A Rich Life

The Old Ideas on Saving & Investing Don't Work -- Here's What Does

“The More Resistance I See to Discussion of the Past 42 Years of Peer-Reviewed Research, the More Confidence I Have That There’s Value in Exploring Those 42 Years of Peer-Reviewed Research in Great Depth.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

There is a 100% chance it did not need an adjustment as it is a retrospective study.

Market timing has never had a successful outcome. You are the promoter of VII, yet you are broke. Why would anyone want to pay you even one dime? You call being broke a “good plan”?

It is a retrospective study that ignores the factor that in the past has always been the most important factor in determinging safety — the valuation level that applies on the day the retirement begins.

I call telling the truth about stock investing a very, very good plan. The fact that it is so hard to gain access to research-based reports on how stock investing works in the Buy-and-Hold Era makes reports that are research-based all the more valuable. The more resistance I see to discussion of the past 42 years of peer-reviewed research, the more confidence I have that there’s value in exploring those 42 years of peer-reviewed research in great depth.

That’s where I’m coming from re this one in any event, Anonymous.

My best wishes, etc.

Rob

“Say That There Is a 1 in 100 Chance That I Was Right in Saying 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. If That’s So, Then Investors Should Be Talking About What I Said in My Famous Post of May 13, 2002, at Every Site on the Internet.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

I still don’t see a single person that told you that you had a good plan and that it worked.

Say that there is a 1 in 100 chance that I was right in saying 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 (those 100 comments indicate that the odds are a lot higher than 1 in 100). If that’s so, then investors should be talking about what I said in my famous post of May 13, 2002, at every site on the internet.

The core job of an investment adviser is to help people plan their retirements. If the Buy-and-Holders got the numbers wildly wrong in their retirement studies, then the issue that I have put on the table is the most important public policy issue before the United States today.

There’s hundreds of millions of dollars in the development and promotion of the Valuation-Informed Indexing concept. It’s impossible to overstate how much leverage there is with this.

I’d say that that’s a pretty darn good plan. And, if you Goons didn’t believe that I was right about the Greaney study, you wouldn’t oppose honest posting so strongly. If you truly believed that the Greaney study contained a valuation adjustment, you would have posted a link to it many years ago. There’s a sense in which every abusive comment that you advance is yet another endosement of the merit of my plan.

Fair enough?

Rob

“I Learned That the Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold Urge Is a Very Strong Thing. It Would Be Very Easy to Overcome It If Investors Were 100 Percent Rational, As Was Assumed By the People Who Concluded That There Is No Real Need for Market Timing Because the Market Is Efficient.”

by

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 miracle is the learning process that is taking place in the background as we speak.”

You lost all your money, you lost your wife and you lost your home. What did you learn from all that?

I learned that the Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold urge is a very strong thing. It would be very easy to overcome it if investors were 100 percent rational, as was assumed by the people who concluded that there is no real need for market timing because the market is efficient. It’s not easy to overcome at all. Getting investors to appreciate the critical importance of market timing/price discipline is a big job. It’s a point that needs to be made daily if we are as a nation of people going to rein in irrational exuberance and avoid having to suffer another one of these horrible Buy-and-Hold Crises.

Leave you Goons aside. You bring a lot of ugliness to the table. But the full reality is that you are extreme outlier personalities. In ordinary circumstances, you couldn’t get to first base with the 90 percent of Normals. So how the heck do you pull off what you have pulled off for 21 years running now? A lot of the Normals LIKE irrational exuberance. They want to believe in Buy-and-Hold. They count irrational exuberance gains as if they were real, just as you Goons do.

It’s nice to have 42 years of peer-reviewed research showing us all the realities of stock investing. But having Shiller’s book carried in quality libraries everywhere doesn’t get the job done. We will need to open every discssion board and blog to honest posting if we want to get that CAPE level down to a reasonable level.

Irrational exuberance isn’t hard to understand. It’s the oldest story in the book — humans have a desire within to get something for nothing. But it takes a lot of work to protect ourselves from the ocean of misery that inevitably follows once Get Rich Quick/Buy-and-Hold strategies become popular.

Do you see?

Rob

“The Abusive Posting Is Part of the Story of Stock Investing. It Is the Emotional Part That the People Who Came Up With the Efficient Market Theory Overlooked and That Shiller Focused On in Producing His Nobel-Prize-Winning Research. If We Ignore the Emotional Stuff, We Are Missing Out on Understanding 70 Percent of the Stock Investing Story.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recenrly posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

Remember when Wade said this: “ What is Step 2? There isn’t one. You will still be in the same position as you’ve been in for the last 10 years.”

He was wrong. You are not in the same position as 10 years ago. You are in a much worse position. Your savings are now depleted, your wife divorced you and you lost your house. It is often said that drug addicts and alcoholics finally seek help when they hit rock bottom. You have hit rock bottom, yet your are so far gone that you can’t even deal with the reality of the situation. You have experienced a major failure and your future is bleak, unless there is some kind of miracle.

Wade sees the wall of abuse that a person faces if he seeks to speak honestly re the last 42 years of peer-reviewed research as an obstacle and concludes that it is not worth the personal cost that it would take to overcome that obstacle. I don’t like the personal cost that must be paid one tiny bit. So we are in agreement re that much. But I interpret the reality of the personal cost that must be paid in a different way. I see it as the EXPLANATION of why we have not advanced in our understanding of how stock investing works despite having Shiller’s amazing research findings available to us for four decades now. I see the wall of abuse as something that must be overcome if we all are to live better and fuller and richer and freer lives in the future.

The abusive posting is part of the story of stock investing. It is the emotional part that the people who came up with the Efficient Market Theory overlooked and that Shiller focused on in producing his Nobel-prize-winning research. If we ignore the emotional stuff (which trsanslates into abusive stuff when the question on the table is whether we should permit discussion of the last 42 years of peer-reviewed research), we are missing out on understanding 70 percent of the stock investing story. That 70 percent is a big deal. It is because Shiller put that 70 percent on the table that his work was important enough for him to be awarded a Nobel prize.

So Wade concludes: “It isn’t worth it.” And I conclude: “It is really, really, really worth it, the abusisve stuff shows why it is so important to explore this stuff.” I hate the absive stuff. I don’t like it one tiny bit. But it is a motivator for me because it points to something so important that is holding us all back, our desire to convince ourselves that the emotional element of the stock investing story can be ignored and that was can all just follow Buy-and-Hold/price indifferent strategies. I don’t believe that. I believe that price indifferent strategies end up causing an ocean of human misery. I believe that Buy-and-Hold as currently practiced is dangerous stuff. I believe that Buy-and-Hold needs to be modified according to what we have learned from the last 42 years of peer-reviewed resarch. I call that modified form of Buy-and-Hold “Valuation-Informed Indexing.”

The mistake that the Buy-and-Holders made in the early days was leaving out the emotional stuff that so concerns Wade, that he cynically tells himself can never be overcome. I believe that it can be overcome. I sure hope so! I believe that the overcoming of that emotional stuff is the core job of anyone working in the investment advice field. To give up re the emotional stuff is to give up on the project of offering sound investment advice.

If Wade truly believes that it is impossible to surmount that wall, he should be looking for another line of work. I believe that he will flip back in days to come and that he will at that time regret ever having flippeed to the Goon side. Wade is not a Goon at heart. He is just afraid of what you Goons can do to harm his career. And his decision to suppress the discussion of his own sincere beliefs is certainly not helping in that regard. Each time you Goons win one, it makes things harder for everyone possessing a desire to do honest work in this field.

I naturally wish you the best of luck in all of your future life endeavors.

Rob

“Saying That There Is No Step Two Is an Expression of Cynicism. If It Really Were So That There Is No Possibility That We Could Ever Again As a Nation of People Advance in Our Understanding of How Stock Investing Works, We Should Just Shut Down All the Peer-Reviewed Journals.”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

Remember when Wade said this: “ What is Step 2? There isn’t one. You will still be in the same position as you’ve been in for the last 10 years.”

He was wrong. You are not in the same position as 10 years ago. You are in a much worse position. Your savings are now depleted, your wife divorced you and you lost your house. It is often said that drug addicts and alcoholics finally seek help when they hit rock bottom. You have hit rock bottom, yet your are so far gone that you can’t even deal with the reality of the situation. You have experienced a major failure and your future is bleak, unless there is some kind of miracle.

Woe is me, Anonymous.

The miracle is the learning process that is taking place in the background as we speak. It’s been going on for 42 years now. No, it has not yet come to full fruition. I obviously wish that it had. But for every negative thing that you can point to in “defense” of the suppression of discussion of the last 42 years of peer-reviewed research, I can point to 20 positive things that show why it is so important that we keep in mind why we permit honest posting re the research in every other field.

We are not a bad people. We just are not. We are not a perfect people. But we are a fundamentally good people. So we all need to count our blessings (while not losing sight of the weaknesses that have been brought to our attention and that need to be addressed) and soldier on to the best of our ability. That’s where I am coming from re this thing in any event.

Step Two is opening every site on the internet to honest posting re the past 42 years of peer-reviewed research in this field. We are close. I believe that it will happens in the days (it may take years of days, of course) following the onset of the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis. Given that today’s CAPE value is 31, there is good reason to believe that we are close. We are obviously not living in the promised land today. But we are close. So I solder on. I hope that that works for you.

Saying that there is no Step Two is an expression of cynicism. If it really were so that there is no possibility that we could ever again as a nation of people advance in our understanding of how stock investing works, we should just shut down all the peer-reviewed journals. We haven’t done that. Why? Because we believe in some level of consciousness that further learning experiences are possible, that that excitement that Wade felt when he declared that “Yes, Virginia, Valuation Informed Indexing works!” is real and important. I want millions of people to be able to experience that flood of good feeling that I saw Wade experience when we were working on our research together.

I believe that Wade will flip back in the days following the onset of the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis and that we will have more fun times together. If I were king of the world, he never would have felt even a tiny flicker of concern that anything bad would happen to him if he did honest research in this field. We need more people doing honest research, not fewer. The last thing we need is more people seeking to avoid having your abusiveness directed at us by doing what it takes to appease you Goons. So I make an effort not to go there.

I believe in being polite. So I do that. But I continue to say that I believe 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. When everyone who works in this field feels 100 percent comfortable saying that at every site on the internet, we all will be in a far better place than we are in today. Getting safe withdrawal rates right matters. The people who use retirement studies for help in planning their retirements matter.

That’s where I am coming from re this one, in any event. My best and warmest wishes to you and yours.

Rob

“If It Weren’t for the 42-Year Cover-Up, the Buy-and-Holders Would Be United in Insisting that Greaney Correct the Study Immediately. But That Would Expose the Entire Cover-Up, in Which Everyone Who Works in This Field Is Involved to at Least a Small Degree (Everyone Who Works in the Field Has a Responsbility to Stay Up to Date With the Peer-Reviewed Research).”

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

Why can’t anyone else find evidence of these crimes?  Why doesn’t anyone else see an error in Greaney’s work?  Why did your wife stop believing your stories and get a divorce?  Why don’t you have any fans on this board?  Why don’t you see that you are the common thread (problem)?

The common thread is the failure to correct the error in the Greaney retirement study (it lacks an adjustment for the valuation level that applies on the day the retirement begins. Say that there is only a 1 in 100 chance that I was right in what I said in my famous post from the morning of May 13, 2002, that the Greaney study truly does lack a valuation adjustment. If there is a 1 in 100 change that that is so, it is something that we should be discussing at every discussion board and blog on the internet. The purpose of the investment advice field is to help people plan retirements. Get the numbers in a retirement study wildly wrong and you have undermined the entire investment advice project.

My only involvement is that I pointed out the error in a public way and I have not backed down. If it weren’t for the 42-year cover-up, the Buy-and-Holders would be united in insisting that Greaney correct the study immediately. But that would expose the entire cover-up, in which everyone who works in this field is involved to at least a small degree (everyone who works in the field has a responsbility to stay up to date with the peer-reviewed research).

It’s not going to help things to have the cover-up continue for another year or another month or another day. How could it? Extending the cover-up will make things worse.

My sincere take.

Rob

Buy-and-Hold Goon to Rob: “Whose Version of “Honesty” Should Be Allowed and Who Decides What They Think Is Honest?

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

Whose version of “honesty” should be allowed and who decides what they think is honest?

Each community member gets to decide for himself or herself which case is more persuasive. Anyone who engages in abusive posting to limit the ability of community members to hear both sides is responsible for any losses those community members suffer as a result.

Rob

“If the Site Owners Truly Believed That Honest Posting re the Past 42 Years of Peer-Reviewed Research Should Be Banned, They Would Put Language to That Effect in Their Published Site Rules. They Went Along With Bans Only Because the Abusive Behavior of the Buy-and-Hold Goon Squads Threatened to Destroy Their Sites. I Was There.”

by

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 are not the mother of our discussion boards and blogs.”

The collective community has been having to take on the mother role because of your childish behavior. The investment community (that includes the board owners) decide what we talk about and they have spoken. These board owners have this right, just as you block people on this board.

If the site owners truly believed that honest posting re the past 42 years of peer-reviewed research should be banned, they would put language to that effect in their published site rules. They went along with bans only because the abusive behavior of the Buy-and-Hold Goon Squads threatened to destroy their sites. I was there.

I believe that a lot of people are going to see why it is important to pemit honest posting re the peer-reviewed research in the days following the onset of the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis. At that point, I believe that we may be able to persuade one site owner to stand up to you Goons. As people flood to that site as the only place offering sound investment advice, support for the idea of permitting honest posting re the research will spread.

Or so Rob Bennett sincerely believes, you know? We’ll see.

I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person in any event.

Rob

Buy-and-Hold Goon to Rob: “The Collective Community Has Been Having to Take on the Mother Role Because of Your Childish Behavior. The Investment Community (That Includes the Board Owners) Decide What We Talk About and They Have Spoken.”

by

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 are not the mother of our discussion boards and blogs. It is the people who populate our communities who should get to decide what we will talk about.

http://www.passionsaving.com/investing-discussion-boards.html

Rob

Buy-and-Hold Goon:

“ You are not the mother of our discussion boards and blogs.”

The collective community has been having to take on the mother role because of your childish behavior. The investment community (that includes the board owners) decide what we talk about and they have spoken. These board owners have this right, just as you block people on this board.

Buy-and-Hold Goon to Rob: “Shiller and His Research Are Allowed. Pfau and His research Are Allowed. Your Opinion Is Not ‘Research’. “

by

Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:

Shiller and his research is allowed.  Pfau and his research is allowed.  Your opinion is not “research”.  What is not allowed is your poor behavior and that is why YOU are banned.

The only poor behavior that I am guilty of is that I said in my famous post from the morning of May 13, 2002, 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. Many community members reacted by saying that I had started the most important debate ever held at that forum. There was huge interest in the subject of how valuations affect safe withdrawal rates. Gresney didn’t like seeing that. He completely flipped out and sent his Goon Squad into action. I believe that, if he truly believed that he had included a valuation adjustment in the study, he never would have even formed a Goon Squad. He is the one guilty of poor bahvior for not correcting the study within 24 hours of the moment he leanred that he had made an error in it.

Anyway, that’s my sincere take. I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person regardless of what investment strategy you elect to follow.

Rob