A person could say “I like the color green” and someone on the internet would misinterpret it.willthrill81 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:40 pmThe fact that these threads almost invariably lead to posters saying 'I think Bernstein means X' is indicative of him not being clear enough in his recommendations.bigskyguy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 1:39 pmIf one reads Dr. Bernstein closely, he is indeed advocating 20-25 years of spending in safe "assets" at all ages. However, if I am reading him correctly, amongst those assets would be a paycheck. Given that up until age 45, give or take, assuming one is a responsible adult with a reasonably reliable stream of reasonably predictable income, the need for "invested" safe assets is fairly small. Not the case as one approaches full retirement. His emphasis is much less on asset balance than it is on cash flow. At least that is how I read his approach. I might be wrong, but I would leave it to Dr. Bernstein to comment.willthrill81 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:02 pm
I completely agree that one's own situation, including one's age and risk tolerance, should be the primary driver of one's AA. But that's not what Bernstein has generally advocated. He has recommended (at least other writings) that everyone keep 20-25 years of spending in what he refers to as 'safe' assets, and his 'when you've won the game...' statement implies that stocks are little better than a casino, despite the data showing that bonds are far from being riskless.
I don't have a problem per se with a liability matching portfolio approach, which is basically what Bernstein argues for though without often referring to it as such. But it only makes sense in certain situations and should by no means be taken as the 'default' strategy, as Bernstein has at least strongly suggested it to be.
No amount of clarity is sufficient for everyone