Discussion:
Bannon throws Trump under the bus
(too old to reply)
islander
2018-01-04 00:41:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In the news today: Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.

It looks like the honeymoon is over. Bannon's new book, *Fire and Fury:
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion. He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.

Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
Josh Rosenbluth
2018-01-04 01:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.

Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.

The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
El Castor
2018-01-04 08:41:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
b***@gmail.com
2018-01-04 09:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Let us hope that your attitude (and the cohort who agree) doesn't bring
more disrepute, corruption, mendacity, ignorance and political incompetence
than Trump has managed to do so far. And there is 3 more years looming.

One would suppose it would be noticed that Trump brings woe to everyone
who associates with him. It is a wise course to stand at arm's length
to this bozo.
El Castor
2018-01-04 20:43:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Let us hope that your attitude (and the cohort who agree) doesn't bring
more disrepute, corruption, mendacity, ignorance and political incompetence
than Trump has managed to do so far. And there is 3 more years looming.
One would suppose it would be noticed that Trump brings woe to everyone
who associates with him. It is a wise course to stand at arm's length
to this bozo.
3 more years? You mean 7, don't you?
Emily
2018-01-04 23:31:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 12:43:00 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Let us hope that your attitude (and the cohort who agree) doesn't bring
more disrepute, corruption, mendacity, ignorance and political incompetence
than Trump has managed to do so far. And there is 3 more years looming.
One would suppose it would be noticed that Trump brings woe to everyone
who associates with him. It is a wise course to stand at arm's length
to this bozo.
3 more years? You mean 7, don't you?
Would you care to make a wager?
El Castor
2018-01-05 03:40:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Emily
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 12:43:00 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Let us hope that your attitude (and the cohort who agree) doesn't bring
more disrepute, corruption, mendacity, ignorance and political incompetence
than Trump has managed to do so far. And there is 3 more years looming.
One would suppose it would be noticed that Trump brings woe to everyone
who associates with him. It is a wise course to stand at arm's length
to this bozo.
3 more years? You mean 7, don't you?
Would you care to make a wager?
Will Hillary be his opponent again?
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-05 04:46:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 19:40:51 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by Emily
On Thu, 04 Jan 2018 12:43:00 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by b***@gmail.com
Post by El Castor
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Let us hope that your attitude (and the cohort who agree) doesn't bring
more disrepute, corruption, mendacity, ignorance and political incompetence
than Trump has managed to do so far. And there is 3 more years looming.
One would suppose it would be noticed that Trump brings woe to everyone
who associates with him. It is a wise course to stand at arm's length
to this bozo.
3 more years? You mean 7, don't you?
Would you care to make a wager?
Will Hillary be his opponent again?
Too bad Al Franken won't be his opponent, if he lasts
the whole four years, but I think Al Franken has had his
fill of politics by now, which IMO is too bad for the USA.
m***@my-deja.com
2018-01-04 11:21:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
El Castor
2018-01-04 21:02:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
Lawrence Akutagawa
2018-01-04 21:27:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by islander
In the news today: Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion. He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
***** This line separates my response from the foregoing ******

Actually, The Whining Donald - being the different as different as can be
president that he The Whining Donald clearly is - should seriously consider
invading and annexing all of Mexico much as Putin did with the Crimea. A
number of key pluses results from such action:

- There will be no need whatsoever to build that wall between current day
United States and current day Mexico.
- The long held Manifest Destiny dream by those American of yesteryear will
be fulfilled.
- Inasmuch as all of present day Mexico becomes American territory, all
inhabitants become US citizens and - as US citizens - can go wherever they
want in the United States legally and freely, thereby freeing up precious
ICE resources to now really concentrate on those Muslims and other
undesirables.
- All of Mexico's oil resources become that of the US.
- NAFTA will no longer be a concern/problem for The Whining Donald.
- All those elitists among the rich, the wealthy, and the privileged can now
have Hispanic servants without fear of ICE raids.
- And if a wall is still needed, such a wall along the southern border of
current Mexico with Guatemala will be much, much shorter and therefore much,
much more inexpensive.
- The truly imaginative would vie for - rather than a wall - a great big
ditch at least a mile or so wide and several hundred feet deep between that
southern border of current Mexico and Guatemala because not only would such
a ditch serve as a real deterrent, but also as a real alternative to the
Panama Canal.
etc., etc., etc.
islander
2018-01-05 19:16:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
Meanwhile the December economic figures are in. Employment is down in
the retail sector (the second largest segment in the US). In December!

Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels. Of course if the bubble bursts and takes down the
rest of the economy again, everyone will be hurting.

Where are the promised jobs, BTW? Employment overall is down and wages
are only slightly positive. If we are approaching full employment,
wages should be increasing if you believe in free markets. More smoke
and mirrors? You got your tax breaks for corporations. Where is the
repatriation of dollars from abroad? It should have started happening
on Jan 1st.
Lawrence Akutagawa
2018-01-05 19:21:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by islander
In the news today: Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion. He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
Meanwhile the December economic figures are in. Employment is down in
the retail sector (the second largest segment in the US). In December!

Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels. Of course if the bubble bursts and takes down the
rest of the economy again, everyone will be hurting.

Where are the promised jobs, BTW? Employment overall is down and wages
are only slightly positive. If we are approaching full employment,
wages should be increasing if you believe in free markets. More smoke
and mirrors? You got your tax breaks for corporations. Where is the
repatriation of dollars from abroad? It should have started happening
on Jan 1st.

***** This line separates my response from the foregoing ******

Have no fear!
because
The Whining Donald is here!
Lawrence Akutagawa
2018-01-05 21:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Post by islander
In the news today: Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion. He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
Meanwhile the December economic figures are in. Employment is down in
the retail sector (the second largest segment in the US). In December!

Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels. Of course if the bubble bursts and takes down the
rest of the economy again, everyone will be hurting.

Where are the promised jobs, BTW? Employment overall is down and wages
are only slightly positive. If we are approaching full employment,
wages should be increasing if you believe in free markets. More smoke
and mirrors? You got your tax breaks for corporations. Where is the
repatriation of dollars from abroad? It should have started happening
on Jan 1st.

***** This line separates my response from the foregoing ******

You can just bet that The Whining Donald is just chafing at the bit to be
able to show one and all that he The Whining Donald is as good as - if not
even better than - Obama in dealing with an economic fallout of whatever
kind, of whatever significance, of whatever duration!
El Castor
2018-01-06 21:02:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
Meanwhile the December economic figures are in. Employment is down in
the retail sector (the second largest segment in the US). In December!
Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels. Of course if the bubble bursts and takes down the
rest of the economy again, everyone will be hurting.
Where are the promised jobs, BTW? Employment overall is down and wages
are only slightly positive. If we are approaching full employment,
wages should be increasing if you believe in free markets. More smoke
and mirrors? You got your tax breaks for corporations. Where is the
repatriation of dollars from abroad? It should have started happening
on Jan 1st.
"The unemployment rate for African-Americans fell to 6.8 percent in
December, the lowest level since the government began tracking such
data in 1972. The reasons range from a greater number of black
Americans with college degrees to a growing need for employers in a
tight job market to widen the pool of people they hire from. "The
African American unemployment rate fell to 6.8 percent, the lowest
rate in 45 years. I am so happy about this News!" President Donald
Trump said in a tweet Saturday."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/african-american-unemployment-hit-record-low-december-52177288

"Average hourly earnings rose nine cents, or 0.3%, in December after
gaining 0.1% in the previous month. That lifted the annual increase in
wages to 2.5% from 2.4% in November."
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2018/0105/931251-us-non-farm-payrolls/

I suggest you be patient and wait for those tax cuts to actually
happen.
islander
2018-01-07 14:50:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
Meanwhile the December economic figures are in. Employment is down in
the retail sector (the second largest segment in the US). In December!
Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels. Of course if the bubble bursts and takes down the
rest of the economy again, everyone will be hurting.
Where are the promised jobs, BTW? Employment overall is down and wages
are only slightly positive. If we are approaching full employment,
wages should be increasing if you believe in free markets. More smoke
and mirrors? You got your tax breaks for corporations. Where is the
repatriation of dollars from abroad? It should have started happening
on Jan 1st.
"The unemployment rate for African-Americans fell to 6.8 percent in
December, the lowest level since the government began tracking such
data in 1972. The reasons range from a greater number of black
Americans with college degrees to a growing need for employers in a
tight job market to widen the pool of people they hire from. "The
African American unemployment rate fell to 6.8 percent, the lowest
rate in 45 years. I am so happy about this News!" President Donald
Trump said in a tweet Saturday."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/african-american-unemployment-hit-record-low-december-52177288
"Average hourly earnings rose nine cents, or 0.3%, in December after
gaining 0.1% in the previous month. That lifted the annual increase in
wages to 2.5% from 2.4% in November."
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2018/0105/931251-us-non-farm-payrolls/
I suggest you be patient and wait for those tax cuts to actually
happen.
That doesn't stop Trump from claiming credit for the report on the
increase in employment in December, actually below the monthly rate
needed to maintain growth. He doesn't have a clue!

The shocker in the December report was the decline in retail jobs, the
second largest sector in the US. The growth sectors were health care
(no surprise), construction (largely due to repairing damage of the
hurricanes) and manufacturing (attributed to a weakening dollar).

But Republican economic policy (and I blame this on the Republicans in
Congress) is counter intuitive. Cut taxes and increase the debt when
the economy is doing well and practice austerity when the economy is
doing poorly. This is what the Reagan administration did, the GW Bush
administration did, and now the Trump administration is making the same
mistake. It will be up to the Democrats to clean up the mess once again!
El Castor
2018-01-07 22:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
In the news today:  Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion.  He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
The book was written by Michael Wolfe, and I believe Bannon wasn't
claiming to have personal knowledge of Trump's direct connection or of
money laundering. Trump's reaction is classic Trump, whine and cry like
the petulant narcissist he is.
As long as he cuts corporate taxes, builds his wall, (etc), I don't
give a damn if he whines, cries, beats his breast, and howls at the
moon. (-8
Do you still believe he will build a wall that Mexico will pay for?
I don't either.
Do you believe he will build a wall that the US will pay for?
I don't believe it will happen Beav. The dems aren't going to
want to support the cost of it. The republicans aren't going to
support the cost of it, because they still have to act concerned
about deficit spending, and it might impede the flow of slave
labour.
I do believe he will put on a great show of blaming others
for the wall not being built, and with his calibre I am sure
he believes most of us are buying his bs.
I believe he will build a wall -- not one the length of the entire
border, but at least in the most vulnerable, wall friendly terrain.
Will Mexico pay for it, probably not. Trump has Dems by the balls with
the DACA issue. Hopefully we will see movement on the wall, chain
migration, visa overstays, and more teeth in border enforcement. BTW I
bought his "bs" on corporate tax cuts and he delivered. Have you
noticed that the stock market is up more than 25%, and there are
plausible predictions of 3% GDP growth this year?
Post by m***@my-deja.com
Post by El Castor
Post by Josh Rosenbluth
Bannon represents a key Trump constituency, the economic nationalists
who appealed to rust belt Reagan Democrats who despise establishment
globalist Republicans like Mitch McConnell. I'm not sure how Trump and
the GOP electorally survive a split between Bannon and Trump.
The book paints a fascinating picture of a dysfunctional campaign that
didn't want to win and didn't do any better once in power.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/michael-wolff-fire-and-fury-book-donald-trump.html
Meanwhile the December economic figures are in. Employment is down in
the retail sector (the second largest segment in the US). In December!
Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels. Of course if the bubble bursts and takes down the
rest of the economy again, everyone will be hurting.
Where are the promised jobs, BTW? Employment overall is down and wages
are only slightly positive. If we are approaching full employment,
wages should be increasing if you believe in free markets. More smoke
and mirrors? You got your tax breaks for corporations. Where is the
repatriation of dollars from abroad? It should have started happening
on Jan 1st.
"The unemployment rate for African-Americans fell to 6.8 percent in
December, the lowest level since the government began tracking such
data in 1972. The reasons range from a greater number of black
Americans with college degrees to a growing need for employers in a
tight job market to widen the pool of people they hire from. "The
African American unemployment rate fell to 6.8 percent, the lowest
rate in 45 years. I am so happy about this News!" President Donald
Trump said in a tweet Saturday."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/african-american-unemployment-hit-record-low-december-52177288
"Average hourly earnings rose nine cents, or 0.3%, in December after
gaining 0.1% in the previous month. That lifted the annual increase in
wages to 2.5% from 2.4% in November."
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2018/0105/931251-us-non-farm-payrolls/
I suggest you be patient and wait for those tax cuts to actually
happen.
That doesn't stop Trump from claiming credit for the report on the
increase in employment in December, actually below the monthly rate
needed to maintain growth. He doesn't have a clue!
The shocker in the December report was the decline in retail jobs, the
second largest sector in the US. The growth sectors were health care
(no surprise), construction (largely due to repairing damage of the
hurricanes) and manufacturing (attributed to a weakening dollar).
But Republican economic policy (and I blame this on the Republicans in
Congress) is counter intuitive. Cut taxes and increase the debt when
the economy is doing well and practice austerity when the economy is
doing poorly. This is what the Reagan administration did, the GW Bush
administration did, and now the Trump administration is making the same
mistake. It will be up to the Democrats to clean up the mess once again!
Obama increased the debt from $10.7 trillion to $19.5 trillion while
GDP grew at a very tepid pace -- not one year of 3% growth. I can't
recall you protesting Obama's deficits.

As for December employment, the Internet is wreaking havoc in the
retail business. I was in a local Sears a week before Christmas and
there were literally more employees than customers. Sears just
announced the store is closing. Before Christmas we had three Macys in
Marin -- now it's two. Book stores are becoming a thing of the past.
Remember record stores? Times are changing.

You may not have noticed, but the stock market is up 25% since Trump
was elected. Why? This is why ...

"Apple, tech companies to bring back $400 billion in overseas cash to
the US: GBH Insights says technology companies will benefit from the
repatriation of overseas cash holdings in 2018. The firm's analyst
predicts the companies will bring in $300 billion to $400 billion into
the U.S. this year, with Apple representing $200 billion of that
amount."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/05/apple-tech-companies-to-bring-back-400-billion.html
Dan C
2018-01-04 03:39:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
In the news today: Steve Bannon's new book blasts Trump and his family.
Inside the Trump White House" accuses Donald Jr. of treason and supports
those who claim that Trump knew about the Russian connection, approved
it, and was a party to the collusion. He also accuses the Trump family
of money laundering in extensive dealings with the Russians.
Looks like Mueller will be talking with Bannon soon!
Blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Same old tired "Russian" bullshit.

Fuck off and die, Libtard.
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he sent another AreaFix message.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: Loading Image...
bill bowden
2018-01-08 01:56:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Islander wrote:
Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels.
It may be a good thing for people buying new bonds but not a good thing for people holding old bonds at low rates. Bond values move inverse to interest rate changes. Who wants to buy your 2 percent bond if the new rates are 4%? You have to give it away. It ain't worth the paper it's printed on.
islander
2018-01-09 00:33:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels.
It may be a good thing for people buying new bonds but not a good thing for people holding old bonds at low rates. Bond values move inverse to interest rate changes. Who wants to buy your 2 percent bond if the new rates are 4%? You have to give it away. It ain't worth the paper it's printed on.
Duh! Even tho municipal bonds pay more than keeping your money in the
bank, now is not a good time to buy. My point is that if the Fed raises
interest rates, munis will make more sense than common stock which has
the reverse correlation to interest rates. Of course, munis are a much
safer investment for this stage of life.
El Castor
2018-01-09 20:42:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by islander
Is the stock market in another bubble? Probably, so watch out if it
continues to grow and the Fed raises interest rates. Actually that may
be a good thing because returns on municipal bonds may return to
reasonable levels.
It may be a good thing for people buying new bonds but not a good thing for people holding old bonds at low rates. Bond values move inverse to interest rate changes. Who wants to buy your 2 percent bond if the new rates are 4%? You have to give it away. It ain't worth the paper it's printed on.
That 2% bond is worth the paper it's printed on, but just less than
when it was issued -- if rates have doubled since that issue date. As
you said, investors wont pay 4% prices for 2% yields. Another factor
is maturity date. If that 2% bond matures next week it's worth a lot
more than one that mature in 30 years. Even the 4% bond can have a
trap door. A bond paying 4% when rates have fallen to 2% may have a
call feature and just might get called.
Post by islander
Duh! Even tho municipal bonds pay more than keeping your money in the
bank, now is not a good time to buy. My point is that if the Fed raises
interest rates, munis will make more sense than common stock which has
the reverse correlation to interest rates. Of course, munis are a much
safer investment for this stage of life.
Not necessarily ...
"Puerto Rico Defaults: Are Illinois And New Jersey Next?"
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4069063-puerto-rico-defaults-illinois-new-jersey-next

The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.

My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-09 22:57:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
El Castor
2018-01-10 10:27:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
'Municipal Defaults, While Rare, Do Occur'
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4066127-municipal-defaults-rare-occur

Here is a famous default I witnessed first hand. I worked in a bank's
retail security sales for about 7 years, and although I was licensed
to sell munis, it wasn't something I did very often. Frankly some bond
buyers are short sighted greed bags -- they will leap at an
unreasonably high yield without stopping to consider why it is so damn
high. We had the phones ringing off the hook from people drooling to
buy these WPPSS bonds -- or wups, as they were called.

"What is "whoops" and how did it come to refer to one of the biggest
municipal bond defaults in history?"
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/wpps-municipal-bond-default-whoops.asp
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-10 15:38:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 02:27:40 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
'Municipal Defaults, While Rare, Do Occur'
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4066127-municipal-defaults-rare-occur
Here is a famous default I witnessed first hand. I worked in a bank's
retail security sales for about 7 years, and although I was licensed
to sell munis, it wasn't something I did very often. Frankly some bond
buyers are short sighted greed bags -- they will leap at an
unreasonably high yield without stopping to consider why it is so damn
high. We had the phones ringing off the hook from people drooling to
buy these WPPSS bonds -- or wups, as they were called.
"What is "whoops" and how did it come to refer to one of the biggest
municipal bond defaults in history?"
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/wpps-municipal-bond-default-whoops.asp
If something like that can happen in Islander's Washington
State, it can happen anywhere. Municipal bonds can be
like playing 3-card-monte: you can be cheated and never
know it, because you can't know what your partners are
doing out of your knowledge. The odds are better with
municipal bonds than 3-card-Monte, but they're still "odds".
I'm comfortably situated: I don't want to risk losing that.

I sure wish I'd invested in Bitcoin when it was just getting
started (and sold it all off NOW!). But Hindsight is a
wonderful thing. In sixteenth century Holland, I would have
wished I'd invested in black tulips and sold them off at the
right time. If one waits too long to sell, one might not be
able to find a "greater fool" than oneself.
islander
2018-01-10 17:06:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 02:27:40 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
'Municipal Defaults, While Rare, Do Occur'
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4066127-municipal-defaults-rare-occur
Here is a famous default I witnessed first hand. I worked in a bank's
retail security sales for about 7 years, and although I was licensed
to sell munis, it wasn't something I did very often. Frankly some bond
buyers are short sighted greed bags -- they will leap at an
unreasonably high yield without stopping to consider why it is so damn
high. We had the phones ringing off the hook from people drooling to
buy these WPPSS bonds -- or wups, as they were called.
"What is "whoops" and how did it come to refer to one of the biggest
municipal bond defaults in history?"
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/wpps-municipal-bond-default-whoops.asp
If something like that can happen in Islander's Washington
State, it can happen anywhere. Municipal bonds can be
like playing 3-card-monte: you can be cheated and never
know it, because you can't know what your partners are
doing out of your knowledge. The odds are better with
municipal bonds than 3-card-Monte, but they're still "odds".
I'm comfortably situated: I don't want to risk losing that.
I sure wish I'd invested in Bitcoin when it was just getting
started (and sold it all off NOW!). But Hindsight is a
wonderful thing. In sixteenth century Holland, I would have
wished I'd invested in black tulips and sold them off at the
right time. If one waits too long to sell, one might not be
able to find a "greater fool" than oneself.
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
El Castor
2018-01-10 22:00:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 02:27:40 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
'Municipal Defaults, While Rare, Do Occur'
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4066127-municipal-defaults-rare-occur
Here is a famous default I witnessed first hand. I worked in a bank's
retail security sales for about 7 years, and although I was licensed
to sell munis, it wasn't something I did very often. Frankly some bond
buyers are short sighted greed bags -- they will leap at an
unreasonably high yield without stopping to consider why it is so damn
high. We had the phones ringing off the hook from people drooling to
buy these WPPSS bonds -- or wups, as they were called.
"What is "whoops" and how did it come to refer to one of the biggest
municipal bond defaults in history?"
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/wpps-municipal-bond-default-whoops.asp
If something like that can happen in Islander's Washington
State, it can happen anywhere. Municipal bonds can be
like playing 3-card-monte: you can be cheated and never
know it, because you can't know what your partners are
doing out of your knowledge. The odds are better with
municipal bonds than 3-card-Monte, but they're still "odds".
I'm comfortably situated: I don't want to risk losing that.
I sure wish I'd invested in Bitcoin when it was just getting
started (and sold it all off NOW!). But Hindsight is a
wonderful thing. In sixteenth century Holland, I would have
wished I'd invested in black tulips and sold them off at the
right time. If one waits too long to sell, one might not be
able to find a "greater fool" than oneself.
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
Oh, Islander, lighten up. My understanding at the time was that there
was an environmentalist led voter revolt in Washington. Before it
blew up, a lot of people, many of whom were retirees, bought those
bonds in good faith when they were yielding 5%, and were hung out to
dry in what I believe was the largest municipal bond default in US
history. The WPPS default was a disgraceful episode in Washington
State governmental incompetence and politics.
islander
2018-01-10 22:53:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 02:27:40 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
'Municipal Defaults, While Rare, Do Occur'
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4066127-municipal-defaults-rare-occur
Here is a famous default I witnessed first hand. I worked in a bank's
retail security sales for about 7 years, and although I was licensed
to sell munis, it wasn't something I did very often. Frankly some bond
buyers are short sighted greed bags -- they will leap at an
unreasonably high yield without stopping to consider why it is so damn
high. We had the phones ringing off the hook from people drooling to
buy these WPPSS bonds -- or wups, as they were called.
"What is "whoops" and how did it come to refer to one of the biggest
municipal bond defaults in history?"
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/wpps-municipal-bond-default-whoops.asp
If something like that can happen in Islander's Washington
State, it can happen anywhere. Municipal bonds can be
like playing 3-card-monte: you can be cheated and never
know it, because you can't know what your partners are
doing out of your knowledge. The odds are better with
municipal bonds than 3-card-Monte, but they're still "odds".
I'm comfortably situated: I don't want to risk losing that.
I sure wish I'd invested in Bitcoin when it was just getting
started (and sold it all off NOW!). But Hindsight is a
wonderful thing. In sixteenth century Holland, I would have
wished I'd invested in black tulips and sold them off at the
right time. If one waits too long to sell, one might not be
able to find a "greater fool" than oneself.
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
Oh, Islander, lighten up. My understanding at the time was that there
was an environmentalist led voter revolt in Washington. Before it
blew up, a lot of people, many of whom were retirees, bought those
bonds in good faith when they were yielding 5%, and were hung out to
dry in what I believe was the largest municipal bond default in US
history. The WPPS default was a disgraceful episode in Washington
State governmental incompetence and politics.
Excuse me for assuming that you would blame it on regulations. I should
have known that you would blame it on environmentalists, governmental
incompetence and politics! You could not possibly blame it on the
opportunists who thought that they could make a bundle off the Hanford
complex and enthusiasm over nuclear power.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-11 01:07:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<snip>
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
Oh, Islander, lighten up. My understanding at the time was that there
was an environmentalist led voter revolt in Washington. Before it
blew up, a lot of people, many of whom were retirees, bought those
bonds in good faith when they were yielding 5%, and were hung out to
dry in what I believe was the largest municipal bond default in US
history. The WPPS default was a disgraceful episode in Washington
State governmental incompetence and politics.
Excuse me for assuming that you would blame it on regulations. I should
have known that you would blame it on environmentalists, governmental
incompetence and politics! You could not possibly blame it on the
opportunists who thought that they could make a bundle off the Hanford
complex and enthusiasm over nuclear power.
And did make a bundle on it, I assume, while their victims
were hung out to dry. That's American Business. What are
you, some kind of commie "fellow traveller" or something,
who hates American business?
islander
2018-01-11 15:12:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
Oh, Islander, lighten up. My understanding at the time was that there
was an environmentalist led voter revolt in Washington. Before it
blew up, a lot of people, many of whom were retirees, bought those
bonds in good faith when they were yielding 5%, and were hung out to
dry in what I believe was the largest municipal bond default in US
history. The WPPS default was a disgraceful episode in Washington
State governmental incompetence and politics.
Excuse me for assuming that you would blame it on regulations. I should
have known that you would blame it on environmentalists, governmental
incompetence and politics! You could not possibly blame it on the
opportunists who thought that they could make a bundle off the Hanford
complex and enthusiasm over nuclear power.
And did make a bundle on it, I assume, while their victims
were hung out to dry. That's American Business. What are
you, some kind of commie "fellow traveller" or something,
who hates American business?
I don't hate American business. I'm not that binary. There are many
good things that American business does. I do hate the expression,
"It's just business" which is sometimes used to cover a multitude of
sins. One needs to understand that the business of business is to make
money. There are more important things and they are, at best, done
poorly in American business.
GLOBALIST
2018-01-11 15:37:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
Oh, Islander, lighten up. My understanding at the time was that there
was an environmentalist led voter revolt in Washington. Before it
blew up, a lot of people, many of whom were retirees, bought those
bonds in good faith when they were yielding 5%, and were hung out to
dry in what I believe was the largest municipal bond default in US
history. The WPPS default was a disgraceful episode in Washington
State governmental incompetence and politics.
Excuse me for assuming that you would blame it on regulations. I should
have known that you would blame it on environmentalists, governmental
incompetence and politics! You could not possibly blame it on the
opportunists who thought that they could make a bundle off the Hanford
complex and enthusiasm over nuclear power.
And did make a bundle on it, I assume, while their victims
were hung out to dry. That's American Business. What are
you, some kind of commie "fellow traveller" or something,
who hates American business?
I don't hate American business. I'm not that binary. There are many
good things that American business does. I do hate the expression,
"It's just business" which is sometimes used to cover a multitude of
sins. One needs to understand that the business of business is to make
money. There are more important things and they are, at best, done
poorly in American business.
And once again taking a discussion group and making it into a mutual admiration instant messenger Oh how much sugar do you put into
your tea and which candidate has the nicest hair?
Oh I don't discuss issues that others talk about
An old farts recipe exchange
Jack Fate
2018-01-11 15:45:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by GLOBALIST
Oh I don't discuss issues that others talk about
Bullshit.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-11 16:15:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
Oh, Islander, lighten up. My understanding at the time was that there
was an environmentalist led voter revolt in Washington. Before it
blew up, a lot of people, many of whom were retirees, bought those
bonds in good faith when they were yielding 5%, and were hung out to
dry in what I believe was the largest municipal bond default in US
history. The WPPS default was a disgraceful episode in Washington
State governmental incompetence and politics.
Excuse me for assuming that you would blame it on regulations. I should
have known that you would blame it on environmentalists, governmental
incompetence and politics! You could not possibly blame it on the
opportunists who thought that they could make a bundle off the Hanford
complex and enthusiasm over nuclear power.
And did make a bundle on it, I assume, while their victims
were hung out to dry. That's American Business. What are
you, some kind of commie "fellow traveller" or something,
who hates American business?
I don't hate American business. I'm not that binary. There are many
good things that American business does. I do hate the expression,
"It's just business" which is sometimes used to cover a multitude of
sins. One needs to understand that the business of business is to make
money. There are more important things and they are, at best, done
poorly in American business.
If they're done poorly, then we shouldn't trust them.
Even if they're done well, we need to consider what
they're really doing (or may be really doing), not just
their propaganda about what they're doing. The
tobacco industry in the USA made very "good"
cigarettes and insisted that smoking was not addictive.
Lucy and Desi smoked cigarettes and didn't
apparently suffer any ill effects, unlike with
vitameatavegamin, but nobody was making any
money off vitameatavegamin.


El Castor
2018-01-11 02:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 02:27:40 -0800, El Castor
Post by El Castor
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
'Municipal Defaults, While Rare, Do Occur'
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4066127-municipal-defaults-rare-occur
Here is a famous default I witnessed first hand. I worked in a bank's
retail security sales for about 7 years, and although I was licensed
to sell munis, it wasn't something I did very often. Frankly some bond
buyers are short sighted greed bags -- they will leap at an
unreasonably high yield without stopping to consider why it is so damn
high. We had the phones ringing off the hook from people drooling to
buy these WPPSS bonds -- or wups, as they were called.
"What is "whoops" and how did it come to refer to one of the biggest
municipal bond defaults in history?"
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/wpps-municipal-bond-default-whoops.asp
If something like that can happen in Islander's Washington
State, it can happen anywhere. Municipal bonds can be
like playing 3-card-monte: you can be cheated and never
know it, because you can't know what your partners are
doing out of your knowledge. The odds are better with
municipal bonds than 3-card-Monte, but they're still "odds".
I'm comfortably situated: I don't want to risk losing that.
I sure wish I'd invested in Bitcoin when it was just getting
started (and sold it all off NOW!). But Hindsight is a
wonderful thing. In sixteenth century Holland, I would have
wished I'd invested in black tulips and sold them off at the
right time. If one waits too long to sell, one might not be
able to find a "greater fool" than oneself.
WPPS looms large in Jeff's memory because he was involved in selling
those bonds at one point in his career. That had to be a major conflict
for him since he is also an advocate for nuclear power. This project
was an attempt in the '60s to benefit from the Hanford nuclear complex
(used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons) by building more nuclear
reactors to supply power to the NW. It was a flawed proposal from the
start but investors were attracted to it by the promise of nuclear power
in the '60s. Washington had a solid reputation for the generation of
power in their use of dams which have produced so much power that we
sell it to other states (including California). But, the proposal to
add nukes was ill advised and ran into problems in what was a very
immature technology at the time. Jeff probably blames regulations for
the failure of the program.
Oh, Islander, lighten up. My understanding at the time was that there
was an environmentalist led voter revolt in Washington. Before it
blew up, a lot of people, many of whom were retirees, bought those
bonds in good faith when they were yielding 5%, and were hung out to
dry in what I believe was the largest municipal bond default in US
history. The WPPS default was a disgraceful episode in Washington
State governmental incompetence and politics.
Excuse me for assuming that you would blame it on regulations. I should
have known that you would blame it on environmentalists, governmental
incompetence and politics! You could not possibly blame it on the
opportunists who thought that they could make a bundle off the Hanford
complex and enthusiasm over nuclear power.
I blame it on the bureaucrats who embarked on such an enormous and ill
conceived project without first assessing the desires of the public.
Of course it was an environmentalist revolt that doomed the project,
but those public power bureaucrats should have invested the time and
energy to see it coming.
islander
2018-01-10 15:01:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
El Castor
2018-01-10 22:05:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
Paid first? Not necessarily. Behind most (all?) municipal bond issues
is a legal document known as the indenture. The bond indenture spells
out, among other things, what happens in the event of default.
islander
2018-01-10 22:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
Paid first? Not necessarily. Behind most (all?) municipal bond issues
is a legal document known as the indenture. The bond indenture spells
out, among other things, what happens in the event of default.
Far be it for me to tell you your business, but bond indenture
agreements specify in detail the terms of the debt. While that might
include different priorities in the event of default, one would have to
be really stupid to agree to invest in a bond where you didn't get first
claim on assets in the case of bankruptcy. Of course, there are some
really stupid investors!
rumpelstiltskin
2018-01-11 01:07:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
Paid first? Not necessarily. Behind most (all?) municipal bond issues
is a legal document known as the indenture. The bond indenture spells
out, among other things, what happens in the event of default.
Far be it for me to tell you your business, but bond indenture
agreements specify in detail the terms of the debt. While that might
include different priorities in the event of default, one would have to
be really stupid to agree to invest in a bond where you didn't get first
claim on assets in the case of bankruptcy. Of course, there are some
really stupid investors!
I'd be one of those. It's too boring. The safest thing for me
is not to invest in bonds, since I don't want to make a career
poring over documents to see what they say, and then from
that try to figure out what they really mean.
El Castor
2018-01-11 02:46:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
Paid first? Not necessarily. Behind most (all?) municipal bond issues
is a legal document known as the indenture. The bond indenture spells
out, among other things, what happens in the event of default.
Far be it for me to tell you your business, but bond indenture
agreements specify in detail the terms of the debt. While that might
include different priorities in the event of default, one would have to
be really stupid to agree to invest in a bond where you didn't get first
claim on assets in the case of bankruptcy. Of course, there are some
really stupid investors!
Well, after seven years of coordinating the receipt and delivery of
customer securities for which we were custodian, I spent several more
years in retail sales of securities, and then became a trustee for
municipal bond issues. Reading indentures, and ensuring compliance,
was part of my job. How I got from there to being a Novell CNE and
installing PC networks for the same bank is a long story. (-8
islander
2018-01-11 15:08:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
Paid first? Not necessarily. Behind most (all?) municipal bond issues
is a legal document known as the indenture. The bond indenture spells
out, among other things, what happens in the event of default.
Far be it for me to tell you your business, but bond indenture
agreements specify in detail the terms of the debt. While that might
include different priorities in the event of default, one would have to
be really stupid to agree to invest in a bond where you didn't get first
claim on assets in the case of bankruptcy. Of course, there are some
really stupid investors!
Well, after seven years of coordinating the receipt and delivery of
customer securities for which we were custodian, I spent several more
years in retail sales of securities, and then became a trustee for
municipal bond issues. Reading indentures, and ensuring compliance,
was part of my job. How I got from there to being a Novell CNE and
installing PC networks for the same bank is a long story. (-8
IIRC, you once posted that you didn't like what you were doing.
El Castor
2018-01-11 19:23:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
Paid first? Not necessarily. Behind most (all?) municipal bond issues
is a legal document known as the indenture. The bond indenture spells
out, among other things, what happens in the event of default.
Far be it for me to tell you your business, but bond indenture
agreements specify in detail the terms of the debt. While that might
include different priorities in the event of default, one would have to
be really stupid to agree to invest in a bond where you didn't get first
claim on assets in the case of bankruptcy. Of course, there are some
really stupid investors!
Well, after seven years of coordinating the receipt and delivery of
customer securities for which we were custodian, I spent several more
years in retail sales of securities, and then became a trustee for
municipal bond issues. Reading indentures, and ensuring compliance,
was part of my job. How I got from there to being a Novell CNE and
installing PC networks for the same bank is a long story. (-8
IIRC, you once posted that you didn't like what you were doing.
Like most people, probably even yourself, some I liked, and some I
didn't. Ironically, looking back on a lifetime of work, I suppose the
years I spent working with computers were my favorite. I lived through
a period in which seas of desks littered with papers were replaced by
seas of computers, and I had something to do with it. (-8
islander
2018-01-11 22:12:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by El Castor
Post by islander
Post by rumpelstiltskin
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018 12:42:30 -0800, El Castor
<snip>
Post by El Castor
The reverse correlation you described is stronger for bonds than
stocks for the simple reason that as interest rates rise, bond prices
fall to keep yields of existing bond issues in line with current
interest rates. Prices of stocks in which their share price is closely
tied to dividend yields (ex. utilities) may behave much like bonds and
weaken in price, but because rising interest rates are associated with
a strong economy, job growth, and increased corporate profits, most
stock prices tend to rise.
My own philosophy is that people our age should have a mixture of
stocks and bonds, with the ratio tied to risk tolerance. In my case
it's 50/50, which in the long run has served us well.
Maybe I'm just overly paranoid, but what happens if
one owns a municipal bond for a city such as Detroit,
which goes bankrupt?
There is always risk in investing. It is rare for a city or a state to
go bankrupt, but it does happen and you take a haircut. In the
bankruptcy proceedings, if there are any assets left you get paid first.
Paid first? Not necessarily. Behind most (all?) municipal bond issues
is a legal document known as the indenture. The bond indenture spells
out, among other things, what happens in the event of default.
Far be it for me to tell you your business, but bond indenture
agreements specify in detail the terms of the debt. While that might
include different priorities in the event of default, one would have to
be really stupid to agree to invest in a bond where you didn't get first
claim on assets in the case of bankruptcy. Of course, there are some
really stupid investors!
Well, after seven years of coordinating the receipt and delivery of
customer securities for which we were custodian, I spent several more
years in retail sales of securities, and then became a trustee for
municipal bond issues. Reading indentures, and ensuring compliance,
was part of my job. How I got from there to being a Novell CNE and
installing PC networks for the same bank is a long story. (-8
IIRC, you once posted that you didn't like what you were doing.
Like most people, probably even yourself, some I liked, and some I
didn't. Ironically, looking back on a lifetime of work, I suppose the
years I spent working with computers were my favorite. I lived through
a period in which seas of desks littered with papers were replaced by
seas of computers, and I had something to do with it. (-8
I've seen the seas of desks, both in the government and in industry.
Not pleasant! I was allocated 35 sq ft of space whether I needed it or
not. Things got better in academia where I had my own office (with a
door!). Actually, I had my own office at DARPA. I even had a carpet on
the floor! I've always had computers. At Stanford I had two, but that
was because I raised the money to outfit the research facility where I
worked with computers for everyone including students. It was a major
change in how research was done.

I worked a lot in the nuts and bolts of computing early in my career,
even learning how to program on the world's first transistorized
computer, a Philco Transac 1000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philco_computers#SOLO A nice machine! I
was part of a team that designed special purpose computers during my
first 10 years at NSA.

bill bowden
2018-01-11 17:58:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Islander wrote:
Duh! Even tho municipal bonds pay more than keeping your money in the
bank, now is not a good time to buy. My point is that if the Fed raises
interest rates, munis will make more sense than common stock which has
the reverse correlation to interest rates. Of course, munis are a much
safer investment for this stage of life.
I don't know where you got the idea that stocks have a reverse correlation to interest rates. It makes no sense and is a silly idea. If rates are going up, it means the economy is doing better and companies are booking greater profits and stock values are increasing. You don't buy stocks when they are going down or sell stocks when they are going up. That's a fool's game. I bought my one share of AMZN at $998 which was a ridiculous high price and it's $1200 now 5 months later. I may be a poor man, but I just made a 20% profit on a stock that was considered way overvalued. I can buy 17 large bottles of Kessler with my profits.
islander
2018-01-11 18:27:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by islander
Duh! Even tho municipal bonds pay more than keeping your money in the
bank, now is not a good time to buy. My point is that if the Fed raises
interest rates, munis will make more sense than common stock which has
the reverse correlation to interest rates. Of course, munis are a much
safer investment for this stage of life.
I don't know where you got the idea that stocks have a reverse correlation to interest rates. It makes no sense and is a silly idea. If rates are going up, it means the economy is doing better and companies are booking greater profits and stock values are increasing. You don't buy stocks when they are going down or sell stocks when they are going up. That's a fool's game. I bought my one share of AMZN at $998 which was a ridiculous high price and it's $1200 now 5 months later. I may be a poor man, but I just made a 20% profit on a stock that was considered way overvalued. I can buy 17 large bottles of Kessler with my profits.
No, when interest rates go up, it means that there is less money for
expansion and/or costs go up. The FED raises interest rates to cool the
economy.
Loading...