The Dow was at 172 on Jan. 2, 1931. The buy-and-holders have made out like bandits since that date.
The Dow was at 172 on Jan. 2, 1931. The buy-and-holders have made out like bandits since that date.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
On top of that stocks are extremely overvalued on the belief that fundamental economic principles in place for over 4,000 years have been replaced by “new age” metrics. Of course that is the same nonsense that has been repeated at every bubble since before the Pyramids were built.
And you have been predicting an epic collapse since before the Pyramids were built. Sorry, buddy, but the tune doesn't change, and .... here's the important part..... you don't allow for the possibility that it might not happen. On the contrary, your message is delivered with absolute certainty that it will happen, and even more so emphatically recently. That simply is not the way it works.
seattle prattle wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
On top of that stocks are extremely overvalued on the belief that fundamental economic principles in place for over 4,000 years have been replaced by “new age” metrics. Of course that is the same nonsense that has been repeated at every bubble since before the Pyramids were built.
And you have been predicting an epic collapse since before the Pyramids were built. Sorry, buddy, but the tune doesn't change, and .... here's the important part..... you don't allow for the possibility that it might not happen. On the contrary, your message is delivered with absolute certainty that it will happen, and even more so emphatically recently. That simply is not the way it works.
Your getting brave again after Friday.
https://twitter.com/NorthmanTrader/status/1257724050513833984/photo/1And you’re still following failed investors.
^pretty stupid comment on the Buffett Indicator, though Warren did take a big loss on airline stocks....
Link or it didn’t happen.
Buy low, sell high wrote:
Don't visit this thread wrote:
Except you have no idea when the bottom is. Some people were calling for Dow down to 15,000. So, if you were waiting until then, you would have missed out. Maybe it will go down to 15,000 though. I have no idea. It's best to stay invested and continue to add more as end goal is for you to accumulate appreciating asset that you can tap into when you're older.
Time in the market is more important than timing the market.
Biggest reason for Warren Buffet's massive wealth is simply the time in the market. At age 43, his net worth was $34 million. That's great, but he's now worth around $72 Billion. That's a massive increase as he's had 46 years to grow it.
“Buy low” does not necessarily mean at the bottom.
Good luck with that.
I'm sure you'll get it right from time to time, but in the long-term, it's better to just keep the money in and continue to add more to grow your asset. Also, to rebalance your portfolio annually.
I think once your asset grows to a substantial amount, you'll get it. If you're jumping in and out of the market with thousands or tens of thousands, then you can do that for fun. But once your account grows to be much bigger, you'll see quickly that even an annual gain of 8% or so would start to make a huge difference with your account. You would then get it that all that buying and selling was just a waste of time and money. Also, all of the taxes you have to pay from short term gain, it's a pain.
Don't visit this thread wrote:
Buy low, sell high wrote:
“Buy low” does not necessarily mean at the bottom.
Good luck with that.
I'm sure you'll get it right from time to time, but in the long-term, it's better to just keep the money in and continue to add more to grow your asset. Also, to rebalance your portfolio annually.
I think once your asset grows to a substantial amount, you'll get it. If you're jumping in and out of the market with thousands or tens of thousands, then you can do that for fun. But once your account grows to be much bigger, you'll see quickly that even an annual gain of 8% or so would start to make a huge difference with your account. You would then get it that all that buying and selling was just a waste of time and money. Also, all of the taxes you have to pay from short term gain, it's a pain.
Here is how I rebalance. When stock prices go up, my stock position exceeds where it should be so I sell some stock (sell high). When prices plunge, my stock position becomes lower than I want, so I buy (buy low). And I only sell those stock I have held for at least one year, so there are no taxes on ST gains. It’s pretty simple really.
Buy low, sell high wrote:
Don't visit this thread wrote:
Good luck with that.
I'm sure you'll get it right from time to time, but in the long-term, it's better to just keep the money in and continue to add more to grow your asset. Also, to rebalance your portfolio annually.
I think once your asset grows to a substantial amount, you'll get it. If you're jumping in and out of the market with thousands or tens of thousands, then you can do that for fun. But once your account grows to be much bigger, you'll see quickly that even an annual gain of 8% or so would start to make a huge difference with your account. You would then get it that all that buying and selling was just a waste of time and money. Also, all of the taxes you have to pay from short term gain, it's a pain.
Here is how I rebalance. When stock prices go up, my stock position exceeds where it should be so I sell some stock (sell high). When prices plunge, my stock position becomes lower than I want, so I buy (buy low). And I only sell those stock I have held for at least one year, so there are no taxes on ST gains. It’s pretty simple really.
Got it. I do that too of rebalancing, but only do it annually to minimize taxes as well as I don't want to sell my winners too early by not buying/selling too often. I keep a good amount of bond allocation to avoid panic selling and think, "this time it's different" like when stocks were falling in March.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
On top of that stocks are extremely overvalued on the belief that fundamental economic principles in place for over 4,000 years have been replaced by “new age” metrics. Of course that is the same nonsense that has been repeated at every bubble since before the Pyramids were built.
You are an absolute, total, and unequivocal moron. I would like to start another fin thread and have you excluded, it would probably be pretty good.
Where is Maserati? His party membership rants seem pretty prophetic atm.
Looks like mas last posted before open on March 23.
Buffeted wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
On top of that stocks are extremely overvalued on the belief that fundamental economic principles in place for over 4,000 years have been replaced by “new age” metrics. Of course that is the same nonsense that has been repeated at every bubble since before the Pyramids were built.
You are an absolute, total, and unequivocal moron. I would like to start another fin thread and have you excluded, it would probably be pretty good.
Where is Maserati? His party membership rants seem pretty prophetic atm.
You obviously can’t handle anything other than what is spoon fed to you by the financial industry. Just tune in to CNBC and you’ll get the “pretty good” of the DGTD thread.
The market is artificially high right now because the Fed acted extremely quickly this time around, bailed out airlines, gave everyone $1200, increased unemployment, and loaned money to businesses. In most ways it was a good thing, but it is also delaying the inevitable in some cases and merely propping up the stock market. A huge percentage of Americans didn't pay their rent for the month of April, and I've already seen several businesses in my town close their doors permanently. It can be argued that those were weak businesses that probably needed to go anyway, but I do think that in the short-term, things are going to be very bad.
You are spot on. Hard to imagine what leads someone to view it differently.
https://twitter.com/4Awesometweet/status/1257756716927561728
Thinking more about airlines, 70% of what they got was free money, and 30% was in the form of a super low interest loan basically in exchange for 3% nationalization. Airlines are eligible for more super low interest loans (around 1%) in the fall, again in exchange for further nationalization (up to around 7.5% I believe). With this in mind, I'm not sure the federal government will even allow the big players to go under as 7.5% ownership in these giant corporations is probably an attractive thing for the government, and it also sets a precedent of partial nationalization of giant corporations. I still think American Airlines will file chapter 11 at the very least, but I can't really see the other big 3 collapsing. The government has too much to lose, and too much to gain.
Bankruptcy does not mean AA will disappear. The govt will make sure that don’t.
That all may be true, but it does not appear to be a growth industry any time soon.
"Household debt balances through March totaled $14.3 trillion, a 1.1% increase from the previous quarter and now $1.6 trillion clear of the previous nominal high of $12.7 trillion in the third quarter of 2008 during the financial crisis, according to New York Federal Reserve data released Tuesday."
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/05/consumer-debt-hits-new-record-of-14point3-trillion.html
Anyone waving this off is not dealing with reality.
PRD wrote:
Anyone waving this off is not dealing with reality.
Igy is a big proponent of personal debt, especially to support a lavish lifestyle. Even more so if you are almost 70 and preparing to retire soon.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
And you have been predicting an epic collapse since before the Pyramids were built. Sorry, buddy, but the tune doesn't change, and .... here's the important part..... you don't allow for the possibility that it might not happen. On the contrary, your message is delivered with absolute certainty that it will happen, and even more so emphatically recently. That simply is not the way it works.
Your getting brave again after Friday.
...
Brave and getting braver. That's exactly the point. I gauge my investing based on market returns. You base it to alarger extent than I upon past metrics (historical valuations).
Next up on the earnings front, for me, Shopify after market close.