Merged: Is the worst of the Global Financial Crisis behind us?
I reckon the $AUD has a bit left in it. I went in again at 88 cents with debt.
I have also bought a couple of residential properties- one international and one in SYD. Wouldn't mind buying in on some speculative oil shares all my pilot mates are in on. Dunno. Being pretty cautious.
What are the doomsayers doing? Sleeping on their cash?
I have also bought a couple of residential properties- one international and one in SYD. Wouldn't mind buying in on some speculative oil shares all my pilot mates are in on. Dunno. Being pretty cautious.
What are the doomsayers doing? Sleeping on their cash?
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 10th Jan 2010 at 09:07.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What are the doomsayers doing? Sleeping on their cash?
So there’s what I think are pretty compelling reasons for Dow 1,000. I challenge you to give one good reason why that target is ridiculous. By the way, “This time it’s different” or “the Government and the Federal Reserve know what they are doing” receive an ‘F’ grade.
We are not oblivious to the meaning of Dow 1,000. After all, our work on the Kondratieff cycle has long forecast the winter depression brought about by too much debt. We don’t take any pleasure in making these forecasts. We know that if they come to fruition many people will be financially destroyed. Such destruction will wear heavy on personal relationships and on people’s health. It will engender massive anger from those who have been dispossessed of their wealth and livelihood. We don’t want it to happen but we are frightened that it will. So far everything that we have anticipated through our knowledge of the Kondratieff cycle has happened. The future looks particularly bleak
We are not oblivious to the meaning of Dow 1,000. After all, our work on the Kondratieff cycle has long forecast the winter depression brought about by too much debt. We don’t take any pleasure in making these forecasts. We know that if they come to fruition many people will be financially destroyed. Such destruction will wear heavy on personal relationships and on people’s health. It will engender massive anger from those who have been dispossessed of their wealth and livelihood. We don’t want it to happen but we are frightened that it will. So far everything that we have anticipated through our knowledge of the Kondratieff cycle has happened. The future looks particularly bleak
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look back thru the history of this thread, 4PW's has made a complete arse of himself as he spruiked the USD. Still spruiking- and the AUD is up thru .93 today.
He must have lost a fortune so far. In fact, you could've MADE a fortune if you had done the exact opposite of his advice.
He must have lost a fortune so far. In fact, you could've MADE a fortune if you had done the exact opposite of his advice.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go easy, muscles. Don't take yourself so seriously. This is a forum, not a boxing ring.
I've got time off soon, so perhaps I'll have time to lay out a few lines on why this and why that.
The end of the world is not nigh.
I've got time off soon, so perhaps I'll have time to lay out a few lines on why this and why that.
The end of the world is not nigh.
"If China sneezes, Australia catches pneumonia..."
He must have lost a fortune so far. In fact, you could've MADE a fortune if you had done the exact opposite of his advice.
However, what I find with many pilot doomsayers, is they subscribe to one author such as Harry Dent or depression2007.com and use it to validate their neutral or do nothing approach to investing. And when property or shares come off 30% they still do nothing- because they are waiting for it to drop further.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Much has been made of market calls. Littering this thread like rubbish are demands for explanations to why this and why that. Holding hands with these demands stand comments that amount to nothing more than derogatory character assassination. There is also the smell of fear.
My response doesn’t hope to answer or assuage any of that. I am responding because I am responding. Make what you will of that. My perspective is my perspective. It needs no justification to any but my own financial account, an account that showed great losses in its early life circa 1995.
So how to add to the sum of knowledge, then? What can I possibly write that can be of any use to anyone? Perhaps I could start and end with a truism: emotions rule markets. Wow, what a revelation. But how you measure emotion, if you agree emotion rules markets, is therefore important.
I use a lens that acts as a microscope for the close-in work, and a telescope for long range forecasting. The lens is the lens. It has to be appreciated for what it is, a lens. It is not the market. It allows me to observe the market, focusing on what the herd’s emotions indicate as the next probable move - up or down. But that’s a critical word, probable, for nothing is certain in this realm. Which is why one must appreciate that a lens, be it one whose roots are of a fundamental or technical nature, requires more of a person than mere possession.
More ‘than just a lens’ comes in the form of a trading plan, and guts.
You need to know when to trade or you might as well just throw darts at a board. For what it’s worth, my trading plan has a lens that demands action in three instances, and three instances alone.
The trading plan itself can be broken down to three parts as well. Only three? Why not. Good things are simple things. There’s no need to rely on four or five or 15 or 22 parts. Just three will do; a market tool (the lens), money management and a psychological approach to complete the trio.
Money management isn’t difficult to describe. It’s a plan or system for containing losses (and letting profits run) through effective management of actions, limits on capital application and stop loss positions.
What I see through my lens is not always interpreted correctly for the time frame being worked on. If the market tool says buy for the medium term, the short term may prove that to have been a ‘not yet, sucker’ signal. That’s not to say the market tool was wrong, only more complex than my interpretation of the lens indicated. If the immediate movement has gone against you, there is an urgent need for an objective price at which interpretation is absolutely wrong. That’s money management. That’s also when you get out.
MM tells you never to risk more than a specific figure on any position. This may be as low as 2% of your capital on hand, which may limit access to many, many leveraged markets. So suck eggs from the sideline. Or get a job with Goldman Sachs. Meanwhile, limiting access to a market is not the big deal. Ensuring an ability to stop losses immediately when interpretation of what the lens indicates proves to be wrong is. Hence the need for a maximum of 2% capital application to a position.
Bit too esoteric? Hey, I’m doing the best I can here. Moving right along: An individual should not hold onto a position to ‘prove’ he or she is right. That would be counter productive. But, oddly enough, it’s not uncommon, which leads me to the psychological approach, the last but by far not the least of three pillars supporting success.
Why buy real estate? Why trade leveraged instruments? Why save money in a low interest bearing deposit account? We do these things for a reason. What that reason is bears investigation. If you’re doing it for accolades from the digital reproduction of thoughts (hailing from anonymous sources, of course) in a chat-room like this, you definitely need to know that is the reason for your decision to enter your specified market.
You need to know for one reason, and one reason alone, which is to limit losses. When do you exit or enter or hold onto a position? When a well liked contributor on PPRuNe says so? If your psychological reasons for trading, saving money or buying real estate are based on approval of a chat room audience, that chat room audience’s approval will guide you into ruin. Fast. So good luck. Market Wizards, by Marty Schwartz, is a frightening account of how destructive an untamed psychological approach can be if not fully understood.
On the other hand if you know you’re in it to make money and not to brag about it to friends, colleagues or digital reproductions of thoughts (hailing from anonymous sources, of course) in a chat-room like this, the only thing that matters is cutting out of a position should it be unprofitable. This you would do for the psychological reasons underpinning the trade, that being to make money, not hot air.
So there are three pillars: market tool, money management and psychological approach.
Of the USD, there is a very high probability in the medium term that a major reversal in trend has occurred. The sideways movement of the past year, of which most are aware of only one part, the down part, appears complete. The last leg took a long time to play out.
It confused a lot of people, me included. It tried many a person’s patience and savaged perhaps more wallets, but the probability is that the bottom is in on the USD. If that is correct, my lens allows for a multi-year Dollar bull to surge out of the pen.
But I am asked WHY the Dollar rally. Here’s what may be a clearer answer than the above slightly cryptic one. It comes in the form of one word: securitization.
In 1999, normal banking blended with investment banking. What started out in the good ol’ USA quickly went viral, global. The reason is not in any way complex. It’s because Wall Street wasn’t making enough money, bound as they were by the straight jacket of regulator-imposed capital ratios, by borrowing short and lending long, that is, regular banking.
So, with some tricky footwork, main street banks thwarted capital ratios via the creation of the shadow banking system. Australian banks are exposed. The big-four hope to fool everyone into thinking they’re not exposed, but they bought into CDS’, CDO’s and all the other exotic instruments created at the beginning of this decade (we’re not done with the decade until the end of 2010 by the way).
At any rate, the shadow banking system has not shrunk since the big rally in equities circa March 2009. On the contrary, the system has gone further underground and, indeed, grown exponentially. Which is to say that of the 60 trillion plus, yes, that’s trillion, dollars in credit default swaps and collateralized debt obligations created by the former Lehman Brothers and the current Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs et al market wizards, none of it has been cleared. NONE of it.
De-leveraging is now the operative word.
Martin Wolf (FT), Bill Gross (PIMCO) and yes Ambrose Evans-Pritchard have been blowing on that trumpet for some time. Few listen. Those who hate the tune attempt to belittle and discredit those that hear the music and fear it. Wolf, Gross, EP are referred to as pessimists. And here’s the irony of it all. They are learned, studied, immensely well read and connected individuals with pedigree! They are anything but pessimists. They’re realists, critical analysts who have not allowed their critical faculties to just tune out because the herd says we’re done with that annoying retraction of ever-upward growth.
The tune will play. As it does, the instrument demanded in return for assets requiring selling off are not apples, woodchips, pens, trinkets, promises, IOU’s or even a fine piece of ass. The instrument will be dollars, for the world’s massive overhang of debt is denominated in USD. It is for this reason, this FUNDAMENTAL reason, for the Dollar rally.
Don’t be fooled. While the US Fed has been busy buying Treasuries and printing money via quantitative easing, the amounts they’ve come up with have not come anywhere near the overhang of debt out there. What’s a few trillion to what is a minimum of $60 trillion in debt? You need to really think about those figures. As for me spruiking the USD, all I can say is tell him he’s dreamin’. That’s so ridiculous it’s laughable.
But if you need objective proof of that, go to the library and hire the tome that is William Greider’s ‘Secrets of the Temple – How the Federal Reserve Works’. Or buy the book. Far from being a Dan Brown look-alike, Greider is a consummate professional leading you through history, and reality, of meetings and the results of actions by the Fed to try and control the direction of their currency, the USD.
To wit, no amount of money is enough if going against a market as big as the currencies market. No matter if you are the Fed, the Bank of Japan, the ECB or have four Pratt and Whitney’s at your disposal: if the market decides the Euro will cave, the Euro will do just that. If the market decides the Dollar will rally, the Dollar will do just that.
Which makes Thomas L Friedman so ridiculous when he asks in today’s IHT if China is “the next Enron”. There he is, giving advice to James Chanos that you should ‘never short a country with $2 trillion dollars in reserves’. He failed to mention the daily, that’s daily not monthly, amount changing hands in the Forex market is in excess of that whopping reserve. Or that he is not John Chanos.
If I’m going to drop names, I might as well end by dropping another. Jaron Lanier is a digital pioneer. He too comes with pedigree. Lanier is the guy that coined the phrase ‘virtual reality’. I think that qualifies him, somewhat, to speak of the Web. So here’s the thing: he wonders “if the Web’s structure and ideology are fostering nasty group dynamics and mediocre collaborations”. I wonder about that, too. I wonder about the application of such to PPRuNe. In Lanier’s new book ‘You Are Not a Gadget’ he blames the Web’s drive-by anonymity for fostering vicious pack behavior on blogs, forums and social networks.
I read most of that in one of those paper’s you find yourself reading. The writer is a New Yorker, John Tierney. Look him up. He’s not bad. The article reminded me of this thread, and how a mere OPINION of mine on the likely direction of the USD led to manifestations of pure hatred in private messages from someone I don’t know, have never heard of or spoken to, and yet thinks he has the RIGHT to send vitriolic bile my way, your way, any way, because of my temerity to dare post a one-liner here, in the most hallowed sanctuary that is PPRuNe, indicating the likely movement of the USD.
The bottom is in, at any rate. The lens I use indicated 74 on the Dollar Index. The market stopped dead at 74.2 and has rallied ever since. The likely direction is short term sideways, medium term up (way up) and long term down (way down). Whatever.
If your (active) interest is real estate, bonds, equities or securities, it can only be but patently obvious that the terrain is not always friendly. If you are yet to dip your toe in the waters of finance, do say carefully. And good luck with your learning. Don’t be put off by the mosquitoes that need swatting every now and then, or by the rather long time it takes to truly understand the meaning and essential value in the strength of having three very solid pillars to your trading foundation.
Buy dollars, sell China (medium term, not long term).
With respect to Gnads.
My response doesn’t hope to answer or assuage any of that. I am responding because I am responding. Make what you will of that. My perspective is my perspective. It needs no justification to any but my own financial account, an account that showed great losses in its early life circa 1995.
So how to add to the sum of knowledge, then? What can I possibly write that can be of any use to anyone? Perhaps I could start and end with a truism: emotions rule markets. Wow, what a revelation. But how you measure emotion, if you agree emotion rules markets, is therefore important.
I use a lens that acts as a microscope for the close-in work, and a telescope for long range forecasting. The lens is the lens. It has to be appreciated for what it is, a lens. It is not the market. It allows me to observe the market, focusing on what the herd’s emotions indicate as the next probable move - up or down. But that’s a critical word, probable, for nothing is certain in this realm. Which is why one must appreciate that a lens, be it one whose roots are of a fundamental or technical nature, requires more of a person than mere possession.
More ‘than just a lens’ comes in the form of a trading plan, and guts.
You need to know when to trade or you might as well just throw darts at a board. For what it’s worth, my trading plan has a lens that demands action in three instances, and three instances alone.
The trading plan itself can be broken down to three parts as well. Only three? Why not. Good things are simple things. There’s no need to rely on four or five or 15 or 22 parts. Just three will do; a market tool (the lens), money management and a psychological approach to complete the trio.
Money management isn’t difficult to describe. It’s a plan or system for containing losses (and letting profits run) through effective management of actions, limits on capital application and stop loss positions.
What I see through my lens is not always interpreted correctly for the time frame being worked on. If the market tool says buy for the medium term, the short term may prove that to have been a ‘not yet, sucker’ signal. That’s not to say the market tool was wrong, only more complex than my interpretation of the lens indicated. If the immediate movement has gone against you, there is an urgent need for an objective price at which interpretation is absolutely wrong. That’s money management. That’s also when you get out.
MM tells you never to risk more than a specific figure on any position. This may be as low as 2% of your capital on hand, which may limit access to many, many leveraged markets. So suck eggs from the sideline. Or get a job with Goldman Sachs. Meanwhile, limiting access to a market is not the big deal. Ensuring an ability to stop losses immediately when interpretation of what the lens indicates proves to be wrong is. Hence the need for a maximum of 2% capital application to a position.
Bit too esoteric? Hey, I’m doing the best I can here. Moving right along: An individual should not hold onto a position to ‘prove’ he or she is right. That would be counter productive. But, oddly enough, it’s not uncommon, which leads me to the psychological approach, the last but by far not the least of three pillars supporting success.
Why buy real estate? Why trade leveraged instruments? Why save money in a low interest bearing deposit account? We do these things for a reason. What that reason is bears investigation. If you’re doing it for accolades from the digital reproduction of thoughts (hailing from anonymous sources, of course) in a chat-room like this, you definitely need to know that is the reason for your decision to enter your specified market.
You need to know for one reason, and one reason alone, which is to limit losses. When do you exit or enter or hold onto a position? When a well liked contributor on PPRuNe says so? If your psychological reasons for trading, saving money or buying real estate are based on approval of a chat room audience, that chat room audience’s approval will guide you into ruin. Fast. So good luck. Market Wizards, by Marty Schwartz, is a frightening account of how destructive an untamed psychological approach can be if not fully understood.
On the other hand if you know you’re in it to make money and not to brag about it to friends, colleagues or digital reproductions of thoughts (hailing from anonymous sources, of course) in a chat-room like this, the only thing that matters is cutting out of a position should it be unprofitable. This you would do for the psychological reasons underpinning the trade, that being to make money, not hot air.
So there are three pillars: market tool, money management and psychological approach.
Of the USD, there is a very high probability in the medium term that a major reversal in trend has occurred. The sideways movement of the past year, of which most are aware of only one part, the down part, appears complete. The last leg took a long time to play out.
It confused a lot of people, me included. It tried many a person’s patience and savaged perhaps more wallets, but the probability is that the bottom is in on the USD. If that is correct, my lens allows for a multi-year Dollar bull to surge out of the pen.
But I am asked WHY the Dollar rally. Here’s what may be a clearer answer than the above slightly cryptic one. It comes in the form of one word: securitization.
In 1999, normal banking blended with investment banking. What started out in the good ol’ USA quickly went viral, global. The reason is not in any way complex. It’s because Wall Street wasn’t making enough money, bound as they were by the straight jacket of regulator-imposed capital ratios, by borrowing short and lending long, that is, regular banking.
So, with some tricky footwork, main street banks thwarted capital ratios via the creation of the shadow banking system. Australian banks are exposed. The big-four hope to fool everyone into thinking they’re not exposed, but they bought into CDS’, CDO’s and all the other exotic instruments created at the beginning of this decade (we’re not done with the decade until the end of 2010 by the way).
At any rate, the shadow banking system has not shrunk since the big rally in equities circa March 2009. On the contrary, the system has gone further underground and, indeed, grown exponentially. Which is to say that of the 60 trillion plus, yes, that’s trillion, dollars in credit default swaps and collateralized debt obligations created by the former Lehman Brothers and the current Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs et al market wizards, none of it has been cleared. NONE of it.
De-leveraging is now the operative word.
Martin Wolf (FT), Bill Gross (PIMCO) and yes Ambrose Evans-Pritchard have been blowing on that trumpet for some time. Few listen. Those who hate the tune attempt to belittle and discredit those that hear the music and fear it. Wolf, Gross, EP are referred to as pessimists. And here’s the irony of it all. They are learned, studied, immensely well read and connected individuals with pedigree! They are anything but pessimists. They’re realists, critical analysts who have not allowed their critical faculties to just tune out because the herd says we’re done with that annoying retraction of ever-upward growth.
The tune will play. As it does, the instrument demanded in return for assets requiring selling off are not apples, woodchips, pens, trinkets, promises, IOU’s or even a fine piece of ass. The instrument will be dollars, for the world’s massive overhang of debt is denominated in USD. It is for this reason, this FUNDAMENTAL reason, for the Dollar rally.
Don’t be fooled. While the US Fed has been busy buying Treasuries and printing money via quantitative easing, the amounts they’ve come up with have not come anywhere near the overhang of debt out there. What’s a few trillion to what is a minimum of $60 trillion in debt? You need to really think about those figures. As for me spruiking the USD, all I can say is tell him he’s dreamin’. That’s so ridiculous it’s laughable.
But if you need objective proof of that, go to the library and hire the tome that is William Greider’s ‘Secrets of the Temple – How the Federal Reserve Works’. Or buy the book. Far from being a Dan Brown look-alike, Greider is a consummate professional leading you through history, and reality, of meetings and the results of actions by the Fed to try and control the direction of their currency, the USD.
To wit, no amount of money is enough if going against a market as big as the currencies market. No matter if you are the Fed, the Bank of Japan, the ECB or have four Pratt and Whitney’s at your disposal: if the market decides the Euro will cave, the Euro will do just that. If the market decides the Dollar will rally, the Dollar will do just that.
Which makes Thomas L Friedman so ridiculous when he asks in today’s IHT if China is “the next Enron”. There he is, giving advice to James Chanos that you should ‘never short a country with $2 trillion dollars in reserves’. He failed to mention the daily, that’s daily not monthly, amount changing hands in the Forex market is in excess of that whopping reserve. Or that he is not John Chanos.
If I’m going to drop names, I might as well end by dropping another. Jaron Lanier is a digital pioneer. He too comes with pedigree. Lanier is the guy that coined the phrase ‘virtual reality’. I think that qualifies him, somewhat, to speak of the Web. So here’s the thing: he wonders “if the Web’s structure and ideology are fostering nasty group dynamics and mediocre collaborations”. I wonder about that, too. I wonder about the application of such to PPRuNe. In Lanier’s new book ‘You Are Not a Gadget’ he blames the Web’s drive-by anonymity for fostering vicious pack behavior on blogs, forums and social networks.
I read most of that in one of those paper’s you find yourself reading. The writer is a New Yorker, John Tierney. Look him up. He’s not bad. The article reminded me of this thread, and how a mere OPINION of mine on the likely direction of the USD led to manifestations of pure hatred in private messages from someone I don’t know, have never heard of or spoken to, and yet thinks he has the RIGHT to send vitriolic bile my way, your way, any way, because of my temerity to dare post a one-liner here, in the most hallowed sanctuary that is PPRuNe, indicating the likely movement of the USD.
The bottom is in, at any rate. The lens I use indicated 74 on the Dollar Index. The market stopped dead at 74.2 and has rallied ever since. The likely direction is short term sideways, medium term up (way up) and long term down (way down). Whatever.
If your (active) interest is real estate, bonds, equities or securities, it can only be but patently obvious that the terrain is not always friendly. If you are yet to dip your toe in the waters of finance, do say carefully. And good luck with your learning. Don’t be put off by the mosquitoes that need swatting every now and then, or by the rather long time it takes to truly understand the meaning and essential value in the strength of having three very solid pillars to your trading foundation.
Buy dollars, sell China (medium term, not long term).
With respect to Gnads.
Last edited by 4PW's; 14th Jan 2010 at 08:25.
Not sure if Ian Gordon has been mentioned in this forum previously, but go to "longwavegroup.com", then SPECIAL EDITIONS and have a read of "Dow 1000 is not a silly number".
Doom and gloom, I know, but this guy saw the GFC coming - just saying...
Doom and gloom, I know, but this guy saw the GFC coming - just saying...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GFC II the return
Gotta wonder if the likes of 4PW is right given the last 7 days on the markets
Bloodbath on share markets | News.com.au
Bloodbath on share markets | News.com.au
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok. I'm on a mission here. Big deal going on tomorrow, but this is a five minute window in which I'm having a break. So I'm reviewing data, writing and sending. I think of and quickly click onto this chat site, and yeah, I'm popping one off.
Generally hunkered down on the financial front, so no drama there. But let me put it to you this way: think of an avalanche. The markets are one, and their roll downhill has started. It will gather pace very quickly, with far more speed and devastation that what we went through in '08.
Gold? Laughable. China? Same. Any and all equities? Get ready to burn your scrips. Short a financial product? Can you see the short selling bans on the horizon? I can. Along with potential counter-party risk where the system is overloaded, and collapses.
This is beyond most people's awareness, which is fine.
I wouldn't rag on my son for not knowing w.t.f. about getting an airplane prepped for flight; started without burning the hot section; taxiing without ending up in the rhubarb; knowing HOW to rotate, or when; not getting lost at night on the way from, say, Singapore to London.
That's because he's 17 and he does not know jack **** about flying airplanes, or about markets, how they work, what drives them and how to profit (and limit losses) from them. I wouldn't rag on him for that.
Land, art, collectibles, commodities (talk to me about copper, i dare you), bonds, stocks; toast. Burnt bloody toast mate. Sorry, but if you can't fly an airplane you shouldn't be in the cockpit. Same goes for financial products. If you DON'T understand them, you should be in cash. If you DO understand them, you would be.
This is NOT pessimism. It's about not having faith in my son's ability to pole a whale all the way to London. It's about knowing why and when an avalanche is about to roll, and getting the phuck out of the way.
But hey, what would I know.
Generally hunkered down on the financial front, so no drama there. But let me put it to you this way: think of an avalanche. The markets are one, and their roll downhill has started. It will gather pace very quickly, with far more speed and devastation that what we went through in '08.
Gold? Laughable. China? Same. Any and all equities? Get ready to burn your scrips. Short a financial product? Can you see the short selling bans on the horizon? I can. Along with potential counter-party risk where the system is overloaded, and collapses.
This is beyond most people's awareness, which is fine.
I wouldn't rag on my son for not knowing w.t.f. about getting an airplane prepped for flight; started without burning the hot section; taxiing without ending up in the rhubarb; knowing HOW to rotate, or when; not getting lost at night on the way from, say, Singapore to London.
That's because he's 17 and he does not know jack **** about flying airplanes, or about markets, how they work, what drives them and how to profit (and limit losses) from them. I wouldn't rag on him for that.
Land, art, collectibles, commodities (talk to me about copper, i dare you), bonds, stocks; toast. Burnt bloody toast mate. Sorry, but if you can't fly an airplane you shouldn't be in the cockpit. Same goes for financial products. If you DON'T understand them, you should be in cash. If you DO understand them, you would be.
This is NOT pessimism. It's about not having faith in my son's ability to pole a whale all the way to London. It's about knowing why and when an avalanche is about to roll, and getting the phuck out of the way.
But hey, what would I know.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4PW's
I wish there were more posters on here with the literary skills that you have demonstrated.
I will not comment on the wisdom or otherwise of your messages, but I thoroughly enjoyed reading your posts.
I will not comment on the wisdom or otherwise of your messages, but I thoroughly enjoyed reading your posts.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, most insightful. I just hope you're not entirly correct!!! An interesting decision facing the EU re Greece, Spain and Portugal. How this instability will "mesh" with north America markets . . . . . . . The trillion dollar question???
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Maintain a long term appreciation
2. Invest in what you know
3. Largely invest the money you've aquired by living within your means
There. Simple. No requirement for shock headlines, doomsday quotes or 'a little bit fancy' grammar.
4. Avoid predicting currencies and forecasting index levels on public forums - you look like an arse.
2. Invest in what you know
3. Largely invest the money you've aquired by living within your means
There. Simple. No requirement for shock headlines, doomsday quotes or 'a little bit fancy' grammar.
4. Avoid predicting currencies and forecasting index levels on public forums - you look like an arse.
Naked,
If you are talking about long term appreciation, I would suggest the year 2018 onwards if you are serious.
Check this out (yes again)... HS Dent | Economic Research, Trends, Forecast, Asset Protection
b.
If you are talking about long term appreciation, I would suggest the year 2018 onwards if you are serious.
Check this out (yes again)... HS Dent | Economic Research, Trends, Forecast, Asset Protection
b.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arnold, if you look at the history of 4PWs exchange rate predictions, he isn't even square yet. The only thing in his favour (and which has me now spooked) is that large financial houses, banks etc -see financial rags- are predicting that the AUD will hit parity with the USD this year. As soon as a lot of economists all start pointing in one direction, it's time to run in the other.
Bushy- he may be eloquent, but it's just a case of baffling with bull****. His reasoning is bizarre (to be kind).
As for the rest; naked-recommiting's post gets the "OUTSTANDING" award. Market ructions (even large ones) are buying opportunities- not signs that the market is finished.
Bushy- he may be eloquent, but it's just a case of baffling with bull****. His reasoning is bizarre (to be kind).
As for the rest; naked-recommiting's post gets the "OUTSTANDING" award. Market ructions (even large ones) are buying opportunities- not signs that the market is finished.