FYI: To still believe in active management is quite something, especially when you work at BlackRock (ticker: BLK), the world’s largest asset manager and a giant in the world of index investing. Yet Mark Wiseman, 49, believes it’s a critical component in long-term investing that will provide the returns that people need for retirement.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/blackrock-talks-solutions-to-short-termism-and-the-retirement-crisis-51562370565?mod=past_editions

@Old_Skeet - Thanks for commenting. One of the main problems with bonds is that virtually all of us own them either directly or indirectly. I know I do. Bonds are everywhere. If you own a balanced or asset allocation fund you likely own a great many. There’s a reason why the balanced fund came into existence. It relates to the conventional wisdom which says that when equities decline in value bonds appreciate in value, helping to compensate for the equity losses. However, with rates now so low, bonds wouldn’t seem to have the degree of offsetting value (vs stocks) they would have had 10 or 20 years ago.
If you are investing in bonds for “income” than you (or your fund managers) are probably not holding a lot of U.S. government paper. My initial comment pertained to the U.S. 10 year, which if held 10 years to maturity should generate about 2% per year. I suspect you’re banking on a much healthier income stream than that 2%. There are bonds that produce much more than 2% of course. However, the lower you go on the credit scale the more closely linked to the fortunes of equities those bonds become. And the less immune to carnage during a steep stock market slide they become.
No other single investment class that I can think of so permeates the financial markets as do bonds. They affect mortgage rates and thus the affordability of housing. They affect auto loans and thus the automotive industry. They’re intrinsically linked to the dollar’s value in the foreign exchange markets which affects the prices we pay for everything from clothing and smart phones to gas and oil. And, for older investors, bond rates affect the ability to grow their assets and maintain a decent standard of living during the retirement years.

I have no familiarity with Fidelity or Vanguard other than they have some pretty good fund and ETF options. But for the most part you can get any of those options through Schwab if you wanted. Same for TRP funds. But, that probably doesn't stand out as unique to other big brokerages, like Fidelity, Vanguard and TRP.
All my experience is with Charles Schwab where I rolled most of my 401k and pension-lump to an IRA when I left my long time employer. That was about 5 years ago. At the time I wavered keeping everything in my employer's 401k at TRP or transferring everything to an IRA at TRP or transferring to CS. I chose CS for a few reasons:
1- maybe the biggest reason was they had a local office. I much prefer a human, 1 on 1 sit down than phone or computer contact. I ended up being linked to a very nice guy who has gained my trust. He is often just my sounding board for ideas I have. He calls or emails about every 6 months or so to check in and see how things are going. And best of all, I don't pay a dime for the advice, feedback and help! Schwab does offer many different options for paid advisory including a very low cost advisory service linked to their robo portfolio. I do have money in the robo, but at this time I haven't gone the advisor route. They also offer the standard 1% fee where they manage everything in your financial life. Not for me but maybe for some.
2- the product selection, everything from 1000's of funds, ETFs, banking products like MMs, CDs, credit cards, checking and savings accounts, numerous managed portfolio options.
3- the option to have multiple accounts at one place. My mind tends to like "buckets" or separating money for different purposes. A separate 3 year retirement withdrawal account with MM, CDs, treasuries that is linked to my credit union checking account is an example.
4- the online and local learning seminars to just hear new ideas or learn different skills and options (I'm not great at it, but I like to dabble or "play" in stocks and there was plenty of info on that along with a trading platform to manage buys and sells).
Just some personal reasons for where I ended up. At 65 I'm still working full time but will probably go part time or quit altogether soon. Good luck Art.

I think that David was comparing the fund houses, not the brokerages. Fidelity has done a good job at improving its bond funds, and it has the occasional fine equity fund. But overall, and especially for equity/hybrid funds, I would go with T. Rowe Price over Fidelity.
Here's M*'s latest set of reports on target date fund series by some of the largest families. (Premium membership required).
https://www-prd.morningstar.com/articles/847110/morningstar-targetdate-fund-series-reports.html
I think anyone can access the reports it links to; here are the links for reports on three different series of target date funds:
Vanguard: https://news.morningstar.com/pdfs/STUSA04OVV.pdf
Fidelity: https://news.morningstar.com/pdfs/STUSA04OLH.pdf
T. Rowe Price: https://news.morningstar.com/pdfs/STUSA04OMN.pdf
And a more detailed report on the T. Rowe Price Retirement Target Date Funds; however this report is three years old.
https://mpera.mt.gov/Portals/175/documents/EIACPacket/20170126/V.d.Morningstar_Addendum.pdf
Note that T. Rowe Price has two different series of target date funds, which it calls Retirement Funds and Target Date Funds. The former are more aggressive.
https://www.troweprice.com/content/dam/fai/Collections/DC Resources/Target Date Solutions/GlidePathComparison.pdf
You're asking about brokerages though, and that's a different question. A nice thing about Fidelity's brokerage is that you can now get both Fidelity funds and T. Rowe Price funds NTF.
As far as brokerage services are concerned, Fidelity is way ahead of the others. Vanguard's comes in for its share of criticisms, but they've improved over time. It seems reasonably competent though not first tier in variety of services or quality or even hours of operation. I haven't used T. Rowe Price's brokerage, and I dare say few have unless they're primarily Price fund investors. It's more of a convenience offering by Price for its fund investors than it is a full fledged brokerage.
Fidelity is especially suited for decumulation, because you can pay a one time transaction fee to set up your position in a cheaper institutional share class of a fund, and you pay nothing to sell shares periodically. (Schwab has a similar pricing structure).
Vanguard is of course better if you want Vanguard open end funds. Many Vanguard funds are not available through Fidelity, and those that are cost $75 to buy (as opposed to Fidelity's customary $49.95 charge for most transaction fee funds). Also, Vanguard provides access to some institutional class shares with lower minimums than at Fidelity. Finally, if you have over $1M in Vanguard funds, you get 25 free transactions per year, which you can use to buy and sell transaction fee funds of other families through their brokerage.

In the July commentary David S. says ...I far prefer T. Rowe. Fidelity forever seems to be scrambling to expand The Fidelity Empire, T. Rowe seems to be focused on managing my portfolio. So I moved money from Fidelity to T. Rowe....
I was wanting to ask what MFO contributors use for a brokerage house and why. Especially those in or nearing retirement.
Personally I have experience with Fidelity and Vanguard but only in the accumulation phase. As retirement nears I will have 401's to rollover and would like to consolidate both mine and my wife's portfolios. Due to work retirement plans we now have monies in 4 different investment companies. Once retired the 2 main 401's will need to be rolled over.
Vanguard, Fidelity or T. Rowe Price? What are your thoughts.
Art

updated again 7/2:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1486174/000143510919000310/chou497.htm
497 1 chou497.htm
CHOU AMERICA MUTUAL FUNDS
Chou Opportunity Fund (CHOEX)
Chou Income Fund (CHOIX)
Supplement dated July 2, 2019 to the Prospectus dated May 1, 2019, as supplemented
This Supplement supersedes and replaces in its entirety the Supplement dated July 1, 2019 to the Prospectus dated May 1, 2019.
Background: Fund Liquidation, Rescission of In-Kind Redemption to Affiliate, and Continued Ability of Shareholders to Redeem for Cash Prior to the Liquidation Date
On June 28, 2019, the Board of Trustees (“Board”) of Chou America Mutual Funds (the “Trust”):
1) approved an Amended and Restated Plan of Liquidation and Dissolution (the “Amended Plan”) for the Chou Opportunity Fund and the Chou Income Fund (the “Funds”), in order to amend and restate in its entirety the Plan of Liquidation and Dissolution originally adopted by the Board at its June 5, 2019 meeting (the “Original Plan”); and
2) rescinded the proposed redemption-in-kind of the 1.75 Lien Term Loans (the “Exco Loans”) of Exco Resources, Inc. (“Exco”), by a company that owns shares of each Fund and that is owned and controlled by Francis Chou, the Portfolio Manager to the Funds and the chief executive officer of the Adviser (such company, the “Chou Affiliated Shareholder”).
In anticipation of their liquidation, the Funds stopped accepting purchases on June 5, 2019. The Funds are in the process of winding up and are no longer pursuing their respective investment objectives and strategies. Reinvestment of dividends on existing shares in accounts which have selected that option will continue until the liquidation.
Shareholders will be permitted to redeem from the Funds prior to the Liquidation Date (as hereinafter defined), according to the ordinary procedures for redemptions from the Funds described in this Prospectus. Mr. Chou intends for the Chou Affiliated Shareholder to retain its shares in each Fund until the liquidation is completed, so each Fund expects to have sufficient cash to pay any redemptions by the other shareholders.
The Exco Reorganization and Risks to Shareholders
As previously disclosed, Exco is involved in an insolvency proceeding in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court”) and each Fund has determined that the Exco Loans constitute illiquid investments. On June 18, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court approved a Plan of Reorganization of Exco Resources, Inc. that, when implemented, will result in cancellation of the Exco Loans in return for newly-issued common stock of Exco (the “New Exco Shares,” and together with the Exco Loans, the “Exco Investments”). According to the Disclosure Statement for the Plan of Reorganization, New Exco Shares will not be listed on or traded on any nationally recognized market or exchange and there can be no assurance that an active trading market for the New Exco Shares will develop. In the absence of a trading market for the New Exco Shares, the Funds’ expect that they will need to continue to calculate their net asset value per share (“NAV”) based on the Board’s good faith determination of the fair value of the New Exco Shares.
As of July 1, 2019, the Exco Loans represented approximately 23.88% of the net assets of CHOEX with the remaining portfolio assets represented by cash. As such, any changes in the NAV of CHOEX will derive almost entirely from changes in the value of the Exco Investments.
As of July 1, 2019, the Exco Loans represented approximately 11.78% of the net assets of CHOIX. CHOIX expects to complete the liquidation of its other portfolio holdings shortly, after which time any changes in its NAV will derive almost entirely from changes in the value of the Exco Investments.
The Funds anticipate that they may have difficulty reducing their holdings of the Exco Investments prior to the Liquidation Date (a) in the absence of a market for the Exco Investments and (b) due to the rescission of the redemption in kind by the Chou Affiliated Shareholder.
As redemptions from the Funds continue to occur prior to the Liquidation Date, the Exco Investments will represent an increasing proportion of the Funds’ net assets. Consequently, if redemptions continue, any changes in the value of the Exco Investments will have an increasing effect on the Funds’ respective NAVs and total performance.
The Amended and Restated Plan of Liquidation
Under the Amended Plan, the Liquidation Date will be the first day on or after July 31, 2019, on which the Funds can reasonably transfer such shares to any remaining Shareholders following the receipt by the Funds of the New Exco Shares.
Unlike the Original Plan, the Amended Plan will require Shareholders to receive their liquidating distributions in the form of a pro rata interest in (1) the New Exco Shares and (2) the cash remaining in the applicable Fund. However, if there are any restrictions on the transferability or ownership of the New Exco Shares that would prohibit a distribution of those shares to a Shareholder or make it impracticable, the Shareholder will, without election, receive the cash equivalent of the value of such shares.
You should consult with your own adviser or attorney to discuss whether any such restrictions may apply to you, and whether any tax or other considerations may apply to your receipt of the New Exco Shares upon the liquidation of the Funds.
The New Exco Shares could be subject to market and other risks, and Shareholders that receive the New Exco Shares could incur increased transaction fees and other costs, including brokerage costs, upon any eventual sale or other transfer of those shares. As noted above, there can be no assurance that an active trading market for the New Exco Shares will develop. Shareholders can find more information regarding Exco and its plan of reorganization at the following website:
https://dm.epiq11.com/case/EXCO/info
After the Funds receive information regarding the number and form of the New Exco Shares they will receive and have completed arrangements for the distribution of the shares, they will distribute to Shareholders instructions for providing directions for the delivery of their pro rata interest in the New Exco Shares. The instructions will also specify the date by which such directions must be provided and the expected Liquidation Date.
Any Shareholder who does not wish to receive the New Exco Shares must redeem its shares in the Funds prior to the Liquidation Date.
If you own Fund shares in a tax deferred account, such as an individual retirement account, 401(k) or 403(b) account, you should consult your tax adviser to discuss the Fund’s liquidation and determine its tax consequences.
* * * *
For more information, please contact a Fund customer service representative toll free at
(877) 682-6352.
PLEASE RETAIN FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

Updated again:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1486174/000143510919000308/chou_497e.htm
497 1 chou_497e.htm
CHOU AMERICA MUTUAL FUNDS
Chou Opportunity Fund (CHOEX)
Chou Income Fund (CHOIX)
Supplement dated July 1, 2019 to the Prospectus dated May 1, 2019
Background: Fund Liquidation, Rescission of In-Kind Redemption to Affiliate, and Continued Ability of Shareholders to Redeem Prior to the Liquidation Date for Cash
On June 5, 2019, the Board of Trustees (“Board”) of Chou America Mutual Funds (the “Trust”) approved a Plan of Liquidation and Dissolution (the “Plan”) pursuant to which the assets of the Chou Opportunity Fund and the Chou Income Fund (the “Funds”) will be liquidated and the proceeds remaining after payment of or provision for liabilities and obligations of the Funds will be distributed to shareholders.
Each Fund will seek to complete the liquidation on or around the close of business on July 31, 2019 (the “Liquidation Date”). Shareholders will be permitted to redeem from the Funds prior to the Liquidation Date, according to the ordinary procedures for redemptions from the Funds described in this Prospectus. Francis Chou, the Portfolio Manager to the Funds and chief executive officer of the Adviser, owns and controls a company that owns shares of each Fund (the “Chou Affiliated Shareholder”). Mr. Chou intends for the Chou Affiliated Shareholder to retain its shares in each Fund until the liquidation is completed, so each Fund expects to have sufficient cash to pay any redemptions by the other shareholders.
In anticipation of their liquidation, the Funds stopped accepting purchases on June 5, 2019. The Funds are in the process of winding up and are no longer pursuing their respective investment objectives and strategies. Reinvestment of dividends on existing shares in accounts which have selected that option will continue until the liquidation.
On June 28, 2019, the Board of the Trust rescinded the proposed redemption-in-kind of the 1.75 Term Lien Loans (the “Exco Loans”) of Exco Resources, Inc. (“Exco”) by the Chou Affiliated Shareholder.
The Exco Reorganization and Risks to Shareholders
As previously disclosed, Exco is involved in an insolvency proceeding in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas United States (the “Bankruptcy Court”) and each Fund has determined that the Exco Loans constitute illiquid investments. On June 18, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court approved a Plan of Reorganization of Exco that, when implemented, will result in cancellation of the Exco Loans in return for newly-issued common stock of Exco (the “New Exco Shares,” and together with the Loans, the “Exco Investments”). Shareholders can find more information regarding Exco and its plan of reorganization at the following website:
https://dm.epiq11.com/case/EXCO/info
According to the Disclosure Statement for the Plan of Reorganization, New Exco Shares will not be listed on or traded on any nationally recognized market or exchange and there can be no assurance that an active trading market for the New Exco Shares will develop. In the absence of a trading market for the New Exco Shares, the Funds’ expect that they will need to continue to calculate their net asset value per share (“NAV”) based on each Fund’s Board’s good faith determination of the fair value of the New Exco Shares.
As of June 28, 2019, the Exco Loans represented approximately 23.85% of the net assets of CHOEX with the remaining portfolio assets represented by cash. As such, any changes in the NAV of CHOEX will derive almost entirely from changes in the value of the Exco Investments.
As of June 28, 2019, the Exco Loans represented approximately 11.57% of the net assets of CHOIX. CHOIX expects to complete the liquidation of its other portfolio holdings shortly, after which time any changes in its NAV will derive almost entirely from changes in the value of the Exco Investments.
The Funds anticipate that they may not be able to reduce their holdings of the Exco Investments prior to the Liquidation Date due to (a) the absence of a market for the Exco Investments and (b) the rescission of the redemption in kind by the Chou Affiliated Shareholder.
As redemptions from the Funds continue to occur prior to the Liquidation Date, the Exco Investments will represent an increasing proportion of the Funds’ net assets. Consequently, if redemptions continue, any changes in the value of the Exco Investments will have an increasing effect on the Funds’ respective NAVs and total performance.
If you own Fund shares in a tax deferred account, such as an individual retirement account, 401(k) or 403(b) account, you should consult your tax adviser to discuss the Fund’s liquidation and determine its tax consequences.
* * * *
For more information, please contact a Fund customer service representative toll free at
(877) 682-6352.
PLEASE RETAIN FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

oi ---
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/business/rolling-stones-social-security-retirement.html

That excerpt from the report seems to be diametrically opposed to the way "gambling" was used in the MW story. The former is talking about some investors' perceptions, while the latter was talking more about "reality" (my word).
Here's the same excerpt including preceding and following sentences:

The American Council of Life Insurance found that some participants equated lifetime annuity payments with gambling on their lives, meaning they perceive annuities as increasing risk rather than decreasing it. The individual sees the annuity as a bet, and if they receive the full cost of the annuity payouts before they die, the annuity was a worthwhile investment, but if they die beforehand, it was a bad investment. Less consideration is given to the utility of peace of mind, or the benefits of mortality pooling. This suggests that many participants hold deep beliefs and convictions regarding the loss of principle [sic], control of retirement balance, and a desire to maintain an ability to draw on accumulated savings, which potentially stops participants from making beneficial long-term decisions.

The MW article says that in the real world ("Without more and better ... choices") retirees are gambling. So here, gambling is not about annuities, which do exist, but rather the lack of education ("information") and the lack of alternatives.
Here's how I look at gambling with respect to retirement (not really much different from hank's view):
I use a traditional pension (defined benefit plan) that is just large enough to fully fund a person's retirement as the baseline for a "safe" retirement. An objective equivalent would be a lump sum payment that is converted into the same income stream as that pension. Another objective equivalent would be a defined contribution plan, which is also just a pile of cash, likewise converted into the same income stream as that pension.
One stream is called a "pension", the others, an "annuity'. Strip away the emotion, the deep beliefs, the convictions, and they're the same thing.
Now, nearly all retirees would not take that income stream (unless you called it a pension). Rather, they would take the money and invest it. They would put that safe retirement at risk for the chance to wind up with more. Perhaps more to enjoy during retirement, perhaps more to leave as a legacy. It doesn't matter. The point is that they are putting something at risk (a safe retirement) for the possibility of "winning" something.
That's gambling. No value judgment. They may feel, for example, that it is more important to leave a legacy than to have the certainty that they won't wind up destitute.
It is more likely that they don't have enough to start with, so the safe baseline alternative doesn't exist. In that case, no matter what they do, it's is a gamble. Of necessity.

We are holding off drawing SS as long as possible. My wife started at full retirement age (66), and I’m considering waiting until 70. For us, SS functions as a sort of longevity insurance. Plus, my wife has many close relatives who lived into their 90s and later.

“Without more and better lifetime income choices, retirees are essentially gambling with their retirement savings. Too few have the tools and information needed to manage their nest eggs to last throughout their golden years.”
I’m not up to speed on all this. Glanced at the MW story only. But what in heck do they consider “gambling”? Since there’s a significant body of opinion in the investment community and here on the board that one should actually “ramp up” their equity exposure as they progress during retirement, this reference to “gambling” strikes me as vague at best and misdirected at worst.
I don’t subscribe to the school that recommends increasing equity exposure during the retirement years. But the bigger “gamble” in the early years of retirement seems to me to be in locking-in a low growth potential, be it by going heavily into cash / bonds or putting all your eggs into an annuity (less ”growthy” than maintaining a well diversified portfolio with as much exposure to equities as you can tolerate).

The cited paper discusses how various different decumulation strategies could work: SPIA, laddered bonds, systematic [periodic withdrawal] spending, target date fund + QLAC, managed payout fund, and annuity with GMWB rider.
The paper is focused on defined contribution plans (401(k), 403(b), etc.), not IRAs. Nevertheless, the same sort of approaches could be applied to IRAs.
Judging from the reader comments on the MarketWatch site, people seem to view investing during one's decumulation period is no different from investing in one's accumulation period, except perhaps that one focuses a bit more on income-generating securities.
But as the paper states: By recognizing the clear difference between accumulation and decumulation risks, it is easy to understand why income solutions can vary so greatly in terms of composition and the risks they seek to address.
The paper, though it does some simulations, strikes me as largely an overview (albeit a very clear one) of the considerations people have in retirement and how the different approaches address or fail to address them. It's a nice writeup (skip the MarketWatch piece). The three page exec summary in turn makes for a good, somewhat quick read.
http://cri.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/policy-report-19-02.pdf

@Gary - that's not what Lewis wrote. Go back and read it again. Lewis said ".... and this constant assumption that Americans are stupid and don’t know how to maximize their retirement." See that part about "this constant assumption."

Social Security benefits are guaranteed to keep up with inflation and last for life. That’s important when half of all 65-year-old American women can expect to live past age 86, according to Social Security estimates. The average life expectancy for U.S. men who are currently 65 is age 84.

What about the half of women who don’t live that long? The most important number no one can know for sure is his/her life expectancy. If you are not physically healthy and/or longevity doesn’t run in your family taking Social Security early makes sense. Also many people don’t have the retirement savings to time their taking of the benefit perfectly like this story suggests, yet they may still be sick of working and not want to work till age 70 before retiring. In other words, the answer to when to take the benefit is complex and this constant assumption that Americans are stupid and don’t know how to maximize their retirement by the financial services sector is getting pretty old.

FYI: The world of retirement savings recently reached a significant milestone that has important implications for workers and retirees: For the first time, assets in defined-contribution savings plans represent more than 50% of all retirement plan assets globally, according to Willis Towers Watson.
While some defined-benefit pension plans still exist, many more workers today have to rely on defined-contribution plans (think: 401(k) and IRA accounts) to fund their retirements. With today’s defined-contribution plans, workers have to assume the responsibility for making all the complex savings and investment decisions that will significantly affect the amount of money they will have available once they stop working and retire.
While recent innovations in defined-contribution retirement plans, such as the use of auto-enrollment, are making it easier to save, the focus now must shift toward a more-comprehensive approach to help individuals make those savings last.
Increasingly, workers expect their retirement plans to not only help them save, but also help them to generate and manage income through retirement. A recent report by the Georgetown University Center for Retirement Initiatives, “Generating and Protecting Retirement Income in Defined Contribution Plans”, looks at how different approaches can meet individual goals for doing just that.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-retirement-plan-of-the-future-turning-that-pot-of-money-into-monthly-income-2019-06-28/print

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/3521/000119312519186064/d749776d497.htm
497 1 d749776d497.htm TAF ALGER SMALL CAP FOCUS FUND
THE ALGER FUNDS
Alger Small Cap Focus Fund
July 1, 2019 Supplement to the Statutory and Summary
Prospectuses dated March 1, 2019, as supplemented to date
The Board of Trustees of The Alger Funds has authorized a partial closing of Alger Small Cap Focus Fund (the “Fund”), effective July 31, 2019.
The Fund’s Class A and C Shares will be available for purchase by existing shareholders of the Fund who maintain open accounts.
The Fund’s Class I and Z Shares will be available for purchase by existing shareholders of the Fund who maintain open accounts and investors who transact with certain broker-dealers identified by Fred Alger & Company, Incorporated, the Fund’s distributor. Please check with your financial advisor regarding the availability of Class I and Z shares of the Fund for purchase at their firm.
In addition, the Funds Class A, C, I and Z shares will be available to new investors that utilize certain retirement record keeping platforms identified by the Fund’s distributor.
The Fund’s Class Y Shares will remain open to all qualifying investors.
The Fund may resume sales to all investors (or further suspend sales) at some future date if the Board of Trustees determines that doing so would be in the best interest of shareholders.

FYI: One of the signature achievements of the post-millennial capital markets is the driving down of investor costs to near zero, via Reg NMS which did away with the fraction spreads market makers once enjoyed and converted stock exchanges to a decimalized system.
While there have been winners and losers as a result of this and other improvements, no one would argue that the individual investor hasn’t become better off – more access, lower costs, increased liquidity. The concurrent shrinking of the average internal expense ratio at mutual funds and ETFs has been undeniably positive for the end investor trying to save for college, retirement, etc.
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is now calling for a transactions tax on investors and traders that would represent a big step backwards for market participants, with the altruistic goal of wiping out the $1.6 trillion in student debt that many believe is holding back the economic potential of millions of young Americans.
Regards,
Ted

InvestmentNews Article:
https://www.investmentnews.com/article/20190624/FREE/190629961/wall-street-lashes-out-at-bernie-sanders-plan-to-pay-off-student

FYI: Dear retail investors holding lame 0.75% bank certificates of deposits and U.S. Treasury bonds yielding a tad over 2% for 10 years. If you want your money to yield something outside of the stock market, then it’s time to leave the United States.
Not pack-your-bags, sell-your-home leave the United States. But time to diversify out of U.S. bonds and CDs and put that retirement money somewhere far, far away.
It can’t go to Germany. That’s a negative yield debt. It can’t go to Japan. That’s money under the mattress. So it has to go to the emerging markets. Like China. Yes, China.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2019/06/21/for-fixed-income-investors-time-to-leave-america/#290485bc51f6
M* Snapshot GARBX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/garbx/quote.html

An immediate annuity can have a place in your retirement portfolio, particularly if you feel you need to have at least one stream of income you can count on. But because interest rates are so low, you should wait until rates rise again before purchasing an annuity.

FYI: The California Public Employees’ Retirement System was one of the first public-pension systems to tie its investments to social activism. Now it is having second thoughts.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.wsj.com/articles/calpers-dilemma-save-the-world-or-make-money-11560684601