OK, Boomer

Discussion of the Stock portion of the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8784
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: next to emotional support peacock
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by dualstow » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:24 am

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:20 am
But for now we are in pretty healthy shape--
-ah, tut-tut. Careful now.
RIP Paul Volcker
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2079
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:37 am

What could possibly go wrong Ha ha
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8784
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: next to emotional support peacock
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by dualstow » Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:41 am

O0
RIP Paul Volcker
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Montague, MA
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:33 pm

dualstow wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:04 am
I would define winning the game as firmly believing that I have enough capital to easily live off my investments.
You might be technically, right, mathjak, as there is always the chance of unforeseen disasters. However, I would enjoy the present as long as it lasts.
That phrase of Bernstein's struck a chord within me, and I agree with your interpretation. The only major variable I see (for me) is IF there are some major medical advances that would NOT be covered by insurance or Medicare and. therefore, could only be obtained by those who directly pay for it. That is the Wild Card.

Vinny
User avatar
ochotona
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2879
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 5:54 am

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by ochotona » Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:52 pm

To me, "if you've won the game stop playing" means don't be 70%-100% into equities when closer than 10 years to retirement, or in retirement. Take it back down to 40% Golden Butterfly, 30% Desert, 25% Permanent.

Boomers are anchored psychologically on the Reagan years. The returns have been good since 2009, so they've forgotten the equities disaster which was 2000-2009. They expect they won't get whacked again because they forever inhabit the nostalgic Golden 1980s realm of Magical Reaganism.

‘You've got to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?’
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2079
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:09 pm

Remember though ,Bernstein’s view changes with the weather

Last time I read his book he believed in annuities and fixed income to create a liability matching portfolio and only extra money above that level went in to risk assets ....so he may not mean just reducing equities....

Quite frankly I stopped heeding anything he said many years ago ....

The truth is I found I never won the game ..I just find a more comfortable level to keep playing.. I like our lifestyle, I like spending what we do and I like living where I do ..it takes a certain level of income and a certain amount of risk assets to sustain it with a high level of success rate
jacksonm2
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 5:46 pm

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by jacksonm2 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:49 pm

ochotona wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:55 am
Almost one-tenth of boomers were entirely in equities during the quarter, running the risk of serious losses in a market meltdown.
I'm guessing those are the ones who need to make risky investments because they hadn't saved enough and are now trying to catch up. If that's only 10% of boomers it doesn't sound so bad to me.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2079
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:02 pm

jacksonm2 wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:49 pm
ochotona wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:55 am
Almost one-tenth of boomers were entirely in equities during the quarter, running the risk of serious losses in a market meltdown.
I'm guessing those are the ones who need to make risky investments because they hadn't saved enough and are now trying to catch up. If that's only 10% of boomers it doesn't sound so bad to me.
they may also have pensions that cover their living expenses and for all purposes the pay check never stopped ...I know a lot of retirees who have nice pensions and are investing for legacy money for heirs. Others don’t draw much off of their portfolios because of other income sources and they run 70% equities or higher and they can since it is not lived off of
jacksonm2
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 5:46 pm

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by jacksonm2 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:31 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:02 pm
jacksonm2 wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 2:49 pm
ochotona wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:55 am
Almost one-tenth of boomers were entirely in equities during the quarter, running the risk of serious losses in a market meltdown.
I'm guessing those are the ones who need to make risky investments because they hadn't saved enough and are now trying to catch up. If that's only 10% of boomers it doesn't sound so bad to me.
they may also have pensions that cover their living expenses and for all purposes the pay check never stopped ...I know a lot of retirees who have nice pensions and are investing for legacy money for heirs. Others don’t draw much off of their portfolios because of other income sources and they run 70% equities or higher and they can since it is not lived off of
Right. I always put this kind of story about how baby boomers are in dire straits approaching retirement in the category of "lies, damn lies, and statistics". I'm sure there are plenty who are dumber than dirt when it comes to investing and saving but probably no more than any other generation.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Montague, MA
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:34 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:09 pm
Remember though ,Bernstein’s view changes with the weather

Last time I read his book he believed in annuities and fixed income to create a liability matching portfolio and only extra money above that level went in to risk assets ....so he may not mean just reducing equities....

Quite frankly I stopped heeding anything he said many years ago ....

The truth is I found I never won the game ..I just find a more comfortable level to keep playing.. I like our lifestyle, I like spending what we do and I like living where I do ..it takes a certain level of income and a certain amount of risk assets to sustain it with a high level of success rate
I put William Bernstein up there with the all-time great investing writers. Definitely top 5. I was never struck with his changing views. Can you cite them?

And, if one has an established lifestyle with established expenses he is saying you have won the game if you are practically guaranteed to never outspend what you have provided you reduce your risk taking. What is the point of taking risks when the upside is getting yet more than you'll never need while the downside is ending up with not enough.

Vinny
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by I Shrugged » Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:06 pm

If you have a good bit of wealth, it's hard to think of putting it into t-bills and easing onto some kind of glide path. The PP is good for this. It's still safe, but it grows over time. Why not grow it? Eventually charities and future Shruggeds might benefit.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 510
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Montague, MA
Contact:

Re: OK, Boomer

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:16 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:06 pm
If you have a good bit of wealth, it's hard to think of putting it into t-bills and easing onto some kind of glide path. The PP is good for this. It's still safe, but it grows over time. Why not grow it? Eventually charities and future Shruggeds might benefit.
I do think the Permanent Portfolio is not only an excellent portfolio for many different circumstances but, particularly, for after you have "won the game". You will not lose the game after you thought you'd won it and you will still achieve some growth.

Vinny
Post Reply