I think I mentioned this each time we see this graph.
It's an exponential curve.
A saver account in the Bradford-Bingley is also an exponential curve.
The basic theory of finance is that all assets will grow exponentially.
The other thing about exponential curves is they look incredibly scary at whatever point you choose to look at it.
In 20 years time the Dow Jones from 2000 to 2015 will look no different to how 1980 - 1995 looks now, and 2035 will look incredibly scary. That's the nature of exponential curves.
To demonstrate my point look at 1929, it barely registers as a ripple on the exponential curve, and that was and probably always will be the biggest bubble and biggest crash in the history of the stock market. It's a flat line now.
Will we see another 1929, well who knows but I severely doubt that. If we do, even as an investor with plenty riding on the stock market I'll be "laughing my head off" because it will be a chance to pick up more stocks at rock bottom prices, and you're talking 1000% returns when the market gets that low.
It's an exponential curve.
A saver account in the Bradford-Bingley is also an exponential curve.
The basic theory of finance is that all assets will grow exponentially.
The other thing about exponential curves is they look incredibly scary at whatever point you choose to look at it.
In 20 years time the Dow Jones from 2000 to 2015 will look no different to how 1980 - 1995 looks now, and 2035 will look incredibly scary. That's the nature of exponential curves.
To demonstrate my point look at 1929, it barely registers as a ripple on the exponential curve, and that was and probably always will be the biggest bubble and biggest crash in the history of the stock market. It's a flat line now.
Will we see another 1929, well who knows but I severely doubt that. If we do, even as an investor with plenty riding on the stock market I'll be "laughing my head off" because it will be a chance to pick up more stocks at rock bottom prices, and you're talking 1000% returns when the market gets that low.

Comment