So much for the 10 percenters not carrying the water

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2013 15:14:16 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Dec 11, 2013 15:07:28 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i just spend my time waiting for you to tell me the One Truth, so i don't have to think.

The One Truth is that the last 17 days I experimented with taking you off the "ignore" list,

really?  you are still doing that?  and here i was, thinking that you had taken an interest in alternate points of view. 

and now I think I'll put you back where you belong and save us both the time it takes to talk past each other.

i always prefer to engage those that have differences of opinion with me, for several reasons.  first, out of common courtesy and respect.  i don't consider any person or argument beneath me.  second, to beat my ideas on the anvil of opposition, in the hopes of forging something stronger.  and finally, because it is pretty entertaining- especially with someone, like you, who basically plays intellectual poker with one skill: bluffing.

edit: you needn't have responded to my post that way.  you suggested i was talking about QE1, and i wasn't.  i corrected you, and explained that i was talking about the debt market, not the money supply.  you could have simply said "sorry, i misunderstood you". 

but no matter.  your withdrawal from the debate will not stop me from contesting your posts.  it will only prevent you from rebutting.

[Deleted]

Dec 11, 2013 11:36:49 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

Dec 11, 2013 11:24:48 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I can agree to making the administration more efficient.

I'm sorry my google isn't pulling it up right away, but there was a law changed that allowed compound interest to be added to the debt. I've read the numbers many times but it was a while back. If we went back to only paying interest on the principle borrowed we would be saving a lot of money that would help pay down the debt.

I don't really understand what you are saying.  Can you find that information on the law?  When a treasury note is issued, they pay interest monthly.  Then when the note comes due, they pay back the principal.  I can't think of any other way to do it.

[Deleted]

Dec 11, 2013 16:18:15 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 11, 2013 11:36:49 GMT -5 laterbloomer said:

I can agree to making the administration more efficient.

I'm sorry my google isn't pulling it up right away, but there was a law changed that allowed compound interest to be added to the debt. I've read the numbers many times but it was a while back. If we went back to only paying interest on the principle borrowed we would be saving a lot of money that would help pay down the debt.

I don't really understand what you are saying.  Can you find that information on the law?  When a treasury note is issued, they pay interest monthly.  Then when the note comes due, they pay back the principal.  I can't think of any other way to do it.

I will spend more time googling tonight.

[Value Buy]

CNBC finally picked up on the ten per-centers

www.cnbc.com/id/101264757

Jane Wells:

"they are not only paying their fair share, they are paying everybody's share"

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2013 17:23:11 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

CNBC finally picked up on the ten per-centers

www.cnbc.com/id/101264757

Jane Wells:

"they are not only paying their fair share, they are paying everybody's share"

i don't like the term fair in this argument.  too mushy around the edges.  Obama should stop using it.

like me, he TRIES to use phrases like "best able to" or "those that can least afford...", but he slips up.  old habits die hard.

[Deleted]

@investorbob & AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP I will retract what I said about compound interest on the debt for now. I can't find the explanations that I read but I will keep looking and when I find it I will track you down.

[Deleted]

Dec 11, 2013 21:18:29 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 11, 2013 17:23:11 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

CNBC finally picked up on the ten per-centers

www.cnbc.com/id/101264757

Jane Wells:

"they are not only paying their fair share, they are paying everybody's share"

i don't like the term fair in this argument.  too mushy around the edges.  Obama should stop using it.

like me, he TRIES to use phrases like "best able to" or "those that can least afford...", but he slips up.  old habits die hard.

Do you charge clients based on how much they can afford? If 2 clients need the exact same thing but one has $1mil while the other has $100mil, do you charge them based on "best able to" or "those that can least afford"?

Just because I can afford to pay more taxes than someone else doesn't mean I should be forced to. Especially when the same services are offered to both parties.

"Oh you're rich...that loaf of bread is $458.27....ya know....because you can afford it!"

It's funny how we determine taxes based on this ignorant principle but most would find it ridiculous if normal goods were priced this way. I understand some goods can be negotiated giving different prices for the same item...but everyday grocery items among many other things are generally a set price.

[Deleted]

progressive income taxes dont bother me so much

i dont mind paying my "fair share"

the problem starts when my share keeps rising to pay for everyone else

at the same time that our country is so far in debt, one wonders if it will ever back in the black

when fewer people are paying into a pot, where more and more are taking it out, there comes the issues

that is where we are......

and to exacerbate the problem, the people collecting are not fixing their issues

a hand up is a LOT different than a hand out

my kids are grown....we dont have many deductions other than the charities we participate in

i know dj says his taxes are lower than ever....glad his are......mine keep going up

state/local/and now federal.....they all want bigger pieces

my question for those who think i pay too little

should my standard of living change because our governments cant get their shit together?

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2013 10:24:29 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

progressive income taxes dont bother me so much

i dont mind paying my "fair share"

the problem starts when my share keeps rising to pay for everyone else

at the same time that our country is so far in debt, one wonders if it will ever back in the black

when fewer people are paying into a pot, where more and more are taking it out, there comes the issues

that is where we are......

and to exacerbate the problem, the people collecting are not fixing their issues

a hand up is a LOT different than a hand out

my kids are grown....we dont have many deductions other than the charities we participate in

i know dj says his taxes are lower than ever....glad his are......mine keep going up

state/local/and now federal.....they all want bigger pieces

my question for those who think i pay too little

should my standard of living change because our governments cant get their shit together?

Yes...I'm also in the progressive taxes don't really bother me camp. However I'm tired of "blame the rich" being a rallying call for many in this country. Again...just because someone can afford more doesn't mean they should automatically pay more. The tax code can be kept progressive...yet simplified. We don't need to keep trying to take more and more from one group while lowering the amount paid for another. That goes for both sides of the argument.

As far as I can tell dj is talking about historical rates being low.....because "so many" people paid the 90+% tax rate when it was around.

As to your last question.....no...but some people here and many in this country think the haves (whether earned or inherited) should finance their wants. Unfortunately we have a government that plays that card really well.

[usaone]

All the profits are going to the top 10%. Folks could pay more taxes if they were seeing more of the profits. Look at all the cash some of these company's are sitting on. Yet dividends, ect are not changing as much as they should. More and more of the profits of this country are going to the top.

We have had a transfer of wealth but its to the top. As an investor, small Business owner I'm not afraid to look at the facts. Its hurting all of us. And it has only gotten worse with the Great Recession. 

[Deleted]

usaone

how many people have access to 401k programs but REFUSE to participate?

how can they grow their wealth when they arent willing to be a part of the system?

i have 145+ employees

less than 20% take advantage of the 401k

the owner is starting to wonder if the expense is worth it because our participation rates are so low

i started with nothing.....and learned as i went......

if a 25 yrar old would just take 10% of their gross and put it into a s&p 500 fund.....

by the time they are 60, they will be FINE.....

dont blame those at the top for what those in the middle REFUSE to do for themselves

[usaone]

Refuse? They don't have any money to put in. How about 2008 when all the 401ks were wiped out when the rich cashed in.

Of course folks are not going to rush back in to investing. They don't trust the people at the top.


That's great. I also started out with nothing and made something.



The amount of Billionaires has exploded over the last 15 or so years. Just as the middle class has been crushed.

[happyhoix]

Dec 11, 2013 10:32:56 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Dec 10, 2013 23:57:55 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Willie Sutton:  Why do you rob banks?-  Because that's where the money is.



 

Kind of like the Federal government and JPM right now.

JPM buys a bankrupt bank at the urging of the Feds during the financial crisis, then the Feds sue JPM for bad business practices of the bank they bought for transgressions that bank did before JPM bought it.

I get tired of this misinformation being thrown out there, making it look like the feds forced JPM to buy Bear Stearns and then turned around and screwed them over.

Didn't happen. At the time, JPM got them at a rock bottom price - 2 dollars a share, for a stock with a book value of $84 per share. At the time, analysists were crowing about what a steal JPM made.

JPM is not stupid. THey did a lot of due diligence and knew that Bear Stearns had some corpses buried in the back yard.

From a 2008 article: The danger for JPMorgan will be its potential exposure to lawsuits from Bear Stearns' subprime mortgage division and risks from its derivatives business. money.cnn.com/2008/03/16/news/companies/jpmorgan_bear_stearns/

And that fine they got - about 30% of that was due to what JPM itself did, not what Bear Stearns or WaMu did. Or I guess we need to give them a pass for their own bad behavior, too?

If I bought a farm for pennies on the dollar and then found out there was an old hazardous waste underneath it everyone of you champions of industry on this board would smugly tell me it's my own damn fault for not doing due diligence. But somehow a giant bank makes a calculated purchase of a damaged property and we're all supposed to cry tears over the big mean government going after the consolidated company for it's participation in bringing on the housing crisis that triggered a financial collapse?

Yeah I don't think so.

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2013 11:27:13 GMT -5 usaone said:

Refuse? They don't have any money to put in. How about 2008 when all the 401ks were wiped out when the rich cashed in.

Of course folks are not going to rush back in to investing. They don't trust the people at the top.


That's great. I also started out with nothing and made something.



The amount of Billionaires has exploded over the last 15 or so years. Just as the middle class has been crushed.

bullshit

they werent wiped out....and IF the rich cashed in, they lost out.....

they only people that lost money were the ones that sold at the bottom

if you left your investments alone, you probably have at LEAST doubled your portfolio from the 08 lows

paper losses are just that.....paper

if you want to grow your wealth....there are 3 ways imo to do so

own your own business

own rental properties

invest in equities with other people

and WHY has the amount of billionaires soared in the last 15 years?

IPO's......build a business like google and then get rich

way to much envy and jealously.......you too can do what they have done.......

or dont you believe that?

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2013 11:29:31 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

gd- I think you guys are talking about two different things.

I know what you mean about financial responsibility.  We have some that salt things away, are careful with their sick time, and in general handle their affairs in a way that maximizes what they have and will retain in the future.  We have others, who make the same or more that are hand to mouth, and one crisis away from financial disaster, but of course they have the latest and best smart phones, cars, clothes etc. 

However I also agree with usaone; there is a greater disparity of wealth in our country today than in many years, and it is not healthy.  This is a mega trend, not something you or I can really point to in our work places, but something which ultimately affects us all.  Ultimately it is important to reverse that trend, but how

i dont think we are talking about different things

he is saying people arent investing because of what happened in 08-09

and if that is the case, those people have no one to blame other than THEMSELVES

you can work within the system...or try to change it

i prefer to work within what is out there.....take what i can for myself, and my family

i let my money work as hard as i do......

and it is one of the reasons i am building wealth....not stagnating or going backwards

[Value Buy]

Dec 12, 2013 12:32:27 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Dec 11, 2013 10:32:56 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Kind of like the Federal government and JPM right now.

JPM buys a bankrupt bank at the urging of the Feds during the financial crisis, then the Feds sue JPM for bad business practices of the bank they bought for transgressions that bank did before JPM bought it.

I get tired of this misinformation being thrown out there, making it look like the feds forced JPM to buy Bear Stearns and then turned around and screwed them over.

Didn't happen. At the time, JPM got them at a rock bottom price - 2 dollars a share, for a stock with a book value of $84 per share. At the time, analysists were crowing about what a steal JPM made.

JPM is not stupid. THey did a lot of due diligence and knew that Bear Stearns had some corpses buried in the back yard.

From a 2008 article: The danger for JPMorgan will be its potential exposure to lawsuits from Bear Stearns' subprime mortgage division and risks from its derivatives business. money.cnn.com/2008/03/16/news/companies/jpmorgan_bear_stearns/

And that fine they got - about 30% of that was due to what JPM itself did, not what Bear Stearns or WaMu did. Or I guess we need to give them a pass for their own bad behavior, too?

If I bought a farm for pennies on the dollar and then found out there was an old hazardous waste underneath it everyone of you champions of industry on this board would smugly tell me it's my own damn fault for not doing due diligence. But somehow a giant bank makes a calculated purchase of a damaged property and we're all supposed to cry tears over the big mean government going after the consolidated company for it's participation in bringing on the housing crisis that triggered a financial collapse?

Yeah I don't think so.

Apples and oranges in the article. JPM should not be liable for one penny over WAMU business practices.

As far as the London whale, by all accounts he was a rogue trader. Losing six billion by him alone was well within any penalty the bank should have faced. It was more like double taxation by the Government.

 

It was the Feds that approached JPM about taking them over WAMU.

Yes, there was a rock bottom price.

Actually no. It was actually worth $0.00 because if it was not purchased it would have need insolvent, possibly as early the next morning and the entire banking system could have collapsed.

So they paid $2 a share and received a reasonable deal, had to spend billions to make it a viable entity.

And then since they got it cheap, it makes it ok for the government to claw back, making it a possible $15 a share purchase price instead of $2.00?

No. It does not. Government screwed share holders, not JPM.

Now if the government wanted to go after management of this bankrupt entity, and jail them, fine, do it.

But you go after the money, not the managers.

[Value Buy]

Dec 12, 2013 10:50:24 GMT -5 usaone said:

All the profits are going to the top 10%. Folks could pay more taxes if they were seeing more of the profits. Look at all the cash some of these company's are sitting on. Yet dividends, ect are not changing as much as they should. More and more of the profits of this country are going to the top.

We have had a transfer of wealth but its to the top. As an investor, small Business owner I'm not afraid to look at the facts. Its hurting all of us. And it has only gotten worse with the Great Recession. 

The majority of my stocks increased dividends this year.

All go into dividend re-investment but two.

J&J and JCI

Stock is too high to re-invest at this time.

Put those dividends into WAG and CVX right now, which are also approaching a prohibitive price. 

[usaone]

Dec 12, 2013 13:15:14 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

Dec 12, 2013 11:27:13 GMT -5 usaone said:

Refuse? They don't have any money to put in. How about 2008 when all the 401ks were wiped out when the rich cashed in.

Of course folks are not going to rush back in to investing. They don't trust the people at the top.


That's great. I also started out with nothing and made something.



The amount of Billionaires has exploded over the last 15 or so years. Just as the middle class has been crushed.

bullshit

they werent wiped out....and IF the rich cashed in, they lost out.....

they only people that lost money were the ones that sold at the bottom

if you left your investments alone, you probably have at LEAST doubled your portfolio from the 08 lows

paper losses are just that.....paper

if you want to grow your wealth....there are 3 ways imo to do so

own your own business

own rental properties

invest in equities with other people

and WHY has the amount of billionaires soared in the last 15 years?

IPO's......build a business like google and then get rich

way to much envy and jealously.......you too can do what they have done.......

or dont you believe that?

Including inflation anyone that stayed in is almost back to where they were in 2004.  Great. How has the top 10% done since 2004??

Much Much better.

[Value Buy]

Owners are owners

Worker bees are worker bees.

Worker bees can work their way up the ladder through work and education

Owners can work their way down through stupidity and sloth.

This is not Soviet Russia.

yet.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 12, 2013 10:24:29 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

progressive income taxes dont bother me so much

i dont mind paying my "fair share"

the problem starts when my share keeps rising to pay for everyone else

did you stop to consider why that is happening?

at the same time that our country is so far in debt, one wonders if it will ever back in the black

when fewer people are paying into a pot, where more and more are taking it out, there comes the issues

that is where we are......

and to exacerbate the problem, the people collecting are not fixing their issues

a hand up is a LOT different than a hand out

middle income people generally don't get handouts. 

my kids are grown....we dont have many deductions other than the charities we participate in

i know dj says his taxes are lower than ever....glad his are......mine keep going up

really?  why?  because your income keeps going up?

state/local/and now federal.....they all want bigger pieces

my federal taxes have fallen steadily over the last 30 years.  my state and local taxes are largely unchanged.

my question for those who think i pay too little

should my standard of living change because our governments cant get their shit together?

well, you got the pronoun right.  it is your government and mine.  are you saying we should not pay for it?

[djAdvocate]

Dec 12, 2013 11:10:41 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

usaone

how many people have access to 401k programs but REFUSE to participate?

how can they grow their wealth when they arent willing to be a part of the system?

i have 145+ employees

less than 20% take advantage of the 401k

do you do employer matching?

the owner is starting to wonder if the expense is worth it because our participation rates are so low

i started with nothing.....and learned as i went......

if a 25 yrar old would just take 10% of their gross and put it into a s&p 500 fund.....

by the time they are 60, they will be FINE.....

dont blame those at the top for what those in the middle REFUSE to do for themselves

[djAdvocate]

Dec 12, 2013 13:15:14 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

Dec 12, 2013 11:27:13 GMT -5 usaone said:

Refuse? They don't have any money to put in. How about 2008 when all the 401ks were wiped out when the rich cashed in.

Of course folks are not going to rush back in to investing. They don't trust the people at the top.


That's great. I also started out with nothing and made something.



The amount of Billionaires has exploded over the last 15 or so years. Just as the middle class has been crushed.

bullshit

they werent wiped out....and IF the rich cashed in, they lost out.....

two words for you:

ENRON
WorldCom

[Deleted]

and if you had all your eggs in one basket, you deserved to be sheared like the sheep

are there companies that dont play by the rules....sure

are there ceo's who line their pockets instead of the shareholders....sure

for every company you name, i can list 200 at least that are solid investments

that is why for the average investor, mutual funds and etf's are their only choice

all their eggs dont end up in one basket, or stock, or company

and events like enron, or worldcom, or BP dont wipe out what they have worked years for.....

equities are LONG term propositions....10, 15, 20 years and beyond

what you put into the market should never be taken out except when you retire....

you can move from one fund to another.....or etf to another.....but chasing last years results doesnt work either

i invest....i dont gamble....at least that is the way i see it......

it is like your house.....well for most of us anyway

we didnt use it as a piggybank to buy toys and vacations

over time....it should see slow appreciation, and as you pay down the mortgage you build equity

growing wealth takes time and patience.....

[djAdvocate]

Dec 12, 2013 14:34:59 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

and if you had all your eggs in one basket, you deserved to be sheared like the sheep.

maybe.  i am not sure ANYONE DESERVES THAT.  if you look at how events transpired at these companies, there was a culture of greed that was fostered from the top down.  everyone was invested in the attitude of management, which was that "they could not lose".  let's face it, this kind of groupthink is really really common- even with the "smartest guys in the room".

look @ the GOP last year.  they really thought they would win.  not just the presidency, but the Senate.  they believed their off-year election polling data rather than the polling data that was actually there.  they thought they had 5% more than they had.  and very few on the right even questioned it.  is it WRONG to do that?  did they deserve to be "sheared like sheep".

there are two views of authority.  one is the "free republic" one, where you put smart people in charge, and expect them to do the responsible thing, to see the truth, and to inform their underlings EVEN WHEN THE TRUTH IS NOT PLEASANT.  the other is what you and i would call the real world- which is that people have conflicting interests and internal bulls(*t (yes, even me).  the ONLY way they "adjust" those perceptions is to constantly challenge them, which is hard work.  most people are not up to it.  even the smartest guys in the room.

it is not just "those loser workers" that fall into groupthink, gd.  you and i do it, too.

but i agree with the rest of your post.

[Deleted]

challenging one's own POV.....

yeah....not likely (i am an old dog....and it's hard to learn new tricks)

i am open on some items...and very narrow minded on others

i realize that.....

i am far from perfect...never claimed to be

but i was raised that you are what you make of yourself.....i was told no one was going to give me a damned thing.....if i wanted it, i had to go out and earn it

i have lived that way....and raised my kids the same

we ALL have to live with our decisions...the good ones and the bad ones

there was a thread a few weeks ago about mistakes one had made...or something similar to that

my list would be too long to compile....but i live with them....and i try damn hard not to make the same ones a second time

following the herd, or groupthink as you put it, is so one doesnt have to take responsibility for ones own actions

you can say i was just doing what everyone else was doing.....people do it everyday

sorry....that doesnt work in my little world.....actions have consequences....good and bad

and people need to start taking responsibility for their OWN life.....not relying on someone else

[djAdvocate]

Dec 12, 2013 14:58:42 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

following the herd, or groupthink as you put it, is so one doesnt have to take responsibility for ones own actions

no.  i think you can be responsible and still follow the herd.  literalizing your example, there is a reason for herds.  if there is a predator, it might get a couple of you, but is unlikely to get all of you.  that is how a herd functions.  but to get back to the point: people want something to believe in, gd.  they want someone to trust.  they want to trust their spouse.  they want to trust their boss.  and they want to trust their leaders.  you are saying that YOU don't do that, but you ARE the boss.  do you really want an environment where your workers don't trust you, or do you DEPEND on their trust to achieve your goals? 

i think you are mixing up a very deep seeded desire to believe with a lack of responsibility.  i don't think they are the same thing at all.  but when belief goes bad, it is a FACT that those that were TRUSTED to tell the truth are more to blame for the misfortunes that have happened than those that ENTRUSTED themselves to them, whether you think so or not.

you can say i was just doing what everyone else was doing.....people do it everyday

sorry....that doesnt work in my little world.....actions have consequences....good and bad

and people need to start taking responsibility for their OWN life.....not relying on someone else

that is great, if you are able, confident, and perceptive.  if you are not, a certain degree of trust is required.

i know this woman in Canada.  has a good job, a nice home, a loving husband, and two kids.  a few years back, she found out that her husband had lost his job over a year prior.  he had been going to "work" by camping out in his car at Wal-Mart, and charging everything to a credit card, then disposing of the bills.  her life was shattered by it.

did she DESERVE that?

[Deleted]

i am a very untrusting person...always have been

it takes a long time for me to trust someone....employee, acquaintance, etc

did she deserve that...NO....of course not (but people are shit on by other people all the time).....live and learn

something tells me she wont be taken in like that again.....

bad shit happens to people everyday.....remember my business.....i live it with people

i have seen horror story after horror story.....some caused by the people themselves....some of it just really sucky luck

when crap happens....you have a few choices

you can deal with it....pick yourself up the best you can, and start again (this is what some people do)

or you can whine about it.....pity yourself that the world is out to get you.....and wait for something to change (usually doesnt happen though does it?)

i prefer the first people....i can help those....they need a hand up....and i have zero issue giving that assistance

is she like the first or the second......

[djAdvocate]

Dec 12, 2013 15:23:16 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

i am a very untrusting person...always have been

it takes a long time for me to trust someone....employee, acquaintance, etc

did she deserve that...NO....of course not (but people are shit on by other people all the time).....live and learn

something tells me she wont be taken in like that again.....

bad shit happens to people everyday.....remember my business.....i live it with people

i have seen horror story after horror story.....some caused by the people themselves....some of it just really sucky luck

when crap happens....you have a few choices

you can deal with it....pick yourself up the best you can, and start again (this is what some people do)

or you can whine about it.....pity yourself that the world is out to get you.....and wait for something to change (usually doesnt happen though does it?)

i prefer the first people....i can help those....they need a hand up....and i have zero issue giving that assistance

is she like the first or the second......

well, the whole point was not to make an example of her.  it was to point out that people need to believe in one another, and that their trust is not the same thing as abdication of responsibility.

to answer your question, she is paranoid to the point of being delusional now.  i am not sure that is an improvement over being duped because she loved and trusted her husband.

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2013 13:49:40 GMT -5 usaone said:

Dec 12, 2013 13:15:14 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

bullshit

they werent wiped out....and IF the rich cashed in, they lost out.....

they only people that lost money were the ones that sold at the bottom

if you left your investments alone, you probably have at LEAST doubled your portfolio from the 08 lows

paper losses are just that.....paper

if you want to grow your wealth....there are 3 ways imo to do so

own your own business

own rental properties

invest in equities with other people

and WHY has the amount of billionaires soared in the last 15 years?

IPO's......build a business like google and then get rich

way to much envy and jealously.......you too can do what they have done.......

or dont you believe that?

Including inflation anyone that stayed in is almost back to where they were in 2004.  Great. How has the top 10% done since 2004??

Much Much better.

usaone, I don't mean any disrespect, but I don't think you have a clue how things work.  You are just making stuff up.  For example, you've probably completely overlooked dividends in your analysis of equating today to 2004.

The average Joe doesn't do so well because he makes bad decisions.  He tends to buy high, sell low, and then stays away scared until the next opportunity to buy high.  It's tough to blame that on the rich.  It's also tough to blame the rich when the Average Joe would rather spend his money than save it.  That is the cause of a growing wealth gap.  If the average Joe places more value on a new car than on investing for the future, who am I to say that is a bad thing?  It's a personal choice.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 12, 2013 16:01:23 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 12, 2013 13:49:40 GMT -5 usaone said:

Including inflation anyone that stayed in is almost back to where they were in 2004.  Great. How has the top 10% done since 2004??

Much Much better.

usaone, I don't mean any disrespect, but I don't think you have a clue how things work.  You are just making stuff up.  For example, you've probably completely overlooked dividends in your analysis of equating today to 2004.

The average Joe doesn't do so well because he makes bad decisions.  He tends to buy high, sell low, and then stays away scared until the next opportunity to buy high.  It's tough to blame that on the rich.  It's also tough to blame the rich when the Average Joe would rather spend his money than save it.  That is the cause of a growing wealth gap.  If the average Joe places more value on a new car than on investing for the future, who am I to say that is a bad thing?  It's a personal choice.

people should stop trying to game the market.  it is a good LONG TERM investment.  it should be treated that way by amateur investors.