Grantham reminds me of Marc Faber of the 'Gloom Boom and Doom Report' ... pithy, witty, educated, and great for media hits --- but wrong for a lot longer than you can profit from their advice.
Sadly when the Bear strikes, everyone goes 'oh, they were right!' while forgetting they were early/wrong for many many years.

I didn't see in the article what inflation factor is used in these predictions. Did I miss it?
Grantham has been doing this so long there are now reality checks for those predictions. I found this one from 2018 where on Dec. 31, 2010 this 7 year prediction was made. Below, prediction and actual 7 years later.
2010 prediction... 2018 actual
US LC predicted +0.4%... actual was +12%
US SC predicted -1.9%... actual was +10%
Int LC predicted +2.1%... actual was +5%
Int SC predicted -1.4%... actual was +4%
EM predicted 4.1%... actual was 0%
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/gmo-asset-return-forecasts-vs-actual-returns-2011-2018.html
Not sure what to make of it but this obviously smart man has had trouble with his predictions in the past. Why adjust based on future predictions? Yeah, we may be in a value bubble and a bear market is always on the horizon somewhere down the road, but sounds like his algorithms were saying the same thing in 2010. Remember, his predications have to not only predict the global equity markets, but also the rate of inflation. Impossible task maybe? But A+ for the effort.

We got our boosters at our local CVS. They schedule appts 15 minutes apart and their process went flawlessly for us who happened to get ours on two different days, so we saw it happen twice there. That said, the pharmacist who we've known for years did express a lot of angst though over how taxing the process is on their staffing.

13 years is long enough to make a few investors rich along the way. Who are the current Peter Lynches in their 3rd or 4th innings?

I guess he’s been spilling his guts on CNBC. But CNBC has become impossible to link or view without a paid subscription. (Interview referenced was in late September)
Here’s a decent article summarizing Grantham’s comments.
Here’s a 10-minute discussion / analysis based on a few clips from the CNBC interview. The presenter is decent - but clearly promoting his internet based investor service,.

My advice would be to exercise due diligence and look at your holdings one by one. I’m mostly a bottom feeder, so tend to own things that are pretty beaten up and out of favor. The biggest exception I could find is my commodities fund, BRCAX, up 32% for one year. However, looking back 5 and 10 years the fund has only garnered single digit returns. And, as @BenWP will testify, my single largest holding, TMSRX, appears to be anything but a euphoric bubble. :)
Bonds are a bit troubling. Not sure what kind of duration my allocation funds have, but my direct bond fund holdings are intermediate term (generally 2-5 years). My issue here with Grantham (and other experts) is that I think if equities hit the bricks, the economy will grind to a near halt and intermediate / long bonds will rise in value - albeit for a brief period. But - might be wrong.
However, I agree with most of what Grantham says and respect his knowledge. For defense, I’ve been looking at various defensive funds. None is a “panacea”. All are problematic in some way - - perhaps the reason he stresses cash for defense.

@stillers - it auto defaults to 1985 but the results themselves are constrained by the earliest fund in the comparison. Because I chose SPY vs. Vanguard 500 Index, it started from 1994 vs. 1990 if I had chosen Vanguard. Nevertheless (as opposed to nonetheless)- the results are just impressive all the same. The graphs look a bit different on PV vs. Stock Charts but the results are the same. FWIW I own 2 of the 3 funds mentioned and couldn't be happier. Let's hope the good times continue to roll. Cheers.
Edit Add: May nothing ever change with FDGRX. Has been just stellar for me for many years.

That footage is from awhile back. Today Peter Lynch is 77 years old. My father invested with him and Magellan used to carry 3% front load. Time has changed for sure.

@Roy, you brought up excellent point. We consolidated our brokerage and mutual accounts a number years ago for ease of tracking to two large brokerages. So we have to reconsider this announcement from TRP since we already invested in a number of their excellent funds. The ability to invest in their institutional shares at $50K is quite tempting, plus other offering. At Vanguard, one can purchase Pimco institutional shares at $25K instead of $1M (thanks to @msf). At present, we are evaluating the pros and cons of each brokerages and which one would fit our long term needs. My experience of transfer process with TRP was slow, but that was over 5 years ago.
With regards to Grandeur Peak funds, you can purchase their institutional shares at much lower minimum at many brokerages with a transaction fee. The $ minimum is set at the agreement between Grandeur Peak and that specific brokerages. Since Grandeur Peak funds invest in small to mid cap space, it poses challenges to existing investors when the funds closed, where one cannot purchase additional shares from their brokerages. One can transfer their shares to Grandeur Peak but that is not something I wish to do in the long run.
Also, I am trying to
look at what is under the hood of TRP brokerage but am having issue finding it for comparing to brokerages I am currently using. No luck by calling their customer service.

+1 Yes-you could have done a lot worse than paying the 3 and 5% load on FCNTX and SGENX in the early 1990's and staying in those fund sthe last 30 years !

@Catch22 - Thanks. You’ve covered the bases well. And you were extremely prescient (and correct) about the value of bonds for many years when I and others here were doubters! Credit to you!
Any affinity I may hold for bonds today relates only to relative value near term when compared to equities. I do find it intriguing that a lot of “hedged-equity” funds are actually parked 90% in Treasuries currently. (SWAN for example).
Regards

Hi @hank
I looked again at what I wrote, and the expression of my language is pretty crappy.
I was picking on the folks who seem to think they are able to see the future so far away. The big kids have had too many forecast misses for interest rates since the 2008 melt; at least based upon their salary and access to data.
My IG bond thoughts are more directed to gov't. issue, vs corp.
Quandary:
a state of perplexity or uncertainty over what to do in a difficult situation.
The quandary being: Fed. taper.........well, if the Treasury stills needs to sell bills, notes and bonds to run the house of America; who will buy these if the Fed. tapers too much and doesn't want more Treasury paper?
Lots of folks still need and want U.S. debt.
The question becomes, as usual, supply and demand.
'Course the potential problem today is that rates beyond the control of the Treasury or the Fed. are already low and less swing room than in years past.
I still feel the big kids still don't really know what direction for yields, cause we're still in the "this time is different mode"; and more warped from Covid and all of the affects.
To a point, if there remains enough buyers; yields will go down; and the prices will increase, which is where the money is made.
This write likely didn't help one bit to express much of anything.
I'm attempting to have a decent thought path too late at night for me today.
Remain curious,
Catch

Keep subtracting one. So that one goes from, say, dividing by 19 years to dividing by 18 years ... down to dividing by 1 year. At that point, one must take everything out.
Which is a good thing. Otherwise one would have to divide by zero the next year :-)
https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/required-minimum-distributions-for-ira-beneficiaries

Couple thoughts. Not my expertise.
- If I were very young and saving for 25+ years out, a good actively managed time tested global fund is what I’d use. Heck, with a 25-35 year time horizon until even the first withdrawal, that’s about all I’d use. TEMWX was a great fund in the 70s and for several years beyond. (Went downhill after Franklin took over).
- Here’s one of the first things I learned from our plan’s advisor (whom I don’t begrudge for the 4% commission he was raking in). Says Bob: “Global’s better because if the U.S. becomes overvalued they’ll simply take the money and move it to other areas of the world that aren’t overvalued.” Made sense to me than and still does.
- You might already be invested in a global fund without realizing it. Recently I looked at the Lipper stats for sedate conservative PRSIX which I’ve long held. It’s currently invested 61% in North America. I can pin down about 25% shown to be on other continents. Doesn’t add up to 100. Might be that the fund’s substantial cash & “other” holdings aren’t assigned to any particular geographic area.

RMDs for inherited IRAs are grandfathered - if you have an existing inherited IRA from which you are taking RMDs, you can continue as if nothing had changed. You do not need to deplete them within 10 years.
https://www.irahelp.com/slottreport/stretch-ira-lives-some-beneficiaries
These RMDs cannot be combined with RMDs for all other T-IRAs.
And as I noted in a previous post above, calculating the RMDs for these IRAs under the new tables is not as simple as merely looking them up. I am concerned that there is a nontrivial chance that custodians will err in their OPTIONAL calculations.

RMDs for all T-IRAs can be combined and taken from ANY ONE T-IRA. Brokers'/funds' calculations are OPTIONAL services they offer - I subscribe to those to just double-check my own calculations. Some firms also have contractual signups for calculating AND distributing RMDs but they are good only for straightforward situations.
RMDs for all 403b can be combined and taken from ANY ONE 403b.
Then the spoiler. RMDs for 401k must be taken from each 401k (i.e. they cannot be combined like the 2 situations above).
Note that the RMD tables are changing on 1/1/22, and the IRS will come out with 2022 RMD worksheets LATER so as not to confuse people. But the new RMD tables were decided in 2019/2020, and were initially to go into effect on 1/1/21, but that was delayed to 1/1/22.
RMDs from Inherited IRAs - the old rule requited annual RMDs. But with the IRA stretch gone, the IRAs must be depleted within 10 years and one can do it in any way, gradually, or all at once by the 10th year.

TRP is trying to get some of their bigger investors away from the online mutual fund supermarkets so they can reduce the amount of their management fees they have to pay to Fidelity, Schwab, etc.
For several years I've considered returning our accounts directly to TRP out of loyalty and appreciation for the excellent investment management our accounts have received through PRWCX and Giroux. Around 80% of our investments are in TRP funds (primarily PRWCX). I moved our accounts first to TDA and now at Schwab, why should they be getting a big chunk of the management fees, what are they adding to our investment returns in those funds?
But, up until now there has been no personal financial incentive otherwise to make the move back to TRP. Now that the new Summit program has dramatically lowered the hurdle to access institutional shares ($50,000 rather than $1 million) at the lower ER and also gives access to closed funds like PRNHX, I'm seriously considering making the move. Any non-TRP funds we want to invest in can still be done so through a TRP brokerage account. Being able to park our investments in the institutional shares will potentially add TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS to our returns over the next number of decades if we are blessed to live that long.
I've wondered why more fund shops haven't followed the lead of organizations like Grandeur Peak who will let shareholders purchase the cheaper institutional shares at far lower minimums if they invest directly with the fund rather than through brokers. Kudos to TRP for finally coming around.
Please let me know if I am overlooking something here.

There are several references to articles in Barron's. For those interested, I have been doing weekend summaries from Barron's for several years that are released on Saturday mornings. Some recent ones can be found at this link at the open read-access site,
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/board/12/market-insights

A very good point,@yogibear. BRUFX has lost assets every year since 2016. I was one who bailed a couple of years ago.

This is such a great resource for me during distribution season. What are you guys doing with this data? I use it to create estimates of what my clients will receive in distributions before the end of the year, determine which funds to put off buying, and (some years, not this one) tax loss harvesting out of funds that will pay more in dividends than the capital gains would be.
I assume I'm not the only one who is going to these sites and typing the numbers into excel? Next year.... what do you think about also having a shared google sheet?

Love "experts" predictions, see (link)
Example: In 05/2012 (article)
Question:You have become famous for your cyclically adjusted 10-year price/earnings ratio. What do the latest numbers say about future stock market returns?
Shiller: we found a correlation between that ratio and the next 10 years' return.
If you plug in today's P/E of about 22, it would be predicting something like an annualized 4% return after inflation.
FD: reality, the SP500 made 15+% average anually since that date and much better than countries with lower PE10.
==============
I would love if markets collapse because I would be out. I have been doing it for years and why my biggest loss from any top since 2018 was less than 1%. I made money every week in March of 2020.
How do I know? VIX is one of my indicators, the rest is in a lock box.
The key is to be mostly invested. I'm in the market at 99+%(never cash) at 90+% of the time.