Live data from Hacker News

Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

fortune.com

131–140 of 260 posts

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment makes me realize that in the medium term, after most of the unlucky predictors drop off, you are statistically likely to be left with a few really lucky ones (i.e. if a thousand people are tossing coins, you're likely to get one guy with a streak of 10 heads), and these individuals are perfect to put on pedestals as rare and brilliant talents.

What you do is look at the rationale that was given before it happened. You look at their reasoning and figure out if it was actually what happened in reality. Just make sure you are not picking up on their rationalisation after the fact.

The fact that they had good reasoning in the past does not guarantee they will continue in the future.

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why the dollar cost averaging technique works so well. No, it's not likely to provide you a financial windfall, but it's also not likely to yield you financial devastation either. If you're investing for retirement then it generates quite a bit of wealth in the long term.

Yeah, but if you have a lump sum of money it's still better to invest everything at once if you plan to hold it for decades. Vanguard has a good paper on that titled "Dollar-cost averaging just means taking risk later". And as you get close to retirement, you need to be mindful about sequence of returns risk.

Got a link please? That surely depends on having a > 20 year time horizon

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#135
post #66

At this point, I’m expecting both stagflation and a flat market for years to come. Odd that mortgage rate is above 6%, inflation is high, layoffs are happening, and yet the White House is pretending it’s not a recession and won’t say the word.

Inflation isn't high any more. July was 0% and August was 0.1%. The headline number looks at a 12 month window. Until the very high inflation months earlier this year drop out of that window the headline number will be high. But it does not look like prices are increasing much anymore. All of the long term trends still point to low inflation like they did before Covid. Slow population growth, technology, and boomers…

The reason people find the 'zero inflation' headlines misleading are mainly for three reasons:

1) Aggregate month-to-month inflation metrics were flat/low due to gas prices falling, but many important categories were still quickly inflating. Notably rent, but also food.

2) The reason people normally reference 12 month inflation windows is because many things, like energy prices, are very volatile month to month. It is going to take time to really see the trends.

3) For things that skyrocketed like food, people are hoping to actually see the prices come back down.

So, yeah, you are correct on your numbers, clearly. But as an non-expert, I'm not really sure the current trends are positive. I think they are still pretty troubling.

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#136

At this point, I’m expecting both stagflation and a flat market for years to come. Odd that mortgage rate is above 6%, inflation is high, layoffs are happening, and yet the White House is pretending it’s not a recession and won’t say the word.

They will admit it on November 9th

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#137
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You shouldn't read those headlines. Both the ones walking you off a cliff in increasingly devious ways the interviews with Warren Buffett saying buy and hold which is a pessimal strategy, and the headlines announcing x happened because y as if you should think y leads x. It did not, they don't know that, news blogs get a pass in telling people false causes after the fact, dude it's purely made up and it's a guessing…

Why is buy and hold a "pessimal strategy"?

[I talk about predicting the future in this essay. I mention that up front because maybe then you can take on the walls of text.]

Companies always go to shit eventually and you're left holding the bag. Spesh because there's no dividends and companies never wind down, they just do gambits with borrowed money. That's the Way of the American CEO. Dude these dumbasses even publish books about that being the way, like Jack Welch's suckafucking book Straight from the Gut yeah spilled his guts alright.

That means that when they can't pay that debt, the creditors have priority, shares get no part of any of the money. So CEOs can't own debt on their own company (I think, there's rules, like they all get broken but there's still rules and breaking them has a cost like in slaps on the wrist, like it has to be very intermediated, because otherwise duh first thing everybody would do is short the company they run and fly it into a mountain). So it looks very smooth, very well thought-out, high-integrity, the American tax system is like that too, looks air tight on form 1040, and if you dig it looks more and more airtight until--whoosh cracked window on an airplane everything flying out. Nah.

Dude get in and get the fuck out. Know when to sell. Bill Browder, whom I don't think much of in most regards and have ripped on here explained why he's a nomad. But having talked him down, he does say smart dead-on-the-money intel. You gotta know first off when to get in. Under the thesis that it's exponential (it's impossible to respect that thesis, cubic at best, cubic is short and sweet, "ex-po-nen-tial" is a mouthful) so you can get in whenever it makes no difference. There's no sexy part of the exponential, every part of the exponential is sexy. Like I don't know I got advice like get out right when it's taking off--it never takes off. It's identical to its derivative, no inflection points, no maxima, no minima, it's the comparable in its uniformity to a flatline. In a sense it is a flatline because of inflation, that connects both curves, e^x - e^x = 0, f(x)=0 is the flatline. Alternately, e^x / e^x = 1, f(x)=1, though that's a totally different flatline.

So there is a moment to get in and that's when there's a genuine crash that nobody saw coming, that later is said to be impossible to predict--dude that's when. But to get in at that point you need to have gotten out before then, ideally at the peak. So because of relativity you can't react to the peak, see oh it just peaked time to sell--no there's a delay, like coupla hours for a customer to talk to his broker, so gotta preempt the peak by a coupla hours, that means gotta give the sell order pre-peak--meaning while it's still going up according to some smooth description of the Brownian curve (you never see it in the full grain, that information costs money an hn user doesn't pay). So it's critical your broker try to talk you out of it--that's a very good sign, just convince him you're stupid and he'll say "eh, masochist"--that's exactly what you want to hear. Because if you do depart the cyclical assets at the peak of the cycle and transfer it to countercyclical assets, then you get a bonus from them (not much, gold is politically oppressed by practically all empires, only one exception) so like gold won't double, but in my analysis that's because it's too feared so instead Bitcoin would jump, and I bet on it on margin almost at the trough, and I got 90% of the appreciation in Oct-Nov last year.

So that's the thing, selling near the top. So it's a totally political move, just like predicting the peak on Sep 27 (when the Fed announced the rate hikes, charts lie inflation lies that was the peak that was when the shit got really sticky and the pipes backed up) 30 days before. So for my personal protection, in order not to be subjected to additional psychiatric malpractice and experiments and all that shit, instead of saying my spine gave me a trillion-dollar twitch, I will play the fool card and say it was a quadrillion dollar twitch. What's the difference? For me both are infinite resources, even a million dollars is infinite resources. The difference--even if I say this explicitly--is when I say quadrillion shrinks say I'm crazy, which is good that's what I want. Chose which ward I end up in carefully. Dude no spinal taps.

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#138

I, a random anon from the Internet, think SP500 is heading for 2400 or even lower (1600ish?), which is great news, as millenials will get a chance to buy stocks at a low price.

If that happens, will millenials have any money with which to buy stocks?

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read a lot of these type of predictions, often you see some people say it's a great time to buy, and others it's a bad time to buy, and generally you will only remember the people who guessed correctly, so none of this helps you today at all. Every time those people who got lucky will appear in some future ad or article making a new prediction, and generally fewer will be lucky twice. In the long run, everyone is l…

This is why the dollar cost averaging technique works so well. No, it's not likely to provide you a financial windfall, but it's also not likely to yield you financial devastation either. If you're investing for retirement then it generates quite a bit of wealth in the long term.

This is incorrect.

https://static.twentyoverten.com/5980d16bbfb1c93238ad9c24/rJ...

Re: Stanley Druckenmiller warns the stock market will be ‘flat’ for an entire decade

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but if you have a lump sum of money it's still better to invest everything at once if you plan to hold it for decades. Vanguard has a good paper on that titled "Dollar-cost averaging just means taking risk later". And as you get close to retirement, you need to be mindful about sequence of returns risk.

Got a link please? That surely depends on having a > 20 year time horizon

https://static.twentyoverten.com/5980d16bbfb1c93238ad9c24/rJ...
Post reply on HN