Budgeting skills are as important as what your portfolio is doing—probably, more important really, because budgeting is an everyday issue. If a person can scale back appropriately so that they can actually survive on a 4 percent withdrawal rate, they’re good. Any reasonably designed retirement portfolio will last with a 4 percent withdrawal rate. Eight percent? You’re going to have to get really lucky in your investments.

We love reading his work and he’s a very sharp, knowledgeable finance maven. But his claim about the 4 percent withdrawal rate seems a tad glib–there are many assumptions built-in to this claim that need explanation. Would you really like to bet on such a simple number for your retirement? We think not.

Intuitively, at 4% withdrawal rate,  if your return is 4%/YR and inflation is nil, then in fact you can simply withdraw the gain each year and never deplete the principal. But if, for example, inflation is 2%/YR and your return is 4%/YR, then we can show 4% withdrawal rate would last you 34 years. Not bad. But if your return is 3%/YR and inflation is 4%/YR, then this account will deplete after 22 years if withdrawals are at 4%/YR.  That’s probably a big difference. We show you how to handle all these “What Ifs”.

This post introduces the idea of the Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR), a concept that has recently captured the attention of many investment advisors and publications. We introduce our own focus on this topic now. We announce two initiatives. First, we published a descriptive piece in Advisor Perspectives, a highly respected and popular website for investment professionals. This piece explains SWR ideas without math for the average investor. Second, we published our full research results in detail here, in our permanent pages (see Investing Tools drop-menu above, or click this link):

Investing Tools> Safe Withdrawal Rate

This page introduces our technical analysis and methodology to determinine your own, personal SWR. Our innovation: we capture each individual’s beliefs about his own future returns and inflation to find the expected value of his SWR, irrespective of market history. Ultimately, your personal beliefs about how future returns and inflation evolve is all that matters for your planning purposes.

I grant that low long-term interest rates could continue for months, or even well into next year. But just as easily, long-term rate increases can emerge with unexpected suddenness. Between early October 1979 and late February 1980, for example, the yield on the 10-year note rose almost four percentage points.

He generally warned us that

The United States, and most of the rest of the developed world, is in need of a tectonic shift in fiscal policy. Incremental change will not be adequate.

Do you believe the curent regime has any political courage, let alone sufficient to change course?

• Extrmely low probability
• Extremely high impact
• Unimaginable a priori

Given this BSE, we have had a massive “pivot” from the health care fiasco in the making to focus on USA economy and jobs. The reason for this change is simply the one new Republican vote that can stop disastrous congressional economic policies.

OK, so how can this BSE save us? Bear with us for a bit.

We recently came upon this quote and find it quite descriptive:

“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy…”

by Alexander Fraser Tytler, Scottish lawyer and writer, 1770.

Now, consider this fact:

~50% of USA workers pay $0 taxes, while the rest of the workers (the “rich”) pay all the taxes.

We think it fair to conclude:

Half the population has incentive to free-ride on the others and will cheerfully vote for increasing burdens on those “rich”.

Our country is in peril from financial catastrophes and very poor political decisions. Most pertinently, the Scott Brown BSE may enable the inevitable lunge by Democrats for more taxation and thus massive class warfare to be avoided.

She says

The Fed’s asymmetrical thinking extends as well to its treatment of financial assets—such as equity and debt instruments—en route to a bubble. As prices surge and markets soar, the Fed is reluctant to raise interest rates lest it be accused of hindering growth. But when the bubble bursts and asset prices begin to tumble, the Fed quickly steps in with dramatic interest rate reductions to “restore investor confidence” in hopes of avoiding a meltdown.

and concludes with

Now here’s the scary part: Even though more than half of all American households now own equities directly or through mutual funds, an increase in equity prices does not figure into the Fed’s calculation of inflation. So while measures of core inflation (which exclude food and energy) carefully register minute gains in the price of a fixed basket of goods and services meant to reflect what a typical family buys to achieve a minimum standard of living, they ignore massive price surges in what has effectively become a widely held consumer good: stocks.

Read the full article here

Want to hear a real laugher? Despite the current disharmony in politics, there’s one policy on which all of Washington agrees. Republicans and Democrats, House and Senate, president and Congress all agree that after last fall’s financial crisis, the federal government has to regulate the financial industry more closely to protect our economy from risk of systemic financial collapse.

Here’s the joke. As boom- and bust-prone as high finance always has been and remains, the greatest systemic risk to our economy is not Wall Street. It’s the growing federal debt (and weakening dollar) being enacted by those Washington politicians — the ones who want to protect us from Wall Street.

The piece was written by Tony Blankley and you can read it here.

Our financial situation is breathtakingly unsustainable. You really need to pay attention to preserve and grow your capital.

]]> http://www.rocketcap.com/the-largest-systemic-risk-to-usa-economy-our-federal-debt/feed/ 0 http://www.rocketcap.com/defeat-the-debt/ http://www.rocketcap.com/defeat-the-debt/#comments Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:00:32 +0000 admin http://www.rocketcap.com/?p=1629 A truly excellent web site that focuses on our national debt and how to reduce it is this one:

www.defeatthedebt.com

{ See our last post on Medicare dwarfing all other economic problems }

Let’s take a look at the over-arching debt and obligations owed by the US. We can get get a meaningful overview from the few numbers below.

US Assets and Obligations

The source for these numbers is the US Treasury and National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA). They were conveniently pulled together here. The last line in the table is taken from our post above, and the source is Kent Smetters, Wharton School insurance and risk management professor.

Let’s get some perspective. According to the US Treasury, the average interest rate paid by Treasury is 3.36%/YR. Thus, the interest paid on the debt is about $400B/YR, which is a fraction of the annual revenues to the Treasury. On the other hand, if we applied the entire revenue stream to the US government to interest, we could pay down only $2.2T/.036=$65.5T . Thus, the enormity of the amounts of debt and obligation are loosely bounded.

Even more striking: if the US literally sold itself for the amount estimated by Prof. Smetters, the revenue still would be dwarfed by the outstanding obligations. The US cannot even hope for a hostile takeover to save itself!

So what will the end game from this situation be? Here are the possibilities, as summarized by Sprott, and the very likely outcomes:

• Default on Medicare promises. (Unlikely given the current debate in Washington to expand medical coverage.)
• Default on Social Security promises. (Unlikely given the increasing average age of the voting public.)
• Put forward a credible plan to balance the budget. (Unlikely given the most recent budget projections.)
• Default on outstanding debt. (Unthinkable)

The only remaining solution is to inflate the obligations and debt. QED.

“There is the strong possibility that policy makers in the US and UK will not time the transition from the current quantitative easing to a more tightened monetary policy. That is not because they are no competent. It is because the task is very tricky and there is no play book outlining the steps. This is not Tom Landry (former Dallas Cowboy coach) pacing the field with a play for every situation already planned and practiced well in advance.

The odds favor they will either be too late or too early. Getting it “just right.” The Goldilocks play, would be more than fortunate. In fact, there may be no right play to call. They may be forced to choose between a slower economy and/or inflation/deflation. And as this week’s Outside the Box authors note, there is also the possibility of yet another asset bubble, making the choices even more risky.”

See full text here

Of course, we have written about this looming disaster, and proposed some specific ways investors can prepare for it. See, for example:

http://www.rocketcap.com/portfolios-for-deflation-inflation-and-good-luck/

(Please keep in mind all information and ideas presented on this web site are subject to our Terms of Use. We also remind you that nothing written here can be a recommendation for any particular person to invest. Please consult your own financial or investment advisor before you make any investments.)

Can the Fed Control the Money Supply?

The problem is this: Given the enormous amount of money Bernanke’s Fed has “printed” to restart the credit markets, there now is a substantial danger the Fed will not successfully retrieve that money. Bernanke needs to use all the Fed’s tools to raise interest rates sufficiently for banks to place money on deposit with the Fed, and out of the economy. The Fed must start, at a crucial time we’ll label TIME, a control policy of raising rates fast enough and high enough to attract money. This is a tricky balancing act. When the Fed pays interest, the amount and timing must not be so high or fast as to slow the economy into recession again and deflation, or be so low and slow as to enable inflationary expectations to squirt loose. There are thus three huge unknowns in this problem and all of them are beyond investor influence: TIME, interest rate level, and speed of change in interest rates. Perfection happens when Ben gets it exactly right, and the economy washes the excess money supply back with minimal impact on prices. But being wrong will launch deflation or inflation.

Under these conditions, how best to invest? We take a scenario approach. There are three main future economic conditions (Deflation, Perfection, Inflation) and four main investable asset classes to choose from. We need to pick the amount to invest from each class, depending on our beliefs about the future.

Main Investable Asset Classes

The main asset classes are roughly described this way, considering the variations within each class. First, cash. This ranges from cash in mattress, to money market funds and extremely short term T-Bills. Second, Fixed Income comprises all forms of bonds and ETFs/Mutual Funds based on bonds, both corporate and municipal, and various Treasury offerings, most particularly Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS). Third are corporate equities and ETFs/Mutual Funds based on them. Finally, we have hard assets. These consist of commodities (metals, precious metals, food products, animal products,…) and real estate (land, buildings, and Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)). REITs enable liquidity in real estate purchases, since one trades shares of corporations whose assets are interests in real property. Note that more esoteric asset classes, such as hedge funds and derivatives all can be fit into these categories, if you are willing to sit on top of the bag to close the zipper.

Model Portfolios

Let’s look at a straightforward way to invest for each scenario. Consider this table, which shows the amount of your investable assets to invest in each class, given the scenario.

These amounts were intuitively chosen. By applying the Markowitz portfolio optimation algorithm, one can create an optimal portfolio for all three cases based on one’s own specific ROI and risk assumptions.

Perfection

Under the Perfection scenario, the economy percolates along without undue influence of the money supply, and is what we call “normal”. Our nominal portfolio for Perfection consists of equal amounts of equity and fixed income, with lesser equal amounts of cash and real assets. Again, we note the specific assets in each class are chosen by the individual investor.

Inflation

With inflation, one wants to hold hard assets and inflation protected securities. The two most often named are gold and TIPS. Commodities generally gain in price with overall inflation. Stocks vary with inflation. Empirically, the equities evidence is mixed. Some firms win due to having price increases masked by inflation, while others lose since their purhases also rise with inflation. Surprisingly, cash tends to track inflation. So, compared to Perfection, the model portfolio has more cash and fixed income, with an increased dose of TIPS, less equities, and much more Real Assets.

Deflation

Under deflation, cash is king, and the model portfolio shows this bias compared to the Perfection condition.

Combination

Of course, these scenarios are mutually exclusive, and we can build only one portfolio of all our assets. To build the final portfolio, we have to assign a probability to each scenario, and then combine the asset classes according to the scenario weights.

Bernanke Article in WSJ, 7-21-09

He concludes by saying:

Overall, the Federal Reserve has many effective tools to tighten monetary policy when the economic outlook requires us to do so. As my colleagues and I have stated, however, economic conditions are not likely to warrant tighter monetary policy for an extended period. We will calibrate the timing and pace of any future tightening, together with the mix of tools to best foster our dual objectives of maximum employment and price stability.

The only problem with all this is what he failed to address: how to get the timing right. All his tools are good ones, but the entire challenge is to start using them at best time. He can err by starting too soon, and slow growth, or too late, and enable inflation to squirt loose.

How can he get it right?

No answer. So in self-defense, take anti-inflation positions, while their prices are relatively low.