Permanent Portfolio Forum
https://gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/
Considering he's a huckster that needs to sell a proprietary edge like Ray Dalio, I wouldn't hold my breath.madbean2 wrote: Yes, that did sound a lot like the PP except for the real estate part. Don't know if anybody ever asked him but I'm sure he has heard of the PP strategy and wonder what he thinks of it.
Code: Select all
FABER PP
1968 6.04% 8.95%
1969 -3.16% -5.96%
1970 5.43% 8.07%
1971 6.65% 11.37%
1972 18.75% 19.44%
1973 13.39% 13.83%
1974 9.88% 12.23%
1975 8.23% 6.15%
1976 11.13% 10.82%
1977 6.61% 5.31%
1978 14.10% 11.83%
1979 78.82% 37.92%
1980 5.93% 13.30%
1981 -7.89% -5.18%
1982 18.17% 22.46%
1983 3.26% 3.11%
1984 -0.40% 2.65%
1985 14.86% 19.96%
1986 13.00% 18.81%
1987 9.51% 7.06%
1988 4.55% 3.74%
1989 10.36% 14.33%
1990 -2.38% 1.57%
1991 8.81% 11.94%
1992 2.25% 3.39%
1993 13.29% 13.06%
1994 -1.09% -2.39%
1995 15.65% 19.61%
1996 5.19% 5.09%
1997 12.46% 8.23%
1998 9.56% 12.98%
1999 7.01% 3.26%
2000 0.88% 2.94%
2001 0.10% 0.21%
2002 1.61% 3.13%
2003 16.28% 13.32%
2004 9.55% 5.99%
2005 11.43% 7.79%
2006 13.71% 11.41%
2007 7.49% 13.16%
2008 -9.62% 2.97%
2009 12.51% 5.64%
2010 17.55% 13.38%
2011 3.93% 11.09%
2012 7.90% 6.46%
2013 1.06% -2.43%
2014 5.72% 10.36%
Total 418.08% 422.39%
No worries WAH. I'm 27 and fast seeing my descent into obscurity not understanding kid-lingo these days. I look forward to telling youngsters to get off my lawn.WildAboutHarry wrote: Geez, I had to google Latverian and Vibranium.
I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was...
Well, I'm 62 and don't consider I'm descending into obscurity as much as I am running out of brain cells to store all the new stuff in. Although I can still sing the Sugar Crisp jingle in (near) perfect pitch, word-for-word.1NV35T0R (Greg) wrote:No worries WAH. I'm 27 and fast seeing my descent into obscurity not understanding kid-lingo these days. I look forward to telling youngsters to get off my lawn.WildAboutHarry wrote: Geez, I had to google Latverian and Vibranium.
I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was...
Drink more. It will kill off the weaker brain cells and leave the stronger ones to assimilate more knowledge. The more you drink, the smarter you will feel. This is a key evolutionary "survival of the fittest" strategy, I think from Cheers.WildAboutHarry wrote:Well, I'm 62 and don't consider I'm descending into obscurity as much as I am running out of brain cells to store all the new stuff in. Although I can still sing the Sugar Crisp jingle in (near) perfect pitch, word-for-word.1NV35T0R (Greg) wrote:No worries WAH. I'm 27 and fast seeing my descent into obscurity not understanding kid-lingo these days. I look forward to telling youngsters to get off my lawn.WildAboutHarry wrote: Geez, I had to google Latverian and Vibranium.
I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was...
And in CA, we have no lawns anymore to tell youngsters to stay off of.
[/quote]
[align=center]WildAboutHarry wrote: Well, I'm 62 and don't consider I'm descending into obscurity as much as I am running out of brain cells to store all the new stuff in. Although I can still sing the Sugar Crisp jingle in (near) perfect pitch, word-for-word.
[/align]Excellent question. Maybe we just do not yet realize that atomic constituents of cells age or somehow change. Or maybe there are sub-atomic constituents that we do not yet realize. Really good question. Perhaps there is something in play that we do not understand via science or logic.doodle wrote: This thread is off on an aging tagent now, but on that topic ive always wondered how we age at a molecular or cellular level but at the atomic level such an aging concept doesnt make much sense. Why do we age cellularly if the atomic constituents of cells dont?
We actually don't age cellularly. The body starts to break down like a car that is never maintained. In theory, there is no reason we can't live indefinitely if all the dysfunctional parts are replaced, the juices are cleaned of toxins/debris and the aberrant epigenetic expressions are reversed. Many scientists are working on those issues as we speak. In the meantime, to delay the break down... well, that's the rationale for taking supplements! Doh.doodle wrote: This thread is off on an aging tagent now, but on that topic ive always wondered how we age at a molecular or cellular level but at the atomic level such an aging concept doesnt make much sense. Why do we age cellularly if the atomic constituents of cells dont?
[/align]Great idea. But how do we know with certainty, at least that the odds are greater than 50-50, the supplements will not be found via some as yet unknown mechanism to advance break down? At one time the iron supplements, X-rays, etc. were thought by some to be great stuff.MachineGhost wrote:We actually don't age cellularly. The body starts to break down like a car that is never maintained. In theory, there is no reason we can't live indefinitely if all the dysfunctional parts are replaced, the juices are cleaned of toxins/debris and the aberrant epigenetic expressions are reversed. Many scientists are working on those issues as we speak. In the meantime, to delay the break down... well, that's the rationale for taking supplements! Doh.doodle wrote: This thread is off on an aging tagent now, but on that topic ive always wondered how we age at a molecular or cellular level but at the atomic level such an aging concept doesnt make much sense. Why do we age cellularly if the atomic constituents of cells dont?
Well, unlike in the last century, we have this new fangled thing called clinical research outcomes and epigenetic assaying & screening to determine the positive or negative effects of any given substance. If there's a big downside, its the the relative paucity of a lack of human clinical trials with more exotic or newer substances. The old guard (i.e. multi-vitamin and multi-minerals) has pretty much all been vetted by now. The iron issue is perplexing but it may just be a case of typical Anglo-Saxon blindness/arrogance. It's not as if it wasn't known that excess iron was toxic, just no one connected it to the obesity epidemic until last week.Mountaineer wrote: Great idea. But how do we know with certainty, at least that the odds are greater than 50-50, the supplements will not be found via some as yet unknown mechanism to advance break down? At one time the iron supplements, X-rays, etc. were thought by some to be great stuff.