Anonymous wrote:OP here and I continued to be confused. The responses along the lines of “not everyone has time” are kinda bullshit, right? I mean, the whole idea is to buy and hold, usually to ensure your retirement. So you’re supposed to start early and hold, and if you do that you can ride the ups and downs without a problem. So what am I missing?
Anonymous wrote:In nominal terms, it took about 25 years for the market to get back after the 1929 crash. But, if inflation adjusted and if you held and kept reinvesting all the dividends, it would have taken you about 10 years to get back to whole.
2008 was much less.
There's no doubt the current market is hyper-inflated. But how it plays out is anyone's guess.
The market isn't rational. The P/E ratios are nuts. AI is clearly in a blow off top.
But I have no idea how this is going to play out. Things aren't rational. But there is a lot of money out there, and it needs someplace to go.
The market can be irrational for a long time. I'd be nervous if I was 50. And I'd be paying attention if I was 25. Waiting for the crash for the opportunities.
As an aside, I think it's nuts that we are all depending on Wall Street douchebags to be able to live when we get old.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Market rise and fall. If you are in the market for the long-term, even a big crash isn’t gonna kill you. That’s what I don’t understand. Everyone talks about the market crashing, but if it’s crashing from being so high, and you’ve been in it for a long time then you’re still always gonna come out ahead. So what’s the problem?
You don't think history will ever repeat. Stock market took until 1954 to return to 1929 levels. Stock market declined 80% from 1967 until 1976 and didn't return to 1967 levels until 1982.
If you were 65 in 1967 with no pension...life sucked probably for the remainder of your days and you were likely dead before 1982.
This is a very misleading statement. You omitted dividends and a deflationary state that lasted for several years. So your numbers aren't even close.
Huh? The period from 1967 to 1982 was some of the highest inflation this country has ever seen. The period from 1929 through 1940 was massively deflationary, with massive unemployment and paltry dividends. Still, it took WWII and then another 9 years after WWII (all inflationary periods).
What does it even mean "your numbers aren't even close"? I literally provided the facts of what the market did during those time periods.
Anonymous wrote:OP here and I continued to be confused. The responses along the lines of “not everyone has time” are kinda bullshit, right? I mean, the whole idea is to buy and hold, usually to ensure your retirement. So you’re supposed to start early and hold, and if you do that you can ride the ups and downs without a problem. So what am I missing?
Anonymous wrote:This fear about running out of money when you are approaching retirement is just psychological. The withdrawal rate studies have already taken into account world wars, 70's inflation, 1929, etc. What you are seeing is basically people changing their risk tolerance as they get older, which is pretty common.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Market rise and fall. If you are in the market for the long-term, even a big crash isn’t gonna kill you. That’s what I don’t understand. Everyone talks about the market crashing, but if it’s crashing from being so high, and you’ve been in it for a long time then you’re still always gonna come out ahead. So what’s the problem?
You don't think history will ever repeat. Stock market took until 1954 to return to 1929 levels. Stock market declined 80% from 1967 until 1976 and didn't return to 1967 levels until 1982.
If you were 65 in 1967 with no pension...life sucked probably for the remainder of your days and you were likely dead before 1982.
This is a very misleading statement. You omitted dividends and a deflationary state that lasted for several years. So your numbers aren't even close.
Huh? The period from 1967 to 1982 was some of the highest inflation this country has ever seen. The period from 1929 through 1940 was massively deflationary, with massive unemployment and paltry dividends. Still, it took WWII and then another 9 years after WWII (all inflationary periods).
What does it even mean "your numbers aren't even close"? I literally provided the facts of what the market did during those time periods.
Anonymous wrote:Market rise and fall. If you are in the market for the long-term, even a big crash isn’t gonna kill you. That’s what I don’t understand. Everyone talks about the market crashing, but if it’s crashing from being so high, and you’ve been in it for a long time then you’re still always gonna come out ahead. So what’s the problem?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Market rise and fall. If you are in the market for the long-term, even a big crash isn’t gonna kill you. That’s what I don’t understand. Everyone talks about the market crashing, but if it’s crashing from being so high, and you’ve been in it for a long time then you’re still always gonna come out ahead. So what’s the problem?
You don't think history will ever repeat. Stock market took until 1954 to return to 1929 levels. Stock market declined 80% from 1967 until 1976 and didn't return to 1967 levels until 1982.
If you were 65 in 1967 with no pension...life sucked probably for the remainder of your days and you were likely dead before 1982.
This is a very misleading statement. You omitted dividends and a deflationary state that lasted for several years. So your numbers aren't even close.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Market rise and fall. If you are in the market for the long-term, even a big crash isn’t gonna kill you. That’s what I don’t understand. Everyone talks about the market crashing, but if it’s crashing from being so high, and you’ve been in it for a long time then you’re still always gonna come out ahead. So what’s the problem?
You don't think history will ever repeat. Stock market took until 1954 to return to 1929 levels. Stock market declined 80% from 1967 until 1976 and didn't return to 1967 levels until 1982.
If you were 65 in 1967 with no pension...life sucked probably for the remainder of your days and you were likely dead before 1982.
Anonymous wrote:
But if you’re Gen X don’t you still have time? And haven’t you been benefiting from the strong bull market in recent years?
Anonymous wrote:Market rise and fall. If you are in the market for the long-term, even a big crash isn’t gonna kill you. That’s what I don’t understand. Everyone talks about the market crashing, but if it’s crashing from being so high, and you’ve been in it for a long time then you’re still always gonna come out ahead. So what’s the problem?
OP here and I continued to be confused. The responses along the lines of “not everyone has time” are kinda bullshit, right? I mean, the whole idea is to buy and hold, usually to ensure your retirement. So you’re supposed to start early and hold, and if you do that you can ride the ups and downs without a problem. So what am I missing?