Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skipperr who wrote (3955)	3/9/1998 7:02:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

I have the deepest respect for all the people who risked their lives in battle, for I realize that many of them might even agree with me, but were following orders. I believe that true honor or patriotism comes from whether or not I believe in the US constitution, which I fervently do. It will be a sad thing indeed for democracy if opposition to the government is construed as opposition to the country, i.e. its constitution. As for Clinton and Vietnam, I acknowledge that conscientious objection to warfare has to be respected, and in any case, his explanations for not participating in the war are far more credible than those given by Gingrich, Limbaugh and other sundry self-proclaimed patriots. Dipy.

To: Skipperr who wrote (3955)	3/9/1998 8:52:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

I would very much like to hear your arguement against Asset Allocators that position themselves in a certain % of stocks, bonds, and cash at specified intervals (quarterly, yearly, etc.). I think you are talking about "dynamic asset allocation" here. I am not a big fan of that either. The only thing that seems reasonable to me is periodic re-balancing. It takes all the guesswork out of the investment process and enforces a discipline. Periodic re-balancing usually necessitates small changes to the portfolio. And IMO, that is the way to go. While frequent changes to the portfolio often prove counter-productive, occasional large-scale changes might prove counter-productive too. Brinker's strategy essentially rules out the former while claiming that there is merit in the latter. But I am one of those who think that neither will prove productive in the longer run. Dipy.