12%ayear
Well-known member
ok Mr. TSP Elite
-
Welcome to the TSP Talk Forums forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, join our AutoTracker, and access many other special features. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. -
Please read our AutoTracker policy on the IFT deadline and remaining active. Thanks!
-
$ - Premium Service Content (Info) | AutoTracker Monthly Winners | Is Gmail et al, Blocking Our emails?
Find us on: Facebook & X | Posting Copyrighted Material
-
20% Off Annual Premium Subscriptions!*
Ends Jan 18... Click Here For More Information
* For new or current subscribers -
Join the TSP Talk AutoTracker: How to Get Started | Login | Main AutoTracker Page
-
The Forum works well on MOBILE devices without an app: Just go to: https://forum.tsptalk.com ...
Or you can now use TapaTalk again!
12%ayear's Account Talk
- Thread starter 12%ayear
- Start date
350zCommTech
Well-known member
C or Citigroup is not CIT.
CIT:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIT_Group
C:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citigroup
Braveheart
Member
OK Dumb question but asking anyway. Are we allowed to trade tomorrow before noon for Monday or would that be for Tuesday.
I am 100% G for tomorrow now what if the TSP pays the 1 cent for tomorrow and then I move to the F Fund is that a possibility or a waste ??????
I am 100% G for tomorrow now what if the TSP pays the 1 cent for tomorrow and then I move to the F Fund is that a possibility or a waste ??????
Last edited:
hessian
Member
Hey, I'm home and can't see it - wondering too -was sup?
Braveheart
Member
I can't get a break this is pathetic.:nuts: Lets see how my week went was going into S Fund Monday but said no I'll hold in the F Fund. Was going to the S for Tuesday but said no stay safe in the F Fund and up went the Market 400+ but made my bold move for Wednesday to the I Fund and lost a boat load in the crash. So I cut and run to the F Fund the I jumps today and the Market jumps 260+. I get 2 cents in the F Fund move to the G Fund thinking well I will get that dam penny if it kills me but they pay today and I'm locked in until Tuesday why not !!! Completion of such a great week.:nuts:
Birchtree
Well-known member
Braveheart,
My simple strategy is to be right and sit tight. That way I don't miss any action - which does travel in both directions. My only worry is that if this market does an endless pop Griffin will blow right up past me like a gusher. Patience is truly virtuous.
My simple strategy is to be right and sit tight. That way I don't miss any action - which does travel in both directions. My only worry is that if this market does an endless pop Griffin will blow right up past me like a gusher. Patience is truly virtuous.
Show-me
Well-known member
WOW!!! I wish I could have heard that one.
Braveheart
Member
Thinking back if I had the stones to just sit in the S Fund at 100% it would have been one hell of a week or went 50% S Fund but it wasn't there I thought I had the smart play with all the bad reports but they waited until Wednesday to release every possible bad report. But it's done I won't chase bad money now with good but I need a new plan. I really can't believe the beatings we all have taken. Well back at em next week I will be sitting in the G Fund till Tues.
12%ayear
Well-known member
They can only do so much. You cannot force people to borrow or spend money. The Economy is getting worse not better at the moment.
12%ayear
Well-known member
We can easily see the Market correct 20-30 more % from here. There are no silver linings this time around. High inflation,bad market,bad real estate, and unemployment creeping. Last time, in March 2003 when the Bull run started, we had no inflation and cheap money(low interest rates). Now, we have a global meltdown on the verge of occuring.
Steadygain
TSP Elite
I did some homework - trying to understand how a Bullish Trend could still occur and NOW I UNDERSTAND. Even though the weakness which began last summer completly stem from weakness in the FINANCIAL SECTOR - the information is highly limited and the companies themselves only disclose the bare mimimum. 2 Hedge Funds managed by Bear failed last summer - setting off a CREDIT CRISIS that swept up banks and brokerages around the globe. But the focus was hugely limited; and that is the bottom line - NO ONE WANTS TO DISCLOSE ANY MORE THAN THEY HAVE TO OR UNTIL THEY ARE FORCED TO.
Steadygain
TSP Elite
I did not see any of those threads - but THANK YOU.
All the information I have are exclusively conducted by doing my own homework (my own research) so I can really know what is going on.
Thanks Anidoc - much appreciated.
DCguy
Member
We already lost over 12% and we'll have to lose additional 25% to close below 1000 or 33% to close below 900.
The_Technician
Active member
Hmmm, they just now noticed that one ehhh....personally, I've been predicting 1190 or below on the S&P for about a year now.......as most already know......I can't say 900's though....
12%ayear
Well-known member
If Ben Bernanke manages to save the financial system from collapse, he will — rightly — be praised for his heroic efforts.
Paul Krugman.
But what we should be asking is: How did we get here?
Why does the financial system need salvation?
Why do mild-mannered economists have to become superheroes?
The answer, at a fundamental level, is that we’re paying the price for willful amnesia. We chose to forget what happened in the 1930s — and having refused to learn from history, we’re repeating it.
Contrary to popular belief, the stock market crash of 1929 wasn’t the defining moment of the Great Depression. What turned an ordinary recession into a civilization-threatening slump was the wave of bank runs that swept across America in 1930 and 1931.
This banking crisis of the 1930s showed that unregulated, unsupervised financial markets can all too easily suffer catastrophic failure.
As the decades passed, however, that lesson was forgotten — and now we’re relearning it, the hard way.
To grasp the problem, you need to understand what banks do.
Banks exist because they help reconcile the conflicting desires of savers and borrowers. Savers want freedom — access to their money on short notice. Borrowers want commitment: they don’t want to risk facing sudden demands for repayment.
Normally, banks satisfy both desires: depositors have access to their funds whenever they want, yet most of the money placed in a bank’s care is used to make long-term loans. The reason this works is that withdrawals are usually more or less matched by new deposits, so that a bank only needs a modest cash reserve to make good on its promises.
But sometimes — often based on nothing more than a rumor — banks face runs, in which many people try to withdraw their money at the same time. And a bank that faces a run by depositors, lacking the cash to meet their demands, may go bust even if the rumor was false.
Worse yet, bank runs can be contagious. If depositors at one bank lose their money, depositors at other banks are likely to get nervous, too, setting off a chain reaction. And there can be wider economic effects: as the surviving banks try to raise cash by calling in loans, there can be a vicious circle in which bank runs cause a credit crunch, which leads to more business failures, which leads to more financial troubles at banks, and so on.
That, in brief, is what happened in 1930-1931, making the Great Depression the disaster it was. So Congress tried to make sure it would never happen again by creating a system of regulations and guarantees that provided a safety net for the financial system.
And we all lived happily for a while — but not for ever after.
Wall Street chafed at regulations that limited risk, but also limited potential profits. And little by little it wriggled free — partly by persuading politicians to relax the rules, but mainly by creating a “shadow banking system” that relied on complex financial arrangements to bypass regulations designed to ensure that banking was safe.
For example, in the old system, savers had federally insured deposits in tightly regulated savings banks, and banks used that money to make home loans. Over time, however, this was partly replaced by a system in which savers put their money in funds that bought asset-backed commercial paper from special investment vehicles that bought collateralized debt obligations created from securitized mortgages — with nary a regulator in sight.
As the years went by, the shadow banking system took over more and more of the banking business, because the unregulated players in this system seemed to offer better deals than conventional banks. Meanwhile, those who worried about the fact that this brave new world of finance lacked a safety net were dismissed as hopelessly old-fashioned.
In fact, however, we were partying like it was 1929 — and now it’s 1930.
The financial crisis currently under way is basically an updated version of the wave of bank runs that swept the nation three generations ago. People aren’t pulling cash out of banks to put it in their mattresses — but they’re doing the modern equivalent, pulling their money out of the shadow banking system and putting it into Treasury bills. And the result, now as then, is a vicious circle of financial contraction.
Mr. Bernanke and his colleagues at the Fed are doing all they can to end that vicious circle. We can only hope that they succeed. Otherwise, the next few years will be very unpleasant — not another Great Depression, hopefully, but surely the worst slump we’ve seen in decades.
Even if Mr. Bernanke pulls it off, however, this is no way to run an economy. It’s time to relearn the lessons of the 1930s, and get the financial system back under control. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/opinion/21krugman.html?em&ex=1206331200&en=2f99b2271771220c&ei=5087%0A
Paul Krugman.
But what we should be asking is: How did we get here?
Why does the financial system need salvation?
Why do mild-mannered economists have to become superheroes?
The answer, at a fundamental level, is that we’re paying the price for willful amnesia. We chose to forget what happened in the 1930s — and having refused to learn from history, we’re repeating it.
Contrary to popular belief, the stock market crash of 1929 wasn’t the defining moment of the Great Depression. What turned an ordinary recession into a civilization-threatening slump was the wave of bank runs that swept across America in 1930 and 1931.
This banking crisis of the 1930s showed that unregulated, unsupervised financial markets can all too easily suffer catastrophic failure.
As the decades passed, however, that lesson was forgotten — and now we’re relearning it, the hard way.
To grasp the problem, you need to understand what banks do.
Banks exist because they help reconcile the conflicting desires of savers and borrowers. Savers want freedom — access to their money on short notice. Borrowers want commitment: they don’t want to risk facing sudden demands for repayment.
Normally, banks satisfy both desires: depositors have access to their funds whenever they want, yet most of the money placed in a bank’s care is used to make long-term loans. The reason this works is that withdrawals are usually more or less matched by new deposits, so that a bank only needs a modest cash reserve to make good on its promises.
But sometimes — often based on nothing more than a rumor — banks face runs, in which many people try to withdraw their money at the same time. And a bank that faces a run by depositors, lacking the cash to meet their demands, may go bust even if the rumor was false.
Worse yet, bank runs can be contagious. If depositors at one bank lose their money, depositors at other banks are likely to get nervous, too, setting off a chain reaction. And there can be wider economic effects: as the surviving banks try to raise cash by calling in loans, there can be a vicious circle in which bank runs cause a credit crunch, which leads to more business failures, which leads to more financial troubles at banks, and so on.
That, in brief, is what happened in 1930-1931, making the Great Depression the disaster it was. So Congress tried to make sure it would never happen again by creating a system of regulations and guarantees that provided a safety net for the financial system.
And we all lived happily for a while — but not for ever after.
Wall Street chafed at regulations that limited risk, but also limited potential profits. And little by little it wriggled free — partly by persuading politicians to relax the rules, but mainly by creating a “shadow banking system” that relied on complex financial arrangements to bypass regulations designed to ensure that banking was safe.
For example, in the old system, savers had federally insured deposits in tightly regulated savings banks, and banks used that money to make home loans. Over time, however, this was partly replaced by a system in which savers put their money in funds that bought asset-backed commercial paper from special investment vehicles that bought collateralized debt obligations created from securitized mortgages — with nary a regulator in sight.
As the years went by, the shadow banking system took over more and more of the banking business, because the unregulated players in this system seemed to offer better deals than conventional banks. Meanwhile, those who worried about the fact that this brave new world of finance lacked a safety net were dismissed as hopelessly old-fashioned.
In fact, however, we were partying like it was 1929 — and now it’s 1930.
The financial crisis currently under way is basically an updated version of the wave of bank runs that swept the nation three generations ago. People aren’t pulling cash out of banks to put it in their mattresses — but they’re doing the modern equivalent, pulling their money out of the shadow banking system and putting it into Treasury bills. And the result, now as then, is a vicious circle of financial contraction.
Mr. Bernanke and his colleagues at the Fed are doing all they can to end that vicious circle. We can only hope that they succeed. Otherwise, the next few years will be very unpleasant — not another Great Depression, hopefully, but surely the worst slump we’ve seen in decades.
Even if Mr. Bernanke pulls it off, however, this is no way to run an economy. It’s time to relearn the lessons of the 1930s, and get the financial system back under control. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/opinion/21krugman.html?em&ex=1206331200&en=2f99b2271771220c&ei=5087%0A
12%ayear
Well-known member
Two keys components are needed to help the economy. Higher US DOLLAR and lower oil prices. read this Amsterdam rejects US dollars..
The US dollar's value is dropping so fast against the euro that small currency outlets in Amsterdam are turning away tourists seeking to sell their dollars for local money while on vacation in the Netherlands.
"Our dollar is worth maybe zero over here," said Mary Kelly, an American tourist from Indianapolis, Indiana, in front of the Anne Frank house. "It's hard to find a place to exchange. We have to go downtown, to the central station or post office." http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/03/19/1205602439875.html
The US dollar's value is dropping so fast against the euro that small currency outlets in Amsterdam are turning away tourists seeking to sell their dollars for local money while on vacation in the Netherlands.
"Our dollar is worth maybe zero over here," said Mary Kelly, an American tourist from Indianapolis, Indiana, in front of the Anne Frank house. "It's hard to find a place to exchange. We have to go downtown, to the central station or post office." http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/03/19/1205602439875.html
Similar threads
- Article