Posted on 02/26/2007 9:53:40 AM PST by RobRoy
Stroke of the pen....and it will all be 'fixed'.
Like the Tom Clancy novel when foreign elements manipulated the stock market...the 'President' simply took a mulligan and pretended the sell off wasn't valid.
National emergency...postpone the due dates and/or terms of the risky loans.
>>Clearly, she is an idiot as far as investing goes. I never lost more than 8%.<<
Bully for you. Your story is not typical.
"REAL" investors also made money during the crash of '29, but their claims of everyone else being an idiot does not refute what happened.
Yep. And the "lower class" in the US today enjoys more material prosperity than any population anywhere in the history of civilization.
Impossible to take anything he writes seriously. Here, for example, is just a sample of where Joel Hirschhorn is coming from .
This whole silly screed is just warmed-over psuedo-populist rhetoric in the service of classic class warfare, straight out of the latest edition of the Marxist playbook: 'Leninism For Dummies'.
Using percentages from historical highs is a nice way to augment any argument; but the author knows that, or he/she/it being disingenuous?
Seriously, if her portfolio is that low now after the intervening years, she's been visiting her brokerage house to set fire to the remaining money. :(
Is losing 83% of your money typical for investors in the stock market? I hope not! Judging by the several freepmails I read, I did much more poorly than some, who never lost more than about 2-3%.
I money-back guarantee my story is MUCH closer to typical than your stupid friend who lost 83% of her principle. Holy crap, didn't she have ANY damage control measures in place? Someone with close to a mil ought be a little more intelligent than that. My kids do better on investments at ten years old than this dingbat!
As much as you try to doom-and-gloom, and piss on the economy, there are a lot of us out there making nice money, and are diversified enough to survive these minor bumps in the road.
"It is a stewardship thing. It also allows me to buy a nicer bass."
There's a man with priorities. Go Warwick. ;-)
>>They ain't making any more land.<<
That's not really true. It is kinda like "is it true you stopped beating your wife?"
When land becomes actually limited, the statement you made will be germain. It isn't.
There is LOTS of land, at least in the US, Canada and Mexico, and more is being made "available" all the time. For all intents and purposes it is by no means a limited resource.
At least, not for the forseable future...
Inflation and population increase combined should have led to a roughly 284% increase in the 1980 to 2006 timeframe.
I lost a small percentage for 2001-2002, but it was upsetting enough to think that might be a long trend! However, I hung in and invested more aggressively in the down market. That's hard for some people to do, and it's easier to imagine that she stopped buying, and even removed money from the market - and so did not have the right position to make money for the following years, as so many of us have.
Refresh my memory. When did the White House tell anyone to do something as stupid as borrowing more than he can repay.
>>Here's some shocking news..it's the same way it's always been and it's the worst system imaginable except for all the others.<<
I agree. But sometimes it is painful. It is about to be.
I took out a minimal 140K mortgage (paymets are about 15% of my income (before taxes, and benefits)..
Can you imagine losing $700,000 and not doing a damn thing about it but whine? How the heck does anyone lose over 80% of their principle and not do anything about it?
Hitting down markets is scary, but can be very lucrative and fun on the upside.
Diversification is the key.
What are you saying ? That owning rowhouses in the city promotes more of an understanding of private property than an acre in the suburbs ?
I'll bite - how do suburban homes differ from city homes in their private property aspects ?
Let's see - people in cities pay property taxes, wage taxes, city taxes, and usually extra sales taxes, while people in the suburbs pay property taxes, township taxes, and that's it.
I think you have your statement backwards.
>>This story has obvious flaws.
Regardless, Americans are loosing their freedom as a result of debt.
These aren't limited to those who took out risky, sub prime loans.
The average middle class professional has little time to consider the implications of local government let alone become involved. He accepts increased taxation as a means of preserving his neighborhood schools and property value. The result is expanded debt and less freedom.<<
Thank you. You pretty much summed up how I feel about this article. The warning isn't perfect (they never are), but to throw it out completely would be unwise. Very unwise.
That's not really true.
Wow, you are really a frickin wizard, aren't you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.