kelpdiver 2 #26 April 2, 2010 Quote I like the stock comment by the kallend too Many economist state that this is a false rise due to gov money (aka stimulus). And whether that money can remain or not is a factor that will only delay a collapse unless a real recovery is realized. I personally believe that the market was oversold in 2008, and I deliberately shifted my 401k and other available cash towards the early part of 2009. It was a good long term opportunity. And on paper, I was rewarded for that belief. Even now, it seems fairly priced (one evaluation put it at 104%), but certainly it is being propped by external factors. Part of the problem now is what do you do with money? Saving accounts are paying virtually nothing, and less than inflation even without considering taxes. Bonds are scary, and with the interest rates only having one direct to go, will dive when that happens. That leaves you with real estate (super scary, requires a lot of capital), commodities, and stocks. Investing in a good vacation might be as good a use for the spare money as anything. At least your mind will feel better. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #27 April 2, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteA) The first 700B was signed for by your hero, the 2nd 787B by my hero; quit giving all the blame for the 1.5T to Obama - it just isn't factually correct I think you need to do some fact checking. Your boy has actually distributed more TARP funds than GWB, and I dislike TARP as much as I dislike the stimulus and the HC bill. BO has had a lot more time to spend TARP funds than GWB had. Do you have a point? My point goes towards my reference to 'billions of dollars' that have been spent. On top of the stimulus we have TARP money. Are you impressed that the economy is rebounding? Nope, we bought our way out of this one on credit, the other options were to enjoy decade(s) of suffering or do as Hoover did and raise income taxes 260%. Well, with the stock market up 50% since this time last year there should be enough capital gains to cover the cost of the stimulus. Right, assuming profit-takers are cashing in. I just don't get some people so married to their ideologies that they refuse to look at the totality of the situation. After FR's mess, GHWB started in small steps to fix it, Clinton and the Dem congress in 93 took huge steps and did fix it. Then GWB trashed it worse than ever, now Obama will fix it and I wonder if the idiot American electorate will still be mesmerized by: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi9y5-Vo61w Or perhaps this is more the speed of the American electorate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx7a3leZJJI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijz1CdUj5fg&NR=1 Or maybe a Nixon throwback, he was such a great Republican. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB48/nixon.html As Nixon trivializes 19 or 23 dead soldiers....almost nothing. And Nixon states: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/04/richard-nixon-recordings "Never forget," he tells national security advisers Henry Kissinger and Alexander Haig in a conversation on December 14 1972, "the press is the enemy, the press is the enemy. The establishment is the enemy, the professors are the enemy, the professors are the enemy. Write that on a blackboard 100 times." From that we can discern that Nixon was Pol Pot light. And are we now going to have the Republican electorate bring us back to that kind of censorship and imposed ignorance? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #28 April 2, 2010 Quote Will you be responding to questions that I pose of John now? I will continue to respond to any questions I wish and you will continue to dodge all questions that corner you; nothing changes - I'm not speaking for John. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #29 April 2, 2010 QuoteQuote Well, with the stock market up 50% since this time last year there should be enough capital gains to cover the cost of the stimulus. Shockingly bad analysis for a man with a college degree. Capital gains are only realized when someone closes their position. For the long term holders, that 50% gain didn't even get them back to where they started in 2007 as the slide began. The wiser (and not unemployed) started buying last year, but have not sold. Strawman. Who said anything about timing? Quote And then you have the market timers and the emotional investors (read: fools). Many of them sold at the low, realizing large capital losses, which they deducted on their taxes. If they exceeded the gains by more than 3k (likely), then it's a carryover for future years, so they and many mutual funds won't be declaring a capital gain for a few years. And since market timers often tend to do the worst (buy into the bubble, sell into the crash) behavior, they didn't start buying in 2009 until summer after most of the recovery occurred. So they only gain 20% rather than 50+. And then you have the day traders and other short term speculators.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #30 April 2, 2010 Quote Will you be responding to questions that I pose of John now? Since you appear not to have noticed, this is an OPEN forum.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #31 April 2, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote Well, with the stock market up 50% since this time last year there should be enough capital gains to cover the cost of the stimulus. Shockingly bad analysis for a man with a college degree. Capital gains are only realized when someone closes their position. For the long term holders, that 50% gain didn't even get them back to where they started in 2007 as the slide began. The wiser (and not unemployed) started buying last year, but have not sold. Strawman. Who said anything about timing? Timing is irrelevant. Someone who bough in 2006 still has no gains. Your presumed pool of capital gains taxes is as illusionary as the federal surplus of the past decade. Besides, that tax revenue is already spoken for, and then some, by the ongoing needs of our government. Like I said, piss poor analysis on your part. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #32 April 2, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Well, with the stock market up 50% since this time last year there should be enough capital gains to cover the cost of the stimulus. Shockingly bad analysis for a man with a college degree. Capital gains are only realized when someone closes their position. For the long term holders, that 50% gain didn't even get them back to where they started in 2007 as the slide began. The wiser (and not unemployed) started buying last year, but have not sold. Strawman. Who said anything about timing? Timing is irrelevant. Someone who bough in 2006 still has no gains. Your presumed pool of capital gains taxes is as illusionary as the federal surplus of the past decade. Besides, that tax revenue is already spoken for, and then some, by the ongoing needs of our government. Like I said, piss poor analysis on your part. If timing is irrelevant, what does 2006 have to do with anything? Do try to be consistent.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 April 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Well, with the stock market up 50% since this time last year there should be enough capital gains to cover the cost of the stimulus. Shockingly bad analysis for a man with a college degree. Capital gains are only realized when someone closes their position. For the long term holders, that 50% gain didn't even get them back to where they started in 2007 as the slide began. The wiser (and not unemployed) started buying last year, but have not sold. Strawman. Who said anything about timing? Timing is irrelevant. Someone who bough in 2006 still has no gains. Your presumed pool of capital gains taxes is as illusionary as the federal surplus of the past decade. Besides, that tax revenue is already spoken for, and then some, by the ongoing needs of our government. Like I said, piss poor analysis on your part. BS, there will be some profit-takers that cash out. In this economy more than ever; cash is king and many will take it and run. Then there's GWB's expiring tax cuts that will bring up revenues, you do realize that was the issue that brought up the increasing market, right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #34 April 4, 2010 Quote Then there's GWB's expiring tax cuts that will bring up revenues, Only if it's sold. Quoteyou do realize that was the issue that brought up the increasing market, right? A pending increase in capital gains tax spurred people to buy....riiiiiight....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #35 April 4, 2010 QuoteQuote Then there's GWB's expiring tax cuts that will bring up revenues, Only if it's sold. Quoteyou do realize that was the issue that brought up the increasing market, right? A pending increase in capital gains tax spurred people to buy....riiiiiight.... So Obama and the Dem congress, which will still be Dem at the end of the year won't buy it and will vote to continue the tax cuts? Right and even if your wet dream come true and the R's control congress, you need Obama to sign it or congress to override his veto with 2/3. IOW's, let it go; it aint gonna happen, bro. As for capital gains dissuading people from buying, did you not think that thru? Listen carefully: CAPITAL GAINS ARE APPLIED WHEN CAPITAL IS GAINED, NOT PURCHASES MADE. I think you are confusing that with a luxury tax. Cap Gains Tax increase will do nothing to dissuade people from buying, perhaps it will cause people to not sell off and cash out stocks, houses, etc unless tehy immediately reinvest, creating more stability, more reinvestment as a shield. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
