Author Topic: calling the top  (Read 21723 times)

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Age: 37
Re: calling the top
« Reply #50 on: March 21, 2017, 11:26:28 AM »
I'll take a guess.  Market peak July 2017, S&P drop 100%.  No recovery.  Alien invasion, humanity wiped out.

I think in the event on an alien invasion the S&P500 would not go to zero (i.e. drop 100%). Sure, it would be tough to trade, but all of the inventory (especially from weapons manufactuers and food companies) would be highly valued.

If humanity is wiped out, it may still have value. I'm sure if a Ferengi type race came here they would open the markets after the humans were exterminated and again all of the infrastructure, raw materials, and inventory those companies have would likely be of some value to the Ferengi like peoples.

thenextguy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 205
Re: calling the top
« Reply #51 on: March 21, 2017, 11:39:03 AM »
Probably within +/- 6 months of the start of the next recession. Personally, I think we're at least 2 years away from the next recession (maybe longer), so I don't see a market top anytime soon. It could be pretty flat though.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2211
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: calling the top
« Reply #52 on: March 21, 2017, 05:03:23 PM »
Sometime in early 2018 when Janet Yellen is replaced by a crank who doesn't understand monetary policy.

Oh yeah, i'd say a 50% drop. Will take a few years to recover
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 05:11:17 PM by DavidAnnArbor »

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7848
Re: calling the top
« Reply #53 on: March 21, 2017, 05:08:58 PM »
March 2024 before we see a 10% drawdown.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8486
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: calling the top
« Reply #54 on: March 21, 2017, 05:26:15 PM »
Sometime in early 2018 when Janet Yellen is replaced by a crank who doesn't understand monetary policy.

In light of his other appointments, I predict that Trump will nominate Ron Paul to be the next chairman of the Federal Reserve.

thenextguy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 205
Re: calling the top
« Reply #55 on: March 21, 2017, 06:19:54 PM »
Sometime in early 2018 when Janet Yellen is replaced by a crank who doesn't understand monetary policy.

Oh yeah, i'd say a 50% drop. Will take a few years to recover

Oh god, I didn't think of that. Chairwoman Ivanka?

sovereign

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: calling the top
« Reply #56 on: March 21, 2017, 07:50:06 PM »
Now?

The market has gotten way ahead of itself on high expectations.  What are the odds of a hiccup in the  delivery of those high expectations?  Probably pretty high. ;)


dbm

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: calling the top
« Reply #57 on: March 22, 2017, 12:59:40 AM »
I will call the top.  The market will peak in Oct. 2020, then plunge 30%. 

Who knows?  But this is a fun activity.

Would you say Oct 10th? Then we would have 10/10/2020 for 30%  Got a nice ring to it...

Just hopefully we avoid a 70's style decade long sideways with a slight downward twist market.




DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1991
Re: calling the top
« Reply #58 on: March 25, 2017, 09:44:34 AM »
You have all guessed wrong - SAD! Only I have the correct answer. The correct answer is NEVER. There will be no drops in the market, it will be all winning from here. You are all going to be bored from so much winning. #AlwaysWinning

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7848
Re: calling the top
« Reply #59 on: March 25, 2017, 10:21:21 AM »
You have all guessed wrong - SAD! Only I have the correct answer. The correct answer is NEVER. There will be no drops in the market, it will be all winning from here. You are all going to be bored from so much winning. #AlwaysWinning

Yeah this is so true

anisotropy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 681
Re: calling the top
« Reply #60 on: March 26, 2017, 04:32:45 PM »
April 2017. 50%.

Why wait to be wrong?

haha awesome.

Late 2019. 55% drop, there will be riots on the streets.

Al1961

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 225
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Alberta - B.C.
  • Dad of a husky Husky
Re: calling the top
« Reply #61 on: March 26, 2017, 05:04:29 PM »
April 2017. 50%.

Why wait to be wrong?

haha awesome.

Late 2019. 55% drop, there will be riots on the streets.
Should revise this to top in March 2017. I'm tired of waiting already.

BlueHouse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3311
  • Location: WDC
Re: calling the top
« Reply #62 on: March 26, 2017, 06:53:37 PM »
The top will be the day I dump the remaining $10k that's sitting in Money Market funds from my IRA Rollover I completed back on Nov 18th.

After a great lesson on why time in the market > timing the market I am about to give up on holding out for a pullback and "go all in".

You're welcome. I'll post the day I do this.
I'll watch for this. I've done the same thing and would prefer if someone else triggers the meltdown for a change. Im tired of being the bellwether

Le Barbu

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Québec
  • I really didn’t say everything I said - Y. B.
Re: calling the top
« Reply #63 on: March 26, 2017, 08:56:56 PM »
April 2017. 50%.

Why wait to be wrong?

haha awesome.

Late 2019. 55% drop, there will be riots on the streets.
Should revise this to top in March 2017. I'm tired of waiting already.

The top was in the first week of March guys! Just admit I called it first!

sovereign

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: calling the top
« Reply #64 on: March 26, 2017, 09:11:01 PM »
S&P futures are down 12.75.  Presumably, the market is concerned about the ability of the current administration to deliver on it's economic promises.  Tomorrow could be interesting...

PAstash

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 177
Re: calling the top
« Reply #65 on: March 26, 2017, 09:25:11 PM »
August 2017, 20%

calling the bottom.

With the addition of the internet financial bloggers you tubers and podcasters major media is picking up the FI bug and everything related to it. I am call no major corrections or crash ever again. All people will now index. =) holding period till death.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7848
Re: calling the top
« Reply #66 on: March 27, 2017, 05:52:35 AM »
August 2017, 20%

calling the bottom.

With the addition of the internet financial bloggers you tubers and podcasters major media is picking up the FI bug and everything related to it. I am call no major corrections or crash ever again. All people will now index. =) holding period till death.

i really think that as more and more money flows into vanguard and the other large index fund companies and out of actively managed funds we will approach a much more stable market, basically this isnt a completely off the wall idea.  maybe just a bit premature.

2Birds1Stone

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5761
  • Age: 1
  • Location: Earth
  • K Thnx Bye
Re: calling the top
« Reply #67 on: March 27, 2017, 08:35:59 AM »
The top will be the day I dump the remaining $10k that's sitting in Money Market funds from my IRA Rollover I completed back on Nov 18th.

After a great lesson on why time in the market > timing the market I am about to give up on holding out for a pullback and "go all in".

You're welcome. I'll post the day I do this.
I'll watch for this. I've done the same thing and would prefer if someone else triggers the meltdown for a change. Im tired of being the bellwether

I cheated and put in $5k in on 3/21, still waiting for the other half lol!

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Re: calling the top
« Reply #68 on: March 27, 2017, 09:59:53 PM »
August 2017, 20%

calling the bottom.

With the addition of the internet financial bloggers you tubers and podcasters major media is picking up the FI bug and everything related to it. I am call no major corrections or crash ever again. All people will now index. =) holding period till death.

i really think that as more and more money flows into vanguard and the other large index fund companies and out of actively managed funds we will approach a much more stable market, basically this isnt a completely off the wall idea.  maybe just a bit premature.

If Jim and Carol are the only two active investors left, things won't be very stable. Some people have opined on what an index bubble would (or does) look like. In other words, how does a market look like with a insuitable amount of active traders (price setters). In the world were everyone sane is a passive investor, what happens when only bulls negotiate pricing amongst themselves?

The availability of information may also make things unstable. During the '08 recession, financial advisors, Dave Ramsay, MMM, and every sane expert on the TV told people to not panic and liquidate. The market will rebound. But the availability of bad news meant a whole lot of people liquidated at the bottom and started accumating again after most of the loses were restored.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7848
Re: calling the top
« Reply #69 on: March 28, 2017, 07:14:04 AM »
August 2017, 20%

calling the bottom.

With the addition of the internet financial bloggers you tubers and podcasters major media is picking up the FI bug and everything related to it. I am call no major corrections or crash ever again. All people will now index. =) holding period till death.

i really think that as more and more money flows into vanguard and the other large index fund companies and out of actively managed funds we will approach a much more stable market, basically this isnt a completely off the wall idea.  maybe just a bit premature.

If Jim and Carol are the only two active investors left, things won't be very stable. Some people have opined on what an index bubble would (or does) look like. In other words, how does a market look like with a insuitable amount of active traders (price setters). In the world were everyone sane is a passive investor, what happens when only bulls negotiate pricing amongst themselves?

The availability of information may also make things unstable. During the '08 recession, financial advisors, Dave Ramsay, MMM, and every sane expert on the TV told people to not panic and liquidate. The market will rebound. But the availability of bad news meant a whole lot of people liquidated at the bottom and started accumating again after most of the loses were restored.

this is why a crash would be great.  b/c we'll all keep buying all the way down geting in at cheaper prices.

Tyson

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2465
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Re: calling the top
« Reply #70 on: March 28, 2017, 10:10:48 AM »
People panic.  They always will.  Maybe even more today with the uber-hyped 24 hour news cycle.  If all you hear all day every day is DOOOOOOMMMMM!!!!  SEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!! that is going to dictate the actions of a hell of a lot of people.  Some people might buck the trend, but most won't.  Even index investors can pull their money out and move it elsewhere any time they want. 

So a crash comes, it's hyped by the media, people panic and move their money some place 'safer', and there's still huge drops to take advantage of.  That's the nature of this beast. 

Scandium

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2304
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: calling the top
« Reply #71 on: March 28, 2017, 12:31:46 PM »
Whenever Trump/Ryan fail to pass their tax cuts, because the Freedom Caucus refuse to vote for a budget that keep anything except the military (possibly state-funded churches). There will be a 15% drop, probably May 2018.

I do find it hilarious that all of Wall st are such Reaganomics true-belivers and think these tax cuts (for the rich) will magically boost the economy. You know, unlike all the other times this has proved not to be the case, including by Reagan!

caffeine

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: calling the top
« Reply #72 on: March 28, 2017, 01:03:06 PM »
Whenever Trump/Ryan fail to pass their tax cuts, because the Freedom Caucus refuse to vote for a budget that keep anything except the military (possibly state-funded churches). There will be a 15% drop, probably May 2018.

I do find it hilarious that all of Wall st are such Reaganomics true-belivers and think these tax cuts (for the rich) will magically boost the economy. You know, unlike all the other times this has proved not to be the case, including by Reagan!

Not detracting from what you said - I agree, but the rhetoric around taxes is interesting. The only area where tax cuts/increases have wiggle room is at the higher tiers of income. When someone says the republicans are cutting taxes for rich, while it is true, it is necessarily true. The majority of tax revenue is paid by the rich. A tax cut by its nature tend to disproportionately help the rich than the poor & middle class.

Scandium

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2304
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: calling the top
« Reply #73 on: March 28, 2017, 01:08:35 PM »
Whenever Trump/Ryan fail to pass their tax cuts, because the Freedom Caucus refuse to vote for a budget that keep anything except the military (possibly state-funded churches). There will be a 15% drop, probably May 2018.

I do find it hilarious that all of Wall st are such Reaganomics true-belivers and think these tax cuts (for the rich) will magically boost the economy. You know, unlike all the other times this has proved not to be the case, including by Reagan!

Not detracting from what you said - I agree, but the rhetoric around taxes is interesting. The only area where tax cuts/increases have wiggle room is at the higher tiers of income. When someone says the republicans are cutting taxes for rich, while it is true, it is necessarily true. The majority of tax revenue is paid by the rich. A tax cut by its nature tend to disproportionately help the rich than the poor & middle class.

That's true. I think though that the "nasty party" reputation is from:
a) also cutting benefits/services for the poor at the same time
b) tax cuts to top 1-5%. If only half of earners pay any income tax you could give cuts to the 50-80% segment for example. But somehow it always seems to target the very top. Estate tax for example, paid by tiny-tiny percentage.

PathtoFIRE

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Dallas
Re: calling the top
« Reply #74 on: March 28, 2017, 02:40:17 PM »
...The only area where tax cuts/increases have wiggle room is at the higher tiers of income...

Except about 1/3 of federal revenue is from payroll taxes (OASDI/Medicare, more than $1 trillion/yr). That's a lot of wiggle room that disproportionately affects low/mid income workers

jjcamembert

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 153
Re: calling the top
« Reply #75 on: March 28, 2017, 04:01:25 PM »
Since we do not have a proportionate distribution of wealth invested in the stock market, I don't think we can ascribe market actions to actions of the general public. Take this data for example: http://inequality.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/20.-Share-of-Total-Assets-2-e1455659639255.png

Even if the general public have the same market assumptions and are invested in the total stock market, there's still about 50% of assets owned by the top 1%. My assumption here is that a billionaire most likely isn't actively managing their funds, but they have invested in  funds which in turn manage their money for them. I think it's more likely that money managers panic and start a sell-off and the media just reports after-the-fact, as opposed to the converse that the general public gets fearful and sells their assets.

fattest_foot

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
Re: calling the top
« Reply #76 on: March 28, 2017, 04:31:55 PM »
I'll take a guess.  Market peak July 2017, S&P drop 100%.  No recovery.  Alien invasion, humanity wiped out.

I think in the event on an alien invasion the S&P500 would not go to zero (i.e. drop 100%). Sure, it would be tough to trade, but all of the inventory (especially from weapons manufactuers and food companies) would be highly valued.

If humanity is wiped out, it may still have value. I'm sure if a Ferengi type race came here they would open the markets after the humans were exterminated and again all of the infrastructure, raw materials, and inventory those companies have would likely be of some value to the Ferengi like peoples.

You're insane if you think that aliens are going to honor human ownership rights. They'll take those resources by force and either enslave or kill us all. They may have value, but none for any humans.

Retire-Canada

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7024
Re: calling the top
« Reply #77 on: March 28, 2017, 04:36:51 PM »
You're insane if you think that aliens are going to honor human ownership rights. They'll take those resources by force and either enslave or kill us all. They may have value, but none for any humans.

I read a blog that said they were going to use as meat for some kind of interstellar McDonald's!!!! :(

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Re: calling the top
« Reply #78 on: March 28, 2017, 04:58:27 PM »
Whenever Trump/Ryan fail to pass their tax cuts, because the Freedom Caucus refuse to vote for a budget that keep anything except the military (possibly state-funded churches). There will be a 15% drop, probably May 2018.

I do find it hilarious that all of Wall st are such Reaganomics true-belivers and think these tax cuts (for the rich) will magically boost the economy. You know, unlike all the other times this has proved not to be the case, including by Reagan!

Not detracting from what you said - I agree, but the rhetoric around taxes is interesting. The only area where tax cuts/increases have wiggle room is at the higher tiers of income. When someone says the republicans are cutting taxes for rich, while it is true, it is necessarily true. The majority of tax revenue is paid by the rich. A tax cut by its nature tend to disproportionately help the rich than the poor & middle class.

That's true. I think though that the "nasty party" reputation is from:
a) also cutting benefits/services for the poor at the same time
b) tax cuts to top 1-5%. If only half of earners pay any income tax you could give cuts to the 50-80% segment for example. But somehow it always seems to target the very top. Estate tax for example, paid by tiny-tiny percentage.

Those three deciles (50-80) still pay a pretty meagre amount of income taxes. In the eighties, nineties, and oughts they did get significant tax cuts. Republicans though still campaign in giving them even more tax breaks. Going back to caffeine's point, the average one percenter pays over 50x the amount of income taxes as someone in the 50-99. So even in a disbalanced cut heavily favouring the 50-80 w.r.t. relative taxation, the raw number for the top is a significant savings. Always.

...The only area where tax cuts/increases have wiggle room is at the higher tiers of income...

Except about 1/3 of federal revenue is from payroll taxes (OASDI/Medicare, more than $1 trillion/yr). That's a lot of wiggle room that disproportionately affects low/mid income workers

That is technically a different budget.

kjulez_83

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 86
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne Australia
Re: calling the top
« Reply #79 on: March 28, 2017, 07:49:19 PM »
So is everyone who thinks we're near the top still investing? I keep holding out lately but then it just keeps going up and I wish I invested more earlier!

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2211
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: calling the top
« Reply #80 on: March 28, 2017, 08:11:21 PM »
So is everyone who thinks we're near the top still investing? I keep holding out lately but then it just keeps going up and I wish I invested more earlier!

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Occasionally CompoundInterest will provide graphs as to why you should just go ahead and invest and not wait.

JG in Hangzhou

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Location: Hangzhou, China
Re: calling the top
« Reply #81 on: March 28, 2017, 08:23:43 PM »
I was predicting a top on May 2, 2017. but my latest simulation has exposed a new factor. 
Due to a randomly popular social media thread, all investors will simultaneously move to VTSAX or similar market index fund. 
This will push the market higher due to stability and social media will drive three to five months of new index investing as everyone pushes their leftover pennies into the market.  In month six, a financial news reporter will write a new blog talking about all the companies that are now losing money but have not had any fluctuation in stock market value, leading to additional blogs about the market being super-inflated due to social media. 
On or about November 17th, with Black Friday, Walmart and Best Buy, desperate to improve stock price and woo investors out of the index-only craze, will pay 1000 bloggers to spread the social media index bubble scandal causing consumers to withdraw all money from the market in preparation of after Thanksgiving shopping. 
With no actual stock trading for six months leading to a massive withdrawal by consumers, the market will do a complete fail.  Trump will freeze trading after Trump Inc buys into Walmart and Best Buy, then will initiate the Wall Street Reset Act which will forever ban index trading and mutual funds and require all investors to invest only in individual stocks.

After which the model is unable to predict anything further ... 

PathtoFIRE

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Dallas
Re: calling the top
« Reply #82 on: March 29, 2017, 10:29:36 AM »
That is technically a different budget.

Well, yes and no. There are trust funds for both, but those just buy Treasury securities and are managed by the Treasury, which essentially just commingles the incoming cash flow from OASDI/Medicare taxes with other federal revenues. So yes, politically and to some extent operationally, there is separation. But at the most basic level, no, these are not walled off from the rest of the Treasury operations. Therefore the point is that those with low to mid income levels do in fact contribute a very large (but not majority) proportion of the federal tax revenues in this country, by OASDI/Medicare, by business taxes that are baked into the cost of goods and services that are disproportionately used by this large group of taxpayers, by our federal system that pushes a lot of government taxes and expenditures down to the states which I believe (someone can fact check me here) are often less progressive in their overall taxing structures, and then to a much lesser extent their contribution from the actual federal income taxes.

TL;DR - Low and middle income taxpayers do in fact contribute a large proportion of the overall federal tax revenue, and it's a political choice whether we direct tax cut towards or away from them (see the 2% OASDI payroll holiday of 2011-2012)

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Age: 37
Re: calling the top
« Reply #83 on: March 29, 2017, 11:48:06 AM »
I'll take a guess.  Market peak July 2017, S&P drop 100%.  No recovery.  Alien invasion, humanity wiped out.

I think in the event on an alien invasion the S&P500 would not go to zero (i.e. drop 100%). Sure, it would be tough to trade, but all of the inventory (especially from weapons manufactuers and food companies) would be highly valued.

If humanity is wiped out, it may still have value. I'm sure if a Ferengi type race came here they would open the markets after the humans were exterminated and again all of the infrastructure, raw materials, and inventory those companies have would likely be of some value to the Ferengi like peoples.

You're insane if you think that aliens are going to honor human ownership rights. They'll take those resources by force and either enslave or kill us all. They may have value, but none for any humans.

I said even if they kill us all, a commerce based alien civilization like the Ferengi may have their own markets of the equipment etc. and thus they would still have some value (just not to humans since we're all dead).

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Re: calling the top
« Reply #84 on: March 29, 2017, 02:54:28 PM »
That is technically a different budget.
Well, yes and no. There are trust funds for both, but those just buy Treasury securities and are managed by the Treasury, which essentially just commingles the incoming cash flow from OASDI/Medicare taxes with other federal revenues. So yes, politically and to some extent operationally, there is separation. But at the most basic level, no, these are not walled off from the rest of the Treasury operations. Therefore the point is that those with low to mid income levels do in fact contribute a very large (but not majority) proportion of the federal tax revenues in this country, by OASDI/Medicare, by business taxes that are baked into the cost of goods and services that are disproportionately used by this large group of taxpayers, by our federal system that pushes a lot of government taxes and expenditures down to the states which I believe (someone can fact check me here) are often less progressive in their overall taxing structures, and then to a much lesser extent their contribution from the actual federal income taxes.

TL;DR - Low and middle income taxpayers do in fact contribute a large proportion of the overall federal tax revenue, and it's a political choice whether we direct tax cut towards or away from them (see the 2% OASDI payroll holiday of 2011-2012)

I can agree to a point. I'd mainly dissent on what is a 'large proportion'. If you look at federal revenues and assume the 0-99 pay 100% of the Payroll Taxes, 0% of the Corporate Taxes and "Other" revenue, (and recall they pay around half of income taxes), they 'only' pay 56% of the budget. This isn't factoring in transfer payments. While 56% percent is a majority, it is still small relative to the ratios of income between the average income of a 1%er/company and the 99% and especially small w.r.t. per capita revenue.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2017, 02:56:17 PM by kayvent »

sovereign

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: calling the top
« Reply #85 on: March 29, 2017, 08:25:46 PM »
I'll take a guess.  Market peak July 2017, S&P drop 100%.  No recovery.  Alien invasion, humanity wiped out.

I think in the event on an alien invasion the S&P500 would not go to zero (i.e. drop 100%). Sure, it would be tough to trade, but all of the inventory (especially from weapons manufactuers and food companies) would be highly valued.

If humanity is wiped out, it may still have value. I'm sure if a Ferengi type race came here they would open the markets after the humans were exterminated and again all of the infrastructure, raw materials, and inventory those companies have would likely be of some value to the Ferengi like peoples.

You're insane if you think that aliens are going to honor human ownership rights. They'll take those resources by force and either enslave or kill us all. They may have value, but none for any humans.

I said even if they kill us all, a commerce based alien civilization like the Ferengi may have their own markets of the equipment etc. and thus they would still have some value (just not to humans since we're all dead).
Do we have any latinum on this planet?  Ferengi are all about the gold-pressed latinum (GPL).

Vindicated

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Indianapolis
Re: calling the top
« Reply #86 on: April 13, 2017, 01:06:23 PM »
Why not.

I will venture a prediction.

The market will continue to believe in the US market until Trump loses the 2020 election.  Then the market will correct for what the false promises that were made previously (promises that will continue from now until the next election ends).

So, January 2021 is my guess!

Spicolli

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 38
  • Age: 52
  • Location: California
Re: calling the top
« Reply #87 on: April 13, 2017, 03:42:37 PM »
My guess is that there will be something from Trump's de-regulations that will lead to the next crash. I give it 2+ years and call October 2019 if WWIII doesn't start before that.

TheAnonOne

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1564
Re: calling the top
« Reply #88 on: April 14, 2017, 07:10:49 AM »
Why not.

I will venture a prediction.

The market will continue to believe in the US market until Trump loses the 2020 election.  Then the market will correct for what the false promises that were made previously (promises that will continue from now until the next election ends).

So, January 2021 is my guess!
Wouldn't it be Nov or sooner the prior year if it's obvious he would lose at that point?

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk


aperture

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Location: Colorado
Re: calling the top
« Reply #89 on: April 14, 2017, 08:27:38 AM »
July, 2018 -18%

The rule that says rain will not occur until you leave behind your umbrella also applies - I will FIRE at end of June 2018, so a nice little crash after would be 'ironic' to quote a pop-star with bad understanding of ironic.

Ultimately, I am much much more concerned about a longer term trend than a single hop.  I do not want to see 1966 - 1982 nor 2000 through 2009 again.  A few ups and downs with a gradual overall incline would be nice.  Actually, I think this is very likely since there continue to be game changing technologies on the horizon of widespread implementation.  There will be winners and losers with robotics, wind and solar and self-driving vehicles. Overall the markets will grow while we are building the new economy structured around these changes. That economy may suck though if no one can work and there only small groups of haves and lots of have nots that cannot consume. -ap

Vindicated

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Indianapolis
Re: calling the top
« Reply #90 on: April 17, 2017, 11:43:49 AM »
Why not.

I will venture a prediction.

The market will continue to believe in the US market until Trump loses the 2020 election.  Then the market will correct for what the false promises that were made previously (promises that will continue from now until the next election ends).

So, January 2021 is my guess!
Wouldn't it be Nov or sooner the prior year if it's obvious he would lose at that point?

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

I have no idea.  That's what makes this thread so much fun!

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Re: calling the top
« Reply #91 on: April 17, 2017, 03:38:36 PM »
Why not.

I will venture a prediction.

The market will continue to believe in the US market until Trump loses the 2020 election.  Then the market will correct for what the false promises that were made previously (promises that will continue from now until the next election ends).

So, January 2021 is my guess!

And people on the right will blame it on 'the stock market is projecting slow growth under Andrew Coumo" whereas people on the left will say "see, all those rallies under Trump were smoke"?

sovereign

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: calling the top
« Reply #92 on: April 18, 2017, 05:36:32 PM »
The US stock market will crash again, eventually.  It has always done this periodically and I see no reason to expect anything different.  It's just a structural feature of publicly traded markets.

But WHEN will this next happen?
When people think borrowing money to invest in the stock market is a can't miss proposition?  ;)

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8486
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: calling the top
« Reply #93 on: April 18, 2017, 06:16:34 PM »
When people think borrowing money to invest in the stock market is a can't miss proposition?  ;)

Has it ever been a losing proposition, over sufficiently long time horizons?  I'd be interested in seeing the comparison between medium/long term interest rates and stock market returns over 10/20/30 year rolling periods, to figure out which conditions have been profitable and which have not.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2017, 07:17:26 PM by sol »

Le Barbu

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Québec
  • I really didn’t say everything I said - Y. B.
Re: calling the top
« Reply #94 on: April 18, 2017, 07:06:21 PM »
When people think borrowing money to invest in the stock market is a can't miss proposition?  ;)

Has it ever been a losing proposition, over sufficiently long time horizons?  I'd be interested in seeing the comparison between medium/long term interest rates and stock market returns over 10/20/30 year rolling periods, to figure out which conditions have been profitable and which have not.
[/quote]

I did backesting 3 years ago, short-term treasury vs stock market

90% chances to win over any 10 years period
97% over 20 years
100% over 30 years

Even over 3 years periods, 70% had a positive outcome!

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8486
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: calling the top
« Reply #95 on: April 18, 2017, 07:20:51 PM »
I did backesting 3 years ago, short-term treasury vs stock market

90% chances to win over any 10 years period
97% over 20 years
100% over 30 years

Even over 3 years periods, 70% had a positive outcome!


Okay, so the answer to sovereign's question appears to be "Yes, it's always been a "can't miss" proposition as long as you're willing to wait up to 30 year."

Did you use real (after inflation) market returns?  If not, any idea on how those numbers change when you account for inflation?

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 637
  • Location: Canada
Re: calling the top
« Reply #96 on: April 18, 2017, 07:26:15 PM »
I did backesting 3 years ago, short-term treasury vs stock market

90% chances to win over any 10 years period
97% over 20 years
100% over 30 years

Even over 3 years periods, 70% had a positive outcome!

Wow. I would not have expected that.

brooklynguy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
  • Age: 39
Re: calling the top
« Reply #97 on: April 18, 2017, 08:02:27 PM »
I did backesting 3 years ago, short-term treasury vs stock market

90% chances to win over any 10 years period
97% over 20 years
100% over 30 years

Even over 3 years periods, 70% had a positive outcome!

Okay, so the answer to sovereign's question appears to be "Yes, it's always been a "can't miss" proposition as long as you're willing to wait up to 30 year."

That backtest doesn't really answer that question, because, unless you are the United States government, you generally can't borrow at the short term treasury rate (and even then, not for long term periods).  The type of debt that is best suited for leveraged investing and that is actually available to retail stock market investors (or at least the property-owning subset thereof) is mortgage debt -- the "Welcome and General Discussion" subforum currently has at least a few active threads going that examine the historical success rates of leveraged-investing-via-mortgage strategies, in addition to the umpteen older threads covering that topic that are gathering dust in the forum archives.

Quote
Did you use real (after inflation) market returns?  If not, any idea on how those numbers change when you account for inflation?

Factoring in inflation shouldn't change the results (either both sets of returns would be adjusted for inflation, or not, so the historical success rates should remain constant).

Paul der Krake

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4729
  • Age: 12
  • Location: UTC-10:00
Re: calling the top
« Reply #98 on: April 18, 2017, 08:09:56 PM »
Treasuries are the definition of the risk-free return, so of course you'd expect pretty much anything to be a better investment.

Wall Street wouldn't exist if Treasuries beat any reasonable definition of "the stock market" over any significant period of time.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2595
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: calling the top
« Reply #99 on: April 18, 2017, 08:53:53 PM »
No top in sight, now that Trump has revealed the - "even an idiot can get elected if you promise to de-fund government and make corporations rich" strategy.  At any moment, Trump could lower taxes (or push Congress to 'make it so'), repeal Obamacare / Medicare / and Social Security obligations, or just come out and say that corporations have free reign to pollute, pay zero (or negative) taxes, and exploit workers.  Theoretically, the US stock market could rise for '8 more years' if nothing changes (less than half-hearted yay!).  Americans will be more rich (and eating more chocolate cake) that we ever wanted.  Of course, inflation will also start to tick up, but you didn't ask about negative real returns...
« Last Edit: April 19, 2017, 08:32:09 AM by EscapeVelocity2020 »