Who is to know?

Moral: Wherein we consider all sorts of claims coming out of the Street and beyond. The bulls are running amok, it seems; those in Chicago are emoting with glee at their take.

---

What's one to think? Some say, to the bulls, watch out. On the other side, some say that the pessimists are wrong. The DOW, it is said, will run way beyond 10,000.

Well, let's start a point of view that says, who cares? That is, equity is way overplayed except for those touting casino capitalism and for those who get their take from the churning.

As well, for any who makes a bunch, near zero says that many, many more lose. Basically, if we looked, we would see that many, many make sacrifices. Trouble is that the noise from the racket spewed out by those who grab mega-ly overshadows what is real.

Then, once we get the mania out of our minds, let's go back to fundamentals and look at what might be what. And, let's take our time. We can go about this without worrying about those hyped up on spin, and such.

We need to go back to see why the interest in capitalism. The WSJ had an op-ed talking about Samuel Johnson's time. Of course, he was an acquaintance of Adam Smith, yet those minds had no way of knowing about the current mess that we (admitting part of the blame, here, just from not watching that many of the idiots did not know about fiduciary duty) have made.

So, we all know that knowing adults want freedom to choose and freedom from worrying about those who want to leech your assets. Too, we all know that committee work can be problematic. Yet, all have played on teams and know that a squad (take any team sport) is more than one person.

We see this notion mentioned by one who worked for Goldman Sachs, yet worried about being true to Ayn Rand. To that latter, we could say, what? From whence is there anything from Ayn Rand that is cut in granite for all to consider outright truth?

Yes, we all know about teaming; most do it except for a few executives (namely, the CEOs who are paragons, in their minds).

So, there will a series of posts related to knowing. It might be worthwhile here to mention that those who really know usually are of an autodidact nature. We'll go into that further.

So, away with the day-to-day, thankfully it's only 5 days a week, exuberanced, or angsted (depending upon the day's results) mindsets. It's hard to believe how much money and time has gone into this whole gaming scheme. But, it is not of enduring consequences to ourselves unless we want it to be.

Actually, getting the sandbox bounded, and controlled, will be one topic for discussion.

Remarks:

04/08/2010 -- From the gigantic chimera to ill-begotten gains.

01/03/2010 -- More news on Goldman Sachs as the uber example of 'not on the behalf' comes to fore regularly. It'll need to be a separate subject at some point. Thanks to McClatchy: Nov 1, 2009 & Jan 3, 2010 (update). Goldman has to respond, of course.

11/08/2009 -- The gigantic chimera needs proper attention.

11/06/2009 -- There ain't no train, just like there ain't no free lunch (TANSTAAFL).

10/16/2009 -- 201K <-- 401K --> 25601K, this denotes the current financial gaming.

10/13/2009 -- Always timely, a WSJ op-ed (Don't Get Hit by Crash at Finish Line) gives an appropriate message to the theme.

Modified: 08/24/2011