The sky is falling

[bugzy]

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/apple-shares-pounded-after-downgrades/story.aspx?guid=D8B5E31F-6C1E-47F3-9BB6-657A7F7F2C79&dist=SecEditorsPicks

DOW is down another 550 points today

Apple went down 20 pts

[TOYr32]

My rose bush had buds and is getting ready to bloom . . . thank god I keep my money in a mattress huh!!

[Rezie@Genesis]

buy buy buy?

[mike]

Fuck that, its was supposed to go up, the bill was supposed to pass, instead, it got shot down and the market was down around 700 points........... I'm sitting on my cash.......

[oc-audica]

Gold is up =)

[RavinJetta]

Just be glad you didn't invest in WAMU like some people wanted to do last friday. Down to .03 and about to get pulled.

[GTIcrazy]

DOW is down another 550 points today


Try down 778 right now...

[GTiGirl]

time to buy buy buy!

[mike]

Question is what to buy, alot of stuff is really volatile, it is a great time to buy, if you know what to buy..............

[TOYr32]

Buy Citi Group!!!!

[RavinJetta]

Question is what to buy, alot of stuff is really volatile, it is a great time to buy, if you know what to buy..............

Exactly. Not a time to jump into the market if you are not experienced. Way too volatile right now to play around in.

[RavinJetta]

Buy Citi Group!!!!

Citi Group use to be a really stable stock. I use to have it back when it was in the $50 and it never moved to much and paided a dividend. Glad I sold when I did but it will be interesting to see how it does in the coming months.

[bugzy]

lot of craziness to come, as well

i recommend you go to www.dogparktalk.com and register and post your doggie pics ;)

[GTiGirl]

Eh, all my investments are in wide reaching mutual funds, so I will just buy more shares in the funds I already have: JILGX, RGACX, RWMCX, AEPGX, CAIBX. Purchasing in mutual funds also takes a lot of the scaryness out of the market.

[bugzy]

Eh, all my investments are in wide reaching mutual funds, so I will just buy more shares in the funds I already have: JILGX, RGACX, RWMCX, AEPGX, CAIBX. Purchasing in mutual funds also takes a lot of the scaryness out of the market.
less risk, but not as much gain

but yes, thats what my $$ is too

[GTiGirl]

less risk, but not as much gain

but yes, thats what my $$ is too

This is true. But these are all of my long-term investments, which out perform a lot of single stock investment strategies. I can't touch these accounts for another 28 years, so I'm not worried about it.

[mike]

the European markets aren't doing well as the money seems to be flowing back here to invest in the cheap dollar................... a lot of people who have been doing this for a living, are clueless as to whats coming down the pipe next, what will or will not do well or be hot or not, a lot of stuff going down has never happened, or hasn't happened since the depression era, so its an all new learning curve, and since I don't have hundreds of thousands of excess cash to play with, I will let the ones that do set the learning curve.

[bugzy]

This is true. But these are all of my long-term investments, which out perform a lot of single stock investment strategies. I can't touch these accounts for another 28 years, so I'm not worried about it.
well my mom does pretty well, but she watchs the stocks every day

she just sells even after small gains

her idea ... $1 gained is a $1 gained ;) simple but just dont be greedy

lotta people hold out for the big big big jumps that might or might not happen

[mike]

I have a buddy that plays a similar strategy, he will buy a stock, make some gains, sell it, wait for it to drop, then buy more and keep building up his stake in shares. Seems to work well, but I can't babysit a stock quote all day.

[Rezie@Genesis]

$1 gained is a $1 gained ;) simple but just dont be greedy


that's true but kind of hard to do

[oc-audica]

lot of craziness to come, as well

i recommend you go to www.dogparktalk.com (http://www.dogparktalk.com) and register and post your doggie pics ;)
In the midst of all this craziness, take a little break and watch SoCalEuro BIG G2G 2008 VIDEO (http://www.socaleuro.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36311)

[bugzy]

In the midst of all this craziness, take a little break and watch SoCalEuro BIG G2G 2008 VIDEO (http://www.socaleuro.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36311)
i have ! :) everyone should

[ncttrnl]

Why is it no one is talking about Congress... which is now out on Holiday... for throwing everyone a curveball this morning?

I don't particularly like the idea of a bailout but uncertainty is what really kills the market. You either say you are going to do something or you don't. If the bailout was uncertain from the start, its success or failure would have been made less of an impact on the market. Unfortunately, the White House and Congress stepped in to say they would pass a bailout and made it sound like it was a done deal. Now that the deal fell apart at the last possible second and congress took a break, all that they have successfully done is add to the uncertainty in the market.

The F'n politicians made the whole mess worse today.

[Monster8V]

The F'n politicians made the whole mess worse today.


Got that right!
The question is, was this a political stunt (notice both parties are already pointing fingers at each other) or was this just a really poorly designed bailout plan and by not passing they did us a favor??

Who am I kidding, politicians NEVER do things for OUR interest.

[madajb]

Unfortunately, the White House and Congress stepped in to say they would pass a bailout and made it sound like it was a done deal. Now that the deal fell apart at the last possible second and congress took a break, all that they have successfully done is add to the uncertainty in the market.
.

To be fair, the White House and certain high profile Congressional folk promised a bailout and implied it was all but signed.
A significant portion of both houses as well as the public was against it from the start.
For good or for ill, the system worked exactly the way it was designed.

If "the markets" are dumb enough to base their decisions on a few political soundbites, well then, that's the kind of stupidity that got us into this mess to begin with.

-ajb

[paultakeda]

Exactly. This time, the House worked as it should have -- the majority of the people were against it, the House represents its constituents, the bill was voted down (and should have been closer to public opinion, ~20% instead of just shy 11 votes from passing).

[ncttrnl]

To be fair, the White House and certain high profile Congressional folk promised a bailout and implied it was all but signed.
A significant portion of both houses as well as the public was against it from the start.
For good or for ill, the system worked exactly the way it was designed.

If "the markets" are dumb enough to base their decisions on a few political soundbites, well then, that's the kind of stupidity that got us into this mess to begin with.

-ajb

The markets have always been a confidence game. Its not that they are dumb at all.

Both the White House and Congress should have made realistic statements or kept their collective mouths shut. Given that some decided to make overly positive statements about the progress of the bailout, I would have expected the opposition to be more vocal to counter those statements. Its obviously not like a small minority opposed the bill. If their constituencies truly opposed the bailout, they shouldn't have had any problem publicly opposing it themselves either. Instead, they all went along for the ride and kept relatively quiet until they shot the bill down at the vote.

I understand that this is how our system is designed to work but now is not the time for our leadership to be playing political games. I'm fine with them not doing anything but they should not be making matters worse with their bullshit.

[mr_wrong]

It's interesting that no one ever brings up the fact that the man in charge of this bailout plan, crafting it, and carrying it out, is Henry Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs, one of several major banking firms set to benefit to the tune of billions of dollars from the bailout. No one with ties to the crisis should be involved in doling out taxpayer funds.

[madajb]

Its obviously not like a small minority opposed the bill. If their constituencies truly opposed the bailout, they shouldn't have had any problem publicly opposing it themselves either. Instead, they all went along for the ride and kept relatively quiet until they shot the bill down at the vote.

Depends on where you are and which media you pay attention to, I suppose.
I agree that the mainstream media appeared to presenting the bailout as a done deal, but at in my neck of the woods, my local Congressman had a half-page editorial explaining why he planned to vote against it. As well, talk radio has been abuzz with opposition to the plan.

-ajb

[madajb]

The markets have always been a confidence game. Its not that they are dumb at all.

Reckless, then.

-ajb

[mike]

I don't like the idea of swallowing a $700 BILLION bailout as a taxpayer, and thats why I'm hearing it was shot down, not enough tax payer protections. What does it matter, pick which hole you want it in, we're going to pay for it regardless, either in a failing economy, or taxes, its gonna hurt either way.

[paultakeda]

The New Deal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_deal) it wasn't (and the New Deal wasn't even all that hot).

[mike]

Correct me if I wrong, but wasn't the "New Deal" basically a bunch of government projects for infrastructure, like all the dam projects, paid for by bonds? Seriously, I'm not being a smart ass, no time to read the whole Wiki but thats what I remember from history

[paultakeda]

That was part of it, to give Americans a job (unemployment had hit 25%), but that was part of the second set of reforms in 1935 (the second New Deal). The first set of reforms came in 1933 (FDR was elected in 1932) and were a set of short-term policies to stabilize the economy, including the Emergency Banking Act, the descendant of which is the FDIC via the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.

We then lived in a post-Great Depression era where the FDIC could prevent a run on a bank by swooping in and taking control as well as guaranteeing deposits up to $100,000 as well as defined a set of regulatory controls on what banks could and could not do with deposited monies. Unfortunately the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act and arguably led to the sub-prime mortgage fiasco that brings us to today.

So sure, we stopped the bank runs... but we shouldn't have gotten to this point in the first place.

Anyhow, in a post-Great Depression era, a newer deal is needed, seeing as the first New Deal actually bought us some time this round, keeping our banks running and all. It'll be interesting to see what they turn up.

Personally, I'm glad the bill got shot down. It was crap.

[paultakeda]

I also realize that the reason the bill failed had nothing to do with what's good for the country but rather what's good for their re-election chances in November.

So how about this? Remove every single incumbent, regardless of party -- vote for the new guy. It's not like they'll do anything useful until after the election, and after that, who needs them? Let's deal with the new blood.

[madajb]

So how about this? Remove every single incumbent, regardless of party -- vote for the new guy. It's not like they'll do anything useful until after the election, and after that, who needs them? Let's deal with the new blood.
This is quite similar(yet completely different) to my strategy for voting on propositions. heh.

-ajb

[ncttrnl]

I also realize that the reason the bill failed had nothing to do with what's good for the country but rather what's good for their re-election chances in November.



That's also the reason the bill was proposed in the first place. That and Paulson wanted to reload the bazooka in his pocket.

This whole thing, just like anything else that grabs the public's attention, has been a political circus.

[paultakeda]

That's also the reason the bill was proposed in the first place. That and Paulson wanted to reload the bazooka in his pocket.

I don't think the bill was proposed for political reasons. Something needed to be done. But the way it was proposed, with a presidential address about the sky falling instead of pull up our collective boots, and the way the bill was initially written giving virtually carte blanche control to a single man with no oversight -- that was definitely political/power madness.

This whole thing, just like anything else that grabs the public's attention, has been a political circus.

It just had to be an election year.