Last evening I watched On Patrol Live, gives you a good snap shot of life out there. A featured couple, driving in a car with a 14 month old child, vehicle littered with drugs and drug paraphernalia. What is the first thing that comes out of the criminals’ pocket? A smart phone. The mentality is expressed over and over again on these shows. Like the short film winner at Cannes. Funny to me, to my detriment I suppose. :-)
Last evening I watched On Patrol Live, gives you a good snap shot of life out there. A featured couple, driving in a car with a 14 month old child, vehicle littered with drugs and drug paraphernalia. What is the first thing that comes out of the criminals’ pocket? A smart phone. The mentality is expressed over and over again on these shows. Like the short film winner at Cannes. Funny to me, to my detriment I suppose. :-)
Apple co-founder Wozniak would be worth close to $1 trillion today if he kept all his shares. Trillion with a T.
Last evening I watched On Patrol Live, gives you a good snap shot of life out there. A featured couple, driving in a car with a 14 month old child, vehicle littered with drugs and drug paraphernalia. What is the first thing that comes out of the criminals’ pocket? A smart phone. The mentality is expressed over and over again on these shows. Like the short film winner at Cannes. Funny to me, to my detriment I suppose. :-)
Apple co-founder Wozniak would be worth close to $1 trillion today if he kept all his shares. Trillion with a T.
He will die just like billions before him. Forgotten.
La dépendance des enfants à leurs téléphones mobiles pourrait menacer le tissu même de la société, une étude suggère. Beaucoup d'adolescents sont fanatiques ...
Last evening I watched On Patrol Live, gives you a good snap shot of life out there. A featured couple, driving in a car with a 14 month old child, vehicle littered with drugs and drug paraphernalia. What is the first thing that comes out of the criminals’ pocket? A smart phone. The mentality is expressed over and over again on these shows. Like the short film winner at Cannes. Funny to me, to my detriment I suppose. :-)
Come on, Igy. You could just as well ditz the fact that they were driving a car. There is nothing inherent about cell phone use that indicates lawlessness of otherwise. Everybody has a cell phone, good people, bad people, all peoples.
FWIW, I no longer carry a wallet- don't need to. New cell phone carrying case holds a credit card and driver's license and a folded bill. And hell, I don't even need to carry the credit card because it is stored digitally in my iPhone Wallet program (and when I do use the card, I don't even need to pull it out of the case).
But most importantly, it's right there to take all my selfies to collect all those likes on social media. Geez!
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Reason provided:
additional info about cell phone case
“You are not in touch with the market for such products and that's about as succinctly as I can say it. People don't just piss away a grand on crap they don't want. That's the cost of new phones.”
That may be true. Thirty years ago I was the first person in the Health and Kinesiology Department and the only person in the Athletic Department to have an Apple Mac desktop and laptop. I was the resource if someone had a question, and served on a committee on the campus intranet rollout. Beyond that, proficient on the very sophisticated Morgan Stanley desktop. So, though a senior citizen not entirely from tge dark ages.
About five years ago at Morgan Stanley we had a wholesaler make an Apple app presentations, all these time saving applications. As a very practical person I viewed these as more distractions to actual work. Like the person always buying and preparing to do something, but most often procrastinating the actual work.
I set up my wife’s new iPad the previous week. Since she will be the last person posting on Instagram or producing a music video, I had plenty of apps to remove. I would be perfectly happy if my iPhone had four things: 1) call/texting, 2) internet data usage when not home, 3) email when not home, and 4) camera. Like autos, adds on that drive up prices, marketing tools to create an unnecessary need.
“Come on, Igy. You could just as well ditz the fact that they were driving a car. There is nothing inherent about cell phone use that indicates lawlessness of otherwise. Everybody has a cell phone, good people, bad people, all peoples.”
Oh, I know that, but interesting how the individuals are always grabbing for their phones. And truthfully, I do it too. Nothing more irritating than the gal timing, and working her iPhone during reps in the weight room. “Honey, you spend way too much time fiddling with that.”
That is not only permabear speak, but UBER permabear speak. Stocks are not undervalued or overvalued EVER, and if you think so, then you are just trying to add intelligence or study where none belongs. Yes, I know that experts say that stocks are undervalued or overvalued all the time, but that's BS. Stocks are worth on a specific day what someone will pay for them, and that price goes up or down every day. Your comment then that the next decade may not be kind (at least you said MAY) is also just permabear speak. You have ZERO basis for saying that. Monkeys MAY fly out of my butt. There is NOTHING that indicates that stocks will do anything over the next decade that they haven't done historically, and even if you point to something, that's so bogus as nothing could predict today how stocks will do over the next decade. I'm sorry you did not set yourself up to not be worried about such things.
What you SHOULD have done is this:
1) Began investing in diversified STOCK mutual funds as soon as you had a regular job. This should have been an unrelenting practice no matter what the stock market was doing. Pour money in. Pour money in. Pour money in. When the market goes up, great. When the market is down, stocks are just on sale.
2) Along with investing (at least 15% of your income), you should have done all you could to knock out any debt you had as quickly as possible.
3) Once the debt was gone (and even before if you could handle it if perhaps you still had a mortgage), you should have invested MORE than 15%...either in retirement accounts or also non-retirement accounts if necessary).
That's it. Then you wouldn't be worried about how the market does this year or in the next decade.
I know you are retired now, but for anyone who is still making an income and is worried about how the stock market will do in the next decade (or even just to have a very good safety net), one thing to do is to save up as much as 3 YEARS of expenses in cash that you could use to pay bills if the market tanked, giving you time to allow the market to recover...because it will. This money could go in a savings account (even a high yield savings account) or a checking account. The idea isn't to make money on that money...it's just a large emergency fund.
I first invested in stocks in September 1982, so for almost 41 years. I spent 24 years managing other peoples’ money, over 500 households at Morgan Stanley, at my retirement three years ago my partner and I managed about $150 million. Your comments are good for someone age 35 with $35,000 in a 401k, but entirely inadequate for someone that is 60 and has accumulated a great deal of wealth, or depends on it for retirement. Your views are simple, and serve as a good advertisement for financial services industry.
I comment on many things in financial markets, long oil when no one was interested, or short long bond when it was a thing. Detested crypto, meme stocks, NFTs, and ARKK. Long SARK.
Over the next decade I would rather be long a 10 Year Treasury than long the S&P 500. I would rather be short the U.S. Dollar, than short oil.
You're just wrong. That's ok. You are allowed to be wrong.
My comments are good for ANYONE. If you are retired, you COULD have 3 YEARS of liquid expenses (that's what I have)...that enables you to be all in on stocks for investments if you want to be. If you can't do that or don't want to, I'm ok with it if you want to own some bonds, but that's not my preference. I'm also not too troubled by retirees investing in only dividend-giving stocks just to be a little more conservative. At some point though if you did things the right way while working, it shouldn't matter much how you have your stuff invested. It is entirely possible for a person or a couple with just moderately good professional salaries to end up with $5-$10 million dollars by the time retirement rolls around, and anyone who can't do just about everything they could ever want to on that has some serious problems.
Last evening I watched On Patrol Live, gives you a good snap shot of life out there. A featured couple, driving in a car with a 14 month old child, vehicle littered with drugs and drug paraphernalia. What is the first thing that comes out of the criminals’ pocket? A smart phone. The mentality is expressed over and over again on these shows. Like the short film winner at Cannes. Funny to me, to my detriment I suppose. :-)
Apple co-founder Wozniak would be worth close to $1 trillion today if he kept all his shares. Trillion with a T.
I think he's pretty happy though (other than his love life failures). His net worth is $140 million, and he hasn't been at Apple since 1985 having working primarily on things that benefit society and the world since then.
I'm not sure what enough money is, but you can just everything you want to do short of taking over the world with $140 million.
I first invested in stocks in September 1982, so for almost 41 years. I spent 24 years managing other peoples’ money, over 500 households at Morgan Stanley, at my retirement three years ago my partner and I managed about $150 million. Your comments are good for someone age 35 with $35,000 in a 401k, but entirely inadequate for someone that is 60 and has accumulated a great deal of wealth, or depends on it for retirement. Your views are simple, and serve as a good advertisement for financial services industry.
I comment on many things in financial markets, long oil when no one was interested, or short long bond when it was a thing. Detested crypto, meme stocks, NFTs, and ARKK. Long SARK.
Over the next decade I would rather be long a 10 Year Treasury than long the S&P 500. I would rather be short the U.S. Dollar, than short oil.
You're just wrong. That's ok. You are allowed to be wrong.
My comments are good for ANYONE. If you are retired, you COULD have 3 YEARS of liquid expenses (that's what I have)...that enables you to be all in on stocks for investments if you want to be. If you can't do that or don't want to, I'm ok with it if you want to own some bonds, but that's not my preference. I'm also not too troubled by retirees investing in only dividend-giving stocks just to be a little more conservative. At some point though if you did things the right way while working, it shouldn't matter much how you have your stuff invested. It is entirely possible for a person or a couple with just moderately good professional salaries to end up with $5-$10 million dollars by the time retirement rolls around, and anyone who can't do just about everything they could ever want to on that has some serious problems.
Apple co-founder Wozniak would be worth close to $1 trillion today if he kept all his shares. Trillion with a T.
I think he's pretty happy though (other than his love life failures). His net worth is $140 million, and he hasn't been at Apple since 1985 having working primarily on things that benefit society and the world since then.
I'm not sure what enough money is, but you can just everything you want to do short of taking over the world with $140 million.
Shower, shave, and some exercise doesn’t cost much.
FACTS: In the most recent quarterly filing, Apple for the three month and nine month period ending July 1, 2023, and in comparison to the 2022 filing for the same intervals, total net sales, net income, and earnings per share all declined. Nine month EPS ending June 25, 2022 $4.86 and July 1, 2023 $4.69. During that same year period Apple bought back just under 3% of the stock publicly traded.
If I wanted to be an ass hat, I would have posted this under the handle Fact Checker.
I’m sure you’re bright enough to realize that this refutes nothing that I wrote. But feel free to continue to be wrong.
David Rosenberg with a pair of awful predictions from one year ago. He hinted at a 1987-style crash AND a bull market for LT bonds. He got neither.
Although stocks did fall materially for a few weeks after the tweet, to be fair.
David Rosenberg @EconguyRosie “This all smacks of the Fall of ’87. As was the case back then, stay the course on Treasuries and try to be patient.” #RosenbergResearch 5:46 PM · Sep 1, 2022
Returns since then:
LT Bonds: -11%
Stocks: +15%
That's what we used to call a 'texas hedge.' When you get both sides of a trade wrong.
“This all smacks of the Fall of ’87. As was the case back then, stay the course on Treasuries and try to be patient.”#RosenbergResearch
Weniger is interesting - a generally bearish head of equities at a long-only ETF shop, Wisdom Tree. You don't see that often.
They are hardcore value and dividend guys so they underperform when tech rules the roost. Which it has for 10+ years (except for 2022). Maybe Wisdom Tree is a comfortable place for pessimists who think they have to be in stocks anyway. Igy maybe take a look? I've owned their funds for a long time. They don't keep up with the SP500 but have higher dividends and maybe lower vol.
Anyway, here he is opining 6 months ago that either home prices would fall or mortgage rates would fall. Neither has happened. The housing market right now is indeed weird.
Jeff Weniger @JeffWeniger $2,486. If you looked up "unsustainable" in the dictionary, it would show you this chart. Either mortgage rates come down or prices come down, or both.
10:20 PM · Mar 1, 2023 · 58.6K Views
$2,486.
If you looked up "unsustainable" in the dictionary, it would show you this chart. Either mortgage rates come down or prices come down, or both. pic.twitter.com/1md5mPfeqr
Apple co-founder Wozniak would be worth close to $1 trillion today if he kept all his shares. Trillion with a T.
I think he's pretty happy though (other than his love life failures). His net worth is $140 million, and he hasn't been at Apple since 1985 having working primarily on things that benefit society and the world since then.
I'm not sure what enough money is, but you can just everything you want to do short of taking over the world with $140 million.
You could not even buy Kevin Costner's $165 million house. But I would be okay with $140 million.
David Rosenberg with a pair of awful predictions from one year ago. He hinted at a 1987-style crash AND a bull market for LT bonds. He got neither.
Although stocks did fall materially for a few weeks after the tweet, to be fair.
David Rosenberg @EconguyRosie “This all smacks of the Fall of ’87. As was the case back then, stay the course on Treasuries and try to be patient.” #RosenbergResearch 5:46 PM · Sep 1, 2022
Returns since then:
LT Bonds: -11%
Stocks: +15%
That's what we used to call a 'texas hedge.' When you get both sides of a trade wrong.
Just yesterday he promised a recession within the next 6 months. When that doesn't happen he will come back early next year and again promising "a recession in the next 6 months." He may be wrong a lot but at least he is consistent.
On today's episode of Forward Guidance, David Rosenberg Founder and President of Rosenberg Research & Associates joins the show to discuss the continuing rec...
I think he's pretty happy though (other than his love life failures). His net worth is $140 million, and he hasn't been at Apple since 1985 having working primarily on things that benefit society and the world since then.
I'm not sure what enough money is, but you can just everything you want to do short of taking over the world with $140 million.
You could not even buy Kevin Costner's $165 million house. But I would be okay with $140 million.
My barber who said she once cut Costner’s hair says the wife (impending divorce) is fighting for the house. Pretty sure my barber is up on the latest scoop. :-)
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
You could not even buy Kevin Costner's $165 million house. But I would be okay with $140 million.
My barber who said she once cut Costner’s hair says the wife (impending divorce) is fighting for the house. Pretty sure my barber is up on the latest scoop. :-)
She ain't getting it. She long resisted moving out but a judge eventually made her vacate. Coster has a pretty solid prenup. She is a purse designer. I wonder how much she makes from designing purses.
My barber who said she once cut Costner’s hair says the wife (impending divorce) is fighting for the house. Pretty sure my barber is up on the latest scoop. :-)
She ain't getting it. She long resisted moving out but a judge eventually made her vacate. Coster has a pretty solid prenup. She is a purse designer. I wonder how much she makes from designing purses.
David Rosenberg with a pair of awful predictions from one year ago. He hinted at a 1987-style crash AND a bull market for LT bonds. He got neither.
Although stocks did fall materially for a few weeks after the tweet, to be fair.
David Rosenberg @EconguyRosie “This all smacks of the Fall of ’87. As was the case back then, stay the course on Treasuries and try to be patient.” #RosenbergResearch 5:46 PM · Sep 1, 2022
Returns since then:
LT Bonds: -11%
Stocks: +15%
That's what we used to call a 'texas hedge.' When you get both sides of a trade wrong.
Just yesterday he promised a recession within the next 6 months. When that doesn't happen he will come back early next year and again promising "a recession in the next 6 months." He may be wrong a lot but at least he is consistent.
Rosenberg has seen a lot more than anyone here, and rather balanced. Plus he’s Canadian. If we do get a hard landing the door is back open for 3,000, likely spring/summer 2024.
You're just wrong. That's ok. You are allowed to be wrong.
My comments are good for ANYONE. If you are retired, you COULD have 3 YEARS of liquid expenses (that's what I have)...that enables you to be all in on stocks for investments if you want to be. If you can't do that or don't want to, I'm ok with it if you want to own some bonds, but that's not my preference. I'm also not too troubled by retirees investing in only dividend-giving stocks just to be a little more conservative. At some point though if you did things the right way while working, it shouldn't matter much how you have your stuff invested. It is entirely possible for a person or a couple with just moderately good professional salaries to end up with $5-$10 million dollars by the time retirement rolls around, and anyone who can't do just about everything they could ever want to on that has some serious problems.
OK. Hope it works out for you.
Are you serious? I retired at age 56. I have NO debt. I own my house outright. I have a LOT of money invested (I mean a stupid lot). The way I invest is WAY more conservative and proven than what you do, not to mention my 3 YEARS of expenses in liquid reserves. There is no hoping at all. The hay is in the barn. I have way more than I need or even planned to have.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.