Discussion:
What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic
(too old to reply)
Roland Francis
2008-09-16 12:52:45 UTC
Permalink
Free but useful advice, not all mine.

We are in volatile markets. The steep fall of the past two days will
not last much longer, but the ups and downs will, for the next 6
months. That presents buying opportunities, availed of with care and
professional advice. Remember the old contrarian adage: sell when
others buy and buy when others sell. Or, buy low and sell high. Now is
low.

Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.

Be well diversified however much the temptation. Make sure your
investment portfolio holds a mix of asset classes (equity, fixed
income and real estate) across geographical boundaries.

To do that, invest in mutual funds rather than directly in stocks.
Less volatility and better sleep. Also a professional portfolio
manager knows much before you do when things are going to happen. You
can buy meaningful positions in at most 10 stocks. The average mutual
fund holds 80 to 100 different investments.

Don't sell in panic at this point in time. Just ride out the tumbling
markets. The worst market decline in recent memory has been reversed
within less than 2 years. If you have idle money, buy when it is clear
that the sudden decline has stopped. You will have ample time to know
this. Markets do not bounce back in mere days.

Above all remember that people lose money because of only two
emotions: FEAR and GREED.
May you have the wisdom to avoid both.

With regards from one who has ploughed through various market cycles,

Roland.
Toronto
+1 (416) 453.3371
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-17 13:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Roland Francis wrote:?
Post by Roland Francis
Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.
Folks,
Pay close attention to this one. Buying stocks on?margin?carries the
same risk as a farmer drinking pesticide.
Post by Roland Francis
Also a professional portfolio manager knows much before you do
when things are going to happen.
A professional money manager has no more ability than the
rest of us have in looking into the future.?A good professional money
manager, however, will be able to stear you clear of the pitfalls that
most novice investors fall into.?


On another note, most of you would know?that the US is now using taxpayers
money to support failing insurance companies. First the brokerage firms failed.
Then the banks followed. Now its time for the insurance firms to ask for govt
support. Next its going to be the US?mutual fund firms.


Why did this all happen? Well the US govt decided to print more money and lower
interest rates. Banks?started rounding up people who would never qualify for a
mortgage and offered them loans. In?California, office cleaners were getting loans
to buy a $400,000 house. All they had to do was pay a $4,000.00 deposit
and?make a monthly mortgage payment of $1,000 per month.?When interest
rates went up, the monthly payment went to $4,000 per month. Most people had
to default on their loans, which?led to a glut of houses on the market and thus
a collapse in?prices for these houses.

In the mean time, the local banks that had made these loans sold the loans to the
big New York companies who then sold them to any international bank that wanted
to hold US dollar assets.
??
All US financial institutions and people who kept money in US financial institutions
are now bearing the brunt of these bad loans. The US Govt response to the crises
is to:
1) Print more money
2) Lower interest rates
3) Use tax payers money to support the?losses of companies that are deemed "to
important to fail."

The last country to try these tactics was the good ol' USSR.

Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
Rishi
2008-09-17 14:27:39 UTC
Permalink
It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Rishi
2008-09-19 01:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if
you are professionally qualified. <<<<

Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for
about 3 years now.

I posted about nifty at 2600-3000 based on a moneycontrol interview.
(check below) Even Dow at 7200 is a technical report posted by some
analyst.

Also that is the reason why I suggested people interested in investing
in indian stocks should do so based on a responsible advisory service
like Equitymaster.com

regards

Rishikesh

--------------
Q: Do you have a timeline drawn along those levels? What do you expect
the markets to do when the Nifty reaches above the 4400 mark?

A: If the Nifty goes below the 4400 levels, then in about six months
we will see the 2600 level. We should bounce from there. There is a
minimum target for the Nifty at around the 2750 mark. The Sensex is a
little more bearish and the minimum target I set would be at around
9,200.

http://www.moneycontrol.com/india/news/fii-view/sensex-not-to-fall-beyond-9k-levelsray-barros/19/08/347903

---------------

Also Dow at 7200

http://www.nysun.com/business/the-dow-at-7200-superbears-scary-roar/82182/

-------------------------------------------



It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Roland Francis
2008-09-19 12:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Rishi, please have the courtesy to direct your question to a specific
person, preferably by name.

While you are at it, please tell us who you are and where you are
posting from. Rishikesh is rather anonymous and I think contrary to
Goanet rules.

Roland
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if you
are professionally qualified. <<<<
Roland Francis
2008-09-19 12:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Rishi, please have the courtesy to direct your question to a specific
person, preferably by name.

While you are at it, please tell us who you are and where you are
posting from. Rishikesh is rather anonymous and I think contrary to
Goanet rules.

Roland
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if you
are professionally qualified. <<<<
Roland Francis
2008-09-19 12:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Rishi, please have the courtesy to direct your question to a specific
person, preferably by name.

While you are at it, please tell us who you are and where you are
posting from. Rishikesh is rather anonymous and I think contrary to
Goanet rules.

Roland
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if you
are professionally qualified. <<<<
Roland Francis
2008-09-19 12:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Rishi, please have the courtesy to direct your question to a specific
person, preferably by name.

While you are at it, please tell us who you are and where you are
posting from. Rishikesh is rather anonymous and I think contrary to
Goanet rules.

Roland
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if you
are professionally qualified. <<<<
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-19 16:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if?
you are professionally qualified.
Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having?
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for?
about 3 years now.
Rishikesh,
There is nothing to be sorry about. Those with 'professional credentials'
trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities
of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. That is
why we now have thousands?recently unemployed brokers. I few days ago
they thought they has secure jobs at?the major US brokerage houses.

This morning, The?United Socialist States of America, formerly known as
the USA, came up with new regulations that bans the selling of stocks of
800 financial companies!?

Last week, the USSA nationalized insurance companies.?

The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?
to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets
are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more
money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."

BTW, you are right about gold. The liquidity the USSA has been forced to inject
into its markets will have only one long term result. INFLATION.
?
Mervyn3.0
On an "Question Everything Moment" a local paper today pointed out
that when Manchester United plays Newcastle in the English Premier
League,?the match will essentially be?USSA tax payers verses
UK taxpayers. Manchester United is sponsored by the?USSA govt owned
AIG and Newcastle is sponsored by Northern Rock now owned by
the UK Govt.

Can you think or a more excellent way to?waste taxpayers money?


__________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/gift/
Mario Goveia
2008-09-19 23:07:44 UTC
Permalink
Rishikesh wrote:
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials -
if?you are professionally qualified.
Fri Sep 19 09:04:57 PDT 2008
Mervyn Lobo mervynalobo at yahoo.ca
Those with 'professional credentials' trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."
Mario agrees:
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.? That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar "Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame as to when.??As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's success.? Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a few weeks ago.? Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to read what some REAL experts are saying rather than the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR and Weimar Republic:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Cheers.
Marlon Menezes
2008-09-20 13:20:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
-----
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak.

For good returns, consider P2P lending.

Marlon
Mario Goveia
2008-09-20 14:42:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 06:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.org>
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak
Mario observes:
You are right that my money is at risk - in the short run.
However, the only ones who are laughing are anti-Americans who?overlook
the fact?that the US has the inherent ability to address its problems and
recover from them - always has, always will.
Sooner or later the profligate spending and currency devaluation will end,
as it always does, and the next business upswing will begin, this time,
I'm guessing, from the need to become energy independent.
If it doesn't, it will be the first time in the country's history.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-20 19:46:01 UTC
Permalink
?However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points
?in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Folks,
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
The?Dow index?has increased 44% in the last ten years. All of?that increase
was?accomplished when Bill Clinton and the Democrats were in power. They
ran a Govt?that produced a budget surplus, a?strong?economy and a strong
currency.
??
??
George Bush (43)?introduced policies that have resulted in?budget deficits, a
collapsed?financial sector and a?rapidly depreciating currency. When George
Bush (43) became President, the Dow was at 11,000 points. Eight years into his
failed presidency, the Dow is?at 11,000 points and in a crises mode.
??
??
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It?took?only
US $270?to buy an ounce of gold.?It?takes US $870 to buy?that same ounce
today. This is what?happens to your currency when you?consistently run?budget
deficits. What happens to your?financial sector is even more interesting.
US banks today have no capital?and?are almost?bankrupt. They are depending on Govt
guarantees to survive. Financial institutions from the rest of the world are going
to great lengths to get rid of all their US based assets and currency.
???
??
??
??
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet
recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.?
That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar
"Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame
as to when.?As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's
success.?Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a
few weeks ago.?Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
??
???
Mario, I do wish you a long life. However, even you, with all?your rare diseases, will
live to see gold at $1,650 as there is a finite amount of gold in this world. There is no
limit to the amount?of dollars the US govt?has to print. The more it interferes in running
companies, the more it interferes in the stock markets, the more money it has to print.
More money in circulation results in only one thing. INFLATION.
??
The hedge against inflation is gold.
??
Mervyn3.0
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available?on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the?fallaciousness of the current US administation. ?
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/jeule/2008/sep/18/new-manchester-united-jersey/


__________________________________________________________________
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com
Bosco D'Mello
2008-09-21 06:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
Response: I think the Africans copied it from the Goans, na?? Dont we get the leaders we deserve???
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
Post by Mervyn Lobo
When George Bush (43) was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
Response: Well, somebody made a killing.......and laughing all the way to the bank...oops....which bank!!
Post by Mervyn Lobo
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the fallaciousness of the current US administation
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a ManU jersey (its the one on the back that matters) - the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!

- B
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-21 15:37:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten
?us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
?
Bosco,
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in salary and then?borrows/buys on credit.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason
this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a? ManU jersey (its the one
on the back that matters) -? the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!
The next American president may decide that the American taxpayer should not be subsidizing?the
wages of Cristiano Ronaldo. The new President?could then tell the Federal Reserve to cancel all future
cheques destined for United. United?would then have to sell Ronaldo to the highest bidder i.e.?City.
After all their new?Abu Dhabian owners?are awash with cash :-)


Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-21 17:40:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.??It sums up the
fallaciousness of the current US administation.
Mario responds:
Unlike Marlon who generally uses facts to arrive at his conclusions, regardless of whether I agree with the conclusions or?not, I'm not sure why Mervyn insists on embarrassing himself like this.? I also wonder?where he gets his grossly distorted information from, with no perspective or context whatsoever.
Anyone who knows even a smidgen about the US system of government knows that:
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
b) The US Congress is responsible for the budget in the US Constitution.? The President's proposals mean nothing unless approved by both houses of Congress.? We saw this most dramatically in 1973 when Congress cut off funding for the Vietnam war over the objections of President Nixon?and the US had to withdraw from Vietnam, even though they were on the verge of victory, as subsequently confirmed by Vietcong Gen. Giap in his memoire.
c) The opposition Democrat party has had control of both houses of the US Congress since 2006.
d) Newt Gingrich resigned from the US Senate in 1998, two years before President Bush was elected, and is not part of the US administration.
e) Regarding the "collapsed financial sector" in the US, as of the close of business last Friday, the Dow was up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
f) Regarding the "rapidly declining US dollar", the dollar strengthened?versus Euros from?$0.62 on 4/18/08?tp?$0.69 on 9/18/08, low by historic standards reflecting the enormous level of?imports by the US that sustains the economies of much of the rest of the world.?
I wonder what I will need to correct next.
In the US we describe?those who place the?blame on President Bush for everything imaginable, including?their own bilious and mean-spirited dispositions,?while denying?every one of his substantial and often epic accomplishments in the context of the enormous economic and foreign policy problems he inherited when he became president - anyone remember the declining US economy in early 2001 followed by the shock of 9/11 -?as suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-23 02:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Mario Goveia wrote:?
Post by Mario Goveia
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
I agree. George Bush (43) has been the weakest US president ever. I guess that is why opinion polls in the US
rate him?the least popular president ever.
Post by Mario Goveia
e) Regarding the "collapsed financial sector" in the US, as of the close of business last Friday, the Dow was
up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
Once again, the Dow is at the same level it was when George (43) Bush took power. Eight years of stagnation!
In addition, what George Bush (43) has set up with his policy of lower taxes and high spending abroad, are the
absolute perfect conditions for STAGFLATION.
Post by Mario Goveia
f) Regarding the "rapidly declining US dollar", the dollar strengthened?versus Euros from?$0.62 on 4/18/08?
tp?$0.69 on 9/18/08, low by historic standards reflecting the enormous level of?imports by the US that
sustains the economies of much of the rest of the world.?
If you are going to answer this post,?try and fill in the following blanks, my friend.
The US?DOLLAR?was worth?_____ Euro's when George Bush got into power.
The US?PESO is worth?____ Euro's today.

Anyone holding on to US Peso's really deserves what is coming his way.
Post by Mario Goveia
In the US we describe?those who place the?blame on President Bush for everything imaginable, including?
their own bilious and mean-spirited dispositions,?while denying?every one of his substantial and often epic
accomplishments in the context of the enormous economic and foreign policy problems he inherited when
he became president - anyone remember the declining US economy in early 2001 followed by the shock
of 9/11 -?as suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.
I agree.
No doubt about it, when you have to?save the country's country's?brokerage houses, banks and insurance
companies by nationalizing them, it is an epic accomplishment. It is?especially satisfying to know that?he
managed to?ruin the economy AFTER inheriting a large budget surplus from Bill Clinton.


Another?thing,?the more I hear of John McSame's economic policy, the more tempted I am to send his campaign
money. They very?thought of another four years of the McSame?economic policies is enough to send gold to
$1,650?quickly.


Lastly, I must congratulate you on being the originator of the business plan that depends on money from the
treasury to?let the business survive. Unfortunately, it looks like the big US banks have hijacked your plan and
there will be no tax payers money left for you. Never the less, I am still interested in which direction you think
the depressed US real estate market is heading.

Mervyn3.0
B. Hussein Obama for President?


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-23 17:19:40 UTC
Permalink
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
Mario Goveia wrote:?
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
Mervyn responded:
I agree. George Bush (43) has been the weakest US president ever. I guess that is why opinion polls in the US
rate him?the least popular president ever.
Mario corrects the record:
You still don't get it, but you provide a great opportunity to educate all Goanetters about the?nuances of the US system of government.? The US Constitution puts the US President on the same level as the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.? The US Congress is primarily responsible for the US budget, which you did not know.? You probably also don't know that the US President is primarily responsible for foreign policy.
If Bush 43 were so weak how did he stand up to virtually the entire world and liberate 50 million Muslims from Muslim tyrants?? If Bush 43 were so weak how did he stand up to all the western Europeans and ensure freedom and independance for Kosovo?
American presidents typically have low approval ratings in the middle of a war, as Truman's and Johnson's and Nixon's experiences showed as well.? Bush's approval ratings, however, though low, are three times higher than the current Democrat party controlled US Congress.
Your claim that Bush 43 is the least popular US President ever is also false.? Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1980 was the least popular?and Republican Richard Nixon in 1974 was?second.
Mervyn wrote:
Once again, the Dow is at the same level it was when George (43) Bush took power. Eight years of stagnation!
In addition, what George Bush (43) has set up with his policy of lower taxes and high spending abroad, are the
absolute perfect conditions for STAGFLATION.
Mario responds:
Once again, the point is that you were wrong when you referred to the "collapsed financial sector" when as recently as last Friday the Dow was?up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes", but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in income?taxes collected by the US Treasury.
His failure was in not successfully opposing?federal spending with presidential vetoes, which, however, Congress could have and often did over-ride.
Mervyn wrote:
If you are going to answer this post,?try and fill in the following blanks, my friend.
The US?DOLLAR?was worth?_____ Euro's when George Bush got into power.
The US?PESO is worth?____ Euro's today.
Mario responds:
$1.066 versus $$0.68 which also reflects the US role in helping the rest of the world economy through its imports.? You seem unaware that the world economy would collapse without US imports.
Mervyn wrote:
No doubt about it, when you have to?save the country's country's?brokerage houses, banks and insurance
companies by nationalizing them, it is an epic accomplishment. It is?especially satisfying to know that?he
managed to?ruin the economy AFTER inheriting a large budget surplus from Bill Clinton.
Mario responds:
You still haven't understood that, in the US,?the President cannot do any of this without Congressional approval.
Regarding the US economy, once again, you have no idea what you are talking about as the following analysis shows:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-24 00:03:36 UTC
Permalink
Mario Goveia wrote?
Post by Mario Goveia
Your claim that Bush 43 is the least popular US President ever is also false.?
Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1980 was the least popular?and Republican Richard
Nixon in 1974 was?second.
Thank you, Mario.
Lets see, Nixon decided that the US dollar did not need to be backed by gold.
Gold went from $35 to $70 during his Presidency. Jimmy Carter's economic
policies made gold go from $100 to $800. George (43) Bush economic
policy has resulted in gold going from $270 to $1,000 thus far.?The?answer to
the question of this post is quite obvious. Every time the US has an
unpopular president, Americans start buying gold.?
Post by Mario Goveia
You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes",
but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in
income?taxes collected by the US Treasury.
?
?
Er, the US is so broke that it is printing money like the "Wiemar Republic" There
is no limit to how much money the US has to print. The USSR was the last country
that tried?printing money to solve its problems. It then collapsed. I will admit that?the
USSR's lack of victory?in Afghanistan had a part to play?its collapse.
?
?
?
Post by Mario Goveia
$1.066 versus $$0.68 which also reflects the US role in helping the rest of the
world economy through its imports. You seem unaware that the world economy
would collapse without US imports.
?
?
Thank you. All those who have been holding on?to US dollars, during the Geroge (43)
Bush presidency?feel the pain. The very thought of?another four years of McSame?
policies?makes my?heart, and gold, glow.
?
This will be my last post on this topic for now. I simply do not have the time to
explain things to non-believers.
?
Mervyn3.0
B. Hussein Obama for President?


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Bosco D'Mello
2008-09-24 03:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes
and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in
salary and then borrows/buys on credit.
RESPONSE: This is too simple an explanation for a $4 trillion hole in the
bucket on Wall St. Reading your partisan exchange with our infamous
propagandist does not help an objective discussion.

With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is
all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview
with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4
trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush. He talked of
tools like Derivatives, Leverage and their inherent risks and the tech
melt-down at the end of his presidency and how all the money from that
market ended up in real-estate. And then the honchos on Wall St got into the
cab and drove the truck right into the ground - GREED!!

"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill
Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08

I think Bush (43) has had to endure more than a fair bit of turmoil in his 8
years at the wheel thanks to non-performing predecessors including Bush
(41). Hello Enron!! Hello Andersen!!

Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing
without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas for a
song.
Post by Mervyn Lobo
The next American president may decide that the American
taxpayer should not be subsidizing the wages of Cristiano
Ronaldo. The new President could then tell the Federal
Reserve to cancel all future cheques destined for United.
United would then have to sell Ronaldo to the highest bidder i.e. City.
RESPONSE: I dont think you understand Man-U!! It is no coincidence that it
was declared the richest Soccer Club and the number 1 sports brand by
Forbes. Sponsors are lined-up to get their name on their shirts, stadium and
gear. However there is still considerable debt being carried by the new
owners. AIG is in the middle of their contract. If they go, there will be
many more who will want their name emblazoned on their shirt....:-) BTW
Salgaocar Sports Club beat Sporting Club De Goa to finish third in the 2008
Manchester United Premier Cup (India) - Under 15. Also Manchester United
Soccer Schools have a program in Goa - they are looking for a Goan Ronaldo.

Never mind about Ronnie et al!! What are the repercussions in India (besides
our portfolios....:-(( ) from all these Wall St shake-n-bakes. There are a
few people I know who work for Lehman and Morgan Chase in Mumbai.

- Bosco

PS. Wot!! Obama donors were Fannie & Freddie and he blocked legislation that
would set them straight. Talk about skeletons in a young closet, eh??
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-24 15:32:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
RESPONSE: This is too simple an explanation for a $4 trillion hole in the
bucket on Wall St. Reading your partisan exchange with our infamous
propagandist does not help an objective discussion.
Bosco,
Any person, family, corporation or country that spends more more than
it has will eventually face bankruptcy. George Bush (43) has been on the
mother of all spending sprees. Now the country faces the consequences.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is
all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview
with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4
trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush. He talked of
tools like Derivatives, Leverage and their inherent risks and the tech
melt-down at the end of his presidency and how all the money from that
market ended up in real-estate. And then the honchos on Wall St got into the
cab and drove the truck right into the ground - GREED!!
Bill Clinton left a budget surplus. The melt down in the dot com era effected
only private capital. The melt down in the financial sector today is because
of govt printing more money and making credit available to people who do
not qualify for it. These people cannot repay their loans. The US govt now
has to use tax payers money to prop up?companies that are collapsing as
a result.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill
Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08
In my life?time, the British Empire has collapsed, along with its currency. The USSR
suffered the same fate. The US currency is already on its way down......
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing
without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas
for a song.
The secret, as always, is "buy low, sell high." My bet is that gold is
going a lot higher.
?
Post by Bosco D'Mello
RESPONSE: I dont think you understand Man-U!! It is no coincidence that it
was declared the richest Soccer Club and the number 1 sports brand by
Forbes. Sponsors are lined-up to get their name on their shirts, stadium and
gear.
And the sponsor they chose was the worst insurance company in the world? :-)


Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Instant Messaging, free SMS, sharing photos and more... Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger at http://ca.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/
Mario Goveia
2008-09-24 15:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
The?answer to the question of this post is quite obvious. Every time the US has an unpopular president, Americans start buying gold.?
Mario responds:
If you say so.? But don't you have to have a seller for every buyer?? I wonder which country?those come from?
The real question is why you continue to distort the US system of government and the role of the US President, which takes such a lot of bandwidth to correct.
Mervyn writes:
Er, the US is so broke that it is printing money like the "Wiemar Republic" There is no limit to how much money the US has to print.
Mario responds:
Your reponse above was to my comment, "You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes" but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in?income?taxes collected by the US Treasury." which corrected yet another false statement by you about Bush 43's policies.
Bush 43's tax policies, which Congress accepted, caused income tax collections to skyrocket as the econmy grew steadily for seven straight years and still hasn't slipped into a recession.? The size of the US economy is what has enabled it to survive its recent financial problems mostly caused by ridiculous lending practices by major banks, for which they are now paying a heavy price.
Regarding printing money, I'm afraid you are right, and this has contributed to the US dollar devaluation.? However, any such narrow-minded comparisons with the Weimar Republic, and your previous equally narrow-minded comparisons with the communist USSR are patently absurd, since the US asset base and GDP are strong enough?that the US can manage and correct its financial problems unlike those other systems.
You still seem unaware that the world economy, including Canada's, are substantially dependant on US imports, and we have still pledged $63 BILLION over the next ten years to help fight HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria in mostly poor and tropical countries, which I wish other countries would support instead of cheering for the US to fail.
Mervyn wrote:
The very thought of?another four years of McSame? policies?makes my?heart, and gold, glow.
Mario responds:
There is a good chance that?McCain will win the US presidency, but gold is far more likely to?reach $1,650 if he does not.? If you don't think so you?have no clue about not only his opponent but also the Democrats who currently control the US Congress.? But then, as we have seen in this exchange, your knowledge of?the US?is pretty narrow and usually grossly distorted.
But then you covered yourself when you said you had no idea when gold would reach $1,650, which makes it useless as a recommendation.? The economic value of an investment does not depend simply on the buy and sell prices but also on the time difference in?between.? Any credible book on basic economics will explain to you why this is, and you will typically find it in the very first chapter.
Mervyn wrote:
This will be my last post on this topic for now. I simply do not have the time to explain things to non-believers.
Mario responds:
Ongoing credible belief requires reliably?recognizable facts, without gross distortions interspersed.
When you cite recognizable facts I have no problem recognizing them.? Unfortunately, you also include so many distortions that have nothing to do with any issue at hand that it is just as well that you have decided to take a break, as your approach must be pretty exhausting.
However, I am never too exhausted to notice and question or correct an unrecognizable fact, and this does not apply just to you, believe me.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-24 16:21:44 UTC
Permalink
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes?and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in?salary and then borrows/buys on credit.
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:06:38 -0400
From: "Bosco D'Mello" <bospam at canada.com>
With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4 trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush.
Mario responds:
The reason is simple.? President Clinton understands the US system.? Mervyn still does not, even with all I have tried to teach him on?Goanet:-))
For example, his comment above of Bush reducing taxes and borrowing money, when the fact is that Bush's tax policies, which were accepted by Congress, caused taxes to skyrocket.? The problem was not taxes but the failure of the President and Congress to control spending, which led to the independant Federal Reserve Bank increasing the money supply to keep interest rates low - i.e. "printing money" - and so on.
Secondly, the equally absurd reference to a family man.? The largest economy?in the world has a lot more credit than any family man.? If he had tried to use someone like?Donald Trump as an example, he would have been closer to a sensible analogy, but then he would have been unable to make?the point he was trying to make.
Bosco wrote:
I think Bush (43) has had to endure more than a fair bit of turmoil in his 8 years at the wheel thanks to non-performing predecessors including Bush (41). Hello Enron!! Hello Andersen!!
Mario responds:
Bush 43's accomplishments have?been distorted beyond all recognition by his political adversaries suffering from? Bush Derangement Syndrome.? However, I do fault him for his failure to use his presidential veto to stem the unconscionable profligate federal spending that took place under his watch.? I tried to correct the record with my blog essay:
http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=2749#more-2749
Bosco wrote:
Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas for a song.
Mario responds:
You must have observed what happened to those who bought gold at $1,000 based on what they thought was a recommendation on this very forum.? Actually the only reasonably safe "killing" you in Canada can make right now is to buy real estate in the US for a song, use it for vacations, rent it out when you are not using it, and remember what Bill Clinton just said:
"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill?Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08
Finally,?regardless of who wins the US Presidency this year, it will take the Palin & Jindal ticket in 2012 to really fix the US financial problems for the longer term, and you are probably young enough to reap the benefits of that.
Bosco wrote:
PS. Wot!! Obama donors were Fannie & Freddie and he blocked legislation that would set them straight. Talk about skeletons in a young closet, eh??
Mario responds:
You have no idea what this guy is hiding in his closet, but it's beginning to trickle out and this series by the Editors of Investors Business Daily will?give you a clue:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=305851942725035
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306457496204115
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306977141583041
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307062146193647
Mario Goveia
2008-09-25 15:24:44 UTC
Permalink
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
George Bush (43) has been on the mother of all spending sprees.
Mario responds:
Sorry, folks, but Mervyn is still not getting it.? George Bush 43 has no power to spend anything without the approval of the US Congress, which has been controlled by his political adversaries since the 2006 elections.
Mervyn wrote:
Bill Clinton left a budget surplus.
Mario responds:
Again, Bill Clinton did not leave anything except some curious stains on the White House walls and furniture:-))
In 1993, after Clinton was elected, the very first budget he proposed?for the consideration of Congress that showed $200 billion DEFICITS throughout the five year budget projection period, even with the largest tax rate increases in history at the time.? The Congress which was controlled by his party at the time accepted his budget.? This is my evidence that they had no clue as to how to create budget surpluses.
The subsequent and unforeseeable?technological and communications revolutions, which the administration had nothing to do with, caused a sharp growth in the economy, and the Republicans taking control of both houses of Congress in 2004?succeeded in slowing the growth in spending, and massive bipartisan cuts in defense spending because the Cold War had ended, is what created the surpluses in the late 90's.? By the end of Clinton's term, this had all dissipated and the economy had begun to decline in late 2000 and Bush 43 inherited an economic slowdown, and we were then hit with 9/11 eight months after Bush took office and was still organizing his administration.
Mervyn wrote:
In my lifetime, the British Empire has collapsed, along with its currency. The USSR suffered the same fate. The US currency is already on its way down......
Mario responds:
The US currency has stabilized since earlier this year, and any comparisons with the British Empire and the USSR are absurd, because the largely US free enterprise system is far larger, diverse, stronger and resilient than those other regimes.
Mervyn wrote:
The secret, as always, is "buy low, sell high." My bet is that gold is going a lot higher.
Mario responds:
Wow!? Why didn't I think of that?? But wait.? Isn't someone then selling low and buying high?? Oh, I forgot.? They are all morons.??
The problem seems to me how to CONSISTENTLY tell in advance, without having to "bet".? Isn't "betting" what they do at?casinos and racetracks?
Most professionals achieve a growth rate in their investments of around 10% per annum over the long run.? There are some who do better and some who do worse.
Mervyn wrote:
When George Bush (43) became President, the Dow was at 11,000 points. Eight years into his
failed presidency, the Dow is?at 11,000 points and in a crises mode.
Mario responds:
I'm not sure how?Mervyn thinks that such distorted and?selective information to suit a pre-conceived?agenda will pass muster with all the facts we have at our disposal these days.? But, as I've said before, he provides so much scope for real facts to be disclosed with proper context and perspective.? We need to thank him:-))
The following chart shows the history of the Dow.? During the Clinton administration the Dow averaged much lower than the Dow during the Bush 43 administration.? The?Dow rose sharply during the Clinton administration then peaked at 11,723 and declined towards the end?as the country slipped into an economic slowdown, then was hit by the economic shock from the 9/11 attack.? It then?recovered from the policies of Bush 43 and the Republican Congress and?hit its all time high of over 14,164 in 2007.? The last time I checked that was still during the Bush 43 presidency
The Dow?has declined recently because of the financial crisis caused by inappropriate lending practices by major banks and inadequate oversight by the Congressional Committees responsible for overseeing the Banking sector, mainly because the Democrats who Chaired these since 2006 were pushing for lower lending standards to make home buying possible by lower income Americans whose previous alternative was to rent.
http://www.the-privateer.com/chart/dow-long.html
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-26 01:55:57 UTC
Permalink
Folks,
Let me stick to the (off) topic here.
?

If you have five?years or more before you need to access the money you have
in the stock market,?the best thing for you to do right now is probably nothing.


If you have less than five years, see the person who advised you to buy the stocks
you have. S/he will be best placed to give you advice, depending on what your current
situation is and what info s/he has about you on file.


Personally, I think the stock markets are heading for a crash since the US financial
system has collapsed. I have raised a lot of (non-US) cash and will only start buying
mutual funds?after the crash.

?
These? decisions are made on the following facts:
1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The?US treasury is now broke.
2) When?Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.
3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.
4) Increase in the supply of money?ALWAYS results in inflation.
5)?Both US presidential candidates?promise more of the McPain.?

?
Mervyn3.0
The?current US?capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses."



__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Alfred de Tavares
2008-09-26 14:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Devise an enduring parachute, Guruji????

AT, happily with none funds to save...
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:55:57 -0700> From: mervynalobo at yahoo.ca> To: goanet at lists.goanet.org> Subject: Re: [Goanet] What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic> > Folks,> Let me stick to the (off) topic here.> > > If you have five years or more before you need to access the money you have> in the stock market, the best thing for you to do right now is probably nothing.> > > If you have less than five years, see the person who advised you to buy the stocks > you have. S/he will be best placed to give you advice, depending on what your current > situation is and what info s/he has about you on file.> > > Personally, I think the stock markets are heading for a crash since the US financial > system has collapsed. I have raised a lot of (non-US) cash and will only start buying > mutual funds after the crash.> > > These decisions are made on the following facts:> 1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The US treasury is now broke.> 2) When Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.> 3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.> 4) Increase in the supply of money ALWAYS results in inflation.> 5) Both US presidential candidates promise more of the McPain. > > > Mervyn3.0> The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses.">
_________________________________________________________________
News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
Alfred de Tavares
2008-09-26 14:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Devise an enduring parachute, Guruji????

AT, happily with none funds to save...
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:55:57 -0700> From: mervynalobo at yahoo.ca> To: goanet at lists.goanet.org> Subject: Re: [Goanet] What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic> > Folks,> Let me stick to the (off) topic here.> > > If you have five years or more before you need to access the money you have> in the stock market, the best thing for you to do right now is probably nothing.> > > If you have less than five years, see the person who advised you to buy the stocks > you have. S/he will be best placed to give you advice, depending on what your current > situation is and what info s/he has about you on file.> > > Personally, I think the stock markets are heading for a crash since the US financial > system has collapsed. I have raised a lot of (non-US) cash and will only start buying > mutual funds after the crash.> > > These decisions are made on the following facts:> 1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The US treasury is now broke.> 2) When Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.> 3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.> 4) Increase in the supply of money ALWAYS results in inflation.> 5) Both US presidential candidates promise more of the McPain. > > > Mervyn3.0> The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses.">
_________________________________________________________________
News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
Alfred de Tavares
2008-09-26 14:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Devise an enduring parachute, Guruji????

AT, happily with none funds to save...
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:55:57 -0700> From: mervynalobo at yahoo.ca> To: goanet at lists.goanet.org> Subject: Re: [Goanet] What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic> > Folks,> Let me stick to the (off) topic here.> > > If you have five years or more before you need to access the money you have> in the stock market, the best thing for you to do right now is probably nothing.> > > If you have less than five years, see the person who advised you to buy the stocks > you have. S/he will be best placed to give you advice, depending on what your current > situation is and what info s/he has about you on file.> > > Personally, I think the stock markets are heading for a crash since the US financial > system has collapsed. I have raised a lot of (non-US) cash and will only start buying > mutual funds after the crash.> > > These decisions are made on the following facts:> 1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The US treasury is now broke.> 2) When Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.> 3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.> 4) Increase in the supply of money ALWAYS results in inflation.> 5) Both US presidential candidates promise more of the McPain. > > > Mervyn3.0> The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses.">
_________________________________________________________________
News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 14:25:05 UTC
Permalink
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic

The?current US?capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."

In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.

venantius j pinto
Mario Goveia
2008-09-26 17:08:22 UTC
Permalink
Mervyn Lobo wrote:
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries have learnt to follow.
Mario responds:
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the surface, both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and totally out of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.? They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only 3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income taxes.
The only time that a corporation has been bailed out by the government, it has been under highly unusual circumstances where the harmful ripple effect would cause considerable harm to the rest of the economy.??For example, Bear Sterns and?Lehman Bros.?were not bailed out and were or are being acquired by others. ?The shareholders and executives who mismanaged the company rarely benefit unless they had gotten out before the problems surfaced.
In cases where fraud has occurred the top executives?have been?prosecuted and sentenced to long jail terms and made to pay?heavy fines.
In most cases the bailouts are?through loan guarantees as opposed to outright infusions of government money.? While this still puts taxpayers at risk, in most cases the corporations survived and, as in the case of Chrysler, repaid their debt to the Treasury with interest.
When critics comment about the rish getting risher in the US, that's not quite true either, because the composition of who is?"rich" is constantly changing in America.? Recently it was disclosed that the top 1% of US tax payers made 22% of total income and paid 40% of total income taxes in 2006.? However, what was interesting was many of the?individuals?in that top 1% in 2006 were?not in the top 1% five years ago.? In the US, it is quite normal for people to make?money, then not do as well later on and?be replaced by someone else in the top 1%.
One can literally go from rags to riches and back to rags in one lifetime, which rarely happens anywhere else.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-26 16:23:41 UTC
Permalink
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
These? decisions are made on the following facts:
1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The?US treasury is now broke.
2) When?Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.
3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.
4) Increase in the supply of money?ALWAYS results in inflation.
5)?Both US presidential candidates?promise more of the McPain.?
Mario responds:
Folks, as a general rule, I never have a problem with a recommendation if the person is following his or her own?recommendations.??That's the only true test of whether someone is serious about?their recommendations.? If they are not, then they're simply?bloviating and their recommendations are meaningless.
In a previous life I was responsible for a $100 million corporate pension fund.? The only managers we hired to manage our funds were those who could show us that they had become millionaires from investing their own money.? These are hard to find but they're out there.??The theory was, "If you haven't made yourself rich from your investing skills, why should I believe you will make a lot of money for us?"? This cuts through all the fancy presentations and tap dancing that pension fund managers can put together.
Mervyn has previously told us?that anyone taking a recommendation by him on Goanet deserves their fate:-))? So he has already warned everyone:-))
However, I must say that finally, after several tries, Mervyn has listed some recognizeable, albeit selective,?facts, as well as some unrecognizeable ones, and, as usual, without much context or perspective.? Thankfully, he has given up the absurd comparisons with the USSR and the Weimar Republic, though he is still peddling his comical assertion that Bill Clinton had successfully and singlehandedly "managed"?the economy during his watch.? In the US economic system there is very little the President can do on his own.? He doesn't even have day to day control of the money supply which is the responsibility of the?independent?Federal Reserve Bank.
To say the US Treasury is "now broke" seems to show an ignorance of?the fact that the US Treasury has been in a debt position for decades, underwritten by the size of its considerable assets and GDP.? The reason?the US dollar has?been the lead currency for decades is because the US has always had a strong and growing economy and has always been considered a safe place to invest for investors from all over the world.? The US GDP is at all time highs, and even the larger projected deficits are at normal levels when related to the US GDP at around 3%.? As any rational observer would know, it has hardly been business as usual for the US since 9/11.
When Clinton left office the US economy and the Dow were both declining.? Subsequently the Dow recovered and reached a high above 14,000, then declined due to?the currrent financial?crisis caused by inappropriate real estate lending practices by the banking industry, encouraged by some left wing politicians who wanted low income Americans to be able to?own their own homes.? The crisis is being addressed and will be corrected.
The increase in the money supply does not always lead to inflation if it is offset by productivity increases.? The US inflation rate if averaged over several months is far below that of many industrial economies.
The two US presidential candidates have sharply opposing views of how to run the US economy.? Barack Obama is a virtual socialist, where John McCain is a virtual capitalist.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 19:06:14 UTC
Permalink
Mario,
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow
and grossly misleading and totally out of context." Unless you are saying
that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just
rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people
like me a job. You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true
indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail
if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed. I know I do not control
that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of
income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.

A bailout is also maintaining business as usual. But what do paintbrushes
like me know?

Anyway Mario, You have finally made your self amply clear to me. Someday you
just may see things differently. I am always very hopeful, since you are a
sharp individual. But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your
comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other
topics. No point in me interjecting in an area you have probably thrived in,
and see very differently.

Perhaps this too is out of context, but I will say it. A while ago a person
who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my
personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ? which is any case I do quite
sparingly and that too on issues which are far from finance and economics.
Its time to take his advice. Considering what I just said abouve, this is my
last post on this topic.

Keep thriving.

Venantius J Pinto
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mario Goveia <mgoveia at sbcglobal.net>
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the surface,
both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and totally out
of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was
offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.?
They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a
considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the
rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only
3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income
taxes.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 20:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
Mario,
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow
and grossly misleading and totally out of context." Unless you are saying
that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just
rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people
like me a job. You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true
indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail
if the upper 50% paid what they really owed. I know I do not control that
but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income
taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.
A bailout is also maintaining business as usual. But what do paintbrushes
like me know?
Anyway Mario, You have finally made your self amply clear to me. Someday
you just may see things differently. I am always very hopeful, since you are
a sharp individual. But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your
comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other
topics. No point in me interjecting in an area you have probably thrived in,
and see very differently.
Perhaps this too is out of context, but I will say it. A while ago a person
who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my
personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ? which is any case I do quite
sparingly and that too on issues which are far from finance and economics.
Its time to take his advice. Considering what I just said abouve, this is my
last post on this topic.
Keep thriving.
Venantius J Pinto
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mario Goveia <mgoveia at sbcglobal.net>
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the
surface, both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and
totally out of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was
offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.?
They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a
considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the
rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only
3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income
taxes.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 20:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
Mario,
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow
and grossly misleading and totally out of context." Unless you are saying
that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just
rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people
like me a job. You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true
indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail
if the upper 50% paid what they really owed. I know I do not control that
but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income
taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.
A bailout is also maintaining business as usual. But what do paintbrushes
like me know?
Anyway Mario, You have finally made your self amply clear to me. Someday
you just may see things differently. I am always very hopeful, since you are
a sharp individual. But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your
comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other
topics. No point in me interjecting in an area you have probably thrived in,
and see very differently.
Perhaps this too is out of context, but I will say it. A while ago a person
who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my
personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ? which is any case I do quite
sparingly and that too on issues which are far from finance and economics.
Its time to take his advice. Considering what I just said abouve, this is my
last post on this topic.
Keep thriving.
Venantius J Pinto
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mario Goveia <mgoveia at sbcglobal.net>
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the
surface, both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and
totally out of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was
offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.?
They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a
considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the
rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only
3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income
taxes.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 20:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
Mario,
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow
and grossly misleading and totally out of context." Unless you are saying
that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just
rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people
like me a job. You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true
indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail
if the upper 50% paid what they really owed. I know I do not control that
but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income
taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.
A bailout is also maintaining business as usual. But what do paintbrushes
like me know?
Anyway Mario, You have finally made your self amply clear to me. Someday
you just may see things differently. I am always very hopeful, since you are
a sharp individual. But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your
comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other
topics. No point in me interjecting in an area you have probably thrived in,
and see very differently.
Perhaps this too is out of context, but I will say it. A while ago a person
who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my
personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ? which is any case I do quite
sparingly and that too on issues which are far from finance and economics.
Its time to take his advice. Considering what I just said abouve, this is my
last post on this topic.
Keep thriving.
Venantius J Pinto
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mario Goveia <mgoveia at sbcglobal.net>
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the
surface, both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and
totally out of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was
offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.?
They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a
considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the
rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only
3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income
taxes.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-28 20:42:47 UTC
Permalink
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:06:14 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow and grossly misleading and totally out of context."? Unless you are saying that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people like me a job.
Mario explains:
Why would you be surprised?? I explained exactly why I described your comments, and Mervyn's, as shallow and grossly misleading.? In short, there is no such thing as socialism for the rich in US policy in the context of your response to Mervyn's comment which you were referring to.? To begin with, most corporations that are mismanaged are not bailed out - they are typically acquired at huge losses to their stockholders.? Even when they are, their owners pay a heavy price.? Finally, US tax policy is such that low income Americans pay little or no income taxes.
Venantius wrote:
You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed. I know I do not control that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.
Mario responds:
No, it is 97 %, not more.??? I have no idea what you mean by, "but what would that 97% entail if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed.? I know I do not control that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then."
Everyone in a capitalist society is paid what they are deemed to be worth by those who own the businesses or their representatives in management who are responsible and accountable to the owners.? When the top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes, and the bottom 50% pay 3%, then how can you call this a system of "socialism for the rich."
Secondly, as I mentioned, those who are in the top 1% are not the same in 2006 as the list in 2001.? So, the composition of who exactly are?"the rich" changes constantly in the US - it is not always the same people.? One cannot make the case that "the rich are getting richer" because many of them are actually getting poorer relative to some years ago and being replaced by others who were less rich some years ago.
Venantius wrote:
A bailout is also maintaining business as usual.? But what do paintbrushes like me know?
Mario responds:
I guess it depends on the paintbrush.? However,?the fact is that a bailout is not even close to being business as usual.? In most cases those deemed responsible for the corporate debacle pay a heavy personal price, and lose their jobs and are replaced by others.? We, as taxpayers, pay a heavy price if the objectives of the bailout are not met.
Perhaps you have missed the news that Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, Lehman Bros and AIG are all under investigation by the FBI.? That is not business as usual.? Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. and Washington Mutual will all cease to exist as viable entities.? That is neither "socialism for the rich" nor business as usual.
Venantius wrote:
But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other topics.
Mario responds:
Surely you do not expect me to agree with a proposition that does not fit the facts??
If, on the other hand, you had criticized the faulty lending policies that had been foisted on the banking system by Democrats since the Carter administration, all interested in social engineering at someone else's expense, or criticized corporate top executive salaries that are not tied to the performance of the company, or golden parachutes which I abhor when they apply to failed executives, or criticized the?top executives at Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac who were forced to resign for "inappropriate accounting practices" then showed up as advisors to Barack Obama, who received more contributions per year from this organization's employees and PACs than anyone else in Congress, or shown some appreciation for who produces most of the jobs in America and pays most of the taxes, I would have agreed with you.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=75586
Venantius wrote:
A while ago a person who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ?
Mario responds:
I would agree with the first part,?but the rest of the advice seems shortsighted to me, because surely you can do both.? I would discourage you from withdrawing from the fray.? Instead, read up on these economic and financial issues from a number of sources, so that you are more familiar with how these things work.
If you are really interested in how the US economy works, for example, read the books written by Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell, who tend to keep things simple, and?explain?their?opinions based on recognizeable?facts.? You will?be surprised how little those in the media know about these issues, yet they are the ones who influence most people.
Roland Francis
2008-09-16 12:52:45 UTC
Permalink
Free but useful advice, not all mine.

We are in volatile markets. The steep fall of the past two days will
not last much longer, but the ups and downs will, for the next 6
months. That presents buying opportunities, availed of with care and
professional advice. Remember the old contrarian adage: sell when
others buy and buy when others sell. Or, buy low and sell high. Now is
low.

Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.

Be well diversified however much the temptation. Make sure your
investment portfolio holds a mix of asset classes (equity, fixed
income and real estate) across geographical boundaries.

To do that, invest in mutual funds rather than directly in stocks.
Less volatility and better sleep. Also a professional portfolio
manager knows much before you do when things are going to happen. You
can buy meaningful positions in at most 10 stocks. The average mutual
fund holds 80 to 100 different investments.

Don't sell in panic at this point in time. Just ride out the tumbling
markets. The worst market decline in recent memory has been reversed
within less than 2 years. If you have idle money, buy when it is clear
that the sudden decline has stopped. You will have ample time to know
this. Markets do not bounce back in mere days.

Above all remember that people lose money because of only two
emotions: FEAR and GREED.
May you have the wisdom to avoid both.

With regards from one who has ploughed through various market cycles,

Roland.
Toronto
+1 (416) 453.3371
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-17 13:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Roland Francis wrote:?
Post by Roland Francis
Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.
Folks,
Pay close attention to this one. Buying stocks on?margin?carries the
same risk as a farmer drinking pesticide.
Post by Roland Francis
Also a professional portfolio manager knows much before you do
when things are going to happen.
A professional money manager has no more ability than the
rest of us have in looking into the future.?A good professional money
manager, however, will be able to stear you clear of the pitfalls that
most novice investors fall into.?


On another note, most of you would know?that the US is now using taxpayers
money to support failing insurance companies. First the brokerage firms failed.
Then the banks followed. Now its time for the insurance firms to ask for govt
support. Next its going to be the US?mutual fund firms.


Why did this all happen? Well the US govt decided to print more money and lower
interest rates. Banks?started rounding up people who would never qualify for a
mortgage and offered them loans. In?California, office cleaners were getting loans
to buy a $400,000 house. All they had to do was pay a $4,000.00 deposit
and?make a monthly mortgage payment of $1,000 per month.?When interest
rates went up, the monthly payment went to $4,000 per month. Most people had
to default on their loans, which?led to a glut of houses on the market and thus
a collapse in?prices for these houses.

In the mean time, the local banks that had made these loans sold the loans to the
big New York companies who then sold them to any international bank that wanted
to hold US dollar assets.
??
All US financial institutions and people who kept money in US financial institutions
are now bearing the brunt of these bad loans. The US Govt response to the crises
is to:
1) Print more money
2) Lower interest rates
3) Use tax payers money to support the?losses of companies that are deemed "to
important to fail."

The last country to try these tactics was the good ol' USSR.

Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
Rishi
2008-09-17 14:27:39 UTC
Permalink
It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Rishi
2008-09-19 01:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if
you are professionally qualified. <<<<

Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for
about 3 years now.

I posted about nifty at 2600-3000 based on a moneycontrol interview.
(check below) Even Dow at 7200 is a technical report posted by some
analyst.

Also that is the reason why I suggested people interested in investing
in indian stocks should do so based on a responsible advisory service
like Equitymaster.com

regards

Rishikesh

--------------
Q: Do you have a timeline drawn along those levels? What do you expect
the markets to do when the Nifty reaches above the 4400 mark?

A: If the Nifty goes below the 4400 levels, then in about six months
we will see the 2600 level. We should bounce from there. There is a
minimum target for the Nifty at around the 2750 mark. The Sensex is a
little more bearish and the minimum target I set would be at around
9,200.

http://www.moneycontrol.com/india/news/fii-view/sensex-not-to-fall-beyond-9k-levelsray-barros/19/08/347903

---------------

Also Dow at 7200

http://www.nysun.com/business/the-dow-at-7200-superbears-scary-roar/82182/

-------------------------------------------



It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-19 16:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if?
you are professionally qualified.
Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having?
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for?
about 3 years now.
Rishikesh,
There is nothing to be sorry about. Those with 'professional credentials'
trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities
of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. That is
why we now have thousands?recently unemployed brokers. I few days ago
they thought they has secure jobs at?the major US brokerage houses.

This morning, The?United Socialist States of America, formerly known as
the USA, came up with new regulations that bans the selling of stocks of
800 financial companies!?

Last week, the USSA nationalized insurance companies.?

The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?
to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets
are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more
money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."

BTW, you are right about gold. The liquidity the USSA has been forced to inject
into its markets will have only one long term result. INFLATION.
?
Mervyn3.0
On an "Question Everything Moment" a local paper today pointed out
that when Manchester United plays Newcastle in the English Premier
League,?the match will essentially be?USSA tax payers verses
UK taxpayers. Manchester United is sponsored by the?USSA govt owned
AIG and Newcastle is sponsored by Northern Rock now owned by
the UK Govt.

Can you think or a more excellent way to?waste taxpayers money?


__________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/gift/
Mario Goveia
2008-09-19 23:07:44 UTC
Permalink
Rishikesh wrote:
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials -
if?you are professionally qualified.
Fri Sep 19 09:04:57 PDT 2008
Mervyn Lobo mervynalobo at yahoo.ca
Those with 'professional credentials' trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."
Mario agrees:
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.? That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar "Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame as to when.??As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's success.? Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a few weeks ago.? Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to read what some REAL experts are saying rather than the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR and Weimar Republic:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Cheers.
Marlon Menezes
2008-09-20 13:20:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
-----
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak.

For good returns, consider P2P lending.

Marlon
Mario Goveia
2008-09-20 14:42:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 06:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.org>
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak
Mario observes:
You are right that my money is at risk - in the short run.
However, the only ones who are laughing are anti-Americans who?overlook
the fact?that the US has the inherent ability to address its problems and
recover from them - always has, always will.
Sooner or later the profligate spending and currency devaluation will end,
as it always does, and the next business upswing will begin, this time,
I'm guessing, from the need to become energy independent.
If it doesn't, it will be the first time in the country's history.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-20 19:46:01 UTC
Permalink
?However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points
?in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Folks,
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
The?Dow index?has increased 44% in the last ten years. All of?that increase
was?accomplished when Bill Clinton and the Democrats were in power. They
ran a Govt?that produced a budget surplus, a?strong?economy and a strong
currency.
??
??
George Bush (43)?introduced policies that have resulted in?budget deficits, a
collapsed?financial sector and a?rapidly depreciating currency. When George
Bush (43) became President, the Dow was at 11,000 points. Eight years into his
failed presidency, the Dow is?at 11,000 points and in a crises mode.
??
??
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It?took?only
US $270?to buy an ounce of gold.?It?takes US $870 to buy?that same ounce
today. This is what?happens to your currency when you?consistently run?budget
deficits. What happens to your?financial sector is even more interesting.
US banks today have no capital?and?are almost?bankrupt. They are depending on Govt
guarantees to survive. Financial institutions from the rest of the world are going
to great lengths to get rid of all their US based assets and currency.
???
??
??
??
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet
recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.?
That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar
"Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame
as to when.?As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's
success.?Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a
few weeks ago.?Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
??
???
Mario, I do wish you a long life. However, even you, with all?your rare diseases, will
live to see gold at $1,650 as there is a finite amount of gold in this world. There is no
limit to the amount?of dollars the US govt?has to print. The more it interferes in running
companies, the more it interferes in the stock markets, the more money it has to print.
More money in circulation results in only one thing. INFLATION.
??
The hedge against inflation is gold.
??
Mervyn3.0
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available?on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the?fallaciousness of the current US administation. ?
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/jeule/2008/sep/18/new-manchester-united-jersey/


__________________________________________________________________
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com
Bosco D'Mello
2008-09-21 06:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
Response: I think the Africans copied it from the Goans, na?? Dont we get the leaders we deserve???
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
Post by Mervyn Lobo
When George Bush (43) was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
Response: Well, somebody made a killing.......and laughing all the way to the bank...oops....which bank!!
Post by Mervyn Lobo
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the fallaciousness of the current US administation
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a ManU jersey (its the one on the back that matters) - the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!

- B
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-21 15:37:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten
?us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
?
Bosco,
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in salary and then?borrows/buys on credit.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason
this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a? ManU jersey (its the one
on the back that matters) -? the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!
The next American president may decide that the American taxpayer should not be subsidizing?the
wages of Cristiano Ronaldo. The new President?could then tell the Federal Reserve to cancel all future
cheques destined for United. United?would then have to sell Ronaldo to the highest bidder i.e.?City.
After all their new?Abu Dhabian owners?are awash with cash :-)


Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-21 17:40:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.??It sums up the
fallaciousness of the current US administation.
Mario responds:
Unlike Marlon who generally uses facts to arrive at his conclusions, regardless of whether I agree with the conclusions or?not, I'm not sure why Mervyn insists on embarrassing himself like this.? I also wonder?where he gets his grossly distorted information from, with no perspective or context whatsoever.
Anyone who knows even a smidgen about the US system of government knows that:
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
b) The US Congress is responsible for the budget in the US Constitution.? The President's proposals mean nothing unless approved by both houses of Congress.? We saw this most dramatically in 1973 when Congress cut off funding for the Vietnam war over the objections of President Nixon?and the US had to withdraw from Vietnam, even though they were on the verge of victory, as subsequently confirmed by Vietcong Gen. Giap in his memoire.
c) The opposition Democrat party has had control of both houses of the US Congress since 2006.
d) Newt Gingrich resigned from the US Senate in 1998, two years before President Bush was elected, and is not part of the US administration.
e) Regarding the "collapsed financial sector" in the US, as of the close of business last Friday, the Dow was up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
f) Regarding the "rapidly declining US dollar", the dollar strengthened?versus Euros from?$0.62 on 4/18/08?tp?$0.69 on 9/18/08, low by historic standards reflecting the enormous level of?imports by the US that sustains the economies of much of the rest of the world.?
I wonder what I will need to correct next.
In the US we describe?those who place the?blame on President Bush for everything imaginable, including?their own bilious and mean-spirited dispositions,?while denying?every one of his substantial and often epic accomplishments in the context of the enormous economic and foreign policy problems he inherited when he became president - anyone remember the declining US economy in early 2001 followed by the shock of 9/11 -?as suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-23 02:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Mario Goveia wrote:?
Post by Mario Goveia
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
I agree. George Bush (43) has been the weakest US president ever. I guess that is why opinion polls in the US
rate him?the least popular president ever.
Post by Mario Goveia
e) Regarding the "collapsed financial sector" in the US, as of the close of business last Friday, the Dow was
up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
Once again, the Dow is at the same level it was when George (43) Bush took power. Eight years of stagnation!
In addition, what George Bush (43) has set up with his policy of lower taxes and high spending abroad, are the
absolute perfect conditions for STAGFLATION.
Post by Mario Goveia
f) Regarding the "rapidly declining US dollar", the dollar strengthened?versus Euros from?$0.62 on 4/18/08?
tp?$0.69 on 9/18/08, low by historic standards reflecting the enormous level of?imports by the US that
sustains the economies of much of the rest of the world.?
If you are going to answer this post,?try and fill in the following blanks, my friend.
The US?DOLLAR?was worth?_____ Euro's when George Bush got into power.
The US?PESO is worth?____ Euro's today.

Anyone holding on to US Peso's really deserves what is coming his way.
Post by Mario Goveia
In the US we describe?those who place the?blame on President Bush for everything imaginable, including?
their own bilious and mean-spirited dispositions,?while denying?every one of his substantial and often epic
accomplishments in the context of the enormous economic and foreign policy problems he inherited when
he became president - anyone remember the declining US economy in early 2001 followed by the shock
of 9/11 -?as suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.
I agree.
No doubt about it, when you have to?save the country's country's?brokerage houses, banks and insurance
companies by nationalizing them, it is an epic accomplishment. It is?especially satisfying to know that?he
managed to?ruin the economy AFTER inheriting a large budget surplus from Bill Clinton.


Another?thing,?the more I hear of John McSame's economic policy, the more tempted I am to send his campaign
money. They very?thought of another four years of the McSame?economic policies is enough to send gold to
$1,650?quickly.


Lastly, I must congratulate you on being the originator of the business plan that depends on money from the
treasury to?let the business survive. Unfortunately, it looks like the big US banks have hijacked your plan and
there will be no tax payers money left for you. Never the less, I am still interested in which direction you think
the depressed US real estate market is heading.

Mervyn3.0
B. Hussein Obama for President?


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-23 17:19:40 UTC
Permalink
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
Mario Goveia wrote:?
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
Mervyn responded:
I agree. George Bush (43) has been the weakest US president ever. I guess that is why opinion polls in the US
rate him?the least popular president ever.
Mario corrects the record:
You still don't get it, but you provide a great opportunity to educate all Goanetters about the?nuances of the US system of government.? The US Constitution puts the US President on the same level as the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.? The US Congress is primarily responsible for the US budget, which you did not know.? You probably also don't know that the US President is primarily responsible for foreign policy.
If Bush 43 were so weak how did he stand up to virtually the entire world and liberate 50 million Muslims from Muslim tyrants?? If Bush 43 were so weak how did he stand up to all the western Europeans and ensure freedom and independance for Kosovo?
American presidents typically have low approval ratings in the middle of a war, as Truman's and Johnson's and Nixon's experiences showed as well.? Bush's approval ratings, however, though low, are three times higher than the current Democrat party controlled US Congress.
Your claim that Bush 43 is the least popular US President ever is also false.? Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1980 was the least popular?and Republican Richard Nixon in 1974 was?second.
Mervyn wrote:
Once again, the Dow is at the same level it was when George (43) Bush took power. Eight years of stagnation!
In addition, what George Bush (43) has set up with his policy of lower taxes and high spending abroad, are the
absolute perfect conditions for STAGFLATION.
Mario responds:
Once again, the point is that you were wrong when you referred to the "collapsed financial sector" when as recently as last Friday the Dow was?up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes", but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in income?taxes collected by the US Treasury.
His failure was in not successfully opposing?federal spending with presidential vetoes, which, however, Congress could have and often did over-ride.
Mervyn wrote:
If you are going to answer this post,?try and fill in the following blanks, my friend.
The US?DOLLAR?was worth?_____ Euro's when George Bush got into power.
The US?PESO is worth?____ Euro's today.
Mario responds:
$1.066 versus $$0.68 which also reflects the US role in helping the rest of the world economy through its imports.? You seem unaware that the world economy would collapse without US imports.
Mervyn wrote:
No doubt about it, when you have to?save the country's country's?brokerage houses, banks and insurance
companies by nationalizing them, it is an epic accomplishment. It is?especially satisfying to know that?he
managed to?ruin the economy AFTER inheriting a large budget surplus from Bill Clinton.
Mario responds:
You still haven't understood that, in the US,?the President cannot do any of this without Congressional approval.
Regarding the US economy, once again, you have no idea what you are talking about as the following analysis shows:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-24 00:03:36 UTC
Permalink
Mario Goveia wrote?
Post by Mario Goveia
Your claim that Bush 43 is the least popular US President ever is also false.?
Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1980 was the least popular?and Republican Richard
Nixon in 1974 was?second.
Thank you, Mario.
Lets see, Nixon decided that the US dollar did not need to be backed by gold.
Gold went from $35 to $70 during his Presidency. Jimmy Carter's economic
policies made gold go from $100 to $800. George (43) Bush economic
policy has resulted in gold going from $270 to $1,000 thus far.?The?answer to
the question of this post is quite obvious. Every time the US has an
unpopular president, Americans start buying gold.?
Post by Mario Goveia
You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes",
but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in
income?taxes collected by the US Treasury.
?
?
Er, the US is so broke that it is printing money like the "Wiemar Republic" There
is no limit to how much money the US has to print. The USSR was the last country
that tried?printing money to solve its problems. It then collapsed. I will admit that?the
USSR's lack of victory?in Afghanistan had a part to play?its collapse.
?
?
?
Post by Mario Goveia
$1.066 versus $$0.68 which also reflects the US role in helping the rest of the
world economy through its imports. You seem unaware that the world economy
would collapse without US imports.
?
?
Thank you. All those who have been holding on?to US dollars, during the Geroge (43)
Bush presidency?feel the pain. The very thought of?another four years of McSame?
policies?makes my?heart, and gold, glow.
?
This will be my last post on this topic for now. I simply do not have the time to
explain things to non-believers.
?
Mervyn3.0
B. Hussein Obama for President?


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Bosco D'Mello
2008-09-24 03:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes
and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in
salary and then borrows/buys on credit.
RESPONSE: This is too simple an explanation for a $4 trillion hole in the
bucket on Wall St. Reading your partisan exchange with our infamous
propagandist does not help an objective discussion.

With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is
all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview
with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4
trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush. He talked of
tools like Derivatives, Leverage and their inherent risks and the tech
melt-down at the end of his presidency and how all the money from that
market ended up in real-estate. And then the honchos on Wall St got into the
cab and drove the truck right into the ground - GREED!!

"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill
Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08

I think Bush (43) has had to endure more than a fair bit of turmoil in his 8
years at the wheel thanks to non-performing predecessors including Bush
(41). Hello Enron!! Hello Andersen!!

Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing
without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas for a
song.
Post by Mervyn Lobo
The next American president may decide that the American
taxpayer should not be subsidizing the wages of Cristiano
Ronaldo. The new President could then tell the Federal
Reserve to cancel all future cheques destined for United.
United would then have to sell Ronaldo to the highest bidder i.e. City.
RESPONSE: I dont think you understand Man-U!! It is no coincidence that it
was declared the richest Soccer Club and the number 1 sports brand by
Forbes. Sponsors are lined-up to get their name on their shirts, stadium and
gear. However there is still considerable debt being carried by the new
owners. AIG is in the middle of their contract. If they go, there will be
many more who will want their name emblazoned on their shirt....:-) BTW
Salgaocar Sports Club beat Sporting Club De Goa to finish third in the 2008
Manchester United Premier Cup (India) - Under 15. Also Manchester United
Soccer Schools have a program in Goa - they are looking for a Goan Ronaldo.

Never mind about Ronnie et al!! What are the repercussions in India (besides
our portfolios....:-(( ) from all these Wall St shake-n-bakes. There are a
few people I know who work for Lehman and Morgan Chase in Mumbai.

- Bosco

PS. Wot!! Obama donors were Fannie & Freddie and he blocked legislation that
would set them straight. Talk about skeletons in a young closet, eh??
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-24 15:32:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
RESPONSE: This is too simple an explanation for a $4 trillion hole in the
bucket on Wall St. Reading your partisan exchange with our infamous
propagandist does not help an objective discussion.
Bosco,
Any person, family, corporation or country that spends more more than
it has will eventually face bankruptcy. George Bush (43) has been on the
mother of all spending sprees. Now the country faces the consequences.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is
all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview
with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4
trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush. He talked of
tools like Derivatives, Leverage and their inherent risks and the tech
melt-down at the end of his presidency and how all the money from that
market ended up in real-estate. And then the honchos on Wall St got into the
cab and drove the truck right into the ground - GREED!!
Bill Clinton left a budget surplus. The melt down in the dot com era effected
only private capital. The melt down in the financial sector today is because
of govt printing more money and making credit available to people who do
not qualify for it. These people cannot repay their loans. The US govt now
has to use tax payers money to prop up?companies that are collapsing as
a result.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill
Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08
In my life?time, the British Empire has collapsed, along with its currency. The USSR
suffered the same fate. The US currency is already on its way down......
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing
without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas
for a song.
The secret, as always, is "buy low, sell high." My bet is that gold is
going a lot higher.
?
Post by Bosco D'Mello
RESPONSE: I dont think you understand Man-U!! It is no coincidence that it
was declared the richest Soccer Club and the number 1 sports brand by
Forbes. Sponsors are lined-up to get their name on their shirts, stadium and
gear.
And the sponsor they chose was the worst insurance company in the world? :-)


Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Instant Messaging, free SMS, sharing photos and more... Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger at http://ca.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/
Mario Goveia
2008-09-24 15:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
The?answer to the question of this post is quite obvious. Every time the US has an unpopular president, Americans start buying gold.?
Mario responds:
If you say so.? But don't you have to have a seller for every buyer?? I wonder which country?those come from?
The real question is why you continue to distort the US system of government and the role of the US President, which takes such a lot of bandwidth to correct.
Mervyn writes:
Er, the US is so broke that it is printing money like the "Wiemar Republic" There is no limit to how much money the US has to print.
Mario responds:
Your reponse above was to my comment, "You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes" but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in?income?taxes collected by the US Treasury." which corrected yet another false statement by you about Bush 43's policies.
Bush 43's tax policies, which Congress accepted, caused income tax collections to skyrocket as the econmy grew steadily for seven straight years and still hasn't slipped into a recession.? The size of the US economy is what has enabled it to survive its recent financial problems mostly caused by ridiculous lending practices by major banks, for which they are now paying a heavy price.
Regarding printing money, I'm afraid you are right, and this has contributed to the US dollar devaluation.? However, any such narrow-minded comparisons with the Weimar Republic, and your previous equally narrow-minded comparisons with the communist USSR are patently absurd, since the US asset base and GDP are strong enough?that the US can manage and correct its financial problems unlike those other systems.
You still seem unaware that the world economy, including Canada's, are substantially dependant on US imports, and we have still pledged $63 BILLION over the next ten years to help fight HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria in mostly poor and tropical countries, which I wish other countries would support instead of cheering for the US to fail.
Mervyn wrote:
The very thought of?another four years of McSame? policies?makes my?heart, and gold, glow.
Mario responds:
There is a good chance that?McCain will win the US presidency, but gold is far more likely to?reach $1,650 if he does not.? If you don't think so you?have no clue about not only his opponent but also the Democrats who currently control the US Congress.? But then, as we have seen in this exchange, your knowledge of?the US?is pretty narrow and usually grossly distorted.
But then you covered yourself when you said you had no idea when gold would reach $1,650, which makes it useless as a recommendation.? The economic value of an investment does not depend simply on the buy and sell prices but also on the time difference in?between.? Any credible book on basic economics will explain to you why this is, and you will typically find it in the very first chapter.
Mervyn wrote:
This will be my last post on this topic for now. I simply do not have the time to explain things to non-believers.
Mario responds:
Ongoing credible belief requires reliably?recognizable facts, without gross distortions interspersed.
When you cite recognizable facts I have no problem recognizing them.? Unfortunately, you also include so many distortions that have nothing to do with any issue at hand that it is just as well that you have decided to take a break, as your approach must be pretty exhausting.
However, I am never too exhausted to notice and question or correct an unrecognizable fact, and this does not apply just to you, believe me.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-24 16:21:44 UTC
Permalink
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes?and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in?salary and then borrows/buys on credit.
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:06:38 -0400
From: "Bosco D'Mello" <bospam at canada.com>
With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4 trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush.
Mario responds:
The reason is simple.? President Clinton understands the US system.? Mervyn still does not, even with all I have tried to teach him on?Goanet:-))
For example, his comment above of Bush reducing taxes and borrowing money, when the fact is that Bush's tax policies, which were accepted by Congress, caused taxes to skyrocket.? The problem was not taxes but the failure of the President and Congress to control spending, which led to the independant Federal Reserve Bank increasing the money supply to keep interest rates low - i.e. "printing money" - and so on.
Secondly, the equally absurd reference to a family man.? The largest economy?in the world has a lot more credit than any family man.? If he had tried to use someone like?Donald Trump as an example, he would have been closer to a sensible analogy, but then he would have been unable to make?the point he was trying to make.
Bosco wrote:
I think Bush (43) has had to endure more than a fair bit of turmoil in his 8 years at the wheel thanks to non-performing predecessors including Bush (41). Hello Enron!! Hello Andersen!!
Mario responds:
Bush 43's accomplishments have?been distorted beyond all recognition by his political adversaries suffering from? Bush Derangement Syndrome.? However, I do fault him for his failure to use his presidential veto to stem the unconscionable profligate federal spending that took place under his watch.? I tried to correct the record with my blog essay:
http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=2749#more-2749
Bosco wrote:
Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas for a song.
Mario responds:
You must have observed what happened to those who bought gold at $1,000 based on what they thought was a recommendation on this very forum.? Actually the only reasonably safe "killing" you in Canada can make right now is to buy real estate in the US for a song, use it for vacations, rent it out when you are not using it, and remember what Bill Clinton just said:
"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill?Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08
Finally,?regardless of who wins the US Presidency this year, it will take the Palin & Jindal ticket in 2012 to really fix the US financial problems for the longer term, and you are probably young enough to reap the benefits of that.
Bosco wrote:
PS. Wot!! Obama donors were Fannie & Freddie and he blocked legislation that would set them straight. Talk about skeletons in a young closet, eh??
Mario responds:
You have no idea what this guy is hiding in his closet, but it's beginning to trickle out and this series by the Editors of Investors Business Daily will?give you a clue:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=305851942725035
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306457496204115
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306977141583041
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307062146193647
Mario Goveia
2008-09-25 15:24:44 UTC
Permalink
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
George Bush (43) has been on the mother of all spending sprees.
Mario responds:
Sorry, folks, but Mervyn is still not getting it.? George Bush 43 has no power to spend anything without the approval of the US Congress, which has been controlled by his political adversaries since the 2006 elections.
Mervyn wrote:
Bill Clinton left a budget surplus.
Mario responds:
Again, Bill Clinton did not leave anything except some curious stains on the White House walls and furniture:-))
In 1993, after Clinton was elected, the very first budget he proposed?for the consideration of Congress that showed $200 billion DEFICITS throughout the five year budget projection period, even with the largest tax rate increases in history at the time.? The Congress which was controlled by his party at the time accepted his budget.? This is my evidence that they had no clue as to how to create budget surpluses.
The subsequent and unforeseeable?technological and communications revolutions, which the administration had nothing to do with, caused a sharp growth in the economy, and the Republicans taking control of both houses of Congress in 2004?succeeded in slowing the growth in spending, and massive bipartisan cuts in defense spending because the Cold War had ended, is what created the surpluses in the late 90's.? By the end of Clinton's term, this had all dissipated and the economy had begun to decline in late 2000 and Bush 43 inherited an economic slowdown, and we were then hit with 9/11 eight months after Bush took office and was still organizing his administration.
Mervyn wrote:
In my lifetime, the British Empire has collapsed, along with its currency. The USSR suffered the same fate. The US currency is already on its way down......
Mario responds:
The US currency has stabilized since earlier this year, and any comparisons with the British Empire and the USSR are absurd, because the largely US free enterprise system is far larger, diverse, stronger and resilient than those other regimes.
Mervyn wrote:
The secret, as always, is "buy low, sell high." My bet is that gold is going a lot higher.
Mario responds:
Wow!? Why didn't I think of that?? But wait.? Isn't someone then selling low and buying high?? Oh, I forgot.? They are all morons.??
The problem seems to me how to CONSISTENTLY tell in advance, without having to "bet".? Isn't "betting" what they do at?casinos and racetracks?
Most professionals achieve a growth rate in their investments of around 10% per annum over the long run.? There are some who do better and some who do worse.
Mervyn wrote:
When George Bush (43) became President, the Dow was at 11,000 points. Eight years into his
failed presidency, the Dow is?at 11,000 points and in a crises mode.
Mario responds:
I'm not sure how?Mervyn thinks that such distorted and?selective information to suit a pre-conceived?agenda will pass muster with all the facts we have at our disposal these days.? But, as I've said before, he provides so much scope for real facts to be disclosed with proper context and perspective.? We need to thank him:-))
The following chart shows the history of the Dow.? During the Clinton administration the Dow averaged much lower than the Dow during the Bush 43 administration.? The?Dow rose sharply during the Clinton administration then peaked at 11,723 and declined towards the end?as the country slipped into an economic slowdown, then was hit by the economic shock from the 9/11 attack.? It then?recovered from the policies of Bush 43 and the Republican Congress and?hit its all time high of over 14,164 in 2007.? The last time I checked that was still during the Bush 43 presidency
The Dow?has declined recently because of the financial crisis caused by inappropriate lending practices by major banks and inadequate oversight by the Congressional Committees responsible for overseeing the Banking sector, mainly because the Democrats who Chaired these since 2006 were pushing for lower lending standards to make home buying possible by lower income Americans whose previous alternative was to rent.
http://www.the-privateer.com/chart/dow-long.html
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-26 01:55:57 UTC
Permalink
Folks,
Let me stick to the (off) topic here.
?

If you have five?years or more before you need to access the money you have
in the stock market,?the best thing for you to do right now is probably nothing.


If you have less than five years, see the person who advised you to buy the stocks
you have. S/he will be best placed to give you advice, depending on what your current
situation is and what info s/he has about you on file.


Personally, I think the stock markets are heading for a crash since the US financial
system has collapsed. I have raised a lot of (non-US) cash and will only start buying
mutual funds?after the crash.

?
These? decisions are made on the following facts:
1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The?US treasury is now broke.
2) When?Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.
3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.
4) Increase in the supply of money?ALWAYS results in inflation.
5)?Both US presidential candidates?promise more of the McPain.?

?
Mervyn3.0
The?current US?capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses."



__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 14:25:05 UTC
Permalink
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic

The?current US?capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."

In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.

venantius j pinto
Mario Goveia
2008-09-26 17:08:22 UTC
Permalink
Mervyn Lobo wrote:
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries have learnt to follow.
Mario responds:
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the surface, both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and totally out of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.? They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only 3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income taxes.
The only time that a corporation has been bailed out by the government, it has been under highly unusual circumstances where the harmful ripple effect would cause considerable harm to the rest of the economy.??For example, Bear Sterns and?Lehman Bros.?were not bailed out and were or are being acquired by others. ?The shareholders and executives who mismanaged the company rarely benefit unless they had gotten out before the problems surfaced.
In cases where fraud has occurred the top executives?have been?prosecuted and sentenced to long jail terms and made to pay?heavy fines.
In most cases the bailouts are?through loan guarantees as opposed to outright infusions of government money.? While this still puts taxpayers at risk, in most cases the corporations survived and, as in the case of Chrysler, repaid their debt to the Treasury with interest.
When critics comment about the rish getting risher in the US, that's not quite true either, because the composition of who is?"rich" is constantly changing in America.? Recently it was disclosed that the top 1% of US tax payers made 22% of total income and paid 40% of total income taxes in 2006.? However, what was interesting was many of the?individuals?in that top 1% in 2006 were?not in the top 1% five years ago.? In the US, it is quite normal for people to make?money, then not do as well later on and?be replaced by someone else in the top 1%.
One can literally go from rags to riches and back to rags in one lifetime, which rarely happens anywhere else.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-26 16:23:41 UTC
Permalink
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
These? decisions are made on the following facts:
1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The?US treasury is now broke.
2) When?Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.
3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.
4) Increase in the supply of money?ALWAYS results in inflation.
5)?Both US presidential candidates?promise more of the McPain.?
Mario responds:
Folks, as a general rule, I never have a problem with a recommendation if the person is following his or her own?recommendations.??That's the only true test of whether someone is serious about?their recommendations.? If they are not, then they're simply?bloviating and their recommendations are meaningless.
In a previous life I was responsible for a $100 million corporate pension fund.? The only managers we hired to manage our funds were those who could show us that they had become millionaires from investing their own money.? These are hard to find but they're out there.??The theory was, "If you haven't made yourself rich from your investing skills, why should I believe you will make a lot of money for us?"? This cuts through all the fancy presentations and tap dancing that pension fund managers can put together.
Mervyn has previously told us?that anyone taking a recommendation by him on Goanet deserves their fate:-))? So he has already warned everyone:-))
However, I must say that finally, after several tries, Mervyn has listed some recognizeable, albeit selective,?facts, as well as some unrecognizeable ones, and, as usual, without much context or perspective.? Thankfully, he has given up the absurd comparisons with the USSR and the Weimar Republic, though he is still peddling his comical assertion that Bill Clinton had successfully and singlehandedly "managed"?the economy during his watch.? In the US economic system there is very little the President can do on his own.? He doesn't even have day to day control of the money supply which is the responsibility of the?independent?Federal Reserve Bank.
To say the US Treasury is "now broke" seems to show an ignorance of?the fact that the US Treasury has been in a debt position for decades, underwritten by the size of its considerable assets and GDP.? The reason?the US dollar has?been the lead currency for decades is because the US has always had a strong and growing economy and has always been considered a safe place to invest for investors from all over the world.? The US GDP is at all time highs, and even the larger projected deficits are at normal levels when related to the US GDP at around 3%.? As any rational observer would know, it has hardly been business as usual for the US since 9/11.
When Clinton left office the US economy and the Dow were both declining.? Subsequently the Dow recovered and reached a high above 14,000, then declined due to?the currrent financial?crisis caused by inappropriate real estate lending practices by the banking industry, encouraged by some left wing politicians who wanted low income Americans to be able to?own their own homes.? The crisis is being addressed and will be corrected.
The increase in the money supply does not always lead to inflation if it is offset by productivity increases.? The US inflation rate if averaged over several months is far below that of many industrial economies.
The two US presidential candidates have sharply opposing views of how to run the US economy.? Barack Obama is a virtual socialist, where John McCain is a virtual capitalist.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 19:06:14 UTC
Permalink
Mario,
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow
and grossly misleading and totally out of context." Unless you are saying
that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just
rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people
like me a job. You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true
indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail
if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed. I know I do not control
that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of
income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.

A bailout is also maintaining business as usual. But what do paintbrushes
like me know?

Anyway Mario, You have finally made your self amply clear to me. Someday you
just may see things differently. I am always very hopeful, since you are a
sharp individual. But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your
comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other
topics. No point in me interjecting in an area you have probably thrived in,
and see very differently.

Perhaps this too is out of context, but I will say it. A while ago a person
who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my
personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ? which is any case I do quite
sparingly and that too on issues which are far from finance and economics.
Its time to take his advice. Considering what I just said abouve, this is my
last post on this topic.

Keep thriving.

Venantius J Pinto
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mario Goveia <mgoveia at sbcglobal.net>
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the surface,
both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and totally out
of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was
offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.?
They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a
considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the
rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only
3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income
taxes.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-28 20:42:47 UTC
Permalink
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:06:14 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow and grossly misleading and totally out of context."? Unless you are saying that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people like me a job.
Mario explains:
Why would you be surprised?? I explained exactly why I described your comments, and Mervyn's, as shallow and grossly misleading.? In short, there is no such thing as socialism for the rich in US policy in the context of your response to Mervyn's comment which you were referring to.? To begin with, most corporations that are mismanaged are not bailed out - they are typically acquired at huge losses to their stockholders.? Even when they are, their owners pay a heavy price.? Finally, US tax policy is such that low income Americans pay little or no income taxes.
Venantius wrote:
You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed. I know I do not control that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.
Mario responds:
No, it is 97 %, not more.??? I have no idea what you mean by, "but what would that 97% entail if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed.? I know I do not control that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then."
Everyone in a capitalist society is paid what they are deemed to be worth by those who own the businesses or their representatives in management who are responsible and accountable to the owners.? When the top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes, and the bottom 50% pay 3%, then how can you call this a system of "socialism for the rich."
Secondly, as I mentioned, those who are in the top 1% are not the same in 2006 as the list in 2001.? So, the composition of who exactly are?"the rich" changes constantly in the US - it is not always the same people.? One cannot make the case that "the rich are getting richer" because many of them are actually getting poorer relative to some years ago and being replaced by others who were less rich some years ago.
Venantius wrote:
A bailout is also maintaining business as usual.? But what do paintbrushes like me know?
Mario responds:
I guess it depends on the paintbrush.? However,?the fact is that a bailout is not even close to being business as usual.? In most cases those deemed responsible for the corporate debacle pay a heavy personal price, and lose their jobs and are replaced by others.? We, as taxpayers, pay a heavy price if the objectives of the bailout are not met.
Perhaps you have missed the news that Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, Lehman Bros and AIG are all under investigation by the FBI.? That is not business as usual.? Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. and Washington Mutual will all cease to exist as viable entities.? That is neither "socialism for the rich" nor business as usual.
Venantius wrote:
But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other topics.
Mario responds:
Surely you do not expect me to agree with a proposition that does not fit the facts??
If, on the other hand, you had criticized the faulty lending policies that had been foisted on the banking system by Democrats since the Carter administration, all interested in social engineering at someone else's expense, or criticized corporate top executive salaries that are not tied to the performance of the company, or golden parachutes which I abhor when they apply to failed executives, or criticized the?top executives at Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac who were forced to resign for "inappropriate accounting practices" then showed up as advisors to Barack Obama, who received more contributions per year from this organization's employees and PACs than anyone else in Congress, or shown some appreciation for who produces most of the jobs in America and pays most of the taxes, I would have agreed with you.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=75586
Venantius wrote:
A while ago a person who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ?
Mario responds:
I would agree with the first part,?but the rest of the advice seems shortsighted to me, because surely you can do both.? I would discourage you from withdrawing from the fray.? Instead, read up on these economic and financial issues from a number of sources, so that you are more familiar with how these things work.
If you are really interested in how the US economy works, for example, read the books written by Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell, who tend to keep things simple, and?explain?their?opinions based on recognizeable?facts.? You will?be surprised how little those in the media know about these issues, yet they are the ones who influence most people.
Roland Francis
2008-09-16 12:52:45 UTC
Permalink
Free but useful advice, not all mine.

We are in volatile markets. The steep fall of the past two days will
not last much longer, but the ups and downs will, for the next 6
months. That presents buying opportunities, availed of with care and
professional advice. Remember the old contrarian adage: sell when
others buy and buy when others sell. Or, buy low and sell high. Now is
low.

Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.

Be well diversified however much the temptation. Make sure your
investment portfolio holds a mix of asset classes (equity, fixed
income and real estate) across geographical boundaries.

To do that, invest in mutual funds rather than directly in stocks.
Less volatility and better sleep. Also a professional portfolio
manager knows much before you do when things are going to happen. You
can buy meaningful positions in at most 10 stocks. The average mutual
fund holds 80 to 100 different investments.

Don't sell in panic at this point in time. Just ride out the tumbling
markets. The worst market decline in recent memory has been reversed
within less than 2 years. If you have idle money, buy when it is clear
that the sudden decline has stopped. You will have ample time to know
this. Markets do not bounce back in mere days.

Above all remember that people lose money because of only two
emotions: FEAR and GREED.
May you have the wisdom to avoid both.

With regards from one who has ploughed through various market cycles,

Roland.
Toronto
+1 (416) 453.3371
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-17 13:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Roland Francis wrote:?
Post by Roland Francis
Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.
Folks,
Pay close attention to this one. Buying stocks on?margin?carries the
same risk as a farmer drinking pesticide.
Post by Roland Francis
Also a professional portfolio manager knows much before you do
when things are going to happen.
A professional money manager has no more ability than the
rest of us have in looking into the future.?A good professional money
manager, however, will be able to stear you clear of the pitfalls that
most novice investors fall into.?


On another note, most of you would know?that the US is now using taxpayers
money to support failing insurance companies. First the brokerage firms failed.
Then the banks followed. Now its time for the insurance firms to ask for govt
support. Next its going to be the US?mutual fund firms.


Why did this all happen? Well the US govt decided to print more money and lower
interest rates. Banks?started rounding up people who would never qualify for a
mortgage and offered them loans. In?California, office cleaners were getting loans
to buy a $400,000 house. All they had to do was pay a $4,000.00 deposit
and?make a monthly mortgage payment of $1,000 per month.?When interest
rates went up, the monthly payment went to $4,000 per month. Most people had
to default on their loans, which?led to a glut of houses on the market and thus
a collapse in?prices for these houses.

In the mean time, the local banks that had made these loans sold the loans to the
big New York companies who then sold them to any international bank that wanted
to hold US dollar assets.
??
All US financial institutions and people who kept money in US financial institutions
are now bearing the brunt of these bad loans. The US Govt response to the crises
is to:
1) Print more money
2) Lower interest rates
3) Use tax payers money to support the?losses of companies that are deemed "to
important to fail."

The last country to try these tactics was the good ol' USSR.

Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
Rishi
2008-09-17 14:27:39 UTC
Permalink
It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Rishi
2008-09-19 01:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if
you are professionally qualified. <<<<

Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for
about 3 years now.

I posted about nifty at 2600-3000 based on a moneycontrol interview.
(check below) Even Dow at 7200 is a technical report posted by some
analyst.

Also that is the reason why I suggested people interested in investing
in indian stocks should do so based on a responsible advisory service
like Equitymaster.com

regards

Rishikesh

--------------
Q: Do you have a timeline drawn along those levels? What do you expect
the markets to do when the Nifty reaches above the 4400 mark?

A: If the Nifty goes below the 4400 levels, then in about six months
we will see the 2600 level. We should bounce from there. There is a
minimum target for the Nifty at around the 2750 mark. The Sensex is a
little more bearish and the minimum target I set would be at around
9,200.

http://www.moneycontrol.com/india/news/fii-view/sensex-not-to-fall-beyond-9k-levelsray-barros/19/08/347903

---------------

Also Dow at 7200

http://www.nysun.com/business/the-dow-at-7200-superbears-scary-roar/82182/

-------------------------------------------



It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-19 16:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if?
you are professionally qualified.
Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having?
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for?
about 3 years now.
Rishikesh,
There is nothing to be sorry about. Those with 'professional credentials'
trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities
of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. That is
why we now have thousands?recently unemployed brokers. I few days ago
they thought they has secure jobs at?the major US brokerage houses.

This morning, The?United Socialist States of America, formerly known as
the USA, came up with new regulations that bans the selling of stocks of
800 financial companies!?

Last week, the USSA nationalized insurance companies.?

The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?
to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets
are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more
money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."

BTW, you are right about gold. The liquidity the USSA has been forced to inject
into its markets will have only one long term result. INFLATION.
?
Mervyn3.0
On an "Question Everything Moment" a local paper today pointed out
that when Manchester United plays Newcastle in the English Premier
League,?the match will essentially be?USSA tax payers verses
UK taxpayers. Manchester United is sponsored by the?USSA govt owned
AIG and Newcastle is sponsored by Northern Rock now owned by
the UK Govt.

Can you think or a more excellent way to?waste taxpayers money?


__________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/gift/
Mario Goveia
2008-09-19 23:07:44 UTC
Permalink
Rishikesh wrote:
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials -
if?you are professionally qualified.
Fri Sep 19 09:04:57 PDT 2008
Mervyn Lobo mervynalobo at yahoo.ca
Those with 'professional credentials' trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."
Mario agrees:
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.? That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar "Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame as to when.??As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's success.? Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a few weeks ago.? Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to read what some REAL experts are saying rather than the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR and Weimar Republic:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Cheers.
Marlon Menezes
2008-09-20 13:20:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
-----
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak.

For good returns, consider P2P lending.

Marlon
Mario Goveia
2008-09-20 14:42:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 06:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.org>
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak
Mario observes:
You are right that my money is at risk - in the short run.
However, the only ones who are laughing are anti-Americans who?overlook
the fact?that the US has the inherent ability to address its problems and
recover from them - always has, always will.
Sooner or later the profligate spending and currency devaluation will end,
as it always does, and the next business upswing will begin, this time,
I'm guessing, from the need to become energy independent.
If it doesn't, it will be the first time in the country's history.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-20 19:46:01 UTC
Permalink
?However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points
?in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Folks,
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
The?Dow index?has increased 44% in the last ten years. All of?that increase
was?accomplished when Bill Clinton and the Democrats were in power. They
ran a Govt?that produced a budget surplus, a?strong?economy and a strong
currency.
??
??
George Bush (43)?introduced policies that have resulted in?budget deficits, a
collapsed?financial sector and a?rapidly depreciating currency. When George
Bush (43) became President, the Dow was at 11,000 points. Eight years into his
failed presidency, the Dow is?at 11,000 points and in a crises mode.
??
??
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It?took?only
US $270?to buy an ounce of gold.?It?takes US $870 to buy?that same ounce
today. This is what?happens to your currency when you?consistently run?budget
deficits. What happens to your?financial sector is even more interesting.
US banks today have no capital?and?are almost?bankrupt. They are depending on Govt
guarantees to survive. Financial institutions from the rest of the world are going
to great lengths to get rid of all their US based assets and currency.
???
??
??
??
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet
recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.?
That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar
"Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame
as to when.?As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's
success.?Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a
few weeks ago.?Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
??
???
Mario, I do wish you a long life. However, even you, with all?your rare diseases, will
live to see gold at $1,650 as there is a finite amount of gold in this world. There is no
limit to the amount?of dollars the US govt?has to print. The more it interferes in running
companies, the more it interferes in the stock markets, the more money it has to print.
More money in circulation results in only one thing. INFLATION.
??
The hedge against inflation is gold.
??
Mervyn3.0
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available?on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the?fallaciousness of the current US administation. ?
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/jeule/2008/sep/18/new-manchester-united-jersey/


__________________________________________________________________
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com
Bosco D'Mello
2008-09-21 06:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
Response: I think the Africans copied it from the Goans, na?? Dont we get the leaders we deserve???
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
Post by Mervyn Lobo
When George Bush (43) was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
Response: Well, somebody made a killing.......and laughing all the way to the bank...oops....which bank!!
Post by Mervyn Lobo
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the fallaciousness of the current US administation
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a ManU jersey (its the one on the back that matters) - the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!

- B
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-21 15:37:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten
?us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
?
Bosco,
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in salary and then?borrows/buys on credit.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason
this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a? ManU jersey (its the one
on the back that matters) -? the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!
The next American president may decide that the American taxpayer should not be subsidizing?the
wages of Cristiano Ronaldo. The new President?could then tell the Federal Reserve to cancel all future
cheques destined for United. United?would then have to sell Ronaldo to the highest bidder i.e.?City.
After all their new?Abu Dhabian owners?are awash with cash :-)


Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-21 17:40:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.??It sums up the
fallaciousness of the current US administation.
Mario responds:
Unlike Marlon who generally uses facts to arrive at his conclusions, regardless of whether I agree with the conclusions or?not, I'm not sure why Mervyn insists on embarrassing himself like this.? I also wonder?where he gets his grossly distorted information from, with no perspective or context whatsoever.
Anyone who knows even a smidgen about the US system of government knows that:
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
b) The US Congress is responsible for the budget in the US Constitution.? The President's proposals mean nothing unless approved by both houses of Congress.? We saw this most dramatically in 1973 when Congress cut off funding for the Vietnam war over the objections of President Nixon?and the US had to withdraw from Vietnam, even though they were on the verge of victory, as subsequently confirmed by Vietcong Gen. Giap in his memoire.
c) The opposition Democrat party has had control of both houses of the US Congress since 2006.
d) Newt Gingrich resigned from the US Senate in 1998, two years before President Bush was elected, and is not part of the US administration.
e) Regarding the "collapsed financial sector" in the US, as of the close of business last Friday, the Dow was up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
f) Regarding the "rapidly declining US dollar", the dollar strengthened?versus Euros from?$0.62 on 4/18/08?tp?$0.69 on 9/18/08, low by historic standards reflecting the enormous level of?imports by the US that sustains the economies of much of the rest of the world.?
I wonder what I will need to correct next.
In the US we describe?those who place the?blame on President Bush for everything imaginable, including?their own bilious and mean-spirited dispositions,?while denying?every one of his substantial and often epic accomplishments in the context of the enormous economic and foreign policy problems he inherited when he became president - anyone remember the declining US economy in early 2001 followed by the shock of 9/11 -?as suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-23 02:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Mario Goveia wrote:?
Post by Mario Goveia
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
I agree. George Bush (43) has been the weakest US president ever. I guess that is why opinion polls in the US
rate him?the least popular president ever.
Post by Mario Goveia
e) Regarding the "collapsed financial sector" in the US, as of the close of business last Friday, the Dow was
up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
Once again, the Dow is at the same level it was when George (43) Bush took power. Eight years of stagnation!
In addition, what George Bush (43) has set up with his policy of lower taxes and high spending abroad, are the
absolute perfect conditions for STAGFLATION.
Post by Mario Goveia
f) Regarding the "rapidly declining US dollar", the dollar strengthened?versus Euros from?$0.62 on 4/18/08?
tp?$0.69 on 9/18/08, low by historic standards reflecting the enormous level of?imports by the US that
sustains the economies of much of the rest of the world.?
If you are going to answer this post,?try and fill in the following blanks, my friend.
The US?DOLLAR?was worth?_____ Euro's when George Bush got into power.
The US?PESO is worth?____ Euro's today.

Anyone holding on to US Peso's really deserves what is coming his way.
Post by Mario Goveia
In the US we describe?those who place the?blame on President Bush for everything imaginable, including?
their own bilious and mean-spirited dispositions,?while denying?every one of his substantial and often epic
accomplishments in the context of the enormous economic and foreign policy problems he inherited when
he became president - anyone remember the declining US economy in early 2001 followed by the shock
of 9/11 -?as suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.
I agree.
No doubt about it, when you have to?save the country's country's?brokerage houses, banks and insurance
companies by nationalizing them, it is an epic accomplishment. It is?especially satisfying to know that?he
managed to?ruin the economy AFTER inheriting a large budget surplus from Bill Clinton.


Another?thing,?the more I hear of John McSame's economic policy, the more tempted I am to send his campaign
money. They very?thought of another four years of the McSame?economic policies is enough to send gold to
$1,650?quickly.


Lastly, I must congratulate you on being the originator of the business plan that depends on money from the
treasury to?let the business survive. Unfortunately, it looks like the big US banks have hijacked your plan and
there will be no tax payers money left for you. Never the less, I am still interested in which direction you think
the depressed US real estate market is heading.

Mervyn3.0
B. Hussein Obama for President?


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-23 17:19:40 UTC
Permalink
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
Mario Goveia wrote:?
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
Mervyn responded:
I agree. George Bush (43) has been the weakest US president ever. I guess that is why opinion polls in the US
rate him?the least popular president ever.
Mario corrects the record:
You still don't get it, but you provide a great opportunity to educate all Goanetters about the?nuances of the US system of government.? The US Constitution puts the US President on the same level as the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.? The US Congress is primarily responsible for the US budget, which you did not know.? You probably also don't know that the US President is primarily responsible for foreign policy.
If Bush 43 were so weak how did he stand up to virtually the entire world and liberate 50 million Muslims from Muslim tyrants?? If Bush 43 were so weak how did he stand up to all the western Europeans and ensure freedom and independance for Kosovo?
American presidents typically have low approval ratings in the middle of a war, as Truman's and Johnson's and Nixon's experiences showed as well.? Bush's approval ratings, however, though low, are three times higher than the current Democrat party controlled US Congress.
Your claim that Bush 43 is the least popular US President ever is also false.? Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1980 was the least popular?and Republican Richard Nixon in 1974 was?second.
Mervyn wrote:
Once again, the Dow is at the same level it was when George (43) Bush took power. Eight years of stagnation!
In addition, what George Bush (43) has set up with his policy of lower taxes and high spending abroad, are the
absolute perfect conditions for STAGFLATION.
Mario responds:
Once again, the point is that you were wrong when you referred to the "collapsed financial sector" when as recently as last Friday the Dow was?up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes", but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in income?taxes collected by the US Treasury.
His failure was in not successfully opposing?federal spending with presidential vetoes, which, however, Congress could have and often did over-ride.
Mervyn wrote:
If you are going to answer this post,?try and fill in the following blanks, my friend.
The US?DOLLAR?was worth?_____ Euro's when George Bush got into power.
The US?PESO is worth?____ Euro's today.
Mario responds:
$1.066 versus $$0.68 which also reflects the US role in helping the rest of the world economy through its imports.? You seem unaware that the world economy would collapse without US imports.
Mervyn wrote:
No doubt about it, when you have to?save the country's country's?brokerage houses, banks and insurance
companies by nationalizing them, it is an epic accomplishment. It is?especially satisfying to know that?he
managed to?ruin the economy AFTER inheriting a large budget surplus from Bill Clinton.
Mario responds:
You still haven't understood that, in the US,?the President cannot do any of this without Congressional approval.
Regarding the US economy, once again, you have no idea what you are talking about as the following analysis shows:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-24 00:03:36 UTC
Permalink
Mario Goveia wrote?
Post by Mario Goveia
Your claim that Bush 43 is the least popular US President ever is also false.?
Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1980 was the least popular?and Republican Richard
Nixon in 1974 was?second.
Thank you, Mario.
Lets see, Nixon decided that the US dollar did not need to be backed by gold.
Gold went from $35 to $70 during his Presidency. Jimmy Carter's economic
policies made gold go from $100 to $800. George (43) Bush economic
policy has resulted in gold going from $270 to $1,000 thus far.?The?answer to
the question of this post is quite obvious. Every time the US has an
unpopular president, Americans start buying gold.?
Post by Mario Goveia
You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes",
but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in
income?taxes collected by the US Treasury.
?
?
Er, the US is so broke that it is printing money like the "Wiemar Republic" There
is no limit to how much money the US has to print. The USSR was the last country
that tried?printing money to solve its problems. It then collapsed. I will admit that?the
USSR's lack of victory?in Afghanistan had a part to play?its collapse.
?
?
?
Post by Mario Goveia
$1.066 versus $$0.68 which also reflects the US role in helping the rest of the
world economy through its imports. You seem unaware that the world economy
would collapse without US imports.
?
?
Thank you. All those who have been holding on?to US dollars, during the Geroge (43)
Bush presidency?feel the pain. The very thought of?another four years of McSame?
policies?makes my?heart, and gold, glow.
?
This will be my last post on this topic for now. I simply do not have the time to
explain things to non-believers.
?
Mervyn3.0
B. Hussein Obama for President?


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Bosco D'Mello
2008-09-24 03:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes
and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in
salary and then borrows/buys on credit.
RESPONSE: This is too simple an explanation for a $4 trillion hole in the
bucket on Wall St. Reading your partisan exchange with our infamous
propagandist does not help an objective discussion.

With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is
all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview
with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4
trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush. He talked of
tools like Derivatives, Leverage and their inherent risks and the tech
melt-down at the end of his presidency and how all the money from that
market ended up in real-estate. And then the honchos on Wall St got into the
cab and drove the truck right into the ground - GREED!!

"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill
Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08

I think Bush (43) has had to endure more than a fair bit of turmoil in his 8
years at the wheel thanks to non-performing predecessors including Bush
(41). Hello Enron!! Hello Andersen!!

Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing
without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas for a
song.
Post by Mervyn Lobo
The next American president may decide that the American
taxpayer should not be subsidizing the wages of Cristiano
Ronaldo. The new President could then tell the Federal
Reserve to cancel all future cheques destined for United.
United would then have to sell Ronaldo to the highest bidder i.e. City.
RESPONSE: I dont think you understand Man-U!! It is no coincidence that it
was declared the richest Soccer Club and the number 1 sports brand by
Forbes. Sponsors are lined-up to get their name on their shirts, stadium and
gear. However there is still considerable debt being carried by the new
owners. AIG is in the middle of their contract. If they go, there will be
many more who will want their name emblazoned on their shirt....:-) BTW
Salgaocar Sports Club beat Sporting Club De Goa to finish third in the 2008
Manchester United Premier Cup (India) - Under 15. Also Manchester United
Soccer Schools have a program in Goa - they are looking for a Goan Ronaldo.

Never mind about Ronnie et al!! What are the repercussions in India (besides
our portfolios....:-(( ) from all these Wall St shake-n-bakes. There are a
few people I know who work for Lehman and Morgan Chase in Mumbai.

- Bosco

PS. Wot!! Obama donors were Fannie & Freddie and he blocked legislation that
would set them straight. Talk about skeletons in a young closet, eh??
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-24 15:32:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
RESPONSE: This is too simple an explanation for a $4 trillion hole in the
bucket on Wall St. Reading your partisan exchange with our infamous
propagandist does not help an objective discussion.
Bosco,
Any person, family, corporation or country that spends more more than
it has will eventually face bankruptcy. George Bush (43) has been on the
mother of all spending sprees. Now the country faces the consequences.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is
all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview
with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4
trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush. He talked of
tools like Derivatives, Leverage and their inherent risks and the tech
melt-down at the end of his presidency and how all the money from that
market ended up in real-estate. And then the honchos on Wall St got into the
cab and drove the truck right into the ground - GREED!!
Bill Clinton left a budget surplus. The melt down in the dot com era effected
only private capital. The melt down in the financial sector today is because
of govt printing more money and making credit available to people who do
not qualify for it. These people cannot repay their loans. The US govt now
has to use tax payers money to prop up?companies that are collapsing as
a result.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill
Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08
In my life?time, the British Empire has collapsed, along with its currency. The USSR
suffered the same fate. The US currency is already on its way down......
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing
without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas
for a song.
The secret, as always, is "buy low, sell high." My bet is that gold is
going a lot higher.
?
Post by Bosco D'Mello
RESPONSE: I dont think you understand Man-U!! It is no coincidence that it
was declared the richest Soccer Club and the number 1 sports brand by
Forbes. Sponsors are lined-up to get their name on their shirts, stadium and
gear.
And the sponsor they chose was the worst insurance company in the world? :-)


Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Instant Messaging, free SMS, sharing photos and more... Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger at http://ca.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/
Mario Goveia
2008-09-24 15:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
The?answer to the question of this post is quite obvious. Every time the US has an unpopular president, Americans start buying gold.?
Mario responds:
If you say so.? But don't you have to have a seller for every buyer?? I wonder which country?those come from?
The real question is why you continue to distort the US system of government and the role of the US President, which takes such a lot of bandwidth to correct.
Mervyn writes:
Er, the US is so broke that it is printing money like the "Wiemar Republic" There is no limit to how much money the US has to print.
Mario responds:
Your reponse above was to my comment, "You also don't seem to know that Bush's tax policy is not one of "lower taxes" but of lower "income tax rates" which resulted in a tremendous INCREASE in?income?taxes collected by the US Treasury." which corrected yet another false statement by you about Bush 43's policies.
Bush 43's tax policies, which Congress accepted, caused income tax collections to skyrocket as the econmy grew steadily for seven straight years and still hasn't slipped into a recession.? The size of the US economy is what has enabled it to survive its recent financial problems mostly caused by ridiculous lending practices by major banks, for which they are now paying a heavy price.
Regarding printing money, I'm afraid you are right, and this has contributed to the US dollar devaluation.? However, any such narrow-minded comparisons with the Weimar Republic, and your previous equally narrow-minded comparisons with the communist USSR are patently absurd, since the US asset base and GDP are strong enough?that the US can manage and correct its financial problems unlike those other systems.
You still seem unaware that the world economy, including Canada's, are substantially dependant on US imports, and we have still pledged $63 BILLION over the next ten years to help fight HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria in mostly poor and tropical countries, which I wish other countries would support instead of cheering for the US to fail.
Mervyn wrote:
The very thought of?another four years of McSame? policies?makes my?heart, and gold, glow.
Mario responds:
There is a good chance that?McCain will win the US presidency, but gold is far more likely to?reach $1,650 if he does not.? If you don't think so you?have no clue about not only his opponent but also the Democrats who currently control the US Congress.? But then, as we have seen in this exchange, your knowledge of?the US?is pretty narrow and usually grossly distorted.
But then you covered yourself when you said you had no idea when gold would reach $1,650, which makes it useless as a recommendation.? The economic value of an investment does not depend simply on the buy and sell prices but also on the time difference in?between.? Any credible book on basic economics will explain to you why this is, and you will typically find it in the very first chapter.
Mervyn wrote:
This will be my last post on this topic for now. I simply do not have the time to explain things to non-believers.
Mario responds:
Ongoing credible belief requires reliably?recognizable facts, without gross distortions interspersed.
When you cite recognizable facts I have no problem recognizing them.? Unfortunately, you also include so many distortions that have nothing to do with any issue at hand that it is just as well that you have decided to take a break, as your approach must be pretty exhausting.
However, I am never too exhausted to notice and question or correct an unrecognizable fact, and this does not apply just to you, believe me.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-24 16:21:44 UTC
Permalink
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes?and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in?salary and then borrows/buys on credit.
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:06:38 -0400
From: "Bosco D'Mello" <bospam at canada.com>
With the annual theatrics of world leaders ongoing in NY, Bill Clinton is all over the tube with his Clinton Global Initiative. I saw an interview with him last night. He was asked 3 times who was to blame for this $4 trillion fiasco. He did not even come close to blaming Bush.
Mario responds:
The reason is simple.? President Clinton understands the US system.? Mervyn still does not, even with all I have tried to teach him on?Goanet:-))
For example, his comment above of Bush reducing taxes and borrowing money, when the fact is that Bush's tax policies, which were accepted by Congress, caused taxes to skyrocket.? The problem was not taxes but the failure of the President and Congress to control spending, which led to the independant Federal Reserve Bank increasing the money supply to keep interest rates low - i.e. "printing money" - and so on.
Secondly, the equally absurd reference to a family man.? The largest economy?in the world has a lot more credit than any family man.? If he had tried to use someone like?Donald Trump as an example, he would have been closer to a sensible analogy, but then he would have been unable to make?the point he was trying to make.
Bosco wrote:
I think Bush (43) has had to endure more than a fair bit of turmoil in his 8 years at the wheel thanks to non-performing predecessors including Bush (41). Hello Enron!! Hello Andersen!!
Mario responds:
Bush 43's accomplishments have?been distorted beyond all recognition by his political adversaries suffering from? Bush Derangement Syndrome.? However, I do fault him for his failure to use his presidential veto to stem the unconscionable profligate federal spending that took place under his watch.? I tried to correct the record with my blog essay:
http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=2749#more-2749
Bosco wrote:
Never mind all this blood-letting!! Tell us how we can make a killing without having to buy a house in Arizona or Texas or the Carolinas for a song.
Mario responds:
You must have observed what happened to those who bought gold at $1,000 based on what they thought was a recommendation on this very forum.? Actually the only reasonably safe "killing" you in Canada can make right now is to buy real estate in the US for a song, use it for vacations, rent it out when you are not using it, and remember what Bill Clinton just said:
"For 200 years people have been betting against the US and have lost" - Bill?Clinton, NY, Sep 22/08
Finally,?regardless of who wins the US Presidency this year, it will take the Palin & Jindal ticket in 2012 to really fix the US financial problems for the longer term, and you are probably young enough to reap the benefits of that.
Bosco wrote:
PS. Wot!! Obama donors were Fannie & Freddie and he blocked legislation that would set them straight. Talk about skeletons in a young closet, eh??
Mario responds:
You have no idea what this guy is hiding in his closet, but it's beginning to trickle out and this series by the Editors of Investors Business Daily will?give you a clue:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=305851942725035
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306457496204115
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306977141583041
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307062146193647
Mario Goveia
2008-09-25 15:24:44 UTC
Permalink
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
George Bush (43) has been on the mother of all spending sprees.
Mario responds:
Sorry, folks, but Mervyn is still not getting it.? George Bush 43 has no power to spend anything without the approval of the US Congress, which has been controlled by his political adversaries since the 2006 elections.
Mervyn wrote:
Bill Clinton left a budget surplus.
Mario responds:
Again, Bill Clinton did not leave anything except some curious stains on the White House walls and furniture:-))
In 1993, after Clinton was elected, the very first budget he proposed?for the consideration of Congress that showed $200 billion DEFICITS throughout the five year budget projection period, even with the largest tax rate increases in history at the time.? The Congress which was controlled by his party at the time accepted his budget.? This is my evidence that they had no clue as to how to create budget surpluses.
The subsequent and unforeseeable?technological and communications revolutions, which the administration had nothing to do with, caused a sharp growth in the economy, and the Republicans taking control of both houses of Congress in 2004?succeeded in slowing the growth in spending, and massive bipartisan cuts in defense spending because the Cold War had ended, is what created the surpluses in the late 90's.? By the end of Clinton's term, this had all dissipated and the economy had begun to decline in late 2000 and Bush 43 inherited an economic slowdown, and we were then hit with 9/11 eight months after Bush took office and was still organizing his administration.
Mervyn wrote:
In my lifetime, the British Empire has collapsed, along with its currency. The USSR suffered the same fate. The US currency is already on its way down......
Mario responds:
The US currency has stabilized since earlier this year, and any comparisons with the British Empire and the USSR are absurd, because the largely US free enterprise system is far larger, diverse, stronger and resilient than those other regimes.
Mervyn wrote:
The secret, as always, is "buy low, sell high." My bet is that gold is going a lot higher.
Mario responds:
Wow!? Why didn't I think of that?? But wait.? Isn't someone then selling low and buying high?? Oh, I forgot.? They are all morons.??
The problem seems to me how to CONSISTENTLY tell in advance, without having to "bet".? Isn't "betting" what they do at?casinos and racetracks?
Most professionals achieve a growth rate in their investments of around 10% per annum over the long run.? There are some who do better and some who do worse.
Mervyn wrote:
When George Bush (43) became President, the Dow was at 11,000 points. Eight years into his
failed presidency, the Dow is?at 11,000 points and in a crises mode.
Mario responds:
I'm not sure how?Mervyn thinks that such distorted and?selective information to suit a pre-conceived?agenda will pass muster with all the facts we have at our disposal these days.? But, as I've said before, he provides so much scope for real facts to be disclosed with proper context and perspective.? We need to thank him:-))
The following chart shows the history of the Dow.? During the Clinton administration the Dow averaged much lower than the Dow during the Bush 43 administration.? The?Dow rose sharply during the Clinton administration then peaked at 11,723 and declined towards the end?as the country slipped into an economic slowdown, then was hit by the economic shock from the 9/11 attack.? It then?recovered from the policies of Bush 43 and the Republican Congress and?hit its all time high of over 14,164 in 2007.? The last time I checked that was still during the Bush 43 presidency
The Dow?has declined recently because of the financial crisis caused by inappropriate lending practices by major banks and inadequate oversight by the Congressional Committees responsible for overseeing the Banking sector, mainly because the Democrats who Chaired these since 2006 were pushing for lower lending standards to make home buying possible by lower income Americans whose previous alternative was to rent.
http://www.the-privateer.com/chart/dow-long.html
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-26 01:55:57 UTC
Permalink
Folks,
Let me stick to the (off) topic here.
?

If you have five?years or more before you need to access the money you have
in the stock market,?the best thing for you to do right now is probably nothing.


If you have less than five years, see the person who advised you to buy the stocks
you have. S/he will be best placed to give you advice, depending on what your current
situation is and what info s/he has about you on file.


Personally, I think the stock markets are heading for a crash since the US financial
system has collapsed. I have raised a lot of (non-US) cash and will only start buying
mutual funds?after the crash.

?
These? decisions are made on the following facts:
1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The?US treasury is now broke.
2) When?Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.
3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.
4) Increase in the supply of money?ALWAYS results in inflation.
5)?Both US presidential candidates?promise more of the McPain.?

?
Mervyn3.0
The?current US?capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses."



__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 14:25:05 UTC
Permalink
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
Subject: Re: [Goanet] What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic

The?current US?capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."

In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.

venantius j pinto
Mario Goveia
2008-09-26 17:08:22 UTC
Permalink
Mervyn Lobo wrote:
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries have learnt to follow.
Mario responds:
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the surface, both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and totally out of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.? They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only 3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income taxes.
The only time that a corporation has been bailed out by the government, it has been under highly unusual circumstances where the harmful ripple effect would cause considerable harm to the rest of the economy.??For example, Bear Sterns and?Lehman Bros.?were not bailed out and were or are being acquired by others. ?The shareholders and executives who mismanaged the company rarely benefit unless they had gotten out before the problems surfaced.
In cases where fraud has occurred the top executives?have been?prosecuted and sentenced to long jail terms and made to pay?heavy fines.
In most cases the bailouts are?through loan guarantees as opposed to outright infusions of government money.? While this still puts taxpayers at risk, in most cases the corporations survived and, as in the case of Chrysler, repaid their debt to the Treasury with interest.
When critics comment about the rish getting risher in the US, that's not quite true either, because the composition of who is?"rich" is constantly changing in America.? Recently it was disclosed that the top 1% of US tax payers made 22% of total income and paid 40% of total income taxes in 2006.? However, what was interesting was many of the?individuals?in that top 1% in 2006 were?not in the top 1% five years ago.? In the US, it is quite normal for people to make?money, then not do as well later on and?be replaced by someone else in the top 1%.
One can literally go from rags to riches and back to rags in one lifetime, which rarely happens anywhere else.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-26 16:23:41 UTC
Permalink
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mervyn Lobo <mervynalobo at yahoo.ca>
These? decisions are made on the following facts:
1) Bill Clinton left the US with a budget surplus of 560 BILLION dollars. The?US treasury is now broke.
2) When?Clinton entered office, the Dow was at 3,300 points. When he left, it was at 11,000 points.
3) We have had eight years of debauching of the value of the US dollar.
4) Increase in the supply of money?ALWAYS results in inflation.
5)?Both US presidential candidates?promise more of the McPain.?
Mario responds:
Folks, as a general rule, I never have a problem with a recommendation if the person is following his or her own?recommendations.??That's the only true test of whether someone is serious about?their recommendations.? If they are not, then they're simply?bloviating and their recommendations are meaningless.
In a previous life I was responsible for a $100 million corporate pension fund.? The only managers we hired to manage our funds were those who could show us that they had become millionaires from investing their own money.? These are hard to find but they're out there.??The theory was, "If you haven't made yourself rich from your investing skills, why should I believe you will make a lot of money for us?"? This cuts through all the fancy presentations and tap dancing that pension fund managers can put together.
Mervyn has previously told us?that anyone taking a recommendation by him on Goanet deserves their fate:-))? So he has already warned everyone:-))
However, I must say that finally, after several tries, Mervyn has listed some recognizeable, albeit selective,?facts, as well as some unrecognizeable ones, and, as usual, without much context or perspective.? Thankfully, he has given up the absurd comparisons with the USSR and the Weimar Republic, though he is still peddling his comical assertion that Bill Clinton had successfully and singlehandedly "managed"?the economy during his watch.? In the US economic system there is very little the President can do on his own.? He doesn't even have day to day control of the money supply which is the responsibility of the?independent?Federal Reserve Bank.
To say the US Treasury is "now broke" seems to show an ignorance of?the fact that the US Treasury has been in a debt position for decades, underwritten by the size of its considerable assets and GDP.? The reason?the US dollar has?been the lead currency for decades is because the US has always had a strong and growing economy and has always been considered a safe place to invest for investors from all over the world.? The US GDP is at all time highs, and even the larger projected deficits are at normal levels when related to the US GDP at around 3%.? As any rational observer would know, it has hardly been business as usual for the US since 9/11.
When Clinton left office the US economy and the Dow were both declining.? Subsequently the Dow recovered and reached a high above 14,000, then declined due to?the currrent financial?crisis caused by inappropriate real estate lending practices by the banking industry, encouraged by some left wing politicians who wanted low income Americans to be able to?own their own homes.? The crisis is being addressed and will be corrected.
The increase in the money supply does not always lead to inflation if it is offset by productivity increases.? The US inflation rate if averaged over several months is far below that of many industrial economies.
The two US presidential candidates have sharply opposing views of how to run the US economy.? Barack Obama is a virtual socialist, where John McCain is a virtual capitalist.
Venantius Pinto
2008-09-26 19:06:14 UTC
Permalink
Mario,
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow
and grossly misleading and totally out of context." Unless you are saying
that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just
rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people
like me a job. You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true
indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail
if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed. I know I do not control
that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of
income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.

A bailout is also maintaining business as usual. But what do paintbrushes
like me know?

Anyway Mario, You have finally made your self amply clear to me. Someday you
just may see things differently. I am always very hopeful, since you are a
sharp individual. But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your
comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other
topics. No point in me interjecting in an area you have probably thrived in,
and see very differently.

Perhaps this too is out of context, but I will say it. A while ago a person
who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my
personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ? which is any case I do quite
sparingly and that too on issues which are far from finance and economics.
Its time to take his advice. Considering what I just said abouve, this is my
last post on this topic.

Keep thriving.

Venantius J Pinto
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mario Goveia <mgoveia at sbcglobal.net>
The current US capitalism model is: "Privatize the profits, socialize the
losses."
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:25:05 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
In the above sense, the US system has truly and unabashedly been about
socialism for the rich and wealthy class. A model that many others countries
have learnt to follow.
While Mervyn's model is cute and Venantius sounds plausible on the surface,
both these observations are shallow and grossly misleading and totally out
of context and perspective.
To begin with, I would like to know when was the last time Venantius was
offered a job by a poor person?
Most failing corporations in the US are not bailed out by the government.?
They either go out of business or are acquired by other companies at a
considerable loss to their owners.? A bailout is the exception, not the
rule.
Regarding socialism for the rich, the bottom 50% of US taxpayers paid only
3% of total income?taxes in 2006.? The upper 50%?paid 97% of total income
taxes.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-28 20:42:47 UTC
Permalink
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:06:14 -0400
From: "Venantius Pinto" <venantius.pinto at gmail.com>
I am a bit surprised that my observation elicited the observation, "shallow and grossly misleading and totally out of context."? Unless you are saying that rich people have to be rewarded through a variety of techniques that
should never be addressed as "socialism for the rich," but perhaps "just rewards" for their initiatives in generating wealth, and in offering people like me a job.
Mario explains:
Why would you be surprised?? I explained exactly why I described your comments, and Mervyn's, as shallow and grossly misleading.? In short, there is no such thing as socialism for the rich in US policy in the context of your response to Mervyn's comment which you were referring to.? To begin with, most corporations that are mismanaged are not bailed out - they are typically acquired at huge losses to their stockholders.? Even when they are, their owners pay a heavy price.? Finally, US tax policy is such that low income Americans pay little or no income taxes.
Venantius wrote:
You also quote some valuable statistics, all very true indeed. Yes it well may be 97% or even more, but what would that 97% entail if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed. I know I do not control that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then.
Mario responds:
No, it is 97 %, not more.??? I have no idea what you mean by, "but what would that 97% entail if the upper 50% were paid what they really owed.? I know I do not control that but can include this as a relevant point. That mite in the form of income taxes from the upper 50% would be an astronomical 97% then."
Everyone in a capitalist society is paid what they are deemed to be worth by those who own the businesses or their representatives in management who are responsible and accountable to the owners.? When the top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes, and the bottom 50% pay 3%, then how can you call this a system of "socialism for the rich."
Secondly, as I mentioned, those who are in the top 1% are not the same in 2006 as the list in 2001.? So, the composition of who exactly are?"the rich" changes constantly in the US - it is not always the same people.? One cannot make the case that "the rich are getting richer" because many of them are actually getting poorer relative to some years ago and being replaced by others who were less rich some years ago.
Venantius wrote:
A bailout is also maintaining business as usual.? But what do paintbrushes like me know?
Mario responds:
I guess it depends on the paintbrush.? However,?the fact is that a bailout is not even close to being business as usual.? In most cases those deemed responsible for the corporate debacle pay a heavy personal price, and lose their jobs and are replaced by others.? We, as taxpayers, pay a heavy price if the objectives of the bailout are not met.
Perhaps you have missed the news that Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, Lehman Bros and AIG are all under investigation by the FBI.? That is not business as usual.? Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. and Washington Mutual will all cease to exist as viable entities.? That is neither "socialism for the rich" nor business as usual.
Venantius wrote:
But thinking again, its better to just listen in on your comments, rather than even briefly commenting as I do with some other topics.
Mario responds:
Surely you do not expect me to agree with a proposition that does not fit the facts??
If, on the other hand, you had criticized the faulty lending policies that had been foisted on the banking system by Democrats since the Carter administration, all interested in social engineering at someone else's expense, or criticized corporate top executive salaries that are not tied to the performance of the company, or golden parachutes which I abhor when they apply to failed executives, or criticized the?top executives at Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac who were forced to resign for "inappropriate accounting practices" then showed up as advisors to Barack Obama, who received more contributions per year from this organization's employees and PACs than anyone else in Congress, or shown some appreciation for who produces most of the jobs in America and pays most of the taxes, I would have agreed with you.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=75586
Venantius wrote:
A while ago a person who I esteem made a point to me that I should concentrate more on my personal work, rather than engage on Goanet ?
Mario responds:
I would agree with the first part,?but the rest of the advice seems shortsighted to me, because surely you can do both.? I would discourage you from withdrawing from the fray.? Instead, read up on these economic and financial issues from a number of sources, so that you are more familiar with how these things work.
If you are really interested in how the US economy works, for example, read the books written by Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell, who tend to keep things simple, and?explain?their?opinions based on recognizeable?facts.? You will?be surprised how little those in the media know about these issues, yet they are the ones who influence most people.
Roland Francis
2008-09-16 12:52:45 UTC
Permalink
Free but useful advice, not all mine.

We are in volatile markets. The steep fall of the past two days will
not last much longer, but the ups and downs will, for the next 6
months. That presents buying opportunities, availed of with care and
professional advice. Remember the old contrarian adage: sell when
others buy and buy when others sell. Or, buy low and sell high. Now is
low.

Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.

Be well diversified however much the temptation. Make sure your
investment portfolio holds a mix of asset classes (equity, fixed
income and real estate) across geographical boundaries.

To do that, invest in mutual funds rather than directly in stocks.
Less volatility and better sleep. Also a professional portfolio
manager knows much before you do when things are going to happen. You
can buy meaningful positions in at most 10 stocks. The average mutual
fund holds 80 to 100 different investments.

Don't sell in panic at this point in time. Just ride out the tumbling
markets. The worst market decline in recent memory has been reversed
within less than 2 years. If you have idle money, buy when it is clear
that the sudden decline has stopped. You will have ample time to know
this. Markets do not bounce back in mere days.

Above all remember that people lose money because of only two
emotions: FEAR and GREED.
May you have the wisdom to avoid both.

With regards from one who has ploughed through various market cycles,

Roland.
Toronto
+1 (416) 453.3371
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-17 13:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Roland Francis wrote:?
Post by Roland Francis
Never borrow to invest except for the long term (10 years or more) and
except in a strategy that has no margin call. I feel extremely sorry
for quite a few of the people I know who are being contacted by their
investment firm for margin calls on top of their current losses
running into the tens of thousands.
Folks,
Pay close attention to this one. Buying stocks on?margin?carries the
same risk as a farmer drinking pesticide.
Post by Roland Francis
Also a professional portfolio manager knows much before you do
when things are going to happen.
A professional money manager has no more ability than the
rest of us have in looking into the future.?A good professional money
manager, however, will be able to stear you clear of the pitfalls that
most novice investors fall into.?


On another note, most of you would know?that the US is now using taxpayers
money to support failing insurance companies. First the brokerage firms failed.
Then the banks followed. Now its time for the insurance firms to ask for govt
support. Next its going to be the US?mutual fund firms.


Why did this all happen? Well the US govt decided to print more money and lower
interest rates. Banks?started rounding up people who would never qualify for a
mortgage and offered them loans. In?California, office cleaners were getting loans
to buy a $400,000 house. All they had to do was pay a $4,000.00 deposit
and?make a monthly mortgage payment of $1,000 per month.?When interest
rates went up, the monthly payment went to $4,000 per month. Most people had
to default on their loans, which?led to a glut of houses on the market and thus
a collapse in?prices for these houses.

In the mean time, the local banks that had made these loans sold the loans to the
big New York companies who then sold them to any international bank that wanted
to hold US dollar assets.
??
All US financial institutions and people who kept money in US financial institutions
are now bearing the brunt of these bad loans. The US Govt response to the crises
is to:
1) Print more money
2) Lower interest rates
3) Use tax payers money to support the?losses of companies that are deemed "to
important to fail."

The last country to try these tactics was the good ol' USSR.

Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Connect with friends from any web browser - no download required. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA at http://ca.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
Rishi
2008-09-17 14:27:39 UTC
Permalink
It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Rishi
2008-09-19 01:40:12 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if
you are professionally qualified. <<<<

Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for
about 3 years now.

I posted about nifty at 2600-3000 based on a moneycontrol interview.
(check below) Even Dow at 7200 is a technical report posted by some
analyst.

Also that is the reason why I suggested people interested in investing
in indian stocks should do so based on a responsible advisory service
like Equitymaster.com

regards

Rishikesh

--------------
Q: Do you have a timeline drawn along those levels? What do you expect
the markets to do when the Nifty reaches above the 4400 mark?

A: If the Nifty goes below the 4400 levels, then in about six months
we will see the 2600 level. We should bounce from there. There is a
minimum target for the Nifty at around the 2750 mark. The Sensex is a
little more bearish and the minimum target I set would be at around
9,200.

http://www.moneycontrol.com/india/news/fii-view/sensex-not-to-fall-beyond-9k-levelsray-barros/19/08/347903

---------------

Also Dow at 7200

http://www.nysun.com/business/the-dow-at-7200-superbears-scary-roar/82182/

-------------------------------------------



It seems target for Dow is around 7200 and for Indian stocks - nifty
around 2600 and Sensex at 7500.

Some tremors will be felt in india - mostly for real estate
speculators. Interest rates should go up so would home loans, so less
buying. Many who bought the second homes in Goa, might be interested
in selling now. All that India growth story turned out to be Ambani
growth story.

Once Nifty goes to around 2600-3000, wait for a month or two for
midcap and small caps to melt down and make long term investments in
potential.

Subscribe to a service like Equitymaster and invest in their
recommended stocks. Also invest on monthly basis in a SIP (piecemeal)
way.


regards
Rishikesh

BTW Gold would really appreciate with all this problems.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-19 16:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials - if?
you are professionally qualified.
Really sorry about, I should have posted a disclaimer. I am not having?
any professional credentials re stock markets but I am a investor for?
about 3 years now.
Rishikesh,
There is nothing to be sorry about. Those with 'professional credentials'
trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities
of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. That is
why we now have thousands?recently unemployed brokers. I few days ago
they thought they has secure jobs at?the major US brokerage houses.

This morning, The?United Socialist States of America, formerly known as
the USA, came up with new regulations that bans the selling of stocks of
800 financial companies!?

Last week, the USSA nationalized insurance companies.?

The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?
to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets
are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more
money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."

BTW, you are right about gold. The liquidity the USSA has been forced to inject
into its markets will have only one long term result. INFLATION.
?
Mervyn3.0
On an "Question Everything Moment" a local paper today pointed out
that when Manchester United plays Newcastle in the English Premier
League,?the match will essentially be?USSA tax payers verses
UK taxpayers. Manchester United is sponsored by the?USSA govt owned
AIG and Newcastle is sponsored by Northern Rock now owned by
the UK Govt.

Can you think or a more excellent way to?waste taxpayers money?


__________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/gift/
Mario Goveia
2008-09-19 23:07:44 UTC
Permalink
Rishikesh wrote:
Kindly let readers know your qualifications and credentials -
if?you are professionally qualified.
Fri Sep 19 09:04:57 PDT 2008
Mervyn Lobo mervynalobo at yahoo.ca
Those with 'professional credentials' trading in the stock market do not have any more insight to the?vulgarities of?the?market than those who have not sat for the exams. The concept of lowering taxes, printing more money and borrowing?to spend abroad, has a price. Those with money in the?markets are now paying that price. The only govt that has printed more money than the current USSA adm?has been?the "Weimar Republic."
Mario agrees:
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.? That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar "Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame as to when.??As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's success.? Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a few weeks ago.? Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to read what some REAL experts are saying rather than the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR and Weimar Republic:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Cheers.
Marlon Menezes
2008-09-20 13:20:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
-----
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak.

For good returns, consider P2P lending.

Marlon
Mario Goveia
2008-09-20 14:42:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mario Goveia
Also, to get another perspective, you may want to
read what some REAL experts are saying rather than
the absurd comparisons between the USA and the USSR
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080919/business/wall_street_mood_1
Post by Mario Goveia
Cheers.
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 06:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Marlon Menezes <marlon at goacom.org>
Wall Street is in a good mood (for now) because the
Feds are using your money to bail them out. They are
laughing all the way to bank so to speak
Mario observes:
You are right that my money is at risk - in the short run.
However, the only ones who are laughing are anti-Americans who?overlook
the fact?that the US has the inherent ability to address its problems and
recover from them - always has, always will.
Sooner or later the profligate spending and currency devaluation will end,
as it always does, and the next business upswing will begin, this time,
I'm guessing, from the need to become energy independent.
If it doesn't, it will be the first time in the country's history.
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-20 19:46:01 UTC
Permalink
?However, while we are waiting for that to happen, the Dow is up?40 points
?in the last month, up 18% the past 5 years and up 44% the past 10 years.
Folks,
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
The?Dow index?has increased 44% in the last ten years. All of?that increase
was?accomplished when Bill Clinton and the Democrats were in power. They
ran a Govt?that produced a budget surplus, a?strong?economy and a strong
currency.
??
??
George Bush (43)?introduced policies that have resulted in?budget deficits, a
collapsed?financial sector and a?rapidly depreciating currency. When George
Bush (43) became President, the Dow was at 11,000 points. Eight years into his
failed presidency, the Dow is?at 11,000 points and in a crises mode.
??
??
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It?took?only
US $270?to buy an ounce of gold.?It?takes US $870 to buy?that same ounce
today. This is what?happens to your currency when you?consistently run?budget
deficits. What happens to your?financial sector is even more interesting.
US banks today have no capital?and?are almost?bankrupt. They are depending on Govt
guarantees to survive. Financial institutions from the rest of the world are going
to great lengths to get rid of all their US based assets and currency.
???
??
??
??
Rishikesh, watch out for any "free" advice on Goanet.??One expert advisor on Goanet
recently told us that those who took his advice on the internet deserved their fate.?
That was when gold had hit $1,000 an oz. and he gleefully predicted in a similar
"Off-topic" post that gold would go to $1,650 an oz. but without any time frame
as to when.?As you know the time frame of an investment is critical as to it's
success.?Gold closed today at around $870 and has been as low as $820 a
few weeks ago.?Perhaps it will reach $1,650 sometime during my lifetime:-))
??
???
Mario, I do wish you a long life. However, even you, with all?your rare diseases, will
live to see gold at $1,650 as there is a finite amount of gold in this world. There is no
limit to the amount?of dollars the US govt?has to print. The more it interferes in running
companies, the more it interferes in the stock markets, the more money it has to print.
More money in circulation results in only one thing. INFLATION.
??
The hedge against inflation is gold.
??
Mervyn3.0
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available?on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the?fallaciousness of the current US administation. ?
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/jeule/2008/sep/18/new-manchester-united-jersey/


__________________________________________________________________
Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com
Bosco D'Mello
2008-09-21 06:09:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
There is a saying in Africa, "You usually get the leaders you deserve."
Response: I think the Africans copied it from the Goans, na?? Dont we get the leaders we deserve???
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
Post by Mervyn Lobo
When George Bush (43) was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
Response: Well, somebody made a killing.......and laughing all the way to the bank...oops....which bank!!
Post by Mervyn Lobo
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.
It sums up the fallaciousness of the current US administation
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a ManU jersey (its the one on the back that matters) - the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!

- B
Mervyn Lobo
2008-09-21 15:37:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Before we send Bush (43) to the 'gallows' perhaps you can enlighten
?us about the specific policies you are referring to above that led to the consequences you list.
?
Bosco,
To put this in the simplest terms, Bush reduced taxes and borrowed money for a spending spree.
It is just like a family man who insists in a cut in salary and then?borrows/buys on credit.
Post by Bosco D'Mello
Response: Now-now....dont be drawing the Red-Devils into this.......albeit this is the only reason
this post caught my attention. You can stick any name on the front of a? ManU jersey (its the one
on the back that matters) -? the lads still come through as champs!!! Go Reds!!!
The next American president may decide that the American taxpayer should not be subsidizing?the
wages of Cristiano Ronaldo. The new President?could then tell the Federal Reserve to cancel all future
cheques destined for United. United?would then have to sell Ronaldo to the highest bidder i.e.?City.
After all their new?Abu Dhabian owners?are awash with cash :-)


Mervyn3.0


__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
Mario Goveia
2008-09-21 17:40:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mervyn Lobo
George Bush (43) introduced policies that have resulted in budget deficits, a
collapsed financial sector and a rapidly depreciating currency.
When George Bush (43)? was sworn in, the US dollar was strong. It took only
US $270 to buy an ounce of gold. It takes US $870 to buy that same ounce today.
PS. Here is the new Manchester United jersey that is available on Newt Gingrich's site.??It sums up the
fallaciousness of the current US administation.
Mario responds:
Unlike Marlon who generally uses facts to arrive at his conclusions, regardless of whether I agree with the conclusions or?not, I'm not sure why Mervyn insists on embarrassing himself like this.? I also wonder?where he gets his grossly distorted information from, with no perspective or context whatsoever.
Anyone who knows even a smidgen about the US system of government knows that:
a) The US President does not have any greater power than the US Congress and the US Supreme Court.
b) The US Congress is responsible for the budget in the US Constitution.? The President's proposals mean nothing unless approved by both houses of Congress.? We saw this most dramatically in 1973 when Congress cut off funding for the Vietnam war over the objections of President Nixon?and the US had to withdraw from Vietnam, even though they were on the verge of victory, as subsequently confirmed by Vietcong Gen. Giap in his memoire.
c) The opposition Democrat party has had control of both houses of the US Congress since 2006.
d) Newt Gingrich resigned from the US Senate in 1998, two years before President Bush was elected, and is not part of the US administration.
e) Regarding the "collapsed financial sector" in the US, as of the close of business last Friday, the Dow was up 40 points over the past month, up 18% over the last 5 years and up 44% over the last ten years.
f) Regarding the "rapidly declining US dollar", the dollar strengthened?versus Euros from?$0.62 on 4/18/08?tp?$0.69 on 9/18/08, low by historic standards reflecting the enormous level of?imports by the US that sustains the economies of much of the rest of the world.?
I wonder what I will need to correct next.
In the US we describe?those who place the?blame on President Bush for everything imaginable, including?their own bilious and mean-spirited dispositions,?while denying?every one of his substantial and often epic accomplishments in the context of the enormous economic and foreign policy problems he inherited when he became president - anyone remember the declining US economy in early 2001 followed by the shock of 9/11 -?as suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, or BDS.
Continue reading on narkive:
Search results for 'What To Do In Falling Markets - Off Topic' (newsgroups and mailing lists)
6
replies
[Goanet] OFF TOPIC: WHAT TO DO IN FALLING MARKETS.
started 2008-10-20 03:01:28 UTC
goanet@lists.goanet.org
41
replies
[Goanet] Fall of the dollar
started 2007-07-27 09:01:16 UTC
goanet@lists.goanet.org
6
replies
[Goanet] OFF TOPIC. What to do in falling markets.
started 2008-10-19 03:39:10 UTC
goanet@lists.goanet.org
161
replies
[Goanet] Rupee to touch 60 Against the USD
started 2009-03-02 10:06:32 UTC
goanet@lists.goanet.org
153
replies
[Goanet] What To Do In Falling Markets - Off topic
started 2008-09-27 08:30:18 UTC
goanet@lists.goanet.org
Loading...