Category Archives: Financial Independence

The cold days of winter offer the reminder that a safe, warm and comfortable home may be attainable through the Homeownership program, said Michelle Woods, executive director, Habitat for Humanity of St. Charles County. Through our programs, we are excited to lead our neighbors into financial independence for affordable, stable housing that supports our

mission to enhance lives, foster relationships and build the community one home at a time.

About Habitat for Humanity of St. Charles County

Habitat for Humanity of St. Charles County builds safe, decent and affordable homes with hard-working families in St. Charles County. The nonprofit community-level affiliate acts in partnership with and on behalf of Habitat for Humanity, an international, non-governmental, nonprofit organization devoted to building strength, stability and self-reliance through shelter. Habitat for Humanity of St. Charles County has built 89 homes for Habitat families since 1997, with more than 2,000 volunteers donating 14,000 hours each year.

Habitat for Humanity of St. Charles County offers a hand up opportunity that transforms lives, builds a strong foundation and forges lasting relationships with communities for a bright future. Applicants and co-applicants selected for a Habitat home agree to perform a minimum of 150 sweat equity hours each, for a total of at least 300-450 hours, in the building of their home or other Habitat projects. In collaboration with community partners, Habitat for Humanity of St. Charles County offers free financial coaching and skills to potential homeowners through the Homebuyer Readiness Program, in which participants learn about credit, debt, budgeting, setting goals and saving money. In addition, the organization guides homeowners through an affordable mortgage repayment process.

Read the original post:

Building Homes and Strengthening Communities through Homeownership | Business | stltoday.com - Suburban Journals

People with Alzheimers disease and related dementias may start having trouble managing their finances several years before their diagnosis, according to new research supported by NIA. Published online in JAMA Internal Medicine, the study is the first large-scale analysis of peoples ability to manage their money before and after a dementia diagnosis.

Commonsymptoms of dementia, including memory and cognitive limitations, can lead people with dementia to have trouble handling money and paying bills, so repeated financial mistakes can be an early sign of the disease. The new study, led by scientists at Johns Hopkins University, linked Medicare claims data to credit card payments and credit reports to examine dementia-related money problems. The researchers analyzed information from 1999 to 2018 on more than 81,000 Medicare beneficiaries, about a third of whom were diagnosed with dementia within this period. All study participants were at least 65 years old and lived alone. The researchers studied the number of missed credit card payments and credit scores for seven years before and four years after a dementia diagnosis and compared this information against data from people without dementia.

The study found that people who had dementia had more missed credit card payments as early as six years before their diagnosis and were more likely to have lower-than-average credit scores two-and-a-half years before their diagnosis. After diagnosis, people with dementia had even more missed payments and lower credit scores than people without dementia, and this trend continued for at least three-and-a-half years after diagnosis. Results also showed that among people with dementia, those who had lower levels of education had increases in missed payments seven years before diagnosis, while people who had higher education levels had increases in missed payments only two-and-a-half years before diagnosis. This difference confirms previous findings suggesting that people with higher education levels can have less severe dementia symptoms.

The researchers point out some limitations of the study: By using only Medicare claims data, the study might have missed some cases of dementia, and additional information from utility bills, rent payments, or medical collections might have helped to provide a clearer picture of money problems. Also, the findings might not apply to married couples or older adults in assisted living facilities, because those people might have help handling their finances.

The studys results help show that the period during which an older adult might be at risk of financial mismanagement and scams may be longer than currently understood and point to the need for early diagnostic tools and policies to help protect older adults. The researchers also noted that improved support services and financial guidance could help people with dementia and their caregivers get the resources they need to maintain their financial security and independence.

This research was supported in part by NIA grant R21AG053698.

These activities relate to NIAs AD+ADRD Research Implementation Milestone 9.M, Develop diagnostics/biomarkers in asymptomatic individuals, and 9.N, Determining the value of screening for clinically relevant cognitive impairment in the absence of a cognitive complaint.

Reference: Nicholas LH, et al. The financial presentation of Alzheimers disease and related dementias. JAMA Internal Medicine. 2020. Epub Nov 30. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.6432.

See the original post here:

Dementia may cause problems with money management years before diagnosis - National Institute on Aging

SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISMThe article youre about to read is from our reporters doing their important work investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers businesses have been impacted. Thats why the SC Times is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insiders program here. Thank you.

JOIN NOW

By Tom Blake

Marillee emailed, saying she had read that single women age 65-plus dont want to live with a man. She wanted to know if that was true. I asked my e-newsletter readers for their opinions. Fifteen women responded by email:

Terry: Humans our age are set in their ways. Sex is nice but not necessary (at least for women), separation of incomes is tricky, and sharing of living spaceunless the space is hugewould be difficult.

Laurie Jo: I have mixed feelings regarding being a couple under the same roof. My boyfriend of five years lives 90 minutes away.

I am lonely a lot of the time. Living together is not an option for us; I have decided that, for now, going back and forth for each of us on alternating weekends is OK.

Elizabeth: I know many older women who want companionship but are worried about living together. Many are afraid of taking on household chores or losing financial independence.

Kaitte: Im an independent woman, not needing a man to take care of memost men cant handle that.

Susan, 78: I love having my own place.

Deanne, 67: I was happily married for 30 years, lost my husband six years ago. I want to live with a partner, to enjoy making a home together. Im better as a partner than as a solo act.

Hamila: I was married for 42 wonderful years and was a caregiver for the last six years of my husbands life. I have no desire to live with another man. I enjoy male company, but I do not want to share my home.

Gail: I would live with a man for a couple of days each week, plus on trips and adventures. But full-time? No thank you. Im too independent and happy.

Lisa: I moved last year from Southern California to Tucson. While I would like to find a partner, the LAT (living apart together) arrangement describes my preference.

Id like to find someone to do activities with, share meals, and have sleepovers, but I want my freedom and independence. too.

Arlene: Its a trade-off! We get a roof; they get a slave. Not for me! My ex never cleaned his toilet. He never cleaned anything except his car every Sunday morning, which prevented him from churching with me.

Kathleen, 60: I would like having a male companion to spend time with, especially seeing concerts, plays, book readings, or even going out with for a meal, but living togetherno thanks!

Dianne: No. Once is enough. Cant see how any man over 60 could offer anything that would make moving in worthwhile.

Bonnie: While a mans companionship is wonderful, being solo is also wonderful. Such an individual thing.

Alicia, 68: I stay busy with my hobbies. I would love to share a home with a man. I would hope the man would likewise have his hobbies, interests, and friends.

Mary Lou, 75: I cant imagine living with someone today. I have turned into an independent senior woman, and I like my routine.

Toms summary

Most single women age 65-plus would like a male companion, but less than 25 percent of this group want to live with a man. The word independent was mentioned often. Might women choosing to live alone become a trend?

How each relationship plays out is different. As Bonnie said, Such an individual thing. There is no right or wrong response.

One thing this pandemic has taught us: we all need our space, we need time alone. But its still mighty nice to come home to that welcome hug from our mate.

Tom Blake is a retired Dana Point business owner and resident who has authored books on middle-aged dating. See his website at findingloveafter50.com. To comment: tompblake@gmail.com

Related

BECOME AN INSIDER TODAYTrustworthy, accurate and reliable local news stories are more important now than ever. Support our newsroom by making a contribution and becoming a subscribing member today.

CONTRIBUTE NOW

Read the rest here:

On Life and Love After 50: Do Single Women 65-Plus Prefer to Live Alone? - San Clemente Times

The race for the top position at the national Olympic committee has been marred by mudslinging, accusations and subsequent denials, with the four candidates busy taking shots at one another rather than making concrete pledges to improve sports in the country.

Lee Kee-heung is going for a second four-year term as the head of the Korean Sport & Olympic Committee (KSOC). He's up against three opponents: Lee Jong-kul, a five-term legislator and former head of the Korea Basketball Association; Yoo Joon-sang, a four-term lawmaker and current president of the Korea Sailing Federation; and Kang Shin-wook, a university professor and former head of the Korean Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance.

The election is Monday, with 2,170 voters -- selected from the KSOC, its member federations, provincial, municipal and other regional sports associations -- set to participate in online voting from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Lee Kee-heung, who is also a member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), has had a bull's-eye on his back since the campaign began on Dec. 30 last year.

The candidates had their first televised debate last Saturday and they touched upon a wide range of issues, such as eliminating abuse in sports, promoting sports participation among the public and ensuring more financial independence for the KSOC.

Much of that seemed to have been forgotten by Tuesday. Lee Jong-kul filed a complaint with Songpa Police in southeastern Seoul against Lee Kee-heung, accusing the current KSOC chief of embezzlement and abuse of authority. Lee Kee-heung responded by also filing a criminal complaint against his opponent on charges of spreading false information.

During that TV debate, Lee Jong-kul claimed that Lee Kee-heung had forced KSOC member associations to hire his lineal descendants and that the latter had illegally concealed those family members' salaries.

Lee Kee-heung, in turn, has said his rival has greatly defamed his character with wrong information.

Kang, meanwhile, has accused other candidates of attempting to force him to quit.

Things got so out of control over the weekend that the four candidates couldn't even agree to hold a second TV debate.

It had been scheduled for Thursday but the KSOC's election committee decided to cancel it on Monday. It said only two of the four men agreed to it, and the two others declined that opportunity. The election body needed unanimous support from all four candidates to stage the second debate.

The committee is also looking into an allegation that one of the candidates had been illegally conducting phone surveys.

Candidates are only allowed to contact voters directly to seek support, but they can't commission a third party to run surveys on voters.

The committee said it had received an anonymous tip regarding illicit surveys, and the candidate who is found to have done so will be duly penalized. (Yonhap)

The rest is here:

Election campaigns for top S. Korean Olympic job marred by mudslinging - The Korea Herald

This Point of View piece was written byDr. Hassan Masri, an intensive care specialist in Saskatoon.

For more information aboutCBC's Opinion section, please see theFAQ.

"Is there a doctor from here that I can ask for a second opinion?"

The question surprised me. I was struck by how my patient seemed to think it was a reasonable demand.

It was 2013. I was in my first year of medical training in Baltimore.

I had always assumed that my fair skin, red beard and male privilege would protect me from such questions. I forgot that my name tag had HASSAN MASRI written in threatening capital letters.

To be clear, this patient wasn't asking for a second opinion regarding some complex medical mystery. It was solely because of my place of birth and the name my parents gave me.

This experience was not unique to this one patient in Baltimore. It has reoccurred many times in my career, including in both Toronto and Saskatoon.

Those interactions are not common, but they are also not rare. They trigger a war in my head between my commitment to professional treatment of all patients and my commitment to always speak up against any actual or perceived racism.

They are also a reminder of a larger system of inequality that harms the overall quality of health care delivered in our country.

I was reminded again of this way of thinking by a protester at a rally in front of our Saskatchewan legislature building.

"I have a message for Scott Moe and what's that, what's that public health minister's name" The speaker went on to intentionally mispronounce chief medical health officer Dr. Saqib Shahab's last name and make other racist comments.

These comments shook me to my core. They showed how a top-ranking health official and physician can easily be attacked simply for having a name that is not common. His academic brilliance, leadership and jaw-dropping resume aren't enough to make him belong.

When I post on social media, I am regularly told by those who may oppose my views that I should take my opinions and thoughts with me and return to where I belong.

In my mind that place where I belong is Mississauga. It's where I grew up, where my parents live and where a lot of my memories are made.

In their mind that place is some imaginary third-world country with corruption and no resources.

Preconceived ideas in medicine are damaging. The mere appearance of a man or woman can affect the trust a patient has in their health care providers.

According to the 2016 Census, about 20 per cent of physicians in Canada are immigrants. That means about 28,000 people here are immigrant physicians. Those numbers are even higher in certain rural areas in Saskatchewan and many big hubs like the GTA.

Immigration and immigrants are at the core of who we are as Canadians. Cities, communities and industries were built by the hands of hard-working immigrant Canadians who brought with them a wealth of culture, ideas and knowledge.

Being a male physician comes with an incredible amount of privilege that can at times be blinding. This includes an assumed role of leadership in my community, a large degree of financial independence and a lot of respect from the people around me.

These privileges, at times, make me forget that I am vulnerable to the same comments made to me back in 2013 in a patient's room in Baltimore.

Racism in medicine is not rare.

Positions of power in hospitals and organizations are often filled with people "from here." Assumptions are often made that physicians "from here" are superior in their approach and training to those who have uncommon names, even when in a lot of cases their training was the same.

This reality is extremely harmful to the delivery of care in our country. In a nation where health-care delivery is filled with inequalities, the lack of representation leads to further inequities and worse outcomes.

Health-care policies and the overall strategies of delivery of care are made by those at the top of the helm. The obvious absence of true representation leads to unintended consequences where patients who are not "from here" are forgotten or ignored.

COVID-19 further highlighted this unpleasant reality in many aspects. Recommendations to go home and isolate alone at home when sick with COVID-19 showed a clear lack of understanding of some people's realities.

Many immigrants live in multigenerational homes. To go home and isolate alone is simply not physically or financially possible.

People from the city of Brampton, with its large population of immigrants, were accused of being reckless and not staying apart from each other. Assuming that those patients are reckless may lead to a bias when treating them, when in fact those patients are doing their best to stay safe within their means.

Countless research papers and studies showed that unfavourable biases by health-care providers lead to worse outcomes for patients. I don't claim that more representation among the high ranks of leadership in health care would fix this problem, but it certainly appears to be a large part of the solution.

Those lacking understanding of the realities and cultures of immigrants are less likely to provide meaningful solutions to their unique challenges.

These experiences are certainly not the majority of our reality in medicine, but they are common enough to be noticed.

A nation built on immigration and immigrants can be better and should be better.Immigrants in general and in medicine deserve so much more.

This column is part of CBC'sOpinionsection. For more information about this section, please read thiseditor's blogand ourFAQ.

Interested in writing for us? We accept pitches for opinion and point-of-view pieces from Saskatchewan residents who want to share their thoughts on the news of the day, issues affecting their community or who have a compelling personal story to share. No need to be a professional writer!

Read more about what we're looking for here, then email sask-opinion-grp@cbc.ca with your idea.

Continue reading here:

Racism against doctors is not rare in Canada and it hurts our entire health-care system - CBC.ca

A woman sued by a businessman who alleges she duped him for financial reasons into thinking he was dating a fashion model has been ordered by a judge to stay away from the woman, who said he will stop at nothing to get her back into a relationship.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David Swift on Tuesday issued a temporary restraining order on behalf of Stefanie Gurzanski, directing Stephen J. Cloobeck not to come within 100 yards of her, her home, workplace, vehicle and 54-year-old mother, Sandra Gurzanski.

Stephen has made it very clear that unless I return to our relationship, he will continue to threaten and harass me and attempt to ruin my life,'' Gurzanski said in a sworn declaration. I feel he is acting in an irrational manner.''

Local news from across Southern California

Cloobeck, 59, filed the first legal volley when he brought his suit in Los Angeles Superior Court on Friday, naming as defendants matchmaker Katherine Abigail Le, the 23-year-old Gurzanski and Gurzanski's friend, Adrianna Suchor.

Cloobeck alleges fraud, theft, unjust enrichment and invasion of privacy.

According to the suit, Cloobeck is a single, successful businessman'' to whom Le represented herself as a matchmaker for men like him.

Le told Cloobeck that she could find him a woman that would take care, love and cherish him for the rest of his life,'' the suit states.

Cloobeck accepted Le's invitation and last summer Le introduced Cloobeck to Gurzanski, telling him she was a prominent fashion model,'' a good girl'' and a woman of his dreams that would be with him forever,'' the suit states.

Instead, she (Gurzanski) is a grifter, looking for her next mark from whom she could take as much property as possible while pretending to be in love,'' the suit states.

As the result of Gurzanski's fraud, Cloobeck's heart was broken and he was duped out of significant assets.''

Gurzanski said in her declaration she was the one fooled by Cloobeck after they met July 30 at his home.

I told him about my successful modeling career and businesses in which I was engaged,'' she said. Stephen also talked about his life.

I felt Stephen and I had chemistry and I grew interested in spending more time with him. At the end of the night, Stephen invited me to go out with him the next day.''

Early in the relationship, Cloobeck gave Gurzanski a credit card and told her she could buy whatever she wanted, she said. He also began buying gifts for her and said, Now you can never leave me'' and You're going to be dealing with me forever'' and I will haunt you for the next 10 to 20 years,'' according to Gurzanski.

These statements made me feel uncomfortable,'' Gurzanski said.

Cloobeck began harassing Gurzanski about her modeling career on Christmas Eve, she said.

He started telling me that I was no longer allowed to publish pictures on Onlyfans.com,'' she said, referring to the content subscription service. I told him that I was going to keep doing my work as it is a source of income.''

On Christmas Day, Cloobeck asked her to marry him, but she declined and told him she wanted to end their relationship, Gurzanski said.

Starting the day after I told Stephen that I no longer wanted to be in a relationship with him, he became unhinged and began abusing and harassing me,'' Gurzanski said.

He began attacking me and everyone around me with the intent of hurting me, isolating me from my friends and family, and he also began to try and destroy my financial independence.''

Gurzanski said she hired a security guard because I am scared of being harmed.''

A hearing is scheduled Feb. 2 on whether to extend the temporary restraining order.

View original post here:

Businessman Says Fashion Model' He Dated Was Part of Fraudulent Matchmaking Scheme - NBC Southern California

Richard: Right, exactly. Rather thanjust looking into the abyss of Zoom.

Alex: Did you work from home prior toCovid-19? What was your work setup before all this?

Richard: So Ive been a freelance writerfor quite a long time. Ive had periods where I would work in an office on TVproductions, and I remember distinctly this feeling of going out at 11 a.m., earlyon in my freelancing career, and there just kind of being nobody around. Its asensation which is almost like guiltyoure out of step with the rest of howthings work, youre out of that diurnal commute, the only other people around are old people or unemployed people, and you almost feel like otheroffice workers start to think that what you do is not real. And that sort ofillegitimacywell, thats one of the things that I loved about it: I didntwant to have the feeling of having a real jobbut then the times when I did goto an office, Id sometimes realize almost retrospectively that Id been lonelyfor a period, and you have this almost elation of talking to colleagues. Ithink people who do work from home are familiar with those feelings.

Alex: My experience has been justthat maybe we should try to be more flexible in general, and not make itan all-or-nothing.

Richard: Thats right. And I mean, thehistory of remote work is littered with incorrect predictions, so we might aswell add some more, but

Alex: Lets add some more.

Richard: That seems to be whats goingto happen. I dont think everybody is going to jump into remote work full-timewhen they have the option. Its just that things like working from home whenyou need to or want to are going to become more socially acceptable, and thatshould be beneficial, depending on how much surveillance is involved.

Alex: Thats the optimistic future.And I think youve described very well how these things that are pitched asthings that will help liberate the employee, like a policy of saying you canwork from home when you want to or need to, these things can then be turnedright around by bosses and turned into another way to heavily monitor what theemployee does.

Laura: Right. I was also thinking, somany people were actually already working from home before the pandemic, butthey were also working a full day at the office, too. There was an incrediblestatistic I read that before the great recession, it was incredibly rare for someoneto check email before they went into the office. And after, something like 50percent of people who answered the survey said they checked email before theygot out of bed. If that isnt working from home, what is?

Richard: Yeah, and its almost alwaysunpaid working from home. People arent submitting a time sheet at the end ofthat week, saying, I spent all this time checking emails in bed, on mysmartphone, but that is work.

Laura: Right, and you wonder if thissurveillance software that tracks you between nine and five, if it counted someof the stuff that you do on the train and in bed in the morning, then it mightnot look so good for the employer. You might be owed overtime.

Richard: One of the weirdest thingsabout some of this surveillance and team management softwarethis is true ofMicrosoft Teamsis that some of it has started to introduce what iseffectively a commute into remote working. People are still performingcommuting behaviors of having time, a few minutes, before their work starts. Ihave seen people, and Ive read stories, about people who do stuff like put on asuit, get in their car, drive around the block, come home, and then go intotheir home office.

Alex: The early clerks office had fireplaces and easy chairs to resemble a home, right? That stuck out to mebecause it reminded me of big tech company offices that have essentiallyrecreated some version of that, where its fun to go to the office. So when Ithink about the future of work from home, I remember that Facebook, to use oneexample, has not just held onto their Manhattan real estate, but theyve rentedmore Manhattan real estate. Do you think that that is a harbinger of, like,this is not the beginning of the work-from-home era?

Richard: I mean, with tech companies, thiswas part of the reason why Yahoo got spooked into spiking a lot of their remotework. They were looking at companies like Google, where theres an electronicdrum kit and a pool table. Anna Wieners book, Silicon Valley, is, is full of these incredible details, whereshell go into the office, and theres just, like, a guy with no shoes onstrumming an acoustic guitar, and there always seems to be someone mixingcocktails. Its almost like, in her life, people are going home to get work doneand going to the office to hang out. And part of the thinking behind that comesfrom this sort of frat bro mentality, where if you set up a sort of dorm roomsession with the right people, their ideas will spring off each other. And atGoogle that was taken seriously enough that my understanding is they did thingslike made sure that there was a little queue for food so that people didnt gettheir food from the canteen too quickly, because that way you would have thisincidental contact, where you start sharing ideas and, you know, Watson wouldmeet Crick. The story of technology is full of these kind of meet-cutespeoplejust happening to run into each other, working on a similar thing. And those corridorconversations were what they were trying to generate.

Alex: Again, if were talking abouthow this is going to look in a few years, I think the unequally distributedfuture is it, because people who work for companies like Google are going tohave the freedom to choose how they decide to work. And for other people, Ithink its going to be a lot more limited going forward.

Richard: You can already see thatsplit if you think about the difference between working at an Amazon campusstyleoffice and working in an Amazon warehouse. The amount of initiative and leisureafforded to one versus the sort of mechanization of the otherthose are very,very extreme differences now.

Alex: Well, thank you so much fortalking to us today, Richard.

Richard: Its a pleasure, Alex.

Alex: Richard Cookes article iscalled The Perpetual Disappointment of Working From Home, and you can find iton NewRepublic.com.

Laura: After a short break, well beback to talk to Katie McDonough about the seductive fantasy of earlyretirement.

Alex: The U.S. has a contradictory relationshipwith work. Our civic religion valorizes working hard, and our popular cultureromanticizes slackers. Today, the American economy seems to demand perpetualhustle. Many young people have no real expectation of ever enjoying acomfortable retirement. But what if leaving work behind werent such animpossible dream? What if you could retire decades before you qualify forsocial security? More leisure time and a decent retirement have been centraldemands of the labor movement basically since it came into existence. In recentyears, though, a loosely affiliated group has turned the collective demand offreedom from work into something more like a collection of life hacks.

Were joined now by Katie McDonough, a deputy editor at The New Republic who recently wrote aboutfantasies of retiring early.

Hi Katie. Thanks for coming on the show.

Katie McDonough: Hi,thanks for having me.

Alex: You wrote about this whole sortof cottage industry thats grown up around giving people financial advice abouthow to retire early. It has an acronym to describe it, FIRE, which stands for financialindependence, retire early. So before we get into your own dreams ofretirement, give us an idea of what FIRE is about. What does the successful FIRE retirees lifestyle look like?

Katie: So one thing that I heard inresponse to my piece, and that I will tell you, is that there are so manyvarieties of FIRE, and its really reductive to say that they are only onething. So some people do genuinely really emphasize the FI part: The financialindependence part ends up being the main goal; the retire early ends up becomingkind of secondary. And so you see different people, based on where theirinterests are, do different things. Some people are retiring early because theymade hundreds of millions of dollars at scammy startups, and they spend theirdays microdosing in and around San Francisco, and it seems really fun. Otherpeople move to parts of the country with comparatively low costs of living andthey seem to, like, blog a lot. It seems like FIRE becomes almost their secondjob because so much of this is self-help advice and podcast-blog industry, inaddition to the financial advice itself. And so it varies depending on what youwant from it, but its a set of advice that supposedly everyone can accessequally. Its meant to be a code that, once you have the tools and ingredients,its just completely democratic and everybody can do it.

Alex: How does everyone do it? Whatare the basics of how you get to do it?

Katie: Theres really practical stuffthat makes sense. Its like: Dont eat takeout, maybe ride your bike instead ofpaying for gas, other things like that. And if it works for you, thats great.Theres nothing wrong with that. But then theres this really specializedinvestment part that is the actual thing that unlocks the wealth thats wildlyinaccessible. Maybe Im just projecting my own deficiencies onto much of therest of the country, but it feels like something thats very difficult to masterand is actually really time-consuming and needs a lot of expert insightfinancialconsultancies and other things like that. Not the kind of thing that you canfigure out on your own.

Laura: But you talk in the articleabout fat and lean versions of this. What was the difference between those two,and what kinds of income are you looking at if youre on the fat version versusthe lean version?

Katie: I think it varies so muchdepending on where in the country you live, but the lean version is that youlook at what the average person spends in the United States annually, andyoure supposed to go way under that. There are some FIRE people who are like, Ihave two children, I spend $16,000 a year, by making really lean budgets forthemselves. And then theres fat FIRE, which is more of the type ofperson who made many millions of dollars and can just live well because theyactually dont have to think too much about their spending because they justhave what seems like endless reserves of money.

Laura: You also talk about two sort ofcultures among the early retirees. One is a kind of tech bro type, and thenanother is a sort of gentler, more wholesome version of this. How would youcharacterize them?

Katie: I think the first variety involvesa lot of ketamine. Its just people taking drugs and living in nice apartmentsand going on vacations and living what seems like very well. And then there isthe version that is more commonly associated with the genrebutwebsites that aggregate a lot of these stories tend to just include themtogetherbut the more wholesome version is someone who retired at 50and spends more time with their kids. And there are actually these reallyreassuring and warm and appealing narratives about what it means to reclaimmore of your time. I would call it the soft genre: I ride my bike a lot, Iread books more.

Alex: It seemslike this advice just assumes you have a paycheck large enough to sock away aportion of it that is significant and that youre not then spending that entireportion on servicing your own debt, right?

Laura: Yeah,there are a lot of people who are not buying lattes, andtheyre also not getting to save that money.

Katie: I think whatgets regarded as, Oh, look at this amazing frugality, look at us making responsiblechoices is really just what it is to live with really low income, right? Youactually dont get to do a lot of things, like eat out nice dinners or buy bighouses or take cabs everywhere. The kind of comic version of it that getsrepeated a lot is, Oh, millennials and their avocado toast or theirlattes, or something. But this level of discretionary spendinga lot of peoplearent buying those kinds of things and they stay broke because they startedbroke.

Alex: Every three or four months, you know, a Wall Street Journal or Business Insiderpiece will go around Twitter thats like, This 26-year-old just bought hisfirst house: Heres how. Paragraph one is like, Stopped going out to themovies.Paragraph 15 is like, Parents gave him a loan.

Laura: It seems to me to fit in with acouple of other trends. One is the tiny housetrend, one is van lifelike, these ideas that you can just escape fromthe usual system that everyones in and go off and define yourself. Doyou think that those forms of behavior are a response to something bigger? Whatdo they tell you about the economy?

Alex: I wonder if theres a sort ofunconscious nostalgia here. Thats what made me think about the tiny housething, because there actually was a time in living memory in the United Stateswhen you didnt need a large income to get by, as it were. It wasactually possible for much of the twentieth century to have a modest income and livemodestly but have no debts. You didnt have to strive to be rising up someladder, but just the basic necessities of housing, health care, and foodthethings you need to stay alivewere attainable at this very low level. So I dowonder if part of this is trying to recreate that, but now it requiresaccumulating a base of capital first before you can then recreate thatlifestyle.

Katie: I think thats right. And I alsothink thats where the part where, if you apply these same critiques and thenincorporate a structural analysis, it becomes the liberatory project that existselsewhere.

Alex: You should start a FIREnewsletter or podcast that slowly begins introducing that. Youve got to getthem to think structurally. But what would the substantive version of FIRE looklike? The one that actually involved the critique youre talking about?

Katie: The gentlest entry point is basicsocial democracy, right? Reinvesting in public pensions and retirement,increased wages, reduced work hours across the board, a robust labor movementthat can achieve these things. They have these critiques of, We work too hardhere, were in the rat race, but theres no sense of the ways in which leisureand autonomy are systematically denied people, too. So, very structurally, beinga Black woman worker whos doing home health care versus being a tech workerliving in San Franciscothe means through which you can do cost-cutting andsavings and investment from those two positions are quite different. Not onlyeven the means that you have to build wealth but the kind of daily experienceof your labor being fundamentally different. It doesnt really come into the literature.

Alex: None of the FIRE blogs havethat chart that shows productivity and wages diverging in the 70s andjust getting further and further apart?

Katie: Maybe you can join me in thispodcast.

Alex: And then we can retire earlytogether.

Laura: One question on that, thoughImean, Ive seen that graph, and we all know that real wages have been goingdown since the 1970s; household incomes have been going down, even thoughusually a two-person household now has double the income because maybe thewoman is working too. We know all of that, but its a very long road fromknowing that to actually having any kind of change based on that knowledge. AndFIRE is like, you read this one book and maybe you could start to do it for yourself.Isnt that the appeal, that its something you can actually enact? You donthave to wait for Congress.

Katie: Oh, totally. I think people enterinto the literature from so many different places that its veryreasonable to expectand you see this reflected in some of the people writingabout their journeys to financial independencebut it very much was born of aplace of, I am never going to get this any other way, the only thing that I cando is this, so here I am kind of trying to take my piece of it. And so its notas if I think that a person cant practice different financial habits whilealso having these larger structural critiques or participating in collectivemovements that would help accelerate the process through which more of us canget more of that. But I think that as a genre, it doesnt really account forany of that. In a lot of these blogs, theres an almost entire absence ofpolitics. Its as if there is no president in FIRE world, there is no Congress.I think thats a really interesting absence.

Alex: Thats funnythinking about itin another way, FIRE, financial independence retire early, as a sort of blogand podcast trend, its very individualistic. But if you would just imaginethat same phrase as a demand from a political movement, its revolutionary,like independence from the market is actually sort ofrevolution.

Katie Yes!

Laura: But then isnt that a differentacronym? Thats UBI.

Katie: I mean, there are a lot ofdifferent versions of what this has looked like historically. Eight hours forwork, eight hours for rest, eight hours for what you will is one version of anarticulation of, like, Your entire day should not be consumed with labor. So, yeah, I think part of what Im so drawn to, or just fascinated by, is that thethings being articulated through this writing do feel almost like a funhouse-mirrorversion of left ideas or left critique of the way that we live, and how wereexpected to live. But then the answer is, Well, just figure your way out of it, and youll be fine.

Alex: Katie, thank you so much fortalking to us today.

Katie: Thank you so much for having me.And also, this is my notice of resignation from The New Republic. Ive accumulated millions in savings and Imretiring.

Alex: Well, congratulations! Katiesarticle, The Long Plot to Escape From Work, is part of Work Sucks Month at The New Republic, a series exploring howand why we work and why we dont want to. You can read Katies piece and othersin the series at newrepublic.com.

Read the original post:

Transcript: The Future of Telecommuting - The New Republic

There is no dignity quite so impressive, and no independence quite so important, as living within your means. This beautiful and simple quote is symbolic of why financial independence is important for us all. And when it comes to women, it is, of course, of paramount importance. Women have come a long way, just fighting for equal rights and opportunities. Its been the equivalent of starting a race much later while others get a headstart. While women have closed the gap in this race of equality, theres plenty to do. This journey towards a more just, equal, and accepting world that values women for their selves has one extremely important component: financial independence.

Also Read:WoMoneyKiBaat : Why this daughter puts investment on priority as caregiver

In simple terms, financial independence is the ability to earn a living that enables folks to pay for their living to sustain themselves. It is imperative to understand that financial independence is not limited to working men. It is a basic necessity and requirement for everyone living in the 21st century. After all, it enables several critical aspects of our lives:

Being financially independent not only gives one a sense of accomplishment; it also helps in building healthy morale. It essentially empowers women further, enabling them to make their own decisions and calling the shots the way they seem fit. This confidence and sense of fulfillment help them be self-sufficient, both emotionally and financially.

Whether its toxic domestic environments, or financial and medical emergencies, being financially independent is an all-encompassing concept that serves as a one-stop solution for all kinds of problems. It, in my opinion, is a suitable solution that delivers women the freedom to lift themselves out of such situations without having to rely on others. And we all know how liberating that can feel, right?

Also Read:Alia Bhatt Turns Entrepreneur, Launches Sustainable Kidswear Brand Ed-a-Mamma

Inflation is (always?) on the rise, and over the past decade, it has compelled individuals of every gender to be financially independent. This is especially important when it comes to women. After all, they too pay their bills while simultaneously breaking societal norms and preconceived notions that only men can be breadwinners of the family. This sort of challenge is tackled with investments, prudent savings and financial planning. Being financially independent isnt just about earning enough its about saving enough and being able to spend enough.

Its only then that women can show how essential it is for both women and men to contribute to the expenses they incur in a household as inflation affects everyone.

Who doesnt want firmer control over important decisions? I know the women do. A firm grip over financial resources without having to depend on another person, is a common goal agnostic of your background, gender, professional capacity, or other factors. Perhaps more than the prudency of it, its also the feeling of happiness and fulfilment that we derive from that, thats most important.

Also Read:First Salary Is Always Special: It Gave Me A Sense Of Independence

Financial independence is important for women of the 21st century. It is not to prove a point, but to ensure that women can break the stereotypes and support themselves if they want and need to. It makes them financially secure and enables them to make their own decisions, support their spouses, and finally, give a sense of achievement and accomplishment in a unique and empowering manner.

Shruti Aggarwal is the co-founder of StashFin, an app-based digital lending venture started by a team of former financial service professionals. The views expressed are the authors own.

Read the original post:

Financial Independence Is Important For Women Not To Prove A Point, But To Break Stereotypes - SheThePeople

For many people, achieving financial freedom is likely to be a main goal within their lifetimes. This will enable them to enjoy greater independence and, in some cases, a better quality of life.

However, a large sum of money does not necessarily lead to greater financial independence. Rather, it is the passive income it provides that can make the biggest impact on an individuals financial outlook.

Therefore, now could be a good time to start investing in cheap dividend stocks with long-term growth potential. Over time, they could make a real difference to an investors quality of life.

Building a large portfolio during a lifetime is likely to be viewed as a means of achieving financial freedom by many investors. While this is partially correct, the reality is that spending capital is rarely a good idea. Over time, the size of an investors portfolio will decline if they are spending capital, rather than the income it produces. This can mean that they eventually run out of money and face a tough financial situation.

As such, the passive income provided by a sum of capital is likely to have a bigger influence on an individuals financial prospects. For example, a large sum invested in dividend shares is likely to provide greater financial independence through producing a larger income return compared to capital held in cash savings at a low interest rate.

Furthermore, the rate at which a passive income grows can have a significant impact on an individuals financial freedom. Should it fail to rise at an above inflation pace, they may find that their spending power deteriorates over time. As a result, buying high-yielding shares with the potential to offer dividend growth over a sustained time period could be a sound move.

Clearly, how an individual invests today depends on their stage in life. For those investors seeking to achieve financial freedom in the long run, buying a diverse range of high-quality businesses at low prices could lead to impressive capital returns. A stock market rally that causes valuations to revert to their long-term averages appears to be likely. This could produce high returns that catalyse an investors portfolio in the coming years.

For those investors who are seeking to make a passive income from their capital today, investing in stocks with dividend growth prospects could be the main priority. They could include companies that pay out a low proportion of their profit as a dividend, as well as those businesses that have bright financial futures. They may be able to afford to deliver strong dividend growth that makes a positive impact on an investors financial freedom in 2021 and beyond.

The 10 Best Stocks to Buy This Month

Renowned Canadian investor Iain Butler just named 10 stocks for Canadians to buy TODAY. So if youre tired of reading about other people getting rich in the stock market, this might be a good day for you.Because Motley Fool Canada is offering a full 65% off the list price of their top stock-picking service, plus a complete membership fee back guarantee on what you pay for the service. Simply click here to discover how you can take advantage of this.

Click Here to Learn More Today!

Read the original:

Why I Think a Growing Passive Income Is the Key to Financial Freedom - The Motley Fool Canada

SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISMThe article youre about to read is from our reporters doing their important work investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers businesses have been impacted. Thats why the DP Times is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insiders program here. Thank you.

JOIN NOW

By Tom Blake

Marillee emailed, saying she had read that single women age 65-plus dont want to live with a man. She wanted to know if that was true. I asked my e-newsletter readers for their opinions. Fifteen women responded by email:

Terry: Humans our age are set in their ways. Sex is nice but not necessary (at least for women), separation of incomes is tricky, and sharing of living spaceunless the space is hugewould be difficult.

Laurie Jo: I have mixed feelings regarding being a couple under the same roof. My boyfriend of five years lives 90 minutes away.

I am lonely a lot of the time. Living together is not an option for us; I have decided that, for now, going back and forth for each of us on alternating weekends is OK.

Elizabeth: I know many older women who want companionship but are worried about living together. Many are afraid of taking on household chores or losing financial independence.

Kaitte: Im an independent woman, not needing a man to take care of memost men cant handle that.

Susan, 78: I love having my own place.

Deanne, 67: I was happily married for 30 years, lost my husband six years ago. I want to live with a partner, to enjoy making a home together. Im better as a partner than as a solo act.

Hamila: I was married for 42 wonderful years and was a caregiver for the last six years of my husbands life. I have no desire to live with another man. I enjoy male company, but I do not want to share my home.

Gail: I would live with a man for a couple of days each week, plus on trips and adventures. But full-time? No thank you. Im too independent and happy.

Lisa: I moved last year from Southern California to Tucson. While I would like to find a partner, the LAT (living apart together) arrangement describes my preference.

Id like to find someone to do activities with, share meals, and have sleepovers, but I want my freedom and independence. too.

Arlene: Its a trade-off! We get a roof; they get a slave. Not for me! My ex never cleaned his toilet. He never cleaned anything except his car every Sunday morning, which prevented him from churching with me.

Kathleen, 60: I would like having a male companion to spend time with, especially seeing concerts, plays, book readings, or even going out with for a meal, but living togetherno thanks!

Dianne: No. Once is enough. Cant see how any man over 60 could offer anything that would make moving in worthwhile.

Bonnie: While a mans companionship is wonderful, being solo is also wonderful. Such an individual thing.

Alicia, 68: I stay busy with my hobbies. I would love to share a home with a man. I would hope the man would likewise have his hobbies, interests, and friends.

Mary Lou, 75: I cant imagine living with someone today. I have turned into an independent senior woman, and I like my routine.

Toms summary

Most single women age 65-plus would like a male companion, but less than 25 percent of this group want to live with a man. The word independent was mentioned often. Might women choosing to live alone become a trend?

How each relationship plays out is different. As Bonnie said, Such an individual thing. There is no right or wrong response.

One thing this pandemic has taught us: we all need our space, we need time alone. But its still mighty nice to come home to that welcome hug from our mate.

Tom Blake is a retired Dana Point business owner and resident who has authored books on middle-aged dating. See his website at findingloveafter50.com. To comment: tompblake@gmail.com

BECOME AN INSIDER TODAYTrustworthy, accurate and reliable local news stories are more important now than ever. Support our newsroom by making a contribution and becoming a subscribing member today.

CONTRIBUTE NOW

Read the original post:

On Life and Love After 50: Do Single Women 65-Plus Prefer to Live Alone? - Dana Point Times