by sheepskinneroriginal •Nov 1, 2013 1:23 PM
Didn't take you long to get that one deleted, did it, loser?
Hey, dimwit! The government didn't build the first transcontinental railway. The Union & Central Pacific RR companies did.
If AAPL ends the year in the $520 to $550 range, it's liable to gain 20-30% next year to $620 to $700+.
Why discuss Palin? She's not running. Here is the latest GOP voter polling on some of those who might actually be running (Christie & Paul leading):
Poll Date Sample Christie Paul Ryan Bush Rubio Cruz Walker Jindal Spread
Rasmussen Reports 11/7 - 11/8 LV 22 20 -- 12 16 12 5 -- Christie +2
Bush isn't running, either, so Christie probably picks up most of his support, for Christie/Bush moderate 34% v. Paul/Rubio/Cruz/Walker conservative 53%, with 13% favoring someone else or undecided. Giuliani was ahead in the preference polls at this point in 2009, too, for the 2012 nomination.
Yeah, at $515, the big risk is to shorts who don't recognize strong support at $514.
Another day like today & AAPL breaks out above that range, into the $529 to $539 range, then on to $555, the high for 2013.
This is what it looks like when government tries to create a more perfect society by intervening in the private economy and taking away consumer choice. And it’s just the latest example. Government regulations cost the economy $1.75 trillion a year, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
That shows up in higher costs for food because ethanol mandates make corn more expensive, for utility bills because EPA regulations restrict the burning of cheap coal, for automobiles because relentless hikes in emissions and mileage standards require ultra-expensive technology.
What those regulations don’t do is increase average earnings. While middle class buying power is dwindling, middle class paychecks are standing still because policies such as Obamacare and the war on coal and oil depress hiring and drive down the demand for workers.
The left blames globalization and greedy CEOs for the plight of the middle class. But nothing has hurt middle America more than the government trying to help it.
Obamacare is the biggest assault ever on the middle class.
If not radically altered or repealed, it will diminish lifestyles and increase the financial struggles of average individuals and families. Combined with other costly government meddling in the economy, it will destroy the concept of an American middle.
Incomes that over the past decade have barely kept pace with inflation will not absorb the surging cost of health insurance that will come for many, if not most people, on Jan. 1.
We’re painfully familiar with Obamacare’s impact on the individual insurance market. Those who buy their own insurance are seeing policies canceled and replaced with ones costing two to three times as much. President Barack Obama’s fake fix won’t provide much relief.
But Obamacare’s pain is spread much broader. Those with employer-provided insurance are also getting stung. Policies that previously asked for manageable contributions from employees will now carry either much higher monthly premiums or outrageous deductibles and co-pays, or both. Out-of-pocket costs are leaping to an average $5,000 to $6,000 annually for individuals, and $10,000 to $12,000 for families.
That means a young, middle class couple that decides to have a baby will come home with both an infant and a $10,000 bill for delivery and related care. Maybe it’s a good thing Obamacare mandates contraception coverage. Only the poor and the rich will be able to afford to have babies.
These middle-class workers with employer-provided policies likely won’t be eligible for government health insurance subsidies. Many will face the unsavory reality that they may be better off not working.
Obamacare was sold as a path to making America healthier by giving everyone insurance coverage. But what good is insurance you can’t afford to use? How many people will put off recommended tests and treatments because they don’t have the money to pay the deductible?
Vast majority? Says who? You?
Pistol with minimum 15-round mag is ideal for home defense. Two shotgun barrels aren't. You don't even get benefit of intimidating round-cycling sound. Shows how much you know?
No one has the right to tell me with what weapons I can defend my home. Least of all you, numbnuts.
I do, having already posted that. But I doubt Martinez will run. Rather, she'll try to ride Christie's coat tails, at least for 2016.
The DHS doesn't buy for the states. Nor is DHS the only federal agency buying ammo.
The stockpiles & annual additions to ammo supply far exceed training needs. The feds are buying about five times as much ammo per federal LEO as per soldier, sailor, airman & Marine. With vastly increased number of "police" armored vehicles, this is clearly a regime preparing for war against its own citizens, I mean subject population. Obama considers the military too politically unreliable, despite his ongoing purge of the officer corps & indoctrination of other ranks, so, as he has often stated, needs another armed force at his own disposal.
That's pretty much the bottom for a Democrat. Can't get much lower than 37% without his own party turning against him.
That poll result, if even close to accurate, is simply devastating. The people want the monstrosity repealed in total or part, but won't happen with Obama in the White House, even if Democrats in Congress beg him not to veto it. And Reid's relaxing the filibuster means that Senate Dems might well vote for repeal to save their skins in 2014 & 2016.
The young have been hit hard by Obamacare. I'm not sure that she can count on the youth vote against either Paul or Christie. Less sure about Cruz, although the young are disproportionately Latino.
Personally, I'd like to see two female GOP governors nominated, rather than Senators or a male governor like Walker, Daniels, Kasich or Christie, despite their admirable union-reining in efforts. Running Martinez & Haley would help take the Democrats' War on Women & Race-baiting cards off the table.
Weekly max pain for tomorrow is $520.
Dunno about $540 next week. Maybe possible but not probable.
IMO back to year's high of $555 is possible by Dec 31, however. That's around $6 per week for a little over six weeks.
AAPL has way outperformed the market since April, June & September. It will continue doing so.