Agreed that there is a real problem with "Hey, they were stupid so we will let them starve" argument.
So, just picking nits here - I don't think that "selling low and buying high" is the significant issue with letting people handle all of their own retirement planning/saving/investing. I think that the fact that millions of people will simply never save anything (and therefore never invest anything - wisely or otherwise) is orders of magnitude more important than whether they are consistently "selling low and buying high" (which, by the way, nobody can actually do, any more than anyone can consistently sell high and by low).
you could still force people into saving, like we do now with SS. You would still have the forced saving but let people invest the money as they wish.
That's where the terrible decisions would be made.
Not really. If people are able to consistently sell low and buy high then they are capable of identifying the lows and highs beforehand. This is something that has repeatedly been proven to be beyond the capabilities of even the experts. Ergo, it is irrational to think that people are even capable of consistently selling high and buying low.
I know that this is hard for you to swallow in your profession as a financial advisor. Nonetheless, it is a fact.
Going beyond that, if the Feds can mandate the savings (presumably with identified accounts) then they could also mandate investment choices and bounds. For example, simply require all funds in mandated savings accounts be invested in some combination of stock/bond mutual funds with caps/floors on percentages in each.
You refuted the point that the wage ratio dropped for every demographic. You didn’t refute the point that wage increases were biggest for the lowest earners. The only reason the first one wasn’t true for everyone is because there are now lots of women in the workforce who are getting larger raises..regardless of their wage percentile. Probably due to them being in the workforce longer though I imagine you think that’s some government intervention.
You’re out of your league here. I’m always curious why liberals try to turn this stuff into rocket science when it’s not. There’s some basic math here and if you understand how the calculations are done you understand what it means. And it pretty much always leads to the simple conclusion you can’t legislate wealth. That’s kind of intuitive.
Are we looking at the same table 1? The 95th percentile saw a 4.5% increase from 2018-2019. No other group had an increase larger than that in that same time frame.
Still waiting on a response to this. Agip made the claim too so he can back it up if he wants.
you could still force people into saving, like we do now with SS. You would still have the forced saving but let people invest the money as they wish.
That's where the terrible decisions would be made.
Not really. If people are able to consistently sell low and buy high then they are capable of identifying the lows and highs beforehand. This is something that has repeatedly been proven to be beyond the capabilities of even the experts. Ergo, it is irrational to think that people are even capable of consistently selling high and buying low.
I know that this is hard for you to swallow in your profession as a financial advisor. Nonetheless, it is a fact.
Going beyond that, if the Feds can mandate the savings (presumably with identified accounts) then they could also mandate investment choices and bounds. For example, simply require all funds in mandated savings accounts be invested in some combination of stock/bond mutual funds with caps/floors on percentages in each.
You are basically saying 'surrendering and fighting take the same amount of skill.' Obviously they don't. Fighting is much harder.
nah selling low and buying high only requires people to go along with the crowd and let their fear make your decisions for you. Why do you think stocks plunge at times? It's not science...it's just mass panic all at the same time. Investors are very very good at that.
.ignoring the fear and sticking to a plan is very very hard and only a small number of people can do it.
Every year a study comes out analyzing individual investors' performances at Fidelity. they barely make any money at all despite the stock market's huge runup over the last 20 years or so.
As to your last point - sure the gummint could invent some kind of 'guard rails' plan to keep people from doing too much damage to themselves.
So quickly glossing over the fact that I was correct about providing data…you’ve got a different take?
My definition of a “stolen” election is when you vilify the opposition opponent for 6 years with fake conspiracies. Then nominate a candidate that you hide in his basement for 9 months.
Again, the constant delusion. You’ve convinced yourself that YOU are the fact-based one. The only “fact” I clearly recall you claiming was that you don’t think that Fauci was right about some things (and drawing the conclusion that he is corrupt and/or stupid). While in the same breath claiming that Trump was (merely) “inconsistent.”
If that’s the best best comparative conclusion you can draw from your imagined treasure trove of great facts - and it is - you simply need to get a better brain. That’s tough, though.
Oh, and if there was any doubt that I was correct about that, there’s your SECOND paragraph above. Absolutely pathetic.
But hell, I’ll be more specific: Don’t want to be vilified? Don’t act like Donald Trump. And speaking of “facts,” Trumpers like you don’t make the LONG list of his crystal clear transgressions false by simply calling them “conspiracies.” Although I know that that works for the mouth breathers.
Additionally, THIS (for you and all the other Trumpers):
By far, the single most important political fact that anyone can raise right now in this currently democratic country: The last president clearly tried to steal a presidential election.
And that man is still the clear leader of his party.
And you people support him and his party.
The massive problem with that pales in comparison to multiples of the sum of every other policy difference you can raise.
When you can tolerate the above - something that could absolutely destroy this country as we know it - many will find little or no desire to quibble with you on lesser issues. And pretty much everything else is a massively lesser issue.
Say the simple words: Trump is objectively horrible in a million ways. R party should have repudiated him and disowned him long, long ago.
THEN actual adults might treat you with some respect in discussing other issues. Until then, you deserve little but intellectual (and civic) scorn.
I’m not sure what “intellectual scorn” is but I’m sure it’s not coming from you.
It’s what intelligent, well educated, NOT snowed by Fox and Trump people like me have for dumb f*** Trumpers like you. Clear enough?
Studies show that the average return on the monies contributed to social security is around 1% per year. That’s not a good return for money that’s invested for decades. So giving people a poor return on their investment is a good idea in your mind?
ok great idea. Let Americans do their own investing and let them starve when they lose all their money by selling low and buying high for their entire careers. Great idea. (massive sarcasm)
In my state, state government employees do not pay into social security or Medicare. Guess what. They aren't starving. Far from it. In fact, they have retirement packages that those in the private sector can only dream of (because the portion that would go to social security / Medicare appreciates at 6-8% per year instead of 1% per year, the funds are not abused by the managers of the fund who spend them to pay for things they were never intended for, and those on the top end are not forced to subsidize those on the bottom end). From the janitors to the executives, they all retire early with fat benefits.
Dems keep climbing in the generic ballot. Up to D+0.7%
Highest in almost a year.
Getting worried, insurrectionists? That Chuck Schumer will likely be running the show for another couple years is good news, right? Because you have been instructed by the 'why is everyone so mean to me' guy to hate Mitch.
Once again Baghdad agip, you rely too much on one of the worst pollsters out there, Nate Silver. You should start looking at Rich Baris "the people's pundit" on Twitter. His analysis second to none.
Say the simple words: Trump is objectively horrible in a million ways. R party should have repudiated him and disowned him long, long ago.
In my opinion, he is not horrible. Our interests align in many ways. I especially liked the effect he had on woke folks and on bleeding heart liberals. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The lengths his enemies will go to in order to vilify him astound me.
This really gets at the heart of the stupidity of Trumpism:
1) There are literally thousands of other R politicians and potential R politicians who align with your interests. The right could have cast aside the badly, badly unsuitable Trump for one of them. It wasn’t him or Bernie.
2) No behavior is disqualifying as long as the person is entertainingly criticizing your political opposition? That’s absurd and extremely dangerous for a country.
3) Your friend/enemy justification is horribly flawed. The left is your “enemy” on any number of policy issues. And whether you want to admit it, or not, if you’re HALF the patriot you no doubt consider yourself, you’d EASILY realize that the right is currently your enemy on a number of extremely important policies/issues, including, foremost, DEMOCRACY. And since Trump is their leader, tossing in any number of other Trump flaws including horrendously bad honesty, decency, respect for the rule of law, etc.
In my opinion, he is not horrible. Our interests align in many ways. I especially liked the effect he had on woke folks and on bleeding heart liberals. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The lengths his enemies will go to in order to vilify him astound me.
This really gets at the heart of the stupidity of Trumpism:
1) There are literally thousands of other R politicians and potential R politicians who align with your interests. The right could have cast aside the badly, badly unsuitable Trump for one of them. It wasn’t him or Bernie.
2) No behavior is disqualifying as long as the person is entertainingly criticizing your political opposition? That’s absurd and extremely dangerous for a country.
3) Your friend/enemy justification is horribly flawed. The left is your “enemy” on any number of policy issues. And whether you want to admit it, or not, if you’re HALF the patriot you no doubt consider yourself, you’d EASILY realize that the right is currently your enemy on a number of extremely important policies/issues, including, foremost, DEMOCRACY. And since Trump is their leader, tossing in any number of other Trump flaws including horrendously bad honesty, decency, respect for the rule of law, etc.
Put a different and much more succinct way, I’m happy to guess that NONE of you Trumpers on this thread have or are raising your kids to be ANYTHING like Trump. Nor do you or would you tolerate it in anyone else in your life.
YET, you want THAT man to be the most powerful person in the world.
In my opinion, he is not horrible. Our interests align in many ways. I especially liked the effect he had on woke folks and on bleeding heart liberals. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The lengths his enemies will go to in order to vilify him astound me.
This really gets at the heart of the stupidity of Trumpism:
1) There are literally thousands of other R politicians and potential R politicians who align with your interests. The right could have cast aside the badly, badly unsuitable Trump for one of them. It wasn’t him or Bernie.
2) No behavior is disqualifying as long as the person is entertainingly criticizing your political opposition? That’s absurd and extremely dangerous for a country.
3) Your friend/enemy justification is horribly flawed. The left is your “enemy” on any number of policy issues. And whether you want to admit it, or not, if you’re HALF the patriot you no doubt consider yourself, you’d EASILY realize that the right is currently your enemy on a number of extremely important policies/issues, including, foremost, DEMOCRACY. And since Trump is their leader, tossing in any number of other Trump flaws including horrendously bad honesty, decency, respect for the rule of law, etc.
Excellent post there, brother! Correct, of course.
This really gets at the heart of the stupidity of Trumpism:
1) There are literally thousands of other R politicians and potential R politicians who align with your interests. The right could have cast aside the badly, badly unsuitable Trump for one of them. It wasn’t him or Bernie.
2) No behavior is disqualifying as long as the person is entertainingly criticizing your political opposition? That’s absurd and extremely dangerous for a country.
3) Your friend/enemy justification is horribly flawed. The left is your “enemy” on any number of policy issues. And whether you want to admit it, or not, if you’re HALF the patriot you no doubt consider yourself, you’d EASILY realize that the right is currently your enemy on a number of extremely important policies/issues, including, foremost, DEMOCRACY. And since Trump is their leader, tossing in any number of other Trump flaws including horrendously bad honesty, decency, respect for the rule of law, etc.
Put a different and much more succinct way, I’m happy to guess that NONE of you Trumpers on this thread have or are raising your kids to be ANYTHING like Trump. Nor do you or would you tolerate it in anyone else in your life.
YET, you want THAT man to be the most powerful person in the world.
Folks, that makes absolutely ZERO sense.
Wake the f*** up. Please.
Biden has been a terrible parent and he still gets unusually preoccupied with with little girls. No, YOU need to wake up.
🚨BREAKING:
Ashley Biden’s leaked diary that detailed how Joe Biden took inappropriate showers with her when she was a child is confirmed as authentic. pic.twitter.com/6UAlYsDL6D
Dems keep climbing in the generic ballot. Up to D+0.7%
Highest in almost a year.
Getting worried, insurrectionists? That Chuck Schumer will likely be running the show for another couple years is good news, right? Because you have been instructed by the 'why is everyone so mean to me' guy to hate Mitch.
Historically (since 1946), the party of the president in power at the time loses 25 seats in the house of representatives during the midterm elections. Given that we are in the midst of a recession, crime spike, homeless crisis, drug crisis, immigration crisis, inflationary spiral, foreign policy fiasco, etc. I see no reason for that trend to change course. You can pull up whatever left-winged poll you want, the dismal performance of Biden's Administration will have voters pining for change in the next election.
Your stats are correct, INCLUDING the fact that we are in a recession. We will NOT be in a recession on midterm voting day though. Recessions typically affect Presidential elections though and not midterm elections. The overwhelming factor in midterms has been voting against the party in power.
It is STILL likely that Republicans will take over the House...not guaranteed, but likely. I believe the Senate stays with Democrats. Not much talk lately of a "red wave" though. Republicans really need to take the Senate and the House for that to be the case.
The REASON that this midterm election MIGHT buck the trend is that there are too many extreme positions on the right.
Trump - He's a damn fool, and most of America is tired of his act and those who support him. He has lost even more support with this Mar-a-lago nonsense.
Roe v. Wade - This Supreme Court decision is a much more major one than normal, and it goes against what the vast majority of Americans want. This decision works against Republicans in two ways...1) mobilizes Democrats and Independents and even some Republicans who believe the choice should be up to the woman and her doctor, and 2) it pacifies Anti-Abortionists who are one-issue voters and who believe the job is now done.
Not really. If people are able to consistently sell low and buy high then they are capable of identifying the lows and highs beforehand. This is something that has repeatedly been proven to be beyond the capabilities of even the experts. Ergo, it is irrational to think that people are even capable of consistently selling high and buying low.
I know that this is hard for you to swallow in your profession as a financial advisor. Nonetheless, it is a fact.
Going beyond that, if the Feds can mandate the savings (presumably with identified accounts) then they could also mandate investment choices and bounds. For example, simply require all funds in mandated savings accounts be invested in some combination of stock/bond mutual funds with caps/floors on percentages in each.
You are basically saying 'surrendering and fighting take the same amount of skill.' Obviously they don't. Fighting is much harder.
nah selling low and buying high only requires people to go along with the crowd and let their fear make your decisions for you. Why do you think stocks plunge at times? It's not science...it's just mass panic all at the same time. Investors are very very good at that.
.ignoring the fear and sticking to a plan is very very hard and only a small number of people can do it.
Every year a study comes out analyzing individual investors' performances at Fidelity. they barely make any money at all despite the stock market's huge runup over the last 20 years or so.
As to your last point - sure the gummint could invent some kind of 'guard rails' plan to keep people from doing too much damage to themselves.
Hey dude, I like you. So don't take this personally. But you really don't understand numbers.
I'm not "basically saying" anything at all. I am very directly saying that in order to consistently sell low and buy high one must be able to determine, before the fact, where the highs and lows are. That is a mathematical certainty. And if one can determine consistently where the highs and lows are, before the fact, then one is doing something that it has been repeatedly demonstrated nobody can do. That is a simple fact.
The very obvious, and not really debatable, conclusion is that it is simply not possible for the dumb masses to consistently sell low and buy high. Instead, this notion that the dumb masses do so is simply a silly, but self-comforting, phrase that "the pros" like to bandy about in order to feel superior.
The only things that matter for expected outcomes are the amount/time saved/invested and the average allocation. Pros neither suck at, nor are good at, determining when to get in and out of the market. The exact same thing is true of the masses. We are all idiots when it comes to timing the market, with no better chance to beat the market than 50-50, with the same to be said for losing to the market.
Typical incompetence by an affirmative action piece of trash.
So the president who just pushed through an executive order for student debt forgiveness outside of his designated powers feels that the individual he may come up against in the next election is a threat to our democracy?
Typical incompetence by an affirmative action piece of trash.
So the president who just pushed through an executive order for student debt forgiveness outside of his designated powers feels that the individual he may come up against in the next election is a threat to our democracy?
So quickly glossing over the fact that I was correct about providing data…you’ve got a different take?
My definition of a “stolen” election is when you vilify the opposition opponent for 6 years with fake conspiracies. Then nominate a candidate that you hide in his basement for 9 months.
Again, the constant delusion. You’ve convinced yourself that YOU are the fact-based one. The only “fact” I clearly recall you claiming was that you don’t think that Fauci was right about some things (and drawing the conclusion that he is corrupt and/or stupid). While in the same breath claiming that Trump was (merely) “inconsistent.”
If that’s the best best comparative conclusion you can draw from your imagined treasure trove of great facts - and it is - you simply need to get a better brain. That’s tough, though.
Oh, and if there was any doubt that I was correct about that, there’s your SECOND paragraph above. Absolutely pathetic.
But hell, I’ll be more specific: Don’t want to be vilified? Don’t act like Donald Trump. And speaking of “facts,” Trumpers like you don’t make the LONG list of his crystal clear transgressions false by simply calling them “conspiracies.” Although I know that that works for the mouth breathers.
Every response from you comes with ZERO facts. A lot of words, a lot of rhetoric and no information that disputes anything I posted.
You don’t even know what I previously posted about Fauci to even attempt to refute what I posted. If I were in your position I’d stop wasting my time posting stuff so meaningless. Literally…your thoughts are worthless.
For you reference I posted that Fauci was asked about the effects of a previous infection on immunity after 15 months OF the pandemic. Millions had recovered by that time and the long time head of the NIH couldn’t explain whether the people previously infected had immunity. An obvious lie.
One last chance to explain that contradiction. I can give you a lot more examples of how the pandemic response was politicized. But I’ll start with one?
