Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 433 posts

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#351

Post by slavik81 »

svachalek wrote: post #326
wiz21 wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pardon my ignorance, but why will the : "existing holdings will return to their yesterday prices at some point" ? The way you put it seems so inevitable (although "at some point" may be 100 years from now). So, as you're not the only one to say that, I'd like to know what makes you think that the holdings will get back to their previous level ? Because, if they increase from their current position, then you certainly…

It tends to fluctuate within a range but just to play devil's advocate, note that it took about 30 years to recover from the 1929 crash.

It's a good strategy to buy in over time to reduce the risk that you pumped all your money in at the peak of a bubble. It averages things out, so spikes and drops are not as big of a deal.

Your stocks from 1929 would not have recovered for quite a long time, but your stocks from 1925 would only take 6 years to get back in the black.

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#352

Post by 001sky »

adt2bt wrote: post #331
vasilipupkin wrote: post #252

I just want to offer everyone a professional piece of advice. Large down moves in equity markets is exactly when you should buy equities because that's when expected returns are at their highest.

This got me thinking - is it possible to develop a profitable long-term investment strategy that takes advantage of stock market dips? For example, say I have $1000 to invest every month. I'll take that $1000 and put $500 into an index fund and $500 into a savings account. Then, once the market dips 10% from its previous high, all the accumulated money in the savings accounts is invested over 4 weeks. I made a simple…

testing (a) trading strategy in a short window ... why?

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#353

Post by rorykoehler »

merpnderp wrote: post #272
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Europe socialism created limited working hours, affordable health care, free public education all the way to university level - and beyond - and was also responsible for massive investment in infrastructure and R&D. Modern social democratic states wouldn't exist without it. You might want to understand what the word means before running down a political system you seem to know nothing about. As for abject poverty…

I'd hardly call Europe socialist. Socialism is the social ownership (state ownership) of the means of production. A welfare state is a state with large programs to ensure the welfare of the people, which better describes much of Europe. As for extreme poverty, China has seen a 90% reduction in extreme poverty since 1981, and India has seen a 60% reduction since 1981, and Sub-Saharan Africa has seen a 12%. The Indian…

>(state ownership) of the means of production

That would be Communism, a very extreme form of Socialism. Many countries in Europe are very Socialist.

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#354

Post by lewisl9029 »

chiph wrote: post #314
wiz21 wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pardon my ignorance, but why will the : "existing holdings will return to their yesterday prices at some point" ? The way you put it seems so inevitable (although "at some point" may be 100 years from now). So, as you're not the only one to say that, I'd like to know what makes you think that the holdings will get back to their previous level ? Because, if they increase from their current position, then you certainly…

There is obviously nothing guaranteeing that will happen. However, it has done so every single time that a correction has happened in the past. This is where the word "faith" applies to the markets.

This is pretty much it.

Thinking rationally, we can see pretty obviously that this is a case of using the past to predict the future. It's never guaranteed to work, but since it tends to be the common sentiment shared among so many investors, it does become somewhat self-perpetuating. At the end of the day, the market does move based on sentiments, after all.

However, it probably is a good idea to try to shield yourself from potential downsides when this sentiments changes in the future (and it certainly can).

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#355

Post by branchless »

markvdb wrote: post #346
branchless wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure point 3 is correct. Buying regularly would have seen you buy below today's price and above it.

Dollar cost averaging lowers risk and increases returns. If you can afford it, you may also want to have a look at value averaging.

It lowers risk making returns and/or losses less volatile. It does not increase returns. Of those dumping a lump sum in some lose more some win more and averaging them smooths it out. It's not a magic have your cake and eat it.

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#356

Post by pnut »

jes wrote: post #162
code4tee wrote: post #7

Broadly speaking the US economy is quite healthy and people were expecting a correction in the stock market for some time. Within tech, it will have some negative impact on the plans of some companies as it will be harder to get lofty valuations based on 'fluff'... during such times investors want to see hard facts and real results to back-up value--but that's a broader trend thats been slowly developing for some tim…

Unfunded liabilities (money that is owed, but not currently on-hand) in the United States are said to be greater than $127T: http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/01/17/you-think-th... This does not account for unfunded liabilities owed by the states. The situation there is very difficult as well. You also mention that China is rampant with corruption. In my view, with respect to politics and cronyism, I think th…

I've got maybe 70 more years to live, my unfunded liabilities spiral into the millions!!! And that's before children! I must be bankrupt!

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#357

Post by seanmcdirmid »

wutbrodo wrote: post #334
forgetsusername wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfunded liabilities (money that is owed, but not currently on-hand) in the United States are said to be greater than $127T: This is classic one-sided accounting. That money is not vaporized, never to be seen again when it's paid out. It is paid to US citizens as income . Out one pocket, into another.

I'm far from a reflexive debt hawk, but when someone mentions something like this, aren't they usually referring to the instability inherent in unfunded liabilities (as opposed to what you seem to be assuming (s)he means, which is that the money is illusory)?

And let's not ignore the usa's role as a debtor of last resort: people actually need to save money for retirement, China and Norway needs to do something with their dollars so their economies don't overheat. Even if the interest rates suck, the US gov and financial system has always been will to take your dollars off your hands in a pretty safe way, which is part of the reason the dollar has been so successful.

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#358

Post by maratd »

rorykoehler wrote: post #353
merpnderp wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd hardly call Europe socialist. Socialism is the social ownership (state ownership) of the means of production. A welfare state is a state with large programs to ensure the welfare of the people, which better describes much of Europe. As for extreme poverty, China has seen a 90% reduction in extreme poverty since 1981, and India has seen a 60% reduction since 1981, and Sub-Saharan Africa has seen a 12%. The Indian…

>(state ownership) of the means of production That would be Communism, a very extreme form of Socialism. Many countries in Europe are very Socialist.

Communism is state ownership of all property. The parent gave the proper definition of socialism. It is the state ownership of the means of production. Europe is not socialist. There were various attempts, but the means of production is still overwhelmingly private.

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#359

Post by coldtea »

icebraining wrote: post #197
coldtea wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are you going on about? If capitalism is a race to the bottom, we would have reached it a long time ago. Only for a long time it had internal pressure (workers demands) and external pressure (the Cold war etc). Else we'd be still with child labor, 14 hours work day and such...

Workers and their demands are part of capitalism, as one of the sides of the labor market.

Not if capitalists can prevent it, crush it, disallow it, etc -- along with their friends in the goverment, with "right to work" laws, etc.

It's funny that for something supposedly pragmatic and empirical, as capitalism, there are people invoking the "no true capitalism" defense.

I mean when they say that in "true capitalism" the government would not interfere and the market would adjust itself etc, where in real life (and in all know historical cases), the government is in the pockets of powerful moguls and big business lobbys).

Re: Stocks Off Sharply as Market Upheaval Grows

#360

Post by pnut »

MCRed wrote: post #84
sillygeese wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when you look at the US economy as a whole things are doing quite well To be more accurate, when you look at the propaganda spewed by the mainstream media, everything seems to be fine, because they keep spinning everything in a positive light. In the US, for starters, there's a huge bubble in stocks, and an echo bubble in housing. There's a massive property bubble in Canada and Australia, and so on. With interest r…

We have a democrat who is president, and who took over after a crisis during the term of a republican. (never mind that he was part of the cause of the crisis with his 1990s era "not lending to people who can't repay is racist" lawsuit against banks)... so the liberals of HN are highly motivated to believe that democrats are "responsible" and that they have "fixed the economy" after republicans "wrecked it". So when…

America is the greatest economic engine the world has ever known. It's not because we're situated on a mountain of rubies, or that we are intellectually superior to other countries.

It's because of our system of government. This talk about the government being the problem, causing harm to the economy, really irritates me - the American economy owes its very existence to the American government and the private property protections it offers in the forms of regulations, legal system, social welfare programs, public education, military, etc etc etc.

If you can't stomach the sausage making in the US without losing respect for all the greatness it permits, just stop paying attention and vote for whoever says what feels right, that's the American way.

Your italicized real recovery sounds like another adrenaline boost in the arm, rather than the robust, sustainable recovery that is actually occurring.

Post reply on HN