Down goes the Dow

Sally Vix wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Sally,

Quit with the “lie” stuff. I said “index” return. I hope you have reinvested dividends on everything you own since 2000. Using your numbers it is far below the 10% you quoted earlier.

Shall I now call you a liar?

Igy

Why would you not account for dividends? Seriously, dividends factor in. Who cares about the index return. People owning stocks or funds either are paid dividends or revinvest them. Why do you choose to ignore them when comparing how one asset has done versus another.

And show me where you got that 3.47 number. It is bogus. Please show me where you got that number from. I can show you all my calculations - please show how you came to that bogus 3.47 number.

Sally,

You are a big fat ugly liar.

A laddered CD portfolio was above 2% in 2018. I have not been in CDs as long as you claim.

Igy

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Sally,

You are a big fat ugly liar.

A laddered CD portfolio was above 2% in 2018. I have not been in CDs as long as you claim.

Igy

Quit with the name-calling. I never claimed you were in CDs for any length of time. Again, quit with the name calling of me and others here. It makes you look bad.

Sure Bob.

Reinvesting dividends has given me big fat ugly portfolio performance.

This site is all about portfolio shaming, not body shaming.

seattle prattle wrote:

Reinvesting dividends has given me big fat ugly portfolio performance.

This site is all about portfolio shaming, not body shaming.

Then stop with the liar accusations.

I didn't call you a liar. But i will unless you come up with the proof and post it here. (See what i did there?)

seattle prattle wrote:

I didn't call you a liar. But i will unless you come up with the proof and post it here. (See what i did there?)

Referring to the other guy.

But whatever....

Sally Vix wrote:

And show me where you got that 3.47 number. It is bogus. Please show me where you got that number from. I can show you all my calculations - please show how you came to that bogus 3.47 number.

Bump.

Ask Bob.

The Bumpases wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

And show me where you got that 3.47 number. It is bogus. Please show me where you got that number from. I can show you all my calculations - please show how you came to that bogus 3.47 number.

Bump.

if you don't include dividend reinvestment,that's about the return for the S&P over that period, give or take a few tenths.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Ask Bob.

Thanks for finally being honest and admitting that you made up that number.

Posted five days ago from the same calculator used by Sally. I am sure with the rise in the market since then makes me a liar. That’s just how ridiculous some of you get. Poor debate skillls in my view.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

within the time period you described the retirees portfolio not only recuperated the downturn, it set a new all time high. Maybe you should go check what you wrote and see for yourself. Here, let me help: period 2000 - 2009.

Let me help you 3.47% 19 year index return.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Posted five days ago from the same calculator used by Sally. I am sure with the rise in the market since then makes me a liar. That’s just how ridiculous some of you get. Poor debate skillls in my view.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Let me help you 3.47% 19 year index return.

You’re asked to explain how you came up with that number and you point to the post where you originally mentioned it as your source? And then you have the audacity to claim others have poor debating skills?

????????????

The Bumpases wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Posted five days ago from the same calculator used by Sally. I am sure with the rise in the market since then makes me a liar. That’s just how ridiculous some of you get. Poor debate skillls in my view.

You’re asked to explain how you came up with that number and you point to the post where you originally mentioned it as your source? And then you have the audacity to claim others have poor debating skills?

????????????

Are you that dense? Try January 2000 through January 2019, a nineteen year S&P 500 Index returned annualized at 3.219%. Do the calculation yourself using the application supplied by Bob, I mean Sally. When I ran the numbers earlier in the week I probably ran it thru February.

Your comment is just ridiculous.

Why don’t you post using one of your numerous other handles?

Answer: It would expose who you are.

?

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

Reinvesting dividends has given me big fat ugly portfolio performance.

This site is all about portfolio shaming, not body shaming.

Then stop with the liar accusations.

That ball is in your court. If you want people to stop calling you a liar, stop lying.

Oh please.

“The Goldilocks narrative made repeated appearances from 2010-16, and the current version sounds something like this – inflationary pressures have receded, giving central banks wide latitude to pause almost indefinitely on policy tightening. Global growth is slowing, but not enough to be truly concerning. And US political risks are close to resolution, with growing investor optimism that lasting solutions to funding the US government and US-China trade are now within reach. We are sceptical that this story holds together.”

Andrew Sheets, Morgan Stanley 2/17/2019

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Ask Bob.

Not that I care but why would you bring my real name into the discussion? Seriously, Ghost, that is all you have?