4 ms·
Real estate is partially explained by what you wrote. Wealth concentration passive investment. California is (19%) passive investment real estate, Hawaii (40%
by araes 1y ago
Real estate is partially explained by what you wrote. Wealth concentration passive investment. California is (19%) passive investment real estate, Hawaii (40%), Alaska (35%), Vermont (31%), West Virginia (30%), and Wyoming (30%). It's just wealthy people passive.
Bond's don't go up fast enough to keep up with the S&P, and especially the top 7. Buying a few percent of every S&P is better than buying bonds. 1Y is 19.8%. Bonds are 4.2% (Hitchhiker joke). 5Y is ~13.5% Until 2022 bonds were less than 2%.
They also look flat when you look at a line chart. Doesn't matter if the flat line means you make 4% a year. It looks flat.
Also, personal view. The concentration of wealth is only part of it. Humans in most cases aren't really involved. It doesn't actually have that much to do with "human" fundamentals. It has to do with algorithms calculating. Even a lot of hedge funds and banks just push a button, turn on a trading algo and walk away to go have a beer. The numbers are too large, and far away to actually mean much. Line twiddling about $200T in stocks does not actually mean much to normal humans. It's kind of that Russ Hanneman joke if you've ever seen Silicon Valley. "No. Billion not Million. B not an M. It's a 1000 of those."
The stock market situation's a bit like those auto-battlers that have taken over a lot of video gaming. "You want to actually play?" "No." "The game's going to play itself and you're not allowed to participate."