IN EDIT! HERE IS THE LINK TO THE PODCAST OF THE THIRD HOUR OF MAY 31st MONEYTALK: KABC 790 If more become available, I will post them.
STOCK MARKET....(in response to Larry from Ill. who asked about investing 100% of his kids college funds in the stock market) Brinker said: The real question for you is going to be what the market does between now and the time that you need to spend this money. You know what the market has done – it's tripled in the past six years. So nobody that I know is jumping up and down and saying this is the buying opportunity of a lifetime. The reality is this tremendous market run and surge that we've had has brought us to this point.
Honey EC: I think the "point" that Brinker was referring to is the near all-time record highs that the market has been reaching and nipping at. But he is still fully invested in all Marketimer portfolios.
STOCK/BOND ALLOCATION 50-50 NOT 60-40 IN RETIREMENT....In response to Frank from Milwaukee, who asked about being 100% in stock market, Brinker said: That's not something that would work for me. I don't see any reason to have 100% stock ratio in retirement, even if you have a pension. I would not be willing to go more than 60/40 and that's the absolute most I would go in retirement - and that would only be because you have a guaranteed pension.…
MODEL PORTFOLIO III.... Brinker said: In portfolio III, we have a duration of around two, which is very very low. And we have a current investment yield of about 3%. So in terms of duration we have controlled investment risk there by limiting duration.… You always have the alternative of using a laddered FDIC insured CDs if you are uncomfortable owning any bonds. And that way, your principal is not at risk.… For anybody that is worried about it. – That would be for a zero risk tolerance income investor.
Honey EC: I found it interesting that Brinker gave the duration and yield for his Marketimer model portfolio III bond funds. I don't think he has ever done that before. That is his balanced portfolio that he recommends for retirees. The other two portfolios are all stocks. (All fully invested.) There are three bond funds in P-3: DoubleLine Low Duration Bond (DLSNX; DoubleLine Total Return Bond (DLTNX); and Osterweis Strategic Income Fund (OSTIX). Percentage-wise, these three funds make up 50% of the portfolio, but dollar-wise -- for those who have been in the portfolio since 2008, when it dropped like a rock, it is close to 70-30 (stocks over bonds).
Honey, the Curious: I wonder if Brinker got confused and thought he was talking about his income portfolio since he does not include portfolio III duration or dividend yields in Marketimer. It would be great if one of you great mathematicians would figure out the duration and yield on those there funds that I listed above.
VANGUARD GINNIE MAE BOND FUND....Caller Bruce from Chicago said: I retired and I have my money divided between Ginnie Mae and the total Stock market Index. I'm not making any money on the Ginnie Maes but I do want to be safe. Can I ask you if there is something else that I could possibly consider where I would get a little bit more interest?
Brinker replied: If you don't want to take any risk, then you are getting fairly close to a risk free investment scenario. And if you want to go there, I have to tell you, you're not going to get much these days because of the Fed's policy of keeping short rates low.… If you don't want to take any risk at all been you could put together a ladder of FDIC fully insured Certificates of Deposit. Your interest rate is going to be very low, but you're going to get your money back on maturity and have the freedom to reinvest as you seek at that time.GINNIE MAE AND MARKETIMER MODEL PORTFOLIO III....Carol (Marketimer subscriber) from Illinois said: I've always followed your model. I'm a retired person – have my 401(k) with Vanguard. And late last year, I converted my Ginnie Mae into the money market waiting to hold on to see what would go on with the interest rates. I'm still in the money market but I'm thinking about your recommendation for your model three portfolio in the bond area.
Brinker replied: I think that we have addressed this issue a number of times. I feel reasonably comfortable with the approach we are taking which is, we are keeping our durations down – our durations are down roughly in the area of 2.0 – a little bit less. At the same time we are doing that, we are generating a nice investment income – right now it's about 3%.
Honey EC: Brinker did not tell either caller that he sold all Marketimer Vanguard Ginnie Mae Fund holdings in July 2013 -- almost two years ago. Research proves that this cost investors dearly since GNMAs have done much better than most of the funds Brinker moved subscribers into.... That includes Carol who moved out of Ginnie Mae into money market funds. Brinker's advice was to move the cash into Fidelity Floating Rate Fund -- he has since sold all of that too.
BRINKER IGNORES CALLER AND TALKS ABOUT INCOME PORTFOLIO ON PAGE 7 INSTEAD.....Brinker continued talking to Carol: "If you take a look at that income portfolio on page 7 where we spell this out, you'll see it's yielding about 3% investment income and the duration has been held down close to 2%. We are taking some credit risk in the portfolio because in an expanding economy, I feel comfortable taking some credit risk. Certainly during the period that the economy is expanding and we anticipate that is going to continue at as low to moderate pace.…
Honey EC: Even though Carol asked about model portfolio III, it was very clever of Brinker to tell Carol about his Marketimer income portfolio since he had already discussed portfolio III. Kind of like a two-fer advertisement. :) However, the "page 7" income portfolio is the same as the bond portion of portfolio III, except it has a fourth bond fund in it: Metrowest Unconstrained (MWCRX).
Or maybe he REALLY WAS confused when he answered the first caller.
BOND FUND INVESTOR WILL WEEP AND GNASH THEIR TEETH....Brinker continued: I continue to believe that there is interest rate risk out there because of the fact - first that the Fed has held the rates down here a very long time. And they have been quite vocal that they would like to raise interest rates when conditions merit that - and that could happen going forward. And at the same time, given the very low rates you are seeing in the long-term, you obviously have a substantial level of interest rate risk that is out there. And I can pretty much guarantee you that when that happens, when you see a move toward normalization of interest rates, you will see weeping and gnashing of teeth in the income investment community when they see their net-asset-values heading south. They are not going to like it one bit
THERE IS A LOT OF RISK IN BOND MARKET....Brinker continued: The situation is with short rates where they are – and with long rates – after all, you looking at the 30-year treasury trading in the vicinity of 3%. With that kind of rate structure, there certainly is a lot of risk in the bond market. The longer your maturities, the longer your durations, the more risk you are accepting.
COMPARING STOCKBROKERS WITH ADVISORS..... Caller Bill from Oregon asked: "Have you ever compared the results between stockbrokers and advisers with the fiduciary relationship with their clients?"
Brinker replied: Here's the problem with trying to do that. Do you know many stockbrokers that publish certified audited results?. (answer: "No") Well there's your problem because without those results, you'd be hamstrung. (caller: "Which one would you choose?") I like no-load mutual funds. We've talked in detail about keeping your expenses down, and that's where some of these very low-cost index funds come in – no-load funds in all cases.… Sometimes people will say what about ETF's? Just the same thing - they are exchange traded mutual funds. They just trade during the day instead of pricing at the close. Mutual funds are mutual funds – whether they are mutual funds that are no-load or whether they are exchange traded mutual fund.BETTER TO ROLL 401K INTO IRA WHEN YOU RETIRE.....Caller Mike asked: "When a person retires and they have a 401(k), should they leave it in the 401(k) or move it to something else when they retire?" Brinker replied: I like rolling it into an IRA - and I'll tell you why – because first of all there can be some estate benefits -- but also, you can take control.
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT REVISED TO LOUSY....Brinker comments: Gross Domestic Product in the first quarter was just as lousy as we thought it would be. We said it would be lousy, it was lousy. Announced in preliminary form at the -0.2 annual growth and the revision put it at -0.7% annual growth. Now there will be one more revision in June – the final revision.
SLAMMING CONGRESS AND THE USA....Brinker comments: It's true, when too many craven politicians are bought and paid for by the lobbyists who whistle Dixie with their money and their power, that is when you have the best government money can buy. Welcome to the USA!
Honey EC; At least three times today, Brinker viciously slammed congress, but he never says a critical word about what's coming out of the White House...I wonder why?
JEFFCHRISTIE'S MONEYTALK FINAL EXAM QUESTION: (Honey EC: Old-time Starship Trekkies will know the answer to this, but most of those who recently beamed aboard will have to look up the answer.)
Bob Brinker has shown animosity to all but one of the following people:
A) Rush Limbaugh
B) Maria Bartiroma
C) Larry Kudlow
D) Lou Rukeyser
ANSWER
FrankJ did not think the guest-speaker today offered anything that would be helpful or interesting to investors. I certainly agree.
Brinker's guest-author was Brent Schlender: Becoming Steve Jobs: The Evolution of a Reckless Upstart into a Visionary Leader
HEADS UP: There is some podcasting of Moneytalk available at KABC 790 in Los Angeles.
Podcast: Link to hour 3, May 31st
Podcasts: Sunday May 24th.
Link to hour one podcast
Link to hour two podcast
(Older programs are also available.)
79 comments:
HB, I think it is too early to definitely say that BB is live today! :-)
LOL, Chris....He's definitely gotten more clever at fooling us, but I have an almost fail-safe way of telling.
I don't DARE tell you what it is because he would immediately find a way around it. :)
Missed the first hour, are we still staying fully-invested? Herb
Hi Herb....There was nothing said in the first hour about NOT staying fully invested. :)
Check back later for my summary. I will transcribe everything he says about the stock and bond market -- as I do every week.
Thank you, Miss Bee. Herb
i don't understand Bruce from Chicago saying he isn't making any money on his Ginnie Maes. The Vanguard site shows the current yield at 2% with a 2015 total return so far of +0.98%. He is unrealistic if he wants better than a 2% yield without taking any risk.
Jim....Thanks! I didn't want to take time to check that out, but not too long ago, you have compared that fund to the funds Brinker replaced it with and the results were shocking. Ginnie Mae did so much better.
Well, have you put on your seat belt? What a crazy market today!
Gabe
The market petered out toward the end!
Gabe
I have read the June issue of Marketimer...Just like he said yesterday on Moneytalk, it's all systems go for fully invested.
HEADS UP: There is some pod-casting of Moneytalk available at KABC 790 in Los Angeles.
Right now the latest pod-casts available are from Sunday May 24th. That program was all re-runs and old calls spliced together.
If the May 31st show becomes available, I will post links here.
In the latest Markettmer, Bob ruled out the possibility of a recession at this time.
Gabe
Gabe...If I recall correctly, Brinker's definition of a recession is two quarters of negative GDP.
Well, we've got one in the books...Guess it remains to be seen if his prediction for the next quarter works out.
This is my first month without the Market Timer.
How will life go on without getting out of GNMA at the wrong time, being advised to sell Fidelity Floating rate too late?
Bob's answer to anyone who is the least bit nervous, a ladder of CDs.....
His one hour program even if live:
38 minutes of content
12 minutes of that an ad for his own products.
10 minutes repeating general advice he has given Ad nauseam.
leaving 16 minutes for callers..
Hmm, regarding Jeffchristie's exam this week: I've been listening to BB since 1990 but I didn't get the right answer. I guessed good ol' Louie Rook.
What did Angry Li'l Bobby say negative about that unassuming, humble man?
I don't understand why anyone would want bonds. The stock market ascends, historically. We know that todays bonds will be worth less soon---don't we? I don't know much about bonds but it seems a simple conclusion that bonds are a bad investment---for now.
Maybe I'm demonstrating my ignorance and somebody will set me straight.
Burt.... LOL! You summed it up very well. And don't forget that there are always 2 or 3 calls from "long-time listeners and Marketimer subscribers" where Brinker has an inside conversation talking about his handy-dandy portfolios on various pages. :)
The odds favor a drop of the S&P 500 in June. In the last 10 years there have been 3 up years; 7 down years; ave. return = -1.40%. This doesn't mean a drop this year for sure, but those are the odds. So be prepared for a disappointing month, and be happy if it turns out to be ok.
- Dan G
A roller coast ride!
Gabe
May car sales came in today and they surprised to the upside and beat all estimates. I think BB was right that the 1st qtr was an aberration due to the weather, and the rest of the year will be good (but not great). A guess is 2nd qtr will be closer to 2%.
Anyone interested in hearing hour 3 of last Sunday's show can download a podcast of it at KABC 790 now. I will let you know if more hours become available.
Tito...Your premise that "bonds will be worthless soon" is based on what?
Are you aware that the last quarter GDP was actually -0.07% And that pundits, like Brinker, are simply hoping that the next quarter will be good enough to put us into a 2-2 1/2% for the year?
And I don't care what the official unemployment rate is, the under-employment rate is atrocious -- and we have over a million people now living on welfare benefits of some sort (read handouts from workers/investors/savers).
How far and how fast can the Fed raise rates without sending us into a recession?
Tito: If what you say is true (bonds will be worthless soon), then why is the bond market still much larger than the stock market?
Do you know something that all the professional bond traders out there don't know?
Actually, I think Tito said bonds would be worth less....rather than worthless. And he will be right.....some day.
You say...."and we have over a million people now living on welfare benefits of some sort (read handouts from workers/investors/savers"
Does that include all government entitlement programs such as Social Security? I've see numbers where that is included and I think that's a little misleading. SS payments are not quite the same as welfare handouts.
We have a tired old bull!
Gabe
NotThatBob....You are right! Are you aware that you can write to me at my email address?
honeybee.roses@gmail.com
No Benny. It does not include Social Security or Medicare. Programs that the recipients paid into their whole working life.
Social Security is taxed up to 85% -- ever hear of people on welfare paying income tax? And Medicare recipients pay hefty monthly fees. Neither are welfare and calling them "entitlements" is questionable.
Excerpts: Research Date: April 13th, 2015
Welfare is the organized public or private social services for the assistance of disadvantaged groups. Aid could include general Welfare payments, health care through Medicaid, food stamps, special payments for pregnant women and young mothers, and federal and state housing benefits. The Welfare system in the United States began in the 1930s, during the Great Depression. Opponents of Welfare argue that it affects work incentives.
Cousin Benny said: Actually, I think Tito said bonds would be worth less....rather than worthless. And he will be right.....some day.
You are quite right. I did misread it. But I am so used to deciphering poor English (elsewhere on the internet) that I don't bother scrutinizing as much as I used to, so I missed it.
Yes, bonds will be worth less someday. They fluctuate regularly just like stocks, only not as much.
I also misquoted Tito...My apologies.
I also misquoted Tito...My apologies.
My recollection of Brinker making remarks critical of Rukeyser goes back to when Lou was hosting Wall Street week which would have been prior to 2002.
One of the things that made me question whether Brinker was the financial expert that he claimed to be was the fact that he was never a guest on WSW. Just about every other expert was on the show one time or another.
Here is a post at SI where Boca Pete talks about Brinker being critical of things being said on WSW.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readreplies.aspx?subjectid=57682&msgid=29659216
Brinker began one show by talking about a Barrons article critical of Lou.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=12035325
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=12030241
Note to all readers: It's important to know that the handle "mistertopes" is The Bob Brinker, himself.....
Here is a post that I made on Suite 101 in 2006 regarding what Jeffchristie posted above.
honeyoneohone - Brinker, Gail Dudack and "the Loumeister"
Even though poster Ian@SI never mentioned Bob Brinker or his opinion of the Gail Dudack firing, Bob Brinker, posting as "donlane/mistertopes," felt the need to interject it.
Additionally, Brinker made it clear that he was not a fan of Louis Rukeyser. This fact was made painfully obvious when Mr. Rukeyser died. On Moneytalk, Bob Brinker never mentioned the fact, and never paid any respect to his passing.
Interest rates on the 10 year keeps going up!
Gabe
Back and forth!
Gabe
I'm fuzzy on what BB has said, and I likely misunderstood, but I'm sure I've heard him say lately that once a person reaches critical mass, you should "not risk" your principle which to my mind means 100% cash with "zero" invested in the market.
But I've also always heard him over the past 20 years otherwise advise people to be invested at least 50/50 in stocks/income funds. Can someone clarify please?
Anon:
You aren't fuzzy. You're accurate in what you say you heard. I think it comes down to what one's definition of "risk" is. No investment risk is cash, CD's and I guess very short term Treasuries. But these three types of holdings all risk erosion due to inflation. I think BB looks at appropriate risk for retirement and those approaching retirement as 50-50 based on his recent, frequent recommendations for this allocation.
My thoughts: people's risk appetite is all over the place. Those investing need to consider what role their SocSec and/or pension if any will play in covering expenses and then take only that risk necessary to cover the rest and stay ahead of inflation which means SOME stocks.
Vanguard Prime Money Market Fund is now paying 0.2% Don't spend it all in one place!
Gabe
I hope fixed income investors had a chance to see Rick Santelli interview Jeffrey Gundlach Wednesday morning. Gundlach had some interesting things to say. Among the key points were that he feels the Fed will NOT raise interest rates this year. Last year Bob Brinker was certain that they would raise rates this year. Gundlach's comments on junk bonds also seem to contradict Brinker's notion that taking credit risk is somehow safer in a rising rate environment. Here is a link to watch the full interview:
Gundlach on Rates
Brinker is so low-class regarding Louie Rook (and anyone else he doesn't agree with).
Back and forth!
Gabe
Honeybee, Bluce,Benny,
---what Benny said.
I believe bonds are an essential part of investing but I procrastinated and now feel like it's too late or too early The fed is dying to increase rates so it seems more procrastination is advisable. But how long---? A fifth of our children live in poverty and another recession would be dire. It's an important and very difficult decision---I'm glad I don't have to make it.
Tito
HB Good memory jog on Mr Topes and Don Lane. IIRC Don Lane was a name connected to his radio calls of car races in Pennsylvania. Mr Topes?
Tito...I agree with what you said, except that it's pretty hard for any child in America to live in poverty -- unless you consider having free food, free medical, free housing, free cell phones, free internet, free clothes, etc. being poverty stricken. I doubt another recession will change that.
Now if you say that children are mistreated by their parents abusing the system, I agree. We can have a very lengthy conversation about that, starting with women popping them out with no father taking responsibility.
But all that said, yes, another recession will be dire for workers, savers and investors.
Muddlehead....Thank you so much for that info about Don Lane. I'm not real sure why he chose "mistertopes." However, I know that he made the change in order to derail searches and possible cover up his Don Lane posts. This all happened after he was outed by one of his most devoted sychophants -- the host of the thread, "justawerkinstiff."
Justa, aka Tom Swyrs(?), is still around, but lays low for the most part.
I had documented every single post that Bob Brinker made as Don Lane/mistertopes at Suite 101. Unfortunately, when Kirk left there, they folded and did away with all of his Brinker threads -- literally 100s of thousands of posts were lost.
However, even though they gave no warning as promised, I had saved a lot them to disk so that I can preserve them -- just in case anything should happen to them at Silicon Investor.
HottieBee,
Have you ever used the post dates you have of Don Lane/Mr Topes etc and see if anything is at The Wayback Machine?
Just a thought.
tfb...No, I haven't. I have a complete file of all of them from Silicon Investor. Brinker posted on three threads there.
One of the threads he frequented back then was the UTEK thread. Brinker was touting that stock at a time when through his BJ Group, he had insider connections.
On NBR, Paul Kangas asked him about that, but of course, Brinker denied it. But the facts are documented.
You know how it is, like these days, what are you going to believe -- what he said or your lying eyes? :)
BTW: There has never been another alias proven to be Bob Brinker since he stopped posting as mistertopes. But as you can imagine, having read, filed and posted every one of his posts, I am very familiar with his "style" etc.
I believe that he has made posts under other aliases at my Silicon Investor thread, and also on this blog -- not very often -- but very sure.
I have only given away that I recognize him one time, and that was on SI when he posted as "Yelvington." He gave himself away by starting out making fun of himself (he loves to do that) and then getting angry at me and having a tantrum.
For those who are curious or interested. Here is the LINK to Yelvington's posts.
If you scroll down, you will see links to 40 or so of his posts. He stopped posting in 2011 after he got nasty on my thread and I let him know that I "knew" who he was...
Notice that his major interest is in the various Bob Brinker threads!
Equities getting slammed!
Gabe
"Tito...I agree with what you said, except that it's pretty hard for any child in America to live in poverty -- unless you consider having free food, free medical, free housing, free cell phones, free internet, free clothes, etc. being poverty stricken. I doubt another recession will change that. "
Do you happen to have a link for all this free stuff? Why would anybody want to work?
I am ....Skeptical.
Dear Thomas....If you doubt that many people DO NOT want to work because government handouts are more generous than what they can make by working, then you truly are named appropriately.
As for a link. Have you been living in a cave for the past few decades?
I believe it is toss up as to how the market will respond to a positive or negative report on employment tomorrow.
Gabe
The HottieBee writes, aka the (hghjijmlmgfg) (see note),
As for a link. Have you been living in a cave for the past few decades?
Maybe this will explain it:
A anthropomorphic regression talks about Obama phones.
and the rap song that was made from it:
Why Taxpayers are idiots
tfb
Note:
Warning: Classy or dignified people, PC or faggoty types should not attempt to solve that cryptogram.
TFB....Here's my response.
Market gyrations!
Gabe
The 10 year is marching toward 3%!
Gabe
EWET....You no doubt know that I cannot publish what you wrote. This forum is rated PG, not R. :)
That said, I agree with your premise, but your white ancestors (and mine -- back to the Revolutionary War) were not the only ones doing that.
Honeybee,
This is the best country to be poor in---if you have to be poor. I am not poor nor have I ever been but I understand that it is a struggle. Parents who are barely getting by, i.e. poor, are mostly working long hours for low wages so they have little time to spend with their children. With a low income they must get the most calories for the least cost. Good, nutritious food may be available from school but congress took a big chunk of that out of that budget a while back. So more poor kids get even worse nutrition. Because they are eating high calorie foods they tend to be overweight but not well nourished. Many cannot afford to live in a safe, healthy, conveniently located neighborhood. Medical care is free---when you are in desperate shape. Preventative care is out of reach for most that are poor but suffering with asthma, diabetes, poor vision, hearing problems, mental illness and many other chronic conditions. The emergency room must see patients regardless but doesn't provide dental care unless it happens to be life threatening. Bad teeth mean pain, difficulty eating, bad breath etc. The devil is in the details and by saying "free stuff" you are simplifying something that is not simple. I must ask what research into credible sources have you done to determine that so many things are free to poor children? Perhaps some children get free Internet at school, certainly at libraries---but at home? What proportion of poor children get free Internet at home or free cell phones? Those things may be available to a few from a source I have not heard about but I would not know how to go about getting a free phone without a credit card and a plan agreement. Is it only ambition that keeps more poor parents from quitting their 18-hour a day job(s) and applying for all the free stuff?
Tito
Tito...Like with everything, there are always many exceptions to the rules.
Of course, there are people working hard to make ends meet - most of them are classified as "middle class."
Also, clearly when I say "children" get free stuff, I am talking about the parents (mostly mothers) receiving benefits for the children and additional benefits for addition children.
LOL @ The Fluffy Bunny's "Warning"!!!
Honey, speaking of ancestors, some trivia: King Henry II of England (1133-1189) was my 24th great-grandfather. He had a mistress named Ida de Tosny who bore his (acknowledged) son, William Longespee, my 23rd GG, who became the Earl of Salisbury and "the rest is history," as they say.
I have many ancestors who fought in the Revolution and the Civil War.
Bluce...Wow, that is some kind of awesome pedigree. :)
I don't know mine that far back. So far (on my mother's side), we have done genealogy back to the mid-1600s on her father's father's side. And my grandfather's mother's side to Scotland in the 1700s.
Will Bob Brinker get his correction?
NIA: Why the S&P is About to Roll-over
Honey: Yes it's interesting.
A good friend did the work last winter. She has been doing genealogy for over 30 years -- long before the internet -- and once she started digging and realized the extent, she told me it was by far the most interesting family she's ever done.
It was all a bit hard to believe at first; me and my sisters are still trying to absorb it all. My maternal grandmother's maiden name goes back, unbroken, to the 1300s in England when one of her ancestors married a descendent of King Henry II.
Who knew? LOL
I am curious about this genealogy stuff. I've heard about DNA genealogy where they use actual DNA insofar as possible, to trace family lineage but short of that, how do you really know the records are what they say they are?
Like, for example Princess Dianna and her son Prince Harry who looks an awful lot like the horse trainer.
Plus there must have been numerous family events which were never accurately reported over the centuries.
Why is it that everybody is related to a king or other important personage but nobody is related to a stable boy?
Afie...You need to read up on DNA....No matter how many "family events" may alter it, it is what it is.
As for records on sites like Family Find DNA Match, they do an actual DNA test. So an "events" that may have occurred will still link you up regardless of other family history.
And I think only Bluce has said he is related to royalty. I certainly did not say that. All I would say about my ancestors is that there were a lot of very strong women who raised enormous families on virtually nothing.
Which brings me to another topic you might find interesting: Mitochondrial DNA.
Tito,
I am going to say this very nice, you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about. To your credit you state you do not know what it is to be poor, and that point is emphasized by the drivel you write. You do not have a clue. You have swallowed a bunch of propaganda. You have been manipulated; it happens.
I know what so called poverty is first hand. I know what it is like to live in a home without heat, to have a father who worked 3 jobs, a mother who worked two and all the children were working from 1st grade on, mowing lawns, sweeping floors doing whatever to contribute a bit to the family pot. My father actually froze to death trying to put food on the table, talk about dying hard.
We had little, except pride, and as my grandfather said "No man ever goes on the dole". "Whatever you do, don't ever go on the dole." As far as I know none of use took a dime of charity. You might be surprised how many people get by who are poor without resorting to charity. The interesting thing (at least to me) is I do not know of a single person who grew up in an actual hardworking poor family, who they themselves are poor. I do not know a single one and I knew a lot of poor families. Even in my family, two of the 4 kids ended up millionaires. We put ourselves through college by working, no loans, no charity. When a car broke down or you got sick, your meager savings evaporated. But that is what motives you to get that second or third job, that is how you get ahead honestly. No man has a right to burden his fellow man. When you pay for something yourself you value it. To that end I do know a lot of poor people who held out their hand, took food stamps, heating assistance, housing assistance and guess what they are still poor and so are their children.
And I don’t forget, I go to the cemetery almost every day and thank my parents for what I have, the values they gave me. That is the real wealth. The may not have left anything in terms of monetary value, but somehow all their children ended up better then they, and their children’s children are better off still yet.
I have the opposite view as you do. I think this is a horrible country to be poor in, because the system is designed to rob you of self-esteem and self-worth, to perpetuate the cycle of poverty and make you dependent on government. I shudder to think what I might be today if my family had opened itself to the helping hand of government welfare or charity.
I find it interesting that Indians, Chinese, Russians, Mexicans that I know come here dirt poor, many with limited educations, and unable to speak English (refugees). They do not access welfare and guess what 20 years later they are millionaires, living in paid off homes with their children kicking ass and taking names in school. And then I look at the American family on assistance, the poverty becomes generational.
And that is the perspective of one who lived it.
"Social Security is taxed up to 85% -- ever hear of people on welfare paying income tax? And Medicare recipients pay hefty monthly fees. Neither are welfare and calling them "entitlements" is questionable."
I believe you mean that up to 85% of SS earnings may be subject to tax... not that the tax rate is 85%. You say neither SS nor Medicare are "welfare" but I disagree . As soon as the recipient takes out more than he has contributed that continuing payment is nothing more than a government hand out to.....(Edited by moderator)
Pete
Pete...Of course that is what I meant. Got any other nits to pick?
BTW: I edited your disrespectful reference to retirees so you wouldn't embarrass yourself too much.
Afle: Great point. You know there must have been "situations."
Nameless---,
Try being poor in the Philippines. Then tell me how much better it is than being poor in the U.S.
Tito
How to avoid dependence on gov't "help." Just follow these easy steps:
Finish high school.
Avoid friends with low ambition.
Learn to recognize people who are successful and learn from them.
Have a plan to do SOMETHING post high school. It doesn't have to be college, but it should be more than just hangin' out.
Girls ... don't get pregnant. If you want to be a "baby momma" you've made a decision to limit your future to one of dependency ... in most instances. But why jinx an innocent child to growing up in the same situation. When it comes down to it, it is a very selfish decision.
Wait until you're older to get married both male and female. If the male partner doesn't have a decent work history, a job, some ambition, some maturity and if neither of you has any money saved, fuggetabboudit.
Honeybee,
I agree that there are exceptions but don't think my example is one. I also agree that most in this country are somewhere in the middle class. But the gap between the rich and everybody else is increasing and that's a problem in my opinion (because of how it's increasing). Ours is the wealthiest country in the world. We should not have so many (any?) living in poverty.
Tito
Honeybee,
I meant to add my name---Tito---but sometimes have trouble remembering to check the box.
Tito...I agree we shouldn't have so many living in poverty, but let's take a look at a few of the reasons why there are that many -- just a few of the reasons.
We are the only country in the world that transports in tens of thousands of refugees (right now, mostly Muslim) regularly and then provides support for them for -- who knows how long -- maybe forever.
We are the only country with open borders where as many illiterate, desperately poor, and/or lazy can be given full medical care, including pre-postnatal immediately on arrival.
We are the only country that began (under the Johnson administration) providing full support for out-of-wedlock babies -- effectively taken the responsibility away from the sperm donors and placing it on taxpayers. Take a look at the gigantic increase of black babies born to women who have no husband -- or even a man in the home. (I know the same thing happens with white women, so don't call me racist, but the numbers in black communities is staggering!)
How many tens of thousands of "children" have come across our borders recently and been bused and flown to various locations around the country? Who pays for all of their support?
There are regularly radio ads right here in Santa Cruz asking for help with foster children -- desperately needing "shoes and school supplies." So what are the chances that many of them just arrived from south of the border -- some from way south? We know some cities in California had citizens blocking the arrival of busloads of these families -- which could never happen in this area. The powers-that-be would welcome them, at the same time they increase there own salaries.
Nope, I don't like it either Tito, but if your inference is that there are kids in poverty because we don't pay enough tax supporting them, then we will have to agree to disagree. Frankj gave some good ways to avoid having your children live in poverty above -- don't miss it.
I could go on, but this subject is about covered -- for this forum anyway.
Honey: Some great posts here. I'm hoping you will allow one more short one.
The great Walter E. Williams has commented that black families were largely intact (at around the same percentage as white families) up until the '50s or so when the government decided to "help" them. It's been falling apart ever since.
Great comment Bluce. Walter Williams has much more sense than just about any liberal that I am aware of, and I am not a republican.
MikeE
I'm hoping you will allow one more short one.
Nope...I am not going to say it...I am going to be good, going to be good...
tfb
The Fluffy Bunny should be taken out back and shot!
( . . . another great Brinker line)
Not sure anyone answered your question with regard to bond fund duration. Here is information from Morningstar website.
DLSNX - 1.15 duration
DLTNX - 2.94 duration
OSTIX - 1.96 duration
Not sure what the bond fund weighting is - but most likely a duration of 2 years is accurate. Although I would say that the credit quality of the holdings is quite risky for a retiree.
I used to be a Brinker fanboy, but missing the great recession made me realize market timing newsletters are futile. Keep up the great work.
Post a Comment