Ok, Frank. Let me lean on your trading experience. What does 134 million short mean? Does it mean too many shorts and they are gonna get squeezed (bullish) or everyone is going short as they know something
(bearish). Also, is our government still allowed to "naked short sell", where they NEVER have to cover? Can there be such a thing as a "never cover short"? Remember, up until about 6 months or so ago, the government was naked short selling fannie...and profiting, because they never had to cover. Never. It does not make sense to me to have shorts that never have to cover, what happens after the "normal" expiration period of these "never cover" shorts?
That is like saying the key to golf is to hit the ball in the hole in as few strokes as possible. Dollar cost averaging is sound, but you may wait a long time to try to catch $3 again. This is dollars chasing pennies. Stick with your dollar cost averaging but know you are taking a risk with "unpurchased" shares as you make exactly "0" on any unpurchased shares.
This is not a headache for Lambreth..this is a headache for Obama. This means there is corruption in 4 agencies..FHA, EPA, Treasury, and, of course the VA scandal which led to Secretary of the VA's resignation. The best Obama can hope for is not be impeached.
Buffet has explained the rookie investor mistake of "over diversification". They have a $5000 portfolio and have 10 stocks and wonder why they dont make money. Instead, buy a company you are in love with and stay with it. You did the latter, and you can expect a good result.
Hmmm...Do tell us more. While this does not trade After HOurs, we can look forward to a good Monday and good week...
These substandard "toxic" loans were forced down fannies throat, by the government, in order to protect banks from massive losses. It was even worse than the government stealing all fannies dividends in 2012. The government has literally shot fannie in the face, with a shotgun, TWICE, and never thought fannie would survive, after forcing toxic loans on us and then swiping (not sweeping) profits. I say, since fannie has recovered from the government's toxic poisons, its a real testament to fannie's business mode. If fannie's business model is "failed" like the government says, then how come fannie is bailing out the federal government, and not the other way around?
Please post below, so that longs can know who to ignore and dont have to search the whole board. Any helpers or aliases of Logic32 should be first on the list. Conceited bashers go to the top of the list, right logic?
Of course the laws of probability indicate that the stock will trade in a range that is inclusive of plus or minus 10 cents, so at some point it is highly likely to be 3 cents up or down. You are delusional if you think that is genius, that is like predicting the sun will come up tommorrow..somewhere in the world. Your self deception is likely the result of others considering your intelligence to be inferior.
Since when have you gained the expertise to "self proclaim" yourslelf a genius? Oh, I know..you awarded yourself that ability. The problem with your hypothesis is that if you were a genius, you would not need to tell others, they would be giving you awards for your intelligence and you would accept them with humility. Your self analysis is as conceited as it is incorrect. "A fool is right in his own eyes."
The average person does not know that our government stole fannie mae shareholder property. They "bought" the government spin that its a "third amendment sweep" when its really a "third amendment theft"
Yea, and you probably sold all your Apple Stock to buy Enron, too. I have done stupid stuff before, but this is far worse.
Oh, yes, Im just gonna run out and listen to someone's advice that begins, "OK Morons". Even if you were right 50 percent of the time (you are not), I have no interest in listening to anyone who insults me. There are plenty of people on this board who do not insult my intelligence, so I need not listen to those who do.
Someone suggested a high speed shreder....that should end it quickly as this would be the governments admission of guilt. Innocent parties are not afraid of evidence..they want it revealed to exonerate themselves.
Guilty parties want to hide and destroy evidence... if the government tries the shredder, in which category would that put them in??
You make the assumption the likes of Epstein, and Olsen, the pros of the business will fall for that. This is the computer age, and Epstein and Olsen are not the VA, and the government can not get away with shredding evidence. This is a crime, and puts the government in contempt. This is like tearing up a traffic ticket, beleiving you have eliminated it.
Yes, the government can step on their necktie and make this case still shorter. Here is the problem with your hypothesis: There are multiple copies of these documents, many of which will be stored electronically. All the plaintiffs would have to do is subpoena the internet service provider, and there is egg all over the governments face, should they even attempt a cover up. Nixon tried that, with disastrous results. Of course, there can be inter governmental "whistle blowers" with access to those documents who can also provide them. This is like lying to a police officer, when they have your DNA. It will look very very bad when these documents do surface. The government already tried that with the IRS "lost emails", and they are admitting they may be recoverable, after some pressure.
Veterans have already seen what happens when the federal government takes over health care, and it is not good. Vets get substandard care, at a very high cost to taxpayers. Please see the recent health care scandals which led to the resignation of Eric Shinseki, a cabinet level position right below the president. Obama had to fire Shinseki or that mess was on him. It still is. Obamacare is also a disaster where promises have already been broken...more people have lost health coverage with Obamacare than gained coverage. You can not insure millions and millions of people for nothing like Obama promised. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Nationalization of Fannie Mae is a disaster of epic proportions. You can not comprehend what 3 trillion in mortages is, this is more money than probably the top 3 industries..not companies. This represents about half the mortgages in America.
No. Your option puts taxpayers at even more risk without the cushion of the shareholders, who have lost much already, while taxpayers have come out of the fannie mae bailout smelling like a rose. The Federal government is already a money pit, 17 trillion in the hole, and nationalization of fannie increases that immediatley another 3 to 5 trillion. China may not like to see that much debt and bail out all its tbills, the credit rating could be lowered, and this would be an economic disaster which would make the 1929 bust seem like the church bazar's tea party. Economies of scale shows repeatedly the federal government is way, way, way to large to effectively manage busiess, and depends on small business to create jobs..not more government, not even big business...small business creates jobs. That is because small business operates more efficiently than big business and especially the federal government because of economies of scale.
You see, you have fannie shares if you own them or not, if you 1) own a home 2) have a desire to buy a home 3) Have a job in real estate, mortgage, banking, construction or other housing related industries or 4) pay taxes. All of these groups will lose if the government succeeds in destroying fannie shareholders. The only way to get out of this speculation is to move out of the USA and invest in bitcoin. So, selling your fannie shares wont mean you are not vested in the outcome of the fannie mae lawsuits. You may as well buy fannie mae, when it goes up, you win big, when it goes down, everybody losses shareholders and Americans who are not shareholders alike.