MattZ Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 i don't disagree w/ you or Jon an iota and i'll assign lion's share of the problem to cramer/CNBC/analysts/whomever...but, like the countless discussions on the mortgage problem, people need to learn to not take things at face value. especially when it comes to large amounts of their own $. all i'm saying. Yep, no argument from this guy here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted March 13, 2009 Author Share Posted March 13, 2009 So we're all in agreement that Cramer is the devil and we should make the sign of the evil eye and spit every time his name is uttered right? This post = Shocker. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 And it's a facade that helped to convince lots of people to put 401k money into the market because the stock market goes up 10%/yr. Why? Don't ask questions. It does. It doesn't.Actually, Cramer (in Oct 08) advised anyone who needed access to retirement funds within 5 years to move to cash. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Actually, Cramer (in Oct 08) advised anyone who needed access to retirement funds within 5 years to move to cash. Yes. After the market was almost 40% from its peak. The facade that I referenced had crumbled by then. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
myboyblue Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Well, while I think the 2006 video is fairly damning, the dude at least came out and took the beating from Stewart and admitted he did some wrong stuff. So he gets some points for that. Agreed... he actually handled it better than most could have. Being a multi-millionairre may help the situation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
explodo Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 You have to give Suze Orman a little credit though. I watch her show quite a bit and she does give some pretty sound advice. I love the "Can I Afford It" segment.So does my mom. But doesn't it seem kind of ridiculous that people have to call into a TV show to figure out if they can afford something? I'm a bit spend crazy myself, but it might be time for all of us to get back to the "if you have the money, you can afford it" philosophy. that said, i'll also throw some accountability towards anybody who based their financial gameplan solely on his advice or other like douchebags versus a multi-faceted, more educated approach to their investments/finances.I think this is true, but it was pretty damning when Cramer blatantly advocated manipulating the market with rumors, etc. And short selling. These things effect us whether or not we listen to Jim Cramer. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Winston Legthigh Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Yes. After the market was almost 40% from its peak. The facade that I referenced had crumbled by then.True - he didn't predict the collapse that started in August, and continued through... now (and beyond), so the timeliness wasn't the best, but it was still good advice. I'm sure Cramer has given both good and bad advice, as any financial advisor has done, but people have to realize that there's different advise for different needs - perhaps his show doesn't have enough disclaimers in it. The same security could be a sell for someone based on their needs/goals, and a buy for someone else. But, anyone who uses the TV as their sole source for making investment decisions is lucky that their own stupidity hasn't left their accounts in the red already. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 That was the most exhilarating TV I've seen in a while.Whole interview should be up soon:http://www.thedailyshow.com/ This post = Shocker. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rusty Shackleford Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 In our country we rely too much on Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted March 13, 2009 Author Share Posted March 13, 2009 JUDE - you were going to write what you wrote no matter what anyone said in the thread to that point. Any chance to appear contradictory in social threads, you'll take it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moe_Syzlak Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 True - he didn't predict the collapse that started in August, and continued through... now (and beyond), so the timeliness wasn't the best, but it was still good advice. I'm sure Cramer has given both good and bad advice, as any financial advisor has done, but people have to realize that there's different advise for different needs - perhaps his show doesn't have enough disclaimers in it. The same security could be a sell for someone based on their needs/goals, and a buy for someone else. But, anyone who uses the TV as their sole source for making investment decisions is lucky that their own stupidity hasn't left their accounts in the red already.While I agree with this, but it is disingenuous for CNBC to say that when they happily want everyone to do just that in order to manipulate the market to their own ends. I'm glad Cramer didn't go that route. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 So we Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 JUDE - you were going to write what you wrote no matter what anyone said in the thread to that point. Any chance to appear contradictory in social threads, you'll take it. Not any chance, of course we all know it was no surprise that this interview would be welcomed warmly here. I think other than Cramer peddling a bunch of his books to the unsuspecting his sin's are pretty minor. If people think they can make a bunch of money in the market by watching TV and following whatever talking head flavor of the week is on, they shouldn't be managing their own portfolios. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted March 13, 2009 Author Share Posted March 13, 2009 Not any chance, of course we all know it was no surprise that this interview would be welcomed warmly here. Did you watch it? If so, did you really not feel some sort of visceral reaction that Stewart was, if nothing else, trying to call a spade a spade? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Did you watch it? If so, did you really not feel some sort of visceral reaction that Stewart was, if nothing else, trying to call a spade a spade? I'm not arguing that at all. Do you go and rebuild car transmissions in your spare time after listening to Car Talk on NPR? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 I think on the macro level, journalism has really failed this country in this decade. We totally fucked the tree on Iraq, and we totally fucked the tree on this, to the severe detriment of the well-being of the United States of America. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 If people think they can make a bunch of money in the market by watching TV and following whatever talking head flavor of the week is on, they shouldn't be managing their own portfolios. i agree and did agree w/ this...but completely (or at least nearly completely) absolving cramer and like-minded 'experts' of responsible/ethical guidance under the auspices of what their show/network is about...is just as silly as applying complete blame to him. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted March 13, 2009 Author Share Posted March 13, 2009 I'm not arguing that at all. Do you go and rebuild car transmissions in your spare time after listening to Car Talk on NPR? Car Talk advises, then directs callers to their mechanics, always.(btw nice way of trapping me into admitting I'm an NPR addict) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Car Talk is the one thing on NPR I can actually listen to without getting vaguely annoyed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 i agree and did agree w/ this...but completely (or at least nearly completely) absolving cramer and like-minded 'experts' of responsible/ethical guidance under the auspices of what their show/network is about...is just as silly as applying complete blame to him. I've watched Cramer for a combined total of about 2 hours in my entire life and have yet to shift any of my 401K or IRA funds based upon his input. I did read a couple of his books and some others he recommend as well. Now if this interview costs him his show because people followed his every word as investing gospel I'm fine with that, but they had no business using the Mad Money program as an investment tool in the first place. Car Talk advises, then directs callers to their mechanics, always.(btw nice way of trapping me into admitting I'm an NPR addict) Car Talk is the one thing on NPR I can actually listen to without getting vaguely annoyed. Finally something I can agree with you libs on. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 To be honest, I never cottoned to the whole day-trader DIY thing. It reminds me of the "a person who is their own lawyer has a fool for a client" thing. Still, American business journalism really fell down on this. WE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rusty Shackleford Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 I think on the macro level, journalism has really failed this country in this decade. We totally fucked the tree on Iraq, and we totally fucked the tree on this, to the severe detriment of the well-being of the United States of America. This is the point. Journalists have gotten so cozy with their sources that they have forgotten why they have sources in the first place. Rather than use the sources to get information, which leads through investigation to other information, they just take what their sources say and pass it on as fact. Why? They don't want to insult, and therefore lose, their sources. After all, they rationalize, if I don't pass this source's story on, someone else will. But the whole point of journalism is to get at the real facts and tell the world what those facts are. Too many journalists seem to have forgotten this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
explodo Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 This is the point. Journalists have gotten so cozy with their sources that they have forgotten why they have sources in the first place. Rather than use the sources to get information, which leads through investigation to other information, they just take what their sources say and pass it on as fact. Why? They don't want to insult, and therefore lose, their sources. After all, they rationalize, if I don't pass this source's story on, someone else will. But the whole point of journalism is to get at the real facts and tell the world what those facts are. Too many journalists seem to have forgotten this.Maybe we here at Via Chicago should start a newspaper. Half of the people here seem to be journalists. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.