stock market was up today...

#12,309
#12,309
The Dow Jones is falling like a big roadrunner cartoon boulder again today ..thanks, Joe.

Dow is down, at this posting, a sweet negative of -136.81 so far today. Joe's guys who are in charge are crushing those big positive figures alright .... I hope it turns out for the good as the day goes on into the afternoon. I need my 401K to keep growing in the right direction.
 
#12,310
#12,310
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
The Dow Jones is falling like a big roadrunner cartoon boulder again today ..thanks, Joe.

Dow is down, at this posting, a sweet negative of -136.81 so far today. Joe's guys who are in charge are crushing those big positive figures alright .... I hope it turns out for the good as the day goes on into the afternoon. I need my 401K to keep growing in the right direction.
Click to expand...

There’s very little happening right now to push the averages ahead. Agreeing on a reasonable infrastructure plan would be helpful. Steady COVID progress will keep the economy from derailing. Favorable, easy year-over-year income statement comparisons should create solid support. We might be range bound until the mid-terms come into focus. The rogue nations of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and possibly even Cuba could certainly be disruptive at any time as they all see Kamal-Joe as weak and easy targets to take advantage of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#12,313
#12,313
#12,314
#12,314
Velo Vol said:
Barely any discussion at your link. I've read a longer post on this before, but I forgot where.

Fact is that here, as with many things, we don't have a lot of data points before 1700.
Click to expand...
I was curious as to the methodology for measuring interest rates in 2000 BC
 
#12,317
#12,317
DancingOutlaw said:
A man who averages $100k per year of salary over his career and a man who averages $20k per year will receive the same benefit at retirement. It's incredibly regressive. They will never let you opt out because the only people that will are the ones who keep the pyramid running. My retirement plan doesn't include SS because I assume I'll either be means tested out of it or MC will eat the entire check.
Click to expand...
Looking for an explanation, not an argument. If the $100K earner will pay up to five times more SS tax than the $20K earner, but will receive the same SS benefit as the $20K earner, isn't the SS tax progressive rather than regressive?
 
#12,318
#12,318
SuzyVol said:
Looking for an explanation, not an argument. If the $100K earner will pay up to five times more SS tax than the $20K earner, but will receive the same SS benefit as the $20K earner, isn't the SS tax progressive rather than regressive?
Click to expand...

Progressive tax, regressive “benefits”. I put benefits in quotes because despite the government’s narrative… it is an entitlement program disguised as a retirement “contribution” plan.

Speaking of Social Security, I used to think that waiting a few years for the higher monthly payout was the best option. Now I’m thinking that taking about a $1,000/month less but starting 8 years (96 months) sooner might be the better choice. $150k-$250k could be accumulated during the 8 years which should be better than the extra $1k at maximum benefits age (70 yo). Die a day before benefits begin and you get zero. Plus there’s no telling what will happen with “benefits” as the trust fund approaches a zero balance in 10-15 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#12,319
#12,319
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Progressive tax, regressive “benefits”. I put benefits in quotes because despite the government’s narrative… it is an entitlement program disguised as a retirement “contribution” plan.

Speaking of Social Security, I used to think that waiting a few years for the higher monthly payout was the best option. Now I’m thinking that taking about a $1,000/month less but starting 8 years (96 months) sooner might be the better choice. $150k-$250k could be accumulated during the 8 years which should be better than the extra $1k at maximum benefits age (70 yo). Die a day before benefits begin and you get zero. Plus there’s no telling what will happen with “benefits” as the trust fund approaches a zero balance in 10-15 years.
Click to expand...
I agree with your thinking. I started my SS as soon as I could without incurring the earnings penalty. So, I had some actuarial reduction, which I was okay with. My wife started her SS as soon as she could, so she also had the actuarial reduction.
 
#12,320
#12,320
SuzyVol said:
I agree with your thinking. I started my SS as soon as I could without incurring the earnings penalty. So, I had some actuarial reduction, which I was okay with. My wife started her SS as soon as she could, so she also had the actuarial reduction.
Click to expand...

I’ve got a couple of years to think about it, but the two things that are sticking out right now are (1) die before the targeted age and you get zero and (2) if you are able to get a historical return on the money that you receive, you could come out way ahead. Two variables that are hard to predict and evaluate are what COLA does to the monthly “benefits” under the various scenarios… when starting at age 62, 70, or in between (as I understand it you are not limited to begin drawing at exactly age 62, or 65, or 67. They’ll calculate it any year before maximum benefits age.). The other unknown is whether or not investment returns can reflect historical averages. Interest rates could stay at historical lows and market index averages could be neutral for the entire time. However one of the huge considerations will be how the anticipated insolvency of the trust fund will be addressed. Simply paying out only current collections from payrolls is radical, but not an impossible outcome. That could result in “benefits” being cut by a third. If I had to guess the least politically harmful approach for elected officials will be to take from the general fund. Reducing the COLA, reducing the monthly payments, raising the age of full benefits, or raising the payroll tax on employees will get supporters voted out. Raising the employers’ share above 6.2% or raising the earnings cap might create less trouble for those looking to be re-elected. I’m not sure if ignoring the problem results in the first scenario of simply paying out benefits equivalent to payroll receipts or not, but if that can happen without legislation then it becomes a real possibility.

One other benefit of going ahead and taking whatever they pay as early as possible, you won’t spend the following years worrying and wondering what the distribution scenarios will be in the future.
 
#12,322
#12,322
ADP private jobs report was a big miss 330K vs estimated 653K this morning. Hold onto your hats for this Friday's jobs report. But, could be a market whipsaw, because the fed may delay rate increases (taper).
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#12,323
#12,323
Ernest T. Vol said:
ADP private jobs report was a big miss 330K vs estimated 653K this morning. Hold onto your hats for this Friday's jobs report. But, could be a market whipsaw, because the fed may delay rate increases (taper).
Click to expand...

I don’t typically give that much credit or blame to POTUS for equity markets moves. This could be an exception, although COVID is still lingering a bit. Maybe vaccinations shouldn’t be such a partisan issue. Kamal-Joe wasn’t interested in getting a Trump Vaccine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ernest T. Vol and SpaceCoastVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top