I sell some stocks to someone for say, $100....and I walk away with his money...
Later, the guy trys to sell them to someone else...but he cannot find a buyer...
Bottom line is even though the stock value declined, I still have my $100.00
--much of that money is still sitting on the sidelines, in the form of excess cash reserves; large corporations are flush with it, as are the top
1%
Actually it did not. The stock market is now at near the all time high.
See
Dan
You obviously have not paid much attention to stocks.
\ Dan
Wrong. It is investing. I have done it for years.
More wrong statements. Hove you read any books about investing?
Dan
[stock investment value]
It came right back and kept growing, but that wasn't worth sensational headlines.
If modern society is too complex for you, maybe you should learn to live without its more sophisticated elements instead of trying to claw down the people who have adapted successfully.
Stocks are very fragile eggs. Friends lost -bundles- when the SHTF several times during your Anointed One's current reign. Even mutual funds took large hits. Silver (small investment here) and gold are considerably safer. They survive chaos well. And chaos is coming.
I could live on that. I'm short--can I borrow a mil? Thanks! ;)
People who panicked and sold lost bundles, those who didn't soon recovered their investment.
How do you buy food with gold? The coins aren't small enough to trade equitably for the amount of freshly grown food you can eat before it spoils. I can't use up $5 worth of potatoes, onions or carrots, stored cool and dark, without having to throw some out. jsw
I retired back in 2000. I thought that way pretty successful adaptation.
But maybe you really know better?
Larry, I spent significant amount of time thinking about safety of investments, what it means, and what it does not mean. I also owned a significant (for me) amount of silver, 40 lbs. So I am not completely averse to owning precious metals. I also own a fair amount of stocks.
I have realized that volatility is not risk, despite what most finance professionals believe. For an asset that produces income, like stocks or apartments, the risk is overpaying compared to the future income.
This thinking did help me out in 2009, when I realized that owning stocks at then-current prices, would entail no risk at all due to fat dividends that I could buy. So I bought stocks with almost all available money. It was as riskless as things could possibly get.
As for gold and silver, they are much more risky to hold that stocks, because they produce no income. Nobody knows what they are "worth". Silver has industrial uses, so does gold, but to a lesser extent. Industrial use somewhat defines the "floor" price for silver, but not really for gold. Beyond this, they are speculative assets and they pay you nothing at all when you own them. A brick of gold does not earn any money. Stocks pay you while you own them and it makes a big difference.
I bought silver for $7 per ounce and sold it for 13.5 per ounce. It went to $45 per ounce and is now back to $20 per ounce. Hardly riskless. I know that at the current prices, I would not be buying either of them.
FYI
LOL
If there was any real chaos, a little bit of silver will be about as much good as having a collection of beanie babies.
...is mostly in your mind.
Nope, it's already overflowing its container.
If there's one thing Usenet is good for, it's getting free investment advice from people who don't have any money. All of you broke Usenutters should get together and start an investment advice firm. Start by recommending your universal tried and true path to financial success: a lifetime of investing in cigarettes and lottery tickets, and spending spare time writing nonsense instead of earning.
Invest in a lathe. Wealth fairly squirts out of the spindle of a lathe occupied in the production of something useful.
Speaking of which, WTF ever happened to EA?
Yeahbut some prefer writing baloney instead of all that troublesome pandering to customers etc. Not to mention that people who believe there's a coming zombie apocalypse in which some silver will become valuable, tend to be too stupid to produce anything useful. That lack of intelligence is the primary reason they're broke now and spending their time listing all the ways Obama supposedly caused their problems.
Probably changed his handle again.
On Tuesday, September 24, 2013 11:16:13 AM UTC-4, whoyakidding's ghost wrot e:
I do have some money even though I retired in Jan of 1998. Actually I have more money now than when I retired. I did offer tried and true investment advice. The book A Random walk down Wall Street is written by a Universi ty of Pennsylvania Professor. Read it or do not read it. It makes no diff erence to me.
Dan
Then I wasn't talking about you.
Just pointing out that the internet is also good for getting investment advice from people with money. Of course by the time you learn enough to know which is the good advice, then you do not need any advice.
Dan
Only an idiot believes that the reason he's poor is because of people who are even poorer.
====================
If you're in the market, you are playing in a crooked casino.
Eric Hunsader, founder of Nanex, said: ?The data clearly shows something that physically could not have happened ... that FOMC news had to be in Chicago and New York before 2pm [eastern time].?
According to exchange data analysed by Nanex, about $800m in futures contracts were traded in Chicago. Mr Hunsader said that implied that either the information was sent to Chicago early or that someone had received it in advance.
The pattern of price movements is likely to add to concerns about whether so-called high-frequency trading firms gain an unfair advantage in the market from early access to government data.
Citing unusual market patterns, Nanex CEO Eric Hunsader, whose firm supplies market data to the financial industry, said nearly $800 million worth of futures contracts traded in Chicago about 7 milliseconds before the 2 p.m. release time of the Fed's Open Market Committee decision last Wednesday.
You are worrying about how some people can take advantage of a few millisec onds before others have the same info. That is not investing. Investing i s figuring out which companies are well managed and therefore are going to prosper. Then buying the stock and holding it until you think that somethi ng has changed and the company is no longer well managed. I have owned mo st of my stocks for decades. A few milliseconds is not going to matter whe n a stock is held for over twenty years.
An example is Illumina. I bought 300 shares in May of 2006 at $26.82 a shar e. It split in September of 2008. I still own the stock. So how concerned should I be over a few milliseconds back in 2006. Unlike real casinos whe re the odds are against you, the odds in the stock market favor you.
Do you have any stocks? Have you ever owned any stocks? Have you invested in other things that have done better than the stock market? Should you be commenting on something where you have no experience?
Dan
None of this matters, if you plan on owning stocks for at least a few months.
iPolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.