@rforno allows me to pounce quickly and buy stuff I want during volatility when stuff goes on sale.

I don't need to hold cash in order to do the above. I sell my bond funds and buy stock funds...or...at Schwab they let me buy a stock/CEF (examples: SPY,VTI,QQQ,PCI) even if I'm fully invested in IRA and after I complete the buy I sell the exact amount from my mutual fund, Fidelity will not let you do it, you must have the cash in the account.
I don't see any reason to be in cash and why most times I invest at 99+% even in retirement unless I see elevated risk (such as VIX>35) and sell as part of my portfolio defense.
I haven't used cash (besides several thousands) for several decades prior to retiremet and after that. I have credit cards I can pay for almost everything and if I need more I can sell my funds and pay in 2-3 days. The only time you need cash is for illegal drugs and ransom. Of course, most retirees should have more than one bond fund and be invested in high-rated bonds as a ballast for stocks.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1580733/000119312520250152/d42150d497.htm
497 1 d42150d497.htm BMO LGM FRONTIER MARKETS EQUITY FUND
Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
Registration No. 333-193915
BMO LGM Frontier Markets Equity Fund
Supplement dated September 21, 2020 to the Prospectus
dated December 27, 2019, as supplemented
Fund Liquidation and Elimination of Quarterly Repurchase Policy
Shareholders of the BMO LGM Frontier Markets Equity Fund (the “Fund”) have approved the proposal to liquidate and dissolve the Fund. On September 30, 2020 the Fund expects to make its first liquidating distribution to shareholders. The initial liquidating distribution is expected to comprise approximately 90% of the Fund’s assets. The Fund will continue to make liquidating distributions quarterly until all Fund assets are distributed to shareholders and all shares are redeemed. Shareholders (other than tax-qualified plans or tax-exempt accounts) will recognize gain or loss for tax purposes on the redemption of their Fund shares in the liquidation.
As a result of actions by the Board of Trustees and shareholders, the Fund will no longer invest pursuant to its investment strategies or achieve its investment objective of capital appreciation.
Shareholders also have approved the elimination of the Fund’s fundamental policy of making quarterly repurchase offers. Accordingly, the Fund is discontinuing that process.
Income Distribution
Prior to the Fund’s initial liquidating distribution, the Fund will make an income distribution to shareholders. The Fund expects the income distribution to be paid on September 29, 2020, prior to the liquidating distribution scheduled for September 30, 2020.
Important Information for Retirement Plan Investors
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares or of any IRA or retirement plan distribution, the ability to roll over any distribution, and any tax-savings options you may have. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you may be able to roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account. If you are eligible to do so, the rollover must occur within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income. You can make only one tax-free rollover from an IRA to another IRA in any 12-month period (regardless of the number of IRAs you own). Any subsequent distribution of untaxed amounts from an IRA within the 12-month period would be included in your gross income, and may be subject to a 10% early withdrawal tax. The previously described limitation allowing only one tax-free rollover per 12-month period does not apply to (1) rollovers from traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs (conversions), (2) trustee-to-trustee transfers to another IRA, (3) eligible rollovers from an IRA to a retirement plan, (4) eligible rollovers from a retirement plan to an IRA, and (5) eligible rollovers from a retirement plan to a retirement plan.
Please retain this Supplement with your Prospectus for future reference.

I forgot my /sarc tag!

Right. Sarcasm. Where have I heard that before? I think we're far past Dostoyevsky's definition.

Nothing was stipulated about how long they turned it down. As a retired parent w adult children (who are savers) I just have a thing about passing up free money when young.

Right. Nothing was stipulated about why they turned it down either. Student loans. Medical bills. Aging parents. Whatever. We're past facts.

Sven posted:
>> Some don't invest because our company offers only low cost index funds, even with generous company match.
Ital mine. This seems remarkable to me,

Sven is talking about one guy. One guy.

and I bet it would to about anyone.

Small sample sizes and logical fallacies.
When I was in positions to hire people I needed specific skill sets that had absolutely nothing to do with coping with investment decisions.
When the retirement plan came up our advice was to pick the targeted date fund if they didn't want to hassle with the research. If they chose not to participate we didn't bug them because it was no picnic finding their skill sets to begin with. And we didn't think it was appropriate to dig into their personal decision.

No, HR should not track. It's a free country for being stupid. (manifestly.)

OK. Ignore what you wrote. I should just assume sarcasm from you.

I wonder how they got the job in the first place.

Because they can do things you can't. It's just that simple.

I had invested with Will Danoff in the past. Very consistent performance from year to year. Even during the tech bubble Contra fund still managed to loss less. Just wish Fidelity let him to close the fund much earlier at smaller asset. On this aspect, T. Rowe Price is much better that is where I invest for a good % of retirement $.

Research by The National Institute on Retirement Security. Because sometimes it's nice to talk about facts. Are they a creditable organization? You be the judge.
The study is from 2014. I'm not convinced that conditions have gotten any better for the millenials.

Figure 1 shows that in 2014 Millennials (66.2%) had similar rates of working for an employer that offered employees a retirement plan as GenX (68.8%) and Boomers (67.6%). But, as displayed in Figure 2, a challenge to this generation is the fact that only a little over half of Millennials (55%) are eligible to participate in an employer-sponsored retirement plan, compared to over three-fourths of GenX (77%) and Boomers (80%).
Figure 3 shows that Millennials have high (94.2%) take-up rates when they are both offered and eligible to participate in a retirement plan sponsored by their employer. These high rates (94.2%) are nearly equal to the rates of Boomers (94.4%) and GenX (95.4%). As a result, a little over one-third of Millennials (34.3%) participate in an employer-sponsored retirement plan, compared (in Figure 4) with half of GenX (50.5%) and Boomers (50.9%). The rate at which eligible employees take-up an employer-sponsored retirement plan is about 95 percent for all generations.
As displayed in Figures 1 and 4, in 2014, nearly two-thirds (66.2%) of working Millennials had access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan. But, only a little over one-third (34.3%) of Millennials actually participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan. This is because a much smaller percentage of Millennials (55%) were eligible to participate in the plan offered by their employer than in older generations.

So they have access, but they aren't eligible? Why is that?

A possible explanation for lower rates of retirement plan eligibility and therefore coverage is that the Millennial generation has a higher rate of part-time employment than GenX or Boomers. Figure 13 indicates that in 2014, the rate of part-time employment by Millennials (25.1%) was close to double the rate of part-time employment by GenX (13.6%) and Boomers (14.9%). The higher rate of part-time employment by Millennials is a large factor in their lower eligibility for employer-sponsored retirement plans, as they may not work enough hours to be covered by their employers’ plans.52 Under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), employers can limit eligibility in retirement plans by requiring that an employee worked at least 1,000 hours in order to have a year of service under the plan.53Working 1,000 hours in one year is equal to working a little over 19 hours per week.
A second possible explanation for lower rates of coverage in a retirement plan is that this generation has not worked in their current position long enough to become eligible for participation in the plan. Figure 14 shows the length of time that Millennials have been employed with their current employer in 2014. Figure 14 also shows that over half of Millennials have only been employed with their current employer for at least a year (26.5%) or under one year (23.6%). These short tenures contribute to their lower eligibility rates, as their employer may not allow them to participate in an employer-sponsored retirement plan until after they have worked for the employer for one year of service.

A side bar addresses the second point:

There is a media-fueled perception that Millennials are perpetual job-hoppers.54 But two prominent studies show that this perception is a myth. First, a recent Pew Charitable Trusts study found that three-fourths (75%) of college-educated Millennials in 2016 were employed for more than 13 months with their current employer, compared to 72 percent of Gen Xers in 2000.55 Second, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics in a study tracking Boomers throughout their work-lives, found that Boomers held short tenures with their employers during their younger years.56 Specifically, it found that of the jobs that Boomers began when they were 18 to 34, 69 percent of those jobs ended in less than a year and 85 percent ended in fewer than five years.57 Thus, Millennials are job-hopping at similar or even lower rates to their Gen X and Boomer predecessors.

Yeah? But what about the avocado toast?

Totally agree. Many college graduates have large college loan debt - often $50-100K. Finding jobs in this pandemic is not easy. Our companies hired a few this year but that is less than the attrition rates due to retirement and others.
Younger generations are very different than the older ones. Some don't invest because our company offers only low cost index funds, even with generous company match. Guess our priorities on investing are quite different.

@Baseball_Fan
I'm mainly a bond fund trader who uses momentum and usually 2-3 funds but several times annually I trade stocks/ETF/whatever for hours-days when I think I have a good chance to make money. I don't invest in alternative funds because most/all don't have long term reliable risk/reward. My goals at retirement are very specific based on a need of just 4% annually including inflation for the next several decades: make 6+% annually + never lose more than 3% from any last top. I did much better since retirement in 2018. Any time I feel risk is elevated I just sell a big % of my portfolio.
ADVNX is doing very well year-to-date (rated at M* in the top 4% for Multi sector funds) but management changed on 2/21/2020 so you can't rely on previous risk/reward.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1548609/000089418920007697/brownadvisoryfundsstrategi.htm
497 1 brownadvisoryfundsstrategi.htm 497
BROWN ADVISORY FUNDS
Brown Advisory Strategic Bond Fund
(the “Fund”)
Institutional Shares (BIABX)
Investor Shares (BATBX)
Advisor Shares (Not Available for Sale)
Supplement dated September 14, 2020
to the Prospectus, the Summary Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information
dated October 31, 2019
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Brown Advisory Funds (the “Trust”), based upon the recommendation of Brown Advisory LLC (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser to the Fund, has determined to close and liquidate the Fund. The Board concluded that it would be in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Trust effective as of the close of business on October 14, 2020. Accordingly, the Board approved a Plan of Liquidation and Termination (the “Plan”) that sets forth the manner in which the Fund will be liquidated.
The Board has determined to waive any applicable redemption fees and exchange fees for shares redeemed on or after September 14, 2020.
Effective September 15, 2020, in anticipation of the liquidation, the Fund is no longer accepting purchases into the Fund. In addition, the Adviser will begin an orderly transition of the portfolio to cash and cash equivalents and the Fund will no longer be pursuing its stated investment objective. Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their investments as described in the Fund’s Prospectus.
If you hold your shares in an IRA account, you have 60 days from the date you receive your proceeds to reinvest or “rollover” your proceeds into another IRA and maintain their tax-deferred status. You must notify the Fund’s transfer agent by telephone at 800-540-6807 (toll free) or 414-203-9064 prior to October 14, 2020, of your intent to rollover your IRA account to avoid withholding deductions from your proceeds.
Pursuant to the Plan, if the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction prior to October 14, 2020, your shares will be redeemed on October 14, 2020, and you will receive your proceeds from the Fund, subject to any required withholding. These proceeds will generally be subject to federal and possibly state and local income taxes if the redeemed shares are held in a taxable account, and the proceeds exceed your adjusted basis in the shares redeemed.
If the redeemed shares are held in a qualified retirement account such as an IRA, the redemption proceeds may not be subject to current income taxation. You should consult with your tax advisor on the consequences of this redemption to you.
Shareholder inquiries should be directed to the Fund at 800-540-6807 (toll free) or 414-203-9064.
Please retain this supplement for your reference.

Yes, the stock market and the economy is two very different thing. Those of us who have jobs and 401(K) are very different those who live from paycheck to paycheck with little saving, let alone investing for retirement. Unfortunately these income folks will not benefit from the stock market and the bigger pictures of the American Dream.

According to the most recent Federal Reserve data, the top 1 percent of U.S. households by wealth own 39 percent of equities and mutual fund shares, and the top 10 percent own 83 percent . Also, the top 1 percent of U.S. households by income own 41 percent of equities and mutual fund shares, and the top 20 percent own 87 percent.
https://federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distribute/chart/#quarter:122;series:Corporate%20equities%20and%20mutual%20fund%20shares;demographic:networth;population:1,3,5,7;units:shares;range:1989.3,2020.1
This data suggests the need to sell shares to fund retirement needs is likely to have a fairly small impact on stock market behavior. (I just noticed @Mark posted some of this data on another post earlier this morning.)
The quote already pasted to this thread about valuation and TINA speaks to the PE ratio question. That's a daily marketplace decision. But, that decision takes into account the knowledge that central banks are active participants and that fiscal policy is also playing an active role in supporting the economy. The quote suggests it will be difficult for valuation concerns to gain traction in this environment. I suspect if the upward creep in the P/E ratio is gradual the marketplace will continue to accept it assuming the economy can return to a pattern of growth (but I am certainly not betting the farm that is the case). But, what happens if (when?) inflation takes hold? That will presumably force central banks to modify their behavior. The limits of MMT tie in with this too. But, it appears the marketplace views those issues as distant concerns for another day.

per Politico:
I read that the stock market isn't the economy, but after a while . . .

More than 22 million rental units, a little over half the rental housing in the country, are in single-family buildings with between one and four units, according to data compiled by the Urban Institute. And most of those buildings have a mortgage — meaning the property owners themselves still need to make their own monthly payments.
“In a four-unit building, if one person can’t pay rent you’ve just lost 25 percent of your income,” Pinnegar said.
Most of the units are owned by mom-and-pop landlords, many of whom invested in property to save for retirement. Now they’re dealing with a dramatic drop in income, facing the prospect of either trying to sell their property or going into debt to meet financial obligations including mortgage and insurance payments, property taxes, utilities and maintenance costs. If enough landlords can no longer make those payments, it would threaten everything from the school budgets funded by property taxes to the stability of the $11 trillion U.S. mortgage market itself.
Six months into the crisis, millions of tenants can no longer meet their rent — and the situation is only getting worse. Tenants already owe some $25 billion in back rent and will owe nearly $70 billion by the end of the year, according to an estimate last month by Moody’s Analytics.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1020425/000168386320013174/f6885d1.htm
(MSSFX)
497 1 f6885d1.htm FORM 497
LITMAN GREGORY FUNDS TRUST
Supplement dated September 11, 2020
to Prospectus of the
Litman Gregory Funds Trust dated April 29, 2020, as supplemented
This supplement should be read in conjunction with the Prospectus dated April 29, 2020, as supplemented.
For all existing shareholders of the PartnerSelect Smaller Companies Fund (formerly, Litman Gregory Masters Smaller Companies Fund):
The Board of Trustees (the "Board") of the Litman Gregory Funds Trust (the "Trust" or the "Funds") has approved the tax-free reorganization of the PartnerSelect Smaller Companies Fund, a series of the Trust (the "Smaller Companies Fund"), into the PartnerSelect SBH Focused Small Value Fund, a series of the Trust (the "SBH Focused Small Value Fund") (the "Reorganization"). The Reorganization does not require the approval of the shareholders of the Smaller Companies Fund or the SBH Focused Small Value Fund.
The Reorganization was proposed because, among other things, the announced pending retirement of Dick Weiss, portfolio manager of the portion of the Smaller Companies Fund sub-advised by Wells Capital Management, Inc., and the decision by Litman Gregory Fund Advisors LLC (the "Adviser") to not recommend the continuation of the sub-advisory relationship with Wells absent Mr. Weiss as portfolio manager. The Board also considered the overall decline in assets in the Smaller Companies Fund from shareholder redemptions that has resulted in a corresponding increase in the Smaller Companies Fund's expense ratio. The Adviser has advised the Board that it is unlikely that the Smaller Companies Fund will increase in size significantly in the foreseeable future. The SBH Focused Small Value Fund and the Smaller Companies Fund have the same investment objective and similar investment strategies, policies, risks, and restrictions. Furthermore, the investment sub-advisor of the SBH Focused Small Value Fund also currently manages a portion of the Smaller Companies Fund, thus preserving access by shareholders to this manager's portfolio management expertise. The Adviser has committed to limit the expenses of the SBH Focused Small Value Fund at a level below that of the Smaller Companies Fund at least through April 30, 2022. By consolidating the two funds instead of liquidating the Smaller Companies Fund, the Adviser believes that significant realized and unrealized capital losses and capital loss carryforwards may be preserved for the benefit of shareholders while allowing individual shareholders to assess their particular tax situations and act in their own best interest with respect to the realization of capital gains or losses.
To effectuate the Reorganization, the Smaller Companies Fund will transfer all of its assets to the SBH Focused Small Value Fund, and the SBH Focused Small Value Fund will assume all of the liabilities of the Smaller Companies Fund. On the date of the closing of the Reorganization, shareholders of the Smaller Companies Fund will receive Institutional Class shares of the SBH Focused Small Value Fund equal in aggregate net asset value to the value of their shares of the Smaller Companies Fund, in exchange for their shares of the Smaller Companies Fund. The Reorganization is expected to be effective in October 2020.
Effective September 14, 2020, shares of the Smaller Companies Fund will no longer be offered to new shareholders, and shareholders holding Institutional Class shares of any other series of the Trust will not be able to exchange their shares for shares of the Smaller Companies Fund. Shareholders of the Smaller Companies Fund will be allowed to redeem their shares in the Fund until the closing of the Reorganization.
Please keep this Supplement with your Prospectus.

You may remember Stan Druckenmiller as a frequent guest on the old PBS Nightly Business Report. This is not intended to represent a broad spectrum of opinion. Nor is his view anything new (unless you’ve been asleep in a cave for the past decade or longer). Since Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, I’m quoting an amount of bio that under normal circumstances might be inappropriate.
“Druckenmiller began his financial career in 1977 as a management trainee at Pittsburgh National Bank. He became head of the bank's equity research group after one year. In 1981, he founded his own firm, Duquesne Capital Management. In 1985, he became a consultant to Dreyfus, splitting his time between Pittsburgh and New York, where he lived two days each week. He moved to Pittsburgh full-time in 1986, when he was named head of the Dreyfus Fund. As part of his agreement with Dreyfus, he also maintained management of Duquesne. In 1988, he was hired by George Soros to replace Victor Niederhoffer at Quantum Fund. He and Soros famously "broke the Bank of England" when they shorted British pound sterling in 1992, reputedly making more than $1 billion in profits, in an event known as Black Wednesday. They calculated that the Bank of England did not have enough foreign currency reserves with which to buy enough sterling to prop up the currency and that raising interest rates would be politically unsustainable. He left Soros in 2000 after taking large losses in technology stocks ...
According to Bloomberg News, on August 18, 2010, Druckenmiller announced the closing of his hedge fund "telling investors he'd been worn down by the stress of trying to maintain one of the best trading records in the industry while managing an 'enormous amount of capital.'" Duquesne Capital Management posts an average annual return of 30 percent without any money-losing year. His funds were down for about 5 percent when he announced his retirement in August. However, they had since erased the losses and closed with a small gain through successful bets that the market would rally in anticipation that the Federal Reserve would announce further "Quantitative Easing" to assist in reducing unemployment and avoid deflation.
According to The Wall Street Journal, on August 18, 2010, Druckenmiller "told clients that he's returning their money and ending his firm's 30-year run, citing the 'high emotional toll' of not performing up to his own expectations." He indicated it was not easy to make big profits while handling very large sums of money.“
Link to Wikipedia Article

Postscript: It’s clear to me that one of my money managers has absolutely no concept of what a bubble is. Dodge and Cox clearly doesn’t like to party. Their flagship domestic stock fund, DODGX, is down nearly 10% YTD. It’s negative over 1-year and has averaged just a sedate 5.2% annualized return over the past 3. “What mania?” they might be asking about now.
:)

Thanks, David for point us to this. Here’s Barron’s take : https://www.barrons.com/articles/climate-change-poses-a-major-risk-to-u-s-financial-system-warns-regulator-51599667397
“ The risks from climate change include damage to infrastructure, housing, crops, communities, and livelihoods, as well as to the value of financial assets, according to the report, which argues that systemic shocks related to climate change can undermine the financial health of banks and insurance markets.
It makes 53 recommendations, including that financial supervisors require bank and nonbank financial firms to address climate-related financial risks, that companies make meaningful disclosures about climate risk, and that U.S. and financial regulators provide clarity to confirm the appropriateness of making investment decisions using climate-related factors in retirement plans.”

For long-term investors, which in aggregate retirement plans are, even if their individual employees may not be, climate change will have a huge impact on the investment landscape no matter what the current ostrich head in the sand chief says.
I think ultimately the big traditional energy players will acquire the alternative energy ones as the competition from solar and other players becomes more viable as it has already been each year. Then ESG investors will really be scratching their heads as to what to own. An affordable electric car isn't far off, yet I don't necessarily think Tesla will be the one to make it. Telecommuting thanks to climate change and covid will become the norm to reduce traffic, carbon and office space. Avoid office real estate. Avoid insurers of coastal properties in Florida.
Anecdotal story I heard from one realtor who does business in Florida, that most mainstream insurers no longer want to insure Florida's coastal homes and the insurers that do charge exorbitant rates and actually model for a binary situation--either disaster doesn't happen and they're hugely profitable or it does happen and they go bankrupt and screw policy holders. Bankruptcy is modeled in.
But I wonder if the investment thesis is really what matters at this point. There needs to be real government regulation--on a global level--to reduce the inevitable destruction.

from today's New York Times:

A report commissioned by federal regulators overseeing the nation’s commodities markets has concluded that climate change threatens U.S. financial markets, as the costs of wildfires, storms, droughts and floods spread through insurance and mortgage markets, pension funds and other financial institutions.
“A world wracked by frequent and devastating shocks from climate change cannot sustain the fundamental conditions supporting our financial system,” concluded the report, “Managing Climate Risk in the Financial System”

Managing Climate Risk in the US Financial System (September 2020)
Recommendation #4 seems to directly address the administration's push against the inclusion of ESG investments in retirement plans. The CFTC, to the contrary, recommends:

The United States and financial regulators should review relevant laws, regulations and codes and provide any necessary clarity to confirm the appropriateness of making investment decisions using climate-related factors in retirement and pension plans covered by ERISA, as well as non-ERISA managed situations where there is fiduciary duty. This should clarify that climate-related factors—as well as ESG factors that impact risk-return more broadly—may be considered to the same extent as “traditional” financial factors, without creating additional burdens.

How this plays out at the individual investor level puzzles me. Even if we can guess the three likeliest short-term outcomes (say, increases in extreme weather, greater number of "orphaned" assets, a push for more-sustainable energy generation and distribution), I'm not exactly sure of how to act on the information. Do you simply dodge carbon? Look for "impact investors" who actively seek to mitigate effects? Shift to financials on the premise that insurance companies make money from catastrophic events (high short-term payoff offset by even higher premium increases)?
Curious.
David

I have no idea if there will be a rotation to value or mid-caps in the near-future. Regarding turnover, I generally avoid equity funds with turnover greater than 40%.
The ARTQX management team outperformed the mid-cap value category for a number of years based on total return/risk-adjusted return. However, poor stock selection and the retirement of one of the senior managers seems to have taken a toll. ARTQX has lagged its category every calendar year from 2014 - 2019 (except 2016).
TRMCX is a good fund. Although there is some key-person risk, T. Rowe Price is well-resourced and generally handles manager transitions well. Purchase of this fund may be restricted to customers who trade directly with T. Rowe Price.
If you're not opposed to indexing, VMVAX may also be worthy of consideration.

https://www.kiplinger.com/retirement/retirement-planning/601350/does-a-40-bond-allocation-make-sense-in-todays-portfolios?amp
Does 40% bond allocation make sense in today's portfolio
Whether you’re the kind of investor who meets regularly with an adviser or the set-it-and-forget-it type who rarely looks at your 401(k), there’s a good chance your portfolio is set up with something close to a 60/40 mix of stocks and bonds.
Think it depends on your age and risks assertion. For us have 20s-25s% in bonds distribution, these levels maybe right for us. BTW we also hold other vehicles for risk stratification (strategy)

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=IR5WX4rLGbKvtgWqkLvICQ&q=Saving+for+Retirement+Is+Never+Easy.+The+Covid+Pandemic+Has+Made+It+Even+Harder.&oq=Saving+for+Retirement+Is+Never+Easy.+The+Covid+Pandemic+Has+Made+It+Even+Harder.&gs_lcp=ChFtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1ocBADUKsYWKsYYPIiaABwAHgAgAHZAYgB2QGSAQMyLTGYAQCgAQKgAQGwAQA&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-hp
Saving for Retirement Is Never Easy. The Covid Pandemic Has Made It Even Harder.
Ed Daizovi, a 57-year-old career diplomat, entered the retirement homestretch earlier this year: He had just moved back from Africa and was setting up a new home in Miami where he planned to retire next year with his wife of 29 years, after investing diligently to fund a comfortable retirement.
But the coronavirus pandemic—and the volatility stirred first by the market’s crash and quick recovery, and now by uncertainty heading into the election—is making Daizovi wary about his retirement timeline
Many folks indeed are suffering. We hope c19 conditions improve in the near future and more peoplemay get their old jobs back/lives back in orders. Heard so many personal stories of misdeeds, financial turmoils/ family restrains and conflicts previously.

https://www.schwab.com/resource-center/insights/section/on-investing
Schwab Fall issue
Come What May
1 0
by
Walt Bettinger
| AUGUST 24, 2020
Whatever the circumstances, we’re here to help.
The Law of Averages and Your Portfolio
9 3
AUGUST 24, 2020
How outsize gains plus outsize losses may produce long-term success.
Tax Withholding in Retirement
3 0
AUGUST 24, 2020
How to help ensure you prepay enough taxes once you’re no longer working.
Socially Responsible Investing in Your 401(k)
AUGUST 24, 2020
What to know before adding socially responsible investments to your retirement portfolio.
How to Shop for Bonds
3 0
AUGUST 24, 2020
You comparison-shop for everything else—so why not for bonds?
Can Your Family Members Collect Social Security When You File?
by
Carrie Schwab-Pomerantz
| AUGUST 24, 2020
Social Security benefits begin with you—but they don’t end there.
Enjoy
....