patrick.net

As you can see, not only does the price breach the long term moving average but it also retests the middle of the Bollinger Band, traversing the lower half, prior to another decline.

So thus, there's your setup for the next bear market.

Until this formation re-occurs, we're basically in a type of technical correction much like others in the past few years.

And yes, there will be a bear market in the future; we just need to wait.

As long as my dividends keep coming, actual stock prices don't matter much to me.

In 1987 stocks dropped 20%+ in one day, faster than the recent drop.
Stocks will go up again soon as 1. Weather warms up 2. Panic subsides. 3. Vaccines are made

I believe the bull market may last for 10 years more. If so, I will be rolling in dough. If not, I will be fine anyway.

Like Booger mentioned, dividends help me keep a perspective. I’m getting a few bucks this week so I don’t worry.

I wish I had some new cash to buy some more stocks.

Taxes suck. They just suck. Throwing that out there because I just finished them after nearly 12 hours.

I'm not buying the market in general but a few decent stocks that got beaten down that pay good dividends were easy buys.

clambo says

I believe the bull market may last for 10 years more. If so, I will be rolling in dough.

Cool.....then you will be able to afford to eat dinner at the regular hour instead of the early bird meals. Imagine the looks of envy when you walk into your favorite senior restaurant at 6pm and catch the early birders walking out.

It ain't the price that drives the early bird hour. its the digestive system and the 9pm beddybye...

komputodo says

Cool.....then you will be able to afford to eat dinner at the regular hour instead of the early bird meals.

just_dregalicious says

Taxes suck. They just suck. Throwing that out there because I just finished them after nearly 12 hours.

At least you do your own, so you get a better handle on your finances. I am amazed by how many people use accountants when their particular tax situation is rather simple.

Komputodo, you’d be surprised, in the nicest restaurant near where I lived the parking lot filled before dark with Bentleys, BMW, Mercedes, Jags as geezers went to early dinner.
I would see them as I returned from the beach.
One afternoon a couple of semi drunk females came out and they talked to me.
I think they were on the prowl in the place.
“This restaurant is great!”
“Really? How’s the sea urchin ceviche?”
A confused stare from both.

Evidently even the rich can’t pass up a good deal.

I don’t predict doing this because I am not so hungry at that time of day, rather lunchtime.
But lunchtime prices are generally lower anyway.

just_dregalicious says

Taxes suck. They just suck. Throwing that out there because I just finished them after nearly 12 hours.

Agreed.

There should be no income tax and no sales tax.

There should be only a tax on land and other natural resources which no one created, like radio spectrum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

There should be only a tax on land and other natural resources which no one created, like radio spectrum.

How about air? If all air used for anything but breathing were taxed or charged for, we would have a much lower pollution problem. For example, it take about 30,000 gallons of air (at standard atmosphere) for every gallon of gasoline in a typical auto engine. Under true capitalism, there is no such thing as a "free good," and the user of the air would have to pay for it, same as drawing water from a river. If you pollute air or water, you are passing off your costs to others. Of course, this would not apply to using sunlight or gravity.

Taxes are generally bad except for use taxes which I don’t mind.

I prefer a sales tax to income tax for example.

The problem is that people give away their rights to goldbrick bureaucrats who are rich the day they are hired by the government, if you consider the pension they will receive.

Florida has zero income tax, 6% sales tax, lower gasoline taxes and has far better roads and streets than where I am now in N California. How do they do it?

One difference may be that it’s not quite as easy to get government free benefits there?
Another is the firemen and cops aren’t millionaires.

It would be interesting to see what the state does to save money, although it would never happen in California anyway.

theoakman says

I'm not buying the market in general but a few decent stocks that got beaten down that pay good dividends were easy buys.

Got any ticker symbols to share with us?

HeadSet says

How about air?

Interesting idea. So you'd roll an air pollution tax into the cost of gasoline?

For Patrick, the stock which is beaten down lately is WFC Wells Fargo, it pays a dividend this week.

A couple of years ago I inherited some at $54, now it’s $40.85

I blew it not acting sooner to get out.

But the dividend yield is good and it will not go away and will make money as banks usually do.

I could kick myself. Others like the dividends, I want capital appreciation.

Interesting idea. So you'd roll an air pollution tax into the cost of gasoline?

Think about it. Under pure capitalism, one must pay for land, labor, capital. You propose the owner of the land is the government corporation, with all users of land to pay a "rent" for any land they use. In the same way, with clean air owned by the gov corporation, air would be a resource it's users must pay for. Paying a market rate for both land and air, under capitalist theory, would evolve those inputs to the most efficient use. Imagine if the true cost of pollution were added to the price of coal fired electricity, to the price of diesel and gasoline powered transportation, and to any manufacturing. We would see more local production more efficient vehicles, and maybe even conceptual changes like goods delivered by heavy lift dirigibles and computerized rail. Maybe even advanced sail technology. Although lower in payload, an old time clipper ship was a fast as today's cargo ships. I also think we would be further along in solar, wind, hydro, a more efficient electrical grid with better conductors, maybe mag-lev, and so on. It was just too cheap to use fossil fuels because the cost of pollution was made an externality.

just_dregalicious says

Taxes suck. They just suck. Throwing that out there because I just finished them after nearly 12 hours.

That's why "I gotta guy for that."

clambo says

I prefer a sales tax to income tax for example.

100% agreed.

Why punish sales? It's a cornerstone of the economy. No sales, no need for productivity.

Don't tax productivity and the sales that drive the productivity.

Tax rents! Tax Vacant Land!

rocketjoe79 says

That's why "I gotta guy for that."

Control suits me.

https://www.ispot.tv/ad/AauM/national-car-rental-suits-me-featuring-patrick-warburton

As an aside, it's interesting that was deleted from u tube.

NoCoupForYou says

Why punish sales? It's a cornerstone of the economy.

Because:
1 - The trade deficit shows the US consumes a lot more than it produces and therefore it makes sense to punish sales with taxes, rather than punish production with payroll taxes.
2 - Sales taxes apply to products wherever they are produced. Chinese products sold here should contribute to taxes to the US if benefiting from US consumers. No need to mess up with trade deals.
3 - It automatically taxes more the rich than the poor.

Heraclitusstudent says

3 - It automatically taxes more the rich than the poor.

In absolute numbers, yes. But there will be inevitable whining about "secretary paying bigger %% of her income than Warren Buffet" again.

Heraclitusstudent says

NoCoupForYou says

Why punish sales? It's a cornerstone of the economy.

Because:
1 - The trade deficit shows the US consumes a lot more than it produces and therefore it makes sense to punish sales with taxes, rather than punish production with payroll taxes.
2 - Sales taxes apply to products wherever they are produced. Chinese products sold here should contribute to taxes to the US if benefiting from US consumers. No need to mess up with trade deals.
3 - It automatically taxes more the rich than the poor.

The biggest reason for a sales tax is that the illegals have a much harder time avoiding it.

Any thoughts on oil stocks? Futures are way down, pushing producers and servicers to 2009 recession levels. I bought Halliburton and Exxon today.

Eric Holder says

Heraclitusstudent says

3 - It automatically taxes more the rich than the poor.

In absolute numbers, yes. But there will be inevitable whining about "secretary paying bigger %% of her income than Warren Buffet" again.

No, economists and pundits generally agree that sales taxes are extremely regressive and hit the poor harder by far than the people with more money.

Shaman says

No, economists and pundits generally agree that sales taxes are extremely regressive and hit the poor harder by far than the people with more money.

I don't have any data, but back of napkin math makes me question this. Is the trailer trash guy buying $500 in parts to keep his car running paying more in sales tax than the family buying a $60k Lexus SUV? One purchase can dump volumes of money to whatever sales taxing body is out there.

You are correct though that for the basics that everyone needs (grocery, gas, etc), it disproportionally hits the poor harder.

Shaman says

No, economists and pundits generally agree that sales taxes are extremely regressive and hit the poor harder by far than the people with more money.

You can have a different tax rate on first necessities like groceries and luxury items to help make it more fair.

4 - Even US companies supply chains are using dummy organizations to book profits in low taxes countries, evading US taxes altogether. With sales taxes, there is no such concerns: you sell here, you pay here. And that's that.

WookieMan says

Shaman says

No, economists and pundits generally agree that sales taxes are extremely regressive and hit the poor harder by far than the people with more money.

I don't have any data, but back of napkin math makes me question this. Is the trailer trash guy buying $500 in parts to keep his car running paying more in sales tax than the family buying a $60k Lexus SUV? One purchase can dump volumes of money to whatever sales taxing body is out there.

You are correct though that for the basics that everyone needs (grocery, gas, etc), it disproportionally hits the poor harder.

Heraclitusstudent says

Shaman says

No, economists and pundits generally agree that sales taxes are extremely regressive and hit the poor harder by far than the people with more money.

You can have a different tax rate on first necessities like groceries and luxury items to help make it more fair.

4 - Even US companies supply chains are using dummy organizations to book profits in low taxes countries, evading US taxes altogether. With sales taxes, there is no such concerns: you sell here, you pay here. And that's that.

Right, in the EU basic necessities are either tax free or low taxed whereas regular sales tax applies to other items. I think any tax is a crutch and should be avoided, but if I had to choose between income and sales tax I'd choose sales tax anytime (note that the EU has high income taxes as well so it's not necessarily a role model for this topic - however you get much more in services no matter whether rich or poor for your taxes, in the US you get close to zero services for the taxes paid unless you're on the dole).

Rin says

Until this formation re-occurs, we're basically in a type of technical correction much like others in the past few years.

I admire people who put their faith in technical analysis. As if past numbers mattered more than current events.

The path the pandemic will take seems pretty clear: Just look Italy (500 new cases today), France (61 new cases),... the US is just a week behind France, 2 weeks behind Italy, and a month and a half behind China. Authorities will take very basic precautions, until they panic and clamp down forcefully on people's movements. Then they have a chance to limit the damage - at a high cost.

The actual impact on the economy, though, is completely unknown. How many will continue to work?, how far will things get?, what are the second order effects like defaults? How long will it last? (3 months? a year? 10 years?).

There are times when normal rules don't apply. But is it the case here?

This seems totally unknowable, and as a result the market seems radioactive to me at this time.

Heraclitusstudent says

Rin says

Until this formation re-occurs, we're basically in a type of technical correction much like others in the past few years.

I admire people who put their faith in technical analysis. As if past numbers mattered more than current events.

The path the pandemic will take seems pretty clear: Just look Italy (500 new cases today), France (61 new cases),... the US is just a week behind France, 2 weeks behind Italy, and a month and a half behind China. Authorities will take very basic precautions, until they panic and clamp down forcefully on people's movements. Then they have a chance to limit the damage - at a high cost.

The actual impact on the economy, though, is completely unknown. How many will continue to work?, how far will things get?, what are the second order effects like defaults? How long will it last? (3 months? a year? 10 years?).

There are times when normal ru...

Compared to the US France and Italy did take zero precaution and that's why the CV spread. They will contain it now that they're closing large events and putting epicenters into lockdown. The US is many steps ahead in terms of containment and should level off much faster.

I'm sorry, what precaution did the US take? Travel limitations were a joke. Some people came back from cruises, or even China going through other countries, and are roaming freely now.
The US has contaminated people in some communities, who probably don't even know they are carrying this, and will follow Italy and France. I don't see why not.

Germany now at 129 cases, compared with 66 Saturday.

9 Coronavirus Cases Now Confirmed in Santa Clara County .

Heraclitusstudent says

I'm sorry, what precaution did the US take? Travel limitations were a joke. Some people came back from cruises, or even China going through other countries, and are roaming freely now.
The US has contaminated people in some communities, who probably don't even know they are carrying this, and will follow Italy and France. I don't see why not.

They hospitalize and/or self-isolate cases pretty quickly. They were the first to have airport screens and to cancel flights. The uptick in cases is because they are testing many more people since lowering the criteria. To be expected. Germany has 83 Million people - 129 cases are relevant how? Look at the stock market for how serious it is - it will stay volatile but overall it's adjusting to reality, not pandemonium.

SC: "The new cases are both men who had "household contact" with other people who were found to have the virus — one in Santa Clara County and one in another county, according to the health department. Both men are at home under isolation."

Also to be expected. They should watch and take care of the homeless population.

mell says

83 Million people - 129 cases are relevant how?

Please. When you increase 30% a day, going from 129 to 83 millions is less than 2 months. This is not a relevant comparison.

mell says

SC: "The new cases are both men who had "household contact" with other people who were found to have the virus — one in Santa Clara County and one in another county, according to the health department. Both men are at home under isolation."

Also to be expected.

Right, because contamination at work, at school, in cafes, in trains, buses, etc... are not be expected?

Heraclitusstudent says

mell says

83 Million people - 129 cases are relevant how?

Please. When you increase 30% a day, going from 129 to 83 millions is less than 2 months. This is not a relevant comparison.

That didn't happen in China, otherwise everyone would be infected by now. There's a natural evolution of confirmed cases, rising at first then leveling off. European countries have started to isolate epicenters, even lock-downs, called off large public gatherings/events and flights. You can't seriously do such math - why don't you give a realistic number of how many infections will be counted in Germany. I say less than 2000, before leveling off. Europe is also much more densely populated than the US, making it a bit harder there.

"More than half of the cases in Germany are in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany's most populous state where an infected couple attended carnival celebrations. The Heinsberg district, with 65 cases, is particularly hard hit."

Heraclitusstudent says

mell says

SC: "The new cases are both men who had "household contact" with other people who were found to have the virus — one in Santa Clara County and one in another county, according to the health department. Both men are at home under isolation."

Also to be expected.

Right, because contamination at work, at school, in cafes, in trains, buses, etc... are not be expected?

Of course it is - you will see more and more companies telling their employees to work from home, and school closures if necessary. It's really the large gatherings that spread this.

mell says

That didn't happen in China, otherwise everyone would be infected by now. There's a natural evolution of confirmed cases, rising at first then leveling off.

The slowdown in China is due to very strict measures that are nowhere in sight and hard to imagine in the US.
This is my point: it will grow UNTIL people panic an change their habits.
It will clearly grow in the US. This is already baked-in. It's stupid at this point to be condescending to Italians and French. You are not better in any way. Especially at a time when the CDC can't run enough tests.


mell says

It's really the large gatherings that spread this.

Why?
If each sick person contaminates 3 others, that's enough.
It's a discussion at the coffee machine.