Dow industrials fall below 7,000; lowest since '97

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

6,726.02

Trade Time: 4:02PM ET

Change: Down 37.27 (0.55%)

The market is drifting, looking for a direction. That is a good sign.

[Jasman0717 9]

It will be awhile, if ever, before I move any money back into the stock market

[spookyturtle 9,466]

It will be awhile, if ever, before I move any money back into the stock market

When it gets to zero, buy like crazy.

[Jasman0717 9]

It will be awhile, if ever, before I move any money back into the stock market

When it gets to zero, buy like crazy.

I will be sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for that moment. Some of the blue chip companies are pretty close to zero as it is.

[dalegg 143]

6,726.02

Trade Time: 4:02PM ET

Change: Down 37.27 (0.55%)

The market is drifting, looking for a direction. That is a good sign.

6594.44 -281.40 (-4.09%) Mar 5 4:02pm ET

I think it found it.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

6,726.02

Trade Time: 4:02PM ET

Change: Down 37.27 (0.55%)

The market is drifting, looking for a direction. That is a good sign.

6594.44 -281.40 (-4.09%) Mar 5 4:02pm ET

I think it found it.

Ouch!

I heard a commentator say this morning, that the fastest way for the market to find a bottom, was for the government to pull out all the support, and let everybody that is ready to fail, fail quickly, and then the money would come pouring back in. Interesting idea. All the profitable parts of GM and AIG, for example, would be snapped up and run at a profit, instead of being siphoned off to fund failing pension funds and unprofitable ventures, respectively.

[HAL 9000 96]

But what about unknown ancillary repercussions? Job losses, etc?

I think if the idea were feasible it would have been tried... or perhaps the Obama admin is waiting for a 'lower' moment were this would present itself as a 'fair option'??

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

But what about unknown ancillary repercussions? Job losses, etc?

I think if the idea were feasible it would have been tried... or perhaps the Obama admin is waiting for a 'lower' moment were this would present itself as a 'fair option'??

I thought you were a scientist. I am an engineer. Sometimes you just let things fail, so you can find why it failed, and redesign to avoid that failure a second time.

[HAL 9000 96]

But what about unknown ancillary repercussions? Job losses, etc?

I think if the idea were feasible it would have been tried... or perhaps the Obama admin is waiting for a 'lower' moment were this would present itself as a 'fair option'??

I thought you were a scientist. I am an engineer. Sometimes you just let things fail, so you can find why it failed, and redesign to avoid that failure a second time.

And when I design an experiment, I design it so that I have positive, negative, and experimental treatments that can give measurable independent variables.

Letting something fail isn't really something appropriate when talking about people's livelihoods.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

But what about unknown ancillary repercussions? Job losses, etc?

I think if the idea were feasible it would have been tried... or perhaps the Obama admin is waiting for a 'lower' moment were this would present itself as a 'fair option'??

I thought you were a scientist. I am an engineer. Sometimes you just let things fail, so you can find why it failed, and redesign to avoid that failure a second time.

Not if your a socialist. Obama said the stock market was like a tracking poll He's got Bush to blame. Im seeing that he's dumber than the jerkwads that voted for him.

[I'm Gone 60]

I heard a commentator say this morning, that the fastest way for the market to find a bottom, was for the government to pull out all the support, and let everybody that is ready to fail, fail quickly, and then the money would come pouring back in. Interesting idea. All the profitable parts of GM and AIG, for example, would be snapped up and run at a profit, instead of being siphoned off to fund failing pension funds and unprofitable ventures, respectively.

This is just what Jim Rogers has been say since this stuff started. You let stuff fail and people will pick up the stuff worth saving and things will carry on. The stuff the government is doing is just going drag things out and things are still going to go under and the government is knee deep in debt.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

But what about unknown ancillary repercussions? Job losses, etc?

I think if the idea were feasible it would have been tried... or perhaps the Obama admin is waiting for a 'lower' moment were this would present itself as a 'fair option'??

I thought you were a scientist. I am an engineer. Sometimes you just let things fail, so you can find why it failed, and redesign to avoid that failure a second time.

And when I design an experiment, I design it so that I have positive, negative, and experimental treatments that can give measurable independent variables.

Letting something fail isn't really something appropriate when talking about people's livelihoods.

Is a slow death better than a quick death? Perhaps if the market does quickly what is inevitable, then we can pick up the pieces quickly, and find a better job for those displaced workers sooner. The way it is being tried now, easing our way to the bottom, soon there won't any resources left to help anyone.

Edited March 6, 2009 by Mister_Bill

[dalegg 143]

6626.94 +32.50 (0.49%) Mar 6 4:02pm ET

Edited March 6, 2009 by dalegg