Back to Budgeting and Taxes
Sunday, August 7, 2011 - 4:14 AM
Start With $10,000 And Retire A Millionaire
http://finance.yahoo.com/retirement/article/112585/start-with-10k-retire-millionaire-marketwatch?mod=series-dd-article
Yeah... why didn't I think of that. I'll tell the bank I want that 7% solution program.
Call it a 7% solution. Assume a 7% inflation-adjusted return from a portfolio of U.S. and international stocks, bonds and cash -- not overly aggressive, but an expected return that requires taking some risk -- and living well within your means.
Yeah... why didn't I think of that. I'll tell the bank I want that 7% solution program.
3
4. Monday, August 8, 2011 - 8:19 AM
Thanks much.
Note that all these eye-catching, convoluted, math-like (since it is terrible math), and "truly misleading" articles are wirtten by bored people who have too much time on their hands and nothing worthwhile to do (ok, count me in for the bored/too much time part to respond:D).
Note that all these eye-catching, convoluted, math-like (since it is terrible math), and "truly misleading" articles are wirtten by bored people who have too much time on their hands and nothing worthwhile to do (ok, count me in for the bored/too much time part to respond:D).
2
5. Monday, August 8, 2011 - 8:49 AM
51hh, agreed, on this article. But the Bloomberg article on Nixon/Gold standard was worth the time, I thought.
Seems to be a dud around here, though. The article kind of explains how all the fuzzy math and gaming of US currency really took off. I expected some good feedback and discussion on that one. Even if someone thought the facts were off, I was looking forward to the insight of others on the subject.
The article is 5 pages long. What I posted was very little of what is actually in the article.
So that's why the eye catching stuff is written. It's what we will read. It must be what we want.
The other stuff is just too heady for us, I guess.
Maybe that's why the politicians can pretend they know math, and talk circles around themselves and voters.
Seems to be a dud around here, though. The article kind of explains how all the fuzzy math and gaming of US currency really took off. I expected some good feedback and discussion on that one. Even if someone thought the facts were off, I was looking forward to the insight of others on the subject.
The article is 5 pages long. What I posted was very little of what is actually in the article.
So that's why the eye catching stuff is written. It's what we will read. It must be what we want.
The other stuff is just too heady for us, I guess.
Maybe that's why the politicians can pretend they know math, and talk circles around themselves and voters.
1
