So much for the 10 percenters not carrying the water

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2013 16:03:47 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 12, 2013 16:01:23 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

usaone, I don't mean any disrespect, but I don't think you have a clue how things work.  You are just making stuff up.  For example, you've probably completely overlooked dividends in your analysis of equating today to 2004.

The average Joe doesn't do so well because he makes bad decisions.  He tends to buy high, sell low, and then stays away scared until the next opportunity to buy high.  It's tough to blame that on the rich.  It's also tough to blame the rich when the Average Joe would rather spend his money than save it.  That is the cause of a growing wealth gap.  If the average Joe places more value on a new car than on investing for the future, who am I to say that is a bad thing?  It's a personal choice.

people should stop trying to game the market.  it is a good LONG TERM investment.  it should be treated that way by amateur investors.

[usaone]

Agreed its long term. But the average joe doesn't have the income to put into the market. If your not getting increases in pay you can not invest as much as needed.

In the 1970's in a bad economy we had a savings rate near 10%. Because even in that bad economy we had increase's in pay rates.

[usaone]

And folks in there 50's and 60's don't have the time that's needed for the market to come back.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 9:56:01 GMT -5 usaone said:

Agreed its long term. But the average joe doesn't have the income to put into the market. If your not getting increases in pay you can not invest as much as needed.

In the 1970's in a bad economy we had a savings rate near 10%. Because even in that bad economy we had increase's in pay rates.

again.....this is crapola

no matter what your income level....you should be able to PAY YOURSELF first

10%.....

if you net $ 1200 every 2 weeks....then $ 120 needs to go into a savings. PERIOD

that 10% is a minimum......more of course for those who can......

then you LIVE on the rest.....

If you are not getting increases in pay, then you have to figure out why.....

if you work on a contract, then maybe that contract needs to be renegotiated

if not, then why not......cant you sell your worth to your boss.....pickup better skills....take on more responsibility.....

it is a competitive market out there.....you have to EARN more....not just want more

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 9:57:16 GMT -5 usaone said:

And folks in there 50's and 60's don't have the time that's needed for the market to come back.

i am in my 50's

i never left the market

i buy and hold equities....i rarely sell unless the reason i bought the company in the first place has changed

i buy blue chip dividend paying companies....not high flyers

and if tomorrow the market would crash from 16000 to 5000, it wouldnt affect me one iota

in fact i would be buying the same companies i own now....but at major discounted prices

as i get older, i will slowly move from equities to bonds......for the income

the market (equities) are for everyone.....from 18-100......just in different percentages

[Value Buy]

Dec 13, 2013 9:57:16 GMT -5 usaone said:

And folks in there 50's and 60's don't have the time that's needed for the market to come back.

I have worked for the same company for over 40 years.

People in their twenties (back when I was in my twenties) did not open IRA'S. They claimed they could not afford to. I claimed you could not afford not to.

When they were in their thirties, our company started a 401-k program.

These same people claimed they could not afford to participate. I said they could not afford not to. When Roth IRA'S became available, these same people said they could not afford to open one.

Some of these same people in their fifties and sixties now say they still cannot afford to participate.

There is always an excuse not to. Many were expensive vacations, big homes, lavish lifestyles, and even sometimes, college education for the kids. Usually there was not really much money for the kids when it came time to go away to school.

At some point the excuses have to end and reality must set in. We are all responsible for our own efforts.

[happyhoix]

Apples and oranges in the article. JPM should not be liable for one penny over WAMU business practices. So if I buy a tenement house for pennies, I shouldn't get fined by the local housing authority because my building isn't up to code? Bullshit. I knew what I was buying when I bought it. If I didn't want the hassle of getting fines, I would have paid more money for a building that was up to standards.

As far as the London whale, by all accounts he was a rogue trader. Losing six billion by him alone was well within any penalty the bank should have faced. It was more like double taxation by the Government.
So if my company has a truck driver who has had multiple DUIs and he crashes his 18 wheeler into a van full of nuns, having to replace that 18 wheeler should be punishment enough for my company? What about the concept of a company keeping good enough control over their employees to ensure they behave in a legal and ethical manner?


It was the Feds that approached JPM about taking them over WAMU. So if Uncle Sam asked you if you would eat a bug for the good of the nation, you have to eat that bug? They could have refused to bite. That's what happened to Lehman's. They did their due diligence and were happy to get such a good deal.


Actually no. It was actually worth $0.00 because if it was not purchased it would have need insolvent, possibly as early the next morning and the entire banking system could have collapsed. So let's ask ourselves, who was responsible for the whole banking system to be in this precarious position? According to the feds that issued the fine, 30% of that fine was for bad actions JPM did THEMSELVES. 

Government screwed share holders, not JPM. Who triggered the whole financial meltdown to begin with? JPM was right in there with the rest of the banks, chopping at the bit to get a piece of that action. So they got their hand spanked and shareholders got left holding the bag.

But you go after the money, not the managers. Wrong again. This fine was chump change to a company as big as JPM. They pass the loss off to the shareholders. If you really want to stop this kind of behavior from happening in the future, you make the managers personally liable, up to and including jail time.

Look at the hazardous waste and safety rules. Upper management are the potential jailees should the company engage is deliberate, willful misconduct - and that's how it should be. Shareholders shouldn't be left holding the bag when it's management who committed the egregious acts. And you don't whine like a bitch and blame the regulators when you commit an egregious crime and get caught doing it.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 10:06:47 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

Dec 13, 2013 9:56:01 GMT -5 usaone said:

Agreed its long term. But the average joe doesn't have the income to put into the market. If your not getting increases in pay you can not invest as much as needed.

In the 1970's in a bad economy we had a savings rate near 10%. Because even in that bad economy we had increase's in pay rates.

again.....this is crapola

not entirely.  historically, pay has kept up with productivity.  this allowed an ever increasing standard of living in the US, which meant that putting money away was fairly easy.

i agree with you that it is not IMPOSSIBLE now- but usa is right that it IS HARDER for all but the upper income brackets to do so.

[Deleted]

only if people are living ABOVE their means

and it is NEVER easy to save....never has been....never will be

it is much easier to spend and enjoy....than save for the proverbial rainy day

and way to many dont care about tomorrow.....

they want their iphone, and 60" plasma.....to hell with having savings to cover the car repair that will be needed in a few months

that is the difference....people that live within their means....and those that live ABOVE their means

they have to keep up with the guy down the street that has the new toy

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 11:53:51 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

only if people are living ABOVE their means

and it is NEVER easy to save....never has been....never will be

it is much easier to spend and enjoy....than save for the proverbial rainy day

and way to many dont care about tomorrow.....

they want their iphone, and 60" plasma.....to hell with having savings to cover the car repair that will be needed in a few months

that is the difference....people that live within their means....and those that live ABOVE their means

they have to keep up with the guy down the street that has the new toy

i guess so, but if you will forgive me, gd- this lecture doesn't sound so great from a 10%-er.

[Deleted]

dj

i wasnt always a 10%......

not even close

my first job out of the air force paid me 28k annually in 1982 (married with 2 kids)

in Philadelphia....that didnt go very far

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 13:22:51 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 13, 2013 11:53:51 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

only if people are living ABOVE their means

and it is NEVER easy to save....never has been....never will be

it is much easier to spend and enjoy....than save for the proverbial rainy day

and way to many dont care about tomorrow.....

they want their iphone, and 60" plasma.....to hell with having savings to cover the car repair that will be needed in a few months

that is the difference....people that live within their means....and those that live ABOVE their means

they have to keep up with the guy down the street that has the new toy

i guess so, but if you will forgive me, gd- this lecture doesn't sound so great from a 10%-er.

So truth is only good if it comes from someone who may not have much?

Now, I'm pretty certain (correct me if I'm wrong) that your point was that people don't want to hear the advice when it comes from a 10%er because of some perceived disconnect between the "classes". That to me seems ignorant.

My point is good advice is good advice, regardless of where it comes from. If some rich guy wants to tell me how to make money legitimately then I'm the only one to blame if I brush off the advice given.

[EVT1]

Dec 13, 2013 13:22:51 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 13, 2013 11:53:51 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

only if people are living ABOVE their means

and it is NEVER easy to save....never has been....never will be

it is much easier to spend and enjoy....than save for the proverbial rainy day

and way to many dont care about tomorrow.....

they want their iphone, and 60" plasma.....to hell with having savings to cover the car repair that will be needed in a few months

that is the difference....people that live within their means....and those that live ABOVE their means

they have to keep up with the guy down the street that has the new toy

i guess so, but if you will forgive me, gd- this lecture doesn't sound so great from a 10%-er.

So would either of you support compulsory retirement investing similar to what Australia does?  

Of course it sounds shitty when it comes from someone with plenty of disposable income.  But of course all the working poor has Iphones and 60" Plasmas- it's just a lifestyle choice- at least that is the myth some choose to believe.  Much easier to deal with the problem of the working poor if you just blame them for all of it.

So how do people live below their means when their means do not even cover the cost of living?

BTW keeping up with the Joneses is not the typical behavior of the working poor.  That stuff happens when incomes start to come up.  

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 14:13:16 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

dj

i wasnt always a 10%......

me neither.

not even close

my first job out of the air force paid me 28k annually in 1982 (married with 2 kids)

my first REAL job paid me $29.5k in 1989.  no kids.  my first year working on my own, i made the princely sum of $7,801

in Philadelphia....that didnt go very far

still.  i don't think either of us were even in the bottom TWO quintiles, gd.  we have kept up.

[Deleted]

evt

almost everyone starts out poor or at low level....

what you do from that point on determines where you will finish....

if you spend everything you make.....you will always be poor or just getting by

if you dont improve your skills, or take on extra responsibility, you wont get more money at your job, or promotions

those are facts.....like them or not

whether or not someone wants to do what it takes to improve their life is another matter entirely

i have employees who will never be more than clerks.....no drive...no ambition.....not willing to do more

that is okay....i need those employees also.....not everyone wants to be the boss or a supervisor

but dont bitch to me about what you make when you had chances to do more, or learn more

that doesnt keep them from buying the $ 200 pair of shoes, or the $ 500 newest ipad

and they inevitably come to me when their car needs work, or some emergency pops up for an advance

sometimes....it really is the choices people make that determine the outcome.....

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 14:35:27 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 13, 2013 13:22:51 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i guess so, but if you will forgive me, gd- this lecture doesn't sound so great from a 10%-er.

So truth is only good if it comes from someone who may not have much?

no, that was not my point.  the top 50% of wage earners have kept up with productivity.  the bottom half have NOT.

Now, I'm pretty certain (correct me if I'm wrong) that your point was that people don't want to hear the advice when it comes from a 10%er because of some perceived disconnect between the "classes". That to me seems ignorant.

i am as dumb as a bag of rocks, FT.  you should know that by now.  so yes, it is totally ignorant, consistent with my lack of intelligence.

My point is good advice is good advice, regardless of where it comes from. If some rich guy wants to tell me how to make money legitimately then I'm the only one to blame if I brush off the advice given.

nice red herring, but it was not my argument.  my argument has to do with knowing how the bottom 20% live, and what it has been like to be part of that class for the last 20-40 years. 

gd and i bragging (because that it is what it sounds like) about how easy it is to save doesn't really mean much to someone in that class.  they need to hear it from someone who has either BEEN in their class or is IN IT.

i could tell you how many times a month i go out to eat, and how many bands i have seen in the last year.  that was all super easy for me.  but i am in the top 10%.  it might not be so easy for others outside my class. 

you stand the risk of sounding like Marie Antoinette when you lecture people significantly poorer than you about the benefits of saving.  that is ALL i was saying.

forgive my woeful ignorance, FT. 

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 15:21:25 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

evt

almost everyone starts out poor or at low level......

you sure about that?

i am not being a dick.  i really don't know.  but i suspect that this is NOT true.

[Deleted]

i have never worked for anyone that started out at the top....have you?

maybe it happens.....

i said almost everyone.....maybe 90% or higher

unless you work for yourself from go.....and how many do that?

some....but over 20%? i wouldnt think so.....

hey...i could be wrong....maybe people do start at the top......but i sure in the hell wasnt one of them....

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 15:29:50 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

i have never worked for anyone that started out at the top....have you?

no, but that was not what you said.  you said "most people start at the bottom".  did you mean "bottom of the ladder" or "bottom 20% of income"?

maybe it happens.....

i said almost everyone.....maybe 90% or higher

unless you work for yourself from go.....and how many do that?

paltry few.  when i bought this business i was 27.  i remember going to my first trade show, and everyone kept asking me where the boss was.

some....but over 20%? i wouldnt think so.....

hey...i could be wrong....maybe people do start at the top......but i sure in the hell wasnt one of them....

me neither.  but i might have mistook what you meant.  i thought you were talking about INCOME.

[Deleted]

no...incomes will vary on professions

some higher....some lower

i was talking of the bottom of the ladder

MOST start there......

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 15:42:13 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

no...incomes will vary on professions

some higher....some lower

i was talking of the bottom of the ladder

MOST start there......

yeah, that i agree with.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 15:22:44 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 13, 2013 14:35:27 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

So truth is only good if it comes from someone who may not have much?

no, that was not my point.  the top 50% of wage earners have kept up with productivity.  the bottom half have NOT.

Now, I'm pretty certain (correct me if I'm wrong) that your point was that people don't want to hear the advice when it comes from a 10%er because of some perceived disconnect between the "classes". That to me seems ignorant.

i am as dumb as a bag of rocks, FT.  you should know that by now.  so yes, it is totally ignorant, consistent with my lack of intelligence.

My point is good advice is good advice, regardless of where it comes from. If some rich guy wants to tell me how to make money legitimately then I'm the only one to blame if I brush off the advice given.

nice red herring, but it was not my argument.  my argument has to do with knowing how the bottom 20% live, and what it has been like to be part of that class for the last 20-40 years. 

gd and i bragging (because that it is what it sounds like) about how easy it is to save doesn't really mean much to someone in that class.  they need to hear it from someone who has either BEEN in their class or is IN IT.

Such as myself? I'm not anywhere near the top 10% at this point. I grew up fairly poor. Not dirt poor but certainly struggling to be called lower middle-class. Now, I'd say I'm at the middle middle-class level and trying to work my way up. Luckily I have a mother that taught me a lot about finances and how to handle money properly. I realize that a lot of people don't have that. However, I've tried to give many people basic money handling principles and I've heard more than I care to admit: "I can't do that" or "Yeah but I only make this much...I can't save money". I call BS because I've done it when I didn't have much to my name.

i could tell you how many times a month i go out to eat, and how many bands i have seen in the last year.  that was all super easy for me.  but i am in the top 10%.  it might not be so easy for others outside my class. 

I can do the same and it's more than I wish it was. I could certainly be helping myself more but I've chosen to go have fun when the prudent/smarter thing to do would have been buy a couple more stocks to add to the portfolio.

you stand the risk of sounding like Marie Antoinette when you lecture people significantly poorer than you about the benefits of saving.  that is ALL i was saying.

That was my point on explaining what I thought you meant. Perhaps I didn't word it properly...but I still think that good advice is good advice regardless. Just because someone chooses not to listen given that the person doing the talking is either imminently richer or poorer than them is foolish on the listeners behalf.

forgive my woeful ignorance, FT. 

I certainly don't think you're ignorant. Far from it actually.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 15:58:03 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 13, 2013 15:22:44 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

That was my point on explaining what I thought you meant. Perhaps I didn't word it properly...but I still think that good advice is good advice regardless.

sure.  but here is the advice that i was commenting on:

"even if you are poor, you can still save and invest".

and sure, that is TRUE.  but it is kinda meaningless coming from a rich guy.

Just because someone chooses not to listen given that the person doing the talking is either imminently richer or poorer than them is foolish on the listeners behalf.

forgive my woeful ignorance, FT. 

I certainly don't think you're ignorant. Far from it actually.

i mistook what you said then.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 16:14:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 13, 2013 15:58:03 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

I certainly don't think you're ignorant. Far from it actually.

i mistook what you said then.

Why is it meaningless? It's only meaningless to the point that you (the receiver of the information) have it in your head that because the advice giver isn't like you (at this moment) then they can't possibly know what you're going through. I'm calling BS because you (the receiver) have no clue what they (the giver) have or have not been through or done in their life. Again....good advice is good advice. People miss out on all kinds of opportunities for many reasons. Not taking good advice is one of those reasons.

ETA: Even if you don't want to hear the "you can save and invest" line then you're only hurting yourself by being close-minded.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 16:18:43 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 13, 2013 16:14:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i mistook what you said then.

Why is it meaningless? It's only meaningless to the point that you (the receiver of the information) have it in your head that because the advice giver isn't like you (at this moment) then they can't possibly know what you're going through.

no, that is not what i was claiming.  i am sorry if i was totally unclear, FT- but you really are not understanding me.  i said "never been in" that situation.  i think your advice is perfectly valid.  you have walked a mile in the receiver's shoes.  i, however, have not.  i started out as "middle income" (or maybe even "upper middle"), and have gone up since then.  for me to say how easy it is to save is meaningless.

I'm calling BS because you (the receiver) have no clue what they (the giver) have or have not been through or done in their life.

i wasn't speaking from the receiver's perspective.  i was speaking from Marie Antoinette's

Again....good advice is good advice. People miss out on all kinds of opportunities for many reasons. Not taking good advice is one of those reasons.

ETA: Even if you don't want to hear the "you can save and invest" line then you're only hurting yourself by being close-minded.

oh, i am sure they hear it just fine. 

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 11:06:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 13, 2013 10:06:47 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

again.....this is crapola

not entirely.  historically, pay has kept up with productivity.  this allowed an ever increasing standard of living in the US, which meant that putting money away was fairly easy.

i agree with you that it is not IMPOSSIBLE now- but usa is right that it IS HARDER for all but the upper income brackets to do so.

Pay does not have to keep up with productivity in order for standard of living to rise.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 16:38:02 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 13, 2013 11:06:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

not entirely.  historically, pay has kept up with productivity.  this allowed an ever increasing standard of living in the US, which meant that putting money away was fairly easy.

i agree with you that it is not IMPOSSIBLE now- but usa is right that it IS HARDER for all but the upper income brackets to do so.

Pay does not have to keep up with productivity in order for standard of living to rise.

true.  but standards of living rise faster when it does. 

[Deleted]

Yes, standard of living rises faster when standard of living rises faster.

Where did you get that the top 50% have kept up with productivity but the bottom 50% have not?  (If from that study I posted, well, I must admit I still have not read it yet....)

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 16:26:56 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, i am sure they hear it just fine. 

And that's my main point. Regardless of whether the person does or does not relate to your situation doesn't mean the advice isn't good...or sometimes bad/terrible. Just because you hear something doesn't mean you'll listen to it...which in turn is your problem...Not the person giving it.

That's more my overall point. Let's specifically take you as an example just as an easy reference.

From what I can tell you are a decently successful business man. You've also stated that you've never been in my position. I consider this great. Many other do not and will reject your advice because you're "not one of us". That is a foolish notion to me because you may have what I want. Knowledge on a particular subject that I may be unaware of. I want to build wealth at a great rate and you as a successful business man could possibly teach me more than I can learn by myself since I may not know where to start.

So while you think that those that have never been in a certain position can't or shouldn't "lecture" those on that level, I look at it as gaining knowledge from someone whose position, wealth wise, I'd like to be in.

[EVT1]

Dec 13, 2013 15:21:25 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

evt

almost everyone starts out poor or at low level....

what you do from that point on determines where you will finish....

if you spend everything you make.....you will always be poor or just getting by

if you dont improve your skills, or take on extra responsibility, you wont get more money at your job, or promotions

those are facts.....like them or not

whether or not someone wants to do what it takes to improve their life is another matter entirely

i have employees who will never be more than clerks.....no drive...no ambition.....not willing to do more

that is okay....i need those employees also.....not everyone wants to be the boss or a supervisor

but dont bitch to me about what you make when you had chances to do more, or learn more

that doesnt keep them from buying the $ 200 pair of shoes, or the $ 500 newest ipad

and they inevitably come to me when their car needs work, or some emergency pops up for an advance

sometimes....it really is the choices people make that determine the outcome.....

Coming off kind of preachy there- but I don't think anyone disagrees about what it takes to succeed or how to be responsible with money.

I take issue with the idea that the working poor do not deserve enough to live on because of some free market mumbo jumbo.  Also, some people are just not smart enough to do much more. 

I back a living wage and the elimination of government wage subsidies- if the people that end up making that wage choose to waste it on $200 sneakers and eff up their finances then oh well- but they at least shoud be able to afford a basic life, be able to take a sick day when needed, and afford to contribute to retirement and have health care.

4 fantastic ideas I think would fix a lot of our problems- single payer healthcare, mandated sick and vacation time, living wage law, superannuation style national pension program.

Not popular with some groups I hear.