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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joan Osland Graffius who wrote (211333)	12/24/2002 8:44:23 PM
From: Box-By-The-Riviera™	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

you have been a bright star,,,,,, particularly in the arena of ficd. responsibility....... a beacon... and not one time over the years have you written a comment with bitterness or a snipe and such... kudos to you... and.... as to your post... we're fucked more or less. J

To: Joan Osland Graffius who wrote (211333)	12/25/2002 10:45:25 AM
From: Knighty Tin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Joan, I agree. The funds haven't even started to be questioned. And it is taking so long because govt. is in cahoots with Wall Street. It has been for a long time, but we never see how deep the connection until the market blows up.

To: Joan Osland Graffius who wrote (211333)	12/25/2002 10:57:22 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Respond to of 436258

good book: "The Mind of Wall Street" by Leon Levy. puts the current madness into perspective by comparing the current stock-centric thinking of today to the bond-centric thinking of the early 50s.

To: Joan Osland Graffius who wrote (211333)	12/25/2002 11:04:32 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

re: the "pension problem", S&P puts core earnings at just 18 bucks and change on the SPX, as opposed to 40 or 50 bucks maintained by the fiction writers with day jobs on Wall Street. this just shows how much of so-called earnings are not real money but just accounting fiat. high return assumptions and discount rates keep forward pension liabilities low and hence current "earnings" high. (this discrepancy alone should convince people that the so-called Fed model of earnings yield is bunk, since the 10yr is a cash return and the SPX earnings yield is a fantasy return.) but at the same time we have a "leak" of several hundred billion a year of hard cash which cos must add to their pension portfolios to prop up even their current lofty assumptions. it seems to me that in today's low-interest-rate environment, return assumptions should not be over 5%, and even that is kind of high. if the SPX all had to shift to 5% assumptions, what would this do to the market's perception of the pension "situation", and the SPX itself, and hence the actual pension portfolios? lots of reflexivity there and it all seems to point DOWN. happy christmas!