I mean, yes the economy is collapsing. Even after cuttting a lot of non-essentials and optimizing for cheaper stores, my weekly grocery bill is still $20 more than it was 2 years ago, when I was...
I mean, yes the economy is collapsing. Even after cuttting a lot of non-essentials and optimizing for cheaper stores, my weekly grocery bill is still $20 more than it was 2 years ago, when I was basically buying whatever we wanted from whichever store we felt like going to.
I've cut down my spendifng on misc stuff, focusing almost exclusively on houshold essentials, groceries, and occasional takeout.
That's not what the article says. Freight is down from record highs that caused widespread supply problems. That was inflationary. But freight being lower than record highs is hardly a collapse....
That's not what the article says. Freight is down from record highs that caused widespread supply problems. That was inflationary. But freight being lower than record highs is hardly a collapse.
It's also not about the economy as a whole, it's about physical goods only. Much of the economy is services.
We do need to question the macroeconomic statistics (they aren't the whole story) but they look pretty good. The unemployment rate is back where it was just before the pandemic, which was then the lowest in 50 years. GNP is up. This isn't what "collapsing" looks like.
I'd also say in general there's a strong tendency for people to never say the economy is doing well. I honestly don't think I've ever heard someone talk about how the economy (or specifically the...
I'd also say in general there's a strong tendency for people to never say the economy is doing well. I honestly don't think I've ever heard someone talk about how the economy (or specifically the job market) is doing well apart in real life, casual conversation, except from maybe business owners, even when it was certainly doing well, at least on a relative scale.
When the economy is doing well, it begs the question, "why aren't you doing well (or better), then?". On the other hand, the worse the economy is, the better your own achievements or lack thereof are. For the individual, the worse things are, the more comforting their own personal circumstances, in a way.
I distinctly remember in like 2019 when I was volunteering at low income schools how everyone was talking about how the job market was bad. I always nodded and agreed, but of course the job market in 2019 was red hot, about as hot as it has or ever will be in the US. In some respects it doesn't really matter as long it's mentally comforting to the individual, although if you're banking on a "better" job market to come to your aid when you think it's at a low point, and it's, well, not, then you may make poor decisions based off of that belief.
I also think this is a major reason why news companies love to talk about the recession angle: people love to hear it.
Yes, it’s felt like a manipulation for a long time. I can see the problems that are present and the stock market isn’t on a crazy bull run anymore, but that doesn’t mean things are about to...
Yes, it’s felt like a manipulation for a long time. I can see the problems that are present and the stock market isn’t on a crazy bull run anymore, but that doesn’t mean things are about to collapse. I suspect some people out there want the masses to make poor financial decisions as they plan for a recession.
The wealthy got used to capital being artificially cheap for over a decade thanks to incredibly low interest rates brought about by the last recession. Cheap capital enables everything from easy...
The wealthy got used to capital being artificially cheap for over a decade thanks to incredibly low interest rates brought about by the last recession.
Cheap capital enables everything from easy stock buybacks to risky business ventures. They want a recession to bring unemployment back up, reduce labor costs, and bring interest rates back down.
Not sure who you mean by the wealthy but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to say that typical businesses like recessions. In a recession, people spend less, resulting in lower sales, less...
Not sure who you mean by the wealthy but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to say that typical businesses like recessions. In a recession, people spend less, resulting in lower sales, less revenue and lower profits or even losses. Sure, maybe they can lower some costs with unpleasant things like closures and layoffs, but this is bad overall. This is typically summed up by saying "business is bad" and it would be weird to think that business people want business to be bad.
Same deal for shareholders. Lower earnings isn't what they want.
(There are some businesses that do well in a recession, because people keep old cars going longer for example. But that's not most of them.)
Yes, there is of course conflict between workers and businesses over how profits get divided up, but the relationship is not entirely adversarial. Business being good means there is more to divide up, and a good union contract only goes so far if the business is failing.
I didn't say businesses like recessions, I said they like low interest rates and cheap labor. A normal recession can last ~6 months but trigger changes that result in years of artificially low...
I didn't say businesses like recessions, I said they like low interest rates and cheap labor. A normal recession can last ~6 months but trigger changes that result in years of artificially low interest rates. There are lots of startups and even major businesses out there who were only viable because of inexpensive capital (think of all those tech companies that spent nearly a decade lighting money on fire for the sake of growing their userbases)
A recession leading into a major election can also help them swing voters towards their preferred candidate.
There are lots of reasons for the 1% to push this recession narrative even if it means they lose some money in the short term.
I agree that businesses like low interest rates and cheap labor, but those goals often don't go together. Lower interest rates tend to result in a stronger economy and lower unemployment, which...
I agree that businesses like low interest rates and cheap labor, but those goals often don't go together. Lower interest rates tend to result in a stronger economy and lower unemployment, which are good for workers. Sometimes startups lighting money on fire is good for workers too, while it lasts, because they create relatively good jobs and increase competition for workers.
I don't agree that Republicans are the preferred party of business. They used to be, but these days it's more divided. (Do you really think Google or Disney executives want Trump or DeSantis to win?) Trumpists are often anti-business, and they control the Republican party these days.
I think what those links show is that inequality is usually increasing, regardless of how the economy is doing. Investors do well most of the time, other than in the recession itself. This is why...
I think what those links show is that inequality is usually increasing, regardless of how the economy is doing. Investors do well most of the time, other than in the recession itself. This is why investing in stocks is recommended, after all. They go up more on average. Meanwhile, wage increases are happening more rarely.
Pretty much every year could be considered either during a recession or after one, depending on how far back you look. It doesn’t mean people believe that recessions cause the following good years, or that investors are happy that their investments went down before they went up again.
Sometimes investors can take advantage of low prices to buy assets on sale, though. I think Warren Buffett is (was) pretty good at this? There is a “heads I win, tails you lose” aspect to this but I still don’t think it shows that wealthy people like recessions.
Historically, I think the most common inequality reset is a war?
Is the economy collapsing? It's proven exceptionally resilient given the circumstances. (War in Ukraine disrupting energy and food supply chains, lingering effects from the pandemic, and rising...
Is the economy collapsing? It's proven exceptionally resilient given the circumstances. (War in Ukraine disrupting energy and food supply chains, lingering effects from the pandemic, and rising tensions between the West and China)
I would expect more mass joblessness in a "collapsing economy". So far this feels nothing like 2008, and it looks like the Fed may actually deliver on their promise of a "soft landing" after ~2 years of inflation.
Economies rarely crash overnight. However my crystal ball is telling me a few things: Tech sector job disruption is only beginning. Amazon alone has cut what, 19% of their workforce since Novmber?...
Economies rarely crash overnight. However my crystal ball is telling me a few things:
Tech sector job disruption is only beginning. Amazon alone has cut what, 19% of their workforce since Novmber? And they were hardly the only tech giant cutting back massively. Collectively I think I counted 40,000 positions from Amazon, Microsoft, and Google alone.
The internet ad bubble is bursting. Companies are not seeing the revenue growth from perpetually increasing ad spend. Large swaths of the internet rely on this ad spend continuing to flow.
Wages are not rising proportionally. Even if inflation is 'getting better' on paper, that is not reflecting in everyday essentials.
This whole article seems to be a way of saying 'the retail sector has excess inventory, and they don't anticipate needing to replace it for some time.' That tells me that the companies that place orders are anticipating further continuation of low consumer spending.
The housing market is slowing down tremendously. Houses that were purchased in the frenzy of cheap debt are gonna stagnate or go underwater. With layoffs (and thus higher unemployment) in higher paying jobs (probably to stike fear in workers more than a true need), people are gonna start defaulting on loans that they could afford when wages were rising.
My 401k dropped 15% this year. The only reason it wasn't worse is that I converted all of the existing balance to bonds early, which is supposed to be a thing I do when I'm in my 50's, not my 30's. I left new contributions go where they were before, and the bonds continue to outperform markets. Mostly by holding steady rather than dropping. For institutional investors who (ostensibly) know what they're doing.
I think the economists in the thread are overly optimistic about what is coming. Much like the 2008 crisis, I don't know when things are gonna get real bad....but the scent is in the air.
In the end, the tech layoffs have way more visibility in the news than impact on the economy. It's an ultimately small amount of highly paid knowledge workers, many of which will soon be employed,...
In the end, the tech layoffs have way more visibility in the news than impact on the economy. It's an ultimately small amount of highly paid knowledge workers, many of which will soon be employed, even if at inferior wages. It's a rough situation for H1-B visa holders, but a recession that does not make.
The overall job market is very strong currently. Like
With layoffs (and thus higher unemployment)
That's not really a thing so far? Unemployment, regardless of which U- you're using, is very low. There's some signs it's cooling but that's a change in the second derivative. We're still quite far from having high unemployment nationally. Additionally, unlike in 2008, homeowners this time pretty much all have fixed rate interest rates (which were fixed when interest rates were dirt cheap!) and banks were infamously much more stringent on who was approved for mortgages after 2008.
In terms of the wage "keeping up", the magnitude of the issue from anecdata does not really appear in the data. From the BLS: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/realer.nr0.htm. In particular, we see that production and non-supervisory roles have a real wage hourly growth. Even at its worst metrics, the gap between nominal wages and real wages is not that high.
My 401k dropped 15% this year. The only reason it wasn't worse is that I converted all of the existing balance to bonds early, which is supposed to be a thing I do when I'm in my 50's, not my 30's. I left new contributions go where they were before, and the bonds continue to outperform markets. Mostly by holding steady rather than dropping. For institutional investors who (ostensibly) know what they're doing.
That seems... uh, a kinda really bad thing to do per personal financial guidelines? That's definitionally trying to time the market, and you really shouldn't unless you're a hedge fund (and even then, the famous Buffet bet showed ETFs beating hedge funds in many cases).
I agree, but with caveats: attempting to time the market is usually bad, but we have to buy and sell sometime (even if rarely) and it seems like looking for good prices isn’t in itself a bad...
I agree, but with caveats: attempting to time the market is usually bad, but we have to buy and sell sometime (even if rarely) and it seems like looking for good prices isn’t in itself a bad thing? If you can buy on sale your investment is going to do better, or less worse.
Also, one lesson from last year is not to buy fixed-income investments at near-zero interest rates. All assets go down when interest rates rise. Even if you hold fixed-income investments to maturity, that’s at least an opportunity cost, and opportunity costs are real if you have to sell. Better to stick with cash. Buying bonds now seems fine though, for part of your portfolio.
Seems like the key is to avoid missing the upswings, so staying out of the stock market as a long-term thing, for years, seems pretty bad to me. Stocks beat bonds over the long term.
2022 was a bad year for stocks and bonds, but that seems over? This year isn’t, so far. Looking at the S&P 500, the trend has been up for six months. If I were out of the market I’d be pretty concerned about missing another stock market boom like there was after 2008.
Here's the thing though. Housing prices were inflated. Debt was so cheap people were desperate to get out of rentals into housing, and it fueled a seller's market like never before in my life. It...
Additionally, unlike in 2008, homeowners this time pretty much all have fixed rate interest rates (which were fixed when interest rates were dirt cheap!) and banks were infamously much more stringent on who was approved for mortgages after 2008.
Here's the thing though. Housing prices were inflated. Debt was so cheap people were desperate to get out of rentals into housing, and it fueled a seller's market like never before in my life. It was priced approximately $80k more than it was worth. My home was on the market for < 8 hours, and we got three offers. We accepted a cash offer, over asking price, flexible move-out date (since we needed to find a new house), and they waived all inspections. Whilst this particular buyer didn't need a mortgage (retirees), this shows what the market was like.
So you've got a red hot housing market, with buyers making questionable choices to get their foot in the door (waiving inspection is a bad idea). As the market cools back to sanity, it becomes a buyers market again. They can start demanding sellers fix things that were ignored before. Even if housing prices don't drop, if they stagnate long enough, a lot of money is gonna get lost in having to fix up a house that sold easily in a sellers market but not a buyer's one.
It might not be a 2008-era mortgage meltdown, but there's going to be a reckoning, especially if employment doesn't hold. I know my employer was having trouble filling positions during the Great Quitting, and now those positions are being removed rather than seeking new people to fill them.
That said, there's also a large amount of inflation I haven't seen talked about: COVID triggering mass retirement from people who were close enough, and decided to retire a bit before they intended (especially as there were some incentives trying to cut headcount gracefully during lock downs). You now have masses of backlogged cash in 401k's flowing into the economy.
That seems... uh, a kinda really bad thing to do per personal financial guidelines? That's definitionally trying to time the market, and you really shouldn't unless you're a hedge fund (and even then, the famous Buffet bet showed ETFs beating hedge funds in many cases).
The majority of the balance was in market indexes. Some was also in the institution's lifecycle plan which does that sort of high-risk -> low risk thing as you approach retirement. The majority of the balance is now in bond indexes, which stopped the hemorrhaging early and is now still outperforming market indexes.
I keep my new contributions coming in to the old buckets, to keep easy visibility on how the market shifts (evaluated roughly every 3-4 months). If things start looking better, I'll start shifting some back to get that faster growth again.
The key thing about 2008 is that people were actually underwater on their mortgages and relying on an increasing market for real estate to flip the house onto. That's not the case with the current...
The key thing about 2008 is that people were actually underwater on their mortgages and relying on an increasing market for real estate to flip the house onto. That's not the case with the current market. People are buying expensive houses, but they're just... living in them. These people also have good credit. Unemployment is not particularly high or increasing for that matter, so there's no reason why the people with mortgages will start defaulting more.
I keep my new contributions coming in to the old buckets, to keep easy visibility on how the market shifts (evaluated roughly every 3-4 months). If things start looking better, I'll start shifting some back to get that faster growth again.
That's timing the market. You got lucky and the bonds ETFs outperformed the equity ETFs but if you could consistently time equity exchanges such that you make a profit you'd make hundreds of millions of dollars at equity trading ;D
That wasn't luck my friend. That was knowing that raising the rates was gonna do to an overinflated stock market with promises of curbing inflation. I'd wager the market is still collectively...
You got lucky and the bonds ETFs outperformed the equity ETFs
That wasn't luck my friend. That was knowing that raising the rates was gonna do to an overinflated stock market with promises of curbing inflation.
I'd wager the market is still collectively overinflated by a solid 20%.
I mean, yes the economy is collapsing. Even after cuttting a lot of non-essentials and optimizing for cheaper stores, my weekly grocery bill is still $20 more than it was 2 years ago, when I was basically buying whatever we wanted from whichever store we felt like going to.
I've cut down my spendifng on misc stuff, focusing almost exclusively on houshold essentials, groceries, and occasional takeout.
That's not what the article says. Freight is down from record highs that caused widespread supply problems. That was inflationary. But freight being lower than record highs is hardly a collapse.
It's also not about the economy as a whole, it's about physical goods only. Much of the economy is services.
We do need to question the macroeconomic statistics (they aren't the whole story) but they look pretty good. The unemployment rate is back where it was just before the pandemic, which was then the lowest in 50 years. GNP is up. This isn't what "collapsing" looks like.
I'd also say in general there's a strong tendency for people to never say the economy is doing well. I honestly don't think I've ever heard someone talk about how the economy (or specifically the job market) is doing well apart in real life, casual conversation, except from maybe business owners, even when it was certainly doing well, at least on a relative scale.
When the economy is doing well, it begs the question, "why aren't you doing well (or better), then?". On the other hand, the worse the economy is, the better your own achievements or lack thereof are. For the individual, the worse things are, the more comforting their own personal circumstances, in a way.
I distinctly remember in like 2019 when I was volunteering at low income schools how everyone was talking about how the job market was bad. I always nodded and agreed, but of course the job market in 2019 was red hot, about as hot as it has or ever will be in the US. In some respects it doesn't really matter as long it's mentally comforting to the individual, although if you're banking on a "better" job market to come to your aid when you think it's at a low point, and it's, well, not, then you may make poor decisions based off of that belief.
I also think this is a major reason why news companies love to talk about the recession angle: people love to hear it.
Yes, it’s felt like a manipulation for a long time. I can see the problems that are present and the stock market isn’t on a crazy bull run anymore, but that doesn’t mean things are about to collapse. I suspect some people out there want the masses to make poor financial decisions as they plan for a recession.
The wealthy got used to capital being artificially cheap for over a decade thanks to incredibly low interest rates brought about by the last recession.
Cheap capital enables everything from easy stock buybacks to risky business ventures. They want a recession to bring unemployment back up, reduce labor costs, and bring interest rates back down.
Not sure who you mean by the wealthy but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to say that typical businesses like recessions. In a recession, people spend less, resulting in lower sales, less revenue and lower profits or even losses. Sure, maybe they can lower some costs with unpleasant things like closures and layoffs, but this is bad overall. This is typically summed up by saying "business is bad" and it would be weird to think that business people want business to be bad.
Same deal for shareholders. Lower earnings isn't what they want.
(There are some businesses that do well in a recession, because people keep old cars going longer for example. But that's not most of them.)
Yes, there is of course conflict between workers and businesses over how profits get divided up, but the relationship is not entirely adversarial. Business being good means there is more to divide up, and a good union contract only goes so far if the business is failing.
I didn't say businesses like recessions, I said they like low interest rates and cheap labor. A normal recession can last ~6 months but trigger changes that result in years of artificially low interest rates. There are lots of startups and even major businesses out there who were only viable because of inexpensive capital (think of all those tech companies that spent nearly a decade lighting money on fire for the sake of growing their userbases)
A recession leading into a major election can also help them swing voters towards their preferred candidate.
There are lots of reasons for the 1% to push this recession narrative even if it means they lose some money in the short term.
I agree that businesses like low interest rates and cheap labor, but those goals often don't go together. Lower interest rates tend to result in a stronger economy and lower unemployment, which are good for workers. Sometimes startups lighting money on fire is good for workers too, while it lasts, because they create relatively good jobs and increase competition for workers.
I don't agree that Republicans are the preferred party of business. They used to be, but these days it's more divided. (Do you really think Google or Disney executives want Trump or DeSantis to win?) Trumpists are often anti-business, and they control the Republican party these days.
Wealth trickled up following the last recession. Just food for thought.
I think what those links show is that inequality is usually increasing, regardless of how the economy is doing. Investors do well most of the time, other than in the recession itself. This is why investing in stocks is recommended, after all. They go up more on average. Meanwhile, wage increases are happening more rarely.
Pretty much every year could be considered either during a recession or after one, depending on how far back you look. It doesn’t mean people believe that recessions cause the following good years, or that investors are happy that their investments went down before they went up again.
Sometimes investors can take advantage of low prices to buy assets on sale, though. I think Warren Buffett is (was) pretty good at this? There is a “heads I win, tails you lose” aspect to this but I still don’t think it shows that wealthy people like recessions.
Historically, I think the most common inequality reset is a war?
Is the economy collapsing? It's proven exceptionally resilient given the circumstances. (War in Ukraine disrupting energy and food supply chains, lingering effects from the pandemic, and rising tensions between the West and China)
I would expect more mass joblessness in a "collapsing economy". So far this feels nothing like 2008, and it looks like the Fed may actually deliver on their promise of a "soft landing" after ~2 years of inflation.
Economies rarely crash overnight. However my crystal ball is telling me a few things:
Tech sector job disruption is only beginning. Amazon alone has cut what, 19% of their workforce since Novmber? And they were hardly the only tech giant cutting back massively. Collectively I think I counted 40,000 positions from Amazon, Microsoft, and Google alone.
The internet ad bubble is bursting. Companies are not seeing the revenue growth from perpetually increasing ad spend. Large swaths of the internet rely on this ad spend continuing to flow.
Wages are not rising proportionally. Even if inflation is 'getting better' on paper, that is not reflecting in everyday essentials.
This whole article seems to be a way of saying 'the retail sector has excess inventory, and they don't anticipate needing to replace it for some time.' That tells me that the companies that place orders are anticipating further continuation of low consumer spending.
The housing market is slowing down tremendously. Houses that were purchased in the frenzy of cheap debt are gonna stagnate or go underwater. With layoffs (and thus higher unemployment) in higher paying jobs (probably to stike fear in workers more than a true need), people are gonna start defaulting on loans that they could afford when wages were rising.
My 401k dropped 15% this year. The only reason it wasn't worse is that I converted all of the existing balance to bonds early, which is supposed to be a thing I do when I'm in my 50's, not my 30's. I left new contributions go where they were before, and the bonds continue to outperform markets. Mostly by holding steady rather than dropping. For institutional investors who (ostensibly) know what they're doing.
I think the economists in the thread are overly optimistic about what is coming. Much like the 2008 crisis, I don't know when things are gonna get real bad....but the scent is in the air.
Thanks for coming to my TEDx talk.
In the end, the tech layoffs have way more visibility in the news than impact on the economy. It's an ultimately small amount of highly paid knowledge workers, many of which will soon be employed, even if at inferior wages. It's a rough situation for H1-B visa holders, but a recession that does not make.
The overall job market is very strong currently. Like
That's not really a thing so far? Unemployment, regardless of which U- you're using, is very low. There's some signs it's cooling but that's a change in the second derivative. We're still quite far from having high unemployment nationally. Additionally, unlike in 2008, homeowners this time pretty much all have fixed rate interest rates (which were fixed when interest rates were dirt cheap!) and banks were infamously much more stringent on who was approved for mortgages after 2008.
In terms of the wage "keeping up", the magnitude of the issue from anecdata does not really appear in the data. From the BLS: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/realer.nr0.htm. In particular, we see that production and non-supervisory roles have a real wage hourly growth. Even at its worst metrics, the gap between nominal wages and real wages is not that high.
That seems... uh, a kinda really bad thing to do per personal financial guidelines? That's definitionally trying to time the market, and you really shouldn't unless you're a hedge fund (and even then, the famous Buffet bet showed ETFs beating hedge funds in many cases).
I agree, but with caveats: attempting to time the market is usually bad, but we have to buy and sell sometime (even if rarely) and it seems like looking for good prices isn’t in itself a bad thing? If you can buy on sale your investment is going to do better, or less worse.
Also, one lesson from last year is not to buy fixed-income investments at near-zero interest rates. All assets go down when interest rates rise. Even if you hold fixed-income investments to maturity, that’s at least an opportunity cost, and opportunity costs are real if you have to sell. Better to stick with cash. Buying bonds now seems fine though, for part of your portfolio.
Seems like the key is to avoid missing the upswings, so staying out of the stock market as a long-term thing, for years, seems pretty bad to me. Stocks beat bonds over the long term.
2022 was a bad year for stocks and bonds, but that seems over? This year isn’t, so far. Looking at the S&P 500, the trend has been up for six months. If I were out of the market I’d be pretty concerned about missing another stock market boom like there was after 2008.
Here's the thing though. Housing prices were inflated. Debt was so cheap people were desperate to get out of rentals into housing, and it fueled a seller's market like never before in my life. It was priced approximately $80k more than it was worth. My home was on the market for < 8 hours, and we got three offers. We accepted a cash offer, over asking price, flexible move-out date (since we needed to find a new house), and they waived all inspections. Whilst this particular buyer didn't need a mortgage (retirees), this shows what the market was like.
So you've got a red hot housing market, with buyers making questionable choices to get their foot in the door (waiving inspection is a bad idea). As the market cools back to sanity, it becomes a buyers market again. They can start demanding sellers fix things that were ignored before. Even if housing prices don't drop, if they stagnate long enough, a lot of money is gonna get lost in having to fix up a house that sold easily in a sellers market but not a buyer's one.
It might not be a 2008-era mortgage meltdown, but there's going to be a reckoning, especially if employment doesn't hold. I know my employer was having trouble filling positions during the Great Quitting, and now those positions are being removed rather than seeking new people to fill them.
That said, there's also a large amount of inflation I haven't seen talked about: COVID triggering mass retirement from people who were close enough, and decided to retire a bit before they intended (especially as there were some incentives trying to cut headcount gracefully during lock downs). You now have masses of backlogged cash in 401k's flowing into the economy.
The majority of the balance was in market indexes. Some was also in the institution's lifecycle plan which does that sort of high-risk -> low risk thing as you approach retirement. The majority of the balance is now in bond indexes, which stopped the hemorrhaging early and is now still outperforming market indexes.
I keep my new contributions coming in to the old buckets, to keep easy visibility on how the market shifts (evaluated roughly every 3-4 months). If things start looking better, I'll start shifting some back to get that faster growth again.
The key thing about 2008 is that people were actually underwater on their mortgages and relying on an increasing market for real estate to flip the house onto. That's not the case with the current market. People are buying expensive houses, but they're just... living in them. These people also have good credit. Unemployment is not particularly high or increasing for that matter, so there's no reason why the people with mortgages will start defaulting more.
That's timing the market. You got lucky and the bonds ETFs outperformed the equity ETFs but if you could consistently time equity exchanges such that you make a profit you'd make hundreds of millions of dollars at equity trading ;D
That wasn't luck my friend. That was knowing that raising the rates was gonna do to an overinflated stock market with promises of curbing inflation.
I'd wager the market is still collectively overinflated by a solid 20%.