the idiot wrote:
Bad Wigins has made a nonsensical post in reply to me, now my day is complete!
Don't know or care about your day, but your argument is nonexistent.
the idiot wrote:
Bad Wigins has made a nonsensical post in reply to me, now my day is complete!
Don't know or care about your day, but your argument is nonexistent.
Racket wrote:
Maserati wrote:
I’m exhausted, have been on conference with some friends. I think we are convening at my place at 5am with popcorn to watch the show.
This may be more living history.
Good night to all, sleep tight. ?
I would be careful of overestimating the power of futures traders. Market makers will show their hand around 8 or so like they always do in these huge pre-market moves
i definitely believe this. I've seen it too many times already, the huge gap down at open to be followed by rebounding, and fairly committed rebounding, throughout the day. NOt jumping to any conclusions just yet....
seattle prattle wrote:
Racket wrote:
I would be careful of overestimating the power of futures traders. Market makers will show their hand around 8 or so like they always do in these huge pre-market moves
i definitely believe this. I've seen it too many times already, the huge gap down at open to be followed by rebounding, and fairly committed rebounding, throughout the day. NOt jumping to any conclusions just yet....
And note that we get 30% drawdowns more often than you’d think. Every 5 years, I think? Not swearing to that. So may be less historically important than we think.
Yet we still get the sweet 10% per year returns.
Bad Wigins wrote:]Don't know or care about your day, but your argument is nonexistent.
Ok boomer...
BTW, I’ve been fascinated by the running gag on here that Malcolm Gladwell is playing BW for fun, and so I pay close attention, out of morbid curiosity. For the life of me I’m perplexed how that idea ever popped up.
agip wrote:]And note that we get 30% drawdowns more often than you’d think. Every 5 years, I think? Not swearing to that. So may be less historically important than we think.
Yet we still get the sweet 10% per year returns.
Not sure what anyone else has planned for tomorrow at the open, other than mas and his popcorn, but I’ve placed some small orders for two US index ETFs at 90% of Friday’s close, one anchored to SP500, the other on NASDAQ.
the idiot wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:]Don't know or care about your day, but your argument is nonexistent.
Ok boomer...
BTW, I’ve been fascinated by the running gag on here that Malcolm Gladwell is playing BW for fun, and so I pay close attention, out of morbid curiosity. For the life of me I’m perplexed how that idea ever popped up.
I'm fascinated by how you think you didn't lose an argument just because you ignored it. Loser!
Ok BW, I concede. You win the internet argument.
the idiot wrote:
agip wrote:]And note that we get 30% drawdowns more often than you’d think. Every 5 years, I think? Not swearing to that. So may be less historically important than we think.
Yet we still get the sweet 10% per year returns.
Not sure what anyone else has planned for tomorrow at the open, other than mas and his popcorn, but I’ve placed some small orders for two US index ETFs at 90% of Friday’s close, one anchored to SP500, the other on NASDAQ.
Not a bad idea at all. I've been trading this non-leveraged tech ETF: XLK
In calmer times i would trade triple leveraged ETFs, but now i don't bother with so much in cash, i just trade more of the non-leveraged ETFs.
Might join you in an trade or two at the open.
Maserati wrote:
Ryan Foreman wrote:
As a lower middle class investor, I don't understand the fear of a Sanders presidency. Speaking strictly as an investor.
Medicare for All does not increase overall healthcare spending in the country. Even the studies that say Sanders will increase the budget by $2 trillion point that out. It is already a sunk cost largely forced on the back of the employers. M4A shifts that cost on to the government and takes that burden off the backs of employers.
Take Ford Motor company for example, which I own. Last year it was noted that Ford is paying over $1billion/year in health care. Under a Bernie Sanders plan all of that come s off their books. Plus all the businesses to whom Ford sells fleets of Truck and Vans will see their health costs come off their books giving them more money to invest in Ford's products. To help pay for it Sanders will increase taxes on people like the Ford Family who control Ford.
Why should I have a problem with that?
A whole bunch of reasons, for instance do you not think that the Fords would pass that tax burden on to you, or at least get you to share in it?
Then again, maybe lower-middle-class investors ARE voting for the Bern.?
What tax burden?
First of all, its not entirely clear from Sanders what kind of extra taxes there will be at the corporate level. Likely he will reverse rates back to where they were under Obama (or Bush for that matter). The talk is more about Sander's wealth tax. But as I said, that is on the people like the Ford Family. It's not on Ford motor company or middle class investors like me. I will probably have to pay ordinary income tax rates on Ford dividends. But that's hardly any big deal in the big scheme of things.
But secondly, do you not realize what an an enormous tax burden corporations already effectively pay around healthcare. Remember, there is a government mandate that corporations offer full time employees health insurance if they offer it to anyone. Moreover our tax system excludes the huge amount of employer health insurance from an employees wages. So politically corporations like Ford are already squeezed in having to pay for all their employee's health insurance. In every way that matters that is a huge tax.
Racket wrote:
Why should I have a problem with that?
The guy openly talks about how he's going to go after Wall Street, raise taxes on businesses, impose a transaction tax on HFT funds and maybe other speculative trading, and crack down on corruption. Even if he's only 1% successful it will be enough to hit the bottom line and in this day and age missing quarterly revenue might as well be a death sentence.[/quote]
Sander's plan would automatically create $1 billion more in profit and free cash flow for Ford. So again, why should I have a problem with that?
You are right that there would a transaction tax on all securities sold. But for buy and hold investors that will be negligible. Its the volume day traders, and ETFs that will have a problem with that.
Eleven years ago today the S&P 500 hit 666, to take the index back to 1996 levels. I wonder how much index value will be wiped out at this cycle low?
the idiot wrote:
agip wrote:]And note that we get 30% drawdowns more often than you’d think. Every 5 years, I think? Not swearing to that. So may be less historically important than we think.
Yet we still get the sweet 10% per year returns.
Not sure what anyone else has planned for tomorrow at the open, other than mas and his popcorn, but I’ve placed some small orders for two US index ETFs at 90% of Friday’s close, one anchored to SP500, the other on NASDAQ.
Headed to open way down.
Giles Corey wrote:
the idiot wrote:
Not sure what anyone else has planned for tomorrow at the open, other than mas and his popcorn, but I’ve placed some small orders for two US index ETFs at 90% of Friday’s close, one anchored to SP500, the other on NASDAQ.
Headed to open way down.
some stout hearted and cash rich will put in some absolutely ridiculous buy orders in case of a flash crash sort of thing. stocks or etfs down 50%, that kind of thing.
Ryan Foreman wrote:
Racket wrote:
Why should I have a problem with that?
The guy openly talks about how he's going to go after Wall Street, raise taxes on businesses, impose a transaction tax on HFT funds and maybe other speculative trading, and crack down on corruption. Even if he's only 1% successful it will be enough to hit the bottom line and in this day and age missing quarterly revenue might as well be a death sentence.
Sander's plan would automatically create $1 billion more in profit and free cash flow for Ford. So again, why should I have a problem with that?
You are right that there would a transaction tax on all securities sold. But for buy and hold investors that will be negligible. Its the volume day traders, and ETFs that will have a problem with that.[/quote]
Anything you want less of, you tax. Sanders' plan would almost guarantee less investment capital in the US. Investmetn capital would flow to where it is welcome and not taxed.
free and fluid capital markets are one of the greatest things the US offers and as a result we are an enormous recipient of money coming in from around the world. Intentionally slowing that would be insane.
Euro markets down 6% to 10% today.
Vs. 3% dips last few weeks.
Just getting worse.
agip wrote:
Giles Corey wrote:
Headed to open way down.
some stout hearted and cash rich will put in some absolutely ridiculous buy orders in case of a flash crash sort of thing. stocks or etfs down 50%, that kind of thing.
Hell even I'll buy in soon. No way this lasts unless capital just really vanishes. The dip is going to become far too tempting to buy and it's not like unemployment is at like 10% where people's ability to buy has vanished.
Racket wrote:
Hell even I'll buy in soon. No way this lasts unless capital just really vanishes. The dip is going to become far too tempting to buy and it's not like unemployment is at like 10% where people's ability to buy has vanished.
When did you get out?
Giles Corey wrote:
Racket wrote:
Hell even I'll buy in soon. No way this lasts unless capital just really vanishes. The dip is going to become far too tempting to buy and it's not like unemployment is at like 10% where people's ability to buy has vanished.
When did you get out?
Well Giles the BOOMERS have made it so me and my MILLENNIAL cohort haven't been able to buy in at all because of their ridiculous and UNFAIR monetary policies and stupid prices (but they've gotta be able to afford that sweet overpriced boomer bait on bringatrailer.com somehow!). Don't even get me started on HOUSING PRICES and FOREIGN INVESTMENT.
agip wrote:
Giles Corey wrote:
Headed to open way down.
some stout hearted and cash rich will put in some absolutely ridiculous buy orders in case of a flash crash sort of thing. stocks or etfs down 50%, that kind of thing.
shorting VIX futures because we're going up when cash open starts. gonna get on some NQ shorting as well once the circuit breakers turn off (how is that even constitutional!?!)