OT: Anyone Look At The Stock Market Today???

[Lula]

what stocks would you buy?

[Arkansas]

I am not a broker. I don't wanna lead anyone astray.

However, look at the history of the longs. Who has endured any fluctuations? Maybe the high techs like IBM and HP. Maybe the autos like Ford or GM. Can GM sustain this market? Can Ford overcome a $1+ stock amidst the foreign market? What will oil do to America in the long run? Gas is down...some... but do the domestics have a plan for electric, natural gas, hybrid, etc...and can that plan re-convince America to hold on?

Maybe the cells like Winstream or Verizon. ATT & Motorola have always done well for me...but I'm in for the long haul.

Just look at the things that people will always rely on. Stay away from the Macys & Dillards...go for the mid-tiers that will still do well in the suck economy..like WalMart.

Trust your gut. What do you think that America, as retail consumers, will always do business with?

And definitely, most definitely, trust your funds...as long as you've done your research on the fund mgr's track record. For example, a local guy who has made my family a ton recently left his firm for another. Does that mean that the previous brokerage was bad? Not necessarily. But does it mean that his new firm is better? If you KNOW him and trust him, then yes. However, don't go whole hog. Play with it and set conditions. What's the overall track record of the new firm & why did he move there? Lotsa variables.

Diversify. Even though the entire market pretty much stinks, there are more stable funds that historically do better than others. T-bills, the gov bond market is always sound - less pay back, but solid. And even in troubled times, there are growth markets, although a huge gamble, that still payoff handsomely in the end...depends on the sector, and what your gut tells you what will be currently profitable, and eventually be profitable.

Point is, don't be afraid to play...even if only for a few bucks (hundreds/thousands vs bigger). For the short term, there's not much more to lose. If you can play for the short term, then be selective and not afraid of immediate loss...as long as you think it'll pay in the long run.

Stay away from banks. Wells Fargo is doing good. Citi isn't really, but they'll be okay. Bank of America has been posting short term losses, but I think they'll still grow.

Biggest thing IMO, whatever you've got right now - is all on paper. It's not a loss until you cash out. If you've had something that's been okay, then stick with it. In a few years, it'll re-grow...no matter what President.

And speaking of Presidents, I don't put much faith in any. IMO, it's not a Presidential fault (any administration/party). Our economy is based on consumer spending, corporate investment, and international speculation. The power that America has is me & you, how we live. Do we buy our teens cars? Do we buy that 65" plasma even though we don't really need it? Do we keep ourselves healthy in every day practice, or do we rely on doctors & insurance companies to dictate our health? Do we wear cotton clothes and do we grow our own vegetables? Do we take responsibility for our own well-being? And that well-being isn't just physical health, it's financial health...it's emotional/family health. Don't ever rely on the government's subscribed fixed income. Do what you can NOW to increase you 'retirement'. Even if it's painful right now to install a 401k, do it. Even if you can't really afford to establish a college fund for your kids, do it. Even if you can put away 10 bucks a month for a young one, it will make a difference when that kids turns 18. (Please, don't take a defeatish attitude where you think it won't matter. It will.)

Live simply. And that doesn't mean denying yourself any pleasures, just redefine those 'pleasures' and make it a point right now to keep the future in mind. We don't need mansions & Hummers. We don't need $400 jeans & big vacations. Living simply means personally defining happiness & living within your current means. Living simply also means that we'll have a few extra benjamins to put back into the market. And spend them conservatively, or at least, in a fund in which you've done your homework. But still I encourage playing. There's fun & satisfaction in hitting the stocks that are important to America...things that will get used/consumed no matter what. Find the stocks that support consumables like grocery stores and beer. Tyson & Budweiser are good. Clothing & tires. And even though the housing market is in the tank, look at the companies that support home improvement. Think about it. In a market where we can't buy new homes, we'll want to redo the homes that we have.

Okay, I guess I've rambled enough. I don't want to give direct stocks advise. Honestly, my choices aren't good for everyone, and I don't want to potentially lead anyone in the wrong direction. Bottom line, it's bad...very bad...could get worse. But if you can play, then it's definitely a buyer 's market. Take advantage of it...if you can...however you can.


later~

[ForceInfinity]

I hate to say this, but GM's done, or they're going to bankruptcy. That company's slow to change and they're starting to buckle under the heavy overhead they incur from the pension liabilities and wages. But they bet the farm on trucks and SUV's, and look where it got them.

-IBM? I agree. Last I heard, they were set to report surprisingly good earnings. They'll survive the downtrend.
-Wells Fargo? One of the few banks that are actually doing okay, but I wished they stayed away from Wachovia
-GE? They took a big dive because of their capital division, and to be sure, their capital division is pulling down their funds, but they're near their 52 week low.
-Intuit was near their 52 week low even though they're still doing double digit growth. Everyone still needs to do their taxes, and Quick Books appeals to small businesses and they are going to get the US out of recession (that's how it always works)

Alot of companies are beaten down by 50% or more. Stock market itself is down 40%. I'm thinking that

<<
I would blame the government totally. Exhibit 1 - 11.3 trillion dollar national debt. Exhibit 2 - Liberal policies by the big government which gave us subprime lending and other social engineering.
>>
Last I checked Rupblicans were in control of the congress 6 of the last 8 years. My big beef is the republicans don't practice what they supposedly speech. They wanna cut taxes sure, but they spend like democrats. At least the democrats try to cover the revenue side of things and are generally up front about it.

I agree with Slucero, we should let the banks die, survival of the fittest. Most average american's don't have more than 100k in their accounts won't lose any money because of FDIC.

Everyone needs to get off this kick that Obama is going to make this a socialist country. He can no more make this a socialist country as a republican can solve the budget deficit. Beyond being CNC of the military, all he can do is sign bills and negotiate treaties. If you wanna get pissy about someone making the country socialist, maybe you should take a longer look at your representatives and senators. THEY are the ones and not presidents that cause all this mess.

I think what we need to get this country going is *ironically* $150, hell $200 oil. That'll cause one of a few things to happen, among them it'll cause the companies to start exploring other energy alternatives: ramping up oil shale, tidal power, wind power, solar arrays, nuclear. In the last few years, there've been invoations with solar including CIGS and now solar paint! That may be the catalyst mentioned above that'll turn this country into a producer again, but usually it takes this country getting pushed to get off their duff to do something (ie slucero's example of WWII), and I think the catalyst is going to be energy.

[Lula]

thank you arkansas. i don't have any extra to play with, but i'm always thinking . i agree with so much of what you said. i used to be a designer jeans person, but since having my son i have done an about face. every little bit i can save i do. i live well within my means probably more than i need, but i'd much rather build for my son's future.

thanks for taking the time, you've given me something to think about

[Enigma869]

Oh that wacky stock market! Today saw the biggest one day gain (in points) in the history of the market! Fasten your seat belts...It's going to be a VERY bumpy ride!

http://money.cnn.com/?cnn=yes


John from Boston

[Saint John]

Oh that wacky stock market! Today saw the biggest one day gain (in points) in the history of the market! Fasten your seat belts...It's going to be a VERY bumpy ride!

http://money.cnn.com/?cnn=yes


John from Boston

Today was a bear market bounce.

[Tito]

It may go up a little bit more tomorrow. But it will drop and even out by the week.

[Enigma869]

Down another 733 points today! Woo hoo! I love this freakin' ride!


John from Boston

[conversationpc]

Down another 733 points today! Woo hoo! I love this freakin' ride!


John from Boston

Looks like it declined pretty steadily today rather than the volatile up-and-down stuff from previous days.

[strangegrey]

Folks, listen to sluce...his posts are delivered with knowledge.

[Enigma869]

Folks, listen to sluce...his posts are delivered with knowledge.

Then tell him to get his ass in here, and elucidate us


John from Boston

[Purrkat]

It's all Madonna's fault. She just had to make headlines with her divorce garbage.

[strangegrey]

Gunbot,

Thanks for posting that dow chart. I've been actually pointing to that chart for a while, trying to suggest that, in very crude terms, we might be looking at a normalization of an 8000 point dow. I'm also glad you printed the linear version of that. The log version that all of the finance sites don't display the bubbles in as clear a picture....

Regardless, I've taken your chart and incorporated some of my own commentary along with a crudely drawn trend line suggesting where I might think this dow will ultimately rest.....8000.

[slucero]

I wouldn't buy shit in this market... unless you could afford to lose the money...

People get wet in their pants when Congress signs the bailout... For those of you shouting "buy, buy, buy"..... here's the last 2 weeks of DOW numbers... you have a better chance of making money selling High Quality NY crack to traders on Wall street...

DATE OPEN CLOSE REALITY
15-Oct-08 9,301.91 8,577.91 -724.00
14-Oct-08 9,388.97 9,310.99 -77.98
13-Oct-08 8,462.42 9,387.61 925.19
10-Oct-08 8,568.67 8,451.19 -117.48
9-Oct-08 9,261.69 8,579.19 -682.50
8-Oct-08 9,437.23 9,258.10 -179.13
7-Oct-08 9,955.42 9,447.11 -508.31
6-Oct-08 10,322.52 9,955.50 -367.02
3-Oct-08 10,483.96 10,325.38 -158.58
2-Oct-08 10,825.54 10,482.85 -342.69
1-Oct-08 10,847.40 10,831.07 -16.33


Lets add up the TAXPAYER PAID, corporate welfare to date...

—$700 billion to buy assets from struggling institutions.
— $50 billion from the Great Depression-era Exchange Stabilization Fund to guarantee principal in money market mutual funds.
— $10 billion in Treasury direct purchases of mortgage-backed securities in September.
—$144 billion in additional MBS purchases by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
— $85 billion loan for AIG, which would give the Federal government a 79.9 percent stake and avoid a bankruptcy filing for the embattled insurer. AIG management will be dismissed.
— $87 billion in repayments to JPMorgan Chase for providing financing to underpin trades with units of bankrupt investment bank Lehman Brothers .
—$200 billion for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
—$300 billion for the Federal Housing Administration to refinance failing mortgage into new, reduced-principal loans with a federal guarantee, passed as part of a broad housing rescue bill.
—$4 billion in grants to local communities to help them buy and repair homes abandoned due to mortgage foreclosures.
—$29 billion in financing for JPMorgan Chase's government-brokered buyout of Bear Stearns in March.
—$200 billion of currently outstanding loans to banks issued through the Fed's Term Auction Facility, which was recently expanded to allow for longer loans of 84 days alongside the previous 28-day credits.

GRAND TOTAL SO FAR.... 1.8 TRILLION Dollars.... OR... $6000 per person in the good ol' USA... What the Fed is doing is the equivalent of robbing Peter (You and me) to pay Paul (the tards on Wall Street) so they can CONTINUE to rob Peter (You and me)... to pay themselves...

oh... and don't forget the 2.3 Trillion that's come from Europe...

Letting the banks fail would have been hard... but the debt would disappear with the banks. Now it "lives"... AND this masssive (see above 1.8 Trillion) infusion of cash is going to KILL the economy when it starts to recover... anybody remember 18% interest rates?... well that was done ON PURPOSE by the Fed chief back then... to fight inflation...

The Government is just getting started....

I'll say it again... we are a net consumer nation... and until the U.S. has an economy that can support itself... and we become a net PRODUCER nation, i.e. we make what we buy... we're fucked.

One more thing...

This "Bailing out" of these institutions is nothing more than a gigantic transfer of wealth, namely MIDDLE-CLASS wealth... because the money transfer is coming in the form of FREE bailout money to these institutions, that the Fed is currently PRINTING as fast as they can!. This massive infusion of cash is gonna come back to us in the form of hyper-inflation (insane price increases) which is essentially a "Tax"..... and guess who it hits the worst... thats right... the middle-class.... US!

As of June 30, 2008 there 1.3 Trillion in bank savings, and 5.8 Trillion in commercial banks. 7.1 Trillion in deposits...

All the Fed had to do was guarantee the deposits... THAT'S IT... then the money would have stayed where it was... and this unraveling would have happened quickly and efficiently.

It should be fairly obvious to all that this train is gonna derail... i.e. a recession/depression is imminent... and hopefully you all are getting the idea just how badly we're getting the shaft by our elected public servants....

.. and we should be fucking FURIOUS about it....

[separate_wayz]

If you want to look at charts, you have to do it the right way.

With growth trends, you have to take the logarithm of the trend (in this case, the rate of growth in the Dow Jones Industrial Average). Taking the logarithm gives you a flat line for a constant growth rate (say, 9%). If you don't take the logarithm, you end up with a more and more rapidly increasing trend line, seemingly going up into the stratosphere.

Also, the Dow Jones is a price-weighted index, not a market capitalization index, like the S&P500. It would be better to use a market cap index for such a presentation.

Regardless, here's the DJIA logarithmically transformed, for the period 1982 to 2008. You can see the one asset price bubble ("tech bubble") clearly in the late 1990s. You can also see the recent, extremely severe drop below the long-term trend.

[strangegrey]

Actually, it doesn't much matter what chart you look at...I personally disagree with the assertion that the proper chart, appearance wise, is the log chart. We can argue that till we're blue in the face....In the end, it doesn't much matter.

The reason I like the linear chart is that it explodes out the non-trend periods to a more pronounced view. The linear chart only makes the trend line easier to follow, for people that don't want to put the time in to develop some visual acuity.....if you run a modest trend line on either chart, you see both the tech bubble and the housing bubble rather clearly.

In both cases, a modest trend line still lands you at ~8000 mark, once you discredit and discount clinton and bush's respective bubbles....

[separate_wayz]

Actually, it doesn't much matter what chart you look at...I personally disagree with the assertion that the proper chart, appearance wise, is the log chart. We can argue that till we're blue in the face....In the end, it doesn't much matter.

The reason I like the linear chart is that it explodes out the non-trend periods to a more pronounced view. The linear chart only makes the trend line easier to follow, for people that don't want to put the time in to develop some visual acuity.....if you run a modest trend line on either chart, you see both the tech bubble and the housing bubble rather clearly.

In both cases, a modest trend line still lands you at ~8000 mark, once you discredit and discount clinton and bush's respective bubbles....

Yes, a linear chart does show non-trend periods in a more pronounced way. But, no, it doesn't give you the right illustration, by drawing a straight line.

That's the problem with using linear graphs with non-linear growth data: it's difficult to find trends. Drawing a straight line (as you've done) on a linear chart to illustrate non-linear data gives you the wrong answer. You'd need to draw a steeply curved exponential line on your graph to find a lower support line, or even a trend. Too hard to do, and too easy to come up with the wrong answer.

The easy way is to deal with straight lines -- hence the rationale for taking the log. If you take the logarithm of the DJIA from 01/01/1982 through 10/15/2008, the trend line shows a forecasted value of 11,790 for the DJIA on 10/15/2008, versus the actual close of 8,598 -- quite a difference from saying the bottom is at 8,000. In your scenario (linear graphing), the DJIA is still overperforming by some 600 points. In mine (logarithmic graphing), the DJIA is under-performing by over 3,000 points.

The DJIA may certainly fall farther. But it's not because there's a reversion to a mean at 8,000 -- it's already below its 25-year trend line.

[strangegrey]

my trend line is a rather pesimistic view....but my red line actually curves upward....as already stated, we can disagree till the cows come home. both bubbles are clearly visible in both charts...it's subjective whether one overstates the bubbles or the other understates it.