Never, I have a panny business model plasma right now, 42 incher, and it could be my near-sightedness but it's the perfect size, larger isn't better for me. The plasma also has healing properties and there is absolutely no flicker when watching sports/nascar. LCD and my eyes don't get along nearly as well.
More begging for rate cuts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Car dealership group AutoNation Chief Executive Mike Jackson said Tuesday the U.S. economy is in danger of slipping into a recession unless the Federal Reserve moves aggressively to cut interest rates.
"I think we are at a tipping point," Jackson told Reuters in an interview. "They have to recognize that they are bringing into play a recession for this economy.
"They need to begin to cut rates, not just once but several times," he said of U.S. monetary policy makers. Jackson, who runs the largest publicly traded car dealership group in the United States, said the pressure on the economy is hurting auto sales.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Car dealership group AutoNation Chief Executive Mike Jackson said Tuesday the U.S. economy is in danger of slipping into a recession unless the Federal Reserve moves aggressively to cut interest rates.
"I think we are at a tipping point," Jackson told Reuters in an interview. "They have to recognize that they are bringing into play a recession for this economy.
"They need to begin to cut rates, not just once but several times," he said of U.S. monetary policy makers. Jackson, who runs the largest publicly traded car dealership group in the United States, said the pressure on the economy is hurting auto sales.
I saw a lunar eclipse last night at moonset around 5:00 am that count?
It was really frickin cool moon turned a dark coppery color. Here's some pics from around the nation.http://spaceweather.com/submissions/map.php?cat=eclipses&limit=40
One of the better economists today. Doesn't blow sunshine.
Fiscal versus Monetary Solutions to the Subprime Crisis <!--
--><!-- content_table --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top colSpan=2>Nouriel Roubini | Aug 27, 2007
There is now a growing realization that the turmoil in financial markets in the last few weeks is not just due to a liquidity crunch but it is more importantly related to serious credit problems: bankrupt and/or distressed homeowners, bankrupt mortgage lenders, distressed homebuilders, some distressed highly leveraged financial institutions and even some over-leveraged parts of the corporate sector. Liquidity problems and crunches can be solved with liquidity injections by central banks. But more severe credit problems of borrowers cannot be resolved with monetary policy. Rather if the distress of borrowers need to be addressed sometimes fiscal solutions – like financial support of distressed mortgage borrowers – needs to be considered.
Once you consider fiscal solutions to credit problems, the same conceptual issue of whether lender of last resort support by central bank will lead to moral hazard (i.e. bailout of reckless lenders and borrowers) is relevant to the issue of a fiscal solution to credit problems. Were homeowners innocent victims of predatory lenders or reckless borrowers and "condo flippers" who should have known better? If we implement fiscal policies that are going to help distressed home owners aren’t we also rescuing the reckless lenders? Will forbearance and attempts to reduce the rate of foreclosures – various mitigation measures - solve credit problems or exacerbate them and only postpone more severe defaults down the line? Should caps on the portfolio of the GSEs (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to be loosened to allow them to provide liquidity to seized mortgage markets or will this lead to greater moral hazard for institutions that – while formally private – are assumed to be protected by some implicit public bailout guarantees? And is greater portfolio exposure by GSE a form of fiscal policy or monetary policy?
These are some of the complex and difficult issues that analysts and policy makers are starting to address. Bill Gross of Pimco is now proposing the creation of a fiscal institution like the RTC (that resolved the S&L banking crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s) – what he called the Reconstruction Mortgage Corporation – to resolve the subprime credit problems. While this may sound as a fiscal bailout of borrowers (and by default of lenders) the alternative in his view is destructive home price deflation (as much as 10% fall in home prices in his view) and million of homeowners ending up in foreclosure. Folks at Goldman Sachs are actually predicting that home prices will fall as much as 15% in the next few years before they bottom out.
Larry Summers – former secretary of the Treasury – is concerned about the size and activities of the GSEs; but he correctly argues today in the FT that in situations of severe credit distress it is important to be pragmatic rather than religious on issues of moral hazard:
“what is the role for public authorities in supporting the flow of credit to the housing sector? The lesson learnt during the S&L debacle was that it was catastrophic to finance home ownership through insured banking institutions that borrowed short term and then offered long-term fixed-rate home mortgages. Now a system reliant on securitisation, adjustable rate mortgages and non-insured financial institutions has broken down.
I am among the many with serious doubts about the wisdom of the government quasi-guarantees that supported the government-sponsored entities, Fannie Mae, the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp , as they have operated in the mortgage market. But surely if there is ever a moment when they should expand their activities it is now, when mortgage liquidity is drying up. No doubt, credit standards in the subprime market were too low for too long. Now, as borrowers face higher costs as their adjustable rate mortgages are reset, is not the time for the authorities to get religion and discourage the provision of credit.”
Dean Baker wants to help the victims (the subprime borrowers in his view) rather than the reckless lenders (the “bloated bankers); so he is suggesting changes in foreclosure rules to allow moderate and low-income homeowners to remain in their homes indefinitely as renters.
A number of authors - including analysts at BNP – have argued a fiscal solution is needed and that government sponsored agencies should be allowed to purchase more conforming loans.
Even the Bush Administration, that has opposed suggestions to have Fannie and Freddie expand their mortgage portfolios, is now suggesting that Federal Home Administration could help distressed borrowers. Whether this specific proposal is only a minor Band-Aid -that is aimed at stemming more incisive Congressional action - or not is an open issue.
The main point is that – leaving aside important issues of moral hazard from fiscal bailouts – there is now a new and increasing recognition that severe credit and financial distress problems cannot be resolved with monetary policy alone. Thus, if a political consensus were to emerge that some financial support of distressed mortgage borrowers is fair and necessary then fiscal – as opposed to monetary alone - solutions may have to be discussed and implemented. The prospect of home prices falling 10 to 15% and two million plus home owners losing their homes is – rightly – becoming a political issue. And political issues lead to fiscal solutions when there is a political consensus that the consequences of no action can be a severe economic and social fallout from the worst U.S. housing recession in decades.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Fiscal versus Monetary Solutions to the Subprime Crisis <!--
--><!-- content_table --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top colSpan=2>Nouriel Roubini | Aug 27, 2007
There is now a growing realization that the turmoil in financial markets in the last few weeks is not just due to a liquidity crunch but it is more importantly related to serious credit problems: bankrupt and/or distressed homeowners, bankrupt mortgage lenders, distressed homebuilders, some distressed highly leveraged financial institutions and even some over-leveraged parts of the corporate sector. Liquidity problems and crunches can be solved with liquidity injections by central banks. But more severe credit problems of borrowers cannot be resolved with monetary policy. Rather if the distress of borrowers need to be addressed sometimes fiscal solutions – like financial support of distressed mortgage borrowers – needs to be considered.
Once you consider fiscal solutions to credit problems, the same conceptual issue of whether lender of last resort support by central bank will lead to moral hazard (i.e. bailout of reckless lenders and borrowers) is relevant to the issue of a fiscal solution to credit problems. Were homeowners innocent victims of predatory lenders or reckless borrowers and "condo flippers" who should have known better? If we implement fiscal policies that are going to help distressed home owners aren’t we also rescuing the reckless lenders? Will forbearance and attempts to reduce the rate of foreclosures – various mitigation measures - solve credit problems or exacerbate them and only postpone more severe defaults down the line? Should caps on the portfolio of the GSEs (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to be loosened to allow them to provide liquidity to seized mortgage markets or will this lead to greater moral hazard for institutions that – while formally private – are assumed to be protected by some implicit public bailout guarantees? And is greater portfolio exposure by GSE a form of fiscal policy or monetary policy?
These are some of the complex and difficult issues that analysts and policy makers are starting to address. Bill Gross of Pimco is now proposing the creation of a fiscal institution like the RTC (that resolved the S&L banking crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s) – what he called the Reconstruction Mortgage Corporation – to resolve the subprime credit problems. While this may sound as a fiscal bailout of borrowers (and by default of lenders) the alternative in his view is destructive home price deflation (as much as 10% fall in home prices in his view) and million of homeowners ending up in foreclosure. Folks at Goldman Sachs are actually predicting that home prices will fall as much as 15% in the next few years before they bottom out.
Larry Summers – former secretary of the Treasury – is concerned about the size and activities of the GSEs; but he correctly argues today in the FT that in situations of severe credit distress it is important to be pragmatic rather than religious on issues of moral hazard:
“what is the role for public authorities in supporting the flow of credit to the housing sector? The lesson learnt during the S&L debacle was that it was catastrophic to finance home ownership through insured banking institutions that borrowed short term and then offered long-term fixed-rate home mortgages. Now a system reliant on securitisation, adjustable rate mortgages and non-insured financial institutions has broken down.
I am among the many with serious doubts about the wisdom of the government quasi-guarantees that supported the government-sponsored entities, Fannie Mae, the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp , as they have operated in the mortgage market. But surely if there is ever a moment when they should expand their activities it is now, when mortgage liquidity is drying up. No doubt, credit standards in the subprime market were too low for too long. Now, as borrowers face higher costs as their adjustable rate mortgages are reset, is not the time for the authorities to get religion and discourage the provision of credit.”
Dean Baker wants to help the victims (the subprime borrowers in his view) rather than the reckless lenders (the “bloated bankers); so he is suggesting changes in foreclosure rules to allow moderate and low-income homeowners to remain in their homes indefinitely as renters.
A number of authors - including analysts at BNP – have argued a fiscal solution is needed and that government sponsored agencies should be allowed to purchase more conforming loans.
Even the Bush Administration, that has opposed suggestions to have Fannie and Freddie expand their mortgage portfolios, is now suggesting that Federal Home Administration could help distressed borrowers. Whether this specific proposal is only a minor Band-Aid -that is aimed at stemming more incisive Congressional action - or not is an open issue.
The main point is that – leaving aside important issues of moral hazard from fiscal bailouts – there is now a new and increasing recognition that severe credit and financial distress problems cannot be resolved with monetary policy alone. Thus, if a political consensus were to emerge that some financial support of distressed mortgage borrowers is fair and necessary then fiscal – as opposed to monetary alone - solutions may have to be discussed and implemented. The prospect of home prices falling 10 to 15% and two million plus home owners losing their homes is – rightly – becoming a political issue. And political issues lead to fiscal solutions when there is a political consensus that the consequences of no action can be a severe economic and social fallout from the worst U.S. housing recession in decades.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
I guess I'm sad for being the polar opposite of pretty much everybody on wall street cheerleading stocks and trying to pimp the markets higher as the insiders bail and disperse their stock to the masses....the voice of opposition is just a sad thing i suppose. I've said before i'm not happy to forsee a possible financial disaster on the horizon.
Also go to the yahoo message boards if you want to see bulls posting online.
Timetopay, go stick your head back into the cloud where you came from.
Nobody gives two shits whether or not you agree with whats posted here from a bearish perspective.
You come into this thread every day or so, with the same bullshit.
The bulls in this thread post related topic items, but you post the same crybaby crap.
If the truth is too painful for you, dont read this thread.
Alot of crooked people are on wall street and if the stock market has to drop for that to be exposed, than so be it.
Theyve sold Americans defective goods and hopefully enough of them realize the truth before its too late for them to save their remaining wealth.
Ron Paul being heard will be unavoidable once more of the truth is exposed.
:drink:
Nobody gives two shits whether or not you agree with whats posted here from a bearish perspective.
You come into this thread every day or so, with the same bullshit.
The bulls in this thread post related topic items, but you post the same crybaby crap.
If the truth is too painful for you, dont read this thread.
Alot of crooked people are on wall street and if the stock market has to drop for that to be exposed, than so be it.
Theyve sold Americans defective goods and hopefully enough of them realize the truth before its too late for them to save their remaining wealth.
Ron Paul being heard will be unavoidable once more of the truth is exposed.
:drink:
Most of my friends and everyone in my family have already heeded and are mostly prepared for a housing collapse.
Those that havent, will next time think twice before quickly dismissing advice that doesnt follow conventional groupspeak.
Again, it makes no difference what you think about other posters thoughts.
Everyone isnt going to be a cheerleader...learn to deal with it.
I was short stocks today, so why wouldnt I want the market to fall?
Lots of shortsellers in the market ttp. Not every day, but sometimes I sell stocks short.
Makes no difference to me whether or not that bothers you.
Those that havent, will next time think twice before quickly dismissing advice that doesnt follow conventional groupspeak.
Again, it makes no difference what you think about other posters thoughts.
Everyone isnt going to be a cheerleader...learn to deal with it.
I was short stocks today, so why wouldnt I want the market to fall?
Lots of shortsellers in the market ttp. Not every day, but sometimes I sell stocks short.
Makes no difference to me whether or not that bothers you.
Well i can only speak for myself I understand its a fine line between being informative and "rooting" it on when concerning falling markets. That said we've been living on borrowed time for a long time, so we will have to pay the piper at some point in a big way, maybe that time isn't yet, but all i know i'm still fairly young and i'll be the one having to deal with this mess later in life. Luckily I was prudent and saved and didn't go heavy into debt like so many american's have. Those that were smart will be just fine, those that took the bait of easy credit will lose and to some extent i say good ridence, i'm probably gonna end up paying for your stupidity in taxes the rest of my life. Watch them come out with a sheeple homebuyer bailout bill at some point. We wouldn't be in this mess if the bait of years of easy credit dangled in front of the sheeps face wasn't taken on by somebody, the party will end when they run out of sheep to take on credit to live beyond their means.
Bottom line bears always get the bad rap. We didn't create the bad markets, we aren't causing them to go down. The ones that partcipated in all the unsustainable overexcesses (granted some bears for years have been getting squeezed/losing money in some of the frothy stocks so i guess in that way they helped things get out of control ) are to blame not us get mad at them.
) are to blame not us get mad at them.Not sure why I keep getting brushed with a bull or cheerleader label. I happen to agree totally that things look bleak BUT i refuse to root it on or hope to make some money in the market.
Yes I short stocks and buy put options like the rest of ya but I will never be one to hope the US collapses to make a few bucks personally.
Some of you want to thats your call. It kind feels to me like hoping a rich parent dies so you can get the money. They will die,you will profit,but to sit there and hope they die and post there vitals and laugh about them is kind of disturbing. But again just my opinion.
Yes I short stocks and buy put options like the rest of ya but I will never be one to hope the US collapses to make a few bucks personally.
Some of you want to thats your call. It kind feels to me like hoping a rich parent dies so you can get the money. They will die,you will profit,but to sit there and hope they die and post there vitals and laugh about them is kind of disturbing. But again just my opinion.
Honestly timtopay my general feeling is their will be MAJOR pain at some point the sooner it happens the better, because the longer they allow these overexcesses to continue to build and the more sheep they sheer the bigger the fallout will be. I know you've said before your on the sidelines i'm glad.
It's all about the boom/bust cycle...the longer and bigger you let the boom go the bigger the bust will be.
It's all about the boom/bust cycle...the longer and bigger you let the boom go the bigger the bust will be.
Time, thats a pretty good post and when its time to be bullish on housing and economy, Ill buy something.
Too many people (gladly you arent with this group), refuse to listen or understand any potential bad scenarios.
Until tomorrow, over and out.
Hot day = cold beers tonight.
Too many people (gladly you arent with this group), refuse to listen or understand any potential bad scenarios.
Until tomorrow, over and out.
Hot day = cold beers tonight.
These are the bad guys and they will continue to say it on they way down as they did with the fallout of the tech bubble...anyway timetopay i'm off to go make sure the sky is still blue. :toast:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobius Buys Stocks, Says Global Economy Is `Healthy' (Update5)
Aug. 28 (Bloomberg) -- The global economy is ``very healthy'' and losses from the U.S. subprime mortgage slump have ``almost passed,'' said Mark Mobius, who oversees $30 billion at Templeton Asset Management Ltd. in Singapore.
``We're pretty bullish,'' Mobius, whose Templeton Emerging Markets Investment Trust has beaten its benchmark over the past five years, said during an interview from Hong Kong. ``Markets are probably going to surge ahead to new highs barring any other unforeseen circumstances.''
The fund manager said he has purchased shares of energy companies Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Co., PetroChina Co. and Petroleo Brasileiro SA during the market rout of the past month. South African shares and those of Chinese companies traded in Hong Kong are among the most attractive in emerging markets worldwide, he said. Mobius added that U.S. shares are ``not very expensive.''
The Morgan Stanley Capital International Emerging Markets Index, a global benchmark, has dropped 9.6 percent since reaching a record high on July 23, on concern that defaults among U.S. subprime borrowers will spill over to other markets and slow economic growth.
The Federal Reserve earlier this month lowered the interest rate it charges banks and acknowledged for the first time that an extraordinary policy shift is needed to contain the subprime- mortgage collapse that began roiling the world's financial markets two months ago.
`The Right Thing'
``The Fed has been doing the right thing,'' Mobius said. ``The U.S. economy will continue to power along as a result.''
The Templeton Emerging Markets Investment Trust has returned 30 percent annually during the past five years, exceeding the 24.4 percent gain in the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Mobius said he's ``looking at companies in Egypt and Dubai,'' and mentioned real-estate stocks in the latter market, without elaborating.
``I can't think of any market where we've been paring down because money continues to flow into the funds,'' he said.
Mobius's bullishness on stocks is shared by some of the biggest banks. Credit Suisse Group recommended on Aug. 21 that investors should raise holdings of stocks worldwide following the sell-off in the past month and on speculation the Fed won't let a credit-market debacle hurt growth.
Teun Draaisma, the Morgan Stanley strategist who advised trimming holdings in Europe before declines in February and July, raised his recommendation on stocks in the region to ``overweight'' from ``neutral,'' on Aug. 13.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobius Buys Stocks, Says Global Economy Is `Healthy' (Update5)
Aug. 28 (Bloomberg) -- The global economy is ``very healthy'' and losses from the U.S. subprime mortgage slump have ``almost passed,'' said Mark Mobius, who oversees $30 billion at Templeton Asset Management Ltd. in Singapore.
``We're pretty bullish,'' Mobius, whose Templeton Emerging Markets Investment Trust has beaten its benchmark over the past five years, said during an interview from Hong Kong. ``Markets are probably going to surge ahead to new highs barring any other unforeseen circumstances.''
The fund manager said he has purchased shares of energy companies Sinopec Shanghai Petrochemical Co., PetroChina Co. and Petroleo Brasileiro SA during the market rout of the past month. South African shares and those of Chinese companies traded in Hong Kong are among the most attractive in emerging markets worldwide, he said. Mobius added that U.S. shares are ``not very expensive.''
The Morgan Stanley Capital International Emerging Markets Index, a global benchmark, has dropped 9.6 percent since reaching a record high on July 23, on concern that defaults among U.S. subprime borrowers will spill over to other markets and slow economic growth.
The Federal Reserve earlier this month lowered the interest rate it charges banks and acknowledged for the first time that an extraordinary policy shift is needed to contain the subprime- mortgage collapse that began roiling the world's financial markets two months ago.
`The Right Thing'
``The Fed has been doing the right thing,'' Mobius said. ``The U.S. economy will continue to power along as a result.''
The Templeton Emerging Markets Investment Trust has returned 30 percent annually during the past five years, exceeding the 24.4 percent gain in the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Mobius said he's ``looking at companies in Egypt and Dubai,'' and mentioned real-estate stocks in the latter market, without elaborating.
``I can't think of any market where we've been paring down because money continues to flow into the funds,'' he said.
Mobius's bullishness on stocks is shared by some of the biggest banks. Credit Suisse Group recommended on Aug. 21 that investors should raise holdings of stocks worldwide following the sell-off in the past month and on speculation the Fed won't let a credit-market debacle hurt growth.
Teun Draaisma, the Morgan Stanley strategist who advised trimming holdings in Europe before declines in February and July, raised his recommendation on stocks in the region to ``overweight'' from ``neutral,'' on Aug. 13.
Since this thread wasn't bumped today, I was thinking it must be a good day on Wall St.
Curious to see if my theory was correct, I had to check it out.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=368 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=gratopborder0 width=143 height=20>Indexes</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 align=right width=80>Value</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 align=right width=65>$ Change</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 align=right width=65>% Change</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 width=15></TD></TR><TR><SCRIPT> writeindexesnyse();</SCRIPT><TD class=gratop2>Amex Composite</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>2,211.80</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+34.67</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1.59 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>Dow Jones Industrials</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>13,273.36</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+231.51</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1.78 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>Dow Jones Trans.</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>4,827.60</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+94.62</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>2.00 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>Dow Jones Utilities</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>485.72</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+8.71</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1.83 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>Nasdaq Composite</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>2,557.77</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+57.13</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>2.29 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>S & P 100</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>681.98</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+12.99</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1.94 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>S & P 400 Midcap</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>853.03</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+18.15</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>2.17 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>S & P 500</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1,460.53</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+28.17</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1.97 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=gratop2>S & P Global 100</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1,528.90</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+15.90</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1.05 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
</TD></TR><TR></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
surprise, surprise, surprise
<!--code added for cdc. --><! Copyright IBM Corporation, 2001, 2002 !><SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1>var SA_ID="nyse;nyse";</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="//stats.surfaid.ihost.com/crc/sacdcg3p.js?nyse"></SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT>
Curious to see if my theory was correct, I had to check it out.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=368 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=gratopborder0 width=143 height=20>Indexes</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 align=right width=80>Value</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 align=right width=65>$ Change</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 align=right width=65>% Change</TD><TD class=gratopborder0 width=15></TD></TR><TR><SCRIPT> writeindexesnyse();</SCRIPT><TD class=gratop2>Amex Composite</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>2,211.80</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>+34.67</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>1.59 %</TD><TD class=gratop2 align=right>
surprise, surprise, surprise
<!--code added for cdc. --><! Copyright IBM Corporation, 2001, 2002 !><SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1>var SA_ID="nyse;nyse";</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="//stats.surfaid.ihost.com/crc/sacdcg3p.js?nyse"></SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT>
volume was crappy (low) today. If they can make a higher high here than i'll say the tide may be turning, otherwise still in a super volitile ride down for now. Of course yen sold hard today.....same ol story...world markets at the fate of the yen movements kinda funny.
