Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by freedomforall 2 months ago
    Do you think the market decline will change many voters from one lame statist party to another? Perhaps I am naive or uninformed, but I don't see many Trump voters switching to the hated Dems if the market drops, and Trump hating socialists certainly aren't going to switch either.

    I think Wall St manipulates the market for their own profit. They still control government via corruption regardless of which party is in control and Trump hasn't given Wall St. much reason for concern so far. In fact, a partial housecleaning of some significant members of both parties would probably distract attention from the puppeteers.
    I wouldn't put it past the Dems to make promises to return to power though.
    imo, the market has been overbought for several years and is overdue for a significant pullback. Interest rates are going up and Wall St is ready to profit.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 2 months ago
      I know there are economists that have been predicting the market was overdue for about a 30% correction, and maybe this is the beginning of that adjustment. However, there are a number of very powerful figures that deal in the market, and can stand a temporary billion dollar drop. My mind keeps saying "October surprise."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months ago
        They are right...the market is way over valued...but what is confounding is that these corrective predictions have persisted for several years now...and from people that know what they are talking about...but somehow, something has propped the market it up...which will probably make the inevitable down turn even worse...in my opinion.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by strugatsky 2 months ago
      Can you be more specific than “Wall Street”? Neither the physical location nor the stock market offices are responsible for what you accuse them, I believe.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 2 months ago
        Goldman for certain, but I think most of the major trading companies with the ability to trade in volume and move the market conspire to steal from the very people and companies who are their customers. Usually it's not the major traders that get "caught" because they let others take a fall instead, every time. The "industry" has controlled the Treasury Dept for decades and iirc the SEC has been run by Wall St lawyers the past 5 years.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by MinorLiberator 2 months ago
    45 years a free market Economist, learned enough to say: you’re all potentially right.

    I have been paying more attention to politics lately, so have only seen some possible major developments:

    Central banks, especially The Fed, which I firmly oppose, throws a major wrench into the analysis. If, as I have heard, they are going to finally let interest rates rise, and even the market expectation of a rise, could easily cause the stock market to do what it’s doing.

    And I have seen Trump complaining loudly against that: “I like low interest rates.” Grrr.

    In my very tentative opinion, and I don’t even know the current Fed chairman, he would be the only likely person who, if anti-Trump, might do this, “intentionally”. I doubt that. As he can’t do it on his own.

    OTOH, rates have been artificially much, much too low for years. They have to rise. We could be nearing the peak of what Mises call the “crackup-boom”. Not good.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 2 months ago
    I would be much more worried about a weaponization/partisan attack at the Federal Reserve. It would have severe repercussions and the Democrats don't care right now what they do to restore themselves to power.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Dobrien 2 months ago
    Supply and demand.. Correcting valuations to discount future earnings. All of which can be manipulated short term. Response to interest rate changes and trade considerations. Herd behavior and program trading , all play a role in the trading action.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 2 months ago
    Yes to a degree, but me dino also agrees with what freedomforall, Solver, DrZarkov99 and Olduglycarl are saying about the stock market here so far.
    The stock market is subjected to a wide variety of influences, including manipulative billionaire traitors who dream of global socialism and may not all be named George.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 2 months ago
    A lot of the business news commentators seem to forget to mention that much of the buying and selling in the stock market is initiated by computer algorithms. They never mention the big Wall Street Financial Institutions IT personnel created the algorithms to maximize profits. To quote Jim Cramer's soundboard "Sell, Sell, Sell"!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  25n56il4 2 months ago
    I'm still trying to figure out why it went so high. Dumb, dumber, and dumbest. I don't worry about the market fluctuating. It's being manipulated. I was amazed when it passed $10K!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 2 months ago
    Maybe the mostly liberal investors are realizing the jig is up as trump won with kavanaugh, and they better take their deep state gains
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Abaco 2 months ago
    I sold my little brokerage business a couple years ago, and have been watching the market since with a sense of wonder. We are way overdue for a correction, if you put much value on history precedent. See the article in Marketwatch just 1 or 2 days ago about the bear chart. It's pretty good, actually. You can see, as I did when it happened, the market preparing for a Hillary victory, then the revival in Trump's victory...see how the pattern was going. I had to scramble for a week to move my own holdings then because I was sure Hillary was going to win and had positioned myself accordingly. You'll find humor in that I was in things like a contract prison company, Taser, and several other telling holdings...haha!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 2 months ago
    I view the stock market at this point as gambling. Unless the stock pays dividends, there is no coupling of performance to investor return - it is all speculation. And so speculation is going to drive the ups and downs.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Solver 2 months ago
      I disagree. To the investor, it is about risk. There are very risky stocks that could be huge winners or huge losers based on many volatile factors. This is more the gambling side. There are also much safer stocks, where historically the price trends upwards slowly, with low volatility, while the core company continues to produce what is needed.

      And the best thing is, the investor gets to choose which stocks they want to invest in. Or NOTA.

      Compare that with “investing” into a system of progressive taxation.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  blarman 2 months ago
        Risk about what, exactly on what return, exactly?

        The only "return" investors get on most stocks now available (non-dividend stocks) is if they sell the stock to someone else who hopes that very same stock price keeps going up so they, too, can profit. It's a game of pure speculation like roulette - and you have to know when to walk away. The other detrimental part of this methodology is that if one pays one's executives with stock options, those executives become incentivized to hide anything that might bring the stock price down and devalue those options (until they vest), while at the same time they are rewarded with hyperbolic claims about future growth, etc. See Elon Musk. It is a short-term mentality all about taking quick advantage of momentary gains.

        Compare that to a stock which pays dividends. The investor gets some return regardless of the stock price - a return which is predicated on the profitable function of that company during the previous quarter or year. Investors are rewarded through their continued investment in the company AND its profitable function. Add to that that stock options offered as part of executive bonus plans then become a long-term incentive, executives are much more likely to address problems rather than put them off, engage in long-term relationships with customers, suppliers, and partners, and employees know that the focus of the company will enable them to actually build a career. (HP used to be this way.)

        "Compare that with “investing” into a system of progressive taxation."

        Not sure how that ties to the stock market in any way. Besides that, the only people who invest in taxation are big government elitists hoping to be in control.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Solver 2 months ago
          Determining risk is not an “exact” science. People that get it mostly right can make a fortune. Even dividend paying stocks have risk. Just ask those whose dividend paying stocks plummeted in value before or after the dividend was cut.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  blarman 2 months ago
            I agree that risk is purely a personal determination. And I don't claim that dividend-paying stocks are without risk.

            The point that I am making is that non-dividend paying stocks are not an investment. They are purely speculative ventures and the only way the speculator gains is when someone else loses. In a real investment, both parties gain when the investment pans out but there is no loss required for that gain to be realized.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  Solver 2 months ago
              Dividend investors also speculate. A dividend stock is still stock, that after time, can have a greater or lesser value then what you bought it at.

              Also, if you use leftist think, then when a stockholder gets a dividend, the workers are losing money they should’ve been paid. They are all losers, being oppressed, and must rise up in anger to break their chains, as well as a bunch of other things.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  blarman 2 months ago
                "Dividend investors also speculate. A dividend stock is still stock, that after time, can have a greater or lesser value then what you bought it at."

                I'm not denying any of that. Like most of the world, you've been conditioned to think solely in terms of stock price as the "value" of a company - rather than its balance sheet. I remember a time when stocks which didn't pay dividends were just coming on the scene. (Microsoft was one of the first.) Stocks would accurately reflect the true production value of a company - not their speculative value. Price-to-Earnings ratios meant something, as did a host of other financial indicators (debt-to-equity, etc.) Now the only thing that matters is the PR campaigns which either tout the hype or downplay it - depending on the issue. No talk at all of actual profitability. (Again - Tesla!)

                Case in point: Amazon recently topped a billion dollars in stock value. Yet Amazon's day-to-day loses money. Facebook hasn't turned a profit in years yet still enjoys robust "value" - at least until it was discovered that they were covering up egregious ethical violations. Apple - if considered based on their product offerings alone - isn't worth the billion they are at either. One can go down the entire list of companies included in the major indices such as the Dow and see a disturbing trend of over-leveraged companies. They operate only one PR fiasco away from insolvency.

                'Also, if you use leftist think,"

                Don't make my head hurt. There's no reason a company can't have both dividends and a profit-sharing program. Then you benefit both your employees and your investors - and doubly so if your employees are also investors. It's the best of both worlds IMHO. Hewlett-Packard used to be this way. I used to work for them when it was, and you couldn't find more dedicated employees. After they changed their policies and killed many of the employee- and investor-appreciation programs, most of the dedication went out the door as well. Now they are just a glorified consumer electronics manufacturer where they used to be the premier tech research company in the world.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 2 months ago
    It's tempting to impose a post hoc story on market fluctuations, but I think it's random noise superimposed on the "signal" of expectations of future earnings. You don't know notice the noise in more illiquid things, e.g. similar businesses not on a public stock exchange, but I imagine it's there. It's why you can look at ratios to estimate a business value, but there's no right answer; it's just what buyers and sellers agree to. It's the same with stocks, just more liquidity of a huge herd of buyers and sellers.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo