You're smarter than that tripe. THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX. By definition the market has a seller for every buyer. If I sell and hence underweight and you buy and hence become fully invested, in a bull market I have UNDER PERFORMED the market even though I'm long. The majority of Americans do not own stock-directly or indirect. Just three decades ago only 13% of Americans had equity investments. The bull market left many behind and CAUSED the enormous gap between rich and poor. This break is a wealth gap buster. The broke guy is still at zero but the asset holder just went from 50b to 20b. The guy living under the bridge is a DE FACTO SHORT. The same way a renter is short a residence. To those without stocks or renting a house, a bear market should be rejoiced. I'm a perfect example. I had what was considered a decent sum of money for a 35 yo in the mid-90's. But instead of buying stocks-which I've been bearish on since like 1994-I bought Treasuries. The result? I'm a HUGE LOSER. Is my "loss" part of your zero sum definition? No because I'm not a participant. In fact I even made quite a bit in interest and appreciation on the Treasuries. But in the SUM OF PORTFOLIO LIFE I was a gross under performer to a basket of SPX bought at 400. Example: If tomorrow the dollar goes to zero and the Dow trades 50,000 is everyone a winner? NO!! The 60% of America with no stock are DE FACTO short and the 30% who're under weighted will under perform the rally. Thus the winners are only those who're all in. The irony is that around the time the masses exit stocks for the "safety" of Treasuries is about the time Bonds too will crash. Perhaps 60 Minutes forgot that Bonds broke 50% in the early 80's. Always cracks me up when a moronic liberal talks about the superior performance of stocks under a Dem President. How about the performance of the one market directly under the perusal of the President-Treasuries. T-Bonds do considerably better under GOP administrations.
I feel bad for these people but when was it decreed that bear markets had been eliminated? Nobody's entitled to live a pain free life, especially when they can't be bothered take responsibility for their own finances.
Even a hooker tells you the price upfront. How bad is that? If you buy a mutual fund, it takes hours to find out what you pay. You have to CALL TO ORDER A STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION to get the full trading costs. A prostitute gives you the price in dollars right up front. So which is the crime?
How would you know that? Seriously, maybe there should be a thread called "the death of common sense and the rise of victim hood in America." Do people need to be told that if the fees are opaque there's a problem? Or if the fees are really high, invest somewhere else? Or bear markets can still happen? Or save for a rainy day?
Great points about taking responsibility for one's own investments but these people trusted Wall Street for a reason. The same way if they became ill they would trust a highly rated doctor. If they got in trouble they would trust a highly rated lawyer. You do not operate on your own heart, defend yourself in court, etc. The problem here is that Wall Street professionals can not be trusted as other professional people can. People didn't know that, they do now. It was never presented to the public as gambling, it was presented as sound.
The doctor and lawyer comparison is made all the time and you just made it so let me ask you this... if you were diagnosed with something serious would you get a second opinion? Would you learn about your disease or condition? Or would you passively go along with whatever you were told, even if it was by a nurse's assistant which BTW some "financial professionals" have less education than. And what about bear markets? Why would you think they'd been eliminated?
That's the problem right there... almost the entire problem rests in your last sentance. Americans view their homes as assets. They're not - a home is an EXPENSE. B
I seem to recall some highly appointed officials (Hank Paulson, Ben Bernake) and an elected official, Barney Frank telling the public AKA 401k holders, that the crisis was contained. During this time they know doubt we being bombarded by CNBC as this being a god time to buy. These people donât spend all day educating themselves about the crooked markets. They have normal jobs. There problem now is they listened to those in charge. These appointed officials who are responsible for this mess. What is the link that connects these three mentioned above?