On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 20:56:35 -0400, John wrote:
And you predicted all this a month ago?

I'm sorry. 2 weeks and 4 days ago


On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 20:03:17 -0400, Alex wrote:

Adorable Deplorable wrote:
On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:46:28 -0400 (EDT), Justan Ohlphart wrote:

Adorable Deplorable Wrote in message:
On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 08:32:39 -0700 (PDT), Its Me wrote:On Thursday, March 12, 2020 at 11:18:01 AM UTC-4, John H wrote: ...that is the question! -- Freedom Isn't Free!Don't sell. Not unless you want to turn your short term losses into long term losses.The idea would be to get back in when, and if, things start improving. I'm not 'investor certified'though!--Freedom Isn't Free!
A 50% loss would result in the need to make a 100% gain to break
even, if you bought back the same stock at what you sold it for.
If the stock declined another 50% you could buy twice the amount
you sold but you'd still need a 100% gain to break
even.

If the stock rose 50% after you sold it would cost you 25% more to
buy it back. If the stock regained its original value it would
cost you twice as much as you sold it for, to buy it
back.

Numbers dont lie.
I suppose that means to hang on to it?
--

Freedom Isn't Free!

And buy more!

snip stock thing

If they are really serious that we are going to hit stop on the
economic engine until they declare the virus is contained, the economy
might not start when we hit go.
The debt bomb we are all dreading may have gone off by then and we
will be in worse shape than 2008-9 with the central banks failing not
just AIG and Lehman.
I understand that is probably not going to happen but it isn't as
unrealistic as some of the predictions I am hearing about this virus.