Again, what I presented was already a ridiculous, contrived set of circumstances.Sure, but what happens if you live for 15 years instead of 10?
Even though nothing anything like that has ever come even remotely close to happening. Note that my contrived example didn't "require a positive return" at all, it was a -50% real return forever. A drop of 50% followed by no real gains until the end of time. For something like this to happen to a BH retirement portfolio, there would have be such catastrophic failures in the structure of society that your stock/bond ratio will be unimportant, and your 9mm/.223 ratio will be top of mind.My intended point is that presuming a positive rate of return during one’s retirement lifetime entails some risk—and that perhaps expecting a flat or even negative return might be more realistic or “safer,” in the sense that if things go poorly, you might be in a better position than if your retirement math requires a positive return.
I think you need $11T to retire. You know, just in case.Although then you can easily get into an endless cycle of how much extra do you need and just how negative of a return can you handle and for how long, so perhaps it is better to just double whatever your anticipated number is and go with that.

Statistics: Posted by lazydavid — Wed Nov 13, 2024 5:31 am