zlacker

[parent] [thread] 8 comments
1. throwk+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-05-21 22:54:10
Is the math meaningful though?
replies(3): >>JumpCr+y >>state_+y1 >>simonh+R1
2. JumpCr+y[view] [source] 2022-05-21 22:57:57
>>throwk+(OP)
> Is the math meaningful though?

"Meaningful" is squishy. Is it strongly predictive, and in some cases, definitive? Yes.

3. state_+y1[view] [source] 2022-05-21 23:04:59
>>throwk+(OP)
If we could all get a stable (guaranteed) 15% per year, everyone would invest. But the world economy doesn’t grow at 15%.
replies(1): >>tjs8rj+c2
4. simonh+R1[view] [source] 2022-05-21 23:06:33
>>throwk+(OP)
To the same extent that money is meaningful.
◧◩
5. tjs8rj+c2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-21 23:08:46
>>state_+y1
The US economy doesn’t grow at 7% a year but that’s what the s&p is expected to do
replies(2): >>hrunt+Y2 >>vkou+xw
◧◩◪
6. hrunt+Y2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-21 23:13:26
>>tjs8rj+c2
Well, the S&P (assuming the S&P 500) doesn't represent the entire US economy, but 500 companies that represent, arguably, the "winners" of the US economy, so expecting them to grow 7% while the entire economy as a whole grows less is not unexpected.
replies(1): >>majorm+63
◧◩◪◨
7. majorm+63[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-21 23:14:18
>>hrunt+Y2
How much of that is inflation? If, historically, GDP growth is about 3% and inflation is about 3%, and you're trying to invest in the strongest companies, is that how you get to 7%+?
replies(1): >>abakke+nu
◧◩◪◨⬒
8. abakke+nu[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-22 03:58:08
>>majorm+63
how many companies lose money for a few years and fold? if the S&P is winners, then it is counterbalanced by all the bad investments, pre revenue startups, and other businesses which are losing money. balancing out to 3% is not impossible.
◧◩◪
9. vkou+xw[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-05-22 04:31:57
>>tjs8rj+c2
Population growth + inflation + transfer of wealth from workers to capital owners + productivity gains has over the long run been pretty close to 7%.
[go to top]