Thread: Buying Gold with my Thai savings?

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by PaulBunyon

Thanks for the link. I checked and there's a wiki page with the am info...

Gold reserve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So that means the US has the most Gold in reserve and the most gold backing its currency too, right?



On Wiki they also broke holdings worldwide down like this...

Holding Percentage
Jewelry 52%
Central banks 18%
Investment (bars, coins) 16%
Industrial 12%
Unaccounted 2%


As the poor have better lives they do buy more gold jewelry. The people in places like China and India are sure to buy more if their buying power increases. There's a lot of support there for this metal.

No, the Euro zone has more gold. The US does not have any gold backing the dollar. The only thing backing the dollar is treasury debt.

I have been buying the dips in bullion and mining stocks for a while now.

Support for any currency comes from confidence in the overall economy. In order for a currency to be strong an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

You seem to think hiding money away is gold is the only way to go when the last 100 years of history shows 2 big bull markets and decades of underperformance.

You have been wrong all year and still can't admit you're wrong about gold.

Now you are claiming the price falls are paper gold. Well then, go sell your gold and sell what price you get. Moron.

Wrong. Stock market performances lead the economy. Shares are valued based on profit forecasts for the next 12-24 mths. If stocks start performing it's because companies are expected to make bigger profits over the next 1-2 years which means the economy is picking up.

Why do people such as yourself who have no experience in stock markets make such ignorant comments?

I don't know.

Originally Posted by draco888

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

actually not entirely true, the business cycle does have a direct impact on company earnings, hence their stock price and their ability to pay back their debt

the correlation is there but can be seasonal or lagged and sometimes can be lead indicators in terms of expectation and forward earnings forecast, all depending on market style regime (smallcap vs large cap effects etc...) and overall market outlook sentiments. It's a mix of emotional and fundamentals that drive the markets, and the correlation is definitely there, and some would say that the real economy now bases forecast on actual indexes prices, which seems a bit foolish, but it is becoming a reality as markets become more and more "emotionally" oriented.

That is why I said minimal. But if you choose to use leading, lagged, seasonal or whatever of course you can force a correlation out. Of course the business cycle affects company earnings but not necessarily stock prices.

You obviously have never studied finance or business at Uni.

Stock prices rise due to earnings

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

Of course the business cycle affects company earnings but not necessarily stock prices.

they usually do, WallStreet is about earnings and beating forecasts. Entire strategies are run around that, and fund managers will decrease or increase their exposures when those forecasts are revised or the actual failed to beat the forecast.

Correct. Fund managers base their decisions around valuations based on earnings. Stocks that are forecast to produce consistent EPS growth are highly valued.

But sometimes stocks will fall in price after a strong profit report because future earnings growth isn't expected to be good.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by Thormaturge

I saw such a market in 1990's UK and landlords couldn't sell property fast enough.

that's because they are idiots and went to realize total return loss, which has nothing to do with yield, which was still positive for the new acquirer. God, get professional help, you have no clue how to manage property as an investment. The bad news is that you are not alone. Could explain why all those fools in the 90s were selling, at the worst possible time and when the yield would actually go up for the new acquirer.

Why are you mixing up yield for the new acquirer with that of the seller? Totally separate yield calculations.

Wow you live in a simple world don't you? Did you read that the stock Market leads the real economy by a year or two in the readers digest? Must be true then, after all the economy has always performed after a stock market rally has it not?

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by PaulBunyon

Thanks for the link. I checked and there's a wiki page with the am info...

Gold reserve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So that means the US has the most Gold in reserve and the most gold backing its currency too, right?



On Wiki they also broke holdings worldwide down like this...

Holding Percentage
Jewelry 52%
Central banks 18%
Investment (bars, coins) 16%
Industrial 12%
Unaccounted 2%


As the poor have better lives they do buy more gold jewelry. The people in places like China and India are sure to buy more if their buying power increases. There's a lot of support there for this metal.

No, the Euro zone has more gold. The US does not have any gold backing the dollar. The only thing backing the dollar is treasury debt.

I have been buying the dips in bullion and mining stocks for a while now.

Support for any currency comes from confidence in the overall economy. In order for a currency to be strong an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

You seem to think hiding money away is gold is the only way to go when the last 100 years of history shows 2 big bull markets and decades of underperformance.

You have been wrong all year and still can't admit you're wrong about gold.

Now you are claiming the price falls are paper gold. Well then, go sell your gold and sell what price you get. Moron.

Wrong. Stock market performances lead the economy. Shares are valued based on profit forecasts for the next 12-24 mths. If stocks start performing it's because companies are expected to make bigger profits over the next 1-2 years which means the economy is picking up.

Why do people such as yourself who have no experience in stock markets make such ignorant comments?

I don't know.

Do some reading re the correlation between stock Market returns and GDP growth then you may not appear so ignorant. Even buttercup realises it's a bit more complex.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by PaulBunyon

Thanks for the link. I checked and there's a wiki page with the am info...

Gold reserve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So that means the US has the most Gold in reserve and the most gold backing its currency too, right?



On Wiki they also broke holdings worldwide down like this...

Holding Percentage
Jewelry 52%
Central banks 18%
Investment (bars, coins) 16%
Industrial 12%
Unaccounted 2%


As the poor have better lives they do buy more gold jewelry. The people in places like China and India are sure to buy more if their buying power increases. There's a lot of support there for this metal.

No, the Euro zone has more gold. The US does not have any gold backing the dollar. The only thing backing the dollar is treasury debt.

I have been buying the dips in bullion and mining stocks for a while now.

Support for any currency comes from confidence in the overall economy. In order for a currency to be strong an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

You seem to think hiding money away is gold is the only way to go when the last 100 years of history shows 2 big bull markets and decades of underperformance.

You have been wrong all year and still can't admit you're wrong about gold.

Now you are claiming the price falls are paper gold. Well then, go sell your gold and sell what price you get. Moron.

Wrong. Stock market performances lead the economy. Shares are valued based on profit forecasts for the next 12-24 mths. If stocks start performing it's because companies are expected to make bigger profits over the next 1-2 years which means the economy is picking up.

Why do people such as yourself who have no experience in stock markets make such ignorant comments?

I don't know.

Ah ok it's as simple as that is it? Ok then.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

actually not entirely true, the business cycle does have a direct impact on company earnings, hence their stock price and their ability to pay back their debt

the correlation is there but can be seasonal or lagged and sometimes can be lead indicators in terms of expectation and forward earnings forecast, all depending on market style regime (smallcap vs large cap effects etc...) and overall market outlook sentiments. It's a mix of emotional and fundamentals that drive the markets, and the correlation is definitely there, and some would say that the real economy now bases forecast on actual indexes prices, which seems a bit foolish, but it is becoming a reality as markets become more and more "emotionally" oriented.

That is why I said minimal. But if you choose to use leading, lagged, seasonal or whatever of course you can force a correlation out. Of course the business cycle affects company earnings but not necessarily stock prices.

You obviously have never studied finance or business at Uni.

Stock prices rise due to earnings

Originally Posted by draco888

Ah ok it's as simple as that is it? Ok then.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

actually not entirely true, the business cycle does have a direct impact on company earnings, hence their stock price and their ability to pay back their debt

the correlation is there but can be seasonal or lagged and sometimes can be lead indicators in terms of expectation and forward earnings forecast, all depending on market style regime (smallcap vs large cap effects etc...) and overall market outlook sentiments. It's a mix of emotional and fundamentals that drive the markets, and the correlation is definitely there, and some would say that the real economy now bases forecast on actual indexes prices, which seems a bit foolish, but it is becoming a reality as markets become more and more "emotionally" oriented.

That is why I said minimal. But if you choose to use leading, lagged, seasonal or whatever of course you can force a correlation out. Of course the business cycle affects company earnings but not necessarily stock prices.

You obviously have never studied finance or business at Uni.

Stock prices rise due to earnings

It's not as simple as your posts but it's not complicated.

All the LT strong performers will produce large profits. ST tech stocks can perform well but ultimately it comes down to earnings.

Stocks that do well over 20-30 years produce substantial profits.

Originally Posted by DrAndy

Originally Posted by socal

I said this would happen 2 years ago. So I'm right on track.

Originally Posted by socal

I said this would happen . So that makes me right, not wrong.

got a few links for that?

I sadi it would happen, in November I think

sell your gold when it was around B1700 I said

oh no you said, it is wonderful stuff, gold, I have lots of it all marked as real gold

good luck

Link
07-01-2011, 10:18 AM #370 (permalink (Buying Gold with my Thai savings?)) socal

Whether the COMEX holds from here remains to be seen. All I can guess is that there will be huge volatility until more COMEX player want to cash their position in gold rather then paper.

Originally Posted by draco888

Do some reading re the correlation between stock Market returns and GDP growth then you may not appear so ignorant. Even buttercup realises it's a bit more complex.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

No, the Euro zone has more gold. The US does not have any gold backing the dollar. The only thing backing the dollar is treasury debt.

I have been buying the dips in bullion and mining stocks for a while now.

Support for any currency comes from confidence in the overall economy. In order for a currency to be strong an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

You seem to think hiding money away is gold is the only way to go when the last 100 years of history shows 2 big bull markets and decades of underperformance.

You have been wrong all year and still can't admit you're wrong about gold.

Now you are claiming the price falls are paper gold. Well then, go sell your gold and sell what price you get. Moron.

Wrong. Stock market performances lead the economy. Shares are valued based on profit forecasts for the next 12-24 mths. If stocks start performing it's because companies are expected to make bigger profits over the next 1-2 years which means the economy is picking up.

Why do people such as yourself who have no experience in stock markets make such ignorant comments?

I don't know.

Do some reading

I studied finance at Uni, worked in the industry and read dozens of other books.

You've got NFI.

Originally Posted by draco888

Wow you live in a simple world don't you? Did you read that the stock Market leads the real economy by a year or two in the readers digest? Must be true then, after all the economy has always performed after a stock market rally has it not?

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

No, the Euro zone has more gold. The US does not have any gold backing the dollar. The only thing backing the dollar is treasury debt.

I have been buying the dips in bullion and mining stocks for a while now.

Support for any currency comes from confidence in the overall economy. In order for a currency to be strong an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

You seem to think hiding money away is gold is the only way to go when the last 100 years of history shows 2 big bull markets and decades of underperformance.

You have been wrong all year and still can't admit you're wrong about gold.

Now you are claiming the price falls are paper gold. Well then, go sell your gold and sell what price you get. Moron.

Wrong. Stock market performances lead the economy. Shares are valued based on profit forecasts for the next 12-24 mths. If stocks start performing it's because companies are expected to make bigger profits over the next 1-2 years which means the economy is picking up.

Why do people such as yourself who have no experience in stock markets make such ignorant comments?

I don't know.

No I learnt it from working with brokers and large fund managers.

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by DrAndy

Originally Posted by socal

I said this would happen 2 years ago. So I'm right on track.

Originally Posted by socal

I said this would happen . So that makes me right, not wrong.

got a few links for that?

I sadi it would happen, in November I think

sell your gold when it was around B1700 I said

oh no you said, it is wonderful stuff, gold, I have lots of it all marked as real gold

good luck

Link



07-01-2011, 10:18 AM #370 (permalink (Buying Gold with my Thai savings?)) socal

Whether the COMEX holds from here remains to be seen. All I can guess is that there will be huge volatility until more COMEX player want to cash their position in gold rather then paper.

$100 an ounce

You're a nutter.

[quote=draco888;2420531]You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

[quote=waradmiral;2420308]

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by PaulBunyon

Thanks for the link. I checked and there's a wiki page with the am info...

Gon.

Correct

Dow Jones At New All Time Highs - Here's Why





Curious why the Dow Jones Industrial Average just hit new all time highs? Here's a partial list of recent economic events:

• Markit US PMI Miss
• ISM Manufacturing Miss
• ISM New York Miss
• Vehicle Sales Miss
• ADP Employment Miss
• ISM Services Miss
• Challenger Job Cuts Miss
• Initial Claims Miss
• Trade Balance Beat
• Non-Farm Payrolls Miss
• Hourly Earnings Miss
• NFIB Small Business Miss
• Wholesale Inventories Miss

And that's ignoring the absolute economic collapse in Europe, the Chinese slowdown, and the Japanese economic basketcase.
What is there to even say anymore: Stalingrad 4 Eva! Remember: central planning works.

[quote=socal;2420963][quote=draco888;2420531]You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by PaulBunyon

Thanks for the link. I checked and there's a wiki page with the am info...

Gon.

Correct

Dow Jones At New All Time Highs - Here's Why






Curious why the Dow Jones Industrial Average just hit new all time highs? Here's a partial list of recent economic events:

• Markit US PMI Miss
• ISM Manufacturing Miss
• ISM New York Miss
• Vehicle Sales Miss
• ADP Employment Miss
• ISM Services Miss
• Challenger Job Cuts Miss
• Initial Claims Miss
• Trade Balance Beat
• Non-Farm Payrolls Miss
• Hourly Earnings Miss
• NFIB Small Business Miss
• Wholesale Inventories Miss

And that's ignoring the absolute economic collapse in Europe, the Chinese slowdown, and the Japanese economic basketcase.
What is there to even say anymore: Stalingrad 4 Eva! Remember: central planning works.

That simple graph shows a strong correlation 50% of the time.

Geez mate you are a battler.

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by socal

No, the Euro zone has more gold. The US does not have any gold backing the dollar. The only thing backing the dollar is treasury debt.

I have been buying the dips in bullion and mining stocks for a while now.

Support for any currency comes from confidence in the overall economy. In order for a currency to be strong an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

You seem to think hiding money away is gold is the only way to go when the last 100 years of history shows 2 big bull markets and decades of underperformance.

You have been wrong all year and still can't admit you're wrong about gold.

Now you are claiming the price falls are paper gold. Well then, go sell your gold and sell what price you get. Moron.

Wrong. Stock market performances lead the economy. Shares are valued based on profit forecasts for the next 12-24 mths. If stocks start performing it's because companies are expected to make bigger profits over the next 1-2 years which means the economy is picking up.

Why do people such as yourself who have no experience in stock markets make such ignorant comments?

I don't know.

I can tell that you get all of your so called information from news stand magazines like Fortune. Its so obvious.

So was the stock market in Wiemar Germany indicative of good future economic prospects ? Look at the German stock market priced in Marks as the economy imploded and led to starvation and the onset of WW2

Wrong, never read Fortune. Have no need for old info or US mags.

You can't get anything right.

Gold - wrong
Stocks - wrong
Comments about others - wrong

It's rather amusing.

Chart from the 20s and Hitler

Just proves what an idiot Socal is. No wonder he can't afford to see a doctor

[quote=waradmiral;2420969][quote=socal;2420963]

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Correct

Dow Jones At New All Time Highs - Here's Why






Curious why the Dow Jones Industrial Average just hit new all time highs? Here's a partial list of recent economic events:

• Markit US PMI Miss
• ISM Manufacturing Miss
• ISM New York Miss
• Vehicle Sales Miss
• ADP Employment Miss
• ISM Services Miss
• Challenger Job Cuts Miss
• Initial Claims Miss
• Trade Balance Beat
• Non-Farm Payrolls Miss
• Hourly Earnings Miss
• NFIB Small Business Miss
• Wholesale Inventories Miss

And that's ignoring the absolute economic collapse in Europe, the Chinese slowdown, and the Japanese economic basketcase.
What is there to even say anymore: Stalingrad 4 Eva! Remember: central planning works.

That simple graph shows a strong correlation 50% of the time.

Geez mate you are a battler.

Umm open ze eyes. The s&p index fell while data was ok and it spiked when the data went down.

But that's what happens when the market is mainly comprised of Fortune magazine readers like yourself.

Which good economic prospects was the DOW pricing in from 2004 to 2007 ?

Originally Posted by waradmiral

an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

A more comprehensive look at this factor was conducted by Elroy Dimson, Paul Marsh and Mike Staunton of the London Business School, whose work featured in a previous column. The profs

take the records of 83 countries from 1972 to 2009 (the most comprehensive set available) and rank them by GDP growth over the previous five years. Investing each year in the countries with the highest economic growth over the preceding five years earned an annual return of 18.4%, but investing in the lowest-growth countries returned 25.1%.
One might object that the professors are looking backwards while the market looks forward. But in a great 2005 paper, Jay Ritter of the University of Florida used the LBS data to look at more than a century of markets. He found that

there is a cross-sectional correlation of minus 0.37 for the compounded real return on equities and the compounded growth rate of real per capita GDP for 16 countries over the 1900–2002 period.

Originally Posted by draco888

Originally Posted by waradmiral

an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

A more comprehensive look at this factor was conducted by Elroy Dimson, Paul Marsh and Mike Staunton of the London Business School, whose work featured in a previous column. The profs

take the records of 83 countries from 1972 to 2009 (the most comprehensive set available) and rank them by GDP growth over the previous five years. Investing each year in the countries with the highest economic growth over the preceding five years earned an annual return of 18.4%, but investing in the lowest-growth countries returned 25.1%.
One might object that the professors are looking backwards while the market looks forward. But in a great 2005 paper, Jay Ritter of the University of Florida used the LBS data to look at more than a century of markets. He found that

there is a cross-sectional correlation of minus 0.37 for the compounded real return on equities and the compounded growth rate of real per capita GDP for 16 countries over the 1900–2002 period.

That's not a surprise at all. Buying shares after 5 strong years of eco growth would have you buying shares near a peak.

Rather obvious.

You want to be buying shares before the growth starts.

That's just common sense investing.

2009 is a perfect example. Eco tanking, shares hit rock bottom and started to rise expecting an improved eco going fwd.

You buy before the eco turnaround not 5 years after

I see you chose to ignore when forward looking data is used

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

Originally Posted by waradmiral

an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

A more comprehensive look at this factor was conducted by Elroy Dimson, Paul Marsh and Mike Staunton of the London Business School, whose work featured in a previous column. The profs

take the records of 83 countries from 1972 to 2009 (the most comprehensive set available) and rank them by GDP growth over the previous five years. Investing each year in the countries with the highest economic growth over the preceding five years earned an annual return of 18.4%, but investing in the lowest-growth countries returned 25.1%.
One might object that the professors are looking backwards while the market looks forward. But in a great 2005 paper, Jay Ritter of the University of Florida used the LBS data to look at more than a century of markets. He found that

there is a cross-sectional correlation of minus 0.37 for the compounded real return on equities and the compounded growth rate of real per capita GDP for 16 countries over the 1900–2002 period.

That's not a surprise at all. Buying shares after 5 strong years of eco growth would have you buying shares near a peak.

Rather obvious.

You want to be buying shares before the growth starts.

That's just common sense investing.

2009 is a perfect example. Eco tanking, shares hit rock bottom and started to rise expecting an improved eco going fwd.

You buy before the eco turnaround not 5 years after

Hurrah, the economy is picking up! This must be great news for equity markets, right? Unfortunately, it is not. There is an increasing amount of research that indicates that the relationship between GDP growth and stock returns is not so harmonious. And yet, many investment decisions are still based solely on economic growth.

A couple of years ago Morgan Stanley did some interesting research on this topic. Using the 'Triumph of the Optimists' database compiled by Dimson, Marsh & Staunton (2001), which contains over a hundred years of economic and market data for nineteen different countries, they concluded that the relationship between stock markets and GDP growth was predominantly negative. Their findings are irrespective of the time horizon over which this relationship is measured. Analysis of both shorter and longer intervals demonstrates that economic growth and equity returns are negatively correlated.

In a similar study, using the same database, Goldman Sachs related GDP growth to actual returns. They calculated that, if you had invested only in those countries with the highest economic growth, your return would, on average, have been 3% per year lower than if you had invested in the countries with the poorest growth. Interestingly enough, if you only look at the emerging countries from the data sample, the 'slow growers' would have earned you as much as 5% more per year.

Low growth, high return

One of the best examples of this negative relationship between stock markets and GDP growth is China. Since 1992, China has outgrown the United States by a whopping 8% per year on average. But, it is the investor who put his money in the US stock market who actually made the best return. While lagging China by a mile in terms of economic progress, US equities outperformed Chinese stocks by roughly 8% per year. More evidence that the relationship between economic growth and equity returns is not a match made in heaven.

Originally Posted by draco888

I see you chose to ignore when forward looking data is used

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Originally Posted by draco888

Originally Posted by waradmiral

an economy has to grow and to grow an economy you need strong businesses. Strong businesses make large profits, pay dividends and most large businesses are listed on stock markets and will exhibit strong gains during good economic conditions.

A more comprehensive look at this factor was conducted by Elroy Dimson, Paul Marsh and Mike Staunton of the London Business School, whose work featured in a previous column. The profs

take the records of 83 countries from 1972 to 2009 (the most comprehensive set available) and rank them by GDP growth over the previous five years. Investing each year in the countries with the highest economic growth over the preceding five years earned an annual return of 18.4%, but investing in the lowest-growth countries returned 25.1%.
One might object that the professors are looking backwards while the market looks forward. But in a great 2005 paper, Jay Ritter of the University of Florida used the LBS data to look at more than a century of markets. He found that

there is a cross-sectional correlation of minus 0.37 for the compounded real return on equities and the compounded growth rate of real per capita GDP for 16 countries over the 1900–2002 period.

That's not a surprise at all. Buying shares after 5 strong years of eco growth would have you buying shares near a peak.

Rather obvious.

You want to be buying shares before the growth starts.

That's just common sense investing.

2009 is a perfect example. Eco tanking, shares hit rock bottom and started to rise expecting an improved eco going fwd.

You buy before the eco turnaround not 5 years after

I see you fail to understand how equities markets work.

Bull markets in stocks typically last 3-5 years.

Why the hell would you buy near the end of one?

For the same reason you want to buy gold at the end of a bull market. You're a follower not a thinker.

[quote=socal;2420985][quote=waradmiral;2420969]

Originally Posted by socal

Originally Posted by draco888

You are wrong again, there is minimal correlation between stock market performance and an economies performance.

Originally Posted by waradmiral

Correct

Dow Jones At New All Time Highs - Here's Why






Curious why the Dow Jones Industrial Average just hit new all time highs? Here's a partial list of recent economic events:

• Markit US PMI Miss
• ISM Manufacturing Miss
• ISM New York Miss
• Vehicle Sales Miss
• ADP Employment Miss
• ISM Services Miss
• Challenger Job Cuts Miss
• Initial Claims Miss
• Trade Balance Beat
• Non-Farm Payrolls Miss
• Hourly Earnings Miss
• NFIB Small Business Miss
• Wholesale Inventories Miss

And that's ignoring the absolute economic collapse in Europe, the Chinese slowdown, and the Japanese economic basketcase.
What is there to even say anymore: Stalingrad 4 Eva! Remember: central planning works.

That simple graph shows a strong correlation 50% of the time.

Geez mate you are a battler.

Umm open ze eyes. The s&p index fell while data was ok and it spiked when the data went down.

But that's what happens when the market is mainly comprised of Fortune magazine readers like yourself.

Which good economic prospects was the DOW pricing in from 2004 to 2007 ?

The real answer why the DOW is up is the same reason why the stock market went up in Germany in the 20's.

From Bloomberg

Fed Maintains $85 Billion Pace of Monthly Asset Purchases



Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said further gains in the U.S. labor market are needed for the central bank to consider reducing its record monetary easing.
“Obviously, there has been improvement,” he said at a news conference in Washington today after the Fed decided to leave the pace of asset purchases unchanged at $85 billion a month. “One thing we would need is to make sure that this is not a temporary improvement.”



But windermir thinks we are in a new age where economic and financial gravity no long applies like it did a few decades ago.


Keep calm and buy gold