Anybody Buying Yet? Where’s the Bottom?

[Deleted member 28227]

Not really arguing that. I can say there have always been bubbles- Tulip bulbs, South China Sea co, Railroads and Radios, Internet, Housing. And there will be more. I just don't know what the author's point was. He said low rates hurt savers and pushed them into risky assets causing a bubble, but also said they were a group going to get hurt - "Savers, for another, who already have limited ways to diversify to protect their portfolios from decline." My response is WTF!. Pick a lane. You can't have a bubble and then complain people who enjoyed the bubble need to be able to protect their bubble-driven gains.

How else do you construct the whirlpool of negativity

 

[BigHornRam]

Not really arguing that. I can say there have always been bubbles- Tulip bulbs, South China Sea co, Railroads and Radios, Internet, Housing. And there will be more. I just don't know what the author's point was. He said low rates hurt savers and pushed them into risky assets causing a bubble, but also said they were a group going to get hurt - "Savers, for another, who already have limited ways to diversify to protect their portfolios from decline." My response is WTF!. Pick a lane. You can't have a bubble and then complain people who enjoyed the bubble need to be able to protect their bubble-driven gains.

He wasn't complaining. Just telling you what is what. It is likely going to take decades to get out of the mess we are in.

"Getting out of this bind won’t be easy. Allowing these distortions to continue threatens economic stagnation, greater wealth inequality, and Congressional inattention to the costs of growing government debt. One way or the other, the Fed and investors will have to reduce their dependence on excess asset price inflation for years and, likely, decades to come."

What do you think the odds are for a big omnibus getting shoved through before Christmas? 99%? Spend, spend spend!

 

[Sytes]

While vast majority of federal employees are excitedly wondering when they get their FREE, ALL PAID days off, "Furlough", shutting down govt is a political soapbox grandstanding pile of vocal diarrhea from both sides of the aisle.

"Furlough", in federal government terms equates to, "we'll pay you for your free days of leave [furlough] once we stop bullchitting".

There is absolutely zero saved employee pay by furloughing non exempt employees. ZERO.

It's to the point of expectation Season's Greetings leave that does not draw from earned AL or SL. It's flat out free leave that most U.S. citizens don't realize is gifted vs "closed govt employee $ saved".

In fact, the overtime $ spent to catch up for the loss of time + paying employees for the entire time they were "furloughed" makes the furlough an expense to taxpayers.

 

[SAJ-99]

He wasn't complaining. Just telling you what is what. It is likely going to take decades to get out of the mess we are in.

"Getting out of this bind won’t be easy. Allowing these distortions to continue threatens economic stagnation, greater wealth inequality, and Congressional inattention to the costs of growing government debt. One way or the other, the Fed and investors will have to reduce their dependence on excess asset price inflation for years and, likely, decades to come."

What do you think the odds are for a big omnibus getting shoved through before Christmas? 99%? Spend, spend spend!

Sure, I agree on the mess. But every $1 of government spending is someone else’s $1 of income. It isn’t as simple as reduce spending and everything will be fine, just like pretending cutting taxes and all would be fine didn’t work. I agree with you it needs to be addressed, but who’s volunteering to take the pain?

 

[BigHornRam]

Sure, I agree on the mess. But every $1 of government spending is someone else’s $1 of income. It isn’t as simple as reduce spending and everything will be fine, just like pretending cutting taxes and all would be fine didn’t work. I agree with you it needs to be addressed, but who’s volunteering to take the pain?

Social Security solvency needs to be addressed right now. I won't put up a stink if my soon to be available benefits get cut or even eliminated. How about you?

 

[SAJ-99]

Social Security solvency needs to be addressed right now. I won't put up a stink if my soon to be available benefits get cut or even eliminated. How about you?

Agree. Means test and increase collection age. Done. Simple fix.

 

[Dave N]

Social Security solvency needs to be addressed right now. I won't put up a stink if my soon to be available benefits get cut or even eliminated. How about you?

Well, I'm the oddball. Next year when I can start collecting I will HAVE to collect due to the current added benefit to my pension dropping off at 62. That would leave me with less than 1K income per month. So, yes, I would put up a stink about cutting my benefits that I have paid into my entire life just when I needed them most.

 

[BigHornRam]

Well, I'm the oddball. Next year when I can start collecting I will HAVE to collect due to the current added benefit to my pension dropping off at 62. That would leave me with less than 1K income per month. So, yes, I would put up a stink about cutting my benefits that I have paid into my entire life just when I needed them most.

I understand Dave. That is why it should be means tested.

 

[SAJ-99]

Well, I'm the oddball. Next year when I can start collecting I will HAVE to collect due to the current added benefit to my pension dropping off at 62. That would leave me with less than 1K income per month. So, yes, I would put up a stink about cutting my benefits that I have paid into my entire life just when I needed them most.

So I’m guessing you started paying into the system is 1980 or so. Avg life expectancy was 73 (now 79). You promise me you won’t live past 73 and BHR and I will grandfather you in.


It’s a joke everyone. Don’t get all worked up over it.

 

[BigHornRam]

So I’m guessing you started paying into the system is 1980 or so. Avg life expectancy was 73 (now 79). You promise me you won’t live past 73 and BHR and I will grandfather you in.


It’s a joke everyone. Don’t get all worked up over it.

Okay Dr. Jack.

 

[Dave N]

So I’m guessing you started paying into the system is 1980 or so. Avg life expectancy was 73 (now 79). You promise me you won’t live past 73 and BHR and I will grandfather you in.


It’s a joke everyone. Don’t get all worked up over it.

40 years ago that would have been a promise. Hell, never thought I would hit 60!

 

[shannerdrake]

Federal employees will generally be GS or WG employees. They are the same across the nation. Their pension called the FERS is really small. The state of Montana went away from the types of pensions you mentioned around 2008ish or so. As far as state and local in cali that sure could be. Most of those systems fail long term.

Any federal employee hired after 1/1/87 is on FERS or K-FERS retirement. The old “lifetime pensions” most people think of were on the old CSRS which was pretty sweet.

FERS and K-FERS require you to pay a percentage of pretax money and you essentially get 1% for every year you work of your “High 3” which is the average of your three highest consecutive years. Vesting is after 10 years. That 1% bumps to 1.1% if you retire after 62 and have more than 20 years service.

 

[sierrahunter]

Any federal employee hired after 1/1/87 is on FERS or K-FERS retirement. The old “lifetime pensions” most people think of were on the old CSRS which was pretty sweet.

FERS and K-FERS require you to pay a percentage of pretax money and you essentially get 1% for every year you work of your “High 3” which is the average of your three highest consecutive years. Vesting is after 10 years. That 1% bumps to 1.1% if you retire after 62 and have more than 20 years service.

Right. So, if your high 3-year salary was 100,000, and you put in 30 years, you would get $30,000/year in pension payments. This is not meant to be a livable pension without a 401k, but even this small amount is remarkable in today's world.
For those that begrudge this pension, you have two options. The first is to pursue changes through your representatives. The second is to get a job with the Feds and earn your own pension. Don't expect a posh position where you don't make an honest living. I'm sure they exist in the Federal government, but i have yet to meet someone with a job like that.

 

[shannerdrake]

Right. So, if your high 3-year salary was 100,000, and you put in 30 years, you would get $30,000/year in pension payments. This is not meant to be a livable pension without a 401k, but even this small amount is remarkable in today's world.
For those that begrudge this pension, you have two options. The first is to pursue changes through your representatives. The second is to get a job with the Feds and earn your own pension. Don't expect a posh position where you don't make an honest living. I'm sure they exist in the Federal government, but i have yet to meet someone with a job like that.

Correct on your math. Plus federal employees pay into their pension. Anywhere from .8-4.4% per year depending on when they joined.

I’m sure some feds really make big money and don’t do much, but I haven’t seen them. I had about 400 feds reporting to me at one time and the overwhelming majority worked very hard. Sure there were some “bad apples” who milked them system and did the minimum, but I’ve worked in corporate America too and let’s not pretend those types don’t exist there.

I think so many people get emotional about feds because they think it’s “their money” that’s paying fed’s salaries. Maybe. But let’s not forget that about half of all US households pay $0 in federal taxes.

And folks who hate on feds would do good to remember that there was $800B spent on PPP that no one seemed to care to pay back. That’s enough money to pay every fed’s salary and benefits for 4 years….to do absolutely nothing.

 

[HONEYBADGER]

That’s ridiculous. Both parties want jobs, it’s just a matter of who can claim them with the best BS story.

Now that the election is over they admit jobs numbers were grossly inflated.

Hate to say I told you so but.......

And this is just one jurisdiction.

Ooops sorry folks it wasn't 1.1 million jobs. It was only 10k.

Things are going to get much much worse before they ever start getting better.

 

[Sytes]

Correct on your math. Plus federal employees pay into their pension. Anywhere from .8-4.4% per year depending on when they joined.

I’m sure some feds really make big money and don’t do much, but I haven’t seen them. I had about 400 feds reporting to me at one time and the overwhelming majority worked very hard. Sure there were some “bad apples” who milked them system and did the minimum, but I’ve worked in corporate America too and let’s not pretend those types don’t exist there.

I think so many people get emotional about feds because they think it’s “their money” that’s paying fed’s salaries. Maybe. But let’s not forget that about half of all US households pay $0 in federal taxes.

And folks who hate on feds would do good to remember that there was $800B spent on PPP that no one seemed to care to pay back. That’s enough money to pay every fed’s salary and benefits for 4 years….to do absolutely nothing.

Unless you're covered under COPRA. 1.7% for 20 yrs + 1-1.1% w/ 8hrs AL every two weeks, along with 2x's OT,
among other aspects make a lucrative deal including buyback of DD214 time (available to most all fed retirement plans). GS 13+ w/ COLA is a pretty decent setting however, there are various federal positions that are under paid.
Agree, federal, state, local, private, all hold less than stellar employees however, it's a bit more, eh, simplified for private sector to dump bad apples vs government actions to cut the tree down.

I've worked private, county, and Federal. In my 35 year experience, more slouches in government positions than private. Goes back to chopping trees vs plucking bad apples though, YMMV.

Back on topic, interesting review and assessment:

MarketWatch Live: Stocks log weekly losses with recession fears on rise

Follow all the latest market movements for Friday here.

www.marketwatch.com

 

[shannerdrake]

Unless you're covered under COPRA. 1.7% for 20 yrs + 1-1.1% w/ 8hrs AL every two weeks, along with 2x's OT,
among other aspects make a lucrative deal including buyback of DD214 time (available to most all fed retirement plans). GS 13+ w/ COLA is a pretty decent setting however, there are various federal positions that are under paid.
Agree, federal, state, local, private, all hold less than stellar employees however, it's a bit more, eh, simplified for private sector to dump bad apples vs government actions to cut the tree down.

I've worked private, county, and Federal. In my 35 year experience, more slouches in government positions than private. Goes back to chopping trees vs plucking bad apples though, YMMV.

Back on topic, interesting review and assessment:

MarketWatch Live: Stocks log weekly losses with recession fears on rise

Follow all the latest market movements for Friday here.

www.marketwatch.com

Thanks for getting us back!

I did my year end investment review yesterday and had to face the reality that my TSP was worth basically the same it was this time last year and that’s after a year of max contributions.

I just keep telling myself that everything I am buying now I’m just getting for really cheap .

Those of you who know better, are there any good bloggers/sites that give good guidance on the government mutual funds?

 

[BigHornRam]

Now that the election is over they admit jobs numbers were grossly inflated.

Hate to say I told you so but.......

And this is just one jurisdiction.

Ooops sorry folks it wasn't 1.1 million jobs. It was only 10k.

Things are going to get much much worse before they ever start getting better.

Come on man. The folks in charge would not knowingly give us false information before an election and then revise the numbers afterwards. That's just kook conspiracy stuff....

Washington Post confirms layoffs after leaked video of tense town hall

The video reflects the Post's growing business, leadership and cultural challenges.

www.axios.com

 

[SAJ-99]

Now that the election is over they admit jobs numbers were grossly inflated.

Hate to say I told you so but.......

And this is just one jurisdiction.

Ooops sorry folks it wasn't 1.1 million jobs. It was only 10k.

Things are going to get much much worse before they ever start getting better.

You are not telling me anything. I have said the jobs data is weird for months now. And it's not a huge conspiracy. What is being measured is large in scope and complicated. But whatever, Great. Maybe we are already where the Fed wants to be.

The adjustment has nothing to do with the election being over. The BLS adjusts its data set every March. Also, you can also take a look at income tax revenue collected and get some idea of the jobs picture. Data as of Sept 30.

 

[BigHornRam]

You are not telling me anything. I have said the jobs data is weird for months now. And it's not a huge conspiracy. What is being measured is large in scope and complicated. But whatever, Great. Maybe we are already where the Fed wants to be.

The adjustment has nothing to do with the election being over. The BLS adjusts its data set every March. Also, you can also take a look at income tax revenue collected and get some idea of the jobs picture. Data as of Sept 30.

Weird = manipulated..... before the election. Revised to actual data after the election. Nothing to see here. Move along.