YIKES! It never ends!!
lol you Dems really know how to slime it up, donchya?
crooked hillary just can't seem to stop lying, can she? lol Good luck Dems, you're gonna need it ;)
YIKES! It never ends!!
lol you Dems really know how to slime it up, donchya?
crooked hillary just can't seem to stop lying, can she? lol Good luck Dems, you're gonna need it ;)
lol ... trumpkins cannot stop running against hillary. ... lol
thht wrote:
looks like susan rice is not the only person embroiled in the Obama mass surveillance state. using surveillance for strictly political purposes...
Who invented what, when?
It must be nice to live in a world unconstrained by facts or history.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
thht wrote:looks like susan rice is not the only person embroiled in the Obama mass surveillance state. using surveillance for strictly political purposes...
Who invented what, when?
It must be nice to live in a world unconstrained by facts or history.
trumpkins cannot stop running against hillary. they are still looking for a win.
love these sources this guy uses. Might as well link to the national inquirer or Fox, dude. Amusing.
hahaha Goodness!!
You Libbies just don't stop, do ya? lol How ya gonna try to squeeze outta this one? Better get Politifact and Snopes to 'debunk' the truth like always...
Sorry, Eric. I normally agree with you on most things, but not this. Your thoughts sound exactly like the rationalization of high valuations that was prevalent right before the tech bubble in 2000.
Good Grief!! ;)
You Libbies just don't stop, do ya?
lol how ya gonna try to squeeze outta this one? Better get Politifact and Snopes to 'debunk' the truth like always...
eric a blair wrote:
love these sources this guy uses. Might as well link to the national inquirer or Fox, dude. Amusing.
lol yea maybe I'll link to your sources instead. which one of those was close to calling the election again? lol
thht wrote:
YIKES! It never ends!!
lol you Dems really know how to slime it up, donchya?
crooked hillary just can't seem to stop lying, can she? lol Good luck Dems, you're gonna need it ;)
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/judical-watch-uses-new-huma-abedin-emails-to-press-trump-justice-department/article/2630405
With this incredible meaningful new finding, someone should call Fox right now so they can blow the lid off this thing!
thht wrote:
looks like susan rice is not the only person embroiled in the Obama mass surveillance state. using surveillance for strictly political purposes... not good, not good at all for democrats. this is going to hurt them very, very, very badly believe me
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/08/01/former-obama-aide-now-a-person-of-interest-in-congressional-probe-over-unmasking/
Ok, so the National Security Advisor (Rice) and now the Deputy National Security Advisor (Rhodes) were involved in unmasking. Does this make it more or less likely that said unmasking was done for work-related purposes?
eric a blair wrote:
Disagree.
The 25 year average PE for the SP500 is 16. Right now it is 17.5. That is in no way historically unsustainable.
the question is if a PE ratio in 2017, with all the globalism, with all the tech, with all the fewer recessions, with all the lower interest rates and lower inflation....means the same as it did in 1972. because the market only looks v. expensive when compared to some very bleak times 30+ years ago, before the internet and tech.
Are you insinuating that life (or just the economy) was "very bleak" prior to the internet and tech? Or did you just choose an odd way to structure your statement?
foo wrote:
Sorry, Eric. I normally agree with you on most things, but not this. Your thoughts sound exactly like the rationalization of high valuations that was prevalent right before the tech bubble in 2000.
I'm pretty sure that the PE in 2000 was not only 1.5 points higher than the 25 year average 1975-2000
although to be fair, I'm using forward PE so that is a guess of what earnings will be rather than what they have been
but the truth is that I'm an optimist and ignore calls for stock market doom as a habit. I certainly have no record of predicting or avoiding crashes.
lol u guys MIGHT. WANNA. BE CAREFUL ;)
doing that whole 'echochamber' thing again...
next thing ya know, you'll be totally out of touch with the electorate and saying how such and such candidate has 95% chance 'guaranteed' victory lolol
HOLD.
THE.
PRESS!!!
lololol liberals can you stop it? Can you just stop it?? lol I know the media will mostly ignore this, but... how ya doing hows your party lookin? You doing OKAY? Those safe spaces OKAY??
Hey look, I'm sure success is right around the corner ;)
http://observer.com/2017/07/house-judiciary-committee-letter-dnc-primaries-department-of-justice/
eric a blair wrote:
foo wrote:Sorry, Eric. I normally agree with you on most things, but not this. Your thoughts sound exactly like the rationalization of high valuations that was prevalent right before the tech bubble in 2000.
I'm pretty sure that the PE in 2000 was not only 1.5 points higher than the 25 year average 1975-2000
although to be fair, I'm using forward PE so that is a guess of what earnings will be rather than what they have been
but the truth is that I'm an optimist and ignore calls for stock market doom as a habit. I certainly have no record of predicting or avoiding crashes.
I'm also an optimist long term investor and stay fully invested through downturns, so I actually hope you are right...
lololololol
NO LIBERAL BIAS HERE, GUYS.
Americans trust in impartiality of Liberals here, guys!!!
I'm sure Mueller's... just... fine... lolol
RIP DEMOCRAT PARTY
foo wrote:
eric a blair wrote:I'm pretty sure that the PE in 2000 was not only 1.5 points higher than the 25 year average 1975-2000
although to be fair, I'm using forward PE so that is a guess of what earnings will be rather than what they have been
but the truth is that I'm an optimist and ignore calls for stock market doom as a habit. I certainly have no record of predicting or avoiding crashes.
I'm also an optimist long term investor and stay fully invested through downturns, so I actually hope you are right...
BTW, the tech bubble implosion is starting this week or next. Chips are going down among others. sell now
foo wrote:
eric a blair wrote:I'm pretty sure that the PE in 2000 was not only 1.5 points higher than the 25 year average 1975-2000
although to be fair, I'm using forward PE so that is a guess of what earnings will be rather than what they have been
but the truth is that I'm an optimist and ignore calls for stock market doom as a habit. I certainly have no record of predicting or avoiding crashes.
I'm also an optimist long term investor and stay fully invested through downturns, so I actually hope you are right...
You shouldn't if you still are some ways until retirement and you expect to continue to put more money in the market in the interim.
25 is a distorted measure since it includes a few bearish periods, looking at periods leading up to the downturns is better IMO.
eric a blair wrote:
Disagree.
The 25 year average PE for the SP500 is 16. Right now it is 17.5. That is in no way historically unsustainable.
the question is if a PE ratio in 2017, with all the globalism, with all the tech, with all the fewer recessions, with all the lower interest rates and lower inflation....means the same as it did in 1972. because the market only looks v. expensive when compared to some very bleak times 30+ years ago, before the internet and tech.
TroLLminator wrote:Maybe not a recession but a massive market correction yes. Stocks have been trading at historically unsustainable P/E ratios, it is coming and not too far in the future.