...why are people still using this thread? It's kind of insane.
...why are people still using this thread? It's kind of insane.
Some good news for those who believe it's NOT different this time...
Please delete that post before Igy's head explodes.
Ben Drew wrote:
The CAPE has a 10 year lookback which takes it back to 2007. The result is an abnormal skewing of the data making it essentially useless at this time.
So explain to me why S&P 500 EPS is at the same level as 2014? Possible valuation/earnings gap you think?
It's at that level because it's rising. It fell after your date, and has now risen back to that level on its way higher. This is good news.
Go, Pats!
No it won't rise higher. The con is over and your passive investment will be down the drain.
Go Fats!
Smarter people than you think earnings will keep going up.
Morgan Fairchild wrote:
No it won't rise higher. The con is over and your passive investment will be down the drain.
Go Fats!
Actually S&P 500 earnings are growing at a 16% rate.
Financial Advisor wrote:
Morgan Fairchild wrote:No it won't rise higher. The con is over and your passive investment will be down the drain.
Go Fats!
Actually S&P 500 earnings are growing at a 16% rate.
Growing into 2014 EPS levels.
Stanley Morgan wrote:
Smarter people than you think earnings will keep going up.
Not really, they always mark earnings up. Same game porridge fools like you dine on.
Morgan Fairchild wrote:
Financial Advisor wrote:Actually S&P 500 earnings are growing at a 16% rate.
Growing into 2014 EPS levels.
Nope. They're already beyond that.
https://dollarcollapse.com/stock-prices/dumb-dumber-money-keeps-pouring/Stanley Morgan wrote:
Smarter people than you think earnings will keep going up.
Dumb and Dumber wrote:
Stanley Morgan wrote:https://dollarcollapse.com/stock-prices/dumb-dumber-money-keeps-pouring/Smarter people than you think earnings will keep going up.
Why did you quote my post? That's article has nothing to do with earnings.
Retail investors absorbing the wisdom of your "smarter people" and taking action by opening accounts at record levels.
If that's the case, why do they mention only Schwab? Do you have similar data for other brokerages?
That supports my thought that most, if not all, of these "new" accounts are really just a shifting of market share. Both Schwab and TD lowered their commissions to attract accounts from other firms. Clearly it worked. Good for them and good for the investors.
Sure, going passive. Wrong, new investors. Either way, a cheap way to lose money.
Why did you post that video, if you think he's lying?
What you imply was not said in the video. You are the one lying.