When will the market climb?

[James Lemon]

What?

More magic money is not going to fix the global depression.

 

[Jerome Marot]

We are going to be giving our population a basic living wage, whether folk work or not.

Probably not. In any case, a universal basic income was part of the initial proposals of the candidate for the Socialist Party at the latest French presidential election. It lasted about a week. The socialist voters wanted work and not money. It was also voted down in Switzerland and several other countries.

This is linked to what David Graeber calls the phenomenon of bullshit jobs, with a twist. In 1930, the economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that we would have achieved a 15-hour work week now. We probably have, in average. But as anyone having followed management courses knows, work hours cannot really be split. It is far more efficient to have 500 employees working a 40 hours week than having 1000 employees working a 20 hours week, even if the total hours is the same. Why? Simply because you save on training and management and also because you can select the best employees.

So what happened is that we have overworked employees and high unemployment. And because we are rich societies and don't really want to see people die of starvation, we have unemployment benefits (even in the USA, think food stamps and medicare), which amounts to some limited form of basic income under a different name.

The result is that jobs are perceived as scarce and, at the same time, are an indication of higher social status. That, in turn, makes jobs desirable in themselves which raises their intrinsic value. Because jobs are valuable in themselves (and not just for the associated salary), people are willing to compromise on the job offers, which pushes the salaries down. There surprisingly many people working for no salary or even for a negative salary (they pay to work). Since this is a photography forum, I'll simply give the example of https://unsplash.com, but other examples abound: internships, Uber drivers, etc. A universal basic income is likely to only make that situation worse.

 

[James Lemon]

Probably not. In any case, a universal basic income was part of the initial proposals of the candidate for the Socialist Party at the latest French presidential election. It lasted about a week. The socialist voters wanted work and not money. It was also voted down in Switzerland and several other countries.

This is linked to what David Graeber calls the phenomenon of bullshit jobs, with a twist. In 1930, the economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that we would have achieved a 15-hour work week now. We probably have, in average. But as anyone having followed management courses knows, work hours cannot really be split. It is far more efficient to have 500 employees working a 40 hours week than having 1000 employees working a 20 hours week, even if the total hours is the same. Why? Simply because you save on training and management and also because you can select the best employees.

So what happened is that we have overworked employees and high unemployment. And because we are rich societies and don't really want to see people die of starvation, we have unemployment benefits (even in the USA, think food stamps and medicare), which amounts to some limited form of basic income under a different name.

The result is that jobs are perceived as scarce and, at the same time, are an indication of higher social status. That, in turn, makes jobs desirable in themselves which raises their intrinsic value. Because jobs are valuable in themselves (and not just for the associated salary), people are willing to compromise on the job offers, which pushes the salaries down. There surprisingly many people working for no salary or even for a negative salary (they pay to work). Since this is a photography forum, I'll simply give the example of https://unsplash.com, but other examples abound: internships, Uber drivers, etc. A universal basic income is likely to only make that situation worse.

There is isn't any incentive for government workers to be efficient. I think the only reason they take coffee breaks is because they get tired of looking out the window all day.

 

[Asher Kelman]

There is isn't any incentive for government workers to be efficient. I think the only reason they take coffee breaks is because they get tired of looking out the window all day.

Your humor works only as long as you don’t really visit work places!

Workers earn their coffee breaks and use them efficiently. In 5 seconds the cards are out and a packed snack and they are joking around and happy. As quickly they clean up and are back to work 15 minutes later!

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Probably not. In any case, a universal basic income was part of the initial proposals of the candidate for the Socialist Party at the latest French presidential election. It lasted about a week. The socialist voters wanted work and not money. It was also voted down in Switzerland and several other countries.

This is linked to what David Graeber calls the phenomenon of bullshit jobs, with a twist. In 1930, the economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that we would have achieved a 15-hour work week now. We probably have, in average. But as anyone having followed management courses knows, work hours cannot really be split. It is far more efficient to have 500 employees working a 40 hours week than having 1000 employees working a 20 hours week, even if the total hours is the same. Why? Simply because you save on training and management and also because you can select the best employees.

So what happened is that we have overworked employees and high unemployment. And because we are rich societies and don't really want to see people die of starvation, we have unemployment benefits (even in the USA, think food stamps and medicare), which amounts to some limited form of basic income under a different name.

The result is that jobs are perceived as scarce and, at the same time, are an indication of higher social status. That, in turn, makes jobs desirable in themselves which raises their intrinsic value. Because jobs are valuable in themselves (and not just for the associated salary), people are willing to compromise on the job offers, which pushes the salaries down. There surprisingly many people working for no salary or even for a negative salary (they pay to work). Since this is a photography forum, I'll simply give the example of https://unsplash.com, but other examples abound: internships, Uber drivers, etc. A universal basic income is likely to only make that situation worse.

Jérôme,

Yours is an important post as it attempts to address effects on various motivations and ambitions that might change.

inna small study in Canada, hospitalization were reduced by 8.5% after 4 years, there was a greater tendency for folks to echew higher paying temporary jobs with little future, to those with a growth possibility built in. In addition, 100% of boys now competed high school instead of being taken out early to help provide family sustenance.

We need far more research, but for sure this is a complex new social game changer that is worth studying in a variety of towns to get a grasp of the likely benefits and long term risks!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

I don't see how a motivation to, basically, keep up with the Joneses is ever going to change. Moreover, there is a whole industry busy studying this motivation and increasing it to bring continuously increased profits.

 

[Jerome Marot]

There is isn't any incentive for government workers to be efficient. I think the only reason they take coffee breaks is because they get tired of looking out the window all day.

If they don't like coffee they can pass some time on a forum like this one.

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Deeply entrenched tech companies hit bottom in mid-March, and aren't going away in the rest of the decade. Boeing at under $100 and Amazon at about $1500 are good examples. They have both nearly doubled since then, although Boeing still has a long way to go (understandably) to recover its value before the 737MAX problems cratered its reputation. I bought a little of each and can feel good about them, but overall, we're back to 2019 somewhere, and it doesn't feel deserved.

 

[James Lemon]

Your humor works only as long as you don’t really visit work places!

Workers earn their coffee breaks and use them efficiently. In 5 seconds the cards are out and a packed snack and they are joking around and happy. As quickly they clean up and are back to work 15 minutes later!

Asher

And when you say "working" is they are now at home lounging around in their pajamas instead of drinking coffee at work.

 

[Asher Kelman]

And when you say "working" is they are now at home lounging around in their pajamas instead of drinking coffee at work.

You really know very little about workers apart from your lazy “coffee-drinkers”! My experience is with conscientious, hard-working people who do the job they are paid for admirably!

You are obviously hiring the wrong people or else just hearing obnoxious stories, James!

I assure you it’s a very efficient way of hiring labor!

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Deeply entrenched tech companies hit bottom in mid-March, and aren't going away in the rest of the decade. Boeing at under $100 and Amazon at about $1500 are good examples. They have both nearly doubled since then, although Boeing still has a long way to go (understandably) to recover its value before the 737MAX problems cratered its reputation. I bought a little of each and can feel good about them, but overall, we're back to 2019 somewhere, and it doesn't feel deserved.

The rises might be attributed to the pumping in of uncontrolled cash by the government! So it may not represent usual growth in value.

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

I don't see how a motivation to, basically, keep up with the Joneses is ever going to change. Moreover, there is a whole industry busy studying this motivation and increasing it to bring continuously increased profits.

Jérôme,

Was that in reply to my reference to the Canadian whole-town study in post #66, above?

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

Was that in reply to my reference to the Canadian whole-town study in post #66, above?

Yes, it was but I did not realise your post referred to a study in a Canadian town. However, I am not sure studies of universal basic income are representative if they are limited to a small group.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Yes, it was but I did not realise your post referred to a study in a Canadian town. However, I am not sure studies of universal basic income are representative if they are limited to a small group.

The idea is to have a number of inhabitants that is large enough to study but not too large to fund. I believe this number is about 10,000. Remarkably it didn’t have people sitting at home swirling coffee! The folk went for work but could afford to skip the quick temp fix jobs and think long term. Alcoholism decreased as well as road traffic accidents. A little more benefit than can be dismissed so easily!

if one has a fixed idea of worker “Laziness”, then one is stuck in a negative paradigm which is self-defeating. All men aren’t “good”, but most folk want the pathway of a job with prospects. However, it seems that this route is best taken with some immediate economic security so education doesn’t need to be cut short for a family to be well-fed!

The effect on having 100% of the children finish high school is to me outstanding!

Now these finding may not translate so easily in a community where “getting pregnant and living off welfare with 3-4 children“, (often by different fathers), is almost normal, but at least we now know that the modest “basic wage“ of about $13,000 as of 10 years back is not detrimental to society in the few examples studied.

That at least should open up the possibility of a conversation on the subject in academic circles for grants to better study.

Can one replicate completion of high school behaviors? Does this extend to cutting percent of young men arrested for criminal behavior? Are there potentials for shifting current costs to society of jailing and policing society to making it healthier in the first place.

These are not assertions, beyond my conviction that the evidence to date demands we discover whether or not we can better our society by creating a security blanket under which folk are more confident to plan for long term commitment to a place in society with a stable job.

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

The idea is to have a number of inhabitants that is large enough to study but not too large to fund.

Yes, but my argument is that this changes the study. A large part of the effects comes from the perception the people who live on social benefits have of themselves. If it is a limited study, this people have the perception that they are part of a select few who have been chosen for the study. When you extend the benefits to the whole population that effect disappear and the same people perceive themselves as failures who can only live on the dole. Or they may rationalise the situation internally and perceive themselves as victims entitled of positive discrimination. I am obviously exaggerating here, but you get the message I hope.

Note that I am not dismissing the positive effects you noted. Some amount of social benefits have positive effects, decrease violence and drug usage (including alcohol) and allow a large percentage of the young access to higher education. That is not disputed. What I dispute is that it is simple. The idea of a more equalitarian society clashes with a simple problem: humans want all people to be equal and, at the same time, want themselves to be above all others.

As to "communities living off welfare with 3-4 children", the following article about reduced fertility rates is amusing: https://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/09/10/brazil.novelas.study/index.html
It tends to show that our choice of life are a social construct and, therefore, strongly influenced but what is considered to be higher status behavior around you.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Jérôme,

Theater has been for thousands of years a medium for both entertains and infusing social and political values. Morality plays in Europe with traveling troupes of actors arriving at a village green to perform, long proceeded sit down indoor theaters.

Cowboy movies, the stories in the Bible, Startrek, soap operas, police movies, dramas all carry messages.

However, the effects in Brazil are amazing and perhaps that explains their easy devotion to Mary to solve everything!

Back to a living basic wage, we spend so much money on police and jails that it’s about time we understood the dynamics of parts of our societies that seem to inherit antisocial and criminal behaviors in the first place.

I myself indicated that we need to study these effects. Certainly the folk were proud their kids were finishing school or they had more meaningful longer term “careers”, albeit as a warehouse worker.

if need be we have to write the soap operas and Bible Stories to better match modern social needs!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

Back to a living basic wage, we spend so much money on police and jails that it’s about time we understood the dynamics of parts of our societies that seem to inherit antisocial and criminal behaviors in the first place.

But we do. Therefore the situation is not as it is per chance, but by design. Qui bono?

 

[Asher Kelman]

It is by chance that folk are born in certain banlieuex or “‘hoods”! We can break that cycle by invading those almost independant territories of “exclusion” and work to normalize social values and possibilities by outreach and engagement and opportunities.

Either we spend on jails and cops or we can try something different!

Asher

 

[James Lemon]

The market will not climb . It will look like this V U W L for years .

 

[Asher Kelman]

The market will not climb . It will look like this V U W L for years .

Well it depends. For many companies that sheltered in place, the customers will return. Millions of tiny businesses might go under but will revive as these are niches that will be filled by the next opportunist.

We have not lost the elite classes or ability to write, translate or communicate. We have not lost the ability to overproduce food.

So yes, things will change, like trade balance between the USA and China, but a lot of ideas hanging around, that previously couldn’t get attention, (like a basic wage, free public transport in cities or free advanced skill training for adults) might be explored.

The stability of police being pretty well
Protected from prosecution In the USA will be stressed or upturned. We could see defanging police unions that to some extent currently intimidate or control politicians that pay and empower them!

Teacher’s unions might also have less leverage, as remote learning becomes more effective and cost efficient for certain sectors and needs than physical classrooms. Classrooms being needed for peer interaction, socialization and personal growth more than for academic instruction, itself.

Each differently affected segment of society‘s purchasing power and wish to buy services and goods will of course contribute to the shape of individual stocks as the market attempts recovery.

But ultimately the stock market is a favored offspring of our society and will get protection and deference as we want our savings to increase in value. Politicians are wary of doing anything that threatens share values. When government action strengthens stock market sentiment, the politicians appear to be “successful Captains of the Ship of State”, although the actual economic welfare of half the population may be lagging behind expectations!

Essentially we’ll have a mixture of strong V recovery with L components decreasing the upward slope and government cash handouts counteracting that!

So it will be a V recovery overall and with room for trying new ideas, we’ll grow even faster, but a lot of labor will have to be redirected in the process as we will be using new paradigms for how we meet our needs!

Asher

 

[James Lemon]

Well it depends. For many companies that sheltered in place, the customers will return. Millions of tiny businesses might go under but will revive as these are niches that will be filled by the next opportunist.

We have not lost the elite classes or ability to write, translate or communicate. We have not lost the ability to overproduce food.

So yes, things will change, like trade balance between the USA and China, but a lot of ideas hanging around, that previously couldn’t get attention, (like a basic wage, free public transport in cities or free advanced skill training for adults) might be explored.

The stability of police being pretty well
Protected from prosecution In the USA will be stressed or upturned. We could see defanging police unions that to some extent currently intimidate or control politicians that pay and empower them!

Teacher’s unions might also have less leverage, as remote learning becomes more effective and cost efficient for certain sectors and needs than physical classrooms. Classrooms being needed for peer interaction, socialization and personal growth more than for academic instruction, itself.

Each differently affected segment of society‘s purchasing power and wish to buy services and goods will of course contribute to the shape of individual stocks as the market attempts recovery.

But ultimately the stock market is a favored offspring of our society and will get protection and deference as we want our savings to increase in value. Politicians are wary of doing anything that threatens share values. When government action strengthens stock market sentiment, the politicians appear to be “successful Captains of the Ship of State”, although the actual economic welfare of half the population may be lagging behind expectations!

Essentially we’ll have a mixture of strong V recovery with L components decreasing the upward slope and government cash handouts counteracting that!

So it will be a V recovery overall and with room for trying new ideas, we’ll grow even faster, but a lot of labor will have to be redirected in the process as we will be using new paradigms for how we meet our needs!

Asher

There are many obstacles ahead, many companies are highly leveraged as it is. Supply shocks causing inflation numerous problems to list. Some say it will be a lost decade. Others are saying technology is killing capitalism but what are the alternatives considering there are no other ism's? People need to be making transactions for the gears of capitalism to be well oiled. Yes there are many things we can do more efficiently, things that should have been done long ago. Yes I agree that the stock market is the favored offspring of society. We can address that but main street will need a big bailout. Whatever that may be for those carrying debt monies could be given to them to pay down their debts. For those not holding as much debt monies could be given to them as well but with a condition that it has to be invested.

I was watching demonstrations on the news in Tel Aviv and other places as well and people are already in serious circumstances.

 

[Jerome Marot]

This are the last 5 years of the Nasdaq which I just downloaded:

​

What do you exactly mean by "the market is not climbing"?

 

[Asher Kelman]

Yes, Jérôme, the Dow too!

Overall, folk have not lost confidence.

But COVID-19 restrictive conditions hammered the market for the past 4 months or so.

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Here we see the return on the DOW average in 3 historical time cycle periods.

Amazingly, the DOW has been so profitable in the past 7 years. As the slope increases, so do the corrections can seem a little frightening in the short run!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

Your charts are interesting, but they are about the market over a century. The market is bound to increase over such a long time, as its value is linked to the size of the world economy. I am also not sure whether the figures are corrected for inflation.

This is the Dow Jones for the same period and at the same scale than the Nasdaq which I posted earlier on:

​

It is not as insanely raising as the Nasdaq, but the index is at the value it had in early 2019.

You asked the question "when will the market climb?" at the beginning of the covid-19 crisis. What I meant to show by these graphics is that the market effects of the covid-19 crisis are apparently gone. That is a bit surprising, as we still are in the middle of a crisis, but it may be partially explained by the measures taken to increase liquidity.

What awaits us is obviously another matter.

 

[Andy brown]

There are many obstacles ahead, many companies are highly leveraged as it is. Supply shocks causing inflation numerous problems to list. Some say it will be a lost decade. Others are saying technology is killing capitalism but what are the alternatives considering there are no other ism's? People need to be making transactions for the gears of capitalism to be well oiled. Yes there are many things we can do more efficiently, things that should have been done long ago. Yes I agree that the stock market is the favored offspring of society. We can address that but main street will need a big bailout. Whatever that may be for those carrying debt monies could be given to them to pay down their debts. For those not holding as much debt monies could be given to them as well but with a condition that it has to be invested.

I was watching demonstrations on the news in Tel Aviv and other places as well and people are already in serious circumstances.

James.
Whatever you are trying to say, you really need to start by getting your English past grade 3 level before trying to be taken seriously.
Sorry but this is an unintelligible pile of rubbish.
I try not to communicate with you because I find you boorish, brash and coarse.

Why do I feel the need to admonish you?
Because you feel the need to spout your non existent wisdom. It’s galling.

Seriously..... this is not a sentence...”Supply shocks causing inflation numerous problems to list”.
Dear oh dear!
The rest is no better.
Again, sorry, I wish I wasn’t in the mood to be kicking your arse but you leave no option.

You are not a journalist. Please don’t pretend to be one.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Your charts are interesting, but they are about the market over a century. The market is bound to increase over such a long time, as its value is linked to the size of the world economy. I am also not sure whether the figures are corrected for inflation.

This is the Dow Jones for the same period and at the same scale than the Nasdaq which I posted earlier on:

View attachment 5180
​

It is not as insanely raising as the Nasdaq, but the index is at the value it had in early 2019.

You asked the question "when will the market climb?" at the beginning of the covid-19 crisis. What I meant to show by these graphics is that the market effects of the covid-19 crisis are apparently gone. That is a bit surprising, as we still are in the middle of a crisis, but it may be partially explained by the measures taken to increase liquidity.

What awaits us is obviously another matter.

Jérôme,

if one has linked a loan to that market, then one is not now back to normal. For me personally, the stress is not relieved enough to be at 2019 level.

But in the longer term view of things then, yes it has recovered substantially!

 

[James Lemon]

James.
Whatever you are trying to say, you really need to start by getting your English past grade 3 level before trying to be taken seriously.
Sorry but this is an unintelligible pile of rubbish.
I try not to communicate with you because I find you boorish, brash and coarse.

Why do I feel the need to admonish you?
Because you feel the need to spout your non existent wisdom. It’s galling.

Seriously..... this is not a sentence...”Supply shocks causing inflation numerous problems to list”.
Dear oh dear!
The rest is no better.
Again, sorry, I wish I wasn’t in the mood to be kicking your arse but you leave no option.

You are not a journalist. Please don’t pretend to be one.

So why don’t you keep your childish comments to yourself Andy? It’s meant for those with an IQ above 70.

 

[James Lemon]

This are the last 5 years of the Nasdaq which I just downloaded:

View attachment 5177
​

What do you exactly mean by "the market is not climbing"?

You are referring to one small component of the market. The market goes up and down every day I meant that the market will not climb over the long term. I am suggesting it will eventually go flat 4 or 5 years out and wont gather much steam in the short term. It is currently propped up through financial engineering and thus recent positive gains. The economy equals the total sum of all transactions and it is the total amount of spending that drives the economy.

 

[Jerome Marot]

This last image corresponds to the last 6 months of the chart I posted earlier (message #82), just presented with a different scale. It shows the same growth, but with a flatter scale. Here the same period from the website I used in message #82:

​

Whichever chart we use, we still have a growth of about 50% from the low in mid March. From the time the question was asked, market did climb.

These are just 6 months. Earlier I used a chart over a period of 5 years, as I think it gives more context. It shows that the market started to climb at the end of 2016 and it shows the crash at the end of 2018. That latter period is particularly interesting at it is the most recent crash prior to covid-19.