Truth

Apr 13, 2022 2:30 AM

LitchLitch

Views

129633

Likes

1709

Dislikes

41

Never invest in anything but an S&P 500 index fund. Unless you are a congress person and can engage in insider trading legally. No, there is nothing we can do about it. Just remember this for when the time comes.

Do what they do, portfolio has looked great ever sense

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's why I prefer goldfish to make my own my investment choices for me

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Gar Gensler doesn't do his job, just blows corporate.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

why 3500?

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Source?

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

No one triggered by this? It's just accepted... there is always 1 comment setting people off. No when congress makes rules for their profit.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I don't think politicians should have any stocks at all or have many millions to throw around. I also don't think stock markets should exist

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Their funds should be locked into a retirement plan where they have no control over how it is invested while they are in office.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sounds like we need a Congress Tracking Fund

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Whole market funds often outperform the snp, It’s biggest weakness is it over invests in large companies and under invests in small ones

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This really pisses me off

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

S&P...salt and pepper?

4 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Yep

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't listen to anyone else, you are 100% correct

4 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Standard and Poor Index of 500 stocks that broadly represent the stock market as a whole

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Okay but the s&p 500 has been artificially raised since March 2020 so it’s hard to beat fraud

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Of course, their Master's pay well

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I get the argument, but this is still bad advice. International diversification should be considered mandatory everywhere.

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well they make the laws so they can trade before the laws are made and can sell off stuff before covid hits

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

3 out of 3 of my stock market investments beat the S&P in 2021 and i'm interested in politics.

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Soooo... Could we track their trades and follow them quickly? Would have the effect of their stock moves becoming highly visible, amplified

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sounds like you are proposing a pump'n'dump scheme.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

35 out of 535 members. I mean some are just going to randomly do better right?

4 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Depending on who it is, there *might* be insider trading involved, but you can't really tell that just from the numbers.

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Exactly. Sounds like the average congressperson underperformed the S&P500 in 2021 (already a cherry-picked year due to COVID market rebound)

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Thats why you want to look at the average of all congress. That OP doesnt give it should tell you all you need to know.

4 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Averages, outliers, and how the major markets are doing in comparison.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There are other things to invest in other than index funds, but managed funds are never worth it. My 401k is 100% in an s&p 500 index but>

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My Roth IRA is diversified between mostly tech stocks, and that has crushed my 401k. Much more risk but if your young a bit of risk is ok.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I also hear being a contrarian pays when everyone thinks the same way

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

It might help to understand that hedge funds seek to hedge against ANY losses, not maximize gains. This is them performing properly

4 years ago | Likes 51 Dislikes 4

Better than the index, with a load that further reduces returns vs. 0.1% index fund load? I beg to differ.

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 8

on an institutional level, hedge funds are basically insurance products so you can dump your equity allocation in passive with minimal

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

hedging costs and not lose your job on a negative year.

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

"Better" depends on your goal. A hedge fund is designed to never have a downturn, as those who use them live on the distributions. Investing

4 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

In an index is great, because only the average matters. 4 down months in a profitable year is fine. For hedge fund users, that 4 months with

4 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

no income & entirely unacceptable. Plus, with the scale of hedge funds, lower returns still being vast wealth

4 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Source? 3 of 3500 sounds really low even for random chance.

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Hedge funds have to pay fund managers a commission, so they have to consistently beat the average just to come out neutral

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Hedge funds try to protect against losses. They're not trying to pursue profit like most normal investors would. The post is misleading.

4 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

uh so why is neither number better than random chance?

4 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Because people can make predictions on trends they observe and invest their money accordingly.

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

Because whoever made this doesn't understand what hedge funds are but wants to give investment advice.

4 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

The fact that Congress people are even allowed to invest is butt-fucking insane. The fact that drugs are illegal is a outright violation /

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Of your rights. The fact that we printed 80% of all currency in a few years is downright ridiculous. The fact that prisons charge rent /

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Is deliberately insidious. The idea that public office can be lucrative is straight up criminal. What in the fuck is going on? This /

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Isn't one sided. This isn't red v blue. This isn't a matter of political affiliation. This is a matter of the powerful edging us out of /

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Literally everything. We are getting fucked from every angle imaginable, and they keep finding more angles.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Members of Congress, Presidents, Cabinet members and Federal judges, including SCOTUS, should have to put their assets PERMANENTLY into a...

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

...single blind trust, and receive dividends from it in proportion to the value of the assets they put into it. Private citizens should...

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

...be able to buy shares in it, also. If you don't like the idea of permanently losing control over your assets, we'll just have to forgo...

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

...your services, and you'll just have to remain in the private sector. Also: no serving on corporate Boards or delivering paid lectures...

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

...after your public service ends, either. If you enter public service, you make a lifetime commitment. That's my idea, anyway.

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm not sure about permanently, but a multi-year period of gardening leave seems appropriate.

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Given the outrageous corruption in Washington, and on some of our state houses, I think it needs to be permanent, and we need to offer...

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

...generous compensation to public servants to make up for lost earning potential.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

in 2021 I beat it probably 350 times

4 years ago | Likes 438 Dislikes 3

Rookie numbers

4 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

High fives prostate

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm surprised you can still read this post.

4 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

4 years ago | Likes 52 Dislikes 0

each day, right?

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

At least

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Is that Standard or Poor?

4 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Chafed

4 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

4 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

v

4 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

You skipped 6 days?

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

I think you meant 15, though that's still potentially below average

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Slow month?

4 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

I dunno, 2021 was a great year for hook-up apps and FWB's, so I'd think my beat-it number was at an all-time low.

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

Some of us took Covid seriously

4 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

I was vaccinated by March, 2021. I was one of the first qualified categories (teaching). It's possible to take covid seriously and still 1/2

4 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 8

see friends and fuck-buddies. 2/2

4 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 7

Dow index is OK too. But there is something we can do, we can run for congress!

4 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

You'd have to be a fool to think everyone could just up and run for congress. You know how much money it requires to run a campaign????

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Dow is owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

dow is such a market indicator a lot of work is put into forcing it to recover quickly. which makes indexes linked to it benefit from these>

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

recovery / consumer confidence efforts. Warren buffet says Invest in the dow.

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I do not understand any of this.

4 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

The SP500 in this context is an unmanaged fund that tracks the top 500 companies and thus its growth is unguided by human intervention. 1/2

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's used as a growth benchmark. So when congressmen are beating that growth rate personally, it shows some funny business is likely in play

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I didn't either but it's just saying Congress is corrupt

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

OP argues 35 senators performed incredibly unlikely well on the market compared to professional investors, and that that means corruption./1

4 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

In truth you'd expect a small percentage of individuals to beat the average, and the hedge funds do not aim for consistent S&P500 profits./2

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

tl;dr OP is making misleading claims by cherry picking data and ommitting relevant facts for political propaganda purposes. /3

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It's misleading at best. The S&P 500 is a list of the 500 biggest companies. Lots of people invest in those companies, and they profit 1/4

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

when their investments' values go up. A hedge fund plays the opposite game: they invest so they profit when values fall. 2021 was a 2/4

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

great year for the stock market, so traditional investors (including politicians) made profit, but hedge funds didn't. @OP is implying 3/4

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

that politicians are doing something illegal (or at least unethical) in their trades, but this is actually how it's _supposed_ to work. 4/4

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

A hedge fund is not exclusively composed of shorted positions. Of course they aim to make money if the market is rising, too.

4 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

But they don’t aim to make as much as an index fund. They just have to beat inflation.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The S&P 500 is just a list of the 500 biggest stocks on the NY Stock exchange. Because these are the biggest corporations in the US they 1/

4 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

have a high consistent growth. A hedge fund is a special investment fund that rich people buy into and some guy decides where to invest 2/

4 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Ah, thank you for explaining!

4 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

their money. They take risks and invest in things besides stocks, they are usually run by smart guys with lots of information. They 3/

4 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

can rarely increase their investment a much as if they just put the money in the S&P 500. But a significant number of congress people who 4/

4 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

are supposed to be focused on the countries needs can outperform the specialists with the most information. Because they are cheating. 5/5

4 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

https://unusualwhales.com/i_am_the_senate/full

4 years ago | Likes 156 Dislikes 3

Nah tubberville seems like a financial genius who does detailed and novel fundamental analysis /s

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Georgia, Florida, Arkansas, Utah, Texas, California, North Carolina, West Virginia, Vermont, Michigan

4 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

Graphs without axis labels hurt the discourse. They could have beaten the index by 10x or a tenth of a percent based on this.

4 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 0

Now do their significant others.

4 years ago | Likes 63 Dislikes 0

Certain senator who's husband who happens to chairman of NYSE

4 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

spy ?

4 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

S&P 500’s ticker

4 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Wow good job democrats. Both guilty and deserve jail

4 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Seriously how is this okay in the US?

4 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 1

Both parties agree that their leaders getting rich as fuck is good. Both parties agree that no other parties should be allowed to exist.

4 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

The ones who breaks the law are the one who makes the law

4 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 0

They aren't even breaking the laws because they made it legal.

4 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Thats why we can't do anything about it. The people who would need to change the law are the people benefitting from it.

4 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

We still have the option of electing leaders that swear to uphold certain standards and not re-electing them if they fail...but that

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not really, sure in Theory that could happen, but in practice our politicians select their voters. 98% of incumbants are re-elected.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

requires a level of focus and involvement in politics that most citizens sadly aren't willing to put in. I blame us as voters the most.

4 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There are rich people paying a lot of money to keep so many citizens unwilling to invest in running our government. It's deliberate.

4 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0