Long Position on Silver and Gold?

[roberth]

If fewer companies are buying new trucks, it's an indicator that there's less demand to move stuff around the country.

Less demand to move stuff around the country translates to companies/people spending less money, possibly in anticipation of an economic downturn.

Also, if trucking companies are opting to engage in maintenance/refurbishment of current trucks that are nearing what would normally be their end of life, this also could be an indicator that the trucking companies are doing what they can to save money because at some level, it's cheaper to maintain a fleet of aging vehicles than it is to replace them with new trucks.

Thank you.

That's weird though, if the economy is booming why is there less movement of goods around the country?

Has railroads seen an uptick in business? According to this revenues and mileage have fallen - https://www.bts.gov/content/rail-profile (last data is from 2016)

More on railroads - https://www.freightwaves.com/news/ra...volume-growing

Association of American Railroads costs money to see their data.

Are companies are building more local facilities so they don't need long-haul trucking? I don't know, just asking questions.

[CobaltSkink]

Now, that 401(k) money is ours. The government isn't going to steal it.

You know, consumers just aren't smart enough to manage it wisely.
So, the government is going to help consumers manage it properly.
Just like helping that sheep over the fence.

[Irving]

If fewer companies are buying new trucks, it's an indicator that there's less demand to move stuff around the country.

Less demand to move stuff around the country translates to companies/people spending less money, possibly in anticipation of an economic downturn.

Also, if trucking companies are opting to engage in maintenance/refurbishment of current trucks that are nearing what would normally be their end of life, this also could be an indicator that the trucking companies are doing what they can to save money because at some level, it's cheaper to maintain a fleet of aging vehicles than it is to replace them with new trucks.

I'm not sure that's correct. A crash usually happens suddenly and people buy and buy right up until that point, so it doesn't make sense that trucking companies don't have the demand in anticipation of a crash.

[roberth]

Now, that 401(k) money is ours. The government isn't going to steal it.

You know, consumers just aren't smart enough to manage it wisely.
So, the government is going to help consumers manage it properly.
Just like helping that sheep over the fence.

[Skip]

This is unbelievably bad. So offer huge pensions and benefits and spend money like there's no tomorrow, and now the govt gets to bail out those pension programs? this is complete bull. This better get shot down

It's only passed in the House and word is the Senate will kill it.

If for some reason the Senate GOPes, Trump isn't going to let them take $6T from the markets on his watch. Not necessarily because he cares about us, but because it would cause market turmoil that would jeopardize his reelection and legacy.

Teresa Ghilarducci, and a "working group" started shopping this idea around in 2008.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122662401729126813

She called the 401(k) "a failed experiment." A McDermott spokesman called her proposals "intriguing" and "part of the discussion." Mr. Miller hasn't so far endorsed the plan.

The main liberal objection to 401(k)s seems to be that they let average Americans control their own investment decisions for retirement. As Shlomo Benartzi, a professor at UCLA's Anderson business school, told Mr. Miller's committee, "Individuals have a tendency to buy at the peak, and then panic when the markets drop and sell at the bottom." Better to have the government do this instead.

And private pension funds are underfunded. And public service pensions are underfunded. And Social Security is going broke in an era of un-checked deficit spending. But yes, these private accounts are huge problem!


This lady hates private retirement savings with a passion that spans decades. It's irrational. I wonder if a 401K killed her puppy when she was a child?

And Dems love her.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...ings/24842705/

Senate Democrats have used Ghilarducci's proposals as a springboard for their own plans. "Every candidate will talk to a pension geek," she explains. And "that's me." It's been reported that she's among a group of economists advising all-but-announced presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. (Neither Ghilarducci nor Clinton staffers would confirm ? or deny.)

Which would give Ghilarducci, who is 57 with a pixie-like face and a high-energy manner, a broader platform for her controversial ideas than ever before. The daughter of a single welfare mom, Ghilarducci maintains a strong, if often unfashionable, faith in an active government and a strong safety net. How else could she have made it from a dusty California town to tenure at elite universities (first Notre Dame and now the New School, where she directs the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis) to the ear of the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee?

[snip]

She's been saying this for more than 20 years ? in 1993, when the vehicle was in its infancy, she wrote an op-ed headlined "Beware the 401(k)." To her labor-economist eye, the 401(k) wrongly shifts risk from the employer to the employee and offers no guaranteed payout.

[Irving]

It's probably accurate that people are bad at managing their own money, but the only entity that I can even imagine would be worse, would be government.

[earplug]

Looking at the price of copper shows me that the economy is dead. Nobody is bothering to steal copper wire at the current price.

[Irving]

Isn't the economy in pretty good shape right now? Aren't we at low unemployment?

I'm not arguing that a crash, correction, or down turn is not on the horizon. We pretty much have to be in good shape for a crash to be a crash though, right?

[MrPrena]

Subjective.

Retired fixed incomer are getting ~2% annual yield, whereas even McDonald cheeseburger* is rising at higher % rate.
Whoever is going to be next president with lower rate and print money fast will be a BETTER president to consumer lover. (Why save? you can borrow money for nearly FREE and buy myself a Aston Martin!)
Whoever president receive huge pile of money supply from global float+ no room to go any lower interest rate will be the WORST president.

Average joe consumes most of their income. They get into debt to buy cyclical, luxury, and necessities. Even people with 10 years of professional experience now can afford 750k house, 200k car on a loan.
At this economy, who can even actually [easily] buy a $50k vehicle without financing? Who can buy a 220k slum run down house with cash here?
Without a loan, most of us are all poor as hell.

When average age of population turns about 45+ , it will be worse. Look at Japan for an example.
At that time, we will have more incentive to have more kids or ease up immigration criteria. Someone have to make $ and pay taxes for baby boomer's retirement....


I couldn't find mean/avg age, but found mean age
http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/median-age/

[BushMasterBoy]

Silver above 17 and gold above 1500.