SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 11 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Saturday January 27 2018, @12:43PM
from the I-got-mine!-And-Yours.-And-Yours.-Annnnnd-yours,-too. dept.
from the I-got-mine!-And-Yours.-And-Yours.-Annnnnd-yours,-too. dept.
The 1% grabbed 82% of all wealth created in 2017
More than $8 of every $10 of wealth created last year went to the richest 1%.
That's according to a new report from Oxfam International, which estimates that the bottom 50% of the world's population saw no increase in wealth.
Oxfam says the trend shows that the global economy is skewed in favor of the rich, rewarding wealth instead of work.
"The billionaire boom is not a sign of a thriving economy but a symptom of a failing economic system," said Winnie Byanyima, executive director of Oxfam International.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Only 1% of World's Population Grabbed 82% of all 2017 Wealth
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 261 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
BELA LUGOSI is my co-pilot ...
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday January 28 2018, @06:36AM (10 children)
You just countered your own claim. 2.1 is greater than 2.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 28 2018, @12:00PM (9 children)
My point, such as it is, is that US stocks have yielded significantly lower returns since 2000, than they have before that time. Even your quoted index has only improved by less than a factor of three since its peak in early 2000. But if we went a similar amount of time back to say, 1983, it's a jump of more than an order of magnitude from then to 2000.
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Sunday January 28 2018, @01:50PM
WFIVX is a Wilshire 5000 index fund. From 10 years ago it has increased 2.5 fold.
Reference: http://quotes.morningstar.com/chart/fund/chart?t=WFIVX®ion=usa&culture=en_US [morningstar.com]
I personally keep most of money in a total stock market index fund, VTSAX, which increased 2.7 fold over the past 10 years.
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Sunday January 28 2018, @02:04PM
Using DIA (Dow Jones Index ETF), with dividends re-invested...
Since 2000, DIA has increased 3.2 fold.
Since 1985, DIA has increased 4.1 fold. (Sorry, the backtest portfolio visualizer tool doesn't go back to 1983.)
Reference 1: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&timePeriod=4&startYear=2000&firstMonth=1&endYear=2017&lastMonth=12&endDate=01%2F27%2F2018&initialAmount=10000&annualOperation=0&annualAdjustment=0&inflationAdjusted=true&annualPercentage=0.0&frequency=4&rebalanceType=1&showYield=false&reinvestDividends=true&symbol1=DIA&allocation1_1=100 [portfoliovisualizer.com]
Reference 2: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&timePeriod=4&startYear=1985&firstMonth=1&endYear=2017&lastMonth=12&endDate=01%2F27%2F2018&initialAmount=10000&annualOperation=0&annualAdjustment=0&inflationAdjusted=true&annualPercentage=0.0&frequency=4&rebalanceType=1&showYield=false&reinvestDividends=true&symbol1=DIA&allocation1_1=100 [portfoliovisualizer.com]
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Sunday January 28 2018, @02:12PM (4 children)
A couple notes:
The price quoted on the exchanges is the current price available for trading.
Comparing it to the price from the past is almost never accurate because most funds give out dividends on a regular basis, either monthly or quarterly.
If you have the dividends re-invested (which every single investment house would offer/recommend), the increased value of these funds goes up dramatically. This is the "miracle" of compounding.
This is also why you show a quote price for Wilshire 5000 which looks almost flat but the value has gone up dramatically. They give out all the value in dividends.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 28 2018, @07:13PM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Monday January 29 2018, @12:27AM
Thanks for at least keeping an open mind. My hope is to educate some people on using index funds to invest.
The fact of the matter is, while any particular year can be fantastically good or horrible, over the long term the market gets over 6% return per year.
The key to making that yourself is to use low cost index funds and to keep your money in the funds and not take it out when the going gets rough, because the market WILL go bad for years at a time. But time in the market is more important than money in the market.
Read a good forum, such as https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/index.php [bogleheads.org] or read a short primer such as If You can by Bernstein: https://www.etf.com/docs/IfYouCan.pdf [etf.com]
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Monday January 29 2018, @12:36AM (1 child)
The other thing to remember:
If you are using a fund manager, remember that (by definition) the average fund manager does as well as the total market, prior to taking out his fees (also known as the Expense Ratio).
Which means that the average fund manager does worse than the market when you consider his fees.
You may think that you have an above average fund manager. It may be true ... but... would you bet that he will be above average for the life of you investing with him? And if he retires, would you bet that the person replacing him would be above average as well? Better to use an index fund with a very low Expense Ratio.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 29 2018, @02:20AM
First time I invested in a fund, I found that out. They had a great year and then several subpar ones right after I joined. I've since learned that even for relatively competent funds a great predictor for a bad year is having an extremely high year or two before due both to investments tending to rise in bursts and the "me too!" effect from new people piling on the train.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday January 28 2018, @07:06PM (1 child)
I haven't quoted any index, that was you! I just noted that you claimed:
And then for some reason followed up with documentation that is HAS.
Please quit muddying up discussions with falsehoods. Just admit you were talking out your ass and move on.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 28 2018, @07:11PM
Indeed. I see now how I was in error. Indices don't include reinvestment of dividends. As I should have realized, the Dow components (and apparently most of the stocks that make up the Wilshire 5000) have significant dividends.