Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Anonymous,MyNameIsUrl,6Tricia,staffordian, for Donating to support the site

Retirement Investing board question

For questions or input on how the site works or improvement you would like to see.
MrFoolish
Lemon Slice
Posts: 385
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 190 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430061

Postby MrFoolish » July 24th, 2021, 7:32 am

vrdiver wrote:To me, "decumulation" represents the topic of unwinding a working lifetime of investing, either with a timeframe that ends with the poster's demise, or includes the desired transfer of assets at said demise. It's not about "investing" but about how to manage the investments achieved, with the new requirement of actually living off of them.

VRD
(Decumulating since 2014, but not very successfully ;) )


But dependending on circumstances and investment returns after retirement, someone might make more from their investments than they spend. So they will still be accumulating. On which board would you suggest they post?

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4215
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2536 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430136

Postby Gengulphus » July 24th, 2021, 4:19 pm

Gengulphus wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:Finally, to return to this thread's subject and MDW1954's "Reach some sort of consensus" challenge, I'm not at all certain whether we have already reached some sort of consensus or not... Discussions like this one can result in people dropping out of them when they don't care about the matters that are still being discussed or only have mild preferences between them, or alternatively failing to make it clear that the preference they're still expressing is only a mild one, both of which can result in the discussion giving the impression of less consensus than there actually is. So I think some sort of poll is in order at this point to try to establish whether there is a consensus or not, and I've therefore just posted such a poll.

At present, the results of the poll are:

31 votes: The Retirement Investing board remains unchanged as it currently is
13 votes: The Retirement Investing board is split into two boards, one to discuss investing after retirement, the other to discuss investing before retirement to fund retirement
9 votes: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to investing after retirement only; another board is created to discuss FIRE (but other discussion of investing before retirement to fund retirement should go to other existing boards)
3 votes: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to investing after retirement only; discussion of investing before retirement to fund retirement should go to other existing boards
2 votes: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to 'decumulation' only; another retirement investing board is created for discussion of 'accumulation'
1 vote: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to 'decumulation' only; another board is created for discussion of FIRE (but other 'accumulation' discussion should go to other existing boards)
0 votes: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to 'decumulation' only; discussion of 'accumulation' should go to other existing boards

I'm posting these now because the numbers of votes haven't risen all that much since yesterday morning - i.e. the results appear to have stabilised. Note by the way that I've not included some figures from what you get if you click on "View results" in the poll, namely the total votes figure of 59 and the percentages it ascribes to the various options. This is because the poll allows people to vote for more than one option being acceptable - so all it tells us about the number of people who have voted is that it's at least 31 (since nobody can vote twice for the same option) and at most 59 (since every voter must vote for at least one option), and so for instance it only tells us that the Retirement Investing board remaining unchanged is acceptable to between 31/59 = 53% and 31/31 = 100% of voters, while the straight before/after retirement split is acceptable to between 13/59 = 22% and 13/31 = 42% of voters.

I have however noticed wordings of a subsequent comment or two that suggest to me that some might have treated it as a "vote for the best option" poll rather than a "vote for all the options you find acceptable" poll. Nothing remotely conclusive and I'm not pointing any fingers, but I did set the poll up to allow people to change their votes. So if anyone has misunderstood the nature of the poll and wants to correct their vote in the light of that misunderstanding, it's easy to do so.

And just in case this post results in a lot of vote changes, I'll be treating the above results as preliminary and leave the poll running for another day or two before posting some more definitive results.

I've ended up leaving the poll running for rather more than just another day or two, due to taking my eye off the ball, but its updated results don't show any fundamental change:

34 votes: The Retirement Investing board remains unchanged as it currently is
18 votes: The Retirement Investing board is split into two boards, one to discuss investing after retirement, the other to discuss investing before retirement to fund retirement
9 votes: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to investing after retirement only; another board is created to discuss FIRE (but other discussion of investing before retirement to fund retirement should go to other existing boards)
3 votes: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to investing after retirement only; discussion of investing before retirement to fund retirement should go to other existing boards
3 votes: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to 'decumulation' only; another retirement investing board is created for discussion of 'accumulation'
1 vote: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to 'decumulation' only; another board is created for discussion of FIRE (but other 'accumulation' discussion should go to other existing boards)
1 vote: The Retirement Investing board's subject becomes restricted to 'decumulation' only; discussion of 'accumulation' should go to other existing boards

As explained above, all that is known about the number of respondents to the poll is that it's at least 34 (as no-one could vote more than once for the first option) and at most 69 (as every respondent voted for at least one option). That means that the poll results are that:

* Somewhere between 49% and 100% of respondents consider it acceptable that the Retirement Board remains unchanged as it is.

* Somewhere between 26% and 53% of respondents consider it acceptable that the Retirement Board gets split into 'after retirement' and 'before retirement, to fund retirement' boards, and whatever that percentage is, it's little more than half the percentage who find it acceptable that it remains unchanged as it is.

* The percentages finding any of the other options in the poll acceptable are all under 30%.

So in terms of MDW1954's "Reach some sort of consensus" challenge, I'm not certain whether any of the options in the poll is acceptable sufficiently widely to be described as a consensus. But I am certain that all the options other than leaving the Retirement Investing board unchanged as it is are not acceptable that widely (53% acceptability is IMHO clearly nowhere near enough to be described as a consensus, especially when its existence implies that another option has near-100% acceptability).

In short, the poll indicates either that the consensus is for leaving the Retirement Investing board unchanged as it is, or that there is no consensus for any of its options.

Gengulphus

MDW1954
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1645
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:46 pm
Has thanked: 285 times
Been thanked: 583 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430182

Postby MDW1954 » July 24th, 2021, 9:30 pm

Thank you, Gengulphus. That seems to me to a fair summary.

MDW1954

AsleepInYorkshire
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3149
Joined: February 7th, 2017, 9:36 pm
Has thanked: 3868 times
Been thanked: 1873 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430189

Postby AsleepInYorkshire » July 24th, 2021, 10:31 pm

Gengulphus wrote:In short, the poll indicates either that the consensus is for leaving the Retirement Investing board unchanged as it is, or that there is no consensus for any of its options.
Gengulphus

There can be no doubt that you have a very clear and concise mind and your analytical and mathematical skills are brilliant. And some of us, including me, get that.

So in the future would you please put your conclusion or summarising comment at the start of your post please. The rest is a support mechanism that I don't need as I trust my own judgement regarding your abilities, which I hasten to add are enviable and genuinely incredible.

It's good to have such a great contributor here. But if you posted tomorrow that we had 14hrs and 20 seconds to live I'd believe you. I wouldn't need proof.

Absolutely no offence meant

AiY

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4215
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2536 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430205

Postby Gengulphus » July 25th, 2021, 6:51 am

AsleepInYorkshire wrote:So in the future would you please put your conclusion or summarising comment at the start of your post please. ...
...
Absolutely no offence meant

And none taken - but I cannot write my posts in a way that will please all readers. Some will want summary/conclusion only, some will want the reasoning as well, and of the latter, some will want it after a preliminary 'executive summary' and some will want it in its natural place as the conclusion of the reasoning... On top of that, in some cases (though not this one), I don't even have an easily-stated summary/conclusion, just a collection of thoughts people might want to consider.

In an environment in which people are being paid to write, the person doing the paying would of course be the one authors would need to please. But here, the only workable method IMHO is that authors write as seems best to them (within the bounds of site rules/moderation, of course), and readers learn to cope with cases where that has resulted in a post that doesn't suit them.

Gengulphus

vrdiver
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2709
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 2:22 am
Has thanked: 504 times
Been thanked: 1029 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430281

Postby vrdiver » July 25th, 2021, 2:25 pm

MrFoolish wrote:
vrdiver wrote:To me, "decumulation" represents the topic of unwinding a working lifetime of investing, either with a timeframe that ends with the poster's demise, or includes the desired transfer of assets at said demise. It's not about "investing" but about how to manage the investments achieved, with the new requirement of actually living off of them.

VRD
(Decumulating since 2014, but not very successfully ;) )


But dependending on circumstances and investment returns after retirement, someone might make more from their investments than they spend. So they will still be accumulating. On which board would you suggest they post?


If they were talking about their investing, then whichever investment board was most appropriate; if they were posting about what is essentially the topic of extracting money from their investments, or organising them with a view to losing their marbles or for succession planning, then a retirement board would be, IMHO, more appropriate.

Retirees don't stop doing all the stuff they did whilst working, including, in many cases (at least on TLF) to continue to invest. The issue here seems to be to find a suitable place to gather posts that discuss the specific additional things that retirees have in common, which, put simply, is using their accumulated wealth to replace earnings, and perhaps a greater focus on how to manage that wealth for the remaining duration.

In my personal case, I spend less than I make, but that doesn't mean I'm not interested in improving the way in which I extract my spends, or that I have no interest in my wealth succession plan. I also have an interest in investing, both for new money, and for keeping an eye on existing capital, so I would be one of those people that that highlight, who I suggest would need to think about the best board to post on, depending on the core topic of their post.

VRD

scrumpyjack
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2582
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:15 am
Has thanked: 234 times
Been thanked: 1167 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430282

Postby scrumpyjack » July 25th, 2021, 2:32 pm

AsleepInYorkshire wrote:
Gengulphus wrote:In short, the poll indicates either that the consensus is for leaving the Retirement Investing board unchanged as it is, or that there is no consensus for any of its options.
Gengulphus

There can be no doubt that you have a very clear and concise mind and your analytical and mathematical skills are brilliant. And some of us, including me, get that.

So in the future would you please put your conclusion or summarising comment at the start of your post please. The rest is a support mechanism that I don't need as I trust my own judgement regarding your abilities, which I hasten to add are enviable and genuinely incredible.

It's good to have such a great contributor here. But if you posted tomorrow that we had 14hrs and 20 seconds to live I'd believe you. I wouldn't need proof.

Absolutely no offence meant

AiY


All you have to do, AIY, is just read the last para in future.

I think it was Harold Macmillan who said the way to communicate was:
1. Tell them what you are going to say
2. Say it
3. Summarise what you have said.
:D

88V8
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2711
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Has thanked: 880 times
Been thanked: 995 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#430322

Postby 88V8 » July 25th, 2021, 6:50 pm

Retirement Planning, Investment and Money Management... might be a title that would attract my interest.

As it is, despite being retired, I never post on that board and scarely look at it.
Same on TMF.
For me, everything of interest is covered on other boards.

It might be helpful if posters raised a cross-link there when there are retirementish subjects being posted elsewhere, as happens with HYPP and Company News for example.

V8

MrFoolish
Lemon Slice
Posts: 385
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 190 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#438731

Postby MrFoolish » August 31st, 2021, 6:36 pm

Nobody is posting on the sub-board. I'd suggest getting rid of it and keeping all retirement stuff on the one board. Why overcomplicate things?

Gilgongo
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 171
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 6:51 pm
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 56 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#439608

Postby Gilgongo » September 4th, 2021, 9:19 am

MrFoolish wrote:Nobody is posting on the sub-board. I'd suggest getting rid of it and keeping all retirement stuff on the one board. Why overcomplicate things?


Yes. At the original poster on this, I said I wasn't in favour of splitting boards. More boards lead to less posts per board, leading to less reading/replying and to less value for all of TLF - there are far too many boards already. Yet is seemed to somehow come to that - as it always does.

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4215
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 2536 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#439758

Postby Gengulphus » September 5th, 2021, 6:35 am

MrFoolish wrote:Nobody is posting on the sub-board. I'd suggest getting rid of it and keeping all retirement stuff on the one board. Why overcomplicate things?

I'm fairly certain that the subforum had more threads on it than just the one (locked) "Board name" thread that's currently there when I last took a proper look at it. So my suspicion is that some work was put into moving the contents of the subforum on to the main board, to be followed by getting rid of the subforum, but that work has stalled for some reason.

Possibly that reason is a question of what should be done with the "Board name" thread: deleting it seems a bit harsh, but moving it elsewhere is liable to lose its context? If so, I'd suggest changing the thread subject to supply that context, e.g. to "Board name [subforum thread moved here in order to close the subforum]", moving all of its posts into this thread (with the possible exception of the final moderator message from csearle, which would become confusingly self-referential) and then finishing the job.

Gengulphus

csearle
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3438
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 2680 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: Retirement Investing board question

#439768

Postby csearle » September 5th, 2021, 8:28 am

Gengulphus wrote:So my suspicion is that some work was put into moving the contents of the subforum on to the main board, to be followed by getting rid of the subforum, but that work has stalled for some reason.
It was above my pay¹ grade. I've (finally) submitted a request.

C.
¹Not to be taken literally.


Return to “Lemon Fool - Improve the Recipe”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Howard and 6 guests