Depression pricing in the markets?

[Yankees Rule]

Sure looks that way. Just wondering this morning how bad things will get? Looks as though we could see 10% unemployment by spring. Time to start a small hobby, making jewlery and selling it online or something. I am happy I have no debt, but how safe is anything even federal and state pensions. Start a small farm with veggies and chickens. Maybe a small cheese making ability also. Gotta get self sufficent.

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yankees Rule ...Just wondering this morning how bad things will get? Looks as though we could see 10% unemployment by spring. Time to start a small hobby, making jewlery and selling it online or something. I am happy I have no debt, but how safe is anything even federal and state pensions. Start a small farm with veggies and chickens. Maybe a small cheese making ability also. Gotta get self sufficent.

I'd suggest you not experiment with unproven strategies. Stick with something with a successful track record:

[Yankees Rule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo I'd suggest you not experiment with unproven strategies. Stick with something with a successful track record:

[CuppaJoe]

Every day I wake up and say, "I'm reading no more finance threads!" so here I am, like a moth to the flame. That's it, "Fluffy" regards moths as the best toys. Now, how to keep them alive in shipment to eBay customers.

[2B]

The misfortunes I really enjoy when it happens to other people are all the layoffs in the news business. The NY Times, Reuters, AP, and many others have all announced and/or implemented cutbacks. I know I shouldn't enjoy their pain but after the never ending stories for the last 8 years about "the worst economy in 50 years, etc." they are finally getting them to experience the worst economy in 50 years. And, they get to fully embrace the joys of it. Maybe if any of them get back into the biz they will be more inclined to report facts and not push their agenda or the mantra of their industry.

Now if it would only hit CNBC. They just need to keep Becky.

I think I've developed financial shell shock from the last few months. I'm having flashbacks to 1973-74 when I lost almost 90% of my portfolio. I was real big into the go-go stocks and the nifty-fifty.

To calm myself down I'll periodically run FIRECalc on my cash, mini-pension and SS to see that I really can have a decent retirement with no equities left.

Other than a swap into VTI for tax loss capture, I've kept the faith. It still hurts watching almost 30% of my portfolio (many hundred thou ) disappear in next to no time at all. All the "end of the financial world" stories don't cheer me up except that the only way to clean out the system is to get pessimism beyond the level of rational behavior.

[HFWR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2B Now if it would only hit CNBC. They just need to keep Becky.

And Michelle...

They could rename the show "Squawk Boxes"...

[cardude]

Quote:

They could rename the show "Squawk Boxes"...

Ooooo, now that's funny. LOL.

[ziggy29]

Step away from the 24-hour cable news.

[2B]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HFWR And Michelle...

I agree but that's about all they need to keep.

[TromboneAl]

Or Squaw Boxes.

[Bikerdude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2B Other than a swap into VTI for tax loss capture, I've kept the faith. It still hurts watching almost 30% of my portfolio (many hundred thou ) disappear in next to no time at all. All the "end of the financial world" stories don't cheer me up except that the only way to clean out the system is to get pessimism beyond the level of rational behavior.

I tend to agree with the following quote:

“We have entered a period of risk aversion unlike anything we've seen in our lifetime. Investors will be too wary for a while. You'll read stories about people who got rich betting against subprime mortgages and then about people who combed through the wreckage and found bargains. The next rich wave will be those who figure out where the value is. As for the average American investor, he'll be a deer in the headlights for years. It will be a while until greed gets comfortable again.”

Michael Lewis, Author of "Liar's Poker," and "Moneyball,"

[lazygood4nothinbum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2B The misfortunes I really enjoy when it happens to other people are all the layoffs in the news business. The NY Times, Reuters, AP, and many others have all announced and/or implemented cutbacks. I know I shouldn't enjoy their pain but after the never ending stories for the last 8 years about "the worst economy in 50 years, etc." they are finally getting them to experience the worst economy in 50 years. And, they get to fully embrace the joys of it. Maybe if any of them get back into the biz they will be more inclined to report facts and not push their agenda or the mantra of their industry.

yikes

[clifp]

I am generally pretty good about avoiding schenfraude but in the case of the NY Times I will make an exception. I am looking forward to them filing chapter 11.

It is hard to know which pisses me off more their biased reporting, hideous fact checking, or their incredible arrogance.

Just about 10 years, I helped a bit with a speech that Intel CEO Andy Grove gave to the Newspaper Publishers Associate. In the speech he told the publisher that in the future there would no such thing as "internet companies". There would be only two types of companies those that embraced the internet and dead companies.

At the time the number of people on the internet was perhaps 1/5 of current users. Ebay was just getting started and Craigslist wasn't even an idea, (the two of them combined to annihilate the classified ad business ), so it wasn't obvious that highly profitable newspaper business would soon enter a death spiral. The newspaper editors weren't exactly thrilled to hear the bad news, but NY Times folks were the most vocal about denying the future importance of the internet.

I doubt that any NY Times managers believe in creationism and probably scream about creationism being taught in schools, how ironic that failed to see Social Darwinism in their own backyard. Capitalism does require creative destruction, it is almost always painful, but the reality is that both Big 3 and the newspaper business failed to adopt to new environments. The recession simply hastened there inevitable deaths.

In the case of the NY Time "Hasta la vista baby."

[Bestwifeever]

I think the NYTimes will veer back toward the middle without a Republican administration to rail against--but regardless, without the press, biased as it has seemed recently (and I agree with you there), we will all have to get our "news" from bloggers and press releases and government announcements. Yeah, those won't have any biases....

[boont]

The NYTimes has the best news website on the internet.

It is also still the paper of record. So until you have a replacement, it rules, not you.

boont

[2B]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bestwifeever I think the NYTimes will veer back toward the middle without a Republican administration to rail against--but regardless, without the press, biased as it has seemed recently (and I agree with you there), we will all have to get our "news" from bloggers and press releases and government announcements. Yeah, those won't have any biases....

The NYT has a long standing bias against repubs. During the Civil War, they ran editiorials saying how good it would be if someone assasinated President Lincoln.

[Hal3]

Any information technology business model that starts with "First, cut down a tree." Is is not just dead. It's dead and petrified and crushed into gravel for roadbed.

[Yankees Rule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp I am generally pretty good about avoiding schenfraude but in the case of the NY Times I will make an exception. I am looking forward to them filing chapter 11. It is hard to know which pisses me off more their biased reporting, hideous fact checking, or their incredible arrogance. Just about 10 years, I helped a bit with a speech that Intel CEO Andy Grove gave to the Newspaper Publishers Associate. In the speech he told the publisher that in the future there would no such thing as "internet companies". There would be only two types of companies those that embraced the internet and dead companies. At the time the number of people on the internet was perhaps 1/5 of current users. Ebay was just getting started and Craigslist wasn't even an idea, (the two of them combined to annihilate the classified ad business ), so it wasn't obvious that highly profitable newspaper business would soon enter a death spiral. The newspaper editors weren't exactly thrilled to hear the bad news, but NY Times folks were the most vocal about denying the future importance of the internet. I doubt that any NY Times managers believe in creationism and probably scream about creationism being taught in schools, how ironic that failed to see Social Darwinism in their own backyard. Capitalism does require creative destruction, it is almost always painful, but the reality is that both Big 3 and the newspaper business failed to adopt to new environments. The recession simply hastened there inevitable deaths. In the case of the NY Time "Hasta la vista baby."

Creationism?? Please lets leave the [moderator edit] out of this please. People can believe in stories if they like. The NYTimes is written at an 8th grade level of reading. You may not like what they say, but the paper is heads over most daily newspapers. Great book review on sunday and a real good magazine.

[clifp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yankees Rule Creationism?? Please lets leave the [moderator edit] out of this please. People can believe in stories if they like. The NYTimes is written at an 8th grade level of reading. You may not like what they say, but the paper is heads over most daily newspapers. Great book review on sunday and a real good magazine.

I think the Washington Post is an all round better newspaper, and vastly superior in political coverage. The Post is also biased but it least tries to be objective and actually checks facts which seems to be an optional exercise at the NY Times lately.

The Wall St Journal has been head and shoulders better than NY Times in covering, explaining and investigating this economic crises and if you are in hurry the WSJ Front page is far more useful than then NY Times in getting the news in a few minutes.

USA Today has better sport section. San Jose Mercury News covers technology better. I guess the NY Times still has the best foreign affairs,
I'll grant the NY Times weekend magazine is good. The book reviews can be a fun read but irrelevant.

But debating newspaper qualities is a bit like arguing about which buggy whip is superior 100 years ago.

When Russia rolled into Georgia, how many of us ran out to pick up a NY Times to find out was going on? I turned on CNN, and then immediately hit the net. As far as I am concerned (this goes double for anybody under 30) Google News is superior to the NY Times in every respect. Similarly if I want to see if a book is any good, I can wade through a lengthy review from the NY Times reviews of books, or I can go on to Amazon and read the 4 or 5 of the best reviews, and get more useful information in a fraction of the time.

Yes the NY Times website is pretty good, but unlike the WSJ, they haven't figured out a way of making money with it. I actually pay money for the WSJ, (although that arrangement will end this year if the WSJ tries to raise prices). AFAIK the NY Times is actually a laggard in making money with new media compared to other newspapers.

The NY Times's arrogance, that they are the newspaper of record will ultimately be responsible for their destruction.

[FIRE'd@51]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clifp Yes the NY Times website is pretty good, but unlike the WSJ, they haven't figured out a way of making money with it.

What's to figure out? Access to the NYT website is free. The WSJ charges for access to theirs.