Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
The people who used Greaney’s study to plan their retirement would have done well. Those who followed your advice would have done poorly. There will be no court cases. Bogleheads has a right to ban you and you don’t even need to violate any rules. There’s no “compelling public interest” in a mid-tier discussion forum. Heck, YouTube (the #1 site which you, of course, refuse to use) could ban you for being a Phillies fan or even for your VII theories and there’d be nothing you could do about it. I thought you went to law school?
I went to law school and i don’t agree with what you’re saying, Sensible. I absolutely believe that there’s a compelling public interest in whether or not millions of middle-class investors have some means to gain access to honest and accurate and research-based reports on what the peer-reviewed research teaches us all about how stock investing works in the real world.
It’s the most important public policy issue of our day. On pure substance terms, there are more important matters: the polarization of political views; the war in Ukraine; climate change; the unrest in the Middle East. But all of those are highly complicated matters. In this case, the solution is easy-peasy. If Shiller only published his Nobel-prize-winning research today, there would not be one dissenting voice questioning the need for it to be discussed at every discussion board and blog, without a single exception. The only thing holding us back is the 43-year cover-up. That makes the Buy-and-Holders look really, really, really bad. But it’s not as if it will look better for the Buy-and-Holders when it’s a 44-year cover-up.
I think that we all need to act together to get every site opened to honest posting re the research. Buy-and-Holders and Valuation-Informed Indexers should be united re the process question and they would be if it were not for you Goons. The same laws that apply in every field of human endeavor outside of the investing advice field need to be made applicable in the investing advice field as well. It”s silly that I should even feel a need to say that. It’s not all just about turning a quick buck any way you can.
My best wishes to you.
Rob
It is not goons, or your silly opinions on Greaney, or board owners that ban you………or any of your other nonsensical views. Your failure is based on your actions/inactions. You quit your job way too soon and with inadequate savings. You had no established side business or other sources of income. Upon early failure, you refused to go back to work.
The formula is very simple. Work to bring in an income. Spend less than you make. Put aside 15-20% with every check for retirement. Invest in a diversified group of low cost mutual funds/ETFs. That is it. Very simple.
The problem is that some people don’t want to work and want a short cut. That isn’t going to happen for 99% of all people.
I believe that an important part of the story is following research-based investment strategies when investing one’s retirement money. I am ashamed of myself for not having spoken up about the error in the Greaney retirement study (it lacks a valuation adjustment) during the first three years in which I posted at the Motley Fool board. I am proud of myself for having finally worked up the courage to do so and for not backing down during the 22 years since I did so.
I naturally wish you the best that this life has to offer a person.
Rob
So you haven’t brought in an income for the last 25+ years just so that you can continue to repeat your Greaney line…….to which Evidence answered yet again last week.
He didn’t answer. Evidence has acknowledged that the Greaney study lacks a valuation adjustment. That’s what I believe as well.
Our only difference is that I say that the study needs to be corrected and Evidence does not say that. I have asked him on numerous occasions whether he believes that Shiller’s Nobel-prize-winning research showing that valuations affect long-term returns is legitimate research. On one or two occasions he said: “Sure.” But he has not as of today advanced a statement saying that the study needs to be corrected.
I believe that there should not be one dissenting voice re that one. People use retirement studies to plan retirements. I have seen it happen. There were people at the Mptley Fool board using the Greaney study to plan their retirement on nearly a daily basis.This is serious stuff.
Rob
Anyone who uses Greaney’s stuff to plan their retirement did fine.
Not because he got the number right.
When you tell people that a particular withdrawal rate is safe, it should be safe, not wildly risky.
If you identify a wildly risky withdrawal rate as safe, it may still work. But, if you stick with the flawed methodology, sooner or later there will be failed retirements as a result. What do you do then? Is Greaney going to compensate all the people who suffer failed retirements because his study was not corrected when he learned of the error?
And how about Buy-and-Hold? Greaney made the error because he believed in the Buy-and-Hold claim that valuation-based market timing (price discipline) is not always 100 percent required. How do we get the word out to every investor that it was all a horrible mistake? What do we do about the millions who will be hurt by the inevitable economic collapse?
Had we opened every site to honest posting re the peer-reviewed research, we would today be 22 years ahead of where we are in our development of the Valuation-Informed Indexing concept.
Rob
Wildly risky is what you did and continue to do.
As a society of people we need to get from where we are to where deep in our hearts we all know we need to be. How is it going to happen without some of us working up the courage to take some chances?
Today’s CAPE Value is 35. Good job, Buy-and-Holders!
Rob