Yesterday I talked about what I deemed to be some rather harsh and somewhat insulting comments coming from the passive investing camp and being directed toward those who have a different opinion of how to invest. While I agree with the idea of being more passive and using indexes (which we do in practice), I – like many others – have grown increasingly perturbed at the level of discourse between the disciplines, particularly online.
But in my plea to the passive indexing authorities, I used a very unfortunate metaphor in comparing their rigidity and fundamentalist ideology to that of the Taliban. After speaking with some friends, it had occurred to me that I was essentially doing the exact thing that I was asking others not to – inadvertently insulting others to get a point across.
The metaphor is not an apt description of the passive investing writers, whom I had mentioned I had a lot of respect for. I wish I had made my same points but without having used it.
Dan Solin does a lot of good and saves the people who read his views from making big mistakes with their retirement investing. The only negative I meant to convey is that sometimes his points are made at the expense of others – people who do their best but may disagree with the passive philosophy.
I wanted to clarify that and apologize specifically to Dan, whose message I agree with even if I don’t always like the way he chooses to present it. I should have drawn a different comparison if my aim was to engender a more harmonious discussion. My clunky metaphor may have accomplished the exact opposite effect and for that I’m sorry.