Replies

People seem fixated on this government definition of savings and notion that anything not allocated to consumables is savings.

I have already explained why logically it's not savings; its not protected. At least cash held in savings account isn't subject to daily fluctuations. Cash invested in stocks is.

There are far too many folks who wake up, heck their current portfolio value and say 'wow I've saved a ton of money, look at all my savings in my stocks', then the next day there's some piece of bad news and they are crying that thy've lost money. Neither are true you've neither profited nor lost until you sell. If the princible investment is not protected it isn't savings.

Then of course we have mutual funds, the problem with these however is that in instances of major market changes it's far too tough to get out of these before incuring a loss and without fees for getting out. If the princible investment is not protected it isn't savings.

Calling these non protected investments savings is naive, and the government calling them such is deceptive.

The government has been making stupid assumptions about stocks being savings for years. The same act which gave birth to the IRA gave birth to one of the stupidest and most anti-market policies. At a specific age all 401k holders must begin withdrwing from their plan. Thus when all the babyboomers with 401ks hit that age (I beleive its 70) an enormous class of folks MUST beging liquidating their market holdings.

Does that sound good for the market to you?

"it's not savings; its not protected."

Bwhahahhahahahaahhahahahahahahahahahahah!!!
A new definition.

"Calling these non protected investments savings is naive, and the government calling them such is deceptive. "

I guess that means everyone is calling them savings but you.

"Thus when all the babyboomers with 401ks hit that age (I believe its 70) an enormous class of folks MUST begin liquidating their market holdings.Does that sound good for the market to you?"

At age 70 1/2, people must begin paying taxes on the money that has been deferred, yes. That year they must withdraw 1/27 of their money which may be less than they were withdrawing to live on anyway. And they can easily be taking it from their MM accounts which has no little if any effect on market prices.

At the same time money will still be pouring into the markets from their children, so the net effect is not predicable but it certainly doesn't portend disaster either. If their children pour more money in, we have some inflation and the economy grows, prices will still be going up not down.