They aren’t “pretty sure” or “mostly sure.” It’s a bona fide Certainty.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48111499)

I'm 35 and just hit $3M net worth on a relatively modest salary by trusting the S&P500. You? LJL

This was actually the single most valuable thing I learned from my financial economics class or any class in college outside the math and stats departments.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48111958)

This part is true. What else are you going to do with your money besides buy into the Jewish money letters casino? Once you have a House and Guns and Ammo, what else is going to help you when permanent ITE comes?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48111608)

If you're going to invest in anything, why not invest in the single thing that the US Political system is designed to protect?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48111707)

"No, redditors are definitely not thinking that, they're smarter than that."

Yeah man, or maybe cowshit is right that people legitimately believe there is less a chance of number going down than nuclear war?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116336)

"eat up that dividend return" - the word "that" in this sentence reference "tax advantages" in the prior. two wholly distinct concepts

and your threatening conclusion is that they do not perform as advertised. to whom is this the relevant question rather than "would that money, tax adjusted, outperform if put in the SPX or the plan"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48111888)

The problem isn't her fund options, it's the plan itself. They are charging her $4,000 a year just to have an account open.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48112675)

https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/vemo/vemo-return-forecasts.html

Imagine getting the 5th percentile US equity returns of 3.1% CAGR for 30 years.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48111950)

And it’s not just Reddit. The financial planning and wealth management industries take this as an absolute and undeniable truth. Probably because most people realistically can’t retire unless it’s true.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48112239)

November 1968 to November 1988: inflation adjusted price return, -1.38%. Inflation adjusted total return (w dividend reinvestment), 2.73%.

November 1968 to September 1985: inflation adjusted price return, -3.27%. Inflation adjusted total return, 0.9%

worst case-November 1968 to July 1982: inflation adjusted price return, -6.89%. Inflation adjusted total return, -2.94%.

all percentage returns annualized

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48114371)

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/how-to-survive-the-worst-bear-market-of-all-time-120034754.html

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48114918)

None of them want to hear it

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48115038)

https://realinvestmentadvice.com/bull-steepening-is-bearish-for-stocks-part-two/

I don't see how price earning multiples can inflate beyond their current levels. Unless there is significant earnings growth, which is unlikely in an economic slowdown, stock prices ought to drop in the medium term. It's reason to keep some powder dry in mmfs that can b deployed when stocks fall from nosebleed levels.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48115820)

Discuss

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48112569)

he's been ridiculing me on the boart re my investment practices for the last month plus. meanwhile, i put my entire 401k balance into VOO, SCHD, SCHG, VGT, and SMH. in the last two weeks it's gone from like $690k to $790k.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48112641)

But all anyone can tell me is the Same Thing we’ve all heard before. I want to discover truth and reveal New Facts. Not backward looking data that says nothing but, “boomers became easily rich.”

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48114029)

Altogether, well diversified indexing is as good as it gets. I think the sentiment that "if this thing generates shit returns over my 30+ years of working, then everything is fucked" is a pretty sound one.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48114089)

i have everything in US based equities.

it's risky, but i think a fairly safe bet that the US will continue to outperform. i guess if US stocks start shitting the bed for a few years, you take a hit and maybe reevaluate.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48114893)

i index, but within the US only. foreign stocks have proven to be SPS. who knows when that will change.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48114911)

you are a fucking idiot.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48114962)

I bet you've never been in a real fight.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48117308)

Yeah, the S&P absolutely beat the shit out of international stocks for the past 50 years, but that's already baked into the price of domestic and foreign stocks. I'll just buy everything because I have no idea if that's what it'll do for the next 40 or so years that are of interest to me (after that I'll be DET and stop caring)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48115047)

and with respect to the investment split i chose, it's stupid that i did that because you really cannot glean anything at all from the prior performance of an investment vehicle, so you should probably just invest in rocks or bonds. odd that you just shoot holes in other people's investments without offering any useful insight yourself.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116379)

yea you Owned Me afaik, i'm an Idiot imho

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116461)

While the U.S. has never experienced a 20-year period of negative real returns, it has gotten close a few times. From February 1966 through December 1982, U.S. stocks lost 0.16% on an annualized basis, when including dividends and adjusting for inflation. That’s a 16-year period of negative real returns. Additionally, from September 1929 through December 1944, U.S. stocks experienced a 15-year period of negative real returns. This coincided with the beginning of the Great Depression through WWII.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48115840)

Really makes u think 🤔

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116272)

The economic improvement under Reagan was pronounced. The Fed enacted sharp rate increases which tamed inflation but produced a recession, then the Reagan tax cuts revitalized things at the cost of what now looks like a modest rise in deficit.

I have seen enough ups and downs that I keep 5-7 years' expenses in insured deposits or short term Fed securities. Probably unnecessarily conservative but it makes me feel better.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116485)

if you'd put 10k into the s&p in 1968 and left it until 1998, the annualized return would be just over 12%.

so yeah if you were in the s&p for the exact length of the bear market then got out the second it ended, you'd be bad off. brilliant insight.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48117307)

A 15% treasury bond from the early 80s would give stocks a run for their fucking money. And even before that in the 70s it would appear bonds beat stocks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116536)

Redditors and xo posters think of risk as making a guaranteed High Return. Then they point to a chart of the last 40 years. I want to see their Chart of the Future.

I am diversified in Treasury Bonds, crypto, stonks. I made some lucky af trades and put it in Treasury Bonds bc I don’t want to Lose ill gotten gains. Per exeunt’s wisdom, any money I put in stonk I expect to lose half potentially. Crypto I expect to lose it all. A Gen Xer should probably just pay off his student loans before he worries about investing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116564)

where'd i go wrong?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116901)

—Sam Bankman-Fried

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116537)

but what he's saying ITT is absolutely retarded as fuck. he's bashing redditors for their faith in the S&P while at the same time saying he thinks the "macros" "look like 1970" and i presume he's suggesting that we are in for a 10+ year bear market. in other words, he can accurately predict the stock market....but redditors are stupid!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5598286&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310901",#48116946)