nnuut's Account Talk

[hessian]

Maybe it was just us at DoD - that at noon today the Hill was still battling over how to spend funds (con't resolution for another week for civilian workers still in the mix as I recall then) - recall 1994, or was it '95? I'll be sure to rub it in, if I end up sittin' at home.

 

[nnuut]

Maybe it was just us at DoD - that at noon today the Hill was still battling over how to spend funds (con't resolution for another week for civilian workers still in the mix as I recall then) - recall 1994, or was it '95? I'll be sure to rub it in, if I end up sittin' at home.

I'm DOD! We are getting off the 24th, day before Xmas, thanks to Bush and another 8 hours, due to excellent performance, I think we can take that one anytime. So I have no idea what you're talking about, but am ALWAYS willing to take off a day with pay!!

 

[hessian]

I'm DOD! We are getting off the 24th, day before Xmas, thanks to Bush and another 8 hours, due to excellent performance, I think we can take that one anytime. So I have no idea what you're talking about, but am ALWAYS willing to take off a day with pay!!

Hey Nnuut, that's interesting. I'm inside the Beltway (nothing glamorous, & NOT one of the infamous beltway-bandits, but can't avoid the DC politics at their best. Here's the latest insanity... Enjoy! :nuts:

The House of Representatives has passed a bill to extend funding the federal government's operations Dec 14th until December 21st. Posted: December 14, 2007 7:25 AM
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news...g-resolution-expires-dec.-21.-2007-12-13.html

 

[nnuut]

Hey Nnuut, that's interesting. I'm inside the Beltway (nothing glamorous, & NOT one of the infamous beltway-bandits, but can't avoid the DC politics at their best. Here's the latest insanity... Enjoy! :nuts:

The House of Representatives has passed a bill to extend funding the federal government's operations Dec 14th until December 21st. Posted: December 14, 2007 7:25 AM
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news...g-resolution-expires-dec.-21.-2007-12-13.html

This is the kind of action that in the past has caused them to dip into OUR "G" Fund!! Don't see it this time but it's happened before. How do you like them using our retirement funds to run the government? CROOKS!:nuts:

 

[hessian]

Hey Nnuut,
Here's follow-on to story... If, as suggested by Bush, a "full-year CR" gets passed - imagine - an entire year without "pork spending" for either side! :laugh:
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=38850&dcn=todaysnews

Bush: "Instead they should pass a one-year continuing resolution that does not include wasteful spending or higher taxes." Bush said any spending package approved this year should be "clean" legislation "without gimmicks, without policy riders that could not be enacted in the ordinary legislative process."

 

[nnuut]

Ya never know what they will really do, do you believe that, (that's a double DO DO) is there a hidden agenda? Are they going to use that money for the WAR? Yep I think that's it!!:suspicious:

Speaking of the WAR, I'm getting out of stocks tomorrow going 100% "G" fund. Just too many Head and Shoulders in the charts, and this:
Morgan Stanley is scheduled to report results on Wednesday and Bear Stearns on Thursday.
Also set to report this week is, Goldman Sachs which is expected on Tuesday to post a profit for the quarter. I don't believe that either, don't believe anything much!!
And more;
Current Account
NY Empire State Index
Net Foreign Purchases
Housing Starts
Building Permits
Crude Inventories
GDP-Final
Chain Deflator-Final
Initial Claims
Leading Indicators
Philadelphia Fed
Personal Income
Personal Spending
Core PCE Inflation
Mich Sentiment-Rev.

http://www.briefing.com/Investor/Public/Calendars/EconomicCalendar.htm

 

[FogSailing]

Re: nnuut's Account

Can't blame you for being suspicious Nnut...I share a certain cynicism these days...

I'm still ticked off at Uncle Ben for allowing so many to "dream" of a .5% rate cut when the Fed knew all along that the economic news wasn't good and inflation was deciding to take a quantum leap...

My gut tells me that Griffin is right...there is another big up day coming ...only problem is the big "when", especially since all the Wall Streeters are doing such a good job of scaring everyone out of the market..

I'm watching Griffin's moves this week..let's beat these creeps at their own game...SOMEHOW...Still trying to figure that one out..

FS

 

[hessian]

Hey Nnuut,
Regarding what DC will do, who knows, but they always seem to worked it out. Seen it so many times I've become numb to it I guess).

Anyway, on markets calls, you have vast experience compared to me. I may follow, but I also may see what next week brings. I see the wall of worry, and hear the wailing too. But I'm gonna see if other factors I've heard are plausible - the last week may have had something partly to do with this week being options and futures expiration (Quadruple Witching). Some say last week's daily moves may have been ridding of puts/calls (not only the Fed's mess).
It is said the week of options/futres expiration usually goes opposite to the prior week's trend. I also read that last week, investors may have been dumping/selling their bad stocks (for 2007 tax purposes).
But I also may change direction at any time! Thanks & GL!

 

[nnuut]

Hey Guys I wouldn't recommend FOLLOWING ME! I haven't been doing very well lately, out of SYNC!

 

[nnuut]

How about those Rich Peope not paying their part in the Tax System?

How the tax system works
>
>
> Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all
> ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,
> it would go something like this:
> The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
> The fifth would pay $1.
> The sixth would pay $3.
> The seventh would pay $7.
> The eighth would pay $12.
> The ninth would pay $18.
> The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
>
> So, that's what they decided to do.
> The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
> arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you
> are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost
> of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
>
> The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so
> the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
> But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could
> they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair
> share?'
>
> They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted
> that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man
> would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner
> suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly
> the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should
> pay.
>
> And so:
> The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
> The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
> The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
> The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
> The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
> The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
> Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
> continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men
> began to compare their savings.
>
> "I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He
> pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
> "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar,
> too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
> "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man.
> "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all
> the breaks!"
>
> "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get
> anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
>
> The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
> The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine
> sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the
> bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough
> money between all of them for even half of the bill!
>
> And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is
> how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the
> most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for
> being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they
> might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat
> friendlier.
>
> David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
> Professor of Economics
> University of Georgia

 

[kar_crazy]

could not remember the name of wine they were trying to sell me rum
i dont need rum right now trying to drink the slow stuff

 

[presskh]

How about those Rich Peope not paying their part in the Tax System?

How the tax system works
>
>
> Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all
> ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,
> it would go something like this:
> The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
> The fifth would pay $1.
> The sixth would pay $3.
> The seventh would pay $7.
> The eighth would pay $12.
> The ninth would pay $18.
> The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
>
> So, that's what they decided to do.
> The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
> arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you
> are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost
> of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
>
> The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so
> the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
> But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could
> they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair
> share?'
>
> They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted
> that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man
> would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner
> suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly
> the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should
> pay.
>
> And so:
> The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
> The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
> The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
> The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
> The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
> The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
> Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four
> continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men
> began to compare their savings.
>
> "I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He
> pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
> "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar,
> too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
> "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man.
> "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all
> the breaks!"
>
> "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get
> anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
>
> The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
> The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine
> sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the
> bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough
> money between all of them for even half of the bill!
>
> And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is
> how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the
> most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for
> being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they
> might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat
> friendlier.
>
> David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
> Professor of Economics
> University of Georgia

I agree with the professor's point. Actually, it's even worse than his story indicates - I've read where the top 10% of taxpayers pay 75% of all income taxes and the the top 5% pay 50%. Conversely, those at the lower end, who pay virtually no taxes, generally receive, by far, the most government services (AFDC, "earned" income credits, housing assistance, reduced school lunch prices, child tax credits, college expense grants, etc.)

 

[Scout333]

May be even worse than that! See editorial from Wall Street Journal -
"The Wall Street Journal

Editorial

December 17, 2007

Taxes and Income; Page A20



Every Democrat running for President wants to raise taxes on "the rich," but they will have to do something miraculous to outtax President Bush. Based on the latest available tax data, no Administration in modern history has done more to pry tax revenue from the wealthy.

Last week the Congressional Budget Office joined the IRS in releasing tax numbers for 2005, and part of the news is that the richest 1% paid about 39% of all income taxes that year. The richest 5% paid a tad less than 60%, and the richest 10% paid 70%. These tax shares are all up substantially since 1990, and even somewhat since 2000. Meanwhile, Americans with an income below the median -- half of all households -- paid a mere 3% of all income taxes in 2005. The richest 1.3 million tax-filers -- those Americans with adjusted gross incomes of more than $365,000 in 2005 -- paid more income tax than all of the 66 million American tax filers below the median in income. Ten times more."

 

[rokid]

Last week the Congressional Budget Office joined the IRS in releasing tax numbers for 2005, and part of the news is that the richest 1% paid about 39% of all income taxes that year.

In 1998, the richest 1% owned 38% of all U.S. wealth. I doubt they've lost ground.

Under a progressive tax system, they aren't doing their share. Why should I and some billionaire hedge fund manager pay the same federal income tax rate? The hedge fund manager benefits more from societal infrastructure and has more to lose. He/she should pay more taxes - and certainly not less.

http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html

 

[nnuut]

I think many are paying taxes in third world countries by now! There is nothing wrong with making a LOT of money!! Yes I think they should pay more, but don't run them off. I think everyone should pay taxes even the poasses! They will get their $20 tax back in food stamps etc. anyway. Yes, I said that!!!:nuts:

 

[presskh]

In 1998, the richest 1% owned 38% of all U.S. wealth. I doubt they've lost ground.

Under a progressive tax system, they aren't doing their share. Why should I and some billionaire hedge fund manager pay the same federal income tax rate? The hedge fund manager benefits more from societal infrastructure and has more to lose. He/she should pay more taxes - and certainly not less.

http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html

A "progressive" tax system simply means that the rate increases as income increases. The degree of progressivity can vary. It is only your judgement (not mine!) that the wealthy are not paying their "fair" share.

As for the hedge fund manager, they do pay more far more taxes than lower income people. I personally don't believe any system other than a "flat" tax system is inherently fair - someone making 10 times as much money as someone else should pay 10 times (and only 10 times!) more in taxes. The current semi-welfare state in our country goes beyond what the constitution originally intended (providing basic public services) and seeks to perform politically-motivated social engineering (failing, I might add) by taking money from those earning more and redistributing it to those earning less.

 

[nnuut]

Man I'm STRESSED OUT, I need a break. Sorry I can't devote more time to the board, but lots of stuff going on. Maybe after the first of the year, but I'm trying!!

 

[nnuut]

ETAC :suspicious:
View attachment 2845

 

[nnuut]

Yes I'm still around and still 100% "G".
I noticed something on the SPX chart that is worth looking at. Seems that SPX jumped above the 5 day Simple Moving Average, that may be good if we get a follow through tomorrow. Also on the chart the 50 Day Simple Moving Average touched the 200 SMA. This hasn't happened sense July 2006, which was followed by one heck of an Uptrend. I really don't know if that is a viable signal or not but unusual and something to take into consideration. The SloSto is also at what could be the bottom and might start back up. MACD is just starting an UP. I might have to consider taking the plunge tomorrow. Is that a Head and Shoulders forming?
View attachment 2848
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=spx&p=D&yr=0&mn=9&dy=0&id=p55192775979

 

[kar_crazy]

let em hang Norm N G L