Four years of strong stock returns, a French bond market losing patience with French politics, and store prices that may soon depend on who's buying.
Picked from 27 new articles across 16 sources · arrow keys for other days
Today in 30 seconds
30s left
Stock-heavy portfolios have roughly doubled since October 2022, about 19% a year, close to twice the long-run average. story 1 ↓
That shows what selling in a slump costs, but a run this strong can also make stocks feel safer than they are. story 1 ↓
Noah Smith says French protesters' demands for more spending raise France's borrowing costs, which leaves less money for that spending. story 2 ↓
Digital shelf tags and AI could let stores set prices by shopper. A former drugstore worker's advice: wait before buying. story 3 ↓
In England from 1700 on, family wealth shocks mostly faded within three generations, a study using differences in family size finds.
1/3HumbleDollar· Mark Crothers· Oct 22
Stock-heavy portfolios have probably doubled since the October 2022 low
HumbleDollar writer Mark Crothers estimates that a 90% or 85% stock portfolio held since the 2022 bear-market bottom has roughly doubled, with no new money added. He argues this shows why staying invested matters.
Why it matters · It puts a number on what selling in a downturn costs, and it warns that a strong run can make stocks feel safer than they really are.
Know this first
Context from the editor, not the article · 26 sec
1 · What a bear market is
A bear market is a fall of 20% or more from a recent peak. In 2022 the S&P 500, an index of 500 large US companies, fell about 25% and hit bottom in mid-October.
2 · Reading allocations like 90:10
Ratios like 90:10, 80:20 or 60:40 give a portfolio's split between stocks and bonds. More stock usually means higher long-run returns and deeper drops along the way.
3 · Why 2022 was unusual
Bonds usually cushion falling stocks. In 2022 inflation was high and the Federal Reserve raised rates quickly. Bond prices fall when rates rise, so broad US bond indexes lost about 13%, one of their worst years on record.
2/3Noahpinion· Noah Smith· Oct 22
France's riots meet a bond market that doubts France will repay its debt
Noah Smith argues that France's latest riots, which hit as investors start pricing in a possible government default, show the limits of European welfare states. Taxes, spending and debt are already high, and voters won't accept cuts.
Why it matters · It shows how a country's politics can reach its borrowing costs, and why "spend in busts, save in booms" breaks down when voters never accept the saving half.
Know this first
Context from the editor, not the article · 31 sec
1 · Insuring against default
A credit default swap (CDS) is a contract that pays out if a borrower fails to repay. When a government's CDS price jumps, investors think default has become more likely. This is a sharper warning than rising bond yields alone.
2 · Spend in busts, save in booms
Keynesian economics says governments should borrow and spend to prop up demand in a deep recession. Then they should run tighter budgets in good times so the debt doesn't keep growing. Nothing enforces the second half.
3 · France's pension fight
France has an unusually low retirement age (62 in 2023) and an aging population. President Macron's plan to raise it to 64 set off mass protests. Opposition from the far left and far right has frozen the change until after the next election.
3/3HumbleDollar· D.J.· Oct 22
Digital shelf tags and AI could end fixed store prices
A HumbleDollar writer warns that digital shelf tags, online price shifts and AI could make fixed prices rare. His advice: pause before buying, decide how much effort a deal is worth, and question the need.
Why it matters · If prices start following what each shopper will tolerate, the sticker stops being a fixed fact, and comparison shopping and patience matter more to a household budget.
Know this first
Context from the editor, not the article · 26 sec
1 · Dynamic pricing
Sellers change prices often in response to demand, time, inventory or competitors. Airlines and ride-hailing apps have done this for years. Online retailers can reprice items many times a day with software.
2 · Electronic shelf labels
Small digital screens that replace paper price tags. Head office can update every price in a store remotely in seconds, which cuts labor costs. It also makes frequent price changes cheap and easy.
3 · Surveillance pricing
Using personal data, such as browsing history, location, device or purchase records, to estimate how much a particular shopper will pay and set their price to match. US regulators have begun studying the practice.
Same as 401(k): the main US workplace retirement account.
Image: HumbleDollar
Four years from the bottom
US stocks bottomed in mid-October 2022, at the end of the last real 1, a fall of 20% or more from a peak. Four years later, HumbleDollar writer Mark Crothers estimates that a portfolio held steady at 2 or 85:15 (stocks to bonds), with no new money added, has likely doubled from that low. He gives no exact index or figures, so treat this as an estimate.
Why that's unusual
Doubling in four years means about 19% a year, 3: 1.19 multiplied by itself four times is about 2. Over the long run, US stocks have averaged roughly 10% a year, so this was close to twice the usual pace.
Almost nobody expected it. In 2022 stocks were falling, and bonds, which normally cushion a portfolio, fell too. High inflation pushed interest rates up, and existing bonds lose value when rates rise. Bonds had one of their worst years on record and kept lagging for years afterward. Crothers notes that no one was calling a bottom at the time. People who sold to wait for "clarity" had to buy back in at higher prices, if they came back at all.
Doing nothing versus saving hard
To show the scale, he uses the average balance in a 4, the main US workplace retirement account: about $100,000 in the third quarter of 2022. Doubling that through saving alone would take about $2,100 a month for 48 months. Few households can manage that. A stock-heavy investor got there by simply staying invested. His conclusion: "time in the market, not timing the market."
Milder mixes, and a warning
A standard 5 portfolio fell less in 2022 but has recovered more slowly. Crothers says nobody knows whether it will double before this rally ends. His own portfolio is about 80:20 and hasn't quite doubled yet.
He also warns that the 2022 losses made stocks feel riskier than they were, and four years of gains can make them feel safer than they are.
Caveats
Measuring from the exact bottom makes the gain look as big as possible. Someone who bought at the January 2022 peak first had to make up a deep loss.
The figures are 6: inflation since 2022 has taken a real share of the gains, and the article doesn't adjust for it.
Four good years don't predict the next four. Crothers himself says "nobody knows."
The milestone
Mark Crothers writes on HumbleDollar, a personal-finance site. In this piece he marks four years since the last real 1 bottomed in mid-October 2022. A bear market is a drop of at least 20% from a peak. His claim is that an investor who held a steady 2 or 85:15 mix of stocks to bonds, and added no new money, has likely doubled their portfolio since that low.
The word "likely" matters. Crothers doesn't show a calculation, an index or a start and end value. Treat the milestone as an informed estimate, not a measured result.
How unusual is doubling in four years?
Doubling over four years works out to about 19% a year, 3. Compounding means each year's gain builds on the previous year's total. The check: 1.19 × 1.19 × 1.19 × 1.19 ≈ 2.0. Over the long run, US stocks have averaged roughly 10% a year (general background, not a figure from the article), so 19% is close to double the usual pace. Crothers adds that "nobody's crystal ball saw it coming."
Why nobody saw it coming
Crothers points out how bad things looked in October 2022. Stocks were in a full bear market. Bonds, which usually steady a portfolio when stocks fall, fell too. Inflation was high and interest rates were climbing fast. Existing bonds lose value when rates rise, because new bonds pay more. Bonds had one of their worst years on record, and Crothers notes they kept struggling for several years after stocks recovered.
So a balanced portfolio had nowhere to hide that year. He says no one was calling a bottom: "Most of us were just hoping the pain would stop." Bear-market lows "never announce themselves." People who sold to wait for "clarity" had to buy back in at higher prices, if they came back at all.
The mattress comparison
To show the scale, Crothers takes the average 4 balance in the third quarter of 2022. A 401(k) is the main US workplace retirement account, and that average was about $100,000. Doubling it through saving alone, with no investment growth, would take about $2,100 a month for 48 months. The arithmetic: $100,000 ÷ 48 ≈ $2,083. Few households can save that much. An investor who stayed put got the same result by doing nothing.
From this he draws the familiar rule: "time in the market, not timing the market."
What gentler portfolios did
He contrasts the stock-heavy investor with a standard 5 portfolio, 60% stocks and 40% bonds. It fell less in 2022 but has climbed back more slowly, and he doesn't know whether it will double before this bull market ends. His own portfolio, about 80:20, hasn't quite doubled. He expects it to pass the mark if the rally reaches a fifth year.
That ordering follows from the split. More stock meant a deeper fall in 2022 and a faster recovery. The extra bonds in milder portfolios slowed the recovery, especially since bonds lagged for years.
The warning
Crothers ends on a balanced note: "The losses of 2022 made stocks feel riskier than they were, and four years of gains can make them feel safer than they are." His advice is to enjoy the gains while staying "sensible about protecting the downside." He doesn't say what that means in practice, such as rebalancing or a particular bond share.
Caveats worth keeping in mind
Measuring from the bottom flatters the result. Starting at the lowest point of a crash makes any later gain look large. Someone who invested at the January 2022 peak first had to recover a large loss, so their four-year result looks far less dramatic.
The figures are 6. Doubling in dollars isn't doubling in purchasing power. Inflation since 2022 has taken a real share of those gains. The article doesn't adjust for it.
The useful lesson is not that stocks return 19% a year. It's that the best stretches often start when things feel worst, and you can't get them back once you've sold out.
Remember
Doubling in four years means about 19% a year compounded, roughly twice the long-run stock average.
In 2022 bonds fell alongside stocks, so balanced portfolios lost their usual cushion and recovered more slowly.
Gains measured from the exact bottom flatter the result and aren't adjusted for inflation.
The cost of insuring against a French default rose more sharply than French interest rates.1 / 4
Riots, again, but with a debt problem
France has had another wave of riots. After weeks of student protests over crumbling schools, too few teachers and poor job prospects, a weekend of looting led to about 2,400 arrests. Damage was estimated at several hundred million dollars. Noah Smith notes that French riots are routine, from the 2005 suburban riots to the 2018–2020 "1" protests over fuel taxes and living costs. What's different this time is the bond market.
What investors are signaling
French long-term interest rates are rising, as they are worldwide. More telling is the price of 2, which are contracts that pay out if France fails to repay its debt. That price has risen even faster than rates. Smith reads this as investors doubting France will raise taxes or cut spending. They expect it to keep borrowing to cover higher interest costs. The article shows this in charts, not figures.
Why France is stuck
Smith cites Paul Krugman, who blames pensions. France's official retirement age was 62 in 2023, and its average actual retirement age is the lowest in Western Europe. A plan to raise the official age to 64 is frozen until after next year's election.
Smith argues both fixes look blocked:
Spending is already a larger share of 3 than in almost any rich country, above Sweden and Denmark. Much of it goes to pensions and health care for the old.
Taxes are already the highest share of GDP among rich countries. Past taxes on the rich didn't work. The wealth tax raised about 1% of revenue, pushed at least 10,000 wealthy people abroad, and by one estimate cost almost twice what it brought in. A 75% tax on income above €1 million raised €160 million in 2014 and was repealed. A higher 4 (a sales tax) would hit the people now protesting.
The loop
Protesters want billions more for schools, pensions, benefits and fuel subsidies. Investors see that cuts are politically impossible and charge France more to borrow. That leaves less money for the spending protesters want. Smith calls benefits a "one-way ratchet."
He says this exposes a weakness in 5, which he supports: government borrowing to prop up demand in a slump. It only works if governments save in good times. In the early 2010s France did neither. Its spending and debt kept rising through the euro crisis, while Germany cut.
Smith also links the riots to a jump in betting-market odds for anti-immigration candidate Marine Le Pen, though he admits the rioters aren't mainly immigrants. It's an opinion piece. It makes a clear case about the fiscal bind but gives few hard numbers on debt or default risk.
The news
France has had another wave of riots. Students had protested for weeks over crumbling schools, too few teachers and poor job prospects. Then came a weekend of looting in Paris, Marseille, Bordeaux and other cities. About 2,400 people were arrested, and property damage and theft were estimated at several hundred million dollars. In Limoges, a fire badly damaged the city hall, which had survived two world wars, and brought down its clock spire.
Noah Smith admits that "rioting in France" is not unusual in itself. There were nationwide riots over a police killing in 2023. Before that came the "1" protests of 2018–2020, a year and a half of near-continuous unrest over fuel taxes and living costs. Two decades ago there were weeks of suburban riots. His argument is that this round is different because it coincides with a fiscal crisis, and because the riots make that crisis worse.
What the bond market is saying
Long-term interest rates are rising around the world, France's included. Smith points to a second signal that is specific to France: the price of 2 on French government debt has risen even more abruptly than its bond yields. These contracts pay out if a borrower fails to repay. Rising rates everywhere reflect general conditions. A jump in what investors pay to insure against a French default reflects a judgment about France.
Smith's reading is that investors increasingly doubt France will either raise taxes or cut spending. They expect it to cover rising interest costs by borrowing more, and that path can end in default. The article shows this in charts but gives no figures for yields or swap prices.
Krugman's diagnosis: pensions
Smith quotes Paul Krugman, who argues the core problem is retirement. French debt is already high relative to 3, the country's annual economic output. The government still runs large deficits even though there is no war, severe recession or pandemic to justify them. An aging population means pension costs will grow faster than revenue. France's official retirement age was 62 in 2023, and its average actual retirement age was the lowest in Western Europe. Macron's government planned to raise the official age gradually to 64, still low for a rich country. Opposition from the far left and far right has frozen that increase until after next year's election.
Why neither fix is easy
Cutting a deficit means cutting spending or raising taxes. Smith argues France is near the limit on both.
Spending. French government spending takes a larger share of GDP than in almost any other rich country, well above Sweden and Denmark. A large part of social spending goes to pensions and health care, and health care is weighted heavily toward the old. Those are the most politically protected lines in the budget.
Taxes. French taxes are already the highest share of GDP among rich countries, above the Scandinavian countries. Smith revisits two past attempts to tax the rich harder:
The wealth tax raised only a few billion euros at its peak, about 1% of total tax revenue. At least 10,000 wealthy people left, mostly for French-speaking Belgium. France then lost their income and other taxes too. Economist Eric Pichet estimates the net cost was almost twice what the wealth tax brought in.
The "supertax", a 75% rate on income above €1 million brought in by President François Hollande in 2012, raised just €160 million in 2014. It drove out high-profile people, including actor Gérard Depardieu and LVMH chairman Bernard Arnault, and was repealed two years after it took effect.
Membership of the European Union and French-speaking neighbours (Belgium, Switzerland, Luxembourg) make it easy for the rich to leave. The remaining option is taxing the middle class, for example through a higher 4 (VAT), a sales tax charged at each stage of production. Smith calls this a political nonstarter, because it would fall on the same people now in the streets.
The feedback loop
Smith's central point is a loop between protests and borrowing costs. Protesters want billions more for schools, pensions, benefits and even fuel subsidies. That shows the political pressure against 5, meaning deficit-cutting through spending cuts or tax rises. Investors see that pressure and charge France more to borrow. Higher interest costs leave less room for new social spending, the opposite of what protesters want.
He calls benefits a "one-way ratchet." Each increase raises expectations for the next, until even mild cuts set off riots.
The case against Keynesian policy in practice
Smith, who calls himself a left-liberal, says this undercuts his own side's main tool against recessions. That tool is Keynesian fiscal stimulus: government borrowing to support total spending in the economy during a slump. He says few macroeconomists doubt stimulus works in a severe downturn. The catch is that it has to be paired with austerity in good times, and someone in power has to accept the political cost of that.
Economist Hanno Lustig noted that during the euro crisis Krugman had urged France to spend more. Smith thinks this is a little unfair. In 2011 Krugman wrote that once economies escaped the "6", when interest rates are stuck at zero and monetary policy can't do more, deficits would matter again. Krugman wrote about the US, but the warning fits France.
Even so, Smith grants Lustig's point using French data. In the early 2010s French spending and debt neither jumped as stimulus nor fell as austerity. They kept rising as if the recession hadn't happened. Germany cut during the bust. France just kept borrowing. Smith invokes economist 7, who argued that politicians' incentives, not technocrats' judgment, drive deficits. Smith puts it bluntly: spending is set less by experts than by "angry ignorant people burning down government buildings."
Immigration and politics
Smith also says the riots show the limits of tolerance toward mass immigration, though here his evidence is thinner. He says it isn't clear immigrants are disproportionately behind these riots. Viral videos show racially mixed crowds. The 2023 riots were driven largely by immigrants and their children, but the Yellow Vest unrest was mostly white. Still, as disorder spread, the odds for anti-immigration candidate Marine Le Pen rose on 8, a prediction-betting market. The odds for left-wing candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who promises big spending increases, didn't move. Smith sees the same shift toward Germany's anti-immigration AfD party.
What's left open
This is an opinion essay, not an analysis. It gives no figures for France's debt-to-GDP ratio, deficit, yields or swap prices. It doesn't estimate how likely a default actually is. It doesn't explain what would happen inside the euro, where France can't print its own currency. Its link from riots to immigration politics rests on one betting-market chart. It is clearest on the fiscal bind: high taxes, high spending, a low retirement age, and voters who reject every way out.
Remember
Rising default-insurance prices, more than rising yields, signal that investors doubt France specifically, not just high global interest rates.
France's past taxes on the rich raised little and drove the wealthy to nearby French-speaking countries.
Keynesian policy fails if governments never save in good times. France kept spending and borrowing through the 2010s regardless of the economy.
Setting an individual's price using personal data such as browsing, location or purchase history.
Image: HumbleDollar
D.J., who writes for the personal-finance forum 1, argues that the fixed, posted price may soon be "more the exception than the rule." His answer is an old habit: pause before you buy. The post is a short opinion piece based on his own experience, not on data.
Why fixed prices appeal
D.J. remembers working in a drugstore. Back-to-school supplies piled on display tables under "Priced as Marked" signs sold faster than the same items at the same price on a nearby aisle. He offers three possible reasons. Shoppers may have assumed a table meant a deal. Rummaging through the pile was fun. And the table was simply more convenient than searching the aisles.
He compares this to 2. Some buyers accept a take-it-or-leave-it price that isn't the lowest, because they hate negotiating or want a quick, low-stress sale. In both cases the price is set in advance and is the same for everyone.
What is changing
D.J. points to three forces:
Online prices move. Leave a site and come back, and the price may have gone up. It can also go the other way, with a small discount to get you to finish the purchase.
3. Some large retailers are replacing paper tags with digital screens. These can be updated remotely in seconds, so frequent price changes cost almost nothing.
Surveillance and AI. With personal data and software, a retailer could estimate what you will pay and charge that.
Economists call this 4: charging each buyer close to their personal maximum. Instant tags combined with shopper data make it more practical in physical stores. The article doesn't name retailers or show evidence that in-store personalized pricing is happening yet. He presents it as a direction, not a fact.
His advice
Getting a good deal will still take effort, D.J. says. The real question is how much research each purchase deserves. Pausing first helps in three ways. It blocks impulse buys, which flexible pricing is well placed to exploit. It gives you time to decide how much effort the deal is worth. And it makes you ask whether you can afford the item or need it at all.
What's missing
The post has no numbers on how often prices change or how much they differ. It barely mentions that flexible pricing can also bring faster markdowns. It doesn't discuss regulation, and it doesn't weigh the time spent hunting against what you'd save. For small purchases, paying the marked price may be perfectly reasonable.
D.J., a contributor to the personal-finance forum 1, has posted a short reflection called "Priced as Marked." His argument is that the fixed, posted price may be on its way out, and that the shopper's best defense is an old habit: stopping to think before buying. The post is an opinion piece built on personal observation. It contains no data, so this write-up is short.
What a fixed price offers
D.J. starts with his early years working in a drugstore. Staff would heap seasonal goods, such as back-to-school pens, erasers and glue sticks, onto display tables marked with "Priced as Marked" signs. He noticed that those items sold faster than the identical items on a nearby aisle at the same price.
He suggests a few reasons this might happen:
A sense of a bargain. Shoppers may have assumed that a display table meant a deal, even when it didn't.
The fun of the hunt. Digging through a pile to find the right item can be enjoyable in itself.
Convenience. The table put the goods in plain view and saved people a walk through the aisles.
He then compares this with 2. Some buyers will accept a take-it-or-leave-it price that isn't the lowest available, because they dislike negotiating, want a quicker sale, or value a calm purchase. What links the two cases, he says, is that the price is set ahead of time and is the same for everyone. What you see is what you pay.
Why that may change
D.J. argues that fixed prices "might be more the exception than the rule" before long. He gives three reasons.
Online prices already move. You can leave a website, come back, and find the price has gone up. He notes this works in both directions. A retailer may also offer a small discount to get a returning visitor to finish the purchase.
Physical stores are going digital. Some large brick-and-mortar retailers are replacing paper shelf tags with electronic ones. Paper tags change slowly because a worker has to replace each one by hand. A digital tag can be updated from head office in seconds, so frequent price changes become nearly free.
Data and AI. D.J. points to "today's surveillance culture and AI" and says it is easy to see where this leads: retailers working out what each customer is willing to pay.
The economic idea underneath this is 3. A seller makes more money by charging each buyer close to the most that buyer would pay, rather than one price for all. That has always been hard to do at a supermarket shelf. Data about individual shoppers, combined with tags that can change instantly, makes it more practical. The article does not say which retailers use electronic tags, whether any of them currently personalize prices in stores, or how widely surveillance pricing is used. He presents it as a direction of travel, not something documented.
To illustrate (a hypothetical example, not from the article): a cereal box might show $4.29 on a quiet Tuesday morning and $4.79 at the Saturday rush. An app might offer one loyal customer a 30-cent coupon that a different shopper never sees. Neither shopper would have a fixed reference price to compare against.
His advice: pause before buying
D.J. doesn't propose anything new to counter this. He says getting a good deal will take effort, as it always has. The question is how much research and comparison shopping each purchase deserves. His main tool is the pause. Taking a moment before buying:
curbs impulse purchases, which flexible pricing systems are well placed to exploit;
gives you time to decide how much effort this particular deal is worth;
lets you ask whether you can afford the item, and whether you need it at all.
He suggests this may be "the best way to avoid leaving money on the table." The point is practical. Shoppers can't see a pricing algorithm, but they can control their own timing, and waiting removes much of a seller's advantage. Waiting is also the move his online example rewards. Shoppers who leave the site sometimes get offered a discount when they return.
What the piece leaves open
The post ends by asking readers whether they chase good deals or accept the posted price for the sake of convenience. Several questions go unanswered:
Evidence. There are no figures on how often prices change, how big the differences are, or how common personalized pricing is.
Upside for shoppers. Electronic tags can also make markdowns faster and more targeted, for example on food nearing its sell-by date. D.J. mentions only briefly that flexible pricing "can cut both ways."
Rules and transparency. He doesn't discuss whether regulation or disclosure requirements might limit individually targeted prices.
The value of your time. He says deal-hunting takes effort but doesn't weigh that effort against the likely savings. For small purchases, paying the marked price may well be the sensible choice.
The drugstore story suggests one more point that D.J. doesn't spell out. Many shoppers were happy to pay a fixed price for convenience and a little fun. Retailers know this. The display table and the no-haggle lot are reminders that how something is sold affects what people pay, even before an algorithm gets involved.
Remember
Fixed prices partly sell on convenience. Many shoppers accept a non-lowest price to skip haggling and stress.
Digital shelf tags make in-store price changes nearly free, which makes personalized pricing in physical stores practical.
Pausing before purchase is free, beats impulse-driven pricing, and forces the question of whether you need the item.
The comparison is a little lopsided. Real 401(k) savers kept contributing, which boosted their balances. The $2,100 figure isolates investment growth, which is fair for the point he makes, but it isn't what an actual account looked like.
It isn't a forecast. Crothers says plainly that "nobody knows" how long the rally lasts. Four strong years say little about the next four.
