Ask HN: Are We in a Bubble?

136 points by ushakov ↗ HN
i'm getting an overwhelming feeling we're in a stock/crypto/dotcom/housing bubble as of now

companies with zero revenue raising billions, s&p returning ~30% last year, bitcoin going 10x, housing (in my area) up 2x

yet we are in the middle of pandemic, millions get sick every day, inflation 30yr high, supply shortages

is the economy is broken? should we be expecting a crash/crisis soon?

edit: i can't help but think there will be a counter reaction to the Fed printing dollars recklessly in 2020

and i'm even more scared Fed will go on a printing spree again to keep the current bubble from popping

205 comments

[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 232 ms ] thread
Yes we are in a bubble. The fed reserve does not allow bubbles to collapse circa 2008 anymore. There is too much income disparity between top earners and lowest earners. There is too much inflation and too low of interest rates. The healthcare system is beyond fucked, it’s become a mockery or symbol of fuck you to the lower middle class and lower. Housing prices are very high. The fed reserve needs to let the economy crash a bit so there is enough crisis to push legislation forward. We need to get rid of the federal reserve it is a cancer to American society. We also need to send a bill to China for reparations caused to our economy by covid. Having to pick between Sleepy Joe and Dumbo Trumpo can tell us all we need to know about the current state of politics. Too much infighting and polarization yet the discussion at hand is over vaccines instead of income disparity. Luckily I work in tech and have a somewhat privledged background so none or these issues even come close to effecting me so I don’t care as much. Optimistic as education increases I hope to see some good changes.
I doubt that any country could have prevented covid spreading through the world.
China screwed by allowing the research. Not having enough safeguards in place to stop something like this from happening. They also covered it up for months and know the severity of it. They are clearly at fault.
Just wait until you hear about how the US handled it!
Hence the dumbo trumpo. Everyone has responsibility
Sort of bubble... if we look at other countries like Zimbabwe that had hyperinflation, their stock market inflated along with the currency, more or less keeping the same values. At least until the government in Zimbabwe shut down the market. Here in the US, the Fed controls the money supply, and it's widely believed that the Fed won't choke the money growth any further if the market falls by 20% to 30%, depending on your pessimism. Of course, if the actual economy collapses due to Covid and supply chain problems, there is no bottom.
I’ve seen this question posted here or the others forums I visit - multiple times per year, and every year since at least 2012.

I don’t know if the market is in a bubble. I do know, if I pulled out of the market at any point since 2012, my net worth wouldn’t be anywhere close to what it is today.

2022 could very well have the mother of all crashes. On the other hand, every year since at least 2012 has brought new highs. I do believe that time in the market beats timing the market. Even Dr. Michael Burry had to hold credit default swaps for 2-3 years before the mortgage bonds and the underlying loans proved to be garbage.

maybe we're in a bubble, but it's just not popping and therefor people acting like we're not in a bubble?

i can't see how this is sustainable at all

edit: why downvote an opinion?

If it's not popping, is it a bubble?
I'm reading that as "not popping yet".
Sometimes bubbles slowly deflate rather than pop.
I've read some assertions that it would have popped already if not for the federal reserve buying assets and keeping borrowing cheap, suggesting that the fed's actions are ultimately inflating it bigger and bigger.
What could pop the bubble then would be a sharp reversal of this type of policy, like a return to 1980s-level interest rates. But they have zero incentive to go that route, as far as I can see.
Or as Warren Buffet says, "The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent"
buffet says "be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful".
People seem to obsess over are we in a bubble but, if you do something like panic selling or something about it you are probably going to lose. The old adage to invest in index funds using your 401k before and after the bubble occurs means that you can take advantage of the fact that during the bubble you are getting the indices at a discount.

In 2020 I bought some tech and it went up pretty high but then 2021 I missed out on some of my hand picked investments but still had my 401k buying index funds.

No one can claim to predict a bubble because there are so many forces in play to predict it and people that can claim it you really shouldn't listen to.

(comment deleted)
> People seem to obsess over are we in a bubble

I think this is going to be common for a generation or so. The 2008 crash was penalty the first total crash of the internet age. The previous big crash, the dot-com bubble, was big news, but not tied to everything yet. It took out a lot of tech-sector stuff while main-street people said “told you so…”

2008 was a crash where no one was safe. Everyone said housing was a bubble that couldn’t pop - home prices don’t drop. It’s a generational event that left people (economically) traumatized.

Well we've pretty much been on the verge of a new collapse for just as long but the central banks have been keeping the economy floating by lowering interest and buying bonds. And it's working great. The big question is how long this can go on. The longer we wait the bigger the crash, but what government will wanna be responsible for a crash at all? The thing is that the longer it goes the more apparent it is how fake the current economic system is. It can no longer be considered capitalism any more. A lot of western countries has defaulted into some form of planned economy.
I think that perhaps a helpful way to think about it is that we've shifted from an economy of reals to the sort of gold-based economy of MMORPGs where the value of the currency, the number of units of currency, and the policies for how the units can be exchanged are actively and continuously modified by policymakers exempt from democratic oversight. For the broader end-user population, myths and stories about how things work trade widely and actual information, though perhaps public, is "too technical" and not shared as widely.

In such a planned economy, is there a reason to think that the bubble is able to burst? The myth of a bursting bubble may be helpful to mitigate moral hazard, of course.

>… are actively and continuously modified by policymakers exempt from democratic oversight

Are we certain this is a bad thing? Looking over the last couple decades of American politics, the politicians typically optimize for short term outcomes, and not necessarily optimal outcomes for their constituents but whatever it is that will best accommodate their own careers.

One could argue that you absolutely need specialists/technocrats running the Fed, if you’re going to have a Fed at all.

One data point - a key takeaway from Michael Lewis’s book The Premonition was a damning assessment of the CDC and the top leadership in California’s public health. And while Lewis isn’t a Trump fan, he didn’t spare Democrats.

As COVID spreading across America, California’s politically appointed top public health expert literally did nothing and squashed any attempt by her team from devising any policy. She downplayed the seriousness of the virus, and as Lewis calls out, she had no significant background in infectious disease or specific qualifications for the job other than being given that role by the California governor because of goals around non white women in leadership positions.

Meanwhile, the CDC provided zero leadership, simply because the head is appointed by the President, and was afraid of upsetting Trump.

You could argue that instead of political appointees, you want constituents to directly vote for these roles. Given the typical Americans apathy or general lack of knowledge around some of these complex topics, I’m not convinced that’s a great idea.

“I do believe that time in the market beats timing the market”

my problem with this: what if stocks will not recover after crash in decades? I am not an expert, but isn’t Japanese exchange standing still for 30 years?

Interestingly, the average Japanese citizen is doing pretty okay for themselves even in a stagnant market. Who cares about the market doing so great in the USA if the average person is doing shitty? I would prefer to be in Japan right now, personally.
That could happen. A kind of long-term black swan event.

It is good practice to go shopping for groceries. But what if tomorrow is the day you get hit by a truck in the shop’s parking lot? Kind of negates the benefit, doesn’t it?

Point being, hypotheticals are not predictions. There’s no perfect heuristic here. That’s life.

based on two recent market corrections:

in the 2008 financial crisis, unless you were heavily into real estate related funds, if you panic sold a mixed portfolio of blue-chip stocks / mutual funds / varied ETFs at the low point in the market, you would have lost a significant amount of money. People who held their assets saw recovery to initial value and continued climb by 2012/2013 or so

in the spring 2020 big market drop at the start of covid19, same thing. I saw a bunch of mutual fund stuff in my 401k drop significantly in value. If I had sold it in a panic at that time, I'd now be screwed, because not only did it all recover to its pre-covid19 levels by late summer of 2020, but has significantly increased since then.

> if I pulled out of the market at any point since 2012, my net worth wouldn’t be anywhere close to what it is today

True in every bubble, and many times also true in non-bubbles. But in bubbles, people are much more likely to see enormous gains.

I think we are going back into a real estate bubble not very different than what preceded the 2008 financial crisis. I even see "high return" real estate funds that proudly advertise they're heavily into CDOs. For fuck's sake. Really, guys?

Do we now have a whole new generation of young finance bros creating debt instruments that were literally children in 2006-2009 and haven't learned the lessons from the very recent past?

Look at the absurd rise in single family home prices for a modest, detached home on a small lot in major cities. Look at the price of what would be the same location/street address of a $450,000 house in Seattle in 2014 vs now. It's absolutely a bubble.

could it be just inflation. I heard that there was a lot of moneys being printed.
I think it's a lot worse than what you're saying. The price of gold was $45/oz in 1970. 52 years later it's $1,800/ounce. That's roughly 7.6% a year or 45x increase. If you use the inflation provided by the government, CPI, (1), they say inflation is only 3.6%/year or roughly 7x since 1970. Obviously we have a discrepancy. Is the dollar worth 45x less than 1970 or 7x times?

When we look at prices of things like education, housing, and healthcare, the 45x number makes a lot more sense. Education has 30x in price over the same time period (2). If you're comparing prices in dollars, it feels like education got really expensive compared to the basket of goods the BEA tracks but in reality, education requires less gold than it did in 1970. Our incredible supply chains and manufacturing automation have lowered most consumer prices such that we don't really notice inflation but when you look at things that can't get much cheaper like housing, healthcare, education, asset prices of all sorts, you can't miss the fact that they correlate more closely with gold than the USD.

Since we went off the gold standard, the US government has been inflating the currency which in effect, taxes holders of USD. The US gets away with it because of its military but how long can that last? The absurd rises in prices aren't crazy. They're catching up with reality. We can't just keep printing our currency and hope our military is strong enough to enforce this economic fantasy.

(1) https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1970?amount=1

(2) https://www.yahoo.com/now/average-cost-college-jumped-incred...

Education and health care are both subject to Baumol’s cost disease.

“Our incredible supply chains and manufacturing automation have lowered most consumer prices such that we don't really notice inflation…”

What’s your definition of “inflation”? It sounds like it’s something other than purchasing power, which is surprising to me.

“The US gets away with it because of its military”

So do countries with smaller militaries have…less inflation? More? More or less monetary growth? It’d be interesting to see if the data bear out your hypothesis.

You really misunderstand the Baumol effect. It's about why jobs with no productivity gains have higher salaries over time (it's to keep up with places were wages did grow due to productivity gains). It's used to explain why jobs like musicians have increases salaries over long periods of time.

My definition of inflation is simple: dollars to gold. If you measure things in grams of gold, our current situation makes a lot of sense. A random basket of good subject to complicate macro trends makes no sense. Pretty much everything takes less gold to purchase these days. Assets like property, health care, and education actually require less gold to acquire than 50 years ago but not that much less. Products like consumer goods, require much much less gold now. This makes sense. We can develop property faster and cheaper but we can't make land so it's only a bit less gold. Mass produced goods are an order of magnitude cheaper due to automation.

Now let's go back to dollars. Every time the US prints dollars, it taxes the system. The total value of the system is the same but now the US government has some spending cash and everyone else holds a bit less. Why would any want to hold dollars?

Partly, no one does. The richer you are, the less of your net worth you hold in dollars. But the world is forced to use dollars. Originally, the US & England came together to create an international gold backed currency system to logistically enable transactions without shipping tons of gold. In 1970, President Nixon abandoned this system (1). Please really do look at this chart and it's impossible to ignore when it happened.

Our military & economic momentum are the only reason any uses dollars. It's complicated to describe all the ways but the biggest is that our navy guarantees safe global trade without piracy and fragmentation. If the US Navy disappeared, international shipping would quickly dissolve to squabbles on laws and borders. Small military conflicts would break out around the world. China's already hinted at as much in the South China sea. The Strait of Hormuz would become a war zone. We can argue about specifics but long story short, the world uses dollars heavily and doesn't want to. Every country would of course rather have everyone else use their currency. I think we can agree that the world uses dollars despite not wanting to.

Domestically, the move away from gold is killing the middle class. It's a disgusting trick the wealthy have pulled. Essentially by creating the dollar, forcing everyone to use it, and then printing more, the owner class has stolen gold. Cheaper consumer goods from automation & global supply chains has lessened the impact but this newest generation is finally realizing they never afford a house or education for their children. The fact that the average life expectancy has gone down in the US is the craziest thing ever and should be a source of deep shame.

To fix this, we only need two things: Fix the dollar to a specific amount of gold & Transfer a massive amount of wealth from the rich to the poor. It's obviously complicated and a bit fuzzy to describe but any denial of the general situation is like denying climate change. Gold was $40 and now it's $1800. The numbers are right there and pricing everything in gold makes it simpler to see.

(1) https://www.macrotrends.net/1333/historical-gold-prices-100-...

(comment deleted)
Houses in my culdesac in a suburb of Vancouver were selling for $450k in 2014. We bought here last April for $1.05m after seeing prices rise $200k in a month.

The neighbors just sold last week for $1.35m, and there's a house around the corner listed for $1.5m.

Vancouver is really its own special case because not only is it subject to the price rise/increase that is being seen in the top 20/25 largest North American cities, in general for the US/Canada sized market, but also a massive influx of foreign money looking for a place to park it in reliable solid real estate.

I am a participant in the Vancouver area housing market so I concur with your examples of what prices have risen to.

I know a person in Langley whose single family home on a lot in a very normal early 1980s era subdivision was probably $400k valued ten or twelve years ago, they're now receiving unsolicited offers for 1.5 million.

Is there a reason that those foreign investors like Vancouver specifically so much? People have been talking about the sharply increased prices in Vancouver for some time now -- so I'd think if you were looking for a safe place to park 1.5M you might prefer to buy 4 houses in Winnipeg or something?
It's my understanding that it's primarily related to historical (past 40 years) immigration patterns to Vancouver. And the size of Mandarin and Cantonese speaking communities in the metro Vancouver area, which is of a similarly large amount of people as in Toronto.

Earlier immigration to the lower mainland of BC was mostly Cantonese speaking folks from the region of Hong Kong, since about 2000 it's been much more "new money" Mandarin and more northern regions of China.

Not just people looking for a safe place to park money but also enough members of their first language and ethnic community that there's a good selection of grocery stores, restaurants, retail shops, community events/entertainment.

That's my theory, at least.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Canadians_in_Greater_V...

Traditionally it’s been a landing zone for East Asian immigrants.

That said I’m very skeptical that foreign money is causing the bubble in Canada.

We’re bringing in 400,000 high skilled people per year and we allow people to raid their current home value and their pensions in order to buy a home.

Those two things overshadow the measly 6-8% of the market which is foreign buyers.

The proposed ban on foreign purchases will hopefully prove me out.

Couple crazy points about Langley as I have lived here since the 80s

- my parents bought one of those homes back in 1980 for just under 25k!!

- in the 80s the busiest intersection (200 st and bypass) where the chapters, milestones, etc is now, was a giant field full of cows haha :)

So theoretically if your parents are at retirement age and want to live somewhere warm, very rough calculation, if they sold that 25k house for 1.5 million today and put it into a mixed form of investments that return an average of 6% annually, that's $90k a year to live on.

Not counting at all whatever other money they have saved up and RRSPs.

Yeah they downsized a number of years ago but your comment is inline with their overall situation. :)

I got fairly lucky and got my start with a townhouse around 2000 just as everything really started to run up. A friend of mine bought his house on a third acre for 210k about four years before me

Pretty tough situation for young adults today with such high prices.

In 2008, mortgages were being given out like free candy, without proof of ability to pay. Then the impending wave of defaults nearly destroyed the financial system. It was fundamentally a problem of unknown risk.

Since then, mortgage underwriting has tightened up quite a bit. The people who are buying houses right now can actually afford to do it, and they are qualified for the mortgages they are getting. In many cases they are also making cash offers.

In a lot of cases, they can afford to do it because their stock investments, options, RSUs etc. did very well over the past few years. If there is a bubble, that's where it is.

Unless we see a new wave of defaults on mortgages, which I think is pretty unlikely given the above, I don't expect to see a housing bubble burst.

On top of that, there is record low housing inventory, construction costs are high, and low interest rates enable buyers to pay more and still afford the monthly payments. Also, people have come to value having more space during the pandemic. Those factors aren't going to disappear overnight and burst a price bubble. Maybe we will see house prices decline gradually over the next few years as these issues clear up, but that's not a bubble bursting.

That is a very good point. I certainly hope we don't have entities like Countrywide running around handing out no-documentation mortgages like candy.

But I think the price bubble for homes is outpacing ordinary peoples' growth in income in many cities. Not everyone is a HN reader with a six figure salary and money in S&P 500 index funds, ETFs that have almost doubled since 2017.

Another important metric to look at is the percentage of people or dual-income couples whose salaries are more modest, who could have financially handled the burden of a mortgage for a home (or condo) at 2014 market rates and prices, and who have now been permanently priced out of the market into being a permanent renter. The home they might want to buy has now doubled in value but their salaries are not markedly different from 2014.

> Not everyone is a HN reader with a six figure salary and money in S&P 500 index funds, ETFs that have almost doubled since 2017.

But not everyone has to be, because the supply of housing is so limited. The number of new homes is still way below population growth, and it's increasingly becoming a trend for boomers to "age in place" instead of downsizing as they age. That means a large number of would be home buyers are competing for a tiny pool of available homes. In that kind of scenario the price of housing can become completely untethered from what the "average family" can afford, and totally driven the wealth of a small elite.

Eh, a lot might be explained by how offices have now become part of our houses. Single people/DINK couples now buy single family homes to have more work space. A couple that needed one bedroom now needs 3 if both work remotely.
Look at this link. The US built very few houses in the last decade.... we are in a supply crunch. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1041889/construction-yea...

Going back to 05-07 people were bidding up houses in anticipation of them going up in value + there was high supply. People right now are bidding up houses to live in, because there aren't many and interest rates are very low, and they have money in the bank because they weren't spending much the past couple of years.

Three answers already, one yes, one no and one maybe. So we don't know.
It is a bubble only if there is an inevitable bursting to be had at a large scale. You see segments of the economy having micro crashes and correcting so I am not sure. Mass psychology has also changed since '08 smartphones and the internet have evolved a lot.

Look at evergrande in China, almost if not bigger than the lehman brothers' crash but China self regulated it. Same with COVID and stimulus. Retail investors are now more powerful too.

One could argue stimulus inflates the bubble even more especially if it just goes to wealthy people. The worry there is that it seems to be the only way to prevent a crash; so if there’s another pandemic, war, series of natural disasters fueled by climate change, drought/famine they just print more money and inflate it even more. Just keep pulling the lever until it breaks.

Or maybe it never breaks and we should just pull the lever a bunch today and buy our way out of all the worlds problems.

If salary rises along with inflation there is no problem. There is a mass resignation crisis right now as part of that correction, employers who raise pay will do well and the rest won't. People are also finding income outside of traditional employment.

My opinion is, bubbles burst when people panic and people panic due to lack of communication. In the past, you wouldn't see places like /r/antiwork or /r/wallstreetbets grab wallstreet's attention for example. The rich keep getting richer but they are also now better informed so that they know just how much carrot to hang on the stick for the poor. inflation is normal, hence so are bubbles. Bubbles bursting means failure of the system to sustain itself.

I’d disagree that the only reason people would panic is lack of communication. If you have enough of the events I listed happen I close each other such that the government can’t adequately respond to them, there would be a panic.

I guess my point is maybe that we’re in a fragile system rather then a bubble. It’s self sustainable in the steady state (to your point) but if it breaks it’s going to completely collapse and we just have to hope that we never reach the point where it could break. It’s a Similar line of thinking to controlled burns to manage forest fire before they get uncontrollably big. But in the USA at least, the safety net isn’t there to allow for controlled burns in the economy.

Evergrande and Lehman Brothers aren’t really comparable.

A real estate development company defaulting on its debt means losses for investors, most of which have diversified portfolios and can absorb the loss. $300bn in debt is a lot, so I don’t want to discount how serious that is, but they’re not a bank.

Lehman Brothers, on the other hand, was deeply interconnected with the U.S. banking system and touched tens of thousands of businesses. The $600bn they owed were not to “investors” but to businesses, insurance companies and other counter parties that were not prepared to absorb the loss. The prospect of unwinding Lehman’s positions was beginning a catastrophic domino effect on the global financial system. They were quite literally “too big to fail.”

Evergrande is just a big company.

Even further - Lehman had a giant book of derivatives. The counterparts to all those trades woke up to a nightmare - you don't even know what your own book looks like if you don't know what % of your positions with a given counterparty are still valid. Imagine the panic.
yes, but they can go on for much longer than you'd think while you're in one of them
And also pop at the most unexpected time.
I am also really confused. I'm a complete noob and have been trying to learn a bit more about markets and evaluating companies but it seems like so many companies have price to earning ratios of > 30. I mean even $NET (Cloudflare) literally do not make money right now so don't even have a P/E ratio?

If anyone has any light books to understand markets more please do share.

Rivian has in $0 revenue, yet somehow manage to be worth $77,68B

Tesla same thing, extremely overpriced

i remember recommending my friends to buy Tesla stock at $50

today i wouldn't recommend anyone to touch it with a 10 foot pole

Even Elon Musk thinks that Tesla stock is overvalued. He's said that every time he says that the price goes up, he has no control over it either.
but if the price doesn't go up he'll get margin called and would have to sell tesla
Tesla shipped 900k cars in 2021. That’s extreme growth from 2020. If they grow they same this year, by the end of it, they’ll sell more than any other automaker, and if they continue into 2023, they might end up selling more than all other automakers combined.

Leaving this aside, there is also the idea that Tesla is a battery company that just happens to put them mostly on cars. So there could be massive growth beyond that.

Then you check Ford, and it sells less cars each year.

So Tesla valuation is huge, with the expectation of it taking over the whole automotive market by 2024…

The moment this expectation disappears, it’s price will correct itself.

Well, I also warned them about Cloudflare and indicated to them to sell after the AWS announcements. [0] At the time of my comment, it was >$210 a share.

Just look at the responses in [0], telling you to buy more and hold it at the time.

Now it is 50% down since then. I tried to help, but they did not listen.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29355360

A book that has guided my approach (just buy an index fund) is A Random Walk Down Wall Street by Burton Malkiel. It goes over the history of stock markets and stock picking giving evidence that very few people are going to beat the average, even those paid to do so.
Rules and regulations essential to a well-functioning economy, enacted due to lessons learned after previous collapses, were rescinded during this past forty years. Yes, the economy is broken.
I'd say the bubble actually already popped in some places and is popping in other places. The major indices are largely holding up because of high-quality mega cap stocks with huge cash flows that are immune to inflation (or rather, they have pricing power to track inflation).

For example, XBI, the biotech sector ETF is down more than 50% since its Feb 2021 peak. MJ, the marijuana sector ETF is down 70% since Feb 2021.

> companies raising billions with zero revenue, s&p returning ~30% last year, bitcoin goes 10x, housing (in my area) up 2x

This does not automatically imply that there's a bubble. It could be the effect of the increasing inequality, where more and more money are moving towards wealthy companies.

> is the economy is broken?

Absolutely yes.

No one will really know until it pops.
"The cause of bubbles is disputed by economists; some economists even disagree that bubbles occur at all (on the basis that asset prices frequently deviate from their intrinsic value). However, bubbles are usually only identified and studied in retrospect, after a massive drop in prices occurs."

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bubble.asp

Interest rates are very low. This makes asset prices high. This is not quite the same thing as a bubble, though i'm sure when the Fed inevitably raises rates and prices crash, people will declare it to have been a bubble. That doesn't mean that specific sectors aren't in some sort of bubble (e.g. crypto). But high asset prices across the board can be explained most simply by the incredibly low interest rate environment, which values future cash flows nearly equally with present cash flows. Inflation pushes nominal asset prices up even further, too.

If you think inflation is going to continue due to supply chain pressure in China, and/or labor pressure in the US, then the Fed is going to have to raise rates. When they do that, one of two things will happen: Either they'll be sufficiently large to curb inflation, which means that asset prices will probably decline fairly significantly, or they won't, in which case inflation will continue, and asset prices will stay elevated, though perhaps not keeping up with inflation.

It's also possible that China will be less disrupted by Omicron than some people think, and that US businesses will re-allocate labor more efficiently and more quickly than some people expect (via some mix of increased automation and rationalization), and the supply side issues will resolve themselves. If that's the case, the Fed may be able to leave rates alone for now. And in that scenario, there's no major reason for a significant decline in asset prices, though that doesn't mean one can't happen for other reasons.

Ultimately, inflation is the ratio between money and stuff (including services). Asset prices are the risk adjusted present value of future cash flows. Both of these things are influenced simultaneously by interest rates, and the underlying real economy.

Another thing to note is that, to some extent, what we're seeing in the public stock market is the effect of increasing returns to scale. People mistakenly equate the public markets with the broader economy, and while that intuition isn't completely wrong, it's not completely right, either. The stock market is heavily biased towards large scale businesses, and nearly uniformly excludes small businesses. This isn't some nefarious plot, just the mathematics of the cost of listing and the utility of exogenous capital. But the bias that encodes is that at a time when small businesses are rapidly failing and large businesses are absorbing their market share, the stock market may be performing quite well, despite the underlying economy experiencing troubles. This isn't irrational in an economic sense, it's just that the stock market doesn't perfectly track the underlying economy for this, and other reasons.

(comment deleted)
People have been asking this exact question since at least 2014. Some day, there will be a crash, but no one can really predict it. There will be a lot of people how have been "predicting" an imminent crash every year for the last 7+ years who will claim prescience when it finally happens.

The best advice you can get--keep investing at normal intervals in well diversified assets. You can't time the market and you can't predict the future. If there's a crash tomorrow, twenty years from now, it won't matter at all to you. The market will even itself out.

I think we are in a bubble, but I don't see the bubble bursting like in the past. It'll take unrest or worse, since the bubble is inflating via inequality and wealth transfer. Once people are really fed up, then the music stops.

In theory, the bubble bursting should herald some social and economical reforms.

If you discount the recession due to the pandemic this is the longest we've gone without a major bust for 100 years... maybe the economy is fundamentally different now?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDPC1 (shaded areas are recessions)

Though people (including experts) have been speculating about the next bubble burst for 10 years now so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'm a layman, so I just occasionally worry about it. It seems no one really knows.

> If you discount the recession...

Well, yeah. If you discount the GFC and the dotcom bubble it's the longest we've gone without a major bust in even more than 100 years...

Hah yeah I get it but I’m not sure the pandemic is a “normal” recession? but yes i’m dumb, I’ve already covered this
I believe that cryptocurrencies/web3 are in a bubble that's going to pop. So far the utility of these things is dominated by trading on speculative assets (read: ponzi shit) and that's gonna crash at some point with a lot of normal people holding the cards. Doesn't seem good.

Housing I don't know. At least in my area there's just no new constructions happening. Prices are absurd here because a lot of people have a lot of money and there isn't much supply going around.

I know nothing about the stock market and how it works, it's just a machine to bet on things, and lots of companies have had outsized benefits from the pandemic so I guess it makes sense? Who knows

Inflation? Who knows

Housing is also very local. The past decade or two have seen something of a reversal of white flight (and company flight) from a relative handful of cities by a fairly specific college-educated young demographic.

And there's some evidence of a partial reversal of that trend during the pandemic. Of course, it's also quite normal in the US that as people marry, have kids, etc. that they move out to where they have more space and quiet. A question is whether young people will still want to move into cities or if we'll reach some new equilibrium where urban life is less valued again.

Housing is indeed local, but there's zero doubt that we've massively under built housing over the past decade. Every major market in the US has seen 15%+ housing price increases since the (already high) 2019 baseline.
Crypto is never in a bubble per se. It’s just market cycles. BTC returned to $3k after it hit $20k in 2017. Most coins from 2017 no longer exists. The same will happen this cycle. BTC and ETH will likely be around in 4 years, but DAOs, NFTs, Web3? All that shit will die. Its not even that these assets are artificially pumped. It’s real money, and it’s usually retail doing the pumping. Its just that crypto functions on attention. And when the public’s attention isn’t on crypto, everything dies. Probably because a lot of these projects have little to no actual value.
> Crypto is never in a bubble per se… Its just that crypto functions on attention. And when the public’s attention isn’t on crypto, everything dies. Probably because a lot of these projects have little to no actual value.

That sounds like a bubble "per se" to me.

Using the broadest of definitions sure.

My point is that there’s nothing artificial about crypto. These are real people buying real assets from other real people. Not some banks hawking bullshit assets that are artificially rated by some corrupt pseudo government entities.

Want to buy some real tulips from real people?

That's not the 'broadest of definitions' at all. That's just what a bubble is: real people buying real assets from real people at hyperinflated prices.

As an aside, but not related to the matter at hand, what is the 'real asset' people are buying with crypto?

I borrowed against my crypto for USD/USDC and used it to buy a MacBook and pay my tuition. The underlying coins appreciated and earned interest in addition to negative APR (this is all programmatic; the contract will give the best interest rate the market supports) on the loan itself, so I ended up paying back less than I put in.

Keep in mind: I am not in any way rich and paying out of pocket or taking a loan would have strained both me and my parents.

Of course I'm happy that you were able to profit from it, but nothing you just said answers my question or refutes the fact that it is a bubble.
You could borrow against a house in '08 or against tulips in 1634. If it's the rising side of the market, you'll make a killing doing this. If it's the opposite side, then your collateral will vanish.

Whether vanishing collateral matters to you depends a great deal on the nature of the debt you took out and what you spent the loan on.

I've seen it said (on here) that crypto gives you a nice legal way to access the illegal drug market since much of the activity is from illegal activities. If this is true then crypto will probably keep going for some time.
I’m not sure if we’re in a bubble, but the fed recklessly printing infinite money with no plan or capability to pay it back, not to mention the economy absolutely did not need the cash, should not be tolerated. These politicians are mortgaging your future to gain karma points with other politicians (“look how many jobs we created!”). Idk how people fall for this shit.
“Pay it back”? To whom? QE and national debt aren’t the same thing.
> yet we are in the middle of pandemic, millions get sick every day,

What does this have to do with a financial bubble? Millions of people get sick every day in a normal year, you just weren't paying attention to it.

(comment deleted)