Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The official "ASX is tanking!" panic thread

Jump to new
tinhat said:
The All Ords peaked in Feb 2002 so I'll use that peak, which was 3443.9.
Click to expand...

There is somthing fundamentally wrong with using the peak,

The peak is going to be the point when the market is at it's most expensive, The only thing you proove in doing so it that buying businesses at over priced levels results in a poor to medocre result from your investing.

If anything you shoulds compare apples with apples, and compare peaks with peaks and lows with lows.

If you can understand that the bull and bear market cycles regularly take share prices to levels well above and well below the amount a rational private buyer would pay for the entire businesses, you will understand that the peaks are just periods where prices have travelled far above a rational price and the ensuing crash is a healthy thing, and any rally after the crash that takes prices back to fair value is like wise healthy
 
Tysonboss1 said:
if the mining boom falters the miners may see a short set back and their return on equity drop from 40% back to say 15% still a profiable business to own.
Click to expand...

But the value of your initial investment will go down dramatically?

Tysonboss1 said:
5, And what do you base that on,
Click to expand...

Reserves and usage?

Tysonboss1 said:
6, we didn't stop lighting our homes when whale oil became scarce, If you believe that you are basically saying our ability to innovate, recycle and find new sources has been pushed to it's full extent, I disaggree.
Click to expand...

I am not saying that - what I am saying, is that the financial powers that be will prevent any such innovation from occurring because it is not in their interests.

You only have to observe the world now, nobody in power is doing anything about any of these problems - they aren't even talking about it. It's all growth growth growth.

There need to be put severe limits on reproduction and immigration just about outright banned, and nations which fail to comply need to be embargoed by the rest for starters. None of this is happening, we are just speeding faster and faster towards a brick wall.

Tysonboss1 said:
7, you have an entirely wrong view of the economy, the economy is not a cake where if I get rich you automatically have a smaller slice, It is more like candles where we use our own candle to light other peoples candles, with all the various businesses and people working generating products and services that get distributed and we are all better off, we will all get richer together of course some are richer than others, but on balance an average person today lives better than a king 500 years ago
Click to expand...

Last time I checked kings didn't have to slave away their entire life to pay interest on money that was created out of nothing for a crappy property on a tiny block of land.
 
skyQuake said:
22nd Feb 2002 - XJO Accumulation 17268.9
17th Feb 2012 - XJO Accumulation 31970.9

85.1% over 10 years = 6.35% p.a. compounding

Certainly beat CPI growth.
Click to expand...

I calculate a real return of 39.7% based on your figures.
 
Starcraftmazter said:
1, But the value of your initial investment will go down dramatically?


2, Last time I checked kings didn't have to slave away their entire life to pay interest on money that was created out of nothing for a crappy property on a tiny block of land.
Click to expand...

1, yes it would if there is an immediate and sharp down turn in commodity prices, offcourse the company would be less profitable and indeed worth less, but every day they contiune selling ship loads at current high prices counts and improves their balance sheet and net worth

2, No, but most of them died in there 40's, and lived without the comforts we take for granted, ie, running water, air conditioning, elctricity, telecomunitcations, air travel etc etc etc.
 
Tysonboss1 said:
2, No, but most of them died in there 40's, and lived without the comforts we take for granted, ie, running water, air conditioning, elctricity, telecomunitcations, air travel etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

Yes - but living standards are very relative. You should not compare them across time, but rather to the richest people alive today.
 
Tysonboss1 said:
There is somthing fundamentally wrong with using the peak,

The peak is going to be the point when the market is at it's most expensive, The only thing you proove in doing so it that buying businesses at over priced levels results in a poor to medocre result from your investing.

If anything you shoulds compare apples with apples, and compare peaks with peaks and lows with lows.

If you can understand that the bull and bear market cycles regularly take share prices to levels well above and well below the amount a rational private buyer would pay for the entire businesses, you will understand that the peaks are just periods where prices have travelled far above a rational price and the ensuing crash is a healthy thing, and any rally after the crash that takes prices back to fair value is like wise healthy
Click to expand...

Using a arbitrary date like you and Starcraftmazter have been ("circa 2000") during your debate isn't any more meaningful. "circa 2000" which you complained "had a degree of bubblyness". I just posted to where you can find historic CPI data and how you can apply it to the All Ords to calculate real returns over arbitrary time periods.

You can choose whichever data point you want to from the time series, or you might use a moving average or a linear regression.

I've provided a solution and an example of its application to the question that arose as to how to work out the real difference for the XAO between arbitrary dates using the Australian CPI figures.

I don't really want to participate in the broader debate that has developed in the past few pages.
 
Starcraftmazter said:
Yes - but living standards are very relative. You should not compare them across time, but rather to the richest people alive today.
Click to expand...

In a capitalist society there will always be mega rich people and there will always be poorer people.

Notice that the "poor" people in a capitalist society generally live a life that a poor person under a different system would consider hog heaven.

A poor australian lives a life a poor person in bangladesh would dream off.

The greatest Myth in our society is that people get rich at the expense of others, this is untrue., they became rich by making our lives richer and more comfortable.

ie, thomas edison became mega rich by inventing the light bulb and starting which improved the world for all

same can be said for Steve jobs, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Henry ford, Rockerfella, Andrew forrest, Frank lowy, etc.etc.etc

When you create a product that changes the world, or design a system that generates and distributes goods on a large scale you deserve to become rich.

We all make money according to the amount of business we successfully facilitate, and thats a good thing.
 
Tysonboss1 said:
When you create a product that changes the world, or design a system that generates and distributes goods on a large scale you deserve to become rich.
Click to expand...

do these people deserve to become rich simply because they were blessed with a superior genetic code to the homeless guy i saw eating out of a bin on my lunch break today? just because people are able to do impressive things does not mean they deserve what they receive in return. inequality in us as beings leads to serious inequality throughout society, it is not fair and thats that. even your man buffett has said it simply comes down to luck.


i just realised what thread this was in, just a tad off topic?

asx will have tanked by mid year.
 
young-gun said:
do these people deserve to become rich simply because they were blessed with a superior genetic code to the homeless guy i saw eating out of a bin on my lunch break today? just because people are able to do impressive things does not mean they deserve what they receive in return. inequality in us as beings leads to serious inequality throughout society, it is not fair and thats that. even your man buffett has said it simply comes down to luck.


i just realised what thread this was in, just a tad off topic?

asx will have tanked by mid year.
Click to expand...

It's not like they got a dna test, passed it and then got handed a billion dollars.

They concieved and idea, saw it through years of pain staking work and then changed the world,

The homeless guy obviously has mental issues, and hopefully can get some help,

if he gets to the right help he will have a better life than he would in parts of africa where he may have been thrown in the lake at birth.

capitalism works, no other system on earth generates and distributes the amount of goods and services, and it is all based on providing for others so your on situation improves, and the more people you provide for the richer you get.

All the people I mentioned built systems that provided products for millions, jobs for thousands, and millions in tax revenues for schools hospitals etc etc. and then donated large portions of there wealth to charities.
 
Tysonboss1 said:
It's not like they got a dna test, passed it and then got handed a billion dollars.

They concieved and idea, saw it through years of pain staking work and then changed the world,
Click to expand...

exactly where do you think said attributes come from? im not arguing they dont work hard, im saying the homeless guy never in a million years had a chance to achieve such things. nor am i arguing whether certain systems work better than others. so again, is it fair the one man has been given the ability to achieve great things, while another is 'thrown into the river' as you stated? no. no ifs buts or maybes, life is unfair, its precious(to some), but unfair.

anyway thats the last from me, perhaps needs to be a new thread.
 
Tysonboss1 said:
In a capitalist society there will always be mega rich people and there will always be poorer people.
Click to expand...

Yes, but there exist measures of the spread between the rich and the poor - measures of financial equality. And in most developed countries, certainly the anglo-saxan countries, these measures are at or above historic heights.

Tysonboss1 said:
Notice that the "poor" people in a capitalist society generally live a life that a poor person under a different system would consider hog heaven.
Click to expand...

I do not at all agree with that, the poor people in a capitalist system amount to slaves. Most people do in fact, but the poor are especially badly exploited.

Tysonboss1 said:
A poor australian lives a life a poor person in bangladesh would dream off.
Click to expand...

Bangladesh is a capitalist country as well is it not?

Tysonboss1 said:
The greatest Myth in our society is that people get rich at the expense of others, this is untrue., they became rich by making our lives richer and more comfortable.
Click to expand...

I disagree wholeheartedly. The central bankers at the top get rich by printing money at the expense of everyone else and charging interest on it. They did not do anything for anyone.

Tysonboss1 said:
When you create a product that changes the world, or design a system that generates and distributes goods on a large scale you deserve to become rich.
Click to expand...

These rich people who invented things are nothing compared to the financial elite who print money for a living.

Furthermore, inventing things, having good ideas alone is not enough. Because of the way our economies are set up, your success is reliant upon the central bankers ensuring you get the credit you need to prosper. This will not always be the case. Simply look at what happened to Nikola Tesla when he wanted to give the world free energy.

Tysonboss1 said:
We all make money according to the amount of business we successfully facilitate, and thats a good thing.
Click to expand...

Actually we do not. FIRE economy positions are quite useless to the real economy, yet are highly paid. More so than pretty much all other positions.

This is despite the fact that what you say alone is not the end all be all.
 
Just a few points...
Starcraftmazter said:
I disagree wholeheartedly. The central bankers at the top get rich by printing money at the expense of everyone else and charging interest on it. They did not do anything for anyone.
Click to expand...

What? Central bankers in the forbes 100? Don't really know of any rich central bankers



Furthermore, inventing things, having good ideas alone is not enough. Because of the way our economies are set up, your success is reliant upon the central bankers ensuring you get the credit you need to prosper. This will not always be the case. Simply look at what happened to Nikola Tesla when he wanted to give the world free energy.
Click to expand...

Central bankers? I think just a local branch manager can handle that. Pretty sure Tesla didn't go to central banks to get a loan.
These days Angel investors, seed capital, venturecapital or plain old bank lending work just fine.
 
skyQuake said:
What? Central bankers in the forbes 100? Don't really know of any rich central bankers
Click to expand...
Exactly. No motive!!! No reward for controlling the world! The big retarded pot head conspiracy theory of Mormooners running the world behind the central banks for their own grand benefit is total garbage.
There's better money and lifestyle doing other things like taking bonuses at Citi.
The smartest thieves steal right out in the open, legally!
 
young-gun said:
exactly where do you think said attributes come from? im not arguing they dont work hard, im saying the homeless guy never in a million years had a chance to achieve such things. nor am i arguing whether certain systems work better than others. so again, is it fair the one man has been given the ability to achieve great things, while another is 'thrown into the river' as you stated? no. no ifs buts or maybes, life is unfair, its precious(to some), but unfair.

perhaps needs to be a new thread.
Click to expand...
Agree about a new thread. Why don't you start one, based on your comments in the first paragraph above? It's a fascinating topic but shouldn't probably divert this thread.
There are multifaceted arguments on why some people succeed and others fail so I hope you'll take up the challenge to start a thread on this.
 
skyQuake said:
What? Central bankers in the forbes 100? Don't really know of any rich central bankers
Click to expand...

Why exactly would they make their wealth public knowledge? The international banking families like Rothschild own so much wealth, it would make the Forbes 100 list look like a orphanarium.

More importantly they have the power to create money out of thin air. When you have that, your wealth need not be measured in dollars, but your power to control the world and run it as you see fit.

skyQuake said:
Central bankers? I think just a local branch manager can handle that. Pretty sure Tesla didn't go to central banks to get a loan.
Click to expand...

No, they raise capital from the stock market - which is the main reason I like it. What success have they had getting loan finances from banks? Who knows.
 
skc said:
Forget about all other trading strategies...feels like it's BTFD time.
Click to expand...

Problem is US has not had that dip yet...so unless we decouple...
Also true, we did not follow the exact US uptrend since end of Dec either...
XJO seems to have had a resistance at 4300...so maybe today it closes above this line.

cheers,
 
Top