unemployment drops to 7.8%

[gwb72tii]

so why do you bring all this up again roberto? puff up your chest for all to see?
you're the man, as i've said before. a conceited man as i've said before.
you got me over a 18 month time period. wow! you are da fucking man.

EVERYONE ---- BOBBIE IS DA MAN!!!!!!!!!!!

there, now you can go back downstairs to your room at your parents and find some additional graphs and post them here again and puff your chest out again for all to see.
cause bob is da man!

yet the fact remains (those stubborn facts) that bonds have outperformed since 2000, which you were unaware of. that the market in the 80's and 90's ripped the cover off the ball, which you were unaware off. that bonds have been in a bull market since 1981, before you were conceived, which you are still unaware of.

but hey, you got me over an 18 month cycle.

you are the new investment guru

[nando]

George never learned the meaning of hindsight i guess. Or maybe he was talking about himself?

[rwh11385]

wow as usual i am duly impressed with your 20/20 hindsight

How exactly is that hindsight? I'm thinking you don't know the definition of that word...

limited as it is to recent memory where one particular asset class corrects and underperforms for a short time period
and as usual i am also duly impressed with your continuing ignorance that the same asset class, even with the correction, has still been the best asset class to own in this market since 2000

investing is about the future, not the past, and where prospective gains will come from, not where they came from.

So, hypocrite, which way is it?

and i am continually impressed with your lack of knowledge concerning asset allocation, yet are all to eager to make yourself look smart on one item while lacking any knowledge of how the asset is positioned in a portfolio and its weighting.
but hey, ignorance is bliss

edit LOLOLOL you do know (of course you do) that your vanguard fund is also invested in emerging market debt, right?

So George, educate me master of all things selling mutual funds... how is your allocation going if you are a big fan of Treasuries, emerging market debt, but hate stocks?

What percentage of your clients' portfolios lost 10% so far this year?

Yeah... it's a mix of many things, many up quite nicely this year - but only 7.38% is bonds and 92% of bonds are from the US. The 0.46% of total bonds from Mexico and 0.32% of total bonds from Brazil are the two sources emerging market debt in the fund that I see comprise approximately 0.058% of VFIFX... OH NOES! I hope the 61.6% of the fund that is US stocks that have returned about 16.7% YTD can counteract the influence of those emerging market debt in the fund! Oh yeah... YTD is 14.6%, not bad. Worth 0.18% in expenses? Definitely - especially compared to paying someone more to lose money with an ego that blinds him from reality.

[King Mufasa]

People leaving

I'm seeing and hearing a lot of talk of people leaving the U.S and going back to their countries and or saving up to build businesses abroad because the U.S economy.

I hear people going to the Cayman Islands a lot too, its supposed to be financially better and a tax haven.. Well, at least in my neck of the woods at school I hear that and around. I have also heard a lot of students are leaving the U.S to study medicine overseas as it is much cheaper and less time consuming. I don't know about all that but 'm sure it's a percentage drop

[gwb72tii]

wow as usual i am duly impressed with your 20/20 hindsight, limited as it is to recent memory where one particular asset class corrects and underperforms for a short time period
and as usual i am also duly impressed with your continuing ignorance that the same asset class, even with the correction, has still been the best asset class to own in this market since 2000
and i am continually impressed with your lack of knowledge concerning asset allocation, yet are all to eager to make yourself look smart on one item while lacking any knowledge of how the asset is positioned in a portfolio and its weighting.
but hey, ignorance is bliss

edit LOLOLOL you do know (of course you do) that your vanguard fund is also invested in emerging market debt, right?

[rwh11385]

Have fun when emerging market debt bubble pops.

this single statement to anyone in the investment community, or anyone that has studied the commodity business and china, would lay you bare as ignorant. LMAO

pants down? nope, you're bare ass naked.

this tops your earlier statement about the 90's being terrible for investing.

So to reflect back on this, were my pants actually down - or are your returns down because your opinions are rooted in biased and closed-minded groupthink?


JPMorgan USD Emerg Markets Bond is down 11% so far since I made that statement. [Jan 3, 2013 highlighted with the red arrow] I think the call was pretty good, but you of course said I was an ignorant fool because you didn't see the same way.

TGEIX is down 8.5%, plus factoring in .84% expense ratio and your % of funds managed you charge to your clients... they are down, what - 10-11% because of your arrogance? I feel sorry for people who trust someone like you full of hubris with their money.

[rwh11385]

this single statement to anyone in the investment community, or anyone that has studied the commodity business and china, would lay you bare as ignorant. LMAO

pants down? nope, you're bare ass naked.

this tops your earlier statement about the 90's being terrible for investing.

Okay. Enjoy your "incestuous circle jerk" in the investment community.

[gwb72tii]

Have fun when emerging market debt bubble pops.

this single statement to anyone in the investment community, or anyone that has studied the commodity business and china, would lay you bare as ignorant. LMAO

pants down? nope, you're bare ass naked.

this tops your earlier statement about the 90's being terrible for investing.

[rwh11385]

you know, josh is spot on about you twisting words and making specious arguments
have a great investment career. we'll see you in about 7 years when we hit bottom in the mess your messiah leaves for everyone

Where did I twist words? Is this where you try to change the subject and avoid the questions you don't want to answer? (You being wrong about S&P500 not doing well this year / You being wrong around about recession Q1)

Also, why does your investment in emerging market bonds explain your stupid assumption that just because I didn't believe that we were in a recession, that unemployment was going to decline, and that the market was going to climb that I must be a fan of Obama. You are ignorant and assume too much old man. You believe that everyone who doesn't like Obama HAS TO believe the economy and market is going to be shit. You can say it as many time as you wish gwb, and it doesn't make it true. Pretty biased and close-minded.

Have fun when emerging market debt bubble pops.

[gwb72tii]

you know, josh is spot on about you twisting words and making specious arguments
have a great investment career. we'll see you in about 7 years when we hit bottom in the mess your messiah leaves for everyone

[rwh11385]

it doesn't matter the timeframe you want to argue about, doesn't matter the asset class you want to argue about, what kind of stocks, alternative investment, any of it

emerging market BONDS outperformed every single one, every period, going back 10 years.

you'll have to ask benetton about his investments

i see no reason, young or older, to invest in asset classes that maximize risk (loss of principal) unless things go absolutely perfectly (ben bernanke actually gets something correct in his futile reign as fed governor). and there is no way you can show anyone that you'd be better off in stocks than bonds since the end of the bull market in 2000.

these are not normal investing times. it is not a bull market. the market is flat since 2000, except nasdaq which is still down 40%. and bernenke, congress, and the Europeans are doing all they can to prolong the misery by not addressing structural debt issues.

So what? You are all-in with emerging market bonds and therefore assume that no other investment is worthy of competing with it for investment money? Seems rather close-minded.

So you are saying that emerging market bonds have beat every single kind of stock or any alternative investment on every single time period for the last 10 years?

And you want to extrapolate the results of one type of bonds to all bonds? You got to be shitting me. That's like looking at only one sector of stocks and saying that all stocks have returned the same.

And after saying you were scared about China's growth slowing and didn't like the US market because of it, what is the top country holding of JP Morgan's EM bond fund? Brazil. And what is their #1 export market? China. And then the US. And EU is big (20+%). But I guess that doesn't matter because you don't care when it's what your team tells you and not trying to attack an alternative.

Oh well, have fun with basing your entire investment strategy on emerging market bonds - with it being so popular and having many seeking them because of low yields on US treasuries and people still shy of the stock market, there's no chance of it being a bubble in your mind??

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/12/14/video-emerging-markets-bond-bubble/#axzz2FJdBgbd3

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/12/31/winners-and-losers-of-2012-the-beyondbrics-emerging-markets-awards/#axzz2GxkejuJt

But were you wrong about S&P500 doing poorly this year?
Were you wrong about Q1 recession?
Does stating that emerging market bonds did well this year AFTER THE FACT change those assertions that you made?

[gwb72tii]

it doesn't matter the timeframe you want to argue about, doesn't matter the asset class you want to argue about, what kind of stocks, alternative investment, any of it

emerging market BONDS outperformed every single one, every period, going back 10 years.

you'll have to ask benetton about his investments

i see no reason, young or older, to invest in asset classes that maximize risk (loss of principal) unless things go absolutely perfectly (ben bernanke actually gets something correct in his futile reign as fed governor). and there is no way you can show anyone that you'd be better off in stocks than bonds since the end of the bull market in 2000.

these are not normal investing times. it is not a bull market. the market is flat since 2000, except nasdaq which is still down 40%. and bernenke, congress, and the Europeans are doing all they can to prolong the misery by not addressing structural debt issues.

[rwh11385]

you can say it as many time as you wish rwh, and it doesn't make it true.

here, let me ask you a question as you would ask someone else;
can't you read or were you born ignorant, uneducated and a fool?

bonds have handily outperformed stocks over the last 3 years, as measured by the indexes in these posts, bonds compounding at 14.80% versus the s&p500 compounding at 10.87%.
i admit being biased, but to say i was wrong is incorrect. we were biased and correct.

Did we argue 3 years ago? Or did we talk this year?

Did your team celebrate 1% return this year with the fund you mentioned?

You brag about its previous returns but those meant shit this year.


Do you actually operate like this in real life, or are you changing the argument from this year because you were wrong and looking at past years to make yourself feel better?

And you think that picking one fund focusing on government long-term bonds in particular fairly represents all bonds? Or you just gaming your comparison because you are paid to mislead? Your fund mentioned doesn't really represent what you said of "bonds of all kinds".

BND 3 year returns: 5.54%
VTI 3 year returns: 11.92%

If you want to pick and choose types, why not do the same for stocks?
Thought the housing market would rebound?
XHB 3 year returns: 23.4%
Biotech grow?
BBH 3 year returns: 23.5%
Or just the REIT I invested in before?
VNQ 3 year returns: 17.9%

Oh well. Some stocks have been extremely lucrative too. Obviously investing has risk, but so does assuming your team is right and missing out on gains.

The difference is your clients have wealth and don't need to create it, so they play safe. Young people want to grow and create wealth, which typically requires risk. Riding a brief global demand for a safe haven in US treasury bonds might work for a year but might not do as well as stocks another. When the global economy comes around, you won't be able to rely on the same returns as you got in 2011, just like 2012 was subpar for it.

Do you expect the same performance from bonds in 2013? The WSJ article was doubtful about it.

And you never asked the question if you would recommend your son to be mostly in bonds now. Can you not even consider the investment for a young person?

[gwb72tii]

you can say it as many time as you wish rwh, and it doesn't make it true.

here, let me ask you a question as you would ask someone else;
can't you read or were you born ignorant, uneducated and a fool?

bonds have handily outperformed stocks over the last 3 years, as measured by the indexes in these posts, bonds compounding at 14.80% versus the s&p500 compounding at 10.87%.
i admit being biased, but to say i was wrong is incorrect. we were biased and correct.

[rwh11385]

oh man

why are bonds only for the elderly? you are wet behind the ears.
bonds of all kinds can be EXTREMELY lucrative, both for income and growth, just like stocks.
and as you like facts, or so you say, being long bonds of all kinds for the last 5 years has allowed us to meet/exceed the s&p500 without the risk of stocks.
we love stocks, at the right time. and if you bother to think about what i've said. this is not the time in our team's OPINION (yes, opinion) to be long stocks in a substantial way.

You are crusty in your ears. Do you recommend your son to be majority in bonds?

I loved stocks at the right times over the last 3 years, even if your team told you it wasn't going to be a good time to do so. But then again, I guess you are paid for a biased opinion instead of being correct.