HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gary@intrepid.com (Gary Funck)
Subject: Re: C-SPAN & 1929 !
Organization: Intrepid Technology, Inc.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:16:35 GMT

In article <9211071908.AA10763@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu ("Broward "L.A." Horne") writes:
>
>      On Friday, Nov. 6, C-SPAN broadcast the "Joint Economic Committee"
>  hearings on the "October Unemployment Figures".
>
>      First of all, I would really, REALLY suggest that you see this one
>  for yourself.  Seeing is believing!  The following is my interpretation.
>
>      Highlights:
>
>  Part I -  The Unemployment Figures
>
>      The numbers are bogus.  The guys who made them know it, and now
>      Congress knows it.  The unemployment figures for 1992 will probably
>      be revised to show virtually no job growth.  Thrill to the faces of
>      economists who are baffled about why their interpretations were
>      incorrect.  Be amazed by the inquisitive, incredulous chairman
>      as he asks the right questions.  Be chilled by the guilty and
>      concerned faces.
>

There was an interesting show on CNBC this AM.  Two economists were
banging away at these trumped up unemployment and productivity
figures.  They were recommending that Clinton "reset" the figures
to their proper levels, setting the record straight, blaming it on
the previous administration.

One point that came out in the discussion is that lower interest
rates help the "net-debtors", which are corporations, but hurt
the "net-creditors": the working taxpayers.  The reasoning goes that
if the taxpayers' savings/CD's and other investments were paying
a higher rates there would be more spendable income, and
coincidentally more tax revenue.  Lowering rates has the
effect of giving new life to debt-ridden, marginal corporations,
and helped to keep the banking system afloat -- possibly long enough
to sustain a recovery.  But, as usual, it will be the taxpayer
that picks up the tab for this action.

The economists also debunked the idea that the Fed "leads" by
lowering interest rates; they noted that the Fed always "responds"
to econmomic forces. In fact, they said, the lowering of rates
was just a necessary outcome of an economic recession.
As many other economists have stated, they were unhappy with the
"too little, too late" approach taken by the Fed, feeling that
it has killed off a couple of attempts at economic recovery.

(One the economics was Sedlinger (sp?) who is old enough to have
been around for the Great Depression and is considered an
expert on the subject.)

-- 
| Gary Funck  		    gary@intrepid.com  [uunet!uupsi!intrepid!gary]
| Intrepid Technology Inc., Mountain View CA (415) 964-8135
--
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: pardo@src.dec.com (Phil Pardo)
Subject: Inheritance forthcoming...advice sought
Keywords: Loop Holes
Organization: DEC Systems Research Center
Distribution: misc.invest
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 20:37:38 GMT



I am expecting an inheritance soon that is in the neighborhood 
of 10 to 15K.  Does anyone out there know of any loop holes that 
might exist to get around the taxes that will have to be paid on
it or if there is a manner in which to invest it before I physically 
touch the money?

Any and all advice on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Heres to wishful thinking!

				--Phil Pardo
From: gunner1+@pitt.edu (Jayant Rajgopal)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Janus Group
Date: 10 Nov 92 15:45:26 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: gunner1@unixd1.cis.pitt.edu

I just got some stuff from Janus saying that they're introducing three
new funds - a growth fund (investing primarily in medium sized companies),
a growth and income fund, and a bond fund of some sort.  I'm wondering if
this is good news or bad news.  I've got money in several of the existing
Janus funds, and I've found their service as well as their record very good
(now if they'd only move out of Colorado, things would be perfect :-)).
However, my concern is that with the rapid growth in the number of funds
in the family they may not be able to provide the kind of performance that
they have in the past.  I tend to think that families with relatively fewer
funds perform better overall because the fund management can spend more
time on investment.  For example Vanguard and Dreyfus with their large array
of funds  have some star performers but lots of dogs which drag down the  
overall record, but smaller groups like Janus and 20 Century seem to have
a better overall performance record.  Maybe I'm wrong...

Then again, I guess more funds in a group implies more options in the
kinds of investments you want, and more flexibility in moving stuff around
(if you're the kind who takes the trouble to do that frequently).  

Comments ??

--jr--
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: georgec@eng.umd.edu (George B. Clark)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Investing Quickly
Date: 12 Nov 92 17:22:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: eng.1992Nov12.172224.2749
Organization: University of Maryland

It can easily take over two weeks to establish a new account with a
mutual fund familiy. First, you request an application form. A week
later, you get it in the mail. Then it takes several more days before
the account is actually opened, and shares are bought.

Is there a quicker way? A Schwab One account, perhaps?

Recently I decided to invest in INVESCO-Financial Health Sciences
mutual fund. At a 52-week low of $33 per share, down from $47 per
share, it was a bargain. But now the price has shot up to $38, and
I'm still waiting on the U.S. Mail, and it may soon be priced too
high to be a good buy.

In the future, perhaps I should keep account application forms for
all major mutual fund families. Then when any one of them presents a
buying opportunity, I can act quickly.

Has anyone else found a better solution?

no e-mail, please.
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Newsgroups: misc.invest


> In article <Bx9LG7.983@fc.sde.hp.com> fritz@fc.sde.hp.com (Gary Fritz) writes:
> >By the way, there was an article in today's Denver paper that said
> >a doctor's organization had already cancelled their Denver convention
> >because of Amendment 2.  One of the ringleaders of "Colorado for Family
> >Values", the people responsible for Amendment 2, said this was "the
> >kind of intimidation the homosexuals like to use."  Ye gods.
 
Cristophe writes:

> Ah, yes, Medical Organizations, that well-known tool of the radical
> homosexual movement.  I wish there was a treatment for radical reality
> disconnection.

Without making comment on the ammendment itself, soley for the purposes of
clarifying:  The physicians organization that cancelled their convention in
Denver was an organization for gay and lesbian physicians.  Is it supposed to
be a shock or big news that they cancelled?!

Everybody has an agenda.  Everybody seeks to implement their agenda, using
whatever means they can.  In my opinion, modern political life in America
does not concern itself with fairness or reasonableness or the greater good.
It is all about power and about "me" vs "you".  I think that is very
unfortunate for what remains of representative democracy.

Stuart
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: watanabe@milton.cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe)
Subject: jenny craig
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:41:08 GMT

About a month ago I saw some postings about Jenny Craig.
Did anyone save these, or have anything to say about
this stock? If so, please reply by e-mail.

Thank you.

-Larry Watanabe watanabe@cs.uiuc.edu
From: hlb@loral.CTS.COM (Howard Brandell)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: 401(k) Rollover Advice
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:34:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: loral.1992Nov11.203401.26775
Organization: Loral Instrumentation

In article <1992Nov6.210858.15947@astroatc.uucp> niemi@astroatc.uucp (Bob Niemi) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.162109.22057@cbnews.cb.att.com> lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib) writes:
>
>The ONLY WAY TO AVOID withholding is to effect a direct transfer into a
>qualified account (say, an IRA or your next employer's 401K).

It seems to me that those companies that have major fund families such as
Vanguard, or Fidelity hadnling the administration of their 401K plans
ought to be able to simply move the money into an
individual IRA account upon termination of employment.  Thus, one would
not even receive a check merely a new statment indicating the new individual
IRA.
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: gary@intrepid.com (Gary Funck)
Subject: Re: LEAPS anyone?
Organization: Intrepid Technology, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:41:41 GMT

In article <101011@bu.edu> schin@acs.bu.edu (neil schier) writes:
>
>Hello
>I am interested in purchasing LEAPS (long range call options) on Boeing.
>
>Has anyone out there ever bought LEAPS?
>

Sure, Neil.  Is this a survery, or a request for information?

LEAP's are just like any other option, except they are set up to
expire 1, 2, 3 years out.  They have "weird" root symbols that
change from time-to-time, and they don't have a great deal of uniformity
in the strike prices offered.   There are also LEAPS on various major
market indices.

Call the CBOE (1-800-OPTIONS), ask for the current list of LEAPS and
any accompanying litearature.

You can use the usual pricing models to price LEAPS, but keep in mind
that interest rates and dividends play a greater role in the pricing of
LEAPS because of the time held til expiration.

You buy LEAPS just like any other option.  You don't need to know the
option symbol. Just call your broker, tell 'em you want price quotes
on Boeing LEAPS.  They'll take care of the rest :-).

There are a couple of interesting plays with LEAPS:
   1. A proxy for the stock, that you can write covered calls against.
   2. An interest rate hedge.  The price of a LEAP goes up as a function
      of the prevailing interest rate.  On a 2 year LEAP costing $7 today
      with interest rates at 3%, the same option would be $9 if rates
      moved to 6%.  Note: once a LEAP is within, say, 9 months of expiring
      the effect of the interest rate is much less because the decreasing
      time value starts kicking in.
-- 
| Gary Funck  		    gary@intrepid.com  [uunet!uupsi!intrepid!gary]
| Intrepid Technology Inc., Mountain View CA (415) 964-8135
--
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: rainer@spot.Colorado.EDU (Rainer Malzbender)
Subject: Re: A RANDOM WALK DOWN WALL STREET...good book!
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:22:41 GMT


In theory, Malkiel is probably right. However, I've heard from some
people actively engaged in futures trading for large companies that
technical analysis is actually useful because it has become a
self-fulfilling prophesy of sorts - enough people believe in it and
make market decisions based on it that the resulting price behavior
looks like it follows technical analysis "rules".


-- 
Rainer M. Malzbender      I met this guy, and he looked like he might have been
Fyzzicks                  a hat check clerk at an ice rink. Which in fact he
CU Boulder                turned out to be. And I said "Oh boy, right again".
From: chedley@carthago.intel.com (CHEDLEY_AOURIRI)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Concept of selling short.
Date: 9 Nov 92 20:50:03 GMT
Reply-To: chedley@carthago.intel.com (CHEDLEY_AOURIRI)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Intel-Corp,_Hillsboro,_Oregon

In article <1992Nov9.042342.21042@cbnews.cb.att.com>, ask@cbnews.cb.att.com (Arthur S. Kamlet) writes:
...[about short selling]...
|> 
|> At some point you will try to cut your losses in face of a rising
|> stock.  In fact, if the stock goes up a spiral (loop) can result:
|> 
|>        - Stock rises
|>        - Broker may issue call for you to add collateral or
|>          close out your short position
|>        - Some short holders buy the stock back 
|>        - This drives the stock up more
|>        - Broker may issue call for you to add collateral or
|>          close out your short position
|>        - More short holders buy the stock back
|>        - This  drives the stock up more
|>        - Broker may issue call for you to add collateral or
|>          close out your short position
|> 
|>        - you are now in a loop
|> 
This loop is called a "short squeeze", and does not happen very often.

It usually occurs when a bunch of investors illegally huddle and 
decide to simultaneously buy the stock to drive its price up and
pound heavy losses on the short sellers.

However this should not discourage you from shorting a stock 
or any other financial security, if you have reasons to believe 
that it is overpriced and that its price will come down substantially.

-- 
..CHEDLEY..
..!{uunet|tektronix|ogicse}!littlei!chedley    chedley@carthago.intel.com     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Disclaim: The above statements and opinions are strictly mine,
and do not represent any company or organization's position.
......................................................................
From: chedley@carthago.intel.com (CHEDLEY_AOURIRI)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: Junk Bonds
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:25:20 GMT
Reply-To: chedley@carthago.intel.com (CHEDLEY_AOURIRI)
Organization: Intel-Corp,_Hillsboro,_Oregon

In article <BxGquM.F4L@unccsun.uncc.edu>, yhari@uncc.edu (Yog Hari) writes:

|> Are junk bonds highly interest rate sensitive, say as sensitive as the long bond?  
No.
Interest rate sensitivity of a bond depends on its duration (years to maturity).
Longer maturity bonds are more sensitive than shorter ones.
And for a given maturity, zero coupon bonds are more sensitive than interest
paying bonds. So, zero-coupon bonds are more suitable for interest rate 
speculation purposes.

Generally, at equilibrium, the interest rate sensitivity of a bond does not 
depend on its credit quality rating.

-- 
..CHEDLEY..
..!{uunet|tektronix|ogicse}!littlei!chedley    chedley@carthago.intel.com     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Disclaim: The above statements and opinions are strictly mine,
and do not represent any company or organization's position.
......................................................................
From: proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: General Motors
Date: 6 Nov 92 23:43:42 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <lfb8vtINN9dm@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) writes:
>Investing for a turnaround is often lucrative.  The trouble is,
>there are more hoped-for than actual turnarounds.  Right now I'm
>wondering about General Motors.  Several questions:
>
>Ross Perot claims GM could have been fixed back when he tried to
>fix it, when "there was still time".  I remember this but don't
>remember the details.  Exactly what did Perot propose?  Would it
>have worked?  If it would have worked then, why not now?
>
>This morning I went to look at Saturns.  Definitely a better car
>than Tercel, Corolla, Civic, Sentra, or Escort, and also a better
>value.  Trouble is, this seems to be GM's only competitive product
>design outside of trucks and the Corvette.  This would imply that
>a turnaround is at least one product cycle away.

Note that even GM's Saturn division is loosing money.  
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: pearson_steven@tandem.com (Steven R. Pearson)
Subject: Re: Offset 401(k) Rollover Withholding
Organization: Tandem Computers Inc.,  Cupertino, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:34:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.040743.26963@news.eng.convex.com>, Dave Dodson <dodson@convex.COM> writes:
> 
> In article <BxJ25L.zH@taligent.com> cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus) writes:
> >In article <1992Nov11.001442.10923@sequent.com> bills@sequent.com (Bill Sears) writes:
> >>How about this.  If you know you are going to be getting shafted by the
> >>new rule, change your W-4 to claim MANY allowances (like 40 or something).
> >
> >That's a no-no.  When you sign your W-4, you are signing that you
> >believe (and have a rational basis for) the number of allowances you
> >are claiming.
> 
> But you _do_ have a rational basis for the number you are claiming, and
> the IRS cannot force you to be overwithheld, even if they would like to.

But....WHY BOTHER?  If you are going to roll the money over anyway,
why not take advantage of the custodian-to-custodian transfer?  I have done
this with IRAs in the past, and it's really no big deal.  I believe the new law
says your employer must cooperate and provide this as an option.  I think it
is actually more convenient.  Sure, some folks have strange ideas about taking
their rollover and putting it in the bank for 59-1/2 days and grabbing an
interest "windfall."  Well, those fools are only fooling themselves.  They are
stealing from their retirement, and besides, the interest is taxable.

-steve p.  (opinions mine, no warranty, standard disclaimers)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: ds0007@medtronic.COM (Dale Skiba)
Subject: Re: Not in MISC.INVEST please (was: Boycott Colorado)
Organization: Medtronic, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:54:07 GMT

Steven R. Pearson (pearson_steven@tandem.com) wrote:
: Folks, please take this and it's follow-ups to TALK.POLITICS.MISC,
: SOC.MOTSS, etc.  It does not belong here in MISC.INVEST.  It is
: patently a political issue.  A general discussion regarding socially
: responsible investing (SRI), yes even regarding the criteria, would be
: welcomed, but not an emotional debate only tangentially related to
: investing.  Thank you very much.  -steve p.

I'm not all that certain that this is tangentially related to investing.
Investing does not always follow market fundamentals.  Often seemingly
unrelated political topics can greatly change the value of investments.
Follow-ups will inform readers whether this boycott of Colorado Mutual
funds is successful.  A sucessful boycott will generate substantial
discounts on them.  According to market fundamentals, it would be a 
good time to buy them, for when the boycott runs out of steam, or the
Colorado goverment changes its mind, the funds should return to their
true value.

Ethics also plays a part in investment decisions.  This Colorado 
boycott decision may cause people with a sense of fair play to sell
or BUY MORE funds from Colorado.  (Some may feel it is very unfair
to punish very sucessfull mutual fund managers for something a state
goverment has done.  Who's to blame for this situation?  Certainly
not the fund managers!)  And,  of course, others who agree with the
Colorado goverment may "buy Colorado" just to spite the boycotters.

This does give information that is usefull.  Now if my Investco mutual
fund price changes, I know of a possible reason why.  Otherwise I would
have no idea.  Also, I now can consider whether/when it is wise to sell
or buy more shares.

--
Dale Skiba
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: floydb@rpi.edu
Subject: re: "When Issued Rates" vs "After-Market Rates"
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:59:48 GMT


Sorry for the typos in my last message!

(lastline)
From: 6500amd@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Amitav Das)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: by-laws for an investment club
Keywords: investor's club
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:40:19 GMT
Distribution: misc


We are about to set up an investment club. I'd deeply appreciate if you
fellow netters share your experience if you have done so in the past.
The most useful material would be "The by laws" that you have used in your
club specially regarding setting NAV or units, entering/leaving members,
capital investment/distribution methods, whether you have userd full service
or discount brokers, etc. Please e-mail to das%kane@ece.ucsb.edu

Thanks in advance.

Amitav Das.
Dept of ECE. UC-Santa Barbara.
(das%kane@ece.ucsb.edu)

PS. Is there any public domain software for managing portfolio? If so how
can I obtain them? What are the popular software packages that you can buy
(for IBM PC)?


Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: sawyer@twg.com (Bruce B. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: 401(k) Rollover Advice
Keywords: rollover, 401(k), retirement
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:57:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.150512.5826@lgc.com> gene@lgc.com (Gene Lege') writes:
>
>It is my understanding that this change to the withholding law becomes
>effective 1/1/93  ie. There's still time (barely) to roll it the old
>way.
>
>One minor point.  It should still be possible to roll to an IRA.  It just
>has to be custodian-to-custodian.
>
>But it really is an insane change.  I have heard that this change was an
>"over-sight" to a general change in the withholding rules, and will,
>almost certainly, be "corrected."  I'ld like to believe this, but something
>tells me this is niave :-)

Not true.  It was a very intentional change--part of the deal Bush made with
congress in signing into a law a bill which would extend jobless benefits
beyond the then-current six month limit.  This change was designed to raise
some of the funds needed to keep the extension "revenue neutral".  Even though
most people who take direct control will do a rollover within 60 days, so that
they then get to claim the 20% withheld as a tax credit the next April 15, 
the Treasury still gets to pocket the interest that 20% earned between the
time it was withheld and the following April 15.  

With this kind of logic going, does anybody really think they have a chance
of getting the IRS to pay interest on your "escrow" account of taxes withheld
up until the date of tax filing?  Let me show you this bridge I have for sale,
then.
Newsgroups: misc.invest
From: Dave Dodson <dodson@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: Offset 401(k) Rollover Withholding
Originator: dodson@bach.convex.com
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:07:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: dodson@convex.COM (Dave Dodson)
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <BxJ25L.zH@taligent.com> cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.001442.10923@sequent.com> bills@sequent.com (Bill Sears) writes:
>>How about this.  If you know you are going to be getting shafted by the
>>new rule, change your W-4 to claim MANY allowances (like 40 or something).
>
>That's a no-no.  When you sign your W-4, you are signing that you
>believe (and have a rational basis for) the number of allowances you
>are claiming.

But you _do_ have a rational basis for the number you are claiming, and
the IRS cannot force you to be overwithheld, even if they would like to.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave Dodson		                             dodson@convex.COM
Convex Computer Corporation      Richardson, Texas      (214) 497-4234
From: Tihan.Seale@launchpad.unc.edu (Tihan Seale)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Financial markets quoting services?
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:31:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: samba.1992Nov5.163133.22411
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service


Does anyone know of a service that quotes stock, options, or commodity
prices that I can access via modem or the internet? I know about
Compu$erve and the others, but I was hoping for something free or
significantly cheaper since I hope to access the info daily so that I can
paste it into a spreadsheet for analysis. It seems like there should be
-something- out there withh all the other information availabe through the
internet. If you know of anything, please email me. 

TIHAN.SEALE@BBS.OIT.UNC.EDU

Thanks. 



--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: misc.invest,soc.culture.indian