>How stocks were in 1922, 1872,
>or even 1972 seems not to be terribly relevant to me. Once again I think a
>net-present-value calculation on the profitability of the major averages
>over 10 to 20 years might be a better figure to work with than dividends
>which don't reflect profitability equally across industries.
So you can divine the future better than you can understand the past? Is that what makes you the enlightened one?
Doug