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

Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

papers.ssrn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 282 posts

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#161

Post by kgwgk »

tristor wrote: post #155
kgwgk wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> If I was alive in 1923 and stashed away $8 million > your 1923 dollars were likely silver dollars It's unlikely that you had 200 metric tons of silver coins stashed away.

> It's unlikely that you had 200 metric tons of silver coins stashed away. I think the grandparent was imagining they were silver certificate dollars[1], not actual silver dollar coins. That said, silver certificate dollars needed to be converted at some point in the past, in 2023 they can't be converted and only have collector value, and $8 million worth would dilute their collector value substantially. [1]: https:/…

I’m surprised that the certificates can be worth more. I guess they are rare - it may be hard to sell them all for much more than a dollar on average.

In any case eight millions are several metric tons.

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#162

Post by pixl97 »

kortilla wrote: post #138
treis wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it I think this is more that we're entering a post material scarcity economy kind of like we changed from almost everyone being farmers. We're leaving behind the economy where almost everyone manufactures stuff to where they do something else.

> think this is more that we're entering a post material scarcity economy No we’re not. Materials for housing, etc are just as expensive as ever. Food still has to be heavily subsidized by the government directly and indirectly (“water rights”). Post-scarcity is a fantasy world used to justify heavily socialist policies that allow people to not work without having to wonder who does have to work.

Food is heavily subsidized by the government to avoid complete and total social instability. 100 years ago we realized that a underfed population made a terrible workforce and worked on remediating that. All the while farming automation and the green revolution made it so a large portion of our population working in farming/food became just a very tiny fraction. Meanwhile a pure capitalism based farming community would optimize for producing just in time and just enough to maximize profits which would lead to a complete fucking collapse next time a drought came around.

This ''socialism'' you're so seemingly afraid of was a foundation of the capitalistic growth we had in the last century.

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#163

Post by edgyquant »

karatinversion wrote: post #53
ceejayoz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you had $8M in 1923 and kept it under a mattress, it would still be $8M today Saving account interest rates haven't been 0% for the whole last 100 years. It's not a great investment, but you'd have substantially more than $8M.

The parent specifically refers to holding it as cash (“under the mattress”), though. And of course, if you do put it in the bank 1923, there’s no deposit insurance for the first ten years, any possible bank might just go under in the first ten years…

How many of them did though?

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#164

Post by pixl97 »

Invictus0 wrote: post #141
autokad wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because dividends are ultimately why people buy stocks in the first place? I would disagree, I feel like the mojority of stonk owners think dividends are passe companies, and a real company would reinvest its earnings or buy back stock. I disagree with these people. I think a company that has no intention of paying a dividend is merely an over produced digital collectible.

You disagree that buybacks are more tax efficient than dividends? > I think a company that has no intention of paying a dividend is merely an over produced digital collectible. So, Amazon is a NFT?

If Amazon cannot grow, then yes, it's stock price will go down losing you more than you bought the shares for.

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#165

Post by compumike »

insonable wrote: post #122
compumike wrote: post #73

Figures 6 and 9 look a lot like https://totalrealreturns.com/ , especially with the trendlines on these figures, logarithmic y-axis, (disclosure: my side project, recomputed daily at market close) It would be cool to merge in some longer-term historical data as the article author has done, instead of just using actually-tradable assets like I've done. Per the article, the author considers these charts "misleading": >…

Yahoo uses the CRSP method (see: factor to adjust price) to back-adjust old prices when dividends and splits occur, so it's not as misleading as you're probably thinking. I'd be surprised if the others didn't do something like this too.

Yahoo does have this “Adjusted Close” column available in their historical data downloads, but they do not use it for charts.

Their charts are price-only. Same with Google Finance and Apple Stocks.

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#166

Post by yterdy »

sleton38234234 wrote: post #92

I have a theory. The last 100 years has seen govt spending as percent of gdp increase to ever greater levels. People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it. Without the ability to pay for it via taxes, the govt will eventually have to default on it's currency and thus real returns on fixed income/bonds will have to become increasingly negative. Their article already shows a slight widenin…

I agree, insofar that "handouts" are primarily, in monetary volume:

1) favorable loan terms for financial entities (loans in both directions, but ultimately favoring the bottom line of private capital);

2) favorable taxation terms for the wealthiest earners and owners (e.g., low capital gains and inheritance taxes, when compared to income taxes);

and 3) federal and state benefits that often face large and unnecessary administrative costs (in order to reduce fraud (which is only possible because they're means-tested or otherwise restricted));

in that order. And the first two rob the treasury of far, far more than the last. By orders of magnitude, particularly in the past few years.

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#167

Post by smaddox »

xyzzy123 wrote: post #104
smaddox wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private debt dwarfed public debt until very recently, and it's still significany higher: https://braveneweurope.com/steve-keen-what-is-the-role-of-pu... Also GDP is a terrible proxy for economic prosperity. A broken window adds to GDP, but subtracts from prosperity. If we had a better proxy for prosperity, it would be easier to see if government debt was actually net negative or net positive effect. As is, all argume…

I think prosperity (particularly if we include health, education, wellbeing etc) is unfortunately very difficult to measure and any attempt necessarily incorporates a lot of speculation and ideology. A forest cleared creates wealth & prosperity, but what was the value of the forest that was lost? What value do we put on natural amenity, biodiversity, a pristine environment? An employee works very long hours, numbers…

Agreed. But I don't think it would take a herculean effort to do better than GDP.

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#168

Post by geysersam »

PKop wrote: post #147
treis wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it I think this is more that we're entering a post material scarcity economy kind of like we changed from almost everyone being farmers. We're leaving behind the economy where almost everyone manufactures stuff to where they do something else.

>we're entering a post material scarcity economy This seems a rather dangerous view, as the post scarcity era of maybe the late 20th century globalism, or the larger industrial revolution and coincident population explosion, could be nearing it's end. Peak cheap oil may be just around the corner. The growth built atop improving agriculture yields, cheap oil, and cheap labor has resulted in population growth that cann…

> subsisting on their own work output but depending (or being subsidized by) the work and resources of others.

How to even begin defining who is subsisted by who? Is the FAANG engineer creating sustenance or is he subsidized?

I see something else. Millions of people working their asses of, many in multiple jobs, in the richest country in the world.

Most of the productivity increase of the last decades has gone to the richest part of the population. Who's subsisting on who?

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#169

Post by ryeights »

krembanan wrote: post #159
worik wrote: post #96

For modern computing/finance type of people (I was but now have reformed) the lack of financial data is a problem. Even if you can get access to every trade, which is hard, the amount of data is not what modern machine learning types require. Thr EMH is a hard mistress too. There is no amount of data that can help you solve unsolvable equations. So alot fall into this trap, synthetic data. Some of the best statistici…

The Medallion Fund by Renaissance Technologies has had an average annual return of 71.8% from 1994-2014.

What is not known, however, is if those returns were achieved through legal means…

Re: Stock market charts you never saw (2021)

#170

Post by NovemberWhiskey »

compumike wrote: post #165
insonable wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yahoo uses the CRSP method (see: factor to adjust price) to back-adjust old prices when dividends and splits occur, so it's not as misleading as you're probably thinking. I'd be surprised if the others didn't do something like this too.

Yahoo does have this “Adjusted Close” column available in their historical data downloads, but they do not use it for charts. Their charts are price-only. Same with Google Finance and Apple Stocks.

Definitely not seeing Alphabet's 20:1 split in July 2022 when I glance at Yahoo Finance charts - you sure about that? Or are you saying they're adjusted for some corporate actions but not for others?

EDIT: OK, I see there's a note that close is split-adjusted but not dividend-adjusted.

Post reply on HN