Профиль

This is why I say that while I can provide what I consider to be general predictive advice you really - REALLY - should talk to a financial advisor licensed in your jurisdiction if you are considering investing or reinvesting. The tax implications alone require a specialist.

This is done largely because my current mix of ETFs generates more dividends per year than I need to pay my fees. Also complicating this is that in Canada we have both RRSPs and TFSAs, both of which have different taxation considerations, but you can hold ETFs, Mutual funds, Cash, etc. in each.

But that isn't true of ALL my investments. One of my investments is in a mutual fund (everything else is ETFs), and that mutual fund both makes up about 33% of my investments total and any dividends it produces are immediately reinvested back into that mutual fund.

The dividends pay the fees, while I count on long-term stock growth to hopefully give me something to retire on. I try to keep one year's-ish worth of fees in the account as cash, and then any additional cash in the account that may have accumulated because of dividends gets reinvested.

For example: I am invested through my local credit union, and I am using an option which basically pays my credit union 1% of my investments per year to manage all of this for me. This means that I selected a mix of investments, some of which are aimed at stock price growth, others at dividends.

Part of the reason for this is that every jurisdiction is different. If you were in Canada I could tell you which specific instruments I believe are useful, but a lot depends on your specific situation. By this I mostly mean "how does your financial institution and/or advisor make money from you"?

I am not a licensed financial advisor, so I should not provide recommendations for individual stocks, ETFs, or other financial instruments. I would take what I have told you, adjust it to your own requirements, and talk to your financial advisor.

29 июл., 04:12

No. That's a service sector item. I am mostly looking at manufacturing. Who is creating new technologies? Who is manufacturing and selling them, especially in bulk? Selling to consumers isn't going to make much money for the next 20 years because consumers aren't going to have any to spend.

So my personal bet is that these necessary-to-survive industry sectors will see modest, but useful growth over a 20 to 25 year timeframe, probably being just enough ahead of inflation that I can afford to retire if I live that long. If your goals are more short term you'll have to think differently.

For me, who is looking at 20 to 25 years before I crack open the piggy bank, I've put my modest savings into ETFs and mutual funds focused on the technologies we'll all need to survive because if we don't develop and manufacture those at scale nothing else actually matters. No money will help me.

There will always be new stupid bubbles, and economic crises, and so forth. No matter what you guess you are NOT going to guess whatever the next big hyperstock is. That's FINE. You don't need hyperstocks. You need something that will, over your investment time horizon, deliver stead results.

EVERYTHING is guessing. Everything. You look at the market and say "what are we likely to actually need more of when the world is on fire, we're fighting a protracted social (and possibly hot) war against global fascism, and climate change is ratfucking our ability to grow food and filter water".

Time horizon on them to really skyrocket again is probably closer to 2035, but we will *always* need semiconductors. Our whole society runs on them, and those fabs can also be used to crank out next-gen cleantech if for whatever reason we suddenly no longer need RAM, SSDs and CPUs.

Semiconductors are even further out. When the AI bubble pops - and it will - semiconductor stocks are going to *plummet*. But they will, eventually, recover. It's really hard to go broke running a semiconductor fab, making wafers for semiconductor fabs, or making lithography machines for them.

Clean tech should pick up somewhere around 2030, but it's impossible to know who will dominate here. China dominates today's market, but Western nations are tarrifing Chinese cleantech. It also means China is heavily invested in today's cleantech, not tomorrow's. But they dominate manufacturing.

I personally focused on cleantech and semiconductors. Neither of these are going to be helpful short term. In the short term the fascist/oligarch mad rush to monetize soon-to-be-stranded assets means most of the money is going to be in fossil fuels and adjacent companies. However briefly.