Table On-Topic Summary - 22-Sep-2002

A compilation of this board's financial/economic posts From 42405 to 42444

Post  42405  by  rgh41       OT: Your membermark of ljpit was successful

Post  42406  by  srudek       ot ljpit re Tibet.

Post  42407  by  ferociousD       I have worked with the Tibetan Community in exile-

Post  42408  by  ljpit       OT: pmcw,

Post  42409  by  srudek       Reply

S&P Return Matrix frm 2000wave.com/Maudlin The tables described in this newsletter are available for free download from 2000wave.com and seem WAY cool. Among other things, they will tell you what your return would have been investing from any year until sale in any other year. It doesn't surprise me, in the least, that the table apparently PROVES that "buy and mold" is a lousy strategy. As I've been saying for years, most of the stock market "truisms" aren't. For most people, based on previous market patterns, the best thing they can do right now is to sell their stocks for whatever they can get and wait -- probably twenty years -- for the start of the next bull. Or short. (My reverse index fund has been gaining steadily and is up about 50% since I bought at the beginning of May). Or -- probably best of all -- invest in a local business where you won't be treated as a mushroom. Anyway, here's an exerpt from the news letter and a link to the site where you can read the full letter and download the pdf files. Suggest you not miss this; should make for some great discussion here. -------------------- site http://www.2000wave.com/ graphs http://www.2000wave.com/graphs.asp Text version is below. To view in color or printer friendly .pdf please visit our website at www.2000wave.com The Sweet Buy and Buy When Can We Make Money In Stocks Again? Death and Taxes New Web Sites johnmauldin.com By John Mauldin This week we are going to depart from the usual format of surveying the economic landscape for investment insights, and ask ourselves: "What type of returns should you expect from the stock market for the next 5, 10, or 20 years?" Over the long-term the Ibbotson study, used by stock market cheerleaders everywhere, says we should expect to make real returns of 6-7%. This statistic is used by brokers and fund managers who urge investors to buy and hold. Maybe more to the sales point, it is used by them to urge investors to buy some more stocks or mutual fund shares today and hold them as well. If you just keep buying, the study says you will get your reward, by and by. This is the sweet buy and buy sales pitch. The Ibbotson study (and numerous similar studies) is one of the most misused pieces of market propaganda ever. If I thought for one minute you really could get 7% compound annualized returns over the next 20 years by simply buying and holding, I would agree that it would be a smart thing to do. Today, with the help of a different and remarkable study by Ed Easterling of Crestmont Holdings, I am going to help you figure out what type of returns you should expect in your investment future, whether you are 20 or 80 years old. We are going to see when you should be buying, when you should be holding and when you should simply fold and walk away. I cannot tell you how many soon-to-be-retired couples I have talked to, after their retirement savings have been hit 30-40-50% and their comfortable retirement dreams shattered, who tell me their brokers or advisors told them if they just hold on the market would come back. Soon, they are promised. These were the investment professionals they trusted and they assumed they had done their homework. Now they know these guys flunked Stock Market Returns 101, or possibly skipped class in order to attend lectures by Jack Grubman on "How To Buy Telecommunications Stocks." Today I give you the class notes they should have shown you. Ed Easterling is a colleague of mine in the world of hedge fund analysis. He is an expert on Texas based hedge funds. (Let's hear it for specialization.) His client list consists of institutions and high net worth individuals. He has been trying to develop a graphic way to show his clients what they should expect from simple stock market returns over the next decade. He showed me some of his work. Basically, he has developed an Excel spreadsheet showing the stock market returns for the last 102 years. By looking at his tables, you can see what annualized return you would have earned if you hadbought stocks in any year and held them for any length of time. Then he began to analyze what affect inflation, taxes and commissions would have on returns. And finally, he correlated those returns with Price to Earnings (P/E) ratios. I looked at those charts for a long time, asked him to modify them for your use, and have posted them on my publisher's website. In today's e-letter, I am going to share with you some insights you can get from looking at these tables. We are going to see that: *There are clearly times to be in the market, and times when you should be on the sidelines. *When you start investing is one of the most critical components for a successful investor. *There are clear market cycles, and fighting the trend is a loser's game. *Expecting to make 6-7% over the next 20 years is unrealistic in the current cycle. I suggest you read this letter, and then go to the tables, should you find them of interest. (I should also point out that you might have to be patient, because if all 1,000,000+ recipients of this letter try to hit the website at the same time, the web site will be somewhat slow. You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the tables. More about where to go for these tables later in the letter.) . . . First, there are very clear periods when returns are better than others. These relate to secular bull and bear markets. No big insight there. But what I notice is the correlation with P/E ratios. In general, when P/E ratios begin to rise, you want to be in the stock market. When they are falling, total returns over the next decade will be below par. With the exception of WWII, when these periods of falling P/E ratios start, they just keep going until P/E ratios top out. Generally, this topping period comes prior to a recession. Can you use the P/E ratios to signal a precise turn from a secular bull to a secular bear? No, but you can use them to confirm other signals. And once that turn has begun, the trend continues. You generally want to exit the stock market, except for trading accounts and special situations. Second, this chart shows the high probability that a secular bear is currently in progress. High and falling P/E ratios, along with negative returns, are always associated with the beginning of such markets. When you let your eyes follow along the tables, you can see those "red" periods when annual gains were negative. Look at the corresponding P/E ratio. If it is high, it historically has correlated with the beginning of a secular bear, which always takes years to work itself out. Fighting this trend is frustrating at best.

Post  42410  by  pmcw       Reply

PT: Dan, Stock and Tampa (in no particular order), I feel we have made some progress this evening. If as nothing more than a personal favor, please try to take a few steps closer to the middle by each making two posts illustrating understanding and compassion. I'm not asking any of you to respect the leadership on either side, just understanding of the common folks on the street who want to do well for their families. If not over a brew, maybe a cup of joe, I've found there are minimal differences between two when they first consider themselves members of the human race. We can't turn the clocks back to 1948, 1967 or any other day we might want to relive. All we can do is look towards tomorrow. I feel we all agree that the middle east could be a prosperous and peaceful region of the world; some place where the average joe and jane could raise their children and have faith they would have greater opporunities than they enjoyed. I feel the best chance we have to realize this dream is to learn about common ground and empathy rather than pull to the extremes of our positions. Let the children who can play in the streets in harmony before they learn "history" teach us who "know better" as lesson. I hope you take my simple comments as they are intended. If you do, please make two posts that aim to bridge a gap rather than create a rift by pointing out differences. Regards, pmcw

Post  42411  by  Decomposed       OT: Table ON TOPIC SUMMARY Sep 21, 2002

Post  42412  by  Arkural       Reply

OT-[dated] Finnish study says cells react to mobile phone radiation April 22, 2002 16:17 GMT Kalevi Nikulainen Microwave radiation from cellular phones causes temporary alterations in cells, the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority of Finland (STUK) has learned in its studies, but it is too early to know if the cellular level changes have harmful effects on the users of mobile phones. The study results are to be published by the Berlin-based international science publication Differentiation. In the study STUK investigated the effects of microwave radiation and raising temperature in cells. Professor Dariusz Leszczynski, the leading researcher, says that cells that have been exposed to mobile phone radiation react by altering the functioning of many proteins. The radiation can either increase or lessen the production of proteins. Next the research team will try to find out if cellular changes can cause cells to die or if they effect the brain's ability block the entrance of foreign molecules. The research is being funded by STUK, Academy of Finland, the National Technology Agency (Tekes) and EU's Reflex Project. Mobile radiation research has a long tradition in Finland. One of the institutions active in this field is the Radio Laboratory of the Helsinki University of Technology, HUT. According to professor Sergei Tretyakov, HUT has been looking for a means to lessen the mobile phone radiation since 1998. Studies have been conducted in cooperation with STUK and several international partners. The on-going studies are also looking for ways to increase the quality of the communication connection for the user without exceeding the allowable radiation limits. Professor Tretyakov says that it is possible to lower the existing European radiation limit to below the 2 watts per kilogram. "It would be very difficult to lower the limit to ten percent of the present level, but in principle it is possible," he says. Tretyakov has been studying all man-made metamaterials and stealth technology for use in cellular phones. Metamaterials make it possible to reflect all the radiation into one direction, in this case away from mobile phone user. Stealth materials are known from military technology. They absorb radiation and in cellular phones they could be placed between the user and the radiation source. The simplest way to cut down on radiation is to cut down the signal strength of cellular phones, Tretyakov says. However, this solution contains a mandatory trade off. The amount of bits that can transported with lower power cannot be increased which means slower services or poorer quality of voice or, alternately, operators must set up more base stations closer to each other. Another method of protecting the user's brain is to use smart antennae that direct the energy and sending sector precisely into a desired direction. According to professor Pertti Vainikainen this method can also cut down the amount of scatter radiation. Both Tretyakov and Vainikainen say that according to today's best knowledge the radiation levels are already low enough. http://www.mobile.commerce.net/story.php?story_id=1584&s=3 - Mobile Phones and Health Concerns - Frequently Asked Questions http://www.cfi.unsw.edu.au/emf/faq.html - Cellular Phone Radiation Rankings http://www.earthpulse.com/ http://www.sardata.com/ (((note: Released 10 May 2002 The DTI-commissioned SARtest report on cellphone handset protective devices was published today, reviewing about a dozen unnamed devices. Critics point out that by failing to name specific models the report is of little value to users, but the DTI did not wish to seem to endorse any particular devices. The marker used for the test is the Specific Absorption Rate, which aims to indicate the amount of radiation absorbed by a specified conductive permittive material. As such SAR is a dubious indicator of a bio-effect, and is limited to a physical radiation reduction measure and indeed to thermal effects only, whereas the concerns are primarily with non thermal effects. A proper study of whether there are protective effects surely has to use a biological not a pseudophysical marker. Moreover, as a recent Japanese study shows, while a single phone may generate less than permitted exposure limits, in places like enclosed or metal cabinets (e.g. railway carriages) a plethora of users can combine to produce an ambient radiation level well above permitted limits.))) - New mobile phone cancer link 16:45 19 June 02 Radiation from mobile phones might cause tumours by preventing cells from dying, according to new research in Finland. Dariusz Leszczynski at the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Helsinki found that one hour of exposure to mobile phone radiation caused cultured human cells to shrink. Leszczynski believes this is triggered by a response that normally only happens when a cell is damaged. In a person, such changes could disable safety mechanisms that prevent harmful substances from entering the brain from the bloodstream. Radiation-induced changes in the cells could also interfere with the normal death process of apoptosis. If cells that are "marked" to die do not, tumours can form. This research is particularly important, Leszczynski says, because it demonstrates that mobile phone radiation can affect cells without heating them. David de Pomerai, at the University of Nottingham, who provided the first clear evidence on non-heating effects of mobile radiation earlier this year describes the work as "very plausible" and "significant". No mechanism Leszczynski conducted the research at temperatures too low for heat to account for the biochemical changes in the cells. But de Pomerai warns the study does not reveal the mechanism by which mobile phone radiation caused these changes. "Until you can demonstrate a mechanism and demonstrate that it is not a heat-activated process people will dismiss it," he told New Scientist. This is because microwaves do not have enough energy to break even weak chemical bonds - so most scientists believe the only way they could possibly damage cells is through heating. But the energy levels of mobile emissions are set well below those required to cause any heating. Two years ago a UK government enquiry into the health effects of mobile phones, led by Sir William Stewart, concluded there was no evidence of a risk to health. But Leszczynski has found that phone radiation somehow targets proteins in "stress fibres" in endothelial cells, which line blood vessels. This causes the endothelial cells to shrink. Long-term effects The blood-brain barrier normally prevents unwanted molecules from entering the brain. But mobile phone radiation might allow molecules to pass through small spaces between cells, caused by the shrinking. Alternatively, stress fibres might transport molecules directly across the cell membranes, as has been shown in some animal studies. "If the blood-brain barrier is even temporarily affected by mobile phone radiation it might have long term health effects," Leszczynski says. "How harmful to the health it might be is impossible to say for now". Human studies are urgently needed to determine this, he says. Leszczynski has yet to demonstrate that phone radiation does interfere with normal cell death. But the observed action on the proteins in the cells strongly suggests that it would, he says. Duncan Graham-Rowe

Post  42413  by  clo       OT: This is only page 1 of a 2 page article.

Post  42414  by  StockmanI7       OT: Pmcw, middle east

Post  42415  by  tinljhtkh       OT: Which came first,

Post  42416  by  pdowd       Reply

Depending on the path of hurricane Isidore next week , look for price increases for oil and natural gas. Non-essential offshore personel are already being evacuated from the Gulf of Mexico. Looks like this could be devastating for Louisiana Shrimpers as well ! Peace PD.

Post  42417  by  clo       Reply

What's wrong with BOD's? This was posted on TYC board. clo http://www.concernedshareholders.com/ http://www.corpgov.net/forums/commentary/14a-8amends.html

Post  42418  by  Briguy       Reply

Software Quarterly Update... From USBancorp... Michael C. Marzolf, Software Infrastructure Software Infrastructure Quarterly Preview - ARTG-#, BMC-#, BORL-#, EMBT-#, IMAN-#, IWOV-#, RATL-#, SBYN-#@, SLTC-#, STEL-#, VRTS-#, VIGN-#, WEBM-# KEY POINTS: The current Internet Technology (IT) spending outlook remains dismal, however, sales contacts we speak with have been indicating that there is at least a very modest pickup in IT initiative discussions that involve software. Management teams’ confidence in close rates on these deals is low, and therefore we might not see it in the numbers for several quarters, but it is a change. While Oracle’s (ORCL, #) comments are generally dismal, some end-users are initiating projects, and software vendors are getting engaged - a statement we could not have made two quarters ago. We believe that for some vendors, the September quarter is tracking, with enough business in the pipe to meet expectations if close rates are similar to the June quarter, but not enough to confidently beat them. Others are not to fortunate. We also believe that all vendors will need every day in September to close business. Where are business models and sales cycles? During the September quarter, we inquired of many public and private software vendors as to their characterization of the September quarter in general and relative to the June quarter. “Average” responses on the quarter are sober, but generally not worse: Close rates are a general concern, but not materially worse than last quarter. U.S. is with few exceptions relatively unchanged. Europe continues to slip, potentially getting worse. Asia/Pacific is good. Asia/Pacific is bad. (mixed responses) Additional customer processes are still in place stalling deal closure. Customers using old maintenance streams to leverage pricing on new deals. Larger deals here and there, but generally still fewer MEGA deals. All eyes on government, where budgets are opening earlier than usual. European and domestic vacation cycles slightly shorter than expected. Where are expectations? During the last several weeks (prior to Oracle’s release), we inquired of 19 mutual fund analysts as to where expectations are for the September quarter. In response to the question “how big of a miss would disappoint you enough to recommend selling a stock”, we received these general responses for software stocks: 1 Any miss will disappoint enough to sell stock. 3 5 percent miss would disappoint enough to sell stock. 13 5-10 percent miss would be enough to sell stock. 2 15 percent miss or greater would be enough to sell stock. Recommendations: We believe that while IT spending sputters along, neither materially improving nor materially deteriorating that there are several general themes to follow in picking stocks in this Software Infrastructure group: Profitable stories likely to trade between 20 and 30 times earnings-per-share over the next 12 months, buy them below 20 times and sell them at 30 times. Until we see a recovery, washed-out names will likely outperform larger names based on fewer moving parts and valuations at/near/below cash. Everyone is saying big cap will lead recovery; therefore it may not. Several long opportunities are listed in the following section.

Post  42419  by  Briguy       Reply

Where’s The Beef? Strategy To Secure Cyberspace Unlikely To Spur Private Spending; Recommendations To Government Agencies More Interesting - CHKP-#>, ISSX-#>, NET-#>, NSCN-#>, RSAS-#>, SCUR-#>, SNWL-#>, SYMC-#>, VRSN-#> KEY POINTS: Yesterday, September 18, we attended the unveiling of the “National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace For Comment” at Stanford University by the President’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board. With current budget proposals calling for a 64 percent increase in federal Internet Technology (IT) security spending in fiscal 2003, we expect the federal security vertical market to remain robust this year. That said, we do not view the draft strategy as an intermediate-term catalyst to increased spending by consumer or enterprise buyers. By in large the document focused on awareness initiatives and general issues that businesses and consumers should consider, while avoiding specific mandated requirements for those groups. For example, an earlier proposal that ISPs be required to bundle security products with high-speed access did not survive to the draft plan. While the strategy’s recommendations for the private sector avoided specific minimum requirements and regulated standards, the recommendations to government entities were more interesting to us. In particular, the draft document outlines the following timeframe for specific actions by the federal government: Second quarter fiscal 2003 Determine whether policy or budgetary action is required to promote the greater use of security assessment and security policy enforcement tools and actively deploy threat management tools to preempt attacks. Explore the extent to which all government departments can employ the same physical and logical access control tools and authentication mechanisms to promote interoperability. Consider the cost-effectiveness of a scenario-based security exercise for a selected cross-government business process. Third quarter fiscal 2003 Assess whether certification of private sector security service providers is required. Explore the benefits of greater cross-government purchasing of security products and services. Fourth quarter fiscal 2003 Review the performance of the National Information Assurance Program. As a summary point, we see Internet Security Systems, Network Associates, RSA Security and Symantec as well positioned to benefit from not only the proposed increase in fiscal 2003 federal security spending, but also the specific recommendations for action detailed within the draft strategy. The National Strategy To Secure Cyberspace remains a working draft, and the President’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board is soliciting public comment on the strategy through November 18, 2002. The strategy is available at www.whitehouse.gov. --USBancorp Piper Jaffray

Post  42420  by  abveldeh       Reply

nacl01 what happened in Yugoslavia was pure ethnic cleansing and the fact that Nato refused airsupport to the Dutch in Sebrenica, knowing there would be 6000 Muslim men less was pure massmurder. Point is most of you prefer not to know the facts about military actions by the USA(NATO) "I don't understand your statement "Americans have a hang for ethnic cleansing and genocide." America came out against ethnic cleansing in Europe in the 40's and in Bosnia in the 90's." What has the USA done or having done in the last 57 years not to mention the doubtfull reasons to help out in WW29 (merely economic interest) except for expansionim by the gun

Post  42421  by  danking_70       OT: PMCW

Post  42422  by  abveldeh       Reply

lkorrow the orange circles are the refugee camps and the grey ones are the number of Palestinian refugees per country. As to your post 70 % of Europeans see America as the agressor not the Arabs. Hussein is just an extreem exhibit of anti Americanism like Ghadaffi. To Europeans Bush and Hussein are the same. Besides the Bush clan provoced the first Gulfwar, not Hussein. Kuweiit with thehelp of USA technologie(GWB/DC)was drilling sideways under Iraq and Hussein being an Arab had to make a stand but Bush wanted war. And BTW the USA mudered at least a 1/4 million reservist Iraqui soldiers in the North who had never been on the front line. Besides that the USA murdered an other 3/4 million soldiers and civillians.

Post  42423  by  danking_70       OT: Essex woman rants against 'whites' as she take

Post  42424  by  danking_70       OT: Abveldeh

Post  42425  by  abveldeh       Reply

pmcw you never refuted the data of the daily reckoning. All you did was point to a FED website ( which is a bunch of liars) So when I posted a German article saying the last years surplusses actually were huge deficits you gave no answer. You are rather arrogant and name me one political statement which is wrong and economicly not to the point. Keep the word oximoronic for your self and don't insult me. If you want to deal with me in your hautain way of speach do so in French or any other foreign language where we are equal

Post  42426  by  abveldeh       Reply

lkorrow I am a white guy from Holland. I worked sometimes with arabs in construction. Don't let yourself being led by semi intellectuals like PWMC. The Beatles are European BTW

Post  42427  by  abveldeh       Reply

lkorrow how do you think we see the clergy and their followers in the US. In Gods name we kill all over the world because we are the brightest. Well let me tell you as a simple bricklayer: You are not

Post  42428  by  abveldeh       Reply

Decomposed I consider G. Carlin to be an outright anarchist and I like him for that. Certainly not a liberal.

Post  42429  by  abveldeh       Reply

PMWC some questions for you: 1) How do you justify a leader that builds 800 palaces, but says he doesn't have money to provide basic health care, food and education for children? What about the palaces in the USA and how big is the percentage of people in the USA living under the UN poverty line, lack of healthcare and lack of education. Not to mention equal rights for women 2) Do you feel the people of Israel have the right to a sovereign nation? Do you think the Palestinians who live in refugee camps have a right to their birthground and what do you think of Sharon murdering refugees since 20 years thereby attacking civillians in accross border refugeecamps 3) What might the world be like today if Abraham had two daughters and no sons? ;o) Isaac was the son of the Pharao and Abram cheated on him. However the Pharao send Abram away with his wife with many gifts (for the child and the mother, letting Abram live. Ismael the son of Hagar is the forfather of many Arab tribes Later the names were changed to Abraham and Sarah. Ismael and Isaac were only brothers by name. They did not have the same father nor the same mother regards Adriaan

Post  42430  by  abveldeh       Reply

Tampathom the USA voted into law a possible attack against the Netherlands in case there would be a USA citizen being brought to trial before the International war tribunal. Of course some will say this is a fictional situation. However if some US marine sets foot on Dutch soil I will be most happy to slice his f####ng throat. Just in case I would move to my house in France. We have nukes too you know. Bush is afraid he will be accused after his Presidency. Sharon is already on the wanted list in Belgium

Post  42431  by  pmcw       Reply

sr, That's quite an amazing study and can be a valuable tool for investors. Since I feel you enjoy getting down to the real numbers and facts at least as much as me, please join me in a quest to review this data from some different perspectives. When I teach classes to young people I suggest that they open a ROTH IRA and invest 100% of their savings in the Wilshire 5000 index. I prefer the Vanguard Total Market Fund for several reasons. The two most import of these is that it has a very low operating cost and it also is as close to the Wilshire as any simulated index available. (Note: I don't know of any Wilshire 5000 index that literally owns the entire index with perfect weighting. This is why I call them simulations.) After reading the article you linked and reviewing the charts, I'm even more convinced than before that my advice is solid. "Huh" you say............ Let me explain and then, hopefully, you'll join in the adventure to see what applying the data to reality might yield. First, the weak point about the study is that it assumes that one will invest all of their money on a single day. That is simply foolish and it seldom happens in real life. Virtually every valid study I've ever read, as well as most of those I've preformed using real index returns, are based on regular deposits over a long period of time. I tell 18 year olds that they will quite likely have a million dollars (I don't disappoint them with the fact that it will be worth a third of a million after inflation) if they start depositing $1K per year today and continue to do so until they are 65. OK, I am painting a fairly rosy picture, but the returns I assume in order to support my million dollar projections are far less than what the S&P500 has produced during the 76 years it's been in play. As a matter of a fact, if the returns for the next 47 years are the same as the average for the last 76 years, the odds are very good they will actually have a million after inflation. Of course, as we know, historical returns should not be taken as a guarantee for future performance. ;o) Since I'm only given 50 minutes to teach kids who couldn't calculate 10% of the number 50 when I start, I don't go into great detail about the variability's and inherent risks associated with short term volatility. As a matter of a fact, I suggest they cheer when the market drops during the first half of their investing adventure. This, of course, is the accumulation stage and a drop allows more shares to be bought for less money. Naturally, their end results might be better or worse, but I can assure you, given the course these kids usually follow, they'll be better off following my advice than they would following the footsteps typically followed by people born into similar demographics. The second weakness to the way the study is presented is that the returns in the taxable accounts assume taxes are paid each year on capital gains. I realize a separate chart is provided for retirement accounts, but the "real individual" chart can lead some to conclusions that are not totally accurate. Buy and hold index investing, even outside a retirement account, is inherently tax efficient. The reason is the fund does minimal trading (just periodic index rebalancing) so little is declared in taxable dividends. For the most part, the funds essentially compound tax free until withdrawn. Although I've not checked the data used, I will assume it to be accurate so let's put it to a test and correct the results to show what might happen during a real investment lifetime. Assumptions and Guidelines: Let's assume that an investment lifetime lasts 60 years and starts with a person's 18th birthday and terminates on their 78th birthday - a reasonable projection for the life of someone who is 18 today. Let's assume that they deposit $1,000 during the first year and then increase this deposit by 10% per year until they are 53 (35 years) and thereafter by 5% per year until they are 65; at which point they retire. If you adjust these deposits for an average inflation rate of 3.5% per year this intimates that they are only depositing a little over $3,700 the year they turn 40 and that they deposit a total of just under $220K (adjusted for inflation) over the 47 years. We all know that as one gets closer to retirement that they need to consider reducing the risks by lessening their exposure to volatility (reduce equity allocations). Due to this, let's build two models. The first will keep the investments 100% invested in the equity portfolio and the second will run 100% equity until age 55. During the next four years, the allocation will shift by 10% per year to bonds (30 year treasury rate) and then during the next six years, it will be reduced by 5% per year to where at age 65 the person will end up with a 30/70 equity/bond allocation. This kind of straddles the difference advisors tend to suggest of 20% to 40% equity exposure. Since 100% of this investment could easily be directed into a tax free ROTH, let's assume we will use the retirement chart as our guide. The chart provided for retirement shows all the one year returns along the jagged line at the bottom. This is the line we'll use to calculate our possible outcomes. By following this line we find that there are 43 sixty year periods (1901 through 1960, 1902 through 1961, etc.). Below is a listing of these one year returns (I'm not quite sure how they know the results for 2002, but I just assumed they have presented valid data): 1901 34% 1902 4% 1903 -13% 1904 1% 1905 31% 1906 7% 1907 -21% 1908 7% 1909 21% 1910 -4% 1911 11% 1912 1% 1913 -10% 1914 -4% 1915 8% 1916 10% 1917 -21% 1918 -20% 1919 8% 1920 -17% 1921 2% 1922 39% 1923 5% 1924 10% 1925 26% 1926 16% 1927 29% 1928 36% 1929 34% 1930 -15% 1931 -26% 1932 -40% 1933 48% 1934 11% 1935 9% 1936 49% 1937 -1% 1938 -21% 1939 12% 1940 -6% 1941 -11% 1942 -16% 1943 33% 1944 11% 1945 24% 1946 7% 1947 -20% 1948 -1% 1949 3% 1950 26% 1951 19% 1952 13% 1953 5% 1954 25% 1955 42% 1956 17% 1957 -5% 1958 4% 1959 26% 1960 -2% 1961 20% 1962 -5% 1963 13% 1964 17% 1965 9% 1966 -4% 1967 7% 1968 5% 1969 -4% 1970 -18% 1971 16% 1972 10% 1973 -6% 1974 -29% 1975 -1% 1976 -16% 1977 -7% 1978 -6% 1979 0% 1980 6% 1981 2% 1982 -8% 1983 36% 1984 -1% 1985 16% 1986 28% 1987 20% 1988 -9% 1989 19% 1990 0% 1991 11% 1992 10% 1993 8% 1994 1% 1995 16% 1996 22% 1997 29% 1998 23% 1999 20% 2000 4% 2001 -19% 2002 -18% Annual Deposits (Adjusted for an average inflation rate of 3.5%): 1 $ 1,000 2 $ 1,062 3 $ 1,127 4 $ 1,196 5 $ 1,270 6 $ 1,348 7 $ 1,431 8 $ 1,519 9 $ 1,612 10 $ 1,711 11 $ 1,816 12 $ 1,928 13 $ 2,047 14 $ 2,173 15 $ 2,306 16 $ 2,448 17 $ 2,598 18 $ 2,758 19 $ 2,928 20 $ 3,108 21 $ 3,299 22 $ 3,502 23 $ 3,717 24 $ 3,946 25 $ 4,189 26 $ 4,446 27 $ 4,720 28 $ 5,010 29 $ 5,318 30 $ 5,645 31 $ 5,992 32 $ 6,361 33 $ 6,752 34 $ 7,167 35 $ 7,608 36 $ 8,076 37 $ 8,183 38 $ 8,292 39 $ 8,401 40 $ 8,513 41 $ 8,625 42 $ 8,740 43 $ 8,856 44 $ 8,973 45 $ 9,092 46 $ 9,212 47 $ 9,334 Your mission, should you choose to play this game, is to calculate what our investor should expect to have at the end of 47 years (when they are 65) and what they should expect to leave to their heirs at age 78. I don't have the historic return for 30 year bonds, so you're welcome to use a reasonable average or locate the data. If you have any questions on the data points (actual deposit amounts, etc.) please let me know and I'll try to respond this evening - I'll be out the balance of the day. BTW, just as a point of reference (it is actually fairly meaningless, but something others like to point out) the average rate of return for all 60 year investment cycles is 6.9% (adjusted for inflation). Regards, pmcw

Post  42432  by  abveldeh       Reply

danking_70 The Jews were welcome nowhere in the world. Not in the USA either. So putting them in a good old English colony looked like a nice solution and interesting as a foothold in Oil country

Post  42433  by  danking_70       OT: Abveldeh. Ah, another conspiracy theory right

Post  42434  by  abveldeh       Reply

srudek the USA is afraid of China and it needs China's labour. Also the Chinese possess tons of Dollars for all the slave work they have been doing for the USA lending their workforce and the Dollars they made to the USA. Now the USA is eating out of China's hand unless the Americans start producing again and stop living on other peoples labour and wallets. There are still enough Tibetans left but the USA is a bunch of cowards. Why give them the Olympic games. Hu

Post  42435  by  abveldeh       Reply

danking_70 Who divided Europe in economic blocks and what company made the computers to count the Jews in the Koncentrazionzarbeitzlager. IBM right. USA at Yalta right. The Russians were the only bad people right. What was the Marshall plan for. Market bonding right

Post  42436  by  abveldeh       Reply

danking_70 the fact that the Jews were not welcome anywhere has nothing to do with conspiracy. Most European countries did not return their possessions as to the day of today. During or even before the war a ship with refugees was send back from the States. Since the Brits had some territory in the Mid. East it was easy and conveniant to allow for a Jewish State. If you look at the '48 map however the Jews have been stealing territory from the Palestine and destroying their cities and villages from day one. And now they do the same from USA made gunships. Who you call terrorists. The USA sustained Israelis or Palistine refugees claiming what is theirs in the first place. Palestine has never been a Jewish state. Abram was send there as a guest and ordered to behave as a guest. All biblical history thereafter is distorted by the Catholic church. which BTW was very helpfull to the NAZI regime in exterminating Jews, confiscating their belongings and helping to transport treasure and Nazi's to South America. The oil connection is a theory, but just tell me why the USA supports agression against Arab people and how come the situation has agravated since the murder of Rabbin and the coming to power of Sharon and GWB. Any American president needs the Jew voters and money. But GWB has made it clear he will secure oilsupply for the free world.Sharon and GWB have completely different interests. Sharon is a powermad individual serving his own metaphysical interests, whilst GWB has a more earthly economical purpose. Oilsupply. Read my lips. ROTFLMAO All the rest is plain BULL####

Post  42437  by  Tampathom       OT: Challenger Stoiber takes a slim lead in the Ge

Post  42438  by  clo       OT: Tampathom, the German elections...

Post  42439  by  Tampathom       OT: Never good when it's this close...I suspect a

Post  42440  by  Tampathom       OT: Now it's back to Schroeder

Post  42441  by  tinljhtkh       OT: Sunday ramblings—for the first Sunday of what

Post  42442  by  clo       OT: Schröder Appears to Have Narrow Victory

Post  42443  by  pmcw       Reply

A list of the losers who have recently paid CEOCast to spam hype on their stock: ". The reader should use caution, as a result. The following companies, featured in this newsletter, have compensated CEOcast: Golden Eagle International, six thousand dollars per month, plus fifty thousand shares of stock per month, T and G2, eighty thousand shares of free-trading stock from a third-party, Tengasco, six thousand dollars per month, eighty-five hundred shares of stock and options to purchase forty-thousand shares of stock at five dollars sixty-eight cents, SurgiCare, seventy-five hundred dollars per month, one hundred thousand shares of common stock and one hundred thousand warrants exercisable at two dollars twenty six cents, SRM Networks, ten thousand dollars and five thousand shares of stock, PSS World Medical, seven-thousand five hundred dollars, Bioject Medical, seven-thousand five hundred dollars, Wireless Facilities, seven-thousand five hundred dollars, Smartserv Online, seven-thousand five hundred dollars, Vista Continental, four thousand dollars per month and thirty thousand shares of stock, BIO-KEY International seventy-five hundred dollars per month, plus options to purchase two hundred thousand shares at forty-two cents, Penn Octane, six thousand dollars per month twenty thousand shares of stock and warrants to purchase twenty thousand shares of stock at three dollars fifty five cents (our editors own seventy-thousand shares as well)" I'll let you figure out why a company would pay an outfit like CEOCast to pump hype about their company rather than invest the money in efforts that might provide an ROI for stockholders. Regards, pmcw

Post  42444  by  kantbleveit       Reply

ISIL- Does this Director NEED money or does he know something? Selling near low for the year. Intersil Director Nets $645,750 Exercising Options Dow Jones, Friday, September 20, 2002 at 18:27 WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Intersil Corp. (ISIL) Director James Diller generated net proceeds of $645,750 when he exercised options for 50,000 common shares and sold the stock, according to a filing released Friday by the Securities and Exchange Commission. On Wednesday, Diller exercised options to buy 25,000 shares for $1.15 apiece. He then sold these shares for $14.55 each. On Thursday, he acquired another 25,000 shares for $1.15 each and sold them at $13.58, the filing said. Shares of Intersil, a maker of semiconductors and integrated circuits, closed Friday at $13.95, down 23 cents. -Robert L. Grant; Dow Jones Newswires; 202-393-7851 robert.grant@dowjones.com (This story was originally published by Dow Jones Newswires) Copyright (c) 2002 Dow Jones&Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved SOURCE Dow Jones 09/20/2002