<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: It&#8217;s Official: The Giants Won the Super Bowl so the Dow Will Be UP in 2008!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/</link>
	<description>A personal finance blog dedicated to discussing such topics as budgeting, asset allocation, 401K, IRA, cash flow, insurance, financial planning, portfolio management, and other areas in personal finance.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:32:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: juanny</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-227841</link>
		<dc:creator>juanny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 12:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/#comment-227841</guid>
		<description>But unless I&#039;m reading the chart wrong, it&#039;s showing that TB is an original team, because the &quot;call&quot; column is showing that it should be an &quot;UP&quot; year, not down, which is the correlation for an &quot;original&quot; team.

I realize this is a silly comparison (if A happens before B doesn&#039;t mean that A caused B), I&#039;m just confused why they list TB as an original.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But unless I&#8217;m reading the chart wrong, it&#8217;s showing that TB is an original team, because the &#8220;call&#8221; column is showing that it should be an &#8220;UP&#8221; year, not down, which is the correlation for an &#8220;original&#8221; team.</p>
<p>I realize this is a silly comparison (if A happens before B doesn&#8217;t mean that A caused B), I&#8217;m just confused why they list TB as an original.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JLP</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-227258</link>
		<dc:creator>JLP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 21:52:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/#comment-227258</guid>
		<description>Juanny said:

&lt;em&gt;&quot;How is Tampa Bay an “original” team? They were an expansion team in the 70s.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;

Tampa Bay isn&#039;t an original team.  The chart just shows who won the Super Bowl and the performance of the market for the year.  There&#039;s not a 100% correlation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Juanny said:</p>
<p><em>&#8220;How is Tampa Bay an “original” team? They were an expansion team in the 70s.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>Tampa Bay isn&#8217;t an original team.  The chart just shows who won the Super Bowl and the performance of the market for the year.  There&#8217;s not a 100% correlation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JLP</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-227255</link>
		<dc:creator>JLP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 21:49:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/#comment-227255</guid>
		<description>Patrick said:

&lt;em&gt;&quot;This is pretty interesting. Your chart should include years prior to 2002.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;

Too much work for something that has no meaning.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Patrick said:</p>
<p><em>&#8220;This is pretty interesting. Your chart should include years prior to 2002.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>Too much work for something that has no meaning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-227247</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 21:37:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/#comment-227247</guid>
		<description>This is pretty interesting. Your chart should include years prior to 2002.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is pretty interesting. Your chart should include years prior to 2002.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: juanny</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-227215</link>
		<dc:creator>juanny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 20:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/02/05/its-official-the-giants-won-the-super-bowl-so-the-dow-will-be-up-in-2008/#comment-227215</guid>
		<description>How is Tampa Bay an &quot;original&quot; team?  They were an expansion team in the 70s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How is Tampa Bay an &#8220;original&#8221; team?  They were an expansion team in the 70s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

