thanks for reading. I acknowledge your argument but i'll raise you one. my example was about a halving of the stock price but my argument was that narratives around passive income from dividend investing mischaracterize the risks involved, not that its a fruitless endeavour. It's well known that large commercial dividend harvesting strategy tend to exhibit higher volatility profiles during times of stress. Blue chip, dividend growers are different from pure div yield plays as these company will no doubt be sought after and richly valued. This again means during periods of stress, as function of the valuation starting point these company's will potentially exhibit a higher price volatility profile relative to the market. As I mentioned in the article returns should be assessed on a total return, in addition they should be assessed on a relative basis against a suitable benchmark, not in absolute. I'm sure you could find a few names that might disagree with what I said, but i'm referencing the market in aggregate. Please don't misunderstand, this article is not an attack on dividend investing, it has a role to play if it fits your objectives and you understnad the risks, but what bothers me is people who stuff it in a listicle and make it out to be free money.