Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this? dvh update
- From: abelard <abelard3@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:25:03 +0100
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 23:11:25 -0000, "DVH" <dvh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"abelard" <abelard3@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:gqlar4t3k9aq1j8to01af5rfim1ku3lka3@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 23:01:49 -0000, "DVH" <dvh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
delay due to overload and thinks time!
"abelard" <abelard3@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
Here's US GDP versus total NYSE capitalisation:
http://cjoint.com/data/dkxNQ3JClq.htm
Source is www.bea.gov
right...now where will the line now be relative to us gdp....
i know what it signals to me :-)
Here's the S&P 500 adjusted for inflation, from 1997 so it looks even
worse
than the chart I started this thread with:
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/stocks.png
much more informative in my book....
Now I see other people are interested in this. Here's the inflation adjusted
chart from 1900 onwards:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/124103-s-p-500-inflation-adjusted-chart-looks-a-little-different
The commentary discounts the twin peaks of 1997-2008
"Like walking down your hometown streets, things look similar but different.
For example, the chart doesn't show the massive double top that is now
recognized by everyone. Also, from 1900 to 1950, the market treads water
after inflation. Then a roaring bull market followed, to then be deflated by
an equally intense bear market.
Most interesting is that the bear market low is July 1982 - not 1975 as we
usually see on non-inflation adjusted charts. This is where the bull market
that followed next was launched."
glory knows how you are finding these seriously useful links :-)
i'm unsure where you're headed....but i'm sure interested....i've
so far just tried to inject some data....
input!
my own driving interest in this stuff is money as a communication
device...and only very secondarily as a form of self-protection!
but...and referring to other points in this thread....
afaiac more free time means a higher standard of living....
look at the huge gains in time spent in 'education'....
I can go with that.
What about Maria's point about boredom? People don't seem to be equipped to
deal with it - are you thinking the TV and music and so on is adequate for
them?
1)i think you can educate people in a manner that doesn't end in
'boredom'
2a)i can't see inside people's heads to be sure why they are bored
b)i'm unsure less able people have a similar boredom threshold
to those drive by curiosity...eg imv pinball machines and
football seem to engage some people.
3)think of boredom as a malfunction...eg...i try...'why worry about
being bored'...'is the boredom just your brain/unconscious
getting on with its job/housework?'
ps, i'm wondering about finding time to get medieval on the whiners
in the mud bath of 'isn't educating awful...it wasn't like that
in my day'
I see you couldn't resist. I've no idea what a 16-year-old should know or
understand, but your comments look OK. I found some of the questions
mentally engaging, which is a good sign.
sadly there were no takers :-)
my computer is still serviceable....but i'm considering getting a much
more powerful one for ?300, but i'm hoping they may drop to ?200
before i run out of patience....
i've a substantial vehicle which is giving me 53-54 mpg(european)
and look like it will last for ever....it virtually never breaks
down even in small ways....
i live in my own version of paradise...
none of this was nearly so accessible a few decades back and the
availability/accessibility is leaping ahead by the decade and even
by the year or two....
OK.
so...everything is in *fact* cheaper....
There's a post accompanying that chart. Essentially, it makes clear that
US
productivity growth from 1997 to 2007 was a chimera. If that's the correct
word. There was no real productivity gain.
Real wages stagnated for a decade.
That's OK so far. However, the post is based on a presentation by Mandel.
Mandel claims that all the extra cash went to healthcare costs, which
could
be true.
no real problem with that so far....but if i can get my computer for
?200 or a reliable vehicle which will practically run on fresh
air?
But he also claims that the source of the problem was a lack of
innovation.
That all the brilliant IT stuff didn't result in corporate profits. And if
the US had innovated more, things would have worked out OK.
innovation is going at a breakneck rate....i find it difficult to keep
up even in my own area....
i've just been grinding my way through this...9780393058635
if you want to see innovation look there...
Looks very interesting. Amazing what these Viennese were thinking about as
the empire fell. Luckily we got quite a few of them, although the scientists
tended to go to the states.
some of them were quite impressive...
some look like intellectual wankers to me!
i'm having to hone up my cell chemistry to deal with a problem...
i liked the technical side of the text...
i'm trying to keep up with the economic of energy conservation
in houses....there more coming in every day....
and on and on and on
I don't see it. I see massive innovations in IT, but I feel they've had
the
effect of increasing productivity of individuals without increasing labour
needs. I posted last year about how translators wages have not increased
by
one jot in 10 years, despite marvellous software and increasing
professionalisation.
ah yes...indeed...
of course ever more people can get educated in languages...so
more competition...and so many hoping to make to make some
pin money out of their hobby/interest!
It could be that. I'm not sure. Trade has expanded massively too...
translators are probably more professional than they once were.
It could be that they're not providing that much value. Everyone speaks
English, and if you can translate from Tagalog to Russian you won't find a
big market for your services anyway.
they also have the machine assists now
Then look at Google, which has a market cap of about 150 billion dollars
and
10,000 employees, and is help up as a great US innovator.
But old-fashioned glass and building materials maker Saint Gobain, using
techniques invented in the nineteenth century, has a market cap of 15
billion euros and 100,000 employees.
and of course there is also an explosion of innovative glass products
I can't say that answers any questions though ;-)
much of the problem comes with dopey measures of gdp....
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/quality_of_life.htm
i'd like to hear your responses to the above....as i'm not really sure
where you are driving yet...
My responses aren't terribly exciting. I'm not sure where I'm driving
either!
that just makes it more interesting to me!
I'd now like to know whether we're in an information economy or not. If the
information economy is a "true" economy involving cash, then nothing's
really changed.
At the moment it's not, as the downloaders and open source software coders
show every day.
But information certainly has a value, so I wonder why it's not being
exchanged for cash. Is it just that the law hasn't caught up yet, and we're
in the same position as the countries described by de Soto - i.e. lacking
property rights?
Or has something fundamental changed?
we're getting steadily more wealthy?
darwin practically gave his work away......and now it is a huge and
rapidly expanding industry/pursuit....
regards
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
- References:
- Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: DVH
- Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: DVH
- Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: DVH
- Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: DVH
- Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: abelard
- Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: DVH
- Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: abelard
- Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- From: DVH
- Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- Prev by Date: Re: Teacher training in six months is 'just a gimmick'
- Next by Date: Re: I always wondered where Abelard took his name from...
- Previous by thread: Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- Next by thread: Re: Why does the stock exchange chart look like this?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
