Professor Emeritus wrote:
yes but there are rigid and flexible plans
umfundi wrote:Go to England, where you can hone your skills by parallel parking on the other side of the road.
The thing that confuses me is why parking cars front to tail in a single line is called parallel parking.
LAlearning wrote:It would only be preferable if you did not want/need TIPS...and can do math.
umfundi wrote:Cut-Throat wrote:... the L.S. has only 20%......Not enough in stocks IMHO.
The only point I wanted to make is that there are other LS funds with higher stock allocations.
umfundi wrote:Cut-Throat wrote:As a retiree, I prefer the Target Income over the Life Strategy. The Target Fund has 30% stocks, while the L.S. has only 20%......Not enough in stocks IMHO.
There are four LifeStrategy funds, respectively with 20, 40, 60, and 80% equities.
YDNAL wrote:Since you ask, I will not use a computer to rely on what happened yesterday to tell me what will happen tomorrow - nothing that powerful exists. Others are free to do as they wish.
YDNAL wrote:Then, it boils-down to SAVE for "B" to help pay for "A". Certainly NOT rocket science.
YDNAL wrote:I find conjectures to be a waste of everyone's time.
Leesbro63 wrote:I'm no math expert, but I believe this is misleading. What's missing is that if you get a bad market or bad inflation early on, yeah, you can still take 7% at age 80, but 7% of what?