Time to sell stocks?

asur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
1,100
Liberal stock experts (CNN) are even claiming we broke through technical levels that indicate a lower market next week. (< 1042 on the SP) Maybe Obama policies are coming home to roost on stocks finally. Well it's been a wild ride
based on false numbers so far!

Either way, it's gettin bad out there in the real economy, and it called CHANGE!.
 
Werbung:
Liberal stock experts (CNN) are even claiming we broke through technical levels that indicate a lower market next week. (< 1042 on the SP) Maybe Obama policies are coming home to roost on stocks finally. Well it's been a wild ride
based on false numbers so far!

Either way, it's gettin bad out there in the real economy, and it called CHANGE!.

I question if you even know what that means...or just you heard it and thought woooot i can use this to attack Obama mindlessly ....
 
Financials are leading the pack downward because most of the big banks are technically insolvent--criminally so, actually. However, The Powers That Be have not allowed investigations and indictments to go out yet and seem very adverse to doing so. Oh, eventually they'll have to pick some fall guys in order to protect themselves from the pitchforks but not today. Later.

In any case, there's still an ongoing credit contraction and some truly ominous behaviors are becoming evident. As credit contracts, so will business due to the loss of a good portion of its lifeblood.
 
Liberal stock experts (CNN) are even claiming we broke through technical levels that indicate a lower market next week. (< 1042 on the SP) Maybe Obama policies are coming home to roost on stocks finally. Well it's been a wild ride
based on false numbers so far!

Either way, it's gettin bad out there in the real economy, and it called CHANGE!.

LOOK! , yes, the Market is going down , BIG TME! All caused by OBAMA! But where you going to put your money? in cash? , well the value of our Dollar is falling too. Everything in America is CRASHING ! , WHY?, because that IS OBAMA'S PLAN. Obama is PLEASED, he wanted to "CHANGE the FUNDAMENTALS of AMERICA", remember his line? He dislikes our AMERICA, he wants to CHANGE or nation into a "WESTERN EUROPEAN AMERICA", no jobs , zero birth rate , HIGH cost of Food , Energy , Clothing , Taxes , Health care , etc . People will go to OBAMA type GOVERNMEMT in order to live . They will become his SLAVES, answering to him. In other words HIS AMERICA becomes just like the nation our Founding Fathers fled . IS THIS THE CHANGE YOU VOTED FOR ? Of COURSE NOT! Now start doing something about it! VOTE CONSERVATIVE! and KNOW whom your voting for , study their past history , DO NOT BE FOOLED as we were in 2008! TIME is LATE!
Tell your friends , your neighbors , write "letters to editor " , call talk shows , challenge Obama's LIES and policies . OUR AMERICA is worth saving! Yes, our America is on her deathbed but it is worth fighting for. What say YOU?
 
Some people probably take advantage of how Obama and the liberal media lie and brag about the economy and stocks go up. I mean we never had a president and media in chorus pushing false stats about the economy, so why not use it to the trader's advantage. Pump and dump Obama style!

Next some gov't report comes out indicating the reality of the decay of the US economy(like today) and stocks drop. Then on the next business day and maybe over the weekend Obama flunkies will talk up the economy and the stocks rise again.

So the cycle continues and it's a trading market at best!

Nothing is really created in the long run, but decay continues in the real economy and it's called CHANGE!
 
...he wants to CHANGE or nation into a "WESTERN EUROPEAN AMERICA", zero birth rate , Health care...
Sounds good to me.


In other words HIS AMERICA becomes just like the nation our Founding Fathers fled
Uh...Some of our founding fathers were born in the Americas. Furthermore, the countries from which others fled, (some came here for economic reasons, did not flee), modern Western Europe, cannot be compared to the Western Europe of the 1600, and 1700's. Or haven't you noticed?
 
They essentially came for commercial elbow room. There's just not a lot of that left around here now. And if the ruling class can't make enough money, they'll just "globalize" someplace else on the planet where there's opportunity. About the only real opportunity left around here is looting the middle class, which is going quite well at this point.
 
Financials are leading the pack downward because most of the big banks are technically insolvent--criminally so, actually. However, The Powers That Be have not allowed investigations and indictments to go out yet and seem very adverse to doing so. Oh, eventually they'll have to pick some fall guys in order to protect themselves from the pitchforks but not today. Later.

In any case, there's still an ongoing credit contraction and some truly ominous behaviors are becoming evident. As credit contracts, so will business due to the loss of a good portion of its lifeblood.

Most of the big banks are technically insolvent? Says who?

The *most* insolvent lending institution(s) were Fannie and Freddie. Of course they are not going to have criminal investigations into that because Fannie and Freddie were insolvent under specific instructions by government to support the sub-prime market by securitizing sub-prime loans.

Government will never specifically investigate something they know they caused. That's like wondering why Clinton didn't demand Janet Reno to investigate the tapes of Al Gore's office calls for money donations. Shocking!

Similarly, government will never demand an investigation into why banks purchased sub-prime mortgage backed securities, when the government itself was demanding they lend to people who were not credit worthy.
 
Most of the big banks are technically insolvent? Says who?

The *most* insolvent lending institution(s) were Fannie and Freddie. Of course they are not going to have criminal investigations into that because Fannie and Freddie were insolvent under specific instructions by government to support the sub-prime market by securitizing sub-prime loans.

Government will never specifically investigate something they know they caused. That's like wondering why Clinton didn't demand Janet Reno to investigate the tapes of Al Gore's office calls for money donations. Shocking!

Similarly, government will never demand an investigation into why banks purchased sub-prime mortgage backed securities, when the government itself was demanding they lend to people who were not credit worthy.

What's to investigate?

If the subprime bundles were so bad, then why was our savior, the private sector, buying them?
 
Either way, it's gettin bad out there in the real economy, and it called CHANGE!.
That's what Porky Limbaugh says, huh??

:rolleyes:

"It is worth noting the United States’s long-term goal: while adopting a series of influential, long-lasting policies, the U.S. is – in Obama’s words – building a house on rock, striving to ensure its role as a world economic leader in the post-crisis era.

One cannot deny, the U.S.’s power has slipped to a degree compared to its status pre-crisis, while up-and-coming economies are quickly emerging as new powers. However, as the saying goes, even a starving camel is bigger than a horse: at least in the long-term, the U.S.’s strength cannot be matched by that of other countries. The U.S. dollar is still the leading reserve currency, and one cannot deny this fact."
 
Most of the big banks are technically insolvent? Says who?

The *most* insolvent lending institution(s) were Fannie and Freddie. Of course they are not going to have criminal investigations into that because Fannie and Freddie were insolvent under specific instructions by government to support the sub-prime market by securitizing sub-prime loans.

Government will never specifically investigate something they know they caused. That's like wondering why Clinton didn't demand Janet Reno to investigate the tapes of Al Gore's office calls for money donations. Shocking!

Similarly, government will never demand an investigation into why banks purchased sub-prime mortgage backed securities, when the government itself was demanding they lend to people who were not credit worthy.
Every time one of these banks goes down, the FDIC always has to infuse 20 - 40% of book. The insolvency is more due to "mark-to-myth" and a ton of non-performing loans. Bank of America (BAC), Citi (C) and JP Morgan Chase (JPM) are all in horrible shape. Not sure if they're going to be able to save them when the Alt-A's, OptionARM and Commercial Real Estate (CRE) bubbles start popping in earnest (which have already begun).
 
Mark to myth? I suppose your talking about mark to market. If banks actually had to mark their assets to what they could sell them for in the current market, then I doubt that there is a solvent bank in the whole country.

Which is the myth, setting asset values to bubble values or to current values or both? Mark to market is a conservative accounting principle that works well in a conservative market with conservative economic rules and regulations. We haven't had that sort of economic climate since the fifties.

Both parties are so dirty when it comes to advocating the policies that got us into this mess that saying it's the other guys fault is both a factual truth and an absurdity.

Scapegoating works well when it comes to having someone to blame, but you should realize, the scapegoat is just another Lamb without blemish.
 
Werbung:
Who said anything about parties? Mark-to-myth is just a nickname for carrying assets at a book that the market won't support. Of course, it comes due when the loans fail to perform and investors must be defaulted on. Universal forgiveness of debt sounds like a great thing (especially to the debtors) but it also means that a great deal of business stops cold.
 
Back
Top