|
Sask | Absolutely we do things differently up north. When investing our life savings for 40 years we don't dump it all into one investment that has a great track record for the first 2 years and let it ride another 38.
We have been told to have a mixture of stocks, mutual funds and bonds. With bonds being about 50% of the mix after 20 years. And I really was never lucky enough to get any kind of fixed income to give me even 8% over a 20 year stretch, let alone 11% for 40 years.
So yes, me and all the people I know have never gotten remotely close to 11% for 40 years. Not even 8% for 40 years.
Managers even have these things like dollar cost averaging and account rebalancing where, if something is doing well like 20% over a year, they purposely sell it and buy something doing poor under the beleif the poor one will start doing better in the next market swing. Because markets are always cycling.
So yes, me and all the people I know have never gotten remotely close to 11% for 40 years. Not even 8% for 40 years.
The single reason for that was no one I know of has ever considered 100% of their life savings going entirely into stocks. And absolutely not for 40 years even they did 100% stock for a period of time. And the idea of 100% of a guys savings in one single investment type like a stock index fund? I would think investment advisors may even have a legal requirement to not provide such advice or create an investment structure like that. I need to sign papers acknowledgeing a variance from an asset mix different than a 50/50 recommended mix for my age. It is why I have my own self directed account for a portion of my savings.
So we are a lot more conservative up north here and looking back, a much larger portion allocated to gold would have been a better plan once one understands how the system works with debt and currency value destruction. So no, gold would not have been "high risk" over 40 years once a guy understands how our world works.
So at the end of the day, yes, I would have been far better off with a larger portion in gold vs pursuing the typical retirement savings plan I have been programmed to take.
But for the guy that got 11% return on his entire life savings for 40 years, yup - I will take that one. Just tell me what I need to pick today to lock that return in so my kids will benefit. But I will prefer the 15% return for 40 years so let me know that one too. | |
|
40 years what won gold silver, mutuals --check my math
