Let me tell you about a fairy tale I just read. It stars a wise old investor with a soothing voice, a calculator soaked in compounding interest, and a plan so simple it could only come from someone who hasn’t paid rent since Reagan was president. The fable comes courtesy of The New York Times' Jeff Sommer and his June 27, 2025, article, “A Recipe for Doubling Your Stock Returns, Again and Again.”
The gist? Ignore global chaos, multiple wars, and the minor inconvenience of having to eat — just dump your cash into a low-cost index fund, forget about it for six decades, and voilà! You too can turn $1,000 into $390,000 while society collapses around you.
Let’s dive into the strategy that promises you wealth — provided you live longer than the warranty on a nuclear reactor and don't mind a little thing called “not touching your money for 60 years.”
The Secret Sauce? Time. Lots of It.
Charles D. Ellis — 87-year-old investing sage, index fund evangelist, and unintentional performance artist in financial comedy — has a revolutionary idea: invest for 60 years. Yes, 60. Not ten. Not twenty. SIXTY.
“Actually, many of us have that time horizon,” he says, like a man whose social circle includes mostly vampires.
Now, you might be thinking, “But Charles, I just turned 35, and my checking account is allergic to the number four digits.” Fear not! Just pretend your grandkids — whom you haven’t met yet and might hate you for naming them “Nevaeh” and “Axl” — are the real investors here. Because nothing says retirement planning like deferring your wealth until someone else gets to enjoy it after climate change, war, and avocado inflation finish us off.
The World Is Burning? Ignore That.
Sommer begins his article with a bold bit of nihilism: “Forget about the upheaval in the Middle East. Don’t dwell on Russia’s war with Ukraine, U.S. tariffs and the budget deficit — or just about anything else that has been dominating news coverage.”
Oh, okay. So just turn off CNN, stop worrying about whether Florida will be underwater next Thursday, and trust that the stock market will gently levitate your wealth like a meditation app for your portfolio.
Sure, nuclear war might end life as we know it, but have you considered the power of reinvested dividends?
Compound Interest: The Eighth Wonder of the People Who Already Own Houses
The pièce de résistance of the article is that golden number: 38,881.17% return over 60 years. That’s right, if you invested $1,000 in 1965, you’d now have $390,000.
Great! All you had to do was be alive in 1965 with $1,000 you didn’t need. Meanwhile, in 2025, $1,000 barely covers a month of therapy to deal with your economic anxiety from not being born into a generation that got to buy real estate with nickels.
And let's not forget: sixty years ago, you couldn’t even buy an index fund. Those came along in 1976 thanks to Jack Bogle — another financial deity whose basic message was: “Just sit there and don’t do anything stupid.” Solid advice. Unless, of course, you're one of the 60% of Americans living paycheck to paycheck. But sure, let's talk about long-term horizons while people are financing rotisserie chickens at Costco.
Stocks vs. Bonds vs. Real Life
To his credit, Sommer doesn’t fully sip the “stocks only” Kool-Aid. He admits he holds bonds and cash because, in his words, “I’ve never generated enough surplus income to be comfortable with losing a big chunk of my savings in a short-term decline.”
Ah yes, the ancient and noble profession of newspaper columnist — known across the land for its rock-solid job security and six-figure bonuses. Sommer’s honesty here is refreshing: even he hedges his bets. But Ellis? He’s all in on stocks. Bonds are for cowards. Cash is for chumps. You want the sweet stuff? You ride the S&P 500 rollercoaster like a thrill-seeking toddler on a sugar high.
But if you're 65 and have never owned a stock in your life? “Yeah, maybe don’t go 100% equities overnight,” says Ellis, begrudgingly, like a dad warning you not to shotgun tequila before prom.
Do Nothing, Get Rich — Eventually
The takeaway from this whole piece — if you squint hard enough to ignore the reality of rent, recessions, and recess appointments — is simple: the stock market goes up, eventually. And the longer you leave your money in, the more it grows. Exponentially. Magically. Like yeast, but with less gluten and more dividends.
This is true. The math doesn’t lie. But neither does the poverty rate. And for a lot of Americans, this entire conversation sounds like being told to “just invest in a Roth IRA” while they’re trying to decide between insulin and electricity.
Let’s Talk About the 60-Year Math
Here’s where it gets good. The article pulls out the big guns: Howard Silverblatt from S&P Dow Jones Indices ran the numbers. And yes, the S&P 500 returned an average of 10.46% annually from 1965 to 2025. That’s with reinvested dividends. So your money doubles roughly every 7 years. Which sounds incredible, right?
Until you remember that’s only if you didn’t panic sell in 1987, or 2000, or 2008, or 2020, or 2022, or literally any time someone said “China.”
Behavioral finance says otherwise. Most retail investors don’t hold for 60 years. They hold for six months until their cousin tells them crypto is back.
The Most Polite Financial Gaslighting You’ve Ever Read
Sommer’s tone throughout is genteel, almost soothing. It’s like being gaslit by a grandfather who offers you a Werther’s Original while explaining that actually, you're just not being patient enough.
The whole idea that you can ignore everything — politics, global conflict, market crashes, your aging parents’ healthcare bills, your own precarious employment, housing insecurity, and the student loan vampire sucking your paycheck — because you’ll get a sweet compound return in 2085? That’s not optimism. That’s financial gaslighting wrapped in a Patagonia vest.
“Just Keep Investing, Bro”
The Ellis method, endorsed like a sacred scroll, is simple:
-
Pick a low-cost diversified stock index fund.
-
Never touch it.
-
Live through six recessions, two global wars, seven presidents, and possibly the rise and fall of the United States itself.
-
Die rich, or make your grandkids rich while you eat Fancy Feast.
I mean, what’s not to love?
What’s Not Said
What Sommer’s article doesn't spend much time on is inequality. Or inflation. Or the simple truth that half the country can’t afford a $400 emergency, let alone a 60-year stock plan. We love to mythologize the stock market as a great democratizer of wealth — like anyone with $100 and a Robinhood account can “make it.”
But the reality? Investing works best when you already have money. Shocking, I know. You can’t index-fund your way out of poverty. Compounding returns are beautiful, but only if you can afford to keep your money locked up while life demands liquid cash. Housing, healthcare, child care, elder care — none of these wait politely while your ETF climbs out of a bear market.
The Sweet, Sweet Stuff
The article ends on Ellis’s quote that the stock market is “where the sweet, sweet, sweet stuff comes through.” It sounds like something whispered by a stockbroker in a fever dream. Or maybe a candy dealer trying to get kids hooked on sugar.
Yes, compound interest is amazing. But let’s not act like it’s a cheat code for everyone. For the millions juggling side hustles, caregiving, gig work, and inflation-fueled survival, “sweet stuff” sounds more like a mirage than a plan.
The Truth the Article Accidentally Reveals
Here’s the big takeaway Sommer doesn’t quite intend, but definitely delivers:
If you're lucky enough to not need your money, investing long-term is great.
But if you're like most people — needing cash, trying to retire sometime before cyborgs rule the Earth, or simply attempting to survive the latest economic mess — then maybe the whole “ignore the news, just trust the market” mantra feels a little detached from reality.
Like telling someone on a sinking ship to relax because, over the long term, the ocean levels out.
Final Thought: Beating the Market vs. Surviving It
Look, I’m not anti-index-fund. I love index funds. I’d marry an index fund if I could write off the reception. But articles like this — with their soft-focus, time-will-heal-everything optimism — ignore the fact that time itself is a luxury. And so is the ability to be passive.
Real investing isn’t just about discipline. It’s about access. Flexibility. Risk tolerance. And yeah, luck.
So if you can’t afford to wait 60 years to see your money grow, that doesn’t mean you’re a bad investor. It means you’re living in a reality where money needs to move, not hibernate. You’re not broken. You’re just not 87 with a pile of savings, a landline, and a copy of “Rethinking Investing” next to your Metamucil.
Invest if you can. Diversify when possible. Ignore the noise if it helps.
But don’t let someone with generational wealth, decades of privilege, and a golf handicap lecture you on patience. Especially when you’re still trying to pay off a college degree that didn’t come with dividends.
The End. Now go check your retirement account. Then cry. Then go outside and touch grass.