Registered User
Joined: 1/13/2008
Posts: 10
|
I have a gut feeling the Fed will announce a rate cut today. It's not based on any inside information but I wanted to post it somewhere in case I'm right to document it.
We're at support levels (a little below) of 12,500 for Dow and 2400 for NASDAQ and if it closes below these levels it could keep going down and be harder for Fed to have a good effect on the market. I think they'll have to do a lot more to dig out the further it drops and someone is going to wake up and realize that. When that happens, an announcement will come and based on the fact my stomach is not in knots, I think what is happening right now (stocks dropping severly for second day in row) is exactly what will wake someone up.
Bob Childress
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
OK ....
If you're right ...
You can pick any Teddy Bear from the second shelf ....
(Just kidding withya Bob ...)
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
anything the fed does is baked in.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
paul volker-"the fed has to many bubbles going on at the same time, for too long, and is just not in control of the situation."
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,126
|
Any lower rates will reflect in lower markets. I am not sure why folks get excited about rate cuts.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
I'm not an economist ... hell ... I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night ...
But ... a lot of what I'm hearing at night of the commentaries on Asia Squawk Box do tend to make a bit of sense to me ... in regards to allowing interest rates to fall below the "real" rate of inflation ... and this in turn causing an "asset bubble" ....
It just seems that using the conventional wisdom to combat this thing ... is only going to make it worse ... building an ever bigger problem to deal with later ....
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
QUOTE (realitycheck)
. in regards to allowing interest rates to fall below the "real" rate of inflation ... and this in turn causing an "asset bubble" ....
can we say caused an asset bubble.
squawkbox europe is also very good.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/13/2008
Posts: 10
|
And now here at the end of the day, we're almost back where we started this morning - Amazing!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (bchildress) And now here at the end of the day, we're almost back where we started this morning - Amazing!
Benanke did say that Congress should act quickly to enact a stimulus package ....
So ... you can choose something from the first shelf ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,181
|
Bernanke plays hot potato with Congress...."Hey, how about if you think of something this time, get the monkey off my back." Now Bernanke can say later, "I suggested that Congress do something, this is not my fault".
The reality is our country has come down with a bad case of affluenza. The solution is grass roots, once people are willing to live more simply, the market will heal itself. But the cure is not quick and easy and everyone says, "Yes, I'll get around to living more simply...right after I get the 40' SeaRay and the Viper....oh yeah!....and the 64" plasma....but I sure hope the Fed or Congress do something about this mess we're in!"
One of our early Supreme Court judges said that our form of representative government is wholly unsuited for any other than a moral people. Personal principles will win the day and, frankly, nothing else.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/9/2005
Posts: 24
|
Everyone who thinks Congress, or for that matter the Administration, can do something to "HELP" the economy, raise your right hand.
Congress can only hurt it in my opinion.
(Think Unintended Consequences)
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
I have made it very clear that Economics is not my thing, and I want someone who knows more about this stuff than I do to respond to my observaton. I hope that I do not embaress myself.
I say we need a strong Democrat in office that will end our silly involvment in the middle east and give more spending money to the middle class, so that they can help fuel sales of the emerging technologies that are on the horizon. Like Clinton did in the mid 90's - everyone could afford a computer in each house and the middle class drove the economy.
Make the corporate mogules accountble and responsable for their actions to help avoid anothr sub-prime disaster.
Any way that is not all we need of course, but how far off key am I?? Did I get a golden ticket to hollywood 
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (tobydad) The reality is our country has come down with a bad case of affluenza.
That's a classic !
I love it !!
QUOTE (tobydad) The solution is grass roots, once people are willing to live more simply, the market will heal itself. But the cure is not quick and easy and everyone says, "Yes, I'll get around to living more simply...right after I get the 40' SeaRay and the Viper....oh yeah!....and the 64" plasma....but I sure hope the Fed or Congress do something about this mess we're in!"
One of our early Supreme Court judges said that our form of representative government is wholly unsuited for any other than a moral people. Personal principles will win the day and, frankly, nothing else.
Yep !
Apsll ...
As far as political camps go ... there only seem to be two right now ...
Camp 1 = Borrow and Spend
Camp 2 = Tax and Spend
Both lead to the same end ...
It's like choosing between the hangman's noose ... and the firing squad ...
60% of the "wealth" of homeowners in the United States is represented by their homes ...
It gives them the confidence to spend ... and the ability to borrow for larger expenditures ...
And they are watching that wealth quickly evaporate ...
Most of the rest is tied up in the markets ...
And they are watching that quickly evaporate as well ....
While their mandatory expenditures ... food & energy ... are skyrocketing ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 319
|
Are you George Soros in disguise? 
In my humble opinion, the very worse thing that can happen to us is to have the Senate, Congress, and Presidency controlled by one party (either democrat or republican). Watch out for your wallet if that happens.......especially if you are in the middle class.
Concerning the middle east, I doubt if anyone really wants to be there. The real question is will anyone stand up to Islamo-fascism? This past week the UK removed the Holocaust from it's school curriculum because it "offended" the Muslim population because they say it never occurred. This is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.
Perhaps mankind is doomed to continually repeat history because we never learn from the past........whether it involve armed conflicts or severe economic downturns like we are now facing.
survivor
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/28/2005
Posts: 6,049
|
Aspll
To avoid a big political debate Ill try to put this simply.
What's good for the economy is good for the economy.
What's bad for the economy is bad for the economy.
When you think you need a "Strong Democrat" that is
typically what you've been told.
To get votes parties suggest the other is the enemy.
Remember that during the Clinton years the congress was
controlled by republicans.
They claim to want bipartisanship but when election time
comes its "vote for me" or "you must vote for me".
----------------------------------------------------------------
By the way IMO most would view Clinton as a
"weak" Democrat.
Thanks
diceman
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (survivor) Are you George Soros in disguise?
I'd sure like to think that I'm not nearly that liberal ...
QUOTE (survivor)
Perhaps mankind is doomed to continually repeat history because we never learn from the past........whether it involve armed conflicts or severe economic downturns like we are now facing.
survivor
Yep ....
Formula For Getting Elected In a Country of Selfish People ...
Step 1 - Indentify a Problem .... Make Everyone Afraid Of It ... Tell the Them Who to Blame For It (your opponent, of course) ... and Tell Them That You're Going to Fix It (even though you have absolutely no idea how)
Step 2 - Tell Them that this is the greatest country on Earth ... and the most prosperous times that the country has ever known is just right around the corner (but ONLY if you are elected, of course)
Step 3 - Convince them that they are your most favorite special interest group in the country ... and that you will do everything possible to have money overflowing out of their pockets ...
In short ... Smile Big ... and Like Like Hell ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
we need hillary and the "new deal" democrats to regulate wealth and avoid war. lol. hillary approved the war, and the dems have a long history of starting wars.
what we really need is a neither republicans or democRATS. but the real conservative party that follows the constitution to show up.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 319
|
realitycheck - I wasn't referring to you with my George Soros comment. Sorry for the confusion. I was responding to some comments Apsil had posted and I think you posted your response before I got mine posted. And I didn't mean to be criticizing Apsil either. Just some of the comments made sounded like Soros and his class warfare and anti-capitalism nonsense.
survivor
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,126
|
So Britain is giving up his Holocaust reference in history because a bunch of islamics folks claim that it never happen.
You know what Britain should do? Send them all home where they can preach their religion in freedon, and think as they wish about the Holocaust.
This would be hard to do in the US as the US is a country made of countries. But Britain is Britain made initially solely by the british. That is their land, soveraing and proud without needs for Muslins.
They try to help, as many other countries, and that is how they are repaid.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/22/2005
Posts: 849
|
I, like apsll, am not an economist but having observed what has happened to the economy since the Roosevelt (FDR) administration, the thing only positive thing the government (Congress or fed) can do to affect the economy on any time frame longer than a few months is to keep the nation in a war (declared or not). Any thing else has had a negative effect. Witness WWII, Korea, Viet Nam and Desert Storm and its after math and the short periods of peace (if any) we have had afterward
When the government has kept it’s hands off the economy plugs along at its own rate with advances and declines, When the government enters the picture the advance or decline is magnified.
As an aside, we have never lost a war (with the exception on Viet Nam, when the politicians in Washington were where making the strategic decisions instead of professional soldiers, where we simply withdrew before the outcome was decided) nor have we won a peace.
And Yes, I am old enough to have observed these things.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/9/2005
Posts: 24
|
Please take note of Mr. Bernanke's comments today in Congress on the beginning of the sub-prime problem we are experiencing. The initial move away from portfolio mortgage lending to capital market lending, that was accessible to the masses, was Fannie-Mae. (VA preceded but was more restrictive). Please keep that in mind as you form your opinions of the desirability of 'Government led' solutions to economic problems. Their solutions to problems tend to turn into larger problems rapidly.
Eight years ago I thought a Republican President and a Republican Congress would be constructive. Obviously I was wrong. I agree that the best we can hope for now is divided government and gridlock. IMHO
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 319
|
Bernanke's comments seemed weak. He used the word "complicated" over 20 times. Perhaps this job is beyond his academic capabilities.
I would like to see government officials and legislators with some real life experience, such as starting or running a company, meeting payroll, balancing budgets etc before they go to Washington to "represent" us. Too many of them simply feed off the system, pretending they are there to help the citizenry when in fact they are there to simply help themselves. Just my jaundiced view I guess.
survivor
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
Yep survivor ...
We now have a government that is ... Of, By, and For ... the politicians ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/22/2005
Posts: 849
|
survivor
Both of the Bushes, father and son, have had the experience of running a major corporation and Eisenhower had the experience of managing the war in Europe during WWII.
|
|
|
Guest-1 |