STOCK MARKET
- Thread starter vinnie
- Start date
my rice burner has 230K and runs better than ever!
my rice burner has 230K and runs better than ever!
graph shows stocks are rather cheap now, but not excessively so. Red line is the historic average. More info on this metric here.
from this WSJ article "Is Now the Time to Buy Stocks?":
"When prices rise, as in the boom of the 1990s, you can see the dividend yield decline, and vice versa. The lower line is the following seven-year return; it tells you how much total return, if you invested $1 on a given date, you would have made in seven years."
...Stocks could easily fall a lot more. The standard portfolio rule says that your stock percentage should rise with the expected return (stocks and bonds) divided by squared return volatility. So, if you were happy with a 50/50 portfolio with an expected return of 7% and 15% volatility (standard numbers), 50% volatility means you should hold only 4.5% of your portfolio in stocks!
Now, I might answer that, knowing this, everyone has tried to sell, pushing down prices and pushing up expected returns. But expected returns would need to rise from 7% per year to 78% per year to justify a 50/50 allocation with 50% volatility. Prices have not fallen anywhere near enough to make this a sensible forecast."
my rice burner has 230K and runs better than ever!
graph shows stocks are rather cheap now, but not excessively so. Red line is the historic average. More info on this metric here.
from this WSJ article "Is Now the Time to Buy Stocks?":
"When prices rise, as in the boom of the 1990s, you can see the dividend yield decline, and vice versa. The lower line is the following seven-year return; it tells you how much total return, if you invested $1 on a given date, you would have made in seven years."
...Stocks could easily fall a lot more. The standard portfolio rule says that your stock percentage should rise with the expected return (stocks and bonds) divided by squared return volatility. So, if you were happy with a 50/50 portfolio with an expected return of 7% and 15% volatility (standard numbers), 50% volatility means you should hold only 4.5% of your portfolio in stocks!
Now, I might answer that, knowing this, everyone has tried to sell, pushing down prices and pushing up expected returns. But expected returns would need to rise from 7% per year to 78% per year to justify a 50/50 allocation with 50% volatility. Prices have not fallen anywhere near enough to make this a sensible forecast."
That's why I can't understand this bailout. They've had 30 years or more to retool and be competitive and they haven't done a thing.
I rented a chevy in Cozumel a few years back that got 50 mpg but you can't buy that car here. :shrug:
forever :shrug: it's still their money to use while i get 1% or some shit, but i'm moving it to ameritrade and doing the same with the option to trade stocks. and i WILL be doing that when the market gets back on track.
hell, if i put the whole shooting match in GE tell me i won't recover my losses in a few years or so.
just used GE for an example. they are many discount stocks out there.
all i would need is for GE to get back to something like 22 bucks :shrug:
I assume that was the Opel (made for Chevy) Corsa C. It is being replace by the Aveo.
American auto execs figger no American would put up with a vehicle so sluggish as a Corsa anymore. We used to, remember the Geo Metro and Ford Festiva? Slow as a slug, but better gas mileage than any non-hybrid available today.
Refurbished versions of these old gas misers are selling on ebay now for more than they cost new.
Here's another fine GM product, from Holden in Australia, not gonna ever be available in US:
The guy I listened to this AM took call ins and one guy asked about a buy on GE. This stock guru was definatly against GE even long term. I said they didn't even have the paper to float themselves a loan.
At one time GE was the largest employer in this area and there are a lot of people here that hold the stock. That's why the questions about GE pop up here every day.
At one time GE was the largest employer in this area and there are a lot of people here that hold the stock. That's why the questions about GE pop up here every day.
It all comes back to this point, I think:
If a company is too big to fail, it should have been too big to exist in the first place. :shrug:
How can we truly have a competitive marketplace if, poorly run, large corporations are not allowed to fail. It makes it seem impossible for new companies, with fresh ideas to ever break into existing marketplaces.
If a company is too big to fail, it should have been too big to exist in the first place. :shrug:
How can we truly have a competitive marketplace if, poorly run, large corporations are not allowed to fail. It makes it seem impossible for new companies, with fresh ideas to ever break into existing marketplaces.
Exactly. How many small companies went out of business because US auto makers had such a hold on the market.
US auto makers should have seen the light 30 years ago when Honda and Toyoto started topping their sales.
They chose to sit back and now they want a bailout. I know a guy that was laid off when Ford closed a spring plant here. They continued to pay him for 4 years. That shit has to stop.
Let's hope it doesn't come to the point where we have a "Who has lost their job" thread.
That's all I care about at this point, weathering the storm with my job intact. :shrug:
That's all I care about at this point, weathering the storm with my job intact. :shrug:
