THREAD IS CLOSED!!! Ask Rande 6000+ USE NEW THREAD
- Jaybird248
- Rande
- Rande
- Rande
- matttheduck
- Rande
- Rande
- SteveT
- Mark_J
- Roger_Babson
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next »
» Jaybird248 - No Flak
VPRS would also avoid the flak you get from Vanguard when you try to move money from the fund to money market and back for some rudimentary market timing.I'd predict that Vangard will now tighten the rules against using the funds in this way.
-- posted by Jaybird248
» Rande - Jay,
Jay,A win-win -- those who want the flexibility of the ETFs will have their Vipers and existing fund shareholders won't be burdened with the additional costs associated with those who are less than long-term. I would still prefer the Vipers as a long-term alternative to the funds for a number of reasons, but if switching involved tax liabilities then not worth it. For new money, the W5000 Vipers are a no-brainer to me, even with the commission (DCA in small amounts probably still better to go with the index fund).
-- posted by Rande
» Rande - With personal income and savings reports due out this Friday, th
With personal income and savings reports due out this Friday, the lament about how little Americans save will probably be toned up (though income is still expected to exceed spending for April). Are such stories of low personal savings rates overhyped? I'm not so sure, but Farrell thinks so, anyway:-- posted by Rande
» matttheduck - savings rate
i've often wondered about this. after skimming through the article i think we have little to worry about in the aggregate. first, using "after-tax" income tells me that the government statistics do not count social security taxes withheld as savings. we could probably get good arguments on both sides, but the fact is that ss money is savings that will produce (we hope!) retirement income. so there's a minimum of 6.2 or 12.4 percent of income going into savings, depending on how you look at it. secondly, it seems absurd to me that gains in financial assets are not included as part of the savings rate. interest, dividends and capital gains should all be figured as savings, unless they are realized and then spent. third, we really need a better measure for all this. something like net worth as a percent of current annual income. which tells you more about my financial health: that i saved 0.4 percent of my after tax income this month, or that i have 8 times my yearly salary in net worth?-- posted by matttheduck
» Rande - matttheduck,
matttheduck,Good points and I agree that portfolio income should be counted. After all, it is the compound growth over time that is so significant to building wealth. In that regard, dollars saved early on are more powerful and meaningful than dollars saved later in life. Gets a bit complex and perhaps the point (which Farrell makes pretty well) is that there is more to the notion of a savings rate than meets the eye. Having said all that, if we're going to "err" it should be on the side of saving more, not less.
-- posted by Rande
» Rande - Well, yet another ugly day in the markets on low volume.
Well, yet another ugly day in the markets on low volume. It may be difficult to ignore what's going on at the moment, especially with such a wide assortment of naysayers crawling out form under every rock, but it's key during times such as these to do just that. Continue to DCA if that's your mode, and stay the course if you have a prudent plan in place. Calls to action are best ignored, whether bullish or bearish in nature. Ignore 'em.-- posted by Rande
» SteveT - Volume
When I first started paying attention to this stuff 300,000 volume on the NYSE was considered heavy volume. We are within about 3% of the 2-25 low on the S&P and today volume was about 20% give or take less than on 2-25. Could we be about to test the feb. bottom? Yield on 10 year treasury is 11bp higher and sentiment is 5% lower than in Feb.-- posted by SteveT
» Roger_Babson - Picking up some QQQs at $75-$76...
Rande, that you caught a couple of QQQ knives at $75-$76, you ought to be downright giddy about buying with both hands after the close below $75, huh? ;-)That the instrument closed below significant daily and weekly support today, you should be frothing at the mouth at the prospect of picking up some QQQs at $35-$40, right?
By then, the Nasdaq will be a steal at 1,500 (which would hardly characterize a historical bear market WRT time, given that this level would take us only back to the fall of 1998). Besides, that would "only" equate to $3.5 trillion in paper losses to Nasdaq and most of the gains of the S&P 500's top 22 stocks for the past two years, dragging the S&P 500 below 1,000 and the DJIA below 9,000.
Watch SPX weekly 1,313 and monthly 1,327 to hold at the close. If it doesn't, we visit 1,150 in a real hurry. If that level is decisively broken, well, maybe you don't want to know what the next quarterly support level is. For the curious among us, that level is . . . ready? Drum roll, please.
SPX quarterly close support: 450 or ~3,510 on the DJIA.
For all of you Nasdaq fans, a monthly close below 2,950 suggests a quarterly support level of 2,000. Break 2,000 on a quarterly close and you may as well take a long vacation and forget about stocks, because the next level of significant support is closer to zero than anyone will want to contemplate.
Two problems arise even from a modest decline to DJIA ~7,800: (1) How to get back that more than $5 trillion in total market cap paper losses, and (2) how to mitigate the reverse wealth effect's multiplier effect of more than $700 million sucked out of nominal final demand?
If this persists for 9-12 months, the multiplier in reverse threatens an unemployment rate north of 10% by late 2001. I wonder how many people are prepared for this possibility?
Ah, but there's good news for we businesspersons: It surely will solve the general labor shortage problem. Maybe even Kirk will take a break from windsurfing and gardening and do some productive work for a change. :-)
SOS. Good Luck.
-- posted by Roger_Babson
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.