In my experience, when people start
talking of a lost decade for stocks somewhere, this is often a good time to actually own stocks as the next decade is often a lot better although it might not look so.
Not exact matches
Talk of a «
lost decade» in the U.S. is becoming commonplace.
IT, once the blue - eyed boy
of India Inc, has been the least -
talked - about sector for more than a
decade now, as the bellwether industry gradually
lost its sheen with the decline
of western economies.
Also, it is very heartbreaking
talking with people that don't get the proper diagnosis, medication, and counselling until years, sometimes
decades go by, and they look back with a sense
of lost time,
lost relationships, and much sorrow, because intervention didn't happen earlier.
Trump
talking about the manufacturing jobs
lost in Rochester over the last couple
of decades, and called Rochester a «special place» and says if elected, his administration would «make it better.»
With all
of the
talk about the «
lost decade,» well, we have had
lost decades before, in the 30s and 70s.
A vein
of warm sentiment is bared as he speaks
of his two daughters (one lives with her family in San Francisco, the other is a semi-professional photographer in New York), recalls his fondness for Jackson Pollock or
talks about a portrait
of his wife that he drew last year — his first «realistic» work in almost two
decades («I thought I might have
lost my touch, but it turned out stronger than ever.»)
Largely
lost in the present debate, amid
talk of blizzards and the chilly winter across much
of the country, is this simple fact: The
decade 2000 through 2009 was the warmest since the 1880s, when modern record keeping began.
Most people
talk as if Miami and Bangladesh still have a chance
of surviving; most
of the scientists I spoke with assume we'll
lose them within the century, even if we stop burning fossil fuel in the next
decade.