In case anyone is still reading this thread, Gary is using the classic strawman argument technique. This style of debate carries very little worth because the initial position is never addressed (although Im sure its a great rhetorical device to help sell contracts). It tends to follow the following form:
1. Person A has position X. (3% fixed annuity isnt safe investment in 4% inflation.)
2. Person B ignores X and instead presents position Y. (How well does a 25% loss of principal keep up with inflation?)
3. Person B attacks position Y. (If YOU were the investor in S&P 500 indexed fund who lost 25.31% of his money and now only has $74,690 left would you like to trade places with the person who was in the Fixed Indexed Annuity who still has her $100,000 SAFE and sound?)
4. Person B draws a conclusion that X is false/incorrect/flawed. (your inflation argument pointed toward a traditional FIXED annuity which is a SAFE money savings instrument is absurd)
Bookmarks