On 3/28/2026 at 2:09 PM, riclag said:

Ever since Trump started exposing the Washington Establishment , playing the stock market has been a risk. I got out a long time ago,2019.

I don't suppose his family's blatent insider dealing has dented your confidence in him.

On 3/28/2026 at 11:56 AM, EVENKEEL said:

US stocks plummeted on March 27, 2026, with the Dow Jones dropping nearly 800 points () to enter correction territory, while the Nasdaq sank . The market faces its fifth straight weekly loss due to rising oil prices above /barrel, fueled by intensifying Middle East conflict, sparking inflation fears and prompting investors to sell riskier assets.

The Economic Times +3

If this doesn't change soon the republicans are toast

Yes, a double wammy. The poor mad because of the rising prices of everything, thanks to Trump's stupid, illegal tariffs. The rich mad because of the falling stock market, thanks to Trump's stupid, illegal war. My stock portfolio was doing fine under Biden, has gone downhill since the idiot Trump took over.

7 hours ago, biervoormij said:

I don't really know. I am in mutual funds and ETFs for the most part but have done really well in the market. I admit it is hard to watch how much my net-worth is going down due to the war. I believe if I can hold long enough it will come back even if it takes a number of years.

In times like these one either needs to be out of the stock market (and the bond market) - or else following things closely and being very proactive.

Index-linked funds which allow you to sit back and benefit are fine when times are good. but not what you want when the overall market is going down. And note that they are loaded in favour of the biggest market caps such as NVidia, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, and Amazon, since these account for much of the total market value.

When the overall market is going down, a few sectors may be doing quite well. For a while. But these favoured sectors will tend to change in favour of others. So one needs to be on the ball and ready to jump ship.

Petroleum, Shipping, Precious Metals, Grains might be favoured for a while. But to benefit fully one needs to know something about the individual companies within the Sector. An oil or gas company may do well when prices are through the roof, so long as not reliant on Persian Gulf supplies.

Precious metals could still have a lot going for them. But it is a mine-field if you do not understand what you are buying.

Passive investing is not for difficult times.

How soon the market "comes back" is very uncertain. Hopefully not as long as the Japanese stock market crash of 1980.

We are entering uncharted waters.

A rising dollar and falling gold at the beginning of a global economic crisis is not a unique phenomenon if this video is correct:

https://youtu.be/9jvXbysJbWI

But the rise in the dollar and fall of gold is short-lived.

They say that war does not of itself cause the gold price to rise sharply. Inflation is the cause.

"Inflation" is a deceptive word meaning currency devaluation.

Currency devaluation is caused by excessive debt-creation, also known as "money-printing".

To cut to the heart of the matter, the war in the Persian Gulf is, amongst other effects, creating conditions for widespead shortages of petroleum-derived substances needed for food-production, etc. Spiralling inflation is on the horizon.

Let's be prepared.

It's almost as if one can sense why the GOP are gonna get hammered in the midterms......

Some inflammatory posts and replies have been removed.

On 3/28/2026 at 4:28 AM, Yellowtail said:

More unsupported false claims from an America hating leftist.

The leftists are currently the only real patriots Americas has left. Anyone supporting this administration is no patriot.

Good news for next interest rates round because of inflation.The next ECB meeting ion 30 April traders are expecting increase interest rates 0.25% and in June another 0.25% increase.

We inflate our economy with billions fiat money in social benefits + oil price is above $100 +many bankruptsy of companies + food prices have been skyrocketed ............but in European States inflation is "average" 1.9%. Are you kidding "maestro" Christine Lagarde and clowns President E.U Commission Quenn von der Leyen - State Department Kaja Kalas - President o E.U Parliament Roberta Metsola?

I can hear the melody but I dont understand the lyrics. You must be kidding maestro.....!!!

On 3/29/2026 at 11:14 AM, EVENKEEL said:

Then change the tax code. Why didn't the dems do anything? Because they like the breaks as well.

False.

Under Biden a 15% minimum corporate tax was enacted.

Also, a 1% excise tax on stock buybacks

And while not a change to the tax code, per se, Biden got 80 billion dollars to upgrade the IRS which the Republicans had starved of funds for obvious reasons.

And he accomplished this with very narrow majorities.

Trump undid all of this. Again for obvious reasons.

Obama actually passed more. But that will have to wait until tomorrow.

1 hour ago, Paradise Pete said:

The leftists are currently the only real patriots Americas has left. Anyone supporting this administration is no patriot.

Yeah get out there an scream for the Communist revolution, Patriot

On 3/28/2026 at 10:46 PM, connda said:

Bad News for Trump, bad news for all retirees

Bad News for Trump, bad news for all retirees who are heavily invested in the Stock Market.

There - fixed it.

Ya'll make the assumption that "all retirees" hold their investments in stock. Diversity is your friend. My hedges are keeping my portfolio stable compared to the general market and I'm moving upwards as the war heats up. I find it funny when those guys who brag about themselves being "Rich" compares to all of us lowly "Poor Cheap Charlies." I've always have said, "The winds of fate are fickle." By the time this is over, the "Rich" may be poor and the "Poor" may be rich.

That's life (that's life), that's what all the people say
You're ridin' high in April, shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune
When I'm back on top, back on top in June

I said that's life (that's life), and as funny as it may seem
Some people get their kicks stompin' on a dream
But I don't let it, let it get me down
'cause this fine old world, it keeps spinnin' around

I've been a puppet, a pauper, a pirate, a poet, a pawn and a king
I've been up and down and over and out and I know one thing
Each time I find myself flat on my face
I pick myself up and get back in the race

That's life (that's life), I tell you I can't deny it
I thought of quitting, baby, but my heart just ain't gonna buy it
And if I didn't think it was worth one single try
I'd jump right on a big bird and then I'd fly

I've been a puppet, a pauper, a pirate, a poet, a pawn and a king
I've been up and down and over and out and I know one thing
Each time I find myself layin' flat on my face
I just pick myself up and get back in the race

That's life (that's life), that's life and I can't deny it
Many times I thought of cuttin' out but my heart won't buy it
But if there's nothin' shakin' come this here July
I'm gonna roll myself up in a big ball a-and die
My, my!
-That's Life, Frank Sinatra

If you're a younger American, you likely don't have a traditional pension plan. Many of those have been phased out, replaced with 401k plans. You can certainly choose conservative choices for your 401k, but large numbers of Americans have a mix, which includes stocks.

So, while many Americans may not own individual stocks, they are invested in the stock market with their 401k portfolio. What happens with the stock market does have an impact on these American voters. Also true for the large numbers of Americans who have mutual funds with a stock component.

Even those lucky Americans, like me, with a traditional pension, are also impacted by what happens with the stock market, as most traditional pension plans also hold stocks as part of their investment plans.

23 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Look at the data on the rate of tax per income paid across the wealth distribution curve.

It’s great news for the hyper wealthy, bad news for the poor and those on low incomes.

Post the data and explain it.

You won't, because you can't.

22 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

False

The wealthiest 10% of Americans own 93% of stocks even with market participation at a record high

• The richest Americans own the vast majority of the US stock market, according to Fed data.

• The top 10% of Americans held 93% of all stocks, the highest level ever recorded.

• Meanwhile, the bottom 50% of Americans held just 1% of all stocks in the third quarter of 2023.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market-ownership-wealthiest-americans-one-percent-record-high-economy-2024-1#:~:text=Top%2010%25%20of%20Americans%20Own,the%20Stock%20Market%20%2D%20Markets%20Insider

https://archive.ph/DW0A8

https://archive.ph/DW0A8

Do you deny that 93% constitutes a big majority? If not, how high does the percentage have to go?

93% of household ownership. About half the market owned by pension funds, institutions and foreign investors, but you know that, yes? You just love regurgitating lies that sound so good.

Again, the top 10% pay over 50% of state and federal income taxes and the bottom 40% pay almost no income taxes.

On 3/30/2026 at 8:39 AM, mfd101 said:

Just an aside so that non-Usofan retirees don't feel neglected: Not all 'pensions' are dependent on the stock markets' performance.

If you have a government pension (as I do from Oz, as my base income) then it goes up regularly with inflation (every 6 months in my case).

The question then becomes how many working people there are to support the government pension of a retiree.

Like you, I am getting a pension. My son may not be so fortunate, as AI hollows out the middle class.

17 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

The question then becomes how many working people there are to support the government pension of a retiree.

Like you, I am getting a pension. My son may not be so fortunate, as AI hollows out the middle class.

In Australia's case at any rate the answer is: immigration.

3 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

In Australia's case at any rate the answer is: immigration.

IMO the answer is taxing the multinationals such as Chevron and Woodside for a fair share of the resources they extract in Australia and send overseas.

Another answer is to remove the economic distortions of negative gearing and the CGT discount.

The Age Pension budget is $60 billion per year. A 35% tax on Australian gas exports would bring in $25 billion. $10 billion from getting rid of NG and CGT.

Immigration is a double-edged sword. While it boosts economic activity, it also increases demand for services.

3 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO the answer is taxing the multinationals such as Chevron and Woodside for a fair share of the resources they extract in Australia and send overseas.

Another answer is to remove the economic distortions of negative gearing and the CGT discount.

The Age Pension budget is $60 billion per year. A 35% tax on Australian gas exports would bring in $25 billion. $10 billion from getting rid of NG and CGT.

Immigration is a double-edged sword. While it boosts economic activity, it also increases demand for services.

How much can you tax oil and gas and still sell it in an open market?

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Post the data and explain it.

You won't, because you can't.

93% of household ownership. About half the market owned by pension funds, institutions and foreign investors, but you know that, yes? You just love regurgitating lies that sound so good.

Again, the top 10% pay over 50% of state and federal income taxes and the bottom 40% pay almost no income taxes.

I have posted links to reports from credible sources citing the Federal Reserve as the source. So far, you keep on making assertions but offer no evidence. It is to laugh.

As I have pointed out as the top 10% engross an increasingly high percentage of total earnings so it is to be expected that their share would grow. The federal income tax system was designed to be progressive. What isn't addressed by you is how they manage to avoid paying taxes on what is effectively income thanks to various ploys.

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Post the data and explain it.

You won't, because you can't.

93% of household ownership. About half the market owned by pension funds, institutions and foreign investors, but you know that, yes? You just love regurgitating lies that sound so good.

Because I have no intention of devoting hours to this question I used Gemini AI (on Deep Think setting) to see just how including various kinds of investment vehicles would change the figures. Here's the question I asked:

A federal reserve report says that the top decile by wealth of Americans owns about 90 percent of stocks in the stock market. Does that include pension funds and mutual fund and index funds?

Here's the summary gemini produced to the long answer it gave me:

Summary Table

Asset Type	Included in "93% Equity" Figure?	Included in "87-90% Total Stock" Figure?
Individual Stocks	Yes	Yes
Mutual Funds	Yes	Yes
Index Funds / ETFs	Yes	Yes
401(k)s and IRAs	No	Yes
Defined Benefit Pensions	No	No (usually exclud from "stock" counts)

I did ask what percentage of stocks are owned by Defined Benefit Pensions. Here's the question and the summary answer:

What percentage of stocks is owned by defined benefit pension

"Defined benefit pensions own a meaningful but minority share of the market (~6%). The vast majority of the U.S. stock market is owned by taxable brokerage accounts and mutual funds, where the concentration of wealth is highest."

So that would bring the 87-90% figure down a bit. But the fact remains that a big majority of stocks is owned by the top 10%.

12 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

False.

Under Biden a 15% minimum corporate tax was enacted.

Also, a 1% excise tax on stock buybacks

And while not a change to the tax code, per se, Biden got 80 billion dollars to upgrade the IRS which the Republicans had starved of funds for obvious reasons.

And he accomplished this with very narrow majorities.

Trump undid all of this. Again for obvious reasons.

Obama actually passed more. But that will have to wait until tomorrow.

That was when they were going to hire 1000's more IRS agents. You really think those agents aren't going after the middle class as well.

15 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Because I have no intention of devoting hours to this question I used Gemini AI (on Deep Think setting) to see just how including various kinds of investment vehicles would change the figures. Here's the question I asked:

A federal reserve report says that the top decile by wealth of Americans owns about 90 percent of stocks in the stock market. Does that include pension funds and mutual fund and index funds?

Here's the summary gemini produced to the long answer it gave me:

Summary Table

Asset Type	Included in "93% Equity" Figure?	Included in "87-90% Total Stock" Figure?
Individual Stocks	Yes	Yes
Mutual Funds	Yes	Yes
Index Funds / ETFs	Yes	Yes
401(k)s and IRAs	No	Yes
Defined Benefit Pensions	No	No (usually exclud from "stock" counts)

I did ask what percentage of stocks are owned by Defined Benefit Pensions. Here's the question and the summary answer:

What percentage of stocks is owned by defined benefit pension

"Defined benefit pensions own a meaningful but minority share of the market (~6%). The vast majority of the U.S. stock market is owned by taxable brokerage accounts and mutual funds, where the concentration of wealth is highest."

So that would bring the 87-90% figure down a bit. But the fact remains that a big majority of stocks is owned by the top 10%.

Well, you do have to ask honest questions:

what percentage of the us stock market is owned by foreigners - Google Search

what percentage of the US stock market is owned by pension funds and institutions - Google Search

1 minute ago, EVENKEEL said:

That was when they were going to hire 1000's more IRS agents. You really think those agents aren't going after the middle class as well.

Probably there would be some affect on the middle class since audits across the board had drastically declined because of starvation of funding to the IRS.
Middle-Class Transparency: For the vast majority of middle-class filers, income comes from W-2s (wages) and 1099s (interest/dividends). These are reported to the IRS by employers and banks. Because the computer already has the data, it can automatically flag a discrepancy. In these cases, the "audit" is often just an automated letter (a CP2000 notice).

1. The Wealthy "Blind Spot": Higher-income earners often receive income from partnerships, S-corporations, and private equity. These are "pass-through" entities where there is often no third-party reporting to match against.

Just now, Yellowtail said:

Well, you do have to ask honest questions:

what percentage of the us stock market is owned by foreigners - Google Search

what percentage of the US stock market is owned by pension funds and institutions - Google Search

My question took that into account. Maybe you didn't read it?

2 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

My question took that into account. Maybe you didn't read it?

And the response supported my claim, not yours.

Keep regurgitation the lie brother, it's all you have.

Again, the top 10% pay over 50% of state and federal income taxes and the bottom 40% pay almost no income taxes.

Just now, Yellowtail said:

And the response supported my claim, not yours.

Keep regurgitation the lie brother, it's all you have.

Again, the top 10% pay over 50% of state and federal income taxes and the bottom 40% pay almost no income taxes.

And as I repeatedly point out, the top 10% earn an increasingly high percentage of total income and the US income tax system has always been progressive.

And the fact is that the effective rate paid by the wealthiest one percent has declined dramatically from the 1950's. In the 1950's the effective tax rate for the top 1% was 40-45%. Now its 25-29%. And for the top 0.01% the case is even worse. Their effective tax rates was 50-60%. Now it's 23-25%. Were the 1950's a bad time for the American economy?

As for foreign ownership, who cares? The issue raised was how does the stock market decline affect Americans? What relevance does foreign ownership of the shares in the stock market have for that issue?

24 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

And as I repeatedly point out, the top 10% earn an increasingly high percentage of total income and the US income tax system has always been progressive.

No, the US tax system has not always been progressive.

The top 10% pay over half the income taxes, while the bottom ~40% pay nothing.

24 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

And the fact is that the effective rate paid by the wealthiest one percent has declined dramatically from the 1950's. In the 1950's the effective tax rate for the top 1% was 40-45%. Now its 25-29%. And for the top 0.01% the case is even worse. Their effective tax rates was 50-60%. Now it's 23-25%. Were the 1950's a bad time for the American economy?

Yet tax revenues are higher.

24 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

As for foreign ownership, who cares? The issue raised was how does the stock market decline affect Americans? What relevance does foreign ownership of the shares in the stock market have for that issue?

I only care because you keep claiming that the top 10% own over 90% of the stock market, even though you clearly know it is a lie, meant to stir up animosity and further divide the country.

As a leftist, you hate the rich, as a capitalist, I don't. I want everyone to be rich.

31 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

No, the US tax system has not always been progressive.

The top 10% pay over half the income taxes, while the bottom ~40% pay nothing.

Yet tax revenues are higher.

I only care because you keep claiming that the top 10% own over 90% of the stock market, even though you clearly know it is a lie, meant to stir up animosity and further divide the country.

As a leftist, you hate the rich, as a capitalist, I don't. I want everyone to be rich.

31 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

As a leftist, you hate the rich, as a capitalist, I don't. I want everyone to be rich.

Making it personal. A typical ploy of someone who has nothing.

31 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

No, the US tax system has not always been progressive.

The modern income tax regime we have today that was established by the 16th Amendment has always been progressive.

31 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I only care because you keep claiming that the top 10% own over 90% of the stock market, even though you clearly know it is a lie, meant to stir up animosity and further divide the country.

More casting of aspersions on motives. Just an empty unproveable mind-reading act.

What don't you understand about the fact that this discussion is about the effect that the decline in stocks was going to have on Americans. Pointing out that it will have greater effect on the financial situation of the wealthy is an obvious fact. If you have data to refute that, please share it.

6 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Making it personal. A typical ploy of someone who has nothing.

Claiming I am making it personal is a ploy of someone who has less than nothing.

You claim tax rates were higher in the '50, and when I say revenues are higher, you just dodge the question and claim I am making -it personal

6 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

The modern income tax regime we have today that was established by the 16th Amendment has always been progressive.

Which shows that your claim was false.

6 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

More casting of aspersions on motives. Just an empty unproveable mind-reading act.

What don't you understand about the fact that this discussion is about the effect that the decline in stocks was going to have on Americans. Pointing out that it will have greater effect on the financial situation of the wealthy is an obvious fact. If you have data to refute that, please share it.

Now you're making it personal, oh no,

I never claimed that a declining stock market hurt the people invested in it more than it hurts the people not invested in it. Just like I would never argue that tax cuts benefit taxpayers more than the benefit tax recipients, I was only pointing out the false claims you were making.

A leftist claimed: "The share of pre-tax national income going to the top 10% has risen steadily from about 34% in 1980 to nearly 47% today."

But like all leftists, he has to cherry-pick how far back he goes.

On 3/28/2026 at 9:16 PM, EVENKEEL said:

I just crossed the Ca border into Arizona and gas dropped $2.00 Gal. The last gas station before leaving Ca was charging $9.99/gal

Are you even in the US or CA, or just trolling?

Looked up the prices in both countries, and they are even near what you quote

2 hours ago, CallumWK said:

Are you even in the US or CA, or just trolling?

Looked up the prices in both countries, and they are even near what you quote

The US has states. Paid $4.19 in AZ at Loves before I crossed into NV. Will report back what I pay here before heading back to CA,