Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I see the 7% return figure trotted out as average equity returns; but I think that number reflects a lot of “easy money” from the asymmetry of global industrialization in the post-WW2 era. Europe and America spent the 1920s through 1940s building fossil fuel powered heavy industry through a couple of particularly destructive wars. Then we spent the next 50 years spreading it around the globe, with American and European companies collecting a vast majority of the profits.

I’m not entirely sure it’s an assumption that will be correct for too much longer given the industrialization around the globe has increased competition significantly.

I think the true equity growth rate is closer to inflation / population growth rate; especially once we take the costs of climate change into account (think of it as a loan we have to pay back in either remediation of adverse climate effects or decreased future productivity).



Not sure I agree with your premise, but even if it was true, couldn't one simply balance their profile with more stocks from developing markets and be back to average?


Most of those nations didn’t really have viable / accessible public markets until the 90s. So there’s not a lot of reliable data from the first half of the century to go on.

And I’m not saying the US / Europe robbed any of those countries — just that there was a lot of easy growth in those countries in the 20th century, and western companies stepped in to facilitate and got paid a lot of money in the process. That growth is reflected in the stock prices of American and European companies.

My point is that those big, easy growth opportunities aren’t there anymore anywhere; and the growth opportunities in the future will be diminishingly small. We’re no longer bringing a country from the Iron Age mining with hand tools to the industrial era with mechanized mining and smelting; we’re largely just replacing one form of economic activity with another, slightly more efficient version.


401k’s haven been that spectacular for the last 15 years


My Vanguard account, which I've had since 2007, is showing 10.8% returns over the past 10 years.


I think the difference between 10 and 15 is pretty large since the recession started over 10 years ago, but under 15.


You are right, but even 15 year returns are still above 8% with VTSAX.


Exactly my point! We can’t grow at 7% in perpetuity; so at some point it’s going to have to slow down. It feels like that’s starting to happen.


Why can't we? From my point of view, we've just began. Maybe we will see a low decade now, but the decade after that will be incredible.


Also keep in mind we already had a "low" decade... the "lost decade" of 2000 through 2012-ish. That was a bad time for investing.


+1, doesn't it seem like ML can drive just as much GDP growth as the technology that spurred growth over the past decades? it's not clear the US will be at the forefront, but nobody is stopping investors from diversifying their portfolio globally.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: