Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:14 pm

2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:28 pm
however, the idea originated in Silicon Valley and you'll find its most rabid followers there (e.g., Peter Theil, Zuckerberg, many VC's (Trev Griffin's outstanding 25siq blog, which I highly recommend, covers thinking updating as it relates to venture capitalists). In fact, some of them are not stopping with mental upgrading, but biological and neurological upgrading as well (cyborg possibilities via marrying man with machine). Theil, for example, is very much interested in lifespan extension.

In the future, possibly nearer than we'd like to think, it's quite possible those with the financial capacity will be able to transform themselves into a select breed of "superior" human beings ("superior" in terms of their ability to produce superior desired results via enhanced thinking--See Homo Deus The Future of Tomorrow and The Technological Singularity, for example). In some ways, that divide is already happening (Bogleheads might be cited as a low level, crowdsourcing example). This has all kinds of ramifications--good and bad--but for now, I see it as a wave very much worth riding.
I am an admirer of the Silicon Valley, especially after my daughter has graduated from Stanford and I became a member of the Stanford Alumni Association as a parent. Still there are many brilliant people outside the Valley and they have similar ideas, possibly under different names.

I, too, am interested in life extension and a possibility of riding a wave of immortality. I can't judge its likelihood, but it may become another Black Swan. Black Swans can be positive as well as negative. Taleb's recommendation for dealing with Black Swans is antifragility. Generally, antifragility prepares one for various negative Black-Swan events the details of which are unknown a priori. But with life extension, antifragility prepares one for a positive Black Swan by straining one's physical and mental efforts to be able to take advantage of the life extending treatments if and when they appear.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

552BB
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:15 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 552BB » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:18 pm

Hello BH



Some excellent reading on this post



I'lll post some more of my thoughts on this thread later.



:sharebeer

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:28 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:14 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:28 pm
however, the idea originated in Silicon Valley and you'll find its most rabid followers there (e.g., Peter Theil, Zuckerberg, many VC's (Trev Griffin's outstanding 25siq blog, which I highly recommend, covers thinking updating as it relates to venture capitalists). In fact, some of them are not stopping with mental upgrading, but biological and neurological upgrading as well (cyborg possibilities via marrying man with machine). Theil, for example, is very much interested in lifespan extension.

In the future, possibly nearer than we'd like to think, it's quite possible those with the financial capacity will be able to transform themselves into a select breed of "superior" human beings ("superior" in terms of their ability to produce superior desired results via enhanced thinking--See Homo Deus The Future of Tomorrow and The Technological Singularity, for example). In some ways, that divide is already happening (Bogleheads might be cited as a low level, crowdsourcing example). This has all kinds of ramifications--good and bad--but for now, I see it as a wave very much worth riding.
I am an admirer of the Silicon Valley, especially after my daughter has graduated from Stanford and I became a member of the Stanford Alumni Association as a parent. Still there are many brilliant people outside the Valley and they have similar ideas, possibly under different names.

I, too, am interested in life extension and a possibility of riding a wave of immortality. I can't judge its likelihood, but it may become another Black Swan. Black Swans can be positive as well as negative. Taleb's recommendation for dealing with Black Swans is antifragility. Generally, antifragility prepares one for various negative Black-Swan events the details of which are unknown a priori. But with life extension, antifragility prepares one for a positive Black Swan by straining one's physical and mental efforts to be able to take advantage of the life extending treatments if and when they appear.

Victoria
As I've said, I like Taleb, and I think you're perfect candidate for being delighted by the many other book recommendations on the FS site. I now have 5 folders of about 200 books I have yet to read based on recommendations from that site and others. And here my goal was to read all of these "catch up books" by the end of this year...nothing has changed the quality of my life quite like reading non-fiction business books.

As to the Valley, the thinking there is pretty much on the cutting edge due to the high concentration of VC's there (among other things). I highly recommend Trev Griffin's outstanding site 25siq, which delves into the mental models of many SCV VC's based on analysis of their interviews, publications, and articles. I especially like Triffin's "12 things I learned from..." series. Talk about getting to hang out with the smartest guys/gals in the room...it's a killer site, IMO.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:44 pm

2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:28 pm
As to the Valley, the thinking there is pretty much on the cutting edge due to the high concentration of VC's there (among other things). I highly recommend Trev Griffin's outstanding site 25siq, which delves into the mental models of many SCV VC's based on analysis of their interviews, publications, and articles. I especially like Triffin's "12 things I learned from..." series. Talk about getting to hang out with the smartest guys/gals in the room...it's a killer site, IMO.
Thank you, 2015. After I found the blog, the first thing I checked out was A Dozen Things I’ve Learned from John Bogle About Investing https://25iq.com/2013/09/28/a-dozen-thi ... investing/. It's a good selection of Jack's comments and good commentary.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:49 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:39 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:28 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:44 pm
VictoriaF wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:17 pm
2015 wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:34 pm
I have to confess to extreme laziness. There are so many other authors--thinkers like Sherlock Holmes, Darwin, or philosophers like Socrates--I could have quoted to make that point but Buffet/Munger came to mind faster. Basically, they all say the same thing.
This is why I recommend the Farnam Street site--it's for lazy people, like me!
I did check out Farnam Street and subscribed to the newsletter. From my superficial review, they seem to favor referencing Munger and Buffett and don't give enough credit to Taleb. For example, in the article on Mental Models, https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/mental-models/ they trivialize Taleb's contributions. Taleb did not "popularize" Fragility – Robustness – Antifragility; he invented it! They also use concepts from Taleb's work such as Via Negativa without mentioning Taleb.
to
Still, the blog has enough good material to follow it. Thank you for the recommendation,

Victoria
I would go deeper into the site. IIRC, it was Farnam Street that had one (or more) great summaries of Taleb's work (IIRC, I stumbled onto the site via a Taleb quote it contained). You will find the site references a plethora of sources far beyond Munger/Buffet.

In fact, Parrish initially started FS because he realized he was doing a lot of reading without being able to recall it later. So he started FS as a means to memorialize/summarize all of the reading he was doing (the guy reads hundreds and hundreds of books yearly!). He was surprised FS grew into the following it has today. Inspired by Parrish, I began summarizing/memorializing bits and pieces of mental models I read from various sources in order to create my own latticework of mental models, which is now up to over 50 pages. The sources range widely over a broad range of disciplines.

Also since the meat of a book's contents is contained in approx. 10-20% of its contents, I began bookmarking significant content in books I read, and then scanning those pages. Now as part of my daily "afternoon cafe reading", I routinely review the scanned pages of past read books. I am continually amazed how routine reviews of past read works bring out information either forgotten or overlooked before. I am grateful to Parrish for inspiring me in this practice, and as a result of the above two practices, I have actually seen my thinking deepen and expand greatly over the last two years.

My intention in retirement is make this last phase of my life the very best time of my life. I absolutely refuse to be mediocre in retirement by viewing aging as a period of decline and loss. I am supporting this effort by mimicking the personal mental software upgrading that many of the highest performers in Silicon Valley practice. I believe this is one of the most exciting times in history to be alive, one of unprecedented personal possibility, whereby we as individuals have access to the "smartest people in the room" that our ancestors could not even have dreamed of.
Cal Newport's book is the reason this has been one of the most productive and beneficial years of my life. I don't seem to have any low value activities left! It was his notion of a "Wildly Important Idea" that inspired me to focus only on high value activities that lead to retirement as the best phase of my life.

Regarding mental software updating, I was being lazy again as I know it has become somewhat popular in a number of recent books (e.g., Tim Ferriss referenced something similar in his 2007 book The 4 Hour Work Week); however, the idea originated in Silicon Valley and you'll find its most rabid followers there (e.g., Peter Theil, Zuckerberg, many VC's (Trev Griffin's outstanding 25siq blog, which I highly recommend, covers thinking updating as it relates to venture capitalists). In fact, some of them are not stopping with mental upgrading, but biological and neurological upgrading as well (cyborg possibilities via marrying man with machine). Theil, for example, is very much interested in lifespan extension.

In the future, possibly nearer than we'd like to think, it's quite possible those with the financial capacity will be able to transform themselves into a select breed of "superior" human beings ("superior" in terms of their ability to produce superior desired results via enhanced thinking--See Homo Deus The Future of Tomorrow and The Technological Singularity, for example). In some ways, that divide is already happening (Bogleheads might be cited as a low level, crowdsourcing example). This has all kinds of ramifications--good and bad--but for now, I see it as a wave very much worth riding.
Man....and here I thought that bogleheads were producing superior results with their enhanced thinking already.For example,longinvest and his VPW model.Oh well. :annoyed
In one respect, BH is in fact an example, though not exactly a robust one due to all the noise, of enhanced thinking due to the crowd sourcing aspect. Your example of longinvest's generosity with providing us with VPW for free, coupled with his excellent insights contained in the many threads supporting his rationale, are an excellent example of enhanced thinking due to crowd sourcing. Other examples might be the extreme generosity of Nisiprius with regarding TLH (the man has the patience of a saint in answering the same questions over and over again in different threads), Celia, Fire Chief, and other regarding Roth Conversions, Alan S. regarding taxation, etc. There are many, many other examples on this board too numerous to mention, but the contributions of the moderators are too valuable to even be calculated with respect to the wealth generated from actionable information contained here.

I totally loved Victoria's "investing niche" phrase above (which I'm going to steal, btw :wink: . I've come to the conclusion one has to wade through thousands of threads of muck (the latest study on SWR, Bengen, tilting, how much international, to TIP(s) or not to TIP(s), bonds forecasts, endless valuations discussions, the latest exhale from Pfau/Bogle/Ferri/Swedroe/Benz/Bernstein/Fill-In-The Blank-"Expert", links to the latest, greatest podcast/study/interview with _____ on Fill-In-The-Blank, on and on and on and on, before things begin to crystallize for one's personal circumstances. One then gains enough confidence to develop an "investing niche" for one's own personal circumstances. At that point, you can relax and simply skim many threads to ensure you're at least trying to minimize overconfidence and confirmation bias [edited to add: and to ensure you don't miss out on something as personally valuable as VPW, as was the case with my stumbling on it for the first time by means of some excellent questions posed by Victoria in those threads.]

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:59 pm

2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:49 pm
Your example of longinvest's generosity with providing us with VPW for free, coupled with his excellent insights contained in the many threads supporting his rationale, are an excellent example of enhanced thinking due to crowd sourcing. Other examples might be the extreme generosity of Nisiprius with regarding TLH (the man has the patience of a saint in answering the same questions over and over again in different threads), Celia, Fire Chief, and other regarding Roth Conversions, Alan S. regarding taxation, etc. There are many, many other examples on this board too numerous to mention, but the contributions of the moderators are too valuable to even be calculated with respect to the wealth generated from actionable information contained here.
I like your comment about Bogleheads crowd sourcing and I am going to steal it.

Another Boglehead you may want to follow is grabiner. He is brilliant and generous with his patient advice. Years ago, he helped me to save $1,200 of real money. I asked him a question, he asked some questions in return, and pretty soon he offered me a solution I had not been thinking about.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:43 am

VictoriaF wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:59 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:49 pm
Your example of longinvest's generosity with providing us with VPW for free, coupled with his excellent insights contained in the many threads supporting his rationale, are an excellent example of enhanced thinking due to crowd sourcing. Other examples might be the extreme generosity of Nisiprius with regarding TLH (the man has the patience of a saint in answering the same questions over and over again in different threads), Celia, Fire Chief, and other regarding Roth Conversions, Alan S. regarding taxation, etc. There are many, many other examples on this board too numerous to mention, but the contributions of the moderators are too valuable to even be calculated with respect to the wealth generated from actionable information contained here.
I like your comment about Bogleheads crowd sourcing and I am going to steal it.

Another Boglehead you may want to follow is grabiner. He is brilliant and generous with his patient advice. Years ago, he helped me to save $1,200 of real money. I asked him a question, he asked some questions in return, and pretty soon he offered me a solution I had not been thinking about.

Victoria
There are so many people we have to show gratitude to. For example, Taylor Larimore's repeated contributions regarding simplicity served as a solid foundation upon which all else I've read on the topic has been built. I've been unable to find anything, in any field, that contradicts the concept of simplicity. It has made a priceless contribution to my life.

552BB
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:15 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 552BB » Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:45 pm

Good evening BH,



Hello camper1


camper1 wrote:
Thu Aug 31, 2017 8:26 am
Not sure if this has been posted, but this is a very interesting podcast on Mad Fientists website which Kitces gives very clear explanation of the 4% rule. I have read quite a bit on the subject, but listening to the discussion gives me much better understanding of how to look at withdraw rates and early retirement. Also, made me feel better concerning some of my fears concerning future markets effects on withdraw rates.


http://www.madfientist.com/michael-kitces-interview/

Hope others find this interesting also.


This has been a great thread. There have been some excellent commentary and some great links to further study 4% rule.

I don't have much to add except my opinions and observations.



First I will fall back on a basic Boglehead tenet. That tenet is 'Simplicity'.....

So simply stated, about 4% will very likely get us all to the promise land. If I want to retire early, I'll try closer to 3%.

Simple



Next, he mentions how a bad sequence of returns could possibly make you run a foul during your retirement.

Two observations on that. First he shows that even with this last mother of all recessions (worst in our lifetimes, for most of us), thoses that retired at the worst time (about mid 2008) and are still around have all come out ahead as of this time, whether you used 4% or less. This is regardless of asset allocation.

Second, If you were a person that would worry about that in early retirement, then you can always do something that many here have lectured our kids to do..... GET A JOB. In todays modern world, just about any person can earn money using the interconnectivity. Or you can just continue to worry about it, and opine and complain about your concerns on some web sight.

Remember this, some people are not happy unless you are not happy. :D



I think that the work that Michael Kitces and Madfientist have put into this subject gives us all a better awareness of the 4% rule in retirement, and should help us all sleep better at night.



That is my opinion.



Thanks for the thread.



:sharebeer

552BB
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 9:15 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 552BB » Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:11 pm

Hello BH community,



I am adding to this post to address questions raised on another thread.

Also, I did not want to hijack the other thread about Financial Independence (FI).



In particular, some raised the bad financal events of recent, and how there was no work done on how some of these withdrawl rates in relaiton to these bad sequence of returns.

This is not true. From what I read, there was particular attention emphasized on these events.



Next is a partial quote from my previous post above.




Next, he mentions how a bad sequence of returns could possibly make you run a foul during your retirement.

Two observations on that. First he shows that even with this last mother of all recessions (worst in our lifetimes, for most of us), thoses that retired at the worst time (about mid 2008) and are still around have all come out ahead as of this time, whether you used 4% or less. This is regardless of asset allocation.

I think that the work that Michael Kitces and Madfientist have put into this subject gives us all a better awareness of the 4% rule in retirement, and should help us all sleep better at night.






For thoses that have quesitons about this, I would re-read my post above, and then go though the Madfientisit links that talk about this. I found these articles to be very informative.

I think you would too.



I hope this helps.



:sharebeer

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:23 pm

2015 wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:35 pm
To update your thinking software, I highly recommend Farnam Street, the excellent website on thinking maintained by Shane Parrish. It's here where I've found my best non-fiction book recommendations.
Hi 2015,

Earlier today I listened to an excellent podcast on Farnam Street: "Episode 17: Rory Sutherland on the Psychology of Advertising, Complex Evolved Systems, Reading, Decision Making" https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/2017/0 ... d-podcast/ . I'd like to have a record of it. I can get a transcript for $14.95, or I can join the Farnam Street Learning Community, https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/membership/ for $249 per year.

I would not mind to get a transcript of Episode 1: Michael Mauboussin, too. But I am not sure if I need transcripts of all podcasts and whether there is other value in the membership.

Are you or anybody you know members of the Farnam Street Learning Community? Is it worth $249/year?

Thank you again for recommending Farnam Street.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:23 pm
2015 wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:35 pm
To update your thinking software, I highly recommend Farnam Street, the excellent website on thinking maintained by Shane Parrish. It's here where I've found my best non-fiction book recommendations.
Hi 2015,

Earlier today I listened to an excellent podcast on Farnam Street: "Episode 17: Rory Sutherland on the Psychology of Advertising, Complex Evolved Systems, Reading, Decision Making" https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/2017/0 ... d-podcast/ . I'd like to have a record of it. I can get a transcript for $14.95, or I can join the Farnam Street Learning Community, https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/membership/ for $249 per year.

I would not mind to get a transcript of Episode 1: Michael Mauboussin, too. But I am not sure if I need transcripts of all podcasts and whether there is other value in the membership.

Are you or anybody you know members of the Farnam Street Learning Community? Is it worth $249/year?

Thank you again for recommending Farnam Street.

Victoria
Victoria,

I just love the FS site, which has added so much to my efficiency and effectiveness. The mental model of transforming low value activities into habits, routines, and rituals while simultaneously taking up the least amount of mental, emotional, and time energy alone has been priceless.

I never listen to podcasts, there just isn't enough time! I always read the transcripts where available. Also, I found there is so much to learn from the FS site and sites like Trev Griffin's 25siq that you can get a lot of what you need in terms of mental models just by reading the sites(remember, Munger says there are about 100 basic mental models one should use in decision-making, with the good news that only about six "carry the heavy freight" ((his words)).

Honestly, I'm only interested in signal, as there is so much noise out there. So much of what I read, online anyway, is in the form of scanning, as I'm looking for the 20% that's valuable (I got this idea from The Power of Forgetting by Mike Byster). I don't have time to join book clubs or learning communities because I want to be diverse as possible in my inputs and I don't find learning communities efficient enough. My trick for remembering the important stuff is copying it whenever I come across it (even if it's only snippets) to my Latticework of Mental Models document, which is now up to 56 pages! I can't tell you how beneficial it's been to review that document periodically. Inspired by FS's Shane Parrish, my intention is to comprehend, not just read, so reviewing what I've read and want to retain has been incredibly beneficial.

My other trick is to bookmark the most important pages of books I read, scan them to PDF, review them later with highlights and notations. I've just completed a 3 week review of the most important books I've read so far and each time I do my comprehension deepens, such that I can't believe how much I missed the first time!

It was FS that introduced my to the idea of using a latticework of mental modes (based on Munger). Working on embedding these models into my decision-making has had immense impact. A practical recent example is I would have overlooked incorporating VPW into my thinking had I not been so steeped in decision-making reading.

I agree with Buffet and Munger that no single act can contribute to the quality and quantity of a person's life like reading (targeted non-fiction business) books (as well as targeted learning sources).

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:57 pm

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
I just love the FS site, which has added so much to my efficiency and effectiveness. The mental model of transforming low value activities into habits, routines, and rituals while simultaneously taking up the least amount of mental, emotional, and time energy alone has been priceless.

I never listen to podcasts, there just isn't enough time! I always read the transcripts where available. Also, I found there is so much to learn from the FS site and sites like Trev Griffin's 25siq that you can get a lot of what you need in terms of mental models just by reading the sites(remember, Munger says there are about 100 basic mental models one should use in decision-making, with the good news that only about six "carry the heavy freight" ((his words)).
2015,

Thank you for a detailed response! I highly appreciate it and I am certain other Bogleheads benefit from it too.

I agree that there is so much information and so much to learn that no single source should dominate all others. I listen to podcasts while exercising and walking. Behavioral economists call it "temptation bundling," i.e., combining an activity you have to do with an activity you want to do. The problem is that I can't take notes while I am listening. I listen to particularly interesting podcasts more than once, but I don't want to do it sitting at the computer. Having a transcript would solve this problem.
2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
Honestly, I'm only interested in signal, as there is so much noise out there. So much of what I read, online anyway, is in the form of scanning, as I'm looking for the 20% that's valuable (I got this idea from The Power of Forgetting by Mike Byster). I don't have time to join book clubs or learning communities because I want to be diverse as possible in my inputs and I don't find learning communities efficient enough. My trick for remembering the important stuff is copying it whenever I come across it (even if it's only snippets) to my Latticework of Mental Models document, which is now up to 56 pages! I can't tell you how beneficial it's been to review that document periodically. Inspired by FS's Shane Parrish, my intention is to comprehend, not just read, so reviewing what I've read and want to retain has been incredibly beneficial.
Focus on the signal is a good approach, but frequently you don't know where excellent signals will come from. There is a danger to limit your information to certain sources and miss important ideas that come from elsewhere. A recommendation I recently saw is to explore various venues until you find what works for you, then spend 95% of your time on the things that work, and allocate 5% to trying new things.
2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
My other trick is to bookmark the most important pages of books I read, scan them to PDF, review them later with highlights and notations. I've just completed a 3 week review of the most important books I've read so far and each time I do my comprehension deepens, such that I can't believe how much I missed the first time!
How are you scanning books? Do you use a flat-bed scanner and try to flatten books on top? In my experience scanning books does not work well unless I am willing to break their spines.

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
It was FS that introduced my to the idea of using a latticework of mental modes (based on Munger). Working on embedding these models into my decision-making has had immense impact. A practical recent example is I would have overlooked incorporating VPW into my thinking had I not been so steeped in decision-making reading.

I agree with Buffet and Munger that no single act can contribute to the quality and quantity of a person's life like reading (targeted non-fiction business) books (as well as targeted learning sources).
Having good models for improving decision making is important. High-quality non-fiction books are definitely the most rewarding source of knowledge and decision-making support. But for me reading solely for improving my decision making is not enough.

When I work on a project it guides my source selection and the level of attention I pay to various sources. It just happened that the very first Farnam Street podcast I listened to had a treasure trove of ideas. I will probably listen to a few more FS podcasts and if nothing else is as densely useful as the discussion with Rory Sutherland, I may just buy that particular transcript.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:57 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:57 pm
2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
I just love the FS site, which has added so much to my efficiency and effectiveness. The mental model of transforming low value activities into habits, routines, and rituals while simultaneously taking up the least amount of mental, emotional, and time energy alone has been priceless.

I never listen to podcasts, there just isn't enough time! I always read the transcripts where available. Also, I found there is so much to learn from the FS site and sites like Trev Griffin's 25siq that you can get a lot of what you need in terms of mental models just by reading the sites(remember, Munger says there are about 100 basic mental models one should use in decision-making, with the good news that only about six "carry the heavy freight" ((his words)).
2015,

Thank you for a detailed response! I highly appreciate it and I am certain other Bogleheads benefit from it too.

I agree that there is so much information and so much to learn that no single source should dominate all others. I listen to podcasts while exercising and walking. Behavioral economists call it "temptation bundling," i.e., combining an activity you have to do with an activity you want to do. The problem is that I can't take notes while I am listening. I listen to particularly interesting podcasts more than once, but I don't want to do it sitting at the computer. Having a transcript would solve this problem.

"Temptation bundling", I like that. Is that the same thing as drinking and smoking while, say, cleaning the house?
2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
Honestly, I'm only interested in signal, as there is so much noise out there. So much of what I read, online anyway, is in the form of scanning, as I'm looking for the 20% that's valuable (I got this idea from The Power of Forgetting by Mike Byster). I don't have time to join book clubs or learning communities because I want to be diverse as possible in my inputs and I don't find learning communities efficient enough. My trick for remembering the important stuff is copying it whenever I come across it (even if it's only snippets) to my Latticework of Mental Models document, which is now up to 56 pages! I can't tell you how beneficial it's been to review that document periodically. Inspired by FS's Shane Parrish, my intention is to comprehend, not just read, so reviewing what I've read and want to retain has been incredibly beneficial.
Focus on the signal is a good approach, but frequently you don't know where excellent signals will come from. There is a danger to limit your information to certain sources and miss important ideas that come from elsewhere. A recommendation I recently saw is to explore various venues until you find what works for you, then spend 95% of your time on the things that work, and allocate 5% to trying new things.

What I've found, much like your "investing niche" term, that once you set up a latticework of mental models on which to hang decision-making (in this case, investing), to quote Munger, "You’ve got whole categories of things you just bat away so your brain isn’t cluttered with them. That way, you’re better able to pick up a few sensible things to do.” Or Einstein,“I soon learned to scent out what was able to lead to fundamentals and to turn aside from everything else, from the multitude of things that clutter up the mind.” Darwin said the same thing, and you'll find excellent coverage of his ideas on the FS site. Batting away whole categories of noise entering one's personal life (this would include, but is not limited to, social media, mainstream media (business and otherwise), popular entertainment, and coverage of the latest disaster, pending or otherwise (See The Science of Fear)). You simply scan the categories related to business, politics, the economy, technology, society, trends, and information only to take advantage of the popular zeitgeist, and always through the filters of your mental models. Interestingly, the deeper I've gotten into decision-making the better I've gotten at ferreting out signal from noise.

Most important, the further the reading is outside of personal finance, economics, and investing, the more absolutely convinced I am not the smartest person in the room, that anything I believe in, have an opinion on, or conclude is just as likely, if not more so, to be wrong (though same can be said for everyone else). Consequently, all of my models and decisions are simply a hypothesis, open to revision at any time, because most of our "wins" have some amount of nothing more than luck involved. It's one thing to say "the map is not the territory"; it's another to feel it in your gut. I am the patsy at the investing poker table, but at least I do everything I can to remember it.

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
My other trick is to bookmark the most important pages of books I read, scan them to PDF, review them later with highlights and notations. I've just completed a 3 week review of the most important books I've read so far and each time I do my comprehension deepens, such that I can't believe how much I missed the first time!
How are you scanning books? Do you use a flat-bed scanner and try to flatten books on top? In my experience scanning books does not work well unless I am willing to break their spines.

A flat-bed scanner, but I've never had to (and never would!) break the spine of any book.
2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
It was FS that introduced my to the idea of using a latticework of mental modes (based on Munger). Working on embedding these models into my decision-making has had immense impact. A practical recent example is I would have overlooked incorporating VPW into my thinking had I not been so steeped in decision-making reading.
I agree with Buffet and Munger that no single act can contribute to the quality and quantity of a person's life like reading (targeted non-fiction business) books (as well as targeted learning sources).

Having good models for improving decision making is important. High-quality non-fiction books are definitely the most rewarding source of knowledge and decision-making support. But for me reading solely for improving my decision ma.king is not enough.

When I work on a project it guides my source selection and the level of attention I pay to various sources. It just happened that the very first Farnam Street podcast I listened to had a treasure trove of ideas. I will probably listen to a few more FS podcasts and if nothing else is as densely useful as the discussion with Rory Sutherland, I may just buy that particular transcript.

You're in for a treat! I'll say one thing for Parrish, I never get his subscription email deliveries (what he calls "Brain Food") that
I don't find some new idea or new angle on a thinking methodology. Did you check out his page on mental models? Fantastic stuff.


Victoria
Another site I recommend is maintained by Taylor Pearson:
I used his template on that page to create my Anti-Fragile Planning document. The page is called, appropriately, "Antifragile Planning: Optimizing for Optionality (Without Chasing Shiny Objects)". I modified his template a lot, to serve as a tool to keep track of my focus on my "Wildly Important Idea" (Newport again) of making this last phase of my life the most fulfilling. I remain true to a lot of the template's process, including Steps 1-4 and the quarterly review. Pearson's site also has a lot of essays on anti-fragility and optionality which I found enlightening and useful.

hoops777
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by hoops777 » Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:14 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:28 pm
however, the idea originated in Silicon Valley and you'll find its most rabid followers there (e.g., Peter Theil, Zuckerberg, many VC's (Trev Griffin's outstanding 25siq blog, which I highly recommend, covers thinking updating as it relates to venture capitalists). In fact, some of them are not stopping with mental upgrading, but biological and neurological upgrading as well (cyborg possibilities via marrying man with machine). Theil, for example, is very much interested in lifespan extension.

In the future, possibly nearer than we'd like to think, it's quite possible those with the financial capacity will be able to transform themselves into a select breed of "superior" human beings ("superior" in terms of their ability to produce superior desired results via enhanced thinking--See Homo Deus The Future of Tomorrow and The Technological Singularity, for example). In some ways, that divide is already happening (Bogleheads might be cited as a low level, crowdsourcing example). This has all kinds of ramifications--good and bad--but for now, I see it as a wave very much worth riding.
I am an admirer of the Silicon Valley, especially after my daughter has graduated from Stanford and I became a member of the Stanford Alumni Association as a parent. Still there are many brilliant people outside the Valley and they have similar ideas, possibly under different names.

I, too, am interested in life extension and a possibility of riding a wave of immortality. I can't judge its likelihood, but it may become another Black Swan. Black Swans can be positive as well as negative. Taleb's recommendation for dealing with Black Swans is antifragility. Generally, antifragility prepares one for various negative Black-Swan events the details of which are unknown a priori. But with life extension, antifragility prepares one for a positive Black Swan by straining one's physical and mental efforts to be able to take advantage of the life extending treatments if and when they appear.

Victoria
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:56 pm

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:57 pm
What I've found, much like your "investing niche" term, that once you set up a latticework of mental models on which to hang decision-making (in this case, investing), to quote Munger, "You’ve got whole categories of things you just bat away so your brain isn’t cluttered with them. That way, you’re better able to pick up a few sensible things to do.” Or Einstein,“I soon learned to scent out what was able to lead to fundamentals and to turn aside from everything else, from the multitude of things that clutter up the mind.” Darwin said the same thing, and you'll find excellent coverage of his ideas on the FS site. Batting away whole categories of noise entering one's personal life (this would include, but is not limited to, social media, mainstream media (business and otherwise), popular entertainment, and coverage of the latest disaster, pending or otherwise (See The Science of Fear)). You simply scan the categories related to business, politics, the economy, technology, society, trends, and information only to take advantage of the popular zeitgeist, and always through the filters of your mental models. Interestingly, the deeper I've gotten into decision-making the better I've gotten at ferreting out signal from noise.

Most important, the further the reading is outside of personal finance, economics, and investing, the more absolutely convinced I am not the smartest person in the room, that anything I believe in, have an opinion on, or conclude is just as likely, if not more so, to be wrong (though same can be said for everyone else). Consequently, all of my models and decisions are simply a hypothesis, open to revision at any time, because most of our "wins" have some amount of nothing more than luck involved. It's one thing to say "the map is not the territory"; it's another to feel it in your gut. I am the patsy at the investing poker table, but at least I do everything I can to remember it.
Clearly, we cannot and should not try to experiment with all possible sources and topics. Some of them are obviously useless, others are rejected because they present themselves in a wrong way.

My initial question was not about an arbitrary source but about Shane Parrish's community. Normally, I try to avoid online communities because they tie me to my computer more than I want to spend at it, and I don't like recurring charges. Also $249/year is rather steep. But I thought it may be a price for not having to take my own notes. As we discussed elsewhere, financial independence is not a number, it's a freedom to do what you want to do and freedom not to do what you don't want to do. For $249 I'd avoid spending hours at my computer re-listening to podcasts taking notes.

The community that comes with this membership would be an icing on the cake. I am wondering if the icing is worth it and whether the high price of the icing ($249/year) serves as a screening mechanism and a networking opportunity.

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
You're in for a treat! I'll say one thing for Parrish, I never get his subscription email deliveries (what he calls "Brain Food") that I don't find some new idea or new angle on a thinking methodology. Did you check out his page on mental models? Fantastic stuff.
I had a chance to listen to a few more Farnam Street podcasts and found them very good. I am learning new things. I particularly appreciate it that Parrish is asking his guests how they read books (paper, Kindle), how they capture information, and what software they use.

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
Another site I recommend is maintained by Taylor Pearson:
I used his template on that page to create my Anti-Fragile Planning document. The page is called, appropriately, "Antifragile Planning: Optimizing for Optionality (Without Chasing Shiny Objects)". I modified his template a lot, to serve as a tool to keep track of my focus on my "Wildly Important Idea" (Newport again) of making this last phase of my life the most fulfilling. I remain true to a lot of the template's process, including Steps 1-4 and the quarterly review. Pearson's site also has a lot of essays on anti-fragility and optionality which I found enlightening and useful.
Taleb is my favorite writer and philosopher and I am interested in everything related to Black Swans and Antifragility. Thank you for the recommendation.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:59 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:56 pm
2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:57 pm
What I've found, much like your "investing niche" term, that once you set up a latticework of mental models on which to hang decision-making (in this case, investing), to quote Munger, "You’ve got whole categories of things you just bat away so your brain isn’t cluttered with them. That way, you’re better able to pick up a few sensible things to do.” Or Einstein,“I soon learned to scent out what was able to lead to fundamentals and to turn aside from everything else, from the multitude of things that clutter up the mind.” Darwin said the same thing, and you'll find excellent coverage of his ideas on the FS site. Batting away whole categories of noise entering one's personal life (this would include, but is not limited to, social media, mainstream media (business and otherwise), popular entertainment, and coverage of the latest disaster, pending or otherwise (See The Science of Fear)). You simply scan the categories related to business, politics, the economy, technology, society, trends, and information only to take advantage of the popular zeitgeist, and always through the filters of your mental models. Interestingly, the deeper I've gotten into decision-making the better I've gotten at ferreting out signal from noise.

Most important, the further the reading is outside of personal finance, economics, and investing, the more absolutely convinced I am not the smartest person in the room, that anything I believe in, have an opinion on, or conclude is just as likely, if not more so, to be wrong (though same can be said for everyone else). Consequently, all of my models and decisions are simply a hypothesis, open to revision at any time, because most of our "wins" have some amount of nothing more than luck involved. It's one thing to say "the map is not the territory"; it's another to feel it in your gut. I am the patsy at the investing poker table, but at least I do everything I can to remember it.
Clearly, we cannot and should not try to experiment with all possible sources and topics. Some of them are obviously useless, others are rejected because they present themselves in a wrong way.

My initial question was not about an arbitrary source but about Shane Parrish's community. Normally, I try to avoid online communities because they tie me to my computer more than I want to spend at it, and I don't like recurring charges. Also $249/year is rather steep. But I thought it may be a price for not having to take my own notes. As we discussed elsewhere, financial independence is not a number, it's a freedom to do what you want to do and freedom not to do what you don't want to do. For $249 I'd avoid spending hours at my computer re-listening to podcasts taking notes.

The community that comes with this membership would be an icing on the cake. I am wondering if the icing is worth it and whether the high price of the icing ($249/year) serves as a screening mechanism and a networking opportunity.

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
You're in for a treat! I'll say one thing for Parrish, I never get his subscription email deliveries (what he calls "Brain Food") that I don't find some new idea or new angle on a thinking methodology. Did you check out his page on mental models? Fantastic stuff.
I had a chance to listen to a few more Farnam Street podcasts and found them very good. I am learning new things. I particularly appreciate it that Parrish is asking his guests how they read books (paper, Kindle), how they capture information, and what software they use.

2015 wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:54 pm
Another site I recommend is maintained by Taylor Pearson:
I used his template on that page to create my Anti-Fragile Planning document. The page is called, appropriately, "Antifragile Planning: Optimizing for Optionality (Without Chasing Shiny Objects)". I modified his template a lot, to serve as a tool to keep track of my focus on my "Wildly Important Idea" (Newport again) of making this last phase of my life the most fulfilling. I remain true to a lot of the template's process, including Steps 1-4 and the quarterly review. Pearson's site also has a lot of essays on anti-fragility and optionality which I found enlightening and useful.
Taleb is my favorite writer and philosopher and I am interested in everything related to Black Swans and Antifragility. Thank you for the recommendation.

Victoria
A potent antidote for fragility is optionality. I have so much information on optionality in my latticework of mental models document but can't for the life of me remember where I got the concept from. I thought Taleb wrote about it, but now I don't think so. I'm beginning to think I got a lot of it from the 25siq site and from Pearson's site. I think you'll be delighted by the concept, and I think you'll really enjoy Pearson, too, because he writes a lot about anti-fragility.

I should add that I just completed my 3rd quarter (July-Sept) review using my customized version of Pearson's template. It's exciting to review what you've accomplished in the just completed quarter, if you've met or exceeded goals set in the prior quarter, and to set new goals for the upcoming quarter (in this quarter I calculated I can relocate a whole year and a half earlier than I expected based on another review of Howard Mark's The Most Important Thing, and also discovered VPW!). The template serves to keep me on track for meeting my Wildly Important Idea of making this last phase of my life the best time in my life by ensuring I take concrete action to meet quantitative and qualitative goals. I think it's a really cool tool to ensure I stay conscious of focusing my energy on high value activities.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:59 pm

2015 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:59 pm
A potent antidote for fragility is optionality. I have so much information on optionality in my latticework of mental models document but can't for the life of me remember where I got the concept from. I thought Taleb wrote about it, but now I don't think so. I'm beginning to think I got a lot of it from the 25siq site and from Pearson's site. I think you'll be delighted by the concept, and I think you'll really enjoy Pearson, too, because he writes a lot about anti-fragility.
Antifragility is Taleb's concept. He has invented it and spent a fair amount of effort explaining how it's different from robustness. It think now people started accepting antifragility as a legitimate concept and a desirable goal. Optionality is not Taleb's invention, it existed in the markets since times immemorial. But Taleb has devoted a fair part of his Antifragility book to describing what optionality is and how to use it.

You may have heard about it from other sources. A lot depends on the order in which we consume information and how much attention we pay to it. But Taleb deserves the ultimate credit for both Antifragility and the use of optionality in non-financial contexts.
2015 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:59 pm
I should add that I just completed my 3rd quarter (July-Sept) review using my customized version of Pearson's template. It's exciting to review what you've accomplished in the just completed quarter, if you've met or exceeded goals set in the prior quarter, and to set new goals for the upcoming quarter (in this quarter I calculated I can relocate a whole year and a half earlier than I expected based on another review of Howard Mark's The Most Important Thing, and also discovered VPW!). The template serves to keep me on track for meeting my Wildly Important Idea of making this last phase of my life the best time in my life by ensuring I take concrete action to meet quantitative and qualitative goals. I think it's a really cool tool to ensure I stay conscious of focusing my energy on high value activities.
Congratulations with completing your review and exceeding your goals. Unfortunately the limitations of the electronic media, and this being a public forum, do not allow you to get into specific details of your goals and milestones. I would be very interested in hearing about them if we ever met in person. In the mean time, thank you again for recommending Farnam Street. For me, it's a gift that keeps on giving.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:18 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D
hoops, I have been thinking about your post all week as it keeps coming back to me.

First, I would never be so pompous as to think I am any step "above" anyone. As I posted previously, the more I read and study the more suspect I am regarding of opinions, beliefs, and constructs of myself and others. I am with Munger in that I was much less ignorant when younger mostly because I didn't know I was ignorant. For starters, I recommend reading Influence Science and Practice, Robert Greene's books (Mastery, Power, and The Art of Seduction) to begin to get a handle on how easily we can fool ourselves and be fooled by others, and highly recommend The Hour Between Dog and Wolf regarding our physiology in investing--it's an eye opener). The Farnham Street site has some of the best book recommendations I've found as Shane Parrish is a voracious reader (although Ben Carlson's blog sometimes mentions a good book or two at the bottom).

Mental models are really nothing more than frameworks for ways of thinking that match reality (as opposed to thinking in ways that do not match how reality functions. Around 100 model are important; fortunately, a foundation of only about 6 hold the whole building up. I've read about MM's for years, but only really got into them after finding the Farnham Street site. The beauty of mental models is your reading soon becomes like a needle and thread, sewing together "associations" (love this concept from The Power of Forgetting, where you'll also learn how to read more efficiently), until eventually you've sewn a fabric of models through which to strain noise. Soon you'll find yourself having to only scan about 95% of the noise (in order to combat confirmation/consistency bias). This frees you from engaging in FOMO (fear of missing out), because you've disciplined yourself to focus only on signal.

I love Victoria's concept of creating an investment niche. Like mental models for straining 95% of the noise in life, you'll eventually create a niche where you'll bat away whole categories of concepts. This frees you to concentrate on information of high value to you, based on your own niche. In my case, I bat away all click bait threads, threads with nifty charts, graphs, or other chicken bone voodoo (because investing is a complex adaptive system, containing even subsets of systems; hence, predictions are pointless), and any threads containing concepts, links, articles, or guru postings implying "investing is complex/complicated, and you can't possibly figure it out unless you're spoon fed by people supposedly more knowledgeable than you." Gaining sufficient knowledge to create an investment niche frees me from wasting time reading posts about the SWR debate, predictions by anyone, bond bubbles, Tips discussions, rebalancing, dividend income strategies, slicing and dicing, data or chart-driven "conclusions", passive versus active debates, or valuations, among others.

As I've stated previously, reading widely outside the field of investing, economics, and personal finance has been highly beneficial to me because every time I've taken the Complexity freeway off ramp I've always been met with a big red sign reading, "Go Back You Are Going The Wrong Way."

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:21 am

2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:18 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D
hoops, I have been thinking about your post all week as it keeps coming back to me.

First, I would never be so pompous as to think I am any step "above" anyone. As I posted previously, the more I read and study the more suspect I am regarding of opinions, beliefs, and constructs of myself and others. I am with Munger in that I was much less ignorant when younger mostly because I didn't know I was ignorant. For starters, I recommend reading Influence Science and Practice, Robert Greene's books (Mastery, Power, and The Art of Seduction) to begin to get a handle on how easily we can fool ourselves and be fooled by others, and highly recommend The Hour Between Dog and Wolf regarding our physiology in investing--it's an eye opener). The Farnham Street site has some of the best book recommendations I've found as Shane Parrish is a voracious reader (although Ben Carlson's blog sometimes mentions a good book or two at the bottom).
We have a curious overlap in book lists. I own four Robert Greene's book, the ones you have mentioned and "War." But I've read only "Seduction." I recall it as a comprehensive and entertaining review of seduction, but I don't remember any practical tips that I could use for seduction (*).

As someone has posted in another thread, Robert Cialdini the author of "Influence" now has a new book "Pre-suation". From what I've read about it, it does not overlap with "Influence" and stands well on its own. I have not purchased this book yet.

"The Hour Between Dog and Wolf" is a fantastic book. This one I've read, heavily marked, and used in my own research.

In general, I am cautious about following book suggestions, because I have a long list of books that I must read for my own projects. I don't want to stress my cognition with the paradox of choice and various related biases. However, for those who are following this thread looking for book ideas, I want to list the ones that I found particularly valuable:
"The Black Swan" by Nassim Taleb
"Antifragile" by Nassim Taleb
"Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman
"Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely
"Scarcity" by Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir
"Willpower" by Roy Baumeister
"The Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg
"Deep Work" by Cal Newport
"How we learn" by Benedict Carey

I've read many other books on related concepts and other concepts. But these books have made tangible impact on me.

Victoria

(*) The most effective recent book on seduction is "Get the Guy" by Matthew Hussey. But it's specifically addressed to women.
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Wed Sep 20, 2017 11:08 am

VictoriaF wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 10:21 am
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:18 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D
hoops, I have been thinking about your post all week as it keeps coming back to me.

First, I would never be so pompous as to think I am any step "above" anyone. As I posted previously, the more I read and study the more suspect I am regarding of opinions, beliefs, and constructs of myself and others. I am with Munger in that I was much less ignorant when younger mostly because I didn't know I was ignorant. For starters, I recommend reading Influence Science and Practice, Robert Greene's books (Mastery, Power, and The Art of Seduction) to begin to get a handle on how easily we can fool ourselves and be fooled by others, and highly recommend The Hour Between Dog and Wolf regarding our physiology in investing--it's an eye opener). The Farnham Street site has some of the best book recommendations I've found as Shane Parrish is a voracious reader (although Ben Carlson's blog sometimes mentions a good book or two at the bottom).
We have a curious overlap in book lists. I own four Robert Greene's book, the ones you have mentioned and "War." But I've read only "Seduction." I recall it as a comprehensive and entertaining review of seduction, but I don't remember any practical tips that I could use for seduction (*).

As someone has posted in another thread, Robert Cialdini the author of "Influence" now has a new book "Pre-suation". From what I've read about it, it does not overlap with "Influence" and stands well on its own. I have not purchased this book yet.

"The Hour Between Dog and Wolf" is a fantastic book. This one I've read, heavily marked, and used in my own research.

In general, I am cautious about following book suggestions, because I have a long list of books that I must read for my own projects. I don't want to stress my cognition with the paradox of choice and various related biases. However, for those who are following this thread looking for book ideas, I want to list the ones that I found particularly valuable:
"The Black Swan" by Nassim Taleb
"Antifragile" by Nassim Taleb
"Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman
"Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely
"Scarcity" by Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir
"Willpower" by Roy Baumeister
"The Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg
"Deep Work" by Cal Newport
"How we learn" by Benedict Carey

I've read many other books on related concepts and other concepts. But these books have made tangible impact on me.

Victoria

(*) The most effective recent book on seduction is "Get the Guy" by Matthew Hussey. But it's specifically addressed to women.
Yes! I forgot about "War". The only one of his books I found mundane/rather trite (but found amusing while scanning in about 3 minutes) was The 50th Law, in which he collaborated with 50 Cent, and whose binding reminded me of a bible! I gained value from The Art of Seduction (again, woven with concepts found in Power, Sun Tzu's The Art of War as well as The Charisma Myth) by looking at my own unconscious weaknesses, finding my own use of power, rooted in childhood, could be "updated", and transformed into stillness and context, as opposed to focusing on content. I'm sorry if this sounds obtuse, but suffice it to say this mental software "updating" added great qualitative/quantitative value to me. The most important idea is that just because we made unconscious decisions about reality in childhood does not mean we can't update that software thereby making us much more efficient and effective in producing superior results (this applies doubly to behavioral finance with respect to investing).

My problem with this mental models study is I can't remember a lot of the source authors, as much of what I weave from it is in my Latticework of Mental Models document. If I'm reading a particularly relevant 25siq or Farnham Street or other post (recently, Tim Ferriss, Ben Carlson, Ray Dalio, Howard Marks, Mauboussan), for example, I just lift a relevant passages regarding concepts I want to retain and place them in my document. I review this large (and getting larger document) about once a quarter, and the practice is invaluable. I add notes and new realizations in brackets, and it's amazing how each time I review I come away with some deeper insight. I was inspired by FS's Parrish to do this as I don't want to just read, I want to comprehend and apply to my life. This is all part of a mental software update project, funneling into the Wildly Important Idea of making this last phase of my life (retirement) the best time of my life, financially, emotionally, and psychologically (I highly recommend the transcript of Ferriss' podcast interview with Anthony Robbins regarding "beautiful" versus "suffering" emotional state management--Robbins' thinking has evolved in the last two years alone and I found his insights valuable).

In discussing mental models, it's easier to just quote Munger because he speaks on it a lot. I have been unable to find any greater contribution to the efficiency and effectiveness of my life other than reading, studying, reflecting, and integrating (this reading is exclusive of social media, mainstream media, business and otherwise, anything related to pop culture, blog posts aimed at catching "eyeballs", and most other media distractions).

DCChak
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by DCChak » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:16 pm

Lots of very interesting discussion throughout this sprawling monster of a thread.

Several of the authors Victoria cited above (Taleb, Kahnemann, Areily, etc.) were guests, often more than once, on my former Prof's Russell Roberts' podcast - EconTalk - http://www.econtalk.org/. Russ and/or his colleagues interviewed Taleb more than a dozen times, on his books, but also on several other topics. The search engine on that site also allows one to collect not only prior podcasts, but also prior references to leading authors, as well as critiques, commentaries, blog entries and other derivative studies.

I have also enjoyed Farnam Street for some time, but I balk at paying an additional fee for their content.

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Wed Sep 20, 2017 1:20 pm

Recently books on technological singularity current thinking on technology, consciousness, and intelligence have overshadowed everything else for me. I'll admit to being absolutely floored by the last paragraph in Harari's Homo Deus The Future of Tomorrow:
If we think in terms of months we had probably focus on immediate problems such as turmoil in the middle east, the refugee crisis in Europe and the slowing of the Chinese economy. If we think in terms of decades, then global warming, growing inequality and the disruption of the job market loom large. Yet, if we take the really grand view of life, all other problems and developments are overshadowed by three interlinked processes:

1) Science is converging on an all-encompassing dogma, which says that organisms are algorithms and life is data processing.

2) Intelligence is decoupling from consciousness.

3) Non-conscious but higher intelligent algorithms may soon know us better than we know ourselves.
Given these almost imperceptible but life altering developments, many discussions, to include those about SWR debates (this thread), seem almost silly. Leaving aside all other debates (moral and otherwise), choosing to view oneself as no more than a system of algorithms has nothing less than extraordinary implications for increasing effectiveness in matching reality in all areas of life, including investing. You won't get that in a thread about SWR, predictions, valuations, charts, graphs, the latest link to some guru''s click-bait headline, the latest this, that, and other study, publication, and investing viewpoint (Pearson's Fear of Missing Out and "shiny objects" re information lust), asset allocation debates, alpha, beta, and all other esoteric terms, etc. Simplicity allows one to go deeper. And if you don't think deeper about things, you'll be in constant danger of having your attention stolen at every turn, and our today more than ever as our attention goes so goes our life (and often our money, too!).

hoops777
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by hoops777 » Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:05 pm

2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:18 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D
hoops, I have been thinking about your post all week as it keeps coming back to me.

First, I would never be so pompous as to think I am any step "above" anyone. As I posted previously, the more I read and study the more suspect I am regarding of opinions, beliefs, and constructs of myself and others. I am with Munger in that I was much less ignorant when younger mostly because I didn't know I was ignorant. For starters, I recommend reading Influence Science and Practice, Robert Greene's books (Mastery, Power, and The Art of Seduction) to begin to get a handle on how easily we can fool ourselves and be fooled by others, and highly recommend The Hour Between Dog and Wolf regarding our physiology in investing--it's an eye opener). The Farnham Street site has some of the best book recommendations I've found as Shane Parrish is a voracious reader (although Ben Carlson's blog sometimes mentions a good book or two at the bottom).

Mental models are really nothing more than frameworks for ways of thinking that match reality (as opposed to thinking in ways that do not match how reality functions. Around 100 model are important; fortunately, a foundation of only about 6 hold the whole building up. I've read about MM's for years, but only really got into them after finding the Farnham Street site. The beauty of mental models is your reading soon becomes like a needle and thread, sewing together "associations" (love this concept from The Power of Forgetting, where you'll also learn how to read more efficiently), until eventually you've sewn a fabric of models through which to strain noise. Soon you'll find yourself having to only scan about 95% of the noise (in order to combat confirmation/consistency bias). This frees you from engaging in FOMO (fear of missing out), because you've disciplined yourself to focus only on signal.

I love Victoria's concept of creating an investment niche. Like mental models for straining 95% of the noise in life, you'll eventually create a niche where you'll bat away whole categories of concepts. This frees you to concentrate on information of high value to you, based on your own niche. In my case, I bat away all click bait threads, threads with nifty charts, graphs, or other chicken bone voodoo (because investing is a complex adaptive system, containing even subsets of systems; hence, predictions are pointless), and any threads containing concepts, links, articles, or guru postings implying "investing is complex/complicated, and you can't possibly figure it out unless you're spoon fed by people supposedly more knowledgeable than you." Gaining sufficient knowledge to create an investment niche frees me from wasting time reading posts about the SWR debate, predictions by anyone, bond bubbles, Tips discussions, rebalancing, dividend income strategies, slicing and dicing, data or chart-driven "conclusions", passive versus active debates, or valuations, among others.

As I've stated previously, reading widely outside the field of investing, economics, and personal finance has been highly beneficial to me because every time I've taken the Complexity freeway off ramp I've always been met with a big red sign reading, "Go Back You Are Going The Wrong Way."
2015....I know pompous and you are not pompous.Of course you are several steps ahead of me and many others here because you have put in the time and effort to further your knowledge in these areas.However,I do probably know a little bit more about basketball than you and Victoria :D
I just retired and am looking to expand my horizons a bit so I appreciate all the info you have shared and I signed on with Farnham Street in addition to reading Black Swan.If you are not use to those topics they are a bit challenging,but I am loving Black Swan and I am pretty certain it will change my view of the world by the time I am finished.
There are a handful of knowledgeable investors on this forum that enjoy what I call thinly veiled polite insults or putdowns.They stay within the boundaries this forum requires but the intent is clearly obvious.No big deal.This is an awesome forum and I have learned a great deal here.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:51 am

2015 wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 11:08 am
I gained value from The Art of Seduction (again, woven with concepts found in Power, Sun Tzu's The Art of War as well as The Charisma Myth) by looking at my own unconscious weaknesses, finding my own use of power, rooted in childhood, could be "updated", and transformed into stillness and context, as opposed to focusing on content. I'm sorry if this sounds obtuse, but suffice it to say this mental software "updating" added great qualitative/quantitative value to me. The most important idea is that just because we made unconscious decisions about reality in childhood does not mean we can't update that software thereby making us much more efficient and effective in producing superior results (this applies doubly to behavioral finance with respect to investing).

My problem with this mental models study is I can't remember a lot of the source authors, as much of what I weave from it is in my Latticework of Mental Models document. If I'm reading a particularly relevant 25siq or Farnham Street or other post (recently, Tim Ferriss, Ben Carlson, Ray Dalio, Howard Marks, Mauboussan), for example, I just lift a relevant passages regarding concepts I want to retain and place them in my document. I review this large (and getting larger document) about once a quarter, and the practice is invaluable. I add notes and new realizations in brackets, and it's amazing how each time I review I come away with some deeper insight. I was inspired by FS's Parrish to do this as I don't want to just read, I want to comprehend and apply to my life. This is all part of a mental software update project, funneling into the Wildly Important Idea of making this last phase of my life (retirement) the best time of my life, financially, emotionally, and psychologically (I highly recommend the transcript of Ferriss' podcast interview with Anthony Robbins regarding "beautiful" versus "suffering" emotional state management--Robbins' thinking has evolved in the last two years alone and I found his insights valuable).

In discussing mental models, it's easier to just quote Munger because he speaks on it a lot. I have been unable to find any greater contribution to the efficiency and effectiveness of my life other than reading, studying, reflecting, and integrating (this reading is exclusive of social media, mainstream media, business and otherwise, anything related to pop culture, blog posts aimed at catching "eyeballs", and most other media distractions).
I think I have identified a difference between our respective approaches to reading. You are reading many strategically selected books and blogs to enhance your mental software. You don't particularly care where good information comes from for as long as you can capture it in your document, analyze its applicability to your thinking, and periodically review it to get further benefits.

By contrast, I am driven by a life-long ambition to publish. I have published several papers in which I have extended the concepts from the Black Swans and Behavioral Economics to other areas. I was interested in inter-disciplinary research for as long as I remember, because it's much more interesting to develop my own ideas and novel concepts at the intersections of areas of knowledge than to follow established paths. Reading Farnam Street and Charlie Munger in the past few days I was gratified to find that they value inter-disciplinary approaches above all others.

The flip side is that it's difficult to find reputable journals that would publish papers not aligned with their main themes, written by unknown authors. And so I am building my portfolio paper-by-paper. I have written about Black Swans and the continuity of government operations (COOP), about using behavioral economics to extend NIST's cyber security guidance, and about using cognitive biases in cyber space operations to mitigate biases on the friendly side and exploit biases on the adversary side. Last year, I have presented a paper on using concepts from several areas of psychology and behavioral economics for planning a Camino de Santiago journey. And in two weeks, I will be presenting a new paper on using cyber security concepts to avoid getting lost on the Camino. But recently I have come up with a new idea that has eclipsed my previous ideas and plans.

Because I am focused on publishing, I am very deliberate in capturing sources of information. And because I am focused on generating my own ideas, I am always analyzing which parts are mine and which ones are by the others. Thus, I've spent the past few days figuring out where my ideas are similar to and where they are different from Charlie Munger's. At the moment I am pleased that while I can cite him, I can also highlight my unique contributions.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:59 am

DCChak wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:16 pm
Lots of very interesting discussion throughout this sprawling monster of a thread.

Several of the authors Victoria cited above (Taleb, Kahnemann, Areily, etc.) were guests, often more than once, on my former Prof's Russell Roberts' podcast - EconTalk - http://www.econtalk.org/. Russ and/or his colleagues interviewed Taleb more than a dozen times, on his books, but also on several other topics. The search engine on that site also allows one to collect not only prior podcasts, but also prior references to leading authors, as well as critiques, commentaries, blog entries and other derivative studies.

I have also enjoyed Farnam Street for some time, but I balk at paying an additional fee for their content.
DCChak,

Thank you for reminding me about Russell Roberts' podcasts! I used to listen to them but stopped when my interests and attention shifted. I should check his recent podcasts.

I still have not decided whether I want to pay for the premium content on Farnam Street site. My reasons for doing it are:
- saving time on taking notes
- joining an exclusive community selected based on (a) interests similar to mine and (b) ability to pay; and possibly making valuable connections.

My reasons against it are:
- spending more time at the computer than I wish
- developing an endowment effect and status quo bias that will keep me on the site even as it will become less useful
- a recurring expense

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:17 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:05 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:18 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D

First, I would never be so pompous as to think I am any step "above" anyone.
2015....I know pompous and you are not pompous.Of course you are several steps ahead of me and many others here because you have put in the time and effort to further your knowledge in these areas.However,I do probably know a little bit more about basketball than you and Victoria :D
hoops777 and 2015,

I agree that considering ourselves superior because of our knowledge or abilities is arrogant and pompous. I readily admit that I know much less about basketball than hoops777 [very fitting name!] and even less about baseball and American football. I grew up in the Soviet Union admiring figure skating.

However, I think that as a society we don't value intellectual aspirations. Being snobbish is reprehensible. But seeking knowledge and applying this knowledge to life situations is commendable. Introducing complex concepts into conversations is not (necessarily) a sign of elitism. It's an opportunity to apply the concepts one learns and to gently educate one's friends.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:25 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:51 am

<snip>
I think I have identified a difference between our respective approaches to reading. You are reading many strategically selected books and blogs to enhance your mental software. You don't particularly care where good information comes from for as long as you can capture it in your document, analyze its applicability to your thinking, and periodically review it to get further benefits.

This isn't exactly true. It's true I've been reading personal development books since I was around 12 (it's amusing to think of my year 12 old self sitting on the upstairs bathroom floor reading, of all things, The Science of Mind and Psycho-Cybernetics! Just what did I think I was going to do with it??).

The upgrading of mental software project is quite recent, only having come about as a result of retirement, of reading lots of stuff on the 25siq and other blogs about what (I consider to be) the smartest people in the room are doing. My reading is very much interdisciplinary, so my thinking is impacted as such. I'm talking about everything from Qbism, to Charles Dawkins on the concept of parallel universes, and the role of luck in everything from investing to life. I've also delved into basic biology, nature, physics, engineering, Stoicism and other philosophies, astronomy, systems thinking, game theory, poker, tennis, chess---so many I can't remember them all. Why? Because these and so many other subjects outside the field of personal finance, economics, and investing greatly enhance my qualitative as well as my quantitative decision-making. And in life, decision-making is all we've got, and we can't even be sure of that.

By contrast, I am driven by a life-long ambition to publish. I have published several papers in which I have extended the concepts from the Black Swans and Behavioral Economics to other areas. I was interested in inter-disciplinary research for as long as I remember, because it's much more interesting to develop my own ideas and novel concepts at the intersections of areas of knowledge than to follow established paths. Reading Farnam Street and Charlie Munger in the past few days I was gratified to find that they value inter-disciplinary approaches above all others.

The flip side is that it's difficult to find reputable journals that would publish papers not aligned with their main themes, written by unknown authors. And so I am building my portfolio paper-by-paper. I have written about Black Swans and the continuity of government operations (COOP), about using behavioral economics to extend NIST's cyber security guidance, and about using cognitive biases in cyber space operations to mitigate biases on the friendly side and exploit biases on the adversary side. Last year, I have presented a paper on using concepts from several areas of psychology and behavioral economics for planning a Camino de Santiago journey. And in two weeks, I will be presenting a new paper on using cyber security concepts to avoid getting lost on the Camino. But recently I have come up with a new idea that has eclipsed my previous ideas and plans.

Because I am focused on publishing, I am very deliberate in capturing sources of information. And because I am focused on generating my own ideas, I am always analyzing which parts are mine and which ones are by the others. Thus, I've spent the past few days figuring out where my ideas are similar to and where they are different from Charlie Munger's. At the moment I am pleased that while I can cite him, I can also highlight my unique contributions.

Oh, I'm very much convinced you could publish, and probably many others here could as well. But back when I was even more foolish than I am now, I thought anyone who has "learned" as much as I have in life (oh, there goes his pomposity again) I must have some unique purpose to contribute to others. I intended to write books, blogs, speak and write. I think one of the biggest mistakes I've ever made was thinking just because I think I ought to do something, I can, or should. At least now I know I don't want to do these things (I did manage to teach at the university level for a couple of years, only to learn I really don't want to do that).

This is where Taylor Pearson's template is so effective. There is a section which asks "what does the market want?" What I've noticed is my "market" always seems to show up in the form of people around me wanting to be coached in one form or another, so I'm just going with this flow.

Victoria
[/quote]
Last edited by 2015 on Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:47 pm, edited 3 times in total.

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:41 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:17 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:05 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:18 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D

First, I would never be so pompous as to think I am any step "above" anyone.
2015....I know pompous and you are not pompous.Of course you are several steps ahead of me and many others here because you have put in the time and effort to further your knowledge in these areas.However,I do probably know a little bit more about basketball than you and Victoria :D
hoops777 and 2015,

I agree that considering ourselves superior because of our knowledge or abilities is arrogant and pompous. I readily admit that I know much less about basketball than hoops777 [very fitting name!] and even less about baseball and American football. I grew up in the Soviet Union admiring figure skating.

However, I think that as a society we don't value intellectual aspirations. Being snobbish is reprehensible. But seeking knowledge and applying this knowledge to life situations is commendable. Introducing complex concepts into conversations is not (necessarily) a sign of elitism. It's an opportunity to apply the concepts one learns and to gently educate one's friends.

Victoria
What I find reprehensible, especially with respect to investing, is all the Appeal to Authority types who throw out all these concepts predicated on complexity, all of which "whisper" it's all so complicated and you can't possibly figure it all out on your own. They do this via ongoing links, blog posts, guru prognostications, "new studies", and charts, graphs, and other illusions, along with the usual "myths", "tips", "hints" and other double speak designed to obfuscate. Have you noticed every time there's some new, shiny object posted, it's like a bunch of cockroaches scrambling in a room when the lights come on?

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:54 pm

2015 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:41 pm
VictoriaF wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:17 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:05 pm
2015 wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:18 pm
hoops777 wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:40 pm
I will admit gladly admit that I am many steps below Victoria and 2015 intellectually,but I just started reading Black Swans.I just retired and so far I feel much better about my very conservative approach to investing. :D

First, I would never be so pompous as to think I am any step "above" anyone.
2015....I know pompous and you are not pompous.Of course you are several steps ahead of me and many others here because you have put in the time and effort to further your knowledge in these areas.However,I do probably know a little bit more about basketball than you and Victoria :D
hoops777 and 2015,

I agree that considering ourselves superior because of our knowledge or abilities is arrogant and pompous. I readily admit that I know much less about basketball than hoops777 [very fitting name!] and even less about baseball and American football. I grew up in the Soviet Union admiring figure skating.

However, I think that as a society we don't value intellectual aspirations. Being snobbish is reprehensible. But seeking knowledge and applying this knowledge to life situations is commendable. Introducing complex concepts into conversations is not (necessarily) a sign of elitism. It's an opportunity to apply the concepts one learns and to gently educate one's friends.

Victoria
What find reprehensible, especially with respect to investing, is all the Appeal to Authority types who throw out all these concepts predicated on complexity, all of which "whisper" it's all so complicated and you can't possibly figure it all out on your own. They do this via ongoing links, blog posts, guru prognostications, "new studies", and charts, graphs, and other illusions, along with the usual "myths", "tips", "hints" and other double speak designed to obfuscate. Have you noticed every time there's some new, shiny object posted, it's like a bunch of cockroaches scrambling in a room when the lights come on?
I have to confess being vulnerable to a "halo effect" when it comes to some authorities. If the authority is Jack Bogle, Taylor Larimore, Bill Bernstein, Mike Piper, or nisiprius, I give the information the benefit of the doubt and I am far less critical. With most other "authorities" cited by the Bogleheads, including Michael Kitces of this thread, I am either not interested or start reading from the position of criticism.

The terms like "myths", "tips", "hints," "secrets," and alike are carefully selected to seduce an observer to click and become a reader. In a Farnam Street podcast Rory Sutherland pointed out something interesting. He said that advertises were conducting randomized controlled trials well before it became a standard practice in medicine. Advertisers know which words and titles are the best click baits.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Thu Sep 21, 2017 2:09 pm

2015 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:25 pm
This isn't exactly true. It's true I've been reading personal development books since I was around 12 (it's amusing to think of my year 12 old self sitting on the upstairs bathroom floor reading, of all things, The Science of Mind and Psycho-Cybernetics! Just what did I think I was going to do with it??).

The upgrading of mental software project is quite recent, only having come about as a result of retirement, of reading lots of stuff on the 25siq and other blogs about what (I consider to be) the smartest people in the room are doing. My reading is very much interdisciplinary, so my thinking is impacted as such. I'm talking about everything from Qbism, to Charles Dawkins on the concept of parallel universes, and the role of luck in everything from investing to life. I've also delved into basic biology, nature, physics, engineering, Stoicism and other philosophies, astronomy, systems thinking, game theory, poker, tennis, chess---so many I can't remember them all. Why? Because these and so many other subjects outside the field of personal finance, economics, and investing greatly enhance my qualitative as well as my quantitative decision-making. And in life, decision-making is all we've got, and we can't even be sure of that.
Sorry, I did not mean to misrepresent your interests. My main point was that I am applying my reading to my projects, whereas you are your project. If it's wrong, please correct me.
2015 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:25 pm
Oh, I'm very much convinced you could publish, and probably many others here could as well. But back when I was even more foolish than I am now, I thought anyone who has "learned" as much as I have in life (oh, there goes his pomposity again) I must have some unique purpose to contribute to others. I intended to write books, blogs, speak and write. I think one of the biggest mistakes I've ever made was thinking just because I think I ought to do something, I can, or should. At least now I know I don't want to do these things (I did manage to teach at the university level for a couple of years, only to learn I really don't want to do that).

This is where Taylor Pearson's template is so effective. There is a section which asks "what does the market want?" What I've noticed is my "market" always seems to show up in the form of people around me wanting to be coached in one form or another, so I'm just going with this flow.
With the advent of self-publishing, my ability to publish books depends mainly on my own effort and diligence. These go up and down. For example, I am finding that travel is highly disruptive to my intellectual work. On the other hand, if I have a good working process, it's easier to follow and to produce.

University teaching, especially by adjunct professors, can be frustrating. One has to teach courses in the curriculum rather than follow one's own interests. And there is probably a fair amount of bureaucracy. I like giving conference presentations. In addition to the ones I mentioned earlier, I gave presentations on Behavioral Economics at a European Mensa meeting, and Behavioral Economics of Dating (BED), at an American Mensa meeting. I am also thinking of offering a short course in Behavioral Economics at the local organization for learning in retirement.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

itstoomuch
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: midValley OR

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by itstoomuch » Thu Sep 21, 2017 7:35 pm

^
VictoriaF wrote:Behavioral Economics of Dating
OK, I googled it. So Dan Ariely, says to bring an less attractive person to 1st date.
I guess that is how I chose the stocks I buy, chose the prettier one? Then how come I end up with so many poor performing stuff :confused ? And the really good picks are really very good :mrgreen:

Our son dabbles in behavior (Human factors) in his job. I need to ask him if he has applied Ariely, et. alii to his quest :oops:
(He knows of Ariely, I gave son 2 of his books). (Also gave son, The Rules)
YMMV :mrgreen:
Rev90517; 4 Incm stream buckets: SS+pension; dfr'd GLWB VA & FI anntys, by time & $$ laddered; Discretionary; Rentals. LTCi. Own, not asset. Tax 25%. Early SS. FundRatio (FR) >1.1 67/70yo

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Fri Sep 22, 2017 11:38 am

itstoomuch wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 7:35 pm
^
VictoriaF wrote:Behavioral Economics of Dating
OK, I googled it. So Dan Ariely, says to bring an less attractive person to 1st date.
Women knew for thousands years about going out with less attractive girlfriends. Ariely's advice is more nuanced. Your friend should be very similar to you in many ways, but slightly worse in the most important aspect that the opposite sex is looking for. Ariely strongly recommends NOT to tell your friend why you are bringing her (or him) with you.
itstoomuch wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 7:35 pm
I guess that is how I chose the stocks I buy, chose the prettier one? Then how come I end up with so many poor performing stuff :confused ? And the really good picks are really very good :mrgreen:
With stocks you have other problems. Most people are subconsciously attracted to the stocks that have their initials. Of course, nobody would ever admit to it, but studies show that the correlation widely holds.

Studies also show that people prefer stocks of companies with easily pronounceable names. But that's probably less of a problem because if everybody prefers them it's difficult to exploit.
itstoomuch wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 7:35 pm
Our son dabbles in behavior (Human factors) in his job. I need to ask him if he has applied Ariely, et. alii to his quest :oops:
(He knows of Ariely, I gave son 2 of his books). (Also gave son, The Rules)
YMMV :mrgreen:
Ariely has three good books "Predictably Irrational," "The Upside of Irrationality," and "Honest Truth about Dishonesty." A new book "Dollars and Sense" is coming out in November. I think your son should read all of these. "The Rules," on the other hand, is not authoritative. A far better book for women is "Get the Guy" by Matthew Hussey. Note that Hussey is playing with the word "get" using it in the sense of "acquire" and in the sense of "understand."

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Fri Sep 22, 2017 12:11 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 2:09 pm
2015 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:25 pm

<snip>
Sorry, I did not mean to misrepresent your interests. My main point was that I am applying my reading to my projects, whereas you are your project. If it's wrong, please correct me.

Actually, you weren't too far off the mark, my life is my project, precisely because there is so much more at stake now. We are at a particular time in history where all legacy forms of power are dissolving, giving rise to unprecedented collective and personal uncertainty with what can be dire consequences. We have moved from a linear world, where cause and effect were much more interrelated, to a world of complex systems and even nests of systems, where cause and effect are disconnected, where we can never take just one action, because those actions reside in systems with consequences and unintended consequences that we are not able to see. In such a complex adaptive world, much of our thinking, our conclusions, and our decision-making, in the most important areas of our lives can be almost delusional (see Hour Between Man and Wolf, for example). We are in an Age of Creative Destruction and Construction (with profound implications on our personal lives), an Age of Unending Turbulence, and an Age of Attention, Emotion, and Experience. Globally, we are in a winner takes all economy, society, and lifestyle, with fierce ramifications on a personal level. To meet this challenge, I believe it's imperative to create a system for regularly updating our thinking and for optimizing decision-making. To do this successfully, we must develop systems for taking in only the most relevant information, the most critical signal.

I have several tools which I use to strain noise. First, having studied in-depth the concept of Simplicity in a variety of disciplines, I view with a jaundiced eye all Complexity threads, blog/podcast posts, links, publications, interviews, prognostications, studies, books, etc. (particularly those that violate behavioral economics mental models). I scan such information only insofar as it may benefit combating my own confirmation/commitment/overconfidence bias.

Second, having created my own "investment niche" (your fantastic term), I strain for information that will either refute my decisions or perhaps enhance them (i.e., my recent discovery of VPW).

Third, I have a rather elaborate library of book marks, all covering several areas in life for which I have goals. These goals could be anything from retirement relocation, Medicare, ACA reform, to TLH. Whenever I come across a link, post, or thread which contains knowledge I want to retain in a given area, I bookmark it in the appropriate folder. For example, I have yet to engage in TLH, but I read all of the posts in the several threads, and created subfolders on areas such as wash sales, fund tax partners, etc. So as not to annoy people and ask a TLH question that's been asked 500 times before, when it comes time to engage in TLH, I'll simply review my TLH bookmarks.

Finally, I constantly surf the information waters regarding macro influences on my life in the following broad but important areas: (1) business (but only as it pertains to developments that will have a micro impact on my goals or life, e.g., the Equifax breach), (2) politics (only as it relates to tax/social security/medicare/other regulatory reform), (3) the economy, (4) technological trends, (5) society (excludes anything to do with pop culture and social media, and includes areas such as income inequality, current job market disruption/transformation, health matters ((e.g., obesity, opiate, and other sociological trends), (6) trends in general, and (7) innovation (includes everything to do with innovative thinking).

2015 wrote:
Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:25 pm

<snip>
With the advent of self-publishing, my ability to publish books depends mainly on my own effort and diligence. These go up and down. For example, I am finding that travel is highly disruptive to my intellectual work. On the other hand, if I have a good working process, it's easier to follow and to produce.

This is why I am really liking Taylor Pearson's template. This past week, as part of my Q3 review, I have modified it to suit my own needs and goals even more. I will say it has helped me greatly to not only monitor my progress towards specific qualitative and quantitative goals, but to stay on track as well. I was thinking this morning I can see even clearer now how the more I use this tool the more it really helps me stay on track to funnel all of my activities into my Wildly Important Idea of creating a (financially, emotionally, and psychologically) Successful Retirement.

University teaching, especially by adjunct professors, can be frustrating. One has to teach courses in the curriculum rather than follow one's own interests. And there is probably a fair amount of bureaucracy. I like giving conference presentations. In addition to the ones I mentioned earlier, I gave presentations on Behavioral Economics at a European Mensa meeting, and Behavioral Economics of Dating (BED), at an American Mensa meeting. I am also thinking of offering a short course in Behavioral Economics at the local organization for learning in retirement.

Victoria
Yea, it was the self-publishing part that fooled me into thinking I really could write something. No I can't. Why? Because I really don't want to bad enough. What I love about retirement and getting older is you really come into your own, you stop running yourself ragged thinking you have to do, be, or have things that really aren't who you are. Studying simplicity in all its forms really helped with my thinking here, so simplicity isn't just beneficial to investing, but to all other areas of life as well.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Fri Sep 22, 2017 3:17 pm

2015 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 12:11 pm
Actually, you weren't too far off the mark, my life is my project, precisely because there is so much more at stake now. We are at a particular time in history where all legacy forms of power are dissolving, giving rise to unprecedented collective and personal uncertainty with what can be dire consequences. We have moved from a linear world, where cause and effect were much more interrelated, to a world of complex systems and even nests of systems, where cause and effect are disconnected, where we can never take just one action, because those actions reside in systems with consequences and unintended consequences that we are not able to see. In such a complex adaptive world, much of our thinking, our conclusions, and our decision-making, in the most important areas of our lives can be almost delusional (see Hour Between Man and Wolf, for example). We are in an Age of Creative Destruction and Construction (with profound implications on our personal lives), an Age of Unending Turbulence, and an Age of Attention, Emotion, and Experience. Globally, we are in a winner takes all economy, society, and lifestyle, with fierce ramifications on a personal level. To meet this challenge, I believe it's imperative to create a system for regularly updating our thinking and for optimizing decision-making. To do this successfully, we must develop systems for taking in only the most relevant information, the most critical signal.

I have several tools which I use to strain noise. First, having studied in-depth the concept of Simplicity in a variety of disciplines, I view with a jaundiced eye all Complexity threads, blog/podcast posts, links, publications, interviews, prognostications, studies, books, etc. (particularly those that violate behavioral economics mental models). I scan such information only insofar as it may benefit combating my own confirmation/commitment/overconfidence bias.

Second, having created my own "investment niche" (your fantastic term), I strain for information that will either refute my decisions or perhaps enhance them (i.e., my recent discovery of VPW).

Third, I have a rather elaborate library of book marks, all covering several areas in life for which I have goals. These goals could be anything from retirement relocation, Medicare, ACA reform, to TLH. Whenever I come across a link, post, or thread which contains knowledge I want to retain in a given area, I bookmark it in the appropriate folder. For example, I have yet to engage in TLH, but I read all of the posts in the several threads, and created subfolders on areas such as wash sales, fund tax partners, etc. So as not to annoy people and ask a TLH question that's been asked 500 times before, when it comes time to engage in TLH, I'll simply review my TLH bookmarks.

Finally, I constantly surf the information waters regarding macro influences on my life in the following broad but important areas: (1) business (but only as it pertains to developments that will have a micro impact on my goals or life, e.g., the Equifax breach), (2) politics (only as it relates to tax/social security/medicare/other regulatory reform), (3) the economy, (4) technological trends, (5) society (excludes anything to do with pop culture and social media, and includes areas such as income inequality, current job market disruption/transformation, health matters ((e.g., obesity, opiate, and other sociological trends), (6) trends in general, and (7) innovation (includes everything to do with innovative thinking).[/color]

...

This is why I am really liking Taylor Pearson's template. This past week, as part of my Q3 review, I have modified it to suit my own needs and goals even more. I will say it has helped me greatly to not only monitor my progress towards specific qualitative and quantitative goals, but to stay on track as well. I was thinking this morning I can see even clearer now how the more I use this tool the more it really helps me stay on track to funnel all of my activities into my Wildly Important Idea of creating a (financially, emotionally, and psychologically) Successful Retirement.
2015,

Thank you again for detailed responses and recommendations. Your sources are very useful to me, I am already exploring Farnam Street and will check out Taylor Pearson soon.

Best wishes for lasting success with your project!

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

itstoomuch
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: midValley OR

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by itstoomuch » Fri Sep 22, 2017 3:59 pm

VictoriaF wrote:Women knew for thousands years about going out with less attractive girlfriends. Ariely's advice is more nuanced. Your friend should be very similar to you in many ways, but slightly worse in the most important aspect that the opposite sex is looking for. Ariely strongly recommends NOT to tell your friend why you are bringing her (or him) with you.
But your "friend", oughta knows that she is being played as the lessor choice. So why does she go along with your ruse? Perhaps your friend thinks she has something better than you do, thus making you the lessor choice? Or that the target guy has a guy friend that could be a possible? Ariely always as a nuance in the research.
Rev90517; 4 Incm stream buckets: SS+pension; dfr'd GLWB VA & FI anntys, by time & $$ laddered; Discretionary; Rentals. LTCi. Own, not asset. Tax 25%. Early SS. FundRatio (FR) >1.1 67/70yo

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:12 pm

2015 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 12:11 pm
This is why I am really liking Taylor Pearson's template. This past week, as part of my Q3 review, I have modified it to suit my own needs and goals even more. I will say it has helped me greatly to not only monitor my progress towards specific qualitative and quantitative goals, but to stay on track as well.
FYI,

A few minutes ago I checked Taylor Pearson in Amazon. His book "Purposeful Productivity: A Guide to Goal Planning, Stopping Procrastination and Building Online Businesses" was published in Kindle on August 20, 2017, and at the moment is available FREE. I don't know when "free" has started or when it will end.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:22 pm

itstoomuch wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 3:59 pm
VictoriaF wrote:Women knew for thousands years about going out with less attractive girlfriends. Ariely's advice is more nuanced. Your friend should be very similar to you in many ways, but slightly worse in the most important aspect that the opposite sex is looking for. Ariely strongly recommends NOT to tell your friend why you are bringing her (or him) with you.
But your "friend", oughta knows that she is being played as the lessor choice. So why does she go along with your ruse? Perhaps your friend thinks she has something better than you do, thus making you the lessor choice? Or that the target guy has a guy friend that could be a possible? Ariely always as a nuance in the research.
If you don't tell the friend the reason for bringing her with you she can guess but she would never be sure. More likely she would give you the benefit of the doubt, especially if you are friends and have many joint experiences. Telling her about your inferior motives is certain to ruin the relationship. If the friend benefits from going out with you, it's even better.

To be clear, Ariely's research did not involve experiments of people going out with inferior friends. What he did was to artificially alter photographs of men and ask women to rate them. As an example, a group of women has rated Tom and John as 8 out of 10. Ariealy would then alter Tom's picture to make him look worse and offer a new group of women to choose among regular Tom, inferior Tom, and regular John. In this case women chose regular Tom. Then he altered John and asked still another group of women to choose among regular John, inferior John, and regular Tom. In this case women chose regular John. Note that regular Tom and regular John had equal desirability of 8, and that the modifications to the worse were not huge. But having an inferior Tom made real Tom to stand out, and having an inferior John made real John stand out.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

itstoomuch
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: midValley OR

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by itstoomuch » Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:06 pm

^ Yes, I read your cite. But Ariely experiment was with pictures of men and not of women. He let the women chose, which is a concern for us parents of males.
In our example, we are dealing with females who are presenting a choice. Ariely states that males don't care about a woman's income or education level. The metrics are different.

For males, Ariely, states that shortness has a $40,000 penalty per inch (height of course :oops: ) I hope he means in retirement assets and not yearly income. :annoyed

As for the 4% (bergen), JMO, Kinda depends on how your retirements are arranged and related to the Stock/Bond Markets. I tried to decouple from this market and diversify into different kinds of assets.
YMMV
Rev90517; 4 Incm stream buckets: SS+pension; dfr'd GLWB VA & FI anntys, by time & $$ laddered; Discretionary; Rentals. LTCi. Own, not asset. Tax 25%. Early SS. FundRatio (FR) >1.1 67/70yo

hoops777
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by hoops777 » Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:10 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:22 pm
itstoomuch wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 3:59 pm
VictoriaF wrote:Women knew for thousands years about going out with less attractive girlfriends. Ariely's advice is more nuanced. Your friend should be very similar to you in many ways, but slightly worse in the most important aspect that the opposite sex is looking for. Ariely strongly recommends NOT to tell your friend why you are bringing her (or him) with you.
But your "friend", oughta knows that she is being played as the lessor choice. So why does she go along with your ruse? Perhaps your friend thinks she has something better than you do, thus making you the lessor choice? Or that the target guy has a guy friend that could be a possible? Ariely always as a nuance in the research.
If you don't tell the friend the reason for bringing her with you she can guess but she would never be sure. More likely she would give you the benefit of the doubt, especially if you are friends and have many joint experiences. Telling her about your inferior motives is certain to ruin the relationship. If the friend benefits from going out with you, it's even better.

To be clear, Ariely's research did not involve experiments of people going out with inferior friends. What he did was to artificially alter photographs of men and ask women to rate them. As an example, a group of women has rated Tom and John as 8 out of 10. Ariealy would then alter Tom's picture to make him look worse and offer a new group of women to choose among regular Tom, inferior Tom, and regular John. In this case women chose regular Tom. Then he altered John and asked still another group of women to choose among regular John, inferior John, and regular Tom. In this case women chose regular John. Note that regular Tom and regular John had equal desirability of 8, and that the modifications to the worse were not huge. But having an inferior Tom made real Tom to stand out, and having an inferior John made real John stand out.

Victoria
Maybe it is just me,but I would have a difficult time somewhat exploiting my friend and considering them less than me in whatever way.Why would you want to treat a friend in a way that if they discovered your motivation,would probably end the friendship?When you remove all of the academic "talk" and rationalization,you are really just not treating your friend as a friend should in my humble opinion.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

itstoomuch
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: midValley OR

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by itstoomuch » Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:22 pm

^Your friend should be willing to help you out.
Your friend is your frienemey (frenemy).
All is fair in love and war.
You are supposing that you and friend could be a potential to the target.
any other ?
Rev90517; 4 Incm stream buckets: SS+pension; dfr'd GLWB VA & FI anntys, by time & $$ laddered; Discretionary; Rentals. LTCi. Own, not asset. Tax 25%. Early SS. FundRatio (FR) >1.1 67/70yo

hoops777
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by hoops777 » Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:40 pm

itstoomuch wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:22 pm
^Your friend should be willing to help you out.
Your friend is your frienemey (frenemy).
All is fair in love and war.
You are supposing that you and friend could be a potential to the target.
any other ?
Yes....itstoomuch,you are my best and dearest friend.Will you tag along on a date I have on Saturday,because you are not as good looking,interesting or funny as I am. :D
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

itstoomuch
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: midValley OR

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by itstoomuch » Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:56 pm

Ybetcha.
I think I am funnier.
You're reimbursing me, right?
Your target has a fremeny for me?

Wait, Saturday late? I got a concert that my son's HS classmate is putting on locally as a fund raiser for local music students.
Rev90517; 4 Incm stream buckets: SS+pension; dfr'd GLWB VA & FI anntys, by time & $$ laddered; Discretionary; Rentals. LTCi. Own, not asset. Tax 25%. Early SS. FundRatio (FR) >1.1 67/70yo

hoops777
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by hoops777 » Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:03 pm

Yes she does and she is not as good looking,interesting or funny as my target so you should do just fine.We will talk reimbursement after we see how it goes :D
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:33 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:12 pm
2015 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 12:11 pm
This is why I am really liking Taylor Pearson's template. This past week, as part of my Q3 review, I have modified it to suit my own needs and goals even more. I will say it has helped me greatly to not only monitor my progress towards specific qualitative and quantitative goals, but to stay on track as well.
FYI,

A few minutes ago I checked Taylor Pearson in Amazon. His book "Purposeful Productivity: A Guide to Goal Planning, Stopping Procrastination and Building Online Businesses" was published in Kindle on August 20, 2017, and at the moment is available FREE. I don't know when "free" has started or when it will end.

Victoria
Awesome! You could insert "and writing that book" in place of "and Building Online Businesses"!

Yukon
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:10 am

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by Yukon » Fri Sep 22, 2017 7:35 pm

itstoomuch wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:06 pm
As for the 4% (bergen), JMO, Kinda depends on how your retirements are arranged and related to the Stock/Bond Markets. I tried to decouple from this market and diversify into different kinds of assets.
YMMV
Which assets?
Don't Work Forever.

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Fri Sep 22, 2017 8:55 pm

hoops777 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:10 pm
VictoriaF wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:22 pm
itstoomuch wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 3:59 pm
VictoriaF wrote:Women knew for thousands years about going out with less attractive girlfriends. Ariely's advice is more nuanced. Your friend should be very similar to you in many ways, but slightly worse in the most important aspect that the opposite sex is looking for. Ariely strongly recommends NOT to tell your friend why you are bringing her (or him) with you.
But your "friend", oughta knows that she is being played as the lessor choice. So why does she go along with your ruse? Perhaps your friend thinks she has something better than you do, thus making you the lessor choice? Or that the target guy has a guy friend that could be a possible? Ariely always as a nuance in the research.
If you don't tell the friend the reason for bringing her with you she can guess but she would never be sure. More likely she would give you the benefit of the doubt, especially if you are friends and have many joint experiences. Telling her about your inferior motives is certain to ruin the relationship. If the friend benefits from going out with you, it's even better.

To be clear, Ariely's research did not involve experiments of people going out with inferior friends. What he did was to artificially alter photographs of men and ask women to rate them. As an example, a group of women has rated Tom and John as 8 out of 10. Ariealy would then alter Tom's picture to make him look worse and offer a new group of women to choose among regular Tom, inferior Tom, and regular John. In this case women chose regular Tom. Then he altered John and asked still another group of women to choose among regular John, inferior John, and regular Tom. In this case women chose regular John. Note that regular Tom and regular John had equal desirability of 8, and that the modifications to the worse were not huge. But having an inferior Tom made real Tom to stand out, and having an inferior John made real John stand out.

Victoria
Maybe it is just me, but I would have a difficult time somewhat exploiting my friend and considering them less than me in whatever way. Why would you want to treat a friend in a way that if they discovered your motivation,would probably end the friendship? When you remove all of the academic "talk" and rationalization, you are really just not treating your friend as a friend should in my humble opinion.
"Friend" has a range of meanings, from someone you'd give your life for to someone with whom you hang out on Saturday nights. With a "real" friend you may want to spend time one-on-one without interference of potential romantic partners. With a "hang-out" friend you may focus on having good time.

You are appalled by explicit comparisons, but people compare themselves to others all the time. The Bogleheads Forum provides numerous examples of that. You see threads where people compare their salaries, assets, cars, houses, retirement ages, and espresso machines.

There is also a famous saying by H. L. Mencken that 'A man's satisfaction with his salary depends on whether he makes more than his wife's sister's husband.' Someone following Mencken's advice is exploiting his wife, his wife's sister, and his wife's sister's husband!

For really devious tricks read the book "The Game" by Neil Strauss.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

itstoomuch
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:17 pm
Location: midValley OR

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by itstoomuch » Sat Sep 23, 2017 12:08 am

Yukon wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 7:35 pm
itstoomuch wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:06 pm
As for the 4% (bergen), JMO, Kinda depends on how your retirements are arranged and related to the Stock/Bond Markets. I tried to decouple from this market and diversify into different kinds of assets.
YMMV
Which assets?
see signature line. As of Sept 1, we reduced our Discretionary (individual stocks and cash) to finance our retirement home. Remaining Discretionary is ~5% of assets. Discretionary will be our emergency fund. Bulk of retirement consists of: Rental net = GLWB annuities = SS + small pension. We will sell or possibly rent out current home. I have emphasized Income streams not assets.
Rev90517; 4 Incm stream buckets: SS+pension; dfr'd GLWB VA & FI anntys, by time & $$ laddered; Discretionary; Rentals. LTCi. Own, not asset. Tax 25%. Early SS. FundRatio (FR) >1.1 67/70yo

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Sat Sep 23, 2017 4:46 pm

2015 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:33 pm
VictoriaF wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:12 pm
2015 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 12:11 pm
This is why I am really liking Taylor Pearson's template. This past week, as part of my Q3 review, I have modified it to suit my own needs and goals even more. I will say it has helped me greatly to not only monitor my progress towards specific qualitative and quantitative goals, but to stay on track as well.
FYI,

A few minutes ago I checked Taylor Pearson in Amazon. His book "Purposeful Productivity: A Guide to Goal Planning, Stopping Procrastination and Building Online Businesses" was published in Kindle on August 20, 2017, and at the moment is available FREE. I don't know when "free" has started or when it will end.

Victoria
Awesome! You could insert "and writing that book" in place of "and Building Online Businesses"!
Under your influence, and under the influence of Taylor Pearson as well as my own recent resolutions, I have just declined an invitation to go to Japan next year. I hope to use this "found time" productively.

Thanks,
Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

2015
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by 2015 » Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:51 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Sat Sep 23, 2017 4:46 pm
2015 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:33 pm
VictoriaF wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:12 pm
2015 wrote:
Fri Sep 22, 2017 12:11 pm
This is why I am really liking Taylor Pearson's template. This past week, as part of my Q3 review, I have modified it to suit my own needs and goals even more. I will say it has helped me greatly to not only monitor my progress towards specific qualitative and quantitative goals, but to stay on track as well.
FYI,

A few minutes ago I checked Taylor Pearson in Amazon. His book "Purposeful Productivity: A Guide to Goal Planning, Stopping Procrastination and Building Online Businesses" was published in Kindle on August 20, 2017, and at the moment is available FREE. I don't know when "free" has started or when it will end.

Victoria
Awesome! You could insert "and writing that book" in place of "and Building Online Businesses"!
Under your influence, and under the influence of Taylor Pearson as well as my own recent resolutions, I have just declined an invitation to go to Japan next year. I hope to use this "found time" productively.

Thanks,
Victoria
Ah, that's awesome, congratulations and what fantastic commitment! Guess what I saw this morning and immediately thought of you? Trev Griffin has a new post out entitled...A Half Dozen Lessons About Writing and Getting a Book Published. I really like how accessible he is, how he shoots straight in plain English. He's always got practical stuff, and down at the bottom of this post you'll find links to his sources, along with several links to book proposal templates. I hope you find it useful!

https://25iq.com/2017/09/22/a-half-doze ... published/

User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 17491
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: Michael Kitces 4% rule podcast on Madfientist

Post by VictoriaF » Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:23 pm

2015 wrote:
Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:51 pm
Guess what I saw this morning and immediately thought of you? Trev Griffin has a new post out entitled...A Half Dozen Lessons About Writing and Getting a Book Published. I really like how accessible he is, how he shoots straight in plain English. He's always got practical stuff, and down at the bottom of this post you'll find links to his sources, along with several links to book proposal templates. I hope you find it useful!

https://25iq.com/2017/09/22/a-half-doze ... published/
Thank you, 2015,

This is indeed a very good, if sobering, article.
- The things that work for me are that I don't have a day job and don't need money.
- The thing that concerns me is that even if I produce a very useful book, nobody will ever know about it.
- The thing that bothers me is that I need to market my work even before I finish it, and any kind of marketing is a drain of time and attention.

Victoria
WINNER of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)

Post Reply