Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 07:57:55 -0500, HK wrote:


Carson was without question the very best at what he did. So were his
guests and his orchestra. No one who has followed can fill even one of
his shoes.

The odd thing about Carson is I think he was truly an introvert.
Nobody but the Joannes knew him well.



So many JoAnnes, until he married an Alexis!





It's interesting to me that you have come to about the same conclusions
regarding the stock market as I have, that in recent years especially
the "value" of stocks was not based upon any sort of reality, that it
was speculation built upon speculation. Book-cookers.

I never really came to a "conclusion." I always thought it was
bull**** in terms of share price escalation building "value."
Owning shares in solid companies paying dividends better than
contemporary low interest rates was always a solid investment.
But any surety of that was essentially destroyed once Wall Street got
their hands on wage earners 401k money and went to town with it.
Some investors made out because of the natural timing of a Ponzi
scheme, but I'm not one of them.
I avoided it entirely, putting my 401k contributions in money markets.
**** poor return, but I felt it safer.
Did get some profit sharing. As soon as the company shares hit my
account I sold and moved it to the money market.
One short period when my company's P/E was less the 15:1 I made
a few bucks by moving a portion to company stock for a while.
Other than that I've avoided it. Nearly all of my retirement money is
plain old savings. Otherwise known as "biting the bullet" on
spending, or "being a tightass."
You do know that Feds are guaranteeing 401k money markets
to not go negative in retirement accounts?
Don't know how much they've spent on that. The entire 401k system
would have fallen apart if the "safe" investment started losing money.
One of the first things they did last year when the bailouts began.
The 401k system was set up to funnel wages to Wall Street equities.
It ****ed me off a bit to have my funds stuck in money markets paying
a couple points when I could 5 on the open market. But you can't get
it out. Wall Street Communism, simply put.
Still better than taxes though.

In rebuilding the economy, I'd like to see a lot more emphasis on
insured savings accounts paying good interest rates and home mortgages
and other loans at some multiple of the savings rate that assures
solidity for the institutions making the loans. There is no consumer
need for banks the size of Citibank or Bank of America. Commercial
interests have different needs, of course.

The yuppies in charge don't get it, because of their aversion to
protectionism, and low opinion of blue collars, but the only answer is
trade balance, and that means more manufacturing here.
Banking will take care of itself.
Jobs are what's important.
The big adjustment needed is that the "good life" ain't free or
guaranteed.
I've said most of this before, and am boring myself.
And I might be all wrong too.
But hey.

--Vic


I used to "dabble" a bit on "the market" now and then, and a few times I
really gambled but not with any significant amounts of future retirement
money. I did OK with Microsoft. The last shares I owned were in Garmin,
and that did OK for me, too. For speculative investments, I used to like
raw land that was in the path of development and small commercial
properties that had good tenants and paid regular income, much of which
could then be stashed away.