This US History Sounds Marxist, And Also Basically True

Im_a_marxistCan something be basically Marxist and also basically true? Of course my answer is yes, because Marxism as a tool for analysis can sometimes be summed up as a ‘Follow The Money.’

As an economic and political system Marxism has – so far – been as awful a system as we humans can manage to create [possibly in a four-way tie with Fascism, Talibanism and whatever you’d like to call North Korea’s ‘Juche’ system.]

As political analysis, however, Marxism has much to lend to it. Primarily the view that we can understand major economic groups as sharing common interests that they will, in aggregrate, try to advance at the expense of other major economic groups. This article below strikes me as a largely accurate, Marxist, view of US History. Enjoy!

Defending Wealth in America article.

In other semi-related news, I’m slowly making my way through Piketty’s Capital. Very enjoyable so far, and I’ll do a review as soon as I can.

marxist-feminist-dialectic

Please see related posts:

Inequality in America video

Book review of Plutocrats by Chrystia Freeland

TED talk of inequality from a Plutocrat

 

 

Post read (4752) times.

Upper Income People Can’t Be Bothered With The IRA

cigar and moneyPlease see my earlier post on The Humble IRA.

 

Does the humble and homely Individual Retirement Arrangement (IRA) matter to well-paid people?

I remember being shocked in the late 1990s when my mentor Jim on the bond trading floor at Goldman declared “I don’t bother with IRAs because nobody’s getting rich investing through an IRA.”

I eagerly sought out wisdom on personal finance at the time, so I was struck that such a clear tax-advantaged vehicle could be overlooked by a financially savvy professional like Jim.

He was a Vice President at the time and made a good salary and bonus, with bright prospects.  He then became a partner about 6 years later, wholly and thoroughly justifying his scorn for the lowly IRA as a wealth-building vehicle.

His example stuck in my head over the years because – more than the stark irrelevance of an IRA for his own personal situation – I’ve realized that he’s basically right – upper income and wealthy people as a whole really have no use for the IRA.  It’s a waste of time for them.  This is true for a number of reasons.

1. The maximum tax deductibility limit of $5,000 doesn’t get you very far if you have many multiples of that amount to invest.  In the 1990s, when my mentor made his scornful statement about not getting rich from an IRA, contribution limits were stuck at $2,000 – making his scorn even more justifiable.  But even with the upward adjustment to $5,000 in 2012 and $5,500 in 2013, that still doesn’t provide much tax advantage.

2. Most highly compensated people have access to a 401K or a similar saving plan which offers many times the tax-advantaged contributions of an IRA.  If you own your own business, or if you work for a high-paying salary, you could put away at least $17,000 pre-tax in 2012, in addition to larger amounts through employer profit-sharing, leaving the homely and humble IRA in the dust.

3. If you have access to a much better, bigger employer retirement plan like a 401K, as most highly compensated people do, suddenly you’ve lost the $5,000 IRA tax deductibility if you make more than $68K individually, (or $112K if you file with your spouse.)

The end result: my mentor Jim was right.  Upper income people really can’t be bothered with the IRA, and I can’t fault their logic.

All of the above is particularly ironic to me because I’ve spent the past month arguing, pleading, berating, and otherwise pestering the undergraduates to whom I teach personal finance into opening and funding their first personal IRA.

I’ve taught them about the key building-block concepts of compound interest, and understanding wealth, and how to budget and save money.

I’ve argued that opening and funding their first IRA – which I assigned as mandatory homework to them this week – is a key culmination of everything I’ve taught them.

And I do believe in the value of the IRA for them in particular, as I assume they will not be highly paid in their first years out of college, nor will many of them have access to a 401K right away.  So an IRA makes a ton of sense for them.  At least for now.

What I haven’t told them is that as soon as they’re well-paid and wealthy they can forget all about the IRA, with my financial blessing.  But please don’t let them know this yet.

First they have to open the IRA, before they can forget all about it.

 

Please see related posts on the IRA:

The Humble IRA

IRAs don’t matter to high income people

A rebuttal: The curious case of Mitt Romney

The magical Roth IRA and inter-generational wealth transfer

The 2012 IRA Contribution Infographic

The DIY Movement and the IRA

Angel Investing and the IRA

 

 

Post read (20004) times.

Part II – Compound Interest and Wealth

Time is money

Compound Interest Math Formula – The Most Powerful Math in the Universe

Please see my earlier post, Part I – Why don’t they teach this math in school?

For the sake of blowing the lid off this vast cone of silence, here’s the compound interest formula:

Future Value = Present Value * (1+Yield)N

This is the formula you use if you want to see how money grows over time, to become “Future Value.” Present Value is the amount of money you start with.  That could be $100, such as in my examples below, or likewise a series of $5,000 IRA investments each year.  Present Value is whatever you’re starting amount of money is today.

Yield is the interest rate, or rate of return, you get per year.  Usually expressed as something like 5.25% or 0.0525.[1]

N is the number of times you ‘compound’ the yield.  In its simplest form as written above, if you compound annually, N is the number of years your money compounds.

Example of the power of compound interest: Early investment for retirement

 

When do you use this formula?  You use it when you want to know how much your $100 invested today, or this year, will grow over time.

To offer you an extreme example, using the compound interest formula:

What if you invested $100 today, left it invested for the next 75 years, and you were able to achieve an 18% annual compound return?  How big an investment does your $100 become?

The answer is $24,612,206.

Can I interest you in $24 million?  Without working?

As I say that out loud, I feel like a late-night infomercial guy.  And that feeling makes me want to take a shower.  But the money and the pitch is nothing more than compound interest math.

I happen to believe there’s quite a few 20 year-olds who:

a) Could put their hands on $100 today for the purpose of investing in a retirement account, and

b) Would like, at the end their life, to boast a net worth of $24.6 million[2]

I know all you realists out there will say that 18% annual compound return for 75 years is a fairy tale, and of course I can’t disagree with you.

But I’m doing a magic trick here for the sake of making a point, so would you please suspend disbelief for just a moment and revel in the magic?  The point is not to argue about what reasonable assumptions may be, rather the point is to show why knowing how to do compound interest math could be a life-changing piece of information.

At the very least, its a tool that every citizen should be armed with.  Thank you.

To be slightly more realistic, but equally precise, with a series of other assumptions:

If you’re 20 years old now and you let your money grow for the next 50 years, at 12% yield, your $100 invested today becomes $28,900.  That’s also an amazing result.

Try it and find the Future Value for yourself, by inputting into the formula

Future Value = Present value * (1+Yield)N

PV = $100

Yield = 12%

N = 50

Heck, having your money grow like this sure beats working for a living.

These facts are so amazing, I think, that they might induce a 20-year-old to forgo his XBox purchase this year, and invest the money instead in stocks, in a retirement account.

What about putting your money away in your IRA, $5,000 per year from age 40 to age 65, earning 6% return on your money every year?  Would you like to know what kind of retirement you will have at age 65?  Compound interest can tell you precisely the number.[3]

You’ll have $290,781.91[4]

And all of that becomes possible if we have some insight into the inexorable growth, the most powerful force in the universe, the one math formula to rule them all, compound interest.[5]

Eye_of_sauron

 

Please see Part I – Why don’t they teach this in school?

Part III – Compound interest and Consumer Debt

Part IV – Discounted cash flows – example of pension buyout

Part V – Discounted cash flows – using the example of annuities

Part VI – Conclusion and why everyone needs to know this math for the good of society

and Video Posts:

Video Post: Compound Interest Metaphor – The Rainbow Bridge

Video Post: Time Value of Money Explained

 

Addendum by Michael, added later: It turns out one of my high school math teachers not only does teach compound interest, but he included it in his math textbook, linked to here:

 


[1] I fear many of us learned how to convert a percent into a decimal in sixth grade, but not how to do anything useful with it.

[2] Yes, I hear you cynics, that this is in nominal dollars, and $24 million won’t buy them then what it buys today.  But would you just stop being cynical for a moment, and appreciate the magic of compound interest?  Thank you.

[3] If your assumptions are correct, of course.

[4] To achieve this calculation, you’ll have to add up 25 separate amounts, in a spreadsheet.  The first amount, invested at age 40, compounds the most times and is expressed as $5,000 * (1+.06)25.  The second amount, invested at age 41, compounds as follows: $5,000 * (1+.06)24.  The third amount is $5,000 * (1+.06)23, all the way until the 25th amount, which is simply $5,000 * (1+.06).

[5] Thank goodness Sauron didn’t get his hands on the formula FV = PV*(1+Y)N, or else the hobbits would have been so screwed.  Ancient legend has it in the Silmarillion that Sauron actually did acquire the compound interest formula, but he interpreted the mysterious algebraic symbols as high Elvish, a language he could not read at the time.  Speaking of which, does anybody else want to use compound interest to become a Silmarillionaire?  Um, not so funny?  Ok, you’re right, but don’t worry, I’ll be here all night folks.  Don’t forget to tip your waitress.  And try the fish.

Post read (30493) times.