Thread: Can somebody please explain to me why?

The market has an emotional index, I forget the moniker for it, and this plays a huge part, you must know that the traders and stock companies dont care about the little guys ( anyone not an accredited investor, with liquidity of 250k or more) so because they care about big business solely as means for making money, whenever Obama suggests more regulation it kills the free captial market that drives this country.

Regulations can be good if they help the consumer and protect him, but I see most of the regulations helping big governement these days, although some laws have been very helpful, like the law passed for creditors recently, that one worked.

It seems for everyone one that works 10 bomb or more. oh well when your making omlets u break eggs I guess., better then a president stuck on status quo.

Cheers
David

Originally Posted by fccexpert

How exactly is the stock market gambling with other folks hard earned money? The last time I looked, the only money I had in the stock market was money I earned by my own hard work.

If you'd bought shares in one of the recently failed British banks, the value of said shares plummeted because of the cavalier attitude of those managing and investing the bank's assets.
You might have been one of 'the other folks' who trusted the bank's management to manage the money prudently. Instead they took outrageous risks, which in any other sphere would be described as gambling.

Originally Posted by gugi

Huh? You implied that your retirement is contingent on the stock market's response to the government's public announcements.
How should I put it, if you are paid in stock instead of legal tender, you have a serious problem. If you are willingly converting your money into stocks assuming that risk is your own fault and as I pointed out it doesn't take government action for your stock to loose all of its value, government inaction is just as good if not better at it.
I just don't understand the whine when the stock market has been propped to its current level largely by the big government bailouts. Short memory?

I am unaware of any big government bailouts proping up the stock market, can you support this with any facts? I am also unaware of any examples of how government inaction has resulted in a serious decline in the stock market. In fact, I know of few if any cases where government inaction has ever resulted in anything bad. Government action on the other hand almost always either 1) makes things worse or 2) creates more and bigger problems than any it solved.

Your first reply was non-responsive because the question was why the market always falls when President Obama or others in his administration talk about the economy. The implied fact that was not only not in evidence and was actually false was that I owned Lehman Bros. stock. Never have.

Originally Posted by welshwizard

If you'd bought shares in one of the recently failed British banks, the value of said shares plummeted because of the cavalier attitude of those managing and investing the bank's assets.
You might have been one of 'the other folks' who trusted the bank's management to manage the money prudently. Instead they took outrageous risks, which in any other sphere would be described as gambling.

But it was the Banks, or more correctly the Banks' management that was gambling with other peoples money, not the stock market. Unless of course you believe that the banks and the stock market are one and the same.

Originally Posted by Sirshavesalot

The market has an emotional index, I forget the moniker for it, and this plays a huge part, you must know that the traders and stock companies dont care about the little guys ( anyone not an accredited investor, with liquidity of 250k or more) so because they care about big business solely as means for making money, whenever Obama suggests more regulation it kills the free captial market that drives this country.

Regulations can be good if they help the consumer and protect him, but I see most of the regulations helping big governement these days, although some laws have been very helpful, like the law passed for creditors recently, that one worked.

It seems for everyone one that works 10 bomb or more. oh well when your making omlets u break eggs I guess., better then a president stuck on status quo.

Cheers
David

Some regulation is of course necessary since the real world is not perfect. I don't really qualify as one of "the little guys" at least not by your definition, but I don't really think the traders etc are looking out for me either other as in coincides with their own self interest (if they do well by me, they do well by themselves as well). I am even less confident that the government is looking out for me either, rather the oposite in fact as I don't think that any politician ever looks out for anyone other than himself and his only interest is in power. The best I can hope for is that they will just leave me alone.

Originally Posted by fccexpert

Unless of course you believe that the banks and the stock market are one and the same.

Sometimes it's difficult to see where one ends and the other begins. The banks and other financial institutions are certainly entrusted with money belonging to their shareholders. The markets will react according to how these institutions are perceived to be performing, or how they think they may perform in the future.

Originally Posted by fccexpert

I am unaware of any big government bailouts proping up the stock market, can you support this with any facts?

Check the correlations of the stock market with the news of bank troubles, in particular failures.
For example find out the biggest drop in the Dow index and look up the top news event of that day.

Originally Posted by fccexpert

I am also unaware of any examples of how government inaction has resulted in a serious decline in the stock market. In fact, I know of few if any cases where government inaction has ever resulted in anything bad. Government action on the other hand almost always either 1) makes things worse or 2) creates more and bigger problems than any it solved.

That's nice in theory, better check the facts see my previous comment.

Originally Posted by fccexpert

Your first reply was non-responsive because the question was why the market always falls when President Obama or others in his administration talk about the economy.

Since it apparently escaped you, I was actually addressing your retirement concern, which was the motivation for your question (clearly very important to you since you chose to include it as half of your post). In case you missed it as well, I have answered the question in your thread title in a subsequent post.

Originally Posted by fccexpert

The implied fact that was not only not in evidence and was actually false was that I owned Lehman Bros. stock. Never have.

No implied facts. My mistake for overestimating your ability to understand hyperbole as a mean of emphasizing a point.
I already clarified it, but let me repeat. In today's market stock values are based on predictions of the future and since the government has enormous power to change the future any public announcements are taken as indication that the original predictions will be wrong, with default presumption of negative consequences.

Originally Posted by gugi

Check the correlations of the stock market with the news of bank troubles, in particular failures.
For example find out the biggest drop in the Dow index and look up the top news event of that day.


That's nice in theory, better check the facts see my previous comment.


Since it apparently escaped you, I was actually addressing your retirement concern, which was the motivation for your question (clearly very important to you since you chose to include it as half of your post). In case you missed it as well, I have answered the question in your thread title in a subsequent post.



No implied facts. My mistake for overestimating your ability to understand hyperbole as a mean of emphasizing a point.
I already clarified it, but let me repeat. In today's market stock values are based on predictions of the future and since the government has enormous power to change the future any public announcements are taken as indication that the original predictions will be wrong, with default presumption of negative consequences.

???????????

It's happening again

splash!!!!