What's your strategy to cash in on this downturn?

[ItDontMeanAThing]

I'm retiring at the end of the month - talk about poor timing. But I am prepared. I have enough in bond index funds of various durations to not have to sell any stock for 10 years. Longer if my assumption of zero social security proves to be false (I'm 54).

I do like to bottom fish. I've been searching for strong companies in sectors that have been badly beaten down. I made a small purchase of Bank of America (BAC).

[TromboneAl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by socca It would be great for us to use the 'crisis' as an opportunity to re-examine some of the fundamental assumptions upon which our society (and economy) are built. For example, is the assumption of an ever-expanding economy consistent with a grossly overpopulated planet with finite resources, especially when expanding economic activity leads to increasing environmental damage? What is a maximally-just and sustainable society/economic system?

Well put. During the great depression birth rates dropped below the replacement level for the first time in American history.

Quote:

My basic math shows that there is about 120 people per square mile, or roughly 230,000 sq feet to house, feed, recreate, transport each person.

There's a lot wrong with that argument. Here's one problem:

Of the earth's 148,940,000 km² (57.5 million square miles) of land, approximately 19,824,000 km² (7.65 million square miles) are arable.[1] However, arable land is currently being lost at the rate of over 100,000 km² (38,610 square miles) per year.

[al_bundy]

that's why they invented greenhouses

someone came up with a crazy idea to use building roofs, docks and barges in NYC for mini-greenhouses. theory is that we can grow enough food here to feed ourselves and there won't be any use of fertilizer made up of crazy chemicals like they use in insect repellants

[John23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziggy29 I've heard this a gazillion times in the last few days and it's very misleading. With dividends reinvested, it was back to break-even in 1944. Not great, but a heck of a lot better than the 1955 claim. Keep in mind also that if you were fortunate enough to go all-in at the bottom in 1932, an 89% drop from 1929 peak to 1932 trough means you turned $1,000 in 1932 to about $9,000 in 1944 with dividends reinvested. Doesn't seem like waiting until 1955, or even 1944, was a good idea.

I think it just takes a long time to work off the excesses built up. The market in the 80's and 90's went up from a 1,000 to 11,000.

Also, in previous bear markets (in the 30's and 40's), and in the (70's to early 80's), the investing public pretty much abandoned stocks. No one went to work on Wall St, etc. There hasn't been that kind of a wash out yet.

I dont think the market here will drop by more than 50 or 60%. I hope not 89%.

In the 30's, if you bought in the middle, you were pretty much range bound. Similar with the 70's, a choppy market.

Also, there was so much "engineering" going on in the mid to late 90's (every company had that "smooth" 10-15% growth), you factor in the accounting, options expense, etc....that boom is going to look like a mirage the farther we get from it.

[Bimmerbill]

Doubt I'll be able to profit either. Just focused on paying off debts as fast as I can. Usually I like to shop craigslist for "deals" when the economy slows, but I'm paying off my loans etc now instead.

[Animorph]

Man, if you're waiting for something lower than it is now, good luck! I was happy to be able to get the last of my cash back into the market 10/10. I'll be going HELOC if it goes lower.

I think one solid piece of good news and the market will go way up. I'm not going to try to time the last 10% out of this market. Then we'll see how the recession goes.

[FinanceDude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Helena I'm debt free and have been in cash since I retired last year. Not only have I not lost a penny, my nest egg has increased. Now diss me for being a deflationist... as usual.

Might suit you well for the next 24 months.......