OBGibby's Account Talk

[WIND_HUNTER]

Income Angst? Not for Public Employees - Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe

".....Since December 2007, when the current downturn began, the ranks of federal employees earning $100,000 and up has skyrocketed. According to a recent analysis by USA Today, federal workers making six-figure salaries - not including overtime and bonuses - “jumped from 14 percent to 19 percent of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months.’’ The surge has been especially pronounced among the highest-paid employees. At the Defense Department, for example, the number of civilian workers making $150,000 or more quintupled from 1,868 to 10,100. At the recession’s start, the Transportation Department was paying only one person a salary of $170,000. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees were drawing paychecks that size....."

Read entire article at http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/e.../01/27/income_angst_not_for_public_employees/

Looks like 'NSPS' worked well...Huh..

 

[OBGibby]

Another sign that the end is near...


The Public-Union Ascendancy

Government union members now outnumber private for the first time.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703837004575013424060649464.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion

 

[OBGibby]

According to my tsp.gov online account, my 'Personal Investment Performance' (PIP) for the twelve months ending January 31, 2010, was up 34.15%.

Previous 12 Months Ending:

May 31, 2009 -27.15%
Jun 30, 2009 -21.34%
Jul 30, 2009 -12.23%
Aug 31, 2009 -8.27%
Sep 30, 2009 +4.27%
Oct 31, 2009 +18.69%
Nov 30, 2009 +31.51%
Dec 30, 2009 +29.86%
Jan 31, 2010 +34.15%

 

[Steadygain]

(PIP) for the twelve months ending January 31, 2010, was up 34.15%.

May 31, 2009 -27.15%
Dec 30, 2009 +29.86%
Jan 31, 2010 +34.15%

Actually that's a bit misleading -- in that you did way Better !!!

In May it is -27.15 %
Now it is....+34.15%

Total = 61.30 %

Either way -- would rate you as Excellent !!!


So your post should say -- hey I've noticed I'm UP 61.30% since May

 

[Birchtree]

Perhaps he has a good word to say for dollar cost averaging into the lows.

 

[mayday]

Perhaps he has a good word to say for dollar cost averaging into the lows.

"Get em while there hot"

"Or get em while nobody wants them"

 

[OBGibby]

Slow and steady...Like BT says, I'm just throwing some clams down the dark hole every other Friday...Looks like I'll be buying cheap tomorrow!!

 

[OBGibby]

JPMorgan’s Lee Says S&P 500 May Top 1,300 by Year-End

.....“Our forecast has the chance of actually being too low,” said Lee, who recommends mining, energy and technology stocks, on Bloomberg Radio. “There’s going to be growing visibility, more evidence of a recovery.”.....

.....“The sell-off is done,” said Lee, who was among Wall Street’s most-accurate forecasters last year. “We got upside to the U.S. economy. You want to buy the groups that got hit the hardest -- the basic materials, energy and technology stocks.”.....

 

[Handballer]

JPMorgan’s Lee Says S&P 500 May Top 1,300 by Year-End

.....“Our forecast has the chance of actually being too low,” said Lee, who recommends mining, energy and technology stocks, on Bloomberg Radio. “There’s going to be growing visibility, more evidence of a recovery.”.....

.....“The sell-off is done,” said Lee, who was among Wall Street’s most-accurate forecasters last year. “We got upside to the U.S. economy. You want to buy the groups that got hit the hardest -- the basic materials, energy and technology stocks.”.....

JPMorgan’s Lee Says S&P 500 May Top 1,300 by Year-End

.....“Our forecast has the chance of actually being too low,” said Lee..."
When/if it tops 1,300 I'll be pleased. I'm :nuts:.

 

[OBGibby]

Finished reading this one over the weekend:

The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World by Niall Ferguson

A decent read. Light on specifics in some cases, over done with technical jargon in others. The author suffered criticism that it was meant more as a television series tie-in than a robust stand alone work. In any case, it offers an entertaining look at the evolution of finance through the ages. The author argues that finance is the foundation of human progress.

 

[OBGibby]

According to my tsp.gov online account, my 'Personal Investment Performance' (PIP) for the twelve months ending February 28, 2010, was up 49.48%.

Previous 12 Months Ending:

May 31, 2009 -27.15%
Jun 30, 2009 -21.34%
Jul 30, 2009 -12.23%
Aug 31, 2009 -8.27%
Sep 30, 2009 +4.27%
Oct 31, 2009 +18.69%
Nov 30, 2009 +31.51%
Dec 30, 2009 +29.86%
Jan 31, 2010 +34.15%
Feb 28, 2010 +49.48%

 

[Elgallo]

My pip is 56.31 as of the same date

BTW I have been 100% in the CSI game way before March 09. And I amped up my buying at that time.

I'm 62 and qualified for FERS retirement NOW.

I don't see myself ever being out of the market even in retirement. So my risk taking "so close to retirement" is understandable from my perspective.

 

[OBGibby]

My pip is 56.31 as of the same date

BTW I have been 100% in the CSI game way before March 09. And I amped up my buying at that time.

I'm 62 and qualified for FERS retirement NOW.

I don't see myself ever being out of the market even in retirement. So my risk taking "so close to retirement" is understandable from my perspective.

Nice PIP, Elgallo! I'm of like-mind, I doubt I'll be out of the market at any time, even in my retirement...

 

[OBGibby]

This if from a little over a year ago, but still applicable today...


The Public Mischief Of Public Unions
Richard A. Epstein, 03.03.09, 12:00 AM ET
Forbes.com


....inability of the federal and state governments to live within their means.....

.....rich labor contracts routinely extended to public employees as an ostensible quid pro quo for their giving up the right to strike. But the collective bargaining negotiations mandated under state law are always an unfair match. The state, county and local government officials don't face the certain wrath of shareholders. Rather, they operate in uncertain political waters that allow them to escape voter wrath by granting public employees highly favorable, but less visible, pension packages that become payable only down the road.....

.....Often massive overtime payments in the last three years can fatten the pension base. Worse still, these multiples can easily be increased by legislation that provide windfalls to retired workers (who get the benefits right away) under the guise of improving recruitment of new workers who will only get these benefits down the road. Much of the current $40 billion California budget shortfall comes from these dubious pension programs.....

.....State collective bargaining agreements give unions monopoly power; state legislative maneuvers, often backed by pro-union legislators, sweeten the deals already made. These pension deals are never negotiated at arm's length in competitive markets between parties who are free to go elsewhere. Instead, a monopoly union extracts its compensation packages from government officials, many of whom depend on union support to hold public office. These contracts are the kind of self-dealing arrangements that would never be tolerated between a corporation and its key officials. And the subsequent sweeteners simply take property from the majority of citizens who can neither block the transaction nor withhold their tax dollars.....


.....no mechanism in place that allows frustrated citizens to challenge the validity of these agreements either before or after they are put into effect.....

.....we need to enforce a blanket prohibition against unearned increases in pensions or wages to public employees for completed work. In addition, new union agreements should be subject to a mechanism that allows any citizens to challenge them in court as giveaways to union workers before they go into effect--say within 60 days of signing. And we have to insist that government officials negotiate contracts that permit them to reduce employment levels in the face of diminished revenues.....


Richard A. Epstein is the James Parker Hall Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago; the Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow, The Hoover Institution; and a visiting law professor at New York University Law School. His latest book is The Case Against the Employee Free Choice Act, to be published shortly by the Hoover Institution. He writes a weekly column for Forbes.com.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/01/pe...ent-opinions-columnists_california_print.html

 

[OBGibby]

From Greg Mankiw:


The Problem with Deficit Neutrality


Imagine you have a friend who has a budget problem. Every month he spends more than he earns. His credit card bills are piling up. He is clearly on an unsustainable path. Then one day he comes to you with an idea.

Friend: I am going to take off a few days from work and fly down to Bermuda for a quick vacation.

You: But isn't that expensive? Won't that just add to your growing debts?

Friend: Yes, it is expensive. But my plan is deficit-neutral. I have decided to give up that half-caf, extra-shot caramel macchiato I order at Starbucks twice every day. I really don't need that expensive drink. And if I give it up for the next three years, it will pay for my Bermuda trip.

You: Well, then, how are you going to solve the problem of your growing debts?

Friend: I am going to figure that out as soon as I return from Bermuda.

You: But in light of your budget problem, maybe you should give up Starbucks and skip the Bermuda vacation. Giving up Starbucks could be the easiest way to start balancing your budget.

Friend: You really aren't any fun, are you?​

This conversation is meant to illustrate why claims of deficit-neutrality in the healthcare reform bill should not give much comfort to those worried about the U.S. fiscal situation. Even if you believe that the spending cuts and tax increases in the bill make it deficit-neutral, the legislation will still make solving the problem of the fiscal imbalance harder, because it will use up some of the easier ways to close the shortfall. The remaining options will be less attractive, making the eventual fiscal adjustment more painful.

 

[OBGibby]

The health care industry basically ranks around 80th in terms of profitability by industry...

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/health-insurance-industry-ranks-86-by.html

 

[Frixxxx]

Look at #3.

Then at #7 & #14

Sickening that #6 (Cigarettes) is still profitable....


(Reformed smoker here)

 

[Elgallo]

From Greg Mankiw:


The Problem with Deficit Neutrality


Imagine you have a friend who has a budget problem. Every month he spends more than he earns. His credit card bills are piling up. He is clearly on an unsustainable path. Then one day he comes to you with an idea.

Friend: I am going to take off a few days from work and fly down to Bermuda for a quick vacation.

You: But isn't that expensive? Won't that just add to your growing debts?

Friend: Yes, it is expensive. But my plan is deficit-neutral. I have decided to give up that half-caf, extra-shot caramel macchiato I order at Starbucks twice every day. I really don't need that expensive drink. And if I give it up for the next three years, it will pay for my Bermuda trip.

You: Well, then, how are you going to solve the problem of your growing debts?

Friend: I am going to figure that out as soon as I return from Bermuda.

You: But in light of your budget problem, maybe you should give up Starbucks and skip the Bermuda vacation. Giving up Starbucks could be the easiest way to start balancing your budget.

Friend: You really aren't any fun, are you?​

This conversation is meant to illustrate why claims of deficit-neutrality in the healthcare reform bill should not give much comfort to those worried about the U.S. fiscal situation. Even if you believe that the spending cuts and tax increases in the bill make it deficit-neutral, the legislation will still make solving the problem of the fiscal imbalance harder, because it will use up some of the easier ways to close the shortfall. The remaining options will be less attractive, making the eventual fiscal adjustment more painful.

Normally when one finds themselves in a hole most normal folks would begin practicing the first rule of removing themselves from same, and that is, drum roll please, STOP DIGGING!

 

[Frixxxx]

Normally when one finds themselves in a hole most normal folks would begin practicing the first rule of removing themselves from same, and that is, drum roll please, STOP DIGGING!

+1

 

[OBGibby]

"Last year, the House was passing bills without reading them. This year, they're passing bills without voting on them." --former House Speaker Newt Gingrich