Before we ban guns, let's ban idiots from Congress.
I'm quite certain that any one who wants to be a congressman or woman, needs to pass an IQ test before doing so. You have a person here in charge of this gun ban law that she is trying to push through Congress, yet she thinks that gun magazines are like bullets and cannot be reloaded. My five year old son owns a nerf gun and even he realizes that his toy magazines are reloadable.
One of the only segments that CNBC has that I actually enjoy is the Santelli Exchange.
I know that there are a lot of people who have differing opinions about him, but in terms of where this country is going and the wreckless spending habits it continues to engage in, Rick Santelli is spot on.
Today's segment focused on Disability Entitlements and how countless millions are finding refuge in this program, and never leaving it either.
Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who cannot provide for themselves and need a program like Disability to get them through. But far too many Americans are running out of employment benefits after years of coverage, and instead of going and getting a job (and yes jobs are everywhere), they'd rather just move on to the next government program that will allow them to avoid taking responsibility for themselves.
Best part is, that these people aren't even accounted for in the monthly employment numbers, so by leaving the work force, politicians can pound their fist on the table and declare the greatness of the economy and how people are finding work, and that the employment figure is going down.
Rachel Fox's new lead role is to act like a trader
Back in the 90's there was an experiment done with a monkey throwing darts randomly at a wall with a bunch of stock names. Which ever one the dart landed on, that stock was bought. The success during this tech-bubble era was impressive as he managed to out perform the market handedly.
Since March 2009, the market has risen about 120% off of those lows that were formed, due mainly to the Federal Reserve's Bernanke, Quantitative Easing, Bank Bailouts, Auto Bailouts, two stimulus packages and countless handouts to those who simply aren't willing to work. To put it in perspective, the Obama Administration alone has created $6,000,000,000,000 (yes that is Trillion) in additional dollars that didn't exist.
As a result you have a market that has drawn people in similar to the way the 90's did, where people quit there job to become day-traders.
I don't fault her for trading, but glad to see she is taking an interest in the financial markets. My problem is the countless television shows on the financial networks that are rolling her out like a young Jessie Livermore.
I started trading when I was 11 - before there was an internet, and I can tell you, by the time I was 16 years old, I still needed someone looking over my shoulder. So the thought that Rachel Fox could actually be someone worth trusting is a stretch in the least. All we know about here is that she started blogging on August 12, 2012 - That's is.
Back on March 5th she talked about how she was going long on EBAY at $54.70, and then once it got down to $54 she decided to double down. That to me is mind boggling. Her justification is as follows, and I quote:
I bought into Ebay at around $54.70, but the stock dropped down to below 54.00. I could have panicked when the trade got bumpy and lost $.70 or more/share but I didn't bail. I focused and decided to Dollar Cost Average (DCA). Some people say it's bad to DCA, others say it's ok. Bottom line, if you make money, it's always good.
That last comment is what kills me, "If you make money it's always good". The fact that she is looking at trading as a money making scheme-kinda-thing, instead of a profession where you take on trades with certain probabilities of success at a defined risk level, tells me that she has no business being placed on a pedestal as some guru of trading.
I don't fault her for going on the TV promoting herself, it is a great opportunity for her to do so, and to take advantage of all the popularity. I would've innocently done the same thing as she at her age. But the networks are the bigger fools for pulling a stupid stunt like this for the sake of generating ratings and promoting her as someone worth following. She has zero credibility, zero track record, and I highly doubt she has ever seen a sell-off in the broader markets or even a draw down in her own accounts, particularly in the kind of market we are currently trading in.
That is unless she is still doubling and tripling down on that trade in EBAY still - which she has never closed out.
We are all in search of the perfect indicator (whether consciously or sub-consciously), particularly when it comes to timing the market for sell-offs and rallies. But after the developments over the weekend and the one and only Mila Kunis announcing her entry into the stock market, one can't help that she just might be the ultimate contrarian indicator.
Even if the indicator completely falls flat on its face, you have to hope that she'll still give market commentary for all of us... heck, I'd put her in the CNBC anchor chair right now, and replace that Becky (Betty?) gal that always obsesses over her boy-toy, Warren Buffett, and let her co-anchor with Amanda Drury. Then maybe, just maybe, I'd actually start watching CNBC again.
Understanding how the unemployment number is calculated
Something that is constantly perplexing people on SharePlanner and something that I actually get quite a few emails on is about the Employment number. Just how can the employment number be going down when there are less and less people in the actual work force. Here's a chart explaining exactly as much so that you aren't left 'wondering' how the unemployment number continues to creap lower despite the job market getting worse and worse.
Ashley Judd running for takes her from one crooked profession to another
To add to the humor of today's employment report and the market action in general, I thought I'd let you all know that Ashley Judd is running for the Senate seat in Kentucky. This is laughable on so many fronts, particularly since she is running as a liberal democrat in a conservative red state. Granted it might not be as 'conservative' as Georgia or South Carolina, but it is much more conservative than Missouri, Indiana or Iowa and even in those three states she'd face an uphill battle in getting elected.
Here's the other thing, she is going against the Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell.
Voters like having their elected officials in prominent positions of authority in the House and Senate. You vote him out, you replace a very powerful person in the Senate with a freshman senator who has never held a real job outside of pretending to be someone she isn't.
Better yet, let's look at Ashley Judd's credentials as she has played everything from the slut next door, slut down the street, and 'the slut' to a galactic warrior and face police officer. She's taken her clothes off on purpose for more cameras than Paris Hilton has 'accidentally' When I think about it, she'll probably be a great contribution to the Gentlemen's Club we call the United States Senate. In fact, I heard that Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) is already making sure that she sits next to him in the royal Senate Chamber if she wins.
The Libertarian platform could be on the rise and have a huge impact on the next election. Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky might have ignited this alternative party, which isn't so much about party platform, but the lack thereof. They look for government to play less of a roll in practically everything in life, which definitely isn't a bad idea.
Let's put it this way, you had the conservative Tea-Party members supporting Rand Paul's Filibuster, as well as ultra-liberal organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Code Pink. That's impressive, and libertarians pontificating for a limited role of government in our lives, may be able to get a nice cross section of voters from both parties.
Rand Paul's filibuster even sparked some excitement from a website called: Is Rand Paul Still Speaking. Here's the indepth coverage they provided on the filibuster.
and when Rand Paul was not talking...
UPDATE: The filibuster must've worked because it actually got the Obama Administration to answer the question. Couldn't it have been so much easier if they would've just responded to Paul's questions earlier.
Obviously there are a TON of stock picking newsletters out there that try to promote their services as being the best and greatest thing since the invention of the wheel. Frankly 99.9% of them are all garbage and not worth your time at all.
But most newsletters have one or more of the following characteristics in common. If any of these show up on a newsletter you are looking, run for the hllls, don't think... RUN!
Top Ten Reasons Not To Buy A Stock-Picking Newletter if they:
10. If anywhere on their site they have a picture like the one above and associates it with one of their newsletters.
9. If the website promotes their product in a tropical setting claiming to be living the easy life.
8. The trader in any promotional video appears shirtless, or purchased his shirt in the Kohl's Kid section
7. He drives a Maserati to promote his product
6. He tells you how much money he made in a given day, or in some cases a given second and goes on to state how much money you'll make shortly after signing up.
5. His profit curve is eerily similar to Bernie Madoff's and parched at a 45 degree angle.