Unit2Sucks said:

---

I agree that things are a mess on both sides but Biden (or his handlers) were competent enough to realize in January that CV would be a problem and it would have been addressed in a much more comprehensive fashion much earlier. People are voting as much for Biden's team as for the man himself.

Trump punishes competence in his team and is dumb enough to think he's smart enough to make any decision. Trump will probably fire Anthony Fauci soon and put Kushner or Dr Oz in charge of the CV response, so please spare us the bothsides-ism.

---

Spare us indeed.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

I agree that things are a mess on both sides but Biden (or his handlers) were competent enough to realize in January that CV would be a problem and it would have been addressed in a much more comprehensive fashion much earlier. People are voting as much for Biden's team as for the man himself.

Trump punishes competence in his team and is dumb enough to think he's smart enough to make any decision. Trump will probably fire Anthony Fauci soon and put Kushner or Dr Oz in charge of the CV response, so please spare us the bothsides-ism.

---

Serious question Unit2, do you realize that the WHO did not declare this a pandemic until 7 days ago. Read that again - 7 days ago. This virus that started in China in November (really who knows when given how opaque and untrustworthy official China is) began spreading like wildfire in January and for some reason the WHO wouldn't call it a pandemic DESPITE what their head of infectious diseases articulated:

Quote:

---

"What we learned from Ebola is that you need to react quickly you need to go after the virus - you need to stop the chains of transmission...you need deep engagement with lcoal communities...

If you need to be right before you move, you will never win. Perfection is the enemy of the good... The problem in society is everyone is afraid of making a mistake, being paralyzed by the fear of failure."

---

So after seeing what had happened in China, and knowing Chinese Communist officials had lied about early information, and I assume getting advice from their own world expert, the WHO didn't declare it a pandemic until just 7 days ago? Why??? Maybe pressure from China not to? Look at Italy, they banned all incoming travel from China, but that was useless because none of the other EU countries did. So with unfettered travel between EU countries, anyone who had been infected in China could still b in Italy via any of the other countries. Again, what took the WHO so long to declare it a pandemic, which had they done earlier would have triggered all the EU countries to follow Italy and the US's lead in banning travel from China. This, in my humble opinion, is malfeasance of the highest order.

And now the Chinese are starting this astounding disinfomration campaign to try and convince the world the virus started in the US. All the while controlling 97% of the antibiotics we need. That's insane. And it didn't start with Trump... It goes back to policies implemented and supported by Obama and Bush. The abdication of responsibility to the citizens of this country is deep and cross party lines.

It's insane.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

TheFiatLux said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Meanwhile, people still can't get tests and some ventilator companies haven't even received orders for additional supply . The response in the U.S. has been horrific. That is - the Federal Government response of Donald Trump has been horrific. Who cares what China did? Corruption and authoritarian incompetence is to be expected of them. Who care what WHO did?

Can't believe the attempts at obfuscating I'm seeing.

---

You seriously don't care what the World Health Organization did?

I can't believe how people are politicizing this instead of banding together. It's really sad.

---

just curious FiatLux - at what point will you begin to hold your elected officials responsible for their actions on COVID? Apparently we aren't there yet, but when will you? Holding your government accountable for its response is not politicizing, it's asking them to do their job.

---

On election day.

Until then, I would hope we would all come together, is that asking too much? There's so much bad / unclear / doesn't-quite-make-sense information / communication going on.

It's so incredibly dispiriting.

TheFiatLux said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

TheFiatLux said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Meanwhile, people still can't get tests and some ventilator companies haven't even received orders for additional supply . The response in the U.S. has been horrific. That is - the Federal Government response of Donald Trump has been horrific. Who cares what China did? Corruption and authoritarian incompetence is to be expected of them. Who care what WHO did?

Can't believe the attempts at obfuscating I'm seeing.

---

You seriously don't care what the World Health Organization did?

I can't believe how people are politicizing this instead of banding together. It's really sad.

---

just curious FiatLux - at what point will you begin to hold your elected officials responsible for their actions on COVID? Apparently we aren't there yet, but when will you? Holding your government accountable for its response is not politicizing, it's asking them to do their job.

---

On election day.

Until then, I would hope we would all come together, is that asking too much? There's so much bad / unclear / doesn't-quite-make-sense information / communication going on.

It's so incredibly dispiriting.

---

I just want to be clear - I agree with what you want to happen but at the same time I think you are ignoring reality. When Trump thinks "come together" he interprets that to mean praising him. He is incapable of anything else and he's capricious and vindictive.

I think the communities across the country really have come together. The states have taken initiative to do as much as they can to combat this pandemic. It's unfortunate that this can't be driven at the federal level.

oskidunker said:

---

Put in a buy for Carnival at 8. I doubt it gets there but 12 today. 56 a month ago. Trump will give them money do I expect a recovery.

---

Well that didn't take long. Next day and Carnival is now at $8. You still a buyer?

Unit2Sucks said:

---

I agree that things are a mess on both sides but Biden (or his handlers) were competent enough to realize in January that CV would be a problem and it would have been addressed in a much more comprehensive fashion much earlier. People are voting as much for Biden's team as for the man himself.

Trump punishes competence in his team and is dumb enough to think he's smart enough to make any decision. Trump will probably fire Anthony Fauci soon and put Kushner or Dr Oz in charge of the CV response, so please spare us the bothsides-ism.

---

And likewise, many who cannot stand Trump's demeanor, are voting for his party's policies and against policies of open border leniency, sanctuary cities, medicare for all fears, lack of unlimited abortion in late term, glorifying a failed European model, and on and on.

Things are a mess of both sides, but there is no allowance for meeting in the middle. None. Politics nowadays is the biggest mess I have ever witnessed and getting worse by the day.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Joe Biden wrote an oped in January that showed how a competent leader would have handled the situation to protect our country.

---

LOL. Sure he did. Your naivete is charming. But your judgment is suspect.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

I agree that things are a mess on both sides but Biden (or his handlers) were competent enough to realize in January that CV would be a problem and it would have been addressed in a much more comprehensive fashion much earlier. People are voting as much for Biden's team as for the man himself.

Trump punishes competence in his team and is dumb enough to think he's smart enough to make any decision. Trump will probably fire Anthony Fauci soon and put Kushner or Dr Oz in charge of the CV response, so please spare us the bothsides-ism.

---

And likewise, many who cannot stand Trump's demeanor, are voting for his party's policies and against policies of open border leniency, sanctuary cities, medicare for all fears, lack of unlimited abortion in late term, glorifying a failed European model, and on and on.

Things are a mess of both sides, but there is no allowance for meeting in the middle. None. Politics nowadays is the biggest mess I have ever witnessed and getting worse by the day.

---

I'm not just talking about Trump's demeanor. His failures to protect our country from COVID-19 are very much real. Americans are going to die as a result of choices Trump has made. And it's not too late for him to prevent even more negative consequences.

You are probably also aware that he's pushing for trillion dollar surplus and massive government handouts so perhaps it's not the best time for conservatives to villify the "failed European model." I don't know what you thought was going to happen, but Trump has increased the federal deficit every year in office and we are heading toward a $2T annual deficit.

Joe Biden is obviously a centrist candidate so this idea that there is no meeting in the middle strikes me as dishonest or naive. Refusal to acknowledge Trump's personal culpability for his response to the virus is not centrist.

This bothsides-ism is reminiscent of Charlotte. It's okay to condemn white nationalists unequivocably. There is no need to mention everything everyone else in the world has done wrong. Right now the problem is not both sides, it is quite clearly the side that currently runs our government.

---

Well this is a you go to your church and I'll go to mine. Comments like Joe Biden is centrist (he is to you, he is not to me); "both sides-ism is reminiscent of Charlotte" is an attempt by you to color my position where it makes your case look rosy. There are many, many Repub policies that I strongly disagree with but one must eval the pluses and minuses. Your repeated attempts to try to frame conversations with exaggerated characterizations about those with whom you disagree make discussion not possible. Did you read the post at all "who cannot stand Trump's demeanor, are voting for his party's policies". But then you went on to nail Trump with XYZ. Not my stance.

I found commonality with the policies of JFK, Gov Pat Brown, and with Bill Clinton (even though I found/find him of little character) but not many other Dems in my life. But then I find little comfort in the actions and policies of the far right too. I will say, Joe Biden even though I think not a centrist is way, way more palatable than Bernie Sanders policies, even though I like Bernie's character and consistency.

Sigh. And here all I thought we could have a nice thread sharing investment advice. Guess not. Moving to the OT graveyard in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

wallyball2003 said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Joe Biden wrote an oped in January that showed how a competent leader would have handled the situation to protect our country.

---

LOL. Sure he did. Your naivete is charming. But your judgment is suspect.

---

LOL indeed. The way a competent leader would have handled this situation is listening to public health and other experts and acting accordingly. I don't for a second need to believe that Biden wrote a single word of that oped to feel that it's a sign of competence. Is there anyone here who doesn't want Trump to let competent handlers take the lead right now?

Jesus, take the wheel.

TheFiatLux said:

---

Quote:

---

it is quite clearly the side that currently runs our government and is failing to protect us from the TrumpVirus.

---

This is something that really disturbs me.

Do you see what you're doing here? Your hatred of Trump is so strong, and you so want to score political points, you're playing right into the Chinese / Russian playbook. The Chinese are 100% undertaking a disinformation campaign - and they're doing it for a reason - and you're supporting it. I think you should really think about if this is what you want to do. It's terrible.

---

What are you talking about? What disinformation campaign am I playing into? I'm well aware that COVID-19 originated in China and that they've engaged in (and continue to engage in) misinformation.

Nonetheless, we had plenty of advanced notice and did nothing for far too long. South Korea responded far better than we have.

And it's not too late to begin taking action but Trump is indecisive and unwilling to do so. The initial spread of the virus in Wuhan is 100% the responsibility of the Chinese government. The spread of the virus in the US and our federal government's refusal to appropriately respond is 100% on Trump. There is no foreign misinformation campaign that has any relevance to that.

My use of the word TrumpVirus was both an attempt to point out that Trump himself is a virus that has infected our government and country and the fact that his craven attempts to blame China for his own failings is transparent. Of course had China not failed to prevent the outbreak we wouldn't be in this situation, but that doesn't excuse Trump's incredibly poor response.

calumnus said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

This has the potential to be worse than 2008

---

Agreed, 2008 was mostly about financial markets with a hit on housing and potential loss of the auto industry. Those were dealt with effectively with monetary policy and loans/bailouts of specific industries.

This is a real economic shock. The hit on GDP in the second quarter could easily be 10%. When the bad economic data is released the market will tank even further. We could actually have deflation like 1929. Oil and gold are dropping. The problem is, we are already at 0% interest rates and already running a $1 trillion projected deficit. Would the Fed go to negative rates? Is there political will for $1 trillion more in "stimulus" and deficits well over $2 trillion per year?

---

This could also be over in 3 months. My IRA is down 25% but not concerned. We'll be fine.

Politics really is the lifeblood of this board. You guys just can't resist.... Politics in place of college football - well that I can understand at some level. But politics instead of money (this thread) - ah, now you'all have shown your true depraved colors!

(j/k)

But as far as the money goes, S&P down some 30% from the top. Historically has been a good buying opportunity. Except that people forget, we were up 30% in the 8-9 months prior to this virus event. So really we are just right back to where we were ~13 months ago. And does the economic environment today look as good as it did 13 months ago? 13 months ago there was a minor threat of trade war fallout, but nothing like the near certainty of a recession today. 13 months ago the energy, airline, hotel industries and Boeing did not need bailouts to survive. The economic environment today is clearly worse than 13 months ago. So if stocks are at the same price now, but conditions are much worse, why would you buy stocks? You don't. That's why we need another ~20% down move to get to fair value. Down 50% from the top sounds catastrophic, but really that's only down 20% from barely more than a year ago. Definitely tolerable. Indeed beneficial in some ways of thinking since the destruction of 50% of global wealth will eliminate much frivolous, polluting, non-productive/speculative activity.

Cal84 said:

---

Politics really is the lifeblood of this board. You guys just can't resist.... Politics in place of college football - well that I can understand at some level. But politics instead of money (this thread) - ah, now you'all have shown your true depraved colors!

(j/k)

But as far as the money goes, S&P down some 30% from the top. Historically has been a good buying opportunity. Except that people forget, we were up 30% in the 8-9 months prior to this virus event. So really we are just right back to where we were ~13 months ago. And does the economic environment today look as good as it did 13 months ago? 13 months ago there was a minor threat of trade war fallout, but nothing like the near certainty of a recession today. 13 months ago the energy, airline, hotel industries and Boeing did not need bailouts to survive. The economic environment today is clearly worse than 13 months ago. So if stocks are at the same price now, but conditions are much worse, why would you buy stocks? You don't. That's why we need another ~20% down move to get to fair value. Down 50% from the top sounds catastrophic, but really that's only down 20% from barely more than a year ago. Definitely tolerable. Indeed beneficial in some ways of thinking since the destruction of 50% of global wealth will eliminate much frivolous, polluting, non-productive/speculative activity.

---

Totally agree. Let's go back to talking about money and escape the political quicksand.

So on the money note i think what you just wrote would have been correct in terms of the ancient history of last week but not today. The market isn't down to where it was 13 months ago. The market is down to where it was in November of 2016. The entire gains of the (must resist reference to current occupant of the White House) have evaporated. Crazy.

Sebastabear said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Put in a buy for Carnival at 8. I doubt it gets there but 12 today. 56 a month ago. Trump will give them money do I expect a recovery.

---

Well that didn't take long. Next day and Carnival is now at $8. You still a buyer?

---

Bought 100 shares at 8.8. Now 9.5. Doing it for the $250 on board credit you get on every cruise onPrincess, Cunard or Carnival. If I los it, I don't care. Doubt they will go under

oskidunker said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Put in a buy for Carnival at 8. I doubt it gets there but 12 today. 56 a month ago. Trump will give them money do I expect a recovery.

---

Well that didn't take long. Next day and Carnival is now at $8. You still a buyer?

---

Bought 100 shares at 8.8. Now 9.5. Doing it for the $250 on board credit you get on every cruise onPrincess, Cunard or Carnival. If I los it, I don't care. Doubt they will go under

---

Best investing advice I ever got was buy when everyone else wants to sell. Good for you. Will be fascinating to see.

Cal84 said:

---

Down 50% from the top sounds catastrophic, but really that's only down 20% from barely more than a year ago. Definitely tolerable. Indeed beneficial in some ways of thinking since the destruction of 50% of global wealth will eliminate much frivolous, polluting, non-productive/speculative activity.

---

This part is really interesting. What industries will be bailed out and how?

For example, I'm ok with targeted bailouts for targeted industries but done in a way that crushes equityholders. I want American Airlines to survive but can we do it in a way that wipes out equityholders and passes the company to debtholders? Isn't that how capitalism is supposed to work?

I'm against bailouts of fossil fuel companies in any form.

When in doubt, I'd like to see aid go to the bottom and flow up. i.e. don't bail out the restaurant chain, but supplement the incomes of the workers. How do you do that for workers who live off tips? I don't know.

And even if we save an industry, let the weakest go bankrupt. And casinos, cruiseliners - full bankruptcy. Not essential.

Just a few thoughts on this. Not consistently thought through from beginning to end.

>So on the money note i think what you just wrote would have been correct in terms of the ancient history of last week but not today. The market isn't down to where it was 13 months ago. The market is down to where it was in November of 2016.

Nah, it's basically where it was a bit more than a year ago. SPX 12/21/18 = 2416.62. Closing SPX today = 2398.10. Within 1%. Which is white noise.

>This part is really interesting. What industries will be bailed out and how?

Everything and everyone will be bailed out. There is no tolerance in the US right now for concepts like self sufficiency or personal responsibility. College debt? Forgiven. Moratorium on home mortgage payments. Unlimited borrowing lines for airlines, cruise ship companies, Boeing, auto manufacturers, tourism industry, franchise restaurants, etc. All with government guarantees to lenders. Needless to say not all of that will be repaid, so gov't will be on the hook for unquantifiable sums of money.

Neither Dems or Repubs in an election year will be able to say "No" to opening the federal checkbook. And with the destruction of half the global capital base, there will be no appetite to own gov't bonds at sub-inflation interest rates. So all the debt will be immunized by Fed bond purchases. Quantitative Easing (QE), will morph into full blown Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). And it will be with the tacit approval of both Dems and Repubs.

dajo9 said:

---

Cal84 said:

---

Down 50% from the top sounds catastrophic, but really that's only down 20% from barely more than a year ago. Definitely tolerable. Indeed beneficial in some ways of thinking since the destruction of 50% of global wealth will eliminate much frivolous, polluting, non-productive/speculative activity.

---

This part is really interesting. What industries will be bailed out and how?

For example, I'm ok with targeted bailouts for targeted industries but done in a way that crushes equityholders. I want American Airlines to survive but can we do it in a way that wipes out equityholders and passes the company to debtholders? Isn't that how capitalism is supposed to work?

I'm against bailouts of fossil fuel companies in any form.

When in doubt, I'd like to see aid go to the bottom and flow up. i.e. don't bail out the restaurant chain, but supplement the incomes of the workers. How do you do that for workers who live off tips? I don't know.

And even if we save an industry, let the weakest go bankrupt. And casinos, cruiseliners - full bankruptcy. Not essential.

Just a few thoughts on this. Not consistently thought through from beginning to end.

---

Aside from the principles of corporate governance, it may be much cheaper to let firms like Boeing, Carnival, etc. all go bankrupt since their market valuations are now so low that bailouts no longer make much sense, and their bankruptcies will not result in systemic economic or financial contagion.

watch this video and tell me you feel good investing right now. For anyone who doesn't want to watch, they are telling us that testing capacity has finally increased and we are going to see a massive spike in positive tests ("dramatically increase"). This won't represent a change in what's happening on the ground but it means that we will finally have a better sense as to what we are actually dealing with. I can't see the markets responding well to that.

Unfortunately, I think you are right Cal84... and the consequences of this tacit approval could be really ugly down the road.

Cal84 said:

---

. There is no tolerance in the US right now for concepts like self sufficiency or personal responsibility. College debt? Forgiven. Moratorium on home mortgage payments. Unlimited borrowing lines for airlines, cruise ship companies, Boeing, auto manufacturers, tourism industry, franchise restaurants, etc. All with government guarantees to lenders. Needless to say not all of that will be repaid, so gov't will be on the hook for unquantifiable sums of money.

Neither Dems or Repubs in an election year will be able to say "No" to opening the federal checkbook. And with the destruction of half the global capital base, there will be no appetite to own gov't bonds at sub-inflation interest rates. So all the debt will be immunized by Fed bond purchases. Quantitative Easing (QE), will morph into full blown Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). And it will be with the tacit approval of both Dems and Repubs.

---

I was originally pretty anti-bailout in the last crisis because i felt like that one was caused by an almost universal disregard for fiscal prudence. Every institution as well as regulard people seemed to spend beyond their means and operate in a financial fantasy land.

This is completely different. People and companies (for the most part) haven't acted recklessly and over-extended themselves. This is almost like an attack.