Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sschullo

Weird Market

Recommended Posts

 

Just ignorant, and not interested. The facts speak for themselves.

 

FT, Beside paybacks, what makes a union representative knowledgeable about investment products?

Answer: I don't have one, do you?

 

Much like advisors, newsletters or other teachers, I would think that the answer to that question depends entirely on the union representative in question. I imagine some of them are extremely knowledgeable, and some are quite ignorant. And while I bet some of them take "paybacks," I bet there are some that are honest and forthright.

 

By the way, I'm happy to see that teachers as a whole have been upgraded from "stupid" to "ignorant, and not interested." Charming view you have of your colleagues, there. If they agree with you, they have seen the light, and are wise; if they disagree, it must be because they are ignorant and apathetic, or just need to read Bogle and then they'll see things The Right Way.

 

(And to answer your question, yes, I did read the Bogle book. It was an interesting read.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FT.......I'm glad that you read the Bogle book. I feel that he has a lot to offer and Mr. Bogle has done more for the small investor than anyone.

 

Of course there is a spectrum of financial knowledge among uniion officials ; many of them are former teachers who as a group, in my and other opinions are financially illiterate since most do not invest at all or make very poor investing choices, so my hypothesis is that there is not much variance in financial knowledge between these two groups.

 

To emphasize, you said, "I bet there are some that are honest and forthright" Even if this is so would you bet your future security and quality of living on this fact? I would not.

 

These union officials are in the business of running unions and as a group do not have financial license. In the Los Angeles union papers that I had read, I did not see any justification for endorsing a finance company. I simply saw ads saying that the company was endorsed.

 

When union people receive money back for endorsing a product most of us would be very suspicious.

especially when it is a secret. I though that they represented the teacher who voted for them, not the investing company that made a pay back to them.

 

(By the way, when this subject of the union paybacks is discussed, I have to stop for minute because I keep on thinking about the from the 50's "On the Waterfront" with Marlon Brando). I guess our Marlon Brando is Steve, Dan Otter and some of the other "good guys" like Joe.

 

You said, "By the way, I'm happy to see that teachers as a whole have been upgraded from "stupid" to "ignorant, and not interested." Charming view you have of your colleagues, there. If they agree with you, they have seen the light, and are wise; if they disagree, it must be because they are ignorant and apathetic, or just need to read Bogle and then they'll see things The Right Way."

 

FT, looking at your previous post you said that the teacher must be stupid based on the informaion that I gave.

 

THE FOLLOWING IS MT OPINION ONLY which you and others may find biased while others do not: Even though teachers are educated, many are not "street smart" since salaries are protected at a living wage, and there is a pretty good allowance for a decent retirement, and for the most part they do not compete in the "capitalistic rat race" to make a living and hone protective skills, so the teacher can afford to be financially "ignorant, and not interested."

Frankly if they agree with the information that I have learned from those like Bogle, Swedroe, Bernstein, and the like who are more knowledgeble and wiser that I, then , yes "they have seen the light, and are wise". Every body is entitled to disagree, but please let it be based on knowledge which I can respect. Most teachers do not know that they need to or do not wish to seek knowledge about financial investing, so they are vulnerable to the "sharks" in our capitalistic market.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(And to answer your question, yes, I did read the Bogle book. It was an interesting read.)

 

 

FT, I wonder FT, do you or do you not agree with the information that he presented in his book?

Edited by ira

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(And to answer your question, yes, I did read the Bogle book. It was an interesting read.)

 

 

FT, I wonder FT, do you or do you not agree with the information that he presented in his book?

 

 

I agreed with some of what he said; I wouldn't say I regarded the entire book as holy gospel, but it was thought-provoking enough. As I said, an interesting read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you used the knowledge that you gained from the book to reevaluate your potfolio, and if so have you made any changes to it as a result, or did you find that the portfolio that you have does not require change based on the informaton that you learned from the read. I guess the question is, do you find the book useful to you in your personal investing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you used the knowledge that you gained from the book to reevaluate your potfolio, and if so have you made any changes to it as a result, or did you find that the portfolio that you have does not require change based on the informaton that you learned from the read. I guess the question is, do you find the book useful to you in your personal investing?

 

 

Definitely helpful, yes. I had only paid lip service to the concept of rebalancing before reading the book; I hope it'll be a more regular recurrence in the future. I was generally pleased that my asset allocation still made sense to me after reading the book (pleased inasmuch as it meant that the asset allocation had been done reasonably well the first time through).

 

Short answer, though, is that the book was helpful. More knowledge is always helpful. Different points of view are always helpful, frankly, even the ones you disagree with; in defending your own point of view, it makes you reexamine it, and sometimes alter it, sometimes reaffirm it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good.............Sometimes rebalancing takes a lot of strength. When the techs were shooting up in '99 I was rebalancing on very regular basis, (and was feeling that I was missing an opportunity) however in 2000 my strategy was vindicated while some of my friends who overloaded in tech instead of rebalancing to a diversified portfloio lost a large prorportion of their assets.

All of these basic investing concepts, although seeming unimportant at various time periods, turn out to be critical to investing success.

 

In my opinion another great author is Larry Swedroe.......one of the books of his that stood out to me (I think) is called A Winning Strategy of Investing (I think that it was written in 2005)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...