Electoral College Guess
-
jmog
Everyone who has ever talked to a financial advisor knows that within 5-8 years of retirement you get out of the growth markets and get to safer investments (bonds, t bills, money markets, gold, etc). If they were ready to retire and got hit hard then they messed up pretty bad. Come on Z4P I know you have sat in on at least one company wide 401k talk that goes over this.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298877 wrote:The math is very simple.. There were people who were ready to retire that lost 100,000-300,000 on their 401k who no longer could afford to retire and are still working today. Trending upwards means very little when the market crashes and you lose at a much larger/faster rate. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
How exactly is it Obama's fault?Belly35;1298914 wrote:I'm 63 and because of the Obama failure I and many like me will have to take our retirement at 65 but continue to work for additional 10 years to make up for loses. I never planned or truely retiring I will alway work at something just not as hard.
What once was successful buinesses able to be sold with a profitable income to me is now not hold the same value they once had four years ago.
I have to rebuild what I built that Obama didn't build -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
It depends on what you have as an option. If your choices were stocks or bonds.. you still lost money if you moved your money into supposedly non-volatile bonds.jmog;1298935 wrote:Everyone who has ever talked to a financial advisor knows that within 5-8 years of retirement you get out of the growth markets and get to safer investments (bonds, t bills, money markets, gold, etc). If they were ready to retire and got hit hard then they messed up pretty bad. Come on Z4P I know you have sat in on at least one company wide 401k talk that goes over this. -
gut
And if we ever get a real recovery maybe they can finally start making some money of their fixed income investments. 0% interest rates under Obama have been great for retirees on fixed incomes.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298959 wrote:It depends on what you have as an option. If your choices were stocks or bonds.. you still lost money if you moved your money into supposedly non-volatile bonds.
But I doubt he really cares about that. To Obama retirees are just soon-to-be Obamakare liabilities at this point. -
jmog
Oh come on, every 401k for every company I've worked for had many more "safe" options than just bonds.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298959 wrote:It depends on what you have as an option. If your choices were stocks or bonds.. you still lost money if you moved your money into supposedly non-volatile bonds.
I've seen bonds, t-bills, money markets, etc. -
Con_Alma
If anyone ever says that bonds are "non-volatile" then they don't know what they are talking about. I hope that wasn't advice that was actually given.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298959 wrote:It depends on what you have as an option. If your choices were stocks or bonds.. you still lost money if you moved your money into supposedly non-volatile bonds.
There's even risk associated in money market funds if you look at the underlying assets. There's certainly risk involved in Gold which was in the post you copied. -
Con_Alma
Agreed that there are usually "more safe" option in most plans. They still are not principle certain, however.jmog;1298969 wrote:Oh come on, every 401k for every company I've worked for had many more "safe" options than just bonds.
I've seen bonds, t-bills, money markets, etc. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
We don't. And we have 30,000 employees.jmog;1298969 wrote:Oh come on, every 401k for every company I've worked for had many more "safe" options than just bonds.
I've seen bonds, t-bills, money markets, etc. -
fan_from_texas
Really? That seems crazy to me. How can a company of that size not provide targeted retirement date options? That's unfathomable.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298993 wrote:We don't. And we have 30,000 employees. -
gut
The game has completely changed. EVERY portfolio, growth or conservative, should now have some mix of equity and fixed income. And even that is far too general with the different types of asset classes and quality within both.Con_Alma;1298988 wrote:If anyone ever says that bonds are "non-volatile" then they don't know what they are talking about. I hope that wasn't advice that was actually given.
There's even risk associated in money market funds if you look at the underlying assets. There's certainly risk involved in Gold which was in the post you copied.
With rates where they are, it's almost a fools game to be in some of the more conservative bond funds (nothing but downside). The funds doing well, and PIMCO has a few, are poised to crash spectacularly when rates start to rise. The bond funds doing well are doing so mostly with leverage, shorting and/or option. The PIMCO fund I'm in, and I forget the name, when you analyze it is essentially a fixed income hedge fund. I don't how in hell they got into my 401k as an option. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
I lied.. we didn't with ameriprise.. we do now with JP morganfan_from_texas;1298995 wrote:Really? That seems crazy to me. How can a company of that size not provide targeted retirement date options? That's unfathomable. -
Con_Alma
I am very familiar with the "game" and it's changes.gut;1298996 wrote:The game has completely changed. EVERY portfolio, growth or conservative, should now have some mix of equity and fixed income. And even that is far too general with the different types of asset classes and quality within both.
With rates where they are, it's almost a fools game to be in some of the more conservative bond funds (nothing but downside). The funds doing well, and PIMCO has a few, are poised to crash spectacularly when rates start to rise. The bond funds doing well are doing so mostly with leverage, shorting and/or option. The PIMCO fund I'm in, and I forget the name, when you analyze it is essentially a fixed income hedge fund. I don't how in hell they got into my 401k as an option.
I also agree that your statement is too general with regards to what everyone should have. -
Con_Alma
I personally hate those but they have gotten very popular because of the mindest of "it will be managed in a continuing reduced risk manner as time goes on so I'll be O.K.".fan_from_texas;1298995 wrote:Really? That seems crazy to me. How can a company of that size not provide targeted retirement date options? That's unfathomable. -
fan_from_texas
I hate 'em, too, but it seems better than leaving it up to individuals, most of whom don't pay any attention whatsoever.Con_Alma;1299010 wrote:I personally hate those but they have gotten very popular because of the mindest of "it will be managed in a continuing reduced risk manner as time goes on so I'll be O.K.". -
Con_Alma
Yep. Opportunity has spurred another layer of management with which charges can be levied.fan_from_texas;1299017 wrote:I hate 'em, too, but it seems better than leaving it up to individuals, most of whom don't pay any attention whatsoever.
-
Manhattan Buckeye
I've never seen a SEP or 401(k) program without a t-bill fund. Perhaps you don't recognize it by its name?ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298993 wrote:We don't. And we have 30,000 employees. -
Con_Almazwick...whats the company?
Was it Timken???
I thought they had the JP Morgan Stable Value fund in their plan. -
sleeper
Given Z4P's agenda, my guess is he's either lying or downright ignorant.fan_from_texas;1298995 wrote:Really? That seems crazy to me. How can a company of that size not provide targeted retirement date options? That's unfathomable. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
See post #111.Con_Alma;1299026 wrote:zwick...whats the company?
Was it Timken???
I thought they had the JP Morgan Stable Value fund in their plan.
But no they don't.. they have Vanguard target retirement date.
****
I'm checking it right now.. There's 15 options, 10 of which are Vanguard Retirement Fund and 1 with our company esop.. 1 is core bond , 2 are company growth and 1 equity index. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
That's entirely possible.Manhattan Buckeye;1299024 wrote:I've never seen a SEP or 401(k) program without a t-bill fund. Perhaps you don't recognize it by its name? -
Con_Alma
Ahh. Thanks. Not ideal that's for sure.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1299065 wrote:See post #111.
But no they don't.. they have Vanguard target retirement date. -
QuakerOats
Apparently obama doesn't pay much attention to his pension either ---- http://www.cnbc.com/id/49450057fan_from_texas;1299017 wrote:I hate 'em, too, but it seems better than leaving it up to individuals, most of whom don't pay any attention whatsoever. -
jmog
Yeah, I work for a small engineering company (about 45 employees) and we have the targetted retirement date options that automatically move the money to safer avenues the closer you get to retirement.fan_from_texas;1298995 wrote:Really? That seems crazy to me. How can a company of that size not provide targeted retirement date options? That's unfathomable.
