Yesterday’s blog reported on an e-mail that I sent to academic research Wade Pfau on January 16, 2011. Wade responded later the same day. He endorsed John Walter Russell’s characterization of a paper purporting to show that long-term timing does not work as testing “idiot switching.” He said: ” ‘Idiot switching.’ That is great, and describes exactly what the Fisher and Statman paper does. You and John have a great knack for coining new terms. I think VII is a much better term than any alternatives I’ve come across.” He added that he did not think it would be appropriate to use the term “idiot switching” in an academic paper.
Wade also reported that “as always, I will be reading all your links.” He said: “I definitely need to cite some of your work as the founder of VII, as I have not found anyone else who can lay claim to that. Shiller pointed out the predictive power of PE10 but never discussed how to incorporate it into asset allocation, as far as I know.”
So when do we get to the email where you accuse Wade of making a deal with “the goons”?
I believe that what you are looking for is the e-mail in which Wade expresses his concern to me about the threat that the Goons made to get him fired from his job for the “crime” of having publicly expressed his view that the Old School safe withdrawal rate studies need to be corrected now that there is a consensus in this field that they get the numbers wildly wrong, Diversified.
That one comes near the end of our e-mail correspondence. I haven’t counted the e-mails, so I don’t know how long it is going to take to get to it. There are a lot of them. I will keep posting one per day. If I fall too far behind on the posts re my various column entries, I will switch to those for a time to get caught up and then return to the e-mail correspondence with Wade.
I intend to stick to a seven-day posting schedule until we are all caught up. We’ll get there.
Patience is a virtue, my Goon friend!
Rob
Haven’t counted the e-mails? Don’t bother. We know how hard it is for you to count.
I intend to stick to a seven-day posting schedule until we are all caught up. We’ll get there.
Your devotion to this cause is inspiring to us all.
We know how hard it is for you to count.
Um –Thanks, Question Mark.
I think.
Rob
Your devotion to this cause is inspiring to us all.
It should be, Evidence.
The fact that you are hostile to the idea of learning how to invest effectively for the long run highlights the dangers of becoming addicted to a Get Rich Quick approach.
There are no two sides re this matter. We are all on the same side. We all want the same things.
You don’t see it that way. But it is so all the same.
Please take good care.
Rob
The fact that you are hostile to the idea of learning how to invest effectively for the long run highlights the dangers of becoming addicted to a Get Rich Quick approach.
The fact that you are hostile to the idea of producing evidence for your claims highlights the dangers of becoming addicted to a Making Stuff Up approach to financial blogging.
I hope you will be able to back up your claim that people tried to get Wayne fired from his job. You haven’t done so yet, although you repeat that claim over and over again
The fact that you are hostile to the idea of producing evidence for your claims highlights the dangers of becoming addicted to a Making Stuff Up approach to financial blogging.
Good point, Evidence.
Who really knows if a 4 percent withdrawal is always safe or not?
What’s data got to do with research?
Rob
I hope you will be able to back up your claim that people tried to get Wayne fired from his job. You haven’t done so yet, although you repeat that claim over and over again
I have a funny feeling that the fact that the claims were put forward on the internet by the same people who have been for 10 years now threatening to kill anyone who posts honestly on safe withdrawal rates might help us just a wee bit in our efforts to get to the bottom of this mystery, Diversified.
We’ll see.
My best wishes to you and yours.
Rob
You still haven’t offered any evidence that Wade’s job was threatened by anyone. You also haven’t offered any evidence of death threats. Can you back up any of your claims at all?
You still haven’t offered any evidence that Wade’s job was threatened by anyone. You also haven’t offered any evidence of death threats.
Um — Good point, Diversified.
Truly outstanding!
Rob
Can you back up any of your claims at all?
Does 30 years of academic research and 140 years of historical return data count for anything in your book, Diversified?
Rob
Does 30 years of academic research and 140 years of historical return data count for anything in your book, Diversified?
Only if you provide a link.
http://www.passionsaving.com/index.html
Happy reading, Evidence.
Rob
There isn’t a single piece of research or evidence on the page that you linked to.
You are too sharp for me, Evidence.
I wish you all the best in any event.
Rob
I wasn’t aware there was academic research regarding death threats and safe withdrawal rates – thanks for clearing that up.
It’s clear that you are incapable of answering even the most basic questions in an honest and forthright manner.
I wasn’t aware there was academic research regarding death threats and safe withdrawal rates
That makes a lot of sense, Diversified.
Rob
It’s clear that you are incapable of answering even the most basic questions in an honest and forthright manner.
The State of the “Defense” of the Buy-and-Hold Investing Strategy, Circa May 2012.
Rob
“The State of the “Defense” of the Buy-and-Hold Investing Strategy, Circa May 2012.”
The state of defense of a lone, passive-aggressive, troll shouting in the wilderness of his dementia
The state of defense of a lone, passive-aggressive, troll shouting in the wilderness of his dementia
My thought is that this may be one of those ones re which we are going to have to agree to disagree, Diversified.
I certainly wish you the best of luck with whatever investing strategies you elect to pursue, in any event.
Rob
Yours is a rather unusual blog. I went searching for information on PE10 and found this site. However, I find it quite frustrating. People ask you reasonable questions and your response is either to “blow them off” or to say the data is all there, but you refuse to actually say where.
I guess I don’t understand the function of the site? You might take a look at some truly successful discussion sites, such as bogleheads.org. Here, they have a wiki for general reference and vigorous, polite discussions of all sorts of financial topics. They have even discussed PE10 recently.
Sorry if I’ve insulted you, but it seems to me that you might want to model your website more on successful sites that feature true data-based conversations, mutual respect, civility, and informed contributors. I don’t think anyone will get much from your website, nor do I think you will get much return traffic. I certainly have not learned much by looking over you website.
And, by the way, what is it with “death threats”? You seem to have no evidence to present that they ever occurred and these assertions immediately damage your credibility.
Just saying…
They have even discussed PE10 recently.
Wow.
That’s amazing, Marga.
Even P/E10, huh?
The world is changing too fast to keep up.
Rob