Well, you could repeat it for all the 24-year periods from 1917 through now. I wouldn't expect very different results, though accounting for college deferments will be fun.
with only 4 observations, "common sense" and other forms of first-principles reasoning are much more important than the 4 data points. also one should consider data from other countries and other historical eras.
Some observations:
-there are 122 24-year windows in the dataset
-not a single 24-year period had a negative return
-the lowest average return for a 24-year window was 0.15% in the window from 1874-1897
-there have been only two 24-year windows since 1876 with average annualized returns less than 2%
-every window since 1912 has been at least 3%
-every window since 1968 has been at least 7.1% (the author's assumption)
-every window since 1971 has been at least 8%
Note that this doesn't take inflation into account, but also does not factor in the returns from reinvested dividends. Those effects would probably approximately cancel each other out, but hard to say.My point is that having 100 years of investment data is much more like having 4 data points than it is like having 75 or 75 *12 (if you cut the years into months). Even though you literally have 75 data points, they are pretty close to a copy-paste of each other; not statistically independent.