Barry Ritholtz: Markets, Lies And Garbage

Comments

• MaxBialystock

  November 2014

  ...I didn't yet read uncle Barry's thing which you linked to, above. But I don't need to do so, in order to agree with those words you offer. An anecdotal little illustration: A bunch of us were sitting in a Speech class, back in the 1980s. It was discovered by the prof. that one of us was on the debate team. He asked for a little sample from that guy. He took a moment to collect his thoughts, then started into what can only be described as a diatribe, deliberately manufactured to keep up the chatter--- loudly--- so as not to let anyone else get a word in. He went on for a couple of minutes, then drew the obligatory applause.
  
  I asked myself: "THIS is what passes for "debate" these days? That's not a show of debating skill, it's a demonstration of how to crowd-out the other guy, so only YOU yourself can be heard." It wasn't an exercise in debate, it was a demonstration of insufferable childishness--- sanctioned and taught as the thing to do! The casualty, of course, is anything resembling the truth.
• davidrmoran

  November 2014

  I agree totally about all progressivism-rebuttal debate, shouting down with hatred, but the below does not seem anything like what BR claims, dishonest seriously>? --- just maladroitly put and sequenced yet easy to fix by a competent editor:
  
  Stock jockeys can be just as intellectually dishonest as the gold bugs. Carlson again:
  
  Over the last 3 years the S&P 500 is up over 21% per year, while the 5 year returns are almost 16% annually. It’s been on fire. But if you go back 15 years to include both the tech bubble and the Great Recession, the S&P is only up around 4.3% a year. Extend your time horizon to 1980 and the performance is almost 12% per year. From 1928 to 1979, annual returns were much smaller, at around 8% per year. [Starting after the Great Depression] improves annual performance to 10.7% a year from 1933-1979.
  
  just rewrite it to point out the modulations. However good BR he is, he is fundamentally a lazy writer and thinker, 'don't you dare make me work to get to usable conclusions', like most everyone in finance.
  
  The last 3 years, the S&P 500 has been on fire, up over 20% per year, and the 5-year returns are >15% annually. But if you go back 15 years and include both the tech bubble and the Great Recession, it's a bit over 4% a year, only. Now, from 1980, it's almost 12% per year, and starting the year before, 1979, back to 1928, annual returns were around 8%; and moreover if you start *after* the Great Depression, the period 1933-1979, it improves to a bit under 11% annually. So the point is that generally SP500 does a good job and gives good returns regardless, but hits like the tech bubble and the 08-09 crisis make a significant different that takes a while to come out of. yada yada
  
  original is much less helpful, if not foolish
• Old_Joe

  November 2014

  The last 3 years the S&P 500 has been on fire, up over 20% per year; and the 5-year returns are >15% annually. But if you go back 15 years and include both the tech bubble and the Great Recession, it's a only a bit over 4% a year. To illustrate the difference the selected period will make to the outcome, starting from 1980 it's almost 12% per year, but from 1928 to 1979 it's around 8%, while from 1933 ("after" the Great Depression) to 1979 it improves to almost 11% annually.
  
  I have no doubt that someone else can improve on that, too.
• davidrmoran

  November 2014

  Nice!