Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
Short sellers are actually needed for a healthy economy.
Biggest corporate fraud in the world.
- Thread starter Dave Taylor
- Start date
Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
So most interesting that you mention Nikola. My company which is one of the largest Caterpillar dealers in the country just started an electric/hydrogen commercial vehicle division and their product is the Nikola semis. I thought Nikola was a complete scam but apparently just the ex Leo was a POS. http://www.ethero.com
Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/shutterstock_253136563-5bfc2b98c9e77c00519aa7a8.jpg)
How Does Short Selling Help the Market and Investors?
Find out how short sellers provide a service to the market by acting as a check against overvalued companies and exposing unethical practices.
Market, not economy...
Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
Does a crashing market affect the economy? Rewind to 2007-9
Zero sum game.
- Gordon Gecko
The "economy" required the adjustment, and the wake-up call to the lending practices of the time. So yes, it affected it just like any other sudden change. Was it good or bad? Or was it just what it was?
Seems my portfolio recovered from 87 & dotcom & housing...
Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
Thanks to short sellers. Maybe you need to rewind and research who John Paulson is. He shorted the sub prime mortgage crisis and grew his wealth from 250 million to 5 billion. That's why the market flushed out the bad. The problem now is that our idiot government intervened and said "too big to fail". That was a BS move that will be terminal to the economic system at some point in time. Rewind even further and you will notice that without government added money the markets have not made a new high since the tech bubble. Policy change and allowing short sellers to do things the right way would make a much more stable and strong economy.
I'm averaging above 10% over the last 35 years. Da f do I care if some people gamble and get crushed while others gamble and win?
I could have told you that an ARM that can go up 6% in 4 years on a 30yr loan was going to default when the buyer barely qualified at the teaser rate. Banks disappeared because of it.
Too big to fail? Every pension plan would have collapsed. That is what too big to fail was. Not the stock holders in aig.
Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
Correct, but now back to the BS glass house that will collapse again and again. Credit Suiesse...fail, Lehman...fail....GM fail...but bailed....Citi...fail but bailed.Why were some companies bailed out but not others?
johnbryanpeters
Well-Known Member
Because they paid off politicians.
The ones that failed were punished for what they did,
and probably the lack of wider ramifications. ????? if ya like conspiracies.
I don't remember Credit Suiesse being involved ?
The government purchased the underwater assets (well loans?) Then canceled the bank debt.
People claimed bankrupcy, or used that market refinance thing that the govt created.
Then the loans went back to the banks with the new rules.
The scenario was going to be the banks receiving the insured mortgage money (assuming AIG could cover it), and ending up with the home,
with the people out in the street. A serious shave on the home value might not have killed them, but again AIG goes down,
and all the people/pensions invested in the secondary mortgage market. (i don't know how mtg resale works,
but it seems to go to places that need a long term, predictable stream of $$)
GM was not bailed out. They were lent money, and new car incentives were put in place.
This stopped foreign countries from coming in and purchasing GM (and Chrysler) in a fire sale,
and the collapse of their pension fund - in some of the most economically depressed areas, this would have crushed communities.
They paid back the agreed upon debt.
Incentives worked a couple ways - it put higher MPG cars on the road, better smog controls, with modern safety features.
And of course gvt tracking devices in each one....
Sure, in the end GM cost tax payers money, but it was a drop in the bucket compared to 200k people without jobs,
and the ramifications beyond that.
----
in any system, "balance" is the least stable position to be in.
small things have an effect - often, the natural force is back to center,
but occasionally it gets so far out of whack, it isn't coming back without
outside intervention.
monetary and fiscal policy is meant to keep balance.
Growth vs Inflation at the macro scale.
----
again - i'm still moving the needle forward, as are so many people that work, and invest for retirement.
Pensions for our public sector workers are still whole.
maybe the frenzy was the problem?
I didn't buy a 6k sqft home on an ARM in 2006 thinking i'd just refinance or sell it for a profit in a few years.
I did buy a home with 30yr @ 10% in 1990, and refi'ed my way down to 15@3.375 in 2010.
Cheap money as you pointed out. Why would i pay off my house when dividend rates covered the interest,
and capital growth would move the needle closer to retirement? (theoretical, cause work pays for the house)
----
Why have "they" been doing such a bad job?
Is a 20% market correction such a bad thing?
I know you are predicting more, and time will tell.
10 years from now, it will just be a blip that gets talked about with the other blips.
johnbryanpeters
Well-Known Member
No fair being rational.The ones that failed were punished for what they did,
and probably the lack of wider ramifications. ????? if ya like conspiracies.
I don't remember Credit Suiesse being involved ?
The government purchased the underwater assets (well loans?) Then canceled the bank debt.
People claimed bankrupcy, or used that market refinance thing that the govt created.
Then the loans went back to the banks with the new rules.
The scenario was going to be the banks receiving the insured mortgage money (assuming AIG could cover it), and ending up with the home,
with the people out in the street. A serious shave on the home value might not have killed them, but again AIG goes down,
and all the people/pensions invested in the secondary mortgage market. (i don't know how mtg resale works,
but it seems to go to places that need a long term, predictable stream of $$)
GM was not bailed out. They were lent money, and new car incentives were put in place.
This stopped foreign countries from coming in and purchasing GM (and Chrysler) in a fire sale,
and the collapse of their pension fund - in some of the most economically depressed areas, this would have crushed communities.
They paid back the agreed upon debt.
Incentives worked a couple ways - it put higher MPG cars on the road, better smog controls, with modern safety features.
And of course gvt tracking devices in each one....
Sure, in the end GM cost tax payers money, but it was a drop in the bucket compared to 200k people without jobs,
and the ramifications beyond that.
----
in any system, "balance" is the least stable position to be in.
small things have an effect - often, the natural force is back to center,
but occasionally it gets so far out of whack, it isn't coming back without
outside intervention.
monetary and fiscal policy is meant to keep balance.
Growth vs Inflation at the macro scale.
----
again - i'm still moving the needle forward, as are so many people that work, and invest for retirement.
Pensions for our public sector workers are still whole.
maybe the frenzy was the problem?
I didn't buy a 6k sqft home on an ARM in 2006 thinking i'd just refinance or sell it for a profit in a few years.
I did buy a home with 30yr @ 10% in 1990, and refi'ed my way down to 15@3.375 in 2010.
Cheap money as you pointed out. Why would i pay off my house when dividend rates covered the interest,
and capital growth would move the needle closer to retirement? (theoretical, cause work pays for the house)
----
Why have "they" been doing such a bad job?
Is a 20% market correction such a bad thing?
I know you are predicting more, and time will tell.
10 years from now, it will just be a blip that gets talked about with the other blips.
mfennell
Well-Known Member
I'm not an expert but my friend the investment banker is. He was at Morgan Stanley at the time and said we got perilously close to your-credit-card-stops-working. He knew people withdrawing 1000s in cash. Some markets just ... stopped. I had money in limbo for months. Point being, as distasteful as it might be, the gov saving things may have been for the best.
JerseyPete
Well-Known Member
I've wondered how possible is that or how difficult may be the better question.
How much can you draw in cash at one time? It has to be less than 10K without drawing attention, true? At least according to Google.
Perhaps the least bad of only terrible options at that point.
mfennell
Well-Known Member
It depends. My small credit union (3 or 4 branches) makes a big stink about anything over $2k. They ask that you call days in advance. When I needed 11k for a motorcycle, it took 3 branches to get it together. I managed to get $3k at each of two branches, then the teller at the quietest branch took pity on me and gave me $5k.
JerseyPete
Well-Known Member
That's a great example of how difficult it can be for a legitimate reason/transaction.
When I lived in NJ I had Chase and never had any problems withdrawing large amounts of cash. But they don't have Chase where I live now so when I tried to buy a tractor, I just went into the bank thinking they would be able to give it to me. When I handed them the withdrawal slip, they looked at me funny and called the manager. And they discussed it for like 2 minutes and asked how much cash was where and was like, we can do it but it'll be all $20s. They had to take money out of 3 different drawers. Next time we ask you call whatever days in advance.
Also, their ATM only gives me $500 a day limit.
I'm guessing by "withdrawing 1000s in cash" they're not asking for physical cash from Schwab or Etrade or whatever, but cashing out whatever investments and transferring to checking or savings account.
Also, their ATM only gives me $500 a day limit.
I'm guessing by "withdrawing 1000s in cash" they're not asking for physical cash from Schwab or Etrade or whatever, but cashing out whatever investments and transferring to checking or savings account.
Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
So if your dividend pays 5% vs the 3.75% mortgage is it really beating it when the interest is front loaded? This is just a question.The ones that failed were punished for what they did,
and probably the lack of wider ramifications. ????? if ya like conspiracies.
I don't remember Credit Suiesse being involved ?
The government purchased the underwater assets (well loans?) Then canceled the bank debt.
People claimed bankrupcy, or used that market refinance thing that the govt created.
Then the loans went back to the banks with the new rules.
The scenario was going to be the banks receiving the insured mortgage money (assuming AIG could cover it), and ending up with the home,
with the people out in the street. A serious shave on the home value might not have killed them, but again AIG goes down,
and all the people/pensions invested in the secondary mortgage market. (i don't know how mtg resale works,
but it seems to go to places that need a long term, predictable stream of $$)
GM was not bailed out. They were lent money, and new car incentives were put in place.
This stopped foreign countries from coming in and purchasing GM (and Chrysler) in a fire sale,
and the collapse of their pension fund - in some of the most economically depressed areas, this would have crushed communities.
They paid back the agreed upon debt.
Incentives worked a couple ways - it put higher MPG cars on the road, better smog controls, with modern safety features.
And of course gvt tracking devices in each one....
Sure, in the end GM cost tax payers money, but it was a drop in the bucket compared to 200k people without jobs,
and the ramifications beyond that.
----
in any system, "balance" is the least stable position to be in.
small things have an effect - often, the natural force is back to center,
but occasionally it gets so far out of whack, it isn't coming back without
outside intervention.
monetary and fiscal policy is meant to keep balance.
Growth vs Inflation at the macro scale.
----
again - i'm still moving the needle forward, as are so many people that work, and invest for retirement.
Pensions for our public sector workers are still whole.
maybe the frenzy was the problem?
I didn't buy a 6k sqft home on an ARM in 2006 thinking i'd just refinance or sell it for a profit in a few years.
I did buy a home with 30yr @ 10% in 1990, and refi'ed my way down to 15@3.375 in 2010.
Cheap money as you pointed out. Why would i pay off my house when dividend rates covered the interest,
and capital growth would move the needle closer to retirement? (theoretical, cause work pays for the house)
----
Why have "they" been doing such a bad job?
Is a 20% market correction such a bad thing?
I know you are predicting more, and time will tell.
10 years from now, it will just be a blip that gets talked about with the other blips.
Dave Taylor
Rex kwan Do
OMG you can’t use your cc and take on more debt 🫣