Elroy Dimson

They put some money to one side and within five or six years' time, they were going to be in a position to spend the money that they needed.

They did not understand

But the projections in growth for the long run, which the Wharton School professor, Jeremy Siegel, had popularized, facilitates that.

For people who are not such optimists, they are not going to become as wealthy, but the downside is less as well.

If you really need the money, then my world is also in downloads.

If you look at Oxford and Cambridge colleges,

Some are terrifically wealthy and others are not.

If you are worried about whether rain will come through the roof and ruin the organ in your college, you don't stick the money into the stock market if you might need it in a few years' time.

That's the cross-subsidy, if you like, between long-term investors and shorter-term investors.

Long-term investors will do better because short-term investors can't afford losses.

The extent to which bonds have co-moved with or be a diversifier for equities is quite important in all of this.

We went through a period for the first two decades of the current century where

in which we had become used to bonds having a role in the portfolio of being a safe asset.

And then 2022 came along, all bets were off.

I think there is a role in bonds, but I'll give you the personal view because our tastes, I'm talking personally, are fairly modest.

We don't need to spend an awful lot.

There's a big benefit from being heavily invested in equities for somebody who thinks that way.

People sometimes ask me for advice.

I'm not a financial advisor and I don't like giving advice.

But I think you need a clear idea as to how risk-averse you are, how much you might need money for an adverse event.