Report comment

@Badger, the biggest difference is that I take profits when available, at least that has been the biggest difference to date. The second biggest difference is that I concentrate where I feel I have the most opportunity, and that is probably tied with (and into) adding to my position if/when it goes against me.

This will eventually cause a nasty drawdown that I will never get back if I don't accurately anticipate when things will get better. Being aware of this, I keep my nose to the ground and I regularly take cash profits so as to lock high gains in throughout the year.

That is a plausible and enlightening diagram, but it is still speculation until you know the exact plans of the TALF. Even if the TALF does come through too favorable for the banks and onerous for the tax payer, Congress and the Senate can (and probably will) weigh in. The 90% tax on bonuses is the writing on the wall. Many tout it as a smoke screen to hide the fact that AIG is being used to pump an extra $150 billion into the banks, which I agree with, but many are also missing the fact that lawmakers are repairing the one larges flaw in Wall Street since the big partnerships went public. That flaw is the uneconomical compensation system that still rewards execs and big revenue generators as if they were partners but leaves the shareholders holding the economic risk of an operating company as their profits are distributed to faux partners.

There is no way in hell Wall Street would have done this voluntarily, and there is no way they would have allowed this to happen if they were in control, which they are obviously not.

Many would rather see their firms go down and the culture of overpayment remain intact than the other way around, since they could always go back into the ashes of the old firm via the pheonix effect or through a new firm and resume excessive pay.