The news and your investments (#164)

If you're reading this, you are one of the few survivors of last week's internet dumpster fire. This week, Simon and I spend time putting together a model to help you make sense of the news. We focus specifically on when a news report should move you to action and when you should just walk away.  Here's the formula we came up with: Figure out what the claim is. Find evidence that supports the claim. Find evidence that disproves the claim.  Ask yourself whether the claim has any bearing on your investment strategy.  Act accordingly.  My thought in choosing this topic was that we'd spend a few minutes discussing some mental models to help us interpret the news and the rest of the episode answering questions. 50 minutes into the discussion, I felt like we had barely scratched the surface. For that reason we didn't get to a single question this week. Subscribe to our RSS feed here. Subscribe or rate us in iTunes. Win of the week: Adam I disagree with the consensus on pet insurance. In all honesty this goes against your rules that you cannot abscond on something like this. If you are a serious pet owner (and not just getting a goldfish because meh) then do it the right way. It's the same argument that instead of having health insurance "you save funds into an index tracker" etc. etc. You are healthy when young, so the likelihood of a serious health issue is small, but you still have health insurance. Just don't have a pet if you place a financial cost on it like that. My dog has had two surgeries, but over and above that throw emergency visits to the vet here and there and insurance has us covered (well mostly - they don't cover dog biscuits).