The Top Major Differences Between the Great Depression (1929-1933) vs. Today’s Great Recession (2007-2009) | Wade Dokken

These are excerpts from a much longer post http://www.wealthvest.com/blog/wade-dokken/4191/# outlining the 10 major differences between today’s recession and the Great Depression.

 

A person who was a child during the Great Depression of the 1930s would be in his or her nineties today. There is no shared national experience of the depths and devastating human impact of the Great Depression. We feel the recession of today as being extraordinary, but how does it compare to the singular economic event of the last century?

There are many relevant parallels between and lessons to be learned from the Great Depression and Great Recession that can provide a historical perspective and policy insight. The stock market crash of 1929 marked the beginning of the Great Depression, whereas the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008 was the beginning of the Great Recession we are currently experiencing.

Both periods were marked by increased unemployment, frugality, and popular unrest. The scope of the economic crisis, however, is radically different. During the Great Depression the global market did not have the institutionalized structures necessary to undermine the extent of the bust. Furthermore, the Great Depression was characterized by a severe double dip, whereas the current economic crisis has maintained a steady growth rate; growth has slowed, but it has not stopped. There are also significant differences in the levels of deficit spending, manufacturing capacity, and bank foreclosures.

Perhaps of greatest importance were the public policy actions of President George Bush, President Barack Obama, and Ben Bernanke, today’s Chairman of the Federal Reserve. The quick and significant actions taken by a Republican President, a Democratic President, and a Republican-nominated Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board have been the difference between the extent of the severity of these two economic downturns—both of them were the result of historically unsustainable levels of debt prior to the economic collapse.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Chris Martenson, Ph.D.: Don’t Be Fooled: Inflation Has the Upper Hand

Here at Martenson Central, we are endlessly keeping a close eye out for the emergence of deflation, defined here as the purchasing power of the dollar going up. 

Technically, inflation and deflation are terms that indicate a particular combination of money surplus or deficit (respectively), demand for money (of which velocity is but one measure), and demand for various goods and services (which themselves may be in abundance or short supply).

The reason that the inflation vs. deflation debate has been so noisy, yet simultaneously so murky, is that all of these intersecting variables impact the final equation.  It is like the difference between trying to balance a single broomstick on your outstretched hand vs. trying to balance a broomstick with three well-greased hinges at points along its length.  The former is tricky enough to balance; the latter would be impossible for nearly everyone.

Some try to reduce the inflation/deflation debate to a single broomstick (“…all we need to do is look at declining credit and see that we are in deflation!”), but in my opinion, that is far too simplistic a view.  We still need to consider base money creation, velocity, and the relative level of faith in current and future monetary policy among the majority of market participants.

Because we cannot really know all the variables and how they are feeding back and forth between each other, we must simply look at the final impact to gauge where we are.  Fortunately, we can do this with relative ease. 

Again, what we care about at the end of the day is whether our future money will buy more, or whether it will buy less — and, naturally, whether we will even have any coming our way. 

The argument for deflation says that because of declining credit, people will hold onto whatever money they have for dear life, unsure if more money will be forthcoming.  In this case, the velocity of money will slow and collapse.

The argument for inflation includes the idea that existing debts are a form of money and that the world’s central banks are busy printing up more than enough new money to swamp both the commodities markets and people’s preferences to hold something that can be created without any effort or cost.

Many in both the inflationist and deflationist camps say that prices are not worth analyzing because they are the result of, not the cause of, either “-flation.”  But it would be a mistake to ignore prices simply because they represent the passenger, not the driver, in the story.  Knowing where the passenger is going can give you a pretty good indication of where the driver is headed, and therefore it’s important to keep a close eye on prices when assessing inflation/deflation.

Prices

On the plus side for inflation are commodity prices, which are again nearing their all-time peak and which have been compounding at an average annual rate of slightly more than 10% over the past decade.

 

But they seem to be at a critical juncture on this longer term timeline.  Either they will break out from here, or they will be rejected, creating a massive double top not unlike the one seen in the stock market in 2000 and 2007.

Still, commodities could fall back a long way before they would violate the trend line in place since early 2002, when prices began the ascent that would see them finally break out of a long-standing range.

In my book, ten years is a respectable amount of time to assess commodity prices.  Beware those who cherry-pick the 2008 topping event as their reference point, as they are missing the larger story of the trend line that I have drawn in blue above.

But commodities are just a small component of the overall price landscape.  If one trusts the CPI statistic — and I really have my doubts about its construction and methodologies (that’s putting it mildly) — then it would seem that prices are actually quite tame and that disinflation (in which inflation is declining slightly month-by-month but still rising overall) is the greater concern, as the Fed has claimed.

But even here, when viewed on a longer time frame, I really do not see anything to suggest that we are facing a dire catastrophe of price collapse:

 

What I see in the above chart is that prices first climbed at one rate between 2001 and 2004 (first red line segment on the left), then climbed at a faster rate until a blowoff in 2008, have since recovered, and are climbing again quite handily. 

For the record, I happen to think that the CPI systematically undercounts inflation due to underweighting certain components (especially medical care) and completely avoiding the impact of taxes on spending and costs.  Given this, the fact that the CPI is higher this year than last year, we have to score another one for inflation. 

But it’s almost certain that inflation is higher than stated by the CPI, so we might want to rate that one just a little bit more strongly than a literal interpretation of the CPI might suggest.

On the subject of house prices, the situation strongly favors deflation.  And given the importance of housing to the health of bank balance sheets and consumer wealth effects, this is certainly one of the demons that the federal government and Federal Reserve are fighting tooth and nail:

 

While house prices are above where they were a year ago, the bounce has been anemic at best and has recently turned down again.  This is a very poor sign.  Score one for deflation.

Stocks are now at two-year highs, bonds are up quite strongly over the past several years, and oil is at a two-year high.  All of these weigh towards inflation being the dominant theme of the day.

With regard to prices alone favoring inflation, we find that commodities, stocks, bonds, medical costs, college tuition, and the CPI itself are all up over the past year, and in the case of everything but stocks, the past decade.

Conclusion

The point of this approach is to keep prices firmly in view when thinking about inflation and deflation.  While the theories about the role of money and credit as the drivers of the ‘-flations’ are very important to understand, what we really care about at the end of the day is the final impact on our purchasing power.  By nearly every measure, except in limited cases sprinkled throughout (with housing being the most visible and important), we find that prices have been rising smartly.  Or we could say that the dollar and other fiat currencies have been sinking, which is a more accurate way to think about the dynamic. 

This should not surprise anybody, as it is the obvious result of massive printing efforts undertaken by nearly every OECD central bank in response to the prior crisis caused by too-cheap money.  Nor should it confuse students of our economic system, who know that continuous increases in asset prices and real things are essential to the very functioning of the entire system.  Growth is a requirement of our monetary system and, by extension, our economic system.  With growth, everything is fine and the status quo can be preserved.  So naturally there is strong support for all manners of growth within and across our political and financial institutions.  Without growth, the system misfires and threatens to collapse.

Those who read history also know that inflation is by far the more common outcome of a situation in which there is entirely too much sovereign debt that cannot be repaid by ordinary means.  All one needs is to take a quick glance at the balance sheets and off-balance-sheet obligations of practically every developed country to realize that collective insolvency is the correct term to apply. 

So at this point in the story, we see that prices have been rising, our fiscal and monetary authorities are trying quite hard to foster even more rapid price escalations, and they are doing so because the system demands it of them.

Right now, based on prices, we have to score inflation as the winner, although we’ll be the first to change our tune should the data change

Part II of this report covers the rest of the story by going into money and credit (the true drivers of the ‘-flations’) more deeply, as well as other economic data important to helping us figure out where we are in this story, how much time might remain before another “adjustment” arrives, and what we might do about protecting our wealth and opportunities. Click here to access Part II (free executive summary; paid enrollment required to access).

 

Follow Chris Martenson, Ph.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/chrismartenson

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The IPO Window is Wide Open – Joshua Brown – Freestyle – Forbes

The IPO Window is Wide Open

Nov. 7 2010 – 10:00 pm | 231 views | 0 recommendations | 1 comment

I love seeing IPOs. After the long, miserable, frozen-markets winter, it’s nice to see the babies being born.

One really good sign of this rebirth is happening in the venture capitalist space – startups in Manhattan and Silicon Valley are raising big wood right now. Another sign is in the growing strength of the IPO market, even if a lot of the action is concentrated in emerging markets.

Trader’s Narrative has some interesting IPO color as part of their weekly sentiment roundup…

One of the important signs of the health of the financial system is the quantity and quality of initial public offerings. During the 2008 bear market the IPO market shut down completely. Then right around the lows in the spring of 2009 we saw the first glimmer of life return to the IPO market. Then by fall 2009 it was clear that normalcy was slowly but certainly coming back.

So far in 2010 we’ve had 120 IPO pricings. That is the best IPO market since 2007 when in the first 7 months of 2007 there were approximately the same number (124) of pricings. Most of the action has been outside of the US market, especially concentrated in China and Hong Kong. Of course the record setting issuance ($19 billion) of Agricultural Bank in the summer was a milestone but there have been dozens of Chinese or Asian related IPOs since.

The IPO market hasn’t completely returned to normal but the doors are open once again and investors are more than willing to pick up companies that have a compelling narrative, reasonable valuations and attractive fundamentals. All in all, the foundation for continuing improvements have been laid.

In addition to the Asian deals, there is also, of course, the forthcoming GM IPO. Not exactly a debutante making her initial descent down the wraparound staircase, but that’s a whole other story.

There is also the LPL Financial IPO. This one looks to raise around $500 million. It is notable because it is basically a broker/dealer and an RIA firm that facilitates the running of an independent practice. I almost opened up shop as an indie through LPL myself, they run a very impressive operation.

I also noticed that Fresh Market ($TFM), a North Carolina-based grocery store chain (think Whole Foods but southern) was able to come public last week. The company had a monster debut – a 50% rise on day one. Rock on.

Anecdotally, my friends in the brokerage business are telling me that the syndicate calendar has been relentless. There are both Initial and Secondary offerings pricing four nights a week. They also note that the clients are sucking them down – even the virtually unlimited Goldman Sachs ($GS) preferred stock offering went quickly.

The best IPO market since 2007, add it to the list.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

FSOkx: Financial Services Blog: Fortunes of Annuities Reflect State of Economy

Posted on   Feb 18 2010 2:07AM

During the financial crisis, AIG, one of the largest insurers in the world, needed U.S. government’s help to stay solvent, while other insurers saw their stocks drop 70% or more in just a few months due to the uncertainty in the markets.  In such a volatile scenario, investors were attracted by annuities, which gave them opportunities for stable returns. Consequently, fixed annuities experienced heavy growth during the last quarter of 2008, hitting an all time high during the first quarter of 2009 with a growth of 74%.

The situation is changing as the U.S. economy has started to show signs of recovery. The investors and retirees that had turned to fixed annuities have started turning away from them. Sales of fixed annuities fell by 20% in the third quarter of 2009. While various surveys show that roughly 15 to 25 percent of corporations offer annuities to workers who are retiring, a 2009 study reported that just one percent of workers actually opted for the annuity plans.

The industry has been trying to address other concerns that investors have. For the concern about the underutilization of the investment during the life time, a minimum period guaranteed payment scheme to beneficiaries was introduced. For concerns over inflation, annuities with payments pegged to the consumer price index were introduced. Every time investors had an objection, such as the need for several payments at one time, a lump sum in an emergency or concern about rising interest rates, the industry created a rider to add to policies to satisfy their concern.

The government is also supportive of growth of this segment. It has provided incentives like 50% waiver of taxes on the first USD 10,000 in annuity payouts each year. In future, the government may also provide an annual update of the estimated income the savings can generate.

Given the state of the market, it is a little early to tell if these efforts will encourage investors to again start investing in annuity products. However, the fate of annuities until now has been a reliable indicator of the state of the U.S. economy in general and the confidence level of investors in particular.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Why Annuities Won’t Fix The Retirement Problem – CBS MoneyWatch.com

Why Annuities Won’t Fix The Retirement Problem

By Charlie Farrell | Jun 29, 2010 

There’s been a lot of talk lately about the failure of the 401(k) plan and the retirement system in general. The solution being pushed by the Obama administration and others is to convert people’s retirement savings into annuities that provide lifetime income. Sounds good, but it doesn’t solve anything.

Why? Because the income an annuity will produce is directly related to the amount of money you put into the annuity. So if you don’t have much money saved for retirement, you won’t get much of an income stream from an annuity. And most people don’t have much money saved for retirement.

Here’s a basic example of how annuities work:

Let’s say you and your spouse are age 65 and ready to retire. You want to buy one of these annuities you’ve heard about. So you go to get an annuity quote, which will tell you how much income you can produce for each dollar you contribute to the annuity.

  • The type of annuity I am talking about is something called a life-only, immediate annuity, and is the traditional form of an annuity. It’s similar to the payments you might receive from a traditional pension plan.
  • An annuity is basically a contract with an insurance company that says, if you give us $X of money, we’ll pay you $X of income for the rest of your life.

At today’s interest rates, you’ll get about $5.85 of income per year for every $100 you contribute to the annuity (based on a recent quote from a highly-rated insurer). And this $5.85 would be paid to you and your spouse for as long as you both live.  That’s basically a 5.85% payout on your savings in retirement.

So if you’ve saved $100,000 for retirement, your retirement income will be $5,850 a year.  Now, if you saved $1,000,000 for retirement, you’d have $58,500 a year for as long as you live.

In both situations, however, you also must deal with inflation.  These annuity payments don’t increase and are fixed for life. So if inflation runs at 3% a year (the average for the last 80 years), your retirement income will be cut by about 45% by the time you’re 85.  Meaning that the $5,850 of income will buy you about $3,220 of stuff in today’s dollars, and the $58,500 will buy you about $32,200. 

You can buy an inflation-adjusted annuity, but when you do that, your initial payout goes down to somewhere around 4% of the money you put into the annuity.  Why? Because the insurance company knows it has to increase the payments each year for inflation, so it simply reduces what it pays you when the annuity starts.

  • As you can see, there’s no magic money available from annuities. What you put in is directly related to what you get out, and the payment streams are pretty modest, especially when you factor in inflation, which is the biggest risk to fixed income investors.
  • Moreover, with an annuity, you lose access to your money.  Essentially, you gave your money to the insurance company to purchase the annuity. It’s theirs to keep forever, and your income is dependent on the insurance executives running a sound insurance company for the next 30 or so years.  That’s always hard to predict and carries it’s own risks.

What concerns me about the current push for annuities is that they’re being presented as some sort of miracle fix for the retirement crisis. The annuity talk is for the most part a red herring. The problem is a national lack of savings, not a lack of income producing investment options (such as annuities). 

  • And the real issue with annuities is who gets to own and control your life’s savings. It’s an important issue, and I’ll cover that in a later post.

The only way to create meaningful retirement security is to make sure people save more. That means less consumer spending and more investing.  It’s not the type of thing that’s great for the economy today, and it’s not really the message most people want to hear. 

Over the last decade, Americans have saved between 0% and 4% of their income. There’s no way the average American can retire when they don’t save any money.  It’s just that simple. The savings rate needs to be between 10% and 15% to give people any reasonable hope of building retirement security.

Bottom line. Make sure you save a ton of money for retirement.  There’s no substitute for a big portfolio.

Learn More: Want to learn about a simple way to manage your personal finances and prepare for retirement, investigate my new book Your Money Ratios: 8 Simple Tools For Financial Security, available in bookstores and at amazon.com  The Wall Street Journal called the book “one of the best finance books to cross our desks this year.” WSJ 12/19/09.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Four in 10 plan to delay retirement

Four in 10 plan to delay retirement

Is your retirement plan on track?

If not, you’re in good company. Some 40 percent of U.S. workers say they’re going to have to delay retirement because they can’t afford to stop working, according to a survey released this week by consultants Towers Watson.

The biggest reasons cited were the losses suffered in their retirement savings and the need to maintain company-sponsored health care coverage.

“The economic crisis has had a deep effect on employees’ attitudes toward retirement and especially on risk,” said David Speier, a senior retirement consultant at Towers Watson. “Workers continue to have a fear that they won’t be able to afford retirement.”

Most of those who plan to retire later figure they’ll have to work at least three years longer than they previously planned. Two-thirds say they’re paying down debts. More than half have cut back on their daily spending, the survey found.

Boomers headed for retirement are also worried about the Social Security trust fund that many of them are counting on to supplement their battered personal retirement plans. The financial health of the fund is getting renewed interest as the midterm election campaign generates dire warnings about politicians playing fast and loose with the money set aside to pay these benefits.

But a closer look finds that the Social Security trust fund isn’t far off track, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. A recent report points out that the fund is in good shape in the short term, but faces a shortfall of about 0.7 percent of GDP over the next 75 years.

That means that – like any retirement plan – the trust fund needs to be updated to keep it in good financial health. That’s exactly what President Ronald Reagan and Congress did in 1984, when the fund began running surpluses to help offset the coming wave of boomer retirees.

In the meantime, the money is stashed in Treasury securities “that are every bit as sound as the U.S. government securities held by investors around the globe,” the report noted. “Investors regard those securities as being among the world’s very safest investments.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Annuity Illustrations

AnnuityLawyers.com Lists Annuities with “White-collar Crime”

The AnnuityLawyers.com website claims, “Annuities fraud is one of the top kinds of investment fraud scam artists practice.”

I talked to an annuity producer who sold a million dollar indexed annuity to a seventy-year old man only to have the commission reversed nine months later. The man’s son, who had heard that annuities are “bad investments,” called a local attorney to get the his father’s money back. The attorney called the insurance company and accused the producer of the following wrongdoing:

·         He did not tell the customer about the $180,000 first year surrender charge

·         He claimed the policy had an 8% guaranteed interest rate

·         He encouraged his client to sell $1,000,000 in stocks to buy the annuity

·         He did not ask the client about his investments, income, or expenses, and did not explain how the annuity would fit into the client’s overall financial plan

The producer disputed all these representations, but had little documentation to prove it.  Because the producer had such a weak case, the insurance company had little choice but to settle. The $80,000 commission charge-back nearly put this producer out of business.

The 2010 NAIC Annuity Suitability Model Regulations, which will very likely be in effect in every state by the end of the year, will make it easier for financial lawyers to threaten companies and submarine your book of business. Here’s why:

Insurers are now responsible for the supervision, training and sales practices of their agents. These lawyers will claim that the annuity producer was inadequately trained and therefore the company is responsible for an unsuitable sale. Companies will have to prove that the annuity producer was trained, and that he used sales methods or techniques not approved by the company.

These lawyers may claim that the annuity producer did not gather enough information from the consumer. Companies will have to prove that prior to making an annuity recommendation, annuity producers obtained information about the consumer’s 12 areas of suitability:

·         Age

·         Annual income

·         Financial situation and needs, including the financial resources used for the funding of the annuity

·         Financial experience

·         Financial objectives

·         Intended use of the annuity

·         Financial time horizon

·         Existing assets, including investment and life insurance holdings

·         Liquidity needs

·         Liquid net worth

·         Risk tolerance

·         Tax status

These lawyers may try to demonstrate that the annuity producer did not fully inform the consumer about all the ramifications of owning the annuity product. Companies will have to be able to prove that the annuity producer informed the consumer of:

·         the features of the annuity

·         the potential surrender period and surrender charge

·         potential tax penalty if the consumer sells, exchanges, surrenders or annuitizes the annuity

·         mortality and expense fees

·         investment advisory fees

·         charges for and features of riders

·         limitations on interest returns

·         insurance and investment components

·         market risk

The 2010 NAIC Annuity Suitability Model Regulations require companies to set up a special suitability approval department, similar to a life insurance underwriting department, which will examine each sale to ensure that the agent used suitable methods and sales practices. The purpose of this department is to gather information and to determine whether the annuity sale could be defended against those who may try to attack it.

Since it is now clear that the insurance company is always responsible for the product issued, they are now putting in place systems, standards, and training to protect their business. In the future an annuity sale will resemble a life insurance sale in that customers will have to qualify before their annuity application will be accepted. Annuity producers who are not willing or able to provide the necessary documentation to defend the fixed annuity industry against lawyers such as those listed in AnnuityLawyers.com, will find many of their annuity applications denied by the company, and may ultimately be forced out of the fixed annuity business.

Here is what you can do to succeed in today’s litigious environment:

·         Join and NAFA and learn about product suitability, advertising guidelines, and to educate yourself so you can represent yourself as an annuity professional.

·         Use software such as ImagiSOFT’s DataNet to prove that you have gathered information about the consumer’s 12 areas of suitability, disclosed the features of each annuity that you sold, and have documented every step of the sale.

·         Use company-approved advertising materials, illustrations, and disclosures.

·         Keep the recording of a five-minute summary interview with your client where you discuss the purpose of the annuity, the source of funds, the advantages of purchasing the annuity, the potential disadvantages such as surrender charges, the timeframe for the product, and the financial problem this product solves for your client.

·         Discuss the annuity with the beneficiaries. Explain probate, settlement options, and potential tax implications.

·         Let your customers know that you keep detailed records and to call you for a review if they have any questions about any of their annuity products.

May 13th, 2010, posted by Michael J. Prestwich

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Annuity Illustrations

Fixed Indexed Annuities Still Under Attack

You may have heard that SEC Rule 151(a) will be dead if the Finance Reform Bill is signed by President Obama. This is because the Conference Committee bill passed by the joint House-Senate conferees on June 25, 2010 included language proposed by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) to leave fixed indexed annuities under state supervision. The Finance Reform Bill also will make the 2010 NAIC Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation the law in all 50 states.

 

The fight against fixed indexed annuities is far from being over, however.  Here are several articles that appeared in response to the Harkin Amendment:

·         Jane Bryant Quinn on CBS Money Watch wrote, Congress Sells Out Seniors: No SEC Regulation for Indexed Annuities (Be sure to read Sheryl J. Moore’s 32-point response to this article)

·         FINRA, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, posted an Investor Alert about indexed annuities

·         Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI) said in hearings for S.A. 3920, “Deceptive sales practices have been found to be used in these products. An individual in Hawaii pushed equity index annuities to collect high commissions at the expense of senior investors. Those investors least able to effectively evaluate financial products need these federal protections, without question. And they’ve been suffering.” (see full article)

·         Kevin Keller, president of the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, said, “These are products that are ripe for abuse among the elderly. It’s important for consumers, especially the elderly, to have the protection of the SEC.” (see full article)

·         Barbara Roper, director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America, in her letter to Congress wrote, “If adopted, this amendment would open a gaping hole in investor protections without any assurance that the insurance regulation relied on in its place is adequate or effective.” (see full article)

·         Denise Voigt Crawford, the Texas Securities Commissioner and president of the North American Securities Administrators Association said in her letter to Congress, “It’s a hybrid product, so the questions in play here go beyond just equity-indexed annuities themselves and raise issues concerning who is going to regulate these hybrid instruments on a going forward basis.” (see letter to Congress)

 

The list of consumer groups and financial professionals who are against indexed annuities is endless.  What is their beef?  Here is a summary of the issues that I have found after reading numerous articles and following indexed annuities almost from their inception:

·         Deceptive and/or high pressure sales practices

·         High commissions

·         High / long surrender charges

·         Lack of disclosure

 

Most annuity producers and companies who market indexed annuities, especially those who are members of the National Association for Fixed Annuities (NAFA), have already adopted marketing methods and procedures that deal with the above concerns.  Passage of the provisions of the 2010 NAIC Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation opens producers and companies to fines, discipline, and civil action if they cannot prove that they adhered to these higher suitability standards.

 

In short, assuming the final provisions of the Finance Reform Bill remain intact and the law is signed by President Obama, those involved with the development, distribution, administration, and purchase of fixed indexed annuities finally won after a long fight.  This win comes with a price, however.  All the players in the fixed indexed annuity industry must strictly follow the provisions of the 2010 NAIC Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation or the enemies of indexed annuity products will continue their attack with more ferocity than ever before.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Facts About The Retirement Crisis

This is the harsh reality of the current retirement crisis, Americans are delaying their retirement both because of their loss of retirement savings principal and their insufficient initial retirement savings.   These truths are causing a profound reordering of the retirement paradigm–later retirement and less affluence in retirement.  This is why WealthVest is designing index annuities with greater GLWB provisions, and the highest annual equity index crediting rates.   

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Facts About The Retirement Crisis

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment