Quantcast
Channel: Bogleheads.org
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 7834

Investing - Theory, News & General • Does a higher % of stocks mean greater risk of running out of money?

$
0
0
From what I can see, Otar takes a pessimistic view, which is okay because we need to think the unthinkable. If you retired in 1929, I suspect the outcomes would be very bad though the asset class that held up the best were investment grade Muni-Bonds, these helped the Joe Kennedy family sail right through the Great Depression.
I have to admit my jaw dropped.

Isn't what got Joe Kennedy family through the Great Depression was all the money they had made bootlegging during Prohibition?

The Seagram company, in Montreal, used to send railway tanker cars of whisky down to the US border in the evening and park them there on a siding. In the morning, they came back ... empty. That became one of the world's largest beverage companies.

I think the New England sea coast was a good place to move liquid imports.
Investment grade Muni-Bonds would have protected you during The Great Depression, Commodities would have protected you during Stagflation, Size/Value tilts would have protected you during the "lost decade" after the Tech Crash, nominal US Treasuries provided safe harbor during The Great Financial Crisis. Kind of hard to protect against all of things at once, if you could I suspect this would be a big drag on your investment returns. What works in one crisis might not work in another.

So pretty much you prepare for the worst the best you can and hope for the best. You also need to be willing to change your withdrawal rates to deal with changes in the markets and in the economy.
This is all very good advice.

Statistics: Posted by Valuethinker — Fri Feb 13, 2026 3:27 pm — Replies 65 — Views 3616



Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 7834

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>