Is the stock market really +e.v.

[gvibes]

[ QUOTE ]
yes someone will show a profit: your brokerage house, and you will be the big loser--to them. (I know, you mean to suppose zero commissions, and I agree random selection will approximate an index with a positive return, etc etc. But I think it's important to keep in mind with all this talk about privatizing all retirement investment just how incredibily gigantic a windfall that would be for Wall Street firms, and how bad for the non-savvy (ie 99%) investor. (And don't take that to mean that I would necessarily be against it!))

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you an AARP member or something??? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I agree that it would be a windfall of sorts to the investment industry. There may also be a good chance that a lot of shady brokers out there will talk stupid people into a stereotypical churn-and-burn portfolio.

However, I'm somewhat optimistic, as the federal government has already created what shoudl be a model for a simple, low-cost investment provider, in the tsp - tsp.gov

Defined benefit plans are a thing of the past - defined contribution plans are the way of the future.

Then again, I'm a classic liberal, and I believe that people should have freedom to direct their own retirement investments, and the responsibility to bear the consequences of those decisions.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Stocks go up in value because thier underlying assets (companies) go up in value. This is because of the expansion of the economy over time.

[/ QUOTE ]

What exactly does "expansion of the economy" mean? It kind of sounds like trying to explain something by rephrasing it a different way.

eastbay

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Stocks go up in value because thier underlying assets (companies) go up in value. This is because of the expansion of the economy over time.

[/ QUOTE ]

What exactly does "expansion of the economy" mean? It kind of sounds like trying to explain something by rephrasing it a different way.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all the original quote is awkward. Expansion of the economy means growth in GDP. As GDP increases corporate profits tend to increase.

[Soxx Clinton]

I find it hard to believe that stocks (as defined by the S&P, say) would underperform bonds/real estate/gold over the next 50 year period. I'd say the probability of that happening is virtually nil for a number of reasons that are beyond the scope of this board, particularly bonds.