brockwhittaker
Joined 11 years ago
Joined 11 years ago
With regards to safety, I noted that I think there are two types of safety to note here:
1. Default risk. 2. Asset price volatility.
Ultimately if someone is willing and able to hold to expiry, they aren't subject to #2, but this clearly wasn't the case with SVB and may also be the case with other institutions. I think it lacks nuance to not consider the middle states between the purchase of a bond and the full return of the bond upon expiry.
In the United States, people have long seen real estate as a path to wealth (unlike Japan, for example), so it's difficult to reason that people's primary homes shouldn't be their escape hatch into retirement (e.g. the dream of someone buying a house in 1980s Palo Alto and selling it in 2022).
https://tax.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/571/~/i-don...
* https://taxfoundation.org/how-high-are-property-taxes-in-you... ** https://resources.oxfordeconomics.com/hubfs/Housing_affordab...
I think that taking money out of the system entirely means less demand competition for everyone else, which means more resources for others.
I don't employ any technical analysis in trading, nor am I a strong advocate, but technical analysis is more about reactionary psychology than about predicting the future. In the most micro sense, the market is dictated by single individuals buying and selling stock, and in the broadest sense, it's a statistical result of millions, or billions of unknowns. Those are two totally different games.