What are we closing at today?

2»

Comments

  • Down goes IndyMac!

    New question: Where are we opening at on Monday?
  • Markor wrote:
    Yes, the president is just a figurehead. The voters are always the ones to blame, or share in the credit. I don't think believe that's overly simplistic. We better hope it's not, or else we'll really need that closet full of ramen.

    It might just be time. Today, on the radio I started hearing "opinions from real people" who favor going to war with Iran to protect our nations interests.

    Afghanistan made a lot of sense. When we went to war with Iraq, I was on the fence. The evidence sounded pretty strong, but I thought we needed to finish in Afghanistan first before we spread ourselves too thin. Of course, we now know the evidence wasn't there, but some there were a handful of actually legitimate reasons to go into Iraq nonetheless.

    But given where we are today, it's absolutely galling to me that anyone things hoisting guns into Iran is going to solve anything.

    UGH! Maybe it's time to move to Europe. Or Canada at least.
  • New question: Where are we opening at on Monday?
    rcc may be right that "the markets are now managed to a point where a true Black Monday event is no longer possible". We may be in for just a slow grind down. (That said, the odds of a Black Monday this Monday just went way up!) My feeling is that the smart money is getting out en masse, but given their dollar volume they can't do it too fast without causing themselves more pain. Like they unwind their positions by 1% per day, in the meantime telling everyone who will listen that the stock market has likely reached a bottom, like I heard on the radio from a pundit today.
  • Sure, but even a opening 3% down would put a big grin on my face. 3% down in the broader indices would probably mean 6% or more down in financials given the news driving the move. Then there's highly probable "weekend sticksave" to muddy the waters even further.
  • Afghanistan made a lot of sense. When we went to war with Iraq, I was on the fence. The evidence sounded pretty strong, but I thought we needed to finish in Afghanistan first before we spread ourselves too thin. Of course, we now know the evidence wasn't there, but some there were a handful of actually legitimate reasons to go into Iraq nonetheless.
    Seems to me that some 30% of Americans didn't buy the arguments for invading Iraq. A little look into the issue showed that Saddam was in fact always eager to keep his relationship with the US in good standing, so it was obvious that the whole thing was trumped up (even Gulf War I, since Saddam asked the US for permission to invade Kuwait, and got it). The only thing Saddam really balked at was having his anus checked for WMDs, or proving he didn't have any (which Rumsfeld demanded), since of course that's logically impossible. There was also the fact that he was in serious negotiations to be exiled (surely he didn't really mean it).
    But given where we are today, it's absolutely galling to me that anyone things hoisting guns into Iran is going to solve anything.
    My take is that what's happening now is an acceleration of a grab by the current party in the White House for any money they can get, before they lose the chance to grab it with impunity. If they could get something unstoppable started in Iran before the new administration takes over, they'll make a few $trillion more borrowed money before the US implodes for good.

    Bottom line is, the voters have willingly given up much of their power, and now it's costing them dearly. It probably will cost the retirement of most people. On top of all else that has happened, Rove is ignoring a subpoena and it looks like the voters will let him get away with it. Nixon would have loved the current environment.
  • Sure, but even a opening 3% down would put a big grin on my face.
    Same here. As long as I can stay sufficiently employed, the lower the better.

    What's a "weekend sticksave"?
  • Sure, but even a opening 3% down would put a big grin on my face. 3% down in the broader indices would probably mean 6% or more down in financials given the news driving the move. Then there's highly probable "weekend sticksave" to muddy the waters even further.

    My gut says the market will actually turn around next week. Not as part of a long term trend, but rather as just another dead cat bounce. We'll be testing some support pretty soon, and I haven't seen general sentiment change enough to make me think fear has really taken over.

    Might be a good time to sell some stocks though...on a little bounce. If I'm right.
  • Markor wrote:
    Matthew wrote:
    The next POTUS will have inherited a disaster, and will most likely be in office for only 4 years.
    Could easily be true. After all, dumb voters is what got us into this mess. Sad that a party can retain power by ruining the country. We're doomed then.

    If the "dumb" voters end up voting for Obama, are they still dumb or did they magically become the most intelligent people overnight? Seems to me if you're trying to win an election, you're not going to call the electorate stupid.
  • Sure, but even a opening 3% down would put a big grin on my face. 3% down in the broader indices would probably mean 6% or more down in financials given the news driving the move. Then there's highly probable "weekend sticksave" to muddy the waters even further.

    My gut says the market will actually turn around next week. Not as part of a long term trend, but rather as just another dead cat bounce. We'll be testing some support pretty soon, and I haven't seen general sentiment change enough to make me think fear has really taken over.

    Might be a good time to sell some stocks though...on a little bounce. If I'm right.

    I'm leaning toward this as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see the market finish up on Monday even with the IndyMac failure.
  • If the "dumb" voters end up voting for Obama, are they still dumb or did they magically become the most intelligent people overnight? Seems to me if you're trying to win an election, you're not going to call the electorate stupid.
    Can't answer that without getting too political for this forum, so I won't.
  • Markor wrote:
    What's a "weekend sticksave"?

    A sticksave is when a hockey goalie stops the puck with his stick meaning he just barely stopped the puck from going in. There a perception that the government manufactures "good news" when they want to prevent a serious market dislocation. What will happen is there'll be some awful news friday after the bell that everyone stews over the whole weekend, but the Fed or Paulson or somebody will come out on Monday before the open and announce something that'll just barely save the markets from a crash.
  • I learned something new today. Thanks, pf!
  • Way too early. Check futures 15 min. prior to open to get a handle on the open.
  • Is this that sticksave you all were talking about?

    Treasury and Fed Pledge Aid For Ailing Mortgage Giants
    The U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve, capping a weekend of high-stakes maneuvering, attempted to shore up confidence in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by announcing a plan that placed the federal government firmly behind the battered mortgage giants.

    In a statement timed to precede the opening of Asian markets Monday, as well as a closely watched auction of debt by Freddie, the Treasury said it plans to seek approval from Congress for a temporary increase in a longstanding Treasury line of credit for the two companies.

    The Treasury also said it would seek temporary authority so that it could buy equity in either company "if needed" to ensure they have "sufficient capital to continue to serve their mission" of providing a steady flow of money into home mortgages. The plan, which requires congressional approval, also calls for a provision to give the Federal Reserve a "consultative role" in the process of setting capital requirements and other "prudential standards" for Fannie and Freddie.

    The Fed's Board of Governors met Sunday in Washington and voted to grant the New York Fed authority to lend to Fannie and Freddie "should such lending prove necessary," the central bank said in a statement. The move would effectively give the two companies access to the Fed's discount window if necessary, providing a backstop in case the firms were to face a short-term funding crisis down the road.
  • Yeah, but it's a failed sticksave. The sticksaves are becoming less and less meaningful and investors are becoming desensitized to them.
Sign In or Register to comment.