Bull market, how long for?

iro

BananaRepublic wrote: »

You and iro come across as incredibly self centred and callous people. I suspect you are American, and it’s odd because Americans do more for charities than any other nation. They are a generous people. And they have incredible achievements as a nation. And yet when I look at America, I see areas of poverty and levels of crime that should shame any civilised nation.

I believe in creating the kind of country I want to live in and that means showing compassion for those that fall on hard times, and respecting that we all live in an interconnected society. Thus I benefit from the kindness and hard work of those paid less than me. And part of our duty in society is to provide an NHS for example. I’ve come across quite a few Americans who have worked hard all their lives and then found hardship as they got old, because of illness, or unemployment. It’s a country where hard work rewards, but it also punishes the infirm and unfortunate. It is too much winner takes all for my taste. And I suspect the welfare state helps us avoid the sort of violence seen in America.

I DONT care what you think, this thread is about investment duh!

I suggest if you wanna go virtue signal there are better places for you to go and tell people that you have a right to spend their money on things you seem to think are important.

It is called the Money Saving Expert Forum
NOT
the Money Spending Expert Forum

Geddit?

Basic housing and FS the extent of state aid, any more should come from contributions to insurance schemes whilst in work. Anyone receiving state aid should be required to make themselves available for community based work (cleaning parks etc.).

You see I do care about society.

Thrugelmir

iro wrote: »

Looked at NAIT (which is in my portfolio), no evidence of Amazon as far as I can tell.

The FAANG's and other technology stocks are the real drivers of the US indexes.

redpete

iro wrote: »

Completely agree 12 children by 12 different fathers is not uncommon, the 'State' does considerable evil in its attempt to virtue signal and appeal to 'virtue signallers' and their journalistic accomplices..

The number of mothers with 12 children is extremely small, the number of these with 12 different fathers is vanishingly tiny. You might have an interesting point to make but destroy any credibility with this type of nonsense.

bowlhead99

iro wrote: »

Anyone know of a US private equity fund?

Yes, plenty, but you can't invest in them unless you can commit hundreds of thousands or millions (ideally tens of millions) of dollars and you won't find them on the stock exchange because they're private typically partnerships between the fund manager and the institutional investors who fund them.

However, there are various UK listed vehicles which are funds-of-funds, holding investments in a number of US private equity fund and direct private investments, with over 50% exposure to US-based businesses.

Examples I hold,

Harbourvest Global Private Equity
http://www.hvpe.com/~/media/Files/H/Hvgpe/reports-and-presentations/estimated-monthly-nav/2017/30-november-2017-monthly-update.pdf

Pantheon International plc
http://www.piplc.com/system/files/newsletters/pip-october-2017-nav-newsletter.pdf

https://www.LPEQ.com will give you some links to members of the European listed private equity community and the US is the biggest private equity market in the world.

iro

redpete wrote: »

The number of mothers with 12 children is extremely small, the number of these with 12 different fathers is vanishingly tiny. You might have an interesting point to make but destroy any credibility with this type of nonsense.

As many are taken into care at birth not widely reported, the reaction to losing a child to adoption because of a lack of capacity to look after it is quite commonly to get pregnant again and again and again as each child is taken away.

Given the potential fecundity of a female over her lifetime the figure might even be greater than 12 for all we know.

The State is complicit in this IMHO.

iro

bowlhead99 wrote: »

Yes, plenty, but you can't invest in them unless you can commit hundreds of thousands or millions (ideally tens of millions) of dollars and you won't find them on the stock exchange because they're private typically partnerships between the fund manager and the institutional investors who fund them.

However, there are various UK listed vehicles which are funds-of-funds, holding investments in a number of US private equity fund and direct private investments, with over 50% exposure to US-based businesses.

Examples I hold,

Harbourvest Global Private Equity
http://www.hvpe.com/~/media/Files/H/Hvgpe/reports-and-presentations/estimated-monthly-nav/2017/30-november-2017-monthly-update.pdf

Pantheon International plc
http://www.piplc.com/system/files/newsletters/pip-october-2017-nav-newsletter.pdf

https://www.LPEQ.com will give you some links to members of the European listed private equity community and the US is the biggest private equity market in the world.

Very helpful thank you, some interesting ideas to research here.

bowlhead99

iro wrote: »

As many are taken into care at birth not widely reported, the reaction to losing a child to adoption because of a lack of capacity to look after it is quite commonly to get pregnant again and again and again as each child is taken away.

Your reply to the person mentioning that more babies are born out of wedlock than inside it was to state that someone having 12 children by 12 different fathers was 'not uncommon'.

I would contend that, assuming we are still talking about humans, and about the UK or USA, it *is* uncommon.

Your assertion is that it is common, but if you were asked to produce evidence of that, or quote any statistics about what proportion of children born each year are born to mothers who have given birth to 12 different children by 12 different fathers, you would struggle to identify one or two published occurances; let alone a meaningful proportion of the 700-800k births in this country each year (or 4m+ births in USA).

So, it is not common. Stop being stupid.

Given the potential fecundity of a female over her lifetime the figure might even be greater than 12 for all we know.

So by this you are meaning that there *might* even have been one occurance in recorded history where someone gave birth to 13 kids from 13 dads, right?

I think most would struggle to square your comment "I completely agree 12 children by 12 different fathers is not uncommon" with your revised one "I suppose there might have been one somewhere in the whole history of recorded time, who knows".

No, you are just making sensational trolling statements. Such statements detract from any credible argument you might make in your other posts. Maybe you are not actually completely stupid but there is no point patiently reading all the other stuff you have to say to try and work it out.

Ah, but don't worry if there is no evidence - probably it's the complicit government, covering it up! In other news, moon landing was a hoax, JFK and 9/11 was an inside job, etc etc.

You see I do care about society.

I suspect you care more about how your opinions are perceived online. In that sense it's strange that you would make statements causing you to be marked out as a fool who is not to be taken seriously, but I suppose any reaction is a good reaction when you are trolling on the investments board.

BananaRepublic

iro wrote: »

As many are taken into care at birth not widely reported, the reaction to losing a child to adoption because of a lack of capacity to look after it is quite commonly to get pregnant again and again and again as each child is taken away.

Given the potential fecundity of a female over her lifetime the figure might even be greater than 12 for all we know.

The State is complicit in this IMHO.

The number of !!!!less wasters who father multiple children from multiple mothers and scrounge off the state is small, but they provide a nice scape goat for the more extreme right wing.

BananaRepublic

iro wrote: »

I DONT care what you think, this thread is about investment duh!

I suggest if you wanna go virtue signal there are better places for you to go and tell people that you have a right to spend their money on things you seem to think are important.

It is called the Money Saving Expert Forum
NOT
the Money Spending Expert Forum

Geddit?

Basic housing and FS the extent of state aid, any more should come from contributions to insurance schemes whilst in work. Anyone receiving state aid should be required to make themselves available for community based work (cleaning parks etc.).

You see I do care about society.

People on state aid include those who were born with mental or physical disabilities that make it hard for them to find work and people who through no fault of their own are unable to work. The father who loses his job due to disability resulting from a car accident that was not his fault, and his wife is looking after a young child. Would you call them scroungers? The mother who loses her husband to cancer, and has several young children to support. Are they scroungers? Should the children be forced to live a life of penury? The older man and woman who lose their jobs because the factory goes bust, and their skills are out of date. No-one wants to employ older people when they can get keen youngsters. Are they scroungers? No you don’t care about society.

Yes there is a problem with a minority of claimants who exploit the system. That is the nature of a welfare system, and there are issues associated with forcing the shirkers into work. I’ve met some, and they are despicable. But you don’t withdraw support from the deserving majority because of the minority.

Carrieanne

You'd never guess from viewing Channel 5's myriad of benefit programming that fiddling isn't a major concern. The official figures suggest £3.3B was lost to fraud and error in 2015-2016: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/575407/fraud-and-error-stats-release-2015-16-final-estimates.pdf

Some context to £3.3B - UK gives away fourfold that amount annually in Foreign Aid.

The real problem is entitlement. The great majority of UK households are in receipt of benefits. It's because Tax Credits, the State Pension and many other payments which doesn't have Benefit in their title are, nevertheless, benefits.