"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:22:18 -0500, Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:


"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote
No doubt but will the numbers in five years represent
greater value than in January 2000?




Compared to what?

Real value. Pick your favorite commodity indicator. Gold, platinum,
silver, corn, pork bellies, beef, iron ore, median home price, etc.



The only measure that has any meaning would be to compare stock prices to
company values (book or asset), then to now.

Lost of things move in different directions for lots of reasons.
Gold and other hard commodities like that often move in opposite
directions than that of stocks.

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote in message
news:47911525$0$3312$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:30:40 -0500, Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:


knews4u2chew@yahoo.com> wrote
On Jan 18, 10:59 am, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Jan 18, 10:34 am, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:

The Panic Starts
And today's view from overseas.
As goes California so goes....




We're about where we were in October 2006.

Will it go down more? Probably.

Will it go up more? More than likely we'll see higher numbers in the
DOW,
but not for another year or more.

Five years from now we'll see much higher DOW numbers than today.

No doubt but will the numbers in five years represent greater value than
in January 2000?

Something for the "sky is falling" boobs like yourself to consider: the S&L
crisis in the 80's was worse than the worst analysts see for this one.

Could they be wrong? Of Course! But they have better track records than you
boobs do.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:56:18 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:
Something for the "sky is falling" boobs like yourself to consider: the
S&L
crisis in the 80's was worse than the worst analysts see for this one.

Could they be wrong? Of Course! But they have better track records than
you
boobs do.

The troll raises his head again, where is my wack-a-mole mallet....

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote in message
news:47914a67$0$3427$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:56:18 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:
Something for the "sky is falling" boobs like yourself to consider: the
S&L
crisis in the 80's was worse than the worst analysts see for this one.

Could they be wrong? Of Course! But they have better track records than
you
boobs do.

The troll raises his head again, where is my wack-a-mole mallet....

So what else is new? You boobs don't like a dose of reality thrown in your
face, so you run.

What a boob your are, Curly.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:06:12 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote in message
news:47914a67$0$3427$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:56:18 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:
Something for the "sky is falling" boobs like yourself to consider: the
S&L
crisis in the 80's was worse than the worst analysts see for this one.

Could they be wrong? Of Course! But they have better track records than
you
boobs do.

The troll raises his head again, where is my wack-a-mole mallet....

So what else is new? You boobs don't like a dose of reality thrown in
your
face, so you run.

What a boob your are, Curly.

There you go again snipping, replying with poor grammar and attacks rather
than speaking to the issues.

That's known as trolling.

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is....@home.com> wrote in message

news:47911525$0$3312$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:30:40 -0500, Paul Thomas, CPA wrote:

knews4u2c...@yahoo.com> wrote
On Jan 18, 10:59 am, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Jan 18, 10:34 am, knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:

The Panic Starts
And today's view from overseas.
As goes California so goes....

We're about where we were in October 2006.

Will it go down more? Probably.

Will it go up more? More than likely we'll see higher numbers in the
DOW,
but not for another year or more.

Five years from now we'll see much higher DOW numbers than today.

No doubt but will the numbers in five years represent greater value than
in January 2000?

That is a yes with about an 80% certainty. In 10 years it will be a yes
with
100% certainty. It has a better than even chance of being higher by the
end
of this year.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote in message
news:47916d9a$0$3396$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:06:12 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote in message
news:47914a67$0$3427$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:56:18 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:
Something for the "sky is falling" boobs like yourself to consider: the
S&L
crisis in the 80's was worse than the worst analysts see for this one.

Could they be wrong? Of Course! But they have better track records than
you
boobs do.

The troll raises his head again, where is my wack-a-mole mallet....

So what else is new? You boobs don't like a dose of reality thrown in
your
face, so you run.

What a boob your are, Curly.

There you go again snipping, replying with poor grammar and attacks rather
than speaking to the issues.

That's known as trolling.

In simple words you might understand --- Since I was replying solely to your
last note, I snipped all that came before as being unessential. There were
no grammatical errors. And all I did was accurately and tersely point out
your inanities.

You do love to put your moronic and twisted mind on full display for the
world to laugh at.

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is....@home.com> wrote

No doubt but will the numbers in five years represent
greater value than in January 2000?

Compared to what?

There's no doubt that the January 2000 stock prices were much higher than
the values of the companies. Look what happened in early 2000, by March or
so. The market tanked to correct for the inflated stock price to value of
the underlying company.

People were probably focused on Y2K and not watching or caring about the
soundness of the business they were investing in, the price to equity
ratios
of the company, etc and so on.

I don't see that we're at that type of spread in value to price, at least
not in the dollar amounts and not for the reason that the stock is over
priced due to speculation. It's higher, by some amount, because the
company
values dropped due to the global economic downturn.

Stocks will most likely struggle for another year, or 18 months, then
start
their tic upward as business picks up in 09. If anything, it's time to buy
this summer, and hold for 12 months or more.

--
"For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For
those who do not, none will suffice." - Joseph Dunniger

Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Athens, Georgia

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 22:31:39 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:
In simple words you might understand --- Since I was replying solely to
your
last note, I snipped all that came before as being unessential. There
were
no grammatical errors. And all I did was accurately and tersely point out
your inanities.

And again avoided the topic title engaging in ad homenim attacks.

That's called "Trolling."

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote in message
news:4791a741$0$3432$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 22:31:39 -0800, P. Maffia wrote:
In simple words you might understand --- Since I was replying solely to
your
last note, I snipped all that came before as being unessential. There
were
no grammatical errors. And all I did was accurately and tersely point out
your inanities.

And again avoided the topic title engaging in ad homenim attacks.

Idiot,

I addressed and destroyed the inanities you posted long ago.

That's called "Trolling."

Call it anything you like. But I do a public service by telling the world
what a moron you are.

Not really, both are based upon the value of the dollar
not any basis in reality.

Then pick a basket of commodities.

Your rose colored glasses were solidly in place
here on this NG a year ago, in denial re the
ramifications of the sub prime mess to a large
extent...

..and now your rose colored glasses are distorting
your view of 'recovery'...

train wrecks are not recoverable...

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is....@home.com> wrote

Everyone involved in the sub-prime loans stepped
into it of their own free will.

That's been shown not to be true.

Yeah.........

I've not heard of one person who was forced, beyond their own free will,
actually against their will, into signing a note for a sub-prime loan.
There's laws that would invalidate that contract on the books in all 50
states.

Nope.  They might not have *understood* the risks.  They might not have
*read* the contract.  Greed and lust has a way of blinding some folks into
not caring to understand that what they are doing can be harmful.

No one seemed to care that the market was over blown - way the hell over
blown - yet they kept on buying, and selling, and buying, and buying, and
borrowing against an inflated equity, and buying, and borrowing against an
increasingly bloated unsupportable equity.

The balloon popped.  It was a big balloon.  It'll take time to pick up the
pieces.  But ya know, there'll be winners out of this mess, and there'll be
losers out of this mess.  Same for the stock market bubble bust from the
late 90's into the early 00's.  People who knew better came out ahead.  They
were the ones who made sane choices.

It's a small fraction of the global loans
and global real estate market.

How small?

Do you not know?

We've not yet seen even the tip of the mortgage disaster

Yup, there are lots of greedy people out there who didn't bother to read or
understand what they were getting into.....of their own free will.

It's happened before, in other places, with other markets.....

And it'll happend again, in another time and with another market.

It might even happen in the housing market all over again.

We've gotten very good at creating a hyped up market for something - like
who knew that I'd ~need~ to check my e-mail from my phone - what's next? -
making a phone call with my camera?

The stock market was DOOMED-----DOOMED I SAY------and it did go down, and it
came up, and went down, and came up, and came up and went down.  And you
know something - it'll go down and come up again, and go down again, and
come up again.  Just like the sun.

Same for the housing market.  Up - Down - Up - Down - Up - Down - Up. All
you need is a drill seargent barking out cadance.

"Ohhhhhhh.........but the sky is falling...."

Give me a break.

Far from over, you're seeing only the first wave.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.  And the cow jumped over the moon, and Ron Paul is going
to have the election stolen from his billions of dedicated followers by the
elite and secretive cartel that rules the world from Area 51, and all those
other wacky things people say.  Look, if enough of you make enough claims -
and you guys make all kinds of wild proclomations - you're bound to get
something right every once and a while, and somehow you believe that
validates all the other crap that you put forth.

I predict that housing prices will fall, then go up, then fall again, then
go up.......

I see in the future there will be as many homes sold as there are homes
bought.

--
Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it.
----------
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Athens, Georgia

"Curly Surmudgeon" <Curly.is.not@home.com> wrote
Not really, both are based upon the value of the dollar
not any basis in reality.


They are priced in dollars (at least here in the US).

Their values are based dolely on what a consumer is willing to pay for
them. And consumers are fickle people.

Then pick a basket of commodities.



Doorknobs.

They should be as good an indicator as any other indicator for the
purposes you are trying to achieve.