300  at GE  during 71-72.  So now that it's price is down from $58/share in April 2000 when my bride said "we need to sell that GE Stock."  At the time I said "No wait....Bush is going to cut cap-gain-taxes and we'll save a bunch by waiting."  
...


----------



## wimpy77

Toro said:


> Obama today said, when asked about the unemployment figures tomorrow, that "they're going to be bad."
> 
> No wonder the market sold off!
> 
> Barack, my man, you gotta be a wee bit more savvy than that!



i think in all honesty he believes people want to hear the truth, but he doesn't understand that he its not doing alot for confidence


----------



## American Horse

wimpy77 said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama today said, when asked about the unemployment figures tomorrow, that "they're going to be bad."
> 
> No wonder the market sold off!
> 
> Barack, my man, you gotta be a wee bit more savvy than that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think in all honesty he believes people want to hear the truth, but he doesn't understand that he its not doing alot for confidence
Click to expand...


I think all these remarks are telling. 

I think he is still passing the buck.  He believes that he can continue talking down the economy, and all the blame for what happens will accrue to Bush.  He believes, and Rahm Emmanuel has said that "A crisis is to important to waste" and there is a philosophy that concurs stating that "Crisis equals Opportunity"; That seems to be Barackonomics 101, and  that's all this is for the Obama Administration.

...


----------



## wimpy77

his approval rating right now is 62%. i will be watching this closely in the next few weeks. i


----------



## DavidS

Toro said:


> Obama today said, when asked about the unemployment figures tomorrow, that "they're going to be bad."
> 
> No wonder the market sold off!
> 
> Barack, my man, you gotta be a wee bit more savvy than that!



Toro, do you have a link for that? I'd like to at least read or see that for myself.


----------



## Toro

DavidS said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama today said, when asked about the unemployment figures tomorrow, that "they're going to be bad."
> 
> No wonder the market sold off!
> 
> Barack, my man, you gotta be a wee bit more savvy than that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro, do you have a link for that? I'd like to at least read or see that for myself.
Click to expand...


No, a salesman told me that today.


----------



## editec

American Horse said:


> Valerie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 6594.44. Down 281.40. Damn. And if unemployment is bad tomorrow... just wait.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All I have to say is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dow Jones Industrial Average
> (DJI: ^DJI)
> Index Value: 6,594.44
> Trade Time: 4:02pm ET
> Change: Down 281.40 (4.09%)
> Prev Close: 6,875.84
> Open: 6,874.01
> Day's Range: 6,544.10 - 6,874.01
> 52wk Range: 6,661.74 - 13,191.50
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> GE is becoming a good deal at current prices. I have my price alert set for $5.00/share and thought I'd never see it, but yesterday it was down to $5 and change. We last sold 600 shares 10 October 15 2007 at $40/share leaving us with 400; the purpose of the sale was to pay federal taxes. We may soon buy back those 600 shares back for $5/share.
> 
> Those 1000 shares grew out of $15 a week payroll deduction totalling only about $300 at GE during 71-72. *So now that it's price is down from $58/share in April 2000 when my bride said "we need to sell that GE Stock." At the time I said "No wait....Bush is going to cut cap-gain-taxes and we'll save a bunch by waiting."*
> ...
Click to expand...

 


You must have saved a bundle in taxes, I'll wager.

Your bride must be so pleased.


----------



## manu1959

he the dow is at 1997 levels.......clinton years all over again......

seems deregulating the banks didn't work out too well for big bill ......


----------



## oreo

My hair dresser told me she wouldn't buy in until the DOW hit 4000 & I laughed.  Maybe, she's right!


----------



## oreo

wimpy77 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 6594.44. Down 281.40. Damn. And if unemployment is bad tomorrow... just wait.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh it will be bad they are already expecting the unemployment rate to go to 7.9% tomorrow. if that's the case i dont see what will keep it from going to 10% or above, especially if gm files for bankruptcy. at this point i think the government will give them money just to keep that from happening.
Click to expand...


Personally, I think all these bail-outs & government spending is what has got the market terrified.  Ever since our government intervened & bailed-out everyone our markets have literally collapsed.

To me more good tax payer dollars thrown at a failing industry only excalates the downhill slide in the markets.


----------



## oreo

wimpy77 said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama today said, when asked about the unemployment figures tomorrow, that "they're going to be bad."
> 
> No wonder the market sold off!
> 
> Barack, my man, you gotta be a wee bit more savvy than that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think in all honesty he believes people want to hear the truth, but he doesn't understand that he its not doing alot for confidence
Click to expand...


President Obama definitely needs to tone it down.  In fact one of his biggest supporters Jim Cramer--CNBC of Mad Money has just jumped ship on Barack Obama.  He is furious over the sky is falling rhetoric out of this administration.  He also stated, that Obama's policies are the largest transfer of wealth of any President in history & the markets don't like it.  When asked why he voted for Obama.  He stated he thought he was a moderate democrat & that his policies would be moderate.  Little did he know that he was a left wing liberal.

_"The problem with socialism is that government eventually runs out of other peoples money to spend"_  Margaret Thatcher.


----------



## oreo

The market sold off today, March 5, 2009 because of the statement out of General Motors--"after the bail-out" that Chapter 11 was in site.

They will now be requesting more tax-payer dollars to stay afloat.


----------



## manu1959

oreo said:


> The market sold off today, March 5, 2009 because of the statement out of General Motors--"after the bail-out" that Chapter 11 was in site.
> 
> They will now be requesting more tax-payer dollars to stay afloat.



yep and they keep pumping money into a failed business.......

now if they let them fail then others would by the assests and move on......but no we need to save the unions and a failed banking experiment....


----------



## wimpy77

i think he wants to what bill clinton wanted to do. the problem is i think some moderates in the senate are gonna fight him on alot of stuff in the budget and if he doesn't watch out he will get hurt next year in the mid term election.


----------



## manu1959

oreo said:


> My hair dresser told me she wouldn't buy in until the DOW hit 4000 & I laughed.  Maybe, she's right!



i am thinking 3 grand.....


----------



## editec

John D. Rockefeller claimed that he decided to get out of the market the day his bootblack (that's a shoeshine boy for those of you not up on your early XXth century vocations) was touting his daily stocks picks.


----------



## Toro

I don't invest based on extreme events.  Rather, I scale in and out as we approach the extreme event because no one knows what the extreme event will be.  You may wait to buy at 4000, but what if it goes to 5000 and no lower?  During the Depression, when the market bottomed, it went up 180% in three months.  Such a move would put the Dow at 14,000.  Similarly, if you waited to sell tech stocks at 5500 on the Nasdaq, you are still waiting.

What I know is that any time the market has become as cheap as it has today, then returns have been very strong over the next decade, _even if the market goes lower from here._ America has faced far worse, and we somehow survived.  I imagine we will survive this, as well.


----------



## DavidS

oreo said:


> The market sold off today, March 5, 2009 because of the statement out of General Motors--"after the bail-out" that Chapter 11 was in site.
> 
> They will now be requesting more tax-payer dollars to stay afloat.



I've been waffling on this one for a while.... but....

Ford doesn't need a bailout. 

Why not?

They listened to their customers.

They re-designed the Explorer in 2002 to become the first SUV with 4-wheel independent suspension. They launched the focus, one of the best small-vehicles ever created which has been lauded by consumer reports, motor trends, jd power, you name it. The gave the Expedition 4-wheel independent suspension and stopped production of the Excursion. They created the Fusion, which again... everybody loves, have kept the Taurus line for decades... they have the best selling pick-up truck the f-150... what more do you want? An American car company that listens to its customers. And the new Ford Fusion hybrid... again, rave reviews.

What the fuck has GM done? The cavalier anyone? They made shitty cars that got terrible gas mileage. The only good thing they did was revise the Cadillac line a few years back and came out with the CTS and other followers. But they over-expanded, created Saturn for some unknown reason, bought other foreign car companies and turned them into garbage... GM does not create good cars and they don't care about their customers.

I'm not sure if a GM bankruptcy is a bad thing. They've already laid off tens of thousands of workers. Parts companies have already had time to brace themselves for this. I think it's time GM went under. Any company that thinks what its customers want and don't want is irrelevant does not deserve to exist. These brands don't belong to us - the corporate executives. They belong to the consumers who love them.


----------



## wimpy77

Toro said:


> I don't invest based on extreme events.  Rather, I scale in and out as we approach the extreme event because no one knows what the extreme event will be.  You may wait to buy at 4000, but what if it goes to 5000 and no lower?  During the Depression, when the market bottomed, it went up 180% in three months.  Such a move would put the Dow at 14,000.  Similarly, if you waited to sell tech stocks at 5500 on the Nasdaq, you are still waiting.
> 
> What I know is that any time the market has become as cheap as it has today, then returns have been very strong over the next decade, _even if the market goes lower from here._ America has faced far worse, and we somehow survived.  I imagine we will survive this, as well.



i don't think its a question of whether we survive or not. i think we will but i beginning to ask myself the question what long term damage are we doing. doug kass posted an article on the the thestreet.com saying companies should stop laying off people. i don't know if that will happen but it would be nice.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> oreo said:
> 
> 
> 
> The market sold off today, March 5, 2009 because of the statement out of General Motors--"after the bail-out" that Chapter 11 was in site.
> 
> They will now be requesting more tax-payer dollars to stay afloat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been waffling on this one for a while.... but....
> 
> Ford doesn't need a bailout.
> 
> Why not?
> 
> They listened to their customers.
> 
> They re-designed the Explorer in 2002 to become the first SUV with 4-wheel independent suspension. They launched the focus, one of the best small-vehicles ever created which has been lauded by consumer reports, motor trends, jd power, you name it. The gave the Expedition 4-wheel independent suspension and stopped production of the Excursion. They created the Fusion, which again... everybody loves, have kept the Taurus line for decades... they have the best selling pick-up truck the f-150... what more do you want? An American car company that listens to its customers. And the new Ford Fusion hybrid... again, rave reviews.
> 
> What the fuck has GM done? The cavalier anyone? They made shitty cars that got terrible gas mileage. The only good thing they did was revise the Cadillac line a few years back and came out with the CTS and other followers. But they over-expanded, created Saturn for some unknown reason, bought other foreign car companies and turned them into garbage... GM does not create good cars and they don't care about their customers.
> 
> I'm not sure if a GM bankruptcy is a bad thing. They've already laid off tens of thousands of workers. Parts companies have already had time to brace themselves for this. I think it's time GM went under. Any company that thinks what its customers want and don't want is irrelevant does not deserve to exist. These brands don't belong to us - the corporate executives. They belong to the consumers who love them.
Click to expand...


you have to think of the overall picture here. my fiscal mind tells me to let them go under. but i also know that even though part makers have prepared they will be more massive layoffs. but i think because of the grilling bernanke got they government just might say no.


----------



## Ravi

Toro said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama today said, when asked about the unemployment figures tomorrow, that "they're going to be bad."
> 
> No wonder the market sold off!
> 
> Barack, my man, you gotta be a wee bit more savvy than that!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro, do you have a link for that? I'd like to at least read or see that for myself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, a salesman told me that today.
Click to expand...


----------



## Care4all

Where have all of these people that have sold off and gotten out of the Market gone with their money?

Where did they invest it, once out of stocks?


----------



## editec

Care4all said:


> Where have all of these people that have sold off and gotten out of the Market gone with their money?
> 
> Where did they invest it, once out of stocks?


 
Government and municipal bonds would be my guess.


----------



## American Horse

editec said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> 
> GE is becoming a good deal at current prices. I have my price alert set for $5.00/share and thought I'd never see it, but yesterday it was down to $5 and change. We last sold 600 shares 10 October 15 2007 at $40/share leaving us with 400; the purpose of the sale was to pay federal taxes. We may soon buy back those 600 shares back for $5/share.
> 
> Those 1000 shares grew out of $15 a week payroll deduction totalling only about $300 at GE during 71-72. *So now that it's price is down from $58/share in April 2000 when my bride said "we need to sell that GE Stock." At the time I said "No wait....Bush is going to cut cap-gain-taxes and we'll save a bunch by waiting."*
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must have saved a bundle in taxes, I'll wager.
> 
> Your bride must be so pleased.
Click to expand...

With my post I was trying to point out the folly of basing these decisions on tax policy, but that yet we end up making decisions based on tax policy.  Hoping for an improved tax disposition I waited to sell, but a tax obligation forced a sale at a less propitious time than I would've made earlier; mainly we make less than common sense decisions because they are forced on us by a tax policy of little common sense.

and PS. she's just happy that we sold at $40; she's very forgiving. That's one of the reasons she's still my 'bride' after 44 years.


----------



## DavidS

No clue why stocks rose when unemployment was .2% worse than they expected. Stocks are slightly down now and should stay down unless people are tired of selling.


----------



## Valerie

DavidS said:


> No clue why stocks rose when unemployment was .2% worse than they expected. Stocks are slightly down now and should stay down unless people are tired of selling.



I think I'm going to just spend the day thinking about gay marriage and forget about looking at the market all together.   

Oh, yeah I have work to do anyway.  




Remember the climb to Dow 12000 ?  Aaahh.....Those were the days!  

FWIW, I think they're just trying to scare the crap out of us, take as much as they can, show Obama who's boss, and eventually things WILL take a turn for the better soon.


----------



## Ravi

I'm buying today, myself.


----------



## Valerie

Ravi said:


> I'm buying today, myself.



Excellent!  What are you buying, if you don't mind me asking?

My husband and I have been buying in our ROTH IRA accounts.

DIA, SPY, QQQQ, EWJ, CAT  -- and I like the American Funds.
https://www.americanfunds.com/default-home.htm

My SEP IRA is still entirely cash for a year and a half now, and at the moment and I'm driving myself nuts trying to decide what to do with it.


----------



## Toro

DavidS said:


> No clue why stocks rose when unemployment was .2% worse than they expected. Stocks are slightly down now and should stay down unless people are tired of selling.



Because people were expecting worse.

But the market opened up and immediately they sold it.  There is still liquidation going on.


----------



## Ravi

Valerie said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm buying today, myself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent!  What are you buying, if you don't mind me asking?
> 
> My husband and I have been buying in our ROTH IRA accounts.
> 
> DIA, SPY, QQQQ, EWJ, CAT  -- and I like the American Funds.
> https://www.americanfunds.com/default-home.htm
> 
> My SEP IRA is still entirely cash for a year and a half now, and at the moment and I'm driving myself nuts trying to decide what to do with it.
Click to expand...

An accounting error turned up some moolah that should have been paid out in dividends last year...so I'm putting it in the old retirement account with Fidelity...so the tax man doesn't eat it up.


----------



## wimpy77

DavidS said:


> No clue why stocks rose when unemployment was .2% worse than they expected. Stocks are slightly down now and should stay down unless people are tired of selling.



i think at some point there has to be sellers exhaustion.


----------



## DavidS

Toro said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> No clue why stocks rose when unemployment was .2% worse than they expected. Stocks are slightly down now and should stay down unless people are tired of selling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because people were expecting worse.
> 
> But the market opened up and immediately they sold it.  There is still liquidation going on.
Click to expand...


They were expecting 7.9, I thought?


----------



## wimpy77

they were. it was up .2% higher than they thought. but it the market moved into positive territory when the consumer spending report came out.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29549825


----------



## Toro

DavidS said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> 
> No clue why stocks rose when unemployment was .2% worse than they expected. Stocks are slightly down now and should stay down unless people are tired of selling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because people were expecting worse.
> 
> But the market opened up and immediately they sold it.  There is still liquidation going on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They were expecting 7.9, I thought?
Click to expand...


No, the nonfarm payrolls.  That's what investors focus on more, unless the unemployment rate is way out of whack.


----------



## Toro

An index of leading economic indicators I saw today says that we are out of a depression and merely into a recession.  

It said we were in a depression in October.


----------



## wimpy77

Toro said:


> An index of leading economic indicators I saw today says that we are out of a depression and merely into a recession.
> 
> It said we were in a depression in October.



can you post it?


----------



## Toro

wimpy77 said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> An index of leading economic indicators I saw today says that we are out of a depression and merely into a recession.
> 
> It said we were in a depression in October.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you post it?
Click to expand...


No, I'm afraid I can't.  Sorry.  It is the private property of a company.

Plus, its at the office...


----------



## manu1959

Toro said:


> An index of leading economic indicators I saw today says that we are out of a depression and merely into a recession.
> 
> It said we were in a depression in October.



the decline was so rapid from oct of 07 to october of 09 it was quite shocking......

i am not sure i believe that we are are at the bottom of the dive and climbing......

given you can't post it what were the three indicators that are trending flat or up form oct to now.....

remember   ..... "flat is the new up"


----------



## Toro

A better way of thinking about it is that the rate of decline is slowing, not that the economy has bottomed and is picking up.  

It is an index of 22 indicators.  The index just popped up on the last reading and may fall back down again, but it has been moving up from deep depression to just "depression" since February.  Now we are at recession.  In other words, the rate of decline has been slowing for about a month, which makes sense because the corporate bond market has opened up and deals are getting done.

Bloomberg.com: Worldwide

The rate of decline must slow before it can stabilize and begin picking up again.  That is where we are at now.

It also showed that deflationary pressures are easing.

BTW, the average stock is trading at 6x-9x earnings, depending which way you want to measure it.  Those are depression type multiples.  The market is pricing in depression and deflation.  If the economy is now only "recession" and prices are stabilizing, a powerful counter-trend rally is in the offing.  From what level, I don't know, but it should be coming.


----------



## Ravi

Toro seems to agree with NPR. Listening to tonight's broadcast, though overall it seemed dire...it did sound as if things were looking up...claiming the market was reacting to yesterday's news and not to the near future.

We can hope for the best.


----------



## wimpy77

i was watching bloomberg this morning and they seemed to believe it was because of gm and china's vague economic plan details.


----------



## manu1959

Toro said:


> A better way of thinking about it is that the rate of decline is slowing, not that the economy has bottomed and is picking up.
> 
> It is an index of 22 indicators.  The index just popped up on the last reading and may fall back down again, but it has been moving up from deep depression to just "depression" since February.  Now we are at recession.  In other words, the rate of decline has been slowing for about a month, which makes sense because the corporate bond market has opened up and deals are getting done.
> 
> Bloomberg.com: Worldwide
> 
> The rate of decline must slow before it can stabilize and begin picking up again.  That is where we are at now.
> 
> It also showed that deflationary pressures are easing.
> 
> BTW, the average stock is trading at 6x-9x earnings, depending which way you want to measure it.  Those are depression type multiples.  The market is pricing in depression and deflation.  If the economy is now only "recession" and prices are stabilizing, a powerful counter-trend rally is in the offing.  From what level, I don't know, but it should be coming.



thanks....so the angle of decline is less steep.......


----------



## editec

Toro said:


> A better way of thinking about it is that the rate of decline is slowing, not that the economy has bottomed and is picking up.
> 
> It is an index of 22 indicators. The index just popped up on the last reading and may fall back down again, but it has been moving up from deep depression to just "depression" since February. Now we are at recession. In other words, the rate of decline has been slowing for about a month, which makes sense because the corporate bond market has opened up and deals are getting done.
> 
> Bloomberg.com: Worldwide
> 
> The rate of decline must slow before it can stabilize and begin picking up again. That is where we are at now.
> 
> It also showed that deflationary pressures are easing.
> 
> BTW, the average stock is trading at 6x-9x earnings, depending which way you want to measure it. Those are depression type multiples. The market is pricing in depression and deflation. If the economy is now only "recession" and prices are stabilizing, a powerful counter-trend rally is in the offing. From what level, I don't know, but it should be coming.


 
What wonderful news.

We can only hope that you're right.


----------



## Toro

Ravi said:


> Toro seems to agree with NPR. Listening to tonight's broadcast, though overall it seemed dire...it did sound as if things were looking up...claiming the market was reacting to yesterday's news and not to the near future.
> 
> We can hope for the best.



There are some signs we are groping towards stabilization, but the data is still pretty awful.



manu1959 said:


> thanks....so the angle of decline is less steep.......



Right.

We can handle a recession.  We've seen that before.

Of course, it could turn back down again, but one of the reasons why business fell off a cliff is because financing in some markets just stopped.  For example, trade financing went to almost dead overnight.  That's why ports in Asia literally did zero business on some days.  If you cannot finance your trade bills, there ain't gonna be any trade.  So, as that financing becomes more available, you will see more shipments across the ocean.  That is likewise across various other markets.  The securitization market has shut down.  If you have difficulty factoring your credit card receivables or car loans, there are going to be less car loans and higher credit card rates.  This is what the TALF is supposed to address.

Of course, there are still enormous problems.  There is a black hole in Eastern Europe that threatens the European banking system perhaps even more than the subprime mess threatened American banks.  We still could tip over the abyss.


----------



## wimpy77

do you think TALF will work


----------



## toomuchtime_

wimpy77 said:


> do you think TALF will work



It depends on what you expect it to do.  Basically, TALF is the Obama-Geithner plan to get private investors to buy up new issues of debt backed securities in order to get more cash into the hands of lenders without the government having to go to Congress and ask for more money it would rather spend on social welfare projects.  

Technically, the government will guarantee a portion of the price of each new derivative it approves in order to lower the potential risk to the private investor, and if it guarantees enough of the price, no doubt there will be a few stalwart takers, but since creating this market for new issues will not also create a market in which to resell them, the value of the derivative will drop sharply under the mark to market rule as soon as it is purchased unless the guarantee goes along with the derivative when it is sold, but even in that case, this will not effect the lack of a market for non approved derivatives,so under the best of circumstances its impact will be limited.

Another problem with TALF is that it will only approve AAA rated derivatives, but the debt they are based on will be composed of non mortgage consumer debt such as student loans, auto loans and credit card debt.  I guessing that in the midst of this recession it will be difficult to find this kind of consumer debt that will be of AAA quality, so the scope of the program will likely be very small.  

Putting it all together, I can't see how TALF can have any significant effect on the financial crisis or the recession.


----------



## Care4all

toomuchtime_ said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> do you think TALF will work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It depends on what you expect it to do.  Basically, TALF is the Obama-Geithner plan to get private investors to buy up new issues of debt backed securities in order to get more cash into the hands of lenders without the government having to go to Congress and ask for more money it would rather spend on social welfare projects.
> 
> Technically, the government will guarantee a portion of the price of each new derivative it approves in order to lower the potential risk to the private investor, and if it guarantees enough of the price, no doubt there will be a few stalwart takers, but since creating this market for new issues will not also create a market in which to resell them, the value of the derivative will drop sharply under the mark to market rule as soon as it is purchased unless the guarantee goes along with the derivative when it is sold, but even in that case, this will not effect the lack of a market for non approved derivatives,so under the best of circumstances its impact will be limited.
> 
> Another problem with TALF is that it will only approve AAA rated derivatives, but the debt they are based on will be composed of non mortgage consumer debt such as student loans, auto loans and credit card debt.  I guessing that in the midst of this recession it will be difficult to find this kind of consumer debt that will be of AAA quality, so the scope of the program will likely be very small.
> 
> Putting it all together, I can't see how TALF can have any significant effect on the financial crisis or the recession.
Click to expand...


a year ago, this might have been a good plan, before the recession had taken the major downslide perhaps?

but from what you just explained, it does seem unlikely this will have any kind of major impact at this point, because all debt has to be risky at this point....not AAA quality?

care


----------



## toomuchtime_

Care4all said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> do you think TALF will work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It depends on what you expect it to do.  Basically, TALF is the Obama-Geithner plan to get private investors to buy up new issues of debt backed securities in order to get more cash into the hands of lenders without the government having to go to Congress and ask for more money it would rather spend on social welfare projects.
> 
> Technically, the government will guarantee a portion of the price of each new derivative it approves in order to lower the potential risk to the private investor, and if it guarantees enough of the price, no doubt there will be a few stalwart takers, but since creating this market for new issues will not also create a market in which to resell them, the value of the derivative will drop sharply under the mark to market rule as soon as it is purchased unless the guarantee goes along with the derivative when it is sold, but even in that case, this will not effect the lack of a market for non approved derivatives,so under the best of circumstances its impact will be limited.
> 
> Another problem with TALF is that it will only approve AAA rated derivatives, but the debt they are based on will be composed of non mortgage consumer debt such as student loans, auto loans and credit card debt.  I guessing that in the midst of this recession it will be difficult to find this kind of consumer debt that will be of AAA quality, so the scope of the program will likely be very small.
> 
> Putting it all together, I can't see how TALF can have any significant effect on the financial crisis or the recession.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> a year ago, this might have been a good plan, before the recession had taken the major downslide perhaps?
> 
> but from what you just explained, it does seem unlikely this will have any kind of major impact at this point, because all debt has to be risky at this point....not AAA quality?
> 
> care
Click to expand...


The basic concept is sound, imo, but the size and scope of the program is too small.  Last fall, House Republicans, objecting to TARP, proposed that instead of intervening directly in the financial system, the government offer to insure portions of the long term value of debt backed securities charging premiums based on the assessed risk, in effect, insuring the value of the underlying debt.  The idea was the with this government guarantee the  market for these securities would revive, making these securities liquid again, and the higher market value would greatly increase the banks' reserves making them solvent again and able to lend much more money.  In the event the recession continued to produce high default rates, taxpayer liability could have become enormous, but probably no more enormous than it will be if we nationalize the banks under the same conditions or try to buy up the derivatives as TARP originally intended.  If the plan did revive the market for these derivatives and if the increased credit available eased the recession, then it would have cost the taxpayers nothing.

However, Obama, the Congressional Democrats, Paulson and Bush had all already committed to TARP and Paulson dismissed the idea by saying that while he believed it would work it would take too long and TARP would allow the government to fix the banks quickly.


----------



## wimpy77

agree with toomuchtime. this was paulson's original idea but backed out. just like at first when geithner was intially was going to release details on the bad bank scenario. the reason he was so vague at that moment was because at the last moment he backed out. he starting think it would cost way to much and too much risk to the taxpayers.


----------



## Toro

toomuchtime_ said:


> Technically, the government will guarantee a portion of the price of each new derivative it approves in order to lower the potential risk to the private investor, and if it guarantees enough of the price, no doubt there will be a few stalwart takers, but since creating this market for new issues will not also create a market in which to resell them, the value of the derivative will drop sharply under the mark to market rule as soon as it is purchased unless the guarantee goes along with the derivative when it is sold, but even in that case, this will not effect the lack of a market for non approved derivatives,so under the best of circumstances its impact will be limited.



It depends on who the buyer is and their time frame.  Capital is being raised by partnerships to hold all sorts of paper for an extended period of time.  These partnerships are not expecting to flip their paper out in 6-12 months, but instead are looking 3-5-7 years out.  Their limited partners are locked in and are generally more permanent capital anyways, they really don't care if they are marked-to-market down in the near-term, at least not dramatically.  If partnerships are raised to take advantage of TALF products, I imagine they will have similar terms.  I also imagine that the new issues will not be priced based on prior assumptions on default rates.  Thus, there prices wouldn't necessarily plunge since they will be coming to market at attractive prices.

But to answer the question, I have no idea if the TALF will work or not.  I've heard arguments on both sides.


----------



## DavidS

Futures are off 135. We could break 6500 today.

It took us from 2/11 - 3/2 to work our way through the 7000s. If we breach 5999 next week, that will be the shortest amount of time it's taken us to burn through 1000 points on the DOW ever.


----------



## wimpy77

man stocks are virtually flat.

now they are moving in more of a downward trend atm.


----------



## Zoomie1980

wimpy77 said:


> man stocks are virtually flat.
> 
> now they are moving in more of a downward trend atm.



And getting to be a better buy every week.  I basically invest in my 401k at the maximum rate allowed by law.  When the DOW was at it's peak, I was putting only about 15% into stocks, the rest was going mostly to cash and precious metal investments.  Today, I am pumping 85% into stocks.  If it goes under 6000 I will be at or very near 100%....


----------



## editec

Sooner or later the banks are going to have to accept, as we are learning to accept, that the value of real estate has fallen.

Hence the value of their bonds has fallen.

What they ought to be doing now is writing down the principals on those mortgages to reflect the real market value of the real estate.


----------



## wimpy77

editec said:


> Sooner or later the banks are going to have to accept, as we are learning to accept, that the value of real estate has fallen.
> 
> Hence the value of their bonds has fallen.
> 
> What they ought to be doing now is writing down the principals on those mortgages to reflect the real market value of the real estate.



actually watching a special with shelia bair on cnbc a couple of weeks ago, jim cramer brought that very thing up. and shelia bair said at this point the law doesn't law for principles to be lowered.


----------



## wimpy77

Zoomie1980 said:


> wimpy77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> man stocks are virtually flat.
> 
> now they are moving in more of a downward trend atm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And getting to be a better buy every week.  I basically invest in my 401k at the maximum rate allowed by law.  When the DOW was at it's peak, I was putting only about 15% into stocks, the rest was going mostly to cash and precious metal investments.  Today, I am pumping 85% into stocks.  If it goes under 6000 I will be at or very near 100%....
Click to expand...


they were talking to doug kass on cnbc's fast money and he said he thought the was coming ( meaning the market rebound). that's the only show i watch on that channel now.


----------



## DavidS

Futures are up 120. Interesting. Up, down, up, down... no market bottom, yet. We need a good 2-day drop of 10% of more to form a market bottom. Every day we go up, we delay the inevitable. I wish we'd get it over with already so we can really start to recover.


----------



## editec

wimpy77 said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sooner or later the banks are going to have to accept, as we are learning to accept, that the value of real estate has fallen.
> 
> Hence the value of their bonds has fallen.
> 
> What they ought to be doing now is writing down the principals on those mortgages to reflect the real market value of the real estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> actually watching a special with shelia bair on cnbc a couple of weeks ago, jim cramer brought that very thing up. and shelia bair said at this point the law doesn't law for principles to be lowered.
Click to expand...

 
You know in bankrupsty courts every kind of debt except mortgage debts can be written down.

given the fact that reality is causing the price of real estate to seek that magic relationship to what people are ACTUALLY making for a living now, I expect that sooner or later, if we are really hoping to save the banking system, we are going to have to accept that:

1. Those houses is not worth those astronomical sums that people paid for them;

2. Ergo the mortgages are not going to be the income streams the banks were expecting from them;

3. Ergo those bonds are not worth, what Moodys and Standard and Poor said they were worth;

4. Therefore the banks holding those bonds made of those real estate morgages are basically insolvent.

Either we allow the banks to write down the principles owed by the mortgage holders, and reconstitute the banks capitalizations based on these new amounts

OR...

We allow those buyers to go bankrupt.

Then, the banks holding bonds based on those mortgages all go bankrupt, and the USA taxpayer is totally on the hook for FDIC repayments as thousands and thousands and thousands of banks go belly up.

And you want to know what is at the very heart of this problem?

We ENCOURAGED (though goofy financing instruments) the prices of real estate to climb in price much higher than the average salaries of the working class could pay back for them.

Barrring any intervention, I suspect that median home price, which I think even now is probably in the $200,000 range nationally (about 4 times the median salary), is going to find a bottom at whatever the median income for a family in the USA will be.

If the median income is about $57,000?

Then the median home price will be not much higher than 125% of that median income.

And if THAT happens, then every bank and every bond based on the price of real estate is going to crash.

I heard yesterday that ALREADY, because of the dropping market values of real estate, nearly ONE IN FOUR current morgages are _technically_ "under water". People can still afford to pay their motgages, but the equity they THOUGHT they had in their homes is evaporating.

Sooner or later, the people whose homes are deeply under water, are going to decide that paying too much for a home they don't own any equity is foolish.

Even people who thought they had a LOT of equity, are going to wake up and realize that they're NOT putting anything away for their futures by paying off their homes.

And for MOST people in the USA, the ONLY real asset they ever had was the equity they were building up in their homes.

When the declining market value of RE takes _that _away from them, and when the decline means that there is no sense continuing to pay mortgages based on values that no longer exist, people are going to seek other places to live.

They'll rent or they'll buy homes which are priced at the REAL MARKET VALUE of homes today.

And in those parts of the nation where the market prices of homes was wildly out of kilter with the local incomes, those areas will be completely devasted by this process.

That map which I and others have posted, the one that shows where homes are in foreclosure, could get much MUCH redder if we don't figure out what to do, and do it,_ STAT!_

Maine is mostly in the blue, BTW, for those of you who care about what's happening to home values here.

Basically, the market prices of homes here has NOT been going up as quickly as it had in those places  denoted on that map which are pink or red.

We're still safe...but for how long?

Nobody and believe I mean NOBODY really knows.


----------



## DavidS

My bottom of 6500 is holding. We're up 313. Wow. Big day on Wall St.


----------



## Paulie

I called 6500 bottom a couple weeks ago.  Based on nothing but a technical support hunch, really.  I won't be surprised in the least if we break it.

Barney Frank said today that he expects uptick rule to be back in about a month, so we may hold these lows for now, especially if something positive comes out of the M2M hearing.

I'm making a couple bucks on my UYG that I can't seem to quit playing with.  It's become like crack to me lately.  I also sold my DXD lat week when we touched 6500, for a beautiful profit that's going to pay my school for the year.  Been holding it since 8600.


----------



## wimpy77

well citi came out and said that they actually made a profit in the first two months of the year. that's a good thing.


----------



## editec

I think nobody knows how low the stock market is going until the problem of real estate valuation is resolved.

But hey, I HOPE you guys are right and I am completely wrong.


----------



## Ravi

Paulie said:


> I called 6500 bottom a couple weeks ago.  Based on nothing but a technical support hunch, really.  I won't be surprised in the least if we break it.
> 
> Barney Frank said today that he expects uptick rule to be back in about a month, so we may hold these lows for now, especially if something positive comes out of the M2M hearing.
> 
> I'm making a couple bucks on my UYG that I can't seem to quit playing with.  It's become like crack to me lately.  I also sold my DXD lat week when we touched 6500, for a beautiful profit that's going to pay my school for the year.  Been holding it since 8600.


Bernanke is against suspending mark to market.


----------



## DavidS

Paulie said:


> I called 6500 bottom a couple weeks ago.  Based on nothing but a technical support hunch, really.  I won't be surprised in the least if we break it.
> 
> Barney Frank said today that he expects uptick rule to be back in about a month, so we may hold these lows for now, especially if something positive comes out of the M2M hearing.
> 
> I'm making a couple bucks on my UYG that I can't seem to quit playing with.  It's become like crack to me lately.  I also sold my DXD lat week when we touched 6500, for a beautiful profit that's going to pay my school for the year.  Been holding it since 8600.



If the uptick rule is put back in place AND M2M is suspended for 12 to 18 months, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if we're somewhere in the 8000s to end the month. 

My 6500 call was based upon a historical trend of presidents and how many presidents have watched the DOW double under their terms. When Reagan took office we were around 973 on the DOW. When he left office we were around 2000. When Clinton took office we were around 3250. So he should've left office with 6,500, but the market was overbought and rose too high, too fast. We tried to correct ourselves in 2001 and 2002, to no avail. We are where we should be and by 2016, we should be around 13,000.


----------



## Paulie

Ravi said:
			
		

> Bernanke is against suspending mark to market.


Luckily for us Bernanke has no say in it.


----------



## DavidS

Ravi said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I called 6500 bottom a couple weeks ago.  Based on nothing but a technical support hunch, really.  I won't be surprised in the least if we break it.
> 
> Barney Frank said today that he expects uptick rule to be back in about a month, so we may hold these lows for now, especially if something positive comes out of the M2M hearing.
> 
> I'm making a couple bucks on my UYG that I can't seem to quit playing with.  It's become like crack to me lately.  I also sold my DXD lat week when we touched 6500, for a beautiful profit that's going to pay my school for the year.  Been holding it since 8600.
> 
> 
> 
> Bernanke is against suspending mark to market.
Click to expand...


Is he the one who decides to suspend it?


----------



## Paulie

DavidS said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I called 6500 bottom a couple weeks ago.  Based on nothing but a technical support hunch, really.  I won't be surprised in the least if we break it.
> 
> Barney Frank said today that he expects uptick rule to be back in about a month, so we may hold these lows for now, especially if something positive comes out of the M2M hearing.
> 
> I'm making a couple bucks on my UYG that I can't seem to quit playing with.  It's become like crack to me lately.  I also sold my DXD lat week when we touched 6500, for a beautiful profit that's going to pay my school for the year.  Been holding it since 8600.
> 
> 
> 
> Bernanke is against suspending mark to market.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is he the one who decides to suspend it?
Click to expand...


No, it's an accounting rule.  It's the SEC's jurisdiction.


----------

