"John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote:
>The capitalization of the Nasdaq was estimated at $5 trillion on March 10,
>2000 when it reached an all time high of 5048, so the 76% loss in value
>since then represents a $3.8 trillion loss to American "investor".
>>The capitalization of New York Stock Exchange on January 14, 2000 was
>estimated at more than $10 trillion when the Dow Jones Industrial Average
>reached an all time high of 11,722, so the 34% loss in value since then
>represents another $3.4 trillion loss to American "investors".
Makes the faulty assumptions that
1) all of the investors in the stock exchanges are American
2) that all stocks were bought at the high point of the market. The
net change since the beginning of 2000 is very negative, but the
change since 1997 is positive. So it all depends on when the stocks
were bought.
>This $7.2 trillion loss seems to be getting no coverage at all in the "news
>media",
The paper loss has certainly been discussed in the media. You
apparently don't read the right papers.
http://www.cross-currents.net/charts.htm
gives 6 trillion as does
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2927-2002Jul25.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2924-2002Jul25.html
is non-specific about the amount
The NY Times lists 6 articles in the last month alone containing the
words "trillion", "stock", "loss", but I don't have an account
allowing me to see whether they discuss this particular trillion
dollar loss.
>Subtracting this $7.2 trillion loss from the negative personal saving of
>2000 gives us a negative $7,208.5 trillion in personal saving.
Of course, since most stock market assets aren't "personal savings"
this subtraction is more nonsense on your part.
lojbab
