October set a slew of trading records, mostly bad – MarketWatch — This is a fascinating article that you should read in its entirety — for entertainment purposes only.

 
Excerpt:

2. Massive daily moves in both directions sent traders reaching for the Mylanta. The S&P 500 has not had such a volatile month since November 1929, as measured by moves of at least 1% higher or lower. The Dow posted its two biggest point gains on record, climbing by 936 points on Oct. 13 and by 889 on Oct. 28. But it also posted its second-biggest point drop on record, of 733 points.

Found by John “Bear” Ligums.




  1. troublemaker says:

    What’s so weird? This roller coaster type behavior is a classic indicator of an economy that is on the verge of total collapse.

  2. Special Ed says:

  3. Jim says:

    *shrug* I see it as a huge opportunity to take parts of companies that were formerly a bit too expensive anyway.

    Most of the last month or two has been markets unwinding huge positions and risk being re-worked. I don’t expect things to settle down for at least another six months. For those that don’t like wide swings in value… why are you in the markets again?

  4. brendal says:

    This is only the beginning of the end…esp. if Obama is elected.

  5. Mister Mustard says:

    If this gets rid of the hedge-fund leeches and other do-nothing parasites who make millions (or tens of millions, or hundreds of millions) of dollars for shuffling other people’s money around in CDOs and derivatives and credit default swaps and other unitelligible financial smoke and mirrors, some temporary financial discomfort will be WELL WORTH IT.

    And #4 – Brenda Lee

    >>This is only the beginning of the end…esp.
    >>if Obama is elected.

    Oh, that’s right! You’re one of the select few in the multimillionaire/ billionaire range who will actually pay more taxes under Obama, right?

    I’ll bet increasing your marginal tax rate from 36% to 39% will drive you to pack your bags and move to Namibia or Swaziland or someplace with a lower tax rate.

    Right?

  6. QB says:

    With all the volatility I’m amazed how it’s stayed in the 8500 to 9500 band. It’s almost like there are psychological barriers.

    Oh, and if Obama gets elected dogs will mate with cats. If McCain gets elected cats will mate dogs.

  7. john doe says:

    This behavior is called forming a bottom. look at it as an opportunity.

  8. Paddy-O says:

    # Mr ‘Turd said, “Oh, that’s right! You’re one of the select few in the multimillionaire/ billionaire range…”

    Last I checked, the no new tax pledge has gone from $250k/year down to ~$120k/year. If he’s elected it be down around $42k/year by inauguration day…

    Hardly millionaire range. LOL!

  9. Ranger007 says:

    #5 Mister Mustard said

    “If this gets rid of the hedge-fund leeches and other do-nothing parasites who make millions (or tens of millions, or hundreds of millions) of dollars for shuffling other people’s money around in CDOs and derivatives and credit default swaps and other unitelligible financial smoke and mirrors, some temporary financial discomfort will be WELL WORTH IT.”

    Agree! (But I doubt it – both Demos and Repubs will be lobbied by those getting a huge share of all of those hundreds of billions of bailout dollars.

  10. brendal says:

    MM is off his meds – AGAIN!!!

  11. Mister Mustard says:

    #8 – O’Furniture

    >>Last I checked, the no new tax pledge has
    >>gone from $250k/year down to ~$120k/year. If
    >>he’s elected it will blah blah.. bullshit

    O’F, you haven’t been listening. Here’s the relevant part of the tax plan, straight from the horse’s web site:

    I want to provide a tax cut for 95% of Americans. If you make less than a quarter of a million dollars a year, you will not see a single dime of your taxes go up. If you make $200,000 a year or less, your taxes will go down. Now, Sen. McCain talks about small businesses. Only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. The vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan. And we provide a 50% tax credit so that they can buy health insurance for their workers, because there are an awful lot of small businesses that want to do right by their workers but they just can’t afford it. Some small business owners can’t even afford health insurance for themselves“.

    The nonsense that the wingnuts spout about changing income levels, flip-flopping on the tax plan, it’s just standard old right wing BULLSHIT.

    When they talk about Obama’s tax plan, some references are to who “will have no new taxes”, who “will get a tax cut”, and who “will see the largest reduction in tax”.

    Of course they’re different numbers.

    The bottom line is, you make $1/4 million or less, no new taxes.

    Is that simple enough?

    And if you make more than $1/4 million, your taxes will go up by a maximum of 2 or 3 percent.

    Awww, poor multimillionaires! Maybe if the sold on of the unknown (estimated to be 7) houses they have, they wouldn’t even notice the additional tax bite.

  12. Mister Mustard says:

    #10 – Miss Lee

    >>MM is off his meds – AGAIN!!!

    Are you a masochist? A self-cutter? One who burns herself with lit cigarettes? Do you need pain to feel pleasure?

    Every time you post here, you make an ass out of yourself.

    Why do you perseverate?

  13. LibertyLover says:

    Poison,

    So you think 4% isn’t that bad? On a company that nets $1M, that is the cost of a good part-time office worker. So to pay the taxes, these companies will either:

    A) lay someone off.
    B) raise their prices.

    Which would you prefer?

    BTW . . . you still haven’t answered my question about where the line is drawn on Obama’s lawlessness.

  14. Mister Mustard says:

    #13 – Liberty Loser

    >>So you think 4% isn’t that bad?

    Do math much? That’s a maxiumum THREE percent.

    >>On a company that nets $1M, that is the cost
    >>of a good part-time office worker.

    Yeah. I’ll bet there’s just a passle of Joe Six Packs and Joe the “plumbers” that own companies that net $1,000,000.00 AND pay their corporate taxes through personal income taxes.

    I answered your question about Obama’s “lawlessness” about 5 times. What’s the magic number at which you can assimilate the information in the answer?

  15. brendal says:

    Only JCD knows the answer to *that* question, MM!!

  16. Mister Mustard says:

    #15 – Brenda Lee

    >>Only JCD knows the answer to *that*
    >>question, MM!!

    To what question, Miss Lee? You’re making less sense than usual. Isn’t it past your bedtime? You seem delirious.

  17. Dallas says:

    #2 I love your meter, but the reading is off or I hope you do do GAF. !

  18. J says:

    # 4 brendal

    Nice fear mongering but the fact of the matter is that taxes for the $250,000 crowd are only being returned to what they were under Clinton. Obama isn’t pledging to increase taxes. He is pledging to restore them to what they were under a better economy.

    # 13 LibertyLover

    Typical right wing thinking process. You see only two solutions to any problem and both are counterproductive and neither are smart business decisions.

    To all

    As to the topic of this post. The stock market is gambling and if you don’t know that when you go into it then you shouldn’t be participating. In my opinion the stock market is one step above a casino with slightly more predictability. Only slightly!

  19. LibertyLover says:

    #14>>So you think 4% isn’t that bad?

    Do math much? That’s a maxiumum THREE percent.

    Actually, I do. 39% is what he wants to raise the current 35% to. That comes to 4%.

    Watch closely: 39 – 35 = 4.

    BTW . . . that 35% is for both corporate and personal.


    >>On a company that nets $1M, that is the cost
    >>of a good part-time office worker.

    Yeah. I’ll bet there’s just a passle of Joe Six Packs and Joe the “plumbers” that own companies that net $1,000,000.00 AND pay their corporate taxes through personal income taxes.

    There are more than you think. I know of quite a few in my chamber of commerce. After your last comment on how many I asked how many were Sub-S. Most of them were and most of them are quite large.

    But you are avoiding the question . . . again.

    Which do you prefer?

    A) Lay someone off
    B) Raise prices

    I answered your question about Obama’s “lawlessness” about 5 times. What’s the magic number at which you can assimilate the information in the answer?

    Actually, you didn’t. You kept trying to shift blame. Obama broke the law. Where is the line drawn?

  20. Paddy-O says:

    #18 J said, “but the fact of the matter is that taxes for the $250,000 crowd are only being returned to what they were under Clinton.”

    Great! Brilliant, the economy was was starting downhill at the end of Clinton’s term. So with a weak econ now, raising taxes will slow or stop job creation. Great plan. LOL

  21. Paddy-O says:

    #19 LL said, “After your last comment on how many I asked how many were Sub-S. Most of them were and most of them are quite large.”

    I know one Sub-S that employs 200 people and nets ~$15M/year.

    ANYONE who thinks raising taxes on the bus sector doesn’t hurt job growth is either a mental midget or is a liar and has another agenda unspoken.

  22. QB says:

    George HW Bush raised taxes to balance the budget and deal with a recession. The economy bounced back in a year and he got nailed at the polls.

    How come?

  23. J says:

    # 20 Paddy Cake the Ignorant Shit Talker

    That’s funny! It was a natural cycle and it took a Republican president and the give away to the rich to drive that natural cycle into a catastrophe. Thank you for proving my point.

    George Bush and John McCain have been saying the economy was “strong” as recently as August. So, I guess in “Bizarrero World” Up means Down. Coming from you I guess you really mean things were great under Clinton.

  24. J says:

    # 20 Paddy Cake the Delusional Ignorant Shit Talker

    Yeah I remember how bad it was under Clinton. lol

    Unemployment dropped from 7.3% in January of 1993 to 4.0% in January of 2001. 22 million jobs were created during Clinton’s presidency. Economic growth increased by an average of 4.0% per year during Clinton’s presidency. Increase in median family income by an average of $6,338 during the Clinton presidency. Lowered inflation rate from 4.7% during George H.W Bush’s term to 2.5%. 7 million fewer Americans living in poverty at the end of Clinton’s presidency than at the end of Bush Sr.’s term. Record budget surpluses.

    It was SOOOOOO Awful!! LOL You Dolt!

  25. Paddy-O says:

    #24 As I thought, mental midget.

  26. J says:

    # 25 Paddy the Ignorant Shit Talker

    As I thought, no rebuttal beyond name calling.

  27. brendal says:

    #26…hard to have a rebuttal against a mental midget…I don’t debate with my dog, either…neither does Paddy-O…wise man.

    #16 – You posed a question and I answered. Meds got you down AGAIN, MM??

  28. Rick Cain says:

    Extreme market volatility is a bad omen. The DOW is just one indicator. Look at the NASDAQ lately, it just keeps dropping!

  29. Paddy-O says:

    #28 Rick Cain said, “Extreme market volatility is a bad omen. The DOW is just one indicator. Look at the NASDAQ lately, it just keeps dropping!”

    This is a reflection of what the traders think the future holds for the market. It’ll settle a bit after the election and the direction of policy then becomes known. The traders will then know whether earnings will be further attacked (under Obama) or, status quo Cap gains tax policy (under McCain).

    At that point appropriate longer term trading strat can be employed.

  30. J says:

    # 27 brendal

    “hard to have a rebuttal against a mental midget”

    As evidenced every time some one debates YOU.

    “I don’t debate with my dog, either”

    That is not what your dog says.

    “neither does Paddy-O”

    What does he do to your dog then?

    “wise man”

    Who? The dog?


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 4500 access attempts in the last 7 days.