Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Okay, so if he is NOT intending to say that buy/hold forever is a hedge against losing money (which takes losing money off the table) then WHY would he continue to position his stance in such a manner?
I have railed against Stocks on this Forum for months, and MathJak is one of the main voices responding saying that there's been no Fund that has lost money from buying/holding it forever. That's the SAME as saying, "Guys, don't listen to Tucker99, if you just buy/hold stocks forever you will be all set because no fund has ever lost money over a long period of time this way."
Don't try to get up here playing semantics, I mean you guys are so full of it lol. ONE thing you can say about me, I give you my stance and I stand on it with details, data, etc. I don't sit up here and play semantics or do these silly games. I TELL you where I stand and I leave it at that, you guys don't do that, you want to play with words and play semantics all day.
You know damn well MathJak's stance is that if you buy/hold forever, YOU can't lose money. That's what he has been saying which is why I have been railing against that all this time.
Okay, so if he is NOT intending to say that buy/hold forever is a hedge against losing money (which takes losing money off the table) then WHY would he continue to position his stance in such a manner?
I can't tell you what he is saying but he hasn't said what you think he has. Pushing equities and saying hat over all rolling 15 year time periods they have never lost money isn't the same thing as saying they never will. In truth in the major asset classes equities perform the best over the long term and I believe that's what he has said
Quote:
I have railed against Stocks on this Forum for months, and MathJak is one of the main voices responding saying that there's been no Fund that has lost money from buying/holding it forever. That's the SAME as saying, "Guys, don't listen to Tucker99, if you just buy/hold stocks forever you will be all set because no fund has ever lost money over a long period of time this way."
He probably hasn't discussed a specific fund when talking about 15 year time periods.
Quote:
Don't try to get up here playing semantics, I mean you guys are so full of it lol. ONE thing you can say about me, I give you my stance and I stand on it with details, data, etc. I don't sit up here and play semantics or do these silly games. I TELL you where I stand and I leave it at that, you guys don't do that, you want to play with words and play semantics all day.
You stand on your stance with details and data? Except you've made up something that doesn't exist here and argue against it
Quote:
You know damn well MathJak's stance is that if you buy/hold forever, YOU can't lose money. That's what he has been saying which is why I have been railing against that all this time.
I don't know that to be his stance because I've never seen him say that. I do think he believes equites are the best asset class long term and I agree with him and so does history
you have my points correct. diversified equity's have been the best passive investment historically over the long haul. the broad markets have not had a point over any 15 year period where you couldn't have sold and made money. most diversified funds have mirrored the broad markets .
that does not mean you need to sit with the same funds over that 15 years. i sure didn't . i swapped out funds with different weightings and objectives through the years . but none of them lost money over any 15 year period , some just did better than others .
does anyone know of any diversified mutual fund that lost money over any 15 year period ? i am not aware of one , the broad markets sure have not . .
Last edited by mathjak107; 08-11-2015 at 02:51 AM..
The best advice I have ever received on this topic (and just heard additional justification for it by none other than Tony Robbins) flies in the face of what many professional financial or wealth advisers (people that make money by managing portfolios) recommend... take your 401k money and move it all into the most conservative/protected category available to you (if there's something inflation protected as well - choose that).
It's your money, that you earned with your time (your limited "life" time), and there is no reason to risk it in markets/funds which are without a doubt manipulated by those with much greater knowledge, technology, relationships and money to leverage than you or I ever will have. Additionally, make it so that your "account manager" cannot make money moving things around throughout the year (that is exactly how they earn a living - negotiate a set/acceptible fee for holding your money) and just sit tight adding to your account until you are ready to use it.
Sure you may have friends and or family who make huge gains once in a while your account just plugs along, but you will be insulated from major market adjustments/losses which inevitably strike every few years and wipe out significant percentages of people's retirement savings.
That sounds like pretty terrible advice unless you're very close to retirement, and even then I thought the new trend was to use buckets of various risk.
even then it may be terrible advice at retirement to go to conservative . . being too conservative has caused more retirement failures than even 100% equity's would have , over and over and over .
111 rolling 30 year periods since 1926 say odds are that would likely be a terrible move unless you needed no more than a 2% withdrawal rate inflation adjusted.
how you invest in retirement is a function of what you want to draw . if the withdrawals are low enough , no problem going cd's ,short term bonds and tips , but anything over 2% inflation adjusted is risky without using equity's .
it also matters who you are investing for through retirement .
some folks have pensions and ss that meet their needs and they are investing for legacy money . no problem going pedal to the metal in that case . .
if you are investing for your own income than you need to balance out the income level you want with a level of volatility that has a high success rate of maintaining that level through the worst of times and then some ..
nothing is 100% guaranteed in any case .
Last edited by mathjak107; 08-11-2015 at 04:15 AM..
you have my points correct. diversified equity's have been the best passive investment historically over the long haul. the broad markets have not had a point over any 15 year period where you couldn't have sold and made money. most diversified funds have mirrored the broad markets .
Low Expectations, do you see it now? Or are you STILL going to act as if you don't see what's right in front of you?
Let me break it down once again, MathJak says that broad markets (diversifying) have not at ANY POINT OVER A 15 YEAR PERIOD been where you could not have MADE MONEY.
That is saying that if you buy/hold forever, in diversified funds, you won't lose money. Saying you won't LOSE money in something is the same as saying the returns are a "shoe-in", "guaranteed", or as you guys have said before "just throw it in an Index Fund for 30 years and forget about it".
That investment mentality is misleading as hell. There's no guaranteed returns with Stocks, past performance does NOT MEAN future performance will mimic it, and the next 10 - 40 years of the US will look NOTHING like the last 10 - 40 years with Robotics taking over, Globalization taking over, and the Specialized Skill Economy taking over....further dividing the Haves and the Have Nots.
Investing in Stocks is gambling, you might get a 10% return per year over the long haul, a 3% return per year, 2% return per year, 1% return per year, OR you might end up with a negative return per year over a 20 year period and have to HOLD it for another 10 years before the "big returns" come in to balance everything out to an average 3% return per year lol.
Nobody knows! It's gambling! That's why Tucker99 only invests in things he can control and understand, such as Business Portfolios that I operate and Fixed Income Investments.
Americans continue to lean on these "Advisers" who I guess are the so-called "experts", but they aren't "experts" on anything. All they can do is provide various hedges against risk, but they can't tell you what the Stock Market will do 10-30 years from now, they don't know. You don't know. Warren Buffet doesn't know. CNBC doesn't know. Bloomberg doesn't know. Fox Business doesn't know.
It's a gamble with Stocks. With my Business Portfolios, because I'm in 100% control, can make various shifts, market changes, new selling tactics, etc., it's much LESS of a gamble to operate a profitable business than to throw money in Paper Assets that appreciate or depreciate based on variables that have absolutely NOTHING to do with the solid (or inefficient) fundamentals of said companies you buy paper in. There's a reason with a Business Plan, you are able to provide FORECASTS based on current and future operational decisions, new markets being developed, etc. of the business. You can't provide any damn forecast with Stocks.
You guys know I'm 100% spot on with this analysis. You just don't like that I'm saying it because the Investment Community has been brainwashed, programmed and socially conditioned that "Stocks" are the be-all, end-all of investing. They are NOT.
Last edited by jotucker99; 08-11-2015 at 06:35 AM..
Low Expectations, do you see it now? Or are you STILL going to act as if you don't see what's right in front of you?
I see exactly what he has said and it's exactly what I thought and nothing like you are attempting to portray
Quote:
Let me break it down once again, MathJak says that broad markets (diversifying) have not at ANY POINT OVER A 15 YEAR PERIOD been where you could not have MADE MONEY.
Yes he is speaking to the historical perspective
Quote:
That is saying that if you buy/hold forever, in diversified funds, you won't lose money
No it isn't; that's you making things up. Clearly your problem here
Quote:
. Saying you won't LOSE money in something is the same as saying the returns are a "shoe-in", "guaranteed"
The problem is mathjak said none of that, you have made it up to argue against thus making your entire rant totally bunk
The only thing you are spot on with is making things up, projecting them on others and then arguing against what you made up
jotucker ,give it up with your explanations already.
we already said you would all ways have made money selling at any point 15 years or longer in the past and while the odds of it continuing are good they are not guaranteed just as nothing in life is .
they are still the best passive investment choice for growing money over the long term .
don't want to do it ? that is fine , but there are millions of investors who see it differently .
why you are ever comparing working , whether you own the business or not to passive investing which is what you do with the money you make from earning a living just escapes us.
Last edited by mathjak107; 08-11-2015 at 06:35 AM..
jotucker ,give it up with your explanations already.
we already said you would all ways have made money selling at any point 15 years or longer in the past and while the odds of it continuing are good they are not guaranteed just as nothing in life is .
they are still the best passive investment choice for growing money over the long term .
Woah, Dude. That's enough of your cool unemotional logic. We're trying to have a heated argument here.
you are right ! darn , i hate when facts get in the way of a good story .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
