UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (89) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: Rayvt Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 75383  
Subject: Re: Retirement, college, and Obamanomics Date: 1/6/2013 12:43 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Because when you need your liquidity, and the markets down, you can't afford to be s.o.l.
-and-
order to survive 30 years, your account has to survive 30 years intact.


This is an example of the thing that has always driven me crazy about insurance salespeople. In one breath they talk about 30 years, in the next they talk about some shorter term. They keep shifting around the time-frame to meet whatever question or objection you have.

Likewise, they shift between talking about retirement income, leaving money for heirs, and tax savings, to meet whatever question or objection you have. It's like the combination playpen/highchair/walker that new parents get sucker into buying. The salesman makes out like it's a playpen and a highchair and a walker, but it's not -- it's a playpen OR a highchair OR a walker, and when it's filling one purpose it is not filling the others. Moreover, it does each one poorly.

Trying to mash several different objectives into one financial instument is going to cost more and have worse overall results than buying several instruments that each do their one job well.

FWIW, "The August 10, 1998 issue of Barron's reported that worst 30 year period for the S&P 500 since the end of World War II (1955-1984) had an annual return of 9.4%."
"Forgoing the majority of your projected return to protect yourself against an event that hasn't occurred in recent history is very expensive insurance."



Trying to argue in *favor* of a mystical non-strategy supposedly superior to an IUL that nobody has yet brought forth, by randomly choosing any off-the-shelf unstructured IUL is pretty damning in the lack of argument itself.

Nobody is arguing in favor of some other specific strategy. They/we are arguing that IUL's are very costly, and make an impossible promise ("stock market returns without stock market risk." )

It is well known that the optimal strategies for short-term returns are different than for long-term returns. Strategies that focus on low volatility harm your long-term returns. And that's *just* what IUL's brag about, the low volatility and the no-loss floor.
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (89) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next

Announcements

The Retire Early Home Page
Discussion on accelerating retirement day.
Post of the Day:
Macro Economics

2.1: The Labor Pool Problem
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement