Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Stocks Crossing The 13 Week Moving Average <$10.01 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Strauss who wrote (11530)	8/25/2002 11:29:58 PM
From: j g cordes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13094

Re "What we can control is whether we approach the market as gamblers or investors... Eventually the house takes the gambler's money... As investors or knowledgeable traders, it's our responsibility to do our homework before we plunk down our money." Yes, one would hope so, but at this point I'm convinced even being a prudent investor is a deception. "The house," as you say has the odds even with conservatively managed accounts. They (the financial industry) skims so much out of the average investors account that at best they are preserving capital while losing a slow battle with inflation. Larger accounts are treated differently, the returns are less risky and more profitable. Let me take this a step higher, or as that chef on TV says.. kick it up a notch.. I don't feel the stock market is what it appears to be, and certainly not what it promotes itself as. Its not a place to "invest" in a company's prospects. Just the opposite.. the stock market is a place where company's go to get capital to invest in themselves. The common investor is last in line to receive benefits from this relationship.. all sorts of people lay claim to one's money if things go sour. The only possibility of getting even then ahead after one's bought stock is for the price to go up before you sell. That's it.. one's betting one's money on the price of one's shares changing AND one being able to sell it before it goes down. That to me is gambling. The dog either wins or dies, the rooster either wins or dies, the dice either come up winners or you walk. You bet on Joe Frasier or Ali.. one or the other. Its true that an investor "has to take responsibility for their own decisions." However, I feel most people would do far better for themselves over the long run if they invested their savings in tax free bonds or zeros. The stock market is overhyped as an investment arena, its more like a shark pool.. swim at your own risk and don't believe the life guards, they work for the sharks. Just my opinion, so I try to be a shark when swimming with sharks and hope I don't get bit too badly when there are feeding frenzies.. :~) Jim

To: James Strauss who wrote (11530)	8/26/2002 9:18:12 AM
From: Knight	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13094

Jim: I agree with most of what you mentioned here, especially that we have to take responsibility for our own decisions. Also, it is true we all know the brokerages take percentages and some questionable practices exist. It is the nature of the industry. But out and out fraud and deceit is a little harder to predict or guard against when even cons were taken as well. This has been something I personally don't believe was the predictable norm for the market. Especially, when you take into consideration that companies such as World-Com and long standing companies committed out and out fraud and other illegal practices as a standard way of doing business. They played the odds with your money not theirs and that to me makes a hell of a difference. JMO, Vickie