> This emphasis on the 30-year time horizon is very
>misleading and selective. Thirty years is a long time, too
>long for a lot of people alive today, including many who
>are not so old and may not realize it.
Barkley, the 30-year period is meant to simulate something like an average worker's life as a saver. I'm assuming that very few people start saving in their 20s - standard life-cycle consumption stuff. You know, you borrow a lot to set up housekeeping, and then start saving in your early to mid-30s. Then you retire, if you don't die first, around 65. For most people, the 60- or 120-year average returns that stock touts use is pretty meaningless. The damn thing bounces all around its average, meaning that different generations could face radically different returns in the stock market.
Doug