U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-12-2018, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
12,672 posts, read 9,425,981 times
Reputation: 14930

Advertisements

The increases in equity values are the best thing that has happened to public sector employees & retirees.

Of course, many 401k plans are now 801k plans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-12-2018, 10:18 AM
 
Location: NJ
22,670 posts, read 28,559,598 times
Reputation: 14611
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
The increases in equity values are the best thing that has happened to public sector employees & retirees.

Of course, many 401k plans are now 801k plans.
that is interesting. id be interested in seeing data on how the strong market has impacted the financial health of pension plans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 11:05 AM
 
Location: Raleigh
6,964 posts, read 5,187,171 times
Reputation: 9395
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
If ya canít beat em.....
I've never understood the obsession with how well the top X% was doing.

Frankly, I think its a distraction for political gain. It assumes that money/the economy is like a Pizza (finite) as opposed to an ocean. Can "they" behave irresponsibly to wreak havoc with the economy and royally screw everyone, a la the 2007 financial crisis? Yes, but assuming they're doing well solely at the expense of the masses is ridiculous. If you see your neighbor buy a new car and remodel his house, you don't assume he's stealing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
20,955 posts, read 15,275,811 times
Reputation: 23722
I am not affluent by any stretch but even my paltry balances have increased. I've also been able to support my day-to-day activities (not fixed bills - meals, gas, groceries, that sort of thing) for about three months just off trading and crypto profits I've taken.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 11:51 AM
 
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, originally from SF Bay Area
28,386 posts, read 50,582,032 times
Reputation: 28616
I know several people that unfortunately were burned by the stocks for retirement strategy. Hopefully you do better. One lost so much in in 2000-2002 with the dot-com bubble burst then 9/11 that he had to sell off two of his stores and delay his retirement until 2010.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Oceanside, CA
1,738 posts, read 827,032 times
Reputation: 3894
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
My liquid assets are almost entirely in stocks. Most of my income, and practically all income besides SS, when I retire will come from stock appreciation and stock dividends.
You're nuts. Have you already forgotten 2008?

Yes, retirement accounts should include equities. Right now, mine is nearly 100% equities, but I have a good twenty years to go to retirement. Long before I get there, I'll be rebalancing my portfolio to hold more bonds, bond funds, real estate, and other asset classes. By retirement time, roughly a third of your portfolio should be in equities, not all of it.

You cannot count on appreciation or dividends. It's nice when you get them, but there [i]WILL[i] come a time when the market will turn down again, potentially for years. If you don't plan for that, you're planning to fail. Might as well stock up on Alpo while it's cheap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 11:58 AM
 
3,174 posts, read 2,721,937 times
Reputation: 6477
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
most elites (im guessing) earned their way to elite status through business ownership and the profits from that. then their wealth grows additionally from investment appreciation because they just have more money to appreciate.
Some of us got here on good looks and charm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 12:21 PM
 
5,600 posts, read 4,206,197 times
Reputation: 10557
Investing is not for "elites". It makes sense for everyone. My literate, peasant grandfather emigrated from Italy with minimal skills. Even he understood the value of having your money work for you. He scratched a living from the earth with a hoe but still managed to end up owning a lot of property and some commercial buildings. Maybe that is not quite the same as investing in stocks and bonds. He never understood those so stuck with what he could understand and see.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 12:25 PM
 
3,930 posts, read 1,452,457 times
Reputation: 2226
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldwine View Post
As an "elite", I'm genuinely puzzled. You talk of stock appreciation, and... Hoo boy, do I have bad news for you.

Someone of your class should be investing in bonds and index funds.

The stock market is high right now, but we have seen many times how that plays out.

I think you do not understand how we actually accumulate wealth, much less the preferential tax treatment impoverished Republican voters were so insistent I receive.

My 2017 wage income was substantial, I suppose, but I couldn't tell you exactly what it was. Wage income is peanuts. My actual wealth and income that matters is entirely from other sources.


this is something the Trumpsters don't get when they try to say how the middle class benefits from GOP policy too, that those who derive wealth from assets live a very different existence than those who do so through income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2018, 03:28 PM
 
4,718 posts, read 2,255,657 times
Reputation: 8729
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnojr View Post
By retirement time, roughly a third of your portfolio should be in equities, not all of it.
As with most one-size-fits-all answers, this one is often wrong.

There are far too many variables for each person's situation to declare a certain asset allocation of equities to be correct for everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top