street
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Yes, I agree 100% good point.Just remember, the market is not the economy. They are lightly correlated, but short term economy has no correlation.
Yes, I agree 100% good point.Just remember, the market is not the economy. They are lightly correlated, but short term economy has no correlation.
I have no idea what the effect is in terms of "bigger" or "smaller" or in terms of the "point" the author was trying to make BUT there has been a boatload of consolidation in that time period (how many fewer airlines now than then, for instance.) So simply saying there are fewer public companies doesn't mean much to me. The fact that there are more private companies (to me) just means that the economy is doing very well and people are willing to invest in more risky things right now. No expert here, so YMMV.idk, there might be some points. Percent up is not a measure of size. It does state there are 4300 public companies today in (presumably) the DOW, whereas that number was 7300 in 1996, and there are far more private companies than before - that all underscores the "market is not the economy" argument.
idk, there might be some points. Percent up is not a measure of size. It does state there are 4300 public companies today in (presumably) the DOW, whereas that number was 7300 in 1996, and there are far more private companies than before - that all underscores the "market is not the economy" argument.
If more private investors are going to these private companies and equities then, yes, the market is smaller. And that has happened a lot.
The title is clickbait (and journalists almost never get to write their own titles) but if there were a pie chart of where people's money is today, it would appear the slice that's in the public-stock-market is smaller than in recent history, and I'd buy that.
There are three levers to reduce inflation. Increasing interest rates is one, increasing taxes is another, and Quantitative Tightening is the third. All are extremely effective. QT is still ongoing, although at a reduced rate, and is still helping to keep a lid on inflation.To me, it's less about the current level of interest rates but just how quickly they can rise - due to inflation. Nearly the only "lever" to control inflation is the interest rates. Without the current (and very recent) inflation, we would still be at relatively low interest rates. YMMV
I guess one more: Gummint could stop spending money we don't have and printing money to cover the short fall - but I wouldn't count on it. YMMVThere are three levers to reduce inflation. Increasing interest rates is one, increasing taxes is another, and Quantitative Tightening is the third. All are extremely effective. QT is still ongoing, although at a reduced rate, and is still helping to keep a lid on inflation.