Gyroscopic Investing

sophie wrote: I have to say I'm feeling a bit sorry for MG.  I value his contributions generally and hope others do as well.  What was that quote about he who is without sin should cast the first stone?  I think we've all made mistakes in our posts...if mistake this was.

Don't feel sorry for me.  I've washed my hands of the whole business, because, frankly, I really don't care on an emotional basis any more what PP denizens choose to be or not be deluded about.  Whether it was a mistake or not, I honestly don't know.  I'll find out some day when I get around to recreating the conditions that showed a -25% MaxDD.

I suppose the lesson learned here is not to rely on spotty memory when performing a public service.  But when I get personally attacked in a continually insidious manner, I'm naturally bound to act defensive and prone to non-compliance.  My "spicy language" is only in response to that.

The yield curve was inverted in 1969 so it may not have made much difference, but the above numbers are for 10 year Treasuries.  There were no 30 years issued then, so perhaps MG's data was extrapolated somehow...with no gold and no Treasury options, the PP in 1969 is a purely mythological beast anyway.  Can we all agree that a) a 25% drawdown remains within the realm of possibility for the PP, albeit rare and likely transient, and b) that if you invest in any kind of volatile assets you need to be prepared for big drawdowns? 

I've explained my position in another (new) thread.  30-year T-Bond returns were not extrapolated.  And there are various contingencies that could have pushed the MaxDD down to -25%.

Anyway, everyone ought to realize I've been standing on principle here.  I am not anyone's slave, especially LC475's.  If you want the data to prove me wrong (or right), do it yourself.  I am no longer providing a public service.

Xan wrote: MG didn't say "It's realistic for the PP to have a drawdown of 25%", he said that it had in fact suffered such a drawdown, and then when anybody asked him when, why, or how, that person was berated mercilessly.  MG said that the numbers were readily available, at least one time he even posted an enormous useless chart of numbers, which I believe was a snow job since they didn't support his statement.  People were called stupid or lazy for not finding his [ultimately nonexistent] data, and people were called "dickheads" for asking for it.

Then finally when he found out he'd been wrong the whole time, instead of saying "I screwed up, sorry" he made it sound like other people's fault.

I think everyone here is perfectly willing to forgive the mistake.  The bigger problem is how he treated everyone involved.  Expressing the slightest remorse would go a long way, but there hasn't been any sign of that.

You're making grand suppositions here.

I was perfectly jovial until LC475 publically and personally attacked me over this issue.  If you think that I'm the one that reacted inappropriately in defense, I don't know what to tell you.  The search function is available to anyone on this forum.  If they can't find the data showing a -25% MaxDD, they should have messaged me privately instead of piling onto LC475's public ad hominem behavior.

I honestly don't know of it is/was a mistake and if I was wrong, so I'm not certain to be be begging forgiveness just to smooth things over.  Besides, that won't ever happen anyway until LC475 first apologizes.

So deal with it.  I was providing a public service.  If you didn't like it or found it was deficient in some way (it took you YEARS to figure that out?), don't be attacking me personally.  So f*ck you, LC475.  I hope you're happy now because now you have nothing either way.

Gosso wrote: Mar  -26.3%
Apr  -26.1%
May  -25.1%
Jun  -25.3%

Still waiting for that apology, LC475.  Are you man enough to do it?

Everyone.....chill.....out.

Austen Heller wrote: Everyone.....chill.....out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfL_PwWdNGU

I don't know about this whole permanent portfolio thing either. I mean, who is this "Harry Browne" guy anyway? If he's so smart, why is he dead?

Why did he have a "radio show" instead of a podcast? All of the really smart people have podcasts. And WHERE exactly is his YouTube and Instagram?

The only gold I like is the gold in my wife's jewelry.

Buy long term treasury bonds at 3.5%? Are you nuts? They can't possibly go any lower than this! Okay there's at 3% now but they can't possibly go any lower. Get ready for a bond blood bath! 2.5%? Well... they definitely can't go any lower than this! I'll just do a 3-way split between gold, stocks and cash until interest rates rise then I'll buy back into bonds around 4% to 4.5% or so.

I really like the idea of the permanent portfolio and the stability it provides. What if I do it simpler and just use the Vanguard Balanced 60/40 fund (60% Total Stock Market to 40% Total Bond Market) for about 95% of my portfolio and then gold for the last 5%. Maybe mix in a little Gold Miner Stock mutual fund and a REIT fund for a little extra juice for inflation?

TripleB wrote:
The only gold I like is the gold in my wife's jewelry.

Never gets old, ever. EVER.

sophie wrote: The yield curve was inverted in 1969 so it may not have made much difference, but the above numbers are for 10 year Treasuries.  There were no 30 years issued then, so perhaps MG's data was extrapolated somehow...with no gold and no Treasury options, the PP in 1969 is a purely mythological beast anyway.  Can we all agree that a) a 25% drawdown remains within the realm of possibility for the PP, albeit rare and likely transient, and b) that if you invest in any kind of volatile assets you need to be prepared for big drawdowns? 

Exactly! Can we please stop speculating about this chimerical 1969 drawdown?? If anyone mentions it again, I'm going to cry unicorn! ;-)

MachineGhost wrote: Still waiting for that apology, LC475.  Are you man enough to do it?

I would love to give you all the apologies your heart desires!

Unfortunately, you have me on ignore, and far be it for me to break the laws of Physics or The Internet.  So if you cannot receive it, can I truly be said to have given it?

Ahh well, it's all for the best.  This way you're not deprived of the opportunity to question my manhood.

This has the power to calm any person down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7D-1RG-VRk