231–240 of 357 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a crystal ball. However, it would be more useful if more stock indexes would be considered than just one S&P 500. E.g. Dow Jones: http://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historica... Also from other nations.
Dow Jones is probably one of the least interesting ones due to the small number of stocks in it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "anywhere in developed world" I hate this terminology. If the US has, in fact, "finished" developing, then the future of the S&P will be bleak. I don't think that's the case at all, though. I think development has just started and we'll see fantastic advances in bio-informatics, solar power, 3D printing and a number of other fields in the upcoming decades. When I was a teenager, I pirated music. I seriously hope my…
But we live in the best of all possible worlds!
It's funny that this is so non-intuitive. My wife continues to try to "time the market" despite me telling her that it's pointless over such a long time horizon. Maybe this will help convince her.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "anywhere in developed world" I hate this terminology. If the US has, in fact, "finished" developing, then the future of the S&P will be bleak. I don't think that's the case at all, though. I think development has just started and we'll see fantastic advances in bio-informatics, solar power, 3D printing and a number of other fields in the upcoming decades. When I was a teenager, I pirated music. I seriously hope my…
US is far from finishing deveping, fortunately or unfortunately. Take trains, for example, area where US is far behind China, Japan, or European countries, despite the size of its territory. I'm sure there are other examples.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LKZQT6pv_oU/TBqKqQaCcaI/AAAAAAAAA6...
http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/infrastructure/our-insigh...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ETFs are generally cheaper to own in terms of their expense ratios, something like <=1% vs 1% – 3% for mutual finds. It‘s easier to get into and out of ETFs; They trade all day just as a stock does. Mutual funds you enter into at the market‘s close at a price set at that time. Also, ETFs are bit more transparent as to their capital gains taxes costs. Less surprises when you liquidate.
Yikes! Are there really index funds with 1% expense ratios? I think my Vanguard funds are all under 0.2%, some way under. (I've got the impression that Vanguard's ETF expense ratios are similar or identical to the corresponding fund expense ratios.) Thanks for the overview. I'd heard about the constant trading difference before (I've tended not to think about it, since I'm a buy-and-hold-for-years type). Do you have…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That remains to be seen What would a more powerful USA look like? It doesn't appear that the country is after an empire the same way the British had one 100 years ago, so raw aggression is out. I can't imagine a realistic scenario that doesn't require the implosion of other nations to embiggen America.
The USA has a huge empire, probably the largest ever seen, but it's not an empire of government expansion it's an empire built by companies and culture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What would a more powerful USA look like? Passenger rail; durable houses; less unemployment and more labor-force participation; a population not balkanized along political/cultural lines.
With an increase in immigration and a cheapening of robotic workers and kiosks... where is this decrease in unemployment and increase in labor-force participation going to come from? I mean, there is "always" going to be jobs for plumbers and spots for artisan made stuff... but those jobs aren't going to replace the amount of jobs that will be lost when $15 becomes more expensive than iRobot...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't appear that the country is after an empire the same way the British had one 100 years ago US empire is defined more by squashing incipient threats to its global hegemony than by UK-style colony management.
UK-style colony management was also largely about access to colonial resources, and colonial markets. Colonial management was a means to that end. The US empire is doing precisely that, through a mixture of soft and hard power.
Both have imperial dynamics, but for the U.S. the important part is being the "world's policeman" as it comes with the authority to destabilize regions and install puppets where their sovereign governments may act against U.S. interests. With this more limited administrative footprint, they're free to focus on use of violence and propaganda, while taking up domestic market policies that benefit net importer businesses and thus justify maintaining the empire.
Where people say that the Pax Americana is ending it is in part because the dynamic has grown more multipolar since the end of the Cold War, with a diverse group of nations asserting their interests without being overthrown.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
US is far from finishing deveping, fortunately or unfortunately. Take trains, for example, area where US is far behind China, Japan, or European countries, despite the size of its territory. I'm sure there are other examples.
Tangent, but the US freight rail networks are much better than Europe. US is good at freight rail and bad at passenger service, Europe is vice versa.
