Yahoo "Finance Quiz"

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Yep he's a market timer. So what? Is this place about one and only one "right" way to invest or live in ER? I happen to agree with ***** on the following points:

- Our "SWR" is in fact a historic SWR and bears no guarantee to a future "safe" withdrawal rate.
- There are times when one might not want to be fully invested in stocks or when one may want to buy more based on feelings of relative valuations.

Both highly arguable, but I sure enjoy seeing the argument take place. Otherwise I have to wonder what other arguments have been supressed or will be supressed.

Had I not exited the market in early 2000 due to what I considered excessively high valuations, I would still be working today and for a good 10-15 more years. Yep, screw that market timing thing.

Let me ask you folks a simple question: Why arent you buying long term bonds right now? Why dig into the short term corporates when the longer ones give you better yield? But wait...I know the answer...because we "know" interest rates will go up soon and the bond prices will take a beating.

Welcome to the world of market timing. Now go wash up.

The message I got when I first came here was really interesting...buy and hold, index funds, balanced indexes, etc etc...but dont buy this, this and this now because...

"Free speech" as Wabmester says, is a construction that legally only the government need abide by. However its with great courage and maturity that we embrace it throughout.

With regards to this, I found the most recent "disrespectful" post by ***** to contain nothing "disrespectful". In fact it appeared to be a perfectly fine explanatory post of his position. In none of his posts do I see name calling, intentional bad behavior or any intent to do anything except offer an alternative line of thinking.

With rare exceptions, the vast majority of "intercst" posts here appear to consist of calling ***** names and threatening him.

Wow is that constructive and useful to the community...

Jihad is ugly. Vendettas are uglier.

Dory36 will be getting a message from me. Just to be up front with its contents, I'm asking that any talk of banning any member who is simply making their own case be dismissed. I'm also asking that intercst be removed as a moderator because I find his name calling, threats and general conduct to be far below what is considered reasonable for a community moderator.

 

[charlie]

Basically, I agree with TH.

Personally, I find ***** long winded, repetitive, dull
and wrong. But, I think he has a right to say his say just as I have the right to tune him out.

Cheers,

Charlie

 

[Peter]

Personally, I find ***** long winded, repetitive, dull
and wrong. But, I think he has a right to say his say just as I have the right to tune him out.

I agree with Chuck-Lyn.

As a frequent lurker and occasional participator, I'm not quite sure why intercst has a bee in his bonnet about *****, but viewed from the sidelines it seems childish and rather pointless.

Peter

 

[ChocoKitty]

Try tolerating YEARS of this nonsense and see how charitable you feel then. I'm not exaggerating.

Yes, ***** has insulted people, or at least alienated them. At the Motley Fool, had called me "goofy" for posting about the realities of writing and marketing a non-fiction book. He has also taken offense to the fact that I did not want him to use any of my postings on the Fool for a chapter in his book Since I did not know how much he was using or to what extent (because I couldn't imagine writing about someone's story without actually TALKING to them as part of the research), I did warn him about copyright infringement issues and he got really huffy.

 

[haha]

Just to add my 2 cents, I agree with those who support *****' access to this forum. I think He is unfailingly polite, and seems to be kindly motivated. He may also be afflicted with a tendency toward overinflating the significance of certain ideas and his personal contribution to them.

I think it might be this factor which at times annoys various posters. I know it has annoyed me. My personal explanation for this annoyance is that ***** exposes to me my own grandiose feelings. Many of us may have similar feelings from time to time. But in our society adults are usually supposed to conceal this sort of thing.

By way of confession, I have used this and other boards as free, low risk venues for me to try to improve my character and personality. One of my many faults is a tendency to try to straighten out others "mistaken" ideas. This I fear is why I no longer am blessed with a live-in wife. You guys would laugh if you knew how many posts I have deleted, sometimes with a real feeling of loss, when I was sure that it was just what someone needed (usually to prove him wrong and me right).

The truth is, everone here is here by virtue of a fair amount of smarts, and more than a little ability to keep focus. I can learn from everyone here, and I have. But as a lifelong a-hole, it can be a road as hard as that of a reformed drinker.

Another thing that may contribute to anti-***** feeling is that there is a very strong basic belief on this and many other boards that market timing is futile. And, as many have pointed out, ***** is a proponent of a certain type of market timing. The prejudice against market timing may be well founded, but at longer time horizons I think that it is far from being a settled matter.

After all, if Robert Shiller can become the Stanley Resor Professor of Economics at Yale, based mainly on his studies of valuation/future return correlations in various markets, at least some sophisticated people give it credence.

That is enough for me! I would rather read 100 things to find 1 useful thing, than to be denied that opportunity.


Mikey

 

[hocus]

I did warn him about copyright infringement issues and he got really huffy.

I have written a book on how to achieve financial independence early in life that is titled "Passion Saving." The manuscript is now complete, and I am in the process of looking for an agent to shop it to publishers.

Chapter Seven deals with the problem that some middle-class workers experience of feeling that they got into the wrong line of work starting out, wanting to make a shift, but feeling that the financial price of doing so is too great. This chapter is titled "The Woman Who Hoped Not to Be Promoted." I got the idea for the title from thinking about a post put up by ChocoKitty in which she noted that she was up for a promotion to partner at her law firm but not too excited about the idea because the even longer hours that might be required might interfere with her desire to enjoy other aspects of life.

I made note of the chapter title in a post during the time when the Great SWR Debate was raging at the Motley Fool board. ChocoKitty threatened to sue me. Other posters jumped in, saying that was a great idea. There was talk of a class action suit. There was a discussion of the possibility of her entire law firm getting involved on a pro bono (no fee) basis.

At one point ChocoKitty put up a post noting that she understood from her legal training that using a story told in a discussion board post as inspiration for a chapter title is not a violation of any existing statute. I said that, given her understanding of this reality, I found the entire line of discussion to be "goofy." I still hold to that opinion.

 

[ChocoKitty]

I never threatened to sue you and you know that. I simply said that you should get your permissions forms squared away before you proceed and I don't take to intellectual property violations kindly (because, uh, I'm an intellectual property lawyer).

And you never indicated that it was just a title. You had said that you had an entire chapter named after me, which implied that you were planning on using the posts I had written when I was considering turning down a promotion and writing a story about that.

But what the hell, people can wade through all the nonsense themselves and come up with their own conclusions:
http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=18987587&sort=whole#19002553

I still have no clue what sparked this reaction:
http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=19003289

Whatever.

 

[Bob_Smith]

When I worked in a psychiatric setting I was on a treatment team consisting of physicians and other professionals. We always had one or two patients who behaved in a "passive-aggressive" manner. These folks consumed countless hours of our time. They irritated and frustrated others in countless small ways, but always stayed within the boundaries of socially acceptable behavior. They tended to be indirectly manipulative and would needle and prod their target repeatedly; always knowing what buttons to push. They tried to get the targeted person to explode. The passive-aggressive patient almost never crossed the line. They were usually very subtle, and almost ingratiatingly polite on the surface. When their target reacted in anger, the passive-aggressive patient would feign innocence and place the target into a position where it was almost impossible to explain why they reacted so strongly. They came off sounding petty and childish, which is just what the passive-aggressive patient intended. To the uninvolved observer, it often appeared that the person who blew up was overreacting, and the person behaving in a passive-aggressive style was a "victim." There was nothing more difficult than dealing with these folks, and I can recall adding up the hourly pay of all the people sitting around the table with me and thinking, "There's over $1000/hour worth of experienced and highly trained brain power sitting here trying to outmaneuver this passive-aggressive patient with a 6th grade education, and we're stumped".

There's a long history here, and I think ***** knows how to push intercst's buttons. And look where he has us; we've all been set-up to take sides - either for him or against him. Meanwhile, he sits back seemingly enjoying the show. He even interjects comments as his fate on this board is debated. He has made himself THE big issue and seems to relish that role. And he has done all of this in the past, so he clearly understands the damage it causes, yet he continues to do it anyway. I don't believe he operates here in good faith. I've seen this type of thing played out a hundred times, and this has all the markings of a game-player at work.

 

[Cut-Throat]

Once again Bob_Smith has hit the nail on the head and described exactly what was going on here! I think it must be that good old Midwest Iowa Logic!

If ***** was really looking for a SWR discussion, He would have answered my simple question and moved on to another topic. But instead he baits us into asking him questions that he will not answer.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Just to be clear, I'm not supporting *****, but his right to express his differing opinion. In any way he chooses to express it. As long as he's not calling people names, saying things I wouldnt want a 14 year old to see, or doing anything illegal or immoral.

All psychiatric analyses aside, intercst and others have to read the content that upsets them, then they have to consent to having their buttons pushed.

Then they have to decide how they react to it.

Name calling and threats are the lowest reaction level.

 

[dory36]

Jeez Louise, folks! I go away for just a short while and you all get crazy on me!

Personally, I think that when a thread becomes a meta discussion, discussing more about the participants and discussion itself than the topic of the thread, it's time to just drop the subject.

It is also pretty unfair to those NOT in the discussion to make them wade through many pages of stuf to find material related to the topic title.

 

[John Galt]

Well said Dory, and brief, thankfully,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,If you have nothing to say, at least keep it short.

John Galt

 

[hocus]

Re: Yahoo "Finance Quiz"Here is a link to a post f

Here is a link to a post from ES (site owner at NoFeeBoards.com) announcing the reinstatement of my posting privileges.

http://www.nofeeboards.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2586

Here is a link to a thread-starter that I offered at the SWR Research Group this morning on the subject of “Normalization of SWR Discussions.”

http://www.nofeeboards.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2589

Please do not offer comments or questions re these developments on this thread. Post them at the “Normalization” thread at the SWR board.

 

[intercst]

Re: Yahoo "Finance Quiz"Here is a link to a post f

Here is a link to a post from ES (site owner at NoFeeBoards.com) announcing the reinstatement of my posting privileges.

http://www.nofeeboards.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2586

Here is a link to a thread-starter that I offered at the SWR Research Group this morning on the subject of “Normalization of SWR Discussions.”

http://www.nofeeboards.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2589

Please do not offer comments or questions re these developments on this thread. Post them at the “Normalization” thread at the SWR board.

I think that great!

I hope we see more of the SWR jihad on the NoFeeBoards and less of it here. <grin>

intercst

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Hey *****...

Why dont you just go and send Intercst some naked photos so he can get it over with? :

 

[mark seagraves]

Having lurked on retirement planning boards for quite awhile, I have have 2 recurring questions -
why is past return data used but not past investment costs? and why is past foreign data not included? Past commissions were higher, and surely in the past some investor in the U.S. owned a few failed Argentine bonds. The more academic articles I read, the lower past average returns seem to fall.


(and its hard to use dryer sheets on my clothesline)

 

[Cut-Throat]

why is past return data used but not past investment costs? and why is past foreign data not included? Past commissions were higher, and surely in the past some investor in the U.S. owned a few failed Argentine bonds. The more academic articles I read, the lower past average returns seem to fall.

I believe that the reason Foreign Data is not included is that it is simply not available in the same accurate form that the US data is.

As far as investment costs. FIRECalc will let you plug in any investment costs that you would like and see if your portfolio would have survived in past periods.

Have you tried FIRECalc yet?

 

[mark seagraves]

I've played with Firecalc some in the past.

Dimson, Marsh and Staunton have done some studies of international investment returns. If I was to use the Belgian average, we'd be talking about that sizzling 2% past real stock return before expenses (not the U.S. 6-7%).

I have been suprised at how high past investment costs were estimated to be, up to 2% of stock return and 1% of bond return.

I've come to suspect that in the past, an average investor in the U.S. made about 3% real return from a mixed stock, bond portfolio after expenses (tax deferred) while saving, and close to 0% after taxes while spending.

Its interesting that studies of brokerage accounts show average results in the 3% range.