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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Currencies and the Global Capital Markets -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Ounce who wrote (1393)	3/15/1999 5:03:00 PM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3536

History doesn't repeat itself in exactly the same way - but I wonder if we won't see a repetition of the period '68 - '82' with the decimal point one over. It took all of that time for the market to truly break through 1000 on the Dow, and after yet another failed attempt we had the terrible bear market of 74 - although within 18 months the market was having another crack at 1000 - but it wasn't till 82 approx that it actually got through. 10,000 might be a similar marker? dd

To: Bill Ounce who wrote (1393)	3/15/1999 5:51:00 PM
From: Paul Berliner	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3536

Bill, Thread - RE: Boomers are poor savers. Although I'm bearish on the economy, I am flabbergasted as to how many economists, including AG himself, have yapped continuously about the 'savings rate' going to zero and even being negative. This is supposedly derived from measurements of savings deposit growth (including M1 I presume). Anyway, the general public is saving money - a great deal infact - but it is not measured by the Fed. John Q Public has money taken from his check each pay period and stuffed into a 401K or similar vehicle. He is spending like mad because the 401K is growing rapidly in this glorious bull market. The fact that he chooses not to buy a lame 5.05% CD at Ye olde Bancorp is irrelevent when calculating how much is being saved - the only difference this era is that the savings are going into riskier areas than in the past. Maybe the Fed should just calculate how much in principal (not referring to appreciation) has been contributed to 401Ks in the past year and then decide whether the savings rate is really negative (it wouldn't be). Ultimately, and to borrow from the president, 'It all depends on what your definition of Saving is.' Paul

To: Bill Ounce who wrote (1393)	3/15/1999 8:06:00 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3536

Some interesting points. It is a complex scenario and tough to hypothesize the possible influences in any but the sketchiest details. I generally agree with your suggestion that the majority of boomers have undersaved and that with the imposibility of Social Security covering the shortfall will have to opt for semi-retirement. However let me suggest something that might offset this. The baby boomers are poor savers but their parents are not. The WWII generation have been very good savers. And unfortunately this generation is staring to pass from the scene. In the process they are passing their wealth on to their children and even after estate taxes it is a considerable sum. Now this won't save all the boomers but it will have an impact. I know specific examples, not me, where this will be the difference. So it will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Also in my original scenario I had the equity market going sidways with a downward bias before a larger decline took place. The larger decline, however, was not the result of a surge in selling to finance retirement. Instead my thinking was that this selling would be minor and constant, much as you suggest. My thinking was that the market has moved to excess valuations because of the large cash flows. As these flows cease the prop for the market will be removed. Initially this would result in the sideways movement, largely due to the markets complacency. But after several years the market would realize that the rules had changed again and the overvaluation would unwind. But of course this is all just blue sky speculating :)