3 ms·
I appreciate you schooling me on how to better contribute to the discussion. This was my attempt at what you're discussing (admittedly appended perhaps after yo
by snikeris 9y ago
I appreciate you schooling me on how to better contribute to the discussion. This was my attempt at what you're discussing (admittedly appended perhaps after your initial comment):
> Harry's 25% cash isn't dollar bills, it's treasury bills, which have held up to inflation.
OP seemed to be under the misconception that cash meant dollar bills under the mattress. The article addresses this in the section beginning "To explain, I think it helps to start with the definition of cash..."
OP seemed to be under the misconception that cash responds poorly to inflation, which the article also addresses.
- SilasX 9y agoIf your only point is that "cash" includes short-term T-bills, then 1) What else is the article adding? The fact that it (historically) yields something above inflation was enough to refute the OP's implied claim about negative real returns. 2) That wouldn't address the OP's point that they still have a low RoR for a long-term portfolio. 3) As in my comment it wouldn't refute that T-bills haven't kept up with inflation recently. If the article's point is about how balancing into/out of a stable investment can improve portfolio return, then that would warrant a summary in your comment. Sorry if my comments come off as mean. I'm trying to convey why a giant article might not be helpful to resolving the disagreement.
- snikeris 9y agoMy points were that cash includes short-term T-bills, and that they have held up to inflation, both points addressed in the article I linked. > Sorry if my comments come off as mean. You're not coming off as mean. I can tell you're genuinely trying to improve the discussion here, and you reminded me that when I'm replying to someone, the audience is wider than just that person. Thanks.