Down goes the Dow

agip,

I think it does show that markets are trading less fundamentally. I see that in the trading of tickers, be it institution or retail. Same criticism on bonds. The only way you can make money on negative yielding bonds is a trade. Hot potatoes, like reverse musical chairs, where the last guy to get a seat eats the prize--in this case a big capital loss.

Igy

This Igy fellow sounds like a typical Wall Street shill, spouting doom and gloom in an effort to churn sales among ignorant uninformed investors. His type is well known and a big reason for the calls for more WS regulation.

Don't drink the Kool Aid folks.

Not,You are the typical troll, but I actually believe there is a need for MORE and not LESS regulation for Wall Street and the Federal Reserve.So pour the Kool Aid on your head and cool off.Igy

Not gullible wrote:

This Igy fellow sounds like a typical Wall Street shill, spouting doom and gloom in an effort to churn sales among ignorant uninformed investors. His type is well known and a big reason for the calls for more WS regulation.

Don't drink the Kool Aid folks.

re; corporate profits -a measure of them was released today for the 2Q.

It shows that profits have begun rebounding - up two straight quarters now.

eyeballing it, profits are already up 10-15% from their low point. In a quarter or two we will have some very very easy comparisons to make - the headline number will be that corporate profits are up 15% year over year...

that explains why stocks have hung in there.

http://bloomberg.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=472223&cust=bloomberg-us&year=2016&lid=0&prev=/byweek.asp#top

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Not,

You are the typical troll, but I actually believe there is a need for MORE and not LESS regulation for Wall Street and the Federal Reserve.

So pour the Kool Aid on your head and cool off.

Igy

Not gullible wrote:

This Igy fellow sounds like a typical Wall Street shill, spouting doom and gloom in an effort to churn sales among ignorant uninformed investors. His type is well known and a big reason for the calls for more WS regulation.

Don't drink the Kool Aid folks.

0/10

Jelly wrote:

Why would you ignore a tax benefit that affects the bottom line? That doesn't make sense.

Well, this is the beside the point. But GAAP accounting for taxes is a joke. Fundamentally its trying fit a square peg into a round hole. Because the tax system is a cash based system while GAAP is accrual. The ridiculous thing is that nowhere in the financial statements does a company even have to report how much cash they paid in taxes unless they elect to do so in the notes. The tax benefit in any given period can be totally unrelated to how much cash is paid.

There are two answers to your question.

1. you would ignore taxes because it is not an operating expense. If you want to see how Nike is doing operationally you adjust that out.

2. You ignore it if you have been ignoring taxes previously using non gaap measurements of income. In previous quarters when Nike showed great operating income but a big tax expense,did you factor in taxes then? If not, you have to ignore it now. Otherwise you are just cherry picking the data to get close to the result you want.

I was just wondering if you are working full time yet for income presumably then won't your RMDs kill you when you reach 70 1/2? I'm trying to do planning myself so I like to hear what other people to do for tax avoidance and maximizing income.

agip wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

agip,

Article by Ruchir Sharma, in Wall Street Journal. Sharma is a Morgan Stanley Global Strategist.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-tees-up-a-necessary-debate-on-the-fed-1475102579

Igy

alarming

but traders trade on what other traders trade on...might just mean that traders can make money on Fed Day so they all do so. the market still has to hold up the other 350 days per year.

Here's a blog post from NY Fed on The Puzzling Pre-FOMC Announcement “Drift”.

Since 1994, there has been a large and statistically significant excess return on equities on days of scheduled FOMC announcements.

This return is earned ahead of the announcement, so it is not related to the immediate realization of monetary policy actions.

We show that since 1994, more than 80 percent of the equity premium on U.S. stocks has been earned over the twenty-four hours preceding scheduled Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) announcements (which occur only eight times a year)—a phenomenon we call the pre-FOMC announcement “drift.”

topcat,You are correct the RMD will be higher if I do not access any retirement accounts prior age 70 1/2. I have the option to access the retirement funds at any time. The decision to delay accessing social security has these main benefits for my family: 1) by delaying my benefit increases 8% per year (I believe that will substantially outperform investments over the time period in question); 2) my wife will be at her FRA (Full Retirement Age) and is eligible to receive one-half of my FRA benefit; and 3) if I pre-decease my wife, her benefit will be higher.I enjoy working, I see more benefits psychologically and financially by continuing to work.Igy

topcat wrote:

I was just wondering if you are working full time yet for income presumably then won't your RMDs kill you when you reach 70 1/2? I'm trying to do planning myself so I like to hear what other people to do for tax avoidance and maximizing income.

00/100

Your pants r on fire wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Not,

You are the typical troll, but I actually believe there is a need for MORE and not LESS regulation for Wall Street and the Federal Reserve.

So pour the Kool Aid on your head and cool off.

Igy

0/10

Of course, RMDs are not applicable to all retirement accounts. Either this Igy person doesn't know that, or s/he doesn't want you to know that. Either way, not good.

Fire in your undies,

Yes Roth IRAs and Roth 401ks are not subject to RMDs. Most of our money is in Standard IRAs.

Igy

gente what should we conclude from that?

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Fire in your undies,

Yes Roth IRAs and Roth 401ks are not subject to RMDs. Most of our money is in Standard IRAs.

Igy

Most of whose money is in "Standard IRAs"? Your clients?

Yes, the 8% is pretty sweet. I think they changed the law on the spousal benefit and my wife and I might not qualify for that benefit anymore. I just turned 62 and she's 58. I'm not taking SS yet. Going to wait a few years because of that 8% return.

topcat,

The spousal benefit remains, what has ended was the practice of file and suspend. That is the practice where one could file at their FRA (Full Retirement Age), then suspend their application thus allowing it to continue to grow. At that point take a spousal benefit at the spouse's FRA. Under current law my wife's best option is to wait until her FRA and take a spousal benefit based on my FRA. That is because one-half of my FRA benefit is higher than her FRA benefit.

Igy

Fire in ur undies,My answer was personal to a personal question.Igy

Your pants r on fire wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Fire in your undies,

Yes Roth IRAs and Roth 401ks are not subject to RMDs. Most of our money is in Standard IRAs.

Igy

Most of whose money is in "Standard IRAs"? Your clients?

And your answer ignored the fact that there are different retirement vehicles with different withdrawal requirements.

Wall Street stocks were poised to open slightly lower Friday as worries about the financial health of Deutsche Bank AG persisted and unsettled overseas markets.

But stocks appeared to be in for a calmer session with Dow Jones Industrial Average futures industrials futures off just 17 points to 18,080, while S&P 500 index futures slipped 1 point to 2,147.2. Nasdaq-100 index futures futures dropped 6.75 points to 4,838.25.

The Dow industrials closed nearly 200 points lower on Thursday after a report that some of the lender's biggest clients were pulling their investments. Wall Street's CBOE Volatility index , or "fear gauge," jumped the most in three weeks at one point in that session.

The S&P 500 index dropped nearly 1% on Thursday, with all sectors finishing in the red. Friday marks the end of the week, month and quarter, and the S&P 500 is down 0.6%, down 1%, and up 2.5%, respectively, with one session left to go.

Shares of Deutsche Bank (DBK.XE) briefly fell to their lowest level on record in Frankfurt on Friday, triggering sharp losses across European stock indexes. The German bank's U.S.-listed shares (DBK.XE) were up 1% in premarket trading, after closing 6.7% lower on Thursday.

The shares trimmed losses as reports emerged of a letter sent to Deutsche Bank employees by the lender's chief executive, John Cryan. The banking boss said recent media speculation that a group of hedge funds were reducing their exposure to the financial major was "causing unjustified concerns" and that the bank has "strong fundamentals".

European banks cast a shadow: Friday marked the first opportunity for European markets to react to the Deutsche Bank news. At one point, the German lender's shares dropped below 10 euros and traded at a record low.

The Stoxx Europe 600 index fell 1%, as banks across the region took a battering. Spain's IBEX 35 index was down nearly 2%.

"While we do not rule out the possibility of a renewed tension in the financial markets, the amplitude of such scenario is hard to price in," said Ipek Ozkardeskaya, senior market analyst at LGC.com, in a note to clients.

"We are already in a low-rate, post-crisis environment as the result of the 2007-2008 subprime crisis. The financial markets are certainly not well armored to face another financial crisis," Ozkardeskaya said.