Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
A very sobering and frightening PBS Frontline program. I am firmly convinced that many people will never experience a "retirement" and geriatric poverty will be the new norm in the U.S. within the next several decades.
Hardly. Another opinion is that is it an almost completely false, unsubstantiated, shoddy piece of journalism designed solely to alarm. Rekenthaler is not the only person to think so, but his takedown was early; you can google for others. http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=599612
While the promos looked great, the show was a bit of a let-down by PBS standards. Then again ... PBS's been in the process of dumbing everything down for several years now. (Sadly, the News Hour's the latest casualty.) Seems to me the program cast alot of aspersions using a very wide net. A few catchy John Bogle quotes, etc. In the end, it seemed everyone was to blame for ravaged 401K savings accounts - except of course, Joe Investor (poor fella:-). Not a bad program - haven't viewed in several months, but would agree in large measure with davidmoran's assessment.
Got to agree with david and hank - also reviewed the video to confirm my impressions haven't changed.
My sense of history is that people having short retirements and living in relative poverty is not a new norm. Rather, the postwar image of "golden retirement years" seems to me an historical anomaly - brought about by the combination of the New Deal (Social Security), the Great Society (Medicare), and generous private pensions. The latter (like employer-sponsored health insurance) came about in part because the government kept a lid on wages during WWII, so companies offered compensation through other means. Then, the US industries had the world markets to themselves for a couple of decades, enabling them to pay better wages and benefits. Add to the mix increasing life expectancies, and voila - golden years.
For example: "Between 1940 and 1945 the number of pension plans grew dramatically ... [from] 1,530 ... [to] 6,730 ... This positive growth was due to changes in tax policy, the stabilization of wages during WW II and the Korean War, and actions of the War Labor Board." Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, Dec 2012, Vol XXXIX, No. 4, p. 50 (pdf p. 2)
I like JR's (M*'s) response, because he acknowledges the key flaws with 401(k) plans up front (implicitly inviting a reasoned discussion), and then goes on to state why the PBS Frontline piece was distorted - in its use of anecdotes, in its conflating of issues, in its bad statistics.
Is the video even about just 401k's or, as suggested by its title, retirement savings in general? My impression is that people think it is about 401Ks (certainly JR's column addresses this aspect of it). But most of the complaints and issues raised in the video apply to IRAs as well (brokers selling high cost funds, annuities; lack of fiduciary responsibility; people not knowing what's in their funds, what the investment strategies are; etc.)
Comments
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=599612
While the promos looked great, the show was a bit of a let-down by PBS standards. Then again ... PBS's been in the process of dumbing everything down for several years now. (Sadly, the News Hour's the latest casualty.) Seems to me the program cast alot of aspersions using a very wide net. A few catchy John Bogle quotes, etc. In the end, it seemed everyone was to blame for ravaged 401K savings accounts - except of course, Joe Investor (poor fella:-). Not a bad program - haven't viewed in several months, but would agree in large measure with davidmoran's assessment.
My sense of history is that people having short retirements and living in relative poverty is not a new norm. Rather, the postwar image of "golden retirement years" seems to me an historical anomaly - brought about by the combination of the New Deal (Social Security), the Great Society (Medicare), and generous private pensions. The latter (like employer-sponsored health insurance) came about in part because the government kept a lid on wages during WWII, so companies offered compensation through other means. Then, the US industries had the world markets to themselves for a couple of decades, enabling them to pay better wages and benefits. Add to the mix increasing life expectancies, and voila - golden years.
For example: "Between 1940 and 1945 the number of pension plans grew dramatically ... [from] 1,530 ... [to] 6,730 ... This positive growth was due to changes in tax policy, the stabilization of wages during WW II and the Korean War, and actions of the War Labor Board."
Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, Dec 2012, Vol XXXIX, No. 4, p. 50 (pdf p. 2)
I like JR's (M*'s) response, because he acknowledges the key flaws with 401(k) plans up front (implicitly inviting a reasoned discussion), and then goes on to state why the PBS Frontline piece was distorted - in its use of anecdotes, in its conflating of issues, in its bad statistics.
Is the video even about just 401k's or, as suggested by its title, retirement savings in general? My impression is that people think it is about 401Ks (certainly JR's column addresses this aspect of it). But most of the complaints and issues raised in the video apply to IRAs as well (brokers selling high cost funds, annuities; lack of fiduciary responsibility; people not knowing what's in their funds, what the investment strategies are; etc.)