DescentBB

Sell back your portfolio on the open if you haven't already done so. No matter which way the midterms go, you are likely to see more government shutdown/debt default threats, and they stifled growth by about 10% last time. Holding more than 25% stocks could be costly.

Ride the wave sir. Whatever the result of tomorrow, I'm pretty sure life will just plod along again. I'll put it to you this way--it's not like any of the new GOP nominees are more crazy than are already in Congress, so things really won't change all that much. There won't be any government shutdowns, I think the majority of both parties realized how bad of an idea that was.

For six years we've heard about how the President and his minions are going to destroy the country. Didn't happen. If they gain control, which it seems like they will, then maybe it's good because an actual debate about the size of govt might possibly occur. But if the GOP is only going to bring cuts like the Headstart program and student loans, and not talk about the trillions of dollars spent every year on needless defense projects, what else is going to happen except nasty gridlock?

And then after tomorrow we get to bicker for a year before we start fighting about candidates again. What a gigantic sack of ★■◆● this stuff has become.

To the business world at large the only change will be which party gets the greater concentration of bribe money. Today the status quo wins another election no matter which candidates on the ballot get the job of soliciting those bribes for the next term. Yay us.

Besides that, Obama still has another couple of years to continue his last 6 years of 'laser like focus' on the economy. What could go wrong?

the reason I gave the advice I gave is this: Yes, the economy will roll on, and actually(contrary to many predictions), Obama and the Fed have done a really good job, both righting the ship and helping the recovery with limited resources. However, over the past two weeks, I have heard ENTIRELY too much talk of another forced government shutdown, or debt ceiling fights for the next two years. Those, when they occurred during the administration, have brought the growth rate down from between 10% and 20% for their duration and a while past, and that growth never really comes back later(think of it as slightly stunting a plant). Thus, the market will HAVE to correct for that reality, and therefore, this is a good sell point, and wait for the idiots in DC to show their hands more.

It's a shame we didn't elect someone who could run the government we have, rather than electing someone who needs to change it in order to "succeed".

Sergeant Thorne wrote:It's a shame we didn't elect someone who could run the government we have, rather than electing someone who needs to change it in order to "succeed".

huh? Who did that, or said that? Calling for change in attitudes is not the same as changing a damned thing about the government. Making stuff up today?

If I were an active investor, sure, I'd probably be planning to get out, and then back in after the noise dies down.

However, I know enough to know that I have zero skills at timing the market, and I'd certainly hurt myself trying to do so. So I'll just be riding it out.

since this thread has run the course early, on a related note, I toss out this news story:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/ ... ar-BBcXRVl

ever wonder if there is a downside to plunging oil prices?

Foil wrote:If I were an active investor, sure, I'd probably be planning to get out, and then back in after the noise dies down.

However, I know enough to know that I have zero skills at timing the market, and I'd certainly hurt myself trying to do so. So I'll just be riding it out.

x2. I let my "retirement 20xx" lifetime account manager dude worry about all that stuff for me.

If I wanted to make a career out of playing the stocks I'd like to think I could do okay... but I'm just too conservative of an investor to really enjoy doing it.

I'm a conservative investor, for the record, and don't do major repositions very often, but this is one. The last cycle for me was 2007-2009. I've sat pretty tight since then.

callmeslick wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:It's a shame we didn't elect someone who could run the government we have, rather than electing someone who needs to change it in order to "succeed".

huh? Who did that, or said that? Calling for change in attitudes is not the same as changing a damned thing about the government. Making stuff up today?

NO YOU!

Specifically I was thinking of our nation's debt ceiling. I'm sure it wasn't instituted solely as a political tool to allow the opposition to ★■◆● with the incumbents...

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Specifically I was thinking of our nation's debt ceiling. I'm sure it wasn't instituted solely as a political tool to allow the opposition to **** with the incumbents...

technically, our nation HAS no debt ceiling. The Constitution specifically(via amendment) commands that all legitimate debts incurred be paid. The concept of a debt ceiling is completely artificial.

Foil wrote:If I were an active investor, sure, I'd probably be planning to get out, and then back in after the noise dies down.

However, I know enough to know that I have zero skills at timing the market, and I'd certainly hurt myself trying to do so. So I'll just be riding it out.

Yep. We rode it out in 2007. No sense in never getting it back if you sell at the bottom. The market's higher than ever and the bubble's going to pop for sure. Sure, the market will tank in the near future, it always cycles, but the timing on when to sell is just too hit and miss. We'd all be billionaires if we were all prescient on the market. Plus, there's always that pesky capital gains tax you'd have to pay if you did manage to sell at the peak. Right now, cash is king in corporate America. That says a lot about what corporations think is going to happen to the market in the near future. For us, our current strategy of dividend paying stocks may change as my husband and I get older and we desire a more stable place to park our remaining nest egg. We might consider slowly divesting all our stocks over time and park some of the money in cash and the rest in inflation protected treasuries in a monthly ladder, IF the crazy politicians don't muck THAT investment vehicle up.

tunnelcat wrote:

Foil wrote:If I were an active investor, sure, I'd probably be planning to get out, and then back in after the noise dies down.

However, I know enough to know that I have zero skills at timing the market, and I'd certainly hurt myself trying to do so. So I'll just be riding it out.

Yep. We rode it out in 2007. No sense in never getting it back if you sell at the bottom.

very true. The trick was to see the ★■◆● hitting the fan in the near enough future to sell at relatively high prices, and buy back the same stuff a year or so later. The ability to do so, and the liquidity to do so are the main reason that economic crashes make huge money for some folks.

otherwise, the long term strategy you suggest for hubby and yourself seems to be a recipe for trouble(not enough flexibility in the bonds, nor adequate return, and the cash makes you nothing, when you could be making 5% on dividends), but I can be wrong.

callmeslick wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Specifically I was thinking of our nation's debt ceiling. I'm sure it wasn't instituted solely as a political tool to allow the opposition to **** with the incumbents...

technically, our nation HAS no debt ceiling. The Constitution specifically(via amendment) commands that all legitimate debts incurred be paid. The concept of a debt ceiling is completely artificial.

A debt ceiling and the obligation to pay all valid debt are two different things.

Yes, if you create debt, it must be paid, the trick is to limit that debt, not shun obligation.

You concoct that false argument every time the debt ceiling comes up, and every time I can’t put 2 and 2 together on how having an obligation to pay debt, has any bearing on placing limits.

It really sounds like you are saying, there is no limit whatsoever to the amount of debt the federal government can run up, and I guess that might be a fact…without any legal limits in place.

callmeslick wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Specifically I was thinking of our nation's debt ceiling. I'm sure it wasn't instituted solely as a political tool to allow the opposition to **** with the incumbents...

technically, our nation HAS no debt ceiling. The Constitution specifically(via amendment) commands that all legitimate debts incurred be paid. The concept of a debt ceiling is completely artificial.

I hope we can both get our time back on that one...

sorry, Spidey but there is no statute limiting debts. None. It is only a matter of legislative/presidential restraint, and the ability to create budgets that provide adequate revenue for the outlays promised by legislative action.

Yea sure…that all sounds great…but…no prudent economic entity runs without a self-imposed credit limit. NONE!

There is nothing forbidding a law limiting debt, only a law that says all debt must be paid.

I understand what you are saying…perhaps the limits must be placed at the Congress instead of the administration…but as I say…no prudent economic system can operate without limits, unless you want a recipe for disaster.

callmeslick wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:

Foil wrote:If I were an active investor, sure, I'd probably be planning to get out, and then back in after the noise dies down.

However, I know enough to know that I have zero skills at timing the market, and I'd certainly hurt myself trying to do so. So I'll just be riding it out.

Yep. We rode it out in 2007. No sense in never getting it back if you sell at the bottom.

very true. The trick was to see the **** hitting the fan in the near enough future to sell at relatively high prices, and buy back the same stuff a year or so later. The ability to do so, and the liquidity to do so are the main reason that economic crashes make huge money for some folks.

otherwise, the long term strategy you suggest for hubby and yourself seems to be a recipe for trouble(not enough flexibility in the bonds, nor adequate return, and the cash makes you nothing, when you could be making 5% on dividends), but I can be wrong.

Oh, we'll keep the dividend stocks for quite awhile. They're paying pretty. We're just thinking about inflation protection and easy management once we get older and possibly infirm. The TIPS we do have are paying better than any bank CD rate right now, especially the older ones. We've even got an older regular bond that's got a 6% rate. That sounds like gold in this day and age of low interest rates. I'm not going to pay some investment banker or specialist for the "privilege" of managing our account. It's a ripoff. If we'd both had nice pensions instead of the stock market and our IRA's to depend on, we wouldn't NEED to "pay" some "specialist" to manage things for us. Thank you Reagan.

Yesterday, before the election results were known, we had a volatile day. 1.45 points down for me.
Today it looks like I'll probably get that back based on the results favoring the GOP.

So we shall see if the timing of the 'investment tip' was good. Selling on the opening yesterday would have hurt a bit. The warning of a repeat of the government shutdown etc. is sounding more like sour grapes than prophetic though to me. The dynamic of a split congress being removed for one reason.

Will Robinson wrote:Yesterday, before the election results were known, we had a volatile day. 1.45 points down for me.
Today it looks like I'll probably get that back based on the results favoring the GOP.

So we shall see if the timing of the 'investment tip' was good. Selling on the opening yesterday would have hurt a bit. The warning of a repeat of the government shutdown etc. is sounding more like sour grapes than prophetic though to me. The dynamic of a split congress being removed for one reason.

we'll see. Right now, the GOP is talking conciliatory, old-school Senate of compromise and reason. Like I said, there have been too many veiled threats of poison pill type measures for my tastes. It will be interesting to see where the market goes on open today. I'm staying where I'm at until this market corrects a bit.

1.41% gain today (1.39% of yesterdays opening value) , at the close of the first day of post GOP election results. That means all but 0.05 % of the previous days loss is already recovered.
So not selling was the right move so far. I think it is still safe to swim (relatively speaking anyway).

Will, I didn't wish to imply that it was'the' proper moment to sell. IMO, that was a few weeks ago, before the first little trial correction, if one wishes to use hindsight. I just like to sell high and buy cheap when I can, and right now, the market indicators say we are near top level valuation. I just fear the longer term drag that comes from radical governance(shutdowns, default threats, credit downgrades) and figure that sometime in the next couple of years, I am going to have a buying opportunity without excess exposure now. I hope it works out just like that, but likely won't. My real core goal is to prevent disaster and preserve capital while growing it when prudent to do so. So far, my fears aren't justified, as no one is jumping on the 'radicalized' version of GOP thinking. This might be partially due to the Tea Party being beaten down in the Primary season. Maybe Boehner can maintain a sane House, and McConnell can keep the Cruz crew in line and not trying to firebomb government just to grab pre-Presidential campaign headlines.

callmeslick wrote:Will, I didn't wish to imply that it was'the' proper moment to sell. ....

Seems like a pretty clear statement with you pointing out a timeframe of 'now':

callmeslick wrote:Sell back your portfolio on the open if you haven't already done so."

The timing and partisan finger pointing content strikes me more as butt hurt whining than as sound investment advice. That was my read of it anyway. Generally, getting into the market right before the GOP has a big win makes better advice than suggesting selling out...

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:Will, I didn't wish to imply that it was'the' proper moment to sell. ....

Seems like a pretty clear statement with you pointing out a timeframe of 'now':

callmeslick wrote:Sell back your portfolio on the open if you haven't already done so."

The timing and partisan finger pointing content strikes me more as butt hurt whining than as sound investment advice. That was my read of it anyway. Generally, getting into the market right before the GOP has a big win makes better advice than suggesting selling out...

I was reacting to the sudden uptick of blabber about shutdowns and debt ceiling/Obamacare fights. If you wish to time the exact point when the GOP screws the pooch and throws the economy into disarray, be my guest. I merely suggest a very conservatvie position. I was, however, cheered by McConnells insistence, yesterday, that he would not be tolerating government shutdowns or debt ceiling withholds on his watch. Look, if he keeps his word, we could be just continuing to sail upward, all the better for us all. Time will tell.

The “obstructionists” are usually the party out of power. The Republicans will present a budget, the Democrats will scream…”they want to kill the widdle babies”, and the budget will fail to pass…then the media will claim the “Republicans shut down the government”.

Or something like that.

(in other words, Republicans will always be blamed for a shutdown, due to the programming)

Spidey wrote:The “obstructionists” are usually the party out of power. The Republicans will present a budget, the Democrats will scream…”they want to kill the widdle babies”, and the budget will fail to pass…then the media will claim the “Republicans shut down the government”.

Or something like that.

(in other words, Republicans will always be blamed for a shutdown, due to the programming)

there's a positive outlook! Sort of equates to my conservative investment position. Not hoping this scenario plays out, but it seems to be rather likely over the next 24 months or so. My fear is that the Republican approach will be to try to poison the process with dire threats and ultimata, but Mitch says it won't happen.