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

How Sick Is the Stock Market?

bloombergview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: How Sick Is the Stock Market?

#41

Post by aianus »

jacquesm wrote: post #36
venomsnake wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no looting of the neighbors. There was some racketeering though. It was mostly redistribution of the previously state owned enterprises.

And also sometimes the little guys getting a nice revenge on the banks. Case in point: friend bought a house at a relatively high price + mortgage, then hyperinflation happened, said friend paid off the house with one month's worth of salary.

My dad did the same. But they didn't really get one over on the banks. For every such mortgage there were 100 people who lost all of their liquid savings. The bankers came out just fine on the other end.

Re: How Sick Is the Stock Market?

#42

Post by drjesusphd »

gchokov wrote: post #21
dsfsdfd wrote: post #15

Look at the ftse 100 over a 30 year time frame and tell me you can't make a guess as to what's coming. Go here and click on 'all' in the zoom menu https://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXFTSE%3AUKX&ei=qlLcVZHi...

Double bottom, that's what happens. Expecting more heights. Long FTSE! edit: Stock market theme is huge for click baits and zerohedge readers. No extremes are healthy and there's too much drama around this.

> Double bottom

This is no place for this kind of tea leaf reading nonsense.

Re: How Sick Is the Stock Market?

#43

Post by outside1234 »

dharbin wrote: post #20
codingdave wrote: post #18

The younger you are, the less it all matters, as the trend over a decade or more will always be "up". (If not we have bigger problems.) So if you don't plan on retiring off your investments in the next 10 years, just enjoy the ride. If you do want your money in the next few years, it shouldn't be in stocks.

So what you're saying is that past performance is indicative of future results...

over a long enough time period? yes.

Re: How Sick Is the Stock Market?

#45

Post by outside1234 »

jacquesm wrote: post #36
venomsnake wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no looting of the neighbors. There was some racketeering though. It was mostly redistribution of the previously state owned enterprises.

And also sometimes the little guys getting a nice revenge on the banks. Case in point: friend bought a house at a relatively high price + mortgage, then hyperinflation happened, said friend paid off the house with one month's worth of salary.

FYI: the banks also borrow money usually, at low rates (see the amount of interest you are getting on your money at your bank), so their real business is the delta between these lower rates and the rates you pay for the mortgage.

so they made money in this transaction as well. its the entity at the top of the debt pyramid that lost money. it was probably the depositors in your case.

Re: How Sick Is the Stock Market?

#48

Post by n72 »

dharbin wrote: post #20
codingdave wrote: post #18

The younger you are, the less it all matters, as the trend over a decade or more will always be "up". (If not we have bigger problems.) So if you don't plan on retiring off your investments in the next 10 years, just enjoy the ride. If you do want your money in the next few years, it shouldn't be in stocks.

So what you're saying is that past performance is indicative of future results...

You realize that phrase is used in terms of stock picking, not the nature of a free market, right?

Re: How Sick Is the Stock Market?

#49

Post by knodi123 »

outside1234 wrote: post #43
dharbin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you're saying is that past performance is indicative of future results...

over a long enough time period? yes.

The stock market is less than 200 years old. Let's not make any bold predictions about unbreakable trends when we're talking about time periods up to 25% of the age of the market itself. After all, at one time the conventional wisdom was "No football team who plays their home games in a domed stadium will ever win the superbowl." And there were decades of evidence to support that statistical fact!
Post reply on HN