Toggle sidebar

OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Part II (READ THE OP)

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Krams said:
Was actually nice to go in today and take a break from consuming the hysteria. Going in tomorrow and Monday, then off for a few days.
Click to expand...
don't take the subway, the virus can circulate in the air for hours if an afflicted random person or homeless guy coughs inside
 
GordonGecko said:
don't take the subway, the virus can circulate in the air for hours if an afflicted random person or homeless guy coughs inside
Click to expand...
I'm in Westchester county and drive, no way I'd be on mass transit at this point.
 
PuckLuck3043 said:
That investor class includes hard working people who just saw their retirement plan drop by more than 30%. Is that not a big deal especially for those who are close to retirement?
Click to expand...

In real life and death situations no it's not. I don't know if you're getting it but the market is going to be f***ed as long as this virus is running rampant--the sooner that's dealt with the sooner your portfolio can start going up again. Bailing out airlines instead of gearing up our economy to fight this will only delay your economy from going back to where it was because people ain't going to fly and they ain't going to travel and they're going to lose jobs or work less hours left, right and center and production is going to continue to crater until this problem is solved. I think even Donald has figured this out now--don't know why it's so hard for others.

When you first go about saying 'I think this is all a hoax' and then resist and resist until finally the light bulb goes on. This isn't GWB and his preemptive strike in Iraq where he could get away with saying to the population 'oh, you can just go about your regular lives like everything is the same as it ever was. We can handle this.' That was kind of how Donald was figuring on handling this too but now he knows that ain't going to work. Good for all of us that he knows this now. That's why he's not saying shit like that anymore because we're all going to be in this fight whatever our political ideas are. We all got skin in this fight. So someone losing 30% of his portfolio doesn't matter more than someone losing his low paying retail job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brooklyn Rangers Fan and TheDirtyH
PuckLuck3043 said:
I do because I used to be heavily involved in the 403b market.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, most people have no conception of that. When I see terms like "investor class" being thrown out, it really makes me believe that people have no idea of how the market works or who exactly is investing in it. People think it is just billionaires. In reality, many unions and blue collar workers have their retirement money invested into the market by asset managers. Their unions collectively entrust the managers to make investments for their constituency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckLuck3043
Krams said:
It's common sense. Closer you get to retirement the more conservative you get to mitigate risk. As you said, that's not to imply you shouldn't have any money in stocks at that age, but generally at retirement you should already have a comfortable amount of money and be more focused on income from investments and less on growth
Click to expand...

Yes, this is true, but even at retirement age say 60- 65, I would recommend a moderate-conservative portfolio of say 35-40% equities to keep pace with possible inflation and for some growth prospects. As a guideline the "100 Rule" basically states that you subtract your age from 100 and that's the percentage of equities you should have in your portfolio. My original point was regardless of age you need to be invested in equities to some degree.
 
eco's bones said:
In real life and death situations no it's not. I don't know if you're getting it but the market is going to be f***ed as long as this virus is running rampant--the sooner that's dealt with the sooner your portfolio can start going up again. Bailing out airlines instead of gearing up our economy to fight this will only delay your economy from going back to where it was because people ain't going to fly and they ain't going to travel and they're going to lose jobs or work less hours left, right and center and production is going to continue to crater until this problem is solved. I think even Donald has figured this out now--don't know why it's so hard for others.

When you first go about saying 'I think this is all a hoax' and then resist and resist until finally the light bulb goes on. This isn't GWB and his preemptive strike in Iraq where he could get away with saying to the population 'oh, you can just go about your regular lives like everything is the same as it ever was. We can handle this.' That was kind of how Donald was figuring on handling this too but now he knows that ain't going to work. Good for all of us that he knows this now. That's why he's not saying shit like that anymore because we're all going to be in this fight whatever our political ideas are. We all got skin in this fight. So someone losing 30% of his portfolio doesn't matter more than someone losing his low paying retail job.
Click to expand...


Who said someone losing 30% of their portfolio was any more important than somebody losing a low paying retail job? Not me. I feel for anybody losing their job during this crisis and I have been concerned about the economic fallout since day 1. You implied that someone losing 30% of his/her portfolio is only a higher income person playing around with the stock market. The reality is that most of the people involved are hard working blue and white collar people trying to save for retirement and hoping they can do so before the age of 70. Some people nearing retirement just took a very big hit to those plans and that shouldn't be understated.
 
Krams said:
It's common sense. Closer you get to retirement the more conservative you get to mitigate risk. As you said, that's not to imply you shouldn't have any money in stocks at that age, but generally at retirement you should already have a comfortable amount of money and be more focused on income from investments and less on growth
Click to expand...
Sure, but that is up to a specific person and his finanial adviser. And if no such person, then him/her and the family.
 
PuckLuck3043 said:
Yes, this is true, but even at retirement age say 60- 65, I would recommend a moderate-conservative portfolio of say 35-40% equities to keep pace with possible inflation and for some growth prospects. As a guideline the "100 Rule" basically states that you subtract your age from 100 and that's the percentage of equities you should have in your portfolio. My original point was regardless of age you need to be invested in equities to some degree.
Click to expand...
That's fair. I do feel the 100 - your age rule is a little too conservative for people with 30+ years until retirement, and a little too aggressive for people who have already reached retirement age. For me personally, my strategy is to be super aggressive early on when I can withstand the stress from a collapse like we're seeing now, considering I've ~38 years until full retirement age for pension. that rule would put me at 75% equities but I'm far more over-committed than that. By retirement, I'm hoping I have enough to reduce to ~20% with the rest in bonds/REITs/dividend ETFs so I don't have a heart attack when something like this happens lol
 
MyLoveIsBlue said:
Got a question for the stock/finance mavens here. What would happen if they allowed offshore money to be returned to the USA tax free with the stipulation it had to be invested in the stock market for a year? Also, all capital gains would be waived on that money after a year.
Click to expand...
Not at all a maven, but that would do nothing to this market. You have thins that have happened in 8 days that back in 2008-2009 took 6 months to occur.
 
MAP.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Inferno, TheDirtyH, FIRE DRURY and 9 others
Krams said:
That's fair. I do feel the 100 - your age rule is a little too conservative for people with 30+ years until retirement, and a little too aggressive for people who have already reached retirement age. For me personally, my strategy is to be super aggressive early on when I can withstand the stress from a collapse like we're seeing now, considering I've ~38 years until full retirement age for pension. that rule would put me at 75% equities but I'm far more over-committed than that. By retirement, I'm hoping I have enough to reduce to ~20% with the rest in bonds/REITs/dividend ETFs so I don't have a heart attack when something like this happens lol
Click to expand...

Just be careful with being 100% invested in equities at any age. The difference in long term growth for a 80/20 portfolio and 100% is not that big and the risks are greater. Personally I have never recommended a total equity portfolio for anyone regardless of their age.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Krams
Leonardo87 said:
Been ok so far, but it’s just the beginning.
Click to expand...
Same. And I hear ya about this begin just the beginning. Waiting for the shoe to drop at work. Just bidding my time until then.

On the upside, my fiancee matched into a residency program and finds out tomorrow where she'll be. Though I guess she is also waiting for the shoe to drop on the gov't putting out the call for all graduating med students to begin working in hospitals earlier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH, JCProdigy and Leonardo87
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom