> Good point. It's probably the expectation of future returns of
> something valued that makes it an investment -- even if those
> returns are financial.
>> Good point. It's probably the expectation of future returns of
>> something valued that makes it an investment -- even if those
>> returns are financial.
>
> Same expectation applies to gambles. Like *stocks and bonds,
> in todays envinronment. I wouldn't call them investments.
Perhaps they're not good investments, but it seems to me it's
the intent that counts. I don't gamble as an investment, but I
do sometimes do it for entertainment. There may be people who
do view gambling as an investment, but to do so they'd have to
beleive that they've figured out a way to beat house. Yes, I've
met people who sincerely beleived they had a
craps/blackjack/roullette system that would allow them to win
in the long run.
> In fact, I wouldn't call many things investments today, except
> perhaps education expense or business startup costs.
I think the term "investment" speaks more to the intent of the
acquisition rather than the actual performance.
> On a real basis stocks are lower now than in 2003. And bonds
> pay less than inflation, making their loss guaranteed.
That only makes their loss guaranteed if nothing ever changes
and performance from 2003 to present is going to continue
indefinitely. That's not how markets work.

Signature
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I hope something GOOD
at came in the mail today so
visi.com I have a REASON to live!!
miker - 31 Aug 2007 21:18 GMT
> That only makes their loss guaranteed if nothing ever changes
> and performance from 2003 to present is going to continue
> indefinitely. That's not how markets work.
A rising rate envinronment lowers bond returns with capital and opportunity
losses. Lowering rates hurts the dollar and gives you a purchasing power
loss. So whatcher saying is, we can reasonably expect politicians to quite
overspending and the Fed to quit overprinting? That's what it would take to
turn bonds around. I'm not sure governments work that way.
miker
>> Good point. It's probably the expectation of future returns of
>> something valued that makes it an investment -- even if those
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> than
> inflation, making their loss guaranteed.
Where does it say that an "investment" has to have a positive return for it
to be properly called an "investment?"
No "investment" involves certainty, therefore all investments are gambles.
miker - 31 Aug 2007 21:44 GMT
Ok, now I believe you're an economist. :)
miker
> Where does it say that an "investment" has to have a positive return for it
> to be properly called an "investment?"