Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
Topic Author
stemikger
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by stemikger »

Hi I was wondering how many agree with almost everything Jack says and does.

I agree with on everything except these two below.

Here are mine below:
I don't agree with adding more corporate bonds to the total bond market index unless Vanguard changes the fund

I am also on the fence about looking at social security as part of your fixed income allocation. But still not sure.

I'm also not so sure I agree with not rebalancing. I know Jack hardly ever does it.

That's it. I can't think of anything else I read that I disagree with him about. So I'm pretty close to following Jack closer than I am following the Bogleheads.

I know most here don't agree with Jack when it comes to international investing but there might be other recommendations you don't agree with. I would love to here them.
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!
User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Posts: 32839
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

What Jack does ?

Post by Taylor Larimore »

Hi I was wondering how many agree with almost everything Jack says and does.
Bogleheads:

A word of caution.

Each investor has their own goals, time-frame, risk-tolerance, and personal financial situation. What Jack does, should have little bearing on the advice he gives to others.

Best wishes.
Taylor
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle
staythecourse
Posts: 6993
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 8:40 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by staythecourse »

Taylor Larimore wrote:Each investor has their own goals, time-frame, risk-tolerance, and personal financial situation. What Jack does, should have little bearing on the advice he gives to others.
Short, sweet, and right on point. What is good for Jack Bogle may not be good for you just like what is good for me might not be good for others.

Good luck.
"The stock market [fluctuation], therefore, is noise. A giant distraction from the business of investing.” | -Jack Bogle
User avatar
Kenkat
Posts: 9539
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:18 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Kenkat »

I disagree with Mr. Bogle on many things, but on the really important things, I agree with him. His core message is spot on.
User avatar
Petrocelli
Posts: 2966
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:29 pm
Location: Fenway Park, between 2nd and 3rd base

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Petrocelli »

I don't like his watch.
Petrocelli (not the real Rico, but just a fan)
soboggled
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 10:26 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by soboggled »

I really don't understand the utility of considering SS as a bond. The issue is what returns are needed to meet expenses after inflation, not some theoretical exercise in determining proper AA. Just subtracting actual/projected SS income reduces the income needed from investments. This is simpler and probably more accurate.
dbr
Posts: 46137
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:50 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by dbr »

It is a serious mistake to literally follow the dictums of any one person unless one also arrives at that decision by a body of reasoning and analysis.

Put differently, whether or not one "disagrees" with Jack is irrelevant. I would suggest that one take Mr. Bogle's wisdom on the whole quite seriously.
User avatar
whodidntante
Posts: 13090
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: outside the echo chamber

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by whodidntante »

There are many factors that influence investment decisions, and I don't need to find one expert and mechanistically follow his advice. It is possible to learn from different points of view, and to productively debate different views. I disagree with some of Mr. Bogle's opinions and do not apply them for myself. But overall he is a hugely positive influence, one of the good guys in an industry that seldom deserves trust.
User avatar
nedsaid
Posts: 19249
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:33 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by nedsaid »

Mr. Bogle thinks aloud. He puts ideas out there and says surprising things. He has a more flexible mind than people give him credit for. Over time, he has changed his mind on things. I would take whatever statements he makes keeping in mind the total body of his work. His surprising statements need to be looked at in context of the topic discussed in whatever interview he made them.

I know I have been criticized for putting ideas out there and making contradictory statements. I just don't think there is anything wrong with thinking aloud. Sometimes thinking aloud challenges conventional wisdom or even previously stated beliefs.
A fool and his money are good for business.
User avatar
Kenkat
Posts: 9539
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:18 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Kenkat »

Petrocelli wrote:I don't like his watch.
I suspect he does not care for your taste in music either...
soboggled
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 10:26 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by soboggled »

kenschmidt wrote:
Petrocelli wrote:I don't like his watch.
I suspect he does not care for your taste in music either...
So he's not big on rap?
User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Posts: 32839
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Taylor Larimore »

Bogleheads:
"When I disagree with Jack Bogle – I am usually wrong." -- Bill Bernstein
Best wishes.
Taylor
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle
User avatar
LAlearning
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 12:26 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by LAlearning »

i agree on a lot. and think the rest is not so hot.
thankfully most here can form their own opinion and decide what to do about it.
I know nothing!
User avatar
Peter Foley
Posts: 5525
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:34 am
Location: Lake Wobegon

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Peter Foley »

I think Taylor's first post is spot on. All investors are different. I don't have Jack Bogle's portfolio nor risk tolerance, let alone his experience.

I follow the basic principles which seem to apply to all regardless of our financial and psychological differences. I disagree with Mr. Bogle in a number of areas which are more on the margins. I think SS as a bond muddies the water. You need to have a safe portion of your portfolio and you need to be aware of your fixed expenses and discretionary expenses. Having at least some international is prudent in light of the experience of Japanese investors. Rebalancing makes sense from a psychological perspective as well as a safety perspective. . . . . I could go on . .
leonard
Posts: 5993
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 10:56 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by leonard »

soboggled wrote:I really don't understand the utility of considering SS as a bond. The issue is what returns are needed to meet expenses after inflation, not some theoretical exercise in determining proper AA. Just subtracting actual/projected SS income reduces the income needed from investments. This is simpler and probably more accurate.
Spot on.

There's no need to treat any financial instrument or contract as if it's is a non-similar financial instrument. Deal with financial instruments and the associated cash flows at face value.
Leonard | | Market Timing: Do you seriously think you can predict the future? What else do the voices tell you? | | If employees weren't taking jobs with bad 401k's, bad 401k's wouldn't exist.
User avatar
ruralavalon
Posts: 26297
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:29 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by ruralavalon »

stemikger wrote:Hi I was wondering how many agree with almost everything Jack says and does.

I agree with on everything except these two below.

Here are mine below:
I don't agree with adding more corporate bonds to the total bond market index unless Vanguard changes the fund

I am also on the fence about looking at social security as part of your fixed income allocation. But still not sure.

I'm also not so sure I agree with not rebalancing. I know Jack hardly ever does it.

That's it. I can't think of anything else I read that I disagree with him about. So I'm pretty close to following Jack closer than I am following the Bogleheads.

I know most here don't agree with Jack when it comes to international investing but there might be other recommendations you don't agree with. I would love to here them.
I am fine with adding more corporate bonds, and we do that.

Thinking of Social Security as a bond just makes my head ache.

I don't think anyone has a solid answer on international investing, he doesn't claim to have the answer. (Mr. Bogle talks about international stocks at 0 - 20% of total stocks; we have 25%.)

I agree with almost all of Mr. Bogle's suggestions. "Cost matters" is the core, which nearly everyone agrees to.
Last edited by ruralavalon on Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein | Wiki article link: Bogleheads® investment philosophy
User avatar
zaboomafoozarg
Posts: 2430
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by zaboomafoozarg »

Petrocelli wrote:I don't like his watch.
[Animated image removed by Mod Mel]
columbia
Posts: 3023
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:30 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by columbia »

I use target date funds (plus one other), because I'm willing to admit that I don't know anything. :)
User avatar
Topic Author
stemikger
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by stemikger »

Thank you all! I found all these replies very informative!

Steve :beer
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!
User avatar
Aptenodytes
Posts: 3786
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:39 pm

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Aptenodytes »

1) Add corporate bonds because of current bond environment: Yes, but for me only high-yield. Investment-grade bonds don't pay enough for the risk, for me.

2) There is no conceivable way not to take social security payments into your investment planning. We all do it, even those who say they don't. How you do it, e.g. whether or you not you calculate an equivalent bond asset and plug it into some formula, is for me irrelevant. I don't run such calculations, but I don't see why the fact that some people do gives others the heebie-jeebies. So I guess that makes me "agree."

3) Regarding rebalancing, this is not really something worth taking a position on, because Jack's view is I think encompassing of a wide range of behaviors. We know he doesn't mean literally "never rebalance" because that is logically the same as "never choose an AA" and we know he doesn't believe that. For me, the words that people sometimes take issue with are just an educator's way of saying "don't get bent out of shape over how precisely your portfolio matches your target AA. Some drift is fine, because the AA you chose wasn't that precise to start with. For many people, much of the time, the consequences of not rebalancing at all are nil." Framed like that, I agree with it. If you happen to think that Jack really thinks that it is a mistake for anyone to ever rebalance, then I would flat-out disagree with it and can't imagine any possible evidence that would support it. But I don't think that's what he's getting at.

4) I hold my half my equities in international, and I know Jack says don't bother. But I don't think I actually disagree with what I think he actually believes about this. I think he's saying "international probably doesn't matter a whole lot." I think that may well be right. So if you are talking about doctrinaire Jack -- "Stay away from international stocks!!!" -- I disagree with him, but if you are talking about reasonable Jack -- "take 'em or leave 'em" -- I agree with that one.

5) I don't really know all the other positions he takes on things so I don't know how much I agree or disagree. I don't think of Jack as an oracle, so I don't spend time wondering what he thinks about my investment strategy. I respect his intellect and values and drive, and am enormously grateful for what he did as a visionary pioneer who applied his smarts and his moral compass to create something of lasting value. But for investment advice I turn to other sources.
User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Posts: 32839
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

"Don't know anything"

Post by Taylor Larimore »

columbia wrote:I use target date funds (plus one other), because I'm willing to admit that I don't know anything. :)
Columbia:

Being humble is a characteristic of a successful investor. No one knows all this stuff.

You have made 360 Boglehead posts. I suspect you know a lot more than most investors. It is probably why you picked a target date fund.

Best wishes.
Taylor
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle
User avatar
reriodan
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:08 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by reriodan »

I disagree with Jack on international, using his own logic.
Fallible
Posts: 8795
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:44 pm

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Fallible »

dbr wrote:It is a serious mistake to literally follow the dictums of any one person unless one also arrives at that decision by a body of reasoning and analysis.

Put differently, whether or not one "disagrees" with Jack is irrelevant. I would suggest that one take Mr. Bogle's wisdom on the whole quite seriously.
Very much agree with this, along with Taylor's post on investing based on individual need, ability, and risk tolerance. I also think Jack would agree.
"Yes, investing is simple. But it is not easy, for it requires discipline, patience, steadfastness, and that most uncommon of all gifts, common sense." ~Jack Bogle
Northern Flicker
Posts: 15288
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 12:29 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Northern Flicker »

I'm also not so sure I agree with not rebalancing. I know Jack hardly ever does it.
My understanding is that the vast majority of his holdings are in the VG balanced index fund, in which case VG rebalances for him.
User avatar
Christine_NM
Posts: 2796
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:13 am
Location: New Mexico

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Christine_NM »

I am still going with Mr. Bogle's first book, Bogle on Mutual Funds (1994). See page 240 in 1994 edition for suggested portfolios, from complex (8 fund) to ultra simple (1 fund).

The idea that I worked all this out for myself and find that I agree with the book is, how shall I say, ludicrous and absurd. I read the book, started a Vanguard account with the ideas in mind, and they worked. So now I agree.

While I have used international funds in the past I do not think they have made much difference for the simple reason that the allocation was too small to matter. I rebalanced at times but it turned out to matter only once or twice, maybe in 1998 and 2002.

Anyway, if what you mean is does anyone follow what Mr. Bogle wrote in that first book, then yes, I do, more so now than when I first read it. Now you have made me get it out and read it again. It is similar to the Little Book but better. And now that I look at it I recall that Jack signed it for me at Chicago Bogleheads 3.
16% cash 49% stock 35% bond. Retired, w/d rate 2.5%
User avatar
Munir
Posts: 3200
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Munir »

I strongly agree with Jack on corporate bonds and on avoiding international holdings. The re-balancing is minor and the Social Security issue I avoid since it sounds too complicated.
APB
Posts: 128
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 8:24 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by APB »

Just international equity exposure. I believe in weighting globally over a US only portfolio.

Of all individuals in the financial sector, Jack has probably done more to benefit the world than anyone in history. I'm very thankful for his contributions.
My posts represent my own opinion and do not constitute financial advice. I am simply a hobbyist. :)
User avatar
Christine_NM
Posts: 2796
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:13 am
Location: New Mexico

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Christine_NM »

APB wrote:Just international equity exposure. I believe in weighting globally over a US only portfolio.
Gives new meaning to the expression, "Go big or go home". I think I believe in either global or all-US, not sure.
16% cash 49% stock 35% bond. Retired, w/d rate 2.5%
Fudgie
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:01 pm

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Fudgie »

:oops:
Last edited by Fudgie on Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ruralavalon
Posts: 26297
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:29 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by ruralavalon »

Christine_NM wrote:
APB wrote:Just international equity exposure. I believe in weighting globally over a US only portfolio.
Gives new meaning to the expression, "Go big or go home". I think I believe in either global or all-US, not sure.
I am a mug-wump, we have 25% of stocks in international stocks.
"Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein | Wiki article link: Bogleheads® investment philosophy
User avatar
ruralavalon
Posts: 26297
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:29 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by ruralavalon »

Fudgie wrote:
nedsaid wrote:Mr. Bogle thinks aloud. He puts ideas out there and says surprising things. He has a more flexible mind than people give him credit for. Over time, he has changed his mind on things. I would take whatever statements he makes keeping in mind the total body of his work. His surprising statements need to be looked at in context of the topic discussed in whatever interview he made them.

I know I have been criticized for putting ideas out there and making contradictory statements. I just don't think there is anything wrong with thinking aloud. Sometimes thinking aloud challenges conventional wisdom or even previously stated beliefs.
I read a lot of biographies, and you frequently read the phrase (or something similar): "He was a man of many contradictions." That's just the human condition, I think. Cheers!
Another apt quote on the alleged contradictions -- "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds . .." (Ralph Walcott Emerson).
Last edited by ruralavalon on Sun Oct 23, 2016 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein | Wiki article link: Bogleheads® investment philosophy
User avatar
oldzey
Posts: 1743
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:38 pm
Location: Land of Lincoln

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by oldzey »

I don't agree with Mr. Bogle's advice to limit your "funny money" (i.e. money used to speculate on individual stocks, gold, etc.) to no more than 5% of your portfolio.

I'd say 0%.
"The broker said the stock was 'poised to move.' Silly me, I thought he meant up." ― Randy Thurman
User avatar
siamond
Posts: 6003
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 5:50 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by siamond »

My equities are 50/50 between US and Int'l. I rebalance. And I use various tilts. My AA is fixed (no age-in-bond glidepath). And I think his expected returns 'Occam' model isn't quite right. Ouch, quite a few departures from Jack's mantras.

But I think we agree on the really important stuff (low cost, passive indexing, stay the course, etc)! And my respect for the man remains sky-high, even when I disagree on some stuff.

(I do use SS/Pension Net-Present-Value when looking at my AA, but I also look at my AA without it - I like using both perspectives; and I was sold on the idea to use some exposure to corporate-bonds)

PS. in the same vein, I agree with a lot of what Dr Bernstein says (he planted the 'tilt' idea in my mind!), but the LMP/RP framework makes me roll my eyes...
Last edited by siamond on Sun Oct 23, 2016 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Tycoon
Posts: 1625
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:06 pm

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Tycoon »

100% agreement with anyone would bother me deeply.
Emotionless, prognostication free investing. Ignoring the noise and economists since 1979. Getting rich off of "smart people's" behavioral mistakes.
User avatar
Petrocelli
Posts: 2966
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:29 pm
Location: Fenway Park, between 2nd and 3rd base

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Petrocelli »

kenschmidt wrote:
Petrocelli wrote:I don't like his watch.
I suspect he does not care for your taste in music either...
Jack and my wife would agree on that one!
Petrocelli (not the real Rico, but just a fan)
User avatar
in_reality
Posts: 4529
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by in_reality »

ETFs! We need, need, need them!!!

Perhaps it's Jack's opinion that people shouldn't work overseas; but without ETFs, I'd have no choice but to either 1) use individual stocks or 2) intentionally deceive my broker/mutual fund company so as to get around tax laws on mutual funds prevent expats from buying them when resident in another country. US (pfic) laws require Americans to hold US domiciled funds, so buying mutual funds overseas is not a viable option. Jack and Vanguard simply have no consideration for those working overseas.

Of course I guess it could be said that expats by virtue of their choice to work overseas have elected to suffer the consequences, but still we are taxed on global income and considered a tax residents of the US by virtue of citizenship.

Well, Jack is OK personally and Vanguard is doing well, so let's just deny service to those pesky expats whose accounts might take more resources to maintain compliance! Not saying other's should cover it -- bill me for it.

Just saying I think I should have the right to pay Uncle Sam capital gains and dividend taxes as much as anyone else, and that having to use individual stocks would probably limit that. Trying to be a good American (and influence the rest of the world) you know!

I don't really disagree with Jack though and just understand that his perspective is naturally limited by virtue of his only being one person.
User avatar
asset_chaos
Posts: 2628
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:13 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by asset_chaos »

Bogle has proven himself a great man and both deeply knowledgeable and wise in his field. I respect and am willing to consider everything he says about investing, but I don't have any qualms about rejecting any argument of his as unpersuasive if I don't find it so. His status as "Saint Jack" rests on being mostly right, not on any kind of actual transfiguration. However, I think the only major disagreement I have with common Bogle advice is the one about how investing in only domestic stocks is lower risk. And, to be fair, I think Bogle has occasionally clarified that this advice is aimed only at US investors, where it could be considered close enough to correct---I define correct as indexing global stocks---to become less a disagreement and more a quibble. It's clearly nonsense for every non-US investor.
Regards, | | Guy
gkaplan
Posts: 7034
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:34 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by gkaplan »

I disagree with Jack about investing in foreign equity funds. I also disagree with Jack about treating Social Security as part of one's fixed income allocation. I may disagree with him on other investing issues, but these two disagreements stand out.
Gordon
LateStarter1975
Posts: 775
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 4:50 pm

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by LateStarter1975 »

I know enough to know that I don't know much to be able to disagree with Jack. I'm just an ordinary guy trying to get a shake...
Debt is dangerous...simple is beautiful
User avatar
Pajamas
Posts: 6015
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Pajamas »

No one gives perfect advice but I don't know of any bad advice that he has given and his is generally above average.

In respect to international investing, he has said that it is not necessary to take on currency risk and I think that is good advice. U.S. companies have increased their international business greatly since he started out with mutual funds, too.

I don't count on Social Security as a source of income at all but his advice on that is hard to argue with. It is basically an annuity.
User avatar
Crushtheturtle
Posts: 333
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:29 pm
Location: SC

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Crushtheturtle »

He's a great salesman.
- Boglehead meets Daytrader | - The opposite of love is apathy. I apathy the market
SGM
Posts: 3341
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:46 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by SGM »

Regarding Jack's SS comments, the present value of the future income stream for a high earning couple can be over $1MM. Besides a survivor benefit, SS protects against sequence of return risk, longevity and inflation. Since payments are automatic SS guards against cognitive decline. I chose to delay taking SS until age 70 because it is the best annuity available.

Future SS payments cannot be borrowed against so it is not liquid as cash or a bond fund would be. If one has sufficient funds to pay for a large spending shock in retirement the SS income stream can allow for a greater equity allocation. If funds are not sufficient to cover a large spending shock then it would be better to increase bond or cash allocation.

I think Jack was referring his SS comments to those who have sufficient assets to cover a large spending shock.
Personally, I haven't calculated the present value of our SS income streams, but SS and other income streams will allow me to take more risk.
User avatar
Topic Author
stemikger
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Re: What Jack does ?

Post by stemikger »

Taylor Larimore wrote:
Hi I was wondering how many agree with almost everything Jack says and does.
Bogleheads:

A word of caution.

Each investor has their own goals, time-frame, risk-tolerance, and personal financial situation. What Jack does, should have little bearing on the advice he gives to others.

Best wishes.
Taylor
Thanks Taylor! I agree 100%
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!
User avatar
Topic Author
stemikger
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by stemikger »

Petrocelli wrote:I don't like his watch.
I bet it's a Timex. If that is the case, I love it!!!
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!
User avatar
Topic Author
stemikger
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by stemikger »

columbia wrote:I use target date funds (plus one other), because I'm willing to admit that I don't know anything. :)
The ironic thing is - you will most likely do better then so-called sophisticated investors. Good Luck!
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!
Da5id
Posts: 5058
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 7:20 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by Da5id »

I agree with him completely on general principles, just disagree significantly on one specific, namely international investing. I think 0 is too low. I also think 50% is too high. Ended up with my stock allocation split 1/3 Int'l to 2/3 US stocks. I believe the arguments for diversification in this case are stronger than those favoring a totally US-centric approach.
User avatar
Topic Author
stemikger
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by stemikger »

Aptenodytes wrote: 4) I hold my half my equities in international, and I know Jack says don't bother. But I don't think I actually disagree with what I think he actually believes about this. I think he's saying "international probably doesn't matter a whole lot." I think that may well be right. So if you are talking about doctrinaire Jack -- "Stay away from international stocks!!!" -- I disagree with him, but if you are talking about reasonable Jack -- "take 'em or leave 'em" -- I agree with that one.
You are correct. Although Jack does not advise it, he often says adding it will probably not matter. He is adamant about not going beyond 20%
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!
User avatar
Topic Author
stemikger
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by stemikger »

Posted by Jaibert
My understanding is that the vast majority of his holdings are in the VG balanced index fund, in which case VG rebalances for him.
I could be wrong but I don't think Jack owns the balanced index. I know he buys it every year for all his Grandchildren, but I don't believe he owns it himself. Does anyone know if he definitely owns it. Being it is my forever fund when I retire, I would love to know if he owns it himself.
Choose Simplicity ~ Stay the Course!! ~ Press on Regardless!!!
User avatar
SpringMan
Posts: 5422
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by SpringMan »

First let me say I admire Jack immensely. I can think of one thing he says I disagree with, "Don't Peek". In this age of computer security breaches, identity theft, hackers, information leaks, scammers and the like, I believe it is wise to keep an eye on all your accounts, not just investment accounts but bank and credit card accounts as well. I am also not one that counts social security as part of my bond allocation either.
Best Wishes, SpringMan
dbr
Posts: 46137
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:50 am

Re: Who disagrees with Jack. . .

Post by dbr »

OK I guess I have to be honest. I don't agree with virtually every single sound bite that has been quoted from Jack on this forum in the last couple of years. Go figure.
Post Reply