Will the DJIA drop below 10,000 This Year? (10/6 Update: Welcome back, 2004!)

[quote name='FloodsAreUponUS']Its only been open for about 2 years, but its crushing to me everytime I see it.[/QUOTE]

Just quit looking. If you do anything, just contribute less for a while and put some money in CDs or money market funds etc.

But definitely don't close it if you're employer is making contributions. That's free money and just leave it be and wait for it to bounce back.
 
See I am looking at it the exact opposite.....im in my 20s this seems like the perfect time to invest. However.........we only have a few grand in the bank so I hate to invest money that will make me a lot long term.....just for my fiancee to end up loosing her job and need it short term.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']See I am looking at it the exact opposite.....im in my 20s this seems like the perfect time to invest. However.........we only have a few grand in the bank so I hate to invest money that will make me a lot long term.....just for my fiancee to end up loosing her job and need it short term.[/QUOTE]

That's the issue I have. I have enough money to invest, but I simply can not afford to lose it or have it locked up for a long period of time if something were to happen to either my fiance or I.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']See I am looking at it the exact opposite.....im in my 20s this seems like the perfect time to invest. However.........we only have a few grand in the bank so I hate to invest money that will make me a lot long term.....just for my fiancee to end up loosing her job and need it short term.[/quote]
I'm giving my IRA lots of love right now, but it's money above and beyond emergency savings and then some, so I don't really care what happens to it in the near term. Should be nice when I'm 70 though. Hopefully the market stays down till April so I have time to get my wife's IRA opened and maxed out.
 
Yeah, you can't invest if you don't have a good savings base in the bank. Not counting retirement accounts that your employer contributes at no cost to you. Mine get's 8% of my salary each pay check with nothing out of my paycheck and no contribution required by me so I have no reason to care about that money as it's basically free money.
 
[quote name='lordwow']I have enough money to invest, but I simply can not afford to lose it or have it locked up for a long period of time ...(snip) [/quote]

Then, you don't have money to invest.

To channel a little Dave Ramsey, pay off all of your debts except your house. Then, set aside enough money to pay 3-6 months of all of your expenses. Whether you put this emergency fund in a coffee can or a savings account, it doesn't matter. The money needs to be readily accessible within 1 week. Of course, I have yet to see a coffee can go insolvent.

If you have that money set aside, all money above that is for investing. Abuse your 401K first if you have access to funds that have done well for more than 10 years.
 
It amazes me how the general public continues to do the same thing over and over again....buy at tops and sell at lows.

Our economy, actually the global economy, sucks right now and looks to remain weak through much of 2009. There is not going to be a quick recovery to the all time highs on the markets but over years, probably many years, we will get there. We will see the Dow at 15k again.

All that being said, now is when you need to be putting as much as you responsibly can into investments......not at once though, you should be averaging in as the markets continue to swing up and down dramatically.

If you don't know a lot about stocks and don't want to research individual plays or go the mutual fund route, buy sector or index specific ETFs. There are ETF's for just about every industry or global market you can think of. Here are a few of the ETF's I trade a lot, SPY, UYG, QLD, UYM, DIA, SMH.

Also, investing doesn't have to be an "all or nothing" situation. If you want to get involved but only want to risk losing a certain amount of money, use stops. You should never be investing in anything without identifying your exit conditions ahead of time.
 
See we are still a bit short from that. My money pretty much pays our Rent every month($650)and we owe nothing on our car. We have about $3,000 in the bank but need to get the timing belt on her car fixed so that brings us to $2,700. Monthly expenses are around $400 so that means we already technically do have a 6 month nest egg in case she looses her job. However $2,700 may last us 6 months on the bills......but its still an incredibly small amount of money to fall back on and if the economy turned to the 10% unemployment rate many are expecting it could take her quite some time to find another job. So it seems smarter to try and get around $4k at least in the bank before we start dumping extra money into her IRA and 401k.

It has been making me feel torn between hoping the market continues to slide and hoping it recovers. I want it to recover for soundness of mind.....but at the same time it would be good if it stayed down for another few months so I can dump a few grand in investment.
 
I wouldn't worry to much about trying to time the bottom Magus. You can't control what the market does in the future but you can control how much risk you take on. Imagine putting a few thousand into stocks then finding out it's not only the timing belt but the whole engine that needs to be replaced. The best thing to do is to build up your savings first. The first step to investing is saving enough money.

BTW have you considered replacing the timing belt yourself? Some cars it is actually pretty easy to do. The water pump may be easily accessible from under the hood. It depends on the make and model.
 
[quote name='cletus']I wouldn't worry to much about trying to time the bottom Magus. You can't control what the market does in the future but you can control how much risk you take on. Imagine putting a few thousand into stocks then finding out it's not only the timing belt but the whole engine that needs to be replaced. The best thing to do is to build up your savings first. The first step to investing is saving enough money.

BTW have you considered replacing the timing belt yourself? Some cars it is actually pretty easy to do. The water pump may be easily accessible from under the hood. It depends on the make and model.[/QUOTE]

I am not good with cars at all. A buddy of mine works at a shop and took a look over my car for free. He said that the timing belt technically could last another 20,000 miles and is supposed to.....but that he see's alot of Ford Focuses needing them replaced and thus recommends doing it ASAP. Most places I called quoted $400+ so when he quoted me $300 figured was good to let him do it.
 
With car repairs, you might as well take it in the ass. As long as they don't break additional stuff on the car, $300 is cheaper than a tow bill and whatever else breaks on the car when the belt goes.
 
$300 isn't to bad to replace the timing belt. I misread your other post and thought someone was trying to charge you $3000 to replace it. If you trust the guy then go for it. After he takes the old one off get him to show you any cracks or wear and tear on it. It's good to learn how to spot this kind of stuff in the future. Every 60,000 miles or so you'll want to take a look at all the belts and possibly have them replaced.
 
Make sure they fix anything else that might go wrong in the near future in the path of replacing the timing belt. On Ford Escorts, a worn timing belt is an indicator that the water pump is going bad. There's no point in replacing a part twice.
 
Wall Street was trying to keep from influencing the election any more than it already did.

If they had just held the line at 11,000, McCain might be president.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Welcome back, sub 8000!

What magic trick will the Fed use to push the Dow back to 9000 or are we looking at sub 7000 within the next month or both?[/QUOTE]

I was watching CNBC/Fox money/business or some other program this mourning(was watchign through yahoo video so I cant recall the network)and they were implying that they believe the market is sliding more then it would thanks to Obama not picking his cabinet members that relate to wall street yet. They said it makes those on wall street very uncomfortable and bearish whenever they dont know who is going to be in charge in just 2 months and that whenever he names his people the market should rise a fair amount.

Think there might be SOME truth to this but that they should expect it to get back up above 9,000 or anything.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Can we blame Obama yet?[/quote]

You need permission for that? You sir, are not a true Conservative.

~HotShotX
 
[quote name='HotShotX']You need permission for that? You sir, are not a true Conservative.

~HotShotX[/quote]

I absolutely LOVE how people are blaming Obama for the recession in its second or third quarter are the same people who credited Bush I for the economic recovery in the first year of Clinton.

I'll have no problems blaming Obama for the piss poor economy ... in 2010. Until then, Bush, Bush, Bush!

EDIT: Last week, I set the price for the house I'm selling to $500 less than what I paid for it in 2005. Things are looking up for somebody else.
 
He's basically got 3 months to turn it around when he gets in there, then people will start blaming him. Of course, damage control is his specialty, and he'll continue to blame Bush. Bush went in there with a recession and they blamed him almost immediately. Then 9/11 happened. Then 6 months passed, people started blaming him for the economy again.
 
Obama should really be involved right now. The Bush administration has obviously checked out already. They are not looking to do anything proactive, they are just looking for ways to put band aids on the huge shotgun blasts that our economy has suffered and leave the real decisions for Obama.

Since this is obviously the case, Obama should be hitting the media hard not only announcing his final economic team but putting pressure on the Bush administration to move forward with his teams plans.....assuming they have any and God help us if they don't.

At this point everything coming out of Washington basically amounts to, "Just hold on until Obama takes office" and we can't. We can't just wait 60 more days, not with the way the economy is falling apart on a daily basis, not with the automakers on the verge of collapse and GM saying that they don't have enough cash to make it through January.

There is ZERO confidence in the US financial system right now, we need to change that. Seeing an aggressive Obama announcing his formal economic team and at the very least the plans he will put forward on day 1 could help........it certainly couldn't make things worse.
 
Wow. 7500.

You know, I remember talking about how my 401K was going in the shitter last year and people said don't worry. Funny times.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Wow. 7500.

You know, I remember talking about how my 401K was going in the shitter last year and people said don't worry. Funny times.[/QUOTE]

I had a friend going into Economics and law(double major and very smart guy)2 years ago and then again last year argue with me that America wasnt heading in the wrong direction financially. My moms job became shaky awhile ago and I looked around at other stuff like how fast money was funneling to the rich and away from the middle class and it was pretty damn obvious. Yet no one wanted to believe it.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']I had a friend going into Economics and law(double major and very smart guy)2 years ago and then again last year argue with me that America wasnt heading in the wrong direction financially. My moms job became shaky awhile ago and I looked around at other stuff like how fast money was funneling to the rich and away from the middle class and it was pretty damn obvious. Yet no one wanted to believe it.[/quote]


The thing that gets me is some people sound so sure of themselves about the market. Now I certainly don't know everything, but it as if they are basing their opinions on thousands of years of data proving that our current financial system is sound. Let's face it, this is a 100 year experiment that has failed because of greed.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']The thing that gets me is some people sound so sure of themselves about the market. Now I certainly don't know everything, but it as if they are basing their opinions on thousands of years of data proving that our current financial system is sound. Let's face it, this is a 100 year experiment that has failed because of greed.[/QUOTE]

I don't see how you can say this has been a 100 year experiment that has failed because we are certainly much better off now than we were 100 years ago.

Now you can certainly make the argument that the past 15 years have been a failed experiment in excess leverage and credit.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']I looked around at other stuff like how fast money was funneling to the rich and away from the middle class[/QUOTE]

That's such a general statement, though. When has that not been the case in the US?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']That's such a general statement, though. When has that not been the case in the US?[/QUOTE]

Fair, but has it not been going at a much faster rate recently? Everything I have read has stated that wealth distribution is the most unbalanced leaning towards the rich since like the 1930s. We are getting to a point where the amount going to the rich is so great that to historically find times that equal what we are seeing now you have to look to before there was even a middle class.
 
^Feudalism, eh?

...

How was the Gilded Age in terms of wealth distribution?

I don't know a lot of people who work for a company, live on company property, shop at the company store and slowly go into debt like many who lived on coal mines in the early 1900s did.

If I could get enough sleep to restore my imagination, I like a write a story called THX-1136. The "world" is an enclosed Wal-Mart with attached living quarters and no exits.
 
The market is almost at the point when Greenspan made his "irrational exuberance" speech. The SP500 was at 744, the Dow at 6437, Nasdaq at 1300.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']^Feudalism, eh?

...

How was the Gilded Age in terms of wealth distribution?

I don't know a lot of people who work for a company, live on company property, shop at the company store and slowly go into debt like many who lived on coal mines in the early 1900s did.

If I could get enough sleep to restore my imagination, I like a write a story called THX-1136. The "world" is an enclosed Wal-Mart with attached living quarters and no exits.[/quote]

If you're gonna lift a George Lucas story, you might as well use the actual number - THX-1138.
 
[quote name='jaykrue']If you're gonna lift a George Lucas story, you might as well use the actual number - THX-1138.[/quote]

It would be in the same vein as said awesome movie, but contemporary instead of science fiction. Sticky floors, filthy bathrooms, ridiculous congestion and sub par quality all around.

If I remember THX-1138 correctly ...

Humanity became more of a capitalistic hive with no queen bee. Everybody was a cog with a specific duty. No one person was controlling everything. Everybody was following the rules required to make everything efficient. Duvall wanted to exist outside of a system with no exits.

It doesn't really matter. I can't write fiction until I'm getting 6 hours of sleep a night.
 
[quote name='vherub']The market is almost at the point when Greenspan made his "irrational exuberance" speech. The SP500 was at 744, the Dow at 6437, Nasdaq at 1300.[/quote]

MUST...NOT... POST... IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE....:bomb:
 
Wow guess the experts and annalists were right, since Obama leaked his economic cabinet we have seen the market jump around 1,000 points.
 
[quote name='MSI Magus']Wow guess the experts and annalists were right, since Obama leaked his economic cabinet we have seen the market jump around 1,000 points.[/quote]

And we've pledged another $7 trillion in bailouts. That might be related.
 
What's the point in bailing out anything if everyone in the country will have to cough up tens of thousands of dollars to do so? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose?

The media has inoculated this story down to the point that most people have no idea just how incredibly bad this is and will be.
 
It bothers me how they won't let the system fall under its own weight.

I've positioned myself to survive this mostly unscathed. By the government spreading the misery and bailouts around, I'm going to get nailed.

I need my house to sell REAL bad before their fixes destroy half of the companies out there.
 
They really should let these companies fail. I was thinking the bailouts were just given to give these companies time to sell off parts of their organization, but I don't think this is the case any more.
 
[quote name='ananag112']They really should let these companies fail. I was thinking the bailouts were just given to give these companies time to sell off parts of their organization, but I don't think this is the case any more.[/QUOTE]

The craziest thing is that the bailout money is not even going to the places it supposed to. I was watching something this mourning that was an interview with Senator Dodd where he said almost half of the money that has went out so far has been used by companies like AIG not to get money flowing but instead to buy out other companies and expand. The money is not only not doing what it is supposed to.....it is actually being allowed to be spent on purposes other then what it was intended.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']The thing that gets me is some people sound so sure of themselves about the market. Now I certainly don't know everything, but it as if they are basing their opinions on thousands of years of data proving that our current financial system is sound. Let's face it, this is a 100 year experiment that has failed because of greed.[/quote]

So your point is that capitalism fails because... the Dow is low? All right, enjoy your Venezuela.
 
[quote name='DarkSageRK']So your point is that capitalism fails because... the Dow is low? All right, enjoy your Venezuela.[/QUOTE]
Aside from the ginormous body of evidence other than the Dow that supports that hypothesis, the Dow is certainly a symptom. Don't you think?
 
[quote name='speedracer']Aside from the ginormous body of evidence other than the Dow that supports that hypothesis, the Dow is certainly a symptom. Don't you think?[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying we aren't going through some very difficult times but how does a 2-3 year downturn, or even stretching it out and saying 10 years bubbles and busts that have returned us to 97-98 levels = 100 year failed experiment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top