(12-28-2021, 09:25 AM)Scooterd Wrote: Got into a discussion with a member on another board. The individual seemed to be disparaging another investor(s) on that board and ended his comment with -
"they seem to be happy not making any money with stocks like T as long as they get a dividend"
To which I responded -
I think it depends on where you are in your investment "career".I have a family member who worked tel-co field for years is and is now 79.. She worked for Southwestern Bell Corp which became SBC communications which swallowed up Southern NE Telephone and eventually acquired AT&T. Obviously she is no longer in any accumulation Phase, and Mostly out of the market now. She transitioned to an annuity a number of years ago, However during her working career she accumulated over 12,000 ++ shares of AT&T. I asked her if she was going to sell her shares, and she said why? For her- in her later years; she has been perfectly content just leaving the shares alone, drawing her company pension, SS, and AT&T divi's. Not everything is Black and white. - Scoot
To which I received the following retort -
What worked in yester year may not work in the future. Actually will most likely not work as well.Hey I knew a guy who back in 1972 who ..... and ....Yet another guy in 2002 who ...And the that other dude in 2012 who ....If you think T is the answer load up. And I sincerely wish anyone the best if that is their decision. My Dad is 91. His portfolio is not set up for someone in their 90's. It is set up for appreciation and step up of the cost basis upon his passing.
So I'm Thinking to myself, While true no one knows the future - Why would someone who is 91 still be investing in Growth Stocks?
If a recession happens at 91 years of age, the individual investor would not have time (Literally) to possibly recover their losses.
Which brings me to the bigger question??.
At what point should an individual investor think about exiting the market? and if not entirely exiting , should age not be an important determinate factor as to when an investor should begin to move into more capital preservation lower risk type securities not only for themselves but for their potential heirs?.
I myself have my exit plan already determined for a certain point in the future.
- Scoot
To me the final question really comes down to Estate Planning. Most of what I do won't be about capital preservation but about making it simple for whoever outlives me. For example, property is a pain to deal with. Now I have a realtor picked out to use who I know and trust in case I get hit by a truck but I intend to set it up so the properties are a piece of the planned giving of the estate. I haven't decided if personal property should go as part of the estate or not - leaning against it in case there's something someone wants but another thing we'll talk over.
I should never need to touch the *IRA or Roth. But those are easily transferred so other than naming beneficiaries (done but may change things this summer) I won't need to mess with them much. I will be using the taxable account but it should be sustainable - heck, most years the balance should still grow. I will be talking to tax/estate planning folks about which is the best account to pay estate expenses out of. Or it may be that the EF will cover it.
As for what someone should invest in at what age, I don't have a "should" on that. Same for growth vs something else. It's his or her money. If a person has all their faculties and wants to remain an active investor, well, if the body gets to where they can't get around like they used to, it may be a good way to keep their mind active.
*Except for when the government makes me.