@Flash wrote:

I think one would be nuts not to be concerned but foolish to be incapacitated. I am watching a website [systems.jhu.edu] that has a map at the bottom of the page. Click on the map and it will show the current statistics worldwide. We are at 6000 cases at the moment, which is a drop in the bucket as influenza goes. What I am watching more closely is the deaths vs recoveries. At this time there are 132 deaths vs 110 recovered. Since it is likely to be a year before a vaccine is generally available, it is treatment of those infected that becomes critical and at the moment it is not even a 50/50 chance of recovery.

Well, that is an alarming outlook.

@Flash wrote:

@JASFLALMT wrote:

I lost $1200 on the market Monday but regained it yesterday.

And likely are regaining the rest of it today.

And lost it yesterday. That sux.

@sestrahelena wrote:

So, about those masks. Assuming that they're made in China (because everything is) is it not possible that they have been contaminated by infected factory workers prior to being shipped? I am no scientist so my little brain sees this as a distinct possiblity and, if true, the ultimate irony.

I do not know about these masks, but China already warns about contamination in Crest toothpaste and Charmen toilet paper, among others.

@Texans wrote:

I retired with 3 medical certifications in different fields. Do you have any medical experience?

I notice you mentioned certifications and not degrees, which means you could be certified as a nurse's aide (an honorable field and most needed in contagious situations,) in Phlebotomy, and CPR - none of which make you more knowledgeable in this situation that the person calling you out in spreading disinformation.
If they were interested in studying them, why did they let them off the plane to wander around a military base before heading out of town to who knows where? I'm thinking they were allowed on a plane because someone knew or was related to a congressperson.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2020 08:52PM by Burrowsl2l.

@shoptastic wrote:

@JASFLALMT wrote:

Carnival just hit it's lowest price in 5+ years. It might go down even more.

I personally don't buy CNBC's fake financial news take that the reason stocks are dropping so much today (1,000+ points on the Dow already) is due to a few extra cases of coronavirus showing up outside of Asia. Gimme a break.

They didn't know this last Friday?

Bernie sanders landslided in Nevada Saturday, while Bloomberg bombed in last week's debate. It's going to be Trump vs. Bernie in 2020. If Sanders wins and can reverse Trump's corporate tax cuts, then stocks will lose a major source of support.

E.g., Why are health insurance stocks dropping so much more than other sectors of the market? Medicare for All fears.

The virus and slowing global economy are no doubt part of it, but not the main reason for today's sudden drop, imho.

@shoptastic wrote:

@JASFLALMT wrote:

Carnival just hit it's lowest price in 5+ years. It might go down even more.

I personally don't buy CNBC's fake financial news take that the reason stocks are dropping so much today (1,000+ points on the Dow already) is due to a few extra cases of coronavirus showing up outside of Asia. Gimme a break.

They didn't know this last Friday?

Bernie sanders landslided in Nevada Saturday, while Bloomberg bombed in last week's debate. It's going to be Trump vs. Bernie in 2020. If Sanders wins and can reverse Trump's corporate tax cuts, then stocks will lose a major source of support.

E.g., Why are health insurance stocks dropping so much more than other sectors of the market? Medicare for All fears.

The virus and slowing global economy are no doubt part of it, but not the main reason for today's sudden drop, imho.

I do not believe the stocks fell due to a few sick people. I understand the stocks are dropping due to supply lines going down, countries closing borders, and the high probability that most of the work force will soon be sick.
But hey, like the Prez says: all we gotta do is wait for April and this will miraculously disappear.
As far as the markets being scared of a Sanders' win - that is a fallacy. Yes, insurance companies would take a hit, but alternative energy, construction, and research and development markets would surge, and consumers would buy more goods. So the market would actually not fear him so much.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2020 09:09PM by Burrowsl2l.

Nope, lost more during the week, way more. Regained some of it Friday.

What is up with the Tooth paste and toilet paper?

The first death in the U.S. is in the county in which I live... there is currently a case in the city where I teach.... Several local schools have closed so they can sanitize...

Edited to add: the city where the death occurred is only a few miles from home - I drive pat it every day going to work... This just got real...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2020 10:31PM by MFJohnston.

@MFJohnston wrote:

The first death in the U.S. is in the county in which I live... there is currently a case in the city where I teach.... Several local schools have closed so they can sanitize...

I'm starting to get a bad feeling about this.

At first, I thought this was a minor thing that markets were disguising to cover up Bernie Sanders' ascendancy. Now, I'm learning more and getting a sense of how much of a "lock-down" it can cause for an economy.

It's not something a central bank rate cut or other financial stimulus can solve, as is the typical response when there is an economic crisis. This is, instead, a medical one that could easily force people to go into Wuhan-level lock-down for weeks or months (worst case?). That would crush all economic activity.

On the medical side, I really hope and pray we don't have many deaths. Hopefully, the better U.S. health care system allows for better recoveries. I worry about places like India, where there is lots of poverty and nowhere near the medical quality and infrastructure we have.

Many places throughout the world could be on lock-down for weeks or months if this gets really bad......starting to get a better sense of the scale of things. Hoping everyone stays strong throughout this!!!

Also, people seem to be hoarding certain supplies.

I going to stock up myself.

I bought 20 bottles of hand sanitizer today from the Dollar Tree, that should keep me for a year or so.

@JASFLALMT wrote:

I bought 20 bottles of hand sanitizer today from the Dollar Tree, that should keep me for a year or so.

ROFLAMO. Cute.

I work with pathogens all day long. We get it by the case.

PURELL® Advanced Hand Sanitizer Refreshing Gel for Workplaces, Clean Scent, 2 Liter Pump Bottle, 4/CT (9625-04CT)

$180/case. We have two cases worth on the counters right now.

Hand sanitizer should contain at least 60% alcohol, according to the CDC website.

Thanks. The stuff I buy from the Dollar Tree is 70.0%. I figure a $1 for a 10-12 ounce bottle is a good deal (some of the bottles are "bonus" size bottles). Anyway, some of it I am taking to a party I am throwing for my oldest stepdaughter next weekend. I raised her, and she's turned into a germaphobe, too, LOL. We are putting a bottle on each table for guests. I hope that most people take advantage of washing their hands in the restroom, but one never knows, and sanitizer does help kill most germs that they didn't get rid of when they washed. I am cooking for this party, I will fix my plate in the kitchen at the club before I take the food out to the main area. I tend not to eat much at parties; needless to say buffets are nearly impossible for me. Hence my dislike for cruises. I've never been on one. I had looked at some of those private catamaran excursions out of Belize that look pretty cool and that option isn't off the table in the future, but as far as the cattle-herding, floating petrie dishes, hell no.

@Burrowsl2l wrote:

I do not believe the stocks fell due to a few sick people. I understand the stocks are dropping due to supply lines going down, countries closing borders, and the high probability that most of the work force will soon be sick.
But hey, like the Prez says: all we gotta do is wait for April and this will miraculously disappear.
As far as the markets being scared of a Sanders' win - that is a fallacy. Yes, insurance companies would take a hit, but alternative energy, construction, and research and development markets would surge, and consumers would buy more goods. So the market would actually not fear him so much.

I'm reading that supply chains could wreck production if just one part is missing. For example, if OBJECT A requires 200 parts and just 1 is missing, that, alone, could mean the entire thing cannot be finalized or delayed.

My original comments about this being fake financial news were due to the fact that we seemed to KNOW this was spreading and cases were ALREADY popping up outside of the U.S. So, I was like why the sudden drop from Friday to Monday? Just a few extra cases? Didn't seem likely. I still think Monday's drop was due to Sanders mostly. But, then, one of those days after that we got news that California had 8,000+ cases people were monitoring for the coronavirus. That seemed to be a volatility catalyst.

Now, we have the first U.S. death and Super Tuesday coming this week. Could be some interesting times. . .

I mostly worry about the rest of the world, where there is much less health care infrastructure. Even a modern place like Wuhan got so bad that there weren't enough hospital beds! These viruses spread exponentially. They might start small, but they double, triple, quadruple, etc. in days.

This is coming at a time when the U.S. economy and world economy were already very fragile. Mexico is in a recession. Germany and Italy are borderline recession. Canada is in fear of recession. China, many say, will likely have a Q1 negative GDP (half-way to the definition of recession: 2 quarters of negative GDP).

The next few weeks will be very important. This could go exponential in its spread with deaths rising and a need for U.S. lockdown. Hoping we don't get to a point like Wuhan, where people couldn't even get a hospital bed.

Note that it's not just the deaths, but just severe symptoms in people (esp. elderly and kids) that could require hospitalization. Lots of people could need a couple of weeks of hospitalization without the end case being death.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2020 03:42PM by shoptastic.

Very few children have gotten infected.

@shopper8 wrote:

What is up with the Tooth paste and toilet paper?

Can someone link to the alleged contamination news?

We have months (years?) worth of toilet paper in my house, due to bulk buying. No worries on that!

Alleged?

@shoptastic wrote:

@shopper8 wrote:

What is up with the Tooth paste and toilet paper?

Can someone link to the alleged contamination news?

We have months (years?) worth of toilet paper in my house, due to bulk buying. No worries on that!

The different flu viruses kill just as many yearly. I'm not worried about it. Keep hands away from face and use hand sanitizer often. Change clothes when you return home.
Masks do not protect your eyes/ears, which if particles are in the air, can get in and infect you.
Think about it, eye, ears, nose, and mouth are all inter-related. Why cover up half (mouth and nose) and leave 50% unprotected. Masks are a waste of money folks.

The CDC stated to please not purchase masks unless you are a health care worker or an infected person, as there is currently a shortage of masks.

The reason that the nose and mouth are more likely ways for the virus to infect someone is that you breathe through these orifices. Someone would have to directly shoot respiratory droplets into your eyes (a powerful sneeze could do that) or ears, but it's way more likely that you can inhale droplets floating through the air.

@Madetoshop wrote:

Plunging numbers. Hold on. Still letting our monthly investments happen. Wondering if I should invest a surplus available now.

Hmmm.

Did you mean you had a significantly larger "lump sum" type of investment you were considering making, in addition to your already planned monthly contributions?

Not a recommendation at all here, Madetoshop, but just random thoughts:

1.) Whether to invest, how much, and at what time is always dependent on a particular person's situation. Things like age, stability of one's income/job (or ease with which you can find a new one), personal finances - like debt, and goals are all factors.

A 20-something accountant, who has most of his debt paid off, an emergency fund established, and lots of spare cash, could probably see a market pullback of 12% as an easy investing decision. Whereas, a 66 year old, who is heading into retirement with diminished income potential and needing to rely on her investments as primary income for the foreseeable future, may have a different approach. Maybe she needs to protect her decades worth of investments/gains vs. the potential upside of gaining, say, an extra 10%.

2.) Studies have shown that investing a lump sum all at once into the market the day you have it available is better than investing it over time. If you Google: "lump sum vs. dollar cost averaging" ...there are lots of articles on this. Or, one can look up Jack Bogle (Vanguard founder and inventor of the index fund) and his thoughts on this. Basically, if you suddenly inherited $100,000 and took a random period of history and asked if it would be better to invest all of the money in a lump sum into the market the day you got it vs. waiting and spreading it out over time (say, over two years), the math shows you are better doing the former, as the difference is possibly huge over decades.

Markets go up over time (as does inflation), so in theory, the earlier you invest, the better. You get the natural rises in the markets, in addition to compounding (from reinvesting dividends, for example, or just capital appreciation "compounding" ). But, a smaller percentage of the time, this fails, because you could be investing at a horrible time:

a.) right before some giant crash like in 1929 or the dot com 2000-2001 bubble
b.) maybe the market is super overvalued at that time (as the case in a.) above )

As far as I know (people are welcome to correct here), the studies that examine this question don't factor signs of these things into their method.

But, there are also good reasons why dollar-cost-averaging that big sum over months or years may be better for non-financial reasons. Perhaps, it makes you just sleep better! How would you feel if you put a big sum of money into the market and saw it go down 35% in a month or two later? Could you handle that? Would it make you do something irrational? Some argue that the combination of emotional peace of mind + the smaller % of time you get unlucky with the lump sum method make dollar cost averaging a reasonable approach.

Fascinating debate. I don't have answers. I personally would rather DCA. I'll give up some percentage points just to sleep better! Plus, I don't have bullet-proof income in case of a disaster!

3.) In general, investing during market corrections (declines of 10%) or bear markets (declines of 20% or more) have been quite profitable. ...Unless, those initial declines are the start of something worse, as mentioned above. Although, if you have the cash, you could also keep buying all the way down.

4.) But, not everyone has the cash to keeping "buying the dip." During a recession or economic slowdown, people lose jobs. The elderly, who may be on fixed income, often won't have the cash to buy the dip, because all their money is in their investments, which have now crashed. What they might have in an emergency fund may need to be used to make up for the lost income from investments.

Even a younger person, who has a good paying job, might lose that and not be able to find something so quickly. Buying the dip during a crash is GREAT - if you have the financial stability and cash to do it with. I'm always reminded (from watching Real Vision) that NOT EVERYONE can buy the dip, though!

5.) In some recessions, as rare as it may be, having cash is actually UNSAFE. There are rare cases, where you have recession leading to hyper-inflation. In those cases, having something like gold is great and even stocks are better than cash (which is rapidly losing value).

6.) Coronavirus seems like a possible black swan.

a.) It's a medical pandemic, which monetary and fiscal stimulus cannot really directly solve.
b.) It's coming at a time that world economies were already very fragile, so it's sort of like adding fuel to a fire.
c.) It could lead to recession. The last two in the U.S. - the 2000-2001 dot com bust and 2007-2008 sub-prime mortgage financial crisis - led to drops of 50%+ in U.S. stocks.

7.) After stocks began dropping in 2000 and bottoming in 2001, it took until 2007 for them to recover their pre-bust values. After stocks began dropping in 2007 and bottoming in 2009, it took until 2011 for them to recover their pre-bust values. ***I mean the indexes. Individual stocks varied with some going out of business or taking much longer to recover.

The reason we recovered faster in the 2007-08 meltdown was partially due to lower valuations. In 2000-2001, U.S. stocks were egregiously overvalued. As such, it took them much longer to recover.

8.) Where are we today? Prior to the 12% slide, every valuation metric, except one (the equity risk premium comparing stocks to bonds/"risk free" yields), showed the U.S. stock market as highly valued (one of the highest in recorded U.S. history). As such, a 10-12% correction from such all-time, arguably overvalued highs wouldn't necessarily make stocks cheap (as a group in an index - although, individual stocks might be). That is, unless you factor in current interest rates and the ERP (equity-risk-premium). I personally didn't find U.S. stocks, as a whole, that much of a bargain until the last day of the sell-off when they went below 25,000 on the Dow. At 25,409 (closing), I felt they were more fair value.

On the other hand, I have felt emerging markets to be a genuine bargain post-global sell-off (explained earlier in the thread). In a worst case scenario, if we went into a global recession, I think emerging markets would come out of that in much better shape and have a better chance to grow in valuation over the next decade compared to highly valued U.S. stocks.

Depending on where interest rates stand long-term (which would affect the equity risk premium), U.S. stocks could be in for a very bad decade post a recession or perhaps do "okay" (but, likely not great)...as in low to mid-single digit gains a year. It's hard to know. Warren Buffett has said that if interest rates remain low into the future, then U.S. stocks are outrageously cheap. It's hard to know what happens. I only know that U.S. stocks have been in a "bubble" of sorts. By traditional non-ERP metrics, we're at 1929 pre-Great Depression and 2000-2001 dot com bust levels. Only the equity-risk-premium justifies the current levels (as people are forced to buy stocks to have positive real yields - as bank savings accounts, CDs, and many bonds, etc. often offer negative real yields that don't beat inflation).

Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2020 08:32PM by shoptastic.

@MFJohnston wrote:

Alleged?

@shoptastic wrote:

@shopper8 wrote:

What is up with the Tooth paste and toilet paper?

Can someone link to the alleged contamination news?

We have months (years?) worth of toilet paper in my house, due to bulk buying. No worries on that!

alleged to me? ...I haven't been following that particular news item.

@shoptastic wrote:

I only know that U.S. stocks have been in a "bubble" of sorts. By traditional non-ERP metrics, we're at 1929 pre-Great Depression and 2000-2001 dot com bust levels. Only the equity-risk-premium justifies the current levels (as people are forced to buy stocks to have positive real yields - as bank savings accounts, CDs, and many bonds, etc. often offer negative real yields that don't beat inflation).

WORDING CORRECTION: post-sell-off last week, I thought U.S. stocks became reasonable (as mentioned earlier in that post) at roughly 25,000 on the Dow. Not a bargain, but not bad either. Prior to the sell-off, non-ERP metrics showed U.S. stocks as the highest valued or second highest in U.S. history (rivaling the 1929 pre-Great Depression and 2000-2001 pre-dot com bust levels).

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2020 07:14PM by shoptastic.

We're down substantially on paper, too. Hubby is hoping to retire next year, and we have a meeting scheduled with our advisor next week. It will be very interesting to see what she has to say.

@Niner wrote:

I've lost so much money (on paper) these past few days..

Can't wait to continue investing this week! As long as the market's in the red, I'll continue to make daily purchases, much more frequent than my typical weekly contributions! BLACK FRIDAY is still among us!!

@Tarantado wrote:

Can't wait to continue investing this week! As long as the market's in the red, I'll continue to make daily purchases, much more frequent than my typical weekly contributions! BLACK FRIDAY is still among us!!

Were YOU the reason stocks recovered slightly the end of Friday? ...and why futures are up?

Plowing your millions in, eh?

@shoptastic wrote:

Were YOU the reason stocks recovered slightly the end of Friday? ...and why futures are up?

Plowing your millions in, eh?

Hahaha, millions?! Naw. More like thousands, so I'm just a speck in all this traffic. My brother in law works at Fidelity and basically told me that his team's swamped this past week (and probably this week) with people pulling out of their portfolios from the scare.

I'm only interested in DIS (Disney) and GOOG/GOOGL. No other U.S. stocks, nor indexes.

I'm interested in emerging markets for foreign exposure. Europe is cheap, but it's cheap for a reason. LOL. They have a debt disabled economic bloc, bad demographics, and poor growth. They are mostly unappealing to me (with a few exceptions) over the next decade.

Emerging markets have low debt, better demographics (with India's so-called demographic dividend, in particular), a rising middle-class/consumerism, and faster earnings growth rates. They are truly trading at a discount.

INDA (India fund) is something I really wanna buy. It was expensive (for good reason) out of the emerging markets regions (which have been mostly cheap), but is now decently priced, imho.

I might pick up Disney, Google, or INDA.

@Tarantado wrote:

@shoptastic wrote:

Were YOU the reason stocks recovered slightly the end of Friday? ...and why futures are up?

Plowing your millions in, eh?

Hahaha, millions?! Naw. More like thousands, so I'm just a speck in all this traffic. My brother in law works at Fidelity and basically told me that his team's swamped this past week (and probably this week) with people pulling out of their portfolios from the scare.

suuuuuure. You probably secretly moved the market up and have some slick things planned.

Yeah, I can see some retirees getting worried. We've had the longest running bull market in U.S. history. Some people might want to just protect some of their decade-long - or decadeS long - gains.

I haven't sold anything whatsoever during the slump and have zero plans to. It's just that I'm not sure I will buy (U.S. anyways). I'm pretty sure I'll add to emerging markets.

ETA: I added HDB (India's largest bank) on Friday BEFORE the 1,000 point Monday drop. It'd already lost 10% this year.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/02/2020 03:12AM by shoptastic.