Archive for October, 2008 Page 2 of 3



The Impact of Inflation on Social Security Benefits

Center for Retirement Research at Boston College – October 16, 2008


Introduction


Today, the Social Security Administration announced that benefits payable in December 2008 would be increased 5.8 percent beginning January 1, 2009.  This cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) – the largest in 26 years – is an important reminder that keeping pace with inflation is one of the attributes that makes Social Security benefits such a unique source of income.  (The other is that the payments continue for life.)  Higher inflation raises two other issues, however, that diminish the impact of the COLA.  The first issue pertains to Medicare Part B premiums, which are deducted automatically from Social Security benefits.  To the extent that premium costs rise faster than the COLA, the net benefit will not keep pace with inflation.  Historically, premiums have gone up much faster than the COLA, although this year is an exception as premiums for 2009 will be unchanged from their current level.  The second issue pertains to taxation under the personal income tax.  Because the thresholds ($25,000 for single taxpayers and $32,000 for joint returns) above which taxes are levied are not adjusted for wage growth or even for inflation, rising benefit levels mean that taxation reaches further and further down the income distribution.


This brief explores the interaction of inflation and Social Security benefits.  The first section describes the nature of the cost-of-living adjustment.  The second section looks at the interaction of Medicare premiums and the cost-of-living adjustment.  The third section explores how inflation affects the taxation of benefits.  The final section concludes…


Full Paper in PDF


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator

3 Ways the Economic Crisis Is Destroying Baby Boomer Retirement

US News & World Report - October 14, 2008


Baby boomers are nervously trying to navigate their nest eggs to safety amidst a stormy sea of wild stock market swings, falling home values, and precarious job security. It can take years for nest eggs to recover from heavy market losses. But time is something baby boomers—the oldest of whom turned 62 this year—just don’t have enough of.


Here are the problems near retirees now face and what (if anything) baby boomers can do to cope.


Stock market declines. During the past 12 months, retirement accounts have lost $1.6 trillion or 18.3 percent of their value, according to Urban Institute calculations. The Congressional Budget Office puts the figure at $2 trillion over the past 15 months. Individual 401(k) participants’ average losses ranged from 7.2 percent to 11.2 percent in the first nine months of 2008, according to an Employee Benefit Research Institute analysis of 2.2 million participants. These losses disproportionately affect baby boomers because they have less time to recover before retirement.


But pulling your money out of the stock market isn’t the answer if you want to have enough cash to finance 30 years of retirement. “The goal should always be to have a balanced portfolio that reflects the time horizon and taste for risk of the household,” says Mauricio Soto, a research associate at the Urban Institute. The typical retirement account for a worker age 50 or older has 50 percent of its assets in stocks, the Urban Institute found. “The common advice is for households to reduce their exposure to stocks as they approach retirement,” says Soto. As always, it’s still important to contribute at least enough to your 401(k) to take advantage of your employer’s match.


Falling home prices. Older adults were major benefactors of the housing boom. Between 1998 and 2006, the inflation-adjusted median home equity for adults ages 55 and older increased by 42 percent. But now baby boomers are feeling the pinch of housing declines. The average home price fell 3.9 percent from January 2007 to May 2008, according to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. In 20 select metropolitan areas, prices fell 16.7 percent over the same period.


Most seniors don’t tap their home equity to finance retirement, but it is an option when times are tight. If all homeowners ages 62 and older took out reverse annuity mortgages and chose a lifetime annuity option, their median annual retirement income would increase by 18 percent based on 2006 home values, according to recent Urban Institute calculations. A 10 percent home price decline would reduce this gain to 16 percent. But reverse mortgages also have high costs—about 18 percent of the loan value for a 62-year-old—which needs to be repaid plus interest if a senior wants to move.


Decreasing job prospects. The easiest solution to a declining 401(k) balance and falling homes values is to work longer. Working one additional year typically increases annual retirement income by 9 percent. But contracting credit markets could weaken the labor market, thus limiting employment opportunities for older adults. The economy lost 159,000 payroll jobs in September, after losing 73,000 jobs in August. “Low-income people young enough to still be working are more likely to lose their jobs,” says Richard Johnson, principal research associate for the Urban Institute. “Retailers have been hit hard over the past year, and more older people work in retail than anywhere else. So many older people with limited skills could find themselves out of work.”


Read more of this article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator

Reverse mortgages set record, new loan limit eyed

Rueters – October 14, 2008


reverse mortgage loan creation rose 4.2 percent to a record level in fiscal 2008 and growth is expected to accelerate next year due to an impending increase in the federally insured loan limit, a trade group said on Tuesday.


Growth slowed this year as home prices sank, eroding home equity.


In a reverse mortgage, home owners aged 62 or older can tap into their home equity by getting cash in a lump sum, monthly income, a line of credit, or a combination, without having to sell or give up title to their houses.


Money received is tax free, and repayment is made only when the owner permanently moves or passes away. Typically, reverse mortgages are taken by owners looking for more cash without selling their homes.


The industry closed 112,100 Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs) in fiscal 2008, which ended Sept. 30, surpassing the prior record of 107,558 loans in 2007, based on data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development data, the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association said on Tuesday.


HECM reverse mortgages are insured by the Federal Housing Administration, an arm of HUD.


Reverse mortgages had jumped 40.9 percent in 2007 to 107,558 loans from 76,351 in 2006. In 2005 there were 43,131 reverse mortgages created.


As part of the Homeownership and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, HUD approved a single national loan limit of $417,000 for federally insured HECM reverse mortgages that is expected to be effective around Nov. 1.


Previously, the program assigned different lending limits by county ranging from $200,160 in rural areas to $362,790 in the highest home value areas.


See full article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator

Retirement Wreck-Are 401(k)s Still Viable for Saving?

The Washington Post – October 12, 2008


For many Americans, 401(k) plans were supposed to be their own little golden parachutes into retirement.


Now, it seems, those parachutes may not open in time.


The global financial crisis that revealed the flaws of Wall Street has also exposed the vulnerability of America’s retirement system. Employers have increasingly abandoned traditional pensions, forcing workers to rely on 401(k)s and similar plans that have a lot more exposure to the stock market. The assumption was that even if the market suffered short-term losses, over time it would rise, allowing workers to recoup their savings. But the steepness of this year’s market collapse and the still-uncertain depth of the economic downturn has prompted lawmakers, academics and economists to question the wisdom of letting workers hitch their retirement fortunes to the precariousness of the stock market.


So far this year, the Dow Jones industrial average is down 36 percent, eroding the savings of millions of Americans and forcing those who had planned to retire in the next few years to reconsider their plans.


“Right now, we’re really seeing the risks come home, and people are recognizing the extent to which their retirement savings are on the line when the stock market goes down drastically,” said Jacob Hacker, a political science professor at the University of California at Berkeley who chronicled the advent of 401(k) plans in “The Great Risk Shift.”


Until three decades ago, Social Security and pensions, formally known as defined-benefit plans, were the main sources of retirement income. Now, Social Security is in danger of eventually running out of money. And defined-benefit plans, in which employers made the investment decisions and promised to pay employees a set amount each month for the rest of their lives, are quickly disappearing.


Favored by the “ownership society” movement, defined-contribution plans, which 401(k)s fall under, have picked up the slack. In 1985, there were 29 million participants in defined-benefit plans and 10 million in 401(k)s. In 2005, there were 21 million in defined-benefit plans and 47 million in 401(k)s. The government has encouraged that shift, providing $80 billion in tax breaks each year to people who store their money in 401(k)s. But in return, workers have had to assume the investment responsibilities even if they know little about the stock market. They have also had to give up their lifetime guarantee of income.


“Everyone wiped their hands of any obligation for retirement, and the burden shifted from the employer to the employee, and the risk is shifted from the employer to the employee,” said Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, who last week convened a hearing to examine 401(k)s. “In the beginning, no one ever said, ‘Would this be sufficient? Would it work?’ and what you see is a plan that is highly responsive to external events unlike Social Security, unlike defined-benefit plans, unlike a public pension plan.”


Proponents of 401(k)s say with those greater risks come greater rewards. “If you own equities, you really have to believe in the American capitalist system in that the dollars will find the highest and best use,” said Mickey Cargile, a managing partner for WNB Private Client Services, a financial advisory firm in Texas. “Along with that, there will be a period in which the excesses in the market will be purged. That’s what we’re seeing now. That’s what we saw in 1987.”


In the past15 months, Americans have lost about $2 trillion worth of retirement savings both in pensions and 401(k)-style plans, Peter R. Orszag, director of the Congressional Budget Office, told Miller’s committee last week. Because 401(k)s tend to have more stocks in their portfolios than pensions do, Orszag concluded that 401(k)s have been the biggest losers.


This year, the average account balance of 401(k) participants has dropped 7.2 to 11.2 percent, according to an analysis of 2.2 million plans by the District-based Employee Benefit Research Institute. But many workers have seen even sharper declines in recent months, analysts and economists say. Further draining retirement accounts is that many workers have been allowed to dip into their 401(k)s for loans or so-called hardship withdrawals. That trend has been increasing in recent months because people can no longer tap the equity in their homes to pay down credit card debt.


The experts disagree over how long it takes to recover from a bear market. The financial firm T. Rowe Price found that in the past five bear markets going back to 1976, the longest it took for stocks to recover from their peak and then provide a 10 percent annual compound return was eight years. The shortest was five months.


See the full article…


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


Professional Financial Advisors:  Tips for using a financial advisor for retirement planning.


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Losses highlight risks of retiree-aimed funds

Newsday – October 12, 2008


Mutual funds aimed at retirees haven’t been immune from the credit crisis.

Target-date mutual funds geared to retirement dates in 2005 and 2010 and the new managed payout funds designed to invest a lump sum and automatically spin off paychecks for retirees were all in negative territory for the year through the end of the third quarter.

At the end of September, the 2005 target-date funds were down nearly 15 percent for the previous 12 months, according to Morningstar Inc. The 2010 category was down nearly 14 percent.

For September alone, while the Standard & Poor’s 500 fell 9 percent, the retirement category was down only slightly less at about a 7 percent loss, Morningstar said.
That includes managed payout funds from Fidelity, Vanguard and Schwab, which all introduced the payout funds in August 2007.

The drops shouldn’t come as a surprise. Financial firms have been singing a constant chorus about how retirees need to keep stocks in their portfolios later into retirement to generate enough growth to outlast increasing life expectancies.

And target-date mutual funds typically keep 40 percent to 50 percent of their portfolios in stocks for those at or near retirement.

The issue for investors is to consider what type of alternatives they would have chosen if the target-date and managed payout funds hadn’t been around.

Variable annuities are subject to market risk, fixed annuities carry issuer risk and cash investments carry inflation risk. A hodgepodge of stocks and bonds that wasn’t rebalanced regularly could have plunged much further than the target funds.

Still, the losses will make many retirees think differently about how much risk they can tolerate, so it’s a good time to remember the strengths and the limitations of these investments.

– Not a substitute
Some industry players have feared that consumers would confuse the retirement funds with annuities, which typically come with some type of guarantee.

If a payout fund estimates ranges of income, for example, keep in mind it’s an estimate, not a promise.

– One size fits most
The target funds aren’t factoring in the desire to travel the world in the first year of retirement, said Anne Lester, senior portfolio manager for JPMorgan’s SmartRetirement funds.

Big early withdrawals from a stock-heavy nest egg can be devastating, particularly in a year when stocks fall hard, Lester said. Her firm has kept equity stakes at the lower end of the target-date spectrum because of that risk, she said.

– Look under the hood
Be sure you understand how your retirement fund is run, experts said. A fund’s prospectus explains a fund’s asset allocation and how stocks and bonds will be chosen in the fund.

Typically, the funds are a collection of other funds within one institution. Vanguard, for example, relies on its low-cost index funds for its retirement-fund portfolios.

Others, including T. Rowe Price, Fidelity and Schwab, use more actively managed funds that, in theory, have more flexibility in tough markets to avoid trouble spots.

– Putting it on autopilot
Whether stock selection is done by an index or a portfolio manager, target funds do the dirty work of rebalancing among asset classes. Just make sure you have the stomach for it, experts said.

“If people come to the realization that they took on too much risk and want out, fine. But no fair turning it back up when the Dow is at 14,000,” said Jeff Mortimer, chief investment officer for Schwab Funds.

Anecdotally, portfolio managers said investors have been slower to pull out of retirement-oriented funds in the downturn than those in broad-based stock funds.

“This is the advantage of the target-date structure–being there when an individual might not be inclined to rebalance,” said Ned Notzen, chairman of the T. Rowe Price asset allocation committee.


See the full article…


401K Rollovers:  Answers to common 401K Rollover questions at NewRetirement.com


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


Professional Financial Advisors:  Tips for using a financial advisor for retirement planning.


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

Financial Crisis Recasts Debate on Pensions Versus 401(k)s

The Wall Street Journal Market Watch - October 13, 2008


The financial crisis starkly highlights the relative pros and cons of defined benefit pensions and 401(k) plans, according to experts at Watson Wyatt, a leading global consulting firm.


Broadly speaking, the predictable, mainly guaranteed income of pensions (including so-called hybrid plans like cash balance plans) contrasts sharply with the day-to-day fluctuation of 401(k) account values, which are wreaking havoc on planned retirements.

 

“We are in uncharted territory. The 401(k) plan has been around for less than 30 years, and we’ve not yet had a generation of workers retire on all or mostly 401(k) assets,” said Alan Glickstein, a senior retirement consultant at Watson Wyatt. “What happens when market volatility makes 401(k) investment returns and retirement income anything but predictable?”

 

With a 401(k) plan, employees invest assets as individuals. As they near retirement, employees need to construct individual “glide paths” to reduce risk in their 401(k) accounts and to provide some measure of predictable income in retirement. Increasingly, employers are helping with this process, as they are beginning to offer employees target-date retirement funds and, to a far lesser degree, annuity options in their 401(k) plans.

 

With pensions, sponsoring companies invest assets as one large pool and with a longer time horizon than individual employees. They can thus more easily ride out market downturns. In addition, pension plan assets are guaranteed by the sponsoring company and, in a second layer of security, by an agency of the federal government for most benefits.

Individuals bear investment risk in 401(k) plans, while companies take on the risk — and the opportunity to provide more efficient benefits — with pensions.

 

“The current environment underscores some latent employer risks with 401(k) plans,” says Glickstein. “For example, they make it harder for companies to predict who will retire and when. Employees who mostly rely on 401(k)s are also more likely to worry about their financial security, creating an additional drain on morale and productivity during turbulent times.”

 

On the pension side, employers are dealing with new funding rules that became effective in 2008. Companies must fund their pensions based on the value of plan assets relative to liabilities (the present value of projected retirement payouts based on accrued benefits). Under old funding rules, pension sponsors could smooth their asset values based on market returns over a five-year period. Under new rules, companies can only average returns over a two-year period, and the averaged assets cannot exceed current market value by more than 10 percent.

 

The new rules are much closer to the so-called mark-to-market rules that have been implemented in corporate accounting with respect to the balance sheet. Assets are “marked” or valued at what the market will pay for them on a given day, rather than smoothed over time.

 

“The federal bailout of the credit markets is an acknowledgment that in extreme cases, the mark-to-market principle does not work,” said Kevin Wagner, a senior retirement consultant at Watson Wyatt. “This crisis should increase pressure generally to revisit mark-to-market principles. Without some relief, a sustained downturn in asset values will noticeably increase required contributions to pension plans starting next year, when plan sponsors will also be facing significant business pressure.”

 

This pressure, especially with respect to accounting, will be offset to some degree by the effects of higher corporate bond rates on pensions. As high-quality corporate bond rates rise, which they have been doing, the present value of future retirement payouts (or plan liabilities) goes down.

 

In addition to dealing with the workforce management risks mentioned earlier, 401(k) sponsors should be stepping up the oversight and governance of their plans, said Robyn Credico, national director of Watson Wyatt’s defined contribution practice. “We are in a very litigious environment, and the sharp market downturn will only fuel matters.”

 

Credico warns against hasty action: “Now is not the time to switch 401(k) vendors or change investment choices unless absolutely necessary. The market is too fluid.”

 


 


401K Rollovers:  Answers to common 401K Rollover questions at NewRetirement.com


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


Professional Financial Advisors:  Tips for using a financial advisor for retirement planning.


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator.

The sky WILL fall on many people.

Let’s start with some of the known problems before we go to the consequences and actions needed to protect individuals from something I believe is inevitable for the U.S. as a whole.

 

At the federal level, we have amassed at least $55 trillion of national debt and unfunded obligations for Social Security and Medicare.  That’s $184,000 for every man, woman and child in the country.

 

This does not include international balance of payment deficits nor state, county and municipality debts nor unfunded future obligations.  It does not include company indebtedness that we pay for with reduced stock returns and higher product costs.  Nor does it include personal debts such as home mortgages, home equity loans, reverse mortgages, student loans, auto loans and credit card debts.  Whether it’s been greedy companies buying other companies, individuals on a consumerism binge, importing more than we export, government overspending or employers/government promising far more employee future benefits than they can pay, the debt obligations are horrific.

 

Now we see that the credit markets are in dire trouble, so the government is anticipating a $700 billion bailout after already paying about $300 billion to salvage Bear Sterns, Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, AIG, Lehman Bros., Merrill Lynch, and Washington Mutual.  This is supposed to cover unsupportable home loans including ARMs and option ARMs which were destined to be disastrous from the beginning.

 

This is only the beginning.  The AIG $85 billion credit default swap infusion was a drop in the bucket compared with some estimate as $58 trillion of unregulated credit default swaps in the rest of the finance industry.  There are other derivatives that will start showing their ugly heads.  Consider Exchange Traded Notes, ETNs, the cousin of Exchange Traded Funds, ETFs.  These notes don’t even have to own the securities implied by their description.  Or how about the high-risk part of the tranches of Collateralized Debt Obligations held by many seeking higher returns?  Or those who bought factored loans?

 

It’s certain that pension trusts now are much below the amounts required to sustain future payments.  Furthermore, the pension trusts’ projections have depended on ever-hopeful forecasts of returns from future glorious stock market returns as well as bonds that won’t lose value.  Because of Accounting Board Standards, this means that states, government and industry are going to have to start pumping lots of cash into pension trusts—and many industries like the auto producers just aren’t going to be able to do this—and will come begging to the government.

 

Then there is the as-yet-unquantified number of people that will be added to the government payrolls to investigate and administer as-yet-undefined procedures.  All we can say for sure is that this can be more costly than the mandated Medicare overhead that outweighs the costs of the actual medical treatments and can take years to get payments to doctors.  Further, we know that the average person in government is compensated about 50% more than the average person in private industry, in part due to lavish government COLA pensions and extensive health insurance benefits.   So government will grow by leaps and bounds.   As those of us who spent a lot of time working in the defense industry know, surveillance cost are high both for the government and the companies that have to respond to the mandates, data and reviews imposed by the government.

 

Let’s just make the terribly oversimplifying assumption that the average person’s share of this country’s debt and unfunded obligations is $250,000 per person or $1 million for a family of four.   Considering all of the above, this is probably a huge understatement.  If we don’t do anything to retire any of the debt and obligations, and only pay interest at say only 4%, that’s an interest burden we bear a cost of $10,000 per person per year.  If, in addition to paying the interest, we set about to retire those debts and obligations in 30 years, we would each have to contribute $14,500 each year.   So a family of 4 would have to make annual payments of $40,000 each year just for interest or almost $58,000 a year if we don’t want to leave any of this problem to our grandchildren.

 

Some think that we can pay for this by relegating the payments to the top 5% of our population.  If that’s so, every family of 4 supported in that top 5% would have to pay $800,000 just for the interest and $1,160,000 to pay for interest and principal.  That’s PER YEAR for 30 years.  So even without any additions to social programs, there is no way that those who make under $250,000 a year will not see higher taxes.  This is a problem that is going to be solved ONLY if people start saving money and everyone pays something in higher taxes.

 

We are clearly talking about the end of the consuming generation of reckless spenders.  These include people at all levels that have their own image of being able to live like the Jones.  Low income people just can’t enjoy the benefits of higher income people, and higher income people just can’t afford to live like royalty.

 

The end of consumerism has a huge impact on the economy as we know it now.   When we become savers, we have to stop spending as much.  If we would start a full fledged recovery program right now with the objective of having individual finances get back to where savings rates were a little over two decades ago, and if we wanted to recover the lost savings during those two decades in the next 20 years, our national savings rate would have to exceed 20% per year–plus we’d still have to pay at least the interest on all of the debt we and our government have incurred.  Consumer spending constitutes 70% of our gross domestic product so that if we use 20% of our income to pay off the national obligations, our economy will contract sharply.

 

There has only been one time in our modern history when people had a national savings rate of 20% in this country.  That was during World War II when almost everything was rationed from gasoline to sugar, there were no new cars, store shelves were empty, all able people worked at a job, and it was patriotic for everyone to save war bonds—even school children.  There’s more on this in my book, Getting Started in a Financially Secure Retirement published by John Wiley & Sons, 2007.

 

The only people who may come out of this situation with some semblance of the American Dream are those who have already saved and those who will start saving and stop spending NOW!  That’s true if we don’t have something like the revolt against imperial Russia where real estate ownership disappeared, homes were shared by many families assigned by the government, and savings were taken away and consumed largely by the government.

 

Those that will save, and those who already have saved, will be asking, “Where shall we put our money?”  I certainly don’t see the financial market future any better than anyone else, so I can only tell you what I am doing.  I effectively divide my investments into three parts.  The first part assumes that I want to be able to live through the Great Depression II.  The second part assumes that it will take people a number of years to wake up to the problems, so this part is very conventional mix of stock and bond funds.  The third part assumes that we will have hyper inflation.  Only the Great Depression II and hyper inflation provide environments to solve the huge debt problem:  the former by defaulting on loans and the latter by so cheapening the value of the payments that debt payments are a small part of a huge income denominated in almost worthless money.

 

The largest part of my own investments is conventional, but the amount I have in the hyper inflation portion and Great Depression II are sufficient to get me by, especially if the conventional part ends up having some value and not wiped out entirely.  Those who would do similar splits would end up with the sizes of the three parts dependent on the extent of their savings, age, employment security, expectations for the future and probably lots of other factors.

 

Understand that I don’t pretend that I am wise about what to do in either of these extremes.  Still, my own choices for a hyperinflation scenario include candidates like leveraged real estate, stocks, I Bonds, TIPS and inflation-adjusted immediate annuities.  I have been thinking about this for years and so built up my supply of I Bonds when you could buy large amounts at interest rates of over 3% plus inflation.  I know that others more venturesome than I am would now add commodities as well as metals such as gold and platinum.  Very wealthy people often gain inflation protection by saving valuable art and rare collectibles.  Art and collectibles are beyond my financial capability, just as some of my choices are beyond the capability of other people.  For example, a young person probably doesn’t have the resources to buy an immediate annuity and should never buy one in the first place.

 

The Great Depression II portfolio is much more difficult.  My choices here would include money markets, CDs, EE Bonds, treasuries and debt-free real estate.  I know that my parents would add another category.  My parents were struggling young adults during the great depression and gave us children strong encouragement to learn at least one musical instrument so we could earn something even if we lost our regular jobs.  I played the piano, flute and trumpet—not knowing what I might need.  I learned something about diversification even then.

 

Perhaps the best protection during the Great Depression II outcome would be strong and varied work skills.  Even non working spouses and older children should learn some work skills that could bring income if necessary.  Think Rosie the riveter during World War II as opposed to soccer mom.  Learning to be frugal combined with doing as many home, car and clothes repairs yourself is important in a depression environment as could be supplementing your food supply with a home garden.  You might want to store some vegetable seeds for next year.

 

The nation’s debt problems are so large that the sky will fall on the majority.  I firmly believe that to survive, people will have to save—lots.  They will also have to invest it well.  We can’t tell which direction the economy will turn, but we know it has to make drastic changes.  Hence, in addition to having good work skills and savings lots, it’s important to be well diversified and include some things that might help in the Great Depression II or hyper inflation.

 

Of course, we could also have both Great Depression II combined with hyperinflation, sort of stag-flation cubed.  Don’t wait to start your own defensive actions.  Do them now!  The reductions in future benefits will be small if the economy would turn around quickly (which I doubt), but the benefits from taking action now will be huge otherwise.

Economic troubles don’t affect reverse mortgages

Lawrence Journal World & News – October 4, 2008


Getting a conventional mortgage is more difficult if you don’t have a high credit rating or an adequate down payment.


But credit ratings and down payments are not issues if you are interested in getting a reverse mortgage. Problems that have beset the mortgage market are not affecting reverse mortgages, lenders said.


“If you are old enough and you have equity in your house, you get the loan,” said Deborah Decker, vice president of Hilco Mortgage Corp. in Lawrence.


A reverse mortgage is a loan against your home that you don’t have to pay back for as long as you live there or until you die. Then the house has to be sold. To qualify you have to be at least 62 years old.


The reverse mortgage is used by senior citizens to get extra money. There are several ways of receiving the money if you are approved. The owner doesn’t turn over the home’s title to the lender.


There appears to be a growing interest in reverse mortgages because older Americans are facing increasing prescription drug costs and higher taxes, Decker said.


“What was a livable monthly stipend from retirement or Social Security no longer covers everything,” she said. “People are living longer and need more money.”


Decker thinks many senior citizens don’t know about the availability of reverse mortgages.


See the full article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator

SAVING FOR RETIREMENT?: Just hang on

Newsday – October 5, 2008


What should I do now? It’s a natural question for retirement investors watching the unfolding Wall Street financial crisis and worrying about their portfolios.

For most investors, the best answer is: Do nothing. The collapse of venerable companies like Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and American International Group is frightening indeed. But this isn’t the time for the small retirement investor to make big moves.

“I think the small investor usually does exactly the wrong thing for understandable reasons,” says Philip Cooley, a professor of finance at Trinity University in San Antonio and an expert on retirement withdrawal strategies. “They sell low, and they buy high, and that is driven by fear, hope and greed. Fear drives you from the market when we experience what we’ve seen … and when prices get high, euphoria sets in. Even if you understand the emotions and how they impact you, it’s difficult to overcome.”

So, let’s take a break from the epic popping of the housing-subprime loan bubble and focus on the fundamentals for long-term retirement saving.


Take a deep breath. The collapse of major financial players naturally generates fear about what might be next to fail. But remember to draw the distinction between the fate of companies and your personal accounts. Under the massive financial bailout bill approved last week by Congress, accounts will be insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. up to $250,000 per investor.

Brokerage accounts do not enjoy similar insurance protection. But strict Securities and Exchange Commission rules do require brokerages to segregate customer accounts from their own money. In the event that a brokerage firm defaults, investor assets shouldn’t be in jeopardy; typically, the customer accounts will be transferred to another brokerage firm through a merger or sale.

If that fails, a federally mandated nonprofit federal corporation called the Securities Investor Protection Corp. steps in to protect investor accounts.

It’s important to understand that the SIPC doesn’t protect you against market losses or fluctuations; it’s there to make sure you don’t lose the underlying assets, such as stocks, bonds or shares of mutual funds.

Don’t try to time the market. Investors never win by trying to time economic and market cycles. “You need to be right twice, and that’s incredibly difficult to do,” Cooley says. “The turnaround this time certainly will be sparked by solid evidence of a turnaround in the housing market – and that’s going to be very difficult to call.”

If you make regular contributions to your retirement account via automatic payroll deduction or some other method, keep going. You’ll benefit from today’s lower prices and the eventual market recovery.

Also, use the market decline to take stock of your portfolio and to make sure your investment mix is appropriate for your target retirement age. Most investment experts recommend staying about 90 percent in equities until you reach your early 50s; at that point, scale back to 70 percent. Gradually adjust downward to 50 percent in your early 60s, moving more money into fixed income investments.

Don’t hold individual stocks. It’s easy to look like a genius stock picker in a bull market, but that illusion can disappear quickly when the market heads south. Recognize stock picking is a professional occupation requiring financial knowledge and willingness to spend a lot of time monitoring your investments. For most of us, it’s just too risky.

Instead, keep things simple by putting your 401(k) or IRA funds into straightforward mutual fund investments. My favorite choice is life cycle – or target date – mutual funds. Here, you don’t even need to sort through the fund options in your employer’s plan; instead, you just pick a fund targeted for the year you expect to retire, and the fund manager adjusts the asset mix as your target year approaches.

Cooley advises a fairly conservative balance between stocks and bonds. “Unless you are extremely risk-averse, I’d have 50 percent in well-diversified mutual funds holding common stocks, and the rest in bonds and cash.”

Have a buffer. Cooley recommends planning for retirement with three to five years’ worth of living expenses in cash and bonds with laddered (or varying) maturity rates. “Events similar to what we’ve just seen have occurred many times in our history. If you have a buffer, your portfolio of common stocks can gyrate around on the side, and you’ll be able to sleep at night.”

The best way to build that buffer is to fine-tune your household budget with an eye toward cutting expenses. Keep an eye on interest rates in the months ahead; some experts see lower rates later this year in the wake of the Wall Street crisis; if that happens, you might have the opportunity to refinance your mortgage and other consumer debt expenses.

At the same time, look for ways to reduce regular expenses like telephone bills, cable TV, restaurant tabs and the like. You might be amazed what you can achieve with some careful budget scrutiny.

In a shaky economy, cash is king, so do your best to hang on to some of it.


See the article in full…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator

FHA Announces $417,000 Reverse Mortgage Loan Limit

Ventura County Star – October 3, 2008


FHA Commissioner Brian Montgomery announced today that the new HECM, Home Equity Conversion Mortgage, nationwide loan limit will be $417,000. The target effective date is November 1. This is a target date right now, not a set deadline.


There was significant debate within HUD to consider area limits at 115% of area median home value, with a floor of $417,000 and a cieling of $625,500. Ultimately, the interpretation was determined that the new legislation will be a $417,000 loan limit. This was the original limit embraced by the the reverse mortgage industry.


A more liberal interpretation of HR 3221 considered a maximum loan limit to $625,500 in high cost areas, such as Ventura county. The complexity of the bills language created much debate and ultimately the final decsion of the $417,000 loan limit.


A majority of counties nationwide have lending limits at the existing loan limit of $200,162 which has drastically reduced the amount of equity that seniors living in higher-valued homes could access. These new limits will have a significant impact on the quality of life and provide more relief to those seniors who need the help especially in todays turbulent economic environment.


These are all positive developments for the reverse mortgage industry and the older Americans served. As HUD moves toward the implementation of the many other important aspects of the housing bill including the ability to purchase a home using a reverse mortgage the consumer will be able to look forward to additional developments in the near future.


See full article…


Professional Financial Advisors:  Find out what a financial advisor can do for you at NewRetirement.com.


Annuity Advice for Retirement:   Evaluate and compare annuities at NewRetirement.com


About Reverse Mortgages:  Learn all about reverse mortgages at NewRetirement.com


NewRetirement Retirement Calculator:   Assess your retirement plan with the NewRetirement Retirement Calculator



NewRetirement Blogs Home