OT: stocks today

[Anonymous]

[quote=spdrun]Why should I be “nice” — what has it given anyone?[/quote]

You don’t have to be nice, but you should understand that the basic arithmetic behind business favors win-win scenarios over win-lose scenarios.

[spdrun]

Historically, there has been a win-lose scenario every 10 years or so, so I expect to see a few more in my time on this planet. 1974, 1981, 1987, 1991, 2001, 2008, ???

The great thing about win-lose scenarios is that they don’t require brain power to take advantage of. Buying a foreclosed home, dragging any scum living there one, cleaning it up a bit, and advertising in on Craigslist are things that anyone with a HS diploma can do.

[Coronita]

[quote=spdrun]

Literally, I’m looking for 50-75k per year that I have to do minimum work for and not be beholden to a 8-6 job for. Beyond that, I have no interest in property — it’s not a means of growth for me, just a means to assure a basic level of subsistence, because I’m not creative enough to think of any other way of doing this.[/quote]

I don’t think you really being honest with yourself on what you just stated as being the only goal.

If that really was your only goal, and the only thing you were looking for…your goal wouldn’t have a required precondition of an economic collapse towards achieving that goal…

You see, if that really was your only goal… You wouldn’t care which way the economic wind is blowing. You would be playing with the hand you are dealt right now and in the few years… You wouldn’t be trying to “out smart” the direction the market is playing, you would be playing with the market condition as long as things pencil in, or as long as the opportunity presented itself. Both in the stock market and in the real estate market….

Instead though, you appear to be adopting a far alt-outer fridge contrarian ideology that a economic collapse will happen, you’re smarter than the average person, you can outsmart the market consistently, and that your path/decision is the most certain way and only way to achieving your stated goal. In other words, you’re goal isn’t just to achieve your targeted $50-70k/year in passive income. You want to do it in a way in which you prove to yourself (and possibly others) you are right, everyone else is wrong, and you are smarter than the average person.. And the fact that you went against the grain/direction, and possibly been left out of what you could have profited from had you just done the same thing most other “dumber” people are doing, you now feel compelled you need to double down on your direction, in order to make up for being behind relative to people that you think are dumber than you…

So in your case, it’s not simply a matter of finding rental property or any asset that can generate $50-75k/year. It’s more doing it in a way such that you feel you’re smart, everyone else is dumb…Am I correct?

I mean, be honest….If some group of people that are completely dumb as a doorknob, she-she stuck up, spoiled, IVY-league snooty, brat approached you and presented a sure way to help you generate that $50-75k/year in passive income as your stated goal…and the only thing you had to do was put up with his/her crap and constant tirade about how smart he/she is (despite being a dick/ahole and dumb as a doorknob)…for an entire year… Would you do it?… Or would pride get in the way of ultimately achieving your goal?

It’s a philosophical question…

[spdrun]

If I had to work for some asshole for a year, and was GUARANTEED $50k for life after that, I’d do it. Are you suggesting a specific situation?

[Coronita]

[quote=spdrun]If I had to work for some asshole for a year, and was GUARANTEED $50k for life after that, I’d do it. Are you suggesting a specific situation?[/quote]

I’m just wondering how frequently people let their pride get in the way of achieving their goals…. Again, it was just a philosophical question.

For example. If you had to surround yourself with political commentators from Fox news for 2 years working for 5 days 10 hours a day listening and copy writing those editorials from Rush Limbuargh. And in exchange he gave you one of his properties that yielded $50k/year…

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=harvey] you should understand that the basic arithmetic behind business favors win-win scenarios over win-lose scenarios.[/quote]

That is so true in the aggregate. But business is competition and growth oriented and some people will be left behind. Like NAFTA was a win-win and increased trade flows in the aggregate. But the people left behind didn’t have the basic requirements of bootstrapping, the brainpower and wherewithal, to adapt to new market conditions,

[Anonymous]

[quote=spdrun]Historically, there has been a win-lose scenario every 10 years or so, so I expect to see a few more in my time on this planet. 1974, 1981, 1987, 1991, 2001, 2008, ???[/quote]

Many of those were relatively small in the big picture and there was not a balance of win-lose in any of those events. They were mostly lose with a few minor winners who had very precise timing, if not just luck.

[quote]The great thing about win-lose scenarios is that they don’t require brain power to take advantage of.[/quote]

True, it doesn’t require brain power to have very precise timing, in hindsight.

You do seem to be determined to swim against the current.

[FlyerInHi]

I think I get spdrun. He’s not a perma bear. He knows very well that there are opportunities in boom years. But the competition is fierce so doesn’t want to exert the brainpower and effort needed to compete (he admits to be lazy and doesn’t care for bling consumption) Spdrun knows that the nature of business is growth. He’s just waiting for a recession to buy low so he rent out high later. Spdrun’s strategy to buy low assumes there will be an up cycle to follow.

That is very much unlike the permabears who think the system is rigged, and the wealth is “fake” so a collapse is imminent, dollar collapse, etc…

[spdrun]

I am not a perma bear. I’m a tempa-bear. I’m aware that things are cyclical, and that downturns are almost never permanent (in the US, places like Haiti are a different story).

[spdrun]

You expect me to be insulted?

[spdrun]

For example. If you had to surround yourself with political commentators from Fox news for 2 years working for 5 days 10 hours a day listening and copy writing those editorials from Rush Limbuargh. And in exchange he gave you one of his properties that yielded $50k/year…

I’d do it in a second. Maybe I could actually do some good in tempering and subtly altering the message in between Limbaugh and the talking head.

And then I’d use the $50k/yr to go to med school or law school, move to some town in upstate NY or West Virginia, and ACTUALLY have a hand in helping the people that Fox News claims to represent by providing low-cost medical or legal care.

[FlyerInHi]

The thread is about stocks but I believe spdrun is mainly focused on real estate.
The nature of RE rentals requires that you buy low. It’s a good idea to wait and buy during recessions. I can understand that if one is ready to buy, one would want a recession.

[Coronita]

[quote=spdrun]I am not a perma bear. I’m a tempa-bear. I’m aware that things are cyclical, and that downturns are almost never permanent (in the US, places like Haiti are a different story).[/quote]

If you have $1million laying around., and all you want is $50k… You could stick that into a lower risk dividend fund/index fund and you’ll average out around 4-5% per year with the least about of work….

Why would you be so giddy about wanting a crash, that would be a disservice to your ultimate financial goals??? I don’t get it.

It’s one thing to plan for a crash to minimize risk. It’s another thing to want something opposite of what you should have been doing all along that would have been the easier route instead of banking on the “one hit” that you would guess correctly at the right event at the right time ….Unless of course, like I said, it’s to double down on a failed strategy that you held to for too long to make up for lost time…

I don’t even gamble on just 1 strategy for a very long time… and I consider myself “reckless” when it comes to financial speculation….because like I said, if I’m wrong, I’m really screwed.

[spdrun]

Because I feel better owning property. Property is real. Property is an actual possession. Property can be lived in, touched, worked on with my two hands. And I enjoy working with my hands more than working with my brain. I’m primitive that way.

Index funds are dependent on the management of Wall Street scum that I don’t personally know and don’t trust (see also: Madoff). I like the control of real estate. It makes me feel safe to own multiple roofs.

*I* pick the tenants.
*I* pick the property.
*I* decide how to fix the property.
*I* can always live in the property if worse comes to worse.

It satisfies the selfish little kid in me to hoard physical possessions — kind of like the Kindergartener who wants all of the toys and woe to anyone who asks him to care and share.

Also, crashed property yields 8% or more, not 4-5%. In rents, not Monopoly money.

[FlyerInHi]

I takes brainpower and work to manage properties.
You can think is it as competition to do it better than other people. It’s not really passive in the sense that you do nothing. Well, you could do nothing but the returns would suck.

[Author]

Posts