Wow I will move to the dark side. Where the Brit auditing firm has BAC, GS, JPM, AIG, C, TWX, IBM and most other GIANT corp clients under one roof and there are only 4 big ones your right… They can and do what is best for them and their paying clients since they also fund and pay fees to their own regulating agencies for odds in their favor. (CK all 10k audit reports for signing firm)
They will own our so called free country and you will be the lord of the surfs in the land of Milk and Honey.
We are all trying to be plantation owners here and someones got to do the slave work.
Guess we all should watch our own backs….
Still don’t like BAC technical yet but will change mind when it suits me… Thank you for the enlightening analysis.
Wow I will move to the dark side. Where the Brit auditing firm has BAC, GS, JPM, AIG, C, TWX, IBM and most other GIANT corp clients under one roof and there are only 4 big ones your right… They can and do what is best for them and their paying clients since they also fund and pay fees to their own regulating agencies for odds in their favor. (CK all 10k audit reports for signing firm)
They will own our so called free country and you will be the lord of the surfs in the land of Milk and Honey.
We are all trying to be plantation owners here and someones got to do the slave work.
Guess we all should watch our own backs….
Still don’t like BAC technical yet but will change mind when it suits me… Thank you for the enlightening analysis.
If the broader markets cooperate, aapl will easily see 141.
AAPL made a valiant attempt to close the gap below 139.79, but missed by 10 cents. Let’s see if it makes another attempt on it.
EDIT: I’m still watching this gap. I believe the bears got in a little too quick and dragged things down just a bit too soon. I still believe that this gap is begging to be filled, but I think there will be way too much overhead resistance around 140.
One of the reasons we are bumping along at this level is because we are at a channel bottom (in fact, just below it as I type). Previous tags of this channel bottom were on 23 June and yesterday. I’m inclined to think that if the lows of yesterday are broken, then the channel is a bust. However, we might well see another rally like yesterday if we get a sudden spike up as a lot of cover stops will get hit and other bulls playing this channel will be tempted in. If the rally scenario plays out, I can see it getting sold towards the end of the day rather than it going up and up until the close.
Let’s see how things unfold…
EDIT: OK we broke below yesterday’s low, but there’s quite a bit of support at 136.
I agree with your view. However, reverting to un-leverage position means many securities won’t return to their peaks and many physical assets (especially houses) would stay at current prices for a very long time. This would bring down many “too large to fail” banks, leading to a deeper recession than if they don’t fail and many unhappy Americans, which could bring about social unrest and even civil wars.
I agree with your view. However, reverting to un-leverage position means many securities won’t return to their peaks and many physical assets (especially houses) would stay at current prices for a very long time. This would bring down many “too large to fail” banks, leading to a deeper recession than if they don’t fail and many unhappy Americans, which could bring about social unrest and even civil wars.
Not at all Mace. There is no such thing as too big to fail - only too big to prop up. Look around you - pension funds are already WAY underfunded. The country has a barely sustainable debt load. Anything we do going forward hurts something else:
1. If we print money to fill the holes on the banks’ balance sheets we dilute the currency and push up oil and other commodity prices. This kills J6P.
2. If we try and borrow more money for another stimulus, China et al will demand more interest as our default risk is going up. We are also issuing so much supply that yields will spike. This kills housing DEAD and therefore whatever loans are still on the banks’ balance sheets. So the banks die too eventually. This also means the average American’s tax burden going forward will go up PRECIPITOUSLY. This kills the middle class.
So what can we do? We need to collapse the toxic, cancerous banks and use the MANY TRILLIONS of bailout dollars to backstop the fallout. With the 5 or 6 trillion we’ve already spent, we could have backstopped almost all the the pension liabilities and more. Make no mistake - bailing out the banks is neither logical nor moral. It is a quid pro quo to the very people that BOUGHT up our Congresscritters over the past 20 or so years.
So what can we do? We need to collapse the toxic, cancerous banks and use the MANY TRILLIONS of bailout dollars to backstop the fallout. With the 5 or 6 trillion we’ve already spent, we could have backstopped almost all the the pension liabilities and more. Make no mistake - bailing out the banks is neither logical nor moral. It is a quid pro quo to the very people that BOUGHT up our Congresscritters over the past 20 or so years.
Too true. And as for AIG, the Govt. should have underwritten the conventional insurance side of the business (that part which serves the average Joe and his house/car insurance, and normal insurance policies for businesses), and let the whole CDS thing go to the wall. Sure, the banks get whacked, but that’s what happens when you play an unregulated game with no checks in place to see whether the counterparty in your bet has the funds to cover it.
All the money wasted on bailing out the banks could have gone into providing an alternative source of funding for businesses and citizens using sensible lending criteria. That would have staved off a lot of the bankruptcies and served to provide a level of support for both jobs and housing.
