Thank you msf, a thoughtful analysis.
I am an uninformed bystander in the annuity world. But what I do know (or think) is that an investor should not use annuities for all their retirement investment but they should consider replacing a portion of their fixed income sleeve with one.

While I agree that VAs are widely oversold, you'll notice that the second and third paragraphs above are comparing VA deferred annuities with fixed income immediate annuities. Not especially meaningful, but it makes for a great sound bite.
Do you care what the average VA costs, any more you care what the average fund costs? Or do you care what your annuity or your fund costs? Vanguard offers a VA that costs 0.48% (average across the funds offered in the annuity). And unlike the "usual" VAs that charge "stiff penalties", low cost annuities like Vanguard's charge no penalties.
https://investor.vanguard.com/annuity/variable
Likewise, do you care what the average SPIA pays, or what you can get by shopping around? BlueprintIncome.com says that the best current payout rate on a $100K joint life annuity for a 60 year old couple (i.e. younger than the example in the article) is 5.586%. That's quite a bit more than the 4.38% average rate cited in the article. (Admittedly, I'm ignoring the quality of insurer, but then so is the article.)
The article says that according to Vanguard's Monte Carlo Nest Egg Calculator, using the 4% rule with a retirement investment portfolio (with what asset mix, it doesn't say), you've got a 9% chance of having no money left over for heirs. That's a euphemistic way of saying that you have a 9% chance of running out of money while you still need it.
The point of insurance is to protect against worst case events. What happens if the worst happens and you live longer than 30 years? :-) Your odds of being left destitute increase.
The articles presents a particular perspective, and in doing so shades wording, frames numbers, and speaks in generalities that advance this perspective. That's not to say there isn't validity in the picture it draws. Just that it's drawing only part of the picture.

FYI: Plenty of people shudder when they hear the word, “annuity.” Many financial advisors sell them as if they’re life preservers. But they’re usually filled with holes.
Variable annuities, for example, are widely oversold. An advisor might croon, “These products guarantee that you won’t lose money. They’re also linked to the stock market. So when stocks rise, the value of the annuity rises too.” In 2005, columnist Scott Burns published, Seven Reasons To Avoid Variable Annuities. Today, his logic hasn’t lost its sting. Investors pay stratospheric charges, averaging 2.24 percent per year. That hurts investment returns. Variable annuities can also attract unnecessary taxes. And if investors withdraw early, they usually pay stiff exit penalties.
Fixed-income annuities, however, look more attractive to retirees. Here’s how most of them work: You pay an insurance company a lump sum. In exchange, they provide a regular income stream for life. It’s much like buying a defined benefit pension. But in most cases, there’s no upward adjustment to cover inflation. *
Regards,
Ted
https://assetbuilder.com/knowledge-center/articles/should-you-buy-a-fixed-income-annuity-for-retirement

Sold out of most mama's fidelity equities positions at openings . Will Add more Fbnd and fidelity2015 TDF

The fund companies finally realized that one size does not fit all, so they've got multiple series of TDFs.
Would your Fidelity 2015 fund be:
FFVFX (Freedom® 2015), that "Seeks high total return until its target retirement date. Thereafter, the fund's objective will be to seek high current income and, as a secondary objective, capital appreciation"?
Or FLIFX (Freedom® Index 2015), that "Seeks high total return until its target retirement date. Thereafter, the fund's objective will be to seek high current income and, as a secondary objective, capital appreciation"?
Or FIRUX (Simplicity RMD 2015), that "seeks total return until its horizon date through a combination of current income and capital growth. Thereafter, the fund's objective will be to seek high current income and, as a secondary objective, capital appreciation"?

M*'s write, IMHO; is full of fluff and touchy/feely words.
While RMD requirements would change (for the good), basically; the tax revenue raised by reducing the stretch period will subsidize the other programs.
So, taking from much of the middle class, NO; I'll change that to "working class" who have tried their best to save for retirement, and if the spouse(s) pass before using all of their tax sheltered account monies..............well, the children or whomever will get the tax whack. I'm not writing about the ultra wealthy, but the regular folks.
I questioned (shortly after the passing of the house version) our U.S. rep. about the nature of this transfer of wealth for the working class; but have not had a reply yet, and they are still on break.
Better overview of SECURE ACT.

FYI: Some of Vanguard’s funds appeared to lose as much as half their value on Monday—but the company says those losses were just pricing glitches that were quickly rectified.
The $56 billion Vanguard Wellesley Income fund (ticker: VWINX), which invests in large cap value stocks and investment-grade bonds, appeared to lose 56%, according to Vanguard’s website.
The $105 billion Vanguard Wellington fund (VWELX), which Vanguard says is its oldest mutual fund and the nation’s oldest balanced fund, appeared to lose 32%, the company’s website showed.
The $17 billion Vanguard Target Retirement Income fund (VTINX)—a product designed for people already in retirement—appeared to lose 45.6%, according to its website.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/vanguard-pricing-glitch-causes-funds-to-appear-to-lose-half-their-value-51565663400?refsec=funds

FYI: As part of a set of retirement provisions in the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019, or SECURE Act, Congress would make it harder for heirs who inherit a tax-deferred retirement account (like a 401(k) or an IRA) to shelter the money from Uncle Sam. The set of provisions enjoys wide, bipartisan support, so it’s likely to pass sooner rather than later. These rule changes may at first seem like a big change, but taking a wider view, they probably won't have much of an impact.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/942416/the-end-of-favorable-tax-treatment-for-inherited-iras

It takes Krugman 529 words to say that none of us understands wtf is going on with interest rates?
Edit: Kinda busy today. Some chopped up observations ... I don’t think Krugman’s wrong. He just tosses out a number of possibilities - already widely understood.
What I suspect may be the unmentioned elephant in the room is (broadly defined) global demographics. Many nations are experiencing declines in working age populations and increases in the elderly. And, the elderly are living longer. A lot of the change relates to the devastation / loss of life stemming from WWII. Babies born shortly after the war ended are now 70-75 years old.
That demographic shift puts enormous pressure on income producing instruments because the elderly have shorter anticipated time horizons over which to invest and lower risk tolerance in general. Bonds, including those held via various insurance products, become an investment of choice for a growing sector of the populations in the more advanced (wealthier) global economies. This drives rates downward.
So, what accounts for the seemingly unstoppable gains in equities? That’s more complicated. But I suspect a few factors: (1) the loss of defined benefit retirement plans has driven many inexperienced investors into the equity markets leading to more exaggerated boom & bust cycles; (2) money has been driven into equities the low and lower interest rates, (3) global productivity has increased due to the technology revolution. (4) To some extent, the advent of “instant feedback” brought about by the web has prompted more risk taking by market participants than when we relied mainly on time-lagged print sources for news and information. (Think of the “casino effect” on human behavior.)

A classic example showing how legislators can be "influenced" by campaign contributions, to the detriment of their constituents.
Some years ago, I realized how much I was paying in M&E fees to my 403b provider, so I switched to Fidelity. Some restrictions on the Fidelity funds I could purchase, but no fees, except those built into the funds I selected.
At retirement, I rolled it over to a Fidelity IRA.
David

FYI: (This is a follow-up article.)
Teachers in Pennsylvania and Texas are waking up screaming from a midsummer night’s 403(b) nightmare.
Traditionally, large insurers enjoy blasting teacher’s retirement accounts with high fees and unnecessary products. Two states are willing accomplices to mass financial exploitation.
Pennsylvania and Texas passed some of the most blatant anti-consumer 403(b) legislation in modern history.
Deciding it was a crime against humanity having a single low-cost vendor servicing teachers retirement accounts, Pennsylvania took action.
Regards,
Ted
https://tonyisola.com/2019/08/two-steaming-piles-of-403b-s/

My humble proposal –
Each citizen age 18 or over receives a $1,000 credit per month to be applied to health insurance of choice, whether private or public. Any minors must be covered before moving to the next option. (Yeah, I would favor DNA testing to identify deadbeat fathers.)
If the citizen and/or spouse has employer health coverage and the full amount is not needed for primary health coverage, the balance could be applied to dental coverage, vision coverage, or an HSA.
Or, it could be applied to an iron-clad retirement program, public or private. By “iron-clad,” I mean no borrowing, or sketchy exemptions like first home purchase. Retirement, and retirement only. Buy Social Security credits, if you want.

FYI: Yields on cash and money-market funds have fallen lately as the Federal Reserve cut interest rates. But Fidelity appears to be bucking the trend, at least temporarily.
Fidelity caused a stir on Wednesday with an announcement that the firm “has challenged conventional industry practices” by automatically defaulting brokerage customers into a government money-market fund yielding 1.9%.
Fidelity didn’t actually reveal anything new with the announcement (triggering some angry responses from advisors on Twitter). The firm has defaulted nonretirement accounts into Fidelity Government Money-Market fund (ticker: SPAXX) since the third quarter of 2015. New retail retirement accounts made the switch in May, 2019. Advisors who custody with Fidelity are still defaulted into F-Cash, rather than the money-market fund.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/fidelity-sweep-accounts-cash-rates-federal-reserve-schwab-merrill-lynch-vanguard-etrade-51565291732?refsec=funds

@johnN said:

so what is the best plans? buy all these vehicles?

There is a saying a carpenter told me about 15 years ago when he was helping my wife and I build our first retirement home. It goes "Its kind of hard saying without really knowing." A decade is a long time. So, that saying pretty well answers Mark Hulbert's question about the single best investment for that period of time. Having said that, I would pick my largest portfolio holding, RPGAX, to answer the question. It has a broad multi-asset mandate, a fair amount of investment flexibility, and a top notch management team. That seems like a good mix for facing all the unknowns a decade's worth of crystal ball gazing brings to mind. Thinking more short term and small scale with a "Its A Low Interest Rate World" frame of reference, I just took a small, speculative nibble at MNR a few days ago.

FYI: Fidelity Investments has again been accused of engaging in a quid-pro-quo type relationship with a 401(k) plan sponsor, which allegedly cost employee retirement savers millions of dollars in return for bigger profits.
The latest episode involves the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which has been accused of retaining Fidelity's 401(k) record-keeping services and investment funds, despite counsel to do otherwise from attorneys and consultants, with the expectation that Fidelity and co-owner Abigail Johnson would make a large donation to the university.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=V_FLXdqSAs3VtAbs_qCQAw&q=Fidelity+Dogged+Again+By+401(k)+Quid-Pro-Quo+Allegations&oq=Fidelity+Dogged+Again+By+401(k)+Quid-Pro-Quo+Allegations&gs_l=psy-ab.3...3348.3348..4459...0.0..0.375.531.0j1j0j1......0....2j1..gws-wiz.....0.X31mYZ_KEgo&ved=0ahUKEwiamrnagPPjAhXNKs0KHWw_CDIQ4dUDCAc&uact=5

unless you are retired then place everything in bonds

The problem with putting 100% into “bonds” at retirement is that some of us may spend 30 or 40 years in retirement. Do you really want to settle for relatively low bond-like returns over all those years? The other problem with the statement is that “bond” can mean anything from “safe” U.S. Treasury bonds (yielding very little) to speculative C rated junk bonds having very high yields, high risk, and capital appreciation potential similar to that of equities.
Ol’Skeet is correct. I see inflation near everywhere I look. Don’t forget that higher taxes, government imposed fees, and tariffs on imports constitute a form of inflation - as well as the aggregate CPI items. For the life of me I don’t understand the low inflation figures the govt. reports. Just replaced the top boards on my deck with new treated 2x6s. Couldn’t believe the cost of materials alone. The original deck went on the house the first year I was retired. Grateful I wasn’t invested 100% in bonds over those 20 years as the price of lumber was doubling or tripling.
Best answer to those low govt. inflation figures is that technology has gotten cheaper. You can buy a 50”-60” color TV today for no more than a good 27” color set would have cost you 20-30 years ago. (But try munching on a TV for supper).

Derf, I do not see a link to the article or its name. Could you try again, please?

Until @Derf gets back from lunch, these links might help. The February / March 2919 AARP Magazine references a 5-year retirement planner/check-list. By Googling different years (1-5) it may be possible to bring each year up separately (or all together).
- Here’s an overview of the full AARP edition for February/MAR 2019: https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/inside-the-februarymarch-issue-of-aarp-the-magazine-2019-02-07
- Here’s their one-year check-list: https://www.aarp.org/retirement/planning-for-retirement/info-2019/1-year-countdown.html
While the AARP materials leave me wanting, their suggestion to “test drive” the retirement budget a year ahead is invaluable - like testing the waters (and checking for crocodiles) before diving in.

Hi sir catch22,, - It's just me but my retirement portfolio or someone else I help manage probably mixtures of bonds, individuals Corp bonds, tips, munis, etf and funds. Probably spread across the board semi-evenly
Moms-has MUNI, FBND, PTTSX, several private corps bonds, lsbrx,
She still hold 40s%equities, she enjoyed these companies so I did sell them.

Although the request is for books on the subject of retirement funding; I thought I'd post on how I managed my parents money after they retired and now what I'm doing that I'm retired. I'm by no means saying this is right for everyone ... It is what I'm doing and I thought it might provide some ideas for others to think on.
I made an adjustment to my asset allocation back in the 4th quarter of 2018 as I felt that equity valuations were becoming streached plus the yield curve inverted. For now, I'm rocking along at about 20% cash, 40% income and 40% equity which I call my all weather asset allocation.
My all weather asset allocation of 20% cash, 40% income and 40% equity affords me everything necessary to meet my needs now being retired and in the distribution phase of investing. The benefit of this asset allocation is that it provides sufficient income, maximizes diversification, minimizes volatility, and provides long-term returns. For the week the S&P 500 Index pulled back 3.1% while my portfolio declined 1.3%. Year to date I have the equally weighted S&P 500 Index up 17.4% while I'm up a little better than 11%.
The 20% held in cash area provides me ample cash should I need a cash draw over and above what my portfolio generates plus it can provide the capital necessary to fund a special investment position (spiff) should I choose to open one during a stock market pullback. In addition, cash helps stabelize a portfolio during stock market volatility. Example of investments held in this area are cash savings, money market mutual funds (AMAXX, GBAXX & PCOXX) and CD's.
The 40% held in the income area provides me ample income generation to meet my income needs in retirement. It is a well diversified area that incorporates a good number of income generating type funds. Some examples of investments held in this area are ISFAX, PONAX & JGIAX. Currently, the portfolio has a yield of about 3.25% with a distribution yield, which includes capital gain distributions, north of 5%.
The 40% held in the equity area provides me some dividend income along with some growth that equities generally provide which overtime offsets the effects of inflation. Some examples of investments held in this area are NEWFX, SVAAX, SPECX.
Generally, for my income distributions, I take no more than a sum equal to what one half of my five year average total return has been leaving the residual for new investment opportunity. In this way principal grows over time. And, as principal grows so do the distributions.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

Your statement: " unless you are retired then place everything in bonds"
And why would one, in retirement; choose to do this? And what type of bonds? Active managed bond funds, or etf's or individual bonds?

Hello,
You did not mention if you are a self employed individual or are working for some organization. I am self employed and I just set up a defined benefit plan with guidance from this website and the people associated with it. They have very good material and online calculators which might be useful if you are self employed.
Sharing this link here about an article they have on their site about some of the retirement options:
http://www.pensiondeductions.com/ideal-retirement-plan/
Here is a link about defined benefit plans, if you are targeting large contributions:
http://www.pensiondeductions.com/comprehensive-guide-to-defined-benefit-plan/
Good luck!