|
| My point is that using 7% returns in the context he did as opportunity cost is very unrealistic. Your money would have significant risk of loss if invested in something on the assumption of getting a 7% return. What’s that saying about past performance? Edit too add; If I had several million dollars in a lump sum to invest today, it wouldn’t be in land or the stock market, either one. But it’s more the fact that I don’t have the years in my favor to bounce back if a serious correction were to occur. And given the choice and I were 35 years younger, I’d choose land over the stock market, at today’s levels. I don’t need to take those kind of risks at my age.
Edited by Boone & Crockett 12/14/2025 14:05
| |
|
Land rich and cash poor
