Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#33
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:12:07 -0800, "Capt. JG" said: Case 1: Your GM stock has fallen 80%. You sell all your GM stock and put the proceeds into a money market fund. 2 days later the price of GM is the same and you decide that selling was a mistake, and you buy the stock back, using funds from the money market fund. Case 2: Your GM stock has fallen 80%, but you decide it will come back, so you decide not to sell. Assume there's no tax on the transactions, because the stock is in a 401k. Under your theory, you lost money in Case 1, but didn't lose money in Case 2. Yet in both cases the value of your GM stock on day 4 is precisely the same. An absurd conclusion? It should be obvious to anyone it is. ?? There is NO theory involved. If there's no sale transaction, how can there possibly be a loss unless the business goes out completely??? Case 2: I decide it will come back, I'm right, it does. My stock has the same or greater value. The absurdity of that view has been conclusively demonstrated above to any reasonable observer. There's nothing absurd about it, and the only thing you've demonstrated is your inability to accept when you've lost an argument. It's a fact. If you can't handle facts, then I think you need to find another profession. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Bush Blows $1.6 Trillion on War of Lunacy | General | |||
1+ trillion dollar bailouts | ASA | |||
$7 Trillion on Iraq? | General |