The multiple authors assert timing is impossible, but their investments probably aren't doing that hot, either.

There's nothing wrong with assessing risk and investing when the odds are good, and not swinging hard when the risks are high.

James Stack is one guru I trust. http://www.investech.com

James doesn't believe in market timing explicitly, but he does adjust portfolios to match market risk.

Today:
Dow - 11002
NASDAQ - 2162
S&P 500 - 1264

5 years ago today:
Dow - 11070
NASDAQ - 2217
S&P 500 - 1270

Wow, that's crazy.

10924.74

If I were to bet on a direction today, it wouldn't be up...

I'll take that bet. Tomorrow will be up. ;)

I can't keep track of the millions of little afflictions. I need the big picture so I can call crap as just bumps on the road. That's easy for me to say as I'm not a player in the in/out scene. The only thing that would bother me is if I saw a trend to anti free trade. I figure I'd have a long time to confirm my beliefs as it's really not on many people's radar screen especially if they are in/out guys. It'll be the invest & forget guys that would probably take the investment beating on that one imo.

I do love following all the afflictions and trying to understand the money flows. I just can't pick today's horse winner. I put $ in a Fidelity Select Tel fund then Congress allowed it's regulators to crash that market years ago. Currently Reg policy has been changing in favor of a strong Tel market but not sure if it's good enough? I was just saying to myself that Congress will quickly fix the Reg's policy because it's such an obvious situation.. like it's not hard to discover you have a flat tire. Congressmen should only be allowed hire Wall St vets when it comes to financial policy issues. If I had more brains my in/out money could have generated 25-100% over the past years instead of being ahead a little itty bitty bit.

The latest bs is that their may be a dismantling of Mutual Fund independent Chairman/whatever by Congress. The Fed Regulator, SEC/ i think, is being overturned. That's an event imo as a reflection of Congressional policy. If this works out then Congress seemed to be acting pretty quickly. Mutual fund market impact is probably the most efficent machine I can find and it's what I call great liquidity creation available to all of us.

Currently beyond what we all see financially is the elections. I'm figuring the elections is an unknown to markets. I have confidence in Fed Reserve policy management and so I may have to adjust to the possible election impact. That's what market liquidity is all about. If the progressives jam Congress & Pres just because they've won control of Sen or House something will eventuall become vulnerable. Who knows what will come up where Congress has to manage. For instance the progressive populist policy groups isn't about to allow a free market in mutual fund liquidity if they can fix it for the "common man". If the Fed Reserve says they don't need an independent Chairman that should be the end of the story.

Major world wide market and economic policy adjustments will allow a huge jump in wealth to happen. If you buy into the idea that historical growth moves exponentially then you buy into the idea of huge profits available.

If I'm correct the in/out guy will be king.

Starting to nudge the '00 peak again...

Say what?

Even with recent downturns the DOW is up 11% since this post.

Woo hoo! The future's so bright I gotta wear shades!

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1173901794.jpg

This has more to do with some shakeout in Asia than here. Once the dust settles in Asia, the money will start flowing into the U.S.

Reports I hear are that it has more to do with the housing / lending market. Shaky loans coming back to haunt the lenders.

What did you expect after the dems took over, I called it!! When the 1st thing they come in and try do is raise taxes, take away tax relief from those who pay the most, raise the cost of small business by forcing them to start losers off at a higher wage than they are worth. The dems are out to punish those who succeed and buy votes from those who can't:mad:

What planet are you on that the 'Dems took over?' The Repubilcans hold the majority in the Senate.

:confused:

Sorry you're confused. The Congress is tied with equal numbers of Dems and Repubs right now. Tiebreaker is Cheney.

If & when Tim Johnson comes back to work, there will be a Dem majority of one.

What about Lieberman?

He's an Independent.

I think Tech is the only person on earth who thinks the Republicans retained control of the Senate...

Of course, his stance might change if something good comes out of the Senate...then it will be the Dem controlled Senate.

I fear the market is in for a big fall.

I know math is a difficult stubject for the neo-conned, but I'll try to make this simple:

Current congress consists of 49 Democrats and 49 Republicans.

Equal split, so far, right?

There are two independents. Nether independent is wholly in sync with either party. Still can be an equal split.

Take away one Democrat due to illness* (you have to be present to vote) and you have a 49/48 split favoring the Republicans. If one of either of the Independents chooses to vote with the Democrats, that evens it up again. If, in that instance, the other Independent chooses to abstain (Lieberman fails to vote about 5-6 times more often than Sanders) the tiebreaker vote goes to the President of the Senate.... Darth Cheney.

In theory, the Democrats won control of the Senate. In terms of actual, available votes, they did not.

* brain aneurysm qualifies