Wednesday, December 13, 2017

Dow Jones Gold Ratio: Making Money from this All-Important Indicator

April 25, 2012 by  
Filed under Equities & Stocks

[waw_video video=”PgOFzzbh9fg” hoplink=”http://alteraseld.IDOWJONES.hop.clickbank.net/”]

High 1375.00 mid-morning Low 1261.00 early Last 1366.00 up 1 handle Total volume 1.89mil ESM and 4.5k SPMs trade 17 of the DOW 30 FOR SALE MOC BUY 410mil
Dow Jones Never Loss Trade

Dow Jones Gold Ratio: Making Money from this All-Important Indicator

Author: Michael Lombardi

If you are a stock market investor or a gold investor, or both, today’s PROFIT CONFIDENTIAL is a must-read. Why? Because, by the time you are finished reading this issue, you could very well be convinced long-term that the stock market is going down and gold is going up. And you can make a lot of money from these moves.

Let’s start with the important numbers all investors should be aware of:

Stock history first: The Dow Jones Industrial Average opened the year 2000 at 10,786. The same index ended 2010 at 11,577.50. In a nutshell, if you were an investor in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, your capital gain appreciation over the past 11 years would have been a paltry 7.3%. (No wonder we have always preferred micro-cap stocks, penny stocks and small-cap stocks!)

Gold history now: At the beginning of the year 2000, gold bullion was trading at $280.00 per ounce. Gold bullion closed out 2010 at $1,422 per ounce—a gain of 407% in 11 years.

Now, let’s pretend you can’t buy the stocks that comprise the Dow Jones Industrial Average in U.S. dollars, but you can only buy them with gold bullion. Taking the numbers above, in 2000, it would have taken 38.5 ounces of gold to buy the Dow Jones Industrial Average. At the end of 2010, it would have taken only 8.2 ounces of gold to buy the Dow Jones Industrial Average. In other words, when measured in gold and not dollars, the value of the 30 big stocks that make up the Dow Jones Industrials has plummeted over the past decade.

Now, when we look back at almost a century of data in respect to the relationship between gold bullion and the Dow Jones Industrials (often referred to as the Dow Jones Gold Ratio), it gets really interesting.

In the period from 1930 to 1949, a 19-year span, the price of the Dow Jones Industrial Average measured in gold bullion was under 5.0 (during that 19-year period it would have taken less than five ounces of gold to figuratively buy the Dow Jones Industrial Averages’ index).

In the period from 1974 to 1989, a 15-year span, the price of the Dow Jones Industrial Average measured in gold bullion was under 5.0 again.

As I started writing years ago, with the sharp rise in the price of gold since the year 2000, I believe we are entering another multi-year period where it will cost less than five ounces of gold to buy the Dow Jones Industrial Average. To see that happen, the price of gold needs to rise sharply, or the stock market has to come down, or both events need to occur.

Now the scary part: over the last century there have been three times when only one ounce of gold could buy the Dow Jones Industrial Average. If we are headed close to that level again (which I believe we are), fortunes will be made over the next few years on the long side of gold and short side of stocks.

Michael’s Personal Notes:

Words of wisdom from our esteemed technical analyst, Anthony Jasansky, P. Eng., on President Obama inadvertently putting the brakes on the stock market rally:

“Money talks and it has been talking very loud after Uncle Ben started the money printing presses at the old Fed in late 2008. He was so impressed by the results of the magical out-of-thin air creation of $1.75 trillion—dubbed ingeniously as ‘quantitative easing (QE)’—that, in the fall of 2010, he cranked up the printing presses again, launching the $600-billion QE2.

“Though these two huge money injections have been credited with reversing financial and economic calamity, they still fell short on some important fronts. Among the notable failings of QE are the anemic recovery in GDP, lack of growth in employment, continued weakness in residential and commercial real estate, the battered U.S. dollar, and unexpectedly higher yields of long-term treasuries and bonds.

“When recently questioned on the effectiveness of QE, the Fed’s chairman has pointed to the strong stock market as one important benefit. Without missing a beat, the U.S. President in his January 25 State of the Union speech mentioned the recovery in the stock market as being the result of government actions to prevent a depression. Knowing how perverse the market can be, Obama’s bullish assertion may turn out be a timely signal for the stocks to take a deep breather.”

Where the Market Stands; Where it’s Headed:

Could the bear market rally in stocks be over? After all, the Dow Jones Industrials suddenly fell 166 points on Friday. Last Friday was a wake-up call for investors and traders getting too cocky with this market. Stocks do not go up in a straight line week after week (as has been the case for most of December 2010 and this January).

While I need to see more action from the stock market before I throw in the towel on the bear market rally that started in March of 2009, I doubt the rally is over. This week opens with the Dow Jones Industrial Average up 2.1% for 2011.

What He Said:

“‘Home sales down 8.4%, could be the bottom,’ read the headline in last Friday’s USA Today. What do they know that I don’t? They know what realtors and their associations tell them and that’s about it. Unfortunately, the real estate news is predominately written by reporters—not real estate investors with years of experience to share. The hard facts about the real estate market in the U.S. are truly scary. How can the U.S. economy escape the hard landing in U.S. home prices? As we’ll soon find out, it simply can’t!” Michael Lombardi in PROFIT CONFIDENTIAL, January 31, 2007. While the popular media was predicting a bottoming of the real estate market in 2007, Michael was preparing his readers for the worst of times ahead.

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/banking-articles/dow-jones-gold-ratio-making-money-from-this-all-important-indicator-4142313.html

About the Author

Michael bought his first stock when he was 17 years old. He quickly saw $2,000 of savings from summer jobs turn into $1,000. Determined not to lose money again on a stock, Michael started researching the market intensely, reading every book he could find on the topic and taking every course he could afford. It didn’t take long for Michael to start making money with stocks, and that led Michael to launch a newsletter on the stock market. Today, Michael only employs the top market analysts and editors.


Comments

20 Responses to “Dow Jones Gold Ratio: Making Money from this All-Important Indicator”
  1. thewayhome says:

    For example at the end of trading on a Friday the Dow Jones sat at 13442. Yet at the start of foreign trade early Monday morning before the stock markets open in New York it now reads 13536 yet at that time it shows a loss of roughly 20 points. How can the Dow Jones level be higher when there has been a loss from the end of trade one day to the start of another. I have noticed this before that the Dow is stated to end the day at a particular level, yet when trading begins, even with a loss, it is still higher than the end of the previous day. Can you explain the difference in its level from the end of one day to the start of the next without the markets being open.

  2. jeff410 says:

    Because orders for the stocks on the Dow are placed between the time it closes the previous day and the time it opens the following day. That creates a backlog that has to be balanced by the specialists and market makers. Its kind of like a checking account with checks and deposits that have come in over night. Especially electronic deposits that clear after business hours. The opening balance today isnt going to be the same as the closing balance yesterday.

  3. admin says:

    I am curious about day trading and wondered if I can actually buy shares of S&P or Dow?

    I realize we can but Index mutual funds but is there a way of actual buying stocks of the index?

    Perhaps futures or options are the way to play the index?
    Any suggestions between futures or options? Advantages or disadvantages?
    I am seeking this information for a family member who is now living overseas and wants to play the US market index.

    Thank you.

  4. tiddled says:

    . . . which means that, yes, one could buy and sell every stock in either, or both, indexes.

    For the Dow Jones Industrial Average, it currently consists of these 30 companies:

    3M Company DuPont Kraft Foods Inc.
    Alcoa Incorporated Exxon Mobil Corporation McDonald’s Corporation
    American Express Company General Electric Company Merck & Company, Incorporated
    AT&T Incorporated General Motors Corporation Microsoft Corporation
    Bank of America Corporation Hewlett-Packard Company Pfizer Incorporated
    Boeing Corporation Home Depot Incorporated Procter & Gamble Company
    Caterpillar Incorporated Intel Corporation United Technologies
    Chevron Corporation International Business Machines Verizon Company
    Citigroup Incorporated Johnson & Johnson Wal-Mart Stores Incorporated
    Coca-Cola Company J.P. Morgan Chase & Company Walt Disney Company

    Obviously, one could use this as a shopping list. Or one could buy a Dow Index fund.

    Because it’s a much longer list, I won’t be copying the components of the S&P 500 here. As the name implies, there are 500 companies in the list; the current contents are at the link. Again, one could use that as a shopping list, or one could by a index fund. If one intends to buy and/or sell all 500 at the same time, may I suggest investing the programming talent into appropriate software might be a good investment? 😉

    If your relative overseas understands how to trade futures and options, then these lists will be all that is necessary to estimate the risks and rewards. If your relative doesn’t already understand those speculative (not investment!) vehicles, then I advise learning what futures and options are, and how their misuse can multiply risk (sometimes catastrophically), before using them.

  5. ETHO says:

    I’m just starting out in stock market, i haven’t got much money to spend (£500) and i mainly want to trade in international markets such as NASDAQ,DOW JONES… any tips are also welcomed. 🙂

  6. commanderc says:

    odlsecurities also known as investlikethebest. Its important to remember that each trade (both buying and selling the stock) can cost up to £12. So to buy and sell a share, it will cost £24. You need to take this into account when buying the share because ultimately this amount is effectively deducted from any profits you may make. If you are only going to invest 500 it would need to be in something which is very likely to yield a large return, otherwise it would be pointless to invest such an amount. Typically you should avoid putting all your ‘eggs in one basket’ when investing on the stock market. But considering all you would have to pay in trades to the broker, you may not have an option. Sounds risky to invest with £500. Normally I wouldn’t recommend adopting any investment strategy unless you have about £10,000 to invest, £1000 in 10 different stocks with a diversity of industries.

  7. harishr says:

    One of my friend(I am abusing this word if I call him so) got nearly 50000 from me initially saying that he is conducting a trading service and he trades in DOW Jones and will give huge returns.I knew him since 2006 but never had met him.He gave his account number I have transferred the money through icici bank and i have proof for that and have chat transcripts of his words to impress me to join his fraud service.Later one Friday night around 2 AM he called me and said he needs money and I thought he was genuine.Now he has betrayed me.I am not worried about the money but i need to put him behind the bars atleast 1 night.Only problem is i am in chennai, he is in delhi…I am not ready to spend time in court or money in lawyer but take revenge on him….I should be his last victim

  8. SivelS says:

    DannyH, not true.

    Scams are a major issue and have been happening since the dawn of man.

    In response to your question.

    I understand how you feel. I have suffered a scam in the past and it really made me mad as I am generally pretty savvy with finances and can see through scams.

    In my situation I discovered it was a scam 30 mins after seeing the suspect in person and yes… I also wanted revenge. I tried to arrange a meeting with him and was going to bring along a fire arm for “protection.”
    I cooled my head for the next hour to make sure I didn’t fall to rash decisions; I decided to call law enforcement to discuss the issue.

    Apparently in my country (USA) it’s not considered a CRIME! And I couldn’t detain him with my fire arm or put him under citizens arrest. So I took the phone numbers for his business, call center, and personal and put them on boards of warning and washed my hands of it.

    Now, that is to say, I believe it is against some strict financial regulation to pretend to be a financial advisor of any sort. So your situation would be different here. In your country you would have to call your law enforcement to see what they can do, if anything.

    And if the law will not do anything against the scammer you have a choice: Either take it into your own hands or choose to gain wisdom from it and leave it behind.

    I suggest the latter.

  9. rapg6262 says:

    Essay: The Dangers Of Turning Inward
    Jeffrey E. Garten. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Feb 28, 2009. pg. W.1

    Abstract (Summary)
    Here was a city within a city, with ultra-modern buildings, movie theaters, restaurants with international cuisine, workout facilities, classrooms for executive education, accommodations for workers who had to stay late and communications capabilities that I had never seen in American companies. For better or worse, the forces of globalization have pushed them to urban areas to seek a better life. […] it will be globalization that opens the world to them, allowing international agencies to pump in capital, multinational companies to help supply technology and management, and Western universities to transfer knowledge.

    » Jump to indexing (document details)
    Full Text (3238 words)

    (c) 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.

    [Countries are attempting to protect their own companies and workers from the economic crisis. The financial and political damage will be severe, argues Jeffrey E. Garten]

    Not long ago, on a visit to Bangalore, India, I made what I thought would be a 15-minute trip to the outskirts of the city. The journey took 90 minutes on roads filled with cars, trucks, bicycles, push carts, children, all kinds of animals and giant potholes. At one point my taxi was at a dead stop for what seemed like an eternity, waiting for a small group of cows to move to the side of the road. It was dusty and noisy, filled with the sounds of buzzing scooters and honking horns.

    We eventually came to our destination: the campus of Infosys, an Indian technology company with major operations around the world. Here was a city within a city, with ultra-modern buildings, movie theaters, restaurants with international cuisine, workout facilities, classrooms for executive education, accommodations for workers who had to stay late and communications capabilities that I had never seen in American companies.

    Two worlds. One globalized, the other not. One that had access to the world’s capital, technology and management, the other stuck in another century. Many of Infosys’s management and employees came from that poorer world. I wondered what it would take to pull up the millions of others.

    In the next 24 hours, approximately 180,000 people in developing countries will be moving from the countryside to cities such as Shanghai, Sao Paulo, Johannesburg. The same will happen tomorrow and every day thereafter for the next 30 years, the equivalent of creating one new New York City every two months, according to the United Nations. These men and women will need everything — electricity, water, food, heath care, shelter, schools, computers and, of course, jobs. Many have the potential to improve not just their local environments but the world. For better or worse, the forces of globalization have pushed them to urban areas to seek a better life. And it will be globalization that opens the world to them, allowing international agencies to pump in capital, multinational companies to help supply technology and management, and Western universities to transfer knowledge.

    Yet if historians look back on today’s severe downturn, with its crumbling markets, rising unemployment and massive government interventions, they could well be busy analyzing how globalization — the spread of trade, finance, technology and the movement of people around the world — went into reverse. They would likely point to the growth of economic nationalism as the root cause.

    Ordinary protectionism such as tariffs and quotas would be one aspect of this problem, but it won’t be the worst of it because a web of treaties and the enforcement capabilities of the World Trade Organization will constrain the most egregious behavior. Economic nationalism is more insidious because it is broader, more subtle and subject to fewer legal constraints. It is a frame of mind that casts doubt on the very assumption that we live in a single international market, and that relatively open borders are a virtue. It is based on a calculation that despite all the talk about economic interdependence, nations can go it alone, and could be better off in doing so. True economic nationalists want above all to protect capital and jobs in their own countries. They see global commerce not as a win-win proposition but as a contest in which there is a victor and a loser. They are thus not focused on international agreements to open the world economy; to the contrary, they are usually figuring out how to avoid international commercial obligations.

    The last time we saw sustained economic nationalism was in the 1930s, when capital flows and trade among countries collapsed, and every country went its own way. World growth went into a ditch, political ties among nations deteriorated, nationalism and populi

  10. AsifYaqub says:

    We should first of all see the reasons of this movement from rural areas to urban areas, therefore it is an important issue of developing countries, because these countries are facing the problem of pavious Cycle of Poverty and therefore, we can say govt. should manage every thing properly to cop with this issue.

  11. Trout says:

    Alarm bells ringing over US poverty rate
    Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:55:38 GMT
    Many live in poverty in US.
    Most US mayors and city leaders say poverty is a growing problem in their cities, with many families unable to get by, survey says.
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=71542&sectionid=3510203

    US economic Tsunami ‘will claim more’
    Wed, 08 Oct 2008 23:24:29 GMT
    US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson
    US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson says that more financial firms are expected to go bankrupt in the US despite a massive government bailout.

    “One thing we must recognize — even with the new Treasury authorities, some financial institutions will fail,” Paulson said at a news conference on Wednesday.
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=71668&sectionid=3510203

    Dow drops 678.9 points
    Fri, 10 Oct 2008 03:07:23 GMT
    A trader at the New York Stock Exchange shows the stress
    The Dow Jones index has fallen 678.9 to 8579.2, its biggest percentage drop since Black Monday and its third biggest points decline in history.

    In a staggering final hour of trading, the Dow fell more than 400 points after Standard & Poor’s downgraded carmaker General Motors and investors were forced to sell off shares to meet margin calls.
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=71757&sectionid=3510203

    And yet…………with all that suffering

    US seeks more military budget for war?
    Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:19:28 GMT
    The Pentagon has reportedly proposed a $450 billion increase in the military budget in a move believed to be in preparation for a war
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=72009&sectionid=3510203
    All of this was found in an Iranian world service “Press TV”

    Why is it that I can find out more on what is going on in the US on an Iranian site ?

    All of these news clips are out there on US based web sites – but they are consistently buried in a mix of crap about celebrities getting arrested for DUI or Palin’s lip stick or some super stars jiggly bits ?

    Isn’t that in and of itself somewhat telling of the current state of affairs in the US of A
    EL Guapo

    One I am not a Democrat

    Two I go looking for information I don’t wrap myself up in the flag and yell platitudes –

    Blindly redoubling your efforts with no research is a mix for disaster

    Politicians are the employees of the public – educate yourself and tell them what to do

    That is what a good employer would do that is what those who employ the Presidents and Prime Minister should do

    Three – I vote have traditionally voted for the Liberal Party of Canada – although that might change —But I will not be voting for the Canadian Progressive Conservatives
    New Beginning

    Your right – it will be most of the world — very few nations will get away clean from this and none of the “developed” nations will be on that list

    Lucky ones will be slightly affected

    But understand this —- the US is going to get 100% of the blame world wide for all of this

    Every developed nation will look at the US as the cause of all their economic problems

    Good luck attracting any foreign investment under these circumstances

    Any plan to deal with this can not include off shore markets or money — it isn’t coming

  12. JerryS says:

    you are a well read and intelligent man, but i feel the american
    economy will recover and not fail, and more war is not on
    the way.

  13. Ruby says:

    Is this Wall street already cashing in on the bailouts before the legislation is even passed?

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/goldman_sachs_berkshire;_ylt=AruhG.mjSJgeEbU01eM9e7Ks0NUE

    ” OMAHA, Neb. – Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. is investing at least $5 billion in Goldman Sachs, a huge vote of confidence for one of the survivors of the credit crisis that felled two of its investment banking peers.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    In addition to buying $5 billion in preferred stock, Berkshire also got warrants to buy another $5 billion in Goldman’s common stock. Goldman also said late Tuesday it would raise another $2.5 billion in its own public stock offering.

    The news sent shares of Goldman Sachs and stock index futures soaring in electronic trading, after the Dow Jones Industrial Average posted a triple-digit decline for the second day in a row.

    It also could lead to new probing questions from lawmakers for Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, a former co-CEO of Goldman Sachs. He and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress hours earlier that quick action on a $700 billion bailout measure for financial services firms was needed to prevent economic havoc.

    Goldman Sachs’ shares had been tumbling ahead of the announcement of the government rescue plan last Friday as investors feared it could face the same kinds of funding squeezes as Bear Stearns and Lehman. Now members of Congress have to deal what may look to many taxpayers like Wall Street is already cashing in.”

    After reading that, do you believe Paulson and Bernanke are truthful about the urgency of the bailout?

  14. LeBlanc says:

    I am in favor of a bailout.

    Remember the 2.8 trillion USA lost through its Pentagon war machine before 9/11? That would be $8000usd for every man woman and child in the USA. Remember the 8.9 billion lost on a truck in Iraq after “Mission Accomplished”?

    I propose a bailout of $70 trillion dollars bailout to be paid to the 95% percent of the citizens who do not own 95% of the weath. thiamounts to almost $245,614usd per citizen. Now that would really stimulate the economy. The citizens would have it within their power balance the economy.

    Payments of loans, puchases, & investments would stimulate the economy.Investments in Helath, Education, Housing, Infrastruture,Environment, Business, etc. would be an excellent way for the common citizen to be involved. The contributions the common citizen could make would not only stimulate the economy but also be superb for the morales of the citizen. Their chairity would be limitless.

    If a group of citizens chose pool their monies to bailout Lehman Brothers, Morgan Stanley, Bear Stearns, or even start their own firms, that would be the stimulus package of the People By the People, and for the People.

    Once they cleaned their mess at home in the USA, they could take the residuals made from their investments to make ammends to the citizens of other nations, resulting from the lack of USA citizen vigilence of governmental operations, whose exesses both past and present have run amok ruining raping, robbing, the resoucers & mudering the citizens of other nations, especially the indegenous Humans of the Americas who have lost their and resources while recieving much degradation and no rent. The citizens should pay these prices for supporting an oppresive regime & by not policing the government administrators.

    If the Pentagon (Dept. of WAR) can pay $1000usd a hammer, lose money in Iraq; if the President can pay other countries for their vote in the UN; The amount of 70 Trillion usd would be but a pittance or equvalent to a very small micro-loan.

  15. mission_viejo_california says:

    While the Democrats stand against near all of the president’s wartime policies — and in the process court defeat — the stock market is standing with Bush, and the chance for victory.

    It has been widely reported that President Bush simply refuses to turn against the surge in Iraq, or even compromise on it. At the same time he admonishes Congress to toss out troop-withdrawal timetables and to give General Petraeus’s new counterinsurgency plan time to work. And you know what? While the Democrats stand against near all of the president’s wartime policies — and in the process court defeat — the stock market is standing with Bush, and the chance for victory.

    Early last week, when the Democratic leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi launched their latest anti-war offensive, stocks dropped about 150 points. Then, in a press conference a few days later, after Bush discussed clear successes in Iraq’s Anbar province, the Dow Jones soared nearly 300 points, marching ever closer to the 14,000-point plateau.

    Of course, shares trade on the profit and interest-rate fundamentals of the economy. But if you ask folks on Wall Street what their biggest worry is, most will say another 9/11. They rank another attack far ahead of passing sub-prime mortgage problems or wiggles in consumer spending.

    The stock market, in fact, is voting for the president to stay on offense. Here’s a case in point. The highest-ranking Iraqi leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq was just arrested, after which he told interrogators that Osama bin Laden’s inner circle enjoys considerable influence over the Iraqi al-Qaeda branch. “Communication between the senior al-Qaeda leadership and al-Masri frequently went through al-Mashhadani,” said Brigadier General Kevin Bergner. “There is a clear connection between al-Qaeda in Iraq and al-Qaeda senior leadership outside Iraq.”

    And Wall Street connected the dots, too: That day the Dow had been down 150 points. But it rallied back 100 points after the Iraqi capture came across the tape.

    This brings me to a larger point. Despite the criticism President Bush has received over his Iraq War policies, isn’t it interesting that stock markets have been booming since early 2003, when Saddam was overthrown and the president signed his supply-side tax cuts into law? (Bush, of course, never gets any credit on either of these points.)

    In just the past year alone, the Dow has gained a remarkable 30 percent. Meanwhile, Europe and Asia are up about 30 percent, Japan 23 percent, and emerging markets more than 60 percent. Clearly, the world is voting — with real money — for the American system of free-market capitalism. And it’s my strong suspicion that the majority of the global investing community supports the Iraq War and a steadfast U.S. commitment to stop terrorism. They seem to know that if the U.S. doesn’t do it, no one else will.

    I have long believed that stock markets are the best barometer of the health, wealth, and security of a nation. And today’s stock market message is an unmistakable vote of confidence for the president. Even the best low-tax, limited-government economic policies can be thwarted if the men and women going to work in the morning can’t get safely back to their homes and families at night.

    And the fact that the world economy is experiencing the greatest economic boom in history is a direct rebuke to jihadists everywhere. Al-Qaeda despises our country and its capitalist freedoms. And unless stopped cold in their tracks they will strive to destroy the U.S. financial system and free-market development around the world.

    The spread of free trade, the free movement of capital, low taxes, and the breathtaking rise of the Internet — these are generating more jobs, wealth, and prosperity than ever before. And this amounts to a collective thumbing of the nose at the terrorists. It’s as though world markets are saying that history is on our side, and that the crazed self-proclaimed terrorist clerics will ultimately be defeated.

    Free-market capitalism, 10. Al-Qaeda, 0.

    And just as Bush won’t give up on the surge, he’s not about to default to the Democrats on the supply-side investment tax cuts that helped deliver a near six-year economic boom.

    “I’m not going to raise taxes,” he told me in a recent White House meeting of conservative columnists, and he pledges to veto non-defense appropriation bills that exceed a $933 billion line in the sand. He also vows to work overtime to get a free-trade deal with the pro-American countries of Columbia and Peru, not only to expand economic activity, but also to counter the anti-American and socialist policies of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez.

    The media likes to paint Bush into a bunker, making him the victim of a torrent of criticism from which they say he can’t recover. But here are the plain facts: The president’s tax cuts helped reinvigorate investors and businesses. The nation has been safe from attack for nearly six years. And General Petraeus’s counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq just may be working.

    In other words, Mr. Bush deserves a lot more credit than most are willing to give him.

  16. admin says:

    Yes, the stock market is doing well- I guess that justifies 3000+ American casualties and God only knows how many among Iraqi civilians in an unwinnable war that has no, and I mean *NO* end in sight *WHATSOEVER*. I guess that means that there was a credible link between Iraq and 9/11, that there really were WMD, that there really was a “grave and gathering threat”, that major combat actually *IS* over… in a word, this was a brilliantly-conceived, oh-so-necessary endeavor and it’s about time a stand-up guy like yourself had the courage to enlighten us about these things. You deserve a standing ovation. By the way, are the latest developments in stock trading going to convince you to enlist, and if so, when?

  17. tooK says:

    September 16, 2001
    THE WELL OILED MEDIA

    Where are the moderating voices, the views of those who stand against the momentum of war, who challenge the self-serving rationalizations of empire? You are unlikely to find them in the major media.

    The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is headed by Bob Coonrad, formerly deputy managing director of the U.S. propaganda station Voice of America. At the helm of National Public Radio is Kevin Klose, formerly director of the International Broadcasting Bureau, which oversees Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and Radio and Television Marti. [Klose in September 2002 was in Rhinebeck, New York, arguing the necessity of attacking Iraq.] The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is Michael Powell, son of the secretary of state.

    [March 2003: Clear Channel, the Texas-based owner of more than 1200 radio and 36 television stations in the USA, with its own syndication and tour management divisions, has been organizing rallies in support of invading Iraq. They also maintain and enforce a list of banned songs and musicians for their stations. Vice chairman Tom Hicks made George W. Bush a multimillionaire by buying the Texas Rangers baseball team from him. As one of the creators and the first chairman of the University of Texas Investment Management Company (with Clear Channel founder Lowry Mays on the board) when Bush was governor, he turned over the control of its funds to companies close to the Bushes, including The Carlyle Group mentioned below. Clear Channel’s growth has depended on continued deregulation and lax oversight by the FCC and has its own lobbying office in Washington.]

    Secretary of State Colin Powell was on the corporate board of America Online, now merged with Time-Warner, which owns CNN. A member of AOL/Time-Warner’s board of directors, Carla Hills, also sits on the board of directors of Chevron. She was the first President Bush’s trade representative. On the board of directors of Exxon-Mobil sits J. Richard Munro, former chairman and CEO of Time-Warner. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was on the board of the Tribune Company, owner of the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, Newsday, and many other newspapers as well as TV stations.

    [November 2003: Hollinger International board members are charged with pocketing tens of millions of dollars received from other companies. Hollinger is a media company, owned by Conrad Black, that owns the Daily Telegraph in London, the Chicago Sun-Times, and the Jerusalem Post. Hollinger Digital is their investment division and is headed by Richard Perle, who is on the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, which is essentially an industry liaison office (Perle was chairman until questions of propriety forced him to another seat). He also heads Trireme Partners, which is aggressively investing in “homeland security” projects, and steered $2.5 million from Hollinger to Trireme. Gerald Hillman, also on the Defense Policy Board, invested $14 million in Trireme and became a partner. Henry Kissinger is a director at Hollinger and a Trireme advisor. Another Hollinger director is Richard Burt, a former arms negotiator. The Carlyle Group (see below) is considering bailing out Black.]

    Oil companies often share board members with the media. The director of Texaco (recently merged with Chevron), former senator Sam Nunn, is also on the board of directors of GE/NBC (GE is the nation’s sixth largest defense contractor). Texaco board of directors member Charles Price sits on the New York Times/Boston Globe board of directors. Corporate board member William Steere is on the board of directors of Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal. A member of the Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal corporate board, Rand Araskog, also sits on the board of directors of Shell Oil.

  18. IdiotWind says:

    wow, you’re just now figuring that out?

  19. westphalia1 says:

    I was looking at investing in some long hold (call) options on Cigna (CI) and United Health (UNH). During the initial downturn in the economy -between G.W. Bush and Obama-the markets went down and took all the major stocks with it. I was reading something saying that during that time all the major health care insurers “made” healthy profits even with the recession and didnt take much of a loss.CI and UNH are not the same as commodities or tech but are an essential part of our lives. By looking at the (Yahoo Finance) interactive charts and comparing the 2 with the Dow Jones 2 years it shows both companies above the Dow. The 5 year comparison shows the 2008-2009 downturn and CI still came above the Dow for this period. The very sort term trend (on the comparison) shows down for the 2 stocks but the long-and much longer trend shows upward trend above the Dow. I was thinking about an in the money LEAP (call) option-no strategies, condors, collars, puts or anything like that. Just a simple in the money or deep in the money LEAP hold on either CI or UNH. I have a virtual trading account on the CBOE Virtual Trade website and have had CI in my account since the first week of April, 2011. 4 call options. 3 of them are for July 2011 and 1 for i belive) Jan. 2013. The funny thing is the Jan. 2013 40 (Call) gained just as much profit as my one July 2011 43 (Call) option. Can any of you tell me what you think of these 2 stocks and maybe look at the past balances and incomes and the trends and tell me what you think of them as a long term Leap (call option) hold? Do you think an in the money Leap could produce a steady monthly income? Thanks

  20. cactusgene says:

    I think that with an investment in long-term call LEAPs, you have a reasonable good chance to make money. I also believe that both of these companies have good appreciation potential over 2 or 3 years, because they are in the business of making money. And no, you could not use them to produce a steady monthly income, because all you own is the RIGHT to buy this stock at a set price, no matter what its market value rises to. However, you have to sell this option to collect on its intrinsic (and time) value.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!