Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,411
Sir Ivor said in another post:
My second, quite separate, argument is a utility curve based one. I think we can both agree (in my case, for the sake of argument) that equities tend to come out on top over the longer term but that there is a reasonable risk of say a 25% fall over the medium term. Again, for the sake of argument, I am prepared to concede that the upside potential is greater than the downside risk from a purely statistical viewpoint. Clearly from the vantage point of your utility curve you consider this a good bet.
But what about a pensioner considering her life's savings? There is a chapter in the "Book" which challenges pensioners thus:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DON'T BE AFRAID OF THE STOCKMARKET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
or, in the vernacular "Don't be wimps".
I think this "advice" verges on the irresponsible. For many pensioners the loss of 25% of their life savings over 5 years would be crushing. No matter what way you look at it they are gambling their money at least in the medium term, both of us effectively agree on that, the difference between us is that you believe they are getting very good odds. I contend that many pensioners are not interested in very good odds on their life savings. That was the point of the simplified example of the heavily biased toss of a coin. Pensioners, and others, are simply not prepared to toss a coin with 25% of their investment even if the coin is heavily weighted to come down strongly in their favour.
My second, quite separate, argument is a utility curve based one. I think we can both agree (in my case, for the sake of argument) that equities tend to come out on top over the longer term but that there is a reasonable risk of say a 25% fall over the medium term. Again, for the sake of argument, I am prepared to concede that the upside potential is greater than the downside risk from a purely statistical viewpoint. Clearly from the vantage point of your utility curve you consider this a good bet.
But what about a pensioner considering her life's savings? There is a chapter in the "Book" which challenges pensioners thus:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DON'T BE AFRAID OF THE STOCKMARKET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
or, in the vernacular "Don't be wimps".
I think this "advice" verges on the irresponsible. For many pensioners the loss of 25% of their life savings over 5 years would be crushing. No matter what way you look at it they are gambling their money at least in the medium term, both of us effectively agree on that, the difference between us is that you believe they are getting very good odds. I contend that many pensioners are not interested in very good odds on their life savings. That was the point of the simplified example of the heavily biased toss of a coin. Pensioners, and others, are simply not prepared to toss a coin with 25% of their investment even if the coin is heavily weighted to come down strongly in their favour.