Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

alstry (< 20)

Why Alstry DOESN'T Recommend Stocks



July 27, 2011 – Comments (10)

Because a share of stock is a legal ownership in what is supposed to be a private corporation.  With ownership in a PRIVATE corporation comes RISK AND REWARD.

Once government/or WE THE PEOPLE bailed out Wall Street with OVER $20 TRILLION dollars of public money.....the moral privilege of private ownership and wealth was DESTROYED as the VAST MAJORITY of that UNPRECEDENTED payment went to the to 1/5 of society while the bottom 80% got practically nothing.

Think about was PUBLIC money that saved the rich.....gave the rich the BIGGEST entitlement payment in HUMAN HISTORY..and the rich whine, moan and squirm about other Americans getting relative tiny government entitlement payments/benefits barely enough to allow them to eat?

The hypocrisy is beyond anything I have ever seen before....AND maybe anything in history as measured by value.

I live in a very wealthy neighborhood....a former Fed President is my neighbor, doctors, lawyers, pro athletes, etc..... 

this past weekend, my son's neighborhood team had a baseball tournament in a much less affluent neighborhood for the city I drove through that neighborhood, it struck me that the only difference between the families that live in my neighborhood and those families was the size of the entitlement payment they got from government/WE THE PEOPLE...and my "liberal" idiotic neighbors aren't even conscious as they think their token charitble donations is saving the world......when it was the world that saved them and gives them the privilege to make donations while the world suffers.

Until morality is returned to Wall Street.....all private shares of PUBLIC corporations should be returend to the public, that bailed out those shares.... then will I recommend the private purchase of a share of stock if legal morality is returned to Wall Street.

So next time you see a hard working family in a run down neighborhood, think about this.....the primary difference between you and them is your PUBLICLY bailed out financial assets/job/pension.....and they getting little or no public assistance.

10 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On July 27, 2011 at 11:56 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

WARNING:  May cause stress if you think....

In The Land Of Self-Interested Pygmies, No One Advocates For The Nation

Report this comment
#2) On July 28, 2011 at 1:16 AM, awallejr (36.64) wrote:

Or because  you pretty much sucked at it?

Report this comment
#3) On July 28, 2011 at 2:23 AM, XMFConnor (96.50) wrote:

It appears to be you made 436 and had an average negative score per pick.


Report this comment
#4) On July 28, 2011 at 4:59 AM, alstry (< 20) wrote:

It is an interesting time in American History when the rich think they should be rich becasue they are ENTITLED to be bailed out by the taxpayer.

When the average taxapyer is NOT bailed out, what legal/moral right do those not bailed out have against those that are.....?

Watch the job losses stress and anxiety rioting and violence increasing around the you think only Alstry was able to predict it?  You think your CAPS score will matter?

Time to grow up children...MORALITY ALWAYS TRUMPS MONEY.....because no society ever survived for very long when the rich were the BIGGEST entitlement recipients.

Wealth must be earned....not bailed out.

Report this comment
#5) On July 28, 2011 at 3:26 PM, TSIF (99.98) wrote:

If the government gives out money part of it was yours to start with. Take it back and pass it out to someone else who needs it if your morals bother you.

Morality will never get ahead on its own. VERY LITTLE of the wealth in this world was ever earned.

Those who can do, and those who can't whine and make excuses. You tried excusing yourself by saying the market was going to crash. You've missed two years of stellar returns, so now you're bringing up morals.


Report this comment
#6) On July 28, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Teacherman1 (< 20) wrote:

If a graphic I saw this morning on CNBC or Bloomberg was correct, the average S.S. check is under $800. That is pathetic.

I also saw a very wealthy man on CNBC who said, people like him should not be getting S.S. checks. He was certainly old enough to be qualified.

He further stated that his taxes should be raised, but only if it went directly to pay down on the debt.

Sounds like a reasonable plan to me.

If we had a "needs" test for S.S., maybe they could raise that $800 for those who really need it. Not because they deserve it, but because they need it.

JMO and worth exactly what I am charging for it.

Report this comment
#7) On July 28, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Schmacko (91.07) wrote:

"Or because  you pretty much sucked at it?"

This is the real reason.  Alstry was terrible at picking stocks.

Report this comment
#8) On July 28, 2011 at 11:24 PM, alstry (< 20) wrote: guess is you would have been a proponent of slavery.....and would prefer a monarchy over a republic.......

if that is the case, may I suggest you leave America since you don't give a damn about the principles that built this nation and REAL Americans died for.....a few of them my buddies.

Report this comment
#9) On July 29, 2011 at 9:27 AM, TSIF (99.98) wrote:

You're digging now Alstry, even for you. I guess I touched a nerve..I wasn't sure you had any.  Your model is to suck pennies from link throughs on your udderly foolish website.

I'd be very certain that you care less about America or morality than I do.

Report this comment
#10) On July 29, 2011 at 9:31 AM, TMFBlacknGold (90.22) wrote:

The TARP bailouts will amount to less than $19 billion after all is said and done.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners