I genuinely believe that if I received 50 million dollars today, I could die a billionaire. I probably wouldn’t because I am a filthy commie and would use the money for other purposes, but I don’t think it’s that hard. My roommate is like a top 1% trader so I’d probably start there.
Hmm...I guess that depends on how young you are.
I can guarantee that if I had EVER received a $50 million dollar inheritance that I would NOT have become a billionaire (unless it was put into a trust that I couldn't access until age 50 or something like that), because I would have no interest in becoming a billionaire.
I would invest a lot of that money, yes, but we're only on the planet so long, and you can't take it with you, so I would make sure my children were set for life and encourage them to do the same for their children, and then beyond that, I would spend the money to entertain myself...lots of travel, a house with a bowling alley in it (which I will have at some point), etc.
I see where you would spend money entertaining yourself and putting a bowling alley in your house but don't see anywhere you mentioning the donations you would make with your money or any altruistic endeavors. And when you say lots of travel, would that include travel OUTSIDE of Ohio?
Only a fool thinks that identifying a sector that, in the past, provided a certain return is somehow relevant to identifying a sector that, in the future, will provide a certain return.
nah that's not true. Almost all investors use past returns to model future returns. How else do you put together a portfolio? Returns are not random.
I think what you mean to say is that past returns are not guarantees of future returns, which is undoubtedly true. But past returns are certainly relevant to future returns. Are bonds going to return 75% in the future? Will stocks return -89%? Of course not. We look at past patterns to guess at the future.
No, I said exactly what I meant.
Are you predicting that the tech sector will return 13% (average annually) over the next 15 years?
If so, you are a fool. If not, your earlier post was not relevant.
Only a fool thinks that identifying a sector that, in the past, provided a certain return is somehow relevant to identifying a sector that, in the future, will provide a certain return.
nah that's not true. Almost all investors use past returns to model future returns. How else do you put together a portfolio? Returns are not random.
I think what you mean to say is that past returns are not guarantees of future returns, which is undoubtedly true. But past returns are certainly relevant to future returns. Are bonds going to return 75% in the future? Will stocks return -89%? Of course not. We look at past patterns to guess at the future.
By limiting to tech stocks and only the last 15-year window (and excluding the last 10 months?) you're kind of cherry-picking.
I can guarantee that if I had EVER received a $50 million dollar inheritance that I would NOT have become a billionaire (unless it was put into a trust that I couldn't access until age 50 or something like that), because I would have no interest in becoming a billionaire.
I would invest a lot of that money, yes, but we're only on the planet so long, and you can't take it with you, so I would make sure my children were set for life and encourage them to do the same for their children, and then beyond that, I would spend the money to entertain myself...lots of travel, a house with a bowling alley in it (which I will have at some point), etc.
Then you are either a fool or a sadist.
People who are "set for life", by means other than their own efforts, generally turn out to miserable, disgusting human beings. Exhibit A: Donald Trump
US tech stocks have risen 13% per year for 15 years.
if you invest 50 million for 23 years at 13% you get to a billion.
excluding tax issues.
The stock market hasn't broken 10% in any decade in the last century.
The fact that you think you can just slap down your money and get a guaranteed 13% for 23 years proves that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
a) this is a false claim. Several decades of the 20c have had 10% per year returns.
James: The club generated annual revenue of less than $25 million and should have been valued at about $75 million. However, mar-a-lago was valued as high as $739 million.
Trumpists... Sounds like a simply rounding error. FAKE NEWS!
nah that's not true. Almost all investors use past returns to model future returns. How else do you put together a portfolio? Returns are not random.
I think what you mean to say is that past returns are not guarantees of future returns, which is undoubtedly true. But past returns are certainly relevant to future returns. Are bonds going to return 75% in the future? Will stocks return -89%? Of course not. We look at past patterns to guess at the future.
By limiting to tech stocks and only the last 15-year window (and excluding the last 10 months?) you're kind of cherry-picking.
it includes the last 10 months yes.
sure, cherry picking. but I could have used the last 10 years, which came in much stronger at 17% including this downturn. 15 years is the longest number in morningstar for VGT, a classic tech fund, so I used it.
My point was simply to emphasize the massive compounding ability of the stock market.
People who are "set for life", by means other than their own efforts, generally turn out to miserable, disgusting human beings. Exhibit A: Donald Trump
Exhibit B: Hunter Biden
Beat you to it.
Let’s face it. If I was given 50 million dollars, I’d probably end up dead at the base of some canyon in South America after freaking during the ayahuasca trip.
I think maybe I’d build a bunch of low income rent controlled housing? Probably donate to homeless shelters and food banks and stuff. Maybe send a check to Africa and other underdeveloped nations? Assuming I survive the debauchery.
The stock market hasn't broken 10% in any decade in the last century.
The fact that you think you can just slap down your money and get a guaranteed 13% for 23 years proves that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
a) this is a false claim. Several decades of the 20c have had 10% per year returns.
b) of course no return is guaranteed
From 1950-2009, the market had average annual returns of greater than 10% for the decades of the 50s, the 80s, and the 90s and the average annual return for 1950-2009 was 11%. These are for the S & P. Even adjusted for inflation, the decades of the 50s, the 80s and the 90s had total real returns for those decades of greater than 10%.
The stock market hasn't broken 10% in any decade in the last century.
The fact that you think you can just slap down your money and get a guaranteed 13% for 23 years proves that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
a) this is a false claim. Several decades of the 20c have had 10% per year returns.
b) of course no return is guaranteed
You seem to think 13% for 23 years is a done deal.
There is no period in US history where the stock market averaged 13% for over 2 decades.
The stock market has averaged less than 3% from 2000 to today.
nah that's not true. Almost all investors use past returns to model future returns. How else do you put together a portfolio? Returns are not random.
I think what you mean to say is that past returns are not guarantees of future returns, which is undoubtedly true. But past returns are certainly relevant to future returns. Are bonds going to return 75% in the future? Will stocks return -89%? Of course not. We look at past patterns to guess at the future.
No, I said exactly what I meant.
Are you predicting that the tech sector will return 13% (average annually) over the next 15 years?
If so, you are a fool. If not, your earlier post was not relevant.
As I correctly pointed out in my post.
I'm sure we'd agree in person on this sort of thing.
a) this is a false claim. Several decades of the 20c have had 10% per year returns.
b) of course no return is guaranteed
You seem to think 13% for 23 years is a done deal.
There is no period in US history where the stock market averaged 13% for over 2 decades.
The stock market has averaged less than 3% from 2000 to today.
hard for me to get exact returns.
From May 2021 to the present the US stock market has returned 7.8% per year, including dividends. That includes some of the dot.com crash, 9-11, the great financial crisis, COVID, the Euro debt crisis and whatever we are going through now.
I don't have an easy way to check your 3% figure but I suspect it does not include dividends.
VTI Performance - Review the performance history of the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF to see it's current status, yearly returns, and dividend history.
You seem to think 13% for 23 years is a done deal.
There is no period in US history where the stock market averaged 13% for over 2 decades.
The stock market has averaged less than 3% from 2000 to today.
hard for me to get exact returns.
From May 2021 to the present the US stock market has returned 7.8% per year, including dividends. That includes some of the dot.com crash, 9-11, the great financial crisis, COVID, the Euro debt crisis and whatever we are going through now.
I don't have an easy way to check your 3% figure but I suspect it does not include dividends.
From May 2021 to the present the US stock market has returned 7.8% per year, including dividends. That includes some of the dot.com crash, 9-11, the great financial crisis, COVID, the Euro debt crisis and whatever we are going through now.
I don't have an easy way to check your 3% figure but I suspect it does not include dividends.
