- Joined
- May 1, 2005
- Messages
- 46,217
- Reaction score
- 20,467
It's hard to follow through with a short buy. So much can happen to stop it. Good on you for doing it, too bad when it was going to go up big, you didn't pull the trigger.
Economy Stock Market Has Worst Week Since 2008
- Thread starter DEN
- Start date
- Joined
- May 1, 2005
- Messages
- 46,217
- Reaction score
- 20,467
I'm not sure how it'll change things .just it's different, so the implications are really unknown. The economy really just started recovering, and that was via massive deficit spending. So the crash will be a different demon from the last.Ok I agree it’s different how does that change what I said? The unemployment rate has never been a good leading indicator for future economic growth, in fact it’s the classic defitnition of a lagging one. So bringing that up in the context it was is, well, lol worthy.
Also the equivocation of loose fiscal policy and monetary policy in response to a GFC compared to now is also laughable (not saying you did that). Yay we got unemployment to record lows and will now have zero bullets to fire when we need it.
I think we should get rid of these tax cuts and raise rates. Identify critical infrastructure programs with a 3 - 6 month push button readiness plan. The next crash happens or even 2 to 3 qtr consecutive slow downs, and we press the shovel ready button. Everything goes into the bank until then.
Just a thought
Haha I had very little say on money supply policy. But yes with rates at 2~ and zero or negative elsewhere, there isn't anything to shoot with.
To me it's not how we'll have a recession, but how we'll fix it. As QE is a strange beast that helped homeboys and equities , but left regular people behind. A weaker lower and middle class is going to be wrecked in a new recession
- Joined
- May 1, 2005
- Messages
- 46,217
- Reaction score
- 20,467
Dude Altria is going to basically write the legislation for vaping. That's what they did with cigarettes since the MSA.oil is also cheap as hell. back up the truck.
They have been doing some buying of companies I am skeptical of. Weed has been a hedge against the market for a while. Atria invested in Cronos, which hasn't proven itself. And this Juul business, this business could be taken down at any time. lol. Vaping is gonna take a hit. Get out.
I got Pfizer and Bausch Health.
I feel like pot is like the Internet in the 90s, it's easy to buy netscape or pets.com, so I'm not so cool with that move.
Still iQOS is coming and MO is a FCF machine
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 42,611
- Reaction score
- 24,194
Except I do follow through with it every single day in december before today lol fml. I place a stop on it then sell to ensure no more than a 2% loss before buying back in the next day once it has been reweighted. It was just me overthinking a half-day christmas market when my strategy for a whole month was to wait for this day lol... swing and a miss on 20% in a day
. Like spooking an animal you've tracked for weeks because you thought it was making a cute face and wanted to snap a pic because the sunlight happened to be nice the moment before you take your shot.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 1, 2005
- Messages
- 46,217
- Reaction score
- 20,467
Was surprised how low it went on Christmas eve. A half and a slow day on top. I thought there would be declines but not to this level.Except I do follow through with it every single day in december before today lol fml. I place a stop on it then sell to ensure no more than a 2% loss before buying back in the next day once it has been reweighted. It was just me overthinking a half-day christmas market when my strategy for a whole month was to wait for this day lol swing and a miss on 20%
Tax harvesting mayhaps? I too wouldn't have thought to short today. Takes balls man, as it's easy for something to come on and suddenly prop a sector up, ie govt intervention
- Joined
- May 1, 2005
- Messages
- 46,217
- Reaction score
- 20,467
It's nuts, but I don't mind . In long term, dripping more each quarter. Plus buybacks are buying stocks at a more reasonable level.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 66,955
- Reaction score
- 39,156
Tuition free college is stupid, but if we want to make our already existing state universities tuition free, I wouldn't mind that, but I would only support it if we severely peeled back the comprehensiveness of the majors offered, and distilled them to a more limited set of disciplines geared towards actually producing graduates of social worth. After all, if society is paying them to be educated, then they should be directly, materially valuable to society for that investment. So shall die the sentimental attachment to the notion of the "intangible value that an education presents."
This should only increase the quality of the students in those institutions by stimulating competition, after all, unless the very point of free college is simply to babysit people without a purpose who aren't actually be trained for any social utility for four years, and want to coast by in a math-free humanities course instead of get a real job (a model unfortunately towards which more higher institutions are gravitating, we can see, with some have already abolished any GenEd prerequisites or proficiency performance towards admission/graduation).
The value of universities is going down because their utility is declining at the same time tuition is increasing. This is because, like people wanting to own houses they can't afford, or California government workers demanding "humane" pensions the state simply doesn't have the money to pay, we have an entire generation of people who are desperate to believe that merely by obtaining a diploma they are entitled to some higher quality of life. The problem with this "send every kid to college" mentality, obviously, is that it only makes sense if that kid ends up more valuable in the very market economy you mention. They aren't. Kids coming out with humanity degrees today often don't even wield proficiency in basic grammar. We don't need this many college graduates. We have a glut. That is being reflected in their market value.
So no solution I would propose would be fixated on increasing the number of these graduates.
Why is this happening? Well, the salaries of professors is swelling as colleges fight over the ones with the best reputations, among many other factors-- "professor poaching". That was already kicking up when I was rolling through over 15 years ago. Why not start with socialism inside the walls of academia itself, then? Let's hard cap the salary any academic earns. After all, very few of these people contribute directly to generating wealth in the market outside those working in labs in R1 institutions. So why do these professors or administrators need to be paid more than $125k/yr-- anywhere? That's roughly a third above the median salary in this country for a professional degree.
Because that will drive the top talent to working in universities in other countries that are willing to let these people get paid more, you say? Huh. Yeah, unintended consequences are a bitch.
This is a lesson you'd think progressive would have learned with the results from experiments like Obamacare. Healthcare premiums are up 100% since we embraced this "humanitarian" healthcare debacle called Obamacare. But we still haven't gotten rid of it. We just have a frankbaby formed from leftovers of it due to Trump undermining and sabotaging it with his infantile executive orders because he couldn't achieve the same majority in Congress with Republicans at the wheel as Obama did when Democrats were at the wheel. He is the inferior executive politician and leader. Yet, despite Obama's effectiveness in yielding cohesion, all he reaped was a disaster in costs.
You know how things get cheaper? We stop being spineless by giving people everything they can't afford because it's "humanitarian" before passing on the unpaid bill to future generations. Just because technologies exist doesn't mean everyone is entitled to them.
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2010
- Messages
- 8,735
- Reaction score
- 151
As you and I have talked often enough, we are both long term investors of a certain style. However, any investor, irrespective of style, will be utterly annoyed at this type of irrational ups and downs we're experiencing.
I am fully aware that at most normal times the president doesn't affect the stock markets, but at this time I think President Trump is making things drastically worse with his over the top rhetoric about various things like the interest rate, tariffs, etc. I truly believe he could be hyper beneficial for those of us heavily in stocks if he could be calm and pragmatic about his approach. However, that is very clearly not his style, which is upsetting and what's causing the markets to be hyper variable with lots of selloffs.
If he could just have a single position about business, and really push the line towards it, I think he could ease market confusion and any future concerns. However, as we all know his whims are driven by TV variables and truly unregulated BS, so who knows what will happen.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 2,786
- Reaction score
- 54
- Joined
- May 1, 2005
- Messages
- 46,217
- Reaction score
- 20,467
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2011
- Messages
- 15,135
- Reaction score
- 11,701
Sorry, but that's a very contrived and frankly terrible analysis of the situaiton. Everything you're saying here is just based on your feelings about people being "entitled" and wanting "free stuff". Same old boring argument with no substance. I was looking for strong subtantive arguments against it that would outweigh the cons and all you've given me is fluff and empty rhetoric. You calling it "stupid" out of hand reflects very poorly on you. Let me go through my reasoning for why I think making higher education tuition free would be a vast benefit to society, why it should be implemented and why it is needed.
1. Improving workforce flexibility and raising capital.
First of all, there's no entitlement going on here. At large, society will benefit by increasing the flexibility of the workforce and the students who later join the workforce will pay into that society themselves making up for the costs. Education is an investment and one that by all accounts has a net economic benefit.
"Among the report's other findings:
Investments in education pay off handsomely for both individuals and taxpayers. The net present value of a college education — the benefit in today's dollars after costs and discounting for future inflation — is over $380,000 for U.S. men and nearly $240,000 for U.S. women, the report found."
https://www.businessinsider.com/r-us-falls-behind-in-college-competition-oecd-2014-9?r=US&IR=T&IR=T
Investing in high education mobility and high workforce flexibility is exactly what we do here in Denmark, and is part of the reason why we have a healthy and adaptable economy.
"Denmark is the most egalitarian country in the world, but in December 2014, Forbes (once again) ranked Denmark as the best country in the world to do business. (The U.S. ranking was 18th.) The country’s formula for growth is a high level of workforce skills and extensive cooperation among employers and workers to support labor market flexibility." ... "This is why Denmark has one of the highest rates of participation in adult education and training in the world. Rapid technological change makes it important for all adults to be able to upgrade their skills flexibly and throughout their working lives. This is not big brother socialism. This is really smart capitalism."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...the-most-business-friendly-country-whos-right
So with paid tuition we consistently outrank the US by a big margin on both Forbes list and the Economy Freedom Index. Do you know which country ranked #2 this year? Sweden. It's almost as "free stuff" is a deliberately misleading and reductionist insult disguised a real argument. This has nothing to do with "free stuff" and "socialism", it has to do with common sense.
2. Reversing the alarming increase in student debt and tuition costs.
I have already posted the statistics about how student debt and tuition costs have increased exponentially in the last decade. It's at 1,5$ Trillion this year and rising which is absolutely insane.
"Student loan debt is now the second highest consumer debt category - behind only mortgage debt - and higher than both credit cards and auto loans."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2018/06/13/student-loan-debt-statistics-2018/#4f126e0d7310
Default rates are also rising very rapidly, which is a big cause for concern.
"It’s a sum so astronomical that education researchers characterize this as a time of crisis—one that will only worsen without governmental and institutional intervention. In January of this year, Judith Scott-Clayton of Columbia University’s Teachers College wrote in a Brookings Institute report that “the looming student loan default rise is worse than we thought.” Based on the most recent trends, it seems likely that by 2023, about 40% of borrowers may default on their student loans, amounting to about $560 billion in unpaid debt" ... "At the same time, we’re only just beginning to understand the lasting effects of student debt. Because the typical life of a student loan is 10 years, conventional wisdom has long held that education debt isn’t really a burden for people in their mid-30s and beyond. Not anymore."
https://qz.com/1367412/1-5-trillion-of-us-student-loan-debt-has-transformed-the-american-dream/
You said you were well aware so therefor it should come to no suprise to you that no other iniatives put forth at this time will hault this process. There is simply no end in sight and the consequences will be quite devastating for the economy as soon as the recession hits, which it will. Tuition free college would put a stop to this trend. Another solution, along with free tuition, would be to cancel all student debt. That sounds radical on it's head, but $1,5 Trillion in tax cuts by the Trump administration did absolutely nothing to change the trajectory of the GDP, however a study from the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College calculated that canceling student debt would boost GDP by as much as $108 billion a year, because families would be able to spend the the money that would otherwise be paid every month.
"The authors find that cancellation would have a meaningful stimulus effect, characterized by greater economic activity as measured by GDP and employment, with only moderate effects on the federal budget deficit, interest rates, and inflation (while state budgets improve). These results suggest that policies like student debt cancellation can be a viable part of a needed reorientation of US higher education policy."
http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/the-macroeconomic-effects-of-student-debt-cancellation
This is not part of the argument for tuition free college, but it's worth thinking about.
3. Reducing crime, social inequality and poverty rates.
The criminological research demonstrates irrefutable evidence of the inverse relationship between education, crime and poverty. The more educated a population or area is, the lower the violent crime. Higher graduation rates increases public safety AND increases enonomic net income. Actually, it's quite surprising how much capital and safe there is to gain.
"The nation could save as much as $18.5 billion in annual crime costs if the high school male graduation rate increased by only 5 percentage points, a 2013 report from the Alliance for Excellent Education finds." ... "In addition to examining total crime savings, the report projects the number of individual crimes that could be prevented by increasing the male high school graduation rate by 5 percentage points, and finds that such an increase would decrease overall annual incidences of assault by nearly 60,000; larceny by more than 37,000; motor vehicle theft by more than 31,000; and burglaries by more than 17,000. It would also prevent nearly 1,300 murders, more than 3,800 occurrences of rape, and more than 1,500 robberies."
https://all4ed.org/press/crime-rates-linked-to-educational-attainment-new-alliance-report-finds/
At one end you'd save money by more people getting higher education, better jobs and paying into the system and at the other end less costs in sentencing. More good news is that some studies have shown that, while graduation rates are obviously a better goal, you don't even need to increase educational outcomes in order for it to be effective in reducing crime, especially in the at risk population.
"Lastly, education-based policies need not increase educational attainment to reduce crime. Studies on school choice lotteries (Cullen et al. 2006; Deming forthcoming) suggest that providing disadvantaged urban youth with better schools can substantially reduce juvenile and adult crime, even if it has little effect on traditional education outcomes."
https://economics.handels.gu.se/digitalAssets/1439/1439011_49-55_research_lochner.pdf
This is another reason why the prison system should be reformed and improve education for both youth adult offenders as the evidence is overwhelmning. Unfortunately, but very predictably, it has been going in the opposite direction.
"Despite this evidence of their extraordinary effectiveness, educational programs in correctional facilities have in many cases been completely eliminated. As of 2008, more than 1.6 million individuals were housed in adult correctional facilities in the United States, and at least 99,682 juveniles are in custody. The majority of these individuals will be released into communities unskilled, undereducated, and highly likely to become reinvolved in criminal activity. With so many ex-offenders returning to prison, it would seem clear that the punitive, incarceration-based approach to crime prevention has not worked as a basis for criminal justice policy in America"
https://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/crime/education-and-crime/4/
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3592774?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
We're getting sidetracked though. Moving on. Having tuition free higher education grealy benefit especially low income families and social equilibrium. Whit would perhaps in part lend to the solution of the rising income and power inequality.
"The lack of educational mobility has serious implications for individuals and society, he noted. Higher education levels are associated not just with higher earnings, but also with better health, more community engagement and more trust in governments, institutions and other people. Raising educational attainment is not only giving countries more income but it is also creating a greater degree of social cohesion," Schleicher said.""
https://www.businessinsider.com/r-us-falls-behind-in-college-competition-oecd-2014-9
"Only 1 in 2 high school graduates from low-income families attends college, and many say they choose not to enroll because they don’t believe they can afford it. And they are right. Every year, low-income students file their FAFSAs only to learn that they will get insufficient support. That’s because programs like the Pell grant that are targeted to the poor have been underfunded for decades. And that underfunding looks to get worse. The Pell and parallel state need-based grant programs lack the political constituency to demand funding that aligns with their goals."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rse-low-income-students-win-with-free-tuition
4. It's affordable and cost effective.
Bernie Sander introduced a bill last year to make all public 4-year college and universities tuition free for households making $125.000 a year or less and make cummunity college tuition free for all income levels. Included in the bill was cutting student debt interest rates in half by letting them refinance their debt. This program was estimated to cost the government $47 billion each year, to cover 66% of the estimated $70 billion each year. The rest, 33%, would be paid by the state.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/colle...ree-college-for-all-plan-would-cost/37430393/
$70 billion a year is the entire cost estimation. That is an extremely low cost considering the benefits.
To summarize:
You could increase workforce flexibility, reverse trend of student loan debt, better prepare for the recession, combat the issue of negative socioeconomics inheritance, lower crime rates, poverty and lower jail sentences which would all save the taxpayers money. All this at a yearly cost that could have already been paid 22 times over, or for the next 22 years, by the first Trump tax cuts alone! This is the astounding thing. Btw, I don't see you being outraged about the "entitlement" and "free stuff" that the stock buybacks from the tax cuts had as a primary effect.
Your speculation about a few professors leaving the country, which is barely plausable enough to be concerned about, doesn't outweigh the pros listed nor does it even address the argument. Part of the reason why Obamacare increased premiums as much as it did was because the insurancy companies found a way to cut their losses and put the burden on the consumer, as they always do. It was a bad program to begin with and one that was absolutely gutted on the floor by the Republicans many times over before an even more crappy version was passed in congress. Again, that is besides the point and has no barring on the proposal I'm arguing for. If you want to do this whole thing for Universal Health care we can, although it's very time consuming. Let's first focus on the topic at hand.
So, while there are moral and philosphical arguments to be made for providing every citizen with equal opportunity, there is no need for humanism to see how this would benefit America and the American people.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 42,611
- Reaction score
- 24,194
The shared myopia of thinking education is an end-product and not a collective investment in social efficacy.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2011
- Messages
- 15,135
- Reaction score
- 11,701
So concise. That's basicly my long ass post, but sometimes you have to really spell it out.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2006
- Messages
- 16,143
- Reaction score
- 719
Is this what you think the tax cuts did? Lmao.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 50,942
- Reaction score
- 35,949
By the way, want to tell us what the “Jewish question” is yet, or are you saving it for the new year?
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2011
- Messages
- 28,401
- Reaction score
- 0
Stop losses are for pussies. Though I would have more money if I used them. Rather be broke than a pussy.
I don't like them because all it has to do is a kiss a price for a millisecond and it is gone. It could go right back up. And the big guys often know this and trigger stop loss orders only to buy into it.
I don't like them because all it has to do is a kiss a price for a millisecond and it is gone. It could go right back up. And the big guys often know this and trigger stop loss orders only to buy into it.
I am curious how the SEC sees Trumps twitter rants about the FED and interest rates? I mean couldn’t Trump let few people know he was Going to go ballistic on the economy via twitter to make the market react negatively?
Latest posts
-
-
-
Would you rather lose a street fight, or win and kill your opponent?- Latest: Killer Whale
-
