Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I lost zero because the number going down doesn’t equal the value going down. You only lose if you panic sell.
You still lose time, and are now stuck in an unprofitable investment rather than a profitable one. So you are also losing all the value you would have gained had we stayed the course instead of doing this dumb shit. Thats called opportunity cost.
You’re not wrong but they are also right. You’ve lost nothing until you’ve pulled out of the market. And unless you need that money within the next 18 months, that would be a colossally dumb thing to do. Even then I would probably advise against it.
Look up the stock market around March 2020. Huge dip then rebound to pretty much the same trajectory. As long as you left your stuff to sit, you're still doing fine. There's no reason to think the massive rebound would have still occurred without the dip.
I fortuitously moved all my VTI into VTV a couple weeks ago to divest myself of TSLA, and over the past two days have been actively keeping the balance of my 60/40 equities/bonds portfolio by selling a little bit of BND and BNDX to get some more VTV as it sunk. Didn't need to modify the VXUS portion.
Sure was nice to have those bond portions to assuage the decline.
Trying to beat the market is a waste of time. You’re not stuck in an unprofitable investment unless you’re trying to get rich quick. You invest based on your strategy and value of said investment. It isn’t just because the number goes up and down. Time in the market wins every time. Read the founder of Vanguard’s book on investing.
Ordinarily, yes. But in this case, we're dealing with a type of risk we don't usually have to worry about: sovereign risk. It is entirely possible that Trump could be fucking up the country in ways that the market will never come back from because companies just get entirely destroyed or nationalized or who knows what.
In that sort of case, changing your investments -- not timing the market, but responding to the potentially permanent difference in circumstances -- can make sense.
This dip isn't even because of some fundamental issues on the market. It's just the reaction of scared individuals to what a single person says. When that same person the next month says something else the opposite can happen.
7% average annual growth includes dozens of market crashes and two world wars. This is not new, unique or surprising situation in any shape or form. I bet it wont take even a year untill we're back at all time high.
Yep. I'm amazed at how many Lemmy people don't realize this.
Yeah, this thread is very surprising
Right!? I mean, Lemmy on the average is wealthier and smarter than the average person, but what is going on in this thread?! lmao
Well... You only lose if the value doesn't go up. A small but very important difference.
This is the perfect mantra for getting scammed. It'll always go back up, guaranteed! Just keep putting money in, you only lose if you take money out! Yes, it has worked so far, but past performance does not guarantee future results.
You’ve got two choices. 1 - continue to invest using DCA even thought the market is down.
2 - sell, move your money to a CMA or something, likely at a loss for some of it, and pay your capital gains.
Because the option you are engaging in FUD over is that the market does not come back up. My friend, if everything goes to shit in that scenario and you don’t have a pile of cash under your mattress, you’re just as fucked as everyone else. There will be a run on the banks and there will be no money for anyone. So either put stacks of $20s in the freezer or keep investing.
I'm not arguing the market never comes back up, but there have been prolonged periods of time where markets do not recover to previous highs. After the great depression, the US stock market took about 30 years to recover to its previous high and continue growing (https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-data). Similarly, it took Japan's stock market 30 years to recover to its previous high (https://www.macrotrends.net/2593/nikkei-225-index-historical-chart-data) and it's already on its way down.
The stock market does not represent economic reality. There are too many tricks with leverage in many forms, including derivatives, which distort the true value. Too much importance is placed on this glorified casino and for the past few decades, the go-to solution has been to pump money into the system at any sign of trouble. It's not sustainable to keep feeding this beast for the sake of the ultrawealthy who own the vast majority of it.
A stock market crash does not necessarily mean a run on the banks. There was a run on the banks after the stock market crash of 1929 because banks were over-leveraged with loans used to pump the stock market. That same mistake is being made now, but the difference this time is the government guaranteeing deposits. There are other issues where the government may not be able to fulfill those guarantees, but at that point, is this fragile system worth keeping up? We can't keep it up forever.
It's not FUD to point out that infinite growth is not sustainable. On the flipside, the permanent optimism of claiming the line will always go up in the end and not taking into account the amount of time it can take for that to happen is irrational. The key as always is to diversify, but the makeup of that diversification can vary greatly and the stability of the stock market is not guaranteed.
You’re arguing both sides of the coin. Pick one. It also doesn’t really change what I said. You either stay in and hope, or get out and pay the tax man. Your call.
For something like a 401k, changing your allocations has no tax events. For the rest, most of your holdings will be long term and will qualify for a mere 15% or lower tax rate: https://www.bankrate.com/investing/long-term-capital-gains-tax/#what-is-the-long-term-capital-gains-tax-rate
So you want to stay in? Got it.
I don't know how you got that impression but perhaps you're just interpreting my comments through green-tinted permabull lenses.
Hey man, you do you. You seem to want to just argue. I was plenty clear about the available options, even if they are simplified. Stay in, DCA, or go cash in bank or under a mattress. Regardless, if TSHTF cash in hand is the only way to keep the value, whatever that might be. Pick one. I don’t have a dog in your fight.
Well... you haven't watched the stock market or any money market enough then.
I've definitely seen the endless liquidity and leverage pumped into the system, I just don't think it's sustainable.