Of all the man bashing, hysterical columns, this one ranks as one of the worst. 'Anne Letterse' plays fast and loose with numbers (half of 7800 is 3000 ??), trots out hoary old statistics that conceal more than they reveal (women make 80% of what men make), and cites her own personal history of martial and finacial failure without taking personal responsibility for her fate or the fates of her children.We can do without this type of inflamatory 'journalism'.I was hoping to read about how women invest too conservatively, how they need to put a portion of their retirement investments into stocks, not passbook savings.Shame on Motley Fool for running that column.Very sincerely,Paul Menten
Yes, I could not agree with a lot of Anne's letter. So many women make more than their spouses these days. Is it now 20% or 25%? More than a few women I know are worried about the men they are leaving gaining access to their assets. Also, where have many of these women been for the past 30 years (no credit in their names??? names not on assets???)?I don't see too many men around me rolling in dough or many stay-at-home baby-boomer women.Yes, there is cause for concern, but the tone of Anne's letter struck me as rather odd and too far out of touch with the times.G.
I agree that some of those numbers should really have been redone(How hard is it to put $7,800 into a calculator and divide by 2 really, I wanna know since it seems like a no-brainer to me.) and what prey tell was this number used for, geesh! There are at least a few sites that are focused at women that I think could mark some revolution like those of wfn.com, ka-ching.com, ivillage.com and women.com but apparently this shouldn't be noticed for some bizarro reason in the wake-up call after citing more than a few differences between the genders I think.JB
Of all the man bashing, hysterical columns, this one ranks as one of the worst. 'Anne Letterse' plays fast and loose with numbers (half of 7800 is 3000 ??), trots out hoary old statistics that conceal more than they reveal (women make 80% of what men make), and cites her own personal history of martial and finacial failure without taking personal responsibility for her fate or the fates of her children.We can do without this type of inflamatory 'journalism'.Dear Paul, I understand your claim of male bashing, but I have seen quite a bit of it on the male side also. Look at the message board regarding Hewlett Packard and notice how the first male writes that the new female CEO was "whining" and "bitching" during her explanation of a deal lost to a competitor.Took everything I had to not hunt him down and slap him.
To bad Letterese. You should have made a better choice of husbands. Or, maybe taken better care of your marriage. I know of a wonerful lady who lost one husband after 20 years, remarried and lives very well after 22 years in the 2nd marriage. If anything happend to husband number 2, she would be very comfortable with a nice retirement package,Better luck next time.Tom
I realize that Anne is focusing on her situation but remember that there are still 50% of the marriages that don't fail. It's even more difficult to convince a couple to save than an individual so her advice is just as important to men as it is to women. With a national savings rate of just over 3% of income we have a national disaster looming on the horizon.
Savings rate isn't the only factor - Japan has a savings rate above 10% (I think it might even be 30%) and they were stuck in recession for years. Even now the economy still hasn't recovered.
It is sad and unfortunate that the message of womendeveloping self-reliance in financial matters isinterpeted as the hysterical rantings of a male bashing, bitter divorced woman. The point is that Letterese is correct. Women musttake charge of their own future and impliment a system in which their well being is provided and protected. Perhaps those who question this wisdom would like tobecome employed at any to this country's nursing facilities. Note, I said "employed" not "visit".Let those scoffers deal with the day to day realityof elderly women who were taught her Prince Charmingwill always be there for her and take care of her. Shehas devoted a lifetime to her husband and children,notfrom obligation ,but pure love and has done a fine job. But because she never believed or was taught financialprinciples were important to herself she launquishesin a 15X15 room with 1 bathroom, 2 twin beds, anda room mate. ( Okay, I just step off the soap box.) Anyway, thisisn't to discuss good/bad marriages or the distressing state of affairs for the majority of the elderly of the United States. But the message is correct. There must be personal responsibilty and action forwomen if we don't want to grow up to become bag ladies Tabrid
...Women must take charge of their own future and implement a system in which their well being is provided and protected. ... There must be personal responsibilty and action for women if we don't want to grow up to become bag ladies.Amen. So let's talk action. How about a discussion board for women and investing. I single out women because there are some very specific issues for women and money.And let's have the best of the discussions saved to a 'feature' on Motley Fool for women to refer to when they need guidance, encouragement, advice, example.I believe that women deserve different treatment from men when it comes to investing and money because women have different attitudes (very conservative, even timid), different styles, and different needs (they live longer and often harbor needy family members).This is where Letterese failed. Rants, and no wisdom.I gotta run but let's keep this discussion going.Most sincerely,Paul Menten
neegnut, that board already exists. It is called, not coincidentally, "Women & Investing" and it is in the Fools of a Feather folder.
women have different attitudes (very conservative, even timid), different styles, and different needs By "different attitudes", did you mean that women are inherently less risk tolerant in their personal finances and investing styles than men? Link to the Women & Investing Board that JABoa has already pointed out, which happens to have a lot of male contributors:http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?id=1370004001274003Shaniqua
By "different attitudes", did you mean that women are inherently less risk tolerant in their personal finances and investing styles than men? Perhaps 'risk averse' as a generalization.Link to the Women & Investing Board that JABoa has already pointed out...Thanks, I'll move my comments to that board.Sincerely,Paul Menten
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |