1ºImran Lalani
The problem with those books that make your argument is they ignore
1. Leverage of a down payment activating the entire gross value of real estate to grow vs just the down payment
2. Inflation moving at about 4.5% consuming the buying power of money in real terms
3. That you can’t invest directly in S&P. It’s a collection of top 500 companies that always changes to include top 500 - meaning - in 1929 (BTW there’s a math trick reason why they pick that year) the S&P was full of companies that don’t exist today like horse buggy companies.
Later in the 40s, 50s 60s etc. companies that made things that don’t exist. Blockbuster video was once on the list.
Those companies went bankrupt
Tracking the S&P over 90 years is like making a fantasy baseball team with dead players like Babe Ruth.
Historic Index funds picked some deceased companies that underperformed and have never reflected the Fantasy Team at any given real (fixed) time in history
4. The final proof is
You can walk down any middle class street in any city in North America and knock on doors of people who bought 30 years ago and meet someone living in a useful (likely million dollar) home that’s paid off
But I defy you to walk down the same street and knock on doors and find a SINGLE person in America that says yes, I invested one time 30 years ago in the stock market and I have $600k-$1M sitting in an account
One is a real life version to be found with most Boomers in any urban neighbourhood and the other is a stockbroker’s unicorn fantasy sales pitch
PS: they use 1929 as a math gimmick to inflate S&P performance because that was the famed Black Tuesday collapse of the stock market that started the Great Depression that only ended cuz of WWII in 1940.
The entire market tanked wiping out the entire country for a decade in the worse economic collapse in history .
That’s a nice date to use to measure S&P starting point as Day zero cuz it was worth Zero.
It’s not hard to get impressive growth numbers from - wiped out
They don’t use use 1928 (at its pre Depression Peak.) No kidding. That would screw their math up
2ºWe spent $6000 on our wedding in 2017 for 100 guests. My dress was on the $99 sale at David's Bridal. My uncle officiated, my aunt was the photographer, my cousin sang with her guitar, another cousin did hair, another cousin did make-up, we used the church My grandma goes to and got a discount and had the reception at the masonic lodge which was also a discount as I am a member of the lodge. We used paper flowers on Amazon and bought a lot of decorations at the dollar store or at Michael's. What cost the most was catering and the cake.
3ºImran Lalani
Who gets 10% consistently (with no fees or taxes) for 30 years?
That’s the pipe dream of every huckster pushing the stock market. Those investment books always pick 10% cuz money doubles every 7 years (if the interest is also reinvested at 10%) …and so on. But that doesn’t exist.
I hate it when people use twisted math and say this
No fund ever returned that for 30 years consistently. In fact some funds lose money in down decades.
Netting 5% consistently over that time would be a dream
Houses can do that with inflation because their asset growth is built-in to be a multiplier and they can do 5% at best, but it’s 5% on the entire value of the asset (mortgage and all) so your $29k leverages $300k to grow compounded and move up with inflation over 30 years
4ºTrump's First Secretary of Defense...
Jim Mattis 6-4-2020
IN UNION THERE IS STRENGTH
I have watched this week's unfolding events, angry and appalled. The words "Equal Justice Under Law" are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation.
When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.
We must reject any thinking of our cities as a "battlespace" that our uniformed military is called upon to "dominate." At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part. Keeping public order rests with
civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them.
Article continues after sponsor message
James Madison wrote in Federalist 14 that "America united with a handful of troops, or without a single soldier, exhibits a more forbidding posture to foreign ambition than America disunited, with a hundred thousand veterans ready for combat." We do not need to militarize our r
esponse to protests. We need to unite a
round a common purpose. And it starts by guaranteeing that all of us are equal before the law.
Instructions given by the military departments to our troops before the Normandy invasion reminded soldiers that "The Nazi slogan for destroying us...was 'Divide and Conquer.' Our American answer is 'In Union there is Strength.'" We must summon that unity to surmount this crisis—confident that we are better than our politics.
Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.
We can come through this trying time stronger, and with a renewed sense of purpose and respect for one another. The pandemic has shown us that it is not only our troops who are willing to offer the ultimate sacrifice for the safety of the community. Americans in hospitals, grocery stores, post offices, and elsewhere have put their lives on the line in order to serve their fellow citizens and their country. We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square. We must reject and hold accountable th
o
se in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution. At the same time, we must remember Lincoln's "better angels," and listen to them, as we work to unite.
Only by adopting a new path—which means, in truth, returning to the original path of our founding ideals—will we again be a country admired and respected at home and abroad.
~Mad Dog Mattis~
J6, "The Storm"
https://fb.watch/aQjJxPSmi5/