[Gravey]

I suppose if you’re operating on the assumption that tech stocks are vastly overinflated then this makes sense. Otherwise I would expect the people that are regularly buying these securities would be happy that they’re increasing in value, no?

[keernan]

No. The 'goal' of investing (e.g. regularly buying) means attempting to own as many shares as possible. That is achieved by buying low and selling high. Buyers benefit from lower prices, not higher.

So many investors get this concept wrong. I suppose they get excited because what they bought went up in value and they have a sense of being enriched. But, that is backwards. That is what they want 20-40 years from now when it will almost certainly be the case that prices are not just higher, but much higher, than today. But, when they are buying shares, the goal is to pay the lowest price possible. If I am 20 years old, I am screaming: crash and burn baby! Crash and burn! Gimme those shares at 50% off yesterday's price.

[thunky]

> I am screaming: crash and burn baby! Crash and burn! Gimme those shares at 50% off yesterday's price.

Sure, but once you reach the point where you have a lot of money in the market you probably won't enjoy watching 50% of it disappear, even if it means your next auto investment is for a nice bargain price.

Also, when the stock market crashes usually bad things accompany it. Like a depressed economy and job losses.

[hdgvhicv]

The ponzu scheme of SPY is great until it stops. 10% of America’s payroll gets lumped into it each month and generational wisdom is you get a 10% ROI despite the economy growing 2%.

At some point that will collapse, and it won’t be pretty.

[thunky]

> The ponzu scheme of SPY is great until it stops

TINA (there is no alternative).

Inflation will eat your cash.

Bonds hardly generate (real) returns unless you want to take big risks with duration.

Real estate is over inflated.

Gold is speculative.

Crypto is...not real.

What's left?