191–200 of 297 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does the cost of material goods and services mostly stay the same in EUR, or does it somewhat follow the S&P? I don't understand this question, are you asking if material goods and services in Europe, which uses EUR, "somewhat" follows the S&P, a US stock market index?
If you have to hold USD to buy and sell USD products (as a European) it doesn't make sense to compare your SPY position vs EURUSD because you have to use those USD to buy something or pay some debt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is an indicator and it's not totally non-meaningful. But GDP growth, when it's at the price of increasing the public debt and inflation, is no real growth. Instead of looking at the US, let's look at what used to be a relevant ally... In the eurozone, for example, politicians are hiding the lack of growth behind a growing mountain of public debt and the GDP growth ain't even beating inflation since the 2008 crisis…
Share of the world's GDP is a flawed metric. It tells us we're getting a smaller slice, but it doesn't tell us if the pie grew or shrunk. If the EU grew by 50% while India and China became 200% richer, then on paper the share of the world's GDP would be dramatically lower, while everyone would be better off. I don't disagree with the sentiment you expressed at all though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I noticed this as well. I haven’t found a good cure for this other than diversifying globally.
I could be misunderstanding this, but you know that you can buy ETFs that are currency hedged? Taking Vanguard for example, VGS is global equities, but VGAD is global equities that are AUD-hedged (my home country). The only downside is that you pay more in fees (and they're less tax efficient). People generally don't bother with it though, because on a long enough time-line currencies usually revert to their long-ter…
This is a _huge_ downside for index funds, though. Even quite a small fee difference has a huge compounding impact over time; people often miss just how much.
AIUI, assuming you're investing in a global equity fund, currency hedging is almost never worth it. It _may_ be worth it in some cases if you're investing in a foreign index (eg S&P for Europeans), but even then not usually.
I hate Trump, but this piece doesn't seem to prove or argue anything at all. It's basically free market fanaticism, it says that economic metrics are good in spite of protectionism and not because of it because how could it be otherwise? Invisible hand, etc. It's totally begging the question. If the free market economy is so resilient to threats, why didn't it thrive also in 2008?
I think 2008+ if anything shows that free market economies indeed are resilient to threats even in the worst times.
There are threats, the economic data falls into the gutter, but eventually recovers (not without real and quite lasting negative consequences for many people) -> the free market works great because hey, if you held SP500 you were still fine in the long run.
It's like a religion. If things go well it's thanks to God, if things go wrong maybe God is testing or punishing you but all will eventually be fine (in the worst case, after death). The free market is a lot like a god for its followers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly - people have it backwards, when data diverges from lived experience you don't tell lived experience to shut up cuz' dataa you go back and check your models and your data collection. And you check and you check and you check. Einstein was famously wary of Quantum Mechanics rather than taking the findings at face value, and I guarantee that economic data is a hell of a lot less rigorous and more complicated th…
The thing is that that's not a conflict between data and lived experience, it's just a conflict between different sets of data. If you measure wealth and then you measure wealth relative to housing costs, neither one of those is "lived experience". If you do a survey on people's sentiments about the economy, that's data too. I'm skeptical of the term "lived experience" precisely because people tend to use it in argum…
The most infuriating example, to me, is the overuse of GDP. As if that should tell us everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is an indicator and it's not totally non-meaningful. But GDP growth, when it's at the price of increasing the public debt and inflation, is no real growth. Instead of looking at the US, let's look at what used to be a relevant ally... In the eurozone, for example, politicians are hiding the lack of growth behind a growing mountain of public debt and the GDP growth ain't even beating inflation since the 2008 crisis…
Treating share of global gdp as meaningful is bizarre. It doesn't have to be bad for your share to shrink as long as the overall pie is growing.
Aren't they the same thing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google etc may be a US based company, but they can leverage emerging markets just fine. Not sure what are you trying to say.
You’re buying stock in a company not a market, and a company doesn’t need to be based in a country to profit from that country. Plenty of companies listed on foreign exchanges make the majority of their money from the US market etc.
I mean, we're talking about index funds, where you essentially are buying a market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does the cost of material goods and services mostly stay the same in EUR, or does it somewhat follow the S&P? I don't understand this question, are you asking if material goods and services in Europe, which uses EUR, "somewhat" follows the S&P, a US stock market index?
If you have to hold USD to buy and sell USD products (as a European) it doesn't make sense to compare your SPY position vs EURUSD because you have to use those USD to buy something or pay some debt.
Do people do this? Up until some months ago, I was heavily invested in some US companies, and I never actually held USD in my accounts at any point. I used EUR to buy those stocks, the conversion happening together with the purchase, and same thing when I sold them, I received EUR ultimately.
I know I could have another account in my bank with USD set to the currency, I just don't know why'd anyone would want to, when you can convert at the point of sale/purchase. Of course, if you're doing forex trading or whatever, that might make sense, but I don't think generally people hold USD to buy/sell US stocks, because you don't have to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That logic is flawed. The end value and ROI for S&P500 is the same regardless of the currency used to display it. It's the same as complaining that the temperature increased more in Fahrenheit than in Celsius. EDIT: The total value is the same regardless of the fluctuations of currencies used to represent the value. Those are two independent issues. Currencies fluctuate even if you keep them in checking accounts with…
It makes sense if you're looking at it from the perspective of a European investor. e.g. You start with 1000 EUR, convert and buy into an S&P500 fund, wait a year, sell and convert back to EUR. Celsius and Fahrenheit doesn't work as an analogy because the rate does not change over time as it does with currencies.