Buying forest land, implementing solar

I wonder if there's a way to effectively short for the longterm?

The expenses and fees of ETFs tend to diminish the SHORT etfs tending to make it lossy over the longterm (i.e., multiple months)

SDOW has expense ratio of .95% (3x inverse dow30)
SDS has expense ratio of .89% (2x inverse S&P500)
SPDN has expense ratio of .62% (1x inverse S&P 500 - the lowest expense etf of the bunch)

Sortable table at http://etfdb.com/etfdb-category/inverse-equities/#etfs__expenses&sort_name=expenses_score&sort_order=desc&page=1

I know there's definitely a way to effectively long for the longterm. Just ordinary stocks and etfs. I'd argue ordinary stocks would probably be better, no etf expenses eroding away at earnings longterm. For that matter, for taking a longterm long position in the market, I'd probably invest in high dividend large cap stocks.

Ordinarily, though, I think I would definitely focus on rent-seeking investments. I highly suspect the "dividends" in real life rental properties are potentially much higher than dividends.

My neighbor, who once used to own an RV park, told me he would get an RV park established somewhere where "it's nice and warm", like San Padre island.

I wondered about locations close to Houston since houston is a high demand area (Lots of people moving here), with presumably a lot of working class renters. (I met one such employee at walmart, who lived out of an RV probably in a nearby RV park. He was telling me about how good the space heaters were.)

He told me "Good luck collecting the rent! You want those retirees who are looking for nice areas, like San Padre island and land is still affordable there."

Even then, though... I suspect rental demand is higher in Houston vs. San Padre island. I suspect many more people want to be close to "work opportunities" vs "nice areas" with few(er) work opportunities, including retirees. Even if the "collect rates" are lower... I suspect you potentially have many more renters more than making up for it.

I wonder how many landlord tenant relations I might expect? Seems like I have a good history with the desperate girls.

I think for a working class RV park, I'd probably make the rent weekly or maybe biweekly.

Eviction of deadbeats would be faster that way.

And looks like SPDN would be better as a longterm short. The erosion of stock price isn't nearly as pronounced as with the other DOW/S&P short etfs. Although, I can't be sure I'm confusing "erosion of stock price" with "3x the inverse going up of the DOW". But, that's just been my experience with short ETFs... they don't usually perform well over many months due to ETF fees and expenses. And, I suspect we're looking at a multimonth phenomenon here.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/todays-record-breaking-dow-drop-could-little-impact-005303934--abc-news-topstories.html

Looks like we have a lot of optimistic people here in spite of a large selloff by huge players.

That tells me... the bear is about to be unleashed!

Looks like the decline started feb1. Wonder what happened feb1?

Someone got access to economic data for january before anyone else? No doubt this would be the big players.

I suspect we're looking at a decline all the way to 12,000-14,000.

Interestingly, looks like the last decline started in february.

So this would be a 10-year long stock cycle. That is exceptionally long for a stock cycle (Usually 7-9 years) and it's no doubt "overdue". (Actually, if the last major decline was in 2009, it'd be 9 years. So, it's following the pattern.)

People doubt its significance because it's "not following the fundamentals".

LOL! Tell me the last time the stock market followed the fundamentals!

The stock market follows fear and complacent optimistic greed.

My nuke mate asked me the next time a crash will happen, I said "probably in the next couple of years.", well, it's been about 2.5 years since I told him that, so it looks like my prediction is on schedule.

It's interesting, thinking about the psychopaths at the head of the market.

They profit during bubbles and declines.

Judging from how I'm delighting in a stockmarket crash, I can imagine some of the top players are experiencing similar exhilaration. They also like it when it does the opposite.

"ordinary investors"/"not psychopaths" seem to only like it when it goes up and that's where their hopes and subsequent optimism is placed.

So, methinks psychopaths are more well suited to the ups and downs of the market.

Ordinarily, you'd think I'd be pessimistic about it, in terms of how it'd affect my income via mainstreet.

Yeah, I kind of am, but my living expenses are really low and they're going to get even better in 2 months.

Plus, there's still a lot of untapped opportunity out there, in spite of that.

Thinking about that scene in "The wolf of wall street"...

And he's definitely a psychopath... the wolf and all...



Interesting, I did the exact same thing with the HEB chick.

Psychopaths don't read fear, they create it. That's how they know it's there. Otherwise they're emotionally unresponsive, hence the pathology.

Dauntless said:

Psychopaths don't read fear, the create it. That's how they know it's there. Otherwise they're emotionally unresponsive, hence the pathology.

Click to expand...

Hmmm...

https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/psychopath.htm

Looks like they have "less neural activity" to recognizing fear.

I guess maybe I'm not a hardcore psychopath, because I can definitely read fear. In fact, it's one of the emotions I enjoy reading the most. Making friends happy is also a good thing, but driving fear into the hearts of my enemies and the "fear prone" also is particularly enjoyable.

And the HEB chick was fearless... thus why she wasn't much of an enemy of mine...

And no doubt she thought the same...

That quavering voice of interested females... so unattractive...

The HEB chick was very interested, but she was still fearless in her speaking. No quavering, no keeping her voice down, no anxiety-producing stuttering or lapse of speech, etc.

I actually wonder... if my scaring her was turning her on...

She's this fearless chick, right, until I scare her...

Then she's like... "HE'S THE ONE!".

Herself being a psychopath, she was presumably well versed in producing misery and fear in those susceptible to it. Then she finds someone producing those same emotions in her... soulmates.

It's funny the bible is telling me "beware the psychopathic female"...

When it's precisely that girl who's my twin image, my soulmate.

Interesting, vix index. Said to be widely considered to measure fear.



Looks like there's often a run up in the vix upto about a year before a crash.



And looking at this picture of the dot-com bubble, it looks like there's often a semi major retreat within 3-6 months of an initial crash, but it completely gives away within 6 months and largely concludes within a year.

Corresponds to the timing of the runup in the VIX.

So a short on the stock market now would probably be for about a year.

I wonder if the SPDN would be a good tool here for a year long short?

I'd almost think it'd be better than trading on margin, with the interest fees probably higher than 5%.

Damn, look at the dotcom bubble, from 5000 to nearly 1000...

Holy crap, wow.

I suspect the crash of 2009 would've been similar if the feds hadn't intervened...

Instead it went from ~14000 to ~7000...

I suspect this one is going to fall hard. "The taller they are, the harder they fall"

And it was purposely engineered by QE money to be as tall as possible.

So the dotcom peak was 5000, and the 2009 peak was 14000.

Where did all that extra money come from?

I would say the current peak of 26,000 came from QE money, but that doesn't explain the substantially higher 2009 peak compared to the 2000 peak.

Maybe it's from the increased concentration of wealth... suspect some foreign capital investment by the chinese too...

And, there was a lot of high dollar real estate loans being made on the back of chinese investors and america investors via real estate derivatives/packages wasn't there? Much of that newly created loan money probably made its way back into the stock market...

Let's consider the possibility it's going to surge back up like it did back in late 1998.

Looks like it dropped from 2000 to 1600, a similar proportional drop, before continuing to ratchet back up to 5000.

The vix was spiking around then too.

How can we tell it's not doing that this time?

Wait... what is that dotcom bubble image showing exactly?

Because it looks like the DJIA actually went from 11100 to 7500 during 1998-2002 looking at https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EDJI/chart?p=%5EDJI#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%3D%3D

So the 1999 DJIA peak: 11000 Min: 7500
2008 peak: 14000 Min: 7000
2018 peak: 26000 Min: ????

Wow, that's been some massive money printing.

I want to know what that dotcom bubble image is showing... maybe I need to be betting against that index...

Oh, the Nasdaq Composite. IXIC

2000 peak: 5000 Min: 1200
2008 peak: 2500 Min: 1200
2018 peak: 7500 Min: ???

Looking at the numerical trend here, I think I want to bet against the IXIC!

Nasdaq appears to be "more tech heavy", thus potentially more volatile during tech market peaks, like shown above during the dotcom bubble.

Would I think we have a tech bubble this time...

Probably more like 2008... so either DJI or Nasdaq short would probably work.

https://www.nasdaq.com/article/3-ways-to-short-nasdaq-with-etfs-cm578081

As a caveat, investors should note that such products are suitable only for short-term traders as these are rebalanced on a daily basis (see: all the Inverse Equity ETFs here ).

Click to expand...

Don't understand the importance of that caveat, but seems like I should.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/financial-advisors/082515/why-leveraged-etfs-are-not-longterm-bet.asp

A good explanation, I think, as to the main reason why inverse etfs aren't meant longterm. Should take sometime to understand this.

Inverse ETFs aren’t designed to be held overnight
Although it seems pretty simple at first glance, this is actually a tricky trade that requires considerable skill because inverse ETFs rebalance daily. In other words, all price movements are calculated on a percentage basis for that day and that day only. The next day you start all over from scratch.

Here’s an example of beta slippage or how daily rebalancing can throw a monkey wrench into your expected profit and loss calculations and cause worse-than-expected returns.Imagine you pay $100 for one share of an inverse ETF based on an index that’s currently at 10,000. Since you’ve bought an inverse ETF, you’re hoping the value of the index goes down so your ETF goes up in value. That same day, the index falls 10% and closes at 9,000. As a result, your share will increase 10% to $110.

Here’s the catch: daily rebalancing means the next day you start over from scratch. If the index opens at 9,000 and then makes a bullish move, closing at 10,000, that’s an increase of 11.11%. Your inverse ETF will decrease in value by that same percentage, and as a result, your share will go down from $110 to $97.78 (11% of $110 is $12.221).

Failure to understand how daily rebalancing affects inverse ETFs can wreak havoc on traders who try to hold them over longer periods of time. Although Ally Invest doesn’t promote day trading, inverse ETFs are intended as an intra-day trade. Trading on a daily basis can lead to more transaction costs.

If you decide to hold a position in an inverse ETF for longer than one day, at a minimum you should monitor your holdings daily. You must realize if you hold an inverse ETF over multiple trading sessions, one reversal day could not just obliterate any gains you’ve racked up, you could find yourself suddenly (and unexpectedly) facing a loss.

Click to expand...

So... I see...

the percentages are compounded, day to day.

So a 1000 point gain has more weight than a 1000 point drop from some number.

A number of daily gains can easily outweigh the daily drops due to the heavier weighting of the gains over the losses.

So if one is planning on holding inverse etfs longterm... you better be sure it's going down down down...

Since I think there'a high likelihood of retreat within the next 6 months.

I probably shouldn't try to hold an inverse etf longterm.

Well, then, is there any suitable way to do a longterm short? Or is that some kind of fantasy?

http://magazine.globeinvestor.com/static/intro/text/school_24.html

Oh, looks like you can short a stock which then requires margin requirements. Placing money into the account.

Looks like shorting $5000 requires $2500 to be placed into the account with 150% margin requirement.

Then if I were to short $20000, I'd need to place $10000 into the margin account.

It doesn't look like there's interest charges on this "borrowed stock". The brokerage, however, earns interest on the free money sitting in the margin account.

The idea with the $20000 short is that the stock will fall to $10000, which case I buy it back...

So, I make $10000 shorting $20000 of stock.

Make $10000 using $10000.

I make more if the margin requirements are less... like 130%... then I can short more stock with a given amount of money in the margin account.

I wonder if robinhood does shorting?

Now back to the question "are we in 1998 right now, and there's still more to go before it peaks in 2000"?

What kind of fervor are we in, exactly?

No specific industry as far as I can tell.

Although, the NASDAQ does look relatively hot at 7500. IXIC

Not quite at 10000 if I were to expect it to be comparable to the DJIA peak for a "full blown dotcom bubble", but considerably above 5000, so there's definitely some weighting in tech stocks above 2008's peak.

So, I'd think IXIC would be a good candidate for a year long short.

And damn... robinhood doesn't support short selling.

Looks like I need to continue with that ALLY application.

Oh isn't that the truth, a before and after.

Kind of like Jesus.

[youtube]JrHEk4lquOo[/youtube]

Look, a psychopath selling dreams like I've advocated, lol.

I think maybe that's what I was doing with the HEB chick in manipulating her...

Selling dreams...

And I called her faulty inferences in my subtle implications wishful thinking...

I seriously wasn't trying to mislead her, though. I just had no idea that's precisely what she was looking for RIGHT THEN RIGHT NOW

[youtube]qbZa69tIjoI[/youtube]

Isn't that interesting. He had a $72,000 month, I had a $20,000 month. What a mirror.

It's true, I do tend to make my products look impressive. Make it look all good and shiny. The product is still high quality, don't get me wrong, but the display model which lures potential customers in is exceptional.

"One of the most disturbing things that happened that night is that I had an orgasm. Despite years of marriage, it was my first orgasm ever."

But how can this be? How can a victim's experience of rape, especially violent rape, include an orgasm? If you are a blogger on one website (which I refuse to honor with a link) the explanation is simple: "You've suddenly realized that actually, in spite of what you thought before it happened, in reality you wanted to be raped and you're... loving every minute of it... that fact alone makes 'rape' an act of consensual sex."

Click to expand...

Yep, makes a lot of sense to me. The HEB chick wasn't being aroused from me asking her politely to go have some sex, she was being aroused from my imposing myself on her and persisting with it forcefully. Not necessarily like a rapist, OK, she was obviously consenting to it, but you know... not like a beta whose asking and begging for it, seeking her approval.

Submission fantasy, she was enjoying that fantasy.

The difference between a rapist and I was that I wasn't "hiding it" or "sneaky about it", I was pretty direct with it IN FRONT OF HER. And, see... that takes balls. Which girls love. Another big difference is there's a big difference in assault levels between impassioned bedroom eyes fitting to the moment and an exposed sprung dick not necessarily fitting to the moment.

I guess maybe at the time, having emerged victorious with recent skirmishes, I felt powerful. "Had high mana". This in turn was what the HEB chick was lusting for, she gave me those elevator eyes. She tried frustrating me.... but oh... I was too powerful to be frustrated by a pibsqueek like her and I forcibly let her know it. This then aroused her so much being overpowered by personality and "force of will", not unlike the kind of power a rapist has over their victim, that arouses the female so.

Dang, I'm sure I've mentioned all this SOMEWHERE on these boards, more than once:

The day after a stock has made a big move up or down, what is it likely to do? Which direction is the next big move likely to be?

Are you acquainted with the phrase "Reverting to the mean?"Rather than I give you an explanation that you'll gloss over, do a search; maybe the H.E.B. chick will turn out to have posted something on it.

Other phrases for you to look up:

Technical investing.

Value investing.

Fallen angel investing.

200 day moving average. At one point I do recall that you had mentioned riemann sums for doing something and I asked if that worked the same as a 200 day moving average. To simplify a bit what you'll be reading you're trying to figure out if the curve is concave up or concave down, so you can draw conclusions based on that. So your high and low don't have to be at one end, they could both be in the middle somewhere. Fascinating stuff. '

Ah well, I should let you get back to thinking about girls and boys.

The HEB chick wasn't being aroused from me asking her politely to go have some sex, she was being aroused from my imposing myself on her and persisting with it forcefully.

Click to expand...

Actually, yes, much like a rapist the way you say it. She said no, yet he persisted.

[youtube]hBw7nYsHk6Q[/youtube]

Dauntless said:

Dang, I'm sure I've mentioned all this SOMEWHERE on these boards, more than once:

The day after a stock has made a big move up or down, what is it likely to do? Which direction is the next big move likely to be?

Are you acquainted with the phrase "Reverting to the mean?"Rather than I give you an explanation that you'll gloss over, do a search; maybe the H.E.B. chick will turn out to have posted something on it.

Other phrases for you to look up:

Technical investing.

Value investing.

Fallen angel investing.

200 day moving average. At one point I do recall that you had mentioned riemann sums for doing something and I asked if that worked the same as a 200 day moving average. To simplify a bit what you'll be reading you're trying to figure out if the curve is concave up or concave down, so you can draw conclusions based on that. So your high and low don't have to be at one end, they could both be in the middle somewhere. Fascinating stuff. '

Ah well, I should let you get back to thinking about girls and boys.

The HEB chick wasn't being aroused from me asking her politely to go have some sex, she was being aroused from my imposing myself on her and persisting with it forcefully.

Click to expand...

Actually, yes, much like a rapist the way you say it. She said no, yet he persisted.

Click to expand...

Lol, she was saying YES YES YES and I persisted anyway, lol. Granted, she was probably looking for something and thought I had it.

She might've been aroused by my power.

It's a hard thing to measure, power, but that does seem to be the one similarity between the rapist situation that seems to arouse the female. Their power came from asserting their will against the will of the victim (They might've felt power for other reasons, too), my power came from winning local skirmishes.

Asserting power over the female arouses them. Females get turned on by powerful men.

Females will test your power by resisting, but they gleefully relent to powerful men.

The husband who failed to cause her wife orgasm might've been lacking... power.

Submissive beta who didn't get in fights, didn't win them... but he was a model employee that did exactly what his alpha boss told him. Girl attracted to and stayed for the money, but wasn't aroused by his non-powerfulness.

I'm not moving because I can't assert power over my enemies, but because the risks are too high. Guns are unnatural projections of power. A weak competitor who wouldn't dare face me off hand-to-hand can still kill me hidden in the bush with a gun and someone seems to have that intention. And the neighborhood just simply sucks, a bunch of mobiles everywhere, many visibly decaying. And, the bigger lifestyle factors...

-Too far away from the "good" white girls
-Too far from the power lines
-Too far from the main road, takes forever to go anywhere and back.
-Too far from the nearest towns, eats up gas... $$$... $3-$4 a trip.
-The "good" white girls just don't want to live here if they had a choice... and believe me... they have choices in this town. "good" white girls are far and few between here. Bunch of porkers. Unlike impoverished eastern europe, these girls show the symptoms of a wealthy society, in being fat and lazy.

And no word about granny filling out the contract, seems like she was trying the last time I heard. Going to follow up around 10 in the morning.

Dauntless said:

Dang, I'm sure I've mentioned all this SOMEWHERE on these boards, more than once:

The day after a stock has made a big move up or down, what is it likely to do? Which direction is the next big move likely to be?

Are you acquainted with the phrase "Reverting to the mean?"Rather than I give you an explanation that you'll gloss over, do a search; maybe the H.E.B. chick will turn out to have posted something on it.

Click to expand...

I believe we're due for a crash and the signs are there. Price has reached peak relative to the expansion of the money supply since the last crash, the timing of the last one, and so on.

The only question now is how long is it going to take.

Might take a year to mostly conclude, might take two, might take 6 months. But make no mistake, it will conclude.

I'm betting on within a year. Maybe a little longer.

Seems like the unicorn fervor has run out of steam... unlike 1998. Plenty of unicorn fervor left in 1998. So probably won't take 2 years.

Even though it doesn't seem like we've had the same kind of "dotcom" fervor like before, there has been similar "unicorn" investing this time around, funding millions into worthless unproven tech companies in recent years. So the tale tale sign of the dotcom era is here, and I think the NASDAQ is vulnerable to a massive correction not unlike the dotcom days. I don't think we're looking at a 5 to 1 fall, but 3 to 1 is pretty realistic.

And, I know, someone is going to object... "But this time it's different"...

Seems plausibly true, many tech companies are making good money vs 1999 (Google and amazon seems to be making loads more...)...

But what I've learned about stocks is that it doesn't matter how much money the company makes. It matters how much the falling stock price is scaring stock holders. Stock price follows the amount of attention and /the kind/ of attention a stock has.

I will say though, for the "Longterm investor", the price over the next 30-40 years will dwarf current prices save massive global war, both money expansion pressures via loans and QE and the increasing concentration of wealth ensures it. So, even though the price might lose 50-80% of their current value, it's still a bargain for the 40 year span investor. Personally, I'd save my cash and hold off until the crash concludes.

Over the longterm, I definitely think the NASQAQ (IXIC) is a good longterm candidate. Technology is only becoming more prevalent in the economy and I think it will increasingly command attention in future boom cycles.

I'd argue 2008 was diverting money away from tech stocks because of the massive real estate bubble everyone was deluding themselves about. ("Real estate always appreciates! it's a safe investment.") And the real estate financial instruments made it easy for investors, especially the newly rich chinese, to put liquid capital into real estate (But made it just as easy to take it out, which they did in massive numbers.).

And probably because the recent dotcom bubble was keeping investors scared of tech stocks.

But apparently not so much this time...

And despite my investment insights... I can't play the market because I just have too much tied up into the house I'm building. And I really don't feel buckling down in this mexican shi7hole for another year, lol.[i.e., WASTING MY YOUTH]

I should continue the ALLY application to keep my options open.

And,lol, my dad gifted me $100 in GE stock back when I was a kid in 2000 and looks like it was trading around $40 back then, and it looks like it's now trading at $15, lol.

I was kind of hoping "Maybe I have a hidden fortune in my 18 year old trade account", lol.

Who the hell knows where that trade account is and the logon credentials... lol...

That'd be a hunt.

kissing leads to touching leads to loving

So, first base (kissing), second base(touching)... etc... pretty much describes the "normal" sequence. Not like literally achievement levels, lol.

According to one rapist's experience...

Hugging leads to kissing leads to loving. I'm sure there was some unmentioned touching.

(Woke her up to his dick inside her, the first time.)

One rapist claimed he was lot more active in his youth but he's mellowed down...

I bet that's because he was around a bunch of teenage girls in his youth! Not that he's really any less horny nowadays. I might question my libido sometimes until I get around some 16 year old girls, and bonkers.

swbluto said:

And despite my investment insights... I can't play the market because I just have too much tied up into the house I'm building. And I really don't feel buckling down in this mexican shi7hole for another year, lol.[i.e., WASTING MY YOUTH]

I should continue the ALLY application to keep my options open.

Click to expand...

Something new, a HOUSE?
If all your money is tied up in the shack, what happened to the millions you had? Millions is that you claimed to be wealthy a page or two. Now you are fighting your way around the our Mexican shithole.
Good for you, maybe you grew a pair, finally.

Dan

Yes, I intend on building a house on the new land I'm trying to purchase.

And, on the real estate connection...

real estate has gone bonkers as the stock market has reached new stratospheric heights... What's the connection?

My construction neighbor tells me construction is crazy this year, that's why he's not building on the lot he just purchase.

So, essentially, investors provide money to back the mortgage, making mortgages more widely available. Not unlike how savers enable banks to make mortgages, by using fractional reserve banking (They can lend upto 90% of the savings available.).

When investors withdraw money from the real estate markets, they remove the backing, thus making the mortgage money dry up. Suddenly, mortgages are hard to come by. This is what happened during the last recession. When mortgages are hard to come by, and they become more stringent, real estate prices fall... just like they did during the great recession.

So, when the stock market crashes, investors are going to do the same thing... mortgages will be harder to come by, and real estate prices will fall along with the stock market.

So, that's how the stock market will induce a real estate crash, and that explains how it's been inducing a real estate price boom.

So, I suspect we're looking at a repeat of 2008, except I would think on a less severe scale...

Unless they really haven't really been kept in check.

Too big to fail, too big to regulate.

swbluto said:

I believe we're due for a crash and the signs are there. Price has reached peak relative to the expansion of the money supply since the last crash, the timing of the last one, and so on.

Click to expand...

Oh, reeeeeeally. What signs would THOSE be? Do you even KNOW what this "Peak relative to the expansion" MEANS? You're a damn parrot repeating what you've heard. Most of the sort of analysis you're you're misunderstanding usually proves WRONG anyway. I could tell you what I think and I apparently get it right because I don't lose in these situations but you need to learn how to research this.

Oh, there's far, far more money in dot.com and unicorns than in 1998. It's just less sensational. It'll never be different, but there'll always be people doing some things differently and it winds up different for us.

swbluto said:

So, essentially, investors provide money to back the mortgage, making mortgages more widely available. Not unlike how savers enable banks to make mortgages, by using fractional reserve banking (They can lend upto 90% of the savings available.).

Click to expand...

And that 90% they lend gets deposited, so they can lend 81% of the original deposit. This can cycle up to 10 times of the original deposit. So when someone withdraws 1/10th, the payments coming in will cover that fairly quickly, assuming someone else isn't making a deposit to cover it as is the real story. As well as someone paying their loan off early. You don't understand how this works at all. Do you know how spread spectrum creates a theoretically infinite bandwidth by letting everyone on and slowing down, etc.? Yes it can bind up too much, but. . . .

What the financial system is most at risk for is the government taking the money away with higher taxes, deficit spending, etc. Government spending is only half as effective as normal commerce. They lie to us about the great benefit of up to $5 for every $1 they spend, when that $1 does $10 in damage to the economy when they take it.

And no, you did not describe 2008 all over again. And the governments' efforts "Keep in check" made it worse, as always. If let's say your seat belt broke under strain in an accident. The energy that built up and is released makes your impact worse than if you hadn't been wearing it. It's the same with government controls. Chrome moly is stronger than mild steel at first, but it will actually break under the strain in a lot of ways before the mild steel, won't hold up as well over time, etc. Government controls making the crash less severe, right. But it'll be more fun for THEM. Oh, don't let them hear you say that.

Meanwhile, the stock market does not induce crashes. That's like saying a fever induces an infection. Don't blame the symptoms. It's when the house payments stop that people panic and want their money out of banks. FDIC means nothing to them, they withdraw their money and pay $11,000 for a $10,000 government bond because they're afraid to put the cash in their mattress. This is where a lot of the losses of 2008 went. Then the panic selling of the stocks, it's ONLY A SYMPTOM, it is NOT something Wall Street has done, they really are victims of it. Fractional reserve banking does us a lot of good, but anything has risks. You would not be able to live in the city and walk to the grocery store without a car or a care without fractional reserve banking. When your job and the groceries are gone, it's not that Wall Street has let us down, it is that we have let Wall Street down. The individual criminals out there don't do real structural damage.

swbluto said:

But what I've learned about stocks is that it doesn't matter how much money the company makes. It matters how much the falling stock price is scaring stock holders. Stock price follows the amount of attention and /the kind/ of attention a stock has.

Click to expand...

Okay, you've taken an interest in something important, but you need to learn it better. "Investor pressure." Apple is normally artificially high by the fundamentals, which is why it's so volatile. Sure can plunge suddenly, eh? Late 2008 was mostly about investor pressure, most of the stocks there was no reason for the plunge it was just people suddenly willing to sell for whatever they could get then put what was left in another stock they would then also sell at a loss.

But the government has this new system to lock down the stock exchange. Now, that doesn't mean they'll prevent plunges, they'll probably make some things worse. But it WILL be "Different," though that could be in name only, I expect they won't help anything because they never do.

swbluto said:

And despite my investment insights... I can't play the market because I just have too much tied up into the house I'm building.

Click to expand...

Yeah, you could have built a portfolio into 3 figures by now.

swbluto said:

And,lol, my dad gifted me $100 in GE stock back when I was a kid in 2000 and looks like it was trading around $40 back then, and it looks like it's now trading at $15, lol.

I was kind of hoping "Maybe I have a hidden fortune in my 18 year old trade account", lol.

Who the hell knows where that trade account is and the logon credentials... lol...

That'd be a hunt.

Click to expand...

If they bought in 2000 I can't imagine there's any "Log On" that was ever set up for it.

Anything broad and sweeping, such as NASDAQ rather than individual stocks, will tend to be secure, low income you probably won't lose situation. Don't make real longterm plans, if something is succeeding the government is already planning to destroy it for their own purposes. They deny it, but the government really does force these crashes on us to take power, pass laws acting like they're doing us a favor, etc. What happened to your GE stock was the government struck back at the success of Jack Welch, having great fun at what they were able to do for themselves at the investors' expense. So many of them are just old people living on their retirement money and they'll just die anyway if they're not homeless first, why would the government care?

On May 8, 2000 GE had a 3-1 stock split. That means for every share you originally had at $40, you now have three at $15 if they bought before. GE used to pay dividends, I'm guessing you had a dividend account as that would be normal with a parent buying the kid a trust fund stock. If you never received checks and your parents didn't get them either there could be over $100 in that account.

And yes, that could be a bit of a search. But ASK YOUR PARENTS! Was it at the family bank? If so it'll be easy. Through your insurance agent at the time? If he had his own agency or working for someone else, that agency might still be there, it might have been taken over when the guy retired, etc.

GE has been trying to sell off the lightbulbs, etc., to just run out and do something new. Terribly stupid, but they're in charge at the moment. They just want to spend and have fun, no skin off their nose if they destroy what's left, eh?

Dauntless said:

swbluto said:

I believe we're due for a crash and the signs are there. Price has reached peak relative to the expansion of the money supply since the last crash, the timing of the last one, and so on.

Click to expand...

Oh, reeeeeeally. What signs would THOSE be? Do you even KNOW what this "Peak relative to the expansion" MEANS? You're a damn parrot repeating what you've heard.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know what it means. Exact numbers are hard to come by, but we do have a few clues.

3 trillion pumped directly into the stock market by QE. Some of it leaked out due to stock sells, whatever.

How much was already in the stock market. The total market capitalization?

Add that newly printed money to the market capitalization, in addition to the newly created money via loans, calculate the new DJI price, and that's the new predicted peak. (Total market cap / number shares = predicted share price peak.)

You'll find it's probably going to be awfully close to the current peak of 26,000.

2000 peak: 11,000
2009 peak: 14,000
2018 peak: 26,000

In otherwords, if it's going ANY HIGHER, it's not going MUCH HIGHER. So, essentially WE ARE AT PEAK. Time to short the market!!! The frothy tech stocks and the high NASDAQ suggests IXIC will fall by a factor of at least 2, I'm guessing 3, maybe even more.

"Jeff Bezo is now the richest man at 120 billion dollars"

Not anymore after the NASDAQ crash.

Sell any real estate you want to sell NOW, if not already.

Once mortgage money dries up, real estate prices are going to crash.

After the crash is the best time to buy stock and real estate, and ride out to the next peak.

I would probably follow the unemployment rate curve to engage a good time to buy real estate. When the unemployment rate curve peaks is the likeliest time you're going to find the best real estate prices.

You have not ascribed an actual meaning to any of that.

Dauntless said:

You have not ascribed an actual meaning to any of that.

Click to expand...

Someone who wants to delve into the mechanics of a thorough technical analysis is free to do so.

If you have lots of money, maybe one can hire an academic to gather the hard numbers.

I know the big banks have already done so. Like the one that's been cancelling so many high balance cards this year.

Me, I SEE THE BIG PICTURE, and I'm rarely wrong when I'm convinced.

swbluto said:

Dauntless said:

You have not ascribed an actual meaning to any of that.

Click to expand...

Someone who wants to delve into the mechanics of a thorough technical analysis is free to do so.

Me, I SEE THE BIG PICTURE, and I'm rarely wrong when I'm convinced.

Click to expand...

But that's not the big picture, that's the frame. You haven't mentioned the picture at all. The picture. THE PICTURE!

Someone can't see the forest for the trees.

I see the forest.