Trump Economy Naysayers Lesson

Reading Instructions: 

• Put Down the iPhones
• Know a 10 Sec. News Sound Byte is not all the Facts
• Read actual Historical Facts on Record
• Learn how to discover the Real Facts for yourself 

Fully understand what President Trump is accomplishing by comparing today's real facts to historial facts from 1843 to 2018 - You be the Judge... Enjoy this article, a real US History lesson!

To Every Thing There Is a Season,                                               But Your Portfolio Shouldn’t Turn                                                   

By: Jason Zweig, Wall Street Journal

Sept. 21, 2018

Every year, as the end of summer approaches, monarch butterflies head for Mexico, birds migrate south for the winter, and financial pundits predict that the stock market is about to crash.

Is the longstanding popular belief that September and October are the worst months for stocks valid?     Yes and no—mostly no.

Yes, some of the worst days in Wall Street’s history have hit during September and October - But that’s no reason to panic.

• On Sept. 24, 1869, the original Black Friday, the price of gold collapsed roughly 20% and took the stock market down with it.

• On Sept. 18, 1873, the investment bank Jay Cooke & Co. suspended payments, setting off a series of bank failures that triggered one of the worst depressions in U.S. history.

•  On Oct. 16, 1907, a busted speculation in copper led to a run on some of New York’s biggest banks, sparking a panic that ended only when J.P. Morgan personally intervened—ultimately leading to the creation of the Federal Reserve.

• On Oct. 28, 1929, “Black Monday,” the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 12.8% in the crash that set the stage for the Great Depression.

•  On Oct. 19, 1987, the Dow fell 22.6%, the worst daily loss in its history.

• On Sept. 15, 2008, Lehman Brothers failed, ushering in the darkest days of the global financial crisis.

Is this destiny, or just random variation?

According to William Schwert, a finance professor at the University of Rochester who studies the history of asset prices, September does have the lowest average return of any month. From 1834 (the earliest date for broad market data) through 2018, September is the only month whose average return is negative -- at minus 0.4%.

Why Do You Think They Call It 'Fall'? The U.S. stock market has, on average, earned its lowest monthly returns in September. That might be a predictable result of less sunlight and colder weather–or it might just be a random fluctuation. Average returns on U.S. stocks between 1946–2018 by month. Source: G. William Schwert, University of Rochester

But the differences across months have been small, so you shouldn’t read much into September’s relatively poor historical average return, cautions Prof. Schwert.

Over the long run, December has the best average monthly return, at nearly 1.4%, with January close behind at 1.2%. The variations “don’t have much economic significance,” says Prof. Schwert.

As for October, its returns are positive on average, at 0.4% since 1834. Since 2002, October is the third-best month, with an average 1.6% return -- even though the S&P 500 lost nearly a fifth of its value in October 2008.

So investors’ fear of September and October is based less on evidence and more on what psychologists call “availability”—the human tendency to judge how likely an event is by how easily we can recall vivid examples of it. The horrific losses of October 2008 are hard to forget. The milder gains of 7% in October 2015 and 11% in October 2011 are hard to remember.

Investors might be more prone to worry this time of year, though. Researchers have found in numerous independent studies that as summer fades into fall, people’s behavior does turn with the leaves. As the hours of daylight dwindle, brain chemistry can change, reshaping how much risk some people are willing to take.

In his 1903 book, “The ABC of Stock Speculation,” the financial chronicler Samuel Armstrong Nelson wrote: “Speculators are not disposed to trade as freely and confidently in wet and stormy weather as they are during the dry days when the sun is shining, and mankind cheerful and optimistic.” 

Investors trading options are more likely to expect losses in fall than in spring or winter. In the U.S., Canada and Australia, mutual-fund shareholders are all net sellers in their respective fall months, even though Australia’s autumn runs from March through May and it has a different tax year. 

Average returns on U.S. Treasuries appear to be higher in fall than in spring, suggesting that investors seek safety in the darker months. Stock analysts’ earnings forecasts are less optimistic in fall and winter than in spring and summer. 

Across more than 150 years of data, bidders at fine-art auctions paid more, on average, for paintings sold on longer, sunnier days than they did on shorter, darker days. Even players in the National Football League tend to be more aggressive in games played on hot days than on cool days. 

Of course, not all investing decisions are driven by psychology. Nowadays, people might tend to sell stocks in the fall in order to fund tuition payments coming due in September or to pay off credit-card debt they racked up on summer vacations. They might invest more in the first quarter of the year after pocketing year-end bonuses and tax refunds.

Still, “if bad news comes out in the fall, many investors may react more extremely than they might a few months later or earlier, when daylight is more plentiful,” says Lisa Kramer, a finance professor at the University of Toronto who has run several studies on how seasonal mood changes may affect financial behavior.

Although the stock market doesn’t always crash in the fall, you might well be more likely this time of year to treat smaller declines as harbingers of doom. Try, instead, to remember that the darkest months of the year often have the brightest returns.

Write to Jason Zweig at intelligentinvestor@wsj.com 

Rushing to Judgement on the Napolitano Charges

This is the perfect storm of the uber-left to feed the American electorate a poison pill to kill one future conservative Supreme Court candidate from being nominated. In a chess game where the current move now on the board has been to capture the Judge Gorsuch nomination, the next one is for the seat of Judge Ginsberg. Liberals are in a real panic, and for good reason - Napolitano is Conservative!

Fox News has fired Judge Andrew Napolitano (pictured) for exposing UK spy agencies working with Obama, according to his report.

News Credit: Judge Napolitano

One of the most popular faces on news-based TV, Judge Andrew Napolitano, is being let go by Fox News. This is happening “after disavowing his on-air claim that British intelligence officials had helped former President Barack Obama spy on Donald Trump,” according to Yahoo News. A person with knowledge of the situation who chose not to be named has said that the Judge will not be with the network any longer nor will he be in any Fox segments.

It all started last week on “Fox and Friends.” He said he had three different sources showing that Obama traveled “outside the chain of command” to spy and watch President Donald Trump. The United Kingdom called the accusation “nonsense” following White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer making a reference to the report during a briefing. This all goes back to Trump uncovering that he was spied on by Barack Obama before (and perhaps after) he was elected to office.

Judge Napolitano was at the White House advising about Judge Gorsuch and was rumored to be on a short list for the Supreme Court.

In what seems to be a rather common theme in James Comey’s left leaning F.B.I, it was declared by the agency that there is no proof that Trump was spied upon or wiretapped by Obama. This is the same director that when Wikileaks exposed all of the proof about Clinton, and didn’t need much research to move ahead with her prosecution, claimed that more time was needed. Now for something that DOES need to be researched in depth, it seems that Comey can reach a conclusion in no time at all.

The President has flirted with the wise idea of appointing Napolitano to the Supreme Court before. However, he has said regarding the matter, “all we did was quote a certain very talented legal mind who was the one responsible for saying that on television. I didn’t make an opinion on it. You shouldn’t be talking to me. You should be talking to Fox.” This does not mean that “America’s Judge” is forbidden from being appointed to the highest court in the land. Clearly, he is free from other contractual obligations now. The problem is that he may be seen as tarnished, and might face huge opposition to his nomination if it were to happen. Now that he has been fired from Fox, those that oppose him on the left will call this matter in to question as a way to say that he is not honest.

“America’s Judge” has been on the side of the true meaning of the Constitution for a very long time.

Shepard Smith at Fox News all but fell over himself trying to run from the comments. He said, “Fox News knows of no evidence of any kind that the now-president of the United States was surveilled at any time, in any way.” This is the kind of statement by both Fox and Smith that could really come back to haunt them should the Judge’s words prove true. Napolitano is not a man who has a reputation for being wrong nor dishonest in any way. For this reason, if he was right, many viewers will see Fox just as they do CNN, which is fake news. They also will not easily forgive the besmirching of Napolitano or Trump, if vindicated.

This is more than likely to happen too, considering that he had served on the New Jersey Superior Court from 1987 to 1995, and has more than a bit of experience gathered from the post to know facts when he hears them. It is not very probable that Napolitano made up the three sources, either. One source could be any crackpot, two sources would be common, but three? For him to pick three as his number, he must have really had the sources. Unfortunately for “America’s Judge,” unless the three prove brave enough to stand up for him, he could be in real trouble trying to prove this. It can not be imagined that he would ask them to out themselves.

While Judge Gorsuch will likely fill the Scalia vacancy, Napolitano was on a short list to replace Ginsburg or any of the elder Supreme Court members in the future.

He has been with Fox as a senior judicial analyst since 1998, so it is odd that the network would not have a bit more faith and trust placed in him by now. There is simply no feasible way that he would openly sacrifice his career and quite possibly his future on the American Supreme Court just to flirt with a lie. His motive could be to secure a place of security in Trump’s future plans for the Supreme Court, but he has already been consulted for Judge Gorsuch. His name is ALREADY on the short list for any openings. As such, he has no motive whatsoever to have stretched the truth in this report.

It is far more likely that the Judge has stood by his morals and his ethics. He was most likely fired for refusing to expose who told him. He could do that, but then he would have to look into the mirror when done. Considering that so many people are murdered for bravely telling the truth, Napolitano could, in theory, be signing someone’s death sentence with such a disclosure. Beyond that, if they worked for a UK spying agency as said, these three heroes could lose their jobs, pensions and perhaps even be sent to prison for treason. If England uses the firing squad, that too could be an option since we are talking about spying agencies at the very top.

President Trump is irate over hacking and wiretapping that he says is coming from the left.

Rather than send these sources to a life of exile as Snowden’s Russian neighbor, Napolitano can be expected to simply take the blow no matter how damaging. If he never gets to wear the black robe as he sits on the Supreme Court because of his report, he will accept it. If his future shot at that is lost then it was lost for the truth (at least the truth as he believed it to be when he said it). That is something a just judge can live with.

Such a man is not driven by power or greed, so he would be (and still is) a remarkable choice for such a post. That will depend on two things, however. First, it depends on how much time passes before his name comes up when a justice retires or dies, and secondly, if Trump would still appoint him. If so, the president will see many political arrows from the Obama left flying for his head if, or when, he does.

We do know that in all of these years of loyal judicial and analytical service, Judge Andrew Napolitano has been nothing but consistently correct. That means that either he suddenly decided to soil his reputation by lying about three sources in a spy story that otherwise would have passed the news cycle, or he was telling the truth. Where there is smoke, one often finds a fire. Hopefully, that burning smell is the aroma of the Judge happily torching his contract and looking onward.

News source: https://conservativedailypost.com/breaking-fox-news-fires-judge-napolitano-after-he-proved-obama-treason-live-on-the-air/ 

The True November 2016 Surprise is Here Now!

Don't believe what the mainstream press is printing and putting out as facts, they hide the unknown knowns!

 

...Say hello to enormous Obamacare premium hikes! To be announced on November 1st,  seven days BEFORE the November 8th Presidential election, Obama is feverishly trying to delay the announcement until after the elections! ...Now, where are all of those "rich" people Hillary says that need to pay their "fair share" for the people?  ..Guess not anymore after the election, but we people all still owe by IRS law to be paying for it anyway, right now! ...Say, huh?

Quote of Whatever

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones."

—Donald Rumsfeld

Ready to Lose Your Internet? ...Really? ...Yeah!

For God's Sake! - For Your Own Sake! - Tell Congress to keep the Ban on this Obama Bill!

 HAPPENS BEFORE OBAMA LEAVES OFFICE - THE OCTOBER SURPRISE!

The Obama administration has again announced the end to the U.S. stewardship open Internet; Russia and China will take advantage of the American ICANN surrender too.  Authoritarian regimes want to grab control recognizing the 'different modes and methods in Internet management'.--code for a major subversion of the Internet and restriction to freedom of speech. 

Meanwhile, Obama is stealthly trying to pass his 'Executive Order' on the down-low and bypass congressional oversight once again; it will be far from the 'modest change in policy' that Obama claimed in March, 2014.  Is Obama aware of the major damages?  Of course not, he is again clueless!--How many more times must the public take that silly clueless excuse and just admit he knows what he is doing?        

Sands in an Hourglass."Like sands in the hourglass, so are 'The Days of Our Lives'."--to borrow the line from a popular daytime soap opera introduction. Since 1965, it is one of the longest-running scripted television programs in the world. It is even older than the Internet--my how time flies!

FACTOID: On October 24, 1995 the Federal Networking Council, FNC, unanimously passed a resolution defining the term 'Internet'. This definition was developed in consultation with members of the internet and intellectual property rights communities.

RESOLUTION: The Federal Networking Council (FNC) agrees that the following language reflects our definition of the term 'Internet'. It refers to the global information system that -- (i) is logically linked together by a globally unique address space based on the Internet Protocol (IP) or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons; (ii) is able to support communications using the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) suite or its subsequent extensions/follow-ons, and/or other IP-compatible protocols; and (iii) provides, uses or makes accessible, either publicly or privately, high level services layered on the communications and related infrastructure described herein.

"The Internet has changed much in the three decades since it came into existence. It was conceived in the era of time-sharing, but has survived into the era of personal computers, client-server and peer-to-peer computing, and the network computer. It was designed before LANs existed, but has accommodated that new network technology, as well as the more recent ATM and frame switched services. It was envisioned as supporting a range of functions from file sharing and remote login to resource sharing and collaboration which had spawned electronic mail and more recently the World Wide Web, Internet telephone and Internet television.

"The most pressing question for the future of the Internet is not how the technology will change, but how the process of change and evolution itself will be managed. The architecture of the Internet has always been driven by a core group of designers, but the form of that group has changed as the number of interested parties has grown. With the success of the Internet has come a proliferation of stakeholders - stakeholders now with an economic as well as an intellectual investment in the network. [Those major multi-national stakeholders have taken their suppressive political underpinnings to threaten the global Internet freedom of speech that have been advanced since the beginning by the United States ICANN organization.] 

"We now see, in the debates over control of the domain name space and the form of the next generation IP addresses, a struggle to find the next social structure that will guide the Internet in the future. The form of that structure will be harder to find, given the large number of concerned stakeholders. At the same time, the industry struggles to find the economic rationale for the large investment needed for the future growth, for example to upgrade residential access to a more suitable technology. If the Internet stumbles, it will not be because we lack for technology, vision, or motivation. It will be because we cannot set a direction and march collectively into the future."

Like those 'sands in the hourglass' our Internet freedoms are quickly slipping right between our fingers to be lost forever. With our U.S. Federal Communications Commission, the United Nations, the European Union, the various sovereign nations, partisan coalitions and special interest groups they all have strict regulatory agendas to curb current Internet freedoms. Can they all get along?--Read about the U.N. Security Council...

Look at the ridiculous farse exhibited by the United Nations Security Council, its members are so stacked up against any United States participation. Under the Charter, the Security Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. It has 15 Members, and each Member has one vote. Under the Charter, all Member States are obligated to comply with Council decisions. The Permanent Five members, P5, are China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.  Each of the permanent members has power to veto, enabling them to prevent the adoption of any "substantive" draft Council resolution, regardless of the level of international support for the draft. 

All substantive United States' resolutions are null and void by design. --And so after reviewing over 70 years of poor performance of the U.N., do we now give up U.S. control of our Internet and all set a direction to march collectively into the global future?? 

WATCH YOUR INTERNET BILL GO UP!

OR

EMAIL SENATORS & CONGRESSMEN NOW!

A Real Spin in an Airplane - A Tall Tale of a Story

THE GULFSTREAM G550

LEGENDARY QUALITY, FLEXIBLE PERFORMANCE

The G550 has the efficiency to fly 6,750 nautical miles/12,501 kilometers nonstop, but also is capable of operating out of short-field, high-altitude airports. Payload is a plus, too. The G550 can transport up to 18 passengers and still has the range to fly nonstop more than 12 hours.

The Whole Story

Famous Quotes:  …You already know the end of the stories!

• ·         Obama said, "You can keep your plan & your Dr." ... 
• ·         Bill said, "I did not have sex with that woman"…
• ·         Hillary said, "It's a video that started the attack that killed the Ambassador" …
• ·         Loretta said, “We talked for half an hour about grandkids and golf”…

A Field-base operator (FBO) is a commercial business granted the right by an airport to operate on the airport and provide aeronautical services such as fueling and parking. Unidentified personnel who worked at the FBO in Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport called a TV anchor at the local ABC Station who verified the meeting. A second independent source at the airport said Loretta and Bill were alone together on board AG Loretta Lynch’s jet for half an hour.

Question: Why would AG Loretta Lynch go to Phoenix first which is 600 miles South of Aspen and then go North to Aspen from Phoenix? Anyone check on the actual flight plans of both planes?

Well, let’s see... AG Loretta Lynch was headed to Aspen, Co from Washington DC for a speaking engagement, a distance of around 1500 miles in almost a direct line from East to West. The Government plane she was flying in was more than likely a G550 with a range of 6750 miles.

She did not need to stop in Phoenix for fuel because if she would have flown direct, fuel would not be necessary. In fact, if you do the math, the G550 has the range to make that direct round trip route without refueling.

Question: Why was Bill Clinton’s plane waiting for AG Loretta Lynch’s plane to land in Phoenix when she was going to Aspen?

Also remember now, AG Loretta Lynch does not have any grandkids and doesn’t play golf. ...Hmmn!

The meeting was either planned to put the Clinton Fix on or to decide on which golf course Bill played on in Phoenix.