Most days, I read something that reminds me how little I know. And then I read the financial pages.
Let's look at the UK's Daily Mail today, Money Mail section (pages 38-39). The headline is "Storm Warning" - anything from a week to seven years late, depending on your analysis of the underlying trends.
Sub-section: "Will it continue?" Answer: volatility "for the next few months", but "the markets are fundamentally sound in that that they are not over-priced". Yet we've only just heard from Marc Faber, saying that he expects "earnings disappointments" which will show up in the dividends and so alter the p/e ratio for the worse. And on page 66 of the same paper we see disappointments at UBS, Wal-Mart, Home Depot.
The chairman of a large financial advice firm is quoted saying, "You must put this sub-prime mortgage meltdown into perspective. We are talking about £100 billion of losses. [Wait for the punchline.] This sounds like a lot, but it is just one-tenth of the size of the public sector pension liability in this country." Very large, and mostly unfunded, pension liabilities.
Usually, I throw away the money sections of newspapers; I only read them today to see if they'd noticed what was going on. But then I remember that journalists told us for years not to bother with financial advisers, when we could buy our pensions direct from the six-figure wagemen at Equitable Life.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Unfortunately, because of a plague of spam comments, you need to be a "registered user", otherwise your observations will be buried in a torrent of multilingual nonsense. Please do comment!
Say what you please, so long as it's phrased politely and is not libellous or legally proscribed. Fact, reason and wit are keenly welcomed.