What seems cheap these days?

That's what MnD wanted to know this week at Diehards.org. "If the time to buy is when there's blood in the streets, what's looking oversold in your opinion?" the poster asked.

Large-cap U.S. stocks look good to ValueThinker, minus financials, "which may be cheap but may have further to fall." Japan is also mentioned as a place selling at attractive levels, although the economy continues to lag.

DaveD agreed, also pointing to corporate bonds. Those have the highest Sharpe ratios of any asset class right now, he noted.

OUJohn suggests shorting the exchange-traded fund United States Oil (AMEX: USO). And he'd stay away from financials for awhile.

The fate for shareholders of investment banker Bear Stearns was also debated. Some think it's toast while others see value from a much smaller and different business.

But Paul put things into perspective as the discussion headed into an analysis of individual financials. "I don't see why anyone would even need to buy individual stocks. There are ETFs for mortgage REITS, insurance companies, regional banks, home builders, global financials etc. An investor can sub-sector shop to their hearts content," he wrote.

The ongoing conversation can be found here. 

Diehards also discussed a warning by John Bogle about the current popularity of international funds by U.S. investors. A post noted the Vanguard Group founder told Bloomberg television he had real concerns about the flow of investment capital to some unsavory overseas markets.

It quoted him as saying: "We should have never let ourselves get into this position where so many dollars are being held by foreign countries and bought by foreign countries that are enemies. It's hard to think of Russia or China, or North Korea or Iraq as our friends. Friend or enemy, they have a lot of control over what happens here."

"Gee, when foreign money was pouring into our financial markets, raising the S&P 500 and raising the value of your real estate - I don't recall hearing anybody complain," Wagnerjb responded.

"His comments don't sound protectionist," wrote Bob U. "They are protectionist."

He added: "That's all we need now. A fortress America mentality that discourages foreign direct investment. What a solution to our current situation!"

Peanut strongly agreed with Bogle's comments. Governments in places like North Korea, China and Venezuela are dangerous enemies, the poster argued. "I don't believe people realize how bad it is and how much they wish harm on us. As a soldier that has been overseas I have seen first-hand the intensity and fervor in which people that dislike the U.S. display it. They truly want to ruin us and destroy us," Peanut added.

Another pointed out that Bogle was talking about state-directed sovereign wealth funds, not necessarily private investment in the U.S. economy. Links to recent articles about the issue and analysts in the field were included. I would also like to humbly offer another.

The debate rages here.

Multiple conversations considered the rising plight of gold. One, called "$1,000 Gold," talked about whether gold was in a bubble. Snowman9000 certainly thinks so. He rebalanced down more than a third of his position in the precious metal. "If it goes down, I'll be glad I did the extra measure of ‘bubble rebalancing.' If it keeps going up, that's good too!" he wrote.

When another poster told how his portfolio was 13% in gold, Snowman said he thought that was a bit much. But he noted that adjusted for inflation, gold's all-time high was around $2,200. "With that in mind, $1,000 is not a bubble," he added.

Another poster, tc101, bought Central Fund of Canada (AMEX: CEF). The closed-end fund trades like a stock and holds 50 ounces of silver for every 1 ounce of gold, he observed. Tc101 said he preferred that over the streetTRACKS Gold Shares ETF (NYSE: GLD), which is all gold.

Those and other comments about gold can be found here. 

Victoria went to Diehards.org to find out about converting her shares of Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund (VEIEX) into its ETF share class (AMEX: VWO).

She read somewhere that the ETF's price sometimes sells at a premium and sometimes at a discount to its net asset value.

"Unless you are selling immediately after the conversion, there is no difference. If you are indeed selling, then yes, it is better when VWO trades at a premium ... since you get to buy at NAV and sell at premium prices," Indexfundfan explained.

But if she isn't selling, just converting to a different share class, Victoria wondered if she'd still get more shares of VWO if it trades at a premium.

"Since the ETF syncs up with the open ended mutual fund at the end of the day, it is impossible to know what price it will be at or if it be at premium or discount. If you assume the premium/discount when you check it will still be the same at 4:00 p.m., then you can base your conversion on that but it could change," SpringMan responded.

The conversation continues with questions about issues such as the tax implications of trading ETFs in taxable accounts vs. individual retirement accounts.

For more, the thread can be found here.