Sharesmagazine
 Home   Log In   Register   Our Services   My Account   Contact   Help 
 Stockwatch   Level 2   Portfolio   Charts   Share Price   Awards   Market Scan   Videos   Broker Notes   Director Deals   Traders' Room 
 Funds   Trades   Terminal   Alerts   Heatmaps   News   Indices   Forward Diary   Forex Prices   Shares Magazine   Investors' Room 
 CFDs   Shares   SIPPs   ISAs   Forex   ETFs   Comparison Tables   Spread Betting 
You are NOT currently logged in
 
Register now or login to post to this thread.

THE TALK TO YOURSELF THREAD. (NOWT)     

goldfinger - 09 Jun 2005 12:25

Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

MaxK - 05 Nov 2016 09:02 - 74436 of 81564

Another excellent report from the roving reporter on the trump v Clinton boondoggle.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/04/voters-experiences-us-2016-election-trump-clinton-campaign

Fred1new - 05 Nov 2016 10:37 - 74437 of 81564

The flag of the said parties of liberty.




grannyboy - 05 Nov 2016 11:54 - 74438 of 81564

Fred1new 74438

" That maybe one of the reasons for emeregence of the "loony parties" and
they appearance of strength."


Yes those who now look on the establishment parties as not representing them,
and who feel disenfranchised, will look for alternatives to represent them, as
they see the present two party system of Labour and the Tory's as not being much
different from each other, and that in particularly the Labour party no longer
go anywhere near representing their core voters beliefs anymore..

And as the evidence is now showing, there needs to be another populist party
to represent the disenfranchised and to look after their political aims and beliefs.




Fred1new - 05 Nov 2016 12:06 - 74439 of 81564

Good luck.

grannyboy - 05 Nov 2016 12:36 - 74440 of 81564

I wasn't touting for any tidings from you fred, you wern't in the 17.4 million
LEAVERS, who ignored the threats and scaremongering from the elites and to
defy ALL those who were supposed to represent them in the form of establish-
ment cronies...

Fred1new - 05 Nov 2016 13:22 - 74441 of 81564

Approx 37% of an ill informed electorate of the UK voted to leave.

I.e approximately 1/3rd.

I would like to see the plans of the promised land, rather than listening to the excuses being given for austerity carrying on for another 10 years or so.

It would be whimsical if it wasn't so sad.

Looking from the outside, I am told, it looks like over grown schoolboys blustering with poor negotiating abilities and behaving like football hooligans wanting their ball back and threatening to break up the party for others if they don't get the own ways.

What do Fauxpage and Trump have in common.

They appeal to the rabble.

MaxK - 05 Nov 2016 13:50 - 74442 of 81564

And less than that 37% voted to stay...what don't you understand about percentages Fred?

grannyboy - 05 Nov 2016 16:25 - 74443 of 81564

"What don't you understand about percentages Fred?"

Just keep telling him the percentage was 52% for LEAVE, that's the only percentage
that matters....

Fred1new - 05 Nov 2016 17:13 - 74444 of 81564

To whom?

Dil - 06 Nov 2016 08:39 - 74445 of 81564

You obviously otherwise you wouldn't be so worried about it Fred.

Think it might matter to the UK and Europe too and President Obama but what would I know.

grannyboy - 07 Nov 2016 10:04 - 74446 of 81564

It looks like the markets are going to be pumping the indices up before the
US elections, just like what happened prior the eu referendum with stocks and
the gdp exchange rate where it was pumped up in expectation that the vote
would be to 'remain'..

Fred1new - 07 Nov 2016 12:02 - 74447 of 81564

Dil,

At my age I worry for others.

Hoping they have my good luck.

Fred1new - 07 Nov 2016 12:02 - 74448 of 81564

Dil,

At my age I worry for others, not myself.

Hoping that they have my good luck.

ExecLine - 07 Nov 2016 13:34 - 74449 of 81564

Sky-gazers should pencil November 14 into the diary as the moon will come closer to Earth than at any time in almost 70 years.

The "supermoon" will appear up to one-third (30%) brighter and 14% bigger than an average full moon, according to Nasa.

ExecLine - 07 Nov 2016 13:35 - 74450 of 81564

Just in:

The markets wouldn’t react well to a Donald Trump victory

The interminable US election finally terminates this week (we hope).

Assuming that it isn’t too close to call, or that one of the candidates doesn’t throw a massive hissy fit (those are big assumptions, I admit), then we should know who the next president of the United States is by Wednesday.

I’m not going to do anything pompous like formally declaring for one or other of the candidates. I know a fair few Americans read this, but they’d rightly ignore a foreigner telling them how to vote – the same way I couldn’t care less about a US pundit’s views on Scottish independence.

But regardless of your politics, you’d have to be wilfully self-deceiving to believe that markets would welcome the prospect of a Donald Trump victory. It’s pretty clear that investors see a Trump win as being similar to a Brexit vote – it would be an unpleasant surprise for them.

That’s why, after closing lower for nine sessions in a row, the S&P 500 has just gone through its longest losing streak. And it looks like having a rebound today now that the FBI has decided that the whole Hillary Clinton email business is off the table once again.

Why is this the case? In many ways, Clinton and Trump aren’t that different economically. They favour different sectors from one another – renewables versus fossil fuels, for example – but overall, they would both increase spending, and the US Federal Reserve’s monetary policies are unlikely to be significantly different regardless of who wins.

It really just boils down to expectations. Markets don’t quite know what to expect from Trump. He’s not the standard US presidential candidate. On top of that, he seems to be quite a mercurial chap (that’s a polite way to put it). So they need to discount that uncertainty.

In effect, if Trump wins, the market needs to be offered bigger returns in order to invest in risk assets. That means prices have to fall from where they are now.

So if he does win, I’d expect the following to happen: stockmarkets in the US (and therefore, pretty much around the world) would fall hard; the dollar would take a hit too (although not against the Mexican peso, which would fall harder).

Gold would jump. And as for US bond yields – this one’s a tiny bit trickier because you’ve got the “safe haven” impulse to invest in US debt clashing with the fact that it’s the US you’re worried about. But overall I’d expect them to rise (ie, bond prices would fall).

As I said, there’s no need to fiddle with your portfolio ahead of the big day (I’m assuming you already hold some gold, a good spread of global equities and some cash). I’m just outlining roughly what would happen so you know what to expect.

And if you’re a trader type, then going into the election, I’d guess you want to be short the S&P 500, short the dollar (maybe against the yen, which tends to benefit most from safe haven flows), long gold, and short US long bonds.

You’d be able to have a pretty tight stop loss at the upper end, because it’ll rapidly become clear if the bet’s going to go your way or not. But I won’t discuss this any further, because if you haven’t traded before – now is not the time to start.

What if Clinton wins?

What if it’s Clinton? The reaction would be milder overall, because she’s the continuity candidate. You’d probably get a bounce in stocks, a fall in gold, bit of a bounce in the dollar, and a fairly muted reaction from Treasuries (because yields seem to be heading higher anyway, and with Clinton planning on spending more money there’d be no reason for them to fall).

Biotech and big pharma probably wouldn’t like it. Clinton has talked a lot about tackling high drug pricing in the US. More broadly, it would probably set us up for the usual Santa Claus rally in the run up to Christmas as markets relaxed a little. But overall, I wouldn’t expect a huge reaction.

Of course, once the dust settles and the long-term implications of whatever the winning line-up looks like (remember that the composition of Congress matters a lot too in terms of getting things done or not getting things done) become clearer, markets may well get rattled again – regardless of who wins.

As I said, both candidates look set to be big spenders at a time when interest rates are wobbling higher. Both are interventionists, neither is particularly friendly to the ideas of globalisation or free trade, and they both inherit a messy bundle of foreign policy challenges.

We’ll be looking at what those challenges mean for whoever is the next president of the US in the next issue of MoneyWeek, out on Friday.

John Stepek
Executive editor, MoneyWeek

Fred1new - 08 Nov 2016 09:12 - 74451 of 81564

Sums up Brexit Plans.

VICTIM - 08 Nov 2016 10:00 - 74452 of 81564

Obsessed isn't the word is it Freda .

Fred1new - 08 Nov 2016 10:18 - 74453 of 81564

Vic,

I thought you might like an image of one of your icons to hang on the wall.

VICTIM - 08 Nov 2016 10:35 - 74454 of 81564

Yes she'll go with Nige just above me when I nod off , then awaken to see my heroes standing over me . What more can anyone want .

Fred1new - 08 Nov 2016 11:15 - 74455 of 81564

Depends on what turns you on.
Register now or login to post to this thread.