[davedx]

Put as much of your monthly income into a Vanguard fund as you can afford.

Most of my money is in this one: https://americas.vanguard.com/institutional/mvc/detail/mf/ov...

You might want to put some into a fund that comprises bonds, though they've performed poorly (for my investments) in recent years. If you're young (<40), I would put as much, if not all, in a fund consisting of stocks.

Also: this is a long play. Leave it there.

[alanfranz]

All those indexed funds suggestions are biased by the fact that the stock market, overall, has increased in value OVER TIME:

http://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historica...

Remember, the stock market does not create money, it's not a fundamental advancement for humanity. That just means that more people poured money into stocks, rather than other investments or savings.

There's absolutely, ABSOLUTELY no reason for which this growth should keep going on in the future.

[thebigspacefuck]

A stock is a piece of a company. That company should be creating value and that value should be worth money, maybe revenue or assets. The price of a company goes up because it is either worth more today than it was yesterday or people believe it will be worth more tomorrow than it is today. Usually people that own a company are trying to create more and more value. It's human nature bubbling up to the top. Why would the stock market suddenly stop reflecting this value growth for absolutely no reason?

[alanfranzoni]

Because it may be (already) overpriced, and maybe somebody will stop investing in the stock? Because automatic systems (e.g. AI, HFT) will lessen investors' faith in the stock market? Because better investment opportunities come out?

[gieksosz]

This is not exactly like that:

- new companies go IPO, they do it because there is liquidity in the market, so they can count on someone buying their shares and cashing in.

- some blue-chip companies pay out dividends

- as much as many people hate on that, profitable companies engage in shares buy backs which is a way to return money earned by the company to its shareholders. If the company makes no profit, it has less to do buy-backs with.

- in the end a share is a piece of a company, big part of their long term valuation will always be driven by their fundamentals like a ratio between profit and revenue or how likely they are going to default on their debts, no one wants to own a piece of company that is going to disappear

in summary, there is quite some connection to the real economy, but I agree that part of the valuation is just because other people pour money in it is just not that bad.

[alanfranzoni]

It is true that the total market capitalization may be connected with more companies being publicly traded. But the stock market won't create value on its own. It means that somebody pours money into it.

[frockington]

Recent earnings reports and guidance suggest otherwise