Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (173289)	3/5/2003 3:59:42 PM
From: chomolungma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Unfortunately, we have a finite time span on this earth. in 22 years I'm not going to be a spring chicken. If you HAVE to have the money to live off of and your time frame is short (I leave that for you to define), then really you have no choice but to go with something in the fixed-income category. Unfortunately 20 yr. T-bonds are now yielding about 4 3/4% and this is taxed at ordinary rates and every year. You could increase this by buying corporates, but then you add risk. Also long-term fixed securities have a good deal of inflation risk. If we have 5% inflation, what do you think someone is going to pay you for the above security? Not much! Want to get rid of that inflation risk? OK, now you're left with T-bills and have to settle for sub 2% returns and historically these have barely matched inflation giving you a real return of 0% and if taxable a negative return. Given the above, is it any wonder that equities will still be the investment that many choose. They are willing to take the risk to get the historical performance that equities have provided over the long haul, and in my opinion, will continue to provide.

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (173289)	3/5/2003 4:26:24 PM
From: rkral	Respond to of 186894

OT ... Jim, re "Unfortunately, we have a finite time span on this earth. in 22 years I'm not going to be a spring chicken." Me neither. <g> But seriously, what percentage of investors used 100% of their investment dollars to buy at the 1929 market top? Pretty close to zero, I suspect. And zero is what your viewpoint is worth, unless you add some balance and common sense. Most people invest with savings from a wage or a salary. IOW, they invest a little at a time. Thus, a dollar-averaging type of analysis, ... for some years before the peak, or some years including the peak, or whatever contiguous years near 1929 you choose, ... would be considerably more representative than the scenario you espouse. If an investor received a windfall, then invested at the market peak only to see it decline, .. well, he/she was still better off than before they received the windfall. Que sera sera, Ron