Stock Market

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

wow. Broke the 8000 barrier again. Down 313 to 7969. Another bounce back before the end of the day? I hope not. All of those gains from a few weeks ago are pretty much gone.

What are you short the market, or long some puts?
Reguardless it's not looking good down here, for anything. Jay Leno made a joke about the Big 3 (auto makers) last night. He said that they are now: Tonka, Hot Wheels and Matchbox. Pretty funny, but very very sad if you think about how bad it is.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

What are you short the market, or long some puts?
Reguardless it's not looking good down here, for anything. Jay Leno made a joke about the Big 3 (auto makers) last night. He said that they are now: Tonka, Hot Wheels and Matchbox. Pretty funny, but very very sad if you think about how bad it is.

i dont understand why the govnt should bail out automakers.

Why dont they bail out all the 1000's of companies that are tanking right now?

I really dont understand enough about all this to be honest. but if you're going to bail out some.. shouldnt you bail out everyone? or dont bail out anyone!

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

i dont understand why the govnt should bail out automakers.

Why dont they bail out all the 1000's of companies that are tanking right now?

I really dont understand enough about all this to be honest. but if you're going to bail out some.. shouldnt you bail out everyone? or dont bail out anyone!

Whether you understand it or not, you make a great point. Where does it end? Does the great Paulson have the divine wisdom to deem one company "too big to fail" over another? On a larger scale, one industry over another?

Where does it stop? Im not poking at Miraja or anyone else that Ive debated this with, but if this isnt socialism i dont know what is. It is socialism in its purest form. And Im not arguing against what the government is doing, I just think a spade should be called a spade.

It looks like the 700 billion dollar "tarp" should be renamed the 700 billion dollar bait and switch.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Whether you understand it or not, you make a great point. Where does it end? Does the great Paulson have the divine wisdom to deem one company "too big to fail" over another? On a larger scale, one industry over another?

Where does it stop? Im not poking at Miraja or anyone else that Ive debated this with, but if this isnt socialism i dont know what is. It is socialism in its purest form. And Im not arguing against what the government is doing, I just think a spade should be called a spade.

It looks like the 700 billion dollar "tarp" should be renamed the 700 billion dollar bait and switch.

i dont know what this bail out is going to solve...

Obama is pushing hard core though to bail out the automakers. Bush wants to spend as much money as possible it seems. We are transfering the power from one socialist big spender to another. I just hope Obama turns out to be more responsible than Bush (wont be hard to do).

They are all acting like socialists. Thats because they all think like socialists.

I dont understand how they pick the companies to bail out... I can see banks and morgage companys that have control of peoples homes and $$, but I dont understand the automakers.

Unless if GM tanks.. then they take away my Pontiac.. which i Pay for every month... Then I'll be pissed!

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

i dont know what this bail out is going to solve...

Obama is pushing hard core though to bail out the automakers. Bush wants to spend as much money as possible it seems. We are transfering the power from one socialist big spender to another. I just hope Obama turns out to be more responsible than Bush (wont be hard to do).

They are all acting like socialists. Thats because they all think like socialists.

I dont understand how they pick the companies to bail out... I can see banks and morgage companys that have control of peoples homes and $$, but I dont understand the automakers.

Unless if GM tanks.. then they take away my Pontiac.. which i Pay for every month... Then I'll be pissed!

Detroit's fate was sealed in the 80's and the last 25 years played out predictably. People keep talking about tax incentives when purchasing american cars. Screw that. You want me to buy an American car? Spend the cash on R and D and make something that i want to drive. Spend the extra money on service. Why can we drive Japanese cars for 200k miles and we cant drive a ford more than 80k before it implodes?

Obama will give the carmakers their money whether its the right thing to do or not. I pray that the money works out to be an investment as opposed to a bailout.

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Detroit's fate was sealed in the 80's and the last 25 years played out predictably. People keep talking about tax incentives when purchasing american cars. Screw that. You want me to buy an American car? Spend the cash on R and D and make something that i want to drive. Spend the extra money on service. Why can we drive Japanese cars for 200k miles and we cant drive a ford more than 80k before it implodes?

Obama will give the carmakers their money whether its the right thing to do or not. I pray that the money works out to be an investment as opposed to a bailout.

This is fine work.




I give it:

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

This is fine work.




I give it:

Man are you desperate

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

i dont know what this bail out is going to solve...

Obama is pushing hard core though to bail out the automakers. Bush wants to spend as much money as possible it seems. We are transfering the power from one socialist big spender to another. I just hope Obama turns out to be more responsible than Bush (wont be hard to do).

They are all acting like socialists. Thats because they all think like socialists.

I dont understand how they pick the companies to bail out... I can see banks and morgage companys that have control of peoples homes and $$, but I dont understand the automakers.

Unless if GM tanks.. then they take away my Pontiac.. which i Pay for every month... Then I'll be pissed!

Think about all the tax revenue that cars generate. Not to mention about all the people that are employed by these companies. I am also sure that there is some sort of trade (import/export) ramafications to would be effected too. If the automakers went out it just might be the beginning of the end.

[GBBob]

Good article on the math behind the automaker's problems...Numbers are pretty crazy..

http://www.middletownjournal.com/o/c...308thomas.html

[philcski]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Good article on the math behind the automaker's problems...Numbers are pretty crazy..

http://www.middletownjournal.com/o/c...308thomas.html

While he's accurate in his assessments of what ails the auto industry (union labor has CRUSHED autos & airlines), I'm shocked you read this guy- he's the most conservative right out there in national print.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Good article on the math behind the automaker's problems...Numbers are pretty crazy..

http://www.middletownjournal.com/o/c...308thomas.html

I would be a bit suspicious of an article that only quotes the Heritage Foundation. Even within the article itself there are things that don't make its argument:

What about Chrysler's bailout 30 years ago? It was a loan. Didn't Chrysler pay back the government? Wasn't it worth the risk to save jobs? According to the Heritage Foundation, the $1.2 billion in loan guarantees made by the Carter administration still resulted in a partial bankruptcy for Chrysler. "Most of the company's creditors were forced to accept losses just as they would if Chrysler had gone through Chapter 11, and the company ended up firing almost half its workforce, including 20,000 white-collar workers and 42,600 hourly wage earners. The only people who benefited from the bailout were Chrysler shareholders."

The shareholders would be the investor class, not the union workers. Looks like a lot of employees got fired, and I imagine many of those were union members.

Health care costs are crippling industries, no question, but that's not the union's "fault." There's plenty wrong with the current state of unions, but their job is to negotiate the best possible deal for their members. Just like a business' is to get the most profits for its shareholders. The article listed the average hourly wages including health care costs- I would be curious to know what the hourly wage was with that amount for health care deducted, but the article didn't say.

In all the screaming about how expensive a national health care system would be for this country, no one ever brings up what to me, is an important point- it would make manufacturing jobs in America attractive again to international companies, because they wouldn't have to factor health care in their costs. The thing about the insurance industry is that they only make money by not providing service. In cases like flood or fire or theft insurance it makes perfect sense- you pay a relatively little amount of money over time so that in the unlikely event something bad happens, you will get more than what you are paying in to cover catastrophic damages. Odds are, you'll never need it, and the insurance company makes money and you pay a little money for peace of mind and everyone's happy. In the case of health care, it's not a case of a rare instance where you might need care- we all need health care at one point or another. And so we, or an employer, pay a pretty big chunk of money to a company that is going to have to pay out at some point, but doesn't make a profit if it pays out more than it gets in, so it refuses to pay whenever possible. It doesn't make sense. Could you imagine paying money to a restaurant that then says, "Sorry; no food for you."

I'm not saying Europe or Canada have it figured out, but they do pay less per citizen than we do AND they have lower infant mortality rates and a higher life expectancy than we do, so they must be doing something right, as they're getting more for less.

As for the auto companies- I blame some of their problems on them putting all their eggs in the SUV basket, because the profit on them was so great, compared to small cars. They could have been improving gas mileage (and Congress could have required it), but preferred to pay money to lobbyists so that they could continue business as usual. Do any of these people ever think the ride will ever end? I swear, it seems like America is one big grasshopper, and we sure could stand to embrace the ant sometimes.

It's easy to bash the unions, but it's also worth remembering the labor movement are the folks who brought us the weekend. "Not Automatic" is a very dry read, but the accounts of conditions in the GM plants prior to the Sit-Down Strike of 1936 are pretty upsetting.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

What are you short the market, or long some puts?
Reguardless it's not looking good down here, for anything. Jay Leno made a joke about the Big 3 (auto makers) last night. He said that they are now: Tonka, Hot Wheels and Matchbox. Pretty funny, but very very sad if you think about how bad it is.

No, its not that. I think the market needs a giant blowout in order to establish some sort of bottom. I see its coming back now but i think thats bad.

Perhaps it will sell off before the end of the day.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

No, its not that. I think the market needs a giant blowout in order to establish some sort of bottom. I see its coming back now but i think thats bad.

Perhaps it will sell off before the end of the day.

It is going to be hard to establish a bottom, with what seems to be nothing but bad news in the immediate future. Unemployment is up. Big companies (including the fianancials) are struggling and laying off more people. Retailers are already bracing for very bad Christmans seasons. Forget about the auto industry. People are having trouble paying their mortgages, just wait until they can't or stop paying their credit card bills. It just seems like there is or no reason to be positive in the immediate future.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

It is going to be hard to establish a bottom, with what seems to be nothing but bad news in the immediate future. Unemployment is up. Big companies (including the fianancials) are struggling and laying off more people. Retailers are already bracing for very bad Christmans seasons. Forget about the auto industry. People are having trouble paying their mortgages, just wait until they can't or stop paying their credit card bills. It just seems like there is or no reason to be positive in the immediate future.

its called your money in a shoe box in your closet method!

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

its called your money in a shoe box in your closet method!

Well either my box has a hole in it, or my wife gas discovered my bounty.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

It is going to be hard to establish a bottom, with what seems to be nothing but bad news in the immediate future. Unemployment is up. Big companies (including the fianancials) are struggling and laying off more people. Retailers are already bracing for very bad Christmans seasons. Forget about the auto industry. People are having trouble paying their mortgages, just wait until they can't or stop paying their credit card bills. It just seems like there is or no reason to be positive in the immediate future.

You are correct on all that you say but regardless of market conditions, at some point there is value...even now.

An interesting point came up when a couple of colleagues were chewing on the gloomy state of the market. IF a good perecentage of the economy was created by poor credit risk, does that mean that the contraction that we are experiencing is more longterm than short? The points you made in that post support that premise.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

You are correct on all that you say but regardless of market conditions, at some point there is value...even now.

An interesting point came up when a couple of colleagues were chewing on the gloomy state of the market. IF a good perecentage of the economy was created by poor credit risk, does that mean that the contraction that we are experiencing is more longterm than short? The points you made in that post support that premise.

I believe that this is not going to be a short term problem. It is going to take a couple of years (at the least) for us to snap out of this slide/recession. It can't/won't happen overnight. The biggest thing (I think) that has to be fixed is the job market/unemployment rate. People need jobs so they could pay their bills, buy things and most impotantly create tax revenue. That's where it all starts. Until then, everything is going to continue to snowball.

You are right about values, but when the market is so one dircetional like it has been (even on days we are up) it just doesn't matter right now.

[Mortimer]

Auto unions.....blech.

More money for less car. Like Dala said--it's that simple and that predictable. Not that it makes it any easier for everyone,but this is a case of falling from within.