You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #1: Meh that guy is almost continually wrong. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-10 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. Meh that guy is almost continually wrong.
Edited on Thu Dec-09-10 11:17 AM by Statistical
From August 17th: "More bad news ahead. Welcome to a bleak second half 2010, worse for 2011"

Since August 17th the S&P500 is up 13%. If 13% in less than 6 months is bleak man I will take all the bleak I can get.

Another good one:
Since this announcement bonds have risen about 5%, treasuries (the target of QE2) have risen nearly double that.

If he believes stock market is impossible to win why is he recommending 10 stocks less than a month ago.

Also he seems to either miss or intentionally mislead on simple concepts:

"Third: What's ahead for the seven lean years? Wall Street will keep losing. Argersinger: "Grantham predicts below-average economic growth, anemic corporate-profit margins, and other severe obstacles for the stock market. Over the next seven years ... U.S. stocks as a group will deliver annualized real returns between 1.1% and 2.9%. That's less than you might get putting your money in a CD."

The term "REAL" means adjusted for inflation. So 1.1% to 2.9% assuming 3% inflation is 4% to 7% gross. Someone tell me where I can get a CD yielding 7%. The conflation of low "real" numbers is designed to mislead the reader into thinking the projection is that the market will underperform risk free CD. The reality is that a CD earning say 1% in 3% inflation environment would have a real return of NEGATIVE 2%. Even if the lean times prediction is right I would much rather have 1% to 3% real growth than negative 2% real growth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC