Source: Yahoo

Part II coming later today

Category: Asset Allocation, Fixed Income/Interest Rates, Investing, Valuation, Video

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

2 Responses to “Ritholtz vs Siegel on SFTLR”

  1. Greg0658 says:

    my take .. bonds vs stocks universe – fight of gravity

    invest in stocks and shoot 1self in foot – another put: turn over cash under their rules for expansion

    see bits in paragraph “the point is WHY anything in stocks …..”
    http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/08/equity-exposure-as-percentage-of-portfolios/
    8/11/12 at 4:17 pm

    poke peek .. put get

    why stocks ? to make expansion easier for the corps (that may be your flavor) again why ?

  2. ben22 says:

    his response to BR wasn’t of any substance at all, stated generally “not all secular bear markets are the same length of time”

    well, no kidding, he seemed to want to imply in saying this the secular bear could already be over…..of course, if he wanted to make that point he should have also stated it could just as well last much longer than the average secular bear…..as if anyone knows for sure

    anyway, all BR was saying is that “generally history tells us that the average secular bear market lasts X number of years”

    this is really not much different than Siegel’s permanent extrapolation of stock returns, which have “generally done X” in the past.