I have had a drink or two too many to reasonably explain the correlation between stock prices and candidate success, but let me try, anyway, as I get another beverage. And, of course, this is all just my opinion.
Here goes. The Treasury bill is considered one of the safest investments. Money is incredibly safe in a treasury bill, and there will be some return on that investment. Investors will put money into other investments with higher risk, expecting higher return on that money. So, if an investor is going to get x percent return on a treasury bill, that investor would only invest in another stock if they were to get x+y percent return on a stock investment, where y is the additional return they would expect before investing in that stock.
So, let's say the 1-year treasury bill has a 1 percent return, and the investor wants a 3% cushion to invest elsewhere. That means that the investor is looking for a 4 percent return on investment (ROI) annually. So, if the stock has an expected ROI of 4%, it is a break-even risk-wise with a treasury bill, and a $100 stock with a $4 ROI is an equivalent risk to the theoretical investor.
Next, let's assume that the economy improves, so that treasury bills are paying 2%. That same stock with the same risk would now have to have an ROI of 5% for the investor to buy that stock. If the stock is expected to have the same dollar return, it is now worth only $80. The return on investment would be the same, but when the risk is compared to the risk of a treasury bill, the value is less. So, the improving economy results in a lower stock price due to the preceding dismal economy.
As treasury bill rates are tied to the economy, eventually stock prices will fall in line and returns will increase when the economy has completely finished recovering, and treasury bill rates reflect a healthy economy.
The other possibility would be that after the election, investors don't see any opportunities worth the risk, investments go to overseas stocks, and all of my few yards of fertile land become dedicated to growing food.
I could have this wrong, and I hope any economists that see errors corrects me
"Hacking and dumping" emails is not the same as changing vote counts or forcing people to vote a certain way. The exposure of the content of emails was likely embarrassing to the Democratic Party and HRC, but it isn't election tampering.
This was considered very illegal back in 1972 when the DNC was burglarized and files stolen from their offices in the Watergate hotel. How does doing the same thing, only by computer, somehow make it legal?.
I don't remember saying it was legal. I said that it wasn't election tampering.
Yet they wouldn't hack election machines, counting machines or vote counters emails?
If the voting machines or vote-counting computers are connected to the internet, there is an incredibly big security issue that needs to be addressed. Who cares about emails regarding vote counts, provided the votes are tallied correctly, and reported as required by law, which would involve a method removed from the internet.
That hacking DNC email, and using the intelligence in the email to get their puppet into power *ISN"T* election tampering???
No, it is not. No votes have been changed post vote, nor purchased or influenced with threat to my knowledge.
If Russia was trying to put Clinton in power, you'd be screaming for the CIA to protect the election from Putin's tampering,
You don't know me. If Trump's emails were leaked, I'd still feel that it wasn't election tampering, unless there was an email showing that Russia had found vunerable voting machines connected to the internet that they intended to use to swing the election.
I thought my post was in terms simple enough for folks to get the point - there is a difference between leaking embarrassing information and tampering with elections. Maybe you obviously are so enamored with your candidate that you can't see that, you are on the HRC payroll, or you need some sleep.
"By hacking and dumping emails, Russia is trying 'to denigrate the American electoral system, to make it look chaotic, make it look manipulable, make it look subject to intrusion, cheating and vulnerable so you can't trust it...to make us look no better than the Russian electoral system,'" said one senior White House official.
"Hacking and dumping" emails is not the same as changing vote counts or forcing people to vote a certain way. The exposure of the content of emails was likely embarrassing to the Democratic Party and HRC, but it isn't election tampering.
The gambling sites still have her winning. As the stock market hasn't changed appreciably, I believe businesses believe that little change will occur, which also points to another President Clinton. I expect the Clinton sequel to be as successful as The Matrix sequel, and I wasn't all that excited about the original.
So, if we get WAAAY deep into conspiracy theory, perhaps Clinton faked the email security ineptitude to give her plausible denial, and her IT folks have control of many Russian computers (or are spoofing IP addresses) to perform a DDoS that makes it look like the Russians support Trump.
I don't know that even an electric monk would believe that Clinton's staff faked email security ineptitude, though.
Saying that folks aren't making apps that benefit a healthy, functioning, society is a useless statement without specifying what apps would achieve or work toward that goal. Additionally, smart phone apps can't really solve the world's real problems. Violence due to religious extremism isn't going to be negated by a phone app. An app that shows food shortages and food surpluses isn't going to fight world hunger unless someone will pay for the cheap surplus food and transportation.
In common cases where an app would help, apps are available. Some things are too big for a cell phone app, and generally software is available for those problems. If there is a problem where software is a solution, I wish I knew what it was, as do others who would solve the problem quicker than I, and likely profit from making the world a better place.
Almost anyone else in government who mishandled classified data similarly would be a guest of a federal correctional facility for many years.
That would be a more convincing argument if someone ever had been in jail for something similar.
The government isn't likely to let the public know of incidents of classified data mishandling or their resolutution. While in the military and while working as a contractor, I was informed that mishandling of classified information can lead to long terms of incarceration.
In short, she had no real first-hand knowledge of the server setup other than it was in her basement and handled her e-mail. The rest is typical VIP know nothing blather.
The scary part is that she didn't seem to understand the differences between handling classified data and unclassified data. Almost anyone else in government who mishandled classified data similarly would be a guest of a federal correctional facility for many years.
If you can't do a burn out with a Ford Mustang, you should probably go buy yourself a Prius or a Miata instead.
I'm thinking that it is pretty difficult to do a burn out in a Prius, but it is pretty easy in a Miata. It varies, depending upon the year, but for older ones, they should be near 140hp in an about 2300lb car with rear wheel drive and a 4.++:1 drive ratio. At these numbers burn-outs are easy to achieve with little problem, even when unwanted. As they say on automotive boards, "ask me how I know" or "don't ask me how I know," depending upon outcome.
Thus, your advice to get a Miata to do burn-outs if one can't do them in a Mustang is probably good advice. I don't think it holds up well for the Prius, though.
If that is the case, then NASA really needs to work on hiring and/or training more Program Managers.
Sorry, I don't think feeding the giant bureaucracy that NASA has become will get the results we want. Here's my manned space program:
1. Take the money NASA gets for manned space and give it to Burt Rutan.
2. Tell Burt to get people into orbit and to the Moon.
3. Stand back.
Burt's company is Scaled Composites. I don't think I would trust a flight to the Moon and back, and more importantly, reentry, to a composite craft. On the other hand, if Burt thinks he can do it, he could pitch it to NASA - Dryden is just a short drive from his shop.
If that is the case, then NASA really needs to work on hiring and/or training more Program Managers.
Sorry, I don't think feeding the giant bureaucracy that NASA has become will get the results we want. Here's my manned space program:
1. Take the money NASA gets for manned space and give it to Burt Rutan.
2. Tell Burt to get people into orbit and to the Moon.
3. Stand back.
Burt's company is Scaled Composites. I don't think I would trust a flight to the Moon and back, and more importantly, reentry, to a composite craft. On the other hand, if Burt thinks he can do it, he could pitch it to NASA - Dryden is just a short drive from his shop.
I think it was Lee Marvin during the Michelle Triola case, but I can't find it. If I recall correctly, it was something somewhat along the lines of "There is sex you pay for and sex that is free, and the sex that you pay for is a lot cheaper."
Slashdot Mirror
I've wondered whether we should start putting carbon back into the ground, and whether this is feasible.
If we don't recycle plastics that aren't biodegradable, and they end up in a landfill, isn't that putting carbon back into the ground?
I have had a drink or two too many to reasonably explain the correlation between stock prices and candidate success, but let me try, anyway, as I get another beverage. And, of course, this is all just my opinion.
Here goes. The Treasury bill is considered one of the safest investments. Money is incredibly safe in a treasury bill, and there will be some return on that investment. Investors will put money into other investments with higher risk, expecting higher return on that money. So, if an investor is going to get x percent return on a treasury bill, that investor would only invest in another stock if they were to get x+y percent return on a stock investment, where y is the additional return they would expect before investing in that stock.
So, let's say the 1-year treasury bill has a 1 percent return, and the investor wants a 3% cushion to invest elsewhere. That means that the investor is looking for a 4 percent return on investment (ROI) annually. So, if the stock has an expected ROI of 4%, it is a break-even risk-wise with a treasury bill, and a $100 stock with a $4 ROI is an equivalent risk to the theoretical investor.
Next, let's assume that the economy improves, so that treasury bills are paying 2%. That same stock with the same risk would now have to have an ROI of 5% for the investor to buy that stock. If the stock is expected to have the same dollar return, it is now worth only $80. The return on investment would be the same, but when the risk is compared to the risk of a treasury bill, the value is less. So, the improving economy results in a lower stock price due to the preceding dismal economy.
As treasury bill rates are tied to the economy, eventually stock prices will fall in line and returns will increase when the economy has completely finished recovering, and treasury bill rates reflect a healthy economy.
The other possibility would be that after the election, investors don't see any opportunities worth the risk, investments go to overseas stocks, and all of my few yards of fertile land become dedicated to growing food.
I could have this wrong, and I hope any economists that see errors corrects me
"Hacking and dumping" emails is not the same as changing vote counts or forcing people to vote a certain way. The exposure of the content of emails was likely embarrassing to the Democratic Party and HRC, but it isn't election tampering.
This was considered very illegal back in 1972 when the DNC was burglarized and files stolen from their offices in the Watergate hotel. How does doing the same thing, only by computer, somehow make it legal?.
I don't remember saying it was legal. I said that it wasn't election tampering.
Yet they wouldn't hack election machines, counting machines or vote counters emails?
If the voting machines or vote-counting computers are connected to the internet, there is an incredibly big security issue that needs to be addressed. Who cares about emails regarding vote counts, provided the votes are tallied correctly, and reported as required by law, which would involve a method removed from the internet.
That hacking DNC email, and using the intelligence in the email to get their puppet into power *ISN"T* election tampering???
No, it is not. No votes have been changed post vote, nor purchased or influenced with threat to my knowledge.
If Russia was trying to put Clinton in power, you'd be screaming for the CIA to protect the election from Putin's tampering,
You don't know me. If Trump's emails were leaked, I'd still feel that it wasn't election tampering, unless there was an email showing that Russia had found vunerable voting machines connected to the internet that they intended to use to swing the election.
I thought my post was in terms simple enough for folks to get the point - there is a difference between leaking embarrassing information and tampering with elections. Maybe you obviously are so enamored with your candidate that you can't see that, you are on the HRC payroll, or you need some sleep.
Douglas Adams predicted this election, and probably most others, in his HHGTG series with this: It is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. It is number 23 on the list. I don't know that number 42 on that particular list applies to this election, though.
"By hacking and dumping emails, Russia is trying 'to denigrate the American electoral system, to make it look chaotic, make it look manipulable, make it look subject to intrusion, cheating and vulnerable so you can't trust it...to make us look no better than the Russian electoral system,'" said one senior White House official.
"Hacking and dumping" emails is not the same as changing vote counts or forcing people to vote a certain way. The exposure of the content of emails was likely embarrassing to the Democratic Party and HRC, but it isn't election tampering.
The gambling sites still have her winning. As the stock market hasn't changed appreciably, I believe businesses believe that little change will occur, which also points to another President Clinton. I expect the Clinton sequel to be as successful as The Matrix sequel, and I wasn't all that excited about the original.
Or, I could be wrong.
That would draw the police to a lot of private gun ranges, where owners who have sufficient property practice on their own.
Also, who would pay for the cellular connectivity? The gun owners? Yes, the anti-gun crowd would like that as it increases the cost of gun ownership.
I'm sure it's been done in other works of fiction as well.
I remember seeing the idea in a crime/detective drama or two in the late 70s or early 80s, using R/C airplanes.
Perfectly safe, as in the "Zaphod Plays It Safe" sense?
a modern, hipster-compliant makeover
Please, let's not even hint that "hipster-compliant" is a valid or desirable standard.
So, if we get WAAAY deep into conspiracy theory, perhaps Clinton faked the email security ineptitude to give her plausible denial, and her IT folks have control of many Russian computers (or are spoofing IP addresses) to perform a DDoS that makes it look like the Russians support Trump.
I don't know that even an electric monk would believe that Clinton's staff faked email security ineptitude, though.
The problem would be that developers don't know the answer to that question, either.
In your opinion, what software does not exist, but would benefit society/the world if it did?
Saying that folks aren't making apps that benefit a healthy, functioning, society is a useless statement without specifying what apps would achieve or work toward that goal. Additionally, smart phone apps can't really solve the world's real problems. Violence due to religious extremism isn't going to be negated by a phone app. An app that shows food shortages and food surpluses isn't going to fight world hunger unless someone will pay for the cheap surplus food and transportation.
In common cases where an app would help, apps are available. Some things are too big for a cell phone app, and generally software is available for those problems. If there is a problem where software is a solution, I wish I knew what it was, as do others who would solve the problem quicker than I, and likely profit from making the world a better place.
I could be wrong, feel free to disagree.
Almost anyone else in government who mishandled classified data similarly would be a guest of a federal correctional facility for many years.
That would be a more convincing argument if someone ever had been in jail for something similar.
The government isn't likely to let the public know of incidents of classified data mishandling or their resolutution. While in the military and while working as a contractor, I was informed that mishandling of classified information can lead to long terms of incarceration.
In short, she had no real first-hand knowledge of the server setup other than it was in her basement and handled her e-mail. The rest is typical VIP know nothing blather.
The scary part is that she didn't seem to understand the differences between handling classified data and unclassified data. Almost anyone else in government who mishandled classified data similarly would be a guest of a federal correctional facility for many years.
Consequently, it is likely that the "about to go on surface streets alarm" option will be very popular.
If you can't do a burn out with a Ford Mustang, you should probably go buy yourself a Prius or a Miata instead.
I'm thinking that it is pretty difficult to do a burn out in a Prius, but it is pretty easy in a Miata. It varies, depending upon the year, but for older ones, they should be near 140hp in an about 2300lb car with rear wheel drive and a 4.++:1 drive ratio. At these numbers burn-outs are easy to achieve with little problem, even when unwanted. As they say on automotive boards, "ask me how I know" or "don't ask me how I know," depending upon outcome.
Thus, your advice to get a Miata to do burn-outs if one can't do them in a Mustang is probably good advice. I don't think it holds up well for the Prius, though.
I showed it to my boss and the receptionist, and they both thought it was pretty cool. I have a pretty cool boss, though.
Darn, screwed up the blockquotes.
Corrected:
Burt's company is Scaled Composites . I don't think I would trust a flight to the Moon and back, and more importantly, reentry, to a composite craft. On the other hand, if Burt thinks he can do it, he could pitch it to NASA - Dryden is just a short drive from his shop.
Sorry, I don't think feeding the giant bureaucracy that NASA has become will get the results we want. Here's my manned space program:
1. Take the money NASA gets for manned space and give it to Burt Rutan.
2. Tell Burt to get people into orbit and to the Moon.
3. Stand back.
Burt's company is Scaled Composites . I don't think I would trust a flight to the Moon and back, and more importantly, reentry, to a composite craft. On the other hand, if Burt thinks he can do it, he could pitch it to NASA - Dryden is just a short drive from his shop.
I agree with the grandparent - the devil incarnate isn't as evil as the BSA.
I think it was Lee Marvin during the Michelle Triola case, but I can't find it. If I recall correctly, it was something somewhat along the lines of "There is sex you pay for and sex that is free, and the sex that you pay for is a lot cheaper."