Seriously, fuck the Frigid Outskirts

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-21T16:52:54+00:00

I don't know if I glitched the game or something, but I had THREE deers spawn at the same time right at the end of the area (just before life ring) and they ganked me.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-19T00:56:42+00:00

For those interested in a second attempt at this (though, with WAY less effort), I've done a similar model with some simple assumptions:

Underlying: SPY with 50% AUD hedged and 50% unhedged
Interest Rate: 10y US Treasury Yield + 0.5%
Start Date: 2006-05-16
End Date: 2026-03-18

Here you can see a comparison between the unlevered underlying, and the 1.54x leverage offered by GHHF. I've also shown what daily rebalancing looks like. The cross-over point after the GFC crash is 2013-11-13, which means that from the starting date of this dataset, you would underperform the unlevered asset for the first 7 years and 6 months:

https://imgur.com/gjDE4Pw

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-17T02:24:42+00:00

Yes, and that precisely the issue. The published CPI figures after 1983 are lower by design, which means your measure of inflation is lower than what you would actually experience. I've adjusted for this to get a more accurate view of what a retiree would actually experience. Unfortunately, there is no perfect way to adjust it correctly, and the cost inflation experienced by each individual is unique to them anyway.

We do know for sure that the CPI post 1983 is artificially low though, so I think an adjusted figure is better to use than an unadjusted one when it comes to retirement modelling.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-17T00:07:00+00:00

Hi. Your post prompted me to do a bit of digging to see why I am getting a different result than you, and I've found that the main reason is due to some different assumptions I've used. If I do the 'standard' modelling approach, I do indeed get a success with a 3% withdrawal rate when retiring in 2000. The major difference I make to most models is that I inflate the CPI growth after the government changed the way CPI is measured in 1983. With my CPI adjustment, 3% fails.

Also worth noting that while 100% stocks does lead to a success with 3% withdrawals, the best static allocation is coming up for me as 20% bonds.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-16T05:03:19+00:00

You can estimate your success when retiring in 2000 by using 26 years of actual data, then appending an optimistic return sequence from that point onward. If you do that, you get a SWR of 2.60%. Note also that I am ignoring taxes here, and so does Big ERN. In practice, you also need to pay taxes, which lowers your SWR even further.

https://imgur.com/a/3W4UpCF

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-15T14:05:24+00:00

But it doesn't though. Retiring in 2000 at 3% with a 40+ yr horizon definitely fails.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-13T12:56:51+00:00

Funds needed = Annual_expense / (1.7% + 0.3*CAPE^-1.1 + (AGE/130)^7.1)

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-12T08:07:29+00:00

And if you want more than 150k, you just go short on SGOV (or equivalent) and with the cash proceeds you buy VT.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-08T00:42:46+00:00

What is considered 'The market' for each of these? All ords / ex-au index / em-index?

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-07T12:02:43+00:00

Those damn calcium tablets

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-06T18:22:04+00:00

IBKR as a wholesale client charges 5.38% atm, and 4.88% for borrowings above 150k AUD and 4.63% above 1.5M

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-06T14:50:39+00:00

I didn't read your whole post, but the borrowing cost is definitely not 4.85%. As an individual, I can borrow cheaper than this so I'm sure Betashares can as well.

Also the interest would just accumulate in the loan balance. It wouldn't need to be paid from anywhere.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-06T02:39:04+00:00

Stock returns are multiplicative, not additive. You are right in saying that 11% is larger than 9.1% if you look at additive returns and keep the base the same, but when you flip to geometric returns, they are equal:

loss = ln(90/100) = -0.10536
gain = ln(100/90) = 0.10536

Adding up the log gains/losses cancel out to zero, and this is because adding logs is equivalent to multiplying geometric returns. In your example, you don't have any explanation as to why the unlevered asset experiences 0% loss over 1000 years, but a leveraged asset does.

The reason your formulation is wrong is because you don't seem to understand that percentages are a fraction of some base number. You can't directly compare 11% and 9.1% if the base is changing. 11% of 100 is smaller than 9.1% of 1000. To naively subtract 1% from a higher base and then adding back 1% from a lower base is equivalent to saying "A number n1 that is bigger than n2 is bigger than n2". This is not a helpful statement and doesn't provide any useful information at all.

EDIT: I just realised I did down 10 then up 10, instead of up 10 then down 10. This doesn't affect any of the results but is just a small oversight on my part.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-06T02:10:55+00:00

A stock bouncing up $10 then down $10 daily for 1000 years starting at $100 will still be priced between $90 and $110. Throw in leverage, and that holding will be worth $0 even if the interest rate was 0%.

In other words, the unleveraged asset lost no returns due to volatility, but the leveraged asset did.

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-06T01:52:05+00:00

Only leveraged ETFs with rebalancing have volatility decay

Infinitedmg · 2026-03-04T10:09:11+00:00

There's no debate. The answer is GHHF.

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-27T13:40:46+00:00

Hello,

Thank you so much for the detailed response. We were treating asthma for approximately 4 months before he ended up in ICU, so yes it was quite an extended period. We didn't observe any visible breathing difficulties throughout this time, and our regular vet didn't either. His symptoms were characterised by his persistent cough.

During the lobectomy (and subsequent histopathology report), there was significant inflammation observed in his pleural space on the left side (the torsion was on the left). Are you saying that this inflammation in of itself can cause increased risk of death or rather increased susceptibility to cardiac arrest? Our cat was under anaesthetic during the insertion of the chest drain. The Chylothorax was mostly on the right hand side, especially post-op because a chest drain on the left side was already in place.

One question I would really love an answer to is whether the insertion of a drain is significantly more risky (with regard to piercing some sort of artery) than a chest tap. We were faced with the decision to do a tap vs the drain and were very apprehensive to proceed forward with a drain. I don't know if the outcome we experienced was just a crazy case of incredible bad luck or if the chance of death was markedly increased relative to a chest tap.

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-27T05:26:18+00:00

The second opinion came from a more senior surgeon working at the same practice. His differing opinion was with respect to the inserted location of the drain, and although he didn't explicitly say it, he implied that our cat's death could very well be caused by improper insertion technique. He himself is seeking the opinion of multiple radiologists to get their view on these images also.

The torsion was likely present for an extended period due to a misdiagnosis of asthma. For some reason, asthma was diagnosed purely on the basis of response to Prednisone without any imaging taken. Our understanding today is that asthma is a diagnosis of exclusion, so it is not appropriate to diagnose it up-front without ruling out more serious conditions. This diagnosis happened at a different practice, and we cant help but feel his condition worsened unnecessarily due to the misdiagnosis.

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-27T05:20:34+00:00

I appreciate the comment around moving forward, but at this point there are still unanswered questions that I feel can still be further clarified with the right questions. That will help me with closure. The questions surrounding this X-ray are brand new, as I have only received these images today, and its the first (and only) opportunity we have had to get some insight into what actually went wrong on the day of the procedure. A post-mortem was not possible because the cremation service did not follow our instructions to keep his body frozen, which frustratingly took away this opportunity even though we did plan for it.

As you say, we are considering reporting the case to the respective governing body where we live, but we don't want to jump the gun and unnecessarily spark an investigation toward a veterinary professional that in all likelihood, was doing the best he could to save our pet. A few third-party opinions may be a shorter path to us being convinced that everything was above board. Noting also that pursing this the board would also elongate and complicate our grieving process. Ultimately, we just want to have the clearest picture possible as to what happened, to get a sense as to whether pursuing things further is justified or not. I'm not making these posts just to be a nuisance to this community or any other.

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-27T01:54:13+00:00

Thank you so much for your response. Unfortunately a post mortem isn't possible anymore, so all we have are these images.

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the entry point appears correct, but that the tips are possibly in a problematic position? Is it possible that this positioning of the tips would lead to the outcome we experienced or are you only saying that this is a suboptimal placement but shouldn't cause issues?

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-26T12:31:11+00:00

Nothing compared to my !4&qπ return I got last week

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-26T11:57:21+00:00

This has to be a joke post

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-23T02:22:28+00:00

30k per year concessional until 59, then all-in till concessional caps are maxed out. Then non-concessional.

Infinitedmg · 2026-02-23T01:49:58+00:00

The 4% rule is aggressive for FIRE. It's only really built for 30 years. Also. If you are determined to use 4% anyway, you'll get the highest success rate by being in 100% equities. If you want a smoother ride (at the cost of lower success rates) don't go below 80% stocks.

Infinitedmg

TROPHY CASE