Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
……………you do know that this is what the whole discussion is about, right? We need to have those millions in our account by the time we turn 60. Being broke in your 60’s is what is the biggest concern.
The purpose of peer-reviewed research is to help us all to build our retirement accounts as big as possible as quickly as possible.
The fact that a good number of Buy-and-Holders are hotly opposed to the discussion of the last 44 years of peer-reviewed research is a very bad sign for Buy-and-Hold. It’s certainly not all Buy-and-Holders that feels that way, it’s about 10 percent who engage in abusive and in come cases criminal behavior. But the 90 percent of Normals have not spoken up strongly enough in opposition to the tactics that you Goons employ to suppress learning experiences.
If Buy-and-Hold were a real thing, we never would have seen a single abusive post. I mean, come on. I don’t say that the Buy-and-Holders always knew that valuation-based market timing was of critical importance. But they certainly knew that Shiller had done something important and that we all should have been discussing the far-reaching implications of his Nobel-prize-winning research going back to the day it was published.
I believe that we are fundamentally a good people. I believe that we will get there. I think it is just too weird to have one sets of laws that applies to everything outside of the investment advice field and an entirely different set of laws that applies in the investment advice field. We’ll see.
Rob
If you think laws have been broken, then file charges. Otherwise, we know those are just more made up things.
The Get Rich Quick psychology that causes people to believe that their stock portfolio is worth more than what the peer-reviewed research says it is worth also affects their views on legal actions. When we solve one of these problems, we will have solved all of them. As of today, all that we have is the peer-reviewed research we need to understand what is going on. The next step is to give ourselves permission to discuss it at every internet site. Then we will be on our way to lots of wonderful advances.
Rob
You have made the allegations of criminal acts, yet you won’t show links to those criminal acts and you won’t file chart. What are you hiding?
All that you have to do is to look at the Greaney retirement study and see if you can find a valuation adjustment in it. There isn’t one. I pointed that out in a post that I put to the Motley Fool board on May 13, 2002. It hasn’t been corrected in 23 years. There’s no way that that could happen without a lot of funny business going down.
That’s the story. We can all live better lives from this point forward by opening every site to honest posting re the last 44 years of peer-reviewed research. Or we can continue to pretend that there’s no need to practice valuation-based market timing when prices begin to get out of hand. I vote for permitting honest posting.
Rob
This has been addressed thousands of times. You keep your stories going as fake excuses for your failures. You are broke. Fix your own problems. Getting a job would be a good start.
Do you think it would have been better if I had just kept it zipped re the error in the Greaney retirement study?
Rob