For the most part, I agree with your buy and hold strategy. That said there is a difference between the number of days the market has been at an all time high and the number of days that the price to sales and price to earnings ratios have been at all time highs.
Some comments get a large number of down votes. Long threads are already difficult enough to navigate without adding a bunch of comments that do nothing more than explain why some folks don't like a comment.
Johns Hopkins now offers a 10 week AI in Healthcare program taught by its faculty that includes using
AI skills for clinical decision-making and better patient outcomes. Program components include
Predictive Analytics for Disease Management
Machine Learning Algorithms for Clinical Applications
More recently, Daniel Kahneman, who won the Nobel prize for his work on deciaion-making biases detailed a selection of fields which have demonstrated inferior human judgment compared to algorithms in his book Thinking Fast and Slow:
The range of predicted outcomes has expanded to cover medical variables such as the longevity of cancer patients, the length of hospital stays, the diagnosis of cardiac disease, and the susceptibility of babies to sudden infant death syndrome; economic measures such as the prospects of success for new businesses, the evaluation of credit risks by banks, and the future career satisfaction of workers; questions of interest to government agencies, including assessments of the suitability of foster parents, the odds of recidivism among juvenile offenders, and the likelihood of other forms of violent behavior; and miscellaneous outcomes such as the evaluation of scientific presentations, the winners of football games, and the future prices of Bordeaux wine.
My original comment referred to the fact that statistical/actuarial models have been shown to outperform the judgment of individual experts for many years and to do this consistently. Dennis' example is simply consistent with research which actually dates back to the 1950s. Below is an AI summary of Meehl's work. Paul Meehl advocated for the use of actuarial (or statistical) decision-making over the more intuitive clinical decision-making by human judgment, a concept he detailed in his 1954 work comparing clinical and statistical prediction. He demonstrated, and subsequent research confirmed, that statistical prediction rules (SPRs) are often more accurate in making predictions in fields like clinical diagnosis than unaided human intuition, which is prone to biases. His work highlighted the ethical imperative to use available statistical models to provide the best possible predictions for clients and to avoid the pitfalls of relying on overconfidence or flawed intuitive judgments.
In the Appendix of his original artcile, Bengen assumed a 50/50 stock-treasury bond portfolio and stated that the effect of taxes is neglected, as if all retirement money were stored in a tax-derred account. Analysis for a taxable account would be considerably more complex. https://web.archive.org/web/20120417135441/http://www.retailinvestor.org/pdf/Bengen1.pdf Thus, while Bengen's assumption obviously doesn't mean that you can't withdraw taxable assets to support your retirement it does mean that estimating the optimal withdrawal rate is more complex than it is if you are only withdrawing tax-deferred money.
Psychologists Robyn Dawes and Paul Meehl demonstrated the superiority of statistical / actuarial decion making to clinicians' d-m in the 1980s so the superiority of AI isn't surprising. Clinical Versus Actuarial Judgment (1989)Professionals are frequently consulted to diagnose and predict human behavior;optimal treatment and planning often hinge on the consultant’s judgmental accuracy. The consultant may rely on one of two contrasting approaches to decision-making—the clinical and actuarial methods. Research comparing these two approaches shows the actuarial method to be superior. Factors underlying the greater accuracy of actuarial methods, sources of resistance to the scientific findings, and the benefits of increased reliance on actuarial approaches are discussed. https://meehl.umn.edu/sites/meehl.umn.edu/files/files/138cstixdawesfaustmeehl.pdf
Comments
We have MA and still have the B and D premiums and IRMAA deducted from our SS benefits.
Post: Healthcare spending and premiums during a post age-65 retirement- facts and ideas.
Link to comment from September 7, 2025
For the most part, I agree with your buy and hold strategy. That said there is a difference between the number of days the market has been at an all time high and the number of days that the price to sales and price to earnings ratios have been at all time highs.
Post: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Link to comment from September 2, 2025
RDQ has received numerous negative comments including several from Jonathan--all to no effect that I am able to discern.
Post: re RDQ’s “down arrows” —> My 1 cent :
Link to comment from August 30, 2025
Some comments get a large number of down votes. Long threads are already difficult enough to navigate without adding a bunch of comments that do nothing more than explain why some folks don't like a comment.
Post: re RDQ’s “down arrows” —> My 1 cent :
Link to comment from August 30, 2025
Johns Hopkins now offers a 10 week AI in Healthcare program taught by its faculty that includes using AI skills for clinical decision-making and better patient outcomes. Program components include
Post: AI vs. Urgent Care: Guess Who Got It Right?
Link to comment from August 29, 2025
More recently, Daniel Kahneman, who won the Nobel prize for his work on deciaion-making biases detailed a selection of fields which have demonstrated inferior human judgment compared to algorithms in his book Thinking Fast and Slow:
Post: AI vs. Urgent Care: Guess Who Got It Right?
Link to comment from August 29, 2025
My original comment referred to the fact that statistical/actuarial models have been shown to outperform the judgment of individual experts for many years and to do this consistently. Dennis' example is simply consistent with research which actually dates back to the 1950s. Below is an AI summary of Meehl's work. Paul Meehl advocated for the use of actuarial (or statistical) decision-making over the more intuitive clinical decision-making by human judgment, a concept he detailed in his 1954 work comparing clinical and statistical prediction. He demonstrated, and subsequent research confirmed, that statistical prediction rules (SPRs) are often more accurate in making predictions in fields like clinical diagnosis than unaided human intuition, which is prone to biases. His work highlighted the ethical imperative to use available statistical models to provide the best possible predictions for clients and to avoid the pitfalls of relying on overconfidence or flawed intuitive judgments.
Post: AI vs. Urgent Care: Guess Who Got It Right?
Link to comment from August 29, 2025
Superiority in making the correct judgment/prediction/diagnosis.
Post: AI vs. Urgent Care: Guess Who Got It Right?
Link to comment from August 29, 2025
In the Appendix of his original artcile, Bengen assumed a 50/50 stock-treasury bond portfolio and stated that the effect of taxes is neglected, as if all retirement money were stored in a tax-derred account. Analysis for a taxable account would be considerably more complex. https://web.archive.org/web/20120417135441/http://www.retailinvestor.org/pdf/Bengen1.pdf Thus, while Bengen's assumption obviously doesn't mean that you can't withdraw taxable assets to support your retirement it does mean that estimating the optimal withdrawal rate is more complex than it is if you are only withdrawing tax-deferred money.
Post: Quinns confused about the 4% rule
Link to comment from August 27, 2025
Psychologists Robyn Dawes and Paul Meehl demonstrated the superiority of statistical / actuarial decion making to clinicians' d-m in the 1980s so the superiority of AI isn't surprising. Clinical Versus Actuarial Judgment (1989) Professionals are frequently consulted to diagnose and predict human behavior; optimal treatment and planning often hinge on the consultant’s judgmental accuracy. The consultant may rely on one of two contrasting approaches to decision-making—the clinical and actuarial methods. Research comparing these two approaches shows the actuarial method to be superior. Factors underlying the greater accuracy of actuarial methods, sources of resistance to the scientific findings, and the benefits of increased reliance on actuarial approaches are discussed. https://meehl.umn.edu/sites/meehl.umn.edu/files/files/138cstixdawesfaustmeehl.pdf
Post: AI vs. Urgent Care: Guess Who Got It Right?
Link to comment from August 27, 2025