chkdsk

Yahoo finance was the original finance site where your parents used to look up stock quotes for Nokia and Pets.com during the original tech bubble.

So you believe taxi drivers never need to use taxis?

Only when the outrage gets loud enough to affect their chances for reelection (which happens with a lot of issues, just not this one).

Unfortunately, Hackernews seems to be the only place where security is taken seriously. Probably because we understand the severe collective risks involved to everything from banking to healthcare whereas most people as individuals don't care if say, their credit card number is stolen, since they aren't liable for fraud. It's hard to see the bigger picture if you aren't technical.

This is the main issue that both the right wing gold bugs and left wing crypto anarchists don't seem to understand: Steady modest inflation is a good thing.

If there was no inflation everyone would be incentivized to just hold cash under their mattress and not invest into the economy. When you put your money in a CD or money market account hoping to keep up with (or beat) inflation that money then goes to pay payroll for corporations via the commercial paper market. When you put your money into a savings account hoping to generate interest to keep up with inflation your money gets lent to local small businesses and other people to buy mortgages. Inflation creates inertia in the economy.

We don't have an inflation problem. What we have is a wage growth problem. Crypto nor gold bars will ever do anything to solve that. The issue has nothing to do with currency.

Certainly, the networking and prestige of being involved in that deal has value. But personally I'd still be disappointed having to stay up preparing a deck until 4am that ultimately led nowhere.

But, again, I'm still a little confused why we're bending over backwards to try to relate this back to crypto somehow? Are there not enough crypto discussions on HN already?

There literally are no similarities between what you described and the original topic.

There was no exponential growth or betting or downsides here. The Jr. bankers billed a metric-ton of hours and made their firms truckloads in fees. They're probably just disappointed all those late nights were essentially for nothing.

Saudi Aramco is still a 1.5 trillion dollar company. Just not a publicly listed one. A public listing wouldn't change the value of the company. This is not some hot high-growth tech IPO that retail investors would clamor over.

Those are both problems that have nothing to do with currency or the economic concept of 'currency devaluation.'

Inflation has barely been present in the US for the last 10 years compared to historical levels.

The reason your healthcare bill and your rent have increased much faster than inflation (I'm guessing you're in the bay area) is because of US federal government failings in the case of healthcare; and in terms of rent the geographic limitations, rapid growth, and local government failings of the area you've chosen to live in.

Odd you would think that, considering the US dollar is extremely strong right now relative to other global currencies and has been for the last 5 years (save for last year).

I'd love to hear why you think this, and what information sources you're hearing this from? I've seen this line used equally by right wing political groups as well as left wing crypto anarchists who both seem to lack a basic understanding of how finance works.

You absolutely can backtest VTI. We have reliable historical market data of the total US stock market (what VTI is) going back to the late-1800s.

Also, please tell me 1 of those better options?

The link you posted seems to take the opposite view from what you expressed. Batnick is very pro index funds.

As of October last year Index Fund investors still represented less than 18% of the global stock market:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-funds-blackrock-passive/l...

I'd hardly call that "eating the world alive." The only thing its eating so far is the absurd wealth management fees old school financial advisors used to make.

Also there's about 200 different indexes all slicing up the marketplace in various ways. Not every investor is buying the large cap, cap-weighted index (although most are).

Ultimately, this idea of passive "distorting" the markets just isn't true (also I'm not sure what you mean by "earnings profile"...earnings are set by consumer demand for a company's product, not investor demand for company stock). Active traders set prices, indexes simply follow the prices set by active traders. We are no where near the point where distortions would happen, and if we ever got to that point, there would be massive incentive to profit off of a easily predictable mispricing.

If you ever find yourself questioning the validity of all the studies indicating how terrible retail investors are at investing...read r/wallstreetbets and realize you and your index funds are still in the minority.

Not sure why you're being downvoted. None of these assertions are wrong.

I have many family members who still have big company pensions from back in the day and also own target date funds in their 401ks so combined with social security income they end up being massively over-allocated to bonds (a pension & SS can be treated as bonds).

The reason value works isn't just behavioral mispricing. Numerous academic studies have shown there is an inherent risk component driving the persistently larger returns found in "value" stocks.

Behavioral mispricing can be arbitraged. Risk cannot be arbitraged away.

Value still works and will always work due to this added risk component.