[quote=zk]Wow, phaster, you dug this up from a year and a half ago.
While I agree with your assessment of bg, as long as she’s only making a fool of herself and not lying, I, personally, don’t see a need to ban her (not that you were necessarily advocating banning her).
Whether she’s still lying or not, I don’t know, but I haven’t seen it lately.
Just my 2 cents.[/quote]
flu (a.k.a. “bullishgurl”) a cramer “buy buy buy” like character who thinks he knows more than anybody else(on the piggington economics and investing forum WRT to “BONDS”)
is the reason I found and then posted on this thread because basically had a minor epiphany that something akin to air crew assessment and psychology evaluations (i.e. diagnosing mental disorders) would be helpful for personal who have anything to do w/ money/portfolio management, etc.
the same kind of tests are done to see if an individual is fit for duty on subs, and it seems the SDPD screens to make sure “unstable” people don’t make it into the force
so why not the same filter for a bureaucratic who oversees a boat load of money?
as I see things problems are created or continue to exist when $hit for brains individuals (and bureaucracies), more often than not WAY WAY WAY OVER ESTIMATE THEIR OWN ABILITIES, have no grasp of reality or an understanding of the bigger picture and lack the moral strength to admit mistakes!!!
just imagine if there existed a real world individual like the fictional know it all character CLIFF CLAVIN on the old sitcom “Cheers” (where everybody knows your name), AND “a clue-less know-it-all” was managing your retirement portfolio (scary thought eh!)
now (re)consider googling financial news stories WRT issues w/ various muni pension funds, and combine “clue-less know-it-all” portfolio management/oversight w/ corruption, which explains the real world clusterfucks (i.e. CalPERS, SDCERA, etc.) ‘nuf said?!
also given confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance, when an individual (or bureaucracy) who for sake of argument is NOT the sharpest tool in the shed AND is confronted w/ the truth, the reaction is there is going to be first denial then followed by a “backpedaling” $hitFit
(NOTE analysis and conclusions based on supporting “proverbial” 10,000 words or so of “contextual” DATA!)
[quote=phaster][quote=flu]Lol phaster. You crack me up. On one hand you’re disputing the accuracy of all those stats provided by financial institutions about their returns and how it’s not the case…And on the other hand, you’re using some of these status from the same financial institutions about market timing.
Do you enjoy just googling shit and finding whatever sticks to your position. It’s even cute how you started to use the “boldface” type to highlight 1 or 2 lines out of an entire paragraph out of context and redirect you entire discussion on something else. How BG’ish….
Man, remind me never to hang out with folks like you. It’s not that I don’t value actual insight, positive or negative. I do. It’s just I don’t understand some of you that are so fixated with your beliefs that you can’t really think objectively in the only thing that matters…. “How can I make money?”[/quote]
glad you “Lol” last time I posted feedback about specifics, so guess I’ll continue and try to provide more laughs
WRT the… only thing that matters…. “How can I make money?”
sex trafficking??
selling drugs??
taking politically motivated bribes??
which are commonly reported methods of making “Mo’ Money”
BUT IMHO individuals engaging in such money making activity basically have thrown out any belief system that takes into account human costs and instead created an environment where an (un)civil society grows
then we should consider the reason we’re in this “economic” mess is because prior to the bursting of the bubble most everyone (RE agents, mortgage brokers, bankers, wanabe homeowners, etc.) only thought about “How can I make money?” w/out thinking what the knock on effects would be
few thought about the risk, and some that did and were able to buy “swaps” had a nice windfall
so FWIW I consider the restraints imposed by a “belief system” (like perhaps religion) that values honesty and human costs (i.e. empathy), as a small price to pay for a nudging towards a sustainable economy and civil society
WRT bearishgurl’s so-called “cute” posting style…
huh where to start,
well we know bearishgurl is a legend in her own mind
we also know she lacks the mental horsepower and a moral compass to backup the delusion of being a mild mannered super hero who fights for economic justice for oppressed Gubment-Pensioner(s) who did nothing to corrupt or mis-manage the system
so have to disagree I am not worthy of such a comparison (to BGs posting style) because I have yet to post something dumb enough to deserve snarky responses from Rich (our host)
yup big fan AND often there’s an aha moment, like when finding an older dedicated thread where other piggs note other mental processing problems w/ bearishgurl and a suggestion that she should clean up of her act
(guess that’s why the idiom, you can’t teach an old dog new tricks was invented in the first place, to describe people/situations like bearishgurl…)
[/quote]
actually given “frequency” of posts on this site you share much more in common w/ BG than I do, given you two seem to be more regular, regulars (i.e. very active long term users)… and IMHO FWIW the posts contain lots of “noise” and very little “signal”; on the other hand I just drop in every once in a while to see what piggs mostly think about the economy and try to contribute insights supported by data that others might have missed (SEE existing website slogan at bottom of page,… In God we trust. Everyone Else Bring Data!)
[/quote]
[quote=phaster][quote=flu]
[quote]
sure looks like an un-appreciated trend that indicates its only a matter of when TSHTF WRT the muni “bond” funds sector,… so I’d suggest caution as per specific OP query (i.e. What does everyone think of municipal bond funds?… Any thoughts would be appreciated.)
PS WRT “actual insight”
[/quote]
Just curious, did you even both to look at the fund to see what the majority of the holdings of that fund is? Because the articles you quote and what the fund contains just seem, well never mind, you can do your own due diligence, or not, in your case.[/quote]
yup, and the question investors should have about the overall viability of ALL muni bonds is what of “new” accounting rules which among other thing are suppose to fully account for retirement costs on the balance sheet BUT in reality stuff is basically being swept under the carpet, much like news of the head of calpers who was exposed as being corrupt because of bribes that surfaced, the local pensions (mis)use of derivatives, leverage and other bull$hit stuff like giving away an extra 13th pension payment for the last three decades, etc., etc., etc!!!
[quote=governing.com] Why Some Public Pensions Could Soon Look Much Worse
The discount rate rule, known as GASB 67, is just part of the story. Another piece of the new rule, GASB 68, will hit financial statements starting later this year. Under that new rule, governments that are members of a pension plan — say, localities that pool their money with a state plan — are required to report their share of that plan’s unfunded liability on their governmentwide balance sheet for the 2015 fiscal year, something most of those governments have never before had to do.
[quote=californiapolicycenter.org] UNMASKING STAGGERING PENSION DEBT AND HIDDEN EXPENSE
The Fatal Flaw is that pension expenses that create unfunded pension debt are reported in the future as that debt is paid. That’s absurd – the payments of a debt eliminate the debt, they don’t create it. Unfunded pension debt is created by pension expenses in the past – most of which have never been reported to the people. GASB is changing that.
GASB’s changes are only about how governments must report pension finances.
as it stands public pensions share many traits of the old USSR five year economic plans,… in other words both are bureaucratic programs w/ lots of corruption/mis-management and w/ horse$hit propaganda that tries to justify management decisions/operations (the following for example is an article bearishgurl shared as evidence of how well managed the local public pension was doing)
[quote=sandiegouniontribune.com] SDCERA uses smart investment strategy for pension fund
Recent media coverage of the San Diego County Employees Retirement Association (SDCERA) has suggested its retirement fund’s portfolio managers have recklessly pursued riskier investments in pursuit of higher returns to close the pension funding gap. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. SDCERA is answering the real concern impacting public pensions by using tried and true principles of asset liability management and diversification, and not relying heavily on more volatile equities to close this gap.
For the past decade, San Diego County and its employees paid 100 percent or more of their annually required contribution to the SDCERA retirement fund. Consistent employee and employer contributions over the years have laid a foundation for investment gains and asset growth. SDCERA’s investment strategy helps the employer’s budgeting process and stabilizes employer costs by reducing the volatility of returns and steadily achieving the rate of return needed to fund the benefit.
At $10 billion, the SDCERA fund is able to pursue certain investment strategies that larger plans like CalPERS cannot access and smaller plans do not have the resources to deploy. SDCERA’s investment strategy is purposely designed to be no riskier than traditional pension fund asset allocation strategies. Risk-parity and trend strategies, which utilize leverage, are limited to 25 percent of the SDCERA portfolio, not the entire set of portfolio assets. The other 75 percent of the portfolio is managed using traditional asset allocation and rebalancing approaches.
SDCERA’s meticulous risk management is the opposite of “gambling” — it is prudent governance. Managing risk exposure has been a long-standing practice at SDCERA, and one that continues in the fund’s current investment strategy. This context is crucial to fully understanding SDCERA’s approach to portfolio management.
…using the metaphor just as night follows day, most are going to be caught off guard when the “economic” day (which is the phase we’re in right now) inevitably turns into night (the only unresolved questions is “when” and the “magnitude”)
PS my economic assessment isn’t a tin-foil-hat theory, seems the dude who made a name for himself running a bond fund, kinda is telling the world the same damn thing!
[quote=cnbc.com] Bill Gross: I don’t like stocks or bonds
“I don’t like bonds; I don’t like most stocks; I don’t like private equity,” the Janus Capital portfolio manager said Wednesday in his latest letter to investors.
There’s “too much risk for too little return” for banks to lend in the current climate, while the low-interest atmosphere helps asset prices but crimps savings and business investment.
“Banks, insurance companies, pension funds and Mom and Pop on Main Street are stripped of their ability to pay for future debts and retirement benefits,” Gross wrote. “Central banks seem oblivious to this dark side of low interest rates. If maintained for too long, the real economy itself is affected as expected income fails to materialize and investment spending stagnates.”
So where does he think people should invest? Well, that’s also difficult.
“Real assets such as land, gold, and tangible plant and equipment at a discount are favored asset categories,” he said. “But those are hard for an individual to buy because wealth has been ‘financialized.'”
[quote] The Bond King: Investment Secrets from PIMCO’s Bill Gross
Praise For Investment Secrets From PIMCO’s Bill Gross
“No investor is held in higher regard by his peers than Bill Gross. His understanding of the markets and his insights on how to profit from them are unparalleled. Now, Tim Middleton takes you into Gross’s world for an insider’s view on how the world of finance really works. If this book were a bond, it would be AAA rated with a double-digit yield.”
-DON PHILLIPS, Managing Director, Morningstar, Inc.
[/quote]
while on the subject of “BONDS” and all joking aside (for just a moment) since “clavin” being an a know-it-all idiot character on a sitcom was mentioned, here is a little known fact… (that adds to the discussion by putting things into context which is actually relevant and TRUE)
Early in Cheers’ run, its creators were contracted by the U.S. Treasury to create a special mini-episode to promote the purchase of U.S. savings bonds. Titled “Uncle Sam Malone,” the episode never aired on television nor is it included on any of the DVDs; it was intended to be screened for promotional purposes at savings bond drives only. But its writer, Ralph Phillips, was kind enough to upload it to his Vimeo page
[quote]
“Cheers” Uncle Sam Malone (special 1983 mini-episode)
cliff@5:10 well that’s the nice thing about bonds diane, if you hold them for five years or more you’re guaranteed a 7.5% return
sam@5:16 and that means you can double your money in less than ten years, guaranteed
The ‘Rule of 72’ is a simplified way to determine how long an investment will take to double, given a fixed annual rate of interest. By dividing 72 by the annual rate of return, investors can get a rough estimate of how many years it will take for the initial investment to duplicate itself.
and now back to our regularly scheduled programming of piggington Bull$hit
flu (a.k.a. “bullishgurl”), since you’ve been coming here for something like a decade, when the housing bubble was in full swing, ever consider a new username like “BubbleHeadgurl” because it’s time to inject a semblance of “(un)emotional” MATH reality into this forum considering all the facts! (just sayin’… given OT: What should my new username be?)
