"feminists" are old hat, and so are you for mentioning them. they don't like "transgender" people (e.g. Bruce Jenner) and there is currently a battle going on between them. old-line feminists are no longer a force & only old, ignorant blowhards like you & Rush Limberger don't know the difference.
Certainly agree with you on this part:
"...leadership needs to step up and explain that theirs is a uniques product therefore they cannot be compared to an S&P fund or ETF, hence the product is an appropriate diversifier amongst a retirement accounts total portfolio.."
But doubt than new regulations/fear of new regulations would have SUCH a huge impact on one company like this versus its peers.
Think this may have more to do with one entity unloading a huge position in a short amount of time.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Obama (& the Fed) have been heretofore accused of CHEAPENING the dollar by printing SO MANY OF THEM the last few years.
But NOW you are accusing him (them) of keeping it TOO STRONG?!?
So: Which is it???
Sentiment: Strong Buy
The Murdoch Street Journal has also gone downhill since a certain right-wing Aussie media mogul with no understanding of the US Constitution of American (or British, for that matter) civil liberties bought it....
Reagan's "foolish amnesty" was the right thing to do, economically & otherwise....
With low birthrates in the US and most Western countries, you NEED immigration to make up the difference.
This country was BUILT on immigrants, and it is one of - if not THE - source of our wealth, growth, and power.
Non-inflationary (i.e. "real") growth can ONLY be the addition of two things added together: Productivity Growth + Population Growth. So, if you have - say - prod growth of 3% in a given year & pop growth of 1%, you can have a real growth of 4% for that year. The rest - over time - is noise.(Heard A. Greenspan talk about this in his Humphrey-Hawkins testimony back in the 90's, and whether you like him of not or agree with him or not, found out this is pretty much accepted by all main-stream economists as true...)
Immigrants tend to help in BOTH respects.....helping make up for the falling birthrate all Western countries (including Japan, which - though Asian ethnically is considered Western culturally) have nowadays....and helping with prod growth, because their work-product output tends to be high for the amount of pay they get.
Former mayor Bloomberg said that NYC could not operate even one day without "illegal" immigrants.
As shmicker would say: If you like eating food, if you like the house you are in, you can thank an immigrant.
We need to allow MORE LEGAL immigration in the country - the way RR did - about once ever thirty years or so, and people who think otherwise - tea party Repubs or whatever - don't understand economics.
Yes we ARE " choosing which laws we choose to abide by"!!!
When Rosa Parks refused to sit at the back of the bus, she wasn't breaking local custom...SHE WAS VIOLATING STATE LAW...!!!! (The "jim crow laws" in states like Alabama enforced segregation between whites & blacks.)
Not ALL laws are worth obeying....especially "laws" which are not really laws, but are ARTIFICIAL QUOTAS which change...!
To violate a meaningless quota (which is a misdemeanor anyway) in order to feed your family is the morally correct thing to do...!!!
And - BTW - you are NOT "losing $3 per hour" by having to compete with immigrants. If you - as a native English speaker - can't beat out a native Spanish speaker for a job in America, then that is YOUR problem...
When you say "illegal" - think about it - the "law" they are supposedly violating is merely a quota, which changes.
REAL laws discourage bad things - murder, theft, arson - and encourage GOOD things - working hard, feeding your family, contrinbuting to the GDP.
But restrictive immigration laws stand that on its head. They prohibit people from coming here to do jobs no one else ants to do, to feed their families, to add to the GDP, etc....
I don't consider someone who breaks a BS artificial quota an "illegal"....
"Socialsm" means "ownership of the means of production [i.e. railroads, utilities, banks, etc.] by the government".
The FED is a consortium of PRIVATE BANKS. It is NOT a part of the US Gov. Regulated by them, but a private institution.
QE was a way for the Fed to expand its balance sheet go out on the yield curve to buy bonds to keep longer rates low and thereby perhaps keep mortgage rates low & prvide more liquidity.
Good thing, because the world would be in a world of pain right now if that liquidity were not available as this current contraction/deflation hits.
Uh...technical analysis always gives you at least two choices, such as "IF it holds 7, then it may go higher"....so it is right either way....
TA works "75% of the time" in retrospect....
It is only 50% right in advance...
BTW - the word yahoo censored (for some reason [?]) beings with a "W", ends with a "P", and has an "O" in the middle....
It is a derogatory word for Italian Americans (like Tancredo's ancestors) who had a reputation for coming thru Ellis Island without proper papers.
And yet......were still welcomed here....and one of their descendants became famous for wanting to stop other immigrants from following in their footsteps....
The problem is that the "law" these people are breaking is not really a law, but an artificial quota which changes....
It is NOT a felony & - as I say - not even a real law....
When my grandfather came here from Eastern Europe in 1906, he was WELCOMED here through Ellis Island - as were Bill O'Reilly's hooligan (an Irish word) ancestors and Tom Tancredo's #$%$ ("WithOut Papers") ancestors - because the quota was larger as a percent of the population.
REAL laws try to imitate morality, by DIScouraging things like arson, murder, theft... and ENcouraging things like working hard, feeding your family, and contributing to the GDP of the country....
But the laws you now accuse these immigrants of breaking (which weren't laws when your & my ancestors came over) STAND THAT ON ITS HEAD: They separate families, put people in jail, deny them checking accounts, etc. FOR TRYING TO COME HERE, GET A JOB, FEED THEIR FAMILIES, AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE GDP OF THIS COUNTRY...!!!
Your value system is screwed up....!
Yes...Texas - being a backward, #$%$ state - took years to join the rest of the country/world in making auto insurance mandatory....cause even THEY finally realized that you don't want to have to pay $25 grand out-of-pocket becuse some numbnuts w/out insurance hits you...
Yes, geo...probably lowering the Medicare age from 65 to 55 would be the best solution - thus cutting out the middlemen private "health insurance" companies - but the Pres. chose to build on the private system we already have (a Republican, Heritage Foundation, etc. idea) piggy-backing on Mitt Romney's RomneyCare in Mass. years ago....
Look, ace. bypass surgery (not "stents") costs AT LEAST $200K plus...!!!
But that doesn't answer the question: Could he - or YOU - afford to pay that without insurance???
Most people would go BK.
That's why we have insurance....
Probably so, but irrelevant to the discussion....plus, we'll probably (finally!) have flying cars in the next 20 years.
Ridiculous rant. Insurance is a relatively modern, progressive thing, which spreads the risk around & prevents individuals who get into circumstances beyond their control (i.e. car wrecks, heart attacks) to handle the situation without becoming bankrupt.
And - BTW - auto insurance became mandatory since cars first became widely available: 1927 (link)
Autos couldn't be driven, buildings couldn't be built, power stations wouldn't exist, etc. - without mandatory insurance.....it is a hallmark of modern society.
Go back to the stone age, if you wish.