Exactly.
It's like people put Browne on a pedestal because he died. As a result, his investment advice FROM A SINGLE MOMENT IN TIME is given more weight than it deserves...
Why stop at 10 years? Let's go back 40 years ago to 1981...
Harry Browne was advising people to hold ZERO Long-Term Treasuries if they thought we were going to have "level inflation". He also advised having a
negative position in Long-Term Treasuries if you thought rising inflation was coming.
So, what was the difference between 40 years ago and today? Look back at 40 years before the 40 years...
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content ... g-Term.png
1941: All-time low Long-Term Interest Rates at 2.09%
1981: All-time high Long-Term Interest Rates at 14.14% (when Brown was bearish on LTT)
2021: All-time low Long-Term Interest Rates currently at 1.40%
Anyone see a pattern?!?! Browne's view of LTTs changed along with the LTT yield when he wrote the Permanent Portfolio. Shocker.
But I digress... in reality, I would never take a teddy bear away from a scared child. So why should I do differently here. The reality is that some people might need the
illusion of "safety" that the PP brings to keep them from doing something REALLY stupid with their saving.
The emotional decision that keeps them in the PP is probably better than the emotional decisions they would make without it.
That is the crux of the PP. Some of us, based on data, were already using something similar to a PP (which Browne's book and this forum were useful since it added additional insights). Others probably found the PP and kicked the tires quite a bit to see if the data held up. However, it seems that many people here simply subscribe 100% to the feeling of "safety" based on Browne's (overly-simplified and controversial) asset allocation to market conditions.
It reminds me of Marty McFly's vest in Back to the Future. It was great in 1985. The further he got away from 1985 the worse it would get. By 1955 people were making fun of his life preserver. Vests had changed. Life preservers had changed. This is why combining "philosophy" and "asset allocations" in a one-stop-shop wrapper is dangerous. Philosophy can be pretty timeless. Asset allocations are not.
Blindly taking asset allocation guidance from someone in a different point in history is basically insane... the more time that has gone by, the more insane it becomes.
But whatever, who am I to tell another man how to gamble his paycheck (especially when we are playing against each other).