Set forth below are the texts of two comment that I recently put to another blog entry at this site:
I just wanted to confirm with you that asset allocation, and whether one prefers to vary it with valuations, is a personal matter with no right or wrong answer. We make take differing views, but there’s no need to be dogmatic about them.
Dogmatism hurts us.
There are two schools of thought. One is rooted in the research of Eugene Fama. One is rooted in the research of Robert Shiller. Both Fama and Shiller have been award Nobel Prizes in Economics for their work.
Members of both schools should respect members of the other school.
But there ARE right and wrong answers. We should avoid dogmatism because none of us know with certainty which school of thought is the right one. But it is not possible that both schools of though are equally correct. The two schools of thought are rooted in opposite premises.
We don’t know everything. That’s why we should avoid dogmatism.
But we DO know some things. So it would be a terrible mistake to pretend that this is all just a matter of personal choice, that every allocation choice is equally supported by the peer-reviewed research in this field.
You are suggesting that only two extreme positions exist: Either everything is known and there is no room for judgment calls or nothing is known and every choice made is equally supported by the research. I reject both extremes and favor a middle-ground position. We have learned many important things about how stock investing works over the past 50 years and we should hope and expect to continue learning in days to come. We should be happy about what we have learned and we should share what we have learned with as many people as possible. But we should never become so full of ourselves as to imagine that we have learned it all and that there is no room for future learning experiences.
Each investor should make the calls as to how he or she invests. But any advisor who says “every allocation call is equally valid according to the research” is failing to do his job. We should be telling people what the research says in a non-dogmatic fashion. We should tell people what the research reveals and what the research does not reveal and then leave it to them as to what allocation choice to make.
If someone were to say “I am going to go with zero stocks at all times,” I would say that that position is not supported by the research. But I certainly would remain friends with that person. I certainly would see no call to be abusive in any way to that person. Perhaps I have misunderstood the research or perhaps there will be new research supporting that person’s view in coming days. I cannot in good conscience endorse a permanent stock allocation of zero given what I know about what the research says. But I respect the right and responsibility of all investors to make their own calls and I would never think of dogmatically insisting that any investor follow my recommendations.
I am dogmatic about my right (and the right of every one of my fellow community members) to post honestly. But that’s as far as the dogmatism goes. It would be a lie for me to say that the numbers in the Old School SWR studies are accurate and I would never dream of doing such a thing. But I certainly have been friends with many people who use those studies for guidance and I certainly respect and like those people.
Does that answer your question, Anonymous?
Rob
I think you’ve got it, Rob. Now see if you can put this new attitude into practice – create an account at Bogleheads and contribute to a few threads on this topic.
Remember, no dogmatism, no off topic rants, no thread hijacking, no bullying, just, to quote you:
We should be telling people what the research says in a non-dogmatic fashion. We should tell people what the research reveals and what the research does not reveal and then leave it to them as to what allocation choice to make.
Dozens of people are able to do that on Bogleheads, so I don’t think it’s beyond your ability if you try.
I’ll give it a shot, Anonymous.
Rob
Note: Within 10 minutes of advancing this post, I registered at the Bogleheads Forum as “RobBennett” and put a post to the tread titled “Retirement Calculator”:
http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=140227
My post read:
A link to The Retirement Risk Evaluator is set forth below. The unique thing about this retirement calculator is that it contains an adjustment to reflect the valuation level that applies at the time the retirement begins:
http://www.passionsaving.com/retirement-calculator.html
Rob
A note appeared on my screen saying that the comment was in moderation. This was at about 5:00 PM Eastern Time on May 31, 2014. As of the time that I am scheduling this blog entry for future posting (5:00 PM Eastern Time on June 2, 2014), I have not heard any word re the status of the comment.
I wonder why not.
Maybe you can get back on the bogleheads board by starting with your “I was wrong” , then followed by your apologies to Mel, John and others for misrepresenting their comments as well as an apology to Wade for continuing to comment about him, despite his request for you to stop.
If you did that, I would be happy to support your presence on the board, with the understanding you would remain civil.
I will continue posting honestly on safe withdrawal rates and on scores of other critically important investment-related topics, Anonymous.
I believe that that is best not only for me and for millions of middle-class investors, but for all of my many Buy-and-Hold friends as well.
I naturally wish you the best of luck in all your future life endeavors regardless of what investing strategies you elect to pursue.
Rob
Do you expect the bogleheads to merely forget your past behavior and trust that you have changed?
If you did all of that, you would be posting honestly.
Do you expect the bogleheads to merely forget your past behavior and trust that you have changed?
Any Boglehead who thinks that I have changed is a damned fool, Uralapin.
The owners of the Bogleheads Forum are as corrupt as the day is long. But I wouldn’t call any of then fools. You don’t have to read too many of my posts here to know where things stand. They know where things stand.
Following the next price crash, there will be court proceedings. Things will be set straight. That’s how our system works.
After the owners of the Bogleheads Forum have spent some time in prison, their hearts will melt. That’s how human beings work.
I intend to take over operation of the Bogleheads Forum after the prison sentences are announced. There are lots of great people who post there and they deserve to have a place where they can feel clean about the discussions in which they participate.
Our economy will recover. I believe that we will see the greatest period of growth in U.S. history.
When their prison sentences are over, I will welcome the owners of the Bogleheads Forum to the site. We will get along just fine and they will make important contributions. They will feel better about themselves.
We all will make it to the other side of The Big Black Mountain together.
And people will look back in future days and wonder what all the commotion was about.
My best wishes to you.
Rob
If you did all of that, you would be posting honestly.
I’m the one who got the safe withdrawal rate wrong in a study published at my web site.
Good point, Anonymous.
I almost forgot.
Rob
I have not heard any word re the status of the comment. I wonder why not.
Perhaps because the link to your site blatantly violate their terms of use:
“Please do not solicit business or website traffic on this forum.”
Right.
That’s why there are links to FIRECalc on the same thread.
It’s okay to link to retirement calculators that get the numbers wildly wrong. Just don’t ever dare to link to one that was put together honestly and to one that reflects what the last 33 years of peer-reviewed research says.
Makes sense!
Buy-and-Hold is Science!
Rob
The policy doesn’t ban all links. It bans self-serving links to your own website.
Normally a new forum user toes the line awhile before pushing the rules. After all your years online, it’s amazing that this needs to be explained to you.
The 12-year cover-up of the errors in the Old School SWR studies has ruined millions of middle-class lives, X. There is nothing even a tiny bit “self-serving” about my efforts to expose this ultimate act of financial fraud.
The best way to expose it is to report the SWR numbers honestly and accurately. I will continue to do. Without apology or hesitation.
I wish you well.
Rob
it’s amazing that this needs to be explained to you.
Those trying to cover up a massive act of financial fraud are obviously working at cross purposes to those trying to expose the massive act of financial fraud. There is nothing even a tiny bit “amazing” about it.
I want people to learn the realities. That’s the last thing you want. If you wanted people to learn the realities, you never would have gotten involved in a massive act of financial fraud in the first place.
When Bogle gives his speech, the entire Buy-and-Hold house of cards will come tumbling to the ground. On the day following that speech, honest posting on the peer-reviewed research in this field will no longer be perceived by the Wall Street Con Men and their Internet Goon Squads as such a terrible “problem.” Then it will be easy for us to interact as friends once again.
Rob
You say the Bogleheads are fools, corrupt, going to prison, and you intend to take over their board. No wonder they won’t let you post there.
Rob,
I am here to say that I was wrong about something. I have said many times that I think you have been wasting your time for the past 12 years with your posts. I have come to realize that there was some value in your posts in that you have now built up enough of a history that will allow you to use an insanity plea should you ever need it.
You say the Bogleheads are fools, corrupt, going to prison, and you intend to take over their board. No wonder they won’t let you post there.
There are hundreds of great people who are community members there. And of course it is those people I want to help out by taking over the board.
The things you point to are things I say about the “leaders” of the board. And, yes, you are of course correct that it is because I say those things that they don’t want me to post there. I obviously get that.
What do you want me to do about it, Anonymous?
You want me to pretend that the Old School SWR studies are not in error. You want me to pretend that Buy-and-Hold has not been discredited by 33 years of peer-reviewed research. You want me to pretend that the relentless promotion of Buy-and-Hold strategies was not the primary cause of the economic crisis.
I AM NOT INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THIS MASSIVE ACT OF FINANCIAL FRAUD.
I have nothing against the “leaders” of the Bogleheads Forum. If they want to come clean, I am all for it. Nothing would make me happier.
If they do not want to come clean (all evidence points to this being the case), then there’s not anything I can do about it. I am not all powerful. I will just have to accept it and see what happens following the next price crash.
What do you want from me?
I like these people. I respect these people. I am grateful for all the things that I have learned from these people.
Bing. Bing. Bing.
I have zero willingness to post dishonestly to gain the favor of these people.
Bong.
It’s been the same story for 12 years. It never changes.
If you really think that you are not on your way to prison, please go live a fun life with my blessings, okay?
If you think it is a better idea to come clean before the next crash, please know that I am happy to help in any way and that I am happy to do anything I can to make everything go as smoothly as possible for every single individual involved.
Is there anything else to say, Anonymous?
Please just make up your mind and then live with the consequences of your decision.
I wish you the best of luck with it regardless of what you decide.
Fair enough, old friend?
Rob
you have now built up enough of a history that will allow you to use an insanity plea should you ever need it.
The way I see it is that I have built a record showing that I not only talk the anti-Buy-and-Hold talk but also walk the anti-Buy-and-Hold walk.
I think it would be fair to say that, following the next crash we are going to have all sorts of people saying that they had doubts about Buy-and-Hold all along.
I didn’t just harbor such doubts and keep them to myself. I spoke them out loud. Many, many, many times.
That gives me a credibility that none of the others will possess.
No?
A 12-year record says something. I was anti-Buy-and-Hold before being anti-Buy-and-Hold was cool.
Rob