Building Wealth

For the first 30 or so years of working, saving and investing, you’ll be first in the mode of getting out of the hole (paying down debt), and then building your net worth (that’s wealth accumulation.). But don’t forget, wealth accumulation isn’t the ultimate goal. Decumulation is! (a separate category here at the Hub).

Modern Monetary Theory

Posted By |

 

By John De Goey, CFP, CIM

For generations, undergraduates have been fed a steady diet of what might otherwise be called “traditional” economics – economic theory that is predicated on the plausible but largely unsubstantiated premise that people make rational decisions in their own economic self-interest.

That notion of economic self-interest, first championed by Adam Smith, is now nearly a quarter millennium old and there are a number of variants that come from it.  For instance, there are the ongoing debates between monetarists and Keynesians; debates between the so-called ‘salt water schools’ and ‘freshwater schools’ and debates between traditionalists and behaviouralists. Economics, the ‘dismal science’ isn’t really much of a science at all, given that economic theories implicitly recognize the influence of systems theory – where one decision will affect another and so on.  The idea of simple, measurable cause and effect testing is quaint in theory, but almost always impossible to replicate in practice.

A recent ideological variant is something called Modern Monetary Theory (MMT).  It’s an updated wrinkle on the traditional monetarist approach.  Historically, monetarists have posited that the role of central banks is twofold: to ensure both price stability and strong economic growth, as defined by something approaching full employment.  We all saw a proactive form of MMT in action in the U.S. late in 2019 when, despite decades-low unemployment numbers and inflation that was well within the 2% target range (give or take 1%), there were three consecutive rate cuts implemented by Governor Powell. This was a clear attempt to avert a possible recession since the U.S. yield curve had inverted earlier last spring.

Central banks hinting we ain’t seen nothing yet

Lately, central banks have been hinting at the notion that we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.  Apparently, they are now prepared to keep rates low for a very long time (decades at least, but possibly generations) in order to keep more people working.  In essence, the twin monetarist objectives mentioned earlier have now been given a hierarchy. Continue Reading…

An answer to “Can you help me with my investments?”

Posted By |

By Michael J. Wiener

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Occasionally, a friend or family member asks for help with their investments.  Whether or not I can help depends on many factors, and this article is my attempt to gather my thoughts for the common case where the person asking is dissatisfied with their bank or other seller of expensive mutual funds or segregated funds.  I’ve written this as though I’m speaking directly to someone who wants help, and I’ve added some details to an otherwise general discussion for concreteness.

Assessing the situation

I’ve taken a look at your portfolio.  You’ve got $600,000 invested, 60% in stocks, and 40% in bonds.  You pay $12,000 per year ($1000/month) in fees that were technically disclosed to you in some deliberately confusing documents, but you didn’t know that before I told you.  These fees are roughly half for the poor financial advice you’re getting, and half for running the poor mutual funds you own.

It’s pretty easy for a financial advisor to put your savings into some mutual funds, so the $500 per month you’re paying for financial advice should include some advice on life goals, taxes, insurance, and other financial areas, all specific to your particular circumstances.  Instead, when you talk to your advisor, he or she focuses on trying to get you to invest more money or tries to talk you out of withdrawing from your investments.

The mutual funds you own are called closet index funds.  An index is a list of all stocks or bonds in a given market.  An index fund is a fund that owns all the stocks or bonds in that index.  The advantage of index funds is that they don’t require any expensive professional management to choose stocks or bonds, so they can charge low fees.  Vanguard Canada has index funds that would cost you only $120 per month.  Your mutual funds are just pretending to be different from an index fund, but they charge you $500 per month to manage them on top of the other $500 per month for the poor financial advice you’re getting.

Other approaches

Before looking at whether I can help you with your investments, it’s worth looking at other options.  There are organizations that take their duty to their clients more seriously than the mutual fund sales team you have now. Continue Reading…

Is Fat FIRE realistic?

Posted By |

By Mark Seed, myownadvisor

Special to Financial Independence Hub

 

Weekend Reading - is Fat FIRE Realistic
Image Source: Pexels, Gantas Vaičiulėnas

Is Fat FIRE realistic?

Before my answer to that question, for those outside the personal finance, devout FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) bubble, a primer based on what I know …

What is FIRE?

I would like to provide a universal definition from the personal finance community today but there isn’t one. There are, however, some general thoughts/themes when it comes to FIRE and those who follow the philosophy around it:

  • Financial Independence, Retire Early (FIRE) is a movement related to extreme/aggressive savings rates and investment tactics that allow individuals to retire sooner than potentially any traditional budgeting or retirement planning approach might permit.
  • When it comes to savings rates: in some circles, by saving up to 70% of your annual income, some FIRE enthusiasts aim to retire early (and live off small portfolio withdrawals from their accumulated assets).
  • When it comes to portfolio withdrawals: in some circles, by withdrawing a small % of the accumulated assets (e.g., 4% of the portfolio), said FIRE enthusiasts may expect their portfolio to last a lifetime without fear of running out of money.

The FIRE movement – new term, old concept

The FIRE movement takes direct aim at some traditional retirement ages, such as age 60, 65 or even later on but there is no consensus on what is / is not a retirement age, of course.

The theory and movement goes: by dedicating the majority of your after-tax income to savings and specifically saving for retirement, well, you could “retire” sooner than most. Probably true.

From this perspective, FIRE is not a new concept even though the moniker is somewhat newish.

I’ve written multiple times about the FIRE movement and my thoughts on FIRE.

I’ll link to those thoughts here for additional reading as well.

I’m hardly anti-FIRE; this movement/approach/philosophy has always resonated how I live for the most part:

  • To live within your means or slightly below what you make as income.
  • To save early and often.
  • To avoid long-term debt that is not used for wealth generation.
  • To optimize your investing (i.e., keep your costs low and diversified, and avoid money managers).

Several FIRE retirement variations have emerged over the years to frame a particular lifestyle expectation that could come with FIRE. I’ll rank them in order of cashflow significance although these terms also vary based on the FIRE enthusiast you’re talking to:

1. Lean FIRE

As the first word suggests, lean is a strict adherence to a minimalist lifestyle. Many Lean FIRE adherents live on $25,000 per year, or less per year. Here are a few examples:

Jacob Fisker – Early Retirement Extreme. How he used to live on just $7,000 per year. Not a typo.

There is Jessica from Financial Mechanic, who spent less than $20,000 in 2020.

In more recent years, A Purple Life, wrote about a nomadic life earlier this year, living off less than $25K USD.

These are certainly jaw-dropping low numbers …

2. Barista FIRE

Not that you have to become a barista, rather, the term is used to highlight a combination of work-life balance that can be juggled – a form of semi-retirement if you will.

Barista FIRE is a type of semi-retirement whereby you can consider part-time work or work on your own terms, and still enjoy the benefits of some income and workplace benefits. (The term was coined as such since Starbucks offers benefits to part-time workers … something to consider for your semi-retirement plans!?) Continue Reading…

Uncovering the Truth behind Short-Term Trading

Posted By |

Short-term trading may seem appealing to beginning investors, but it’s unpredictable and can lead to significant losses

TSINetwork.ca

Beginning investors may develop an unrealistic idea of how much money they can make by delving into short-term trading. It seems obvious to them that all it takes is some good advice from an expert.

However, any true investing expert understands that random factors play a big role in short-term stock price fluctuations. That’s why these movements are unpredictable. No outsider consistently profits from them.

In fact, there’s a lot of randomness in the stock market and a lot of conflicts of interest. You have to take that into account if you hope to succeed as an investor.

Many investors try to outperform the stock market by going in and out of it erratically, based on their assessment of risk and potential reward. The trouble is that these risk assessments rise and fall with day-to-day or month-to-month economic and business developments, which are also subject to the influence of random factors and conflicts of interest.

As a result, these investors tend to “buy on strength,” as the saying goes. That is, they do more of their buying when confidence is high and stock prices have gone up. By then, however, much of the rise they hoped to profit from will have already taken place.

They are also inclined to “sell on weakness,” when investors are generally nervous and prices have dropped. That way, they hold on to their stocks during much of the decline they hoped to avoid. They may even wind up selling at or near the bottom in prices.

It may seem like a self-evident truth, but it’s worth repeating. While it’s hard to outperform the market, it’s easy to underperform it. In fact, some investors do it almost every year.

Understanding the realities of short-term trading

Many people start out investing with unrealistic ideas of how much money they can make from short-term stock trading, and how quickly they’ll get rich.

Inexperienced investors are shocked when they learn that successful investors rarely if ever do any short-term trading. (That applies to everybody from “The Wealthy Barber” to Warren Buffett.) After all, many stockbrokers, investor newsletters, cable TV financial kibitzers and so on seem to talk about nothing but day-to-day or hour-to-hour market trends. They make it sound easy to GRQ (Get Rich Quick).

It’s easy to sort through yesterday’s investment news and pick out a reason that seems to explain why a stock or the entire market went up or down today. Trying to spot tomorrow’s winners today is vastly harder. Nobody does it consistently. Continue Reading…

Was Inflation transitory?

Posted By |

By Dale Roberts, cutthecrapinvesting

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Inflation is coming down in Canada and the U.S. And one can argue that the rate hikes have had little effect. After all, Canadians and Americans are spending money, and employment is strong. The economy has been very resilient. Perhaps inflation was transitory after all, caused by the pandemic and the invasion of Ukraine. This is not the traditional inflation fight script. The economic soft landing argument is getting more support. Was inflation transitory?

Total inflation in Canada is back ‘on target’ in the 2% to 3% range.

That said, core inflation is still sticky.

From this MoneySense post …

According to Statistics Canada, the June slowdown was driven primarily by a year-over-year drop of 21.6% in gasoline prices. Meanwhile, the largest contributors to the rise in consumer prices are food costs — which rose 9.1% in June — and mortgage interest costs (up 30.1%).

It’s likely a very good guess that rates are staying higher for longer. The bond market is certainly suggesting that as well.

The 5-year remains elevated.

Fixed-rate mortgage holders will likely be resetting at higher borrowing costs over the next 2 to 3 years – adding several hundred dollars a month to the typical mortgage payment. Of course, that takes money out of the economy and money that would have been spent on goods and services.

Next year may be sunnier than forecast

In the Globe & Mail, Ian McGugen offered a very interesting post. Ian looks to one of the most optimistic economists, and that is a growing group.

Jan Hatzius, chief economist at investment banker Goldman Sachs, has set himself apart from the crowd in recent months by declaring that the United States will not sink into a recession. Continue Reading…