Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean yes, past performance doesn't guarantee future results. But it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively at it, when you have a phenomenon that's gone unchallenged for probably a hundred years now. It isn't guaranteed. But nobody's lost their shirt betting it'll continue yet . People always bring up Japan in these discussions, of course. The Nikkei 225 peaked on 29 December 1989, still only at half that value over…
The nikkei 225 peaked at 38k in 1989. It is 29k now, 76% of the old value.
Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
371–380 of 433 posts
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the 2008 crashed happened the office I worked in had lots of people take their money out of their 401ks, IRAs, or brokerages for years. In hindsight it may have been irrational but from what I remember, people were scared. Some people lost their job for years (remember the various news stories about 99-week unemployment people?), you needed whatever money you could get. If that meant cashing out everything you h…
Not only more common -- that is effectively what crashes are: demand for liquidity exceeds the supply, and the way markets are set up, this condition causes an even greater demand for liquidity, in a feedback loop. Most of the time, you can get liquidity, but only at a price that really hurts. Sometimes you can't get it at all.
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#373Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a large difference, one of those is based on a pyramid scheme with no inherent value, and one is based on a company delivering value to customers. With the state of the stock market companies can and do go under, but generally those doing something for people dont magically disappear overnight (like any crypto certainly can.) That's it; that's the difference.
> There's a large difference, one of those is based on a pyramid scheme with no inherent value, and one is based on a company delivering value to customers. Crypto is mostly a store of wealth, similar to a currency. It's inherit value is that it is fungible, transferrable and scarce. Unlike other currencies, the supply is not at the whims of fed officials and politicians. The difference is that you can't pay taxes di…
Currencies are not meant to store wealth. They are the exact opposite, a medium of exchange. From a macroeconomic perspective wealth can only exist in the real world. E.g. you own a house, a car or a factory. When you deposit money into a bank account, you are effectively delegating wealth and letting other people use your money to obtain wealth in your place. These people net a return because of their wealth and let you have a share of their returns.
When you hoard currencies like Scrooge McDuck then you are neither spending your money, nor delegating wealth management to other people. The money has been taken out of circulation.
Then there is the other side of money/currency, money is a claim to another person's labor, meaning if you fail to act on that claim the portion of labor that this claim represents has perished because of unemployment. The solution to this problem is inflation. If labor perishes, make the claim to that labor perish as well. If you do not want to lose purchasing power you will have to invest your money. Banks let you deposit and make your money available to those who are interested in investing on your behalf. You can also put your money into financial assets that directly represent physical wealth such as ownership of a company. If banks and financial assets fail, you can still invest your money yourself.
>Unlike other currencies, the supply is not at the whims of fed officials and politicians.
Considering the vast majority of cryptocurrencies meet their demise at the hands of their creators I'm not exactly sure where the difference is. A lot of cryptocurrency people talk about how the background of the team behind the cryptocurrency is very important.
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
Edit: (Some) Stocks that don’t pay dividends still pay you. Most stocks now don’t pay dividends. Either they reinvest in the business (growing the stock’s value) or buyback shares with extra cash, (alternative method to dividends as they’re returning value to you the shareholder.)
Ethereum will effectively do share buybacks starting in July. They're switching to a system that burns the majority of transaction fees. If share buybacks are equivalent to dividends, then arguably this is equivalent to paying dividends to ETH holders, funded by the fee revenue paid by users.
With pump and dumps it is often not known who the beneficiaries are.
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a lot of newcomers to stock investing in the past year have been given the wrong ideas about the stock market. When all of the headlines are about GameStop and Nokia and AMC and some kid who made it lost a lot of money on RobinHood, the stock market can feel like a place for gambling. Now that cryptocurrency prices are listed right next to stock prices, many people don’t even understand that stocks are owners…
> why stocks can have any value without paying dividends. Well, if a company was never going to issue dividends at any time in the future, or do dividend-alternatives like buybacks or a liquidation at the end of its life (not a normal option), or anything else, its shares would be worthless. I could actually imagine a tech company going out of business before its first dividend.
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but supply is limited in part because of the wealthy folks buying properties they will not use as a residence to hedge against inflation. That real-estate is the least risky manner to protect wealth is a result of low interests rates and inflationary monetary policy. Printing as many dollars in the last year as there were in existence before, has perturbed a "normal" real-estate market. More dollars flying arou…
Supply is mostly limited because demand is up among millennials and material shortages have increased costs and delayed construction.
Millennials were buying houses before all this too (I am and have) without this level of inflated prices (depending on where you are and how "free" the market is).
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the next protracted drawdown We should have seen this drawdown last year.
The longer the bubble builds the bigger the bust. We’ve chosen growth over stability, fundamentals, and robustness. Once the U.S. struggles to stimulate its economy through deficit spending it’ll hit a wall. It’ll be fine for people but there will be a massive dislocation in the economy.
If there is a discrepancy from that ideal then it means that something is going wrong, and the longer that discrepancy lasts, the more things are going wrong. Those wrong things will be discovered as soon as interest rates are back to their normal level.
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is the strategy myself and many of my college friends took when we graduated in the late 80's. And we're all pretty comfy right now. I wonder if your Japanese peers in a Nikkei 225 fund over the same time period would agree with your strategy. Buy-and-hold for them is still down 50% over the last few decades.
Why would expect the Nikkei 225 to provide similar returns to the S&P 500? Company quality varies greatly between these indexes.
Why wouldn't they have similar companies?
Lots of well known global brands in Glorious Nippon, too.
Re: Stock Market Returns Are Anything but Average
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I'm not smart enough to pick individual stocks. At some point (perhaps now) Amazon growth is predicated on cannibalizing other companies. After all, the broad market can't exceed the GDP generally for the long term. My primary point here is not to argue about investment concepts, merely to state a concern about the artificiality of it all. Financialization is real and rather spooky.
The thing is there's a FRACTION of a percentage of people who are "good at picking stocks". Most PROFESSIONAL stock pickers don't beat the market. And those that do, a tiny fraction can do it consistently over a 5-10 year time frame. This is backed up by decades of data. But we still have millions of people who apparently think they are smarter than the thousands of professional stock-pickers who have MAs, PhDs and y…