# Is it safe to invest in stocks ?



## maxcy

As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.

Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?


----------



## neurosport

YouTube - fema coffins

might be better off investing in coffins ...


----------



## eots

neurosport said:


> YouTube - fema coffins
> 
> might be better off investing in coffins ...



I Was going to suggest guns ..gold.. dehydrated food and seeds...


----------



## editec

Define "safe".

I look at the changes our economy is undergoing and I cannot see how it will get healthier in the long run.

I see massive changes in the way American will be living in the future and in the medium run (say the next 20 years or so) I expect American will, on average, become less affluent that we have ALLL come to expect.

I sincerely hope I am wrong.


----------



## Iriemon

maxcy said:


> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?



Stocks are never "safe" in that there is always a risk you can lose some principal.  However, in the long term they have been the best vehicle for investment at least for the small investor.  But you should have a long term view.

With that, I'll take a different tack than the others. 

This is not the first time the doom and gloomers were proclaiming the end of America; their voices were heard loud and clear in the late 70s and early 80s.  Shortly before the stock markets took off on the greatest bull run in memory, if not history.

Will that happen again?  Who knows for sure?  But unless you believe we are headed for another great depression (and some do) then history shows at some point greed begins to outweigh fear and investors start jumping back into the market.  And historically there have been some very strong years following a recession.  By the time you figure out that is what is happening, you've missed it.  In fact the market is already up more than 20% since its low.  

If you do invest, make sure you are well diversified, and if you don't understand the principles of investing, I'd recommend that you consult with someone who does.


----------



## tigerbob

maxcy said:


> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?



No such thing as safe, particularly right now.  Only invest what you could live with losing.  Never borrow to invest.

If you're new to it and want low risk, I'd stick with municipals if I were you.  If you're thinking housing, it sounds like you have an appetite for risk.  I personally wouldn't touch banks or housing at the moment.  There have been positive signs but I still don't think all the bad stuff has shaken out yet.


----------



## PoliticalChic

tigerbob said:


> maxcy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such thing as safe, particularly right now.  Only invest what you could live with losing.  Never borrow to invest.
> 
> If you're new to it and want low risk, I'd stick with municipals if I were you.  If you're thinking housing, it sounds like you have an appetite for risk.  I personally wouldn't touch banks or housing at the moment.  There have been positive signs but I still don't think all the bad stuff has shaken out yet.
Click to expand...


Some believe in the economy in the long run, some try to time the market, and some look at angles, Fibonacci numbers, and inflections of the DOW. Your choice.

That being said, I read and interesting newsletter around inauguration, and followed up with a copy later in the year. The author predicted that the DOW would drop to 6600 by mid February. He was almost on the head.

I called and got a sample newsletter, and this is what he predicted: DOW would regain 30-50% of its losses by summer- but then within a year would fall below the lows, possibley to 5000 as a "second leg" of this recession. He also claimed that every trillion the administration puts in would add a year to the recovery.

If the DOW hits 8800 by summer, that would be two correct calls for this advisor.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Iriemon

PoliticalChic said:


> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maxcy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such thing as safe, particularly right now.  Only invest what you could live with losing.  Never borrow to invest.
> 
> If you're new to it and want low risk, I'd stick with municipals if I were you.  If you're thinking housing, it sounds like you have an appetite for risk.  I personally wouldn't touch banks or housing at the moment.  There have been positive signs but I still don't think all the bad stuff has shaken out yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some believe in the economy in the long run, some try to time the market, and some look at angles, Fibonacci numbers, and inflections of the DOW. Your choice.
> 
> That being said, I read and interesting newsletter around inauguration, and followed up with a copy later in the year. The author predicted that the DOW would drop to 6600 by mid February. He was almost on the head.
> 
> I called and got a sample newsletter, and this is what he predicted: DOW would regain 30-50% of its losses by summer- but then within a year would fall below the lows, possibley to 5000 as a "second leg" of this recession. He also claimed that every trillion the administration puts in would add a year to the recovery.
> 
> If the DOW hits 8800 by summer, that would be two correct calls for this advisor.
> 
> Any thoughts?
Click to expand...


Do you have a cite to the article?


----------



## stekim

Whether it's "safe" or not depends on your time frame.  Stocks are dirt cheap right now.  So the upside is huge.  But the short term volatility isn't going to disappear.  So if you are in the long haul start buying!


----------



## PoliticalChic

Iriemon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> 
> No such thing as safe, particularly right now.  Only invest what you could live with losing.  Never borrow to invest.
> 
> If you're new to it and want low risk, I'd stick with municipals if I were you.  If you're thinking housing, it sounds like you have an appetite for risk.  I personally wouldn't touch banks or housing at the moment.  There have been positive signs but I still don't think all the bad stuff has shaken out yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some believe in the economy in the long run, some try to time the market, and some look at angles, Fibonacci numbers, and inflections of the DOW. Your choice.
> 
> That being said, I read and interesting newsletter around inauguration, and followed up with a copy later in the year. The author predicted that the DOW would drop to 6600 by mid February. He was almost on the head.
> 
> I called and got a sample newsletter, and this is what he predicted: DOW would regain 30-50% of its losses by summer- but then within a year would fall below the lows, possibley to 5000 as a "second leg" of this recession. He also claimed that every trillion the administration puts in would add a year to the recovery.
> 
> If the DOW hits 8800 by summer, that would be two correct calls for this advisor.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you have a cite to the article?
Click to expand...


It wasn't an article, but I recall the prognosticator's name, I believe, was Steve Frankel or Frankle,

I'll try to find the Phone #. If you come across it first, post it.


----------



## neurosport

now is probably a good time to "invest"

and by "invest" i mean get rid of dollars

what to get instead ?  i don't know ... 

hookers and crack perhaps ?


----------



## Toro

Depends what your time frame is.

Over the next 10 years, stocks will be a good investment.  However, we are not out of the woods yet.

I believe the market is in the process of bottoming but we may have another leg.  I think that the March 6 low of 666 has a pretty good chance of being the ultimate low.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Toro said:


> Depends what your time frame is.
> 
> Over the next 10 years, stocks will be a good investment.  However, we are not out of the woods yet.
> 
> I believe the market is in the process of bottoming but we may have another leg.  I think that the March 6 low of 666 has a pretty good chance of being the ultimate low.



At first I thought you made the mistake of dropping a digit, but then I noted who was writing, Beelz


----------



## Paulie

PoliticalChic said:


> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maxcy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such thing as safe, particularly right now.  Only invest what you could live with losing.  Never borrow to invest.
> 
> If you're new to it and want low risk, I'd stick with municipals if I were you.  If you're thinking housing, it sounds like you have an appetite for risk.  I personally wouldn't touch banks or housing at the moment.  There have been positive signs but I still don't think all the bad stuff has shaken out yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some believe in the economy in the long run, some try to time the market, and some look at angles, Fibonacci numbers, and inflections of the DOW. Your choice.
> 
> That being said, I read and interesting newsletter around inauguration, and followed up with a copy later in the year. The author predicted that the DOW would drop to 6600 by mid February. He was almost on the head.
> 
> I called and got a sample newsletter, and this is what he predicted: DOW would regain 30-50% of its losses by summer- but then within a year would fall below the lows, possibley to 5000 as a "second leg" of this recession. He also claimed that every trillion the administration puts in would add a year to the recovery.
> 
> If the DOW hits 8800 by summer, that would be two correct calls for this advisor.
> 
> Any thoughts?
Click to expand...


Sounds about right to me.  I called Dow 6500 as the low, and I'm calling around 8800 to 9000 before we pull back and retest.  We're not out the woods yet by a long shot.


----------



## Iriemon

Paulie said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> 
> No such thing as safe, particularly right now.  Only invest what you could live with losing.  Never borrow to invest.
> 
> If you're new to it and want low risk, I'd stick with municipals if I were you.  If you're thinking housing, it sounds like you have an appetite for risk.  I personally wouldn't touch banks or housing at the moment.  There have been positive signs but I still don't think all the bad stuff has shaken out yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some believe in the economy in the long run, some try to time the market, and some look at angles, Fibonacci numbers, and inflections of the DOW. Your choice.
> 
> That being said, I read and interesting newsletter around inauguration, and followed up with a copy later in the year. The author predicted that the DOW would drop to 6600 by mid February. He was almost on the head.
> 
> I called and got a sample newsletter, and this is what he predicted: DOW would regain 30-50% of its losses by summer- but then within a year would fall below the lows, possibley to 5000 as a "second leg" of this recession. He also claimed that every trillion the administration puts in would add a year to the recovery.
> 
> If the DOW hits 8800 by summer, that would be two correct calls for this advisor.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sounds about right to me.  I called Dow 6500 as the low, and I'm calling around 8800 to 9000 before we pull back and retest.  We're not out the woods yet by a long shot.
Click to expand...


It's a pretty good bet it will get up to 8800 to 9000; what is your prediction on the retest low?


----------



## Toro

PoliticalChic said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Depends what your time frame is.
> 
> Over the next 10 years, stocks will be a good investment.  However, we are not out of the woods yet.
> 
> I believe the market is in the process of bottoming but we may have another leg.  I think that the March 6 low of 666 has a pretty good chance of being the ultimate low.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At first I thought you made the mistake of dropping a digit, but then I noted who was writing, Beelz
Click to expand...


What are you talking about?


----------



## Paulie

Toro said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Depends what your time frame is.
> 
> Over the next 10 years, stocks will be a good investment.  However, we are not out of the woods yet.
> 
> I believe the market is in the process of bottoming but we may have another leg.  I think that the March 6 low of 666 has a pretty good chance of being the ultimate low.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At first I thought you made the mistake of dropping a digit, but then I noted who was writing, Beelz
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
Click to expand...


I don't think she realizes you were referencing the S&P with that 666, not the DOW.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Toro said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Depends what your time frame is.
> 
> Over the next 10 years, stocks will be a good investment.  However, we are not out of the woods yet.
> 
> I believe the market is in the process of bottoming but we may have another leg.  I think that the March 6 low of 666 has a pretty good chance of being the ultimate low.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At first I thought you made the mistake of dropping a digit, but then I noted who was writing, Beelz
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
Click to expand...


You know that the DOW did not fall to '666'  and I believe that, rather than a slip, the mumber has some significance for you:
"Revelation, Chapter 13 speaks of the beast and how to identify his followers. According to verses 16 and 17, they will have the mark or the name or number of the beast on their right hands or foreheads. Verse 18 introduces the number 666 itself: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." 

Identification verified.


----------



## Paulie

PoliticalChic said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> At first I thought you made the mistake of dropping a digit, but then I noted who was writing, Beelz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know that the DOW did not fall to '666'  and I believe that, rather than a slip, the mumber has some significance for you:
> "Revelation, Chapter 13 speaks of the beast and how to identify his followers. According to verses 16 and 17, they will have the mark or the name or number of the beast on their right hands or foreheads. Verse 18 introduces the number 666 itself: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."
> 
> Identification verified.
Click to expand...


He was talking about the S&P 500, PC.  It bottomed at 666.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Paulie said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know that the DOW did not fall to '666'  and I believe that, rather than a slip, the mumber has some significance for you:
> "Revelation, Chapter 13 speaks of the beast and how to identify his followers. According to verses 16 and 17, they will have the mark or the name or number of the beast on their right hands or foreheads. Verse 18 introduces the number 666 itself: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."
> 
> Identification verified.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He was talking about the S&P 500, PC.  It bottomed at 666.
Click to expand...


You mean he's not the devil?

And Toro had gone up in my estimation.


----------



## tigerbob

PoliticalChic said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> You know that the DOW did not fall to '666'  and I believe that, rather than a slip, the mumber has some significance for you:
> "Revelation, Chapter 13 speaks of the beast and how to identify his followers. According to verses 16 and 17, they will have the mark or the name or number of the beast on their right hands or foreheads. Verse 18 introduces the number 666 itself: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."
> 
> Identification verified.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He was talking about the S&P 500, PC.  It bottomed at 666.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean he's not the devil?
> 
> And Toro had gone up in my estimation.
Click to expand...


Toro is a Reds fan, and therefore deserving of all respect.

All Hail Toro!


----------



## PoliticalChic

tigerbob said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> He was talking about the S&P 500, PC.  It bottomed at 666.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean he's not the devil?
> 
> And Toro had gone up in my estimation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Toro is a Reds fan, and therefore deserving of all respect.
> 
> All Hail Toro!
Click to expand...



RED fan. Yeah, see- red suit, horns on that avatar!

I was right all along.


----------



## ItsFairmont

maxcy said:


> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?




You are asking if it's safe to invest in stocks.  There is no answer for that.


However, I will say this:  handing your money over to a complete stranger to manage for you is one heck of a risky way to get rich.


Most millionaires in America got that way the exact same way they did 400 years ago:  real estate.

You don't have to believe me, and you can argue until you're blue in the face.  But I'll trot out fact after fact.  Land is the best way to become rich.

But it requires patience.


----------



## tigerbob

PoliticalChic said:


> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean he's not the devil?
> 
> And Toro had gone up in my estimation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro is a Reds fan, and therefore deserving of all respect.
> 
> All Hail Toro!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> RED fan. Yeah, see- red suit, horns on that avatar!
> 
> I was right all along.
Click to expand...


...said the 'chic' in the red hot pants with the "come hither" look.


----------



## Iriemon

ItsFairmont said:


> maxcy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are asking if it's safe to invest in stocks.  There is no answer for that.
> 
> 
> However, I will say this:  handing your money over to a complete stranger to manage for you is one heck of a risky way to get rich.
> 
> 
> Most millionaires in America got that way the exact same way they did 400 years ago:  real estate.
> 
> You don't have to believe me, and you can argue until you're blue in the face.  But I'll trot out fact after fact.  Land is the best way to become rich.
> 
> But it requires patience.
Click to expand...


Lots of would be millionaires are stuck with property worth less than what's owed on it at the moment.


----------



## Toro

PoliticalChic said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> At first I thought you made the mistake of dropping a digit, but then I noted who was writing, Beelz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know that the DOW did not fall to '666'  and I believe that, rather than a slip, the mumber has some significance for you:
> "Revelation, Chapter 13 speaks of the beast and how to identify his followers. According to verses 16 and 17, they will have the mark or the name or number of the beast on their right hands or foreheads. Verse 18 introduces the number 666 itself: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."
> 
> Identification verified.
Click to expand...


That's where Satan covered his short positions and went long the market.

The devil is a pretty good trader, you know...


----------



## lancenicolase

Don't believe anyone answering this question! I'm not saying that they are wrong or are lying. It's just that you need to do a lot of studying of any of the stocks mentioned before you buy any listed here or anywhere.

I posed a similar question back in October, and got lots of answers. And NO ONE was entirely accurate, and actually everyone was pretty much wrong.

Having said that, this is possibly ALMOST a good time to buy stocks, but I would wait a few more days to see if the market bottoms out or goes lower.

Also, the answerer right above me mentioned a few that might be good, but then he listed a lot of stocks! Just try to consider that the world is using more and more natural resources such as titanium, copper, aluminum, and others. I don't know which is more in demand and less in supply, but you could study that to find out.

I have a long term faith in Goldman Sachs though, and their stock symbol is GS. They are pretty sharp and have their fingers in everybody's pot.


----------



## code1211

maxcy said:


> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?




Use common sense.

An example of common sense.  I bought Ford at $2.00.  It dropped a little then rose.  I haven't checked this morning, but it was above 5 last time I did.  Ford seems to like to keep the value of its stock around 10.  They turned down the bail out.  I bought the stock.

A second point of common sense.  The question you ask puts you in my league when it comes to knowledge on this kind of stuff which is, and I mean no disrespect when I say this, almost knowledge free.  From this point of understanding, buying stocks and going to a Casino are about on a par.  Only "invest" what you can afford to lose.

A good long term investment if you are young is a No-load, diversified Mutual fund with a strong history.  If you are old, a very low risk mutual fund or other instrument with low risk low return.  You can go to your bank this morning and get this done, but you need to be assured, if you are going to lock up cash, that you won't need that cash in the near term.

Finally, take a lesson from the current economy.  Make sure you have proper insurance coverage first, some cash reserves second, pay off debt and get out of debt, start some kind of savings for the five years away stuff and some kind of savings for retirement.

Stocks can be tantalizing, but they can be a great way to lose money.  Be careful with your money.  The only one who cares if you keep it is you.


----------



## code1211

editec said:


> Define "safe".
> 
> I look at the changes our economy is undergoing and I cannot see how it will get healthier in the long run.
> 
> I see massive changes in the way American will be living in the future and in the medium run (say the next 20 years or so) I expect American will, on average, become less affluent that we have ALLL come to expect.
> 
> I sincerely hope I am wrong.



That kind of talk is just silly.  Things are already starting to turn around and the panic times only started in about October.  Are things right now worse than ever?  Not even close.  Are they as bad as they are going to get?  Time will tell.

As a child of Depression era parents and a survivor of the debacle of the mid to late 70's and early 80's, I've heard of and seen worse.

I thought that from last October forward, we had about 12 to 18 months before things got right again.  Well, a Trillion dollars later and myriad of miss judged, poorly planned, politically motivated and misrepresented boondogles we are stumbling around waiting for some guidance from the top.

During this time Obama and Timmy have done many things, but none seem to address the problem.  Toxic assets?  Were these not the big Boogie Man of the Fall?  Have they been bought up, bought down or otherwise taken off the books?  No.

What do we have instead?  Bail outs, band aids and boondogles.  Obama is shaping up to be twice as smart as W if we use only the growth of the debt to measure this stuff.

What Obama is doing right now is paying for a short term problem with long term debt.  It's like taking out a second mortgage to go on vacation.  Makes no sense.  

Luckily, we have the American economy to pay for this.  We've had dumber poiticians trying to save us in the past with even worse results.  My fear is that Obama will save us so completely that there will be nothing left of the economy to pay for the damage.  We can at least be thankful that we haven't fallen into a vast, National Malaise.

You're doing a heck of a job, Timmy.


----------



## Toro

I have no doubt America will get itself out of this mess.  Economies grow because of increases in productivity (as well as population growth).  To assume that the economy cannot recover is to assume that the ingenuity and resourcefulness of the American people is at an end.  Since the American economy has gone through far worse - the Civil War, the 1873 Depression, the 1929 Depression, WWII - the economy will recover from this as well.


----------



## auditor0007

editec said:


> Define "safe".
> 
> I look at the changes our economy is undergoing and I cannot see how it will get healthier in the long run.
> 
> I see massive changes in the way American will be living in the future and in the medium run (say the next 20 years or so) I expect American will, on average, become less affluent that we have ALLL come to expect.
> 
> I sincerely hope I am wrong.



You are pretty much on the money.  The only way this will not be the outcome is if government spending is slashed drastically.  I don't see that happening anytime soon, so we're fucked.


----------



## editec

When American go back to work, THEN I would feel confident to invest generally.

Bear in mind that I still think that the price of real estate is so far out of line with average incomes that things are going to remain out of kilter regardless of what the stock market does from day to day.

That doesn't mean that some stocks cannot be winners, but it does mean that Amnerica cannot win until it does something about the shrinking American middle class.


----------



## WillowTree

editec said:


> Define "safe".
> 
> I look at the changes our economy is undergoing and I cannot see how it will get healthier in the long run.
> 
> I see massive changes in the way American will be living in the future and in the medium run (say the next 20 years or so) I expect American will, on average, become less affluent that we have ALLL come to expect.
> 
> I sincerely hope I am wrong.





you are not wrong,, the democwats will see to that.


----------



## auditor0007

PoliticalChic said:


> tigerbob said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maxcy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No such thing as safe, particularly right now.  Only invest what you could live with losing.  Never borrow to invest.
> 
> If you're new to it and want low risk, I'd stick with municipals if I were you.  If you're thinking housing, it sounds like you have an appetite for risk.  I personally wouldn't touch banks or housing at the moment.  There have been positive signs but I still don't think all the bad stuff has shaken out yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Some believe in the economy in the long run, some try to time the market, and some look at angles, Fibonacci numbers, and inflections of the DOW. Your choice.
> 
> That being said, I read and interesting newsletter around inauguration, and followed up with a copy later in the year. The author predicted that the DOW would drop to 6600 by mid February. He was almost on the head.
> 
> I called and got a sample newsletter, and this is what he predicted: DOW would regain 30-50% of its losses by summer- but then within a year would fall below the lows, possibley to 5000 as a "second leg" of this recession. He also claimed that every trillion the administration puts in would add a year to the recovery.
> 
> If the DOW hits 8800 by summer, that would be two correct calls for this advisor.
> 
> Any thoughts?
Click to expand...


I've read some others who believe pretty much the same thing, that this is a bear rally and it's going to come crashing down hitting new lows.  I would be very hesitant to invest in stocks at this time.  

Here is another big problem.  Wall Street, in the long run, is a reflection of what is happening on Main Street.  However, there are blips on Wall Street that don't always correlate to what is actually happening on Main Street.  This current market rally is evidence of that.  Some people are getting their hopes up because unemployment is not increasing as much as it was, but it is still increasing.  The economy isn't shrinking as much as it was, but it is still shrinking.  We have not yet turned the corner.

To top this off, there is not one single sector of the economy that is poised to lead the way back to recovery.  Housing is in shambles.  We now have nearly 20 million vacant homes.  That's enough homes to house 60 million people.  Does anyone understand these numbers?  60 million people need to fill these existing vacant homes before we need to build any more houses, and housing is one of the most integral parts of our economy.  When housing is not doing well, neither is our economy, and with that many vacant homes out there, we are not likely to see a turnaround for a very long time.

Now, that doesn't mean things will necessarily continue to spiral downward forever, but the idea that we will just bounce out of this is not in the cards, as far as I'm concerned.  This is the classic L recession where we will most likely hit an unemployment rate of around 10%, maybe a little higher, and then remain there for a very long time.  

So what will turn all of this around?  More people.  And this is what tends to happen.  When people don't have money to spend, they end up sitting around home with nothing better to do, and they end up making more babies.  This may sound off the wall, but it's true.  People have more kids when economic times are at the worst.  When the population expansion finally hits, as those kids become adults, the economy finally has the opportunity for real expansion.  Based on that, I'd say we won't be seeing a real strong economy again for another twenty or so years.


----------



## auditor0007

PoliticalChic said:


> Iriemon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some believe in the economy in the long run, some try to time the market, and some look at angles, Fibonacci numbers, and inflections of the DOW. Your choice.
> 
> That being said, I read and interesting newsletter around inauguration, and followed up with a copy later in the year. The author predicted that the DOW would drop to 6600 by mid February. He was almost on the head.
> 
> I called and got a sample newsletter, and this is what he predicted: DOW would regain 30-50% of its losses by summer- but then within a year would fall below the lows, possibley to 5000 as a "second leg" of this recession. He also claimed that every trillion the administration puts in would add a year to the recovery.
> 
> If the DOW hits 8800 by summer, that would be two correct calls for this advisor.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a cite to the article?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wasn't an article, but I recall the prognosticator's name, I believe, was Steve Frankel or Frankle,
> 
> I'll try to find the Phone #. If you come across it first, post it.
Click to expand...


Here's a link to another article on the same subject.  

Tice Sees Stocks Plunging 54 Percent 

Friday, May 1, 2009 10:15 AM

By: Dan Weil  Article Font Size   

The bear market in stocks is just hibernating now and will soon come back with a vicious growl, says David Tice, chief portfolio strategist for bear markets at Federated Investors. 


Tice, who called the markets top in 2007, isnt swayed by the recent 31 percent jump in the Standard & Poors 500 Index from its March 6 low 


Denial isnt just a river in Egypt, he tells Bloomberg TV. A lot of people on Wall Street are experiencing denial. 


This is a bear market rally, Tice says. 


There will be a lot of rallies. However, we expect a lot of declines, with each decline taking out the previous low. 


The S&P 500 could drop to 400, he says. That would constitute a 54 percent plunge from Thursdays close. 

Moneynews - Tice Sees Stocks Plunging 54 Percent


----------



## auditor0007

PoliticalChic said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> At first I thought you made the mistake of dropping a digit, but then I noted who was writing, Beelz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know that the DOW did not fall to '666'  and I believe that, rather than a slip, the mumber has some significance for you:
> "Revelation, Chapter 13 speaks of the beast and how to identify his followers. According to verses 16 and 17, they will have the mark or the name or number of the beast on their right hands or foreheads. Verse 18 introduces the number 666 itself: "Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."
> 
> Identification verified.
Click to expand...


The S&P fell to a low of 666 on March 6th.


----------



## auditor0007

tigerbob said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> 
> He was talking about the S&P 500, PC.  It bottomed at 666.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean he's not the devil?
> 
> And Toro had gone up in my estimation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Toro is a Reds fan, and therefore deserving of all respect.
> 
> All Hail Toro!
Click to expand...


The last time the Reds were any good, the economy wasn't much better than it is today.


----------



## auditor0007

ItsFairmont said:


> maxcy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are asking if it's safe to invest in stocks.  There is no answer for that.
> 
> 
> However, I will say this:  handing your money over to a complete stranger to manage for you is one heck of a risky way to get rich.
> 
> 
> Most millionaires in America got that way the exact same way they did 400 years ago:  real estate.
> 
> You don't have to believe me, and you can argue until you're blue in the face.  But I'll trot out fact after fact.  Land is the best way to become rich.
> 
> But it requires patience.
Click to expand...


This is very true.  However, in order for real estate to increase in value, it requires population growth.  Now is a good time to invest in real estate, but it's going to take some time before it shows a good return.  And you have to make enough on it to pay the taxes, so be careful.


----------



## auditor0007

Iriemon said:


> ItsFairmont said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maxcy said:
> 
> 
> 
> As we see another 23rd U.S Bank - New Frontier Bank in Greeley, Colorado, was closed by state regulators and bank to fail this year amid mounting losses linked to rising unemployment and the slumping housing market.
> 
> Is it safe to invest in stocks while these recessions are still going on, If "Yes" what are the primary precautions should be taken these days before investing in any stocks which are related to Housing markets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are asking if it's safe to invest in stocks.  There is no answer for that.
> 
> 
> However, I will say this:  handing your money over to a complete stranger to manage for you is one heck of a risky way to get rich.
> 
> 
> Most millionaires in America got that way the exact same way they did 400 years ago:  real estate.
> 
> You don't have to believe me, and you can argue until you're blue in the face.  But I'll trot out fact after fact.  Land is the best way to become rich.
> 
> But it requires patience.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lots of would be millionaires are stuck with property worth less than what's owed on it at the moment.
Click to expand...


They bought when it was overvalued.  Real estate is no longer overvalued, although it's not going to show a quick turnaround either.  It's a good long term investment so long as you can generate some income from it.  If you can pay cash for it, then it's a great buy.


----------



## editec

auditor0007 said:


> Iriemon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ItsFairmont said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are asking if it's safe to invest in stocks. There is no answer for that.
> 
> 
> However, I will say this: handing your money over to a complete stranger to manage for you is one heck of a risky way to get rich.
> 
> 
> Most millionaires in America got that way the exact same way they did 400 years ago: real estate.
> 
> You don't have to believe me, and you can argue until you're blue in the face. But I'll trot out fact after fact. Land is the best way to become rich.
> 
> But it requires patience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of would be millionaires are stuck with property worth less than what's owed on it at the moment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They bought when it was overvalued. *Real estate is no longer overvalued*, although it's not going to show a quick turnaround either. It's a good long term investment so long as you can generate some income from it. If you can pay cash for it, then it's a great buy.
Click to expand...

 
I think real estate is still overpriced in many areas of the nation.

I think it's been overpriced for the last thirty years, frankly.


----------



## auditor0007

Toro said:


> I have no doubt America will get itself out of this mess.  Economies grow because of increases in productivity (as well as population growth).  To assume that the economy cannot recover is to assume that the ingenuity and resourcefulness of the American people is at an end.  Since the American economy has gone through far worse - the Civil War, the 1873 Depression, the 1929 Depression, WWII - the economy will recover from this as well.



It will recover eventually.  The real queston is how long is eventually?   I have a question for you Toro.  At some point, somewhere down the road, population increase will have to stop.  There is a limit to how many people this country and this planet can support.  Considering that economic growth has always been driven by populaton growth, what do you see happening once population growth is no longer part of the equation?


----------



## Amanda

*Is it safe to invest in stocks ?*

When has it ever been "safe"? There are ALWAYS risks. There are and have always been safer investment alternatives to stocks (lower yield, but hey, just sayin').


----------



## Toro

Stocks are inexpensive now.

People under 30 how want to start saving for retirement should start buying now because returns over the next 30-40 years will be very attractive.


----------



## American Horse

FANNIE MAE Share Price Chart | FNM - Yahoo! Finance

Two years ago this stock (FNM) was at $62.46 per share price
One year ago, May 8,  it was at $23.68 per share
Yesterday, May 7th it was at $00.88 per share 

It was touted by most analysts, incuding Bob Brinker, a very reliable and conservative investment commentator on his show "MoneyTalk, as an excellent and secure investment, with it's implied Federal guarantee.

Does this suggest anything about the future of highly rated but potentially "politically volatile" stocks?

.


----------



## Iriemon

lancenicolase said:


> Don't believe anyone answering this question! I'm not saying that they are wrong or are lying. It's just that you need to do a lot of studying of any of the stocks mentioned before you buy any listed here or anywhere.
> 
> I posed a similar question back in October, and got lots of answers. And NO ONE was entirely accurate, and actually everyone was pretty much wrong.
> 
> Having said that, this is possibly ALMOST a good time to buy stocks, but I would wait a few more days to see if the market bottoms out or goes lower.



If you've been waiting a few days since Mar 9 to see if the market bottoms or goes lower, you've missed out on a 31% gain in the Dow.

That's the problem with trying to time the market.


----------



## sealybobo

American Horse said:


> FANNIE MAE Share Price Chart | FNM - Yahoo! Finance
> 
> Two years ago this stock (FNM) was at $62.46 per share price
> One year ago, May 8,  it was at $23.68 per share
> Yesterday, May 7th it was at $00.88 per share
> 
> It was touted by most analysts, incuding Bob Brinker, a very reliable and conservative investment commentator on his show "MoneyTalk, as an excellent and secure investment, with it's implied Federal guarantee.
> 
> Does this suggest anything about the future of highly rated but potentially "politically volatile" stocks?
> 
> .



Now is the time.  My brother bought some stock at $10 a share and it went up to $24 a share and then he sold.  Made $14k, minus the broker fee of course.


----------



## Iriemon

sealybobo said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> 
> FANNIE MAE Share Price Chart | FNM - Yahoo! Finance
> 
> Two years ago this stock (FNM) was at $62.46 per share price
> One year ago, May 8,  it was at $23.68 per share
> Yesterday, May 7th it was at $00.88 per share
> 
> It was touted by most analysts, incuding Bob Brinker, a very reliable and conservative investment commentator on his show "MoneyTalk, as an excellent and secure investment, with it's implied Federal guarantee.
> 
> Does this suggest anything about the future of highly rated but potentially "politically volatile" stocks?
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now is the time.  My brother bought some stock at $10 a share and it went up to $24 a share and then he sold.  Made $14k, minus the broker fee of course.
Click to expand...


You forgot to add the disclaimer:  "Past performance may not be indicative of future performance."


----------



## Annie

Who can tell? However with the hits most of us have taken, I'd be skeptical considering there really doesn't seem to be good news to account for the rise, unless veering on 9% unemployment seems good to you:

FT.com / Markets / On Wall Street - On Wall Street: Beware of the suckerâs rally



> On Wall Street: Beware of the suckers rally
> By Spencer Jakab
> Published: May 8 2009 17:42 | Last updated: May 8 2009 17:42
> The market is a cruel mistress indeed. Compounding the pain of big swoons, it kicks investors when they are down by luring them into suckers rallies  typically sharp but fleeting bounces in the middle of a bear market.
> 
> The current recovery has propelled the S&P 500 a third above its March low in just 60 days, convincing many sceptics that a new bull market has begun. Noted bear Doug Kass of Seabreeze Partners said the recent nadir may be a generational low and strategist Tobias Levkovich of Citigroup claimed many large investors who had feared another bear market rally may soon capitulate, pushing markets higher.
> 
> The Bull Market Express may really be pulling out of the station, but Wall Streets trains have a nasty tendency to derail just as passengers jostle for seats. Most recently, the S&P 500 soared 24 per cent over seven weeks ending in early January, only to plunge to a new low. It was a fairly typical suckers rally and bear markets often need more than one to create sufficient disillusionment for a definitive bottom.
> 
> The 20002002 bear market had three, with average gains of 21 per cent in the Dow Jones Industrials over 45 days.
> 
> The granddaddy of all bear markets, 1929 1932, had six false alarms with an average gain of 47 per cent. And Japans ongoing bear saw the Nikkei rise by at least a third four times in its first four years with 10 more false dawns since then...


----------



## Annie

Underpinnings:

Hot Air » Blog Archive » What if we held an auction and no one came?



> What if we held an auction and no one came?
> POSTED AT 9:26 AM ON MAY 8, 2009 BY ED MORRISSEY
> SEND TO A FRIEND | SHARE ON FACEBOOK |	 PRINTER-FRIENDLY
> 
> Great Britain knows how that feels, and now so does Barack Obama.  Treasury had to offer higher-than-expected prices to investors to get them to buy government debt, signaling a distrust of American economic policy and financial strength.  That will have significant consequences for Obamas deficit spending policies (via Instapundit):
> 
> Weak demand at a Treasury bond auction touched off worries in the stock market Thursday about the governments ability to raise funds to fight the recession.
> 
> The government had to pay greater interest than expected in a sale of 30-year Treasurys. That is worrisome to traders because it could signal that it will become harder for Washington to finance its ambitious economic recovery plans. The higher interest rates also could push up costs for borrowing in areas like mortgages.
> 
> Investors also pocketed some gains after strong rally in stocks this week and ahead of the governments April employment report on Friday. Investors were jittery ahead of the formal release of results from the governments stress tests of bank balance sheets, which came out later Thursday.
> 
> Major stocks market indicators slid more than 1 percent, including the Dow Jones industrial average which lost 102 points after gaining nearly the same amount Wednesday.​
> Once again, this shows exactly how speculative the White House and the CBO have been in calculating deficits for the next decade based on Obamas spending plans.  Lets take another look at the deficit projections from OMB and CBO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL][/IMG]
> 
> 
> Both sets of numbers depended on a certain level of economic growth, which so far hasnt begun despite Obamas predictions of rebound in Q1 from the application of the stimulus.  It also depended on a constant supply of debt purchase at steady bond rates.  These projections had to consider interest payments on all of the debt Obama planned to buy while running these deficits, and any hike in interest rates means that those interest payments will have to go up.  That also means that we will have to spend more money than Obama projected, creating even higher deficits and the need for even more bond sales  and more interest payments on those.
> 
> Its basically a Ponzi scheme, and its accelerating.
> 
> One of two things will have to occur to resolve the situation.  Either the federal government will have to massively cut its spending in order to service all that debt at the higher interest rates now demanded, or it will have to pass massive new taxes in order to generate enough revenue to accomplish it.  Which do you think Obama is likely to try?


----------



## Toro

Deficit spending usually is beneficial for stocks, at least in the short term.


----------



## Iriemon

Toro said:


> Deficit spending usually is beneficial for stocks, at least in the short term.



Based on what?

We've ususally had deficit spending, but is there a strong correlation?  Did stocks do better in the 00s with big deficit spending vs. 90s with low deficit spending?  How about the 50s and 60s compared to the 80s?

I haven't done a study, but I doubt you'd find much correlation.


----------



## Munin

editec said:


> When American go back to work, THEN I would feel confident to invest generally.
> 
> Bear in mind that I still think that the price of real estate is so far out of line with average incomes that things are going to remain out of kilter regardless of what the stock market does from day to day.
> 
> That doesn't mean that some stocks cannot be winners, but it does mean that Amnerica cannot win until it does something about the shrinking American middle class.



I disagree, if it is indeed now that the bottom has been reached then this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to buy stocks. Where I do agree is with the risk, if you buy stocks now you will take a very big risk ... but you know what they say about big risks: they pay off big time if the stock goes the good way.

Stocks always recover before the economy recovers, because stocks anticipate the actual economic recovery: when the actual economic recovery happens the stocks will have risen significantly already.  

Certain sectors are interesting right now, the banking sector for example seems to have  bottomed and seems to be recovering (look at the recent stress tests). 

Keep in mind that factors like unemployment are lagging indicators when it comes to the stock market.

Their is also big evidence that many investors are coming back into the stock market. Investors like warren buffet have already stept in and bought a big number of stocks.


----------



## Toro

Iriemon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Deficit spending usually is beneficial for stocks, at least in the short term.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on what?
> 
> We've ususally had deficit spending, but is there a strong correlation?  Did stocks do better in the 00s with big deficit spending vs. 90s with low deficit spending?  How about the 50s and 60s compared to the 80s?
> 
> I haven't done a study, but I doubt you'd find much correlation.
Click to expand...


Ken Fisher has done some work on this, looking at stock markets and deficit financing for countries around the world.  He found that generally there was a correlation, that deficit financing was positive for stocks.

This makes sense because fiscal deficits are expansionary by nature, which means profits will rise and so will stock prices.


----------

