Secular Bear Markets And A River In Egypt
I don't know. I suppose that if most of what I did over the last few decades revolved around compelling individual investors to buy stocks for the long run, come what may, it might be difficult to look at things objectively.
Denial is a powerful force in the world and perhaps one of the most under-appreciated.
These days, a lot of people are having a very hard time with the whole idea that individual ownership of stocks (and now real estate) is not the panacea that they once thought.
That doesn't, however, stop them from encouraging individuals to just "tough it out", likely knowing that, eventually, their advice will pay off - whether or not that advice will pay off in time to fund the retirement of a generation of baby boomers is another question entirely.
Word comes this morning from the Wall Street Journal's always-interesting Jason Zweig that it might be some time before things are hunky-dory again.
In this story coming in advance of tomorrow's update of long-term investment returns by finance professor Elroy Dimson of London Business School, the news is decidedly unfriendly for your typical aspiring retiree with money in the stock market.
The good professor estimated that we'll have to wait nine more years before stocks have even half a chance of hitting their highs of 2007. That is, back when millions of baby boomers started eyeing their retirement account balances again as the housing bubble was meeting its pin.
Those aren't very good odds at all - a 50 percent chance in nine years? 2018?
Who knows what the condition of the U.S. or global economy will be by then?
If you're still sticking with the program of "stocks for the long run", maybe this report at Money Magazine will cheer you up. In one of the daffiest assessments of equity markets that have crossed my computer screen in quite some time, Paul J. Lim, a senior editor at Money Magazine explains how the lost decade that just occurred, really wasn't such a loss.
Yes, it's true that the Dow Jones industrial average sits more than 1,000 points below where it was 10 years ago. But that's irrelevant to your investing strategy for three reasons.
Related Stories
The above story is the opinion of the author only and it does not reflect
iStockAnalyst opinion. Further, the author is not personally advising you
regarding the suitability of the story for your investment needs. In no event
iStockAnalyst will be liable for any loss or damage including without
limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage, or any loss or damage
whatsoever arising from or arising out of, or in connection with the use of this
information. Please consult your investment advisor before making any investment
decision.
