http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... ut-deepens
This headline article in bloomberg reminds me of when my dad, who died two years ago and kept ALL his money in cash, would ask me when there was some kind of dramatic market downturn event like this - how much money did I lose? I would always reassure him that I had lost nothing. I still owned all the stock and had, in fact, lost none of it.
Now if all those rich people did, indeed, sell their stocks and lock in their losses, the headline would be accurate. I tend to doubt that is the case so what, really, is the point of an article like this?
Losing 182 billion dollars
Moderator: Global Moderator
Losing 182 billion dollars
Last edited by Fred on Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- dualstow
- Executive Member
- Posts: 15261
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
- Location: searching for the lost Xanadu
- Contact:
Re: Losing 182 billion dollars
Yeah, it's nuts. Even the first sentence, as if a stranger's losses are also your own losses just because you're at the same level of wealth. Just another sensationalized headline I guess.
.
-
- Executive Member
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2015 7:28 am
Re: Losing 182 billion dollars
The whole thing of "if i don't sell i don't lose anything" is obviously total garbage, why do you invest? To protect and/or grow capital, good luck holding paper assets that have near zero value then if markets tank and simply does not recover, but hey "you didn't sell so you did not lose anything", right?Fred wrote: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... ut-deepens
This headline article in bloomberg reminds me of when my dad, who died two years ago and kept ALL his money in cash, would ask me when there was some kind of dramatic market downturn event like this - how much money did I lose? I would always reassure him that I had lost nothing. I still owned all the stock and had, in fact, lost none of it.
Now if all those rich people did, indeed, sell their stocks and lock in their losses, the headline would be accurate. I tend to doubt that is the case so what, really, is the point of an article like this?
-
- Executive Member
- Posts: 5994
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Re: Losing 182 billion dollars
People in that situation can take comfort in that theory, from their cozy cardboard boxes.dutchtraffic wrote:The whole thing of "if i don't sell i don't lose anything" is obviously total garbage, why do you invest? To protect and/or grow capital, good luck holding paper assets that have near zero value then if markets tank and simply does not recover, but hey "you didn't sell so you did not lose anything", right?Fred wrote: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... ut-deepens
This headline article in bloomberg reminds me of when my dad, who died two years ago and kept ALL his money in cash, would ask me when there was some kind of dramatic market downturn event like this - how much money did I lose? I would always reassure him that I had lost nothing. I still owned all the stock and had, in fact, lost none of it.
Now if all those rich people did, indeed, sell their stocks and lock in their losses, the headline would be accurate. I tend to doubt that is the case so what, really, is the point of an article like this?

Re: Losing 182 billion dollars
Well, I think the IRS agrees with this assertion. Are you going to try to claim a loss if the market doesn't recover this year?dutchtraffic wrote: The whole thing of "if i don't sell i don't lose anything" is obviously total garbage, why do you invest? To protect and/or grow capital, good luck holding paper assets that have near zero value then if markets tank and simply does not recover, but hey "you didn't sell so you did not lose anything", right?