That's a fact. And a phrase I've use often over the past few decades.
Not trying to be a smart-ass, but...
If you are heavily vested in the stock market, it may look rosy.
IMHO, I don't feel that is an accurate indicator of the health of the
economy for your average putz, however. Represents increasing stock
values for do nothing investors - not personal earnings, cost of
living, etc. for the working populace. How do they achieve increased
stock earnings? Cutting salaries, sending jobs overseas, gutting
retirement and healthcare benefits, cheapening products; thereby
increasing volume through replacement sales? Lovely...
The performance of the market has left me totally under whelmed since
There are some exceptions.
As far as the media is concerned, what do you see as a "vested
interest" in the current news?
uh huh. my friend ... ain't gonna bite on that.
Read the last two paragraphs "carefully" ... typical of the "doom and
gloom", despite the reality of the situation.
... and "reality" can be what you report it to be, providing you harp on the
negative long enough.
Pretty straight forward if you ask me.
AKA: "That's nice, but you can do better".
Not my kind of motivation, but have seen enough of it in corporate
life to recognise it.
Certainly are -- and, of course, "since Jan 2000" includes the '01/'02
period--if consolidated at that time then reentered markets beginning in
early 2002, some comparisons would be(*)
DJIA +15% +60%
SP500 0 70
Russ 2000 55 100
NASDAQ -35 100
Oil/Gas 215 240
_I'm_ certainly not complaining... :)
(*) These are approximate taken from www.marketwatch.com graphing tool
between 1/1/00 and 1/1/03 thru 12/31/07.
Look at GE for the last 7+ years.
Was about $65 when Welch retired.
Got as low as low $20s, has struggled to get back in the $30s, never
has made $40.
IMHO, not a stellar track record for a first rate company.
As I said, some winners, some not.
You want an argument, change the subject.
Simply an observation of a pretty decent company.
Personally, had much better results from '93 thru 2000 than from 2001
to date, but that's life in the market.
I would say you were not paying close attention.
It has done quite well beginning in March of 03 for about 12 months. Again
in July of 06 till July of 07 it did quite well,
Over all the Dow Industrials alone is up from about 7,900 to 14,0000
spanning the period of March 2003 to July of 2007. That is a 78% increase
in just over 4 years, averaging an 18% gain every year during that period.
From March 2003 to "Now" it is up about 60%, bringing the average down to,
but still a very healthy yearly average gain of 12.5%.
What would impress you, a better money manager perhaps? ;~)
Who's not paying attention here? He said "since 01/01/00". Not "since March of
DJIA close on 31 Dec 1999: 11,497
DJIA close yesterday: 12,466
That's 8.4% in just over eight years, for an annualized rate of return right
at a whopping ONE PERCENT. After adjusting for inflation, stocks have been a
horrendous money *loser* "since 01/01/00".
Conveniently ignoring the 61% *loss* between 14 Jan 2000 and 9 Oct 2002...
A 78% increase in 4-1/3 years is a 14.4% annual rate, not 18%. (You're not
taking compounding into account.)
57% in 4 yrs 10 mos = 9.8% annually, not 12.5. (Compounding again.)
- addressing the point raised
- not cherry-picking time periods
- correctly calculating annual rate of return
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
Yep -- like you jumping in with another uninformed comment...
Hint: go back a few posts in the thread and read again, for comprehension this
time. Lew said the market had performed poorly since 01/01/00; Leon claimed
Lew hadn't been paying attention, citing performance during a couple of
carefully selected periods during that time; I pointed out that Leon is
ignoring performance over the *entire* time, and gave incorrect figures for
rate of return in several places.
Lew was right: market performance since 01/01/00 has sucked. Sure, there have
been a few periods in there when it did well, but there have also been some
periods when it did very, very badly.
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
Lew, I feel your pain and frustration and AMOF just got off the telephone
with my money manager. I have done pretty well since 03/03 but not as well
as the market. Weeeeer gunna make some changes pretty quick.
I was watching Matt interview that wild and crazy stock guy, Jim Cramer, on
the Today show this morning. Finally he brought up a question and was
correctly answered. Matt asks, isn't the media partly to blame for the bad
feelings and results of people being afraid to spend money because of the
recession. He had to ask this twice but Jim finally answered correctly,
The problems we have today largely stem from misrepresentation, false
information, and deception.
It ain't "News" unless it is exciting. It ain't exciting unless we add some
BS to get your attention.
The environmentalists like to throw false figures out there to get the
uneducated, and apathetic wound up and excited. Recently they whined about
British Airways burning 20K gallons of fuel to make Trans Atlantic flights
with no passengers. That may be true but what they were really complaining
about was the amount of pollution. They claimed IIRC 400 Tons of carbon
pollution. I did the math using their figures and find that burning 20K
gallons of fuel that weights less than 160,000 pounds creates 800,000 pounds
of waste carbon according to their claims. So burning 1 lb of jet fuel
creates 5 lbs of carbon? Nope!
To keep from being burned by the media and while managing your financial
dealings, verify for your self because most everything you hear is a sales
gimmick of some sort.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.