When is a good time to withdraw savings and move them to EU?

hamburger, we don't sit around and cry about the loss. like i said, both my mother and i know that i needed money in the u.s. bank, so it was transferred, so it was done, and there's nothing we can do about that.
that however doesn't mean that it doesn't suck and i am allowing myself a bit of frustration about that.

i am here, of course, to learn about strategies and choices- all future oriented.

also, i'm in historical memory business, so you can't tell me thinking about the past is a waste of time and emotions :wink: (well, when it comes to money, yes. emotions, certainly not).

Really, whether or not you let it stay in U.S. cds depends upon when you think you will need it. If you don't need the money right now, there's no reason to take it out of the U.S. Going for a better interest rate in cds in the U.S. would make good sense, but i suggest to you that as long as it is here in the U.S. and in USD, you haven't lost a thing. If you won't need it right away, there's no harm in letting it accrue more interest (especially if you can get a better rate), while waiting for the USD to improve against the Euro. If the USD recovers the value against the Euro which it had when you moved the money to the U.S., and you then cash in, you will have lost none of the value of your capital, and you will have gained the value of the interest accrued. Really, if you don't need the money right away, the decision really hinges upon whether or not the USD can be expected to regain its former value vis-à-vis the Euro. If you don't need the money right away, the expert opinion you ought to be seeking is whether or not it will be realistic to expect the USD to recover that value. Very likely, better fiscal management by the U.S. government in the near term will improve the dollars position. As long as petroleum continues to be priced in USD, there is hope for the Dollar. These are the kinds of things to consider in your decision . . .


Once again, if you don't need the money right away . . .

Settin' Aah-aah wrote-



The whole post has that "if" at its fulcrum.

Therefore Settin' Aah-aah has said nothing worth a blow on a ragman's trumpet even though thick and very dense people might think otherwise from his generally authorititative tone.

The first thing any sensible person would need to know to answer the thread question is the magnitude of the funds under review.

With low magnitudes any decision is a bet and with higher magnitudes it's a hedge.

setanta was, unlike you, spendius, polite and helpful.

Were I to be considering the matter for real Settin's post would not come into my deliberations. How it can be helpful in the matter is beyond my comprehension.

Perhaps you might explain how it would be helpful. It was like giving you a tip at the races.

"If the USD recovers its value" is a prediction which wiser men in the money markets would like to know the answer to.

According to Mr Galbraith horoscopes and crystal balls have proved more accurate than economic analysis on many occasions.

Hedge funds exist for those with the capital to have choices. Others are simply betting.

I don't see what is polite about leading people up the garden path. Or helpful.

Spendius is, uncharacteristically, making perfect sense.

well, let's just say setanta was more helpful than spendius, whose only contribution was to point out unhelpfulness of setanta's post, which is of zero use or interest to me.

dagmaraka :

i recommend that you read BUSINESSWEEK MAGAZINE at least for a few weeks . you can read it online here . i find it convenient to borrow a copy from the library every other week .
i find that you can get a good feel for how the economy of the USA and the world is performing - and what's coming down the pike .
imo their reporting is pretty straight-forward and not influenced by politics - they give all sides of the various stories of the week good coverage (much like the british THE ECONOMIST - which has more of a european twist ) .
hbg

At no time did i make any prediction on the future performance of the U.S. dollar or of the Euro.

I'm not surprised to see that that fact didn't sink in with Spurious, and zipped right over O'Bill's head.

Agreed, but that was kind of the point of the thread, wasn't it? Coincidentally, it is precisely what Spendi pointed out your post was lacking. Correctly so, now by your own admission.

Spendi essentially pointed out that gambling losses are gambling losses and future wagers shouldn't take them into account. He's right. Unless Dag has a crystal ball, or knows someone who does (or at least has some reason to find someone's opinion on Forex pairs credible; she can A. Diversify or B. Gamble.

You and interestingly she seem to think you made some kind of a point, by pointing out if she doesn't touch it; she may recover her losses. Yeah, well, duh. But if you are not predicting the future of the For-Ex pair; of what use is the "when she needs the money" consideration? Of what use is your opinion on the matter at all; if you're neither going to point out something that isn't already obvious, nor make a case for action one way or another? I'd be curious to see either of you answer those questions intelligently.

Spendi was rude to you, Set, but he wasn't wrong in the point he was making… and he made one. And no part of it flew over my head.

My seemingly unappreciated point and purpose for posting here at all; was to point out that any single currency is a gamble against the rest and that the proven way to reduce this risk is to diversify. This is obvious too, but it seems few people actually do it, so I thought it might be helpful to point it out.

Bill-

I'm only ever rude to people who provoke rudeness and anybody who has any familiarity with Settin' Aah-aah's posting style will tell you that he does precisely that on a regular basis.

He is a particularly intolerant person. A boil up his arse may be the cause or something similar.

dag seems something in the same way herself.

I was trying to be helpful to her by informing her that anybody who might know anything about the matter she raised (God say, or the Oracle at Delphi) won't be on A2K.

I knew a lady who lost half her savings listening to an "expert" on financial matters. I daresay you know one or two yourself. I live in a restricted social milieux.

Even somebody who had got it all right through hundreds of transactions, like a lottery winner, and is sat on his yacht cruising in the Med as a result is no help from when the clock next ticks. And he's unlikely to be on A2K as well.

I also think that Settin' Aah-aah did advise dag but in a neat underhanded way which provided him with a semantic escape route if he was subsequently proved by events to have conveyed an unfortunate impression. For dag I mean. Not him.

And which I did notice.

This was in the service of him posing as a financial expert and a helpful person and thus an all-round good bloke when in actual fact he was using dag, whose financial affairs he doesn't give a rat's arse about, as a dummy on which to hang his pose.

I was concerned to give dag the only advice possible, as I think you are as well Bill, and if that involved my admitting my ignorance of currency movements so be it. If I wasn't so ignorant of currency movements I would bet on them as my bookie keeps on trying to tempt me to do. Horses are easier I find.

I have proved I would sacrifice my image to give dag the best advice.

I was trying to say that it is her own decision and if she would like me to take it for her I will do but only if she understands that I offer no guarantees and refuse to be held responsible for either losses or gains and that she picks my brains at her own risk. And absolutely.

So, if I was in the US with a reasonable number of dollars, enough to provide comfort and security, I would not only get into Euros but I would transfer my body to Europe along with those possessions worth packing up or holding hands with.

That is my totally subjective advice by which I mean it is what I would do with that number of dollars.

Less than that and I would work my fingers to the bone to get the requisite number of dollars and then I would do it.

That is how bad I think the assertion is as a way of doing business despite its previous successes.

I would head for Hay-on-Wye and check in at The Swan Hotel and start putting feelers out which can't be all that difficult for a beautiful woman with an exotic name and a fistful of dollars.

Falling off logs is harder than that.

But I could be wrong. I could be so, so wrong.

Who knows.

It's what I would do though if I was a beautiful woman etc etc.

If Settin' Aah-aah is anything to go by I would try it nearly skint and with skates on.

How rude is that Bill?

He can't even do rude with style.

And then I read this today in a book review in the Sunday Times about a bloke who went to the Harvard Business School --



So there you are dag. Nobody knows the answer and if anybody did they wouldn't tell us now would they? That would be a silly thing to do in such circumstances.

For those interested in educational matters the full review from which that extract is taken can be read on the ID thread.

The dollar is gaining strength, dag.

Because, dipshit, if she thinks that she may need the money in the near future, then keeping it in a certificate of deposit in the United States is no longer a very good idea. To use you're "clever" comment, well Duh.



Dashenka said to respond as though she knew nothing at all about the question. So i provided here a response which points out things that someone who has never thought about might not have thought of. Not everything is always already obvious to everyone, Einstein.

And you can bet i don't give a **** whether or not you consider those responses intelligent.



It apparently shot right over your head and the head of that great braying jackass from England that i was not predicting the future behavior of any currency, and was responding appropriately to a request for comments which would assume that the author of this thread knew absolutely nothing about the subject. On such a basis, it were idiotic (in other words, right up your and your ally's alley) to suggest that anything were "already obvioius."



Nothing i wrote said or implied that Dashenka should not diversify her investment portfolio. She asked about her certificates of deposit in U.S. dollars, and asked for a response which assumed that she knew nothing. She did not say that those cds represented the entirety of her investments, so you have no good reason to assume that they are, and that she would therefore need to use that capital in order to diversify.

I made no assumptions about her meaning, and responded only to the question . . . clown.

By the way, O'Bill, since you seem to be taking great braying jackass lessons from your new hero, i think i'll let you in on some of the downside to that plan. Spurious certainly did claim that i had made a prediction.



Apparently, the word "if" was a mystery to Spurious, so he chose to ignore it, and declared my remark a prediction.



My remarks were simply to provide Dashenka a basis upon which to make her decision--that if she thought the USD would regain its value, she would probably be well off leaving her money in the cds to earn interest until such time as she could cash in without losing value. I didn't predict anything, and i didn't lead anyone anywhere.

You and Spurious deserve each other--you should be in the Olympics together doing the broad jump . . . since you are both so adept at jumping to conclusions . . .

i don't have time to read through responses in detail, i just want to say that i appreciate any and all well meant advice, as i don't know anything about the topic, as i have stated in the opening of this thread.

i would prefer if people didn't turn it into their own battlefield, duking out personal animosities, but what can i do. i'll sift through for relevant information within and try to ignore the rest.

back later.

Jeepers Set, you sure know how to make an ass of yourself. 2 more posts containing absolutely nothing of value. But, it is clear the questioner doesn't care what's relevant, so neither do I.

Settin' Aah-aah wrote-



So let us return a little.

Settin' Aah-aah wrote-



To which I replied in post No. 3337140 on Page 3-



It is quite obvious who the braying jackass is from that. And that is being kind. The alternative is that he has deliberately lied.

A certificate of deposit is a preservation of capital instrument. Whether or not the dollar recovers the value it had when Dashenka converted from Slovak Crowns to US dollars, the capital value in US dollars which was invested in the certificates of deposit cannot be lost. The "gambling" metaphor is so much gobbledygook, because neither the capital investment nor the interest earned on it in US dollars can be lost. Therefore, the only question which remains is whether or not the dollar is likely to recover its value vis-à-vis the Slovak Crown. If Dashenka will not need the money any time soon, and unless she feels certain that the US dollar will not recover its value against Crown (or the Euro, although that's pretty much the same thing), than there is no good reason to take the money out and therefore to knowingly suffer a loss of capital.

This is not at all the same as the "gamble" which is involved in an investment in securities which can lose the value of the initial capital investment. I'm not surprised that Spurious has missed that point, since his only object in responding here was to attempt to take the piss of me . . . too bad it didn't work out for him.