Navigation
SEARCH BOX - USE KEY WORDS, NAMES, OR PHRASES.

866-391-6593

Call For Quote

or Click Link!

  •   Build Your Brand
  •       with KLAS!
CODAmeds®

CODAmeds® Dispensers

Manage pills & supplements

 

 

Entries in Obama Policies (121)

Monday
Sep242018

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 

Monday
Aug292016

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!

 

Thursday
Jul282016

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.

 

Wednesday
Mar232016

A Simple 666 Solution for Borders & Terrorism

I have the immediate answer to completely reset the process of all the undocumented aliens in the immigration of people around the world!

Assignment of an exact unalterable, individual  DNA I.D. match unlike our U.S. citizens' social security number, a lifetime government I.D. number, which can be altered, forged or changed. See the DNA World map showing how tribes historically moved over thousands of years to today.

It involves computerizing the total immigration process with the DNA of everyone. There are no duplicates or forged I.D. records because the records cannot be forged or changed. That permanent number is the international passport number and I.D. or the Mark of 666 as some call it.  Get over 666, we gave up our individual rights when we always use the Social Security number for every important transaction we conduct daily.

Currently this service is available by Ancestry.com  and their ads say, "Uncover your ethnic mix, discover distant relatives, and find new details about your unique family history with a simple DNA test with a cotton swab, a Q-tip to painlessly gather a drop of saliva from the mouth."

That initial cost under a government mandate would be trivial to the cost savings in processing hundreds of thousands of people who would be tracked with or without valid paperwork with DNA I.D. records.  Their whole ethnic background tracing their country of origin would be really valuable in tracing these mass migrations, transmittable diseases or medical records. Government welfare programs could cut down on records duplication, administration costs and processing errors too.

At this point in history with so much at stake with out of control fraud and waste with everyone wanting to get everything for free it's about time to face reality. We must start tracking these unmarked masses of humanities that are roving the earth and drowning countries in unbearable debts and social hardships. It will also assist in tracking terrorist members too.

When is enough finally enough? A mandatory law to enforce DNA I.D. records will be the most efficient method to fairly distribute resources and services to all people trully in need of help. Otherwise, no entry or no benefits. It would also protect everyone from more terrorist groups too.

What do you think?

Friday
Sep182015

Get to the Back of the Bus or Be Thrown Under it!

Do you ever get that tired rundown feeling all the time?--You know, it's actually from always being thrown down under the bus and backed over repeatedly.

Aren't you just getting weary of endlessly hearing about why we are accused of being an unjust, dishonest, conniving American people, blamed for every little glitch in our society or in the world? Obama believes the demographics have changed in America to support his narrative saying, "That's not who we are!" But, either we're being too bigoted or too gluttonous, but also condemned for our extreme values of Constitutional laws protecting individual rights  by limiting the balance of power in Washington politics.

Without those pesky individual rights, the totalitarian government's theology takes controls to supersede beyond imagination a voracious appetite to categorize everyone within its profiles according to Federally mandated standards. So no one's above the law, only below the purview of government legislation to be told what to do. That's bureaucratic bigotry targeting individuals. 

I'll let a great American patriot speak and whom I met, shook his hand and spoke to on a few occasions after church services in Bel Air, CA in the mid-1960s before Ronald Reagan ran for Governor of California in 1967. He served two terms from 1967 to 1975 and declined a third term to run for President from 1981 to 1989 instead.

President Ronald Reagan's uplifting, positive views and outlook are different than Barack. Obama's downward stilted, left-wing socialist ideals view our society within communal groups responsible for every individual's travesty in order to create a political divide, guilty as charged.