US Loses AAA Credit Rating After S&P Downgrade

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Armistead

401's were never meant to be retirement plans, but later laws reworked that allowed them for the lower classes. Basically giving big stock companies a chance to thrive off your buck. You might make money, you might lose it all, scary way to plan retirement as many have found out.

Then what do we have? IRA that companies do not offer. Pension plans? Not one the table anymore. However, companies will sponsor a 401k retirement program. So never meant to be a retirement program means nothing. It has become one! Either way the potential to loose any gains is present. Even the potential to loose the original investment. It is unfortunate the USA allows this type of risk taking on a retirement plan but provides very little help to the individual when the market goes belly up. We get an answer of better smarter investing next time. As for me, my portfolio is set up for conservative investing and monies spread over several options and a few in foreign funds. In short, diversified. This helps in situations like this but I still take some what of a beating. I think I might start hiding cash in the mattress!

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

... I think I might start hiding cash in the mattress!

You know what is a dream scenario for your ?

[Winston]

If you're looking for a save haven, gold has some legs yet. Silver is very good to, up 70% last year and about 30% so far this year and an easier investment to boot. Do take delivery of the metal though, keep it save for those rainy days we all know are coming.


But don't take my advice, do research first. I'd recommend U.S. silver eagles or Canadian silver Maples. Edit: Not for the uk though, sodding vat 20% on coins that should be removed makes this a slightly less profitable action however the silver price will exceed this in a few months.

[Skybird]

I have recommended gold myself over the past years, until some months ago, but I do not do that anymore: the price for it is too high now. Gold always has a fluctuating price, in all history, and it is currently spiking, which means sooner or later it will fall, and it will fall steeply. Then your losses will be stellar if your evasion timing is not perfect.

It simply is too late to buy gold now, me thinks.

If you bought it some years ago, then keep it as a safety, do not sell it as a quick way of making profit - what would you get for it? Uncertainty only. Even if the price drops again, sine you bought it much cheaper, you will not suffer losses.

I bought a little ammount of gold years ago, when the price was between 400 and 500. I see it as a last defence line in case of absolute emergency or chaos. Back then, some in this forum were laughing when I said I could imagine the price going up to 1500, even 2000 and maybe more. Who is laughing now?

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

[AVGWarhawk]

Gold, like anything else, is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Back in the good old days of panning the rivers for a speck of gold is much different than today's panning of the polluted river for gold. At the rate we are going soon we will be like the old west. Bartering for goods and panning for gold.

[Winston]

Maybe, I still think it's got legs. The market for these types of defensive investments will continue to rise. As I said, most importantly it's a save haven to protect your self in case of the worse case scenarios and as such it's good to have some tucked away. It's something each one should look at from them selves. I'm going to put it on the line and say gold will hit $1900 at years end and $2000 mid February next year and will continue to rise there after as it has been doing. The reason is as I've already talked about in previous posts, that paper money is in a massive bubble. It's only a matter of time until it pops in the face of dwindling resources. It's going to happen, but not today. I could be wrong only time will tell...

Originally Posted by Skybird

I back the idea on gold - the small reserves I have, are in solid gold, no "Kaufoptionen" (buying options?). tjhe latter is a oiece of paper only,.and when there is no gold on the market, your paper is useless.

However, gold is expensive currently. On the other hand, althoiugh it traditonally is an up and down for gold, in the face of raising inflation and finacial troubles and the stockmarkets being in doubt, gold maybe never will be at historical low prices anymore anyway.

But in principle: if you want a reserve, yes, go for gold indeed. It also is not immoral, like holding shares is. I admit that also has been an argument for me. If you buy gold, it is deal done-deal over, you bought something, and now it is your property, period. If yoiu buy shares, you claim the right to constantly get payed from the work of other peoiple, who additionally often get pushed and kicked and are put under pressure to increase the profit for shareholders at the end of the year, and maybe even loose their jobs for that argument. Sicne shareholders do not give back anything in return, only bear the risk of eventually loosing the money they spend in shares, profits should be limited to a total of what is equivalent to the money they spend when buying, then the share should be deleted, maybe plus a return equivalent to the interest for leadning money. And that, of course, would make the whole system of shareholding absurd.

Yes, the system of shareholding is absurd indeed. It should be allowed to hold shares only of the copmpany you are working for, eventually. But not for companies that you have nothing to deal with. Then you do not work for stranger's profit, but for your own success. You have a justified self-interest in the company'S success. If foreigners hold your shares, you partially are being possessed by them, like a master owns a slave whom he owes nothing, but benefits from.

Uh, I'm hijacking this. Sorry.

I was looking back though my old posts as I thought that I had posted something about this before back in 2007 and that's You Skybird, hope you don't mind the quote from the past. I never laughed at you back then my good man. In fact you were another voice in my awakning. I got to say it's funny how things never really change. Still always have a plan and always be learning. My understanding has grown since then but I still don't know what the future will bring. Anyone who says without equivocation what will happen tomorrow is a fool.

EDIT :I suck at quoting things

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Then what do we have? IRA that companies do not offer. Pension plans? Not one the table anymore. However, companies will sponsor a 401k retirement program. So never meant to be a retirement program means nothing. It has become one! Either way the potential to loose any gains is present. Even the potential to loose the original investment. It is unfortunate the USA allows this type of risk taking on a retirement plan but provides very little help to the individual when the market goes belly up. We get an answer of better smarter investing next time. As for me, my portfolio is set up for conservative investing and monies spread over several options and a few in foreign funds. In short, diversified. This helps in situations like this but I still take some what of a beating. I think I might start hiding cash in the mattress!

Your cash has just as much value in the mattress as it does the bank so why not.

That's the danger of stocks, stocks aren't real value. Last downfall they say we lost trillions, so where did the money go, no where, it was the assumed value at the time, nothing real.

The danger of most 401's are workers are forced into options and usually can only change that option a few times a year. That really sucks, factors show the market is gonna fail and you can't sell when needed. All you can hope is the ones investing for you do the right thing, but more than not they take high risk, because it's your money.

[Winston]

I fear Armistead that when currency is treated as a commodity then it to fluctuates in value just like anything else. If you were to take a hundred Dollar bill and walk in to the fed you could not exchange it for it's value in gold. The only thing backing the currency is the fact that by law 'This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.' If you wanted to buy a cake from McDonalds say, they can not refuse your money even though it's fiat currency. Remember the Fractional reserve system I talked about previously. Take out the cash from the bank and put it in a suitcase, say $1,000,000. Well there still just bank notes, paper. Those same bank notes are affected by inflation just like the trillions upon trillions of digital Dollars that are floating around the system.
The financial system as a whole needs to be rethought.
Ron Paul talks about going back to a gold standard, that by basing the Dollars value on gold reserves it would give it stability. No doubt it would but gold can be manipulated to. Another solution I hear is for the government to issue money so that it matches the size of the economy. Each year 'x' amount of Dollars to match 'y' the size of the economy as reported by private industry, government expenditure etc...
I have no idea if ether will work or if there is another solution to attain stable money. I just know it would be nice if people were not having to worry about there savings disappearing down a hole.

[flatsixes]

Originally Posted by Armistead

You obviously don't understand personal tax income and corporate tax income.

You may be correct. I've only been practicing corporate law for a few decades. Still, I think the rest of your argument (such as I can understand) makes a good case for abolishing the corporate income tax and taxing the beneficiaries directly, which was my point.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Your cash has just as much value in the mattress as it does the bank so why not.

That's the danger of stocks, stocks aren't real value. Last downfall they say we lost trillions, so where did the money go, no where, it was the assumed value at the time, nothing real.

The danger of most 401's are workers are forced into options and usually can only change that option a few times a year. That really sucks, factors show the market is gonna fail and you can't sell when needed. All you can hope is the ones investing for you do the right thing, but more than not they take high risk, because it's your money.

In a sense, yes, it was only a paper loss concerning stocks. As far as forced, I do not have to contribute to my 401K but knowing myself I do not have the discipline to do it on my own. Therefore I elect to have money taken each week. My portfolio is handled by folks that specialize in 401K. They are paid for their service. I get monthly reports and any switching of funds. All of my stocks are conservative in nature. Aggressive stocks and aggressively grow or aggressively lose as well.

[AVGWarhawk]

WTH? Now the market swings upward 425 points.

[Winston]

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/09/tech...riot/index.htm

Even with the fall of civilisation there's always some one making a profit