Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Shrodinger's economy   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Business cycle, Dow Jones Industrial Average, bear market, bull market, S&P, Market trends, China's economic slowdown, bear market Friday  
•       •       •

2333 clicks; posted to Business » on 28 Dec 2018 at 5:35 PM (16 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



42 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-12-28 05:23:18 PM  
No one knows WTF is going on, like every other day.
 
2018-12-28 05:35:06 PM  
US stock markets performance during the Obama Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
Rate of Return: 149.43%
Annualized Return: 18.68%


S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
Rate of Return: 182.07%
Annualized Return: 22.76%


NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
Rate of Return: 285.56%
Annualized Return: 35.69%


US stock markets performance during the Trump Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
DOW in 12/28/2018: 23,062.40
Rate of Return: 16.32%
Annualized Return: 8.51%


S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
S&P 500 in 12/28/2018: 2,485.74
Rate of Return: 9.44%
Annualized Return: 4.92%


NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
NASDAQ in 12/28/2018: 6,584.52
Rate of Return: 18.53%
Annualized Return: 9.66%
 
2018-12-28 05:43:41 PM  
It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.
 
2018-12-28 05:55:30 PM  

Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.


Why would the stock market care for me?  It's a legal form of gambling. You should know the risks before you start playing. I certainly don't expect Jeff Bezos to personally comfort me if I lose my shirt.
 
2018-12-28 05:57:00 PM  

Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.


so what we should all just do nothing? let inflation eat away at our savings(those of use that have them)? stick our money in a coffee can out back? Just because you don't use the market doesn't mean all of us that do are "rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving". Some of us are simply doing what we can to not be rendered financially obsolete. Is it stacked against us? Sure i won't deny that but coming in here and just stating that "ugh it's bad me no like" is not helpful, not productive and quite frankly makes you sound ignorant and quick to blame others for your failings.

The markets are more accessible than ever using companies like Fidelity or ETrade, information on how to intelligently use the market to your advantage is available for free at any library or via the internet so your lack of intelligent discussion is your loss not the rest of us.

Yes corporate America is not your friend but don't stand there and act like its all insurmountable just because you read the occasional article on Fark.
 
2018-12-28 06:11:57 PM  

hugram: US stock markets performance during the Obama Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
Rate of Return: 149.43%
Annualized Return: 18.68%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
Rate of Return: 182.07%
Annualized Return: 22.76%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
Rate of Return: 285.56%
Annualized Return: 35.69%

US stock markets performance during the Trump Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
DOW in 12/28/2018: 23,062.40
Rate of Return: 16.32%
Annualized Return: 8.51%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
S&P 500 in 12/28/2018: 2,485.74
Rate of Return: 9.44%
Annualized Return: 4.92%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
NASDAQ in 12/28/2018: 6,584.52
Rate of Return: 18.53%
Annualized Return: 9.66%


It kinda helps when your starting point is right after the Great Recession hits.
 
2018-12-28 06:30:17 PM  

hugram: US stock markets performance during the Obama Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
Rate of Return: 149.43%
Annualized Return: 18.68%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
Rate of Return: 182.07%
Annualized Return: 22.76%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
Rate of Return: 285.56%
Annualized Return: 35.69%

US stock markets performance during the Trump Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
DOW in 12/28/2018: 23,062.40
Rate of Return: 16.32%
Annualized Return: 8.51%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
S&P 500 in 12/28/2018: 2,485.74
Rate of Return: 9.44%
Annualized Return: 4.92%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
NASDAQ in 12/28/2018: 6,584.52
Rate of Return: 18.53%
Annualized Return: 9.66%


Your math looks suspect to me. To get the annualized return, you don't divide the total return by the number of years. Instead, you take the power of the return to the reciprocal of the number of years. This is because the returns are compounded yearly. So for the NASDAQ during Obama, the annualized return is (5,555.33 / 1440.86) ^ (1 / 8) = 1.1838, or 18.38%, not the 35.69% you list.
 
2018-12-28 06:34:35 PM  

Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.


So you're advocating that we all buy gold or keep cash under the mattress?
 
2018-12-28 06:55:01 PM  

Ambivalence: No one knows WTF is going on, like every other day.


Stocks go up.  Stocks go down.

You can't explain that.
 
2018-12-28 06:57:36 PM  

jjorsett: It kinda helps when your starting point is right after the Great Recession hits.


exactly, that Obama guy cheated by starting off with a such great position.

/that one driver was only able to pass so many people because he started in 50th place...
 
2018-12-28 06:59:26 PM  

RoomFullOfMonkeys: Your math looks suspect to me. To get the annualized return, you don't divide the total return by the number of years. Instead, you take the power of the return to the reciprocal of the number of years. This is because the returns are compounded yearly. So for the NASDAQ during Obama, the annualized return is (5,555.33 / 1440.86) ^ (1 / 8) = 1.1838, or 18.38%, not the 35.69% you list.


Annualized return is not the same as the IRR, which you are calculating. Annualized is just divide the total return by the number of years. It's a simpler calculation and for short numbers of years, is pretty close to the IRR (internal rate of return). You need to go beyond 15 to 20 years before there's a significant difference between IRR and ARR.
 
2018-12-28 07:00:41 PM  

AngryDragon: Ambivalence: No one knows WTF is going on, like every other day.

Stocks go up.  Stocks go down.

You can't explain that.


media.caglecartoons.comView Full Size
 
2018-12-28 07:01:19 PM  

dericwater: RoomFullOfMonkeys: Your math looks suspect to me. To get the annualized return, you don't divide the total return by the number of years. Instead, you take the power of the return to the reciprocal of the number of years. This is because the returns are compounded yearly. So for the NASDAQ during Obama, the annualized return is (5,555.33 / 1440.86) ^ (1 / 8) = 1.1838, or 18.38%, not the 35.69% you list.

Annualized return is not the same as the IRR, which you are calculating. Annualized is just divide the total return by the number of years. It's a simpler calculation and for short numbers of years, is pretty close to the IRR (internal rate of return). You need to go beyond 15 to 20 years before there's a significant difference between IRR and ARR.


I'd say the difference between 18% and 35% is pretty significant. But thanks for the clarification of terms.
 
2018-12-28 07:04:05 PM  

RoomFullOfMonkeys: dericwater: RoomFullOfMonkeys: Your math looks suspect to me. To get the annualized return, you don't divide the total return by the number of years. Instead, you take the power of the return to the reciprocal of the number of years. This is because the returns are compounded yearly. So for the NASDAQ during Obama, the annualized return is (5,555.33 / 1440.86) ^ (1 / 8) = 1.1838, or 18.38%, not the 35.69% you list.

Annualized return is not the same as the IRR, which you are calculating. Annualized is just divide the total return by the number of years. It's a simpler calculation and for short numbers of years, is pretty close to the IRR (internal rate of return). You need to go beyond 15 to 20 years before there's a significant difference between IRR and ARR.

I'd say the difference between 18% and 35% is pretty significant. But thanks for the clarification of terms.


Actually, I just looked it up. According to Investopedia (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a​/a​nnualized-rate.asp ), my equation is the right one:

Calculating the annualized performance of an investment or index using yearly data uses the following data points:
P = principal, or initial investment
G = gains or losses
n = number of years
AP = annualized performance rate
The generalized formula, which is exponential to take into account compound interest over time, is:
AP = ((P + G) / P) ^ (1 / n) - 1
 
2018-12-28 07:50:30 PM  
It's headlines like this one that make people think economists are a joke. Just say it's highly likely and move on.
 
2018-12-28 08:01:35 PM  

ranna: so what we should all just do nothing? let inflation eat away at our savings(those of use that have them)? stick our money in a coffee can out back? Just because you don't use the market doesn't mean all of us that do are "rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving". Some of us are simply doing what we can to not be rendered financially obsolete. Is it stacked against us? Sure i won't deny that but coming in here and just stating that "ugh it's bad me no like" is not helpful, not productive and quite frankly makes you sound ignorant and quick to blame others for your failings.


Sounds like a lot of projection to me.
If you're struggling to stay financially solvent, the market wasn't made for you, and it certainly isn't going to work for you. You're too small a player and the pittance you get out of it isn't worth coming after individually. Naw, that's all done by attempts to tax 401Ks and such all at once.
But nor did I say it needed to be ignored or destroyed. It just needs to be made to work for everyone, and not just big money. Tamping down on the many kinds of exotic finance products would be a good first step., as well as limits on the ability to sell debt. Taxing capital gains as regular income would be another, with the exception of an actual IPO, or other instruments that actually fund businesses, rather than just flipping shares.
 
2018-12-28 08:08:13 PM  
Basically we're all farked.
 
2018-12-28 08:21:58 PM  

dericwater: Annualized return is not the same as the IRR, which you are calculating.


False.

You need to go beyond 15 to 20 years before there's a significant difference between IRR and ARR.

False.
 
2018-12-28 08:30:00 PM  

Sophont: ranna: so what we should all just do nothing? let inflation eat away at our savings(those of use that have them)? stick our money in a coffee can out back? Just because you don't use the market doesn't mean all of us that do are "rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving". Some of us are simply doing what we can to not be rendered financially obsolete. Is it stacked against us? Sure i won't deny that but coming in here and just stating that "ugh it's bad me no like" is not helpful, not productive and quite frankly makes you sound ignorant and quick to blame others for your failings.

Sounds like a lot of projection to me.
If you're struggling to stay financially solvent, the market wasn't made for you, and it certainly isn't going to work for you. You're too small a player and the pittance you get out of it isn't worth coming after individually. Naw, that's all done by attempts to tax 401Ks and such all at once.
But nor did I say it needed to be ignored or destroyed. It just needs to be made to work for everyone, and not just big money. Tamping down on the many kinds of exotic finance products would be a good first step., as well as limits on the ability to sell debt. Taxing capital gains as regular income would be another, with the exception of an actual IPO, or other instruments that actually fund businesses, rather than just flipping shares.


I agree the flipping of stocks skews the true value. I am actually working towards what I call generational wealth(no idea if thats a real thing) where I will leave my son a portfolio of stocks that pay healthy enough dividends to not be rich but supplemental to his income so that maybe he can choose what he loves for a living instead of toiling at some dead end. Not projecting I just have people around me that say things similar to your post and yes they do meet your description of financial insolvency and when I try to teach them how I do it they stick their heads in the sand rather than work towards meaningful solutions. My apologies if I misinterpreted your position.
 
2018-12-28 08:33:22 PM  

Sophont: Sounds like a lot of projection to me.


... you said with no sense of self-awareness.

It just needs to be made to work for everyone, and not just big money.

And it does.  Yay for Vanguard!

Tamping down on the many kinds of exotic finance products would be a good first step., as well as limits on the ability to sell debt.

Derp.

with the exception of an actual IPO, or other instruments that actually fund businesses, rather than just flipping shares.

Because subsidizing the creation of shell companies to avoid capital gains taxes makes so much sense.
 
2018-12-28 08:37:16 PM  

jjorsett: hugram: US stock markets performance during the Obama Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
Rate of Return: 149.43%
Annualized Return: 18.68%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
Rate of Return: 182.07%
Annualized Return: 22.76%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
Rate of Return: 285.56%
Annualized Return: 35.69%

US stock markets performance during the Trump Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
DOW in 12/28/2018: 23,062.40
Rate of Return: 16.32%
Annualized Return: 8.51%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
S&P 500 in 12/28/2018: 2,485.74
Rate of Return: 9.44%
Annualized Return: 4.92%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
NASDAQ in 12/28/2018: 6,584.52
Rate of Return: 18.53%
Annualized Return: 9.66%

It kinda helps when your starting point is right after the Great Recession hits.


How dare the attractive and successful African-American take office just after a rich cracker crashed the economy!
 
2018-12-28 09:04:10 PM  

hugram: US stock markets performance during the Obama Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
Rate of Return: 149.43%
Annualized Return: 18.68%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
Rate of Return: 182.07%
Annualized Return: 22.76%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
Rate of Return: 285.56%
Annualized Return: 35.69%

US stock markets performance during the Trump Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
DOW in 12/28/2018: 23,062.40
Rate of Return: 16.32%
Annualized Return: 8.51%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
S&P 500 in 12/28/2018: 2,485.74
Rate of Return: 9.44%
Annualized Return: 4.92%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
NASDAQ in 12/28/2018: 6,584.52
Rate of Return: 18.53%
Annualized Return: 9.66%


So you're saying Obama's bigger?

/rimshot
 
2018-12-28 09:28:42 PM  

Catlenfell: Basically we're all farked.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-12-28 10:18:21 PM  

ranna: Sophont: ranna: so what we should all just do nothing? let inflation eat away at our savings(those of use that have them)? stick our money in a coffee can out back? Just because you don't use the market doesn't mean all of us that do are "rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving". Some of us are simply doing what we can to not be rendered financially obsolete. Is it stacked against us? Sure i won't deny that but coming in here and just stating that "ugh it's bad me no like" is not helpful, not productive and quite frankly makes you sound ignorant and quick to blame others for your failings.

Sounds like a lot of projection to me.
If you're struggling to stay financially solvent, the market wasn't made for you, and it certainly isn't going to work for you. You're too small a player and the pittance you get out of it isn't worth coming after individually. Naw, that's all done by attempts to tax 401Ks and such all at once.
But nor did I say it needed to be ignored or destroyed. It just needs to be made to work for everyone, and not just big money. Tamping down on the many kinds of exotic finance products would be a good first step., as well as limits on the ability to sell debt. Taxing capital gains as regular income would be another, with the exception of an actual IPO, or other instruments that actually fund businesses, rather than just flipping shares.

I agree the flipping of stocks skews the true value. I am actually working towards what I call generational wealth(no idea if thats a real thing) where I will leave my son a portfolio of stocks that pay healthy enough dividends to not be rich but supplemental to his income so that maybe he can choose what he loves for a living instead of toiling at some dead end. Not projecting I just have people around me that say things similar to your post and yes they do meet your description of financial insolvency and when I try to teach them how I do it they stick their heads in the sand rather than work towards meaningful solu ...


It's all I can do to put away some money in a 401K with company match.
But for the true players in the stock market, it's a rounding error. More money than I could make in a lifetime gets vaporized because of a Trump tweet. It's not a reason not to get involved, but it is clear how very skewed everything is.
But some shiathead says anyone can open a Vanguard account, so everything is hunky dory and we can't possibly do anything to stop the robber barons. Bullshiat.
We need to come down, hard. Teddy and Franky Roosevelt style.
 
2018-12-28 11:07:27 PM  

Sophont: it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you.


Did someone ever tell you it was made for you? I'm trying to understand how to got this idea in your head in the first place in order for you to be disappointed that's not the case.
 
2018-12-28 11:48:45 PM  
oopsboom:
[media.caglecartoons.com image 600x481]

I miss when a President 'does'ed that instead of Twitter and golf and (poor me) sulking.  Being able to read above a Dick-and-Jane level. Knowing that trade deficits aren't other countries siphoning our money. Knowing that the stock market isn't the economy.
 
2018-12-29 12:12:37 AM  

Meatsim1: Sophont: it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you.

Did someone ever tell you it was made for you? I'm trying to understand how to got this idea in your head in the first place in order for you to be disappointed that's not the case.


This. SUCH a weird thing to write.

It's like yelling at someone who's tending their garden, "Hey maaaan, plants don't care about you maaaan."
 
2018-12-29 12:27:20 AM  
Anyone who thinks the market isn't done dropping does not give enough credit to Trump for what he does best.
 
2018-12-29 12:39:34 AM  

RoomFullOfMonkeys: RoomFullOfMonkeys: dericwater: RoomFullOfMonkeys: Your math looks suspect to me. To get the annualized return, you don't divide the total return by the number of years. Instead, you take the power of the return to the reciprocal of the number of years. This is because the returns are compounded yearly. So for the NASDAQ during Obama, the annualized return is (5,555.33 / 1440.86) ^ (1 / 8) = 1.1838, or 18.38%, not the 35.69% you list.

Annualized return is not the same as the IRR, which you are calculating. Annualized is just divide the total return by the number of years. It's a simpler calculation and for short numbers of years, is pretty close to the IRR (internal rate of return). You need to go beyond 15 to 20 years before there's a significant difference between IRR and ARR.

I'd say the difference between 18% and 35% is pretty significant. But thanks for the clarification of terms.

Actually, I just looked it up. According to Investopedia (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/​annualized-rate.asp ), my equation is the right one:

Calculating the annualized performance of an investment or index using yearly data uses the following data points:
P = principal, or initial investment
G = gains or losses
n = number of years
AP = annualized performance rate
The generalized formula, which is exponential to take into account compound interest over time, is:
AP = ((P + G) / P) ^ (1 / n) - 1


That formula is a lot simpler than I assumed it was. Thanks for looking it up.
 
2018-12-29 09:48:42 AM  

thornhill: Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.

So you're advocating that we all buy gold or keep cash under the mattress?


2% risk free beats the hell out of -20% that you may or may not recover.
 
2018-12-29 09:52:47 AM  

AcneVulgaris: thornhill: Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.

So you're advocating that we all buy gold or keep cash under the mattress?

2% risk free beats the hell out of -20% that you may or may not recover.


The average annual rate of return for the S&P 500 is ~7 percent (adjusted for inflation). Index funds are pegged it to are very dependable.
 
kab
2018-12-29 10:43:47 AM  

BMFPitt: dericwater: Annualized return is not the same as the IRR, which you are calculating.

False.

You need to go beyond 15 to 20 years before there's a significant difference between IRR and ARR.

False.


We found Dwight Schrute's FARK handle.
 
2018-12-29 11:39:38 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Meatsim1: Sophont: it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you.

Did someone ever tell you it was made for you? I'm trying to understand how to got this idea in your head in the first place in order for you to be disappointed that's not the case.

This. SUCH a weird thing to write.

It's like yelling at someone who's tending their garden, "Hey maaaan, plants don't care about you maaaan."


The stock market is a human creation. Ostensibly run by humans. It's not some natural occurence or force of nature that just is. We totally have control over how it operates and who operates it. And the way it's currently operated is not to the regular person's benefit, no matter the small benefit they may get out of it.
 
2018-12-29 11:46:42 AM  

thornhill: AcneVulgaris: thornhill: Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.

So you're advocating that we all buy gold or keep cash under the mattress?

2% risk free beats the hell out of -20% that you may or may not recover.

The average annual rate of return for the S&P 500 is ~7 percent (adjusted for inflation). Index funds are pegged it to are very dependable.


... until they aren't.

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
 
2018-12-29 12:19:05 PM  

AcneVulgaris: thornhill: AcneVulgaris: thornhill: Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.

So you're advocating that we all buy gold or keep cash under the mattress?

2% risk free beats the hell out of -20% that you may or may not recover.

The average annual rate of return for the S&P 500 is ~7 percent (adjusted for inflation). Index funds are pegged it to are very dependable.

... until they aren't.

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.


People like you who come here and claim that the market is always on the verge of imploading back to the Stone Age seem to be looking for validation for your poor decision to keep all of your money in cash, earning barely enough interest to keep pace with inflation.

The data shows that you're wrong. There are index funds that have been around since the 1980s; they have gone through various downturns - when the market tanks, they tank; but over the long haul, their average annual rate of return is still 8 and 9 percent.

If you really think that the market is going to tank and never recover, that pretty much means we're facing the end of the civilization, and whatever money you have in the bank is worthless.
 
2018-12-29 12:27:32 PM  

AcneVulgaris: thornhill: AcneVulgaris: thornhill: Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.

So you're advocating that we all buy gold or keep cash under the mattress?

2% risk free beats the hell out of -20% that you may or may not recover.

The average annual rate of return for the S&P 500 is ~7 percent (adjusted for inflation). Index funds are pegged it to are very dependable.

... until they aren't.

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.


100% true, but even for most of those fortunate enough to have a retirement plan, the promise of a reasonably comfortable retirement decades away is entirely dependent on those ~7% average returns.  2% (less when adjusted for inflation) may as well be zero if you're 30 years away from retirement and nowhere near your goal, so there's little point in considering that as a viable option.  It's basically boom or bust.
 
2018-12-29 12:32:04 PM  

thornhill: AcneVulgaris: thornhill: AcneVulgaris: thornhill: Sophont: It's all a farking racket, kept credible by tying up everyone's retirement in it. Just remember, even if you've benefited from it, it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you. It's just rich-people tax-dodging and dick-waving.

So you're advocating that we all buy gold or keep cash under the mattress?

2% risk free beats the hell out of -20% that you may or may not recover.

The average annual rate of return for the S&P 500 is ~7 percent (adjusted for inflation). Index funds are pegged it to are very dependable.

... until they aren't.

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

People like you who come here and claim that the market is always on the verge of imploading back to the Stone Age seem to be looking for validation for your poor decision to keep all of your money in cash, earning barely enough interest to keep pace with inflation.

The data shows that you're wrong. There are index funds that have been around since the 1980s; they have gone through various downturns - when the market tanks, they tank; but over the long haul, their average annual rate of return is still 8 and 9 percent.

If you really think that the market is going to tank and never recover, that pretty much means we're facing the end of the civilization, and whatever money you have in the bank is worthless.


"Tank and never recover" isn't the only possibility.  The real concern is that due to a new global economic and geopolitical "world order," inflation-adjusted returns over the next 30-40 years will be more like an anemic 4%, which makes a huge difference when compounded over time.
 
2018-12-29 01:42:02 PM  

Hyjamon: jjorsett: It kinda helps when your starting point is right after the Great Recession hits.

exactly, that Obama guy cheated by starting off with a such great position.

/that one driver was only able to pass so many people because he started in 50th place...


Obama's starting point was due to happenstance, not strategy or planning. Obama's ascension to the throne occurred just after a plunge due to the onset of deep economic trouble. You'd have to work damned hard not to shine in an environment where the only direction left is up. Trump on the other hand started at altitude and we've gone higher from there. Climbing when you're already well off the ground is a lot tougher than when you start from the runway.
 
2018-12-29 01:45:14 PM  

Serious Black: jjorsett: hugram: US stock markets performance during the Obama Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2009: 7,949.09
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
Rate of Return: 149.43%
Annualized Return: 18.68%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
Rate of Return: 182.07%
Annualized Return: 22.76%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2009: 1,440.86
NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
Rate of Return: 285.56%
Annualized Return: 35.69%

US stock markets performance during the Trump Administration.
DOW in 01/20/2017: 19,827.25
DOW in 12/28/2018: 23,062.40
Rate of Return: 16.32%
Annualized Return: 8.51%

S&P 500 in 01/20/2017: 2,271.31
S&P 500 in 12/28/2018: 2,485.74
Rate of Return: 9.44%
Annualized Return: 4.92%

NASDAQ in 01/20/2017: 5,555.33
NASDAQ in 12/28/2018: 6,584.52
Rate of Return: 18.53%
Annualized Return: 9.66%

It kinda helps when your starting point is right after the Great Recession hits.

How dare the attractive and successful African-American take office just after a rich cracker crashed the economy!


Really, that's what you take away from what I said? Some people really do try to force-fit everything in the universe into the template they carry in their heads.
 
2018-12-29 02:35:05 PM  

jjorsett: Hyjamon: jjorsett: It kinda helps when your starting point is right after the Great Recession hits.

exactly, that Obama guy cheated by starting off with a such great position.

/that one driver was only able to pass so many people because he started in 50th place...

Obama's starting point was due to happenstance, not strategy or planning. Obama's ascension to the throne occurred just after a plunge due to the onset of deep economic trouble. You'd have to work damned hard not to shine in an environment where the only direction left is up. Trump on the other hand started at altitude and we've gone higher from there. Climbing when you're already well off the ground is a lot tougher than when you start from the runway.


It's true that the president's ability to lift the stock market is specious at best, and their ability to sink it is really only possible with a major farkup, like a trade war.

However, your post is still hilarious because it's conservatives who try to make that idiotic connection, not liberals.  Any illustration of the stock market's rise during Obama is only in response the claim that Obama is a socialist who wrecked the economy and Trump is the one turning things around.  If Trump wants to own the gains since his election, he can take the recent losses too and give Obama credit for 2008-2016.
 
2018-12-29 06:09:36 PM  

Sophont: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Meatsim1: Sophont: it wasn't made for you, and cares nothing for you.

Did someone ever tell you it was made for you? I'm trying to understand how to got this idea in your head in the first place in order for you to be disappointed that's not the case.

This. SUCH a weird thing to write.

It's like yelling at someone who's tending their garden, "Hey maaaan, plants don't care about you maaaan."

The stock market is a human creation. Ostensibly run by humans. It's not some natural occurence or force of nature that just is.


Sure. So is a garden. But that's beside the point. When there's no reason for anyone to imagine that something cares about them, breathlessly announcing that it doesn't just seems weird to me.

I agree that the laws and rules and practices around the stock market could use some changes. Hell, that's true for most things.
 
2018-12-29 06:16:34 PM  

oopsboom: AngryDragon: Ambivalence: No one knows WTF is going on, like every other day.

Stocks go up.  Stocks go down.

You can't explain that.

[media.caglecartoons.com image 600x481]


I feel like the cartoon doesn't apply now that we have an illiterate president who neither knows, nor cares about where the policies came from or why they exist, and just goes with his gut, which seems to be the least educated gut possible.
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report