FireWeatherMet Account Talk

Sort by newest Sort by date
Way to go, FWM! We are going to start calling you day trader. :D


P.S. Don't forget to change your sig. line. ;)
 
Yeah, I agree with you.
I think there is still (since November 2016) a lot of "auto-buy" orders on any dips. So as the smart money fades out of stocks, the masses still buy the dips.
This might be why the stocks are not falling off as rapidly as indicators such as the Transports suggest.

But you know how the game of "musical chairs" goes...when the music stops...everyone panics and rushes to the chairs.
Except by that time, there are not enough chairs to go around...the smart money is already sitting in them.
 
2nd day of month...using 2nd IFT of month...leaving F and G...going in 50% S and 50% I COB today.

This will be my position for the rest of the month...although if things look bad towards late in the month, I might start fading into G.
 
Seems we just filled that deep gap that Tom was preaching late last month (and I should have waited for).
Seems there is chance of a bounce here, as we're likely closer to the turnaround...so staying in seems more prudent than bailing mid month.

Unless......there is something bigger going on. Continued in the political forum (lol). https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-disbands-councils-ceo-campbell-173558128.html



0801170848a.gif


SP.png
 
Last edited:
Interesting dichotomy...sometimes its worth waiting a day before sending something to print (lol).

Charting a failed technical test, S&P 500 stalls at the breakdown point
Published: Aug 29, 2017 12:48 p.m. ET
Charting a failed technical test, S&P 500 stalls at the breakdown point - MarketWatch

then

Opinion: S&P 500 is on the verge of a breakout to the upside
Published: Aug 31, 2017 10:53 a.m. ET

S&P 500 is on the verge of a breakout to the upside - MarketWatch

For what its worth...the first article referenced 2453 on the S&P is the "failed breakout point...hence breakdown coming" but the funny thing is that article became a moot point the very next day as be broke above it, and surged further ahead today.:D
 
Have ridden a good wave upwards (50% S and 50% I) the past few weeks.
Using 1st IFT of September to briefly cash in and step aside.

Going 100% G COB Today
 
Another reason for taking a brief pause and cashing out to the G COB yesterday. The 3rd point (being at a record high) seems to be an even better reason to step aside. :sick:

The stock market just entered a dead zone that sees it drop 70% of the time


  • The S&P 500 has traded lower 70 percent of the time during the last two weeks of September since 1980, according to CNBC analysis using Kensho.
  • In that time, the index's average return has been negative 1.3 percent, the analysis found.
  • The S&P 500 is up 1.4 percent this month and currently sits at a record high.
  • But there are reasons why September could still live up to its dreadful reputation.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/18/mar...eeks-of-september-70-percent-of-the-time.html
 
FYI,

Sitting in the safety of the G after locking in profits a week ago, with one more move before the end of the month...I'm looking at the S fund (below) and asking myself "Do I want to buy in here, at the top"?

092917b.gif


I could stay in the G...but then looking at the F I ask myself "Are we a month off the peak and bouncing off a 1 month low"?

092917e.gif


With that, I'm leaning to go at least half or more into the F fund. Have a few minutes left.
 
Sitting in safety (F-Fund) still.

Using political news here, only as it applies to the markets.
I'm good with that on my Account Talk if anyone wants to keep the discussion there.

Most here know that the main reason for the rally since Election Day, has been the Wall St hope of tax cuts (mainly for themselves of course, lol).

However, the latest attempt at a tax cut package seems just as DOA as the attempt to repeal the ACA.
Been following posts from some of my friends on the right, and even they're up in arms about it (as they've finally discovered math-lol). Here's why:

1) It would reduce the tax cap in 401k's from $18,000 down to $2,800. So if you're socking away 10-15% like Suzie Orman and Dave Ramsey tell you to, you could be paying an extra $2,000-$3,000 in taxes.

2) It would eliminate deductions for state taxes. If you live in TX, WY, FL, AK you might say so what. But even a deep red state like Utah has a 5% flat income tax rate. They, and folks from Georgia to Ohio could pay an additional $1,000-$3,000.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/house-tax-plan-lowers-caps-401-k-cuts-170507970.html

So now, just those 2 things could cost middle to upper middle class folks an extra $3,000 to $6,000 in taxes per year. A tax HIKE not likely to be offset by slightly reduced tax brackets.

The chances of this tax bill going thru now seem to now be fading.
The idea of thousands of dollars of extra taxes for those saving in 401K's and living in states that have income tax(most states) in order to lower taxes for Trump, NFL players, Hollywood actors, Wall St Bankers, not to mention Trumps kids (estate tax elimination) has soured numerous friends of mine who were Trump supporters and/or supporters of tax reform, before they knew what was in it.
I'm assuming this is following a national trend.

As of this evening, futures were down pretty significantly on the indices.
Being that we seem near or just past a top, following a 10 week mercurial rise in stocks, and the recent breakdown of the Transports, (below from Toms Eve Disc) often the market leader, makes me happy that I'm in safety right now.

110217c.gif
 
Last edited:
FireWeatherMet said:
Sitting in safety (F-Fund) still.

Using political news here, only as it applies to the markets.
I'm good with that on my Account Talk if anyone wants to keep the discussion there.

Most here know that the main reason for the rally since Election Day, has been the Wall St hope of tax cuts (mainly for themselves of course, lol).

However, the latest attempt at a tax cut package seems just as DOA as the attempt to repeal the ACA.
Been following posts from some of my friends on the right, and even they're up in arms about it (as they've finally discovered math-lol). Here's why:

1) It would reduce the tax cap in 401k's from $18,000 down to $2,800. So if you're socking away 10-15% like Suzie Orman and Dave Ramsey tell you to, you could be paying an extra $2,000-$3,000 in taxes.

2) It would eliminate deductions for state taxes. If you live in TX, WY, FL, AK you might say so what. But even a deep red state like Utah has a 5% flat income tax rate. They, and folks from Georgia to Ohio could pay an additional $1,000-$3,000.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/house-tax-plan-lowers-caps-401-k-cuts-170507970.html

So now, just those 2 things could cost middle to upper middle class folks an extra $3,000 to $6,000 in taxes per year. A tax HIKE not likely to be offset by slightly reduced tax brackets.

The chances of this tax bill going thru now seem to now be fading.
The idea of thousands of dollars of extra taxes for those saving in 401K's and living in states that have income tax(most states) in order to lower taxes for Trump, NFL players, Hollywood actors, Wall St Bankers, not to mention Trumps kids (estate tax elimination) has soured numerous friends of mine who were Trump supporters and/or supporters of tax reform, before they knew what was in it.
I'm assuming this is following a national trend.

As of this evening, futures were down pretty significantly on the indices.
Being that we seem near or just past a top, following a 10 week mercurial rise in stocks, and the recent breakdown of the Transports, (below from Toms Eve Disc) often the market leader, makes me happy that I'm in safety right now.

110217c.gif
Click to expand...


I have been surprised that a proposal to limit pre-tax 401k contributions was even on the table. We all know (or should know) how Important the tax-deferred 401k is as a vehicle to save for retirement, and that any plan to replace tax deferred savings with an expanded Roth would be hurtful to people trying to save for retirement


The elimination of the personal exemption for homeowners who itemize is, in and of itself, a tax INCREASE of about $1000. And if you live in a high tax state, the elimination of the state tax deduction will increase taxes by a couple of thousand dollars more. So much for it being a tax cut.... in reality it’s a TAX HIKE on the middle class .

I can only hope that the most draconian parts are removed before tomorrow...
 
StockSurfer said:
I have been surprised that a proposal to limit pre-tax 401k contributions was even on the table. We all know (or should know) how Important the tax-deferred 401k is as a vehicle to save for retirement, and that any plan to replace tax deferred savings with an expanded Roth would be hurtful to people trying to save for retirement


The elimination of the personal exemption for homeowners who itemize is, in and of itself, a tax INCREASE of about $1000. And if you live in a high tax state, the elimination of the state tax deduction will increase taxes by a couple of thousand dollars more. So much for it being a tax cut.... in reality it’s a TAX HIKE on the middle class .

I can only hope that the most draconian parts are removed before tomorrow...
Click to expand...

Well, the difficulty of taking those things out, is that now they can't even come close to paying for this tax bill (Cutting the top tax rate from 39% down to 35%, eliminating the Estate Tax on estate values above 6 Million dollars, and cutting the Corporate Tax rate by 10-15%)

That prevents about 10-20% of GOP fiscal hawks in Congress from supporting the tax bill. No Dems will support the tax plan, so it could likely die without even coming up for a vote.

And for the market...that could mean a quick correction from the rapid rise of the last 12 months.
 
Last edited:
Agreed that they are desperately searching for revenue to pay for their proposal... and they are looking at us... our tax-deferred 401k ... our personal exemption... our state tax deduction...
 
Yup, we all make our bets on what may come and hopefully despite our inability to predict the future we all come out OK! :smile:
 
So from a tactical perspective, what is the purpose of this tax plan?

Currently, regarding jobs, we've been at "full employment" statistically (5% or lower) for over 2 years. We now have a "Labor Shortage" in most sectors.
https://www.marketplace.org/2015/09/04/economy/does-51-percent-full-employment

Currently, regarding corporations...they have never been more flush with cash than now.
052016-US-cash-holdings.jpg


So basically, there are no significant amount of new jobs that are needed by our economy. (We need more workers from somewhere else actually).

And corporations have more than twice the amount of cash than they did at the end of the last boom cycle that ended in 2007. Yet now we are going to give them even more cash to hoard (keeping it out of the economy)???

So what is the purpose of this tax change again...that is going to add 1.5 Trillion to the National Debt?
 
I assume it is supposed to grow the economy, and eventually raise wages. If it doesn't, it fails. If it does, the $1.5 trillion likely becomes a surplus. I read somewhere that each 0.1 increase in GDP increases tax revenue by some crazy amount (hundreds of billions or even a trillion.) I wish I could find that.
 
tsptalk said:
I assume it is supposed to grow the economy, and eventually raise wages. If it doesn't, it fails. If it does, the $1.5 trillion likely becomes a surplus.
Click to expand...

There would be no surplus.
The 1.5 Trillion projection of added debt over 10 years is on top of over 10 Trillion of debt already projected over the next 10 years.
This years single year deficit is already on track to be 666 Billion, the largest deficit in the last 5 years.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/24/bud...llion-sooner-than-expected-goldman-sachs.html

Increased GDP growth in past boom cycles have typically been early on, when the unemployment rate was falling from much higher numbers than now. In the mid 1980's most of that 3-5% GDP growth was when the unemployment rate was falling from 8% to 7 to 6%.
Once it reached near 5%, from the late 1980's into the early 1990's. growth slowed also, which is normal. Our unemployment rate has been hoovering between 4.2% to 4.6% for over a year. Statistically we never get lower than that, which (naturally) limits growth.

I think that, just like the Bush tax cuts...this one (if it passes) becomes temporary, and dependent on whether the deficits are lowered. Its an automatic rule if a tax bill doesn't pass by 2/3rds and has to go thru Reconciliation, if I remember correctly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Small caps save the Santa Claus Rally while large caps failed
Replies
0
Views
73
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Stocks pausing, small caps negative reversal?
Replies
0
Views
131
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Another strong open fades quickly
Replies
0
Views
69
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - A very weak jobs report sends stocks... higher?
Replies
0
Views
110
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Support holding... so far
Replies
0
Views
86
tsptalk
tsptalk
Back
Top