SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: HB who wrote (33235)10/2/1998 2:34:00 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 132070
 
HB - curious about your reasoning. My husband works for the federal government, and he has a retirement plan similar to a 401K, so this is of interest to me.

You are discussing how to allocate your contributions to your 401K, right? Which, I assume, has an employer match of some percentage. And, I assume, you get paid every week or bi-week or twice a month, so the money is put in, via payroll deduction every pay period. I also assume that you are not close to retirement, and that you won't need the money for several years.

If you think stocks are going to continue to go down, why not continue to buy them? I mean, they are just getting cheaper, right? I am interested in your response, or that of Mr. Burke.

I make no pretence to be anything but a novice, and maybe I am a gullible one, at that, but I am looking at the cover of "Stocks for the Long Run," by Jeremy J. Siegel, professor of finance at Wharton, which has a graph showing the relative appreciation of stocks vs. bonds vs. gold vs. CPI from 1802 to 1997. According to Siegel, $1 invested and reinvested in stocks since 1802, adjusted for inflation, would equal nearly $7.5 million by the end of 1997. $1 in bonds would equal $10,744, in bills, $3,679, in gold $11.17.

I keep reading that, if you are careful in your selection, and have a long time horizon, stocks are superior to any other investment.

If you are reading this, Mr. Burke, true or not true, and if you had a 401K, would you allocate present contributions to stock funds or bonds or money market? (Assume retirement more than 7 years hence).

Thanks, CobaltBlue



To: HB who wrote (33235)10/2/1998 5:25:00 PM
From: Knighty Tin  Respond to of 132070
 
HB, Nope, but brain dead mortgages fall more slowly than Treasuries when rates turn. Part of that is because the pricing is flaky on mortgages and it is not on Treasuries, but, on paper, you can pretend you have a profit.

MB