sell! sell! sell!

Search

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
"buy & hold morons" ?

"buy & hold quickest way to the poor house" ?

:missingte

I know wealthy people, I know poor people. I can say with absolute 100% certainity through experience & observation people have made a great deal of money with a buy and hold strategy and traders almost always lose money. Of course, all you need to do is look at one of many indexes to see the pattern of success a buy and hold strategy yields.

And that weak dollar is fucking killing us!
:nohead:

Observation & experience & a little common sense >>>>>>>>>> subjective hyperpole.

The buy and hold strategy worked from exiting the great depression to 2000....again past is not an indication of the future....my grandpa worked hard in a rubber factory his whole life, saved hard, invested and became a millonaire, his generation were savers that worked their butts off not extravagent spenders living the high life doing unproductive desk jobs like the baby boom generation and all generations that have followed them is, it eventually will catch up to us all and the younger generation will ultimately be left dealing with the mess.....

going forward I don't believe the buy and hold strategy will work got too many issues to deal with as a nation economically, baby boomers retiring with zero saving, social security, pension funds, basically alot of promises that an indebted nation cannot keep, plus all the near term problems like derivatives, huge debt, yen carry trade, housing collapse, i ramble about....

That buy and hold strategy hasn't work for the last 7 years as the markets overall are down number wise (taking markets as a whole nasdaq included) and are down quite a bit on true value basis taking inflation into account.

Maybe i'm wrong and there is some way out of this mess...
 

Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,905
Tokens
<object width="530" height="370"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/p/A8293DF812F1C968"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/p/A8293DF812F1C968" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="530" height="370"></embed></object>
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
bottom line this is just the "cycle of things" that many bulls talk about....the generation coming out of the great depression knew first hand what happened when people lived for today and way beyond their means. So they worked hard, saved for future generations (their kids etc), invested, and led a meager lifestyle. As for the generations that followed they have not seen or heard first hand what can happen. We've become a live for today nation, live extravegent lifestyle, go into lots of debt that the financial system throws at us, have a we are america we can never fail or see another depression like scenerio mentality, and worry about the future when it comes.
 

Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,905
Tokens
the only answer is alternate energy

money is only created to create debt

so to keep up production must increase

but the main ingredient needed to keep up this charade is what most economists call an "infinite" resource OIL

and by golly its not its a finite resource
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
the only answer is alternate energy

money is only created to create debt

so to keep up production must increase

but the main ingredient needed to keep up this charade is what most economists call an "infinite" resource OIL

and by golly its not its a finite resource

oil and gas prices will collapse along with everything else....big oil profits goodbye.
 

bushman
Joined
Sep 22, 2004
Messages
14,457
Tokens
So money is one side of a gigantic global double entry system.

A worldwide trial balance.

On one side we have money.

On the other side we have tangible assets like houses and gold and intangible assets like human labour which hasn't been done yet(future debt repayments).

This doesn't invalidate the system, it just means we can make it really really big.

Most of the wealth that most of us enjoy today is because of this credit system.

No money around means no-one wants your labour = 1930s depression


BTW. Notice that I include gold in the tangible assets bit.

Gold isn't really money, gold is a tangible asset, like a turnip.

Money has never really been anything more than a convenient paper based representation for trading the tangible assets of the real world.

The big intangible bit depends on whether people are willing to work to pay the banks their loans back, and in the real world most people are.
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
So money is one side of a gigantic global double entry system.

A worldwide trial balance.

On one side we have money.

On the other side we have tangible assets like houses and gold and intangible assets like human labour which hasn't been done yet(future debt repayments).

This doesn't invalidate the system, it just means we can make it really really big.

Most of the wealth that most of us enjoy today is because of this credit system.

No money around means no-one wants your labour = 1930s depression


BTW. Notice that I include gold in the tangible assets bit.

Gold isn't really money, gold is a tangible asset, like a turnip.

Money has never really been anything more than a convenient paper based representation for trading the tangible assets of the real world.

The big intangible bit depends on whether people are willing to work to pay the banks their loans back, and in the real world most people are.

great post couldn't have said it any better :103631605
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
More sly fed movement below the radar

------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Reserve Cuts Fee for Borrowing Its Treasuries (Update1)

By Elizabeth Stanton

Aug. 21 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve Bank of New York cut the fee that bond dealers pay to borrow its Treasuries to a record low in a bid to ease a shortage in the market for loans backed by the securities.

The New York Fed cut its so-called minimum fee rate to 0.5 percent from 1 percent after a surge in demand for government debt caused rates on loans backed by the securities to plunge. The Fed said in a statement the move is ``temporary.''

``We are doing it to provide additional liquidity to the Treasury financing market,'' said Andrew Williams, a spokesman for the New York Fed. He said the rate was the lowest in the history of the program, which has existed in its current form since 1999. The New York Fed last lowered the fee rate on June 26, 2003, the day after policy makers cut their target overnight rate to a four-decade low of 1 percent.

The average rate at which holders of non-specific Treasury securities were able to borrow against them in the $6.6 trillion securities lending market opened at 3 percent and closed at 3.25 percent, down from 4.21 percent yesterday and 2 percentage points below the Federal Reserve's 5.25 percent target overnight rate. The rate fell to as low as 2.1 percent between 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. New York time, dealers said.

``It's unprecedented in my recollection'' for the general collateral rate to fall so far below the Fed target rate, said Louis Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP, a Jersey City, New Jersey-based research firm specializing in short-term debt markets. ``There are clearly a large number of customers who only want Treasury collateral regardless of yield.''

Fed Holdings

Crandall said the lending rate on non-specific Treasuries, known as the general collateral rate, normally falls no more than 0.2 percentage point below the Fed's target overnight rate. Specific Treasury securities, in contrast, often command financing rates at least a percentage point lower than the Fed target rate.

The New York Fed participates in the market for repurchase agreements, or repos, by lending the Treasury securities in its portfolio to dealers. The Fed held $784.9 billion of Treasuries as of Aug. 15, about 18 percent of the $4.4 trillion of marketable Treasuries outstanding.

The minimum fee rate determines the interest rate dealers receive from the Fed on overnight loans backed by the Fed's securities. A minimum fee rate of 0.5 percent means the interest rate received will be at least that much lower than the market rate for non-specific Treasury securities.

Bill Rally

The fee ensures that dealers will borrow the Fed's securities only when the market rates to borrow the securities fall below the general collateral rate by an amount equal to the fee rate. The repo rates for specific securities closed at levels ranging from 2.25 percent to 3.50 percent.

Investors began accepting such low rates on overnight loans backed by Treasuries after the yields on bills tumbled, said John Roberts, a managing director in U.S. government bond trading at Barclays Capital Inc. in New York.

Demand for bills has surged as investors shunned short-term debt issued by corporate borrowers, in particular debt sold to finance holdings of bonds and loans. Yields on so-called commercial paper, especially asset-backed commercial paper, have soared amid concern that losses resulting from rising delinquencies on mortgage loans will keep growing. Commercial paper is a staple for many short-term bond funds.

Bill yields rose after the fee rate reduction, with three- month yields increasing 22 basis points to 3.40 percent and one- month yields climbing 55 basis points to 2.66 percent.

Bill yields had fallen earlier this morning, following a tumble yesterday that was the biggest since Oct. 20, 1987, when the yield fell 85 basis points on the day the U.S. stock market crashed. The yield on three-month Treasury bills dropped 67 basis points, or 0.67 percentage point, yesterday to 3.09 percent, after trading as low as 2.51 percent.

``There is very high demand for U.S. government collateral because it's the highest rated and people are scared to death of credit right now,'' Roberts said.
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
86,789
Tokens
So money is one side of a gigantic global double entry system.

A worldwide trial balance.

On one side we have money.

On the other side we have tangible assets like houses and gold and intangible assets like human labour which hasn't been done yet(future debt repayments).

This doesn't invalidate the system, it just means we can make it really really big.

Most of the wealth that most of us enjoy today is because of this credit system.

No money around means no-one wants your labour = 1930s depression


BTW. Notice that I include gold in the tangible assets bit.

Gold isn't really money, gold is a tangible asset, like a turnip.

Money has never really been anything more than a convenient paper based representation for trading the tangible assets of the real world.

The big intangible bit depends on whether people are willing to work to pay the banks their loans back, and in the real world most people are.


eekster, we actually agree on some things sometimes:103631605

This makes at least 3 or 4 issues already.
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
Paulson, Bernanke, and Dodd throw their heads together and Paulson ex CEO of goldman sachs says "We are going to work through this problem just fine," "These things take a while to play out," Dodd tells bernanke to use "all the tools available"

weren't they the same ones telling us housing would rebound soon and the subprime crisis would be contained...hmm....maybe they are right this time...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

AP
Paulson Seeks to Calm Jittery Investors
Tuesday August 21, 6:31 pm ET
By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer
Paulson Seeks to Calm Jittery Investors, Says Country Will Make Way Through Credit Crunch

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson attempted to soothe jittery investors on Tuesday, insisting the United States will safely get through a spreading credit crisis that has unhinged Wall Street.

"We are going to work through this problem just fine," Paulson said. He urged patience as investors reassess their appetite for risk, saying there isn't a "quick solution" to the matter. "These things take a while to play out," the secretary said.

Paulson commented as the Federal Reserve, trying to further stabilize the reeling markets, pumped another $3.75 billion into the financial system Tuesday. It was the latest in a series of cash transfusions that have topped more than $100 billion since last week.

In another development, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd urged Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to use "all the tools available" so that a spreading credit crisis doesn't undermine the national economy.

Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat who is seeking his party's presidential nomination, did not specifically ask Bernanke to lower a key interest rate in a meeting he had privately with the Fed chairman and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

Dodd, D-Conn., did, however, urge policymakers to do all they could to ease the credit crunch, he said after the meeting.

In the past several weeks, financial markets in the United States and around the globe have been shaken by fears about spreading credit problems that started with home mortgages. Investors are worried that these problems will infect the larger financial system and possibly hurt the U.S. economy. As a result, stocks on Wall Street have careened wildly.

Paulson, however, stressed Tuesday in an interview on CNBC that the economy remains in fundamentally good shape and suggested that it should be should be able to weather the financial storm.

At a news conference concluding a North American summit with the leaders of Canada and Mexico Tuesday, President Bush said the U.S. economy is strong.

"The fundamental question is: 'Is there fundamental liquidity in our system as people readjust risk?' and the answer is, 'Yes, there is,' " he said.

Before taking over the Treasury helm last year, Paulson was a top executive at Goldman Sachs, a huge Wall Street firm.

Credit problems have spread beyond home mortgages to those with blemished credit histories and are now troubling other borrowers. Nervous lenders have tightened credit standards, making it more difficult for individuals and companies to find financing.

Against this backdrop, Goldman Sachs last week pumped $2 billion into one of its struggling hedge funds and was asking other investors to put in another $1 billion. BNP Paribas, France's largest bank, two weeks ago froze three funds that had invested in the troubled U.S. mortgage market.

Investors, meanwhile, have been plowing money into safe havens such as short-term Treasury bills, driving down yields sharply.

The central bank last week sliced its discount rate -- the rate it charges banks for direct loans -- to 5.75 percent.

Fed officials also have been urging banks to borrow from the Fed's so-called discount window, trying to remove a stigma that is a place for banks to turn to only in times of emergency or last resort. The Fed is now allowing loans of up to 30 days versus the normal one day.

New York Fed President Timothy Geithner and Donald Kohn, the second-highest ranking person on the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors, participated in a conference call last Friday with major investment banking firms. They suggested use of the discount window would be viewed as a sign of strength.

Paulson said he has "great confidence" in the Fed but refrained from saying whether its actions thus far will be sufficient.

The Treasury chief did say the Fed's actions will make it easier for market players to "focus on risk" and get themselves straightened out.

On Capitol Hill, some Democrats would like to see mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which are recovering from accounting scandals -- have a larger role in the mortgage market. Some would like to see the two mortgage companies buy "jumbo" mortgages of more than $417,000.

The Bush administration doesn't like the idea. Paulson said that raising investment caps on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac "doesn't do much of anything."
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
4,000
Tokens
"buy & hold morons" ?

"buy & hold quickest way to the poor house" ?

:missingte

I know wealthy people, I know poor people. I can say with absolute 100% certainity through experience & observation people have made a great deal of money with a buy and hold strategy and traders almost always lose money. Of course, all you need to do is look at one of many indexes to see the pattern of success a buy and hold strategy yields.

And that weak dollar is fucking killing us!
:nohead:

Observation & experience & a little common sense >>>>>>>>>> subjective hyperpole.

An excellent article that should help you help yourself. You do realize that just because your salary went up from 10 years ago, assuming you are out of high school, doesn't mean you are any better off than 10 years ago. Just b/c a number in an index goes up, doesn't mean much if inflation is figured in. (this is much thew same myth I'm sure you believe about housing as well) Why can't people grasp inflation, I just don't get it? BUt I'm sure at 15,000 some day you will be waving pom poms without realizing what's behind it...Again, actually read this Willie.


Stocks and Inflation
Adam Hamilton August 26, 2005 2848 Words
Inflation, a pernicious stealth tax on purchasing power surreptitiously levied by immoral governments, is one of the greatest persistent obstacles to serious wealth generation.

By creating fiat money out of thin air and spending it today, governments increase the amount of money in circulation. The larger the money supply grows, the more dollars bid on and compete for goods and services driving up general prices. These rising prices reduce the purchasing power of investors’ scarce capital, effectively expropriating it through a dishonorable “tax” that not 1 in 50 people truly understand.

Inflationary policies increasing monetary growth are tax increases, no different in ultimate effect than directly raising marginal income tax rates. But since so few people, including sophisticated investors, really grasp this, governments often prefer inflation to politically unpalatable direct tax increases.

Somewhat ironically, this relentless monetary inflation hits the poor the hardest, as rising general prices have the largest proportionate effect on those with the lowest incomes. This strikes me as irony-laden because governments across the world actively subsidize the poor in order to bribe them for votes at election time. If these poor folks really understood just how regressive inflationary taxation truly is, they would probably revolt.

Thankfully we investors are not burdened with poverty. The ultimate source of investment capital is savings, consuming less than one earns. And since we investors have lived under our means long enough to save capital to invest, we are obviously not living hand-to-mouth where any rise in general prices would crush us.

Nevertheless, inflation is still a dire threat to our hard-earned investment capital. Over long-term secular time horizons, the inflationary erosion of purchasing power can radically alter our ultimate returns. It does an investor no good to earn 10% when general prices also rise 10%, as his net gain in purchasing power is zero. We invest in order to earn greater purchasing power to increase our standard of living, not to merely see nominal numbers grow.

Interestingly, the groups of investors that seem the most savvy in considering real (inflation-adjusted) returns instead of the usual nominal ones are the contrarians investing in commodities. As I discussed last week, commodities investors often know exactly where key commodities like gold or oil traded in real terms over the past half century. Studies of real commodities price histories are fairly common in contrarian circles.

But sadly mainstream stock investors are seldom if ever exposed to inflation-adjusted studies on the stock markets. Whenever Wall Street talks about secular gains, like in the Great Bull Market from 1982 to 2000, nominal stock-index numbers are used. This serves Wall Street’s interests well by seriously overstating the actual purchasing-power gains won by past investors, but it does a great disservice to today’s investors.

If an investor earns 100% over years but general price levels rise 50% over this same time, half of the investor’s perceived gain is nothing but an illusion. Nominal numbers over long timespans are meaningless as investors seek to multiply capital in order to ultimately spend it on actual goods and services some day. True gains are only relevant in terms of their impact on raw purchasing power. Stock investors really need to take this to heart.

In order to analyze the impact of inflation on stock investors, we did some research work on the mighty S&P 500 this week. The S&P 500, of course, is the flagship US stock index that represents the preeminent publicly traded corporations in America. It is the best proxy for the US stock markets as a whole and it yields the benchmark returns by which all other investments and even portfolio managers are measured.

Using monthly data since 1950, we overlaid the usual nominal S&P 500 with a real S&P 500 adjusted for inflation. The US Consumer Price Index was used for computing the monthly inflation adjustments, which is extremely conservative.

The CPI is intentionally lowballed to understate inflation for political reasons since inflationary expectations are so dangerous for the financial markets. Indeed even Alan Greenspan has said many times that the Fed fears the rise of inflationary expectations even more than inflation itself since the mere expectation of inflation radically alters global capital flows and buying patterns in stocks and bonds.

In addition, non-discretionary government expenses like pensions are directly tied to CPI inflation, so the lower the numbers conjured up the more cash Washington has for discretionary programs it would rather pursue. Higher reported inflation would lead to higher interest rates too, forcing the US Treasury to pay much more to finance its gargantuan debt. True inflation is raw money supply growth, not the heavily manipulated CPI.

So as you drink in this chart and its sobering implications, please realize that these numbers are the most conservative possible estimate of inflation that your ever-benevolent government wants you to believe. If broad M3 money growth was used to measure inflation as it ought to be rather than the controlled CPI, the results below would be far, far worse. CPI inflation truly is the best-case scenario for investors.

The blue line below is the usual nominal S&P 500 and the red line represents the CPI-adjusted real S&P 500, in constant 2005 dollars. At various major long-term highs and lows the actual index levels are noted, and the nominal (blue) and real (red) returns between these interim extremes are computed. Yellow numbers under these returns show the ratio between real and nominal gains. Ratios under 1.00 indicate that actual real returns were smaller than nominal S&P 500 gains.

The net impact of even conservative CPI inflation on long-term stock investors in the last half century has been staggering. Inflation matters, in a monumental way, for stock investors working hard trying to multiply their scarce and precious capital. Only fools ignore the long-term effects of inflation on investments.

Zeal082605A.gif

One of Wall Street’s greatest selling points, which is unfortunately a myth, is that stocks always do well over any long-term span of time. In reality the precise endpoints bracketing a particular long-term timespan are crucial for determining long-term investment success. And the ravaging effects of inflation act to magnify the paramount importance of exquisite buy and sell timing.

Note on the blue line above how the S&P 500 went from 108 in the late 1960s to 107 in the early 1980s for a small 1% loss. That is bad enough, to not earn any money over more than a decade, but if you look at the same slice of time in the red inflation-adjusted data, investors actually lost nearly two-thirds of their purchasing power over this same period! Real losses ran 54x the nominal losses during the last secular bear market a few decades ago.

This illustrates one of the key points of long-term real returns. When stock prices are flat or declining, inflating money supplies accelerate the real losses borne by investors. Somewhat frighteningly, we have already witnessed this in the first downleg of the latest secular bear since 2000. Real losses were already running 1.05x the nominal losses and I suspect this multiplier will only grow as the years march on.

Speaking of years, careful observers will note that the durations marked in gray above for major secular bull and bear markets differ somewhat from those periods recently discussed in Long Valuation Waves 2. The reason is the monthly data used here versus the daily data in my long wave studies. Since CPI data is only available monthly, it makes sense to use monthly stock-index closes as well for this analysis. Actual monthly tops and bottoms can differ significantly in time from when the absolute intra-month daily tops and bottoms are achieved.

And inflation doesn’t just accelerate real losses during secular bears, it retards real gains investors earn during secular bulls. Both secular bulls rendered above clearly drive home this key point. In the 1950s and 1960s, nominal gains ran 536%. But in real terms investors only earned 322% over nearly two decades, or 0.60x the headline gains. While 322% is not trivial, it is vastly inferior to 536%.

And during the greatest bull market in US history, in the 1980s and 1990s, nominal gains rocketed up a staggering 1317% higher. But after inflation was accounted for, investors only earned about half that, 0.53x or 700%, in terms of raw purchasing power. This reveals the unpleasant truth that fully half of the bull-market gains of legend in the last couple decades were illusory, solely driven by Washington and the Fed relentlessly expanding money supplies and driving up general prices.

Now at this point it wouldn’t surprise me if stock investors are thinking, “So what? A 700% increase in my purchasing power is excellent and beyond ridicule.” But they have to realize that this 18-year period of 700% real gains is a major anomaly. Not only is it rare, but investors would have had to buy at exactly the 1982 low and sell at exactly the 2000 high. Perfect timing is not very likely in reality.

What if, instead of buying in 1982 at a major low where everyone hated stocks, investors had bought at a major real high in the late 1960s when everyone loved stocks? In November 1968 the real S&P 500 closed at 599 on a monthly basis. It would not hit this level again until December 1992 and not go materially higher until March 1995. Thus, investors buying at the wrong time during the late 1960s top would have waited 26.3 years before they earned even one additional percent of purchasing power! Ouch.

Such a quarter-century drought devoid of any real gains is absolutely catastrophic. If an average investor starts investing at 25 and retires to live off investments at 65, he only has four decades in which to earn his fortune. Losing 26 years out of these 40 due to buying at the wrong time in the Long Valuation Waves and being ravaged by inflation would utterly scuttle any chance of recovery.

While it is certainly fascinating that the effects of inflation accelerate losses in secular bears and retard gains in secular bulls, the longer term that one’s perspective becomes the more the ravages of inflation become evident. The popular Wall Street assertion that stocks always do well in the long term, when adjusted for declines in purchasing power due to monetary inflation, becomes a pale shadow of its former self.

In the chart above one truly huge timespan is delineated. It runs from 1950 to 2000. Now please realize that the US stock markets made a major secular bottom in 1949 and a major top in 2000, so out of any times to buy and sell since World War 2 these are the most optimal by far. There are no other two interim extremes that would yield higher gains. In this perfect best-case scenario, the S&P 500 rose by a massive 8801% over a half century!

These are awesome gains, but once again they are nominal, not adjusted for purchasing-power declines. If we take the inflation-adjusted S&P 500 in constant 2005 dollars, the gain is gutted to merely 1111%. Over the past half century from the absolute best-case moments in time to buy and sell for the long term, fully 7/8th of the gains investors could have reaped are illusory. These are wiped out by rising inflation decreasing purchasing power.

Now in order to earn 8801% over a little under 51 years, an investor would have to earn 9.25% a year on average in nominal terms. But this same 8801% corresponds with only 1111% in real terms, which works out to an average of 4.87% a year over a half century. Thus inflation wiped out half of the best possible annual gains in the last half century or nearly 7/8th of the final compounded return. Inflation has a huge impact.

All long-term investors, regardless of what they choose to invest in, must consider the relentless impact of inflation. In this stock market case 4.87% real compounded annually is certainly not bad at all, but it is over the most optimal period possible and is a far cry from 9.25% a year nominal. And this inflation obviously doesn’t just affect bonds and commodities as many folks believe, but stocks and even real estate.

The bubblicious real-estate industry today makes a big deal out of quoting nominal gains in houses over long-term periods often running several years to several decades. While inflation has a minor effect over several years, when you get into decades its effect is huge. Just as in stocks, the majority of any gains in a house from 1950 to 2000 are likely eaten up by inflation with true real gains only comprising a modest fraction.

In order to increase their real wealth, investors must seek gains that handily outpace inflation in order to multiply their purchasing power over time. Stocks, bonds, real estate, and commodities can all do this easily if they are purchased near the bottoms of their long cycles. But if they are purchased near the tops of their long cycles, they could face decades with no nominal returns and massive real losses.

As I outlined recently, unfortunately stocks are still near the 2000 top of their long cycles. It usually takes 17 years or so for stock markets to run from their secular peaks to their secular troughs, so unfortunately we are probably only a third or so into this current secular bear. Investors who buy stocks today and want to hold for a decade or more likely face flat markets at best.

Flat markets may not seem like the end of the world, but when the Fed’s relentless fiat inflation is factored in it can lead to massive real losses over timespans exceeding a decade. From the late 1960s to the early 1980s the S&P 500 was unchanged nominally. But after inflation is considered these same investors lost nearly 2/3rd of their purchasing power just for being invested in stocks at the wrong time. Investors face similar peril today due to our similar waning phase in the long cycles.

No investment, including stocks, is immune from the scourge of inflation. Rising money supplies raise general prices across the board simultaneously making each dollar an investor earns worth less in terms of the actual goods and services it can buy. All long-term returns, regardless of the market of origin, must be considered in real terms to be honest and relevant.

The only way to beat inflation is to ride the perpetual bull. There is always a bull market somewhere. When stock cycles are in their rising phase as from 1982 to 2000, investors should be heavily long stocks where they can reap excellent real returns. That particular period yielded awesome real returns running 11.4% a year on average. But from 1966 to 1982, a bear phase, investors would have lost 7.2% real annually in the exact same stock markets.
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
86,789
Tokens
People made a lot of money on "myths" :ughhh:

I guess all those homes we own will disappear

I guess all the wealth the market created isn't real

Those auto's we buy? match boxes baby :banger:

vacations? nobody is traveling anymore, our dollar is too weak :missingte

Those stock market prices driven by record profits? not because people are buying products :ohno:

colleges are empty because tuitions are too high :aktion033

Some day, you gotta get outside.

Smell the roses, observe something. Dance with somebody:dancefool

Experience is the world greatest teacher. That is if you can learn from you experiences.




PS: I appreciate your concern, but you don't need to worry about me helping me. I love your "high school" comment, very impressive! :103631605
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
we have plenty of oil granted it isn't that cheap right now due to inflation (and i'm not sure if prices will ever get back below 40 a barrel peak CHEAP oil is likely here to stay, as far as running out of it and having something alternative that is move viable economically nah....plus our whole infrastructure based on oil would take a major overhaul of the entire system to wean off it this will take a LONG time), gas prices in this country are mainly high due to refinery capacity. The oil industry has gone through alot of consolidation, some refinery's were shut down because they were underproductive etc, and greed obviously. Once the economy slows prices will come down and you are seeing that now 50 cents drop in gas prices since may.
 

Triple digit silver kook
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
13,697
Tokens
Vaulted Treehouse, you are wasting your time explaining inflation and real returns to most people.

Anyone posting anything outside mainstream babble is often dismissed as a permabear.

Now the govt wants to throw all the bad mortgages into fannie and freddie. This essentially means more inflation.

This country continues drifting further from capitalism. Thats not totally a bad thing, but it should stop naming itself a capitalist nation.


:howdy:
 

Triple digit silver kook
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
13,697
Tokens
The buy and hold strategy worked from exiting the great depression to 2000.

From 1966-1982 the market nominally went sideways and during the 1970s we had high inflation, so real returns were terribly negative.

Also, why do people exclude the great depression? Did it not exist? People that held onto this buy and hold forever myth were wiped out then. How does this argument hold water when such a great event is omitted? Fact is, it doesnt.

Buy and hold or not, that was two seperate generations without gains and a very bad time to own most american stock equities except precious metals and energy.

Same from 2000 until current. Weve had alot of inflation and lower dollar since 2000 and the major us indexes are either the same or less than nearly 7 years ago. Thus, "the market" is not + post 2000, its negative.

Most look at the dow jones, eventhough they have no idea its composition or how its a price weighted index. They merely see its 13k, so anyone holding the past 10 years must be ahead.

Fact is dow jones is only 30 stocks, any stock in it that underperforms too long is removed, so its next to useless for measuring long term real returns.

s/p 500 is more useful for measuring overall stocks and its just now even from 2000. Alot of the recovery gains were via owning energy (which most people wouldnt touch until 2005) so again, unless they owned an index fund they missed that move.

The nasdaq lost staggering amounts from 2000-2002. 80% so most portfolios were wiped out regardless of buy and hold. Many of those stocks simply disappeared, so it doesnt matter how long they hold them, they are forever worthless.

Another fact most people dont know is that most of the money entered the market post 1995, and post 1998 for nasdaq core tech and 2000 they piled into internet dot.com stocks. Those nasdaq losses will never be completely recovered.

What I find most amazing is the number of people with little or no factual knowledge, that still throw around baseless opinions about the market and even bash those that may have at least a clue.
 

bushman
Joined
Sep 22, 2004
Messages
14,457
Tokens
Now the govt wants to throw all the bad
mortgages into fannie and freddie.

They will possibly change the nature of the financial arrangement as well Woofy.

Private companies tend to only be interested in how much money they can make next week, whereas governments can take a more long term approach.

I can see government doing a 50/50 arrangement with many people in the not too distant future, especially essential workers, lowering the rate payable and then taking a chunk of the capital gain when the property is realised.
---------------------------------------

HBoS won't let Sams victims off the hook
HBoS can think itself lucky that it usually holds its annual shareholder meeting in Edinburgh and not in London. This geographical fact has spared senior bosses of the financial conglomerate - made up of Bank of Scotland and Halifax - from being questioned year after year about the elderly borrowers whose retirements have been blighted by 'shared appreciation mortgages' - better known as Sams.
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
86,789
Tokens
I am somewhat amazed by people who continue to cite what they believe to be economic facts that prove the quality of life and economic well being is declining when simple observation and experience will prove such is not the case.

Inflation "is really 10%" and incomes are decreasing. The facts that we are buying more stuff and we own more stuff doesn't mean anything, it's about their perception.

Banks made bad mortgage decisions and they're going to pay for it. See the banking crisis of the late 80's for heavens sake. Guess what, we survived, the banking industry survived and I wish I poured every dollar I had into bank stocks at that time.

National debt? I would prefer that it was lower. However, the larger the economy the more debt the federal government can absorb, much like higher income families can afford a bigger mortgage than lower income families.

People over extending themselves? remember debtor's prisons? People have been over extending themselves throughout history.

The gold standard? it was a contributing factor to the great depression!
WTF is gold anyways? Nobody on earth uses such a standard. Maybe that's why nations went to war back in the day, to get more gold for their own country's well being!

The weak dollar has not hurt our economy, look around. And there are sound economic reasons why it hasn't.

Truthfully, nobody knows how to micro manage an economy as different variables pull in different directions and some don't play well with others, but to suggest things are and have been horrible is simply wrong.

Everything is not perfect, and we can always make improvements. One of my biggest concerns is the unfunded & unrecorded pension liability of the social security system. Social security reform should be a top priority, except it's political suicide.

Anyhow, people should stop holding themselves out to be economic scholars as if their subjective beliefs outweigh all others, especially with respect to things we have experienced or are currently experiencing.
 

Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,905
Tokens
Anyhow, people should stop holding themselves out to be economic scholars as if their subjective beliefs outweigh all others, especially with respect to things we have experienced or are currently experiencing.

as you should
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,118,233
Messages
13,552,955
Members
100,580
Latest member
i9betone1
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com