CountryBoys's Account Talk

[Birchtree]

We need more good stuff like that article - many thanks.

 

[CountryBoy]

We need more good stuff like that article - many thanks.

You're welcome Birch and thank you.

CB

 

[Birchtree]

You were asking who or what might be pulling the strings to our economy:

http://safehaven.com/article-12045.htm

 

[CountryBoy]

Thanks Birch,

I've never heard of these Kress Cycles (not suprising as I'm still learning), so I'll have to study the article and these Kress Cycles a little closer to get a good feel for them. The Kress Cycles may have exacerbated the problem, but I still feel this was brought on by something more sinister, that wants to change capitalism as we know it. I still have my tin foil hat on, but, then on the other hand, it may have not been anything sinister, but just the pure stupidity of our elected officials.

Thanks for sharing the article.

CB

 

[wv-girl]

CB,
Does anyone know why Paulson went to China last week? I haven't heard much on it except that he went. And then this week you have foreign investors buying Zero yielding bonds? Any correlations here? Who would buy these types of investments? And it is showing us something a lot more dire than what is being bantered around on the financial news stations? Just food for thought.

 

[alevin]

Does anyone know why Paulson went to China last week? I haven't heard much on it except that he went. And then this week you have foreign investors buying Zero yielding bonds? Any correlations here? Who would buy these types of investments? And it is showing us something a lot more dire than what is being bantered around on the financial news stations? Just food for thought.

WV-girl, I'm not CB but here's the basic answer. Paulson went one last time in a string of 5 bi-yearly talks, Bush started these talks in 06 as highest-level China-US trade policy dialogue. during his administration. One semi-official reason for this round was concern they might devalue the yuan leading to a trade war w/us (and everyone else for that matter). From more recent developments found in thread on ticker-forum, China is officially denying they plan to devalue and people semi-believe them-for now.

http://www.chinatradeinformation.net/china-trade-news/china-us-starts-sed-amid-financial-crisis.html

 

[CountryBoy]

CB,
Does anyone know why Paulson went to China last week? I haven't heard much on it except that he went. And then this week you have foreign investors buying Zero yielding bonds? Any correlations here? Who would buy these types of investments? And it is showing us something a lot more dire than what is being bantered around on the financial news stations? Just food for thought.

WV Girl,

I caught a quick blurb, that China bought a lot of those bonds, but I can't seem to remember where I heard or read about it. Sorry.

CB

 

[CountryBoy]

WV-girl, I'm not CB but here's the basic answer. Paulson went one last time in a string of 5 bi-yearly talks, Bush started these talks in 06 as highest-level China-US trade policy dialogue. during his administration. One semi-official reason for this round was concern they might devalue the yuan leading to a trade war w/us (and everyone else for that matter). From more recent developments found in thread on ticker-forum, China is officially denying they plan to devalue and people semi-believe them-for now.

http://www.chinatradeinformation.net/china-trade-news/china-us-starts-sed-amid-financial-crisis.html

Thanks alevin,

For bailing me out, because I forgot all about that. Another senior moment.

CB

 

[wv-girl]

Quote:
Originally Posted by alevin
WV-girl, I'm not CB but here's the basic answer. Paulson went one last time in a string of 5 bi-yearly talks, Bush started these talks in 06 as highest-level China-US trade policy dialogue. during his administration. One semi-official reason for this round was concern they might devalue the yuan leading to a trade war w/us (and everyone else for that matter). From more recent developments found in thread on ticker-forum, China is officially denying they plan to devalue and people semi-believe them-for now.

http://www.chinatradeinformation.net...al-crisis.html

Thanks alevin,

For bailing me out, because I forgot all about that. Another senior moment.

CB

[/quote]
Thanks to both of you for your responses.
CB,
No one person can possibly keep up with all of these developments all the time. That is what makes the MB so valuable and such a delight.

Alevin,
You might be that one exception that stays on top of everything. I always enjoy reading both your and CB's post and I thank you.

Wv-girl

 

[CountryBoy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by alevin
WV-girl, I'm not CB but here's the basic answer. Paulson went one last time in a string of 5 bi-yearly talks, Bush started these talks in 06 as highest-level China-US trade policy dialogue. during his administration. One semi-official reason for this round was concern they might devalue the yuan leading to a trade war w/us (and everyone else for that matter). From more recent developments found in thread on ticker-forum, China is officially denying they plan to devalue and people semi-believe them-for now.

http://www.chinatradeinformation.net...al-crisis.html

Thanks alevin,

For bailing me out, because I forgot all about that. Another senior moment.

CB

Thanks to both of you for your responses.
CB,
No one person can possibly keep up with all of these developments all the time. That is what makes the MB so valuable and such a delight.

Alevin,
You might be that one exception that stays on top of everything. I always enjoy reading both your and CB's post and I thank you.

Wv-girl [/QUOTE]

That sure is the truth Wv-girl. It helps having so many eyes looking at all of this stuff.

CB (WV Born and Bred)

 

[alevin]

thanks all, just wish I was better at the short-term moves like some folks around here, but given my CapPres objective, I'm better served sticking with the intermediate moves evidently.

 

[alevin]

http://www.contraryinvestor.com/mo.htm

Hi CB, something I found for dividenders' stockings, mine included. Birchie, he's got so much going, I know he won't care but you might.

....we are convinced credit cycle dynamics of the last three to four decades strongly influenced and supported corporate earnings growth in a big way. A chart of exactly what we are talking about follows......

If indeed our supposition regarding the linkage between the credit cycle and nominal dollar corporate earnings acceleration is correct, then by extension can we suggest that US credit cycle dynamics also positively influenced the ability of corporations to support dividend payments over the prior three-plus decades? We think that's more than a fair statement. As you'd guess, the following chart chronicles both S&P nominal dollar dividends set against the same credit market debt relative to GDP character since 1950. Directionally correlated, as is the trend in corporate profits? You bet.

Can we now suggest that we need to at least be open to the idea that change in US credit cycle dynamics ahead may indeed portend change in the character of US corporate dividends to come? And as the credit cycle continues to reconcile, could we possibly be looking at a future decline in aggregate S&P dividends paid? Again, we think this is a fair line of reasoning and deserves both consideration and monitoring in forward decision-making. ...


in summation, a rising S&P dividend yield is telling us something about equity valuations. As we noted, we now rest at a yield level that is the average for the last 60 years, a level we have not seen in close to two decades. We have discussed the case for the "stocks are cheap" argument based on estimated earnings on our site recently. It's the earnings assumption that's the problem. In like manner, it appears that stocks are reasonably priced based on the dividend yield experience of the last six decades. But is the assumption of a static or growing cash dividend stream for the S&P in aggregate also a problematic assumption?

 

[turbo23dog]

Sorry but I'm not feeling that I understand what the above is saying. Does it say that there's a case to be made that future SP500 returns won't be as good as they were prior to 2008?

 

[alevin]

Dividends. Some stocks pay dividends, others don't. Some are paying really high dividends right now, that may not be sustainable. I'm still figuring out this whole dividend thing myself, since I'm trying to narrow the field for my first dividend-oriented stock-picking venture. Single stock-picking for dividends needs to consider whether the price is right based on prognosis for earnings, which is where dividends come from. I haven't quite figured out how that ties in with the whole S&P situation, other than if prices have been going up for 50 years in correlation with a 60 year credit cycle (cycles return to the mean, which means they overcorrect and shoot under the mean too).....well, this little "correction" may take awhile longer in aggregate.

Best to read the whole article. It explains better than I can. I'm still in learning mode how to think about all this since only ever til now been TSP/mutual fund invester and just started learning about charts and indicators, much less fundamentals in the past year or two. Birchtree could explain really well if he chooses, he's been handling single dividend-paying stocks for a really long time.

 

[CountryBoy]

http://www.contraryinvestor.com/mo.htm

Hi CB, something I found for dividenders' stockings, mine included. Birchie, he's got so much going, I know he won't care but you might.

Hey alevin,

Thanks for sharing the article. It was a real good read for someone as new as me. I became more aware of the relationship of the dividend yield to stock share price, as the market started tanking last year.

When I was initially researching for my stocks, I looked at the historical divvy payments, not divvy yield, though I liked a yield that was greater than 3% or the current S&P yield, but the longer they paid a divvy, the more weight I gave them when considering what to purchase.

As I mentioned above, since I have just started buying stocks the past 2 years, I wasn’t as concerned about stock price appreciation and yield, as I was about the consistent growth and payment of dividends, since I knew between the TSP and other financial commitments, I would not be able to purchase stocks in the quantity to take full advantage of the stock price appreciation and truthfully I gave yield at that time short shift. Lately ( greatly reduced financial commitments) I have added a couple of stocks that pay a good divvy but are volatile in there share cost, PCU and DSX and plan on selling them based on their share price return. These 2 stocks add a little spice to my portfolio, but I will still continue to increase my positions on the 10 or so solid divvy payers I have and hope they can at least maintain there divvy during this recessionary period. So far 3 have increased their divvy this year, JNJ, UTX and BHP, while GE is just going to maintain theirs. Who knows what the next couple of years will bring, but hopefully the stocks I selected will at least maintain their divvy, during this period, because if they don’t, I’d really worry about our economy. I wouldn’t be surprised to see more of the GE type action, since the yields of my portfolio are getting higher than I would like, because of the direct correlation to share price.

Luckily I sold what little positions I had in the financial sector, before the subprime mess and don’t plan to venture back in yet, though BB&T and possibly WFC are tempting. But with the Feds direct involvement in the banking sector, I feel the financial sector will be handcuffed for sometime to come, other sectors may also, but in my opinion the financial is going to be the most regulated.

I watch Cramer, though I don’t always agree with him, especially in the past few months. Cramer has been talking about this high yield phenomenon, on his show lately. I tend to ignore his calling for the purchase of these “accidental high yield stocks”, because of the drop in stock prices.

I’ll continue to add to what stocks I have (historical precedence), in our ROTHs, regardless of what happens, though I would like to add some gold.

I don’t know what the future will bring and I wouldn’t be surprised to see some of my holdings reduce or temporarily eliminated their divvies, because I think the economy is not going to rebound as fast as a lot of folks think and after BHO’s 2 year infrastructure stimulus package spent, we may just see a repeat of what happened after FDR’s 2 year works package was spent. I hope we don’t, but I’m trying to prepared for the worse and save as much as I can while the getting is good.

Sorry if this kinda rambled somewhat, but work interfered with my fun. :laugh:

Good Luck,
CB

 

[CountryBoy]

Sorry but I'm not feeling that I understand what the above is saying. Does it say that there's a case to be made that future SP500 returns won't be as good as they were prior to 2008?

turbo,

I've only been at this divvy stock purchasing for only a tad over 2 years, but from what I can gather from the article, is that divvy yields may become artificially inflated, because of the low individual stock share price and when yields get to high to be true something has to give and a lot of times it's the size of the dividend payments. That's the main reason I looked at historical stock divvy payments and gave them more weight than the yield, when deciding what to purchase. But Birch is the expert, but sometimes he talks over my head.

CB

 

[Frixxxx]

CB,

Merry Christmas!!!!

Keep yer butt in the saddle, yer spurs sharp, and yer powder dry!

Eric

 

[CountryBoy]

Good Morning Folks,

Somebody was talking the other day or so about his/her brother may possibly be looking at a Gov't job and since he is a vet he would get Veteran's preference. I thought it was one of the ladies here, but for the life of me, I can't find who it is. Anyhoo below is a link that may be helpful in obtaining a Gov't job as a Vet.

http://www.fedsmith.com/article/1810/

If they don't see it, maybe someone else with a better memory than me will remeber who it was and pass it on.

Everyone have a safe and Happy New Year,

Rus

 

[Show-me]

CB,

It was alevin that had a relative that was a fuel jockey.

 

[CountryBoy]

CB,

It was alevin that had a relative that was a fuel jockey.

Thanks Show-me,

I'll repost over in her place.

CB