Occupy Wall Street heats up

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by newest Sort by date
James48843

James48843

TSP Talk Royalty
Reaction score
569
RealMoneyIssues said:
Is your website down??? or just not enough traffic you have to put this political crap here? Seriously
Click to expand...

Posting this is no different than some of the political sensitive issues that have been posted in the past. There is no reason why we can't debate these issues as long as we stay civil and use common sense.
The point is if no one responds to certain threads they eventually die off and get buried deeper into the forum.
 
RealMoneyIssues said:
Is your website down??? or just not enough traffic you have to put this political crap here? Seriously
Click to expand...

It's news that may affect markets. This is a news thread. The spread of more demonstrations at other sites around the nation- particularly financial centers (added yesterday is Chicago Board of Trade, and San Francisco Market Center) may have a bearing on someone's investment decisions. You never know what news might influence investment decisions.

By the way- speaking of "putting political crap here", at least my signature line doesn't contain quotes from George Orwell, Calvin Coolidge (now there was a slick President), Karl Marx and Margaret Thatcher. :)
 
James48843 said:
Last night, tens of thousands Occupy Wall Street protestors continued their demonstrations in New York. NYPD continued to beat them.

http://www.beltwaytalk.com/showthre...cupy-Wall-Street&p=14275&viewfull=1#post14275

In Chicago, hundreds of demonstrators appear for the first time outside the Chicago Board of Trade building, chanting "We are the 99%". Traders respond.
http://www.beltwaytalk.com/showthre...cupy-Wall-Street&p=14277&viewfull=1#post14277
Click to expand...

I understand the frustration, but I think the protesting in front of the trading facilities is misdirected. Wall Street and the Chicago Board of Trade can't control jobs and what businesses decide to go overseas. Any of the "We are the 99%" can invest in stocks. All it is doing is making headlines and will change nothing.
 
James48843 said:
Some of the "Occupy Wall Street" marchers in San Francisco are advocating a 0.5% Share Transaction Tax on Wall Street traders.

They say that will help reduce the deficit and fund services for people.
http://www.nationalnursesunited.org/pages/financial-transaction-tax
Click to expand...

Are you willing to pay a 0.5% transaction tax when you change your TSP percentages? I don't think I would like that. Let's say you have $250,000.00 in TSP and you move everything to the G fund. That could amount to a $1,250.00 tax, if I understand the tax thing correctly. Now if you move this money around a couple times a year it could get expensive. How would that effect "We are the 99%" group? Just a thought.
 
James48843 said:
By the way- speaking of "putting political crap here", at least my signature line doesn't contain quotes from George Orwell, Calvin Coolidge (now there was a slick President), Karl Marx and Margaret Thatcher. :)
Click to expand...
I am not the owner of BeltwayTalk.com so I was just pointing out that it must be slow over there.

My signature isn't political, it is truth. Prove me wrong and I will happily remove it.

OBTW, this article's market influence is... marginal, but I guess it is an argument for it being here... but only barely

Nasa, most of those political discussions are within individuals threads... I can see that. It just seems that James likes to start threads to get his message out. Sorry if I offended anyone...
 
The slackers that populate these so called protests have been drooling to live out their 60's fantasy of standin against the Man. Now as the Unions join them it all seems just that more staged phony and disingenuous. Which it is.

MAJOR FAIL.
 
James48843 said:
Some of the "Occupy Wall Street" marchers in San Francisco are advocating a 0.5% Share Transaction Tax on Wall Street traders.

They say that will help reduce the deficit and fund services for people, who are too lazy to work and expect everything handed to them on a silver platter.
http://www.nationalnursesunited.org/pages/financial-transaction-tax
Click to expand...

There, I finished that statement for you Jim. You're welcome.

It's pretty arrogant for them to claim that they represent 99% of the people in the nation. I am not in the 1% crowd that they are protesting against and they sure don't represent me. If anything, they represent some of the 15% of people who are unemployed in the country. Hardly a majority I think.
 
nasa1974 said:
Are you willing to pay a 0.5% transaction tax when you change your TSP percentages? I don't think I would like that. Let's say you have $250,000.00 in TSP and you move everything to the G fund. That could amount to a $1,250.00 tax, if I understand the tax thing correctly.
Click to expand...

I don't know- it seems to work pretty well from 1914 until 1966, during which the Federal Government levied a stock transfer tax. A lot of smart finance people say having a transfer tax would greatly reduce volatility.

See:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...&sig=AHIEtbRkV3BiVEV25QDtLWyM-PDz-bZ5uA&pli=1


I can tell you this- the stock market did pretty well in that period of 1914 until 1966, even counting the great depression.
 
nasa1974 said:
Are you willing to pay a 0.5% transaction tax when you change your TSP percentages? I don't think I would like that. Let's say you have $250,000.00 in TSP and you move everything to the G fund. That could amount to a $1,250.00 tax, if I understand the tax thing correctly. Now if you move this money around a couple times a year it could get expensive. How would that effect "We are the 99%" group? Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Convinced me!
 
James48843 said:
I don't know- it seems to work pretty well from 1914 until 1966, during which the Federal Government levied a stock transfer tax. A lot of smart finance people say having a transfer tax would greatly reduce volatility.

See:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...&sig=AHIEtbRkV3BiVEV25QDtLWyM-PDz-bZ5uA&pli=1


I can tell you this- the stock market did pretty well in that period of 1914 until 1966, even counting the great depression.
Click to expand...


Mmmmmm! So it has been done before. OK!! Could you claim it as a deduction?:D
 
NYC had freezing temps last night. It won't be long before they all go home to their moms (no dads). She'll have a nice food stamp dinner waiting for them (Microwaved Twinkies and government peas.
 
James48843 said:
I don't know- it seems to work pretty well from 1914 until 1966, during which the Federal Government levied a stock transfer tax. A lot of smart finance people say having a transfer tax would greatly reduce volatility.

See:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...&sig=AHIEtbRkV3BiVEV25QDtLWyM-PDz-bZ5uA&pli=1


I can tell you this- the stock market did pretty well in that period of 1914 until 1966, even counting the great depression.
Click to expand...

I read yesterday where AFTER FDR confiscated gold, he then devalued the $ 40%. Suppose that had anything to do with the market going up during his tenure?
 
alevin said:
I read yesterday where AFTER FDR confiscated gold, he then devalued the $ 40%. Suppose that had anything to do with the market going up during his tenure?
Click to expand...

From Wiki:
The order was rationalized on the grounds that hard times had caused "hoarding" of gold, stalling economic growth and making the depression worse.[SUP][1][/SUP] The New York Times, on April 6, 1933 p. 16, wrote under the headline "Hoarding of Gold," "The Executive Order issued by the President yesterday amplifies and particularizes his earlier warnings against hoarding. On March 6, taking advantage of a wartime statute that had not been repealed, he forbade the hoarding 'of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency,' under penalty of $10,000 fine or ten years imprisonment or both."[SUP][2]

Pretty interesting read...


[/SUP]
 
I was drawing a parallelt o current market behavior Devaluation of the $ over past 10 years especially has had a very strong inverse correlation-driving market going up. More cheaper $=market goes higher-takes more $ to buy same #shares.

$ goes up in value, market goes down in value.
 
So your saying the WORTH of shares have gone down for the past ten years due to the devaluation? So... the market is actually down and not flat?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top