Category Archives: Financial Independence

When Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex decided to stepback as senior members of the royal family, their main goal was achieving financialindependence from the crown while still supporting Her Majesty, QueenElizabeth.

But their split from the The Firm occurred long before thecoronavirusCOVID-19 absolutely demolished the worlds financial health in a matter ofweeks. While Meghan and Harry were probably feeling confident about makingmoney before, there is a significant lack of speaking engagements currently.

Suddenly, the prospect of making money isnt so simple forthis former royal couple.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex essentially wantedto pick and choose which parts of the royal life they participated in. Theywanted to retain the good parts, like money, power, and prestige, while rejectingtheir least favorite aspects, like participating in the Royal Rota and remainingpolitically neutral.

It became quickly apparent that this approach was nevergoing to work Harry and Meghan were free to leave if they wanted, but theycouldnt just create royal roles as they wished. Queen Elizabeth sent thecouple words of encouragement but remained firm on her stance. They couldntuse the word royal in their branding, for instance. And yes, theyd have topay their own way.

That seemed easy enough when they first quit Harry evenlined up a high-profile speaking engagement at a JP Morgan Summit in February.But now events such as this have been canceled indefinitely, leaving Harry and Meghanstuck withoutan income stream.

Though it seems that way now, the coronavirus pandemic wontlast forever and life will eventually return to some kind of normal. However,financial ramification from business shutdowns that go on for weeks or monthscould wreak havoc on the economy. No one knows what will happen next.

A palace insider told U.K. based broadcaster Neil Sean thatPrince Harry is keenly aware how much the pandemic hasaffected his plans. The worldwide health crisis has plunged the worldinto a financial climate unheard of before and the opportunities for companiesto waste cash by booking celebrities to speak at conferences [arent thereanymore], said Sean. Now it could be a very tricky path to becomefinancially independent.

View this post on Instagram

These are uncertain times. And now, more than ever, we need each other. We need each other for truth, for support, and to feel less alone during a time that can honestly feel quite scary. There are so many around the world who need support right now, who are working tirelessly to respond to this crisis behind the scenes, on the frontline, or at home. Our willingness, as a people, to step up in the face of what we are all experiencing with COVID-19 is awe-inspiring. This moment is as true a testament there is to the human spirit. We often speak of compassion. All of our lives are in some way affected by this, uniting each of us globally. How we approach each other and our communities with empathy and kindness is indisputably important right now. Over the coming weeks, this will be our guiding principle. We will be sharing information and resources to help all of us navigate the uncertainty: from posting accurate information and facts from trusted experts, to learning about measures we can take to keep ourselves and our families healthy, to working with organisations that can support our mental and emotional well-being. In addition, we will focus on the inspiring stories of how so many of you around the world are connecting in ways big and small to lift all of us up. We are all in this together, and as a global community we can support each other through this process and build a digital neighbourhood that feels safe for every one of us. We look forward to sharing more over the days and weeks to come

A post shared by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (@sussexroyal) on Mar 18, 2020 at 8:17am PDT

Unlike so many other people, Harry and Meghan are not in anydanger of losing their homes or not being able to put dinner on the table, eventhough theyre losing income in the coming weeks. Both have a healthy cushionof funds to fall back on if this pandemic drags on for several months. At the veryleast, they should be putting their multi-million dollar house hunt on hold.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been using Instagram to spread messages of positivity and hope during the crisis. They encouraged fans to take care of their mental health in the days ahead. With everything going on, its a lot to take in. Many of us may feel confused. Or alone, or anxious or scaredand in isolation, some of us may just feel bored, or that you dont know what to do with yourself without your normal routine. Its perfectly normal to be feeling any of these things, they wrote.

But heres the good thing (because right now we need to hear good things, right?), they continued. Yes, there is isolation and physical distancing, but there doesnt have to be loneliness. They went on to share some resources to help fans survive social distancing.

These royals have no idea how coronavirus will affect their future. But theyre hoping to come out stronger than before.

Go here to read the rest:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Could Have a 'Very Tricky Path' to Financial Independence After Coronavirus Outbreak, Source Claims - Showbiz Cheat...

Americans are starting to feel the effects of the coronavirus pandemic, which has left few industries untouched. Some employees are already out of work and millions could end up losing their jobs in a potential recession.

The pandemic could even wipe out what's become known as the FIRE (financial independence, retire early) movement, which embraces the concept of saving the majority of your income in your 20s or 30s so you can retire in your 30s or 40s.

That's according toGrant Sabatier,Millennial Money founder and author of "Financial Freedom.""I think the whole idea of retiring early ... will disappear because of this," he tells CNBC Make It. "It's just not going to be as easy, even for people who have been saving up, and it's not going to be as attractive of an idea."

Sabatier started his own financial independence journey in 2010, before the movement really took off. He saved over $1 million in five years by launching a bunch of side hustles and setting aside upwards of 80% of his income.

Despite the movement's growth over the past decade, Sabatier says the concept of retiring early has already started to lose steam among younger generations. And the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global economy and markets could be enough to eliminate the movement altogether, he says.

But that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, he says. "I think that idea of retiring early is, thankfully, disintegrating in the sense that, work is an important part of life. Work is healthy," he explains. "Doing something that you're passionate about is healthy. And money is often a byproduct of the things that we do to create value in the world."

Work is healthy. Doing something that you're passionate about is healthy. And money is often a by-product of the things that we do to create value in the world.

Grant Sabatier

Founder of Millennial Money

Sabatier, who became a millionaire before 30, didn't work a handful of side gigs and saveanextremepercentage of his income to stop working and settle down. For him, it's been less about retiring and more about "having freedom and options and choices," he says.

If you're intent on retiring early, use the extra time you may have right now to reflect on why, he suggests. "I often see people who want to retire early because it's something else to chase it's another trophy to get. When, in reality, so much of what they want they already have. Or, they're much closer to what they want than they realize.

"In this time when we're all quarantined and have a lot of time to think, think about why you really want to retire early. Do you still want that amidst the increasing uncertainty of our times?"

Sabatier encourages people still interested in the movement to focus less on the "retire early" part of FIRE and more on the "financial independence" aspect: "At its core, it's always been about using money to build a life you love and being intentional about your spending so that you have more time and options in your life."

Don't miss:Financial planner: Here's when you should temporarily stop saving for retirement during the pandemic

Like this story?Subscribe to CNBC Make It on YouTube!

Continued here:

Self-made millionaire says the concept of retiring early 'will disappear' due to the coronavirus pandemic - CNBC

By Jon Dulin

There are multiple roads to financial freedom but are you driving in the right direction?

The most important step to financial freedom is understanding what that freedom looks like to you.

It might seem like an unnecessary question but too many people follow the drumbeat for financial independence only to give up in frustration.

If you set out on a road trip with no destination in mind, youre going to run out of gas and get stranded!

Besides just defining that goal so you know in which direction to drive, a lot of people have a conception of financial freedom that may not be as good as they think.

For many people, the idea of Financial Independence, Retire Early (FIRE) is having enough money to quit their job and never work again.

OK, so you ditch the rat race and never work a day againthen what?

At best you become a sun-burnt alcoholic on some far-away beach.

Thats going to get old quick.

You need a purpose, something that gives your days and your life meaning.

For me, financial freedom was enough money that I could devote my time to developing my own business.

It was not worrying about money even when my online assets werent quite generating enough cash flow to pay all our bills.

Now that the business generates tens of thousands a month, financial freedom is doing what I love and never having to worry about money again.

Whether its being able to devote yourself to a charitable cause, running your own business, a hobby or whatever you choose, think about what financial freedom really means to you and about what youll do when you dont HAVE to work for the money.

Knowing where that destination is, you can find it on the map and start planning your course.

Ive found three roads to get you there.

Once youve figured out where you want to go, its time to get in the car and drive. And theres no way to FIRE thats more popular than investing.

Investing is also the easiest road to your financial independence. The boom ininvestment appshas made it easy to open an account and put your money to work.

Note that I said the easiest road, not the shortest.

Investing $6,000 a year and earning the long-term market return of 8% annually, it will take you 35 years to reach that seven-figure payday.

Even if financial freedom means a slightly smaller bank account, investing is like driving to your financial independence in a 92 Camry.

That doesnt mean you should give up on stocks and dump all your money in the other two ideas well talk about next.

Part of the beauty of the other ways to financial freedom is they dont cost a lot (or anything) to get started. That means you can still put your savings in stocks to watch that slow-ride to financial success.

If you decide to invest that hard-earned cash, remember these ideas:

I truly believe that real financial freedom is getting paid to do something you enjoy.

I love growing my online business, talking about financial success and goals, and making that personal connection through the YouTube channel.

Now that doesnt mean its all rainbows and unicorns.

I dont always jump out of bed in the morning and there are some parts of the business that still feel like a job.

But its a whole lot better than the feeling of being stuck in a job I didnt like, feeling like I had no control over my financial future and that my work didnt matter.

In fact, I enjoy running my online business so much, I dont really even think about retirement anymore. I cant imagine not doing this at least for a few hours every day.

And it all started as a side hustle.

Trying to find your side hustle idea? Try these steps:

From consulting or freelancing to writing books, you can make money on any idea.

Dont believe me?

There are 479 video courses on Udemy about solving a Rubiks Cube.

Thats 479 people that are making money from talking about that infuriating puzzle-box of the 80s.

If investing is like driving to your financial destination in an old beater, creating a side hustle is like a Corvette.

Youll still have to work on it and keep it running but it will get you there fast!

Our third strategy to financial freedom, and the favorite for most, is creating streams of passive income.

If you need to get to your financial destination as fast as possible, passive income is like putting the pedal down on a Maserati!

Passive income is money you make without having to do anything after setting it up.

That doesnt mean you never work again. It just means you have an income source producing cash flow while you devote your time to your side hustle or other tasks.

Be careful going after just any idea proposed as passive income though.

As much as I love blogging and creating videos for YouTube, these are pretty far from a passive income source.

The best passive sources are ones that take minimal upkeep or effort after launched.

A few of my favorite passive income ideas include:

Financial freedom isnt a destination you get to overnight.

If it were as easy as a leisurely Sunday drive, we all would have gone there years ago.

Figure out what that freedom really means to you, draw out your map and youll get there sooner than you think.

For many, simply knowing theyre on the right road to financial independence is all the motivation they need to keep driving.

Author Bio:Born and raised in Iowa, Joseph Hogue worked in corporate finance and real estate before starting a career in investment analysis. He has appeared on Bloomberg and CNBC and led a team of equity analysts for a venture capital research firm. He holds a masters degree in business and the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) designation. Joseph left the corporate world in 2014 to build his online businesses, first through creating websites and later through YouTube. Booking just $792.41 in 2015 income, hes grown his online assets to an income of $122,400 for the twelve-months to July 2019. Hes published 10 books and has grown the YouTube channel,Lets Talk Money, to over 161,000 subscribers in less than two years.

This article was republished with permission from MoneySmartGuides. View the original articlehere.

See the original post:

The Best Strategies To Reach Financial Freedom - ETF Trends

Now the independence of the CFPB is under challenge in the Supreme Court. A law firm that we were investigating for possibly cheating its customers has mounted a challenge to block the investigation from proceeding. The Trump administration has sided with the law firm, contending that a government agency having a single director with some protection against removal by the president is a violation of our constitutional system of separation of powers.

Important cases about the structure of the federal government come along only from time to time. When they do, the politics of these cases can create strange bedfellows. So it was in this case, which produced several novelties: the Justice Department refusing to defend the lawfulness of an act of Congress, the agency charged with enforcing consumer-protection laws siding with a law firm accused of cheating its customers, and the House of Representatives but not the Senate being given time to present its views so the justices could canvass all the issues more fully.

As I sat in the courtroom and heard the abstract arguments the lawyers were making about the proper bounds between the legislative and executive branches of our government, my mind kept flashing back to more human moments from the unfolding of this constitutional drama. I thought about some of the tough enforcement actions we had taken, against companies such as Wells Fargo, for manipulating customer accounts to make employee bonuses and pump up the stock price. And our efforts over several years to draft new rules in order to safeguard the mortgage market against another meltdown that would jeopardize the financial future of millions of Americans. As that work was being called into question, I wondered about the practical consequences of this case for families that are cheated or mistreated every day in the financial marketplace.

But in the courtroom, those issues were only implicit. The case isnt about what the government can do for consumers; rather, it presents a classic confrontation between Congress and the president about how much authority each can exert over the removal of high-ranking federal officials charged with administering and enforcing the law. It poses difficult questions because whereas the Constitution clearly and plainly states that the president has the power toappointsuch officials (often with the advice and consent of the Senate), it is silent about who has the power toremovethem.

The issue has reared its head periodically in American history, often in tense situations. When President William Henry Harrison died just a month after taking office, his Cabinet sought to impose on his successor, John Tyler (known as His Accidency), a rule that he would be bound by their majority decisions about policy. He rejected that proposal, and before long, almost all those Cabinet members resigned. After the Civil War, congressional Republicans did not trust President Andrew Johnson to keep the Cabinet officials appointed by President Abraham Lincoln or to carry out the policy of Reconstruction as they believed he should. So they passed the Tenure of Office Act, limiting the removal of certain key officials without the approval of the Senate. When President Johnson defied the law and claimed it was unconstitutional, he was impeached, and escaped conviction by only one vote in the Senate. The legality of the Tenure of Office Act was never settled in the courts, but the statute was later repealed.

Other more obscure situations have given rise to celebrated Supreme Court decisions. One involved the fate of a postmaster in Oregonwhich led to a decision where Chief Justice William Howard Taft, himself a former President, proclaimed a doctrine of unilateral presidential control, unchecked by Congress, over the removal of executive officials for any reason, or no reason at all. Nine years later, another case involved a Federal Trade Commissioner who was fired by President Franklin Roosevelt and later passed away. His family sued for his back pay, contending that the firing was illegal because Congress had protected him from being removed unless dismissal was justified as being for cause (conduct more serious than mere policy disagreements). In that case, the Court reversed course and sided with Congress, holding that the president can be subject to modest restraints on his removal power where officials heading independent agencies exercise a broad mix of powers that seem in some ways to be executive, legislative,andjudicial in character.

Thus, it appears to be settled that the president is in fact the one who exercises removal power over executive officials, yet it is also settled that this removal power can be conditioned in limited respects by Congress, as is the case with independent-agency heads, such as the director of the CFPB. Subsequent cases, including one authored by Chief Justice Rehnquist in 1988, have largely followed this approach by holding that Congress, when it sees fit, can impose modest restraints on the presidents removal of executive officials.

These precedents are close to a century old, but they remain controversial. Some conservatives passionately embrace the theory of the unitary executive, which holds that the president must be able to exercise or control all executive power with no constraints. In practice, this means that if the president cannot do the entire job of administering and enforcing the lawa self-evident propositionthen at least he or she can control other executive officials by replacing them at any time. The natural human assumption is that the person who can fire me from my job can more readily ensure my allegiance to do the job as they see fit. And for those officials in the executive branch under the president, Congress should have no right to interfere in this control over their actions.

But this legal theory, while perhaps logical in the abstract, runs up against potentially embarrassing real-life problems. For example, the Constitution only contemplates two essential executive-branch officialsthe president and the vice presidentand every other executive official only has authority and duties and responsibilities as prescribed by acts of Congress. When it was determined that the country needed to create a new Department of Homeland Security, for example, the president was not free to make those wholesale changes in the organization of the executive branch on his own, but instead had to get Congress to pass legislation to authorize it.

In a different vein, the perceived evils of the spoils system in the 19th centurywhereby a new president could sweep out all executive-branch officials to make way for his own partisansled to congressional limits on the presidents ability to fire most executive-branch officials solely on political grounds. These protections are the accepted principle of civil-service reform that has endured to this day. They are not consistent with an all-powerful executive who can control every rank of executive officials according to his or her whims.

Accordingly, a more practical view of the separation of powers has been to reject the idea that each branch exercises its own powers in its own hermetically sealed sphere. On the contrary, the Framers set up a system of checks and balances whereby each branch interacts closely with the others, and each has various means of asserting itself against the others, so that no single branch of the government can establish tyrannical powers to infringe on the liberties of the people. For instance, the president has the power to interfere with Congress by vetoing legislation. Congress has the power to limit the president by controlling the budget and thus the size, scope, and aspirations of the executive branch. The courts have the authority to review actions taken by Congress or the president and to invalidate those deemed to be illegal.

In the sphere of appointment and removal, likewise, the Constitution gives scope to some interplay between Congress and the President. Since Congress alone can authorize the accretion of additional executive-branch officials and condition their powers, it makes sense that it can, to some extent, condition the grounds of their removal from office as well. And, again, it has done so with the civil-service reform laws that offer considerable protection for the tenure of large numbers of executive-branch officials who can only be fired for cause of some kind.

Of course, the case currently before the Court involves a high-ranking official with much broader powers than an everyday bureaucrat. And as the justices mulled the arguments, they were pulled in different directions as they considered the effects that their decision could have. In particular, they wrestled with two tough hypotheticals. Leaning too much toward Congress could lead to resuscitating the discredited Tenure of Office Act by upholding removal restrictions even on key Cabinet officers (potentially requiring the next president to keep Attorney General Bill Barr or Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in place even beyond President Trumps tenure). But leaning too far toward the president could lead to compromising the independence of such sacrosanct officials as the chair of the Federal Reserve, conferring the power to set interest rates and manipulate the economy for purely political purposes, not necessarily in the public interest. The justices seemed to almost visibly shy away from either of these extremes.

In the end, though the argument offered a muddle of different approaches, the Court is likely to issue a ruling that is fairly limited as a practical matter. A bare majority of the Court may hold that the president can remove a single director of an agency at will and cannot be limited by the for cause removal provision imposed by Congress. But there were other indications that the Courts decision would embrace the big picture by allowing the CFPB to continue to operate and to protect consumers, as Congress intended. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg reminded everyone at the argument, while both Congress and the president had their lawyers arguing before the bench, it is important to remember that consumersthat is, all of ushave weighty issues at stake in this case too.

This story is part of the project The Battle for the Constitution, in partnership with the National Constitution Center.

Read the original:

Why the Supreme Court Should Protect the CFPB's Independence - GovExec.com

AndreyPopov | Getty Images

Some good news in the form of money may be coming to Americans soon.

On Tuesday, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said that the Trump administration plans to move "immediately" to send money to Americans as the coronavirus cripples the economy.

"Americans need cash now," Mnuchin said, indicating checks could come in the next two weeks.

The announcement follows much discussion over how the government could act to help shore up American workers' bank balances now, with so many businesses temporarily closed or operating at reduced capacities.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said this week that he wants the government to send every adult $1,000.

Details on how big the checks the Trump administration hopes to deploy have not been disclosed.

The Treasury Department is proposing sending two rounds of payments to taxpayers on April 6 and May 18, NBC News reported on Wednesday. Both checks would be the same size. How much you receive would be determined by your income and the size of your family, according to the report.

Of course, any plans would need a green light from Congress.

"The basic idea of getting money into the economy very quickly is a good idea," said Leonard Burman, institute fellow at the Urban Institute, a non-partisan think tank, and co-founder of the Tax Policy Center.

It is also an improvement over potential payroll tax cuts, another idea that has been touted by the Trump administration and others in recent weeks.

"The ideal thing would be to target the payments [at] the people who are most vulnerable, the people who lose their jobs who are working in industries that are severely affected by the coronavirus," Burman said. "It's hard to set up something to do that right away."

Whether and how the extra income is taxed will also depend on the terms of the program.

Burman said he thinks making that extra income subject to income taxes is a smart move. That way, he said, it would put a greater burden on high earners to pay more of it back. It would also increase state income tax bases that will be hurt in a recession.

More from Invest in You:Financial independence fans see opportunity as markets lurchPanic shopping and fleeing to cash seem to go hand in handIs social media dictating how you spend?

For individuals, the big question is: How can I best use this money wisely?

The answer depends on your personal situation. Obviously, don't ignore critical expenses like rent, utilities or any other essential bill.

Beyond that, "the majority of people should probably keep it in their checking account or savings account temporarily," said financial advisor Winnie Sun, founder of Sun Group Wealth Partners in Irvine, California.

Another option is that if you have high-interest credit card, or other, debt. In that case, you want to try to pay down some of those balances, Sun said.

If you're near retirement, you definitely want to keep the extra cash on hand. But if you're in your 20s or 30s, you may want to invest the money toward your retirement by putting it in a Roth individual retirement account, Sun suggested.

"If you went and bought XYZ mutual fund or put it into your IRA, I'm sure that in 20 years that would turn out to be a great thing," said certified financial planner Jude Boudreaux, senior financial planner at The Planning Center in New Orleans.

One thing to remember about a universal plan to pay all Americans is that it is not based on financial need.

"It's going to be too much for some of them and not enough for others," Burman said.

If you don't need the money, you may want to consider donating to a charity that's directly involved in relief efforts or to your local food bank, Boudreaux suggested.

It's the difference between just being constantly in a fear and reactive state to the ability to shift and start to move forward again.

Jude Boudreaux

senior financial planner at The Planning Center

"If you wanted to really make a difference in a bunch of families' lives right now, and you absolutely didn't need those dollars, I would really consider passing that along to an organization that does a lot of good for a lot of people," Boudreaux said.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Boudreaux saw firsthand how payments from organizations like the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Red Cross helped prop up the local economy.

"It was super-beneficial to be able to have that just to weather the immediate storm," said Boudreaux, whose own family received about $2,000 in support.

Having that check in hand can allow people to start asking themselves what their next move will be and where they can find work now, he said.

"It's the difference between just being constantly in a fear and reactive state to the ability to shift and start to move forward again," Boudreaux said.

SIGN UP:Money 101 is an 8-week learning course to financial freedom, delivered weekly to your inbox.

CHECK OUT:Clean your phone at least once a day, says infectious disease specialist here's howviaGrow with Acorns+CNBC.

Disclosure: NBCUniversal and Comcast Ventures are investors inAcorns.

Excerpt from:

The government wants to start sending millions of Americans a check. Here's how to use it wisely - CNBC

CHICAGO The breathtaking coronavirus-induced plunge of the stock market has unnerved retirement investors of all ages, but it poses special risks for people close to, or already retired. Unlike younger workers with many years ahead of earning and saving, older investors are less able to fall back on income from work and may have less ability to wait out their losses.

How should older investors think about their portfolios now? In one sense, this is the wrong question. A much bigger concern is uncertainty about the resilience of the economy as major sectors grind to a halt as we fight the virus. Still, here are some big-picture thoughts about portfolios from the experts, and some tactical moves to consider.

First, think of the big picture, said Allan Roth, a CFP and head of Wealth Logic in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Markets going down for the last three and a half weeks is statistically rare, but 11 years of a bull market? This is the first time that has happened, so its the larger perspective that matters.

People are working toward financial independence, and suddenly, the market goes way down in a very fast, shocking manner, Roth added. So the natural instinct is not acting out of fear, but to protect whats left I would love to get out of the market now, it would make me feel so much better. And my logic tells me its the absolute wrong thing to do.

And in this moment, it is critical to understand the difference between volatility and risk.

Volatility is what you will always experience from time to time in the stock market. Risk, on the other hand, is about uncertainty, and the fact that we cannot predict the future. And there is risk in any investment.

For example, selling off your portfolio and stuffing your mattress with cash carries the risk that inflation will erode the value of your savings sharply over time. If inflation continues at a 2% annual pace, cash will lose half its value over a 25-year period.

REBALANCING

Roth is a big fan of rebalancing your portfolio periodically. This keeps you on track with whatever equity-fixed income allocation you have determined is right for you. But it also can improve returns over time, because it lets you run against the market herd without even thinking about it when stocks surge, you are selling a bit toward the top of the market; when they drop, you are buying the dip.

Roth calculates that an all-stock portfolio so far this century (through the end of February, using total market index funds, two-thirds U.S. and one-third international) has enjoyed a 4.98% annualized return, while a balanced portfolio (60% stocks, 40% bonds) earned 5.36%.

TARGET ALLOCATIONS

For retirees, how much of that allocation should go to equities? If you are looking for a proxy on how professional money managers think about that question, look no further than target date funds, which automatically reduce participants exposure to stocks as retirement approaches. Target date funds have become dominant favorites in 401(k) plans in recent years, and a growing number of participants are keeping them in retirement, either by staying in their workplace plans or using them in rollover IRAs.

Fidelity Investments target date series hold 51% equity at the point of retirement an allocation that the firm decreased by 3.5% two years ago. And last year, it boosted global diversification within the equity portion of its portfolio. Along with stocks, the funds hold 41% in bonds and 8% in cash equivalents.

The balance between equities, bonds and cash differs somewhat among the three largest target date fund providers, depending very much on their view of the primary goals for retirees. That reflects a Fidelity view that diversification including cash is critical.

We think investors at the point of retirement are thinking mainly about the balance of risks that theyre likely to experience in the future, said Andrew Dierdorf, one of Fidelitys target date fund portfolio managers. Our goal is to help them maintain their standard of living in retirement.

That means retired investors will need to achieve returns from equities over the long run, especially since they may well live an additional 20 or 30 years, he notes. But the diminished ability to earn income from work an income stream that generally behaves like income from bonds would points to the need for diversification, he adds.

T. Rowe Price has a more aggressive approach. In February, it adjusted the glide path of its retirement funds target date series, with the equities allocation gradually falling to 30% at the end point (30 years after retirement), up from 20% earlier. Investors in this series hold 55% in equities at the initial point of retirement.

The higher equity allocation reflects the saving shortfalls of most investors and rising longevity, notes Wyatt Lee, head of target date strategies for the firm. We cant fully invest our way out of a savings problem, he said. But by maintaining a reasonable level of growth over the long term, we can continue to help support that income stream even if it means more short-term volatility.

For more on how retirees should think about market risk, check out my podcast this week. https://bit.ly/2IZbBwk

(Reporting by Mark Miller in Chicago Editing by Matthew Lewis)

Continue reading here:

Already retired, or close to it? How to think about volatility in perilous times - Financial Post

By Phionah Nassanga

Hustling to make an extra buck has never been a walk in the park. It is not only challenging but it requires hardwork, sweat, tears, setbacks, thoughts of giving up, overcoming obstacles and sacrifice. In the end, it only becomes a rewarding experience only for those who are persistent and decide not to give up. Josephine Nanyanzis dream of financial independence started during her second semester at university. Being the first born of five siblings, Nanyanzis family has always looked up to her. This is what has kept her motivated to search for opportunities even when she was still a university student. However, even when she desired to have her hands onto something, at that time it was not possible, as commuting from Nsangi to Muteesa I Royal University was an expense she could not afford. After contemplating on how she would reduce her transport costs, Nanyanzi sought refuge at her uncles home.

Getting started While at her uncles home, Nanyanzi did the chores at home. My uncles wife owned a chips stall, which was managed by someone else. Every evening, I would rush home to help out with either peeling of the Irish potatoes or the preparations.Nanyanzi says this continued until second year, when her aunt and the employee fell out due to mismanagement of finances. To Nanyanzi this was a blessing in disguise that later turned out to be a turning point.When the two fell out, my aunt asked if I would manage to run the stall and attend lectures. I knew this would come with challenges but I had always desired to have a job that would cater for my personal needs.

Blessing in disguise Nanyanzi did not think twice about operating a stall where every passerby would easily identify her, especially her coursemates. When she assumed the business role, her aunt did not give her capital in form of cash. Instead she bought a sack of Irish potatoes, charcoal, 10 litre- jerrycan of cooking oil and handed the business over to her. At this point, she had herself to blame if the business worked out or not. She was not just managing the business, her aunt gave her full responsibility and she did not expect anything in return.

Challenges One of the challenges she faced was to build trust of new clients. What kept her motivated was the fact that her mother was paying her tuition, even when it was never paid on time. Although she earned between Shs5, 000 and Shs10,000, she did not give up. The first month was a disaster. I remember selling about five plates every evening and the rest would go to waste. However, this did not stop me from working because I hoped that someday, I would be able make money.

DeterminationNanyanzi did not have time to hang around with friends. Her mind was focused on making money and making the business work. Selling a plate between Shs2, 000 and Shs3,000, she was able to save Shs600, 000. After graduating in 2017 with a bachelors degree in education, Nanyanzi was a professional ICT teacher. However, she could not give up on her chips stall.

Teaching and businessMonths later, she got a teaching job to teach Senior Five and Six students. Asked about her daily routine, Nanyanzi says: I wake up at 4am and by 5am I am on my way to Nsangi, where I teach for three days in week. On Thursday and Friday I teach at another school in Nsangi. Nanyanzi is at school by 7am and at 6pm, she heads home to be in time for her evening hustle- selling chips. I sell chips from 7pm until midnight. Unlike before, were I would sell a sack of Irish potatoes for one to two weeks, today a sack goes for two days and in a week, I save between Shs200, 000 to Shs250, 000 as profit. Achievements To Nanyanzi consistency is key, showing up every day, and hustling like her life depends on it. She keeps separate notes for covering expenses, profits and money to reinvest in the business. Nanyanzis stall has grown from strength to strength. From her chips stall, Nanyanzi has bought herself a piece land in Wakiso, renovated her monthers house in the village and she pays school fees for her young sister.

Advice Establishing your side hustle is one of the first steps to financial independence. A salaried job is not enough to cater for all our needs. I know that even if I was chased from work today, I would still pay my bills.

Go here to see the original:

Teacher who is reaping big from selling chips - Daily Monitor

My husband wont let me leave the house, a victim of domestic violence, tells a representative for the National Domestic Violence Hotline over the phone. Hes had flu-like symptoms and blames keeping me here on not wanting to infect others or bringing something like COVID-19 home. But I feel like its just an attempt to isolate me.

Her abuser has threatened to throw her out onto the street if she starts coughing. She fears that if she leaves the house, her husband will lock her out.

For people who are experiencing domestic violence, mandatory lockdowns to curb the spread of COVID-19 (the disease caused by the new coronavirus) have trapped them in their homes with their abusers, isolated from the people and the resources that could help them.

In the United States, where 5,218 people have been infected with the coronavirus, the National Domestic Violence Hotline reports that a growing number of callers say that their abusers are using COVID-19 as a means of further isolating them from their friends and family. Perpetrators are threatening to throw their victims out on the street so they get sick, Katie Ray-Jones, the CEO of the National Domestic Violence Hotline tells TIME. Weve heard of some withholding financial resources or medical assistance.

Keep up to date with our daily coronavirus newsletter by clicking here.

From Europe to Asia, millions of people have been placed under lockdown, as the coronavirus infects more than 183,000 people. But Anita Bhatia, the Deputy Executive Director of the United Nations Women tells TIME that the very technique we are using to protect people from the virus can perversely impact victims of domestic violence. She added that while we absolutely support the need to follow these measures of social distancing and isolation, we also recognize that it provides an opportunity for abusers to unleash more violence.

One out of three women in the world experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, according to the World Health Organization, making it the most widespread but among the least reported human rights abuses. While men experience domestic violence, women make up the majority of victims, with LGBTQ individuals also facing elevated rates of domestic violence. But during times of crisissuch as natural disasters, wars, and epidemicsthe risk of gender-based-violence escalates. In China, the number of domestic violence cases reported to the local police tripled in February compared to the previous year, according to Axios. Activists say this is a result of enforced lockdown.

We know that domestic violence is rooted in power and control, says Ray-Jones. Right now, we are all feeling a lack of control over our lives and an individual who cannot manage that will take it out on their victim. She says that while the number of abuse cases may not rise during the coronavirus crisis, people who were already in an abusive situation will likely find themselves facing more extreme violence, and can no longer escape by going to work or seeing friends.

The current crisis also makes it more difficult for victims to seek help. As medical facilities around the world scramble to respond to the coronavirus, health systems are becoming overloaded, making it more difficult for victims to get access to medical care or therapists. In the best of circumstances, women already have a hard time being heard, Bhatia says.

For many women, even the fear of contracting the coronavirus is stopping them from seeking out medical care after experiencing physical abuse.

I spoke to a female caller in California that is self-quarantining for protection from COVID-19 due to having asthma, an advocate at the National Domestic Violence Hotline wrote in the organizations log book. Her partner strangled her tonight. While talking to her, it sounded like she has some really serious injuries. She is scared to go to the ER due to fear around catching COVID-19.

Many victims also feel that they can no longer seek refuge at their parents home, for fear that they could expose their elderly parents to the virus. For some, travel restrictions may limit their ability to stay with loved ones. Womens shelters may also be overcrowded during this time or may close their doors if the risk of infection is deemed too high.

The coronavirus crisis, which is expected to push the world economy into a recession, may also ultimately make it more difficult for victims to leave abusive relationships. Ray-Jones says leaving an abusive partner often involves secretly saving money, which will be more difficult if victims begin to lose their jobs.

Many social services for victims of domestic violence will also suffer budget cuts under a recession. We are expecting our philanthropic efforts to be really impacted, Ray-Jones says. Itll be hard to fundraise.

Domestic violence advocates say that victims who are not yet in quarantine status should seek help now. Meanwhile, domestic violence organizations like the National Domestic Violence Hotline are developing new strategies to support victims under lockdown. Ray-Jones says digital contact with victims will be very important during this time but that it will be difficult for victims to call while at home with their abusers. The hotline does offers services via online chat or texting, making it easier for victims to seek out help while at home.

Bhatia from United Nations Women has also called for governments to provide packages for paid sick leave and unpaid care work, in order to allow women facing domestic violence to maintain financial independence from their abusers. She added that in order for this public health response to be gender-sensitive, women will have to have decision-making power.

Even with women at the table though, legally mandated lockdowns and quarantines present unprecedented challenges that domestic violence advocates have never faced. As Ray-Jones says we are in uncharted territories in terms of what survivors are going to experience.

If you or someone you know is experiencing domestic violence, contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline via text or call at 1-800-799-7233.

Please send any tips, leads, and stories to virus@time.com.

Thank you! For your security, we've sent a confirmation email to the address you entered. Click the link to confirm your subscription and begin receiving our newsletters. If you don't get the confirmation within 10 minutes, please check your spam folder.

Contact us at editors@time.com.

See the original post here:

As Cities Around the World Go on Lockdown, Victims of Domestic Violence Look for a Way Out - TIME

By Bethany BlankleyThe Center Squarehttps://www.thecentersquare.com/

A panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a lower court's decision Friday blocking the Trump administration's work requirements for Medicaid recipients.

The three-judge panel said Arkansas' work requirements for Medicaid recipients is arbitrary and capricious.

In short, we agree with the district court that the alternative objectives of better health outcomes and beneficiary independence are not consistent with Medicaid, the opinion said. The text of the statute includes one primary purpose, which is providing health care coverage without any restriction geared to healthy outcomes, financial independence or transition to commercial coverage.

Arkansas Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson said he hopes the U.S. Supreme Court will review the case.

Arkansas implemented a work requirement in order to help recipients get worker training and job opportunities while receiving benefits," Hutchinson said. It is difficult to understand how this purpose is inconsistent with federal law. The courts ruling undermines broad public support for expanded health care coverage for those struggling financially.

The National Health Law Program, which opposes state and federal agencies enforcing the work requirement rule, supported the courts decision. The Ohio-based Buckeye Institute did not.

"The ruling is a disappointment and, in the long run, will harm the very people Medicaid is designed to help, Rea S. Hederman Jr., executive director of the Economic Research Center at the Buckeye Institute, told The Center Square. Under Medicaid expansion, healthy, single adults have left the workforce or reduced their work hours to become or remain eligible for Medicaid.

The Buckeye Institute's research found that not enforcing work requirements risks reducing workers' lifetime earnings by nearly $1 million for individuals who transition off of Medicaid, by more than $212,000 for women who remain on Medicaid for their entire working life, and by more than $323,000 for men who remain on Medicaid.

This research confirms that work and community engagement requirements can lead to better job opportunities with better quality private insurance, higher earnings, and can increase economic prosperity," Hederman said.

According to a study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), more than 500,000 people enrolled in Medicaid through expansion in nine states even though their income made them ineligible for the program.

Co-authored by professors at the University of Kentucky and Georgia State University, the analysis clarifies the nine states evaluated represent only 25 percent of the 37 states that expanded their Medicaid programs. The total number of ineligible enrollees, then, is potentially three times higher.

In 2015, when Medicare and Medicaid turned 50, Investors Business Daily pointed out that one was going bankrupt (Medicare); the other was bankrupting states (Medicaid).

In 2015, improper Medicaid payments totaled more than $29 billion, according to the Government Accountability Office.

In 2015, Medicaid accounted for 20 percent of state budget spending. According to research published by the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), Medicaid spending accounted for 30 percent of state budgets, or $603 billion, in 2018.

Overall, 47 states spending on Medicaid has grown as a share of their budgets since 2000, with 32 states spending 25 percent or more of their budgets solely on Medicaid.

Over the next decade, Medicaid spending is projected to outpace economic growth, exceeding more than $1 trillion per year, the FGA states.

State governments can do a better job at reducing fraud, the FGA argues, by also ensuring applicant eligibility includes verifying income, identity, wages and other records.

Go here to read the rest:

highlandcountypress.com - The Highland County Press

In May of 2018, "Glamour" launched its first edition under newly appointed editor in chief, Samantha Barry. Barry's inaugural edition centered on the complex relationship between women and their money.

A year later thousands of women responded to Glamour's Money Survey. Fifty-one percent of respondents said they had a bank account balance of zero and/or were overdrawn.

In an interview with CNBC's Sharon Epperson, Barry explained how financial anxiety can cause stress: "If you are stuck financially, it can take over your life; it can be super-stressful, and it can affect your mental health."

The survey asked respondents to reveal their biggest barrier to financial independence. An overwhelming 71% said they've stayed in a job because they couldn't afford to leave; 31% said they've been financially trapped in a relationship.

The first step to financial freedom is creating a fallback, or emergency, fund, also known as a f*ck-off fund. Whatever you call it, the benefits are all the same: Three to six months of living expenses saved in a separate account for when life throws you a curveball.

More from Invest in You:Earn more than $100,000 when you work from home in one of these jobsSolo entrepreneurs face a big financial challenge: How to save for retirement How to lower your monthly bills 20% and build your wealth in minutes

To create a fallback fund, you'll first need to figure out how much you are spending each month. With your total expenses listed, then calculate how much money you are bringing in. Include side hustles and any other sources of income. Barry says the next step is to list the essentials, "What would a month tightened up look like?" Once you have tallied your essentials (these are usually fixed costs), it's time to start contributing to your fallback fund.

Look for ways to increase your income. The income earned from a side hustle or a raise can be used to start your fund. Be careful not to spend the extra cash. It is wise to have a separate account for you to stash your savings in.

Another option is to find ways to cut back. Look for expenses to cut down on, like dining out and entertainment. Once you've determined where you can cut back, set up automated transfers. Experts recommend automating transfers from your checking account into your savings account.

Savings of three to six months can be daunting, but it's important not to stress over your fallback fund. The most important thing is not to lose sight of your savings goal.

Continue reading here:

The fastest way to build up your emergency fund and gain financial freedom - CNBC