In the past couple of days, I’ve read several articles in the newspapers and in professional forums denouncing the notion of market timing. They say, quite correctly, that no one can time the market and call the ups and downs. Very true. They also say that various market timing tools won’t generate higher returns consistently. Again, very true. They conclude that it makes no sense to step back from the stock market occasionally to assess market conditions.

Let’s put this analysis in a different context, though, and see if that conclusion makes sense. Forget the stock market, let’s talk about the weather—specifically, hurricanes.

What do I think about the S&P 500's break above 2,000? Hear what I discussed with CNBC Worldwide Exchange in an interview today, August 27.

The S&P 500 has set another record, closing above 2,000 for the first time yesterday. Hooray.

I want to be excited, I really do. But I just can’t get there, and I don’t seem to be alone. The press has noted it, without much fanfare. The market itself doesn’t seem all that jazzed.

Why the ennui? I suspect it’s because this may not be a real rally, but one driven by low volumes, senior staff on vacation, and other less-than-exciting factors. After Labor Day, we should get a better look at what investors really think.

Looking into the relationship between interest rates and stock market valuations, I’ve found two very interesting points that have a direct bearing on our investments.

First, the valuation metric you use matters. As you may remember, I prefer a cyclically adjusted price/earnings ratio, or Shiller P/E, over a P/E based on only 12 months of data. When you compare the relationships with interest rates, among other factors, it’s very clear that the Shiller P/E has the better economic foundation; not only is it more intuitively sensible, it’s also a better analytical tool.

As we discussed last week, market crashes (defined as drops of 30 percent or more) have become more common recently, while the smaller declines known as bear markets (drops of about 20 percent) have become less so. With two major crashes in the past 10 years, it seems like a good idea to examine some of the factors that preceded them.

Are there any warning signs that we should be keeping an eye out for?

Yesterday, we talked about the latest prediction of doom—this time, a 67-percent decline in the stock market in the next 18 to 24 months. Unlike most doom-saying, which isn’t supported by any actual data (the collapse of the dollar, for example), arguments for a significant market decline are based on a number of very real facts, many of which I’ve discussed in the past.

I've never really examined the situation of a crash itself, however. What would a crash mean, and how would it likely play out?

Yesterday, I received a question from Joe Esposito that touches on some very relevant demographic-related issues:

“How do you feel about Harry Dent's prediction of a Dow 5,500 and the next big crash starting within the next 24 months or so? Just curious on your take regarding his demographic viewpoints and positioning with booms and busts. (Highs are higher and busts will be lower than that last.) Thoughts?”

When I speak to groups in various parts of the country, I often hear that things there don’t reflect the national employment averages and trends I talk about. This usually leads to some interesting discussions about why that might be the case.

The problem with looking at region-specific trends is the lack of research in that area. So I was glad to discover a recent report by Deloitte University Press that breaks out some numbers on a regional basis, with interesting results.

One of the advantages of a slow summer season is that we can spend some time on topics that are important but not urgent. Demography is a great example. It determines most of the context in which the economy operates, but its trends play out over years and decades. Like the weather, demographic trends are just there, and we have to adjust to them.

Simply looking at the U.S. population distribution can give us some insight into what will happen over the next 20 years or so, as well as what’s happening right now.

As I wrote in my last post, oil prices have stayed lower for longer than many would have expected, and we may see prices drift lower still as supply continues to outpace demand.

Some of the effects of lower prices are obvious, but others aren’t. Let's take a look at who stands to benefit from continued low prices—and who may not fare so well.