Why all the panic?

[mathjak107]

there are quite a few time frames where markets did not recover in real return . it is only after inflation returns that count . 2000 even took 13 years .

in reality if someone told you they got the inside track and 5 years from today in dollar terms you would still be negative , that would be pretty depressing waiting .

[DaveinMtAiry]

I guess we all have our own definition of risk. To me a risk is the possibility of losing a large percentage of your money and over time that just doesn't happen with the market. If we are factoring in inflation then the safer alternative of cash or CDs are kind of a break even or lose ground situation. The best ones barely surpass inflation, most do not when taxes are considered.

To me it's less risky to invest long term into something where the worst case scenario is losing money to inflation vs an investment that will almost guarantee it with no upside.

[Jobster]

I have a feeling that today will be in the green, but the big guys are going to be selling on this bounce. Gut feeling. Nothing more. I don't trust the press. Remember, these are the same people that told people to buy Ripple near its all time high.

"Look how easy it is. You just click the button and buy Ripple."

What was Ripple then? Close to $4? What is it now? $.77?

I'm just thinking, if I was a greedy piece of crap, I would tell retail investors that everything is okay, while I'm selling on every bounce.

[mathjak107]

Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry

I guess we all have our own definition of risk. To me a risk is the possibility of losing a large percentage of your money and over time that just doesn't happen with the market. If we are factoring in inflation then the safer alternative of cash or CDs are kind of a break even or lose ground situation. The best ones barely surpass inflation, most do not when taxes are considered.

To me it's less risky to invest long term into something where the worst case scenario is losing money to inflation vs an investment that will almost guarantee it with no upside.

i do think over the long hall stocks are the most consistent asset . they may have volatility along the way but diversified funds have had little risk the farther out you go

[txgolfer130]

Originally Posted by jrkliny

I am certainly not a pro, especially when it comes to predicting a stampede by the bovine idiots. I doubt that is possible although some day traders try.


I see no logical reason for the stampede. Certainly not slowly increasing interest rates or another good jobs report.


I also wonder what the fund managers did with the money from the sell off. Short term I guess that went to cash. Now where? Probably back to stocks again. Most of the funds are already diversified with a substantial chunk of internationals. Bonds? Not if they want to show decent returns for the year.

I didn't mean to imply you, it was a general "you" referring to traders/hedge fund-ers and institutional money.

There is no real reason, the fundamentals are still good. The "bones" of the economy are solid, but b/c we were in a low yield, low volatility, low rate environment for so long a lot of people got complacent. As I've always said, the market (not stocks, not traders, not long term investors ~ the market=everyone) is a zero sum game. The market will arbitrage automatically if there is an advantage. And that happened over the last few days, and will continue as we acclimate to the new rules and decision makers.

[Mr. Lee]

I think it should be over but time will tell if it is over now or not until after the weekend.

Why the freakout? History shows rising rates have been good for stocks