Friedman had said that the Federal Reserve caused the great depression
and could have prevented it. This seems somewhat chocking, but I have
seen a video of Friedman saying that, and although I may not agree
with all of his economic ideas, I think there may be something to that
assertion of his and others.

The guy at Fidelity Investments discouraged me from moving my IRA
into FDIC CD's.

I am somewhat conflicted on this and am afraid that my gut feeling of
moving alot of my assets into CD's may be the thing to do, but the
recommendation not to leaves me a bit uncertain of what I should do.

Truth is, I don't think anyone has a clue as to how this problem economy will resolve itself.

 I have been somewhat nervous about the economy.

 The guy at Fidelity Investments discouraged me from moving my IRA
into FDIC CD's. He recommended a managed portfolio type account that
he says has become popular, maybe it was PAS or something.

I think things are going to get worse before they get better
so I have moved most of my savings out of the market.
I intend to get back after I stop seeing so much negativity
in the media, even if that means missing out on some gains.

I'm sure you know this, but the frequency and mood of the media tends to
be a contrarian indicator.  Buffett said something to the effect of, "Be
fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful."

Along those lines, Suze Orman recently decided that straight indexing in
an S&P 500 index fund is no longer correct for investors, but that they
should turn to active management through ETFs (not that I give much
credence to Orman).  An editor's note I read said the same thing about
Burton Malkiel (although I cannot locate a source that quotes him).
Does this mean that we should all be piling into S&P 500 index funds?

On Jul 24, 7:44 pm, anoop <ghanw...@gmail.com> wrote:


Well, I got fearful back in 2004 and didn't buy a house.http://tinyurl.com/62sosz
I decided to live with the risk of being "priced out" rather than
being chained
to a mortgage I could barely afford at the time.

Congrats on your good fortune inre your housing decision.

Along those lines, Suze Orman recently decided that straight indexing in
an S&P 500 index fund is no longer correct for investors, but that they
should turn to active management through ETFs (not that I give much
credence to Orman).  An editor's note I read said the same thing about
Burton Malkiel (although I cannot locate a source that quotes him).
Does this mean that we should all be piling into S&P 500 index funds?

Well, I got fearful back in 2004 and didn't buy a house.http://tinyurl.com/62sosz
I decided to live with the risk of being "priced out" rather than
being chained
to a mortgage I could barely afford at the time.  I continue to be
fearful now because of all the numbers I'm seeing on the financial
blogs.  The financial system doesn't look healthy and the govt
seems to be sending out ambulances on a daily basis.

Along those lines, Suze Orman recently decided that straight
indexing in an S&P 500 index fund is no longer correct for
investors, but that they should turn to active management through
ETFs (not that I give much credence to Orman). An editor's note I
read said the same thing about Burton Malkiel (although I cannot

From the '96 sixth edition:

I think things are going to get worse before they get better

so I have moved most of my savings out of the market.
I intend to get back after I stop seeing so much negativity
in the media, even if that means missing out on some gains.

A person may want to be overweight in some sectors such as energy or
alternative energy and ETFs give an investor to make the right
balance.

--
   Ron

I'm not as quick to find that non-purchase so fortunate.
Zillow shows prices (US, I know every city is dramatically different) up
about 30% over that past 5 years, still. Right now, we are back to
mid-2005 price levels.
What's curious though, is that 2004 saw a wild swing in interest rates
for mortgages, ranging 5.5-6.5%. I got a 15 yr fixed, 5.24% at the low
of 03, and right now, the 30yr fixed appears to be running 6-3/4.

(FWIW, my town didn't see the same bubble. In 5 yrs, we peaked at about
a 15% gain, vs US about 41%. We are still up 4.1%, vs US 30%)

Joe

On Jul 24, 7:12 pm, Will Trice <wtr...@notmonitored.com> wrote:

Along those lines, Suze Orman recently decided that straight indexing in
an S&P 500 index fund is no longer correct for investors, but that they
should turn to active management through ETFs (not that I give much
credence to Orman).  An editor's note I read said the same thing about
Burton Malkiel (although I cannot locate a source that quotes him).
Does this mean that we should all be piling into S&P 500 index funds?

Will, pardon my ignorance, but could you please expound on this. ETFs
are passive index trackers by nature. What does Orman mean by "active
management through ETFs"? Is she simply stating that indices other
than the S&P should be held (EFA, RWR, IWO, etc...)? Is she saying
they should be actively bought and sold or does she consider having
more than just the S&P make the portfolio "active" in and of itself?

Well, I got fearful back in 2004 and didn't buy a house.
http://tinyurl.com/62sosz
I decided to live with the risk of being "priced out" rather than
being chained
to a mortgage I could barely afford at the time.

Several banks are on the watch list for going bust and earnings
projections from several companies aren't looking good.

(FWIW, my town didn't see the same bubble. In 5 yrs, we peaked at about
a 15% gain, vs US about 41%. We are still up 4.1%, vs US 30%)

Will, pardon my ignorance, but could you please expound on this. ETFs
are passive index trackers by nature. What does Orman mean by "active
management through ETFs"? Is she simply stating that indices other
than the S&P should be held (EFA, RWR, IWO, etc...)? Is she saying
they should be actively bought and sold or does she consider having
more than just the S&P make the portfolio "active" in and of itself?

Thanks. I don't listen to Orman, so this is news to me.