NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Rob Bennett moderates this Early Retirement Board
Abusive posting will not be tolerated.

Moderator: Founder of Hocomania

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby hocus » 02/19/08 at 10:38:38

Less than 24 hours later here, you assume your conclusion to begin your argument.

I don't assume conclusions.

There are four proofs that the Old School studies get the number wrong (and that the EMT is therefore false):

1) Common sense tells us that valuations must affect long-term returns, as this is so with every other asset class on the face of Planet Earth;

2) The historical stock-return data confirms that what common sense tells us is in fact so;

3) A good number of the most respected experts in the field have stated in strong terms that valuations affect long-term returns; and

4) We have held discussions at numerous boards for close to six years and no "defender" of the Old School studies has been able to come up with a single rational argument showing that common sense, the historical data and the experts are all wrong.

There is no argument that can be made. There never can be one. Valuations affect long-term returns with stocks, just as they do with every other asset class. All opposition to the idea is rooted in an emotional relunctance on the part of a small group of Big Shots who believe in the EMT to admit that they got this wrong.

There is a much larger group (the Normals) who do not today understand things well enough to reject the EMT but who are entirely open to hearing the discussions and learning from them in the event that the small group of Big Shots would permit them to be held in a civil and rational way, as the rules of all the boards require.

Rob
Lying and sliming since May 12, 2002 --  Don't understand why intercst allows me to post here. Learn more about Rob Bennett, see link: http://retireearlyhomepage.com/bennett.html
User avatar
hocus
***** God Member
 
Posts: 5847
Joined: 02/11/04 at 12:31:16

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby hocus » 02/19/08 at 12:00:08

I can see why the nuns had such a hard time with you, hocus.

I cannot argue with that sentiment, Schroeder.

The poor, good sisters! They were special people.

Rob
Lying and sliming since May 12, 2002 --  Don't understand why intercst allows me to post here. Learn more about Rob Bennett, see link: http://retireearlyhomepage.com/bennett.html
User avatar
hocus
***** God Member
 
Posts: 5847
Joined: 02/11/04 at 12:31:16

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby Yipee-Ki-O » 02/19/08 at 13:58:21

There is no argument that can be made. There never can be one. Valuations affect long-term returns with stocks, just as they do with every other asset class. All opposition to the idea is rooted in an emotional relunctance on the part of a small group of Big Shots who believe in the EMT to admit that they got this wrong.

There you go again, hocus. Just like the current occupant of the White House, you seem infatuated with the Straw Man Argument. Of course valuations affect long term stock returns. There's no argument on that point. But there is much disagrement on how to best measure valuations. And hence, whether the stock market (or the S&P 500 since that's the only stock index of which you seem to be aware) is currently overvalued. You and JWR believe that P/E 10 is the best valuation measure. Actually, you not only believe, you demand that everyone else also accept P/E 10 as the best indicator. That's why we see you making arguments that begin with "All opposition to the idea is rooted..." There are various way to measure valuations, but you insist that everyone must agree that what you use is best or you begin to attach labels to those with differing opinions.
Work is the refuge of those who have nothing better to do, Oscar Wilde
Yipee-Ki-O
***** God Member
 
Posts: 10553
Joined: 03/19/05 at 18:40:02

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby hocus » 02/19/08 at 14:25:44

Of course valuations affect long term stock returns. There's no argument on that point. But there is much disagrement on how to best measure valuations.

If valuations affect long-term returns, the Old School studies get the number wrong.

If the Old School studies get the number wrong, millions are going to suffer busted retirements in days to come.

There is indeed disagreement on how best to measure valuations. We should be discussing the pros and cons of all the various viewpoints on boards at which contribitions from all sides of the debate spectrum are both welcomed and encouraged. We should be engaged in efforts to learn what we do not now know.

If we cannot acknowledge that the Old School studies get the number wrong, we cannot even begin the process of learning what we need to know. That's the first step.

The Old School studies do not favor one reasonable view of how to assess valuations over another. The Old School studies make no adjustments for valuations whatsoever. The authors of the Old School studies take the most extreme position imaginable, use it to tell people how to construct their retirement plans, and then ban the discussion of more reasonable positions.

Any board that prohibits discussion of the analytical errors in the Old School studies is a corrupt enterprise. The way it is.

All learning begins with questioning. And all questioning begins with acknowledging that we do not today know it all.

Greaney doesn't know it all. He needs to be told to accept that or to take a long walk away from our boards and to never come back. He has been in dire need of being told that by his friends for a long, long, long, long time now.

I was the first to work up the courage to tell him. What have you done in this regard, Yip?

Rob
Lying and sliming since May 12, 2002 --  Don't understand why intercst allows me to post here. Learn more about Rob Bennett, see link: http://retireearlyhomepage.com/bennett.html
User avatar
hocus
***** God Member
 
Posts: 5847
Joined: 02/11/04 at 12:31:16

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby hocus » 02/19/08 at 14:48:27

Your misrepresentation of the study and its results is soley a function of your personal vendetta against John Greaney.

I'll continue to report the number accurately, Yip.

Rob
Lying and sliming since May 12, 2002 --  Don't understand why intercst allows me to post here. Learn more about Rob Bennett, see link: http://retireearlyhomepage.com/bennett.html
User avatar
hocus
***** God Member
 
Posts: 5847
Joined: 02/11/04 at 12:31:16

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby hocus » 02/19/08 at 14:50:19

It doesn't predict what the SWR number will be in the future, only what it was over past periods of time.

Those suffering busted retirements as a result of their belief that Greaney was shooting straight with the readers of his study will be pleased to hear this.

Rob
Lying and sliming since May 12, 2002 --  Don't understand why intercst allows me to post here. Learn more about Rob Bennett, see link: http://retireearlyhomepage.com/bennett.html
User avatar
hocus
***** God Member
 
Posts: 5847
Joined: 02/11/04 at 12:31:16

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby Schroeder » 02/20/08 at 10:12:27

Hocus replies to martingale . . .

**LINK**
Hocus has gone off into lala land and now seems to be arguing that any evidence that he is wrong is just "belief".

And of course you are doing the same. Evidence is presented that you are wrong in the thread-starter. You didn't prove that it is part of some value effect. You assumed it and you insisted that I refute the assumption. If you are certain that it is so without having spent even 10 minutes considering other possibilities, then you are certain that it is so and that's that. How can I or anyone else refute an assumption?

Looks like hocus is stumped! Way to go, martingale! Image

Schroeder
Proud Member of the Financial Freedom Community!
User avatar
Schroeder
***** God Member
 
Posts: 3892
Joined: 10/11/05 at 19:53:13

Re: NEWS FLASH! Hocomania stalking new prey!

Postby hocus » 02/20/08 at 10:45:38

Looks like hocus is stumped!

Just think how badly Greaney could stump me if he said that it is only his personal opinion that a 4 percent withdrawal is always safe!

Rob
Lying and sliming since May 12, 2002 --  Don't understand why intercst allows me to post here. Learn more about Rob Bennett, see link: http://retireearlyhomepage.com/bennett.html
User avatar
hocus
***** God Member
 
Posts: 5847
Joined: 02/11/04 at 12:31:16

Previous

Return to Honest and Informed Early Retirement Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron