I asked ChatGTP to suggest a withdrawal strategy.

I think the problem here is that many posters are very experienced and we’ve had conversations about withdrawal strategies many, many time over the years, and even recently, counseling newcomers. So no, no one wants to wade through the extended details from ChatGPT because so much of it reads like same old, same old regurgitated stuff.
I get it kinda like all the Social Security threads 😕
 
Why not start a section for ChatGPT post?

If you know that there will be a long initial post you can just completely ignore that forum section...

I see no problem with a long post... I just ignore most of them but some might want to see..
 
In an era where many are willing to credulously accept anything just because it is posted online, sourcing is particularly important. "Because ChatGPT says so" is not a legitimate source.

Although I am certainly not 100% consistent, I try very hard to provide a source for most of my factual assertions. You can look to my various "trigger points" tax threads to see this. That means a US Code cite to the relevant law and sometimes the relevant language in the law, the relevant section of the Code of Federal Regulations, court opinions, and/or interpretative and explanatory documents issued by the relevant government agency. If it is a press article reporting on a study, I try to find the study and read that study for myself (since while journalists may be great writers, they are typically not experts in the field on which they are reporting) and then link it. Only if I am unable to find one of these things will I cite a secondary source, and then I try to use only those who have proven reliable in the past - like Kitces or Finance Buff.

This is merely my longwinded way to explain that while it is fine to ask ChatGPT questions to start learning about a topic, your research should not end there. A summary constructed by an LLM may be flat out incorrect (there is no quality control as far as I can see), but, even more insidiously, it may be incomplete and thereby mislead by omission. I think we owe it to each other to be as accurate as we can and try to properly source factual information we provide.

And, as far as opinions go, I am entirely uninterested in what ChatGPT gleans to be the opinions of others. I want to know what you think and why you think that way.
 
Last edited:
The OP stated: "It's what computers were meant to be from the start IMO."

No, you are all wet with that opinion....they were invented to reduce paperwork, get rid of "admin people", speed up mathematical computations, and play games on.
 
The OP stated: "It's what computers were meant to be from the start IMO."

No, you are all wet with that opinion....they were invented to reduce paperwork, get rid of "admin people", speed up mathematical computations, and play games on.
Jeeeeze reread what I said. I did not say what they were invented for. I said IN MY Opinion it's what they were meant to be...as in get a straight forward answer. Not like Google search which just says hey try these 10,000 websites. Remember the Star Trek series when they would ask the computer a question and get an answer not a hey take a look at these 10,000 variables.
 
Jeeeeze reread what I said. I did not say what they were invented for. I said IN MY Opinion it's what they were meant to be...as in get a straight forward answer. Not like Google search which just says hey try these 10,000 websites. Remember the Star Trek series when they would ask the computer a question and get an answer not a hey take a look at these 10,000 variables.
I hear you but, from the start that was not the thought.
 
My son loves using AI, especially for exploring health issues/questions to bring up with his provider.
He sends some of it to me. I find it fascinating, but also realize its limitations. I prefer to do my own research.
 
That's what I was attempting to do have some of the knowledgeable people give some feedback but apparently many here we're not interested in a deep dive. So I deleted the rather lengthy original post. The summary created left a lot of important details out unfortunately.I guess that's to be expected with a subject like retirement with so many variables and options and opinions.

Definitely covered the basics for a good plan I thought. A good starting point but not the end all. But yes you are correct continue to do your own research and find what works for you and let's you sleep at night. After all it's a guessing game as nobody can predict what's going to happen next not even AI... 😉
"Know your environment" applies.

On any social media platform, long posts may not work well.

There are also different categories of internet users who may respond to your post. Your innocent very-wordy post (since removed) was a trigger. As this thread trails off into the ether, you'll see the tone get harsher.

Older generations may be scared and confused by new ideas. That's just how it goess. The dilemma is that if you go to a younger crowd of social media users, you can quickly fall under the weight of opinions and facts associated with AI and similar topics.

I have no problem straddling here, bogleheads, reddit and whatever else comes along. There's so much to learn, and you never know where the next nugget comes from.

Like you I experiment with new things. I've been that way forever. My career was based on discovering bits of tech before they reached critical mass, and developing practical experience with such. That helped me consult at higher levels with business. So I imagine today we could find youthful AI disciples, who are not so different than I was in the mid 80's with desktop hardware and software. I recall some corp employees who could not accept the idea of computers at all.
 
My son loves using AI, especially for exploring health issues/questions to bring up with his provider.
He sends some of it to me. I find it fascinating, but also realize its limitations. I prefer to do my own research.
I agree it is fascinating as an additional search tool. Its a pretty neat place to start your research but it is not the place to end your research.
IMO....in my opinion.
 
I found AI interesting to rough out a vacation trip in another Country. And being able to modify the answer by follow up questions was helpful.
Still sometimes it got messed up and easiest was to erase and start over.

Not as freaky as when I was on a team of 3 and we developed an AI chess game, things got scary when it could beat us or do unusual moves that turned out tricky, and I was a pretty good chess player.
 
"Know your environment" applies.

On any social media platform, long posts may not work well.

There are also different categories of internet users who may respond to your post. Your innocent very-wordy post (since removed) was a trigger. As this thread trails off into the ether, you'll see the tone get harsher.

Older generations may be scared and confused by new ideas. That's just how it goess. The dilemma is that if you go to a younger crowd of social media users, you can quickly fall under the weight of opinions and facts associated with AI and similar topics.

I have no problem straddling here, bogleheads, reddit and whatever else comes along. There's so much to learn, and you never know where the next nugget comes from.

Like you I experiment with new things. I've been that way forever. My career was based on discovering bits of tech before they reached critical mass, and developing practical experience with such. That helped me consult at higher levels with business. So I imagine today we could find youthful AI disciples, who are not so different than I was in the mid 80's with desktop hardware and software. I recall some corp employees who could not accept the idea of computers at all.
Good post thanks...yes I definitely misread the room. I went overboard for most here. I just discovered CHATGPT and was total impressed with the detailed (sometimes flawed) responses. Its ability to come up with ideas based on totally random question such as Help me redo Sound of Music with today's celebrities and just to test its limit use Music from the Beegees. In a matter of seconds it came up with some pretty innovative detailed responses.

Definitely a lessen learned by me. I would be OK if the moderators closed this thread at this point
 
Last edited:
Stocks (50%): Large-cap dividends, U.S. index funds, and 20–30% international exposure.

Is it just regurgitating information from FAs or does it do like a historical portfolio test? My personal experience of foreign index funds has been poor, but the freebie Fidelity plan also seems to like foreign exposure. I don't know what they are basing it on, maybe I just have a bad choice of fund.
 
Is it just regurgitating information from FAs or does it do like a historical portfolio test? My personal experience of foreign index funds has been poor, but the freebie Fidelity plan also seems to like foreign exposure. I don't know what they are basing it on, maybe I just have a bad choice of fund.
I hesitate reviving this thread but good question. I asked GPT and it gave very detailed answers which I summarized below. Each of these bullet points had details included with them I deleted. I think the details are valuable but some here would not. What I like is you can ask follow up questions which I did but will not include on here. I think if you click on the link I was able to provide in this thread earlier you can read the very detailed chat and the full answers to you questions. As others have noted Info not to be relied on exclusively, just food for thought...IMO..in my opinion. Past performance actually has no indication for future results.

Why Include International Exposure?

  1. Diversification
  2. Growth Opportunities
  3. Currency Diversification
  4. Global Market Representation

Why 20–30%?

  • Academic Research:
  • Practical Balance:
  • Emerging Markets Inclusion:

Sources of Information

  1. Academic Research
  2. Historical Performance Data
  3. Advisory Practices
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom