NSurf9 Account Talk

[nsurf9]

Old Ben says the party's still on - he says he's still got more QE beer in the keg and another order is on the way. Only problem is, the beer has been watered down at stategic intervals and Ben doesn't have real money to pay for the beer transportation order when it arrives.

Us Freshmen really don't know the difference between watered down beer and light beer anyway- all we know is we're getting that same big glass for the same price and the night still seems young.

But Mr. Inflation knows and he's well aware that, that dollar bill you've paid Ben is only worth 50 percent as it was in 1980.

Ben can fool the freshmen, but he can't fool Mr. Inflation 'cause he knows the taste of watered down money and that Ben can't pay the beer transport deliverman much longer - especially if beerman asks for his payment in gold.


Minyanville > Business News > Markets Dow Theory Gives Warning; Can the Fed 'Print Over' It?
Dow Theory Gives Warning; Can The Fed 'Print Over' It? | Markets | Minyanville's Wall Street

Market Shadows Life vs. Stock Market Dow Theory Divergences
Dow Theory Divergences - Market Shadows

SeekingAlpha Bearish Divergence: Has Dow Theory Failed? September 25, 2012
http://seekingalpha.com/article/886551-bearish-divergence-has-dow-theory-failed

 

[nsurf9]

Marty, thanks for re-labeling my TSP aka, I thought nsurf9 was under a "hidden" label, but wasn't sure. Thanks for the fix.

PS: I really don't like those "hidden" labels. I did't realize I hadn't move in 90 days - or my name might be re-labeled "hidden" after 90 days of AutoTracker inactivity. I thought the activity measure included posts to the forum. I do recall that the "hidden"s did include members subscribing to the "premium" services.

Frankly, I pay a lot more attention to the Sentiment Survey than what the "Premiums" might advise - please don't let them hide it. The "premiums records aren't all that stellar, and I don't believe most people take their final cue in making their IFTs. TSP Fantasy doesn't use them. If some people want to pay and have the benefit of them - that's ok, but the decisions of the members of TSP Talk AutoTracker participants ought not be "hidden." That's why I'll never subscribe . . . and precisely why I do post my IFTs under nsurf9 - we all get the benefit of each other - inspite of being limited to only 2 equity IFTs per month.

 

[nsurf9]

Frothy little bubbles appear to be beginning to "plink" - I'm looking for a bottom in the INDEXSP:.INX 1335-1367 area - unless the masses catch wind that "objects in rear-view mirror [really aren't] larger than appear" and US dollar demoniated corporate assests and income are being inflated by monitary policy and erroded by true inflation.



Duly Noted: Ok, "Hidden" on the AutoTracker, does not include TSPTalk members with "Premium" subscriptions.

 

[nsurf9]

Good read from Briefing.com Page One on "where are we now." No Answers . . . but a good read.

Election Is Over, but the Politics Continue

I'm still looking for a technical INX 1335-1367 bottom - I may jump in sooner, almost did this 11/7/12 afternoon.

 

[nsurf9]

Had my finger on the IFT-click trigger only to watch the high noon second gently tick past.

The markets haven't liked Fridays for quite a while anyway, and my wild guess is that the newly (re)elected politicians haven't had enough time to settle the champagne bubbles from celebration, much less their party's concensus on an acceptable path around the "fiscal cliff." Heck, with the Christmas Break, they've ve got, what - at least whole two weeks, from today.

Considering their polarization, they'll likely "do nothing" (as usual) - until everybody is screeming "look you can the whites of Thelma and Louise's eyes - and their mouths are wide open."

On Friday, I'll be looking for political statments that "yes, we've seen the movie, but we note that we really didn't see the car and girls' crash and hit the bottom."

They, by Wed . . . maybe next Friday (with the champagne fully settled), look for an admission that the girls and the T-Bird probally didn't make it.

 

[Birchtree]

Bring on the recession and more food stamps - it won't impact the already existing welfare crowd. We can borrow more money from China to support the next batch of unemployed Hispanics. Elections do have consequences.

 

[sniper]

helicopter ben will save us all with QE5000

 

[nsurf9]

I'm still looking for a technical INX 1335-1367 bottom - I may jump in sooner, almost did this 11/7/12 afternoon.

Pulled the trigger a little earlier than I may have wanted (Wizard of Ozz bought in yesterday, so I thought I might be missing something). INX did break into the trough (below 1367) and cleaned out the 1/2 point frouth at the end of the day.

Take away the US cliff and the Euro rott, and the US economy is looking pretty good, unfortunately, I'm afraid that the Democrats and Republicans will continue the market beatings, until moral improves.

It wouldn't be the first time that I stuck my little toe in - only to lose my whole assumption.

Oh, yeah - did you hear that (34) US states (the red ones) want succession from the Union - again!

 

[sniper]

Oh, yeah - did you hear that (34) US states (the red ones) want succession from the Union - again!

Let them, the red states are the highest % of people on welfare. they vote for people getting zero help from the government, just give em what they want

 

[nsurf9]

Nice read from Briefing.com's Page One.

The indexes seem to be firmly hooked to what appears to be the best alternative and bumper of Congress and the Whitehouse's resolve on solving the fiscal cliff delima - they know they got to "get her done" - so does the market. In a nutshell - the indexes seem to be at neutral - waiting, listening - everyone knows no body wants to "fall off the cliff" and the market will get on with getting on - once it knows whatever the rules are.

Thus far, from the point of most recent trough just after the election results, there has been only a very minimal amount of volitility slack in the tow cable. Clearly the only sensible direction is surely that they both get off their high horses - - if not walk together.

My count is about 13 business days to solve it - throw in a weekend sweat session and call it 15, tops. Quoting one talking head, "you will want to be in stocks, if there is an agreement" - and that includes, even if it is articulated "only in principle." Republicans are already dropping their pledges of "no new taxes." And, democrates will soon follow suit and give up the "can't touch that" entitlements stuff, once its apparent both could go to hell-avannia with all their arguments in a hand basket pretty darn soon.

I just hope they don't misguess where the edge of the cliff is before they stop and look down.


Looking Flat Despite Positive Headlines

 

[nnuut]

Nice read from Briefing.com's Page One.

The indexes seem to be firmly hooked to what appears to be the best alternative and bumper of Congress and the Whitehouse's resolve on solving the fiscal cliff delima - they know they got to "get her done" - so does the market. There has been only a very minimal volitility slack in the tow cable. But, the only sensible direction is surely they both get off their high horses, if not walk together.

My count is about 13 business days to solve it - throw in a weekend sweat session and call it 15, tops. Quoting one talking head, "you will want to be in stocks, if there is an agreement is articulated in principle. And, more likely when one is articulated at least in principle.

I just hope they don't misguess where the edge of the cliff is before they stop and look down.


Looking Flat Despite Positive Headlines

Stock Market & Financial Investment News: Educated Investors Get Live Stock Market News Feeds & Alerts at The Fly On the Wall

 

[nsurf9]

Fellow "cawdrey" TSPer's, and you know who your are.

Yesterday I spoke with a member of Representative Stephen Lynch's (D-Mass) office, Bruce Fernandez (Lynch's man on TSP) and stated that I believe I could help Congressman's Lynch's effort to get a winning vote with the two dissenting union members and convince TSP Executive Director, Gregory Long, to open the option window of 1986 Federal Employees Retirement Act. He invited me to send what I had.

The reason for engaging Congressman Lynch's office is that he is ranking member of the House Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, U.S. Postal Service - Labor Policy and could submit the langage to change the 1986 FERS Act lanugage on its option window from "a mutal fund", if the TSP Counsel accepts, to something to the effect of "a mutual fund or other retirement equivalent investments."

The plan is to, initially, open the window to the very same funds TSP members should already be very familiar - but without 12-noon deadlines and without IFT restrictions, at roughly $5 a trade thru participating brokerages, most likely in form of Exchange Traded Fund equivlants to the main TSP funds. Perhaps with a ROTH version of the same, and well.

This will literally take a House Bill and vote. Fortunately, they already want it. I'm just going to show them the light.

Information on House Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, U.S. Postal Service and Labor Policy

 

[CrabClaw]

Thats great! glad to see you are taking up the fight again

 

[nnuut]

Never give up, I like that, Still fighting the good fight like a snapping turtle!

 

[MrBowl]

I like the idea of unlimited IFTs. Maybe it should be something like "first 2 per month are free, then it's $10 each". I also hope they will do transactions as close to instantaneously as possible. The 4 hour lag time is punitive and adds an element of instability to trading that should never be involved. It serves no purpose other than being a deterrent to trading. It has cost me plenty in the past.

BTW, fantastic job on winning the month. You made all the right moves.

 

[sniper]

Fellow "cawdrey" TSPer's, and you know who your are.

Yesterday I spoke with a member of Representative Stephen Lynch's (D-Mass) office, Bruce Fernandez (Lynch's man on TSP) and stated that I believe I could help Congressman's Lynch's effort to get a winning vote with the two dissenting union members and convince TSP Executive Director, Gregory Long, to open the option window of 1986 Federal Employees Retirement Act. He invited me to send what I had.

The reason for engaging Congressman Lynch's office is that he is ranking member of the House Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, U.S. Postal Service - Labor Policy and could submit the langage to change the 1986 FERS Act lanugage on its option window from "a mutal fund", if the TSP Counsel accepts, to something to the effect of "a mutual fund or other retirement equivalent investments."

The plan is to, initially, open the window to the very same funds TSP members should already be very familiar - but without 12-noon deadlines and without IFT restrictions, at roughly $5 a trade thru participating brokerages, most likely in form of Exchange Traded Fund equivlants to the main TSP funds. Perhaps with a ROTH version of the same, and well.

This will literally take a House Bill and vote. Fortunately, they already want it. I'm just going to show them the light.

Information on House Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, U.S. Postal Service and Labor Policy

awesome news! i only hope this can happen, will the mechanism still be the same or will you be able to set stop loss / buy limit orders, etc?

I'm all for that and taking the transaction fees, hell, it would probably be profitable for blackrock as well.

 

[twodaystocks]

awesome news! i only hope this can happen, will the mechanism still be the same or will you be able to set stop loss / buy limit orders, etc?

I'm all for that and taking the transaction fees, hell, it would probably be profitable for blackrock as well.

I cant think of ANY downside if this were to happen. Now, if they would only open an inverse fund as well, I would be the happiest TSP participant on earth.

 

[nsurf9]

I cant think of ANY downside if this were to happen. Now, if they would only open an inverse fund as well, I would be the happiest TSP participant on earth.

If you have read what I am about to try and do and like it - for now - just indicate a LIKE on this thread - it started with 31.

Inverse investments, Roth and a whole host of other investment alternatives open-up with a small change of the narrow, antiquated language of the 1986 FERS Act - so long as it can be considered a "retirement risk compatible" investment.

I don't know why Congress so narrowly crafted the Act's language, but so long as it stands, any investment in anything other than a mutual fund based investment with its prohibitive restrictions and costs will likely be held ultra-vires and outside the TSP counsel's power to approve. Inasmuch as the window to a mutual fund doesn't help anything, I don't know why the TSP Counsel even voted for the window option - but I'm glad they did - it made me understand that they are already on our side on this issue.

Congress, in its collective wisdow, inserted the window I believe to allow for future expansion of the TSP retirement system.

A simple change to Act's lanugage; ensure investment are retirement compatible; mimimize brokerage hounding of individual TSP members - and, I believe the next vote would successfully open the window to a tremendously improved TSP retirement fund to all federal employees who can enjoy and directly benefit - if they want it. And, as a bounus, the remaing main partcipants will get the proactive element out of their investment and enjoy even further reductions in their administrative and brokerage costs.

I'm not quite sure how, but I will most likely need eveyones' help on this. You, your collegues - everybody you know that has money in TSP.

Foutunately, Congress already provide the window. Congressman Lynch and other members of the oversight committee have stated they want option window to to be revisted and again put to a vote as an indication that they too want it. And key TSP players, including Executive Director Long and ETAC Chairperson Clifford Dailing likely voted (twic) for opening the window option.

This time, we will be pushing with the system that apparently wants to help us, instead of against them - for an alternative works.

NSurf9

 

[burrocrat]

freedom!

YouTube

 

[MrBowl]

I would like to see a NASDAQ fund, or tech-type fund, as well as commodities and/or precious metals. Is that getting to specific?

The only thing I don't like about the inverse funds is that its much easier to lose money on them. Your best chance to do well is in very short spurts, and you must really know what's going on, and be correct about it. That's because over the long run the markets move up and less time is spent losing value than gaining value. I say this because I've lost a few hundred $$ in the SDS before and I probably wouldn't use an inverse fund if one is offered. Instead, if I'm confident in a market tumble I'll use the F fund, hoping that the demand for bonds increases.