[HN Gopher] How this Ends
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How this Ends
        
       Author : simonebrunozzi
       Score  : 59 points
       Date   : 2021-02-17 20:09 UTC (53 minutes ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (avc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (avc.com)
        
       | umvi wrote:
       | Assuming there is a large bubble, what is the best course of
       | action for your average middle class software developer? Stay the
       | course for retirement accounts that are decades from maturity and
       | diversify personal investments a bit to be less stock-heavy?
        
         | bluedevil2k wrote:
         | I'd you're young, keep buying at regular intervals. No one can
         | time the market, and in 20 years this asset bubble pop will be
         | a minor price correction.
        
           | david927 wrote:
           | I would recommend reading The Limits To Growth:
           | 
           | https://www.clubofrome.org/publication/the-limits-to-growth
        
             | bluedevil2k wrote:
             | I appreciate the sentiment, but the books is from 1970. Not
             | sure how relevant it is anymore. Malthus said essentially
             | the same thing hundreds of years ago and was wrong because
             | he couldn't predict the technological changes that change
             | the supply curve.
        
               | david927 wrote:
               | It's not related to Malthus' argument and it's been
               | updated and shown to be utterly prescient:
               | 
               | https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/lim
               | its...
               | 
               | Our technologies have made extraction of resources more
               | efficient but hasn't really fixed the limit of resources.
        
         | randmeerkat wrote:
         | You'll never predict how, when, why, or even if a "bubble" will
         | pop.
         | 
         | Realistically there's trillions of dollars tied up by the 1% in
         | the market and I'm sure they'll do everything in their power to
         | keep it from crashing down.
         | 
         | I would say hold the course, if you have enough extra money and
         | you don't know what to do with it, ask a financial advisor what
         | they think you should do.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | encoderer wrote:
         | Here's how I'm handling it:
         | 
         | - Keep most of IRA in super-broad funds like VTI.
         | 
         | - For personal brokerage accounts, understand that the risk
         | profile now is more like a portfolio of in the money call
         | options than it is equities. With much higher volatility, you
         | can keep a portion of your account in cash, and that is the dry
         | powder you can use when the market takes a dive.
         | 
         | I used this strategy before Covid, had money to buy stocks last
         | march, and it's worked beautifully. I moved some positions back
         | into cash over the summer. Portfolio up over 100% in 2020, even
         | with the cash.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | itsoktocry wrote:
           | > _I used this strategy before Covid, had money to buy stocks
           | last march, and it 's worked beautifully. I moved some
           | positions back into cash over the summer. Portfolio up over
           | 100% in 2020, even with the cash._
           | 
           | "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."
           | 
           | It's great your strategy has worked for you, but we've been
           | in a market that has done nothing but climb for over 10
           | years, and the last couple of years have been absolutely
           | insane. "Buy buy buy" won't work forever.
        
           | jdmoreira wrote:
           | I'm sure you know the old saying... "anyone can make money in
           | a bull market." And here is the proof https://www.bloomberg.c
           | om/news/articles/2021-01-19/robinhood...
           | 
           | I'm sorry I don't want to sound rude but those 100% don't
           | sound that impressive to me right now.
        
             | encoderer wrote:
             | Not meant to impress, and not financial advice. Share what
             | works for you!
        
         | breck wrote:
         | > best course of action for your average middle class software
         | developer?
         | 
         | I'd say get into active investing, not passive index funds.
         | Active investing could mean angel investing, or it could be
         | public equity investing, but what it means is put your money
         | into things you want to learn and help grow. That way, you
         | greatly protect your downside. If your investment goes to zero,
         | at least you learned stuff you are interested in along the way,
         | made friends in the industries you like (could lead to job opps
         | down the road), and helped nudge the world in a direction you
         | want it to go. You'll probably make plenty of mistakes in the
         | first 10 years, but by the second decade you'll be better at it
         | and then if your second decade performance is good you can beat
         | the passive markets and get all those benefits at the same
         | time.
         | 
         | It's a real shame the USA has made it hard for individuals to
         | invest in stuff they know.
        
           | vinger wrote:
           | Your average middle class developer is not an angel investor
           | and the opportunies in an average person network would be too
           | risky.
           | 
           | Lose everything but make a friend and some knowledge is a win
           | for you but not your average developer.
           | 
           | Staying with index funds. They give the safest upside with
           | the safest downside.
        
             | breck wrote:
             | Statistically speaking we're all going to die and all your
             | investments will go to zero then in the long run. The only
             | thing that will then be left is the experience you had and
             | in what direction you nudged the world.
             | 
             | Fall. Get back up. Fall. Get back up. That is life.
        
         | lackbeard wrote:
         | The only advice I have to offer (which may be terrible advice!)
         | is to keep a big chunk of your investment portfolio in cash
         | (10-25%.) If you maintain your target weights in how you
         | allocate your contributions and also by rebalancing a couple of
         | times per year, you'll effectively be automatically buying low
         | & selling high.
        
           | unstatusthequo wrote:
           | Inflation means holding cash actually devalues it. Assets are
           | better protection mechanisms. Real estate, precious metals,
           | crypto maybe, fine art, etc .
        
         | omginternets wrote:
         | I am by no means a reference for financial matters, so I tend
         | to think about big-picture macro-optimisations. In other words:
         | what is fundamentally true, and must therefore always remain
         | true?
         | 
         | One fundamental truth is that tangible, material assets will
         | always outlast virtual assets. In an extreme financial crisis,
         | owning a house is better than owning cash, for example. If you
         | follow this reasoning to its logical conclusion, buying is
         | better than investing (in the financial sense of the word). Or,
         | if you prefer: invest in material assets that are of real use.
         | Optimize these purchases to reduce your tax burden. Put
         | yourself in a position to "hold out".
         | 
         | How far along this reasoning you go depends on your threat
         | model.
        
         | zwieback wrote:
         | Most of our savings are in 401K and bonds but we diversified a
         | bit and bought a condo in a stable neighborhood for our own
         | weekend use and now contemplating rental property. I'm about 10
         | yrs from retirement so not really looking for high-growth
         | investments at this point.
         | 
         | On the other end of the risk scale I buy a couple Powerball
         | tickets each time it goes over 500M$
        
           | kinghajj wrote:
           | > On the other end of the risk scale I buy a couple Powerball
           | tickets each time it goes over 500M$
           | 
           | Buying cheap OTM calls every once in a while would probably
           | have a higher chance of profit.
        
         | mattmaroon wrote:
         | Well if you knew stocks were way overvalued you would of course
         | sell stocks. If you knew the bubble was going to burst you'd go
         | short, buy puts, etc.
         | 
         | Of course we don't know anything. We could be at the beginning
         | of a record breaking bull market brought on my technological
         | advances. Or we could be in a bubble that doesn't burst but
         | just goes sideways for a decade.
         | 
         | But if you thought there was a good chance of a pop, but not
         | 100%, you could diversify some of your holdings. Put some %
         | into puts, some into cash, etc.
        
       | breck wrote:
       | Historically he's right and these great liquidity windows move in
       | a sin wave.
       | 
       | But it's also true that sometimes the new normal is 10x+ the
       | previous normal, after seismic breakthroughs in technology.
       | 
       | Are we about to see a crash or are we in the early innings of one
       | of the greatest bull markets in history? I'm not sure. I can see
       | arguments for both (the arguments for the latter being this:
       | https://twitter.com/breckyunits/status/1360283046147067907/p...,
       | as well as new digital currencies, and the booming space, self
       | driving, green power, tunnel boring and wearable industries). If
       | you believe someday humans will be an intergalactic species then
       | we're still a lot closer to 0.1% than we are to 100%.
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | As someone who has called 9 of the last 2 recessions I do t know
       | where to go with this sort of prediction- even if (I do) I agree
       | with it.
       | 
       | There is "too much easy money". Well not in my pocket, and
       | despite my privileged position both professionally and as an HNer
       | I cannot easily see how to raise a series A to grab some.
       | 
       | And when we do see Treasury bills reach 2%, then what will I do -
       | close down my startup ? resign my job?
       | 
       | Winter is coming. Keep farming, build a grain store perhaps, but
       | we will keep farming.
        
         | icedchai wrote:
         | I'm guessing we won't see 2% for at least 6 to 8 years. Look
         | how long it took for rates to get to 2% after the Great
         | Recession.
        
       | david927 wrote:
       | That's a pretty sanguine take. I'm not so sure that it will end
       | well at all. I think we're still in the winter of the 2008 crisis
       | but now we've burned all of our firewood.
       | 
       | But it's worse than that, actually, because we've exacerbated the
       | situation. The low rates have ballooned debt and any correction
       | means defaults start to cascade, creating a domino effect of
       | credit defaults. If that happens it will be quickly followed by a
       | liquidity crunch; no one will have cash/precious metals.
       | 
       | I'm a little bit furious that the central banks have been
       | experimenting like a doctor from the 19th century with our
       | collective economic health. We're being "bled out" to save us
       | from the common cold with potentially disastrous consequences.
        
         | omginternets wrote:
         | >We're being "bled out" to save us from the common cold with
         | potentially disastrous consequences.
         | 
         | I'm convinced this is a direct consequence of the "management
         | politics" that have become the norm. The winning strategy in
         | politics is not to present meaningful socio-political projects,
         | which carry risk and can cost elections, but instead to let the
         | invisible hand set the course, and content oneself with
         | avoiding immediate obstacles. A consequence of this is that
         | politicians actively _reduce_ their authority, when it suits
         | them. In the case of a global pandemic, this takes the form of
         | deferring to science or medicine; the lockdown wasn 't "their
         | idea", it was the medical profession's!
         | 
         | The _telos_ of the politician is -- in the strictest sense of
         | the term -- _tragic_. It is his job to make hard judgement
         | calls between equally important, but opposing values. In war,
         | politicians send thousands of young men to their deaths, and in
         | the best possible case, this is done in service of another
         | ideal, such as the survival of the nation. Yet with respect to
         | the pandemic, the political class has abandoned its duty to to
         | grapple with these moral issues, and has instead left the
         | decision to the _medical_ class, whose _telos_ makes the
         | resulting policy a foregone conclusion; The medical profession
         | 's function is to reduce risk (at all costs!), not arbitrate
         | values. The result is that we are now maximizing "life" in the
         | lowest biological sense, even if it means sacrificing the basis
         | for _thriving_.
         | 
         | History will look at this as one of the biggest blind-spots of
         | 21st century society. I am convinced of it.
        
         | ivalm wrote:
         | But why would there be liquidity crunch? March 2020 showed us
         | QE to fund a credit backstop works wonders. Maybe inflation is
         | the way things go south but definitely not a credit crunch.
        
       | viburnum wrote:
       | Nobody tell the author about Japan.
        
         | bluedevil2k wrote:
         | Aren't Americans too "spendy" to have that happen here? The
         | main driver of the stagflation in Japan is that they're too
         | thrifty - their stimulus are literally expiring credit cards,
         | forcing people to spend money.
        
           | georgeecollins wrote:
           | It's important to think about the "spendy" / "thrifty" thing
           | as being partly-- maybe mostly-- demographics. Young people
           | are spendy, borrowing against future earnings, old people are
           | thrifty, counting on assets to support them.
           | 
           | Japan is in demographic decline. The US keeps growing
           | demographically, but it does because of immigration. If the
           | US has less immigration the chances improve that it will
           | stagnate economically like Japan.
           | 
           | I don't know if any of the things I am describing are good or
           | bad. But a lot of our assumptions about how the US economy
           | "always" is are based on 300 years of population growth.
        
         | omginternets wrote:
         | Could you elaborate on your point? It sounds like you have
         | something interesting to add to the discussion, but it's
         | getting lost in snark. I for one would like to know what Japan
         | can teach us about this question.
        
           | bluedevil2k wrote:
           | They're facing a unique economic situation where their
           | economy isn't growing and prices are decreasing. When prices
           | decrease, people hold on to their money (after all, it will
           | have more buying power in the future). When people don't
           | spend, the economy slows down. They tried lowering interest
           | rates to $0 to _try_ to motivate spending...hasn't worked.
           | They give stimulus a lot and have expirations on the debit
           | cards they give to force spending...doesn't really work.
           | They're running out of tools to get the economy growing
           | again. This is the reason central banks aim for 1-2%
           | inflation - it encourages spending which is good for the GDP.
        
             | redis_mlc wrote:
             | Japan:
             | 
             | - rapidly aging population (senior citizens don't buy
             | anything, don't participate in labor force)
             | 
             | - women with a job have zero incentive to get married or
             | have kids because of many cultural restrictions on married
             | women (historically they lose their job, and husbands are
             | home very late.) They buy their own condos now and stay
             | single.
             | 
             | - consumer companies missed the Internet boom (Apple stole
             | Sony's lunch)
             | 
             | - Japanese are legendary savers, not spenders. (It's
             | considered shameful to not have $100k in the bank at all
             | times.)
             | 
             | - govt is holding trillions in corporate stock and bonds to
             | prop up their capital markets.
        
             | omginternets wrote:
             | How much of this is cultural (e.g. valuing long-term
             | planning / saving) versus mechanical?
             | 
             | EDIT: this thread has some insight.
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26171294
        
           | jansan wrote:
           | Japan dropped interest rates to zero about 20 years ago. They
           | still do not know how to get out of this.
        
           | david927 wrote:
           | There's this optimistic notion that we'll just bounce back
           | from any setback and continue economic growth.
           | 
           | Japan had the same thing happen that we're seeing now in the
           | 1980's -- and never recovered.
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | to be honest, i'm slightly concerned that we are basically re-
       | enacting the 20th century almost-beat-for-beat. pandemic, roaring
       | twenties. Then the not-fun parts arrive: a Great Depression and
       | then a World War.
        
         | diggernet wrote:
         | Well, on the bright side, we've already skipped the pre-
         | pandemic World War...
        
           | swyx wrote:
           | arguably that was iraq/afghanistan, but yeah much smaller
           | scale than ww1
        
         | adamcstephens wrote:
         | The low interest rates fueling a market bubble seem to align
         | for sure.
        
         | david927 wrote:
         | That's what Ray Dalio says in "Principles". It's terrifying.
        
           | kridsdale1 wrote:
           | Solid book.
        
       | rgifford wrote:
       | If this were a typical end of market cycle, I'd say spot on.
       | However, the Fed owns 30% of US mortgage backed securities. The
       | last time they tried to reverse QE was 2019 when we had that
       | liquidity crunch and markets crashed.
       | 
       | I think this will be the end of many market cycles. This type of
       | ending is much more uncertain. It happens every 80 years or so.
       | War, a new economic structure, or a new currency are all on the
       | table. I don't think deflation is possible without completely
       | imploding the global financial system.
       | 
       | I'm really just parroting Lyn Alden. Check her out if you're
       | interested. She writes great stuff.
       | 
       | https://www.lynalden.com/fiscal-and-monetary-policy/
        
       | useful wrote:
       | the risk in being in cash is much greater than anywhere else
       | 
       | Technology is deflationary, growth in tech looks to be the least
       | risky. Technology has prevented inflation and will for a while. I
       | think the only lever the US has for inflation is largely in
       | housing as it makes up something like 50% of the CPI.
       | 
       | Fixed assets are very inflated but I would like to think the
       | commercial market will take a hit before the residential market.
       | Some factories, plants, and office space is worthless in a world
       | with zoom, solar, and electric cars.
       | 
       | Buy a house, money is cheap. At least you'll have a roof over
       | your head and it will be easier to pay off the loan if there is
       | any kind of inflation that the government has said they want.
        
         | diob wrote:
         | Your last sentence is why I refuse to pay more than the minimum
         | on my house payment. It's very likely we're going to experience
         | inflation, might as well pay it back with cheaper dollars.
        
           | toomuchtodo wrote:
           | What if you're unable to earn dollars due to structural
           | employment changes [1]? That's my concern about not paying
           | off a mortgage. If everything is inflated, paying off debt is
           | a guaranteed return, versus possibly getting into an asset
           | class at it's plateau (see Japan lost decades).
           | 
           | [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-02-17/gig-
           | econo... ("The Gig Economy Is Coming for Millions of American
           | Jobs")
        
             | diob wrote:
             | My thoughts are that I'd be in a lot bigger trouble if that
             | happened. If I can't earn dollars, civilization is likely
             | at the point where owning my house wouldn't even matter.
        
       | thinkingkong wrote:
       | It doesn't end at all. Governments won't be able to raise
       | interest rates without putting a significant portion of their
       | populations under water, or flooding the market with people who
       | can suddenly no longer afford their homes. Banks don't _actually_
       | want a big pile of real estate laying around.
       | 
       | In my city I'm more interested in the effects of the cheap
       | capital + the building boom. There are close to 80 brand new
       | buildings with 100,000's of floorspace across multiple floor
       | plates ALL of it is zoned for offices and ALL of it is totally
       | empty. You'd think normally market dynamics would make some of
       | them affordable, but nope; they'll just sit empty instead.
        
         | creaghpatr wrote:
         | Happens in China too.
        
         | david927 wrote:
         | Even 0% interest rate loans need to be paid back at some point.
         | With real estate being over-built, it's going to sit empty.
         | Eventually the payments can't be made. Then you get credit
         | defaults. Then people need cash and you get a liquidity crisis.
         | And then it all falls down.
        
           | thinkingkong wrote:
           | The loans are being repaid but they're being repaid tax-free
           | from other sources. If you own multiple properties and one of
           | them sits vacant, you can count the 'missed out on income' as
           | a loss against your company. The amount of income you write
           | off as losses is based on the rent you were _previously
           | charging_. IOW I have no incentive to rent my unit at a lower
           | cost if it's basically acting as a tax shelter for my other
           | properties. If the combination of those two things goes
           | negative then yeah, the world gets interesting.
        
             | jay_kyburz wrote:
             | Woah, is that the US? I'm not an accountant, but I'm pretty
             | sure that's not how it works here is Australia.
        
         | PragmaticPulp wrote:
         | > or flooding the market with people who can suddenly no longer
         | afford their homes.
         | 
         | Most mortgages don't have an adjustable rate. They're fixed for
         | the duration.
         | 
         | Regardless, small interest rate increases wouldn't suddenly
         | make variable rate mortgage owners homeless. Gradual rate
         | increases would provide more pressure for overextended
         | individuals to move to housing they can actually afford,
         | though.
        
       | jansan wrote:
       | _But at some point, economies will recover, central banks will
       | tighten the money supply, and interest rates will rise._
       | 
       | Japan was the first country to introduced near zero interest
       | rates and they still haven't found a way out, yet. This indicates
       | that it may take quite a few years until interest rates will rise
       | again.
        
       | omginternets wrote:
       | There's not much substance to this article. The author declares a
       | few opinions, but doesn't take us through his reasoning (let
       | alone evidence).
       | 
       | I'm even tempted to call this FUD, but that usually implies some
       | sort of agenda. I don't even see that, here.
        
         | leprechaun1066 wrote:
         | He basically said, "Everything that has a beginning has an
         | end." But with way too many words.
        
       | nostrademons wrote:
       | The longer interest rates stay at zero, the longer this
       | assumption gets baked into the structure of the economy and the
       | more chaos that'll be unleashed when and if they finally go up.
       | There were no interest rate hikes between 2006 and 2015, and
       | interest rates have been at zero for 8 out of the last 13 years.
       | 
       | It's easy to blame COVID for the latest rate cut, but interest
       | rates were already dropping in late 2019. The Fed slashed rates 3
       | times from July-December, and then went straight to zero in
       | March. I've heard (from finance industry professionals) that the
       | reason was that corporate debt loads rapidly become unsustainable
       | when interest rates go up. They need to roll their debt when it
       | comes due, but debt levels are now such that they rapidly become
       | insolvent when borrowing costs rise.
       | 
       | I'm seeing more people reach the obvious conclusion that interest
       | rates are simply not going to rise. The Fed has an incentive to
       | keep them low - they'll get mass bankruptcy and mass unemployment
       | otherwise, contrary to their full-employment mandate. The
       | government has an incentive to keep them low, since it keeps
       | borrowing costs on the rapidly-ballooning federal debt low.
       | Retirees have an incentive to keep them low, feeding 401K bubbles
       | that they need to live on. Young adults have an incentive to keep
       | them low: it keeps student loan and car payments manageable, and
       | inflation reduces the real value of their debt. Homeowners have
       | an incentive to keep them low: the value of their home will drop
       | if mortgage rates go up. The only people with an incentive to see
       | them go up are vulture funds & shorts, who nobody likes anyway,
       | and prospective homeowners, who are largely the same people with
       | loads of student loan debt that they'd like to see inflated away.
       | 
       | If everybody has an incentive for rates to stay low, they will
       | stay low. This ends in hyperinflation.
        
         | adamcstephens wrote:
         | Or it ends in a market crash. When interest rates are zero,
         | savers have no choice to build on wealth except the market.
         | This is why the market continues to hit higher and higher
         | records, and at some point people will lose trust in the market
         | and flee.
         | 
         | Hyperinflation can always come after the bubble bursts.
        
           | thinkingkong wrote:
           | Flee to where?
        
             | adamcstephens wrote:
             | Why not cash? It doesn't matter where they flee to. Once
             | everyone distrusts the market, a positive feedback loop
             | begins and prices crater.
        
             | the-dude wrote:
             | Crypto?
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | Central banks will outlaw it because they can't control
               | it and devalue it (either through negative interest rates
               | or helicopter money).
               | 
               | Remember when the US outlawed holding gold? [1]
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102
        
               | kinghajj wrote:
               | 1. Central banks (at least, the US Fed) doesn't have the
               | authority to declare crypto tokens illegal unilaterally.
               | 
               | 2. EO 6102 made sense with the gold standard. It wasn't
               | just an "FU" to gold hoarders, but a way to raise revenue
               | to counter the depression. It's not clear to me that it
               | would make sense for such a confiscation of crypto,
               | especially if the legislature were to try option #1.
        
             | david927 wrote:
             | Precious metals, commodities
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-17 21:02 UTC)