unclemick
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Nah - maybe 16 yrs like 66-82.
Pssst - Wellesley SEC yield 4.93% Alas my Target is 3.4% not near as rich.
heh heh heh - BUT Saint's beat Oakland.
.
Length of time to recover our lost money?
- Thread starter Orchidflower
- Start date
Nah - maybe 16 yrs like 66-82.
Pssst - Wellesley SEC yield 4.93% Alas my Target is 3.4% not near as rich.
heh heh heh - BUT Saint's beat Oakland.
.The US economy may have peaked and the good times are behind us. There are no more bubbles to fuel massive growth and the government can only do so much to bail the economy out short of becoming a fascist economy. You got to love the free market system.
harley
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
What an incredibly simplistic and negative POV! How do you know what might happen technologically to fuel growth going forward? Cold fusion, nanotechnology, beam me up Scotty brave new worlds. It seems to me to be the height of hubris to think that what has been is all there ever will be.
And anyway, the gov't is already fascist. It's fear of the people is keeping it's fascist tendencies under control.
Dawg52
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Anyway, is it going to take another 25 years to recoup all the losses many of us are taking right now, too? I am assuming so, but would love to hear what the finance professionals here think.
How about 5 days?
I know I know......not gonna happen.
harley
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
How about 5 days?
Say it took 5 days to get down 40%. Logically, since we have to now go up 80% to get back to where we were, it's got to take 10-11 days. So tighten your belt.
Gotadimple
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
- Messages
- 2,615
Warren Buffet's age and how much money he has impacts his personal risk tolerance only. That really isn't the point, his professional risk tolerance is skewed to satisfying his many stock holders.
He's done well for many. But he isn't always right.
-- Rita
It's not a prediction, but historically, look what happens after huge credit bubbles, and stocks burst...
This is a 100 year DOW chart. Green is the bull markets, red is the bear markets.
I think it could be a long time of choppy markets.
Wouldn't be suprised if it takes 16-20 years from the 2000 peak.
This is a 100 year DOW chart. Green is the bull markets, red is the bear markets.
I think it could be a long time of choppy markets.
Wouldn't be suprised if it takes 16-20 years from the 2000 peak.
OAG
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
US futures are up and the couple of Asian markets already trading are up. 8:07 EST Oct 12.
Dawg52
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
What an incredibly simplistic and negative POV! How do you know what might happen technologically to fuel growth going forward? Cold fusion, nanotechnology, beam me up Scotty brave new worlds. It seems to me to be the height of hubris to think that what has been is all there ever will be.
And anyway, the gov't is already fascist. It's fear of the people is keeping it's fascist tendencies under control.
Or I might be right. The future is either going to be better or worse.
Yeah, you tell 'em! This system sucks! We need to change to that other, better system! That would be . . . uhmm . . . never mind.
How about to a real free market system? One where failure isn't rewarded with government bailouts. Or we could have the government give us the money directly instead of pumping it through the stock market first.
HFWR
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Nah, it isn't fascist, it's socialist...haven't you seen the huge nationalization of assets going on
I don't think the gummint plans to keep these assets, or plans to run these companies. Heck, like good capitalists, they might even turn a profit...
Gotadimple
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
- Messages
- 2,615
Sure, you go first. Lack of oversight allowed this situation to develop. What would you recommend instead of bailing out? How would you get banks to lend money? What would you do to restructure mortgages?
-- Rita
Banks lending money was the cause of the mess in the first place. So how will getting them to lend more money solve anything? I just believe government bailouts are not the answer and will create bigger problems down the road. The future for our children looks bleak.
Gotadimple
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2007
- Messages
- 2,615
Banks lent money that they could borrow from Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae, or from each other. Generally, for every $1 in bank assets, they lent $.96, so that meant if they weren't careful in underwriting the loans and they defaulted, they had no reserves to back up their assets on deposit. When you don't have assets, depositors panic and want their money. When money has no value, then a society based on exchanges of credit (that's not easy credit, just exchanges of credit) cannot function.
So, what alternative do you propose to "the future for our children looks bleak"?
jIMOh
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
WW is my vote
Meaning this see-saw went down a second time and we have two more to go.
I predict 7 years to recover to 2007 levels, which were similar to 2000 levels.
Rustic23
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
I think the recovery will be faster than most are predicting. In the Great Depression, folks in the stock market lost everything they owned. It was not the case of holding on or selling to come in again at a later time. Most were in on margin and were way over their heads. I believe the average person could buy on as little as 10%. When the market dropped their margins were called and positions sold. They were sold out broke no money to reinvest. In fact many lost everything they owned.
As this is not the case now, it would appear that market recovery is more dependent on greed overcoming fear. As the market begins to go up, democrats elected, so the press can begin to tout the economy, rather than slam it, the market will rise.
As this is not the case now, it would appear that market recovery is more dependent on greed overcoming fear. As the market begins to go up, democrats elected, so the press can begin to tout the economy, rather than slam it, the market will rise.
audreyh1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Whatever secular bear market we find ourselves in right now, remember, we are already 9 years in.
Audrey
Audrey
clifp
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2006
- Messages
- 7,733
I am with you Rustic, I think it will be quicker than most people predict. Heck at today's rate we should be back to 14,000 by next Monday
Despite the massive wealth destruction, there is is still a lot of cash and government bonds sitting on the side lines. It seems to me that sticking your money in Money Market, CD or Treasury Bill for 2-3% is a bad idea long-term, eventually either the stock market or real estate will look increasingly attractive. Either of which is good thing.
tangomonster
Full time employment: Posting here.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2006
- Messages
- 757
I'd like to be optimistic, but in surfing, I found this (a blog by someone who is admittedly quite a bear):
Fred's Intelligent Bear Site - Inflation Adjusted DJIA
The major part of his argument against stocks is:
The long term chart of the stock market looks great. It shows a trend line that gains a healthy 5.1% per year. There is one problem. This is the wrong chart! The Dow is expressed in Dollars, and Dollars lose value over time. You must look at the inflation adjusted chart to expose the true nature of the Dow.
On the chart, the long term trend line in green shows an average return of 1.9% per year. If you factor in the long term 15% capital gains tax, the return is even worse. Since capital gains tax is not adjusted for inflation, the average tax must be based on the 5.4% trend of the non inflation adjusted chart, so 15% of 5.4% is 0.8% tax. Therefore, your 1.9% return is reduced to 1.1% after taxes. The Wall Street shills do not want you to know that this meager amount of capital gains is all you should logically expect from a long term general stock market investment.
The Dow has historically moved within well defined channel. The boundaries of the channel have been touched only 4 times since 1910. The top of the channel was last touched in 2000.
They say "the market always goes up in the long term," but at an average return of 1.9% per year, it can take many years to recover from a large decline. The peak in 1929 was not ultimately exceeded until 1992. When the market touched the bottom of the channel in 1982, its value was about equal to the value at the beginning of the chart in 1910.
Most bubbles eventually correct back to where they began. The bubble that began in 1922 gave back all its gains by 1933, and the bull market that started in 1949 gave back almost everything by 1982. The bubble that ended in 2000 could easily correct back to its 1988 level of 4000. If you are optimistic, you might decide that the bubble began in 1995, and the Dow will only correct back to 7500. If you are pessimistic, the Dow could eventually hit the bottom of the channel at about 4000.
Fred's Intelligent Bear Site - FIBS
His investment advice is:
Fred's Intelligent Bear Site - Financial Survival
Can anyone comment on this? The guy is making sense to me, even though he is quite the bearish contrarian. But it goes against everyone I've read and against most of what people on here think....
Fred's Intelligent Bear Site - Inflation Adjusted DJIA
The major part of his argument against stocks is:
The long term chart of the stock market looks great. It shows a trend line that gains a healthy 5.1% per year. There is one problem. This is the wrong chart! The Dow is expressed in Dollars, and Dollars lose value over time. You must look at the inflation adjusted chart to expose the true nature of the Dow.
On the chart, the long term trend line in green shows an average return of 1.9% per year. If you factor in the long term 15% capital gains tax, the return is even worse. Since capital gains tax is not adjusted for inflation, the average tax must be based on the 5.4% trend of the non inflation adjusted chart, so 15% of 5.4% is 0.8% tax. Therefore, your 1.9% return is reduced to 1.1% after taxes. The Wall Street shills do not want you to know that this meager amount of capital gains is all you should logically expect from a long term general stock market investment.
The Dow has historically moved within well defined channel. The boundaries of the channel have been touched only 4 times since 1910. The top of the channel was last touched in 2000.
They say "the market always goes up in the long term," but at an average return of 1.9% per year, it can take many years to recover from a large decline. The peak in 1929 was not ultimately exceeded until 1992. When the market touched the bottom of the channel in 1982, its value was about equal to the value at the beginning of the chart in 1910.
Most bubbles eventually correct back to where they began. The bubble that began in 1922 gave back all its gains by 1933, and the bull market that started in 1949 gave back almost everything by 1982. The bubble that ended in 2000 could easily correct back to its 1988 level of 4000. If you are optimistic, you might decide that the bubble began in 1995, and the Dow will only correct back to 7500. If you are pessimistic, the Dow could eventually hit the bottom of the channel at about 4000.
Fred's Intelligent Bear Site - FIBS
His investment advice is:
Fred's Intelligent Bear Site - Financial Survival
Can anyone comment on this? The guy is making sense to me, even though he is quite the bearish contrarian. But it goes against everyone I've read and against most of what people on here think....
old woman
Full time employment: Posting here.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 567
Saying the taxes are capital gains rates means they are less than normal rates. Also if you die owning stock it passes tax free. Other choices like CDs and real estate are taxable also and you can't defer the taxes as easily.
You can find stocks that pay dividends like utilities, some were priced at PEs or around 10 this week and paid 4-6% dividend so owning them 10 years you double your money approximately.
Other stocks you can pick winners or losers but if you owned 1% of a company 20 years ago and it didn't die you now own 1% of a bigger company probably.
Look at a company like MO and what you would have gotten in gains and dividends if you bought 10K worth 20 years ago. What will it be worth in 20 years? I don't know but if it is around it probably will be worth more and it pays a little dividend.
calmloki
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
It's worth checking with your financial advisor for handy information on your retirement investing and future. Why only last week we stopped in and had a conversation with ours - was encouraged to speak about my view of retirement while the gal was scribbling something or other. Video attached as an example: YouTube - TSX - You're more broke then you think!
i don't pay any attention to charts like this or the Dow against gold or silver or adamantium. with the amount of data available today you can make a chart that says anything you want.
only thing that is true is that we get secular bear markets on a regular schedule that wipe out most gains of the previous bull run and when the bear ends we get a bull market that exceeds those gains.
