• hark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Again, that’s assuming the “worst time to invest” will be followed by the greatest bull run in history. Now try a situation where the government and Fed aren’t pumping trillions of dollars to help the market.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      Now try a situation where the government and Fed aren’t pumping trillions of dollars to help the market.

      Sure thing, lets eliminate anything from the current bull market that starts at the bottom of the 2007 crash. Lets end in 2006, and begin 19 years early in 1987 (to keep the same sample length from the prior example).

      The same $10k in the S&P500 on Jan 1 of 1987 ending in 2006 would be $91,857. This would be a 818.57% total return and a 11.73% compounded annual growth.

      You’re welcome to run your own numbers. Here’s the simple S&P500 calculator I’ve used for our discussion here.

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        You’re missing the point. Ever since Reagan, “the economy” has been in service of the stock market and shareholder primacy has been the rule of the land. This isn’t something that should be assumed natural.