Debt & Frugality

As Didi says in the novel (Findependence Day), “There’s no point climbing the Tower of Wealth when you’re still mired in the basement of debt.” If you owe credit-card debt still charging an usurous 20% per annum, forget about building wealth: focus on eliminating that debt. And once done, focus on paying off your mortgage. As Theo says in the novel, “The foundation of financial independence is a paid-for house.”

MoneySense Retired Money: Should GICs be the bedrock of Canadian retirement portfolios?

Posted By |

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column, just published, looks at the role Guaranteed Investment Certificates (GICs) should play in the retirement portfolios of Canadians. You can find the full column by going to MoneySense.ca and clicking on the highlighted headline: Are GICs a no-brainer for retirees? 

(If link doesn’t work try this: the latest Retired Money column.)

Now that you can find GICs paying 5% or so (1-year GICs at least), there is an argument they could be the bedrock of the fixed-income portfolios, especially now that the world is embroiled in two major conflicts: Ukraine and Israel/Gaza. Should this embolden China to invade Taiwan, you’re starting to see more talk about a more global conflict, up to an including the much-feared World War 3.

Of course, trying to time the market — especially in relation to catastrophes like global war and armageddon — generally proves to be a mug’s game, so we certainly maintain just as much exposure to the equity side of our portfolios.

I don’t think retirees need to apologize for sheltering between 40 and 60% of their portfolios in such safe guaranteed vehicles. Certainly, my wife and I are glad that the lion’s share of our fixed-income investments have been in GICs rather than money-losing bond ETFs: the latter, and Asset Allocation ETFs with heavy bond exposure, were as most are aware, badly hit in 2022. But not GICs; thanks to a prescient financial advisor we have long used (he used to be quoted but now he’s semi-retired chooses to be anonymous), we had in recent years been sheltering that portion of our RRSPs and TFSAs in laddered 2-year GICs. Since rates have soared in 2023, we have gradually been reinvesting our GICs into 5-year GICs, albeit still laddered.

The MoneySense column describes a recent survey by the site about “Bad Money advice,” which touched in part on GICs. Almost 900 readers were polled about what financial trends they had “bought into” at some point. The list included AI, crypto, meme stocks, side hustles, tech and Magnificent 7 stocks and GICs. Perhaps it speaks well of our readers that the single most-cited response was the 49% who said “none of the above.” The next most cited was the 16% who cited a “heavier allocation to GICs.” You can read the full overview here but I did find a couple of other findings to be worthy of note for the retirees and would-be retirees who read this column: Not surprisingly, tech stocks (FANG, MAMAA. etc. were the first runnerup to GICs, receiving 13.24% of the responses. Not far behind were the 10.55% who plumped for crypto and NFTs (Non-fungible tokens). AI was cited by 3.7%: less than I might have predicted; and meme stocks were only 2.81%.

As I said to executive editor Lisa Hannam in her insightful article on the 50 worst pieces of financial advice, GICs are at the opposite end of the spectrum from such dubious investments as meme stocks and crypto. (I’d put Tech stocks and A.I. in the middle).

GICs won’t grow Wealth for younger investors, aren’t tax-efficient in non-registered accounts

The GIC column passes on the thoughts of several influential financial advisors. One is Allan Small, a Toronto-based advisor who occasionally writes MoneySense’s popular weekly Making Sense of the Markets column. He is among GIC skeptics. He told me his problem with GIC is that they “don’t grow wealth. They can act as a parking lot for money for some people but over time there have been very few years in which people have made money with GICs, factoring in inflation and taxation.” Continue Reading…

Do you need Two Million Dollars to Retire?

Posted By |
Billy and Akaisha on the Pacific Coast of Mexico; RetireEarlyLifestyle.com

By Billy and Akaisha Kaderli

(Special to Financial Independence Hub)

We like to keep informed about the topic of retirement from the perspective of money managers and those in the financial fields.

You might have read some of these articles also, you know, the ones that say Americans have not saved enough to retire.

Many of these pieces proclaim that you must save enough in your investments to throw off 80% of your current annual salary so that you can afford a comfortable life away from a job. Lots of them will say that you need US$2 million in investments (or more) and woe to the person who thinks they can do it on less.

Approximately 10% of the households in the U.S. have a net worth of one million dollars or more. What are the other 90% supposed to do? Not retire? What kind of common sense does this make?  Expecting the regular “Joe”to meet this $2 million dollar mark is not realistic.

As you know, we have over three decades of financial independence behind us. And while everyone’s idea of a perfect lifestyle sans paycheck is different, we can tell you that for these 33-years, we have kept our annual spending around $30,000.

The secret: Living within your means

In all of our years of retirement and travel we cannot recall one retiree who regrets their decision to retire. In fact, most have told us that they wished they had done it sooner.

The Society of Actuaries (SOA) recently conducted 62 in-depth interviews of retired individuals across both the U.S. and Canada. These people were not wealthy and had done little to no financial planning. But the vast majority of them shared that they had adapted to their situation and live within their means. Translation: they have adjusted their spending to the amount of money they have coming in every month.

So basically, it’s really that simple and this is why we say if you want to know about retirement, Go to the Source.

It doesn’t have to be complicated

In our books and in our articles about finance, we say over and over that there are four categories of highest spending in any household. We personally have made adjustments in all four of these categories, and have therefore reaped the benefits of having done so. We discuss these four categories in more depth below.

The financial guys and gals will have you tap dance all over the place with investment products, and a certain financial goal you must achieve. They will press upon you the seriousness of the decision to leave your job for a couple of decades of jobless living. We say it doesn’t really have to be that complicated, but it’s very important to pay attention to these four categories.

Listen up

Housing is THE most expensive category for you to manage. It’s not just the house itself, it’s the maintenance, the property taxes, the insurance, and any updating you might want to do to a place where you are going to be living for years down the road.

If you want to rebuild that boat dock to the lake where your boat is parked during the summer, that takes money. If you are tired of the style of faucets, sinks, tile and tub areas of your bathroom and want to upgrade, that is a large expense. Now that you are retired and want a more modern kitchen, more counter space, better lighting, prettier cabinet covers – Ka-Ching! You are hearing the cash register tallying up the cost.

If you have a hot tub, an extensive garden, or if you want to build a deck to connect the house to the garden, or put in a Koi pond … Well, you get the idea.

I understand that for some people, their home is their castle, and those homes are gorgeous and a comfortable place to stay. All we are suggesting is that homes will never say no to having money poured into them.

If you want to travel or to snow bird part time, then you will find yourself paying twice for housing – the one you have left in your first location, and the hotel or the vacation home in which you will spend part of the year.

If you are not vigilant, this one category will suck the life out of your retirement. We just want you to know that you have a choice.

Downsizing in retirement is not a bad thing. Relocating to a state or country with less taxation is a smart move. You could move to an Active Adult Community where you could choose to own the land or lease it. Here a variety of social activities are offered and the maintenance of your front yard is taken care of in your lifestyle fees.

When you travel, you could choose to house sit. Or take advantage of better pricing for apartments or hotels that rent for the month and include utilities, WiFi, and a maid. You could try AirBnB for less than a hotel room, and live like a local instead of a tourist.

Do you know how much your home (including the taxes, insurance and utilities) costs you per day? It is a figure that might startle you.

Transportation is the second highest category of expense. Now we realize that especially in the States, it is a bit more challenging to wrap your mind around the idea of not owning a car, or just having one for your household instead of three.

According to the latest AAA’s report on car ownership in 2023, it costs an average of $12,182 every year — $1,015.17 every month — to drive for five years at 15,000 miles per year.

So then, in the category of transportation, if you decide you want to fly to an island for a vacation, you must add in the cost of the flight… and any boat trips you might take, and any taxis from the airport to your hotel, and the price of a car rental for the week or two that you will be vacationing.

It all adds up and it’s all a part of this category. Continue Reading…

The first $100,000 is the hardest

Posted By |

By Alain Guillot

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Here is a quote by Charlie Munger, vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, Warren Buffett’s business partner.

“The first $100,000 is a bitch, but you gotta do it. I don’t care what you have to do — if it means walking everywhere and not eating anything that wasn’t purchased with a coupon, find a way to get your hands on $100,000. After that, you can ease off the gas a little bit.”

Right now, my portfolio is over $500,000 but the first $100,000 were the most difficult to get because, of course, I started with $0, in a foreign country (Canada), with no family connections, no intergenerational wealth, no nothing.

Since I arrived in Canada, I have been a janitor, a busboy, a waiter, an Uber driver, a cleaner, a dance teacher, an insurance salesman, a photographer, and a website designer.

If you are a low earner, like me, you can only save $100,000 through a lot of discipline, sacrifices, perseverance, and the right mindset.

Most people, even those earning $100K per year, will never accumulate this amount of money. I feel extremely privileged to have arrived and surpassed this milestone.

I am the kind of person who believes that wealth is available to all of us and if we want it, all you have to do is to reach out and get it.

My biggest teacher in almost any entrepreneurial endeavour has been YouTube. My college education was not a complete waste, I get to go around and tell people that I have a college education, but for any practical purpose, it was useless.

You don’t need a fancy degree from any college to build wealth. Even now, I am teaching myself website design via YouTube.

Having the goal of saving $100K

Goals can also help to look toward the future and keep saving efforts in check. The more money you can save, either from reduced expenses or increased income, the faster you can move toward accumulating your first $100,000. And once you do that, the way to the next $100,000 becomes easier.

Having the right mindset

To save $100K you need to train your mind. Keeping your particular goal in mind can help, but you also need to understand how to achieve your goal with a plan.

Getting to $100,000 requires three elements:

  • save more
  • earn more
  • invest in stocks

Tips to save more Continue Reading…

Interac predicts busiest shopping day of the year next Friday, as holiday gifting stress looms

Posted By |
Image by Pexels, Jill Wellington

By Nader Henin, Interac Corp.

Special to Financial Independence Hub

As Canadians shop for last-minute gifts and search for deals, our Interac transaction data predicts that the busiest shopping day of the year will fall this year on December 22nd.

According to the transaction data, nearly 27.8 million purchase transactions are expected to take place next Friday (Dec. 22), representing roughly 2.7 million more transactions than the same date last year.

While Canadians are still planning to partake in gift giving, hosting, and more this holiday season, they’re feeling the constraints of today’s economic climate. Recent Interac survey* findings reveal that nearly four in ten Canadian shoppers (38 per cent) say they are feeling the pressure to spend during the holiday season even though their finances are tight.

Our survey revealed this phenomenon is felt as well among newcomers to Canada. Nearly seven in ten newcomers (69 per cent) say they feel more pressure to spend money around the holidays now that they live in Canada. What’s more, 71 per cent say their financial stress during the holidays has grown since moving to this country.

Amid rising prices, the holidays can be a stressful time of year. More than two thirds of Canadians (68 per cent) say they’re stressed about at least one aspect of spending during the holiday season and some sources of stress beat out others. Among those who are stressed, our survey shows us that buying gifts (77 per cent), spending money hosting and entertaining family and friends (41 per cent) and giving money to family members (34 per cent) are the top sources of stress.

For newcomers who are experiencing at least some holiday spending stress (82 per cent), spending money travelling to visit family and friends (48 per cent) is a prominent stressor.

As stressful as holiday spending can be, there are ways to make things a little easier:

Plan ahead

Try creating a gifting budget well in advance of any spending plans to help stay on track. Where possible, you can also look for a sale, consider a refurbished item or tap into purchases that make you and those around you feel good. You can also lean on Interac Debit to track your payments easily and take charge of your own money

Share the love, split the cost

When purchasing gifts for loved ones, organizing festive outings or hosting your family and friends, split the cost using Interac e-Transfer. Sharing the cost is one of the best ways to make sure you’re maximizing fun while staying in control of spending.

Embrace experiences

The holidays are a time to get together with friends and family and enjoy one another’s company. Consider sharing in an experience, rather than giving a physical gift. Interac research shows us that feel-good experiences are more likely to deliver happiness than material goods.

Continue Reading…

2024 Monetary policy: Pick a Lane

Posted By |
Image by Pexels: Lalesh Aldarwish

By John De Goey, CFP, CIM

Special to Financial Independence Hub

There seems to be some confusion around what to expect for monetary policy in 2024. There’s a strong consensus that cuts are coming, but what is far less certain is how many – and why they are implemented.

Let’s assume that all cuts are of the traditional 25 basis point variety.  Since the bank rate is adjusted every six weeks, there will be eight or nine opportunities to adjust it in 2024 in both Canada and the United States.

There are as many as three narratives making the rounds about what might be in store.  Each narrative has a combination of rate cuts for monetary policy and corresponding outcomes for the broader economy. I attended a luncheon last week hosted by Franklin Templeton,  where senior representatives outlined three possible scenarios with three different narratives accompanying them. A similar perspective was offered earlier this week by the Vanguard Group.

The three narratives are as follows:

#1 We have a soft landing.

The soft landing involves the economy remaining relatively robust, employment remaining strong, delinquency is modest, and rates are normalizing at a level close to but somewhat lower than where they are right now. Most people would suggest that scenario involves no more than two cuts in 2024.

#2 We have a routine recession.

To be more precise, the second narrative involves a garden-variety recession that lasts perhaps a couple of quarters that involves only modest reductions in economic activity over that time frame.  Nonetheless, this scenario includes five or six rate cuts to stimulate the economy to the point where things can become stable going forward.

 #3 We have a severe recession.

The final narrative involves massive cuts that are made out of desperation to keep the economy from plunging into an abyss. This scenario is not only the most drastic, but also seems to be the least likely. Nonetheless, if things get really ugly, seven, eight or nine rate cuts might be needed to stanch the bleeding. One or more of those cuts might even be for 50 basis points or more.

While I accept the logic associated with all three scenarios, I cannot help but notice that much of the financial services industry is conflating those scenarios in a way that strikes me as being intellectually inconsistent. The financial services industry has long been overly optimistic in the way it portrays outlooks and forecasts. It routinely engages in something I call bullshift, which is the tendency to shift your attention to make you feel bullish about the future.

There can be little doubt that stimulative cuts are positive developments for capital markets. What the industry seems disinclined to acknowledge is that cuts are often made out of desperation. People need to look no further then what happened throughout the entire industrialized world in the first quarter of 2020. Central banks in all major economies cut rates to essentially zero by the end of March of 2020 in the aftermath of the COVID pandemic. At the time it was seen as being both necessary and reasonable, given the severity and breadth of the challenge.

Reining in Inflation

As we all know, inflation became the primary public policy challenge by the beginning of 2022. Central banks needed to take what looked like draconian measures to rein in inflation, which had risen to generational highs and needed to be brought under control lest a sustained period of inflation like what was experienced in the 1970s were to recur. By the end of 2023, inflation is still higher than the high end of the range that is deemed to be acceptable for most central banks.

There is still work to be done, yet many pundits seem eager to take a victory lap, as if a reduction in inflation is somehow akin to bringing inflation under control. Much has been done over the past 20 months, but more work is needed. The admonition that rates will have to stay higher for longer is a very real constraint on economic activity and long-term growth prospects. We head into the new year on the horns of a dilemma. Bond market watchers are now suggesting that rate cuts will come no later than Q2 2024, whereas central bankers are insisting that those cuts will be modest and will only begin in Q3 of 2024 at any rate. They cannot both be right.

It gets worse. Most commentators have taken to suggesting that we will have both a soft landing and five or six rate cuts in the New Year. That strikes me as being fantastic – not to mention intellectually inconsistent. If we have a soft landing, it will likely entail the economy being remarkably resilient as it has been throughout 2023. There is absolutely no reason to have a parade of rate cuts in such an environment.

Stated differently, the financial services industry needs to pick a lane. If it believes we will have a soft landing in 2024, it should also be anticipating a very small number of very modest cuts in the second half of the year. Conversely, if it believes a recession is on the horizon, it should be forecasting multiple cuts only after it is clear a recession is underway. These would likely be needed to stimulate the economy in an environment where inflation will likely be modest as a direct result of economic weakness.

To hear the industry tell it, the economy will remain strong, but we’ll get multiple rate cuts anyway. You can’t have it both ways. I call Bullshift.

John De Goey is a Portfolio Manager with Designed Securities Ltd. (DSL). DSL does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information contained herein, nor does DSL assume any liability for any loss that may result from the reliance by any person upon any such information or opinions.