text:
Hard evidence proves US gov't lied about 5G. Navy research report confirms numerous health dangers.
By State of the Nation - 08. June 2019
U.S. Government Has Known About the Serious Adverse Health Effects Associated with 5G for Decades, Hid the Scientific Research Reports from the Public
U.S. Navy Research Report Documented Numerous Radio-frequency and Microwave Radiation Health Hazards in 1972
What can we say: "The government lied, and LOTs of people died."
That's exactly where this nation is right now given the exceedingly dangerous and patently unlawful military deployment of 5G in all 50 states.
How do we know this to be a scientific fact and indisputable truth?
Because the U.S. Federal Government has been in possession of hard scientific research studies that conclusively proved numerous medical ailments and health conditions caused by exposure to microwave and radio-frequency radiation.
This is precisely why the government has repeatedly refused to conduct the statutorily mandated health and safety studies on 5G—the Fifth Generation Cellular Network Technology. The authorities already know how hazardous and harmful 5G is, which is why an Historic Class Action Was Lawsuit Filed Against the FCC by Municipalities Across the USA.
NMRI Research Report
What follows is an official research report published by the Naval Medical Research Institute (NMRI) 0n April 20, 1972 that clearly documents the "Health Hazards" and "Electromagnetic Radiation Injury" caused by "Microwave and Radio-frequency Radiation".
Now the American people will know why the nationwide 5G roll-out is as dangerous as it is illegal. The government has no right to harm or kill, injure or main, sicken or afflict, paralyze or incapacitate the citizenry.
Governmental conduct that produces these extreme consequences to the populace profoundly violates the public trust between the governed and the government. Furthermore, such malfeasance and misconduct irrevocably break the social contract between We the People and the U.S. Federal Government. The sacred covenant between the U.S citizenry and its government has, essentially, been rent asunder.
One can only imagine that the 2000 plus scientific research references which were utilized to form the basis of this report in 1972 have since grown to 20,000 or even 200,000 in 2019, 47 years later.
Perhaps this is why the Government-Corporate Complex has foisted the 5G roll-out on the country without any of the required research; they already possess the irrefutable and quite damning evidence.
Please know that SOTN was not happy when we read this report; for it confirms our worst suspicions about the ongoing MILITARY DEPLOYMENT OF 5G. As follows:
5G WEAPONRY: Microwave Radiation Technology Being Deployed as Depopulation Warfare, Full Spectrum Dominance & Total Human Control (Video)
5Ggate evidence
The screenshots that follow were taken directly from the aforementioned NMRI research report. The concerned reader is highly encouraged to read pages 7 through 11 posted below.
For a more comprehensive listing of report citations, please click on the original link at https://themillenniumreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Navy-Medical-Research-Institute-Military-Microwave-Radiowave-Report.pdf.
Now many will come to understand why it's so important that:
"The 5G roll-out must be terminated, before it terminates US."
June 8, 2019
N.B. Anyone who doubt the existence of the 5Ggate scandal is invited to read this bombshell report. 5Ggate: A Political and Financial Scandal of Epic Proportions
But even more shocking is the NMRI report that follows.
Continue reading at: https://themillenniumreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Navy-Medical-Research-Institute-Military-Microwave-Radiowave-Report.pdf
The skeleton of this undeniable government-corporate conspiracy to harm the American people is fleshed out in the exposés posted below:
They're totally lying about the 5G roll-out!
5G Super-Hotspots: You better know where the "kill zones" are located!
5G ROLL-OUT is an Ongoing National Emergency that Requires an Immediate Shutdown by the American People
5G GENOCIDE: The Most Lethal NWO Conspiracy of the Third Millennium
ULTRA-SOS: 5G Roll-out Seriously Endangers Every Person on Planet Earth
5Ggate: The Greatest Criminal Conspiracy in U.S. History
Wireless Radiation: Stop the 5G Network on Earth and in Space, Devastating Impacts on Health and the Environment
5Ggate: A Political and Financial Scandal of Epic Proportions
Posted on June 5, 2019 by State of the Nation
SOTN Editor's Note: The following exposé only scratches the surface of what is surely the greatest governmental-corporate scandal and financial fraud in U.S. history. The sheer magnitude of financial criminality and political malfeasance of 5Ggate is truly beyond comprehension. Nothing like this has ever happened before.
The depth and breadth of this immense criminal conspiracy has, in and of itself, guaranteed an effective ongoing cover-up. When so many government officials and elected representatives, corporate officers and board members, powerful stakeholders and Big Tech investors are this deeply involved, who will blow the whistle? We're talking about the ultimate buildout of Internet of Things, perhaps the most lucrative global venture in world history.
This was the only way that the criminal government officials and their corporate co-conspirators could have gotten away with the multi-decade crime spree known as 5Ggate—involve as many players as possible so that everyone is, in some way, guilty. Because the entire enterprise was unlawfully undertaken to treacherously deceive the American people, virtually every aspect of 5Ggate has been carried out in secret and by stealth.
How else could the military deployment of 5G take place except under cover of darkness? After all, "the 5G technology platform was not tested as required by law for the most basic safety concerns and human health risks"; hence, the perpetrators have had to conduct the roll-out as surreptitiously as possible.[1] Were the scientific facts and shocking details about 5G known by the U.S. citizenry, they would have already shut it down—FOREVER!
State of the Nation
June 5, 2019
N.B. Bear in mind that the excellent analysis below is only a tip of the 5Ggate iceberg. Even truth-seekers, who have a great command of the 5Ggate gory details, often comment to each other that we still don't know what we don't know about this nakedly criminal operation.
[1] 5G CRISIS: Historic Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against the FCC by Municipalities Across the USA
Anonymous submission from the Anti-5G Advocacy Network
Whereas, the present relentless campaign to deploy geobiocidal weaponized 5G wireless networks nationwide is built on an ever-shifting, ever-growing, forty-year foundation of financial and material fraud and conspiracy; specifically, within the corrupt telecommunications industry:
o Subverting by various means the federal FCC/NTIA and state-level utility regulatory agencies to enable ongoing telecommunications industry deregulation and monopolization, enabling ongoing financial and other fraud/massive profits by constant intensive lobbying and bribes/campaign funding for state officials, inducing favors and massive corporate investments in themselves and in their initiatives;
o Lobbying corporate state legislators/treasurers state-
o The total state financial holdings found in/related to its CAFR are generally at least 30-50 times more than those released to the public as its "Budget". This is what constitutes the "CAFR fraud", now found, not only in every state of this country, but, with theme and variations, in all countries within the globalist central banking system as well. This gives those state/provincial corporate governments participating in this massive financial fraud and conspiracy the incentive to maximize the return on their investments in the telecommunications industry by unquestioningly favoring its initiatives, while both creating and ignoring vast conflicts of interest never investigated by captured federal/state corporate government agencies, or the equally captured corporate media, in which these federal and state corporate governments and the telecom industry are often also heavily invested;
o Co-opting non-profit/academic/think tank organizations to advocate for their fraudulent claims by providing relatively large amounts of grant funding to these groups for the past forty years, including for corrupted published research and astroturf community outreach;
o Buying off corporate media exposure of their criminal activities of fraud and conspiracy by buying large amounts of media advertising, with which they then could in turn further manipulate public opinion;
o Partnering with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to draft and pass federal and state-based cookie-cutter legislation extremely favorable to themselves, but the opposite for their customers and for their country;
o Hiring hordes of lobbyists at the federal and state levels of government to represent their interests in/on government legislative bodies and commissions concerning different telecommunications issues, while the consumers they were/are defrauding remain virtually unrepresented by any authentic advocates;
o Presenting fraudulent claims of intentions to build/upgrade corporate state/regional telecommunications networks of various types, supposedly to create enormous amounts of national/state economic prosperity, while repeatedly doing virtually nothing to perform upon these claims.
o Varying over the years, this has been the main tactic to obtain government backing for ever more corporate mergers, as being presently proposed just before the planned T-Mobile-Sprint telecom merger, for ever more monopolization for ever more profits for ever more power since 1992. It is the main tactic now being used in the present criminal crusade for the deployment of weaponized 5G wifi networks in 2019, with this tactic being routinely and fraudulently used in every US presidential administration since that of William Jefferson Clinton;
o Claiming business expenses on repairs and upgrades to wired networks promised, but never performed, with no accountability demanded by industry-captured, colluding state and/or federal agencies;
o Manipulating cost accounting to increase customer charges/taxes/fees at least 3.5 times what they were in 1980, while largely avoiding any such taxes/charges/fees/penalties themselves;
o Redefining telephone networks as "information" in stead of "telecommunications" networks for financial/competitive regulatory advantage against competition, with the collusion of the corrupted FCC/NTIA;
o Making wired technologies look unprofitable by deliberately failing to upgrade/maintain their infrastructure;
o Putting most (fraudulently claimed) business expenses-claimed/other income into wireless networks;
o Performing no actual upgrades or maintenance for older wired telecommunications infrastructure, then falsely claiming it as being "obsolescent";
o Surreptitiously and subversively using existing designated wired infrastructure, such as now-subsumed state telephone utilities and special access lines, for wireless networks and their backhaul build-out;
o Actually performing installation of more new optical fiber, but stealthily dedicating it to 5G/4G wireless instead, again with no accountability demanded by industry-captured state or federal agencies;
o Blocking regional/municipal broadband competitors by multifarious, highly manipulative methods;
o Generating the "Net Neutrality" controversy as a distraction and cover for the telecommunications industry/colluding corporate government agency financial/material fraud and conspiracy to limit competition – with real non-monopolized competition between telecommunications corporations being the actual source of "Net Neutrality" – not more regulation by corrupted corporate government agencies colluding with the corrupted telecommunications industry for power and control;
o Inducing the corrupt FCC to use its presumed discretionary power of "forbearance" to enable this monumental financial/material
o Shutting off retail copper wire-based landlines as "unprofitable", using their own financial fraud/neglect of infrastructure maintenance as a false pretext to force customers onto wireless technologies paid for by the customers themselves as de facto investors. This further enables them to sell bundle service options when their local/state/regional telecommu
o Inducing the corrupt corporate federal government FCC/NTIA and various corrupt state agencies since 2007-2010 to waive requirements for reporting by the telecommunications industry, and federal requirements for their own reportage, as well as their disappearing records and rewriting of chronological/
o It is this deliberately manipulated, increasingly wide "digital divide" and financial fall of America from grace with the rest of the world that is in part probably presently provoking this present presidential regime's relentless, desperate attempts to bridge this gap, using unlawful, dictatorial force that is founded on the aforementioned crimes of fraud and conspiracy.
o Shutting off the wired lines to also shut off all of their financial, material and moral obligations. This is because wireless service is not similarly regulated for quality of performance; it is, in the twisted logic of the corrupted US Supreme Court and FCC, an imposed contract with "no obligations", as opposed to a wired telecommunications tariff, which does have such obligations. So, customers cannot sue them for malfeasance, being relegated to mere arbitration by their user contracts, nor can displaced unionized telecommunications workers, whose contracts only last so long as wired networks do. All of this can then be presumably done without the informed consent of the public.
o And wireless is therefore more suitable for stealth implementation of Secret Military Armaments as Residential Technology – the SMART grid – that can be used as community-sited electromagnetic weapons by the deep state at any time against the American people as domestic enemy combatants, such as the federal/state/local government-concealed sudden covert incineration via "wildfires" of several thousand residents of Paradise/Butte County, California in early November 2018 using covert 5G-based directed energy weapons, just as such 5G electromagnetic weapons were covertly used by black operations of the US military/its contracted mercenaries to incinerate thousands of people of Panama City, Panama in late 1989, and in Baghdad, Iraq in mid-2003, whose charred remains were then secretly buried in mass graves, as reported by such mainstream media soon after by CBS' 60 Minutes, The Christian Science Monitor and the Academy Award-winning documentary, The Panama Deception.
Therefore, all of those who would so ruthlessly seek to use such criminal financial and material fraud and conspiracy forcibly to impose upon the American people within their communities and without their consent, in violation of the Tenth Amendment of the US Bill of Rights, such geobiocidal technology as weaponized 5G wifi networks during such a long-standing state of national emergency as has existed without rescission since the time of the American Civil War, are in so doing committing treason, as well as potential war crimes – crimes against nature and humanity under the presumed immunity provided by such states of emergency. They are now not only seeking to use we the people as collateral in their malevolently materialistic system of debt slavery, but as collateral damage in their violently nihilistic power games for geopolitical control. And in seeking to do so without our consent, they are also liable, both financially and criminally, individually and officially, as well as morally, for their violation of their oaths of office, as well as of their contracts — commercial, political and spiritual — with the American people, the people of the world, as well as with the Creator of this universe.
Evidentiary Weblinks
Nearly 600 Pages of Actionable Evidence for This Case Provided by Telecom Industry Insiders-The Book of Broken Promises: $400 Billion Broadband Scandal – Free the Net-Bruce Kushner/The Irregulators-2015
Criminal Charges Against the Washington State Corporate Government/Media for Ongoing Financial Fraud and Treason-Rebecca Em Campbell-2012
The 5G Rollout Is Trump's 9/11-The Millennium Report
The 5G Roll-out is Trump's 9/11 – The Millennium Report-4/2019
What Is Really Going on with Trump's Wavering Back and Forth on Vitally Important Issues Like 5G-
The Millennium Report-1/2019
What's really going on with Trump? SOTN responds. – The Millennium Report
They Are Totally Lying About Viability of 5G Rollout—and That Is Very Good News for We the People-The Millennium Report-4/2019
They're totally lying about the 5G roll-out! – The Millennium Report
More Good News for We the People: 5G Rollout Facing $1 Trillion Class Action Lawsuit-
The Millennium Report-4/2019
5G Roll-out Facing $1 Trillion Class Action Lawsuit – The Millennium Report
Comprehensive Free Online Documentary on Weaponized 5G Wifi and Its Human Health/Environmental Health Effects, Featuring Many of the World's Foremost Scientists/Engineers/Activists Dealing with This Deadly Military Technology and Primary Source Evidence: 5G Apocalypse-2019
Documentary: 5G Apocalypse | Soren Dreier


text:
Jackpot Mobile Casino presents the Bonus Bank offer!
Now deposit and play your favourite slot games between 6pm to 9pm and get a 25% bonus up to $50! That's right, you get a 25% instant deposit bonus on your first deposit during the hours.
The offer will available to all players from 4th February onwards, between Monday to Thursday.
You can take your pick from our extensive catalogue of slots games and enjoy them with this amazing offer. This is an excellent idea to escape for a few hours from the mundane routine of week days. A free bonus along with your deposits provides you the chance to play more games and win big!
Make use of this thrilling opportunity to drive off your weekday blues and play all your favourite slot games only at Jackpot Mobile Casino!
Log in to Jackpot Mobile Casino now to avail this exciting Bonus Bank offer!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
|You are here: Home ›› United States ›› Florida ›› Osceola ›› Saint Cloud
List Your Property
Be A Featured Vacation Rental!
List Your Rental
Be A Featured Holiday Rental!
List Your Home
Be A Featured Vacation Home!
|Winter Rental
|Saint Cloud
|2 bedroom, 1 bath fully furnished
Daily Rate: $0.00 Weekly Rate: $0.00
|Max Occupancy: 6 Bedrooms: 2 Bathrooms: 1 Pool: No
|Pet Friendly: No Handicap Access: No Smoking: No
|Saint Cloud, Florida
|Osceola County


text:
rod iron wall decor outdoor art wrought large.
outdoor wall art ideas large patio decor.
large metal wall art outdoor iron decor wrought artwork artwor.
outdoor coastal wall decor from metal art to canvas amp beyond.
outdoor wall decor ideas backyard decorating elegant about art patio plus backya.
rustic tree of life wall decor outdoor n.
outdoor wall decor.
outside wall hangings outdoor ornaments metal iron decor patio art ideas w.
outdoor wall decor ideas metal art decorations creative.
tropical outdoor wall decor patio ideas creative home w.
outdoor metal sun wall art decor.
outdoor wall decor large cool garden metal art extra.
butterfly outdoor wall decor art outside.
outdoor metal wall decor gold art sun.
butterfly outdoor wall decor large metal sun art exterior hanging size of outside.
tree here outdoor wall decor.
outdoor wall plaques decor decorations garden ideas metal hangings.
smiling outdoor wall decor sun face metal art large sunburst home.
wrought iron outdoor wall decor art cast decoration metal i black.
outdoor wall decor large hanging size of outside metal sun wal.
tutorial to hang outdoor wall art without nails or tools on stucco siding decor how.
castaway bay outdoor wall decor sign p.
outdoor wall decor metal art artwork ideas.
outdoor wall decor ideas brick.
outdoor decorative iron wall hangings wrought decor hanging nice ornaments decorations.
exterior wall art metal gate artwork outdoor wrought iron decor o.
extra large wrought iron wall decor outdoor art metal.
image 0 outdoor wall decor rustic sun.
in outdoor wall decor n.
outdoor wall decor n.
outdoor metal wall art hanging bohemian decor faux wrought iron garden gorgeous large.
outdoor wall art ideas backyard patio decor metal.
metal wall scroll outdoor decor medallion.
outdoor wall decor wrought iron garden lovely outside decorati.
outdoor wall decor backyard art ideas pallet idea garden 5 d.
wrought iron outdoor ll or unique art designs metal hangings yard breathtaking rod garden wall decor sun.
sun outdoor wall decor metal fresh bathroom ou.
circle star wall decor outdoor n.
outdoor wall decor ideas ion.


text:
A new addition to the Marvel cinematic universe's stable of stars has been announced via the company's blog. The newest addition is Academy Award winning actor Michael Douglas, who joins Shaun of the Dead director Edgar Wright for his version of Ant-Man.
Douglas will star as Henry 'Hank' Pym, the original creator of the technology that allows the shrinking of humans down to insect size.
He is joined by Paul Rudd as Ant-Man's alter-ego Scott Lang. Ant-Man is set to be released on July 31st 2015.


text:
A favorite school field trip of mine was to the Clontarf Traffic School where my classmates and I took turns driving pedal cars, riding bicycles or acting as pedestrians. Although sadly long gone, that set of child-scale streets was beloved by generations of Dublin children. Decades later, I recognized the concept when I visited a similar facility in Portsmouth, Virginia. Further investigation revealed other miniature towns and cities dotted around the United States, Canada and beyond. I realized that kids who are lucky enough to have access these traffic gardens love having their own world, free from motorized vehicles. Inspired by the power of traffic gardens to create lasting memories about important ideas, I set up Discover Traffic Gardens. The mission is to help communities design new traffic gardens as well as to create unique educational programs where young people see how the built world is put together.
Our busy streets are complicated to understand and can be unsafe places because of their unforgiving nature. Yet growing up knowing how to negotiate and navigate the street network is critical to an active independent life of getting around. For the last century of sharing public streets with motorized vehicles, young people have had ever-decreasing freedom and been some of the most vulnerable users. While we await the dream of complete streets for all ages and abilities, traffic gardens help children figure out and practice the ways we navigate and use streets, intersections and the transportation network.
There is something about learning through whole body movement while having imaginative fun that makes traffic gardens an effective tool for bike and safety education programs. By engaging in their planning and design, children think about how communities are put together. We believe that traffic gardens provide a valuable set of learning tools for young people that help them integrate the ideas learned into more safely navigating public streets.
Fionnuala Quinn


text: Back Share with Chateau Lagrange Pomerol – 2011 Ready 2015 - 2023 0/100 France > Bordeaux > Libournais Overview Prices Reviews & scores Producer Trading PPP Wine Information Region France > Bordeaux > Libournais Producer Chateau Lagrange Pomerol Type Red Grape Bordeaux Blend Red Advice Vineyard Chateau Lagrange Producer Chateau Lagrange Pomerol Appellation Pomerol Designation AOP Classification Cuvee Bottling Gallery Chateau Lagrange Pomerol Live graph & comparisons WO score RP - V - JR - WO score is the average of all critic scores for this wine Tasting notes No critic tasting notes yet available for this wine. Profile Château Lagrange Pomerol Estate Information Area under vines: 5 hectares Soils: Gravel and clay Production: 2 000 cases a year Ageing: between 20% to 25% new oak barrels from 18 to 24 months Grape varieties: 90% Merlot 10% Cabernet Franc Contact details Name Chateau Lagrange Pomerol Address Website Email Phone Wines by this Producer Chateau Lagrange Pomerol Photos Videos Location Wine Passport is only available for wine entries in your cellar Trade Summary (Bids and Offers) There are no current offers or bids for this wine. All offers, bids and your wine Description Date Case Qty Tax Type Offerper Case Bidper Case Purchaseper Case Total Location Action Relative Value Score Price per point tab is not included in your subscription.


text:
You are being redirected to the story the piece of content is found in so you can read it in context. Please click the following link if you are not automatically redirected within a couple seconds:
[PDF] full report: "A Call to Action: For greater corporate transparency 10 years after the Glass Ceiling Commission recommendations"
Author: Social Investment Research Analyst Network (SIRAN) [USA], Published on: 1 December 2005
[companies disclosing full public equal employment opportunity data: Citigroup, Coca-Cola, IBM, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Merck. Companies disclosing full equal employment opportunity data to investors on request: 3M, Anheuser-Busch, Avon Products, Baker-Hughes, Bank of America, Cigna, Dell, EMC, Entergy, ExxonMobil, General Electric, Heinz, Johnson & Johnson, McDonald's, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley, PepsiCo, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble]
Related companies: 3M Altria Anheuser-Busch (part of Anheuser-Busch InBev) Avon Baker Hughes Bank of America CIGNA Cisco Systems Citigroup Coca-Cola Dell EMC Entergy ExxonMobil General Electric Heinz (now Kraft Heinz) HP (Hewlett-Packard) IBM Intel Johnson & Johnson McDonald's Merck Microsoft Morgan Stanley PepsiCo Pfizer Procter & Gamble Walt Disney


text:
My Name is Khan March 12, 2010Posted by Shujath in Hindi, Movies, Reviews.
Tags: 2010, 9/11, blockbuster, DVD, Film, Hindi, Jimmy Shergill, Kajol, Karan Johar, MNIK, Movie, My Name is Khan, Review, Shah Rukh Khan, Shankar Ehsaan Loy, Shibani Bhatija, Sonya Jehan, terrorism, Zarina Wahab
add a comment
Along with rom-coms, movies with the backdrop of "terrorism" have in general been on my must-not-watch list – I hate both genres for similar reasons….unbearable cliches to be exact. Though Karan Johar has not lost his knack to entertain his second directorial foray into "serious" cinema slowly and regrettably turns laughable and cringeworthy like his previous flick. MNIK is still a very watchable film purely because of Shah Rukh Khan but his magic too wears out towards the end.
When I saw the first look of the film a couple of months back, the fact that the story and screenplay are credited to a certain Ms. Shibani Bhatija made the alarm bells in my head work overtime. In the past even seasoned film-makers who have handled "terrorism" haven't moved beyond the stereotypes so it is wrong to expect K Jo-Shibani to do something groundbreaking. Surprisingly, the protagonist's condition is not used to manipulate the audience and that's just the one commendable aspect of the film. There are also a few well crafted moments when the film has to say something about discrimination but mostly goes overboard.
Most people have gone way out praising the movie – at least during the time of its release but now that the film has been reduced to a "medium hit" from "blockbuster" you know better. Still, watch MNIK for Khan.
Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi December 15, 2008Posted by Shujath in Hindi, Movies, Reviews.
Tags: 2008, Aditya Chopra, Amritsar, Anuskha Sharma, Bipasha Basu, blockbuster, Bobby Khosla, Bollywood, Chalte Chalte, Dance Competition, double role, DVD, Film, Gol Gappa Contest, Golden Temple, Haule Haule, Hindi, Hum Hain Raahi Pyaar Ke, Image makeover, Jodi No 1, Kajol, Lara Dutta, Love story, Macho, middle class man, Movie, Phir Milenge, Preity Zinta, Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi, Raj, Ravi K Chandran, Review, RNBDJ, Salim-Sulaiman, Shah Rukh Khan, Shahrukh Khan, Surinder Sahni, Taani, Taani Partner, Tiny Singh, Tujh Mein Rab Dikhta Hai, Vinay Pathak, Yash Raj Films
1 comment so far
Blame it on Rab! – Easy isn't it? That's what Aditya Chopra pretty much does in every phase of what probably is the most moronic offering from Yash Raj Films in recent times. It's a pity because the film starts off so well and I was wondering why on earth was it getting mixed reviews. Twenty minutes or so into the movie I started to know why.
RNBDJ is about this average-looking and shy Surinder Sahni (Shahrukh Khan) who happens to get married to the bubbly Taani (Anushka Sharma) unexpectedly after her fiance dies in an accident followed by her father. Both know that this is a marriage of compromise and Taani makes it clear to Surinder that she would never be able to love him. Big hearted Surinder seems completely reconciled to this fact and is happy enough to have received Taani's promise of being a "good wife". A few days later Taani expresses her desire to join a reality dance show and Surinder agrees. Now Surinder is happy to see Taani happy and decides to undergo a complete makeover (also rechristening himself "Raj" – what else!) just so that he can sneak into the dance rehersals to watch her "be happy". Dumb Taani can't figure it out because the moustache is missing. Raj and Taani slowly become friends and "kyonki ek ladka aur ladki kabhi dost nahin ho sakte" Raj proposes to Taani.
Some explanations are needed here to figure out Surinder's state of mind. Initially he seems to be an introverted guy with the usual insecurites unable to express his love to his wife. Somehow, after an image makeover all that seems to disappear. Later he wants to test Taani if she loves "her husband" or "Raj". The answer is obvious to him but now he is kinda adamant that she love Surinder and not Raj. And this is the same man who at the beginning of the movie doesn't object to his wife telling him that she cannot love him. At the end of all this Surinder comes across as a person who loves to indulge in a lot of self-pity and nothing else. It is even harder to understand Taani. She spends all of her time with Raj and it's only when he proposes to her that she remembers "Oh…I forgot to tell you that I am married!". Coming back to the dilemma – who and how does she make her choice? Raj gives the ultimate solution – Choose the one "Jisme Tumhe Rab Dikhta Ho". Dumb Taani again takes this line literally. Because, next day she is at the Golden Temple with Surinder earnestly begging God to make an appearance in some person – guess whose face Ravi K. Chandran's camera is focussed on when Taani opens her eyes…problem solved! Thank You Rabji!!!
Apart from this uplifting story you also get to learn a couple of brilliant insights about women like (i) The only thing which any woman wants in life is that someone love her as much as it is possible for one person to love another (ii) A woman recognizes her partner more effectively through his dance moves than his facial features and voice. Shahrukh and Anuskha are very appealing as Surinder and Taani until our lady spots the dance competition poster. From thereon I found it hard to empathize with any of them and especially towards the end I felt like pushing both of them off a cliff. Vinay Pathak as Bobby seemed like the only sane character in the film and one hopes if Surinder actually listented to what he said.
The dialogue apart from being bad has an insanely high overdose of "ji" splattered in every line which gets on to your nerves. Among the few redeemable moments are the beautifully filmed songs "Haule Haule" and "Hum Hain Raahi Pyaar Ke". The prelude to the "Haule Haule" number which keeps appearing in the background is too good. The film is shot extremely well but the small town setting which was supposed to be conveyed doesn't work because everything you see in the movie is a set piece except for the title sequence and one scene at the Golden Temple.
In RNBDJ, there are some movies which Surinder takes Taani out for. It is tough to find out whether those were meant to be a parody or not because at the end RNBDJ looks exactly like one of them. One more note to Adi: Please stop referencing Dhoom in your movies as if that is some cult flick which needs to be paid a tribute every time. Aditya Chopra was the creative brain behind a lot of much maligned YRF products in the last few years. When you watch his unadulterated crap in the form of RNBDJ you can guess the amount of influence he might have had in those other films.
All said and done, RNBDJ also has a large share of emotionally manipulative moments (the Sumo Wrestling scene tops the list) which should appeal to a sizeable section of the audience – and may end up becoming a money spinner. I actually would have recommended everyone to watch this one because it genuinely qualifies to be a "so bad it's good" flick but it requires that you invest a huge amount of patience which is totally unwarranted. You might probably want to give this a try for the aforementioned reason when it comes out on TV or DVD.
U Me Aur Hum April 13, 2008Posted by Shujath in Hindi, Movies, Reviews.
Tags: 2008, actor turned director, Adnan Sami, Ajay Devgan, Alzheimer's disease, Ashwini Dhir, Bollywood, Divya Dutta, DVD, Film, Hindi, Isha Sharvani, Kajol, Karan Khanna, Review, Sachin Khadekar, Sumeet Raghavan, U Me Aur Hum, Vishal Bhardwaj
2 comments
It's just a few months back that Aamir Khan debuted as a director, naturally Ajay Devgan's plunge into the director's seat will undoubtedly have to bear the burden of high expectations and comparisons. But if you actually look at it…Ajay is only the third person in his family to direct. Remember "Hindustan Ki Kasam – A dream by Veeru Devgan"? the unanimous verdict for which was that it should have remained a dream. Then came brother Anil Devgan's "Raju Chacha" – one of the most expensive flops of Bollywood which wasn't outrightly a bad film but a good concept squandered away. With "U Me and Hum" one can easily conclude that Ajay has lived up to the standards set by his family and dared not to go beyond.
But you still have to appreciate the bold choice of the story – a lady suffering from Alzheimer's and the painful daily struggles she and her husband have to come to terms with. But then you should also know that "sometimes the greatest journey between two people the story and the movie is the distance screenplay between them". The first half of this flick is as bad as a first half can get. The absolutely pathetic and cringeworthy dialogue/situations/conversations that I encountered made me forget all the bad films I've seen in the last couple of years. Believe me….it really is that bad – and if you liked it and thought it was cute and mushy then God save you! (You might want to blame Devgan for this but then you might recall that in the opening credits this department was credited to a certain Ashwini Dhir – this is the guy who's receiving brickbats since last week for his directorial debut "One Two Three" and even this week's other release "Krazzy 4" receiving equally bad reviews is a product of his pen). Only before the interval the actual story begins and gives you a ray of hope. I wouldn't say that the rest of the movie is great but because I'd been through the previous 80 minutes or so, it did look like a masterpiece compared to that. Again don't get your hopes too high…the movie tries to make a point but when you expect to see the actualization of that it rather abruptly ends.
Ajay and Kajol (who look good together for the first time on screen) have put in really earnest performances and despite the maudlin sentimentality which creeps in at times they did effectively convey the agony and anguish of someone in a situation like theirs. There are also a couple of noteworthy moments – especially the ones where Kajol has a blackout in rather dangerous situations. The same cannot be said of the horrible supporting cast – mainly Karan Khanna, Isha Sharvani and Divya Dutta. The only other person who stands out in this movie is Vishal Bhardwaj with his mellifluous tunes – the title track and "Jeele Ishq Mein" (wonderfully rendered by Adnan Sami) are the best.
There are far more negatives than positives in this film but Ajay and Kajol still manage to give it a certain amount of respectability and they are purely the reason you might want to watch this one…better sleep through the first half and wake up just before the intermission – am sure you'll then have a much better experience.


text:
Glenbard North High School
990 Kuhn RdCarol Stream Illinois 60188
See map: Google Maps
Illinois US
Friday, October 4, 2019 - 6:30pm
It's football season! Support your local high school team! While you're at the game, you may register to vote! Have you moved or changed your name since you last voted? Do you need to register to vote? Please stop by the Voter Registration table starting at 6:30 p.m. Please bring two (2) forms of identification, one (1) with your current residence.
Issues referenced by this event:


text:
Strida Folding Bike Green Good Cond. Great Deal
Strida Folding Bike Green – Good Cond. Great for crowded subways or last-mile/first-mile cross town commutes. Meanwhile it takes up very little space in a cafe, your apartment, or office and when folded can be walked through stores and narrow aisles without hindrance or hesitation. Many times rather than locking it I just took it


text:
Brittney Lofthouse – Contributing Writer
Franklin Town Manager Summer Woodard has appointed Danny Bates to serve as interim Chief of Police for Franklin while the town searches for a replacement for Chief David Adams.
Chief Adams announced last week he would be taking a new position with the Waynesville Police Department with his last day in Franklin being Feb. 14. Adams came to Franklin eight years ago when he was hired as Chief. Woodard said she expects the hiring process for a new police chief to take up to 90 days.
Bates is a lifelong resident of Macon County and first joined the Franklin Police Department in 1993 after graduating from Southwestern Community College's Basic Law Enforcement Program. With more than 25 years experience with the Franklin Police Department, Bates worked his way up the ranks starting as a road deputy, then a patrol Sergeant, Detective Sergeant, Lieutenant and most recently, Captain.
During his career, Bates established the department's Be A Responsible Seller/Server (B.A.R.S.) Alcohol Training Program, an accredited program approved by the North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission. Bates serves on numerous community and civic organizations and boards and takes an active role in the community.
The Town of Franklin is currently advertising for the Police Chief Position and is taking applications. Reporting directly to the Town Manager, the Police Chief is responsible for the supervision of 16 full time sworn officers, one full time civilian personnel, and multiple part-time officers.
The applicant should have strong skills in leadership, community-oriented policing, and excellent communication skills.
Experience in supervision and management specifically in law enforcement work is desired.
The ideal candidate will be a graduate from an accredited college or university with major coursework in criminal justice, public administration, or a related field supplemented by advanced courses in police administration and considerable management experience in law enforcement.
Advanced training through an accredited school or program is preferred.
A Bachelor's Degree is required. Master's preferred.
Applicants must have a valid NC driver's license and must have completed the minimum requirements established by the NC Justice Training and Standards Council for certified law enforcement officers.
Advanced certification is preferred. Salary range for this position is $60,197 – $75,000. The successful applicant must pass drug tests, criminal background check, and psychological evaluation prior to employment.


text:
Is a 100% stock allocation crazy? As long as one addresses their needs for liquidity (as to avoid extracting capital from the markets at bad times) and can tolerate the market price volatility, a 100% or near-100% allocation to equities is not as outlandish as one might suspect. Focusing on fundamentals and valuations instead of market prices should alleviate much of the unnecessary concern with market volatility. Moreover, if investors understand the costs associated with traditional asset allocation strategies, we suspect they will become more skeptical of their balanced portfolios – especially those with longer term investment horizon. It is worth noting we are in good company in challenging the conventional definition of risk and the use of fixed asset allocation portfolios. Like many other great investors, Warren Buffett eschews Wall Street's definition of risk. Moreover, his (i.e., Berkshire Hathaway's) portfolio is virtually 100% stocks. We suspect he worked out the same math and logic we have here but long ago. Unsurprisingly, we are often greeted with skepticism when we suggest higher equity allocations. In some cases (such as with retirees) we recommend a strategy whereby one reduces risk in their fixed income or bond allocations so that they can be less concerned with risk in other parts of their portfolio. For example, one can replace some or all of fixed income allocations with a basic annuity[1] to provide a fixed stream of payments. The annuity removes market and interest rate risk for this allocation because the payments are fixed and guaranteed by the insurer (and backed up by state insurance programs). Moreover, these payments can cover a significant portion of one's monthly or annual retirement budget – perhaps covering essentials like food, shelter, etc. Taking this approach one step further, one can allocate enough in one or more annuities (for diversification) so that the balance of the portfolio can be invested in dividend-paying stocks whereby the dividends alone cover the remainder of one's retirement budgets. That is, they can live off of the dividends once a certain level of their budget is covered by the annuity product(s). Structuring a portfolio is this manner further reduces one's dependence on the market. Even if one uses a broad market portfolio (e.g., S&P 500), the dividend stream is much more stable than market prices. In fact, one can invest in a portfolio of high quality dividend-paying stocks to mitigate dividend and market risk even further. We discuss this concept in our article Destroying Steady Income Streams. So Why Do Investors Even Include Bonds in a Portfolio? Many investors think of bonds as a diversifying asset for their portfolios. In particular, they use bonds to help combat stock market volatility. Many financial advisors happily accommodate (if not promote) this fear of stock volatility and advocate 60/40[2] or similar portfolios with their clients as representing a reasonable balance of risk and return. Academic and practitioner research further supports this "asset allocation" approach. Indeed, there are many studies highlighting 90% [3] of portfolio returns are determined by asset allocations. Accordingly, it is not surprising how prevalent this asset allocation model is with investors of all types. This article analyzes the assumptions behind asset allocation models. We revisit both the purpose (risk reduction) and performance (returns) of standard asset allocation approaches relative to some alternative strategies. We also discuss the flawed logic behind using the 90% explanatory statistic above to support the use of asset allocation models. At the heart of this article is the notion of risk and how it should be defined. Like Warren Buffett, we find the conventional definition of risk most academics and practitioners use (i.e., volatility or standard deviation of market returns) is inappropriate. Accordingly, strategies that minimize this ill-defined risk metric may not be optimal. Indeed, we show how the mechanics of asset allocation strategies can systematically constrain performance and dampen long-term returns. Investors who attain a better understanding of the real risks associated with stock investing (as well as the true cost of avoiding ill-defined risk) may wish to construct their portfolios differently (spoiler: higher equity allocations). This can enable them to potentially outperform 60/40 and similar benchmarks over the long term. To be sure, the views on risk we share here are not new or innovative. We are merely reiterating ideas Buffett and other great investors have advocated for years. We'll leave the readers with a quote from Ben Graham.
Editors Note: The following piece is from Aaron Brask @ Aaron Brask Capital. Aaron is a quant by training — he has a PhD in mathematical finance — but he is also a fundamentals-focused common-sense investor at heart. Aaron's unique blend of skills and insights generated the piece below. If you are looking for a sound bite, Aaron's piece won't be your cup of tea. But if you are looking to question your potential long-held beliefs and step outside of your comfort zone, there are some intriguing ideas and concepts to learn. I enjoyed reading this piece and I think you will too. A counter argument is described by Pete Hecht, here and a more formal counter argument is described by Pastor and Stambaugh here.
"Successful investing is about managing risk, not avoiding it." – Benjamin Graham
Asset Allocation DefinedAsset allocation refers to the process by which an investor or investment professional allocates percentages of a portfolio amongst various asset classes (e.g., stocks, bonds, real estate, commodities, etc.). For example, a 60/40 portfolio is one in which 60% of the assets are allocated to stocks and 40% to bonds. For the purpose of simplicity, we will confine our discussion to just these two asset classes. The logic behind the asset allocation process revolves around diversification and risk. Stock prices typically fluctuate more than bonds and this volatility makes many investors uneasy. In addition to bonds typically being less volatile, they often move in the opposite direction over shorter periods thereby offsetting portfolio volatility even more. Given few if any investors enjoy wild swings or deep drawdowns in their portfolio value, divvying up portfolios between stocks and bonds seems a sensible approach to reduce unwanted volatility. The discomfort associated with market volatility is one reason investors like to reduce portfolio volatility. However, there is another and perhaps more important reason. It relates to investors' emotional or behavioral reactions to this discomfort and the corresponding impact on investment performance. For example, after markets rise and seemingly only go up, investor sentiment is high and many investors take on more risk in their portfolios. Moreover, after markets have fallen and market prices are depressed, negative sentiment abounds and many investors cut their losses and move to the sidelines. Unfortunately, these reactions occur after markets have already moved and the typical result is a buy-high/sell-low strategy. This is a recipe for dismal investment performance. In this light, reducing the volatility of one's portfolio can help avoid these temptations and performance-dampening decisions. Note: We do not discuss them in this article but there are also more advanced implementations of asset allocation. Amongst these alternatives, risk parity is probably the most popular. In a risk-parity allocation, investment positions are formulated based on risk allocations instead of dollars. For example, a standard 50/50 asset allocation would translate into an equal amount of dollars invested in each of the stock and bond allocations. However, a 50/50 allocation within a risk parity portfolio would mean that the amount of risk emanating from the stock portfolio would be the same as from the bond portfolio. So if the risk for stocks was +/-15% and +/-5% for bonds, then the bond portfolio would be three times (15% ÷ 5%) the dollar size of the stock portfolio in order to equate the risks (i.e., risk parity).
Asset Allocation DetailsAsset allocation strategies vary in multiple dimensions. The first and most obvious variation related to how much (if any) to allocate to various asset classes. In general, investors with longer time horizons and higher appetites for risk will allocate higher percentages to stocks. The percentage allocations may be static or dynamic through time. In our experience, most investors prefer to determine a static asset allocation and stick to it through thick and thin. Other investors prefer an approach whereby they specify ranges instead of precise levels. This allows their investment managers to exploit tactical strategies to take advantage of potential market opportunities (e.g., increasing the allocation to stocks when they are priced more attractively than bonds). Alternatively, some investors prefer to revisit and dynamically set the allocations based on their own requirements or market perceptions. Another important detail relates to how often asset allocations are brought back within their required ranges. Many investors follow a time-based approach whereby allocations are adjusted, say, quarterly or annually. Other investors employ thresholds or buffers to trigger rebalancing. That is, if the maximum allocation for equities is 60% then they may wait until the allocation exceeds that level by a buffer – typically between 0% and 5%. Furthermore, some may wait until this buffer is exceeded for a minimum amount of time (e.g. two consecutive monthly readings). Approaches like this can be used to reduce trading (and potential capital gains taxes) by ignoring small or temporary breaches of the prescribed limits.
Three Issues with Traditional Asset Allocation StrategiesWhile all of the above strategies may sound sensible, there are some holes in the logic. This section highlights three issues with traditional asset allocation strategies we find are rarely discussed by investors or advisors. The first issue relates to how risk is defined. Given the overall goal of diversifying via asset allocation is to reduce risk, it is vital to understand the definition of risk. While statistical formulas based on market prices may be academically elegant and easy to compute, it is more important to utilize a definition that accurately reflects the risk investors actually experience. The second issue relates to the logic and statistics used to advocate asset allocation models. We debunk two popular arguments used to make the case for using these models. The first claim involves a commonly cited statistic from a 1986 article published in the Financial Analysts Journal entitled "Determinants of Portfolio Performance" [3]. In this article, the authors (Brinson, Beebower, and Hood) claimed more than 90% of portfolio variation is explained by asset allocation. While we agree with this conclusion, their findings have been both misquoted and misinterpreted on many occasions in an effort to advocate asset allocation strategies and discredit more active approaches. However, these assertions are not supported by the above statistic or the paper from which it originated. The benefits of asset allocation (risk reduction) are well-known and often discussed. However, the real price investors pay for diversifying their portfolios via asset allocation strategies is not. That is the subject of the third issue we highlight. Over the long term, equity allocations have outperformed bonds and most (including us) expect this to be the case going forward. Accordingly, taking money from stocks and allocating it to bonds will likely translate into lower long term performance. We point out just how much performance investors might be missing out on so they can weigh the costs against the benefits for asset allocation strategies.
Issue #1: Risk Is Not the Same as Volatility
"In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable." – Rob Arnott (CEO of Research Affiliates) "Finance departments believe that volatility equals risk. They want to measure risk, and they don't know how to do it, basically. So they said volatility measures risk." – Warren Buffett (1997 Berkshire annual meeting) "Risk had a very good colloquial meaning, meaning a substantial chance that something could go horribly wrong, and the finance professors sort of got volatility mixed up with a bunch of foolish mathematics and to me it's less rational than what we do." – Charlie Munger (1997 Berkshire annual meeting)The most common measurement of risk used by investors and investment professionals is volatility. Mathematically, volatility is the annualized standard deviation of price returns. Like many legendary investors including Warren Buffett and his partner Charlie Munger, we feel the common characterization of risk as volatility does not accurately reflect the true nature of investment risk experienced by investors. There are many problems with using this statistical formula for volatility to define risk. We highlight three here:
- Ignores fundamentals: Volatility only reflects the behavior of market prices and there is significant noise in market prices. It does not consider the quality of the underlying businesses nor the prices at which they are owned (valuation in particular).
- Short term focus: Volatility typically emphasizes short-term focus as it is often calculated over periods of one year or less. Unfortunately, there is significant noise in market prices over shorter periods we cannot control.
- Backward looking: In addition to the short-term nature of the calculation, another issue we have with this definition of risk is that it is backward-looking; volatility is calculated using historical market prices. Accordingly, there is little that speaks to the future risks investors might experience.
If the period over which it is calculated is long enough, the average return could be indicative of future returns (to the extent fundamentals are persistent and prices follow fundamentals). If the period is not long enough to compute a meaningful return, then calculating and observing deviations from this return over much shorter periods will yield even less meaningful information. In reality, short term market fluctuations do not represent real risk to investors unless they extract money. If one does not need to extract capital from their investments, then this definition of risk relates more to the danger of reacting to this perceived risk in a sub-optimal manner. For example, one does not need to liquidate or raise cash but exits the market due to uncomfortable market volatility or drawdowns. Given the excessive focus on market price movements by the media and investment industry, we advocate two methods for dealing with this perceived risk:
- We encourage investors to focus more on fundamental performance rather than market performance. As we discuss later, fundamental performance is generally more stable than market prices. In fact, we have developed our reporting software specifically dedicated to this purpose. Please visit FundamentalReporting.com for more information.
- We also encourage investors to integrate quality and value into their equity portfolios. Higher quality companies can weather economic storms better than lower quality companies. Moreover, stocks with lower valuations can mitigate the downside risk of valuation changes versus glamour stocks with lofty valuations which may be more vulnerable contracting valuations.
A Real Estate AnalogyMany people own real estate as an investment because they feel it is more tangible; they can understand and manage it without too much uncertainty. As long as the rent checks keep coming in and rising over time, many real estate investors are not overly concerned with the precise value of their properties. Indeed, property values are rarely appraised aside from the time they are purchased or sold. We encourage investors in stocks to treat their investments the same way – less focus on prices. However, technology and media constantly push so much stock price data around it is hard to ignore. Prices may go up and down significantly, but it does not mean you have to act. Most investment professionals and investors focus on longer term goals over horizons of 5, 10, 20, or more years. Accordingly, discussions or measurements of risk should correspond to the feasibility of achieving those longer term goals and not the short term noise. A major factor that may dictate the feasibility of various goals is the longer term performance of stocks – will they deliver adequate returns over time? Not everyone has the same level of confidence in the markets or the fundamentals behind them.
"In the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497." — Warren Buffett (2008 New York Times op-ed)One step toward having more faith in markets (i.e., their ability to deliver returns over the longer term) is to understand markets better and monitor more than just market prices. Unfortunately, the financial services industry broadly encourages what we call the squiggly line perception of markets. Indeed, many investors think of the stock market as nothing but random squiggly lines on charts that could go up or down at any point. This perception only encourages the use of naïve statistical formulas to define risk. As highlighted above, the fundamentals get lost with the above view of markets. This is important because the fundamental performance underlying the companies in the market is not nearly as volatile as the market. Whether one looks are dividends, book value, or other fundamentals, it becomes clear that markets themselves are a source of volatility above and beyond the volatility of the fundamentals. Indeed, investments traded in the market are subject to the often-emotional biases of investors and market prices can deviate significantly from the fundamentals in the short term. Over the longer term the prices follow the fundamentals. While there is always disagreement about what the precise price for an investment (e.g., a stock) should be, investors are constantly combing the markets looking for bargains (and opportunities to short) and this helps align prices with fundamentals and make markets relatively efficient. The bottom line is that we believe that monitoring fundamental performance is just as if not more important than market price performance. More generally, we like to break market prices down into two components – fundamentals and valuations. In particular, the price of an individual company depends on its fundamentals and the valuation the market attaches to those fundamentals. Mathematically speaking, the price P of a company can be expressed as P = F x P/F where F is a fundamental quantity (e.g., book value or earnings), so P/F is a valuation metric (e.g., Price-to-book to Price-to-earnings ratio). The returns investors experience with the overall market (or individual investments) can be directly attributed to the performance of the underlying fundamentals and the changes in valuations. It really is just basic math. We believe this decomposition can help investors better understand the nature of the risks associated with investing in stocks by helping them separate the fundamental performance from the noise introduced by the markets (e.g., ever-changing valuations).
Two CorollariesWe derive two corollaries from our simple market price model (P = F x P/F):
- The first is to invest in enterprises with solid, growing fundamentals (a.k.a. quality investing).
- The second is to invest when valuations are attractive (a.k.a. value investing).
- Sound models based on conservative assumptions regarding future market performance
- Setting realistic goals relative to one's resources
- Formulating an investment strategy to minimize real risk to one's goals. We generally define real risk as permanent loss of capital (not a temporary market downturn). Permanent loss of capital could result from investing in a business that fails or overpaying for an investment.
- Executing the investment strategy with discipline to avoid strategic risks (e.g., getting nervous and selling during or after a market downturn).
- Monitoring and re-evaluating models, assumptions, and feasibility of goals.
Volatility AnecdotesIs it sensible to travel by car from Miami to San Francisco in order to minimize the exposure to turbulence? Avoid vaccinations due to fear of getting pricked by a needle? We may not like some things but it is important to view the bigger picture and not let ourselves get paralyzed by misguided notions of risk. Sure, market volatility is something few investors enjoy (some actually do enjoy it!). However, if one understands downswings are only temporary and is confident they will be rewarded over the long term, then they should be better-prepared to tolerate it.
Issue #2: Flawed Logic and False ClaimsIn 1986, three academics (Brinson, Hood, and Beebower a.k.a. "BHB") published an oft-cited paper entitled "The Determinants of Portfolio Performance" in which the authors boasted of their "striking" findings whereby asset allocation accounted for 93.6% of the total variation in pension plan returns. They followed up with an updated study just over a decade later. This study essentially reconfirmed their earlier results by calculating a similar figure (91.5%) with more recent data[7] . Based on these findings, many academics and practitioners started to advocate static asset allocation strategies based on passive investments. To be clear, we do not disagree with the calculation of this statistic; we emphatically disagree with using their statistical findings to advocate static asset allocation strategies. For starters, concluding that asset allocation has a large impact on performance in no way indicates asset allocations should be fixed through time. There is a gap in the logic to arrive at the latter assertion. Indeed, we could argue that because asset allocation is so important, it deserves more attention and adjustment through time. The authors' claim that their results are "striking," is naïve at best. What their paper is really just pointing out is that asset classes are different and generate different returns. For example, let us compare security selection to asset allocation. If one sells a particular tech stock and buys another in the same sector, not that much has changed. The resulting impact on overall performance will not move the dial much. However, if one reallocates money from a tech stock over to a treasury bond, then the impact will typically be more significant. These 90%+ statistics are really just saying stocks are different than bonds. Consider a relay race around a large track with 10 legs. Each contestant gets to choose between various models of motorcycles and cars for each leg. For those who do not know, motorcycles are typically much faster than cars. Is it really surprising the types of vehicles (motorcycles versus cars) turns out to be much more important in determining who wins most races relative to which model of motorcycle or car is chosen? We could perform a similar study to BHB's portfolio analysis and would probably find 90% or more of races were determined by the types of vehicles chosen. Geek's Note: Statistically speaking, 93.6% and 91.5% (out of 100%) are certainly significant figures. However, it is critical to realize these figures refer to the variation (or volatility) of returns – not the absolute level of returns achieved. By analyzing variation of returns instead of the absolute level of returns themselves, the authors have effectively ignored the end result (terminal wealth) that we believe ultimately matters. This notion was pointed out by William Jahnke in his 1997 paper entitled "The Asset Allocation Hoax"[8]. In his conclusion, Jahnke stated: "…agreement that asset allocation is important does not settle the issue of how to do it. What are the appropriate asset classes? Should asset class weights be fixed or dynamic? How should asset allocation be determined? What about the cost of implementation?" Given the above gaps in logic, why do so many follow this fixed asset allocation model? We believe some of the reason stems from the academic elegance. We find academics tend to gravitate toward theories where they can make use of the vast amount of market price data available. Despite the logical flaws, the aesthetics of the formulas and output are too much to resist. On the practitioner side, the fixed asset allocation model makes life easy. It is very practical for advisors and the institutional investment consultants. First, the idea already has plenty of momentum and is often considered industry standard. No one ever got fired for buying IBM! Effectiveness aside, this model is also very well-defined, easy to explain, and simple to execute. Moreover, it creates the illusion of work even though many firms now offer robo-rebalancing for free. These attributes make this model both marketable and defensible. This latter point should not be underestimated. Indeed, alternative strategies might be considered too aggressive and create liability. Moreover, going against the grain requires educating clients on and coaching clients through inevitable periods when the performance lags fixed allocation portfolios and they feel like they are missing out. Imposing fixed asset allocation models on investors relieves advisors and investment consultants of asset allocation decisions. In Jahnke's words, this approach "conveniently shelters both the consultant and the investment manager from the most important investment decision." In our experience, we rarely come across an investor, advisor, or consultant that does not assume fixed asset allocations are a given.
Security Selection and Market TimingThe strategies we discuss in this article operate independent of market valuations. We use the S&P 500 as a proxy for the US stock market on a buy-and-hold basis. That is, our discussions and analysis do not attempt to integrate security selection or market timing. Notwithstanding, we believe using valuations can significantly improve investment performance both cross-sectionally (i.e., security selection) and temporally (i.e., market timing). Notwithstanding, one must consider investor risk profiles, the impact of taxes, transaction costs, and other factors when determining the utility such strategies. We find many practitioners use valuations for security selection but not for market timing. Indeed, market timing is generally considered blasphemy amongst market professionals. While we acknowledge such a strategy is not suitable for all investors, we disagree with the stigma attached to market timing. For bonds, valuations are just basic math. If one knows the price of a bond and its cash flows, then calculating the yield or return is straightforward. In particular, more attractive valuations (i.e., higher yields) directly and mathematically result in higher returns (assuming a buy-and-hold strategy with no defaults). For stocks, the cash flows and fundamentals are less certain. Moreover, there is much noise in the relationship between fundamentals and market prices (i.e., valuations). There is a long list of valuation models but, unfortunately, many of these models to do not accurately relate the fundamentals to the market prices. Our market valuation model is more robust. Even Warren Buffett has acknowledged the type of valuation model we use is "probably the best single measure of where valuations stand at any given moment." More importantly, our core valuation model has a 90% correlation with actual market returns – a feature many of the intuitive sounding but flawed valuations models lack. We believe sensibly integrating valuations can help you increase your returns. Our articles Index Investing: Low Fees but High Costs and More Market Correction to Come provides detailed discussions of how valuations can improve both security selection and market timing, respectively.
Issue #3: The Real Cost of DiversifyingThe first two issues above highlighted logical flaws embedded in many asset allocation models. Indeed, we believe investors should measure and manage risk differently. Despite these shortcomings, we acknowledge asset allocation strategies still address a known problem (however misguided) many investors face by imposing diversification at the asset class level to reduce the perceived market price volatility of portfolios. The point of this section is to estimate the costs borne out of this diversification. One of the primary assumptions made with virtually every asset allocation strategy is that stocks outperform bonds over the long run – hence the typically larger allocations to stocks (e.g., 60 versus 40). Given this assumption (which we agree with and discuss in the shaded section below), it follows that making allocations to bonds will reduce overall portfolio returns relative to stocks. We examine the magnitude of this impact by comparing returns from various stock and bond allocations.
Why Stocks Generate Higher ReturnsThe conventional wisdom is that stocks go up more than bonds over the long-term. This has certainly been the case historically, but will it persist? Our view is that it will. In addition to the historical record, we base our opinion on three factors. The first factor is simple: Bonds are fixed income investments. Their principal does not grow as the value of a bond does not exceed the sum of its par value and coupons. The second factor is that investors are generally averse to volatility and thus require a discount to purchase stocks relative to more stable bonds. This discount (sometimes referred to as the equity premium) translates into higher subsequent returns. In our view, it is not volatility itself that creates this discount (otherwise, the same logic would apply to shorting stocks as well); it is the timing of the volatility. In particular, stocks prices tend to fall during economically challenging times when there is strong demand for liquid capital. In other words, stocks are least liquid when opportunities to deploy capital profitably abound. The third factor relates to the corporate perspective. When companies borrow money via loans or issuing bonds, they must manage their finances as to repay the interest and principal. These liabilities impose significant financial constraints on a company. Issuing equity places no such financial constraints. Accordingly, there is a liquidity preference for issuing equity and firms thus have incentive to price it more favorably to entice investors. Of course there are occasional shorter periods when bonds outperform stocks. Moreover, there will always be individual cases where some bonds outperform some. However, we believe these three factors are not likely to go away and will sustain the long term outperformance of stocks over bonds.
Historical Performance of Stocks versus bondsWe first estimate the costs of allocating money to bonds versus stocks by looking at historical performance. We compare the performance of five different portfolios ranging from all stocks to all bonds. We use the S&P 500 index as a proxy for stocks and the 10-year treasury as a proxy for bonds. The asset allocations we use are: 0/100, 25/75, 50/50, 75/25, and 100/0 (% stocks / % bonds). Our data source goes back to 1972. The first table shows performance over the entire period. We then decompose this period into two smaller periods from 1972-1982 and 1982-2015. Notably, interest rates were generally rising over those first 10 years and falling during the latter period. The reason for looking at these smaller periods is two-fold. First, we believe the first period of rising rates may be more relevant going forward given the current low level of interest rates. Second, we believe the latter period should be the most conservative period over which to compare stocks and bond performance. In particular, declining interest rates provide a direct, mathematical tailwind for the performance of bonds. That is not to say declining rates to do also help stocks. However, we believe this trend favors bonds on balance. The overall results for the entire period are in the above table. There was a +3% return advantage for investing in stocks versus bonds. Given the length of the period (43 years), stocks generated vastly greater terminal wealth – 3.37 times as much versus investing in bonds alone. Looking at the initial decade from 1972-1982 where interest rates were rising, the absolute level of returns was lower as was the additional return from stocks at +1.7%. Based on the lower overall returns and the shorter period, investing in stocks yielded just under 20% more terminal wealth overall. While these results occurred over a 10 year period, we can extrapolate this trend over a 43 year period to compare with the terminal wealth above. In this hypothetical case, stocks would result in over 2 times as much wealth as investing in bonds. The table below looks at the rest of the period from 1982-2015 where interest rates were falling, the absolute level of returns was higher and the additional return from investing in stocks relative to bonds was +3.1%. In other words, investing in stocks yielded more than 2.5 times as much terminal wealth versus investing in bonds. Extrapolating this trend over a 43 year period indicates stocks would result in over 3.4 times as much wealth as investing in bonds alone. For readers interested in a longer historical comparison (that essentially arrives at the same conclusion), we recommend the book Triumph of the Optimists by Dimson, Marsh, and Staunton[9]. They review over 100 years of data on stock and bonds performance. Moreover, they broaden their study to include markets from 16 countries in total.
Model-based Projections of Stocks versus BondsThe second way we compare the performance of stocks to bonds is by modeling various scenarios. We use a 20 year period for analysis. This provides sufficient time for any difference in return to compound and manifest itself. It is also a reasonable time frame over which many investors might consider for wealth accumulation or de-cumulation (i.e., retirement). We model bonds in a straightforward manner by calculating an internal rate of return (IRR) based on the cash flows of each hypothetical bond. We assume bonds are trading at par and consider various levels for interest rates or yields. The initial cash outflow is $1,000 as is the repaid notional at maturity. Interest is paid in equal installments annually. Note: Implicit in this is the assumption of no defaults which we find reasonable for investment-grade bonds. Our model for the stock portfolio is essentially the same except the cash flows (i.e., the amount of dividends or the value of the portfolio at the end) are not known in advance. Accordingly, we present several scenarios we believe to be reasonable. We make varying assumptions for the initial levels and growth of the fundamentals (i.e. earnings, book value, and dividends) and valuations. We analyze the impact of taxes for both stocks and bonds. This includes interest being taxed as ordinary income as well as variable rates for dividends and capital appreciation should assets be liquidated at the end of the period. In a nutshell, the moving parts or variable inputs for our model are as follows: interest rates, initial and terminal stock valuations, initial dividend yield, fundamental growth rate, and tax rates (dividends, long term capital gains, and income). A few notes about our variables:
- We do not include terminal levels for interest rates because we are assuming each bond is held to maturity (at which point the interest rate is irrelevant). While fixed maturity exposures are popular in practice, we do not model them for two reasons. First, it requires buying and selling bonds throughout the period and this significantly complicates the calculations for bond income, principal, and the corresponding taxation. The second and perhaps more important reason is we believe buying and selling bonds before maturity contributes unnecessary volatility to the portfolio and income stream. Indeed, the sanctity of bonds as fixed income investments is built around the notion that investors get their principal back at maturity. If a bond is not held to maturity, then this key benefit is destroyed.
- We do not specifically identify different types of bonds. However, the range of interest rates implicitly covers a wide variety of bonds. This includes municipal bonds as well since their rates can be converted to tax-equivalent yields (i.e., the equivalent level of pre-tax yield that would result in their tax-free yield).
- We do not specify a terminal dividend yield as it is implied by the initial dividend yield and fundamental growth rate.
ConclusionsNote: It is worth stressing this discussion is relevant to investors with longer time horizons (e.g., 10 years or greater). For investors with shorter horizons, it is critical to align assets with liabilities. If you are planning on purchasing a house next week, it is generally not be sensible to invest the funds in the stock market as the value could fluctuate significantly in a week's time. This article has demonstrated at least three major issues with traditional asset allocation strategies (misguided definitions of risk, flawed logic and statistics, and significant performance costs). Our goal is to educate investors as to what these shortcomings are, why they exist, and suggest alternative approaches for measuring, monitoring, and potentially managing risk. In particular, we believe investors should decompose market prices into fundamentals and valuations. This model yields more insight into market dynamics and allows for more precise attribution of market performance. Here are three examples where this model can help investors measure, monitor, and potentially manage risk more productively:
- Invest more in stocks: We believe investors following our model will view market volatility differently. In particular, they may perceive stocks as being less risky than they would otherwise (using the traditional lens of volatility). All else equal[10], they may be inclined to allocate more to stocks. Even if one still follows a fixed asset allocation model, this could be an increase in one's fixed stock allocation. Alternatively, one might choose to abandon the fixed allocation model and allow stocks to grow unconstrained. The higher stock allocation would likely result in more portfolio volatility, but investors would understand volatility itself does not constitute risk and be able to benefit from the higher returns over the long term.
- Avoiding emotional investment decisions: Filtering out market noise and focusing on more stable fundamentals can help investors remain objective by mitigating the emotions markets can stir (stress and anxiety during bear market periods and exuberance during bull markets). This objectivity can help investors avoid making very poor investment decisions (e.g., selling equities when prices are depressed or buying more after markets have rallied).
- Help investors make tactical decisions: Despite the negative stigma attached to market timing, market valuations are the key determinant of market returns over the long term. Much of this relationship is diluted by the many naïve valuation models being used in both academia and practice. Moreover, the results are mired in much short term noise. However, there are robust valuation models with 90% correlations to returns over longer periods (e.g., 10 years) and these can help investors improve performance and avoid enduring unnecessary volatility.
Editors Note: The following piece is from Aaron Brask @ Aaron Brask Capital. Aaron is a quant by training — he has a PhD in mathematical finance — but he is also a fundamentals-focused common-sense investor at heart. Aaron's unique blend of skills and insights generated the piece below. If you are looking for a sound bite, Aaron's piece won't be your cup of tea. But if you are looking to question your potential long-held beliefs and step outside of your comfort zone, there are some intriguing ideas and concepts to learn. I enjoyed reading this piece and I think you will too. A counter argument is described by Pete Hecht, here and a more formal counter argument is described by Pastor and Stambaugh here.


text:
After SpaceX Starlink Launch, a Fear of Satellites That Outnumber All Visible Stars – The New York Times
Images of the Starlink constellationRead More →
Images of the Starlink constellationRead More →
NASA has selected three companiesRead More →
Chick-fil-A locations are all closedRead More →
The recalled items may beRead More →
Ethereum Poised To RunAll eyesRead More →
Dow Jones futures: Beijing gaveAMAZING VINTAGE PORTABLE PLANETARIUM Y-821. WORKS WELL. BOXED. LOOK
An Australian patient's life-saving surgicalRead More →
House Majority Whip Rep. JamesRead More →
An out-of-control cruise ship inDeath Note Confrontation - IDW Games (Genuine Sealed)
A single durian could fetchDiscover Lands Unknown - Fantasy Flight Games - 2018
An American couple visiting theRead More →
Elon Musk made interesting newRead More →
Self-help services may not be permitted in all states. The information provided on this site is not legal advice, does not constitute a lawyer referral service, and no attorney-client or confidential relationship is or will be formed by use of the site. The attorney listings on this site are paid attorney advertising. In some states, the information on this website may be considered a lawyer referral service. Please reference the Terms of Use and the Supplemental Terms for specific information related to your state. Your use of this website constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use, and Cookie Policy.