How much will the final stimulus bill cost?

Clarification please: Are we talking about the Senate bill or the one that will ultimately emerge from the Conference Committee and is signed by the POTUS?

it has to be passed see item 5 of the predictions

and its the final version in the set timeframe.

819 billion (house version) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009
827 billion (senate version) http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/18538.html

Interesting that the Stimulus bill that is agreed upon is actually $780 million. This info has been outthere since Saturday. All of the referring info for the $819mm and $827mm is dated prior to that.

Unless I am missing something here (which is entirely possible) someone is giving money (perhps it is me giving it away).

There are two already decided measures that are counted and that are belonging to the stimulus. The politico article is from yesterday and up to date.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20090208/obama-economy/

IMO the compromise will be above 800 billion and therefore I teke more cheap predictions if available.

you are correct that they agreed upon $780 billion, but that is the base number before adding on the amendments, which could easily add on another $40-50 billion. once they agree on the base plan ($780 billion), they discuss each of the amendments and add them on in order to (a) ensure they get at least 3 republican votes by adding in additional tax cuts and (b) to make sure are able to keep all of the democratic votes by adding in more spending initiatives. so while the base figure is $780 billion, this is the minimum amount to be passed and it is very likely that the final amount well be much higher than $800 billion once the amendments are added on.

the $819 billion and $827 billion numbers agreed upon include the amendments which are likely to be added in the final vote. so think about this: if the house agreed to $819 billion and the senate agreed to $827 billion, why would they go and make cuts?

the confusion is that the $780 billion number is being floated around out there - in reality, this question should be all but settled...

crap!!! I look like a loser!

ok, this will be my last post on this since i am now thoroughly confused myself. i still think what i wrote above is correct but there are various major news sources that continue to write that the agreement (seemingly with amendments) is $780 billion. no one seems to know for sure anymore. the sources that uses the $780 billion number say that there is insistence from both parties to get rid of non-critical spending and tax cuts that don't focus directly on economic stimulus. this is probably necessary to gain public support as the public is very distrusting of the government right now.

so, i guess, for now, i'm sticking with >$800 billion, but for those who think it will be <$800 billion, you could certainly be right - especially if they have decided that the $780 billion includes the amendments upon which they have agreed.

what makes the most sense right now to me is that on a formal basis, the numbers that both the house and the senate have agreed upon is higher than $800 billion, but there's a huge push to get it down to $780 billion and to get it passed on tuesday?

anyone with some thoughts?

OK a outsiders view although this was taken from a news report.

It did not take long for Barack Obama to crave the wind in his hair again.

Several weeks of Sisyphean efforts at building a bipartisan consensus on his $800bn stimulus plan appear to have won the White House very little support from an increasingly hostile opposition. Of the 218 elected Republicans on Capitol Hill, just three have come out in support of the president’s plan - and even their support cannot be guaranteed.

With an increasingly now or never urgency to his efforts, Mr Obama will on Monday take his case to the voters in Elkhart, Indiana, in the kind of “town hall” setting that was a daily event during his 21-month election campaign. In Tuesday he will repeat the performance in Florida. And tonight he holds his first prime-time presidential press conference. There is no guarantee that any of this will work. In spite of pushing his Democratic colleagues in the Senate to broker a compromise with the three Republicans on Friday night that cut more than $100bn (€78bn, £68bn) in spending from the stimulus package and added in new tax cuts, most Republican opposition appears only to have hardened over the weekend.

More than 40 per cent of the $827bn Senate bill comes in the form of tax cuts, compared with 30 per cent in the $819bn bill that passed the House.

“We’re going down a road to disaster,” Richard Shelby, the senior Republican on the Senate banking committee, said on Sunday. “There’s got to be some other way better than what we’re doing. Not the socialist way but to try and get our free market working again.”

Nor do Mr Obama’s efforts appear to be winning applause from his own support base, which is increasingly agitated about the substance of the compromises that were agreed in the Senate.

Liberal economists point to the fact that the $40bn in education aid to state governments was among the most stimulative elements in the original bill. Even Lawrence Summers, Mr Obama’s chief economic adviser, on Sunday sounded disappointed, pointing out that the several billion dollars that was cut in aid to higher education would have fed rapidly through into the economy.

you do realise that the action is that far right in this that they in there frustration of losing the election that they are bordering on a dictatorship.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cba48364-f631-11dd-a9ed-0000779fd2ac.html

here is what has happened over here and in the end will surely happen to the republicans




Federal opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull and the coalition have taken a big hit from voters, the latest Newspoll shows.

The gap in support for the two major parties has widened with Labor benefiting from its $42 billion economic stimulus package and the coalition being punished for its opposition.

Labor leads the coalition 58-42 on a two-party preferred basis, increasing by four points its lead of last month and close to its record margin just after winning the November 2007 election.

Voters have given Labor a big tick for managing the economy with almost two-thirds saying the government was doing a good job.

Only a third thought the coalition would do a better job.

There was a vote of confidence in the stimulus package, with 57 per cent saying it would be good for the economy.

The poll revealed that nearly half the 1,133 respondents thought the stimulus package would make them better off and 46 per cent of them thought they were eligible to receive one of the cash payments.

Nearly two thirds of them said they would be spending the payments on goods and services.

The weekend poll indicates voters are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with Mr Turnbull's performance, with 38 per cent not impressed - up seven points.

Those satisfied with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's performance remains at 63 per cent and he leads Mr Turnbull 62-20 as preferred prime minister.

this just out on bloomberg....

"Stimulus Vote"
"The Senate will have a key procedural vote tomorrow on its $780 billion stimulus legislation, with a final vote scheduled the day after."

hmmm.... looks more and more like $780 billion might be the magic number...

Sarcasm on:
Those penny pinching people we call politicians will be transparent, open and accountable with our tax money. Obama said so.
Sarcasm off:

He was right on target with one of his campaign promises when he told Joe the Plumber that he would spread the wealth around.

"Lawmakers said that by poring over the 736-page bill they had excised about $110 billion, bringing the total cost to about $780 billion — $40 billion less than the stimulus bill approved by the House last week."

ok - the wall street journal finally put out an article and it appropriately breaks down what has happened...

1) the house passed their $819 billion bill.
2) on friday, the senate negotiated the house bill down to $780 billion in order to get republicans collins, spector, and snowe to vote "for" the bill.
3) the democrats need the three republican votes to avoid a procedural delay.
4) the senate votes on their own bill on monday ($827 billion BEFORE friday's negotiations with the republicans)
5) rep. collins came out and said if it's not kept to what they agreed to with the house bill (e.g. $780 billion), she has no problem not voting for the bill
6) it will be very difficult for the democrats to try to add back any spendings b/c of the threat of losing just one republican vote

i'm guessing now that it will be somewhere around $780 billion - at 9% odds right now, it's not a bad bet at all!!! i'm surprised so many people are convinced that it will be >$800 billion.

i'm out of the >$800 billion corner now and into the $750-$800 billion if for no other reason than b/c there's not much more upside on the >$800 billion side and there's limited risk betting $750-$800 billion...

the facts kinda support the move too...well, maybe...

Thanks....perhaps I may be in the right after all. I am sticking with the $780bn figure.

i'm just glad i'm not a politician...

I'm glad you are not a politician too.
8>)

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/08/news/economy/stimulus_showdown/?postversion=2009020821
Overall price tag:
The Senate's bipartisan compromise aimed to reduce the package's overall price tag and remove elements that critics argued did not belong in a stimulus bill.

The House-passed version was estimated to increase the deficit by $820 billion over 10 years. The version initially considered by the Senate cost $885 billion, but grew to more than $900 billion after amendments were passed last week.

Now lawmakers and others estimate that the cost of the revised package, including the bipartisan compromise, is between $820 billion and $827 billion, the same or higher than the House package.

But those are unofficial estimates. The final word on the official taxpayer cost of the Senate bill belongs to the Congressional Budget Office and the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. Their evaluations will likely be released early this week. To top of page

The figure of $820bn is the number to increase the DEFICIT over the next 10 years not today's actual cost of the bill. Also, the numbers the Feb 8th article are pointing to are Friday numbers and not the most recent saturday negotiations. $780bn still appears to be the front runner in my opinion.

Interesting to see how the betting is changing. But think to yourself:
When is the last time the government EVER did anything for less than the estimated amount. Budget overruns are so common that they are expected.

I have already doubled my normal limit for HD wagers, so will everybody please return to the earlier bets this evening and quit screwing with my net worth already?
["No" you say - well it was worth a try. . .]

But seriously, I offer congrats to smv5047 for creating this question: I have never seen the bar graph of betting results so intertwined before.

I don't know where y'all are seeing this $780 billion price tag...

Wall Street heads for lower opening
By SARA LEPRO - 46 minutes ago

NEW YORK (AP) — Wall Street appeared ready to give back some of last week's big gains on Monday, as some of the euphoria over the government's expected stimulus bill faded amid more grim corporate news.

The Senate is expected to pass an $827 billion stimulus bill on Tuesday. The government, however, still faces the challenge of reconciling the Senate bill with the House's $819 billion version that passed earlier...
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gHs5OM3gFG_DytQQZFbWfgPT08MAD9683COO0

pmk, I agree with your logic, however, my concern is how it will be settled.

erik:
the house passed their $819 billion bill - the senate negotiated on friday and got that bill down to $780 billion in order to get commitment on 3 republican votes.
the senate has to vote on their own bill valued at $827 billion when originally drafted.
assuming it passes, the house and senate have to negotiate between the two agreed upon bills to come to a final number.
the $827 billion was the senate bill as originally written before the senate reworked the house's bill. given that the senate had to drop the house bill down to $780 billion in order to get 3 republican votes, they will likely have to do the same to their own bill inorder to retain the 3 republican votes.
i think the issue at hand is really whether or not the numbers ($780 billion, $819 billion, $827 billion) include amendments... it could go either way...

I think both sides wagering HUB$ are thinking this is easy money....bottom line is that it will be for one side or the other. One side will feel silly and the other will feel like it is obvious from the new that is out there. I feel that it is obvious that it is $780bn. I am sure the other side feels the same. I am sure going to feel stupid if I am wrong.....but....it is not the first or last time I will feel stupid either.

Good luck to all (just not as much good luck to the over $800bn!)

looks like i *might* be right about the discrepancies between the senate's $827bn and the $780bn that keeps popping up. looks like the $780bn is what they got the house bill down to after friday's negotiation with the republicans but with amendments, it will push the total amount to over $800bn. i think the amendments have to do with additional tax cuts, which could be what got the republicans to sign on...

from barron's:
DEMOCRATIC SENATORS LANDED the backing of three key moderate Republicans (Susan Collins, R-Maine; Olympia Snow, R-Maine; and Arlen Specter, R-PA) to secure the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate version of the stimulus bill over the weekend.

The addition of amendments adopted during the Senate floor debate are likely to push the total cost past $800 billion.

Are tax cuts actually a "spending cost" of the Stimulus bill.....or is it simple a uncollected revenue in future years. In my humble opinion a cost is actual cash outlay? Any buy into that?

I would think it is reasonable to think that the stimulus bill "cost" would be what size of a "check" is attached. II there future revenues lost from a tax cut are included one could argue that the additional tax revenues from jump starting businesses are to an offset to the costs. In effect, the cuts are meant to spur additions and therefore are not casts at all.

And now its 838 billion (61 vs 36 senate today)
http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/washington/10stimulus-web.html&OQ=_rQ3D1Q26hp&OP=437ea5b6Q2FQ25Q279EQ25@dQ3DW)ddhRQ25R440Q254RQ25w4Q25Q27Q5BWorAOhdAQ25w4WhrQ3F-e-WiQ279E(ohQ3Fe

Here's the whole thing - both versions! All 1600 pages!
http://readthestimulus.org/

@PMK2668
Re: Good luck to all

Thanks and same to you as well.
(I am SOOOOO glad this is only Hubdub money. . . )

$838 billion - WoW! and it looks like they're gonna get the 3 republican votes. the senate just votes 61-36 to invoke cloture and send the bill to a final vote...

from the New York Times:
"Senate Clears Path for Vote on $838 Billion Stimulus"

I'm possibly screwed!

pmk2668: u still have a chance. this from the same NYT article:
"Negotiations this week to resolve differences with the $820 billion bill passed by the House will focus in part on the Senate’s decision to cut $40 billion from a state stabilization fund."
that takes us to the original $780bn number! and if you subtract $40bn from $838bn, that takes us to $798bn!!!

I saw that...that would be incredible (on this HUB$ bet)....I also saw differences in the NASA funding as well as others too. There could be other compromises. There are other differences out there as well and every time I compare and contrast I come back to the $780bn figure. I fear I am going to be totally wrong! I am like an addict I can't refuse the 3 and 4 to 1 monies on the position. Luckily I have won and still have a ton of money in the Redout mountain not blowing. I have over $110k on the right answer (hopeing for two more days). I sadly am into this Question for 2/3rd's of tha number. If I pull both of them off I will be a star!....most likely I will split at best on the two and hobble back somewhere back to earth.

U.S. Taxpayers Risk $9.7 Trillion on Bailout Programs
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aGq2B3XeGKok

The stimulus package the U.S. Congress is completing would raise the government’s commitment to solving the financial crisis to $9.7 trillion, enough to pay off more than 90 percent of the nation’s home mortgages.

the $790ish number is to keep collins of maine. (i thinks she's from maine) anyways they can lose 1 republican and still have 60 votes. this will get decided in conference between house, senate, and whitehouse negotiators. i heard typically in conference a bill rises in value. they can stick things in they bill alot easiar than on the floor of the congress. its gonna be a close one either way. i buy over $800 and somebody buys $750-$800 shortly after. i'm tempted to keep buying. don't wanna lose over $20k on 1 question tho. pmk is alot braver than me putting $110k on 1 question.

snowe, also from maine (hmm, what's up with that state?) is probably louder than collins about keeping the cost down. this from a cbs news interview:

Maine Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe told CBS News' Bob Schieffer that a "range" of items must be removed from the stimulus bill before she would consider voting for it.

Snowe cited funding for the national park service, the census bureau, cleaning up abandoned mines and providing funding for the US Marshals service, among other items.

"I mean, the list goes on," she said. "Those are issues that otherwise should be an appropriate part of the budget process and the annual review but not incorporated in the stimulus package that will do little to ignite economic activity."

what would be a real bummer is if no bill is passed by 3-29-09. be alot of lost HD bucks.

Check this chart out: http://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2008/around_the_world/images/figure04_unemp.jpg

January's unemployment rate of 7.6% doesn't look so terribly out of line compared to historical data from around the world. I wonder if we are having a "crisis" because someone is bored and has nothing better to do!

^ that's pretty funny - but yes, i think it's fair to say that we are in a crisis. do u hear news everyday about new layoffs? well, these numbers are not in the numbers yet. we *will* approach 9% "involuntary" unemployment by the end of 2009 (someone should create a HD question about this) - that puts "total" unemployment at upwards of 13-14% - in general, when you come across 10 people (over the age of 18 and not in retirement), more than one of them are unemployed. the "crisis" is more to do with a 40-60% evaporation in global capital, home foreclosures at high levels with many more ARM mortgage resets to come, the seizing of our credit market, and global governments printing loads of money.

we all have different definitions of what a "crisis" is... my view is that if some of the issues i listed above isn't fixed, we can potentially head into an irreversible downward spiral - and then we go into an extended period of stagflation.

the hope is that this stimulus package fixed some of all of these issues in the near term, stopping/preventing the downward spiral, and then deal with the effects of printing money (inflation) later.

I have a feeling the biggest "fix" is to stop trying to "fix" it so much.

After all, the New Deal didn't work. Does this mean we have to enter WWIII to be ok?

The only thing that comforts me is that are economy may improve before this stimulus bill even gets a chance to work its psuedopowers.

In fact, the bill will spend more in 2011 than in this year. It will spend more from 2012 on than this year. (yes 2 and 3 years away)

So why is it being rushed? Because we need to call it a crisis before we call it a comeback. ("Don't call it a comeback!" :P)

Let's not forget to mention that there's good news out there during this crisis.

The energy tax cut will be start to affect us soon. Inflation has collapsed. Wages on the other hand are up 4 percent from last year. The combination between higher wages and zero inflation means the workers that are still employed get a lot of purchasing power. M2 is up 20% annually. GDP is down so Velocity in MV=YP is down, but once that picks up it will be a stimulus and it will happen much sooner than anything the stimulus will do.

I'm not saying we're safe from turmoil, but this stimulus bill can only hurt at this point. And lets face it, with all that far off future spending, any progress we see soon will be credited to the bill regardless of its true origins. What will the public see as the cause? Whatever is on TV I suppose. I'm going to bet that it will be News about the stimulus bill at work...

sooner than anything the stimulus package* will do

I don't know about brave.....I think brave is pretty far north of what I am actually am (nuts may be better suited)

It's funny how it's always a crisis when you're being robbed and raped, and the government wants to ram it down our throats before any real opposition can be mounted. Look what they did with TARP. Under the cover of an "emergency", and against overwhelming public outcry, they managed to raid the Treasury to the tune of $700 billion. I'm surprised the bald greedy scumbag Paulson and his lackey Bush were willing to leave 1/2 the money on the table. Now it's Obama's turn to screw us by stealing/wasting the other 1/2, and ramming thru this "stimulus" that isn't especially stimulative, but will probably buy him votes from the constituents he is paying back for past support or paying off for future support.

It's pretty obvious that the main problems are and have been a failure of financial institutions to loan out money, thereby keeping the economy moving; and the dreadful housing market, where many people had much of their "wealth". These problems are barely being addressed, certainly not in a manner where they will be speedily remedied. That being the case, what's the rush?

interesting rumblings out there

Moments before the vote, the Congressional Budget Office issued a new estimate that put the cost at $838 billion, an increase from the $827 billion figure from last week.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090210/ap_on_go_co/congress_stimulus_282

I figuring the final number it is not a simple as averaging the two bills final numbers but rather the categorical difference averages and subtracting the individual compromises. When this is done we come to a number more in the $780bn range once again. There asre around $100bn in compromise differences still out there. Take 100bn and figure that half of those will actually end up pamiking it we are at the original mark. Original prediction stands at $750-$800bn.

i'm guessing over $800. things will get added in conference. the senate added tax cuts and cut some spending. the house don't wanna change the bill to much or it won't pass the senate. so they'll add some spending and keep the tax cuts hoping to get republican votes in the house.

Dieseldog....you are likely right. But there is an MSNBC article stating that there is $40bn that could get chopped off very easily wheras others figures stand to stay the same (in the senate version) All it takes is one nice cut and I am in the green. The Dems would prove to be prudent but acting as if they are being conservative while actually spending by putting the final figure inder the $800bn mark.

i have no idea if i'm right just predicting like everybody else. my networth is hoping i'm right. :) if i'm wrong then i lose a bunch of $H bucks and will congradulate you. goodluck.

the $780bn number came from the house bill at $819bn minus the $40bn the senate chopped off = $779bn (or $820bn with the media rounding numbers). but the senate bill came in at $838bn bc they added tax cuts in order to get the three republican votes in the senate. there will be less pressure to cut the numbers bc there's little threat of losing any democrat votes in the house (and even with that, they can afford to lose some votes if that's how it has to be) but there will be pressure to keep most or all of the tax cuts in order to keep the three republican votes, which they desperately need to keep.

my bet was for <$800bn for a long time but have recently switched to >$800bn bc of what i just described.

another factor to consider: when it comes to congressional negotiations, politicians are more likely to "compromise" by adding something or leaving it in to appease the other side rather than to take something out. "i'll let you add spending on this if you let me get this tax cut." much more likely than "i'll cut this spending if you get rid of the tax cut."

when has the government ever underspent? very rarely.

whatever happens, good luck dieseldog, good luck pmk, good luck everyone, good luck to me... i just want this to end so i don't have to check this screen every 10 minutes!!!

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -- Ronald Reagan

"i just want this to end so i don't have to check this screen every 10 minutes!"....priceless and well said. So true!

I am sucha sucker....I keep going in deeper and deeper!

Diesel...wanna make a deal and let us cash out each a small amount to minimize risk?

The longer the bill takes, the better chance of cuts...what else would there be to sumize from it?

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) called for House and Senate negotiators to act swiftly to get the compromise bill to Obama as soon as possible.
"The time for debate on this legislation was productive, but it is now over," Reid said. " ... We must now answer the urgent call for action."

Comparing differences between the Senate and House proposals of the economic stimulus package:
Senate version House version
Tax cuts 44% 34%
Education 9% 18%
Helping vulnerable 11% 13%
Infrastructure 13% 11%
Aid to states 15% 11%
Energy 5% 7%
Health care 2% 3%
Science and tech 1% 2%

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-ussena116031430feb11,0,4209344.story

It's being reported that a compromise has been reached at 790 billion
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123436825805373367.html

I'm taking a bath on this one....ouch! hope the news is wrong....

i am as well rassi. started at over $431k betting on this. if it don't change gonna be barely over $400k. so glad this is $H, or i might jump out the window.

pmk - i have very little to cash out. might as well lose that to. things are looking good for you tho.

It appears that Warrior062 is correct.

Negotiators agree on $790B price for stimulus bill
http://wokv.com/common/ap/2009/02/11/D969GMTG0.html

It is not finalized yet, but I am starting to look for a high ledge to jump from.

Congrats to pmk - looks like this will go your way afterall.
Now if volcano Redoubt blows it stack, I will have a new record for losing money in one day.

DD - I agree about little reason to cash out - No telling what will happen next but not much left to salvage.
Already missing 29K from original 35K wagered.

I can only say that I am one lucky you know what....my gut told me it just had to be right. That honestly was hoping more than thinking. Just to be safe I may take some off the table and I invite others to do the same as I do if they so choose to mitigate some of losses. I thought I was a dead duck here for awhile.....I am not even sure right now.

Ouch, I hope this stimulus plan stimulates the economy more than it stimulated my H$ =(

I just tossed in a ton of money in b/c i thought it was a sure bet. Now I have a bunch of politicians trying to ensure I lose it all. Great.

"At least three senators whose votes are critical to the plan’s approval are insisting that the final bill must be kept below $800 billion. "
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=ag7KM0MV7gAs&refer=news

DAMN YOU ARLEN SPECTER!!!! <shakes fists>

I call Specters office weekly to say just that, firechild.

Way to play the day PMK2668! :-)

This market should be a case study for prediction market junkies. We had two distinct camps who were following the news and potential news extremely close, we had some risktakers (pmk2668) who stuck in there. This market shows that holding onto what might be a losing prediction, could end up paying big dividends if news shifts in your favor.
I want to also say that I am proud of the people commenting on this market, the comments have remained centered on the subject, have remained civil, and have done a great job of helping those who aren't following the story as closely keep up with the news.
I am going to keep this market open until both the house and senate pass this, once that happens I will settle. As we saw in this market there are always chances the numbers aren't concrete yet.

Wow....what a ride! Who in the world was on my side.....sure felt like I was a loner for the most part. I think it was important that the comments were truthful and not untrue propaganda like blog and message boards for the stock market. I commend all who participated and commented

big congrads to pmk. if i gotta lose i'm glad it was to a gracious winner. as destry said this was one of the more respectful and informitive threads. at no time did i feel that anybody was being disrespectful..very refreshing. once again CONGRADS PMK

Thank you dieseldog....I will say it again...I lucked out big time!...Assuming it actually over....it is never a done deal til the Bama signs the final final final version.

i got hurt : /

Hoping for a dramatic change before the official signing, I just wagered 100 to earn 8K.

This question has been such a nail biter that I will "almost" miss it when it is gone.
Then I think of losing 10% of my gross net . YEEEOOOUUCCCHHH

What are we all going to do when this is over? I have a nail biting Oil close under $35 bet that is getting close. I fear that if the stimulus bill pleases Wall Streat that I will miss out on cashing in...it is so close and I am hunkered down from the depth of nowhere once again with a real shot of cashing in.

To all of those who lost alot....Follow my bets. A fool and his HUB$ are soon parted. I was a bit foolhearty in my wagers. I figured that is I liked it at 40% I would LOVE it at 15%. I was such an addict to this wager. I lucked out. I want to get a bit conservative and back off a bit...however, I know that I will catch the bug again and go very very heavy when the time is right......eventually I will be wrong and everyone can pick up a ton of HUB$ on my mishap. Hopefully it will not be for awhile. My competitive spirit makes me want so badly to move up the leaderboard. I made ridiculous progress here recently. My question is....how in the heck do some of these Hubdubbers have several Million $. I cannot imagine rolling the dice and getting to that point.....and still being able to work on a "Real Job" no less!

[Rasmussen Poll]Most Say Lawmakers Don't Understand Stimulus
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/rasmussen_poll_stimulus/2009/02/10/180224.html

According to the latest poll, 48 percent of U.S. voters say that, generally speaking, increased government spending is bad for the economy, while thirty-five percent disagree.

In other poll findings:

# Just 24 percent believe most of Congress understood the contents of the 700-page-plus plan before they voted, while nineteen percent were not sure.

# Of the nation’s voters, 69 percent lacked confidence that Congress knows what it is doing when it comes to addressing the country’s current economic problems, while just 29 percent are even somewhat confident in the legislators.

# Fifty-two percent of Democrats have at least some confidence that Congress knows what it is doing -- a view shared by just 16 percent of unaffiliated voters and 12 percent of Republicans.

# Voters strongly agree with the perspective that “No matter how bad things are, Congress can always find a way to make them worse.” Fifty-eight percent share that view with only 26 percent disagreeing.

# Sixty-eight percent of Republicans and 63 percent of unaffiliated voters agree with that negative assessment of Congress. Among Democrats, 46 percent agree, and 37 percent do not.

# By a 45 percent to 36 percent margin, liberal voters disagree that Congress can always make a bad situation worse. But solid majorities of conservative and moderate voters take the opposite view.

@pmk: My last month has been pretty rediculous, too. What I'm discovering is that it's a mixed blessing to have more money to invest. Some of the markets are so small that trying to put 10% of your assets into one market moves it to the point where it's far less of a value. On the otherhand, sometimes going in slow means that the market catches fire and rises before you could get in what you wanted to put in. I'm at maybe 10% of your assets and profitted plenty off of your infusions and then the groundswell that followed each time, but it seems like the bigger fish you get to be, the tougher it is to make the really big gains on a handful of opportunities.

I wish you all the best in the future and hopefully there will be enough bigger fish out there for all of us to profit... wait, this is starting to sound like Wall Street. We're all doomed! ;-)

Frog chop....I was too once a small grasshopper like yourself! Having monies is dangerous because to compete (and satisfy my leaderboard cravings) I must wager alot to climb and catch. I find myself betting on Things I never even eard of like soccer teams and Beanpots and cricket matches. I have no clue what or who many of them are. I find that there are however ones that catch fire like this one and people cannot wait to throw money at the initial headline. I was a victum of it and then dug deeper and used a little common sense to figure it out. Much of the time I did think I was a dead duck though. Yeah....I thought my HUB$ were gone....but deep down I still thought it made sense. If it were real money....well....my wife would have killed me on the first wager of $100! Heck, I minght have agreed with her!

When I first started out my similar play to this had me signing on each day to make the $20 sign on credit! It was not all that long ago too...yeah....$20! I will not forget where I came from.....At least not this week. By the way.....until this cashes out I have $4HUB in my account.....jsut to provide some perspective on my gambles out there.

My public congratulations to PMK2668. He has collected his Hubdub dollars MUCH faster than I ever did.

I remember starting out too. I made a little money and seemed to have a couple of thousand Hubdob Dollars. I did not respect the game very much and made silly wagers in the beginning. Then one day, suddenly, I had ZERO hubdub dollars. But I have always been a news junkie, (My favorite soap opera - what will happen next in the continuing saga. . .) so I kept coming back to work with the 20 dollar wagers each day. It took quite a while to raise my income level above the original $1000 that was given in the very beginning.

My betting strategy had to change somewhat with a higher amount to wager. If I was not careful, I could place a large bet and watch others siphon it off as they collected their winnings - pre-settlement. The best advice that works for me, is to bet on subjects that you have some knowledge about, so that you can make educated guesses about the outcome. Then stick with your gut feeling on an issue, if you have a strong feeling about it to begin with. You don't have to be an expert in any given area, just have an intuition on whether the outcome makes sense, or if the time frame is realistic, or if somebody else has wagered so much that they have changed the odds into your favor.

I also like to wager on "closing soon" bets, but this can be dangerous. I lost 10K recently because the FBI caught some financial swindler just 4 days before settlement date. And "closing soon" bets usually don't pay off very well. It is common to lay out 10K on a wager just to earn a couple of hundred Hubdub bucks.

Best wishes