gut;1837590 wrote:No that's not how it works.

You only see PE's this high a year or two before and after recessions (when earnings are much lower).

What I am saying is that the market is pricing in earnings growth which will lower the P/E's, so if we are at 26x now, in a couple of quarters it may be at say, 21, when those earnings post.

sleeper;1837591 wrote:Not sure QO understands P/E ratios. Keyword "ratios".

No, I am just a fake accountant.

QuakerOats;1837623 wrote:What I am saying is that the market is pricing in earnings growth which will lower the P/E's, so if we are at 26x now, in a couple of quarters it may be at say, 21, when those earnings post.

That argument really doesn't hold water at these levels and 8 years since the last recession. That argument applies more to individual stocks than entire markets, anyway.

It's a pretty reliable "indicator". Sure, we could get another year or two of decent growth, and then see a 40% bear market.

This should scare the hell out of anyone: The Shiller PE (a cyclically adjusted earnings PE ratio) is 75% above it's historical average and recently crept past its 2007 peak. The only times it's been higher are 1929 and 1999. Yikes!

And there are a couple trillion in cash still looking for a home; and the individual investor has yet to return to the market.


I don't know; I am not seeing a 40% pullback. Obviously 5-10% could be in the cards, but if we get tax and regulatory relief, we could see growth that we have not seen in many years.

QuakerOats;1837639 wrote:And there are a couple trillion in cash still looking for a home; and the individual investor has yet to return to the market.


I don't know; I am not seeing a 40% pullback. Obviously 5-10% could be in the cards, but if we get tax and regulatory relief, we could see growth that we have not seen in many years.

Why is the money looking for a home? The most pro-business President ever was just elected, shouldn't they be getting in at the bottom? What's stopping them?

Logic, you need it!

QuakerOats;1837639 wrote:And there are a couple trillion in cash still looking for a home; and the individual investor has yet to return to the market.

Dude, CC is in the market. You know they say it's time to get out when Joe Schmo finally decides to get in.

QuakerOats;1837639 wrote: I don't know; I am not seeing a 40% pullback. Obviously 5-10% could be in the cards, but if we get tax and regulatory relief, we could see growth that we have not seen in many years.

LMAO.....5-10%?!? BULL markets routinely have pullbacks and corrections like that.

This market is arguably built on shakier fundamentals than it stood in 2007. The values have been severely inflated by easy money and artificially low interest rates. A market correction is 10%. A bear market is 20% - this will be worse because of the weaker fundamental underpinnings. I'd fully expect something between 30-40%....just look at those 3 periods that were higher - 2007 lost 50.9% and 2000 lost 44.7%, lasting 2.1 and 1.3 years, respectively. And the third was the Great Depression.

ptown_trojans_1;1837358 wrote:Man, I really really hope Howard takes the National Security Adviser role. Seems like he would bring in his own people and would bring actual structure to the NSC.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/15/robert-harward-plans-a-housecleaning-of-trumps-national-security-council-staff/

The names as deputies are solid and are national security professionals, not talking heads.

Howard has turned the position down.

O-Trap;1837438 wrote:I would just like to point out these three agreements.

superman;1837451 wrote:So with these 3 all agreeing, there's no way this common sense decision gets made.

Nope.
UGH. Looks like Howard pulled out of the running.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/02/16/trumps-pick-to-replace-michael-flynn-as-national-security-adviser-turns-down-offer-people-familiar-with-decision-say/?hpid=hp_no-name_no-name%3Apage%2Fbreaking-news-bar&tid=a_breakingnews&utm_term=.ad79839dd47a

majorspark;1837662 wrote:Howard has turned the position down.

Beat me to it.
Man, that sucks.

That's too bad. It does suck.

ptown_trojans_1;1837663 wrote:Nope.
UGH. Looks like Howard pulled out of the running.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/02/16/trumps-pick-to-replace-michael-flynn-as-national-security-adviser-turns-down-offer-people-familiar-with-decision-say/?hpid=hp_no-name_no-name%3Apage%2Fbreaking-news-bar&tid=a_breakingnews&utm_term=.ad79839dd47a

I mean, with the shit show so far, I'm not sure we could have justifiably hoped for something like that.

sleeper;1837642 wrote:Why is the money looking for a home? The most pro-business President ever was just elected, shouldn't they be getting in at the bottom? What's stopping them?

Did you really write that? The money is now coming off the sideline and helping with the rally, and there is more to come.


Get in the game.

gut;1837644 wrote:This market is arguably built on shakier fundamentals than it stood in 2007. The values have been severely inflated by easy money and artificially low interest rates. A market correction is 10%. A bear market is 20% - this will be worse because of the weaker fundamental underpinnings. I'd fully expect something between 30-40%....just look at those 3 periods that were higher - 2007 lost 50.9% and 2000 lost 44.7%, lasting 2.1 and 1.3 years, respectively. And the third was the Great Depression.

So you have taken some major short positions I take it.

[h=3]Philadelphia Fed: Manufacturing Outlook Survey Reaches Highest Level In 33 Years.[/h]The Wall Street Journal (2/16, Vigna) reports the Philadelphia Fed’s Manufacturing Business Outlook Survey in February rose to 43.3, its highest level in more than 33 years, with the report showing no obvious outliers. The Philly Fed wrote on its website that the survey suggests that growth in regional manufacturing is broadening. Business Insider (2/16, Bryan) reports the Philly Fed’s manufacturing survey “absolutely crushed expectations on Thursday in another strong sentiment reading for the US economy,” beating economists’ expectations of 18.0 and “leaping up from the 23.6 reading in January.” Overall, the data “seems to indicate a huge leap for current activity as firms reported higher sales and shipments.” According to the release, the index for current new orders “increased 12 points this month (with 44 percent of the firms reporting increases and just 6 percent reporting decreases),” while the shipments index “increased 8 points.”





Not-fake change we can believe in ...

QuakerOats;1837708 wrote:Did you really write that? The money is now coming off the sideline and helping with the rally, and there is more to come.


Get in the game.

If the market is expected to take off, why are investors waiting for the price to increase?

Do you understand the concept of efficient markets? Trump's "rally" has already been priced into the market.

QuakerOats;1837709 wrote:So you have taken some major short positions I take it.

LOL, no. I had some professors who lost a lot of money shorting NASDAQ back in the late 90's. They weren't wrong, they were just early. That's the problem with markets driven by momentum and enthusiasm - unsustainable valuations can persist for months or even years....but it's not a new normal and it just means the snapback is more severe.

This market could still go up another 10-20% before the Bear beats us down. It's just going to make for a bigger fall. But, yes, I am looking to take a more defensive posture (and that doesn't have to mean shorting).

sleeper;1837713 wrote:If the market is expected to take off, why are investors waiting for the price to increase?

Do you understand the concept of efficient markets? Trump's "rally" has already been priced into the market.

The market has already been taking off -- up 16% since the election, and investors will likely continue to wade in as they see growth policies enacted, which is why I think there is still a fair amount of upside left.

As for "efficient markets", you obviously have no concept; you advocate for government healthcare. LOL

QuakerOats;1837726 wrote:The market has already been taking off -- up 16% since the election, and investors will likely continue to wade in as they see growth policies enacted, which is why I think there is still a fair amount of upside left.

As for "efficient markets", you obviously have no concept; you advocate for government healthcare. LOL

Efficient markets and government programs have nothing to do with each other.

Maybe you can find a local community college that offers Finance 101 classes.

Thanks.


...one-payer

QuakerOats;1837742 wrote:Thanks.


...one-payer

Explain the connection between the concept of efficient markets and single payer healthcare.

Please teach me oh wise one. This will be good.

More fake news (from AP, no less) having to be corrected ...............

The Department of Homeland Security is roundly condemning an Associated Press story that broke Friday morning about considering the use of the National Guard to “round up” undocumented immigrants. The DHS says that isn’t true, and—contra the AP’s reporting—that DHS Secretary John Kelly didn’t write the draft memo.


“The Department is not considering mobilizing the National Guard,” said Gillian Christensen, the acting press secretary for DHS.



The concerted effort by the media to rile up the protesters and sore losers is astonishing. They certainly deserved everything they got yesterday.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ice-raid-reports-fake-news-obama-grabbed-400-more/article/2615129


obama rounds up 3,100 illegals in raid in April, 2012 ----- that's ok


Trump rounds up 680 illegal criminals --------- media and rad-left go off the deep end.



Real

The immigration stuff (and the statistics) are all irrelevant. The issue is the overall message they are sending. I don't think most people have an issue with raids to get rid of criminals. I just wish they wouldn't take such a brash approach.

Azubuike24;1837861 wrote:The immigration stuff (and the statistics) are all irrelevant. The issue is the overall message they are sending. I don't think most people have an issue with raids to get rid of criminals. I just wish they wouldn't take such a brash approach.

This is essentially the difference between Obama and Trump.

One framed it in a much more palatable way.

The other one goes in as dry as a Cheeto.

Which is why I support a lot of what Trump is trying to do, he's getting horrible, horrible coaching on how to release, announce and promote it. Sure, there's a sector of people who would criticize him even if he saved 1000 babies on live TV, but the majority really do want a better country. I'm just afraid he's so dense and unable to adjust to a communication style that people understand and embrace. That's his downfall, he's getting tuned out.