NoFeeBoards.com!

No Fees! No Ads! No Spam!

Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index

A TIPS Ladder Example
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index » FIRE Board
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
unclemick
*** Veteran


Joined: 12 Jun 2004
Posts: 231
Location: LA till Katrina, now MO

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nobert

I can't follow your gibberish - so I went to your Libra Investment Management website to see what the heck you are selling.

From what little I could gleen - passive, diversify, MPT, low cost, tax advice for Canadians with cross border tax issues. Not unfamiliar to indexers.

Since you scored high on the test - you probably suffer from the born again MPT syndome. Give yourself twenty years of seasoning - maybe you will calm down.

Hint - the best way to sell Chevy's is not to trash Fords.

Maybe it's me - but I get more sense out of your website. If I were Canadian, wanted a fee only planner, up to date on low cost MPT, I would certainly consider your company.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member


Joined: 21 Nov 2002
Posts: 343
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings unclemick Smile
Quote:
I seem to have missed something - ? isn't the whole point of a ladder to sell bonds(of whatever kind) as they come due. Who cares about market vs NAV in the stretch?

Either you have missed something, or I have. Lets not discount either possibility. Wink But the idea of this plan is to dip into the TIPS ladder when the market is down. So the market is the prime factor in this scenario. How'd you miss that one mick? LaughingWink Also I still don't see how in an extended bear market your tips ladder would survive. Which was my point in the first place.



_________________
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Norbert Schlenker
* Rookie


Joined: 21 Mar 2005
Posts: 43
Location: The Dry Side of the Wet Coast

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

unclemick wrote:
I can't follow your gibberish

So sorry. The Cliffs Notes version: JWR is peddling snake oil.
Quote:
Maybe it's me - but I get more sense out of your website. If I were Canadian, wanted a fee only planner, up to date on low cost MPT, I would certainly consider your company.

Thank you. That's very kind of you. My intention in putting that site up is to help people make good financial decisions and to put enough on the site itself that they can DIY. What I write on fora like this is a pro bono extension.

I hate snake oil. There's a lot of it around when it comes to money. I debunk it when and where I can.



_________________
Great minds think alike. Fools seldom differ.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member


Joined: 21 Nov 2002
Posts: 343
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings ataloss Smile
Quote:
so es do you agree with jwr's decision to ignore volatility wrt tips prices?

I think that was in the ballpark of the question I was asking.
Quote:
also are there questions that must not be asked of jwr- might be a help to nfs and myself

I'm not sure I understand what you've said here. But if it was "aren't there questions that need to be asked?" my answer is absolutely. I think those questions can be asked in a constructive manner don't you?
Quote:
won't ask anyone what "insights" they have gleaned from jwr's "research" on this matter

Once again I'm not sure what that means. Confused



_________________
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter


Joined: 25 Nov 2002
Posts: 559

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I seem to have missed something - ? isn't the whole point of a ladder to sell bonds(of whatever kind) as they come due. Who cares about market vs NAV in the stretch?


A TIPS Ladder allows you to avoid selling stocks at distressed prices, which is what causes retirement portfolios to fail. You can avoid selling any shares for an entire decade, if necessary. When stocks are doing well, you treat your TIPS Ladder as the normal bond allocation in your portfolio. You continue to sell shares of stock when needed and when prices are especially attractive. You replenish the TIPS Ladder when necessary. When stocks are doing poorly, you draw principal from your TIPS Ladder.

as es has suggested the person selling tips before maturity should care Wink

I notice that jwr isn't answering regardless of who asks

although basically I agree, tips are good, dividend paying stocks are good, norwegian widow, john bogle, ben graham etc. if that is all jwr means then i guess I would have to agree

I think nfs had a good and constructive question maybe someone will repeat it and we can see if jwr will answer it Laughing

es- I was thinking of asking people what valuable insight they haved gleaned from jwr (but that would be rude probably)



_________________
Have fun.

Ataloss
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member


Joined: 21 Nov 2002
Posts: 343
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings Norbert Smile
Quote:
ES, I'm disappointed with this line of thinking.

I'm not sure how you could be disappointed in my asking that plans put forward here be taken seriously and responded to in a constructive manner? Confused
Quote:
However, restricting responses to rah-rah-rah, no matter what idea is presented, is not constructive and does not lead to learning

Big difference between rah-rah-rah, asking a question constructively and just being condescending. Big difference.
Quote:
It's your board. You can run it as you like. If you think that it is constructive for someone to repeatedly post useless information, it's your prerogative. I cannot agree. If site policy is going to be

1. Nonsense is permitted, perhaps even encouraged. Repetition especially welcome.
2. Rebutting nonsense is not constructive and will be discouraged.

then the forum is useless. No one can learn anything in such a place.

This is the kind of negative approach I'm speaking of. Your calling someone's idea useless. Whether the idea is useless or not, that serves no other purpose than to be negative. You have 40 posts here and your telling us what our site policy is? All I said was we need to respond in a constructive fashion. That is site policy. You say your rebutting nonsense which is also just aggressively negative. Can't you make your point without all this condescending stuff? If not then perhaps this is a useless forum for you. I hope that's not the case.



_________________
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
JWR1945
***** Legend


Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 1697
Location: Crestview, Florida

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Using a TIPS Ladder

I routinely use TIPS as a theoretical baseline. This baseline has often turned out to be the best approach. Peterperson has looked into the practical aspects of having a TIPS portion of a retirement portfolio. He has found that a TIPS Ladder has many advantages. One is that it can be tax efficient since the nominal principal is left untaxed. Another is that the ladder always returns par plus inflation at maturity. Another is that there are no fees at maturity.

A TIPS Ladder is highly predictable. A significant fraction of the TIPS Ladder matures each year. You can tap the principal to cover rough spots and/or take advantage of opportunities. Or, you can buy new TIPS to replace the old.

The question remains as how to use it most effectively.

Two effects are going on. They are in conflict. I constructed a series of calculators to gain a better understanding. I looked at a variety of simple allocation approaches. The calculators allowed me to move money from bonds into stocks (and, in one instance, to move money from stocks into bonds) without rebalancing.

I have mentioned many times that what kills retirement portfolios is selling stocks when prices are low. This turns out to be a short-term phenomenon. Your TIPS Ladder does not have to protect your portfolio for anywhere near a decade. It just has to allow you to coast through two or three years until stock prices are more favorable.

Over longer periods of time, you should adjust your allocations in line with your valuation indicators. You should own more stock when P/E10 is low and/or when dividend yields are high. You should sell stock when P/E10 is high and/or when dividend yields are low.

The best use of your TIPS Ladder is to take advantage of opportunities. Load up on stocks when stocks are cheap. I am not talking about fair value. Think in terms of P/E10 of 12 or 13 and lower and/or dividend yields of 8% or higher.

Based on Historical Surviving Withdrawal Rates alone, we should allocate nothing to stocks at today's valuations.

It is best to temper such a numerical analysis with other considerations. Always act on the basis of commonsense.

There are valid reasons for owning both stocks and bonds at all times in spite of the market outlook. For example, Ben Graham recommended that you should always allocate 25% and 75% of your portfolio to both stocks and bonds just in case something entirely unexpected happens.

Allowing one's stock allocation to grow gradually by taking money away from bonds turns out to be slightly better than maintaining a fixed allocation and rebalancing each year. Your initial stock allocation should be very low. Your annual reallocation should be of the order of 2% to 4% of your original portfolio (plus inflation). The advantage was very small, 0.1%, but it is another condition that speaks against rebalancing.

In terms of another extended dry spell comparable to the inflation years of the 1960s and 1970s, your best tactic is to dump stocks early, when their intermediate-term prospects are bleak. You should not use your TIPS Ladder to keep stocks in the intermediate-term. Instead, use it in the short-term. Give yourself enough breathing room so that you can get a reasonable price when you dump your shares.

Have fun.

John Walter Russell


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member


Joined: 21 Nov 2002
Posts: 343
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings ataloss Smile
Quote:
I was thinking of asking people what valuable insight they haved gleaned from jwr (but that would be rude probably)

Oh now I understand. Yes someone might take it that way. Wink



_________________
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member


Joined: 21 Nov 2002
Posts: 343
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings ataloss Smile
Quote:
I think nfs had a good and constructive question

I agree. Nothing wrong with his first reply in the thread.



_________________
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter


Joined: 25 Nov 2002
Posts: 559

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think Norbert is trying to get a response from jwr and pushing a little bit- par for the course at discussion boards when a question isn't being addressed. JWR did touch on an answer in his last post and it makes some sense to me although how you determine how high is high, when to switch etc. are unknown. Still an 80% allocation to an asset class that will decline 40-70% doesn't seem wise.



_________________
Have fun.

Ataloss
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JWR1945
***** Legend


Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 1697
Location: Crestview, Florida

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ES wrote:
Greetings unclemick Smile
Quote:
I seem to have missed something - ? isn't the whole point of a ladder to sell bonds(of whatever kind) as they come due. Who cares about market vs NAV in the stretch?

Either you have missed something, or I have. Lets not discount either possibility. Wink But the idea of this plan is to dip into the TIPS ladder when the market is down. So the market is the prime factor in this scenario. How'd you miss that one mick? LaughingWink Also I still don't see how in an extended bear market your tips ladder would survive. Which was my point in the first place.

In the original example, the TIPS Ladder lasted 10 years. Each year, 10% of the ladder would mature (ignoring details related to inflation and interest and reinvestment). This means that you could use up to 10% of your original TIPS allocation for other uses if necessary. (This matures at par plus inflation. You don't have to worry about selling bonds on the secondary market. You have no interest rate risk when you allow a bond to mature.)

Peteyperson was interested in withdrawing 4% of his portfolio's initial balance (plus inflation). With a 20% allocation to a TIPS Ladder, he would receive 2% of his original balance (10% matures at par plus inflation times 0.20 times the original balance) after adjusting for inflation.

This would leave Peteyperson with a need to withdraw another 2% of his original balance (plus inflation) from the rest of the portfolio. Typically, dividends handle this easily.

Most of the time, he would reinvest the maturing TIPS into new 10-year TIPS, thus extending the ladder. But every year, he would have full discretion on what to do with 2% of his original balance (plus inflation). If there were an opportunity or need, he could tap into these funds.

Peteyperson's original idea was to use up his entire TIPS holdings if necessary. If the bear market were to continue, he still would be satisfied. He would have come through the first ten years OK. [But not everyone would agree. That is the reason that I have considered other ladder lengths.]

Have fun.

John Russell


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kathyet
Admin Board Member


Joined: 28 Nov 2002
Posts: 34

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings ataloss
Quote:
I was thinking of asking people what valuable insight they haved gleaned from jwr (but that would be rude probably)



If truth be told I am getting no valuble insight from any of this only a headache. I think most of us here can understand what is snake oil and what isn't. I will have to admit though some of this is bordering on rude, and it makes me wonder what the purpose is.

Norbert wrote:
Quote:
Thank you. That's very kind of you. My intention in putting that site up is to help people make good financial decisions and to put enough on the site itself that they can DIY. What I write on fora like this is a pro bono extension


Are you a financial advisor?

unclemick wrote:
Quote:
Hint - the best way to sell Chevy's is not to trash Fords.

Now that I understand.

Kathyet


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Norbert Schlenker
* Rookie


Joined: 21 Mar 2005
Posts: 43
Location: The Dry Side of the Wet Coast

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ES wrote:
Quote:
ES, I'm disappointed with this line of thinking.

I'm not sure how you could be disappointed in my asking that plans put forward here be taken seriously and responded to in a constructive manner? Confused

Well, ES, I assumed that your condemnation of "those who just write these kind of efforts off" and "easy to trash someone's ideas" was directed at me. Were you referring to someone else?
Quote:
Quote:
However, restricting responses to rah-rah-rah, no matter what idea is presented, is not constructive and does not lead to learning

Big difference between rah-rah-rah, asking a question constructively and just being condescending. Big difference.

I don't do rah-rah-rah. I did try a constructive question and got no answer other than "It is true that I no longer respond". There's some "condescending" for you, ES, but it got a free pass.
Quote:
Quote:
It's your board. You can run it as you like. If you think that it is constructive for someone to repeatedly post useless information, it's your prerogative. I cannot agree. If site policy is going to be

1. Nonsense is permitted, perhaps even encouraged. Repetition especially welcome.
2. Rebutting nonsense is not constructive and will be discouraged.

then the forum is useless. No one can learn anything in such a place.

This is the kind of negative approach I'm speaking of. Your calling someone's idea useless.

There's a lot of good stuff on this board, ES. Did it get here because people refused to take a negative approach? When presented with false information, are people supposed to shut their yaps because calling it false would be seen as "a negative approach"?
Quote:
You have 40 posts here and your telling us what our site policy is?

It's an observation, not advice.
Quote:
All I said was we need to respond in a constructive fashion. That is site policy.

Site policy or just policy for me? I don't see you applying it elsewhere.
Quote:
You say your rebutting nonsense which is also just aggressively negative. Can't you make your point without all this condescending stuff?

I could go point by point if you think that would be better. My concern is that every time I write, "No, that's not true", or "History doesn't bear that out", or "If X is so, then Y must also be so" when Y is obviously false, then I am going to get nailed with "not constructive" or "not helpful" or "condescending".

Set some parameters here. Are we to discuss only agreeable topics? What do we do when people disagree on an issue? Is it like a land rush, where the first person in gets to express their opinion, and everyone with a different opinion should butt out because that wouldn't be "constructive"?
Quote:
If not then perhaps this is a useless forum for you. I hope that's not the case.

I hope so too. I'm looking forward to a definition of "constructive" that includes allowing falsehoods to be labelled false. Is that doable? Suggest wording if you like, so I don't descend into "not constructive" and "condescending" by accident. Faced with this hypothetical example:
Quote:
My calculations reveal that spending every dime you have in the next year has no effect on portfolio survivability.

What does site policy allow in response that (a) does not write the effort off, (b) does not trash the idea, (c) is constructive, (d) is not condescending?



_________________
Great minds think alike. Fools seldom differ.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hix9
* Rookie


Joined: 12 Sep 2004
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hi kathyet
Quote:
If truth be told I am getting no valuble insight from any of this only a headache. I think most of us here can understand what is snake oil and what isn't. I will have to admit though some of this is bordering on rude, and it makes me wonder what the purpose is.


i'm not sure anymore. lots of posting past one another i suppose.

i have trouble distinguishing how profoundly different this is than a regular old tips bond ladder.

i thought it was related to maximizing tax efficiency (which as nfs points out is perhaps small nominally now but which might be worthwhile when savings compound for another 30-40 years). otherwise it seems to operate exactly how i always thought a bond ladder should.

i think the discussion would have been a lot more productive if we ignored the editorial comment on speculative return which seems to have touched off a bit of critical construction but as far as i can tell has nothing to do with the execution of the tips ladder.

on the other hand if the comment re: speculative return/metric contraction was the basis for some sort of optimization strategy i guess i can see the origin of the (pre-emptive?) critique but if a switching technique was presented by jwr i missed it.

ataloss tried to bring up tips volatility as a risk factor for the whole construct but that seemingly went nowhere (which makes me think its much more material than some other issues).

anyway i really cannot disclose my own ignorance on the matter more clearly than i already have in this thread and post so i'll quit while i am behind.

hix9


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beachbumz
** Regular


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 79
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi John!
JWR1945 wrote:

In the original example, the TIPS Ladder lasted 10 years. Each year, 10% of the ladder would mature (ignoring details related to inflation and interest and reinvestment). This means that you could use up to 10% of your original TIPS allocation for other uses if necessary. (This matures at par plus inflation. You don't have to worry about selling bonds on the secondary market. You have no interest rate risk when you allow a bond to mature.)


Thanks for the clarification, I thought this was how Petey planned on working this, but thought maybe I had missed something. Since we don't know when a prolonged downturn will come, one would always have the 10yr ladder in place until then. If I understand correctly, one would not need to w/d the entire 2% to make up the 4% w/d (depending on div yld), so the remainder could be reinvested in 10 yr TIPS.

There was also some talk about tax consequences. With today's low rates, they are not a big deal (amazingly). Who knows how long that will last, but in tax planning you can only plan based on current law and adjust as changes are made.

I ran a simple calculation through Turbo Tax's tax estimator. I assumed a million dollar portfolio with 20% TIPS and 10% REIT and 70% div stocks. I used a 3.5% taxable return on TIPS=$7000, 5% on REITs=$5000, 3% div=$21,000 and assumed $3000 CGD, for a total taxable income of $36,000. For a married couple with no children and under 65, with no deductions, this produced a Federal tax liability $1005.00 for 2004, it would be below 1K for 2005. That's a 2.78% Fed tax rate (I live in FL, so I did not calculate state taxes). Further if you increase everything by 50% assuming a 1.5mil portfolio, the Fed taxes are $2235 for 2004 and less for 2005. That's about 4%.

I'm not sure at these rates, I would want to sell anything to offset the gains. (Obviously, as taxable income increases, or in high tax states, one would want to consider it.)

I also think there are some other concerns with owning the individual stocks vs the mutual fund (and I'm a fan of the individual stock idea). One problem is which stocks will the average FIREe pick. Will there be proper diversification or would one have a tendency to 'chase' yield. What happens when a stock or two or more tank. What do you do? What do you do if a stock doubles overnight? I don't think the average person is very good at dealing with this. Who's going to do the research on the 100 or so stocks (and is that enough, S&P has 500 alone). If you sell the losers for tax purposes, what happens to diversification, or do you find a similar stock, which increases transaction costs.

As far as PE contraction goes, only time will tell whether or not that occurs, but it's possible for PEs to contract without a huge drop in stock prices. As an example, take a $40 stock with $2.00 in earnings for a PE of 20. Also assume $1.00 in dividends and a 2% real growth rate. in 10 yrs, earnings go to approx 2.44 (if payout stays the same, then dividends go to 1.22 real). If the stock is at $40 in year 10, that's a 16.3 PE. So, you could have a real increase in income and at the same time have a decrease in real net worth (adjusted for inflation) and approx 20% contraction in PE.

Another possibility is like what happened with PGN (and many others). It went from 40 to 25 to 40 during all the 'energy problems'. Yet, had I been living off the dividends and not checked the paper, I would not have noticed a thing.

As far as would anyone invest 80% in something that they think will drop 40 to 70% at some point in the next 10 years, I think the answer is a pretty easy no. In fact if you read the original post in this thread, JWR was discussing a 40% TIPS allocation as an alternative to Petey's 20% scenario example. (Based on past posts, I personally don't think he would put 60% in stocks right now.)

Just my 2 cents...

Beachbumz Cool



_________________
Life is Good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
unclemick
*** Veteran


Joined: 12 Jun 2004
Posts: 231
Location: LA till Katrina, now MO

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 3:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sigh!

One more time - If you go to the Libra Investment Management website, click on Investment policy and look at the mythical widow example portfolio - you will find a very good MPT type portfolio. Couldn't have done a better job on my best day.

Now you take my mythical sweetie - the steely eyed Norwegian widow who gets dividend checks from "fine domestic corporations"(a little Charlie Munger") who doesn't give spit about volitility as long as the dividends keep coming and generally keep up with inflation.

Like Ford and Chevy - never the twain shall meet.

So I will ask again - how can you deal/or not with volitility in the distribution phase. This thread is one way.

So if you have saved years for ER, and your portfolio suffers a 40-70% drop do you have a plan? Note that a 'good' MPT portfolio in properly correlated asset classes should prevent this from happening.

BTY - the closest to Charlie Munger's one fine domestic corporation for a pension plan was a boss qualified for the company pension, a smattering of 401k and the big dog - Johnson and Johnson acquired over thirty years ago.

My big dog - Vanguard Lifestrategy mod with auto rebalancing and live with the volitility. No TIPs - non cola pension plus dividend stocks for the baseline. So when the stocks swoon - I watch the dividend stream.

If I 'knew' that a 40-70% drop was coming, instead of a sideways crawl - I would lower my stock allocation.

More than one way to skin a cat.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member


Joined: 21 Nov 2002
Posts: 343
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings John Smile
Quote:
Peteyperson's original idea was to use up his entire TIPS holdings if necessary. If the bear market were to continue, he still would be satisfied. He would have come through the first ten years OK. [But not everyone would agree. That is the reason that I have considered other ladder lengths.]

Ok ten years. Thanks John. That clears things up a bit for me. But what if the bear were really severe? Then all the TIPS would be gone and you'd still be bleeding all over the place. ShockedI know this is a severe example but I always like to consider the worst case scenario. I would not want to see the bond portion of my port evaporate and still be leaking market stuff after it happened. I'm just thinking out loud a bit.

I would think a rebalancing DCA approach would come out well ahead in such a scenario. What do you think?



_________________
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter


Joined: 25 Nov 2002
Posts: 559

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess I was taking jwr's post too seriously. In the sense of have some stocks and bonds, sell bonds when the stocks are down. otherwise live on the dividends and stock sales. reallocate from time to time it sort of makes sense although along with es I am wondering how many will be happy with a 100% stock portfolio 10 years into a bear market. I like jwr's personal approach better- work for the government until you get an inflation adjusted pension that will support your retirement spending



_________________
Have fun.

Ataloss
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member


Joined: 21 Nov 2002
Posts: 343
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Greetings Norbert Smile

Let's not get carried away. I was not targeting you personally it was just a general observation.
Quote:
My concern is that every time I write, "No, that's not true", or "History doesn't bear that out", or "If X is so, then Y must also be so" when Y is obviously false, then I am going to get nailed with "not constructive" or "not helpful" or "condescending".

Now you've gotten carried away. If you read though the posts here you will find plenty of disagreement with the result being a healthy exchange of ideas. If you or anyone else here says "No, that's not true", or "History doesn't bear that out", or "If X is so, then Y must also be so" when Y is obviously false" there is not one person here that will accuse you of doing anything but arguing your point. Except perhaps ataloss. LaughingWink



_________________
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
unclemick
*** Veteran


Joined: 12 Jun 2004
Posts: 231
Location: LA till Katrina, now MO

PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2005 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ataloss!

Skip the pension, TIPs - fund your baseline with 100% good dividend stocks while playing stock/bond allocations along the Vanguard Target Retirement Series depending on valuations. DCA your pension and SS into Vanguard along the way!

Do I have the guts to do it? Nope! Thinking about it - yea wellllll - a little


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index » FIRE Board All times are GMT - 9 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
Designed for Trushkin.net | Styles Database