two interesting stats on CNBC today and Bloomberg

[glovesetc]

In most portfolios the decrease is 25% after todays sterling performance with mutual funds getting hit the hardest in a years time . Real estate is down approximately 25% in the last year with no bottom in sight so if your home and funds are both down 25% each looks like you are down 50% for the year so far !!!! Not bad!!! I will be buying silver contracts either today or tomorrow and maybe i will start a new thread detailing my progress or my demise sort of like my football thread that at the moment is very well!!!

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by glovesetc

Real estate is down approximately 25% in the last year with no bottom in sight so if your home and funds are both down 25% each looks like you are down 50% for the year so far !!!!

Better check your arithmatic there Gloves. zg

[Jeff Dubya]

Originally Posted by zengrifter

Better check your arithmatic there Gloves.

Oh my dear God... it happened. I agreed with ZG.

If you have a 1000 dollar investment, and it loses 250, that is a 25% loss.

If you have a second 1000 dollar investment and it loses 250, that is a 25% loss.

If you add the two together, it's not a 50% loss. It would be a 500 loss on 2000 which is... drum roll... 25%.

But so weird we agree. I need to go shower now. LOL :P

[zengrifter]

You guys are talking about the crash over here... like we haven't been calling it for years "over there" (ie, ZZone). zg

[glovesetc]

If you lose 25% of your house value and 25% of your portfolio you are down 50% compared to where you were when you started . If your net worth is one million dollars and you lost 25% out of each you are down 50% of your net worth . That is assuming all your net worth was in your house and portfolio and you had no other assets such as oriental rugs , Tiffany lamps, diamonds, gold , silver , savings , etc etc ! Guess I should of exolained it in better detail .

[N&B]

And I elsewhere since I got outta REITS in mid-2003, when this began... giving mortgages to those who are at higher risk to NOT pay them off was just plain dumb and greedy. And that mistake has snowballed into this morass, because the corporate leaders got emotionally involved, defending (re: failed to admit) their mistake.

I for one think the bastards should fail, and be humbled in the world court of public opinion. Greatness that begs for a bailout is not greatness, at least the world sees that as of today.

As for the rest of us, we'll just pay our bills and live within our means. Its called balancing and budgeting... two words infamously overlooked by the greatness of the powerful, and their ego's.

And BTW if one starts with $1000 and loses 25%, and then loses another 25%, the results are $750 loses $187.50... the net position of THAT is $562.50 or a loss of 47.5% of the original stake.

[glovesetc]

too many meds -tyhe way I stated it was a gross 25% loss- I do stand corrected !!! Going to bed before I pass out - lol !

[Jeff Dubya]

Originally Posted by glovesetc

too many meds -tyhe way I stated it was a gross 25% loss- I do stand corrected !!! Going to bed before I pass out - lol !

Actually, my argument was quite simplified. The average person would not have the same value of their home in the market, so the REAL answer would be between 25% and 50%. The only way to know for sure would be to do the math and divide the total $ of loss by the total original valuation.

But yeah, I feel ya.

Regardless of the math, it all sucks.