Nevin's Data "Points"

  A recent “news” post about a blog post finds some curious “faults” with the 401(k). The news item carried the provocative title “ ‘Rich Dad’ Robert Kiyosaki Reveals Why the 401(k) Is a ‘Horrible’ Retirement Plan .” It originally ran on GoBankingRates.com, but was subsequently picked up in syndication on Yahoo Finance (at least). For the uninitiated, Robert Kiyosaki is one of those “I’ll help you get rich the way I did” types, providing that road map via books (notably “Rich Dad, Poor Dad”) and seminars. He offers comparisons to decisions made by his dad (poor dad) in contrast to those of the father of his best friend (rich dad).  Suffice it to say that his dad worked hard and saved the old-fashioned way—which is NOT his advice to you. That’s included previous pearls of wisdom like “ Why Saving Money is the Wrong Way to Prepare for Retirement .” Apparently rather than saving for retirement, we’re supposed to “look for an investment that will pay for your desired standard of living. Ma

An interesting—and somewhat counterintuitive—report came out last week, one that cast doubt on the “common wisdom” regarding Roth versus traditional pre-tax savings. The assumption underlying the research [i] was that those who had not yet paid taxes on their savings (the traditional pre-tax savings) would be hesitant to tap into those savings and trigger taxes, certainly more so that individuals that had already paid those taxes. Instead, the research suggested that the opposite occurred; that individuals who had saved on a pre-tax basis actually withdrew more/sooner—but with a twist.  This they hailed as good news. They noted that the research suggests investing in a CT (current-taxed, or Roth) plan could help ease concerns about outliving funds—because they spend at a lower rate (though they saw this as a negative for those who saved on a deferred tax (DT) basis).  They even managed to find a silver lining in the “cloud” of faster spending by the pre-tax crowd beca

As St. Patrick’s Day approaches, I’m reminded of a trip my younger brother and I made with my grandparents to the Great Smoky Mountains.  Now, my grandparents had made many trips to that area, but it was a new experience for me and my brother. To this day I remember a hotel that had a pool with a breathtaking view of the mountains, another sitting right on a rushing stream—and some kind of trading post that had a big black bear outside.  Throughout the trip, my brother and I would try to get a sense of where the next day’s adventures would take us as we followed along in one of those big fold out roadmaps. But in response to our repeated inquiries as to our next stop, my grandfather would demur, saying only that he was relying on “the luck of the Irish” to find us a place to stay for the night. To this day, I’ve no idea if he truly was or not (the Irish in my heritage doesn’t come from his side of the family, but from my grandmother)—but we always found a place to stay for the night—an

  I’m not sure how old I was when I first saw “Night of the Living Dead”—but I have long been intrigued by stories of a zombie apocalypse—where mindless beings inexplicably rise from the dead, with no memory of their past, just a relentless (and apparently insatiable) hunger for…well, “us.” That is perhaps an unfortunate comparison to  last week’s hearing  by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, one ostensibly held to focus on how we were going to stave off the retirement “crisis” by…bringing “back” [i]  defined benefit plans. [ii] There were two fundamental premises underlying the hearing; first that there is, in fact, a retirement crisis, and second, that the restoration of defined benefit plan designs would remedy that situation.  There remains in many circles (including last week’s hearing) a pervasive sense that the defined contribution system is inferior to the defined benefit approach—a sense that seems driven not by what the latter actually produce

Last week we explored the reasons why small businesses DON’T offer a retirement plan to their workers. But there are quite different—and positive—reasons for choosing to do so. The obstacles that keep most small businesses from offering a retirement plan to their workers are an assortment of factors, real and (somewhat) imagined . There ARE remedies for those concerns, [i] but mediation of those concerns doesn’t seem to be a factor in the motivations of small businesses that DO choose to offer a plan. Reasons ‘Able’ According to that recent survey by the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) and Greenwald Research, when the small business owners who offer retirement plans were asked the reasons that they do so, factors associated with attracting and retaining workers were the most prominent. Indeed, the vast majority—more than 9 in 10 of the small business owners [ii] —said that a reason they offer a plan is the positive effect on employee attitude and performance.