Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
We already know that. No one has ever claimed it has an adjustment. What we have said is that is doesn’t need an adjustment and that has been explained to you hundreds of thousands of times as to why that is. It is up to you to do your own study if you want something different. Stop demanding that everyone else needs to do what you want and to believe what you say.
Do you think it would have been better if I had kept it zipped re the error in the study? It made me feel like a creep to do that. There were people at the board who thought the study was legitimate.
Rob
You have no business telling anyone else that you think they made an error when you have a completed failed retirement plan and no education in the field.
I think I had an OBLIGATION to point out the error in the Greaney Retirement study (it lacks a valuation adjustment). There were people at the Motley Fool board who were using the Greaney study for help in planning their retirement. I saw this with my own eyes. I was there in real time.
The fact that there are many people who have been educated in the field who have not done anything to get the Greaney study or similar studies corrected just makes things worse. That’s a big part of the reason why many people have placed their confidence in these studies. We need to get accurate information on how stock investing works out to millions of people.
I am not able to imagine any possible downside.
Rob
You have an obligation to have knowledge, experience and a successful track record, before giving out advice that could impact someone else’s long term financial viability. There is a downside that you fail to understand. No one wants to be broke and divorced like you.
No one wants to live through another Buy-and-Hold Crisis, Anonymous.
I would be in amazing financial shape if it were not for the abusive and in some cases criminal behavior of the members of the various Buy-and-Hold Goon Squads. So that’s a Buy-and-Hold thing, not a Valuation-Informed Indexing thing.
And how much of an expert can anyone who is 44 years behind in his reading of the peer-reviewed research claim to be? That person might be able to claim an expertise in marketing, that’s about it.
Rob
No one wants to take advice from someone with a failed track record. No one wants to take advice that makes things up, like you do.
If no one wanted to hear what I had to say, I would not be banned at a single site. I would not represent a threat to those who promote the Buy-and-Hold strategy.
Rob
You are banned due to your bad behavior and you know it. You won’t answer questions. You hijack threads. You ignore what people have said. You don’t want a discussion. You just want other people to keep it zipped and to fall in line with your thinking. Even your own wife gave up and dumped you.
And I often report accurately that the retirement study posted at John Greaney’s web site lacks an adjustment for the valuation level that applies on the day the retirement begins.
Buy-and-Hold!
Rob
But you go even further to say that it is an error, which it is not. It is like pointing out that the grass in the front yard is green and that it is an error.
I definitely say that it is an error. In a world in which valuations affect long-term returns, it is a logical impossibility that someone could accurately identify the safe withdrawal rate without taking valuations into consideration.
The shocking thing is that the error has not been corrected in the 23 years since I pointed it out. That’s Buy-and-Hold, the marketing gimmick that is in the process of destroying the United States.
If it weren’t an error, there never would have been a single abusive post. If it weren’t an error, the Buy-and-Holders would have been fine with letting people hear both sides of the story so that they could decide for themselves. All of the craziness is rooted in the fact that Buy-and-Hold (which is a marketing gimmick, not an investment strategy) cannot be defended in civil and reasoned debate.
My sincere take.
Rob
Your problem is that you don’t understand the study, just like you don’t understand many other things. It is not surprising to see that your plan completely failed. You need to spend your time listening to others and learning something versus shooting your mouth off about things that you don’t understand. What is even more pathetic is that you even admitted to “not being a numbers guy”. Get a clue, Rob. It is all about numbers.
I understand that Greaney hurt people in very serious ways when he said that a 4 percent withdrawal is “100 percent safe” at all valuation levels. There were lots of comments at the Motley Fool board that showed that people believed him.
There are marketing gimmicks in all fields. But, when protecting a marketing gimmick becomes so important that you are willing to overlook an error in a retirement study that causes it to get all the numbers wildly wrong. people have gotten on the wrong track. Buy-and-Hold did that to us. In other fields, there are marketing gimmicks but people are still permitted to post honestly re the research in the field.
I believe that the same ethical standards that apply in every field other then the investment advice field should apply in the investment advice field as well. Sue me.
Rob
Greaney didn’t hurt anyone. You hurt your family. Not trying to blame everyone else for your poor decisions.
Okay, Anonymous.
I wish you well, in any event.
Rob
If you were right about all your claims, you wouldn’t be broke, divorced and widely banned. Take accountability for your own actions. Otherwise, you are just wasting your time with the therapist.
I don’t believe that I will be broke for long. A bull market is a temporary phenomenon — by definition. It is an out-of-control situation, and, if the society is to continue, control needs to be regained. I won’t have to change what I say when prices return to reasonable levels — you will.
I’d rather be in the situation that I am in. I’d rather that we were ALL in the situation that I am in — not counting irrational gains as real. If we all didn’t have a desire to know the realities of stock investing, we would have made a book about irrational exuberance a best-seller or awarded the researcher who showed the realities a Nobel prize or advanced thousands of posts expressing a desire that every site be opened to honest posting.
It’s all about whether you want to live in a temporary fantasy world or to stay in touch with the realities when you are investing in stocks. I say that the arc of history of personal finance bends toward rationality. There’s nothing “broke” about rationality.
Where I’m coming from.
Rob
In your case, it doesn’t matter what happens with the stock market. You need to have an income before you can even invest in the market. Further, it needs to be a material amount at this point given you are in your 60’s.
Despite what you say, you, nor anyone else would want to be in your situation. Being broke in your 60’s is the worse case scenario. At this point, you would need to win the lottery.
On the day when we take action as a nation of people to open every internet site to honest posting re the peer-reviewed research, we all win the lottery, Anonymous.
The purpose of doing research is to learn new things. Part of the learning process is talking things over among ourselves. Learning is the one true free lunch. Valuation-Informed Indexing is a huge advance over Buy-and-Hold. We are blessed to live in a time when there’s 44 years of peer-reviewed research showing how stock investing works in the real world.
Where I’m coming from.
Rob
The odds of winning the Mega Millions lottery is 1 in 302,575,350. Those odds are much better vs you getting your expecting windfall.
The odds that we are someday going to see some evidence that the Greaney retirement study really has contained a valuation adjustment all along are longer than that.
Rob
The odds that you misrepresent what other people have said and done is 100% certainty.
My best wishes to you and yours. Anonymous.
Rob
Who ever said that it had a valuation adjustment and who, other than you, says it needed one? Do you understand what a retrospective study is? Have you ever had a formal education on evaluating studies? Have you even taken a statistics class? What is funny is that you even admit that you are “not a numbers guy”. Newsflash, Rob: This is a numbers game.
My 22 year old has $125K in her investment accounts. My 20 year old, has $76K in her investment account. Both are much better off financially vs you and also know considerably more than you do about investing. You should be embarrassed with your outcome.
Greaney did a retrospective study on what withdrawal rate survived in the past. He did not do a retrospective study on what withdrawal rate was safe in the past. Had he done that, he obviously would have gotten very different numbers.
Why did he flip out when I asked the question? Because he knows perfectly well that his study lacks a valuation adjustment.
Rob
My 22 year old has $125K in her investment accounts. My 20 year old, has $76K in her investment account. Both are much better off financially vs you and also know considerably more than you do about investing. You should be embarrassed with your outcome.
Did either of them have the courage to point out the dangers of Buy-and-Hold in a public place?
That’s the sort of thing that journalists do, Anonymous. And, yes, they get paid for it. The bigger and more important the truth is that they point out and the more people it affects, the more they get paid.
I think it would be fair to say that this one is pretty darn big and important. It’s been 23 years!
Rob
You obviously did not take a statistics class. You do not do a probability adjustment on past results. Probability adjustments used on forward looking data. Like you said, you are not a numbers guy. Even Wade pointed this out when you tried to quote data from JWR. You really need to understand how the numbers work before making comments.
If you do not look at probabilities, then you are not looking at what is safe. Greaney should have told people that his safe withdrawal rate study ignored the question of what withdrawal rate is safe.
Wade spent 16 months studying the matter from every possible angle and concluded that the Greaney study is “dangerous.” Then you Goons threatened him. Gee, I wonder what is going on here.
Rob
Wade actually said you were wrong. He also told you that you caused him more harm any so called goon. Gee, I wonder what you are hiding.
Is is safe to be broke in your 60’s with no source of income outside of social security? Do you think it is wise to keep making up stories and speaking about subjects that you clearly don’t understand? The problem is with you and not the rest of the world. Fix your own problems.
What will he say in the days and years following the onset of the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis, when every discussion board and blog has been opened to honest posting re the last 44 years of peer-reviewed research? That’s what matters.
Bull markets are a blip in time. Irrational exuberance is a blip in time. Buy-and-Hold is a blip in time. The peer-reviewed research shows what works in the long run.
Rob
“Is is safe to be broke in your 60’s with no source of income outside of social security? Do you think it is wise to keep making up stories and speaking about subjects that you clearly don’t understand? The problem is with you and not the rest of the world. Fix your own problems.”
What kind of person would I be if I kept it zipped re the error in the study? There were people at the Motley Fool board who were using the study for help in planning their retirements. I had become friends with some of those people.
No can do.
Rob
What kind of person would I be to keep it zipped about all your errors, lies and made up stories? You don’t have friends. Haven’t you noticed?
There were thousands of people who expressed a desire that honest posting re the peer-reviewed research be permitted. It wasn’t a majority or anything close to it. But I care about those people. And I am confident that we can turn the thousands into millions once we have opened every site to honest posting.
I believe that we will see a day when the same laws that apply in every field of human endeavor outside of the investment advice field will apply in the investment advice field as well. We’ll see.
Do you think that I should flip to the other side?
Rob
No one is buying it,Rob. Despite your claims of “thousands”, no one is here to support you on a board that YOU control and that allows them to post anonymously. Everyone seems to have abandoned you and are not interested in the stories that you have repeated thousands of times.
Do you think that I should flip over to the Goon side?
Rob
There is no “goon” side. What you should do is this:
Admit you are the cause of your problems.
Get a job immediately and work as long as you are physically capable.
Save as much as you possibly can.
Invest consistently
Apologize to your ex-wife and kids and plead for their support (you will need when you require future care/assistance as you age).
Shouldn’t I also wrote on the blackboard 500 times that “the safe withdrawal rate is always the same number, it never changes”?
Rob
No, just take responsibility and fix your financial failure instead of expecting everyone else to bend to your will.
I don’t need anyone to bend to my will. That’s not an issue.
But I need posts that have my name attached to them to express my sincere views. I don’t believe that the safe withdrawal rate is always the same number. So, if I participate in a community in which safe withdrawal rates are discussed, I need to say that.
That’s pretty much it. I believe that the safe withdrawal rate is a number that changes with changes in valuation levels. I believe that valuations affect long-term returns.
Rob
Yes, you want people to bend to your will. You want to be able to ban posts at your website, but you demand that they let you post what you want. You refuse to post at sites like Reddit because you can’t control the narrative. You want people to pay you money for your opinions on investing, but no one wants to pay you a dime.
I wish you all good things, Anonymous.
Rob
Remember all those times you would tell people that they would need to fix what you saw as problems by “close of business that day”? Ring a bell?
I wish that Greaney would have corrected his retirement study by the close of business on May 13, 2002. We all would be in better shape today if he had. Greaney more than anyone else.
I said something to that effect at the time. It was there for us at the time and it’s there for us now. It’s just a question of us feeling kindly enough about ourselves to give ourselves permission to benefit from the last 44 years of peer-reviewed research. I say that we should go for it.
Rob
And that is just one example. You don’t want a discussion. You just want people to believe what you say and for them to do what you say, while you totally ignore their opinions.
What is clear is that you should have been listening to others that pointed out YOUR errors. If you had listened, you wouldn’t be broke and divorced and needing the assistance of a therapist.
I want PEOPLE to be able to participate in constructive discussions. I want Buy-and-Hold Goon Squad members to be required to follow the published rules of the various sites and the laws of the United States.
Such a meanie!
Rob