Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
>> ruled by emotions <<
Yes, guilty there for sure (unfortunately)
>> politics and nutcase newsletter writers <<
Not ruled by these, but I like to examine all sides and hopefully find some balance somewhere in between. Rickards is clearly not a nutcase, though like other perma-bear types he makes a good living from pushing the bearish side. With the book sales, newsletters, etc, these guys have their reputations and incomes riding on the dark narrative, so that has to be taken into account. I figure when it comes to info, best to have all sides :o)
---
GFP: jUST using DOG for now. Just one buy so far. Watching and waiting. I will wait to see what happens after The Swamp kicks the can again. We might rally for a day or two afterward. Then I'll get more aggressive by adding SH to short the S&P. It has been holding up due in large measure to the tech high flyers. Once I am more sure the Bear is coming out of hibernation I will add PSQ to short the Nasdaq. All single leverage. Now if circumstances warrant it I am not going to avoid the leverages SHORT funds. For 2X exposure there is DXD for the Dow, SDS for the S&P and QID for the Naz. If I think the downside is gaining momentum like a avalanche is possible I would add 3X ETFs (for a short duration)...the SDOW, SPXU and SQQQ. We are way overdue for the next leg of this secular Bear market. I could put forth the 100 reasons why it looks like a Bear is coming. But I don't have the time. I'm amassing data on C Dif cases which is very time consuming. Needless to say that while the market's upward bias is usually in play, there are time when valuations get so out of whack and macro conditions are deteriorating rapidly...that a serious Bear market comes about. A generational Bear market. A 1929-1932 type Bear Market. The kind that occur in 4th Turnings if you are familiar with Strauss and Howe.
GFP: jUST using DOG for now. Just one buy so far. Watching and waiting. I will wait to see what happens after The Swamp kicks the can again. We might rally for a day or two afterward. Then I'll get more aggressive by adding SH to short the S&P. It has been holding up due in large measure to the tech high flyers. Once I am more sure the Bear is coming out of hibernation I will add PSQ to short the Nasdaq. All single leverage. Now if circumstances warrant it I am not going to avoid the leverages SHORT funds. For 2X exposure there is DXD for the Dow, SDS for the S&P and QID for the Naz. If I think the downside is gaining momentum like a avalanche is possible I would add 3X ETFs (for a short duration)...the SDOW, SPXU and SQQQ. We are way overdue for the next leg of this secular Bear market. I could put forth the 100 reasons why it looks like a Bear is coming. But I don't have the time. I'm amassing data on C Dif cases which is very time consuming. Needless to say that while the market's upward bias is usually in play, there are time when valuations get so out of whack and macro conditions are deteriorating rapidly...that a serious Bear market comes about. A generational Bear market. A 1929-1932 type Bear Market. The kind that occur in 4th Turnings if you are familiar with Strauss and Howe.
>> LAND, DBA, and IAUX <<
But there's a risk in having too much in commodities, so 'Moderation in all things' :o)
>>> Commodity Crash Signals Disinflation Is Taking Hold for Now Cost of everything from metals to crops has plunged this year
Economists see inflation slowing, but warn some prices sticky
Cost of everything from metals to crops has plunged this year
Bloomberg
By Carolynn Look and Enda Curran
May 31, 2023
From copper to wheat to natural gas, the cost of some of the world’s most important products is crashing, bringing long-awaited relief for consumers that were stung by last year’s soaring prices.
The commodity crunch unleashed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has taken a sharp reversal, with a Bloomberg gauge dropping more than 10% since the start of the year to the lowest since 2021. Driving the disinflationary trend are a world economy flirting with recession, Europe’s industrial slump and China’s weaker-than-expected emergence from Covid Zero policies.
HRC is down $130 today to the $800 range. That's insane and a overreaction.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-31/commodity-crash-signals-disinflation-is-taking-hold-for-now?srnd=premium&sref=XLA0GJqR
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172026251
<<<
---
I'm a huge fan of paper trading. Have about 30 portfolios running currently on Finviz. All the fad stock portfolios -- such as EVs, MJ, cruise lines, crypto miners -- are lagging terribly. MJ may be the worst.
About the first stock advice I got when I started out decades ago in college was from a book that suggested paper trading for at least 6 months before using real money. Great advice! Today every Robinhood newbie would just dive right in with the most popular fad or meme stocks his pimply pals were into.
GFP actually knows a lot about investing. He's clearly been exposed to some of the best teachers. Too bad he's ruled by emotions and politics and nutcase newsletter writers.
---
Yes, take loses quickly especially when they can cut your taxes, and don't average down on falling stocks.
I didn't know any inverse Dow ETFs existed. Very near the bottom of the Great Recession, around 2008, my kids had some significant money to invest. Things looked grim and probably really were from what many economists now say. I bought both sons some DIA which may still be the only true Dow ETF. Later I added more of an S&P 500 index fund which has outperformed the Dow. Around 2010, I wanted to add some "frosting" to the kids portfolio so I added some QQQ. Wish I had bought QQQ for myself.
Bigworld, >> inverse DOW ETF <<
The Dow is not overbought right now (RSI only 40), neither is the S+P 500 (RSI is 54). The Nasdaq looks near term overextended, though the RSI has come down a little from its overbought level of 71 down to 67. While RSI is only one measure, the traditional time to consider a short scalp trade is when the RSI is in nose bleed territory (70 or higher) and the move is running out of gas.
That would be for quick scalp trades, but for shorting as an intermediate trade, a lot of other macro factors come into play (debt ceiling outcome, June Fed meeting, economic numbers, etc). An even longer term short would involve numerous other factors. Lot of unknowns and guesswork, which is why shorting into an ongoing decline is a lot safer / predictable. To get the best odds, the 'rules' say to only short during an established downtrend. In a downtrend you sell / short the rallies. The current stock market is not in a downtrend (possible exception is the DJIA).
These are just 'the rules' though, and I've never attempted shorting with real money. I think it takes a lot practice, and even then very few can do it successfully. Just sayin' ..
---
Bigworld, Hopefully you aren't using 2X, 3X. Better to test things out with 1X to see if the strategy is working. No sense jumping into the deep end before you are sure you can swim :o) Also use small amounts of $ first to 'test the waters'. Just sayin'..
Don't end up like this guy -
Or this, yikes -
---
Bigworld, Don't forget that you were also trying to go short during the bull market's run-up years. Trying to guess a top ahead of time is very difficult, better to just wait for the downturn to begin and then hop in on the short side for a scalp trade. I think that's how the pros generally do it.
Being short also goes against the stock market's relentless long term uptrend that spans many decades (and centuries), so shorting can't realistically be a long term strategy. There is also the risk of wanting to be short in order to spite / get even with those 'damn politicians', etc. But the motivation needs to be devoid of these emotions, and be based solely on making a profit from the short strategy.
But whatever works. You'll find out soon enough if you have the knack for it (shorting). Doing some paper trades first to practice would seem like a good idea. Another aspect of trading is to not be overly stubborn since traders often have to cut losses quickly when a trade goes the wrong way. The tendency is to stubbornly hang on to a losing position, then double down to get even, etc, which only compounds the loss.
Anyway, GL with it, but be careful :o)
---
gfp: They are meant to be an intermediate trade. I added the sort DOW ETF to start. I will follow with more of that and some of the short S&P ETF. And later I will short the QQQs with an ETF. My spider sense tells me, based on history, that this has been a false breakout to the upside based on FOMO sentiment on 7-10 stocks that are way out over their skis. I will post the latest McAlvany Weekly Commentary. Always insightful.
bar: I bought an inverse DOW ETF to start. I will add more as things develop. Later I will add a short ETF on the S&P. And after that I will add a short on the QQQs. I save them for last because the Nasdaq has been the highest flyer by far. No political point. I see signs of a market topping out. Breadth is horrible. Trading volumes do no confirm a breakout. Headwinds abound. The Fed is going to hike again in June most likely. As soon as the Swamp can pass the kick the can down the road debt ceiling deal we will have one more push higher. And when that fades I will get more aggressive on the short side. The Market is like a blackjack table if you count cards. You know your relative chances are improving as more face cards are left in the shoe. But you can still continue to lose hands. But the farther you go with the odds increasing in your favor the higher the bets that you place. That's where we are now in my opinion. And I'm only using my non-core portion of my funds to short. I still have 90% of my net worth in my house and in inflation hedging stocks and ETFs in mining and energy.
>>> A default wave is building, says Deutsche Bank. Here’s how bad it may get.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-default-wave-is-building-says-deutsche-bank-heres-how-bad-it-may-get-efe4a4d5
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172022482
Deutsche Bank strategists Jim Reid and Steve Caprio just wrote the bank’s annual default study, now in its 25th year. Last year’s, correctly, called for the end of the ultra-low default era, though the current numbers are certainly not terrible. The U.S. high-yield bond default rate through April rose to 2.1% from 1.1%, and U.S. loan default rates rose to 3.1% from 1.4%. Over in Europe, speculative-grade default rates rose to 2.7% from 1.7%. According to Fitch, the average U.S. high-yield default rate is 3.6%.
But, the Deutsche Bank team say, “a default wave is imminent.” By the fourth quarter of 2024, they say the U.S. high-yield default rate will peak at 9%, and the U.S. loan default rate will reach 11.3%. The European speculative-default rate will rise too, though to a less steep 5.8%.
Why? “The tightest Fed and [European Central Bank] policy in 15 years is running into elevated corporate leverage built upon stretched profit margins. This is especially true in the leveraged loan market, where LBO leverage was juiced higher year after year (after year) by zero rates and central bank QE,” they say. LBO means leveraged buyouts, performed by the $5 trillion or so private-equity industry.
And don’t expect the Fed to run the rescue either, as the central bank continues to fight inflation. (Unmentioned by the analysts, but the debt-ceiling deal effectively kills any potential for U.S. fiscal support through the next election, barring an unusually nasty recession.)
Granted, Deutsche Bank is far from the only outfit calling for a recession. Isn’t a downturn, and ensuing defaults, built into prices? Maybe not. The Deutsche Bank strategists say investors might not be ready, given that high-yield bond index quality has improved this cycle, and global loan default rates have been tame for the past 15 years.
They quantify this by looking at the percentage of speculative-grade markets trading at distressed levels. Historically, distressed ratios lead default cycles by about 12 to 16 months. Regressing defaults by distressed ratios, they find the current U.S. high-yield market implying a 3.6% rate of defaults in the third quarter of next year, and European high-yield bonds projecting just over 2.2%.
<<<
---
Bar, Not Berkshire itself, but I did own ~25 of Berkshire's stock holdings, albeit small positions (link below). But the day is approaching when Buffett and Munger will no longer be there, and they have been the big attraction. New management may keep most of the existing holdings, but it won't be Buffett-Munger deciding on the new investments, trimming back older investments, etc. With the gurus gone, there may be a sizeable exodus of investors.
I'm not sure about potential tax implications, especially if they decide to start breaking up the conglomerate structure, but that could be another consideration for investors.
The other thing with Berkshire is that it's gotten so huge, they are forced to buy extremely large companies, like AAPL and OXY, and Buffett's spectacular stock picking ability could likely produce better results with smaller companies. But that said, they've still done great in recent years thanks to the huge Apple position. They also have the big advantage of the insurance side providing a lot of cash to invest due to the insurance 'float' phenomenon. Buffett-Munger set up a great system, and listening to their recent annual shareholder's meeting, they remain very sharp mentally. So no big rush for investors to bail on Berkshire, but I figure the S+P 500 will be a good main vehicle for the stock allocation, and Buffett himself recommends it.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/Long-Term-Stocks-36147
---
$SYTA Looks interesting this morning. Revenues for the 3-month period ending March 31st, 2023 are up 116% from the same time period last year (3-month period ending March 31st, 2022). Not to mention the company has zero debt. Fundamentally sound, could be a good play down the line
https://www.benzinga.com/pressreleases/23/05/ab32642337/siyata-mobile-inc-nasdaq-syta-returns-to-growth-with-first-quarter-revenue-more-than-doubling-com
Have you ever owned BRK? Thought about buying it?
LOL, looks like JAMES RICKARDS saw my LAND, DBA, and IAUX post yesterday?
DBA down pre market, food futures down pre market>>>
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx
Rickards - >>> Red Alert!
>>> The winners in this scenario are gold, silver, land, energy, agriculture and U.S. Treasury notes. The losers are stocks, corporate bonds, and commercial real estate. <<<
>>> Red Alert!
BY JAMES RICKARDS
MAY 22, 2023
https://dailyreckoning.com/red-alert/
Hurricanes are a threat if you live in certain areas. Yet, hurricanes are reliably confined to a hurricane season that runs from June to November in the Northern Hemisphere.
Likewise, wildfires are a threat, but they’re usually confined to periods when dry conditions and high winds combine to make forests predictably combustible.
Put differently, the exact timing of some catastrophes may be unpredictable but they’re usually associated with certain seasons and conditions.
Right now, we’re in the heart of banking crisis season. Even worse, we could be on the brink of a financial crisis worse than 2008.
A global financial crisis is as big a threat to your net worth and well-being as any hurricane or wildfire. Here are some of the warning signs and factors investors and savers need to consider…
Tremors in Crypto-Land
Investors looked at the failure of Silicon Valley Bank on March 10 as the start of a new banking crisis. But a closer look reveals the crisis may have begun over a year earlier in November 2021. That’s when Bitcoin started an epic meltdown.
The price of Bitcoin fell 77.5% from November 2021 to November 2022, from roughly $69,000 per coin to $15,000 per coin.
You might say, “So, what?” if you don’t own any Bitcoin. The problem is that financial systems are densely connected even if the problems arise in crypto-land. One major failure leads to another until the wolf is at the door.
The Bitcoin collapse led to a series of related crashes.
In May 2022, the so-called stablecoin TerraUSD and the related Luna coin lost $40 billion in value. In June 2022, the crypto-exchange Celsius froze all account withdrawals. In June 2022, a crypto hedge fund called Three Arrows was ordered to liquidate. In July 2022, another crypto exchange named Voyager faced a run on the bank and filed for bankruptcy.
In November 2022, came the biggest crypto meltdown of all. FTX filed for bankruptcy. It may be the largest fraud in history. Liquidators and auditors are still sorting out the web of lies and fraudulent account transfers. At least $5 billion is missing and the final total may be much more.
The crypto meltdown continues to this day. A crypto-exchange named Genesis filed for bankruptcy as recently as January 2023. In March, another crypto stablecoin called USDC fell in value well below $1.00 per coin. That’s a disaster because the whole idea of a stablecoin is that the value of $1.00 per coin is maintained at all times.
Crypto Contagion Spreads to Mainstream Banking System
Finally, the virus of financial contagion jumped from the crypto world to the world of mainstream banking.
The carrier was Silvergate Bank, which announced its insolvency on March 9.
Silvergate is a regulated bank, FDIC insured, and a member of the Federal Reserve System. It is also a crypto-bank that made loans against crypto-currencies and offered to buy or sell crypto-currencies for dollars.
Now the liquidity virus was infecting the U.S. banking system. From there, the dominos continued to fall. Here’s a brief chronology of the mainstream banking failures since early March:
March 9: Silvergate Bank announces insolvency, shuts-down.
March 10: Silicon Valley Bank put in receivership by FDIC.
March 12: Signature Bank placed in receivership by FDIC.
March 19: UBS takes over Credit Suisse in a shotgun wedding.
May 1: First Republic placed in receivership by FDIC.
The Current Incoherence of Fed Policy
In response to this cascade of failures, regulators took extraordinary and unprecedented actions. The Federal Reserve opened a facility that makes loans against U.S. Treasury securities delivered by member banks as collateral. What’s unusual is that the loans are equal to 100% of the par value of the securities even if the market value is only 80% of the par value. The Fed is lending more than the securities are worth.
This facility could result in a trillion dollars or more of newly printed money to make the loans. This money printing spree comes at a time when the Fed claims to be reducing the money supply as part of its inflation-fighting. So, the Fed is tightening and easing at the same time.
That’s the kind of public policy incoherence that results from free-form intervention in the markets.
The FDIC is offering potentially to guarantee every deposit in the banking system without regard to the statutory limit of $250,000 per deposit. They justify this using a “systemic risk” exception to the insurance limit.
But systemic risk is undefined and every bank in the system poses a potential systemic risk if a run on the bank creates panic leading to contagion and runs on other banks.
The FDIC insurance fund is also running low because of the $40 billion or more of claims paid out due to the failures to date. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has destroyed confidence in the FDIC system by blurring the limits on insurance offered and depleting the insurance fund. Again, heavy-handed intervention has its costs in terms of uncertainty and lost confidence.
Lag Time for Crisis
It’s also critical for everyday Americans to realize that there are long lags between the time a crisis actually begins and the time it reaches an acute stage that comes to everyone’s attention.
For example, the 2008 global financial crisis hit an acute stage on September 15, 2008 when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy. But it began 18 months earlier in the spring of 2007 when HSBC warned about losses on subprime mortgages.
The Russia-LTCM crisis reached an acute stage in September 1998, but it began 15 months earlier in June 1997 when Thailand devalued its currency against the dollar.
In six major financial crises between 1974 and 2010, the average time between the origin of the crisis and the acute stage was 13.5 months, and the shortest time was 6 months. If we use those benchmarks and date the crisis from March 2023, it could become acute by this September.
If we use the 13.5-month average and date the crisis from November 2021 (Bitcoin crash), then we’re already past due.
Under any historic method, a major crisis is imminent.
The System Is Blinking Red
There are always warning signs of a crisis, which are mostly ignored. The warning signs today include a dollar shortage, high-quality collateral shortages to support derivatives (made worse by the debt ceiling, which prevents net new issuance of Treasury bills), inverted Treasury yield curves, negative swap spreads, auctioned Treasury bills yielding less than the Fed overnight reverse repo facility and the flight of cash from banks to Treasury bills and money market funds.
Admittedly these indicators are highly technical and I’m not going to get into them here. Still, they are publicly available and the extreme conditions they show were last seen just ahead of the 2008 meltdown. The watchlist of banks waiting to fail includes PacWest, Western Alliance, First Horizon, Comerica, and KeyCorp.
In short, the system is blinking red.
The bottom line is that we are facing a severe recession, a financial crisis worse than 2008, de-dollarization, lost confidence in the Fed and the U.S. dollar, political repression through the rise of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) and potentially, extreme social unrest.
The winners in this scenario are gold, silver, land, energy, agriculture and U.S. Treasury notes. The losers are stocks, corporate bonds, and commercial real estate.
You should position your asset allocations accordingly to survive the storm. No one knows exactly when the storm will impact. I can’t give you a specific date.
But don’t wait until it’s too late. It’s better to be months early than one minute too late.
<<<
---
Rickards - >>> The Green Fraud
By Jim Rickards
https://dailyreckoning.com/dei-must-die/
Those yelling the loudest about climate change want to destroy the oil and natural gas industry, destroy nuclear power plant construction, shut down coal-fired plants, end coal mining, mandate electric vehicles (EVs) on very short deadlines and eliminate gas stoves in your kitchen, fireplaces and even outdoor barbecues.
They also want to build wind turbine arrays offshore and on deserts, plains and even mountains near you. They want to install solar module fields on every rooftop and open space near a population center. The climate change radicals want to increase the mining of lithium, nickel, cobalt, copper, rare earths and other dangerous chemicals to feed their obsession with EV batteries.
They’re spending hundreds of billions of tax dollars to subsidize the EVs, battery manufacturing and a coast-to-coast network of charging stations to keep the EVs moving (even if they do have to stop for a charge every 180 miles).
The greenies also want to mandate “15-minute cities” where you can walk everywhere in town within 15 minutes, which means you won’t need your car to visit a doctor, dry cleaner, grocery store, pharmacy or any of the other locations we routinely visit for errands and necessities.
That may sound attractive if you chose it voluntarily. That’s not what the greenies have in mind. They want 15-minute cities as a Trojan horse to eliminate automobiles entirely and force you to ride bicycles or use public transportation. In the end, you’ll need a permit to fly to another city.
The permits will be rationed and you’ll have to put yourself on a waiting list until your turn. You can pay for your ticket with the new central bank digital currency (CBDC), assuming your social credit score is high enough and you didn’t vote for the wrong candidate in the last election.
In short, the climate change agenda is not about climate change. It’s about total political and economic control of the population. So-called climate change is an elite scare tactic to get you to fall into line and obey government orders (as most people do).
Elites claim that if we don’t radically reduce CO2 (carbon dioxide) and CH4 (methane) emissions, global warming will melt the ice caps, raise sea levels, put island nations underwater and flood the New York City subway system in 10 years or less. They’ve been making similar claims for 40 years and they’ve been wrong every time. That doesn’t stop them. Fear works.
What is new is that the climate crowd now has the political power they need to push their agenda using fear and the regulatory state to attack your means of transportation, your personal conveniences and your consumer choices.
This is being enabled by Joe Biden and thousands of bureaucrats buried in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Energy (DOE), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and scores of other agencies.
The U.S. Treasury, SEC and the Federal Reserve have even joined in by regulating loans to the oil and gas industry and requiring financial disclosures about climate change and other ESG (environment, social and governance) metrics.
Meanwhile, the World Bank (controlled by the U.S.) is being encouraged to deny loans to industries that involve carbon-based development and to steer financing toward projects approved by the climate mavens. This is called the “all of government” approach in which every agency gets involved in pushing the climate agenda, even if it’s not the primary job of that agency. The pressure never stops.
In short, the climate change debate could not be more relevant to investors. Those calling the shots in the Green New Deal (what I call the Green New Scam) will decide which industries win or lose, which projects get financed (or not), which initiatives are subsidized by the government or left to wither on the vine and which companies will feel the regulatory heat if they don’t get with Biden’s programs.
Climate change is not a sideshow. Nothing is more relevant to markets, investors and asset allocators today.
Climate change is real but it’s slow and powerful and has nothing to do with trace gasses such as carbon dioxide and methane. It’s caused by the interaction of complex systems such as sun cycles, ocean currents, wind patterns including the jet stream, volcanic activity, salinity levels (in turn caused by ocean current subduction) and other mega-systems over which humans have no control.
We’re living in a world where major forces beyond our control have been hijacked by elites to create a climate of fear to achieve their agenda of total government command over your life. It’s time for Americans and citizens around the world to learn the facts, push back on the elites and reestablish public policy based on real science. It’s time to push the flawed models, phony data and bogus warnings out of the way.
Unfortunately, the public relies on media elites and political leaders for their information. As decades roll by and scare stories are discredited time and again, public skepticism will rise and the alarmists will lose credibility.
The danger is that alarmists may pass legislation, limit choices and impose costs in the name of climate change before the public catches on to the scam. At that point, the economic damage becomes semi-permanent even if alarmism fades.
In the elites’ vision, citizens will be confined to small towns or cities for extended periods. Travel will be tightly restricted. Appliances will be downsized with no consumer choice allowed. Taxes will be imposed on targeted activities to discourage use. Education will be turned to indoctrination to raise a generation who believe in the climate lies needed to gain support for these measures (that kind of indoctrination has been underway for some years).
Welcome to the world of the green elite. It’s coercive, restrictive, arrogant and apparently not much fun. It’s a world where the elites control everything and you do as you’re told. It’s a world based on lies and fear. It’s coming sooner than you expect unless citizens can join hands, reassert the truth and push the elites back into a corner where they belong.
<<<
---
Bar, Two good sectors that are looking comparatively cheap right now are consumer staples and utilities. They were strong during the angst of the bear market, but recently have sold off considerably as investors rotate back into the more 'risk on' sectors. As a group these more mundane sectors are now oversold (RSI under 30). These are some of my favorites anyway -- Pepsi, Coke, Hershey, McDonalds, Procter + Gamble, Church + Dwight, etc, with beautiful long term term charts, nice reliable dividends, and are ideal for conservative buy/hold.
Utilities are also oversold right now, though for these I was using the sector ETFs (FSTA, VDC, XLP), and also for the Water sector (FIW, PHO), although the water ETFs carry a fairly high expense ratio. After the bankruptcy of PG&E in Calif a few years back, I figured it's safer to stick to the broad utilities sector ETFs. One aspect with utilities in general though are the disruptions and funding requirements for the big transition to clean energy. They ultimately pass the costs on with rate hikes, but it's an uncertainty that wasn't there previously. The Water sector doesn't have that, though they can have some future hefty maintenance costs to repair/replace aging infrastructure.
Consumer Staples doesn't have those concerns, but of course input costs are subject to inflation and can hit profitability. But no sector is perfect, and I doubt Buffett will be selling his Coke or McDonalds holdings anytime soon :o)
---
"I invest coldly based on 17 pretty hard and fast rules." "Never short is one of my rules." I now shun stocks with market caps under about $10 billion. Those many rules still give me a huge universe of stocks and funds to select from.
I've yet to have a holding turn out to be a scam, and I've had no dividend reductions aside from Boeing which should be back in 2025 or 2026. And my portfolio has endured many drawdowns including the Covid one in 2020.
My stocks do well in good times and they far, far, far outperform in bad markets.
Bar, Yes, best to be on the analytical 'Spock' side of the spectrum when investing, and not let one's loathing of politics or 'globalists' control our investing strategies too much. I must admit that my faith in the US and the 'system' in general has been sorely tested in recent years, making it hard to stay invested. Remember the old brokerage TV ads -- 'at Merrill Lynch, we're bullish on America'. Not sure I still believe that so much, and have a bad feeling about the future (CBDC especially).
---
Bigworld, Just curious if your shorts are intended to be short term trades, or are more longer term strategies? I have no experience with shorting, but know that it's a highly specialized area so be careful :o)
Looking at the 3 main stock indices from a TA/chart perspective -
Nasdaq is overbought in the near term (RSI at 71), though longer term it still has a long way to get back to its late 2021 highs. Wouldn't be surprised to see a pullback in the near term though since it's clearly getting overextended.
S+P 500 on the other hand (RSI under 60) doesn't look overextended (compared to Nasdaq), and hasn't yet broken out of the bullish ascending triangle that formed over the last 5-6 months. But... continued uncertainty over the debt ceiling, and then the June Fed meeting in 2 weeks, these could keep the upside muted for now, and could create nasty downside moves. Once past the June Fed meeting though, there could be a decent rally, but then plenty more landmines in the Fall and beyond. A lot will depend upon the economic and inflation numbers, etc. Who knows how it's going to play out, but I can spot a bullish chart, and the S+P 500 chart is saying 'higher', though the green light that folks are waiting for hasn't flashed yet.
DJIA had already recovered the most toward its Jan highs (compared to S+P 500, Nasdaq), and has been stumbling around basically sideways all year.
Anyway, GL with the strategy. Fwiw, with shorting I would think that a 'grab the profits when they appear' strategy may be better than a quasi 'perma-short'. Just a guess though. As my dad used to say - 'No one ever went broke by taking a profit' :o)
---
I often think of my fraternity brother decades ago who decided a 100X earnings computer stock was way too expensive. He was still losing on that imbecilic short when I last saw him and the computer stock was starting to make money. He disappeared around that time. Google can't find any trace of him.
"The Indexes are riding the coat tails of 7-10 stocks." Just like almost always.
So did you short some stocks or just buy puts? Are you trying to prove some political point or do you really imagine shorting will work out for you and not wipe you out.
I never confuse smart investing with getting pissed about something.
Biotech is one area where TA/charts are not especially useful, since the stocks depend so heavily upon binary events like clinical trial results, etc. I would definitely not get too deep into the sector financially. Even investors with PhDs in related science fields routinely bomb out trying to pick these stocks. They are 'widow makers', literally. My broker back in the late 1980s lost his job, his house, and his wife after his big biotech wager went bust. My advice -- stay far away from the sector. For exposure, stick to larger pharmas like AMGN, LLY, MRK, etc. Just saying.. :o)
---
Most are Perpetual Startups. Come back in 500 years and they're still running tests or waiting for some FDA approval while the execs are getting huge salaries.
Most bio boards are wall to wall shills or elderly marks. Yes, stay away.
"The Indexes are riding the coat tails of 7-10 stocks." That is scary. They are all probably in the top 20 market cap. Yes, it is typical near a top that a few high weighted stocks skew the averages. Thanks bigworld, I had not looked at that lately, but sort of sensed it.
LOL, biotech, I hear you. If they fail a test, down 30%. If not for the big instructional holdings, I would not have bought it. And this is a short term trade and if it falls below $4.40 I will sell. It has a nice channel line connecting the 3 bottoms in April and May. I like the 3 bottom connects.
Looking at IAUM, it tracks the GLD but I see it has a much lower expense ratio (.09% vrs .40%), so looks like an interesting vehicle. The ETF has over a 1 bil after only 2 years, so looks like it's catching on with investors.
With LAND, you may be right that the bottom is in. And even if it should dip to test the 12-15 range, 15 is probably 'close enough' to at least start a position :o)
ALLK is a biotech (yikes) so you might want to run them by the brainiacs over on Dew's board. Bladerunner follows a lot of the small cap bios. I see ALLK has a nice cash position (252 mil per Yahoo) for a micro cap, though looks like they are losing 165 mil/year, so they'll need that money. I see they have a Phase 3 program, and several in Phase 2, so that should be a positive. But I've 'sworn off' actually owning bio stocks (not even with a $500 position limit). I just can't go back there, --> 'Danger Will Robinson' lol..
---
I've owned the same Vanguard muni bond funds for many years. The "Limited Term Portfolio" and the "Intermediate Term Portfolio." In the past year, I've loved Invesco Bulletshares. I own several laddered issues of them with maturities from 2024 to 2027. They're investment quality TAXable corp bonds. The funds actively trade on the NASDAQ so they could be sold early if desired or held to maturity. Symbols are BSCO, BSCP, BSDQ, BSCR. Some issues go out to about 2032. Very convenient to use.
https://www.invesco.com/us/en/solutions/invesco-etfs/bulletshares-corporate-bond-portfolios.html
I opened some short positions today about an hour after the open. I will scale in deeper on the short side as time goes on. The Indexes are riding the coat tails of 7-10 stocks. If not for those stocks the S&P and Nasdaq would be negative on the year. This present time reminds me so much of the lead up to the dot.com bubble bursting. Everything attached to "AI" is catching a FOMO bid, especially NVDA. Meanwhile the signs of a market top continue to grow. Global debt hitting 335% of global GDP. GDI (gross domestic income) has dropped for 2 quarters in a row. The Dallas Fed reports that this is the 13th month in a row of manufacturing contraction. Their general business index is down to 29.1, the lowest reading in 3 years. And McCarthy's surrender on the debt limit deal may be heading off the rails as the Swamp might actually see some opposition from the few Republicans that still have a functional backbone. The deal McCarthy cut is a joke and not a single Republican should vote for it. And if McCarthy continues to try to jam it through they should replace him. (I never wanted him in the first place. He's a slimy swamp creature if there ever was one.)
Bar, Mostly shorter term Treasuries, but also a few high quality corporates (Apple, J+J, Microsoft, Alphabet). No bonds maturing beyond Dec 2025 though. Also one CD (G. Sachs) and an I-Bond. I have everything laddered monthly.
Since % rates are near to peaking, some analysts are recommending going out toward the 5-7 year maturities, but I plan to keep things shorter. I figure 20% in laddered Treasuries going out 1-2 years, and 20% in laddered T-Bills going out 0-1 year. I count anything under 1 year as a T-Bill even if it's technically a note.
I'd actually feel better having the bond allocation in residential real estate, but am just not a real estate guy, too lazy I guess. But bonds are losers longer term, basically 'instruments of confiscation' due to inflation. Better to have it in hard assets, or the stock market if it wasn't so ulcer inducing.
I assume you are heavy in municipals due to the tax benefits? I had some munis years ago and like them (selectively), but being retired the Federal tax aspect isn't much of a problem, and Treasuries are free from state income taxes.
---
LAND, IAUM, DBA, ALLK
Just bought LAND, IAUM, and DBA as the USA is crumbling, possible drought inflation on food coming and China buying up our farmland on the cheap. ALLK is a channel line chart play I like with no bad news and a lot of insti action and not defensive.
https://fintel.io/so/us/allk
All four a near channel line support, if they drop much below, I get out immediately. I usually don't stay long if they don't move up.
DBA 's take is a bit higher than MOO, but it is tied almost directly to the food commodities index. MOO is more into food businesses that may suffer from higher commodity prices in the short term?
What sort of bonds do you own?
Stocks - 20%
Bonds -- 20%
T-Bills -- 20%
Cash --- 25%
Gold ---- 10%
Silver --- 5%
Palantir (PLTR) is still climbing, and has doubled in the last 3 weeks off the bottom. The other Thiel stock, Rumble (RUM) is still poised near a potential breakout level. I don't own these anymore (switched to S+P 500), but still fun to watch.
Fwiw, some of the other individual stocks I owned haven't fared so well. I see ULTA is down 25% in a month, and Buffett's PARA also got clobbered, down 35% or so in May. QIPT is also down 30%, as is PERI. But meanwhile some turnaround stocks like SLP and OMCL look promising. Overall, the relatively sedate S+P 500 has a lot of advantages, performance and Tagamet-wise.
---
Decided to go up to 20% for the stock allocation (up from 15%).
Current allocation -
Stocks - 20%
Bonds -- 20%
T-Bills -- 20%
Cash --- 25%
Gold ---- 10%
Silver --- 5%
John Bogle stressed the need to find one's comfort zone -- an allocation level that doesn't affect your sleep too much. His usual stock allocation was 80%, but he lowered it to 50% due to his health problems (needed a heart transplant).
Anyway, 20% seems like a good place to start, being just below my personal 'Tagamet' level. I'm figuring 15% Core and 5% Flex, and can always scale back to the Core 15% if necessary.
---
Absolutely. Many see index funds as wimpy. My brother in law, a very smart CPA summed it up perfectly 30 years ago... "But [with index funds] you're accepting mediocrity." I pointed out that mediocrity would be a huge a improvement for the overwhelming majority of new investors especially of the IHUB mindset. Heck, not many Ivy League educated pros beat index funds!
Yes, several studies suggest that women may be better investors than men. Plenty of research has been done of the performance of investing clubs which may be the worst investors ever. They're so bad that most went out of business years ago. And no one's going to suggest the entire club treasury be put in an ordinary index fund. And no member's going to suggest the club should meet less often and almost never trade, which would probably improve results for most clubs.
I've often said that great investing is and should be boring. (think Buffett and Munger!)
Bar, Yes, sites like I-Hub are home to the 'worst of the worst' when it comes to foolish fast buck artists. It's probably 90% I'd say. But there are definitely exceptions.
One interesting observation is that women tend to be much better investors than men. Women tend to be more conservative, trade less, think longer term, etc. Guys see investing as an extension of their ego and virility. We shoot ourselves in the foot, too much testosterone I guess lol.
---
"So why don't more people do it?" By "people" do you mean ihubbers? In recent years IHUB is almost 100% about gambling, crap shooting, kinda like the meme crowd. They're seeking "action" that's lottery-like. Profiting isn't import to them. Many of them are gambling addicts. I no longer see any "investors" on this board.
OTOH tons of prudent investors and investment managers have moved toward indexing. So much so that S&P and Invesco have sued "closet Indexers." If you want to run your own your own S&P 500 index fund, you have to pay S&P for their name and stock selections.
For example: "American Century accused of ‘closet indexing’ in lawsuit"
https://www.ft.com/content/66a16f3a-0f0f-459e-9f26-a4f0e0b09ac1
Bar, The best way to do it is the way you invested from the start --> indexes and conservative blue chips, and starting early, in one's 20s and 30s. Invest a set amount in the index every month, dollar cost average, then just let it go on autopilot. It's so simple, so why don't more people do it?
I remember in the 1980s starting off very conservatively with fixed income and a preferred utility stock yielding 12%. Then I gradually moved into regular stocks, and then wanting things to move faster, in the late 1980s I went into a biotech stock. Sheesh, talk about stupid. The stock (Viratek) actually did really well at first and I was cleaning up, but instead of grabbing the profits I held on for the 'long term', and eventually got clobbered. Anyway, I guess that was the start of my 'grab the profits when they appear' mentality.
Of course with broad indexes and blue chips, the idea is buy/hold forever and let time do the rest. But when you're young, you want action and instant riches. I guess most people have to learn the hard way. My nephew started off in crypto (despite my warnings) and had some initial success (sounds familiar), but then suffered a big loss. Now he has an asset allocation model, dollar cost averages into the S+P 500 every month, etc. Smart kid, smarter than I was, lol.
---
Yes, flat from 2000 to 2013 -- I just checked -- and divs didn't help much. But dividends were a major reason to buy stocks during many periods in the distant past. Newbies often ignore them and they don't show up on most charts.
Here's a unique look at what happened to dividends from 1929 to 1936.
https://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2022/12/dividends-by-numbers-during-great.html#.Y6d-jnbMLyQ
Bar, Yes, in many parts of the country these days, a million dollars merely gets you a house. A million sure ain't what it used to be. The value of the dollar has just eroded steadily.
Stocks have actually been one of the best inflation hedges over time, though the periodic 35-50% haircuts can be tough to handle emotionally. And it takes patience. Looing at the S+P 500 chart from 2000 to 2013, a stock investor would have had a return of exactly zero. Same from 1966-1982 --> zero. The dividends are some consolation, and would have provided enough to buy the required Tagamet lol. I wish there was an easier way..
---
"42% of *millionaires* of this country ..." That quote must be ancient. No one uses "millionaire" anymore to mean "a person of great wealth." At least at my age, millionaire places one in "middle class." Under the current definition, plenty of millionaires own no or almost no stocks. In costly locales, you're a millionaire if you have a nice mortgage-free home and a modest bank account. Many "millionaires" are spouses living off pensions, bank CDs and hubby's life insurance.
But, fact is, most investors do little stock trading according to studies I've read.
Bar. Yes, capital gains taxes are big factor that favors buy/hold. And as Bogle said about market timing - 'done it successfully and consistently'. Consistency is the key. You can time the market successfully for a while, but not consistently.
Rather than having a large % allocated to stocks, and trying to control risk by timing the market, an alternate approach would be to have a smaller % allocated to stocks, and just buy/hold. That's the strategy I'm arriving at anyway --> 10-20% in stocks (S+P 500) and just let it ride.
---
>>> 'The Official Truth': The End Of Free Speech That Will End America
Zero Hedge
BY TYLER DURDEN
MAY 28, 2023
Authored by J.B.Shurk via The Gatestone Institute
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/official-truth-end-free-speech-will-end-america
If legacy news corporations fail to report that large majorities of the American public now view their journalistic product as straight-up propaganda, does that make it any less true?
According to a survey by Rasmussen Reports, 59% of likely voters in the United States view the corporate news media as "truly the enemy of the people." This is a majority view, held regardless of race: "58% of whites, 51% of black voters, and 68% of other minorities" — all agree that the mainstream media has become their "enemy."
This scorching indictment of the Fourth Estate piggybacks similar polling from Harvard-Harris showing that Americans hold almost diametrically opposing viewpoints from those that news corporations predominantly broadcast as the official "truth."
Drawing attention to the divergence between the public's perceived reality and the news media's prevailing "narratives," independent journalist Glenn Greenwald dissected the Harvard-Harris poll to highlight just how differently some of the most important issues of the last few years have been understood. While corporate news fixated on purported Trump-Russia collusion since 2016, majorities of Americans now see this story "as a hoax and a fraud."
While the news media hid behind the Intelligence Community's claims that Hunter Biden's potentially incriminating laptop (allegedly containing evidence of his family's influence-peddling) was a product of "Russian disinformation" and consequently enforced an information blackout on the explosive story during the final weeks of the 2020 presidential election, strong majorities of Americans currently believe the laptop's contents are "real." In other words, Americans have correctly concluded that journalists and spies advanced a "fraud" on voters as part of an effort to censor a damaging story and "help Biden win." Nevertheless, The New York Times and The Washington Post have yet to return the Pulitzer Prizes they received for reporting totally discredited "fake news."
Similarly, majorities of Americans suspect that President Joe Biden has used the powers of his various offices to profit from influence-peddling schemes and that the FBI has intentionally refrained from investigating any possible Biden crimes. Huge majorities of Americans, in fact, seem not at all surprised to learn that the FBI has been caught abusing its own powers to influence elections, and are strongly convinced that "sweeping reform" is needed. Likewise, large majorities of Americans have "serious doubts about Biden's mental fitness to be president" and suspect that others behind the scenes are "puppeteers" running the nation.
Few, if any, of these poll results have been widely reported. In a seemingly-authoritarian disconnect with the American people, corporate news media continue to ignore the public's majority opinion and instead "relentlessly advocate" those viewpoints that Americans "reject." When journalists fail to investigate facts and deliberately distort stories so that they fit snugly within preconceived worldviews, reporters act as propagandists.
Constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley recently asked, "Do we have a de facto state media?" In answering his own question, he notes that the news blackout surrounding congressional investigations into Biden family members who have allegedly received more than ten million dollars in suspicious payments from foreign entities "fits the past standards used to denounce Russian propaganda patterns and practices." After Republican members of Congress traced funds to nine Biden family members "from corrupt figures in Romania, China, and other countries," Turley writes, "The New Republic quickly ran a story headlined 'Republicans Finally Admit They Have No Incriminating Evidence on Joe Biden.'"
Excoriating the news media's penchant for mindlessly embracing stories that hurt former President Donald Trump while simultaneously ignoring stories that might damage President Biden, Turley concludes:
"Under the current approach to journalism, it is the New York Times that receives a Pulitzer for a now debunked Russian collusion story rather than the New York Post for a now proven Hunter Biden laptop story."
Americans now evidently view the major sources for their news and information as part of a larger political machine pushing particular points of view, unconstrained by any ethical obligation to report facts objectively or dispassionately seek truth. That Americans now see the news media in their country as serving a similar role as Pravda did for the Soviet Union's Communist Party is a significant departure from the country's historic embrace of free speech and traditional fondness for a skeptical, adversarial press.
Rather than taking a step back to consider the implications such a shift in public perception will have for America's future stability, some officials appear even more committed to expanding government control over what can be said and debated online. After the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in the wake of public backlash over First Amendment concerns, halted its efforts to construct an official "disinformation governance board" last year, the question remained whether other government attempts to silence or shape online information would rear their head. The wait for that answer did not take long.
The government apparently took the public's censorship concerns so seriously that it quietly moved on from the collapse of its plans for a "disinformation governance board" within the DHS and proceeded within the space of a month to create a new "disinformation" office known as the Foreign Malign Influence Center, which now operates from within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Although ostensibly geared toward countering information warfare arising from "foreign" threats, one of its principal objectives is to monitor and control "public opinion and behaviors."
As independent journalist Matt Taibbi concludes of the government's resurrected Ministry of Truth:
"It's the basic rhetorical trick of the censorship age: raise a fuss about a foreign threat, using it as a battering ram to get everyone from Congress to the tech companies to submit to increased regulation and surveillance. Then, slowly, adjust your aim to domestic targets."
If it were not jarring enough to learn that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has picked up the government's speech police baton right where the DHS set it down, there is ample evidence to suggest that officials are eager to go much further in the near future. Democrat Senator Michael Bennet has already proposed a bill that would create a Federal Digital Platform Commission with "the authority to promulgate rules, impose civil penalties, hold hearings, conduct investigations, and support research."
Filled with "disinformation" specialists empowered to create "enforceable behavioral codes" for online communication — and generously paid for by the Biden Administration with taxpayers' money — the special commission would also "designate 'systemically important digital platforms' subject to extra oversight, reporting, and regulation" requirements. Effectively, a small number of unelected commissioners would have de facto power to monitor and police online communication.
Should any particular website or platform run afoul of the government's First Amendment Star Chamber, it would immediately place itself within the commission's crosshairs for greater oversight, regulation, and punishment.
Will this new creation become an American KGB, Stasi or CCP — empowered to target half the population for disagreeing with current government policies, promoting "wrongthink," or merely going to church? Will a small secretive body decide which Americans are actually "domestic terrorists" in the making? US Attorney General Merrick Garland has gone after traditional Catholics who attend Latin mass, but why would government suspicions end with the Latin language? When small commissions exist to decide which Americans are the "enemy," there is no telling who will be designated as a "threat" and punished next.
It is not difficult to see the dangers that lie ahead. Now that the government has fully inserted itself into the news and information industry, the criminalization of free speech is a very real threat. This has always been a chief complaint against international institutions such as the World Economic Forum that spend a great deal of time, power, and money promoting the thoughts and opinions of an insular cabal of global leaders, while showing negligible respect for the personal rights and liberties of the billions of ordinary citizens they claim to represent.
WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab has gone so far as to hire hundreds of thousands of "information warriors" whose mission is to "control the Internet" by "policing social media," eliminating dissent, disrupting the public square, and "covertly seed[ing] support" for the WEF's "Great Reset." If Schwab's online army were not execrable enough, advocates for free speech must also gird themselves for the repercussions of Elon Musk's appointment of Linda Yaccarino, reportedly a "neo-liberal wokeist" with strong WEF affiliations, as the new CEO of Twitter.
Throughout much of the West, unfortunately, free speech has been only weakly protected when those with power find its defense inconvenient or messages a nuisance. It is therefore of little surprise to learn that French authorities are now prosecuting government protesters for "flipping-off" President Emmanuel Macron. It does not seem particularly astonishing that a German man has been sentenced to three years in prison for engaging in "pro-Russian" political speech regarding the war in Ukraine. It also no longer appears shocking to read that UK Technology and Science Secretary Michelle Donelan reportedly seeks to imprison social media executives who fail to censor online speech that the government might subjectively adjudge "harmful." Sadly, as Ireland continues to find new ways to punish citizens for expressing certain points of view, its movement toward criminalizing not just speech but also "hateful" thoughts should have been predictable.
From an American's perspective, these overseas encroachments against free speech — especially within the borders of closely-allied lands — have seemed sinister yet entirely foreign. Now, however, what was once observed from some distance has made its way home; it feels as if a faraway communist enemy has finally stormed America's beaches and come ashore in force.
Not a day seems to go by without some new battlefront opening up in the war on free speech and free thought. The Richard Stengel of the Council on Foreign Relations has been increasingly vocal about the importance of journalists and think tanks to act as "primary provocateurs" and "propagandists" who "have to" manipulate the American population and shape the public's perception of world events. Senator Rand Paul has alleged that the DHS uses at least 12 separate programs to "track what Americans say online," as well as to engage in social media censorship.
As part of its efforts to silence dissenting arguments, the Biden administration is pursuing a policy that would make it unlawful to use data and datasets that reflect accurate information yet lead to "discriminatory outcomes" for "protected classes." In other words, if the data is perceived to be "racist," it must be expunged. At the same time, the Department of Justice has indicted four radical black leftists for having somehow "weaponized" their free speech rights in support of Russian "disinformation." So, objective datasets can be deemed "discriminatory" against minorities, while actual discrimination against minorities' free speech is excused when that speech contradicts official government policy.
Meanwhile, the DHS has been exposed for paying tens of millions of dollars to third-party "anti-terrorism" programs that have not so coincidentally equated Christians, Republicans, and philosophical conservatives to Germany's Nazi Party. Similarly, California Governor Gavin Newsom has set up a Soviet-style "snitch line" that encourages neighbors to report on each other's public or private displays of "hate."
Finally, ABC News proudly admits that it has censored parts of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s interviews because some of his answers include "false claims about the COVID-19 vaccines." Essentially, the corporate news media have deemed Kennedy's viewpoints unworthy of being transmitted and heard, even though the 2024 presidential candidate is running a strong second behind Joe Biden in the Democrat primary, with around 20% support from the electorate.
Taken all together, it is clear that not only has the war on free speech come to America, but also that it is clobbering Americans in a relentless campaign of "shock and awe." And why not? In a litigation battle presently being waged over the federal government's extensive censorship programs, the Biden administration has defended its inherent authority to control Americans' thoughts as an instrumental component of "government infrastructure." What Americans think and believe is openly referred to as part of the nation's "cognitive infrastructure" — as if the Matrix movies were simply reflecting real life.
Today, America's mainstream news corporations are already viewed as processing plants that manufacture political propaganda. That is an unbelievably searing indictment of a once-vibrant free press in the United States. It is also, unfortunately, only the first heavy shoe to drop in the war against free speech. Many Chinese-Americans who survived the Cultural Revolution look around the country today and see similarities everywhere. During that totalitarian "reign of terror," everything a person did was monitored, including what was said while asleep.
In an America now plagued with the stench of official "snitch lines," censorship of certain presidential candidates, widespread online surveillance, a resurrected "disinformation governance board," and increasingly frequent criminal prosecutions targeting Americans who exercise their free speech, the question is not whether what we inaudibly think or say in our sleep will someday be used against us, but rather how soon that day will come unless we stop it. After all, with smartphones, smart TVs, "smart" appliances, video-recording doorbells, and the rise of artificial intelligence, somebody, somewhere is always listening.
<<<
---
Isn't this quote interesting? Is it accurate? Not sure, but the central idea is on the mark.
"42% of millionaires of this country make less than one transaction per year in their investments." (Bill Schultheis, The Coffeehouse Investor)"
https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Taylor_Larimore%27s_market_timing_quotes
Are you counting taxation and other friction that comes with frenetic "Side Stepping?" (I don't know your tax situation, of course).
Anyway, I've made one trade in 2023, my Deere buy, and so far that's been a minor loser. Still holding about 17 individual stocks, and several funds, mostly index funds. Both kids have sizable chunks of QQQ.
I've always found John Bogle to be reliable. This is one of his best quotes:
"I do not know of anybody who's done market timing successfully. I don't even know anybody who knows anybody who has done it successfully and consistently." (Jack Bogle)
Kunstler on Pathocracy -
>>> Memorial Service
May 29, 2023
https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/memorial-service/
“Liberalism was never about freedom, but nurtured a profound desire to change humanity above all other aspects. This rendered it a willing ally of tyrants promising to do the dirty work of such a project.” — John Waters on Substack
An anxious silence falls over the land this Memorial Day as we discern increasingly that those we put in charge of this shape-shifting thing called the public interest are running out of trips to lay on the people. Something grotesque is revealing itself: a bankruptcy not just of money but of national purpose, meaning, and legitimacy. You realize this day, with a breaking heart, that your country has been stolen by psychopaths.
Brace for impact. We’re already off the road and now it’s only a matter of how this vehicle comes to a stop in the ditch. Then, it’s a question of how each of us emerges from the smoldering wreckage. The main thing, though, is clear to everyone: What we were riding in is no more. We’re out there stumbling around in the dark, in shock, trying desperately to assess our whereabouts and what has happened to us.
Now, the trouble with being ruled by psychopaths is that they don’t care about other people. They are actually incapable of imagining the lives of others, especially the fact that these others care about each other, and what happens to them. You may have noticed, for instance, that the psychopath Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) went to Ukraine last week and declared, “Russians are dying. We have never spent money so well.” Only a couple of months ago, he called for the assassination of Vladimir Putin. He stopped short of dissing Mr. Putin’s mother.
Ukraine, of course, is a lost cause, and it was never a good cause in the first place. Contrary to Lindsay Graham’s untoward utterance, American money has killed far more Ukrainians than Russians. He overlooked that because he doesn’t care about the Ukrainians, for whose sake our “folks” in charge supposedly undertook this clusterfuck. Lindsay Graham also may not have noticed that our country is collapsing and Russia is not. That’s must be because Lindsay Graham does not care about Americans, either.
As for our money, it looks like most of the rest of the world — the nations that still produce things of value — are so turned-off by American pathocracy that they are seeking every way possible to stop using our money in international trade settlements. That money, our dollar, became the world’s reserve currency because our country ended up on top in the previous world war and for the better part of a century afterward dominated the planet militarily. Naturally, as our leadership turned more pathological and pathocratic, so did our military endeavors — until lately they amount to little more than just smashing up other countries to show we can do it.
These other countries must wonder which is the next place that America will try to smash up? Two of these other countries, Russia and China, are coming around to the realization that they are possibly better equipped to do the smashing than America is. There is no indication that our pathocracy recognizes that the next smash-up may be World War Three, and that we may not emerge from it victorious.
Hence, our anxiety this Memorial Day as we reflect on America’s military exploits generally, and must perforce contemplate our less-than-glorious prospects ahead. How will our pathocrat neo-con strategists greet the debacle of our failure in Ukraine? Will they dream up yet another misadventure as reckless and absurd? You have good reason to be concerned.
Pathocracy always marches toward totalitarianism because pathocrats can’t imagine a management of public affairs by a people who care about each other (and their country). Therefore, everyone must be subject to incessant coercion and punishment, especially for their thoughts (and especially for thoughts of opposition to pathocracy). However, there are certainly more people who care about each other than there are psychopaths in America. I’m not a big fan of quantification but, for the record, psychiatric meta-analysis estimates that 1.2 to 4.5 percent of the population displays psychopathic personality disorders.
How that tiny fraction of the citizenry came to take charge of our affairs is surely the big mystery of the moment. My guess is that under conditions of economic-social-and-political collapse, the people who care about each other become preoccupied with their mutual caretaking duties while the psychopaths, unburdened by such cares, can go about other business — such as plunder, murder, and the sowing of chaos.
Sometimes in history, the pathocrats are simply overthrown by the majority of humans with functioning emotional equipment. It’s not easy, though, because in most other places around the world, the pathocracy become the sole owners of the guns and have armies and police at their disposal to put down revolts. That’s not quite exactly the case here in the USA with our Second Amendment to the Constitution. The putative president, “Joe Biden,” cracked some time ago that anyone seeking to oppose him better bring some F-15 fighter planes to get the job done. As the good book says: Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.”
This Memorial Day is the pregnant moment before history gives birth to new and astounding events. Everyone senses it. The rough beasts are out there slouching across the fruited plain. Attend to your duties courageously, as those before us did, who we remember today.
<<<
---
Bar, >> done wonderfully YTD <<
Yes, though they are still down from the Jan 2022 peaks by 13% and 18% respectively.
In comparison, my stock allocation (not counting divs) was up 1% last year, and is up ~1% so far this year, therefore I've beaten the S+P 500 by 11% and 16% respectively since the Jan 2022 peaks. And all thanks to 'market timing' :o)
But that outperformance (and the outperformance in 2020-21) is not something likely to be repeated very often. I managed to side step the 2022 bear market (and the 2020 crash), but this year I also missed most of the 2023 recovery. Over time, better to just stay long and ride out the volatility.
---
Followers
|
8
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
2599
|
Created
|
08/18/18
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |