Thread: Boghies Account Talk

Re(1); 'Why Generation X Should Thank Paul Ryan', RealClearPolitics, Reed Galen
Re(2): 'It's Bootstrap Time for Generation X', RealClearPolitics, Reed Galen

HT: RealClearPolitics

The referenced articles provide a very good synopsis on what is going on in the brains of GenXers.

Why is this important to TSPTalk? Because it WILL affect:

• Your pension
• Your Social Security
• Your Medicare Benefits

Reed Galen is a positive thinking chap.

I know that when my wife and I discuss our retirement, and we discuss it regularly, we make a firm assumption that entitlements: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid will not be there for us.

Why is the above positive? Because he is looking for an equitable solution to address reality:

Paul Ryan's plan will not be enacted in its entirety. I'd venture an easy guess that he never believed that it would be. But at least he's given us a starting point; not for the pundits and politicians who wait for the house to catch fire before looking for the garden hose, but for those of us who care about this country and have a vested interest in our own and our childrens' future.

and, he feels a sense of responsability:

As my generation is actuarially responsible for the safety nets of our elders, we should double-down on the assumption that we’re on our own. Not much more complaining needed on that front: We made a promise to look after them the day we joined the workforce; maybe even the day we first showed up in our parents’ arms.

But, there is an edge to his more recent thinking:

I hope, like me, most of my generation doesn’t plan to sit around and worry about what "the system" has done, or might do to them. The days of thinking about how things were, or how things should be are gone. Everyday we go out and try to make the best life we can for ourselves and our families, and ask "the system" to just leave us alone. If the Beltway politicians want to screw around with debt ceilings and Super Committees that will do little other than raise our cost of living, have at it. But there are a lot more out here like us than they think - and they ignore us at their peril.

I am a GenXer. I have many of the traits of a GenXer - noted in an earlier 'article'. Watch out if you think things will not change during a '4th Turning'. Keep a watch on which Boomer ideals are winning the fight and adjust. And, kinda beware the knife fighting GenX.

I still believe that illegitimacy is one of the great problems in this country for welfare - these kids are ruining our education system as well. And yet nobady talks about it. But I will because I've dealt with the repercussions of the Great Society and liberalism and they stink.

[[Note: Trade not made yet, just thinking. If I pull the trigger you all willl know. Recommendation: Bet against me. That is my value here]]

Howdy,

Every once in a while I hearken back to the hard times of 2007 - 2009. I have reviewed many of your posts from that era - but never my own.
I was definitely smarter back then.
Dumberer Now!!!

Oh well, I'll try to reach for just Dumb.
Then strive for Average.
Then Super.

I'm so dumb I couldn't find my 5 Allocation model. My two synapses are sparking to life and urging me to reallocate. The frowny synapse tells me that an allocation of:

• 0% G
• 0% F
• 50% C
• 15% S
• 35% I

Is not a balanced or scientifically modeled portfolio (Quicken estimates a 7% return with an 11% risk – not so good). My smiley synapse just noted that the ever brilliant Gordon Brown just opened his yak in the Demonic Bachmann Eyes issue of NewsBleak. That synapse is screaming that anytime Gordon Brown (England’s former DumA$$ Prime Minister) is yakking it might be wise to underweight the (I)nternational Socialist Fund!!!

So, even though I don’t like the ‘F Fund’ I have to incorporate some of it into a more balanced approach:

• 10% G - A little cash to buy on a dip
• 18% F - No idea. It must be science!!!
• 40% C - A place to migrate some of that G/F stuff too
• 20% S - Buying a bit more.
• 12% I - Underweighting this pig
• Return: 6%, Risk 8%.

Not a bad risk/return ratio. Rather balanced for someone with at least 18 years to invest. Hiding from Europe. Too bad the ‘I Fund’ has no Chinese, Brazilian, or Indian assets. Too bad…

And, I really distrust bonds. They seem quite bubbly.

And, if I want bubbly I’ll buy Champaign!

As promised, I have made the following IFT. And, I've printed out the 'receipt' as recommended by Alevin. So, even though I don’t like the ‘F Fund’ I have to incorporate some of it into a more balanced approach:

• 10% G - A little cash to buy on a dip
• 18% F - No idea. It must be science!!!
• 40% C - A place to migrate some of that G/F stuff too
• 20% S - Buying a bit more.
• 12% I - Underweighting this pig
• Return: 6%, Risk 8%

I cannot stand 'investing' in a bubble - which is where the 'F Fund' is. But it will probably deflate slower than a normal bubble.

Originally Posted by Boghie

As promised, I have made the following IFT. And, I've printed out the 'receipt' as recommended by Alevin. So, even though I don’t like the ‘F Fund’ I have to incorporate some of it into a more balanced approach:

• 10% G - A little cash to buy on a dip
• 18% F - No idea. It must be science!!!
• 40% C - A place to migrate some of that G/F stuff too
• 20% S - Buying a bit more.
• 12% I - Underweighting this pig
• Return: 6%, Risk 8%

I cannot stand 'investing' in a bubble - which is where the 'F Fund' is. But it will probably deflate slower than a normal bubble.

Now I think you should change your signature block to "Lookin' up at the rainbow".

This was then:
Why the Obamas are Political Black Swans

This is now:
Obama, Beware of the Bunnies

CartersKillerRabbit.jpg

For one, I am thankful our Presidential Black Swan has settled the exclusive utopia of Marthas Vineyard. My only regret is that he will alight again in mere days - with the admirable goal of managing the economy and creating jobs. Maybe we should have a contest to predict the coming Black Swan Event. Here are the criteria as defined by Nicholas Taleb:

• The event is a surprise (to the observer).
• The event has a major impact.
• After its first recording, the event is rationalized by hindsight, as if it could have been expected (e.g., the relevant data were available but not accounted for).

I think the first is a given. This observer (President Obama) is surprised by everything economic. And, we are awaiting a major speech on new (probably old socialist ideas) statist programs to save the West from capitalism. That should satisfy the second criteria. Then, we can predict that not enough was actually borrowed and spent on government welfare and green industry to actually make a difference.

Here is my prediction:

1. Bad Mouth S&P and Money Center Banks
2. Eulogize Warren Buffet and the folk at Marthas Vineyard
3. Blather about Millionaires and Billionaires making something like $250K.
4. Demand tax increases to support an enhanced version of Johnson’s ‘Job Corps’
5. Then watch the stock and bond markets fall!!! There was so much hope and change.

It’s still too early for the markets to discount this President.

I still say blanket amnesty to get more workers here to pay into the boomer's social security. Where will the jobs come from? That's the surprise, probably a soylent green production facility.

I just read an excellent article on our precious Section 8 participants. "The Obama administration is now launching a pilot program giving local housing authorities wide discretion to pay higher rent subsidies to allow Section 8 beneficiaries to move into even more affluent zip codes. Hasn't this program helped wreck enough neighborhood?" They're just moving trash from one spot to another - with the same results. Crime will continue as will homicides. The play book is that violent crime skyrockets in neighborhoods where Section 8 recipients resettle.

Originally Posted by Boghie

As promised, I have made the following IFT. And, I've printed out the 'receipt' as recommended by Alevin. So, even though I don’t like the ‘F Fund’ I have to incorporate some of it into a more balanced approach:

• 10% G - A little cash to buy on a dip
• 18% F - No idea. It must be science!!!
• 40% C - A place to migrate some of that G/F stuff too
• 20% S - Buying a bit more.
• 12% I - Underweighting this pig
• Return: 6%, Risk 8%

the 'F Fund'...will probably deflate slower than a normal bubble.

Boghie, how do you calculate that Return%/ Risk% thing again? I know you must have 'splained it once somewhere. Mind doing it again for us slow learners?

Originally Posted by Birchtree

I just read an excellent article on our precious Section 8 participants. "The Obama administration is now launching a pilot program giving local housing authorities wide discretion to pay higher rent subsidies to allow Section 8 beneficiaries to move into even more affluent zip codes. Hasn't this program helped wreck enough neighborhood?" They're just moving trash from one spot to another - with the same results. Crime will continue as will homicides. The play book is that violent crime skyrockets in neighborhoods where Section 8 recipients resettle.

And the people leaving those neighborhoods are going back to the cities. Some kind of thing similar to what China's doing? Or an attempt to get us more "green?"

China's policy is, if you were not born in the area that you are living in, you are a non-resident and never get the rights to be treated as a resident. You have no property rights, and your kids are not eligible to go to local subsidized schools. In order to get housing, you usually have to bribe a local to let you buy (and they can pull it out from underneath you at any time). Their latest actions (causing protests) were to bulldoze some of the privately run schools for these non-residents. So those poor sots from the countryside moving into the big city, or people displaced by the latest mega project who don't want to move where the authorities tell them to go (as in Three Gorges Dam) are sheep to be shorn by the local officials.

I don't think we are talking about Chinese policy here!