5 ms·

There some doomsayers coming out of the woodwork, esp writing for WSJ and Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/search/?q=stock%20market&sh=44155cf9279f https://www.fo

There some doomsayers coming out of the woodwork, esp writing for WSJ and Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/search/?q=stock%20market&sh=44155cf9279f https://www.forbes.com/search/?q=stock%20market&sh=44155cf92...). The conspiracy theorist in me thinks there is a subversive campaign trying to shift emotions and get the market to tank in time for election season.

potatolicious 3y ago
The whole piece is just a confused mess with only the most tenuous grasp on a thesis. It skips from treasury yield rates to meme stocks to national debt as an explanation for why passive investing is over. The author also seems to be living in a reality where high inflation has persisted - they talk about interest rates rising into the double digits to suppress inflation, despite inflation being firmly back to normal and no evidence of any major rate hikes (if any!) on the horizon? I'm mostly with you on the conspiracy theorist thing here - I think there's a motivated group of people who seem desperate to instill a narrative of economic doom-and-gloom, despite the facts on the ground not at all warranting such an outlook at the moment. Also it's not clear that the author themselves understands the notion of the "set it and forget it" passive investment? The entire point of something like a 401k is that you consistently put money into over a long period of time. This cost averaging accounts for periods of poorer returns. That is in fact the entire point of such an investment strategy.
- dpflan 3y ago
  Indeed: "This cost averaging accounts for periods of poorer returns. That is in fact the entire point of such an investment strategy." The goal of the "motivated group" would be: retention or acquisition of power/influence? Usually that is highly correlated with having wealth. So is it a push to make people buy what they're selling (which is)? Or is this a bitcoin (i.e. this moment's GOLD) push behind the scenes? (e.g. BlackRock's BTC ETF).
  - potatolicious 3y ago
    My read is this is pure political kvetching rather than astroturfing for some product. There's your usual WSJ implication that things are bad because our monetary policy is not austere enough. Then there's the vaguely classist complaining about how "young investors" don't know how to invest and ruined the stock market forever by dumping their stupid money into unprofitable companies (which is funny because these unprofitable companies have oodles of institutional investors and up until 18 months ago were VC darlings - but yes, it's the young people who are idiots) The fact that the author isn't hawking some kind of solution is IMO telling that this is just another "let's complain about the economy" piece that's meant make people believe things are terrible despite little compelling evidence of it. So yeah, it's a day that ends with a "Y" over there at the WSJ.
    - dpflan 3y ago
      For sure: look at the writer's article history on WSJ.

potatolicious 3y ago

The whole piece is just a confused mess with only the most tenuous grasp on a thesis. It skips from treasury yield rates to meme stocks to national debt as an explanation for why passive investing is over. The author also seems to be living in a reality where high inflation has persisted - they talk about interest rates rising into the double digits to suppress inflation, despite inflation being firmly back to normal and no evidence of any major rate hikes (if any!) on the horizon? I'm mostly with you on the conspiracy theorist thing here - I think there's a motivated group of people who seem desperate to instill a narrative of economic doom-and-gloom, despite the facts on the ground not at all warranting such an outlook at the moment. Also it's not clear that the author themselves understands the notion of the "set it and forget it" passive investment? The entire point of something like a 401k is that you consistently put money into over a long period of time. This cost averaging accounts for periods of poorer returns. That is in fact the entire point of such an investment strategy.

dpflan 3y ago
Indeed: "This cost averaging accounts for periods of poorer returns. That is in fact the entire point of such an investment strategy." The goal of the "motivated group" would be: retention or acquisition of power/influence? Usually that is highly correlated with having wealth. So is it a push to make people buy what they're selling (which is)? Or is this a bitcoin (i.e. this moment's GOLD) push behind the scenes? (e.g. BlackRock's BTC ETF).
- potatolicious 3y ago
  My read is this is pure political kvetching rather than astroturfing for some product. There's your usual WSJ implication that things are bad because our monetary policy is not austere enough. Then there's the vaguely classist complaining about how "young investors" don't know how to invest and ruined the stock market forever by dumping their stupid money into unprofitable companies (which is funny because these unprofitable companies have oodles of institutional investors and up until 18 months ago were VC darlings - but yes, it's the young people who are idiots) The fact that the author isn't hawking some kind of solution is IMO telling that this is just another "let's complain about the economy" piece that's meant make people believe things are terrible despite little compelling evidence of it. So yeah, it's a day that ends with a "Y" over there at the WSJ.
  - dpflan 3y ago
    For sure: look at the writer's article history on WSJ.