Not Another Stock Market Thread

I'm so glad you have life all figured out right down to the exact balance of your 401K the minute you wish to retire Phlaggie

xlev2 wrote:

I'm so glad you have life all figured out right down to the exact balance of your 401K the minute you wish to retire Phlaggie

I'm far from having life all figured out (still scratching my head about the popularity of Dane Cook for example, who hasn't ever said a funny thing in my opinion), but if you haven't figured out at least in ball park figures what kind of money you will have at potential retiring milestones, then you haven't put enough thought into your investment strategy.

This deserves a bump since it didn't get much "air play."

Sagarin wrote:

Danielle Park says it as well as anyone. Caveat Emptor.

http://www.financialsense.com/Market/daily/thursday.htm

Ok, this guy says it a whole lot better than me.

Flagpole, maybe you should be more than a little concerned.

Your investing history seems to only go back 20 years.

You'd be in a paupers grave if you were "buy & hold" after the Great Depression.

Didn't the Dow take like 20 years to get back to the 1920's highs???

Mostly I understand where you are coming from, but some of your recent statements like "I don't care where the profits came from last quarter".

Well, I damn well care. You really think things have turned around that far that fast, fundamentally. Doesn't that reek somewhat???

A low volume jobless recovery doesn't make sense.

The young family that lived next door just up and left their house in April, they had refinanced a couple of years earlier and you know how it goes. Nice three bedroom ranch now sits unoccupied, as do several other houses in the neighborhood that suffered the same fate.

Wall street rallies and main street is suffering, this is a fluff rally right now without a solid foundation, not to say you should not invest right now, you should. People want to be invested in the stock market, baby boomers are keeping this rally going right now. When the house next door is sold and occupied by a wage earning owner that is when I know we are coming out of this disconnect, unfortunately that may be several years.

mark to, oh whatever wrote:

Flagpole, maybe you should be more than a little concerned.

Your investing history seems to only go back 20 years.

You'd be in a paupers grave if you were "buy & hold" after the Great Depression.

Didn't the Dow take like 20 years to get back to the 1920's highs???

Mostly I understand where you are coming from, but some of your recent statements like "I don't care where the profits came from last quarter".

Well, I damn well care. You really think things have turned around that far that fast, fundamentally. Doesn't that reek somewhat???

A low volume jobless recovery doesn't make sense.

There are several things you are not understanding.

1) Even though the market took 20+ years to get back to pre-Depression levels following the Depression, DIVIDENDS were a MUCH bigger portion of compensation for investors,a dn so during that time (a BAD time) they still made 5+% annual return...enough to still get rich if you invested enough.

2) The market has changed since the 1930s or even the 1950, and I invest with that changed market in mind.

3) Recoveries ALWAYS happen with a high unemployment rate initially...they are a LAGGING indicator! Don't worry. The jobs will come back.

4) You are correct that I don't care TOO much what influenced the profits we've been seeing from companies. They cut some fat. Fine by me. Profits from companies make people buy stock.

I'll stick with inflation being the big threat in the next couple years.

Interesting thread. Turns out pretty much just like J. Grantham predicted (and I agreed with). Interesting too that I said if it did I would change my target retirement age from 59.5 to 55. I have actually exactly done that in the last several months. Things could still change, but that's where things are today.

Flagpole wrote:

Interesting thread. Turns out pretty much just like J. Grantham predicted (and I agreed with). Interesting too that I said if it did I would change my target retirement age from 59.5 to 55. I have actually exactly done that in the last several months. Things could still change, but that's where things are today.

Fascinating!

no, this is a terrible post. Leverage is down for the most part and the market has flown.

thanks for bumping, Flagpole - I like few things more than reading doom and gloom posts that turn out dead wrong.

whoa. flash from the past. those were scary times. much better now, all things considered.

topcat wrote:

whoa. flash from the past. those were scary times. much better now, all things considered.

Off course you won't see the doomsayers back then weighing back in now and saying how wrong they were.

agip wrote:

thanks for bumping, Flagpole - I like few things more than reading doom and gloom posts that turn out dead wrong.

Yep. Obviously bad things sometimes happen, but if you do all the things you should do - eliminate debt, have an emergency fund, earmark at least 15% to retirement accounts no matter what until you are within 5 years of retirement, then in the 27% of calendar years that the market goes down, it matters not...then it's just a buying opportunity. Even the big crash from Oct. 2007 to March 2009 took me less than 3 years to recover from, and because I bought the whole time, those purchases have ballooned since.