This seems to be the smart strategy. As long as you entire portfolio isn't based in companies dependent on China, American companies probably aren't going anywhere. So why not buy in while they are low and reap the benefits later on?
OK . . . Now I'm Getting Worried About the Market
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
Prime thinks the market will lose half its value by years end. Tells you where he's at. I'm glad I locked in his 10,000 number. It's easy to simply say the markets will go down. Any chimp can tell you that. But to give a specific number doesn't give you an out if you're wrong.
Didn't know the US has only been in existence since 1913. I'll be sure to tell all of our history books that they're wrong.
This is one way to view the 1929 crash. Blame it all on the Fed. Of course this totally ignores the other causes. Namely that the market had gone from a place where nobody invested to a place where everybody invested. And that all of these people saw increases of at least 20% each year and expected the gravy boat to keep going. And that when stocks suddenly went down, people panicked since they had never seen a drop like that before. And that buying on margin back then allowed you to only put 10-20% down.
But we don't have those same conditions today which is why your posts make little sense. First, the market isn't a new place that everyone has suddenly decided to join. It's been around forever, so we don't have a huge influx of new investors. Secondly, people today expect up and downs in the market and also expect growth at a pace far far slower than 20% a year, so if the market doesn't perform, or if it drops in value, hoardes of investors aren't likely to panic and suddenly sell off. And thirdly, margin today cannot be bought for 10-20%. It's at least 50% and it requires a $2,000 initial buy-in.
The two aren't as similar as you think.
Are you needing time to catch up on your Fed history?
Just because you don't understand how it works.......
Nothing you said here is unrelated to the Feds moves. You want to be hateful of 'elites' on your terms and not in fact based terms than that is on you. I'm successful and you're not. You're a whining, needs everything handed to no type, who's bitterness is the source of your ignorance.
You tried blaming the entire 1929 crash on the Fed. That's clearly not the case. There were a variety of reasons why it crashed, many that didn't include the Fed at all. Do you see why I question your understanding of either the Fed or the market? All you've given are the most general of responses in this thread. And I'm not the only one who has pointed out your vagueness. Now to your credit, you did take a stab in your longer response, but it was still riddled with holes since it only considered one factor that led to the crash. Not sure why you can't get that while the Fed did have a role in the crash, so did many other things, many of which have nothing to do with today's conditions.
Last edited:
"Nothing you said here is unrelated to the Feds moves."
And are you serious with this? Are you really trying to tell me that the Fed forced millions to jump into the market before the crash? Or that the Fed forced them to cash out when they got jittery? Or that the Fed forced millions of trades on super low margin rates? Or that the Fed was to blame when the brokers lost their shirts when they tried to call in these margins?
Please stop. You're just embarrassing yourself now.
And are you serious with this? Are you really trying to tell me that the Fed forced millions to jump into the market before the crash? Or that the Fed forced them to cash out when they got jittery? Or that the Fed forced millions of trades on super low margin rates? Or that the Fed was to blame when the brokers lost their shirts when they tried to call in these margins?
Please stop. You're just embarrassing yourself now.
Great book. One that everyone should read.
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.
Found this cool site with quotes from many people on central banks.
https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threads/ok-now-im-getting-worried-about-the-market.82725/page-3
The numbers indicate that the Fed manipulates the currency heavily before every recession. Prove me wrong.Unlike you I like to get my numbers straight before diving in.
Being 25 years away from retirement, I love these low periods, can buy so much more stock that will eventually go back up. Just hope it isn't in one of these down periods when you want to retire, obviously.
If I were getting ready to retire, I would probably pull all my money out of the market during a high point and put it in something more stable. Having the market tank, right before you're planning to retire, obviously would crush you.
No shit? I had the same thought the last time a GOPer was POTUS. It still cost me 20-30% of my net worth.....Which I regained in the first 4 years of Obama's Presidency...and increased on this a bit the last 3.........As I said before...When Dems are in, good times are to be had.
Not a bad idea nole, anytime the last 3-4 years before retirement is find I would think. Where to put it though? Throw it all in an IRA?
Question. Any concern with the cascading effect of the problems in China? And the fact that the Fed has fired off about every arrow in their quiver to prevent any sort of correction during the last recession? And the housing market is anemic at best. And sovereign debt is a new bubble bigger than any we have yet seen? Here is my fear, and why Hawktimus may be right, whether he knows why or not:
China crashes big time, and I mean big time. They are like 1980's Japan on steroids. Another massive failed Keynesian experiment that folks like Krugman will ignore. This will cause the entire global market to flatline. China has accounted for over a third of recent global growth, likely more with multipliers considered. However, they have badly misallocated capital (as all command and control economies inevitably do) and really put themselves in an untenable position. This would be a big problem in normal times, but after the last recession, a lot of bad investment was simply repackaged and resold as sovereign debt. With the biggest single player in sovereign debt about to go belly up in a big way, that entire sector could be in for some massive correction...and there is no place left for the money to run to for stability. Everyone, and I mean everyone, is leveraged to the hilt...only now, instead of it just being banks, it is entire nation-states. America, despite our binge spending, is actually not as bad off as most others, but we are going to get caught up in this too and it could very well get ugly. The last time we had a problem of this magnitude (and actually not as serious as the potential fallout right now), the Fed cut interest rates over 5% down to zero and kept it there (and China was spending like crazy). Rates have only gone up a fraction of a percent, so there is no room for them to really cut this time, and China is no longer in a position to make it rain like a drunk at a strip club. What can they do this time to prime the pump? It looks like they are going to be along for the ride. Every bubble of the last 30 years has simply spawned a bigger and scarier bubble in it's wake because we don't have any patience to let the market correct itself in a meaningful way. When this sovereign debt bubble bursts, I think that is when the music truly stops and the correction of all corrections ensues. And we have left ourselves absolutely no way to brake the descent. I have thought for the last several years that a collapsing China was going to be the first domino to fall to begin the chaos. I guess we will see if some of these folks with their hands on the economic and monetary levers are as clever as they think they are. I am afraid they (and we)are likely to find out in an epic and humbling way that they are not.
China crashes big time, and I mean big time. They are like 1980's Japan on steroids. Another massive failed Keynesian experiment that folks like Krugman will ignore. This will cause the entire global market to flatline. China has accounted for over a third of recent global growth, likely more with multipliers considered. However, they have badly misallocated capital (as all command and control economies inevitably do) and really put themselves in an untenable position. This would be a big problem in normal times, but after the last recession, a lot of bad investment was simply repackaged and resold as sovereign debt. With the biggest single player in sovereign debt about to go belly up in a big way, that entire sector could be in for some massive correction...and there is no place left for the money to run to for stability. Everyone, and I mean everyone, is leveraged to the hilt...only now, instead of it just being banks, it is entire nation-states. America, despite our binge spending, is actually not as bad off as most others, but we are going to get caught up in this too and it could very well get ugly. The last time we had a problem of this magnitude (and actually not as serious as the potential fallout right now), the Fed cut interest rates over 5% down to zero and kept it there (and China was spending like crazy). Rates have only gone up a fraction of a percent, so there is no room for them to really cut this time, and China is no longer in a position to make it rain like a drunk at a strip club. What can they do this time to prime the pump? It looks like they are going to be along for the ride. Every bubble of the last 30 years has simply spawned a bigger and scarier bubble in it's wake because we don't have any patience to let the market correct itself in a meaningful way. When this sovereign debt bubble bursts, I think that is when the music truly stops and the correction of all corrections ensues. And we have left ourselves absolutely no way to brake the descent. I have thought for the last several years that a collapsing China was going to be the first domino to fall to begin the chaos. I guess we will see if some of these folks with their hands on the economic and monetary levers are as clever as they think they are. I am afraid they (and we)are likely to find out in an epic and humbling way that they are not.
Studies conducted by Fed economists. I call BS. Hoover spent money like a drunken sailor on liberty. His wild spending exacerbated what was already a bad situation caused by FedRes meddling. Not even WW2 cured our nation's ills. 12 million soldiers came home stateside looking for work and defense spending was halved. Then boom times happened.
I almost don't want to tell you this, so your Keynesian A$$ will fry. Just wait and see if there is a 2nd and 3rd rate hike. Markets will go into a tailspin.
I could be totally wrong about this (partially because I'm no more paranoid about central banking versus any other type of financial system), but I call BS on "not even WW2 cured our nation's ills." The 50s-70s wouldn't have happened any other way. European infrastructure and politics were devastated by war. So were their colonial efforts. We had almost no serious global competition in industry (the USSR - and central banking is absolutely different from central planning). Our major cities weren't yet priced out for working people. Suburbs were just being invented here and they sounded like a great idea at that time. Libertarians aren't going to be vindicated if/when the federal reserve fails. They've never had better (or any) ideas for a global economy which acknowledge the fact that their politics won't play everywhere.
Last edited:
I would personally try to find something safe at that point in time, depending on how far off you were from your retirement goal. I would sacrifice upside for stability at that point. What good does the upside do you if you have to wait 5 more years for the market to go back up?
I would think you could probably leave some of the money in the market, but I'm sure everyone diversifies anyways, so that's nothing new.
It will be interesting to watch the Chinese elite manage the tiger they have by the tail.
What he's saying is that our involvement in the war didn't help this, it actually hurt us. The benefits of other people going to war is a different issue. Look at the depression in 1920, no intervention happeneed, and it was over after a year. Then look at the crash of 1929, which wasn't even as bad as 1920. Intervention happened and it lasted a decade. You tell me which way is better?
Without fracking you would be right. Even the Saudi oil minister has said oil will never again see $100. The world is awash in oil supply
but oil has never been a supply a demand thing, it's always been a "Saudis say how to price it" thing ever since like the 1970's
so we shall see oil go sky high after wars and such, after texas is totally shut down, you watch
The funny thing is that the dems in this country like to look towards Europe, because they don't think the system over there is better geared toward the common man, but they're actually getting robbed at a far higher pace than even we are. People from European countries are constantly moving here, but hardly anyone is moving from here to the European countries. So, the real question is, why are we pushing so hard to be more like Europe?
I call it the communist takeover, or the new world order takeover. they want America to be eastern Europe, and Obama is doing a darn fine job of it. bush did too.
It's a myth propagated by the banksters and all of their money that WW2 cured our nation. Bastiat's 'Broken window fallacy' destroyed the argument that destruction causes prosperity. Otherwise, we could just build aircraft carriers, send it to the middle of the ocean with NO sailors onboard to fight our enemy and blow them both up. No one has to die. It's a mis-allocation of capital.
Our economy was in the crapper after WW1. The newly created Fed and Washington did nothing and it became just a recession. Meddling would have made it worse. Re: the Great Depression, here are Sec. of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau Jr.'s own words in 1939:
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong … somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. … I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot."
Re: the mid 40's-50's, most of our debt was liquidated. Spending was cut almost 60%, taxes were cut and boom times hit. That's irrefutable.
The FedRes CAUSED the Great Depression and it was exacerbated by Hoover and FDR's disastrous policies. Even Milton Friedman admits this. How did our economy move before the Fed's creation in 1913? With it, we have recession every 4 years or so, a Great Depression and a Greater Depression. They are central planners. They meet every late August at Rockefeller's place in Jackson Hole. They're not making bonbons there. It's a private banking cartel with a monopoly on currency. Legalize competition. Our Fed price fixes and debases our currency (98% has been stolen from the people since 1913). Allow competing currencies and the honest ones will survive, to the benefit of the people. The FedRes has fascict underpinnings. Private with government protection.
Our nation has had better times and with PEACE I might add under libertarianism.
I hate to say this because your brain might explode but Keynes wouldn't raise rates when the economy is faltering.
Your "don't confuse me with the facts" misunderstanding is why I say your view of economics is religion, not reality-based. And it's even worse when you can't even keep your own dogma straight.
But history actually supports him. Who it doesn't support are the big government types.
And, for all those who praise the FED; There will always be a perpetually-growing debt with the Federal Reserve. That will only grow as long as the FED exists. That is how it was designed. Before the FED, we had no "mandatory" income tax. It's technically still voluntary. Regardless, the way the financial system is structured with the FED, there will always be debt. There will always be mandatory income tax to pay the interest the FED charges the US government and it's citizens to use their money. The debt will be owed TO the Federal Reserve. Our money doesn't say "US Treasury Note" on it. It says "Federal Reserve Note." The money isn't even ours!
They create the currency. They charge interest in it. They regulate it. They increase or decrease the supply. It is completely and totally an artificially-manipulated system. Now, some may think that's a good thing. It allows us to generate soooo much money and debt and interest and the "economy grows." But, the problem with this is there is a huge gamble going on. If this propped-up system finally breaks? All that growth and dependency on that system is immediately STOPPED. I shudder to think what the social result would look like.
There was a quote from the HBO film about the 2008 crisis Too Big To Fail.Paul Giamatti portrayed Ben Bernanke. He was addressing others about how an economic system based on credit and debt works. It was essentially "the availability credit has the power to grow a modern economy, the absence has the power to stop it swiftly and absolutely." SO, what they have done is create a system that can cripple our entire global society if it stops working. That is WAY too dangerous for me to just comply that it's the way to go.
They create the currency. They charge interest in it. They regulate it. They increase or decrease the supply. It is completely and totally an artificially-manipulated system. Now, some may think that's a good thing. It allows us to generate soooo much money and debt and interest and the "economy grows." But, the problem with this is there is a huge gamble going on. If this propped-up system finally breaks? All that growth and dependency on that system is immediately STOPPED. I shudder to think what the social result would look like.
There was a quote from the HBO film about the 2008 crisis Too Big To Fail.Paul Giamatti portrayed Ben Bernanke. He was addressing others about how an economic system based on credit and debt works. It was essentially "the availability credit has the power to grow a modern economy, the absence has the power to stop it swiftly and absolutely." SO, what they have done is create a system that can cripple our entire global society if it stops working. That is WAY too dangerous for me to just comply that it's the way to go.
Good post. The Democrats also don't realize that the Federal Reserve is the biggest hammerer of the poor. It does more damage to poor people than anything else could, yet you see them on here defending the institution with every breath.
Oh Brother! Is there any doubt that the Fed is run by Keynesians? No. Ciggy and you other statists trumpet daily how the economy is doing great. Didn't the Fed just raise rates last month? Either way, it is artificial price fixing by old men in secret. Gives them plenty of time to move their money around because the minutes of their meetings aren't released until 6 weeks later. This is what you champion? Cartelization of the banking industry? Fascism anyone?
Why can't you get it through your thick skull? Inflation is THEFT. Whether at 2% or 8%. Step away from the altar of Keynes. He is the hero of Elitists. Yet, you pretend to be for the little man. Christ...is its any wonder this country is forked with voters like you? You're being played like a Stradivarius.
And then the Fed called in those margins, waited for the ensuing panic and bought up America for 20 cents on the dollar. Isn't manipulation fun? They inflated the money supply like crazy to bail out England and their troubles. When things got out of hand, they SHRUNK (deflated) the money supply by 30%. An unprecedented implosion occurred. Smoot-Hawley tariffs were passed. Hoover was a Keynesian in theory for all his spending before Keynes in 1933.
FDR continued those same disastrous policies. He had cattle slaughtered to help out the beef packing industry, so their prices would remain high. Not a good idea when millions of Americans were starving. If we could just print our way to prosperity as the crazy Keynesians claim, why not just give everyone a million bucks?
Similar threads
