FYI: If your mutual fund is run by a woman, it is a rarity.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB11670627175020993366304581066292742744646

Bubbly + Help from state-backed margin finance company = What ???
Chinese shares dropped almost two percent in early trading, reversing much of gains made on Monday following unprecedented steps to stabilise a plummeting market.
Asian assets were also increasingly burdened by rising concerns over massive losses in Chinese stock markets over the past month or so.
Unprecedented emergency measures from Beijing helped Chinese stocks to bounce on Monday but trading remained highly volatile.
In an extraordinary weekend of policy moves, brokerages and fund managers vowed to buy massive amounts of stocks, helped by China's state-backed margin finance company, which in turn would be aided by a direct line of liquidity from the central bank.
"Prior to the selloff the Chinese market looked bubbly, kept rising even as the economy is slowing. It will take some time for the market to calm down," said Shuji Shirota, head of macroeconomics strategy group at HSBC in Tokyo.
"Judging from Japanese experience it is not easy to support share prices just by price keeping operation," he said, referring to Japanese attempts in the 1990s to shore up the stock market by using public funds to buy shares.
Fears of instability in the Chinese economy dented many types of assets that are thought to be leveraged to demand from China.
In the currency market, the Australian dollar fell to a six-year low of $0.7452 on Monday and last stood at $0.7485.
Shanghai copper posted its steepest daily drop in 5 months on Monday, while Chinese steel prices are at their lowest level since the depths of the global financial crisis. Iron ore has fallen 17 per cent since mid-June.
http://profit.ndtv.com/news/market/article-asia-shares-win-reprieve-but-greece-china-concerns-limit-gains-778868
Related to China margin stabilization efforts.
"The stocks exemplify one of the keys to China’s recent market selloff: Some of the biggest losers are companies with a relatively small portion of their shares freely traded, many of them bought using borrowed money."
http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-firms-discover-margin-lendings-downside-1435653636

Yes, I'm afraid to spend money, esp. the portion of cash flow I allocate to reinvesting to build cash flow for next year, and the next, and the next. Looks like this portion will need to be increased now, for next year already.
Obamacare sticker shock arrives
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-06/obamacare-sticker-shock-arrives-insurance-premiums-soar-20-40
"The rate requests are the first to reflect a full year of experience with the new insurance exchanges and federal standards that require insurers to accept all applicants, without charging higher prices because of a person’s illness or disability."
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/04/us/health-insurance-companies-seek-big-rate-increases-for-2016.html?_r=2
“No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up”
--------Lily Tomlin

http://money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/articles/2013/09/05/are-you-afraid-to-spend-money
Junkster and I have been posting similar threads - money and retirement.
I'm wondering how many people here, in retirement, under-spend out of fear or some other issue - must see net worth grow, net worth must grow for ego issues?????????
I grew up poor but I always enjoyed life. I have a strange issue, I don' t like to spend money on thing that take up space. I don't care about cars, as long as they work. But, I'm OK with spending money on things like travel and food.
To be truthful, I have a spreadsheet projecting out my net worth out to 100 and even when adjusting for inflation I a great final net worth - something many would envy. That is with conservative spending and growth.
We all may remember people who lived through the Great Depression. In later years they might have a great deal of money but, they could not spend it. They were OK with giving it to other but they just could not spend it on themselves.
I'm in great health and plan to spend more. BUT, IT IS STILL A PURPOSEFUL EFFORT, TO SPEND.
I try to remember, will I be on my death bed wishing I spent less??
So, what is your story on spending?

Thanks to OJ & davidmoran for their thoughtful and considerate thoughts.
I agree a lot has to do with comfort level (the sleep factor as OJ put it).
We deal with a fine local bank. If anything changed in that regard, we'd pay them off and get out fast. The two "re-fi"s in recent years went to pay for a couple additions on the house. So our equity rose along with the debt. Also, I refuse to go out farther than 15 years on a mortgage no matter how attractive the rate.
Actually, have recently considered paying off all of the mortgage - as it's getting harder and harder to earn 3% in the bond/equity markets without going out there quite a bit on the risk curve. Am only around break-even YTD.
So it goes.

FYI: Fallout from Greece’s “no” vote on whether to accept its creditors demands in exchange for bailout funds is garnering most of the attention from market watchers early Monday.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2015/07/06/oil-prices-plummet-to-three-month-low/tab/print/

You cannot 'austere' (if that is what is meant) your way here to economic improvement or health.

You might enjoy this (if it links ok).
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.zeit.de/2015/26/thomas-piketty-schulden-griechenland&prev=search

Piketty: When I hear the Germans now say that they maintain a very moral dealing with debt and firmly believe that debts must be repaid, then I think: That's a big joke! Germany is the country that has never paid his debts. It can be obtained in other countries no lessons.

FYI: You know Hancock and Washington and Franklin and Jefferson. You might even know Greene and Knox, Henry and Hale.
But it is very unlikely that you know the name Haym Solomon
Regards,
Ted
http://thereformedbroker.com/2015/07/04/the-broker-who-saved-america-3/

Bee asked: "Couldn't you reinvest these dividends yourself rather than "they reinvesting dividends" for you?"
Yes, and a lot of folks prefer to do it this way but......
-Many like to take all their dividends/distributions in cash and then reinvest them in shares of whichever company they hold presents the most compelling value to them at that time. This strategy almost always entails a transaction/trading fee unless one gets free trades for some reason.
-Others (me) like the option whereby dividends are reinvested free of trading fees and, in the case of some companies, at a discount to market value. EPD is one holding of mine that reinvests at a 5% discount.
My dividends/distributions in my Roth IRA accounts are not taxable. Those in my regular brokerage account are. Those in my SEP IRA one day may be.
Scottrade will not reinvest your cash distributions in additional shares. You get cash only. Fidelity will let you choose whether to reinvest or not on a security by security basis.
One note on the Fidelity reinvestment process - your cash is NOT reinvested at the share price on the day the distributions are paid. Fidelity buys sufficient shares up to 14 days ahead of the distribution date and reinvests your distribution at the average price they paid for those shares. Sometimes you win a bit, sometimes you lose a bit.
Also of note, if you use M* to track your portfolio their portfolio tracker program reinvests your cash at the share price listed/posted on the dividend declaration date. This is rarely, if ever, the same as the share price on the day the dividend is actually paid and almost surely is not the reinvestment price Fidelity uses. I cannot speak for the reinvestment process at other brokerages.

In the tax deferred account that I own individual stocks in, the dividends are not reinvested but put into a MM fund within the account. That eliminates the distribution issue before 59 ½. Also that gives me flexibility to reinvest those dividends as I see fit.

Thanks....Nice to know.

In the tax deferred account that I own individual stocks in, the dividends are not reinvested but put into a MM fund within the account. That eliminates the distribution issue before 59 ½. Also that gives me flexibility to reinvest those dividends as I see fit.

Hi @bee,
You noted: " Might the dividend be a distribution in a tax deferred or qualified account which would be a problem where you are younger than 59.5 ?"
Are you asking that if a dividend is taken from the sheltered account (IRA), then it becomes a distribution?
I can't think of a reason for not maintaining the dividend/distribution within the IRA or related sheltered account.
Looking around the MOTIF, I don't find an FAQ or similar about what happens to distributions from one's stocks or etfs held in an account with them.
Lastly, a wonderful summer evening in Michigan. Mid-70's (8:30pm), low humidity and a slight breeze.......and lots of local folks shoot'in them rockets.
Regards,
Catch

They do not allow reinvestment of dividends so for me it is a neat concept but doesn't work for me for that reason.

Couldn't you reinvest these dividends yourself rather than "they reinvesting dividends" for you?
Either way, aren't dividends (reinvested or not) taxable in a taxable account? Might the dividend be a distribution in a tax deferred or qualified account which would be a problem were you younger than 59.5 ?
Does it matter who reinvests dividends, you or the administrator?
I have never had a situation where I didn't have the option to reinvest dividends, but if I did; I would assume I could do this myself as part of adding contributions to this account.

One M* thread with respect to possible annoyances:
http://socialize.morningstar.com/NewSocialize/forums/p/347815/3634184.aspx#3634184
I have looked at it off and on for the past few years more for my grandchildren donations rather than my own account. It's actually simple and credible. If nothing else one can get a great number of potential ideas from looking at the portfolio's that the site and others have created.

Article by Craig L. Israelsen:
"So after six years of a surging bull market, I wanted to revisit that analysis to discover: Does value-oriented investing still win out? My goal was to find out whether the value premium has persisted among U.S. large-, mid- and small-cap equity indexes — and, if so, to quantify its impact."
and,
'These findings do not argue for eliminating growth-oriented assets from a portfolio. However, the analysis does suggest that a value “overweight” is justified in the long run — particularly among small-cap U.S. stock mutual funds."

Article:
can-value-investing-still-trump-growth?

Perhaps, just perhaps, David Winters is a "regular" on WT because he is one of the sponsors of the program. It sure isn't because he is shredding the market as compared with less costly, more attractive alternatives:
CHART
@scott: "That said, it remains to be seen how long investors tolerate it."
Investors are not tolerating the fund's underperformance, as AUM have decreased from $1.67B (9/2014 per FundMojo) to the current $957M (per M*).
Kevin

Thanks from here too, Bee - the audio link is a really good source generally about strategic allocation for income-focused investing, and specifically for ideas for tweaks for H2 2015. -- AJ

Given today’s market conditions and the S&P 500 CAPE valuation, I anticipate an equity annual real return of 1.0%, and a bond return of 2.5% (mix of treasury and corporate holdings) over the next 10-year time horizon.
Add another 2.5% for inflation. I presently expect a 60/40 equity/bond mixed portfolio to generate an actual return of 0.6 X 1.0 + 0.4 X 2.5 + 2..5 (inflation) = 4.1% annual average actual return for the next 10 years. Given the crudeness of the analyses, the projection is 4% annually. Quoting anything more accurate is misleading.

On a macro level I agree. When you look at stagnating wages, labor participation rate, retiring baby boomer, increase of people on food stamps, cost of Obamacare it point to a economic malaise. Also, at some point we will get a VAT which should put an additional damper on things.

FYI: I will link interview early Saturday morning.
Regards,
Ted
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
As we celebrate our tenth anniversary year on WEALTHTRACK we have been taking an in depth look at one of the biggest investment trends of the past decade, the huge migration of both institutional and individual investors from actively managed funds to passive, index-based ones, especially ETFs.
As we have reported before, index funds now account for a third of fund assets, up from 14% ten years ago. And recently exchange traded funds, or ETFs, have seen the lion’s share of the fund flows.
As Morningstar recently reported, U.S. ETFs have more than $2 trillion dollars in assets compared to nearly $13 trillion for all mutual funds, excluding money market funds. That means 14% of fund assets are now in ETFs, up from a mere 4% ten years ago.
During the current six year bull market index funds have outperformed the vast majority of actively managed funds. In addition, the cost benefits of index funds are considered to be overwhelmingly in investors’ favor, especially when compounded over time. The asset-weighted expense ratio for passive funds was just .20% in 2014, compared with 0.79% for active funds.
Even investors in active funds are opting for lower cost ones. During the past decade the lowest cost quintile of active funds received $1.07 trillion of the total $1.13 trillion dollars of the net new flows into actively managed funds.
With better performance and lower costs it’s hard to find anyone concerned about these developments. However this week we have an interview with a critic of the surge to passive investing. Not surprisingly, he is an active fund manager.
David Winters is CEO of Wintergreen Advisers and Portfolio Manager of the Wintergreen Fund, which he launched in 2005. He was nominated for Morningstar’s International-Stock Manager of the year award in 2010 and 2011.
He has been a WEALTHTRACK regular since the beginning because his traditional value–oriented, global approach worked for years. However the last five years have been rough. The fund has underperformed its benchmark and Morningstar World Stock category.
I spoke with Winters about why he thinks the move to index funds is a dangerous market mania, which puts retirees at particular risk.
If you miss the show on air this week, you can always catch it on our website. We also have an EXTRA interview with David Winters about the challenges of being an active manager during a six year bull market. Its available exclusively online. As always, we welcome your feedback on Facebook and Twitter.
Have a great 4th of July weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo