1. Rob says

    John Walter Russell published his research showing that the numbers are wrong in the Old School SWR studies on May 18, 2002, JCL.

    John Greaney should have corrected his study within 24 hours of the time he learned of the errors in it. Then we all should have gotten to work getting all the other Old School studies corrected. John Bogle and Bill Bernstein and Scott Burns and Jonathan Clements should have helped us get articles placed on the front pages of the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times.

    Had that work been done in 2002, we wouldn’t be suffering through an economic crisis today.

    The Ban on Honest Posting has hurt us all in a very big way. It is time to bring the Campaign of Terror to a full and complete stop.

    My sincere take.


  2. Liz Fan says

    As far as I can determine, John Greaney does not even post at the site linked to. And while they may be aware of his work, reading those threads makes it clear that there is no reverential status reserved for his work (if it is referenced at all) versus any other presenter putting forward an idea.

    I think it might be time for you to read posts and information and comments, like the one above, “straight up; with no chaser” as you like to say, instead of seeing a bogyman around every corner, and injecting your paranoia into every line you write. You seem to be headed for a breakdown.

  3. Liz Fan says

    Oh, and I don’t appreciate you deleting my comments on the prior thread. Do you want an audience, or don’t you? I can easily leave if you prefer…????

  4. Liz Fan says

    “It is only by permitting the expression of alternate viewpoints and by over time integrating the best of the new ideas brought to its attention into the overall community message that a community achieves its full potential. ”

    Rob Bennett

  5. Rob says

    there is no reverential status reserved for his work

    A small number there who fancy themselves “leaders” of the community assign “reverential status” to the Buy-and-Hold concept, Liz Fan. That’s the problem.

    The errors in Greaney’s study came about because of his misplaced belief in the Buy-and-Hold concept (the idea that it is not necessary for investors to change their stock allocations when stock valuations rise to insanely dangerous levels). It is because this group cannot bear for people to see how many lives have been destroyed by the promotion of Buy-and-Hold for 30 years after it was discredited by the academic research that they “defend” the Greaney study and the other Old School SWR studies. I am confident that this group would be warning people about the dangers of these studies if doing so did not reflect poorly on Buy-and-Hold and on those who have continued to promote it for the past 30 years.


  6. Rob says

    I don’t appreciate you deleting my comments on the prior thread.

    I have an obligation to those who congregate here to protect them from abusive posting, Liz Fan.

    The way it is.


  7. Rob says

    I don’t know what deleted entry you are referring to, Liz Fan. If you let me know what deleted entry you are referring to, I will let you know why it was deleted.


  8. Liz Fan says

    Well, it’s gone now, so how would i know?????

    I just observed the thread that had two back and forths from us and maybe 8 posts suddenly shrink to 6 posts, with the most recent being deleted. You mean to tell me you are labeling my input as abusive, yet you don’t even know what I said?

  9. Rob says

    you are labeling my input as abusive, yet you don’t even know what I said?

    I don’t memorize the abusive posts, Liz Fan. I delete them to protect the community members who congregate here to learn about the subject matter of the site. That’s the job.


  10. Rob says

    This worldwide conspiracy that has managed to shutdown discussions of safe withdrawal rates all over the internet isn’t very good is it?

    The Greaney study has not been corrected to this day, Liz Fan. People are still using that study to plan their retirements. The threads that you are pointing to do not warn people about the errors in the Greaney study and in the other Old School studies. Why not? Is it not the idea to help people plan their retirements effectively?

    I am going to continue to report the numbers accurately. I don’t feel even a tiny bit comfortable about the idea of encouraging people to use retirement studies that I know get all the numbers wildly wrong. The idea of doing this repulses me.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Comments links could be nofollow free.