Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Jim Welsh-investment-letter – Feb 17, 09
- This topic has 25 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by peterb.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 23, 2009 at 2:17 PM #353182February 23, 2009 at 7:34 PM #353252robsonParticipant
Here’s a fun little stat I stumbled across today. I’ve read numerous people calling a bottom on the S+P at between 600-700, which I acknowledge is very likely. In inflation adjusted terms, the December 1968 high was 654 (109.8*212.058/35.6).
In other words, if we hit 650 we have had negative real growth over the last 40 years. Forget a lost decade, try 4.Many people also argue that the government reports less inflation than truly occurred over the last decade or so. If this is true, the inflation adjusted 1968 high is more like 700 or even 750 and we are already there.
February 23, 2009 at 7:34 PM #352940robsonParticipantHere’s a fun little stat I stumbled across today. I’ve read numerous people calling a bottom on the S+P at between 600-700, which I acknowledge is very likely. In inflation adjusted terms, the December 1968 high was 654 (109.8*212.058/35.6).
In other words, if we hit 650 we have had negative real growth over the last 40 years. Forget a lost decade, try 4.Many people also argue that the government reports less inflation than truly occurred over the last decade or so. If this is true, the inflation adjusted 1968 high is more like 700 or even 750 and we are already there.
February 23, 2009 at 7:34 PM #353383robsonParticipantHere’s a fun little stat I stumbled across today. I’ve read numerous people calling a bottom on the S+P at between 600-700, which I acknowledge is very likely. In inflation adjusted terms, the December 1968 high was 654 (109.8*212.058/35.6).
In other words, if we hit 650 we have had negative real growth over the last 40 years. Forget a lost decade, try 4.Many people also argue that the government reports less inflation than truly occurred over the last decade or so. If this is true, the inflation adjusted 1968 high is more like 700 or even 750 and we are already there.
February 23, 2009 at 7:34 PM #353414robsonParticipantHere’s a fun little stat I stumbled across today. I’ve read numerous people calling a bottom on the S+P at between 600-700, which I acknowledge is very likely. In inflation adjusted terms, the December 1968 high was 654 (109.8*212.058/35.6).
In other words, if we hit 650 we have had negative real growth over the last 40 years. Forget a lost decade, try 4.Many people also argue that the government reports less inflation than truly occurred over the last decade or so. If this is true, the inflation adjusted 1968 high is more like 700 or even 750 and we are already there.
February 23, 2009 at 7:34 PM #353516robsonParticipantHere’s a fun little stat I stumbled across today. I’ve read numerous people calling a bottom on the S+P at between 600-700, which I acknowledge is very likely. In inflation adjusted terms, the December 1968 high was 654 (109.8*212.058/35.6).
In other words, if we hit 650 we have had negative real growth over the last 40 years. Forget a lost decade, try 4.Many people also argue that the government reports less inflation than truly occurred over the last decade or so. If this is true, the inflation adjusted 1968 high is more like 700 or even 750 and we are already there.
February 23, 2009 at 8:02 PM #353272peterbParticipantS&P “500” sounds about right to me.
February 23, 2009 at 8:02 PM #352961peterbParticipantS&P “500” sounds about right to me.
February 23, 2009 at 8:02 PM #353403peterbParticipantS&P “500” sounds about right to me.
February 23, 2009 at 8:02 PM #353434peterbParticipantS&P “500” sounds about right to me.
February 23, 2009 at 8:02 PM #353536peterbParticipantS&P “500” sounds about right to me.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.