Dow hits 2004 low

[tw]

Subtitle says oil, once bouncing at $50 per barrel and selling for only $30 some last year is now at $55. This is CBSMarketwatch.com . Take away the George Jr rhetoric, and the market has been bad for all four years. Bad - unless you are one of the executives raping America with big bonuses, golden parachutes, manipulated spread sheets - and an outright believe that "Greed is Good". Please name one major executive in jail for fruad or theft from Enron, Waste Management, Arthur Andersen, MCI Worldcom, Global Crossing, Tyco International (which moved offshore so that stockholders could not sue it), Xerox and their accountants KPMG who intentionally created a fraudulent audit, Dynergy, Rite Aid, and who remembers how many others. Please feel free to add companies to this list. It is quite long and I cannot possbily remember them all.

Where are the guilty managers who made hundreds of $millions - criminally. Remember that the Republicans- especially the LA senator - threatened to destroy the SEC if it investigated these suspects. Remember that Harvey Pitts - the George Jr SEC commissioner - refused an Congressional offer to double his budget. They don't want to prosecute corporate crime.

So again we go to that same CBSMarketwatch page:
Marsh & McLennan is the largest of the insurance companies. They intentionally rigged market pricing to maximumize their profits at the expense of America. Aon, the second largest is also part of the investigation. What investigation? The George Jr administration would not do this investigation. NY STATE Attorney General is doing the prosecution. Why is it that State of OK had to file prosecution papers against Enron before the Federal Government would even claim to prosecute Enron executives. They hope you forget about Enron - the #5 campaign contributor to George Jr.

Can we identify the campaign contributions that are bribing this George Jr administration? Of course not. But we do know that Davis Besse, a nuclear power plant outside Toledo OH with a potential 3 Mile Island failure, was allowed to keep running after First Energy ran a $450,000 campaign fund raiser for Bush-Cheney. Furthermore, the reactor was later found with a big hole completely through its 6 foot carbon steel wall. No problem. George Jr is president. There is no penalty for maximizing profits at the risk of Toledo.

Where are all these federal prosecutions against corrupt companies AND their getting richer executives. Don't forget who gets most from a George Jr tax cut. The same wealthy 1%. If you make $200,000, then you are not seeing anywhere near the tax breaks seen by Warren Buffet - an early and major critic of all this Richman Welfare. The tax cut was not designed to put new shoes on those working in poverty. The tax cuts are for the many who also don't get prosecuted.

These Corporate and Richman welfare systems assume you don't even read the newspapers (if the article in your newspaper is not as long as this post, then it is Oprah gossip - not news). 'New York State Insurance Department' had to file charges because the George Jr administration will not even prosecute Enron!

IOW the George Jr administration knows mainstream voters - ie those in the Cellar - will remain mute while religious extremists will vote nearly 100% for George Jr. They hope you have an MTV attention span. They assume you will remain dumb, bored, and uninformed. More corporate scandels that have no federal prosecutors - just as you did not notice how the Jersey girls had to fight George Jr to get a 9-11 Commission.

Reports on this Marsh & McLennan and Aon investigation indicts most every major insurance company. Those names should be familiar. Same companies that also lost many employees in the WTC (I think Marsh & McLennan took a direct hit). Well the employees could be replaced. And our well compensated friends in the administration will not investigate the price fixing. What a cozy relationship as the price of gasoline in CA climbs to $3 per gallon.

Get ready folks. The new innovative technologies that make America more energy efficient (and create new jobs) were not started four years ago. Instead those same administration officials solution to energy was to consume more. As a result, gas at $2.30 is a certainty. The real question is how close to $3 per gallon. Based upon America's always increasing consumption, that price will not decrease. It is better to let your campaign contributors get rich rather than demand that America innovate. Corruption that stifles innovation is also what this election is about. $3 per gallon gas means these are the best it gets and that recession is probable.

Dow at 9,753 is all the way back down where it was last November, below where it was Jan 2002 (three months after 9/11), and below where it was four years ago. Where is this booming economy? Only where crime, fraud, and massive legalized bribes (campaign contributions) are going to George Jr. How to undermine an economic recovery? Let your rich campaign contributors pilfer the profits.

If you are earning less than $30,000, then where is that tax cut? If listening to George Jr propaganda, then you believe the economy is booming and that corporate corruption is in jail. After four years, the story is completely different - if we review the facts and not listen to a lying president.

Just another whole group of companies doing massive corporate fraud - and the George Jr administration will not even prosecute. Dow is dropping. As I noted back when they were advocating tax cuts, history says you get a short term boom followed by a recession. The boom is over. Welcome to paybacks - how the economy demands you now pay for those tax cuts. Apply for new jobs at those those innovative companies that sell efficient uses of oil. Oh, they were never created. George Jr tax incentives instead favored more consumption.

[lookout123]

while some improprieties will be found in Spitzer's latest investigations it is important to remember that Spitzer is preparing for a future political office, most likely the governor's mansion. (normal path for the AG) that isn't to say that M&M are without problems, but let's remember who is going after them. it is the same man who has spent vast amounts of time and energy going after mutual fund companies and brokers by targeting 12b-1 fees. he has spent incredible time and energy championing the idea that they are designed to screw the client, when in reality the exact opposite is true.

and as far as the DOW's current standing proving there hasn't been economic recovery? this wasn't exactly an unexpected pre-election slide. most of us have been warning of this temporary movement for 6-8 months. corporate earnings continue to climb at a respectable pace, stock prices (which comprise the DOW) always trail corporate earnings by at least 12-18 months. small and midsize companies feel the upswing first but amateur investors wait to believe in the upswing until the see large companies reap the benefits. large companies affect the DOW. when corporate earnings peaked in the spring of 1998 we didn't see the DOW tumble for quite some time. it is all part of the normal economic cycle with a nasty political race thrown in for good measure.

no matter who is elected, stocks will climb again within a couple of weeks(of a winner being announced). i expect we'll be somewhere around 10,500 by the end of the year and closing on 11,000 by 2Q 2005.

as far as your claim that a lot of white collar folks should have been prosecuted - you are absolutely right. the downside to that process is that it leaves story above the page one fold for a very long time, and that has a very negative affect on the market. although profit and earnings drive the economy, mass psychology have a very meaningful impact on the day to day market.

[Happy Monkey]

Thank goodness for ambitious lawyers looking to make a name for themselves. Nobody else seems interested in holding massive corporations to account. If massive warchests weren't the advantage they are in lawsuits, I might have some sympathy for the anti-trial-lawyer position.

And I'm speaking as the subject of a frivolous lawsuit.

[xoxoxoBruce]

"In one 22-year study tracking the careers of 1,500 men and women, 83 of whom became millionaires, the researcher found that not a single person in the study became wealthy investing in the stock market. in fact, most of the people in the study were still struggling financially after 22 years of work, and one of the main reasons was because they had lost so much money investing their savings in stocks recommended by financial advisers." - Brian Tracy, Getting Rich Your Own Way

[lookout123]

Bruce, does the author have an agenda? He is obviously selling a book telling people interested in investing about HIS way of making money. i'm not familiar with his book, so he may have valid strategies, but i think it is important to remember that he benefits from convincing people that another way of investing isn't as profitable as his way. as always, you can find a study to support any theory you might have.

BUT, i would caution anyone who thinks they are going to become wealthy by being involved in the stock market. the purpose of investing is not to create wealth from nothing. it is to manage funds in a manner that will encourage growth over the long term. investors looking for get rich plans are generally the ones who lose A) the greatest amounts and B) more often. the market is useful for asset maintenance and growth with a view for the long term. it is no more suitable for wealth creation than the lottery or roulette wheel.

as i've said before, the average investor is best served by holding most of their $$ in quality mutual funds. while it is true that there is a greater potential for gain in individual stocks, unless an investor has enough cash to build a quality, diversified, and balanced stock and bond portfolio they run a greater risk of loss than is prudent.

of the 41 clients that i handle with more than $1Million in the market not a single one has less than $200,000 in quality mutual funds. they also own stocks and bonds but they will all tell you that they started with the bulk of their money going into Funds because they needed the relative stability early in their investment plans. (also, funds may be more costly in the short term, but much more cost effective in the long term because once an individual has invested within a fund family they can rebalance and move money around within all of the available fund choices at no further cost.) they are not the Trumps or the Soros's of the world. they are men and women who worked hard in a normal career and followed the advise of an honest broker.

there are brokers and investment advisors who are less than scrupulous - just as there are teachers, lawyers, doctors, etc who don't always have their clients' best interest in mind. you will also find brokers who just don't know what they are doing or have been trained improperly. but the majority of brokers take their responsibility very seriously and provide the best possible advise. as i tell my clients, no matter how good a broker or investor is - they will be wrong about 20-25% of the time on individual stock picks. we don't carry a crystal ball.

and before tw even shows up to yell from the mountain tops that you don't need a broker because we are nothing but "shined up sales whores", always remember you can invest on your own.

there are plenty of wire houses in existance. a layperson can research and learn to do very well by picking their own investments. they may do better or worse than they would have if they had used a broker - results will vary. one of the biggest benefits of using a full service broker is simply having someone between you and your money. people who handle their own money often make decisions that are more motivated by emotion or feeling than on logic and facts. a broker has the ability to ask "why?" and provide an outside, unbiased opinion before placing questionable trades. the broker will also push issues that the individual investor would ignore. (proper balance and diversification)

[xoxoxoBruce]

Bruce, does the author have an agenda?

Don't know? I found that quote on NSFW http://domai.com/ under the "Thought for the Day" and didn't want to miss the opportunity to rattle your cag.....er...uh.......clarify it.

Nicely done, by the way.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Thank goodness for ambitious lawyers looking to make a name for themselves. Nobody else seems interested in holding massive corporations to account. If massive warchests weren't the advantage they are in lawsuits, I might have some sympathy for the anti-trial-lawyer position.

And I'm speaking as the subject of a frivolous lawsuit.

Don't drag the warchests into this, they pretty much mind their own business.

As an aside, I've noticed that the price of gold is the highest it's been in 10 years. In a very general sort of way, the price of gold increases as people begin to feel anxious about the general economic/ political outlook. I realize that gold bugs often tend to be on the wonked out side, but it is an interesting correlation that seems to prove true more often than not. My ex-step father was a gold bug which was what got me interested in the whole thing. He was descended from a family of Armenian Jews who fled all the way across Russia to end up in LA around 1915 or so. They made their escape by means of the proverbial gold coins stashed away in their belongings. When I got my small windfall earlier this year, I bought 8 gold American Eagles to help pay my future rent. At the time I bought them gold was going for $385.00/oz; now its at $424.00.

[russotto]

The only way you're going to get wealthy directly from the stock market is out-and-out speculation, with a good deal of luck. Oh, and you have to start with decent seed money too. Even good, sound investing won't make you rich starting from non-rich.

Much of my money is being handled by 1-800-MATTRESS (actually ING Bank), which looks like a good "investment" nowadays, particularly compared to the index funds the rest is in...

[lookout123]

just remember that the deeper a market dips, the safer it is to get in. it isn't just a cheesy slogan. we don't know how low the market will go on any given dip, but the people that increase their wealth usually do pretty well in down markets. they buy all the way down secure in the knowledge that the economy is a cycle and it will come back up and they will have purchased more shares at a lower cost and have reaped the rewards that the individual who pulled out missed.

"in a recession dis-investors lose, investors win" Mr Buffett

he was interviewed a few years ago, but i can't find a link to the article. the interviewer asked him how he could remain so unshakeable knowing Buffett had just lost $6million on one holding. Buffett calmly responded that he hadn't lost one penny. you only lose if you sell.

Russotto - like i said, the market isn't the tool for wealth creation. it is an excellent path to wealth accumulation, though.

i don't know what funds you have, but i generally don't recommend index funds. a well managed fund will outperform an index fund.
i only maintain my license in a couple of states so i can't give you specific recommendations but i would suggest that you visit:
Lord Abbett
American Funds
Van Kampen

you can build a very nice portfolio in any one of the families or an exceptional one by mixing certain funds from the three.

[tw]

One of the many factors in determining investments is the attitude of the street - and learning which market monitors better have a feel for the fundamentals verses those who 'shine their shoes' daily. Friday's National Business Report on PBS interviews both types. This Friday (22 Oct 2004) interview is informative:

from National Business Report on 22 Oct 2004
PAUL KANGAS: My guest "market monitor" this week is Stan Weinstein, editor and publisher of "Global Trend Alert," an advisory service for institutional investors. Great to see you again Stan. Welcome.
STAN WEINSTEIN, EDITOR & PUBLISHER, GLOBALTREND ALERT: Always my pleasure to be here, Paul.
KANGAS: Nasty, nasty sell-off today. Are we suddenly in a bear market here?
WEINSTEIN: I think we`re in the ninth inning of a bull market. I don`t think we`re yet in the bear market. I think it`s a mistake to talk about bull markets, bear markets. Really a bull and bear market existing side by side. In this tape (ph), you can see so many of the big cap stocks (INAUDIBLE) like Ford, Minnesota Mining getting hit, a lot of that technology doing well. This is typical, late-in-the-day action.
KANGAS: So we`re overvalued, fairly valued or undervalued?
WEINSTEIN: You know me. I`m a technician. I don`t get into value. I think half the market is bullish, half is bearish. I think in the months ahead it will become more bearish.
KANGAS: What if Bush is reelected, will that help? Or if Kerry wins, is that going to hurt? How`s it going to work?
WEINSTEIN: I think that it`s no secret that the market will most definitely want Bush to win. You watch when the polls were bad for Bush, the market went down between February and August. Since then, market`s done somewhat better. I think if Bush gets elected, you`ll see a fourth quarter rally, but I still think that even if Bush gets in, the first quarter, second quarter of the new year could be a problem. With Kerry, I think it will be even worse.
KANGAS: What would be the most prominent warning signs for you to say that we`re going into a bear?
WEINSTEIN: I think you should watch the following levels. Right now we`re getting warnings, the fact that the market is so divergent, split, that`s a concern. But if we close below 1060 on the S&P at any time in the coming months, if the NASDAQ Composite confirms, it closes below 1850, that would be a bear market. I don`t think we`re ready for a bear market. I think there`s one more good rally coming.
KANGAS: What do you make of stocks like General Motors and Google going through the roof?
WEINSTEIN: That`s the most important thing, Paul, that we can get across to viewers tonight. Too many people are treating this as a monolith. You know by reading my stuff that there`s a lot of stuff that I`m very, very bullish on, a lot of technology, the Verisigns (ph), the Googles. That`s doing fine. Conversely, an awful lot of value, General Motors, Ford, Minnesota Mining, we`re bearish on and this phenomenon often appears in the ninth inning of a bull market. It`s one of many reasons I`m concerned.
....
KANGAS: How about a word about bonds? What do we do with bonds here? We only have about 40 seconds left.
WEINSTEIN: I think that bonds are moderately positive which actually worries me for next year for the economy. Bonds are still moderately positive, would only turn negative on bonds if the long-term, 30-year contract breaks down and closes below the 103 level. Right now bonds moderately positive.
KANGAS: Boy, I`ve seen you more bullish on stocks than you are right now.
WEINSTEIN: Well, one of the things that concerned me was on your show last time was I thought there would be a top this year and I think we`ve seen it. It often happens in an election year. I think we`ve done the election-year top. ...

Unfortunately, many other economic indicators suggest this is true. Caution is recommended especially with so many companies issuing profit warnings that even apply to 1st quarter next year.

History demonstrates that when a nation fights expensive wars and even hides those debts, then the long term consequences are negative. Remember, the US never really paid for the Kuwait Liberation. That was paid for mostly by other nations - especially Japan. That war did not result in massive and unpaid debts to create a severe recession.

We are now in a war that has virtually no allied assistance and that incurs massive debts for up to a decade (welcome to nation building made even worse because George Jr made no plans for the peace). It takes people out of productive domestic jobs to liberate a people who did not want to be liberated (just like VietNam). History says this and the resulting massive government debt has negative economic consequences, later. Consider it when a 'shiny shoe' mutual fund promoter hypes a future economic boom. Boom will not happen when the government is currently promoting economic recession, corporate and richman welfare (will not even prosecute massive corporate fraud), and when the economy has fewer 'killer app' products to export.

With Boeing, the drug industry, the insurance industry, the airlines, the auto industry, the chemical industry, etc all in trouble combined with a doubling of energy (oil) prices (and US is now becoming an importer of even natural gas), then where are the products to move us out of recession? Where are the new killer apps from the computer industry now that Intel has hit a brick wall and the software industry is currently stagnated by security (and other) issues. Instead of encouraging innovation, this president promotes tarrifs, trade embargos (openly stifes free trade), corporate welfare (such as tens of billions to the airlines with no strings attached, or welfare to Boeing for 767 tankers, or $millions to GM to develop the hybrid that anti-innovation GM stifled for decades), massive funds to politically inspired and unproductive science (ISS and man to Mars at the expense of ongoing and important research), and hypes fear about terrorism. Even successful domestic terrorism is directly traceable to a president who did not read his own memos.

The Sec of Treasury said a second tax cut would not solve anything just as the first tax cut did. Instead, George Jr (essentially) fired the Secretary rather than learn the facts. This nonsense only increases debts, increases America's now large trade imbalances, and encourages recessions. Invest with caution under a George Jr government. They don't promote innovation, they spend money they do not have (Cheney: Reagan proved that deficits don't matter), and they are realigning American military bases, combat divisions, and international treaties for the next war. All these factors should be part of your investment plan. Does your mutual fund perspectus issue the same caution?

[lookout123]

Consider it when a 'shiny shoe' mutual fund promoter hypes a future economic boom.

even an ignorant "shiny shoe" guy like me would prefer if you didn't misrepresent what i post. please quote using my words where i said we are in or can expect an immediate BOOM. i didn't and wouldn't say that. unfortunately you are too biased to acknowledge that you may be playing a little loose with the facts again.

here's the deal - picture a man walking up a very large hill. next imagine that this man is playing with a yo-yo.
if the hill is the long term market, the yo-yo is the daily headline. it is very easy to become distracted by the yo-yo and miss the bigger picture.

the market is poised to continue on the upswing after the election hysteria subsides. we are not entering a boom market - there are too many issues to slow that down. but the absence of a boom does not necessitate a collapse. the boom of the late '90's was artificial and we shouldn't expect to see that type of action for quite a long time.

but tell me tw - did you bother looking into those links before you decided to continue your biased responses to me? have you ever had your portfolio compared to a solid fund-based approach? or would that be unthinkable because no one could possibly teach you something new? do you just know that your way is the ONE RIGHT WAY because it is your way?

it really is ironic, you have more in common with hannity/limbaugh than you will ever understand. people like you three will scream about the inferiority of others, rather than acknowledge that you don't hold the patent on the truth.

that is the difference here. you go on the attack if someone looks at the same information you do and comes up with a different conclusion. you can't fathom that there might just be 2 ways that, while different, are both effective. life just isn't as black and white as you want to make it out to be.

but please, give me your best shot. i look forward to reading another diatribe about the evils of men like me.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

even an ignorant "shiny shoe" guy like me would prefer if you didn't misrepresent what i post.

The reference to 'shiny shoe' was a reference to a type of people - obviously. Posted were trends and quotes from honest market analysts who advise caution. Posted were reasons why their caution has merit. Posted was a total avoidance of Lookout123's opinions that were provided with no supporting reasons and unjustified professional opinion.

But did the poor little lookout123 get his feelings hurt anyway. Ahhh. That's too bad - until you are willing to answer some simple, blunt questions. One more time: an oppurtunity for Lookout123 to demonstrate he can get his shoes dirty; answer questions honestly. An oppurtunity to demonstrate that Lookout123 learns underlying facts before he has an opinion. Feel free to answer a few simple questions that any honest and informed person can answer:

1) Too many sources, including a video of him sitting in the FL classroom, say this president does not make his own decisions. He is told what to think. He just sat in a FL classroom for seven minutes. He did not even ask if anyone was in charge. What would you have done if Andy Card said, "A second plane has just hit the World Trade Center. America is under attack."? George Jr never even asked one question for seven minutes. Seven minutes when fighter pilots still had no authorization to fire - to protect America. Why? What would Lookout123 have done?

2) With intelligent leadership, then the Iraqi army and police would not have been disbanned. Today's American deaths and the resulting double or tripling of insurgency is directly traceable to George Jr. Administration sources suggest the insurgent number at 12,000 is much higher than they had originally estimated. BBC is suggesting numbers may be more like 20,000 or higher. How does Lookout123 justify a decision that only only drove so many Iraqis to become insurgents?

3) Please tell us that George Jr did not make Iraq ripe for insurgency. Please explain where he made an intelligent decision to disban the military and police?

4) Lookout123 promotes the George Jr mantra. Mix Afghanistan and Iraq as if they are the same war. How is a war justified by virtually every nation in the world same as the war condemned by most every nation? Lookout123 - where does the invasion of Afghanistan - with approval of virtually the entire world - have anything to do with the invasion of Iraq - that was not justified according to most of the world including Canada, Mexico, and the UN Secretary General? Where do you find any logic in calling them both a war on Terrorism? Feel free to demonstrate how an honest financial expert can explain simple world events - to defend the man he advocates for president? Please explain why you think the war in Afghanistan is the same war in Iraq?

5) In a previous post are 14 successful, thwarted, or possible attacks by bin Laden on the US. Name one attack by Saddam - attempted or even planned - during those last ten years. By mixing Saddam with bin Laden, the shiny shoe George Jr intentionally confuses reality. It's called propaganda. A technique to conceal truth or to promote outright lies. Do you feel personally spoken of in a "condescending manner" because your propaganda to support this president is challenged? Please feel free to answer honestly.

6) Zarqawi is as dangerous as bin Laden? Why do you repeat more White House propaganda? When did Zarqawi conspire to take out 10 Pacific airliners, kill hundreds outside an American embassy, or kill thousands in an American city? Where is Zarqawi's organization located throughout the world - or even just in Afghanistan? Is Zarqawi is a major threat only when the president is promoting hype to justify his illegal war? Zarqawi is the threat as serious as bin Laden - or do you always repeat presidential propaganda as fact? Then explain why among the hodge podge of insurgents, former Baathist - remember those people who George Jr fired and were left with nothing to do - are now considered most dangerous of the so many different insurgents?

7) And of course the basic question that any honest poster could answer - When will we go after bin Laden?

How are you trusted to provide financial advise when you cannot even answer simple and fundamental questions to justify your open support for George Jr? You claim he is an honest president - that he does not lie to justify war? That MBA drilled how many dry (unsuccessful) wells and still made how much money? When do we go after bin Laden? Is that so difficult to answer?

Or would it harm your image as a financial expert to admit your choice of president is grossly in error? Do you also believe silly ideas that a 9/11 attack caused a recession, four years of underwhelming growth, loss of how many jobs, and a massive government debt climbing as fast (as a percentage of GNP) as Richard Nixon's record debt? Not hard questons - unless it might dirty your shiny shoes. Please feel free to answer some simple and honest questions. Show us the integrity on which financial advise is based. Demonstrate the truth and honesty that comes to recommend George Jr for president. Please answer some simple and fundamental questions so we can judge your integrity.

Posted were opinions and supporting facts from other sources and that totally ignored Lookout123. But since their opinions so easily offend you, then answer seven simple questions so that we can judge your credibility.

[lookout123]

The reference to 'shiny shoe' was a reference to a type of people - obviously.

what type of people? the lookout type of people?

Consider it when a 'shiny shoe' mutual fund promoter hypes a future economic boom.

this doesn't look like a general statement about a type of people. it is a statement about lookout. that's ok.
this is an example of a statement referencing a type of people. you posted this one in the old portfolio thread. you remember the one - it was where you didn't answer any of my questions?

In reality, the full service broker is a fancy, shined-up salesman whose job is to get you to do what is in his best interest. He is the poor student in school whose only objective in life was the $150,000+ per year salary. Yes, whores make that much.

the majority of your post has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, it is just another example of you ignoring questions regarding the thread topic and demanding answers to unrelated questions. i ask you again - why should i answer all (or any) of your questions when you refuse to respond to any questions or ideas that i post?

you frequently accuse me of being a Bush koolaid drinker who thinks everything he has done is right. Please cite MY WORDS when doing so. i am open about the fact that i am supporting bush in this election. i think i have been equally as open that i don't believe bush is the best possible president for america - only the better of the two available choices. he has made many mistakes. i have posted in other threads (political threads) why i support him in this election. i don't condemn you, or anyone, for supporting Kerry - you should vote for the person that most closely represents your personal philosophy and priorities for the future.

that being said - would you care to address ANY of the questions i have posed to you about financial management? keeping in mind that i didn't say your way was wrong - only different? would you care to rate your portfolio against my recommendations?

or even look deeper into the challenge i gave in May?

here is a quick exercise. imagine that you can travel back 70 years ago and invest $10k in each of 5 stocks (or predecessors) from this list: Alcoa, Altria grp, Am Espress, At&T, Boeing,Caterpillar,Citigroup,Coca-cola,Disney,Dupont,Kodak,Exxon,GE,GM,HP, Home depot,Honeywell,IBM,INTEL,Int'l Paper, J&J,JPMorgan Chase, MCD's,Merck,Microsoft, Proctor&Gamble, SBC Communications,3M, United Technologies, WalMart

If you had picked the top 5 performers you would hold $18.3Million. If the same $50k had been invested in my favorite conservative fund you would now hold $28.5 million. (after the MAXIMUM POSSIBLE sales charges and fees)

i have no interest in another pissing match that makes us both look like fools to the rest of the cellarites - so if that is what you want, i concede. if, however, you would care to have an honest discussion and answer my questions as you expect yours to be answered, we can take this discussion further.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

what type of people? the lookout type of people?

Do you get upset when you cannot see yourself in your shoes? Seven simple questions to prove you have integrity. Answer them or admit you cannot. Lookout123. It's all about whether you can be honest. Seven simple questions that any honest person would answer.