I’ve posted Entry #74 to my weekly Investing: The New Rules column at the Death by 1,000 Papercuts site. It’s called The Reviews Are In: My Investing Ideas Are “Catastrophically Unproductive”!
Juicy Excerpt: Scott said some amazing things in e-mail correspondence with me in the days that followed. While he had written in the column that “a newer school of thought believes that the safe withdrawal rate depends on how stocks are priced at the time you begin making withdrawals,” I think it would be fair to say that he adopted a huffy tone in his future conversations with the fellow who founded the New School and who has for nine years now been the lead promoter of the New School findings and the leading voice calling for correction of the discredited Old School studies.
Scott’s take on Rob Bennett was well summed up in the comment he made in an e-mail to me saying: “You go about it in a manner that is catastrophically unproductive by adding missionary zeal that inflates your importance and demeans others. The whole ideas that there is a New School of safe withdrawal rates reeks of personal aggrandizement.”
Arty says
Rob,
Here is what that link actually says in the copy, which differs from your title: “You go about it in a *manner* that is catastrophically unproductive by adding missionary zeal that inflates your importance and demeans others.”
In truth, I think you could have, and can, go about things more productively in terms of the “manner” of presenting your ideas. And I say that with the best possible intent.
Of course, it is incorrect to say your *ideas* are unproductive, even as others may think so. Quite the reverse. Had most investors listened to your explications on Shiller years ago, even as late as 2007, and then adopted some sort of valuations-informed investing based on PE/10, they would have been better off.
Rob says
I think you could have, and can, go about things more productively in terms of the “manner” of presenting your ideas. And I say that with the best possible intent.
I’m grateful to you for sharing your thoughts re this, Arty.
There is only one issue re which I have drawn a line in the sand. I have said that I will not under any circumstances post dishonestly re the numbers that people use to plan their retirements. I have given two reasons: (1) I have made many good friends in all of the various communities in which I post; and (2) I view a failed retirement as a serious life setback.
It cannot possibly be the case that my agreeing to post dishonestly would take us to a better place. Our problem is that we have thousands of layers of deception in place today, so many layers that many of us cannot make sense of things. We need less deception, not more.
Outside of that, I am 100 percent open to anything anyone comes up with. I am happy to say that Buy-and-Hold was a huge advance over what we had before. I am happy to say that the Buy-and-Holders are good and smart people. I am happy to say that John Bogle is a personal hero of mine, I am happy to say that I have learned from the Buy-and-Holders and that I respect them and admire them and like them.
What can I do that I have not already done?
I will NOT post dishonestly re safe withdrawal rates. Please don’t ask. If there is anything else that I could do, I would be grateful to hear about it.
Rob
what says
I am pretty sure it is possible to post honestly and also not be a complete ass.
Possible for Rob Bennett? Probably not.
Rob says
If a poster says “the Old School safe withdrawal rate studies get the numbers wildly wrong and those studies should be corrected before they cause more middle-class people to suffer failed retirements,” is that person being a complete ass in your assessment?
I think everybody should be saying that. I would not feel good about myself if I knew that I were helping to cause millions of failed retirements. So I make it a point to let people know that the Old School studies get the numbers wildly wrong whenever I am posting at a board or blog at which someone is promoting those studies.
I don’t think it makes me a complete ass to do that, What. I think it makes me a good friend both to the people who would have suffered the failed retirements had I not spoken up and to the people who are giving out the wrong numbers and who I presume want to know what they need to know to stop doing that.
Does any of that make sense to you?
Rob
Arty says
I understand both views here. “What said” is correct in a sense.
I see “honest posting” all the time on the valuations issues—and argued with great vigor—by both professionals and board-poster laypersons. I think the *manner* of presentation is crucial to how something gets heard.
This is separate from the substance of the argument itself. Thus, it is possible to make excellent basic arguments (say, on how valuations matter) but problematic tone and manner can derail the very best arguments. This is true in any field.
Conversely, it is possible to hold a bad position but argue in an attractive manner and thus appear convincing to the less informed (tons of examples, some well-articulated by Rob, but there are literally an infinite number in this field).
Point being, *how* something is said matters greatly. But one can still argue with vigor in a manner that is more likely to be heard by more folks. The choice, invariably is on the writer/speaker.
Rob says
I see “honest posting” all the time on the valuations issues—and argued with great vigor—by both professionals and board-poster laypersons.
The Buy-and=Holders obviously are permitted to post honestly.
But do you really think that, if someone put up a thread there tonight asking for help in getting the authors of the Old School SWR studies to correct their errors, that that post would remain up? I sure don’t.
it is possible to make excellent basic arguments (say, on how valuations matter) but problematic tone and manner can derail the very best arguments.
The sort of thing that will “derail” a discussion there today is if someone points out that the promotion of Buy-and-Hold strategies was the primary cause of the economic crisis, Arty. That’s a pretty darn important point, is it not?
The Buy-and-Hold Crisis is going to put us in the Second Great Depression if we don’t inform millions of people of the dangers of Buy-and-Hold. Ending the crisis is Job #1. There is nothing else that comes close. We are all in the soup if we don’t soon do something about this economic crisis.
If I could wave a magic wand that would take us back to the morning of May 13, 2002, to try a do-over, I would wave the wand. I don’t have a magic wand, Arty. My job is to make the best of a bad situation. I have extended the hand of kindness to those on “the other side” on thousands of occasions over the course of the past nine years. I do so again tonight.
But you know what?
I cannot make them accept the kindness, Arty. There has to be some motivation on the other side for any good things to happen. I think it would be fair to say that you are not helping them to feel more motivated by putting forward the sorts of words you put forward above.
We all need to be permitted to post our honest views. That is so fundamental that there can be no give on that point. All else can be easily worked out. But it is cruel to lead any of these people to believe that there is any give re that one.
I have tried to avoid engaging in that sort of cruelty. I think that we would make a lot more progress a lot more quickly if a few more of us could work up the courage to respect the wishes of the thousands of community members who have expressed a desire that honest posting be permitted.
I care about the Goons. But I stand with the people who built our boards. Those people matter too.
That’s my sincere take re this important matter, in any event.
Rob
azanon says
I don’t think it’s going to be safe for me to post that I support value-informed investing too until the crazy people quit being its primary spokespersons. Until then, my own the record, official position is that I am buy-and-hold all the way baby!
Rob says
My thought is that, given your argument, your conclusion should be just the opposite, Azanon.
If you have thoughts that there is something to VII but worry that it is a crazy person who is its primary advocate, the thing to do is to promote it like crazy (so to speak) yourself. That way it will no longer be a crazy person that is the primary advocate!
We have lots of people who like the VII concept but are afraid to speak out because of what the Goons will say about them. Speak out, for heavens sake! Each time someone speaks out, it makes it that much harder for the Goons to attack.
In time, even our understanding of what is crazy and what is not begins to change. I’m counting on it!
Rob
what says
Why would azanon care about promoting it?
He seems to care more about using it, or something similar, and also not being flagged as a nutjob.
Rob says
We all need to promote VII if we want the economy to recover, What. Get Rich Quick is killing us.
And the nutjob stuff used by the Buy-and-Holders is becoming less and less effective the more people see how much human misery it causes. When you make claims that your strategy is backed by research, sooner or later people demand that you provide a link to a study.
Rob